Endocrine therapy is the main treatment for hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancer. However, advanced tumors develop resistance to endocrine therapy, rendering it ineffective as the disease progresses. There are several molecular mechanisms of primary and secondary endocrine resistance. Resistance can develop due to either alteration of the estrogen receptor pathway (e.g., ESR1 mutations) or upstream growth factors signaling pathways (e.g., PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway). Despite progress in the development of molecularly targeted anticancer therapies, the emergence of resistance remains a major limitation and an area of unmet need. In this article, we review the mechanisms of acquired endocrine resistance in HR+ advanced breast cancer and discuss current and future investigational therapeutic approaches.

Poly-adenosine diphosphate ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (PARPi) are approved for BRCA1/2 carriers with HER2-negative breast cancer in the adjuvant setting with a high risk of recurrence as well as the metastatic setting. However, the indications for PARPi are broader for patients with other cancer types (e.g., prostate and ovarian cancer), involving additional biomarkers (e.g., ATM, PALB2, and CHEK) and genomic instability scores. Herein, we summarize the data on PARPi and breast cancer and discuss their use beyond BRCA carriers.

Adaptive therapy, an ecologically inspired approach to cancer treatment, aims to overcome resistance and reduce toxicity by leveraging competitive interactions between drug-sensitive and drug-resistant subclones, prioritizing patient survival and quality of life instead of killing the maximum number of cancer cells. In preparation for a clinical trial, we used endocrine-resistant MCF7 breast cancer to stimulate second-line therapy and tested adaptive therapy using capecitabine, gemcitabine, or their combination in a mouse xenograft model. Dose modulation adaptive therapy with capecitabine alone increased survival time relative to MTD but not statistically significantly (HR = 0.22, 95% CI = 0.043–1.1, p = 0.065). However, when we alternated the drugs in both dose modulation (HR = 0.11, 95% CI = 0.024–0.55, p = 0.007) and intermittent adaptive therapies, the survival time was significantly increased compared to high-dose combination therapy (HR = 0.07, 95% CI = 0.013–0.42, p = 0.003). Overall, the survival time increased with reduced dose for both single drugs (p < 0.01) and combined drugs (p < 0.001), resulting in tumors with fewer proliferation cells (p = 0.0026) and more apoptotic cells (p = 0.045) compared to high-dose therapy. Adaptive therapy favors slower-growing tumors and shows promise in two-drug alternating regimens instead of being combined.

Purpose: PARP inhibitors (PARPi) have demonstrated efficacy in tumors with germline breast cancer susceptibility genes (gBRCA) 1 and 2 mutations, but further factors influencing response to PARPi are poorly understood. Experimental Design: Breast cancer tumor tissue from patients with gBRCA1/2 mutations from the phase III EMBRACA trial of the PARPi talazoparib versus chemotherapy was sequenced using FoundationOne CDx. Results: In the evaluable intent-to-treat population, 96.1% (296/308) had ≥1 tumor BRCA (tBRCA) mutation and there was strong concordance (95.3%) between tBRCA and gBRCA mutational status. Genetic/genomic characteristics including BRCA loss of heterozygosity (LOH; identified in 82.6% of evaluable patients), DNA damage response (DDR) gene mutational burden, and tumor homologous recombination deficiency [assessed by genomic LOH (gLOH)] demonstrated no association with talazoparib efficacy. Conclusions: Overall, BRCA LOH status, DDR gene mutational burden, and gLOH were not associated with talazoparib efficacy; however, these conclusions are qualified by population heterogeneity and low patient numbers in some subgroups. Further investigation in larger patient populations is warranted.

Cyclin-dependent kinases (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors have significantly improved outcomes for patients with ER+/HER2− breast cancer. Nevertheless, they differ from each other in terms of chemical, biological, and pharmacological features, as well as toxicity profiles. We aim to determine whether QTc prolongation is caused by CDK4/6i in general or if it is associated with ribociclib only. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the prevalence of QTc prolongation as an adverse event in HR+ breast cancer patients treated with CDK4/6i vs those without CDK4/6i. We pooled relative risk (RR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for the binary endpoint of QT prolongation. We included 14 RCTs comprising 16 196 patients, of whom 8576 underwent therapy with CDK4/6i. An increased risk of QTc prolongation was associated with the use of CDK4/6i (RR = 2.35, 95% CI = 1.67 to 3.29, P < .001; I² = 44%). Subgroup analyses revealed a significant increase in the QTc interval for the ribociclib and palbociclib cohorts. The ribociclib subgroup showed a relative risk of 3.12 (95% CI = 2.09 to 4.65, P < .001; I² = 12%), whereas the palbociclib subgroup had a relative risk of 1.51 (95% CI = 1.05 to 2.15, P = .025; I² = 0%). Palbociclib was associated with QTc prolongation; however, the relative risk for any grade QTc was quantitively twice with ribociclib. Furthermore, grade 3 QTc prolongations were observed exclusively with ribociclib. These results are important for guiding clinical decision-making and provide reassurance regarding the overall safety profile of this drug class.

Background: Talazoparib monotherapy in patients with germline BRCA-mutated, early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) showed activity in the neoadjuvant setting in the phase II NEOTALA study (NCT03499353). These biomarker analyses further assessed the mutational landscape of the patients enrolled in the NEOTALA study. Methods: Baseline tumor tissue from the NEOTALA study was tested retrospectively using FoundationOne^®CDx. To further hypothesis-driven correlative analyses, agnostic heat-map visualizations of the FoundationOne^®CDx tumor dataset were used to assess overall mutational landscape and identify additional candidate predictive biomarkers of response. Results: All patients enrolled (N = 61) had TNBC. In the biomarker analysis population, 75.0% (39/52) and 25.0% (13/52) of patients exhibited BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations, respectively. Strong concordance (97.8%) was observed between tumor BRCA and germline BRCA mutations, and 90.5% (38/42) of patients with tumor BRCA mutations evaluable for somatic-germline-zygosity were predicted to exhibit BRCA loss of heterozygosity (LOH). No patients had non-BRCA germline DNA damage response (DDR) gene variants with known/likely pathogenicity, based on a panel of 14 non-BRCA DDR genes. Ninety-eight percent of patients had TP53 mutations. Genomic LOH, assessed continuously or categorically, was not associated with response. Conclusion: The results from this exploratory biomarker analysis support the central role of BRCA and TP53 mutations in tumor pathobiology. Furthermore, these data support assessing germline BRCA mutational status for molecular eligibility for talazoparib in patients with TNBC.