Abstract BACKGROUND Standard-of-care (SoC) endocrine therapy (ET) for patients (pts) with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, PIK3CA-mutated locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (HR+, HER2–, PIK3CA-mut LA/mBC) was transformed by combinations with cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6is); a CDK4/6i-based combination is approved in high-risk early BC. However, in most pts, mechanisms of resistance that emerge during or after treatment with a CDK4/6i and ET combination lead to relapse/disease progression. Dysregulating mutations in PIK3CA, occurring in ~40% of HR+, HER2– BCs, represent a common mechanism of resistance to CDK4/6is and ET combinations. Alpelisib (ALP; a selective PI3Kα inhibitor; PI3Kαi) + fulvestrant (FUL) is approved for pts with HR+, HER2–, PIK3CA-mut LA/mBC, but its widespread implementation in clinical practice has been challenging. As such, there is a significant need to develop PI3Kαis with a better therapeutic index. Inavolisib (INAVO) is a highly potent and selective PI3Kαi that also facilitates the degradation of mutated PI3Kα isoform. INAVO has demonstrated manageable safety/tolerability, alone and in combination with SoC treatments in HR+, HER2–, PIK3CA-mut LA/mBC. Moreover, an ongoing Phase I trial showed that INAVO + FUL elicited encouraging preliminary antitumor activity in heavily pretreated pts, including a CDK4/6i-based regimen. TRIAL DESIGN INAVO121 is a Phase III, randomized, open-label study. Pts are randomized 1:1 to receive INAVO (9 mg oral daily; PO QD) + FUL (500 mg intramuscularly on Days [D] 1 and 15 of Cycle 1, then D1 of subsequent cycles), or ALP (300 mg PO QD) + FUL. Randomization is stratified by visceral disease (yes vs no) and prior CDK4/6i therapy (adjuvant vs metastatic setting). Pts will receive treatment until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA Pts have HR+, HER2–, PIK3CA-mut LA/mBC (confirmed by circulating-tumor DNA or tumor tissue), adequate hematologic and organ function, and disease progression after or during treatment with a CDK4/6i-based regimen. Up to two prior lines of systemic therapy in LA/mBC, including one line of chemotherapy, are allowed. AIMS The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary endpoints include overall survival, BICR-objective response rate, BICR-best overall response, BICR-duration of response, BICR-clinical benefit rate, safety, tolerability, pt-reported outcomes, and pharmacokinetics. STATISTICAL METHODS A stratified log-rank test at an overall 0.05 significance level (two-sided) will be used for the primary endpoint analysis. Median PFS will be estimated using Kaplan–Meier methodology. An independent data monitoring committee will be in place for safety and efficacy. ACCRUAL The study is open for enrollment and has randomized four pts; the study is targeting 400 pts at ~200 sites globally. CONTACT INFORMATION For more information or to refer a patient, email global.rochegenentechtrials@roche.com or call 1-888-662-6728 (USA only). Clinicaltrials.gov number NCT05646862. This abstract was originally presented at ASCO 2023 (TPS1123). Citation Format: Dejan Juric, Kevin Kalinsky, Seock-Ah Im, Eva Ciruelos, Giampaolo Bianchini, Carlos Barrios, William Jacot, Peter Schmid, Sherene Loi, Hope Rugo, Veronica Craine, Katherine Hutchinson, Aulde Flechais, Eirini Thanopoulou, Nadia Harbeck. INAVO121: Phase III study of inavolisib + fulvestrant vs alpelisib + fulvestrant in patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, PIK3CA-mutated locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PO2-19-08.

