Abstract PD5-04: PD5-04 Characterizing the HER2-/Immune-/DNA repair (DRD-) response predictive breast cancer subtype: the hunt for new protein targets in a high-needs population with low response to all I-SPY2 agents
Authors: Wolf Denise M. , Yau Christina , Wulfkuhle Julia , Gallagher Rosa I. , Swigart Lamorna A. Brown , Hirst Gillian L. , Coppe Jean-Philippe , Magbanua Mark Jesus M. , Sayaman Rosalyn , Investigators I-SPY2 , Sit Laura , Hylton Nola M. , DeMichele Angela , Berry Donald A. , Pusztai Lajos , Yee Douglas , Esserman Laura J. , Petricoin Emanuel F. , Van ’t Veer Laura 
Published: March 2023

Background: In previous work we leveraged the I-SPY2 trial to create treatment response predictive subtypes (RPS) incorporating tumor biology beyond clinical HR/HER2, to better predict drug responses in an expanded treatment landscape that includes platinum agents, dual HER2-targeting regimens and immunotherapy [1]. We showed that best performing schemas incorporate Immune, DRD and HER2/Luminal phenotypes, and that treatment allocation based on these would increase the overall pCR rate to 63% from 51% using HR/HER2-based treatment selection. The RPS schema has been selected for prospective evaluation in I-SPY2. Using the RPS, one would prioritize platinum-based therapy for HER2-/Immune-/DRD+, immunotherapy for HER2-/Immune+, and dual-anti-HER2 for HER2+ that are not luminal. HER2+/Luminal patients have low response rates to dual-anti-HER2 therapy but may respond better to anti-AKT. However, there is still a considerable ‘biomarker-negative’ group of resistant cancers (HER2-/Immune-/DRD-) with very low pCR rates to all tested agents, that require a new therapeutic approach. Here we characterize the protein signaling architecture of these tumors to identify new target candidates. Methods: 987 I-SPY 2 patients from 10 arms of the trial were considered for this analysis. All have gene expression, pCR and RPS; 944 have distant recurrence free survival (DRFS) data; and 736 have reverse phase protein array (RPPA) data from laser capture microdissected tumor epithelium. These data – known collectively as the I-SPY2-990 mRNA/RPPA Data Resource - were recently made public on NCBI’s Gene Expression Omnibus [GEO: GSE196096]. We focus on HER2-/Immune-/DRD- tumors, applying Wilcoxon and t-tests to identify phosphoproteins that differ between HR+HER2-/Immune-/DRD- and other HR+HER2- tumors; and between TN/Immune-/DRD- and other TNs. The Benjamini-Hochberg (BH) method is used to adjust p-values for multiple hypothesis testing. In addition, the Kaplan-Meier method is used to estimate DRFS. Results: 201/736 I-SPY 2 patients with RPPA data are classified HER2-/Immune-/DRD- (HR+HER2-: n=138; TN: n=63). Of these, 8.5% (17/201) achieved pCR. Non-responding HER2-/Immune-DRD- had worse outcomes than responders (~75% vs. ~95% DRFS at 5 years). 60/139 phospho-proteins differ significantly between HR+HER2-/Immune-/DRD- and other HR+HER2- tumors (n=122). These tumors are relatively ‘cold’, in that 90% (54/60) of the phosphoprotein activities characterizing this group are at lower levels than in the overall HR+HER2- population; including immune (e.g. pPDL1, pJAK/STAT) and proliferation (e.g., Ki67, CyclinB1, pAURK) endpoints. Phosphoproteins showing higher levels in this subset include ERBB2 (BH p=1.7E-06), Cyclin D1 (BH p=1.4E-05), pAR (BH p=1.4E-05), and ER (BH p=3E-04). Within the TN subset, only 3/139 phospho-proteins differed significantly between TN/Immune-/DRD- and other TN tumors (n=189). These were all immune-related (pPDL1, pSTAT1, and HLA DR), with lower expression in the TN/Immune-/DRD- group. Conclusion: HR+HER2- and TN patients who are Immune-Low and DRD-Low have very low pCR rates to all tested therapeutics in I-SPY2 including standard chemotherapy, platinum, and immunotherapy. Senolytics (possibly targeting Cyclin D1), HER2low agents, and AR modulators may overcome resistance in HR+HER2-/Immune-/DRD-, whereas an immune activator beyond checkpoint inhibition is suggested for TN/Immune-/DRD- patients. [1] Wolf et. al., Redefining Breast Cancer Subtypes to Guide Treatment Prioritization and Maximize Response: Predictive Biomarkers across 10 Cancer Therapies. Cancer Cell 2022

Citation Format: Denise M. Wolf, Christina Yau, Julia Wulfkuhle, Rosa I. Gallagher, Lamorna A. Brown Swigart, Gillian L. Hirst, Jean-Philippe Coppe, Mark Jesus M. Magbanua, Rosalyn Sayaman, I-SPY2 Investigators, Laura Sit, Nola M. Hylton, Angela DeMichele, Donald A. Berry, Lajos Pusztai, Douglas Yee, Laura J. Esserman, Emanuel F. Petricoin, Laura Van ’t Veer. PD5-04 Characterizing the HER2-/Immune-/DNA repair (DRD-) response predictive breast cancer subtype: the hunt for new protein targets in a high-needs population with low response to all I-SPY2 agents [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr PD5-04.