Triple-negative breast cancer xenografts with BRCAness, high expression of SLFN11, and RB1 loss are highly sensitive to topoisomerase I inhibitors.

A significant proportion of patients with oestrogen receptor (ER) positive breast cancers (BC) develop resistance to endocrine treatments (ET) and relapse with metastatic disease. Here we perform whole exome sequencing and gene expression analysis of matched primary breast tumours and bone metastasis-derived patient-derived xenografts (PDX). Transcriptomic analyses reveal enrichment of the G2/M checkpoint and up-regulation of Polo-like kinase 1 (PLK1) in PDX. PLK1 inhibition results in tumour shrinkage in highly proliferating CCND1-driven PDX, including different RB-positive PDX with acquired palbociclib resistance. Mechanistic studies in endocrine resistant cell lines, suggest an ER-independent function of PLK1 in regulating cell proliferation. Finally, in two independent clinical cohorts of ER positive BC, we find a strong association between high expression of PLK1 and a shorter metastases-free survival and poor response to anastrozole. In conclusion, our findings support clinical development of PLK1 inhibitors in patients with advanced CCND1-driven BC, including patients progressing on palbociclib treatment.

Resistance to endocrine treatments and CDK4/6 inhibitors is considered a near-inevitability in most patients with estrogen receptor positive breast cancers (ER + BC). By genomic and metabolomics analyses of patients’ tumours, metastasis-derived patient-derived xenografts (PDX) and isogenic cell lines we demonstrate that a fraction of metastatic ER + BC is highly reliant on oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS). Treatment by the OXPHOS inhibitor IACS-010759 strongly inhibits tumour growth in multiple endocrine and palbociclib resistant PDX. Mutations in thePIK3CA/AKT1genes are significantly associated with response to IACS-010759. At the metabolic level, in vivo response to IACS-010759 is associated with decreased levels of metabolites of the glutathione, glycogen and pentose phosphate pathways in treated tumours. In vitro, endocrine and palbociclib resistant cells show increased OXPHOS dependency and increased ROS levels upon IACS-010759 treatment. Finally, in ER + BC patients, high expression of OXPHOS associated genes predict poor prognosis. In conclusion, these results identify OXPHOS as a promising target for treatment resistant ER + BC patients.

Purpose: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients with residual disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy have a poor outcome. We developed patient-derived xenografts (PDX) from residual tumors to identify efficient chemotherapies and predictive biomarkers in a context of resistance to anthracyclines- and taxanes-based treatments. Experimental Design: PDX were established from residual tumors of primary breast cancer patients treated in neoadjuvant setting. TNBC PDX were treated by anthracyclines, taxanes, platins, and capecitabine. Predictive biomarkers were identified by transcriptomic and immunohistologic analysis. Downregulation of RB1 was performed by siRNA in a cell line established from a PDX. Results: Residual TNBC PDX were characterized by a high tumor take, a short latency, and a poor prognosis of the corresponding patients. With the exception of BRCA1/2-mutated models, residual PDX were resistant to anthracyclines, taxanes, and platins. Capecitabine, the oral prodrug of 5-FU, was highly efficient in 60% of PDX, with two models showing complete responses. Prior treatment of a responder PDX with 5-FU increased expression of thymidylate synthase and decreased efficacy of capecitabine. Transcriptomic and IHC analyses of 32 TNBC PDX, including both residual tumors and treatment-naïve derived tumors, identified RB1 and TYMP proteins as predictive biomarkers for capecitabine response. Finally, RB1 knockdown in a cell line established from a capecitabine-responder PDX decreased sensitivity to 5-FU treatment. Conclusions: We identified capecitabine as efficient chemotherapy in TNBC PDX models established from residual disease and resistant to anthracyclines, taxanes, and platins. RB1 positivity and high expression of TYMP were significantly associated with capecitabine response. Clin Cancer Res; 24(11); 2605–15. ©2018 AACR.

Purpose: Patients with luminal breast cancer (LBC) often become endocrine resistant over time. We investigated the molecular changes associated with acquired hormonoresistances in patient-derived xenografts of LBC. Experimental Design: Two LBC xenografts (HBCx22 and HBCx34) were treated with different endocrine treatments (ET) to obtain xenografts with acquired resistances to tamoxifen (TamR) and ovariectomy (OvaR). PI3K pathway activation was analyzed by Western blot analysis and IHC and responses to ET combined to everolimus were investigated in vivo. Gene expression analyses were performed by RT-PCR and Affymetrix arrays. Results: HBCx22 TamR xenograft was cross-resistant to several hormonotherapies, whereas HBCx22 OvaR and HBCx34 TamR exhibited a treatment-specific resistance profile. PI3K pathway was similarly activated in parental and resistant xenografts but the addition of everolimus did not restore the response to tamoxifen in TamR xenografts. In contrast, the combination of fulvestrant and everolimus induced tumor regression in vivo in HBCx34 TamR, where we found a cross-talk between the estrogen receptor (ER) and PI3K pathways. Expression of several ER-controlled genes and ER coregulators was significantly changed in both TamR and OvaR tumors, indicating impaired ER transcriptional activity. Expression changes associated with hormonoresistance were both tumor and treatment specific and were enriched for genes involved in cell growth, cell death, and cell survival. Conclusions: PDX models of LBC with acquired resistance to endocrine therapies show a great diversity of resistance phenotype, associated with specific deregulations of ER-mediated gene transcription. These models offer a tool for developing anticancer therapies and to investigate the dynamics of resistance emerging during pharmacologic interventions. Clin Cancer Res; 20(16); 4314–25. ©2014 AACR.