Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review Article
  • Published:

ESR1 mutations and therapeutic resistance in metastatic breast cancer: progress and remaining challenges

British Journal of Cancer volume 126, pages 174–186 (2022)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Breast cancer accounts for 25% of the cancers in women worldwide. The most common subtype of breast cancer diagnosed is hormone receptor positive, which expresses the oestrogen receptor (ER). Targeting of the ER with endocrine therapy (ET) is the current standard of care for ER-positive (ER+) breast cancer, reducing the mortality by up to 40%. Resistance to ET, however, remains a major issue for ER + breast cancer, leading to recurrence and metastasis. One major driver of ET resistance is mutations in the ER gene (ESR1) leading to constitutive transcriptional activity and reduced ET sensitivity. These mutations are particularly detrimental in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) as they are present in as high as 36% of the patients. This review summarises the pre-clinical characterisation of ESR1 mutations and their association with clinical outcomes in MBC and primary disease. The clinically approved and investigational therapeutic options for ESR1 mutant breast cancer and the current clinical trials evaluating ESR1 mutations and ET resistance are also discussed. Finally, this review addresses pre-clinical models and multi-‘omics’ approaches for developing the next generation of therapeutics for ESR1 mutant and ET-resistant breast cancer.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Potential therapeutic targets identified in clinical and pre-clinical studies for ESR1 mutant breast cancer.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68:394–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. National Cancer Institute Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results Program. Cancer stat facts: female breast cancer subtypes: NIH; 2017. https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/breastsubtypes.%20html#:~:text=The%20breast%cancer%subtype%HR,based%on%202013%E2%80%932017%20cases.

  3. Network NCC Breast Cancer (Version 6.2020). 2020. Available from: https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/breast.pdf.

  4. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative G. Aromatase inhibitors versus tamoxifen in early breast cancer: patient-level meta-analysis of the randomised trials. Lancet. 2015;386:1341–52.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Schiavon G, Hrebien S, Garcia-Murillas I, Cutts RJ, Pearson A, Tarazona N, et al. Analysis of ESR1 mutation in circulating tumor DNA demonstrates evolution during therapy for metastatic breast cancer. Sci Transl Med. 2015;7:313ra182.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Tate JG, Bamford S, Jubb HC, Sondka Z, Beare DM, Bindal N, et al. COSMIC: the catalogue of somatic mutations in cancer. Nucleic Acids Res. 2019;47(D1):D941–D7.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Zhang QX, Borg A, Wolf DM, Oesterreich S, Fuqua SA. An estrogen receptor mutant with strong hormone-independent activity from a metastatic breast cancer. Cancer Res. 1997;57:1244–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Toy W, Shen Y, Won H, Green B, Sakr RA, Will M, et al. ESR1 ligand-binding domain mutations in hormone-resistant breast cancer. Nat Genet. 2013;45:1439–45.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Pavlin M, Spinello A, Pennati M, Zaffaroni N, Gobbi S, Bisi A, et al. A computational assay of estrogen receptor alpha antagonists reveals the key common structural traits of drugs effectively fighting refractory breast cancers. Sci Rep. 2018;8:649.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Khan A, Ashfaq UrR, Junaid M, Li CD, Saleem S, Humayun F, et al. Dynamics insights into the gain of flexibility by Helix-12 in ESR1 as a mechanism of resistance to drugs in breast cancer cell lines. Front Mol Biosci. 2019;6:159.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Gates LA, Gu G, Chen Y, Rohira AD, Lei JT, Hamilton RA, et al. Proteomic profiling identifies key coactivators utilized by mutant ERalpha proteins as potential new therapeutic targets. Oncogene. 2018;37:4581–98.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Harrod A, Fulton J, Nguyen VTM, Periyasamy M, Ramos-Garcia L, Lai CF, et al. Genomic modelling of the ESR1 Y537S mutation for evaluating function and new therapeutic approaches for metastatic breast cancer. Oncogene. 2017;36:2286–96.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Gelsomino L, Gu G, Rechoum Y, Beyer AR, Pejerrey SM, Tsimelzon A, et al. ESR1 mutations affect anti-proliferative responses to tamoxifen through enhanced cross-talk with IGF signaling. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016;157:253–65.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Li Z, Levine KM, Bahreini A, Wang P, Chu D, Park BH, et al. Upregulation of IRS1 enhances IGF1 response in Y537S and D538G ESR1 mutant breast cancer cells. Endocrinology. 2018;159:285–96.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ekyalongo RC, Yee D. Revisiting the IGF-1R as a breast cancer target. NPJ Precis Oncol. 2017;1:1–7.

