Cargando…

Circulating Tumor DNA Markers for Early Progression on Fulvestrant With or Without Palbociclib in ER+ Advanced Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND: There are no established molecular biomarkers for patients with breast cancer receiving combination endocrine and CDK4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i). We aimed to determine whether genomic markers in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) can identify patients at higher risk of early progression on fulves...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: O’Leary, Ben, Cutts, Rosalind J, Huang, Xin, Hrebien, Sarah, Liu, Yuan, André, Fabrice, Loibl, Sibylle, Loi, Sherene, Garcia-Murillas, Isaac, Cristofanilli, Massimo, Bartlett, Cynthia Huang, Turner, Nicholas C
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7936069/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32940689
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djaa087
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: There are no established molecular biomarkers for patients with breast cancer receiving combination endocrine and CDK4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i). We aimed to determine whether genomic markers in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) can identify patients at higher risk of early progression on fulvestrant therapy with or without palbociclib, a CDK4/6i. METHODS: PALOMA-3 was a phase III, multicenter, double-blind randomized controlled trial of palbociclib plus fulvestrant (n = 347) vs placebo plus fulvestrant (n = 174) in patients with endocrine-pretreated estrogen receptor–positive (ER+) breast cancer. Pretreatment plasma samples from 459 patients were analyzed for mutations in 17 genes, copy number in 14 genes, and circulating tumor fraction. Progression-free survival (PFS) was compared in patients with circulating tumor fraction above or below a prespecified cutoff of 10% and with or without a specific genomic alteration. All statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: Patients with high ctDNA fraction had worse PFS on both palbociclib plus fulvestrant (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.17 to 2.24; P = .004) and placebo plus fulvestrant (HR = 1.77, 95% CI = 1.21 to 2.59; P = .004). In multivariable analysis, high-circulating tumor fraction was associated with worse PFS (HR = 1.20 per 10% increase in tumor fraction, 95% CI = 1.09 to 1.32; P < .001), as was TP53 mutation (HR = 1.84, 95% CI = 1.27 to 2.65; P = .001) and FGFR1 amplification (HR = 2.91, 95% CI = 1.61 to 5.25; P < .001). No interaction with treatment randomization was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Pretreatment ctDNA identified a group of high-risk patients with poor clinical outcome despite the addition of CDK4/6 inhibition. These patients might benefit from inclusion in future trials of escalating treatment, with therapies that may be active in these genomic contexts.