Teresa L. Helsten

The FGFR Landscape in Cancer: Analysis of 4,853 Tumors by Next-Generation Sequencing

Purpose: Molecular profiling may have prognostic and predictive value, and is increasingly used in the clinical setting. There are more than a dozen fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors in development. Optimal therapeutic application of FGFR inhibitors requires knowledge of the rates and types of FGFR aberrations in a variety of cancer types. Experimental Design: We analyzed frequencies of FGFR aberrations in 4,853 solid tumors that were, on physician request, tested in a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) laboratory (Foundation Medicine) using next-generation sequencing (182 or 236 genes), and analyzed by N-of-One. Results: FGFR aberrations were found in 7.1% of cancers, with the majority being gene amplification (66% of the aberrations), followed by mutations (26%) and rearrangements (8%). FGFR1 (mostly amplification) was affected in 3.5% of 4,853 patients; FGFR2 in 1.5%; FGFR3 in 2.0%; and FGFR4 in 0.5%. Almost every type of malignancy examined showed some patients with FGFR aberrations, but the cancers most commonly affected were urothelial (32% FGFR-aberrant); breast (18%); endometrial (∼13%), squamous lung cancers (∼13%), and ovarian cancer (∼9%). Among 35 unique FGFR mutations seen in this dataset, all but two are found in COSMIC. Seventeen of the 35 are known to be activating, and 11 are transforming. Conclusions: FGFR aberrations are common in a wide variety of cancers, with the majority being gene amplifications or activating mutations. These data suggest that FGFR inhibition could be an important therapeutic option across multiple tumor types. Clin Cancer Res; 22(1); 259–67. ©2015 AACR.

Fibroblast growth factor receptor signaling in hereditary and neoplastic disease: biologic and clinical implications

Fibroblast growth factors (FGFs) and their receptors (FGFRs) are transmembrane growth factor receptors with wide tissue distribution. FGF/FGFR signaling is involved in neoplastic behavior and also development, differentiation, growth, and survival. FGFR germline mutations (activating) can cause skeletal disorders, primarily dwarfism (generally mutations in FGFR3), and craniofacial malformation syndromes (usually mutations in FGFR1 and FGFR2); intriguingly, some of these activating FGFR mutations are also seen in human cancers. FGF/FGFR aberrations reported in cancers are mainly thought to be gain-of-function changes, and several cancers have high frequencies of FGFR alterations, including breast, bladder, or squamous cell carcinomas (lung and head and neck). FGF ligand aberrations (predominantly gene amplifications) are also frequently seen in cancers, in contrast to hereditary syndromes. There are several pharmacologic agents that have been or are being developed for inhibition of FGFR/FGF signaling. These include both highly selective inhibitors as well as multi-kinase inhibitors. Of note, only four agents (ponatinib, pazopanib, regorafenib, and recently lenvatinib) are FDA-approved for use in cancer, although the approval was not based on their activity against FGFR. Perturbations in the FGFR/FGF signaling are present in both inherited and malignant diseases. The development of potent inhibitors targeting FGF/FGFR may provide new tools against disorders caused by FGF/FGFR alterations.

Differences in Regulation of Drosophila and Vertebrate Integrin Affinity by Talin