  16. Robertson JF, Ferrero JM, Bourgeois H, Kennecke H, de Boer RH, Jacot W, et al. Ganitumab with either exemestane or fulvestrant for postmenopausal women with advanced, hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer: a randomised, controlled, double-blind, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14:228–35.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Zinger L, Merenbakh-Lamin K, Klein A, Elazar A, Journo S, Boldes T, et al. Ligand-binding domain-activating mutations of ESR1 rewire cellular metabolism of breast cancer cells. Clin Cancer Res. 2019;25:2900–14.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Gelsomino L, Panza S, Giordano C, Barone I, Gu G, Spina E, et al. Mutations in the estrogen receptor alpha hormone binding domain promote stem cell phenotype through notch activation in breast cancer cell lines. Cancer Lett. 2018;428:12–20.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Gu G, Tian L, Herzog SK, Rechoum Y, Gelsomino L, Gao M, et al. Hormonal modulation of ESR1 mutant metastasis. Oncogene. 2020;40:997–1011.

  20. Taube JH, Herschkowitz JI, Komurov K, Zhou AY, Gupta S, Yang J, et al. Core epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition interactome gene-expression signature is associated with claudin-low and metaplastic breast cancer subtypes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2010;107:15449–54.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Parker JS, Mullins M, Cheang MC, Leung S, Voduc D, Vickery T, et al. Supervised risk predictor of breast cancer based on intrinsic subtypes. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:1160–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Lefebvre C, Bachelot T, Filleron T, Pedrero M, Campone M, Soria JC, et al. Mutational profile of metastatic breast cancers: a retrospective analysis. PLoS Med. 2016;13:e1002201.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Vareslija D, McBryan J, Fagan A, Redmond AM, Hao Y, Sims AH, et al. Adaptation to AI therapy in breast cancer can induce dynamic alterations in ER activity resulting in estrogen-independent metastatic tumors. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22:2765–77.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Jia S, Miedel MT, Ngo M, Hessenius R, Chen N, Wang P, et al. Clinically observed estrogen receptor alpha mutations within the ligand-binding domain confer distinguishable phenotypes. Oncology. 2018;94:176–89.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Jeselsohn R, Bergholz JS, Pun M, Cornwell M, Liu W, Nardone A, et al. Allele-specific chromatin recruitment and therapeutic vulnerabilities of ESR1 activating mutations. Cancer Cell. 2018;33:173–86 e5.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Martin LA, Ribas R, Simigdala N, Schuster E, Pancholi S, Tenev T, et al. Discovery of naturally occurring ESR1 mutations in breast cancer cell lines modelling endocrine resistance. Nat Commun. 2017;8:1865.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Jeselsohn R, Yelensky R, Buchwalter G, Frampton G, Meric-Bernstam F, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, et al. Emergence of constitutively active estrogen receptor-alpha mutations in pretreated advanced estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2014;20:1757–67.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Robinson DR, Wu YM, Vats P, Su F, Lonigro RJ, Cao X, et al. Activating ESR1 mutations in hormone-resistant metastatic breast cancer. Nat Genet. 2013;45:1446–51.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Razavi P, Chang MT, Xu G, Bandlamudi C, Ross DS, Vasan N, et al. The genomic landscape of endocrine-resistant advanced breast cancers. Cancer Cell. 2018;34:427–38 e6.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Clatot F, Perdrix A, Beaussire L, Lequesne J, Levy C, Emile G, et al. Risk of early progression according to circulating ESR1 mutation, CA-15.3 and cfDNA increases under first-line anti-aromatase treatment in metastatic breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 2020;22:56.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Clatot F, Perdrix A, Augusto L, Beaussire L, Delacour J, Calbrix C, et al. Kinetics, prognostic and predictive values of ESR1 circulating mutations in metastatic breast cancer patients progressing on aromatase inhibitor. Oncotarget. 2016;7:74448–59.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Franken A, Honisch E, Reinhardt F, Meier-Stiegen F, Yang L, Jaschinski S, et al. Detection of ESR1 mutations in single circulating tumor cells on estrogen deprivation therapy but not in primary tumors from metastatic luminal breast cancer patients. J Mol Diagn. 