Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs), with antibodies targeted against specific antigens linked to cytotoxic payloads, offer the opportunity for a more specific delivery of chemotherapy and other bioactive payloads to minimize side effects. First approved in the setting of HER2+ breast cancer, more recent ADCs have been developed for triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and, most recently, hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancer. While antibody–drug conjugates have compared favorably against traditional chemotherapy in some settings, patients eventually progress on these therapies and require a change in treatment. Mechanisms to explain the resistance to ADCs are highly sought after, in hopes of developing next-line treatment options and expanding the therapeutic windows of existing therapies. These resistance mechanisms are categorized as follows: change in antigen expression, change in ADC processing and resistance, and efflux of the ADC payload. This paper reviews the recently published literature on these mechanisms as well as potential options to overcome these barriers.

Purpose: Antibody–drug conjugates (ADC) harboring topoisomerase I (TOP1) inhibitor payloads have improved survival for patients with metastatic breast cancer. However, knowledge of ADC resistance mechanisms and potential impact on the sequential use of ADCs is limited. In this study, we report the incidence and characterization of TOP1 mutations arising in the setting of ADC resistance in metastatic breast cancer. Experimental Design: Patients with metastatic breast cancer treated with ADCs with available posttreatment plasma-based genotyping were included. TOP1 mutation incidence, mutant allele frequency, and functional characterization were assessed, and incidence was compared with that in patients with metastatic breast cancer not receiving ADC treatment and in The Cancer Genome Atlas. Results: Plasma-based genotyping identified distinct TOP1 mutations (S57C, R364H, W401C, and G359E) in 12.9% of patients (4/31) at the time of disease progression on ADC, compared with 0.7% (3/420) in non–ADC-treated patients with metastatic breast cancer and 0.5% in The Cancer Genome Atlas. The appearance of mutations was associated with clinical cross-resistance, as median duration on the first ADC was 455 versus 52 days for the second ADC. The functional characterization of three novel TOP1-mutant proteins demonstrated that all exhibited reduced enzymatic activity, attenuated covalent DNA binding, and resistance to TOP1 inhibitor ADC payloads SN38 and deruxtecan. Conclusions: We describe the recurrent emergence of functionally altered, resistance-associated TOP1 mutations in vivo under selective pressure from ADCs and the potential impact on mediating cross-resistance to sequential ADCs. TOP1 mutation may represent a biomarker of resistance in this setting, and additional work is needed to optimize biomarkers and ADC payload design to improve outcomes for the sequential use of ADCs. See related commentary by Gwin and Hurvitz, p. 1824

Purpose: The antibody–drug conjugate (ADC) sacituzumab govitecan (SG) comprises the topoisomerase 1 (TOP1) inhibitor (TOP1i) SN-38, coupled to a monoclonal antibody targeting trophoblast cell surface antigen 2 (TROP-2). Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibition may synergize with TOP1i and SG, but previous studies combining systemic PARP and TOP1 inhibitors failed due to dose-limiting myelosuppression. Here, we assess the proof-of-mechanism and clinical feasibility for SG and talazoparib (TZP) employing an innovative sequential dosing schedule. Patients and Methods: In vitro models tested pharmacodynamic endpoints, and in a phase 1b clinical trial (NCT04039230), 30 patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) received SG and TZP in a concurrent (N = 7) or sequential (N = 23) schedule. Outcome measures included safety, tolerability, preliminary efficacy, and establishment of a recommended phase 2 dose. Results: We hypothesized that tumor-selective delivery of TOP1i via SG would reduce nontumor toxicity and create a temporal window, enabling sequential dosing of SG and PARP inhibition. In vitro, sequential SG followed by TZP delayed TOP1 cleavage complex clearance, increased DNA damage, and promoted apoptosis. In the clinical trial, sequential SG/TZP successfully met primary objectives and demonstrated median progression-free survival (PFS) of 7.6 months without dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), while concurrent dosing yielded 2.3 months PFS and multiple DLTs including severe myelosuppression. Conclusions: While SG dosed concurrently with TZP is not tolerated clinically due to an insufficient therapeutic window, sequential dosing of SG followed by TZP proved a viable strategy. These findings support further clinical development of the combination and suggest that ADC-based therapy may facilitate novel, mechanism-based dosing strategies.

Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) have revolutionized the care of advanced breast cancer. ADCs pair an antibody targeted against a tumor-associated antigen with a cytotoxic payload, aiming to deliver therapy more effectively and with fewer off-target toxicities. Given the growth of ADCs in the past few years, patients are now candidates for multiple agents sequentially. Optimal strategies for sequencing ADCs are not yet known. Here we review retrospective data on ADC sequencing, translational understanding of mechanisms of resistance, and novel ADCs and combination agents in the pipeline that aim to improve upon currently available care.

Figure S1. Schematic illustrating proposed temporal window created by SG-mediated drug delivery to enable sequential TOP1i/PARP1i dosing