Integrin-mediated cell adhesion is essential for development of multicellular organisms. In worms, flies, and vertebrates, talin forms a physical link between integrin cytoplasmic domains and the actin cytoskeleton. Loss of either integrins or talin leads to similar phenotypes. In vertebrates, talin is also a key regulator of integrin affinity. We used a ligand-mimetic Fab fragment, TWOW-1, to assess talins role in regulating Drosophila alphaPS2 betaPS affinity. Depletion of cellular metabolic energy reduced TWOW-1 binding, suggesting alphaPS2 betaPS affinity is an active process as it is for vertebrate integrins. In contrast to vertebrate integrins, neither talin knockdown by RNA interference nor talin head overexpression had a significant effect on TWOW-1 binding. Furthermore, replacement of the transmembrane or talin-binding cytoplasmic domains of alphaPS2 betaPS with those of human alphaIIb beta3 failed to enable talin regulation of TWOW-1 binding. However, substitution of the extracellular and transmembrane domains of alphaPS2 betaPS with those of alphaIIb beta3 resulted in a constitutively active integrin whose affinity was reduced by talin knockdown. Furthermore, wild-type alphaIIb beta3 was activated by overexpression of Drosophila talin head domain. Thus, despite evolutionary conservation of talins integrin/cytoskeleton linkage function, talin is not sufficient to regulate Drosophila alphaPS2 betaPS affinity because of structural features inherent in the alphaPS2 betaPS extracellular and/or transmembrane domains.

Breast Cancer Experience of the Molecular Tumor Board at the University of California, San Diego Moores Cancer Center

PURPOSE Multiplex genomic tests are enabling oncologists to interrogate the DNA of their patients. However, few oncologists are proficient with respect to the implications of complex molecular diagnostics. We initiated a Molecular Tumor Board that focused on individual patients with advanced cancer whose tumors underwent genomic profiling, and here report our experience with breast cancer. METHODS A multidisciplinary team that included physicians, scientists, geneticists, and bioinformatics/pathway specialists attended. All molecular tests were performed in a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments environment (next-generation sequencing, 182 or 236 genes). RESULTS Forty of 43 patients (93%; mean age, 59 years) had at least one theoretically actionable aberration (mean, 4.79 anomalies/patient). Median time from ordering to report was 27 days (median of approximately 11 days for specimen acquisition and approximately 14 days for diagnostic processing). Even if we considered distinct abnormalities in a gene as the same, there were only two patients with an identical molecular profile. Seventy-three genes (206 abnormalities; 119 distinct) were aberrant. Seventeen of the 43 patients (40%; median, seven previous therapies in the metastatic setting) were treated in a manner consistent with Molecular Tumor Board discussions; seven (16% of 43, or 41% of 17) achieved stable disease for 6 or more months (n = 2) or partial remission (n = 5). Lack of access to targeted medication was the most common reason that patients could not be treated. CONCLUSION Multidisciplinary molecular tumor boards may help to optimize the management of patients with advanced, heavily pretreated breast cancer who have undergone genomic testing. Facilitating availability of appropriately targeted drugs and clinical trials is needed.

Fibroblast growth factor family aberrations in cancers: clinical and molecular characteristics

Fibroblast growth factor ligands and receptors (FGF and FGFR) play critical roles in tumorigenesis, and several drugs have been developed to target them. We report the biologic correlates of FGF/FGFR abnormalities in diverse malignancies. The medical records of patients with cancers that underwent targeted next generation sequencing (182 or 236 cancer-related genes) were reviewed. The following FGF/FGFR genes were tested: FGF3, 4, 6, 7, 10, 12, 14, 19, 23 and FGFR1, 2, 3, and 4. Of 391 patients, 56 (14.3%) had aberrant FGF (N = 38, all amplifications) and/or FGFR (N = 22 including 5 mutations and one FGFR3-TACC3 fusion). FGF/FGFR aberrations were most frequent in breast cancers (26/81, 32.1%, p = 0.0003). In multivariate analysis, FGF/FGFR abnormalities were independently associated with CCND1/2, RICTOR, ZNF703, RPTOR, AKT2, and CDK8 alterations (all P < 0.02), as well as with an increased median number of alterations (P < 0.0001). FGF3, FGF4, FGF19 and CCND1 were co-amplified in 22 of 391 patients (5.6%, P < 0.0001), most likely because they co-localize on the same chromosomal region (11q13). There was no significant difference in time to metastasis or overall survival when comparing patients harboring FGF/FGFR alterations versus those not. Overall, FGF/FGFR was one of the most frequently aberrant pathways in our population comprising patients with diverse malignancies. These aberrations frequently co-exist with anomalies in a variety of other genes, suggesting that tailored combination therapy may be necessary in these patients.