2020;22:111–21.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Zundelevich A, Dadiani M, Kahana-Edwin S, Itay A, Sella T, Gadot M, et al. ESR1 mutations are frequent in newly diagnosed metastatic and loco-regional recurrence of endocrine-treated breast cancer and carry worse prognosis. Breast Cancer Res. 2020;22:16.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Jeannot E, Darrigues L, Michel M, Stern MH, Pierga JY, Rampanou A, et al. A single droplet digital PCR for ESR1 activating mutations detection in plasma. Oncogene. 2020;39:2987–95.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Chia S, Gradishar W, Mauriac L, Bines J, Amant F, Federico M, et al. Double-blind, randomized placebo controlled trial of fulvestrant compared with exemestane after prior nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor therapy in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, advanced breast cancer: results from EFECT. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:1664–70.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Johnston SR, Kilburn LS, Ellis P, Dodwell D, Cameron D, Hayward L, et al. Fulvestrant plus anastrozole or placebo versus exemestane alone after progression on non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors in postmenopausal patients with hormone-receptor-positive locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (SoFEA): a composite, multicentre, phase 3 randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14:989–98.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Turner NC, Swift C, Kilburn L, Fribbens C, Beaney M, Garcia-Murillas I, et al. ESR1 mutations and overall survival on fulvestrant versus exemestane in advanced hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: a combined analysis of the phase III SoFEA and EFECT trials. Clin Cancer Res. 2020;26:5172–7.

  38. Turner NC, Kingston B, Kilburn LS, Kernaghan S, Wardley AM, Macpherson IR, et al. Circulating tumour DNA analysis to direct therapy in advanced breast cancer (plasmaMATCH): a multicentre, multicohort, phase 2a, platform trial. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21:1296–1308.

  39. Hortobagyi GN, Stemmer SM, Burris HA, Yap YS, Sonke GS, Paluch-Shimon S, et al. Ribociclib as first-line therapy for HR-positive, advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375:1738–48.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Finn RS, Martin M, Rugo HS, Jones S, Im SA, Gelmon K, et al. Palbociclib and letrozole in advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375:1925–36.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Goetz MP, Toi M, Campone M, Sohn J, Paluch-Shimon S, Huober J, et al. MONARCH 3: abemaciclib as initial therapy for advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:3638–46.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Slamon DJ, Neven P, Chia S, Fasching PA, De Laurentiis M, Im SA, et al. Phase III randomized study of ribociclib and fulvestrant in hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer: MONALEESA-3. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36:2465–72.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Sledge GW Jr., Toi M, Neven P, Sohn J, Inoue K, Pivot X, et al. MONARCH 2: abemaciclib in combination with fulvestrant in women with HR+/HER2-advanced breast cancer who had progressed while receiving endocrine therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:2875–84.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Turner NC, Ro J, Andre F, Loi S, Verma S, Iwata H, et al. Palbociclib in hormone-receptor-positive advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:209–19.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Cristofanilli M, Turner NC, Bondarenko I, Ro J, Im SA, Masuda N, et al. Fulvestrant plus palbociclib versus fulvestrant plus placebo for treatment of hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer that progressed on previous endocrine therapy (PALOMA-3): final analysis of the multicentre, double-blind, phase 3 randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17:425–39.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Sledge GW, Jr., Toi M, Neven P, Sohn J, Inoue K, Pivot X, et al. The effect of abemaciclib plus fulvestrant on overall survival in hormone receptor-positive, ERBB2-negative breast cancer that progressed on endocrine therapy-MONARCH 2: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 2019;6:116–24.