Supplementary Data from VERONICA: Randomized Phase II Study of Fulvestrant and Venetoclax in ER-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer Post-CDK4/6 Inhibitors – Efficacy, Safety, and Biomarker Results

TPS1123 Background: Standard-of-care (SoC) endocrine therapy (ET) for pts with HR+, HER2– LA/mBC was transformed by combinations with cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6is); a CDK4/6i-based combination is approved in high-risk early BC. However, in most pts, mechanisms of resistance that emerge during or after treatment with a CDK4/6i and ET combination lead to relapse/disease progression. Dysregulating mutations in PIK3CA, occurring in ~40% of HR+, HER2– BCs, represent a common mechanism of resistance to CDK4/6is and ET combinations. ALP (a selective PI3Kα inhibitor; PI3Kαi) + FUL is approved for pts with HR+, HER2–, PIK3CAmut LA/mBC, but its widespread implementation in clinical practice has been challenging. As such, there is a significant need to develop PI3Kαis with a better therapeutic index. INAVO is a highly potent and selective PI3Kαi that also facilitates the degradation of mutated PI3Kα isoform. INAVO has demonstrated manageable safety/tolerability, alone and in combination with SoC treatments in HR+, HER2–, PIK3CAmut LA/mBC. Moreover, an ongoing Phase I trial showed that INAVO + FUL elicited encouraging preliminary antitumor activity in heavily pretreated pts, including a CDK4/6i-based regimen. Methods: INAVO121 (NCT05646862) is a Phase III, randomized, open-label study evaluating INAVO + FUL vs. ALP + FUL in pts with HR+, HER2–, PIK3CAmut LA/mBC (confirmed by circulating-tumor DNA or tumor tissue), who progressed during or after a CDK4/6i-based regimen with adequate hematologic and organ function. Up to two prior lines of systemic therapy in LA/mBC, including one line of chemotherapy are allowed. Pts are randomized 1:1 to receive INAVO (9 mg oral daily; PO QD) + FUL (500 mg intramuscularly on Days [D] 1 and 15 of Cycle [C] 1, then D1 of subsequent cycles), or ALP (300 mg PO QD) + FUL. Randomization is stratified by visceral disease (yes vs. no) and prior CDK4/6i therapy (adjuvant vs. metastatic setting). Pts will receive treatment until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary endpoints include overall survival, BICR-objective response rate, BICR-best overall response, BICR-duration of response, BICR-clinical benefit rate, safety, tolerability, pt-reported outcomes, and pharmacokinetics. The study is open for enrollment, targeting 400 pts at ~200 sites globally. A stratified log-rank test at an overall 0.05 significance level (two-sided) will be used for the primary endpoint analysis. Median PFS will be estimated using Kaplan–Meier methodology. An independent data monitoring committee will be in place for safety and efficacy. Clinical trial information: NCT05646862 .

Abstract Purpose: Despite promising activity in hematopoietic malignancies, efficacy of the B-cell lymphoma 2 (BCL2) inhibitor venetoclax in solid tumors is unknown. We report the prespecified VERONICA primary results, a randomized phase II clinical trial evaluating venetoclax and fulvestrant in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer, post–cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitor progression. Patients and Methods: Pre-/postmenopausal females ≥18 years were randomized 1:1 to venetoclax (800 mg orally daily) plus fulvestrant (500 mg intramuscular; cycle 1: days 1 and 15; subsequent 28-day cycles: day 1) or fulvestrant alone. The primary endpoint was clinical benefit rate (CBR); secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and safety. Exploratory biomarker analyses included BCL2 and BCL extra-large (BCLXL) tumor expression, and PIK3CA circulating tumor DNA mutational status. Results: At primary analysis (cutoff: August 5, 2020; n = 103), venetoclax did not significantly improve CBR [venetoclax plus fulvestrant: 11.8% (n = 6/51; 95% confidence interval (CI), 4.44–23.87); fulvestrant: 13.7% (7/51; 5.70–26.26); risk difference –1.96% (95% CI, –16.86 to 12.94)]. Median PFS was 2.69 months (95% CI, 1.94–3.71) with venetoclax plus fulvestrant versus 1.94 months (1.84–3.55) with fulvestrant (stratified HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.61–1.45; P = 0.7853). Overall survival data were not mature. A nonsignificant improvement of CBR and PFS was observed in patients whose tumors had strong BCL2 expression (IHC 3+), a BCL2/BCLXL Histoscore ratio ≥1, or PIK3CA-wild-type status. Conclusions: Our findings do not indicate clinical utility for venetoclax plus fulvestrant in endocrine therapy–resistant, CDK4/6 inhibitor–refractory metastatic breast tumors, but suggest possible increased dependence on BCLXL in this setting.