Amino acid changes in Drosophila αPS2βPS integrins that affect ligand affinity

We developed a ligand-mimetic antibody Fab fragment specific for Drosophila αPS2βPS integrins to probe the ligand binding affinities of these invertebrate receptors. TWOW-1 was constructed by inserting a fragment of the extracellular matrix protein Tiggrin into the H-CDR3 of the αvβ3 ligand-mimetic antibody WOW-1. The specificity of αPS2βPS binding to TWOW-1 was demonstrated by numerous tests used for other integrin-ligand interactions. Binding was decreased in the presence of EDTA or RGD peptides and by mutation of the TWOW-1 RGD sequence or the βPS metal ion-dependent adhesion site (MIDAS) motif. TWOW-1 binding was increased by mutations in the αPS2 membrane-proximal cytoplasmic GFFNR sequence or by exposure to Mn2+. Although Mn2+ is sometimes assumed to promote maximal integrin activity, TWOW-1 binding in Mn2+ could be increased further by the αPS2 GFFNR → GFANA mutation. A mutation in the βPS I domain (βPS-b58; V409D) greatly increased ligand binding affinity, explaining the increased cell spreading mediated by αPS2βPS-b58. Further mutagenesis of this residue suggested that Val-409 normally stabilizes the closed head conformation. Mutations that potentially reduce interaction of the integrin β subunit plexin-semaphorin-integrin (PSI) and stalk domains have been shown to have activating properties. We found that complete deletion of the βPS PSI domain enhanced TWOW-1 binding. Moreover the PSI domain is dispensable for at least some other integrin functions because βPS-ΔPSI displayed an enhanced ability to mediate cell spreading. These studies establish a means to evaluate mechanisms and consequences of integrin affinity modulation in a tractable model genetic system.

Sleep aid prescribing practices during neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer.

PURPOSE Sleep disruption is a common complaint in breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. We describe the sleep aid prescribing practices of oncologists treating women receiving adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer at a single institution. METHODS Subjects with early-stage breast cancer who received four cycles of neoadjuvant or adjuvant Adriamycin® and cyclophosphamide (AC) at the University of California, San Diego over a 2-year period were evaluated by retrospective chart review. Clinical data pertinent to sleep disorders and electronic prescriptions for sleep aids were collected using the electronic medical record. RESULTS Of the 124 breast cancer subjects, 52.4% discussed sleep with their provider. Whereas 13.7% of subjects reported prior sleep aid use, 32.3% were prescribed sleep aids during chemotherapy, most commonly lorazepam (31.4%) and zolpidem (29.4%). Women prescribed sleep aids during chemotherapy were significantly more likely to discuss sleep with their provider, more likely to have been taking sleep aids previously, and more likely to be taking psychiatric medications. CONCLUSIONS Sleep disturbances during AC chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer are common and are frequently treated with sleep aid medications. We show that women with prior sleep aid use and concurrent psychiatric medication use were more likely to need sleep aids during chemotherapy, suggesting these are high-risk populations that could be targeted for intervention prospectively.

Genomic landscape of salivary gland tumors.