  47. O’Leary B, Cutts RJ, Liu Y, Hrebien S, Huang X, Fenwick K, et al. The genetic landscape and clonal evolution of breast cancer resistance to palbociclib plus fulvestrant in the PALOMA-3 trial. Cancer Discov. 2018;8:1390–403.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Fribbens C, O’Leary B, Kilburn L, Hrebien S, Garcia-Murillas I, Beaney M, et al. Plasma ESR1 mutations and the treatment of estrogen receptor-positive advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:2961–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Fribbens C, Garcia Murillas I, Beaney M, Hrebien S, O’Leary B, Kilburn L, et al. Tracking evolution of aromatase inhibitor resistance with circulating tumour DNA analysis in metastatic breast cancer. Ann Oncol. 2018;29:145–53.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Ladd B, Mazzola AM, Bihani T, Lai Z, Bradford J, Collins M, et al. Effective combination therapies in preclinical endocrine resistant breast cancer models harboring ER mutations. Oncotarget. 2016;7:54120–36.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Identifier NCT02698176, A Dose Exploration Study With MK-8628 in Participants With Selected Advanced Solid Tumors (MK-8628-006) [Internet]. National Library of Medicine. 2018 [cited Nov 22, 2020]. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02698176.

  52. Identifier NCT02431260, An Open-Label, Dose-Escalation Study of INCB054329 in Patients With Advanced Malignancies [Internet]. National Library of Medicine (US). 2019 [cited Nov 22, 2020]. Available from: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02431260.

  53. Linden H, Kurland BF, Link J, Novakova A, Chai X, Specht J, et al. A phase II clinical trial of HDACi (vorinostat) and AI therapy in breast cancer with molecular imaging correlates. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:556.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Lok SW, Whittle JR, Vaillant F, Teh CE, Lo LL, Policheni AN, et al. A phase Ib dose-escalation and expansion study of the BCL2 inhibitor venetoclax combined with tamoxifen in ER and BCL2-positive metastatic breast cancer. Cancer Discov. 2019;9:354–69.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Spoerke JM, Gendreau S, Walter K, Qiu J, Wilson TR, Savage H, et al. Heterogeneity and clinical significance of ESR1 mutations in ER-positive metastatic breast cancer patients receiving fulvestrant. Nat Commun. 2016;7:11579.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Moore HM, Savage HM, O’Brien C, Zhou W, Sokol ES, Goldberg ME, et al. Predictive and pharmacodynamic biomarkers of response to the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase inhibitor taselisib in breast cancer preclinical models. Mol Cancer Ther. 2020;19:292–303.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Baselga J, Dent S, Cortes J, Im Y, Dieras V, Harbeck N, et al. Phase III study of taselisib (GDC-0032) + fulvestrant (FULV) v FULV in patients (pts) with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, PIK3CA-mutant (MUT), locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (MBC): Primary analysis from SANDPIPER. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36:LBA1006.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Razavi P, Dickler MN, Shah PD, Toy W, Brown DN, Won HH, et al. Alterations in PTEN and ESR1 promote clinical resistance to alpelisib plus aromatase inhibitors. Nat Cancer. 2020;1:382–93.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. Bardia A, Hurvitz SA, DeMichele A, Clark AS, Zelnak A, Yardley D, et al. Phase I/II trial of exemestane, ribociclib, and everolimus in women with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer after progression on CDK4/6 inhibitors (TRINITI-1). Clin Cancer Res. 2021;27:4177–4185.

