Beyond <i>ESR1</i> : Multi-pathway genomic drivers of endocrine resistance in HR⁺/HER2⁻ breast cancer.

H Humaid Obaid Al-Shamsi (Burjeel Cancer Institute, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates) M Massimo Cristofanilli (Weill-Cornell Medicine, New York–Presbyterian Hospital, New York) M Muzammil Shaikh (Nanavati Max Super Speciality Hospital, Mumbai, India) A Ashok K. Vaid (Medanta, The Medicity, Gurugram, India) S Sewanti Atul Limaye (Medical &amp; Precision Oncology, Clinical and Translational Oncology Research, Sir HN Reliance Foundation, Mumbai, India) A Amish Vora (Hope Oncology Clinic, Delhi, India) N Niyati Krunal Shah (Sir H. N. Reliance Foundation Hospital and Research Centre, Mumbai, India) D Darshana Suresh Patil (Datar Cancer Genetics, Nashik, India) R Rajan Datar (Datar Cancer Genetics, Nashik, India) N Navin Srivastava (Datar Cancer Genetics, Nashik, India) V Vineet Datta (Datar Cancer Genetics, Nashik, India) K Kinner Shah (Shalby Hospital, Ahmedabad, India) A Ashok Sebastian Komaranchath (Burjeel Hospital, Muscat, Oman) D Dorthe Schaffrin-Nabe (Praxis Für Hämatologie und Onkologie, Bochum, Germany) T Tim Crook (Cromwell Hospital, London, United Kingdom) S Shiroma De Silva-Minor (Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, United Kingdom)

Abstract

1071 Background: Endocrine resistance in HR⁺/HER2⁻ breast cancer is often associated with acquisition of ESR1 point mutations, but many patients at progression remain ESR1 wild type. Identifying ESR1 -independent, multi-pathway acquired resistance mechanisms is critical for guiding subsequent therapy. Methods: We analyzed 1,429 HR⁺/HER2⁻ breast cancer samples (468 tissue, 1,171 cfDNA), including 210 paired cases, from patients with metastatic breast cancer undergoing molecular testing for treatment guidance or disease monitoring. Next-generation sequencing performed at Datar Cancer Genetics assessed SNVs, CNAs, and gene fusions. Alterations implicated in endocrine resistance were analysed for incidence, specimen type, and co-alteration patterns. Results: ESR1 -wild-type tumors frequently harbored clinically relevant endocrine resistance mechanisms, most commonly involving the PI3K/AKT, FGFR, ERBB2, MAPK , and cell-cycle pathways. At least one resistance-associated alteration was identified in 40.4% (473/1172) of evaluable ESR1 -wild-type cases, while 14.8% (173/1172) harbored alterations across multiple resistance pathways, highlighting substantial ESR1 -independent resistance biology. Among ESR1 -driven mechanisms, ESR1 SNVs were detected slightly more frequently in cfDNA than tissue (13.7% vs 12.8%), despite inclusion of cfDNA samples obtained during clinical surveillance, supporting the sensitivity of liquid biopsy for detecting emergent resistance. ESR1 fusions represented a distinct, non-overlapping resistance mechanism, identified in 7.4% (28/379) of tissue samples, most commonly ESR1–CCDC170 (71%) and ESR1–AKAP12 (14%); 21 fusion-positive cases lacked ESR1 SNVs, underscoring the need for fusion assessment to fully capture ESR1 -driven resistance. Dynamic pathway activation was further supported by acquired PI3K pathway mutations, detected in cfDNA in 3.3% (4/122) of cases initially PIK3CA -wild-type in paired tissue samples. Conclusions: Endocrine resistance in HR⁺/HER2⁻ breast cancer is mediated by multiple actionable genomic pathways beyond ESR1 , including PI3K/AKT, FGFR, ERBB2, MAPK , and cell-cycle alterations. These findings expand opportunities to personalize therapy and guide clinical trial selection by targeting non- ESR1 resistance mechanisms. Incidence of endocrine resistance-associated genomic alterations beyond ESR1 point mutations in tissue and liquid biopsy for HR⁺/HER2⁻ breast cancer. Endocrine Resistance Biomarker ESR1 -Mutant Cases (%) ESR1 Wild-Type Cases (%) ESR1 fusions 11.1 6.7 FGFR1 alterations 13.2 7.0 CCND1 amplification 15.2 7.0 FGFR2/3 alterations 3.7 2.0 HER2 -mutant, non-amplified 2.5 2.6 PIK3CA mutation 43.7 25.1 PTEN mutation 2.0 1.6 AKT1 mutation 5.6 3.6 MAPK Pathway( RAS/RAF/MEK ) 4.6 4.0

Article Details

Volume / Issue Vol. 44, Issue 16_suppl
Published June 01, 2026
Pages 1071-1071
ISSN 0732-183X
Publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Journal Info

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

ISSN: 0732-183X Health Sciences

Authors (16)

H

Humaid Obaid Al-Shamsi

Burjeel Cancer Institute, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates

M

Massimo Cristofanilli

Weill-Cornell Medicine, New York–Presbyterian Hospital, New York

M

Muzammil Shaikh

Nanavati Max Super Speciality Hospital, Mumbai, India

A

Ashok K. Vaid

Medanta, The Medicity, Gurugram, India

S

Sewanti Atul Limaye

Medical &amp; Precision Oncology, Clinical and Translational Oncology Research, Sir HN Reliance Foundation, Mumbai, India

A

Amish Vora

Hope Oncology Clinic, Delhi, India

N

Niyati Krunal Shah

Sir H. N. Reliance Foundation Hospital and Research Centre, Mumbai, India

D

Darshana Suresh Patil

Datar Cancer Genetics, Nashik, India

R

Rajan Datar

Datar Cancer Genetics, Nashik, India

N

Navin Srivastava

Datar Cancer Genetics, Nashik, India

V

Vineet Datta

Datar Cancer Genetics, Nashik, India

K

Kinner Shah

Shalby Hospital, Ahmedabad, India

A

Ashok Sebastian Komaranchath

Burjeel Hospital, Muscat, Oman

D

Dorthe Schaffrin-Nabe

Praxis Für Hämatologie und Onkologie, Bochum, Germany

T

Tim Crook

Cromwell Hospital, London, United Kingdom

S

Shiroma De Silva-Minor

Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, United Kingdom