Effective treatment options for advanced salivary gland tumors are lacking. To better understand these tumors, we report their genomic landscape. We studied the molecular aberrations in 117 patients with salivary gland tumors that were, on physician request, tested in a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) laboratory (Foundation Medicine, Cambridge, MA) using next-generation sequencing (182 or 236 genes), and analyzed by N-of-One, Inc. (Lexington, MA). There were 354 total aberrations, with 240 distinct aberrations identified in this patient population. Only 10 individuals (8.5%) had a molecular portfolio that was identical to any other patient (with four different portfolios amongst the ten patients). The most common abnormalities involved the TP53 gene (36/117 [30.8% of patients]), cyclin pathway (CCND1, CDK4/6 or CDKN2A/B) (31/117 [26.5%]) and PI3K pathway (PIK3CA, PIK3R1, PTEN or AKT1/3) (28/117 [23.9%]). In multivariate analysis, statistically significant co-existing aberrations were observed as follows: TP53 and ERBB2 (p = 0.01), cyclin pathway and MDM2 (p = 0.03), and PI3K pathway and HRAS (p = 0.0001). We were able to identify possible cognate targeted therapies in most of the patients (107/117 [91.5%]), including FDA-approved drugs in 80/117 [68.4%]. In conclusion, salivary gland tumors were characterized by multiple distinct aberrations that mostly differed from patient to patient. Significant associations between aberrations in TP53 and ERBB2, the cyclin pathway and MDM2, and HRAS and the PI3K pathway were identified. Most patients had actionable alterations. These results provide a framework for tailored combinations of matched therapies.

Molecular inimitability amongst tumors: implications for precision cancer medicine in the age of personalized oncology.

Tumor sequencing has revolutionized oncology, allowing for detailed interrogation of the molecular underpinnings of cancer at an individual level. With this additional insight, it is increasingly apparent that not only do tumors vary within a sample (tumor heterogeneity), but also that each patients individual tumor is a constellation of unique molecular aberrations that will require an equally unique personalized therapeutic regimen. We report here the results of 439 patients who underwent Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendment (CLIA)-certified next generation sequencing (NGS) across histologies. Among these patients, 98.4% had a unique molecular profile, and aside from three primary brain tumor patients with a single genetic lesion (IDH1 R132H), no two patients within a given histology were molecularly identical. Additionally, two sets of patients had identical profiles consisting of two mutations in common and no other anomalies. However, these profiles did not segregate by histology (lung adenocarcinoma-appendiceal cancer (KRAS G12D and GNAS R201C), and lung adenocarcinoma-liposarcoma (CDK4 and MDM2 amplification pairs)). These findings suggest that most advanced tumors are molecular singletons within and between histologies, and that tumors that differ in histology may still nonetheless exhibit identical molecular portraits, albeit rarely.

Cell-Cycle Gene Alterations in 4,864 Tumors Analyzed by Next-Generation Sequencing: Implications for Targeted Therapeutics

Alterations in the cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK)-retinoblastoma (RB) machinery disrupt cell-cycle regulation and are being targeted in drug development. To understand the cancer types impacted by this pathway, we analyzed frequency of abnormalities in key cell-cycle genes across 4,864 tumors using next-generation sequencing (182 or 236 genes; Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments laboratory). Aberrations in the cell-cycle pathway were identified in 39% of cancers, making this pathway one of the most commonly altered in cancer. The frequency of aberrations was as follows: CDKN2A/B (20.1% of all patients), RB1 (7.6%), CCND1 (6.1%), CCNE1 (3.6%), CDK4 (3.2%), CCND3 (1.8%), CCND2 (1.7%), and CDK6 (1.7%). Rates and types of aberrant cell-cycle pathway genes differed between cancer types and within histologies. Analysis of coexisting and mutually exclusive genetic aberrations showed that CCND1, CCND2, and CCND3 aberrations were all positively associated with CDK6 aberrations [OR and P values, multivariate analysis: CCND1 and CDK6 (OR = 3.5; P < 0.0001), CCND2 and CDK6 (OR = 4.3; P = 0.003), CCND3 and CDK6 (OR = 3.6; P = 0.007)]. In contrast, RB1 alterations were negatively associated with multiple gene anomalies in the cell-cycle pathway, including CCND1 (OR = 0.25; P = 0.003), CKD4 (OR = 0.10; P = 0.001), and CDKN2A/B (OR = 0.21; P < 0.0001). In conclusion, aberrations in the cell-cycle pathway were very common in diverse cancers (39% of 4,864 neoplasms). The frequencies and types of alterations differed between and within tumor types and will be informative for drug development strategies. Mol Cancer Ther; 15(7); 1682–90. ©2016 AACR.