  60. Chandarlapaty S, Chen D, He W, Sung P, Samoila A, You D, et al. Prevalence of ESR1 mutations in cell-free DNA and outcomes in metastatic breast cancer: a secondary analysis of the BOLERO-2 clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 2016;2:1310–5.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Dahlgren M, George A, Brueffer C, Gladchuk S, Chen Y, Vallon-Christersson J, et al. Pre-existing ESR1 mutations in early-stage primary breast cancer predict failure of endocrine therapy and poor survival. Cancer Res. 2020;80:CT074-CT074.

  62. Identifier NCT03318263, CIrCuLAting Dna ESr1 Gene Mutations Analysis (CICLADES) [Internet]. National Library of Medicine (US). 2020 [cited Nov 22, 2020]. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03318263.

  63. Identifier NCT03439735, Determinants of Resistance to First-line Therapy With an AI and Palbociclib for HR+ MBC [Internet]. NIH National Library of Medicine. 2018 [cited Nov 2, 2020]. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03439735.

  64. Identifier NCT04212702, ESR1 Mutations in Asian ER+ Metastatic Breast Cancer on Hormonal Therapy-based Treatments [Internet]. National Library of Medicine (US). 2020 [cited Nov 22, 2020]. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04212702.

  65. Identifier NCT03079011, PAlbociclib and Circulating Tumor DNA for ESR1 Mutation Detection (PADA-1) [Internet]. National Library of Medicine (US). 2020 [cited Nov 22, 2020]. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03079011.

  66. Identifier NCT02738866, Palbociclib With Fulvestrant for Metastatic Breast Cancer After Treatment With Palbociclib and an Aromatase Inhibitor [Internet]. National Library of Medicine (US). 2020 [cited Nov 22, 2020]. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02738866.

  67. Identifier NCT03560856, A Biomarker Study of Palbociclib + Fulvestrant for Second, and Third Line of Postmenopausal Women With hr+/her2- Advanced Breast Cancer (PALPETBIO) [Internet]. National Library of Medicine (US). 2018 [cited Nov 22, 2020]. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03560856.

  68. Identifier NCT02913430, Phase II Treatment of Metastatic Breast Cancer With Fulvestrant Plus Palbociclib or Tamoxifen Plus Palbociclib [Internet]. National Library of Medicine (US). 2019 [cited Nov 22, 2020]. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02913430.

  69. Plourde P, Schwartzberg L, Greene G, Portman D, Komm B, Jenkins S, et al. An open-label, randomized, multi-center phase 2 study evaluating the activity of lasofoxifene relative to fulvestrant for the treatment of postmenopausal women with locally advanced or metastatic ER+/HER2− breast cancer (MBC) with an ESR1 mutation. Am Assoc Cancer Res. 2019;79:(4 Supplement) Abstract OT1-01-02.

  70. Identifier NCT04432454, Evaluation of Lasofoxifene Combined With Abemaciclib in Advanced or Metastatic ER+/HER2- Breast Cancer With an ESR1 Mutation (ELAINEII) [Internet]. National Library of Medicine (US). 2020 [cited Nov 22, 2020]. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04432454.

  71. Identifier NCT03778931, Phase 3 Trial of Elacestrant vs. Standard of Care for the Treatment of Patients With ER+/HER2- Advanced Breast Cancer (EMERALD) [Internet]. National Library of Medicine (US). 2020 [cited Nov 22, 2020]. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03778931.

  72. Identifier NCT02448771, A Study of Palbociclib in Combination With Bazedoxifene in Hormone Receptor Positive Breast Cancer [Internet]. National Library of Medicine (US). 2020 [cited Nov 22, 2020]. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02448771.

  73. Jeselsohn R, Guo H, Rees R, Barry WT, Barlett CH, Tung NM, Krop IE, et al. Results from the phase Ib/II clinical trial of bazedoxifene and palbociclib in hormone receptor positive metastatic breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2019;79:PD1-05.

