Dataset Information

The Immunology of Hormone Receptor Positive Breast Cancer.

ABSTRACT: Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) has revolutionized the treatment of cancer patients. The main focus of ICB has been on reinvigorating the adaptive immune response, namely, activating cytotoxic T cells. ICB has demonstrated only modest benefit against advanced breast cancer, as breast tumors typically establish an immune suppressive tumor microenvironment (TME). Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is associated with infiltration of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and patients with TNBC have shown clinical responses to ICB. In contrast, hormone receptor positive (HR+) breast cancer is characterized by low TIL infiltration and minimal response to ICB. Here we review how HR+ breast tumors establish a TME devoid of TILs, have low HLA class I expression, and recruit immune cells, other than T cells, which impact response to therapy. In addition, we review emerging technologies that have been employed to characterize components of the TME to reveal that tumor associated macrophages (TAMs) are abundant in HR+ cancer, are highly immune-suppressive, associated with tumor progression, chemotherapy and ICB-resistance, metastasis and poor survival. We reveal novel therapeutic targets and possible combinations with ICB to enhance anti-tumor immune responses, which may have great potential in HR+ breast cancer.

SUBMITTER: Goldberg J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8202289 | biostudies-literature | 2021

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Immunology of Hormone Receptor Positive Breast Cancer.

Goldberg Jonathan J Pastorello Ricardo G RG Vallius Tuulia T Davis Janae J Cui Yvonne Xiaoyong YX Agudo Judith J Waks Adrienne G AG Keenan Tanya T McAllister Sandra S SS Tolaney Sara M SM Mittendorf Elizabeth A EA Guerriero Jennifer L JL

Frontiers in immunology 20210511

Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) has revolutionized the treatment of cancer patients. The main focus of ICB has been on reinvigorating the adaptive immune response, namely, activating cytotoxic T cells. ICB has demonstrated only modest benefit against advanced breast cancer, as breast tumors typically establish an immune suppressive tumor microenvironment (TME). Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is associated with infiltration of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and patients with TNBC ha ...[more]

PMID: 34135901

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAKT pathway activation is implicated in endocrine-therapy resistance. Data on the efficacy and safety of the AKT inhibitor capivasertib, as an addition to fulvestrant therapy, in patients with hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer are limited.MethodsIn a phase 3, randomized, double-blind trial, we enrolled eligible pre-, peri-, and postmenopausal women and men with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer who had had a relapse or disease progression during or after treatment with an aromatase inhibitor, with or without previous cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitor therapy. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive capivasertib plus fulvestrant or placebo plus fulvestrant. The dual primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival assessed both in the overall population and among patients with AKT pathway-altered (PIK3CA, AKT1, or PTEN) tumors. Safety was assessed.ResultsOverall, 708 patients underwent randomization; 289 patients (40.8%) had AKT pathway alterations, and 489 (69.1%) had received a CDK4/6 inhibitor previously for advanced breast cancer. In the overall population, the median progression-free survival was 7.2 months in the capivasertib-fulvestrant group, as compared with 3.6 months in the placebo-fulvestrant group (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.51 to 0.71; P<0.001). In the AKT pathway-altered population, the median progression-free survival was 7.3 months in the capivasertib-fulvestrant group, as compared with 3.1 months in the placebo-fulvestrant group (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.65; P<0.001). The most frequent adverse events of grade 3 or higher in patients receiving capivasertib-fulvestrant were rash (in 12.1% of patients, vs. in 0.3% of those receiving placebo-fulvestrant) and diarrhea (in 9.3% vs. 0.3%). Adverse events leading to discontinuation were reported in 13.0% of the patients receiving capivasertib and in 2.3% of those receiving placebo.ConclusionsCapivasertib-fulvestrant therapy resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival than treatment with fulvestrant alone among patients with hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer whose disease had progressed during or after previous aromatase inhibitor therapy with or without a CDK4/6 inhibitor. (Funded by AstraZeneca and the National Cancer Institute; CAPItello-291 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04305496.).

Project description:BackgroundResistance to endocrine therapy in breast cancer is associated with activation of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) intracellular signaling pathway. In early studies, the mTOR inhibitor everolimus added to endocrine therapy showed antitumor activity.MethodsIn this phase 3, randomized trial, we compared everolimus and exemestane versus exemestane and placebo (randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio) in 724 patients with hormone-receptor-positive advanced breast cancer who had recurrence or progression while receiving previous therapy with a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor in the adjuvant setting or to treat advanced disease (or both). The primary end point was progression-free survival. Secondary end points included survival, response rate, and safety. A preplanned interim analysis was performed by an independent data and safety monitoring committee after 359 progression-free survival events were observed.ResultsBaseline characteristics were well balanced between the two study groups. The median age was 62 years, 56% had visceral involvement, and 84% had hormone-sensitive disease. Previous therapy included letrozole or anastrozole (100%), tamoxifen (48%), fulvestrant (16%), and chemotherapy (68%). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were stomatitis (8% in the everolimus-plus-exemestane group vs. 1% in the placebo-plus-exemestane group), anemia (6% vs. <1%), dyspnea (4% vs. 1%), hyperglycemia (4% vs. <1%), fatigue (4% vs. 1%), and pneumonitis (3% vs. 0%). At the interim analysis, median progression-free survival was 6.9 months with everolimus plus exemestane and 2.8 months with placebo plus exemestane, according to assessments by local investigators (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35 to 0.54; P<0.001). Median progression-free survival was 10.6 months and 4.1 months, respectively, according to central assessment (hazard ratio, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.47; P<0.001).ConclusionsEverolimus combined with an aromatase inhibitor improved progression-free survival in patients with hormone-receptor-positive advanced breast cancer previously treated with nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors. (Funded by Novartis; BOLERO-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00863655.).

Dataset Information

The Immunology of Hormone Receptor Positive Breast Cancer.

Publications

The Immunology of Hormone Receptor Positive Breast Cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets