Protein signaling and drug target activation signatures to guide therapy prioritization: Therapeutic resistance and sensitivity in the I-SPY 2 Trial

Rosa I Gallagher,Julia Wulfkuhle,Denise M Wolf,Lamorna Brown-Swigart,Christina Yau,Nicholas O'Grady,Amrita Basu,Ruixiao Lu,Michael J Campbell,Mark J Magbanua,Jean-Philippe Coppé,I-SPY 2 Investigators,Smita M Asare,Laura Sit,Jeffrey B Matthews,Jane Perlmutter,Nola Hylton,Minetta C Liu,W Fraser Symmans,Hope S Rugo,Claudine Isaacs,Angela M DeMichele,Douglas Yee,Paula R Pohlmann,Gillian L Hirst,Laura J Esserman,Laura J van 't Veer,Emanuel F Petricoin
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xcrm.2023.101312
2023-12-19
Abstract:Molecular subtyping of breast cancer is based mostly on HR/HER2 and gene expression-based immune, DNA repair deficiency, and luminal signatures. We extend this description via functional protein pathway activation mapping using pre-treatment, quantitative expression data from 139 proteins/phosphoproteins from 736 patients across 8 treatment arms of the I-SPY 2 Trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01042379). We identify predictive fit-for-purpose, mechanism-of-action-based signatures and individual predictive protein biomarker candidates by evaluating associations with pathologic complete response. Elevated levels of cyclin D1, estrogen receptor alpha, and androgen receptor S650 associate with non-response and are biomarkers for global resistance. We uncover protein/phosphoprotein-based signatures that can be utilized both for molecularly rationalized therapeutic selection and for response prediction. We introduce a dichotomous HER2 activation response predictive signature for stratifying triple-negative breast cancer patients to either HER2 or immune checkpoint therapy response as a model for how protein activation signatures provide a different lens to view the molecular landscape of breast cancer and synergize with transcriptomic-defined signatures.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?