  74. Lawson M, Cureton N, DuPont M, Delpuech O, Trueman D, Zhang P, et al. Not all selective estrogen receptor degraders are equal-preclinical comparisons of AZD9833, AZD9496, and Fulvestrant. AACR Annual Meeting, Philadelphia (PA): AACR; 2020, 80(16 Suppl):Abstract nr 4379.

  75. Identifier NCT04214288, A Comparative Study of AZD9833 Versus Fulvestrant in Women With Advanced ER-Positive HER2-Negative Breast Cancer (SERENA-2) [Internet]. National Library of Medicine (US). 2020 [cited Nov 22, 2020]. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04214288.

  76. Metcalfe C, Ingalla E, Blake RA, Chang J, Daemen A, De Bruyn T, Giltnane JM, et al. GDC-9545: a novel ER antagonist and clinical candidate that combines desirable mechanistic and pre-clinical DMPK attributes. Cancer Res. 2019;79:P5-04.

  77. Identifier NCT04546009, A Study Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of GDC-9545 Combined With Palbociclib Compared With Letrozole Combined With Palbociclib in Participants With Estrogen Receptor-Positive, HER2-Negative Locally Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer [Internet]. National Library of Medicine (US). 2020 [cited Nov 22, 2020]. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04546009.

  78. Campone M, Bardia A, Ulaner G, Chandarlapaty S, Gosselin A, Doroumian S, et al. Dose-escalation study of SAR439859, an oral selective estrogen receptor degrader, in postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2020;80 (Supplement): Abstract nr P5-11-02.

  79. Identifier NCT04059484, Phase 2 Study of SAR439859 Versus Physician’s Choice in Locally Advanced or Metastatic ER-positive Breast Cancer (AMEERA-3) [Internet]. National Library of Medicine (US). 2020 [cited Nov 22, 2020]. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04059484.

  80. Lu Y, Gutgesell LM, Xiong R, Zhao J, Li Y, Rosales CI, et al. Design and synthesis of basic selective estrogen receptor degraders for endocrine therapy resistant breast cancer. J Med Chem. 2019;62:11301–23.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  81. Gonzalez TL, Hancock M, Sun S, Gersch CL, Larios JM, David W, et al. Targeted degradation of activating estrogen receptor alpha ligand-binding domain mutations in human breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2020;180:611–22.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Mao C, Livezey M, Kim JE, Shapiro DJ. Antiestrogen resistant cell lines expressing estrogen receptor alpha mutations upregulate the unfolded protein response and are killed by BHPI. Sci Rep. 2016;6:34753.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  83. DeRose YS, Wang G, Lin YC, Bernard PS, Buys SS, Ebbert MT, et al. Tumor grafts derived from women with breast cancer authentically reflect tumor pathology, growth, metastasis and disease outcomes. Nat Med. 2011;17:1514–20.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  84. Petrillo LA, Wolf DM, Kapoun AM, Wang NJ, Barczak A, Xiao Y, et al. Xenografts faithfully recapitulate breast cancer-specific gene expression patterns of parent primary breast tumors. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;135:913–22.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Li S, Shen D, Shao J, Crowder R, Liu W, Prat A, et al. Endocrine-therapy-resistant ESR1 variants revealed by genomic characterization of breast-cancer-derived xenografts. Cell Rep. 2013;4:1116–30.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Zafar H, Tzen A, Navin N, Chen K, Nakhleh L. SiFit: inferring tumor trees from single-cell sequencing data under finite-sites models. Genome Biol. 2017;18:178.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  87. Kim C, Gao R, Sei E, Brandt R, Hartman J, Hatschek T, et al. Chemoresistance evolution in triple-negative breast cancer delineated by single-cell sequencing. Cell 2018;173:879–93 e13.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  88. Davis RT, Blake K, Ma D, Gabra MBI, Hernandez GA, Phung AT, et al. Transcriptional diversity and bioenergetic shift in human breast cancer metastasis revealed by single-cell RNA sequencing. Nat Cell Biol. 2020;22:310–20.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. O’Leary B, Hrebien S, Morden JP, Beaney M, Fribbens C, Huang X, et al. Early circulating tumor DNA dynamics and clonal selection with palbociclib and fulvestrant for breast cancer. Nat Commun. 2018;9:896.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  90. Sachs N, de Ligt J, Kopper O, Gogola E, Bounova G, Weeber F, et al. A living biobank of breast cancer organoids captures disease heterogeneity. Cell 2018;172:373–86 e10.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Patel HK, Tao N, Lee KM, Huerta M, Arlt H, Mullarkey T, et al. Elacestrant (RAD1901) exhibits anti-tumor activity in multiple ER+ breast cancer models resistant to CDK4/6 inhibitors. Breast Cancer Res. 2019;21:146.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  92. Fanning SDV, Mayne C, Toy W, Carlson K, Martin T, Nowak, J, et al. Bazedoxifene inhibits ESR1 somatic mutants with improved potency compared to tamoxifene and raloxifene. New Orleans, LA: AACR 107th Annual Meeting; 2016.

