Allelic dosage of RB1 drives CDK4/6 inhibitor treatment resistance in metastatic breast cancer.
Authors: Safonov Anton Mikhailovich , Bandlamudi Chaitanya , Selenica Pier , Marra Antonio , Ferraro Emanuela , Mandelker Diana , Solit David B. , Berger Michael F. , Norton Larry , Powell Simon N. , Shen Ronglai , Robson Mark E. , Chandarlapaty Sarat , Reis-Filho Jorge S. , Razavi Pedram 
Published: June 2022

1010 Background: We recently reported inferior outcomes to CDK4/6 inhibitors and endocrine therapy (CDK4/6i-ET) associated with germline BRCA2 (g BRCA2) in a cohort of estrogen receptor (ER) positive breast cancers. Co-occurrence of gBRCA2 with loss of heterozygosity (LOH) of neighboring RB1 was found to portend particularly poor outcomes. Here, we sought to define the effects of pre-treatment RB1 allelic copy number status on outcomes of CDK4/6i-ET and the likelihood of developing RB1 loss-of-function (LOF) mutations on CDK4/6i through the analysis of an expanded cohort of metastatic ER+ breast cancer patients. Methods: Patients who underwent sequencing on MSK-IMPACT from April 2014 to May 2021 were included. For every sample preceding CDK4/6i-ET, we performed FACETS to infer RB1 allele specific copy number, ploidy, tumor purity and fraction genome altered (FGA). Patients were categorized based on RB1 allelic status: HetLoss (total of one allelic copy), copy neutral LOH (CNLOH), other allelic imbalance including all other aneuploidy states, and diploid. Progression free survival (PFS) was assessed using univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for ET partner and FGA. Firth penalized logistic regression was used to study association of pre-treatment RB1 status with acquired RB1 LOF variants in paired post-CDK4/6i samples. Results: Of 2,630 potentially eligible patients, 279 patients had genomic sequencing performed prior to 1st line CDK4/6i-ET. Of these, 75 (26.8%) exhibited RB1 HetLoss, 39 (14.0%) had CNLOH of RB1, 111 (39.7%) exhibited diploid RB1 state, while 54 (19.4%) had other patterns of RB1 allelic imbalance. All non-diploid RB1 states were associated with significantly shortened PFS relative to diploid (univariate HetLoss HR: 2.05, 95% CI: 1.42, 2.97; CNLOH HR: 2.08, 95% CI: 1.32, 3.25; other imbalance HR: 1.70, 95% CI: 1.11, 2.58). Only HetLoss remained significant when adjusted for FGA (HR 1.61, 95% CI: 1.09, 2.38, p = 0.017). RB1 LOF was rare in pre-CDK4/6i tumors (< 1%); excluding these cases did not change our results. Of the 176 patients with paired pre- and post-CDK4/6i samples, only RB1 HetLoss in pre-CDK4/6i sample was significantly associated with development of RB1 LOF mutations in post-CDK4/6i sample (18.4%) as compared to diploid (4.2%, OR 4.25, 95% CI 1.02, 17.7, p = 0.047). These results indicate that tumors with one functional copy of RB1 are more likely to acquire RB1 LOF on CDK4/6i to achieve biallelic RB1 loss as a mechanism of CDK4/6i resistance. Conclusions: We demonstrate that LOH and allelic imbalance of RB1 are associated with shorter PFS on CDK4/6-ET. We postulate this may occur partly as a result of more frequent acquired RB1 LOF mutations under selective pressure of CDK4/6i. These data supports the implementation of more refined allele-specific copy number methods and identifies a high-risk population for escalated monitoring and treatment approaches.