BACKGROUND: Venetoclax (VEN) is a potent and selective inhibitor of the anti-apoptotic protein, BCL2. Preclinical studies have implicated the BCL2 family members, BCLXL and MCL1, in VEN resistance, and clinical studies in hematological malignancies have demonstrated subgroups with high ratios of BCL2/BCLXL and BCL2/MCL1 have the greatest VEN antitumor activity. The randomized phase 2 VERONICA study (NCT03584009) evaluated VEN in combination with fulvestrant (F) vs F alone in ER-positive, HER2-negative MBC pts who experienced disease recurrence/progression during or after a CDK4/6 inhibitor. Previously reported results from VERONICA (Lindeman et al. ASCO 2021) did not show an improved clinical benefit rate or progression-free survival (PFS) with VEN+F vs F alone. Here we present exploratory biomarker analyses of the expression of BCL2 family members and genomic alterations in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and association with clinical outcomes from VEN+F vs F. METHODS: Tumor specimens were obtained during screening from 103 patients enrolled in the study, and expression levels of BCL2, BCLXL and MCL1 were analyzed by IHC. Baseline plasma-derived ctDNA was evaluated using the FoundationOne® Liquid assay. Expression of BCL2, BCLXL, MCL1 and mutations in ctDNA were correlated with PFS from VEN+F vs F based on the primary analysis (cutoff: Aug 5, 2020). RESULTS: In the overall population, protein levels of BCL2, BCLXL and MCL1 were similar between the VEN+F vs F arms. Patients whose tumors were BCL2 3+ trended towards having the greatest difference in median (m) PFS (3.9 months [mo] in VEN+F vs 1.7 mo in F; hazard ratio [HR] 0.38 [95% CI 0.09, 1.62]) albeit in a small sample size (n=13). Similarly, subgroup analysis suggested a trend for increasing mPFS and improved HR in VEN+F vs F alone in patients with the lowest BCLXL expression. mPFS in patients with a BCL2/BCLXL ratio ≥1 was 3.7 mo for VEN+F vs 1.8 mo for F (HR 0.67 [95% CI 0.3-1.49]) whereas patients with a BCL2/BCLXL ratio <1 had no difference in mPFS between the arms (2.0 mo in both arms, HR 1.21 [95% CI 0.7-2.1]). In the ctDNA-evaluable population, ESR1 (42.6%), TP53 (41.5%) and PIK3CA (35%) were the most prevalent genomic alterations observed and well-controlled between arms. PFS was similar between the ESR1 wildtype (wt) and mutant (mut) subgroups. TP53 mut status was a poor prognostic factor in both treatment arms. The PIK3CA wt subgroup had increased mPFS with VEN+F vs F alone (HR 0.66 [95% 0.38-1.17]) compared to PIK3CA mut (HR 1.59 [95% 0.74-3.34]). Patients with PIK3CA wt and BCL2 high tumors had the largest difference in mPFS between VEN+F (3.7 mo) vs F alone (1.9 mo) (HR 0.58 [95%CI 0.28-1.19]), compared to PIK3CA wt-BCL2 low tumors (2.4 vs 1.9 mo; HR 0.67 [95%CI 0.26-1.72]). CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that a high ratio of BCL2 to BCLXL conferred a trend towards a greater benefit to VEN+F compared to F alone, consistent with other clinical studies evaluating VEN. These analyses highlight the need to profile BCL2 and its family members to identify the VEN-sensitive subgroups, especially in indications where high expression of BCLXL or MCL1 may be observed. The ctDNA profile of VERONICA patients indicate a heavily pretreated patient population. The benefit observed in PIK3CA wt patients from VEN+F suggest increased dependence on BCL2 in this subgroup, while PIK3CA mut tumors likely rely on PI3K/AKT/mTOR survival programs or other BCL2 family members to evade apoptosis. Exploratory biomarker analyses are ongoing to further understand the VERONICA patient population. Citation Format: Geoffrey J. Lindeman, Tharu M. Fernando, Rebecca Bowen, Ching-Wei Chang, Rupal Desai, Kushagra Gupta, Aulde Fléchais, Timothy R. Wilson, Aditya Bardia. Exploratory biomarker analysis in VERONICA, a phase 2 study of venetoclax + fulvestrant versus fulvestrant in patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (mBC) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-13-06.

