Abstract Background: Vepdegestrant, an oral PROTAC ER degrader, showed encouraging clinical activity and was well tolerated in a phase 1/2 study (NCT04072952) including patients (pts) with heavily pretreated ER+/HER2- aBC. In a subsequent phase 3 trial (VERITAC-2, NCT05654623), vepdegestrant demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in progression-free survival vs fulvestrant among pts with previously treated ER+/HER2- aBC and ESR1 mutations (ESR1m). Here, we report exploratory ctDNA biomarker analyses from the phase 1/2 study evaluating vepdegestrant monotherapy. Methods: This multicenter, open-label study included a 3+3 dose escalation (phase 1; vepdegestrant doses: 30−700 mg daily) and dose expansion (phase 2; vepdegestrant 200 mg or 500 mg once daily). Eligible pts had ER+/HER2- metastatic, recurrent, or locally advanced unresectable breast cancer previously treated with ≥1 cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor and ≥2 (phase 1) or ≥1 (phase 2) endocrine regimens. Baseline (cycle C 1 day D 1) and on-treatment (C1D28) circulating-free DNA (cfDNA) samples from the majority of pts treated with vepdegestrant (all at doses ≥100 mg/day) were analyzed using F1LCDx from Foundation Medicine. For these exploratory analyses of the pooled phase 1/2 dataset, baseline and on-treatment changes in variant allele fraction (VAF) of ESR1-mutated ctDNA and tumor fraction (TF; percentage of cfDNA that originates from the tumor) were assessed in association with the clinical benefit rate (CBR; complete response, partial response, or stable disease for ≥24 weeks) and analyzed by Firth’s penalized logistic regression. Results: Among 154 pts treated with vepdegestrant, 138 had ctDNA samples analyzed with the F1LCDx platform (all had received vepdegestrant ≥100 mg/day). Of these, 81 pts (59%) had ESR1m (D538G 41%; Y537S 39%; Y537N 22%; E380Q 8%; L536P 6%; L536R 5%). When analyzed as single variables, ESR1m VAF and TF at baseline were not positively or negatively associated with CBR; among pts with ESR1m, mean (95% CI) baseline ESR1m VAF was 9.1% (5.7-12.4) in pts with clinical benefit (n=34) and 7.4% (2.6-12.1) in pts without clinical benefit (n=32) and mean baseline TF (95% CI) was 18.4% (12.0-24.8) and 22.2% (15.4-29.0), respectively. However, when baseline ESR1m VAF was normalized to baseline TF, a higher ESR1m VAF/TF ratio was significantly associated with better CBR; mean ESR1m VAF/TF (95% CI) of 0.59 (0.47-0.72) vs 0.35 (0.25-0.45) in pts with vs without clinical benefit (p=0.005). Robust reductions in ESR1m VAF were observed across Y537X, D538X and L536X variants of ESR1 after 1 cycle of treatment, with 87% of ESR1m alleles showing ≥50% reduction from baseline at C1D28. Robust reductions in TF were also observed, with 81.5% of pts with ESR1m demonstrating ≥50% reduction in TF from baseline at C1D28. Among pts with ESR1m, change in TF was significantly associated with clinical benefit; the median percentage change in TF from C1D1 to C1D28 was −99.2% in pts with clinical benefit (n=33) vs −50.4% in pts without clinical benefit (n=32; p0.001). Conclusions: Patients with higher baseline ESR1m VAF/TF, a likely indicator of ESR1m clonality, had better clinical outcomes with vepdegestrant than pts with lower ESR1m VAF/TF. Greater decreases in ctDNA TF after 1 cycle of treatment were associated with increased likelihood of achieving clinical benefit. Overall, these exploratory biomarker analyses provide potentially clinically useful insights on pt responses to vepdegestrant and add to a growing body of evidence on the use of ctDNA in decisions around treatment continuation for pts with ER+/HER2- aBC. Citation Format: S. A. Wander, H. S. Han, E. P. Hamilton, S. A. Hurvitz, M. Lachowicz, W. Wu, J. Corradi, A. Van Acker, M. A. Dorso, E. Duperret, S. Lonning, S. Dychter, C. Ma. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) biomarker analyses of a phase 1/2 study evaluating vepdegestrant, a PROteolysis TArgeting Chimera (PROTAC) estrogen receptor (ER) degrader, in ER-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative advanced breast cancer (aBC) abstract. In: Proceedings of the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2025; 2025 Dec 9-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2026;32(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PS2-07-24.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
S. A. Wander
H. S. Han
E. P. Hamilton
Clinical Cancer Research
Harvard University
Massachusetts General Hospital
Washington University in St. Louis
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Wander et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/699a9e00482488d673cd465c — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1557-3265.sabcs25-ps2-07-24