  93. Shomali MCJ, Koundinya M, Weinstein M, Malkova N, Sun F, Hebert A, et al. Identification of SAR439859, an orally bioavailable selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD) that has strong antitumor activity in wild-type and mutant ER+breast cancer models. San Antonio, TX: San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016.

  94. SV Bhagwat, B Zhao, W Shen, C Mur, R Barr, LJ Kindler, et al. Preclinical characterization of LY3484356, a novel, potent and orally bioavailable selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD). AACR Annual Meeting, Philadelphia (PA): AACR; 2021, 81(13_Suppl):Abstract nr 1236.

  95. Samatar AA, Li J, Hegde S, Huang P, Ma J, Bunker K, et al. Discovery of ZN-c5, a novel potent and oral selective estrogen receptor degrader. Cancer Res. 2020;80:4373.

  96. Jardim DL, Millis SZ, Ross JS, Woo MS-A, Ali SM, Kurzrock R. Cyclin Pathway Genomic Alterations Across 190,247 Solid Tumors: Leveraging Large-Scale Data to Inform Therapeutic Directions. Oncologist 2021;26::e78–e89. https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2020-0509.

  97. Moore HM, Savage HM, O'Brien C, Zhou W, Sokol ES. Goldberg ME, et al. Predictive and Pharmacodynamic Biomarkers of Response to the Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinase Inhibitor Taselisib in Breast Cancer Preclinical Models. Mol Cancer Ther 2020;19:292–303. https://doi.org/10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-19-0284.

Download references

Funding

This study is supported by BCRF 19-055, NIH R01 CA207270, NIH R01 CA072038, CPRIT MIRA RP180712 (Kelly Hunt, PI), and T32 CA203690-02 to SAWF. SKH received training support from the National Institute of Health (NIH) Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award (NRSA) Individual Predoctoral Fellowship (F31CA260983) and the NIH Training Program in Cell and Molecular Biology (T32GM008231).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Lester and Sue Smith Breast Center, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA

    Sarah K. Herzog & Suzanne A. W. Fuqua

  2. Program in Integrative Molecular and Biomedical Sciences, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA

    Sarah K. Herzog & Suzanne A. W. Fuqua

  3. Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA

    Suzanne A. W. Fuqua

  4. Dan L Duncan Cancer Center, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA

    Suzanne A. W. Fuqua

Authors
  1. Sarah K. Herzog
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Suzanne A. W. Fuqua
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Concept and design of review: SKH and SAWF. Writing and review of the paper: SKH and SAWF.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Suzanne A. W. Fuqua.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

SAWF is a subject editor, member of the Editorial Board of BJC and guest editor of the special issue on metastasis.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Herzog, S.K., Fuqua, S.A.W. ESR1 mutations and therapeutic resistance in metastatic breast cancer: progress and remaining challenges. Br J Cancer 126, 174–186 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41416-021-01564-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41416-021-01564-x

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links