1004 Background: For patients (pts) with ER-positive, HER2-negative MBC, CDK4/6 inhibitors + endocrine therapy (ET) is standard first-line treatment, with single-agent ET considered for second-line. Nevertheless, most pts progress. A novel therapeutic target is the antiapoptotic protein BCL2, which is overexpressed in ̃85% of primary ER-positive breast cancers. VEN is a potent, selective BCL2 inhibitor that has shown promising clinical activity in pts with ER-positive and BCL2-positive MBC who have received prior ET. We report the prespecified primary and updated (for overall survival [OS]) analysis of VERONICA (NCT03584009), a phase II study of VEN + F vs F in ER-positive, HER2-negative LA/MBC. Methods: Pts were ≥18-year-old women with ER-positive, HER2-negative LA/MBC, who received ≤2 prior lines of ET and no prior chemotherapy in the LA/MBC setting and experienced disease recurrence/progression during/after CDK4/6 inhibitor therapy (received ≥8 weeks prior). Pts were randomized 1:1 to VEN (oral; 800 mg daily) + F (intramuscular; 500 mg day 1 and 15 of cycle 1; day 1 of subsequent 28-day cycles) or F, and were treated until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, death, or predefined study end. Pts were stratified by prior lines of therapy in the LA/MBC setting (1 vs 2) and BCL2 status (high vs low). Primary endpoint was clinical benefit rate (CBR; complete response, partial response, and stable disease ≥24 weeks). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and OS; safety and exploratory subgroup analyses were also conducted. Results: At primary analysis (cutoff: Aug 5, 2020), 103 pts had been randomized (intention-to-treat [ITT] population). Median age was 58.0 and 59.5 years in the VEN + F and F arms, respectively. CBR was similar between arms (VEN + F: 11.8% [n = 6/51; 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.44–23.87]; F: 13.7% [7/51; 5.70–26.26]; risk difference: -1.96% [95% CI -16.86–12.94]). Median PFS was 2.69 months (95% CI 1.94–3.71) in the VEN + F vs 1.94 months (1.84–3.55) in the F arm (stratified hazard ratio: 0.94 [95% CI 0.61–1.45]). Results for CBR and PFS were similar in the BCL2-high and -low subgroups vs the ITT population. More grade 3–4 adverse events (AEs) were observed in the VEN + F vs F arm (n = 13/50 [26%] vs 6/51 [11.8%]). AEs observed with VEN + F were consistent with their individual safety profiles. At updated analysis (cutoff: Oct 22, 2020), OS data were not mature (35.0% event/pt ratio); median OS was 16.99 months in the VEN + F vs not reached in the F arm (stratified hazard ratio: 2.06 [1.04–4.09]). Conclusions: From the primary analysis, VERONICA did not show an improved CBR or PFS with VEN + F, vs F alone, in pts with endocrine- and CDK4/6 inhibitor-refractory LA/MBC. Biomarker analysis is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT03584009 .

TPS1108 Background: CDK4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6is) administered with endocrine therapy have demonstrated improvements in progression-free survival (PFS) for estrogen receptor (ER)+ advanced breast cancer (BC), but resistance occurs, and new options are needed in the post-CDK4/6i setting. BCL2 is an estrogen-responsive anti-apoptotic molecule overexpressed in 75% of BCs. The BCL2 inhibitor venetoclax (Ven) has shown improved outcomes and tolerability in hematological malignancies such as chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and has been investigated in BC. A phase 1b study of Ven + tamoxifen demonstrated safety and an efficacy signal in ER+, BCL2+ metastatic BC (mBC). Preclinical data for Ven + fulvestrant (Ful) have also shown synergy. Based on these proof-of-principle data, the current study evaluates safety and efficacy of Ven + Ful vs Ful in women with ER+, HER2– locally advanced (LA)/mBC progressing after first- or second-line of prior therapy for metastatic disease, including ≥8 wks of a CDK4/6i. Methods: VERONICA is a global, randomized, phase 2, multicenter, open-label study. Eligible patients (pts) are aged ≥18 yrs with confirmed ER+, HER2–, inoperable LA/mBC, ≥1 measurable lesion, tissue evaluable for BCL2, and ECOG performance status 0–1. Prior Ful or Ven, or prior chemotherapy for LA/mBC are prohibited. Stratified by BCL2 expression (low vs high) and number of prior lines of mBC therapy (1 vs 2), pts are randomized 1:1 to Ven 800 mg PO daily + Ful 500 mg IM (cycle 1 days 1 and 15, and day 1 of each subsequent 28-day cycle) vs Ful 500 mg IM alone. Treatment continues until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. Primary endpoint is clinical benefit rate defined as complete/partial response + stable disease for ≥24 wks from randomization. Secondary efficacy endpoints include PFS, objective response rate, duration of response, and overall survival. Safety, pharmacokinetic, biomarker (e.g. BCL2 and PI3K expression) and patient-reported outcome analyses will also be conducted. Currently, 21 of the planned 100 pts have been enrolled; enrollment is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT03584009.