AZD9496: An oral estrogen receptor inhibitor that blocks the growth
Transcription
AZD9496: An oral estrogen receptor inhibitor that blocks the growth
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 Title: AZD9496: An oral estrogen receptor inhibitor that blocks the growth of ERpositive and ESR1 mutant breast tumours in preclinical models. Running title: Pharmacology of SERD inhibitor in breast cancer models Hazel M. Weir,a Robert H. Bradbury,a Mandy Lawson,a Alfred A. Rabow,a David Buttar,a Rowena J. Callis,b Jon O. Curwen,a Camila de Almeida,a Peter Ballard, a Michael Hulse,a Craig S. Donald,a Lyman J. L. Feron,a Galith Karoutchi,a Philip MacFaul,a Thomas Moss,a Richard A. Norman,b Stuart E. Pearson,a Michael Tonge,b Gareth Davies,a Graeme E. Walker,b Zena Wilson,a Rachel Rowlinson,a Steve Powell,a Claire Sadler,a Graham Richmond,a Brendon Ladd, d Ermira Pazolli,c Anne Marie Mazzola,d Celina D’Cruz,d Chris De Savi.d Authors’ Affiliations: a Oncology iMed, AstraZeneca, Mereside, Alderley Park, Macclesfield SK10 4TG, UK; b Discovery Sciences, AstraZeneca, Mereside, Alderley Park, Macclesfield SK10 4TG UK; c H3 Biomedicine, Technology Sq, Cambridge, MA 02139,dOncology iMed, AstraZeneca R&D Boston, Gatehouse Drive, Waltham, MA 02451, U.S. Key words: SERD, estrogen receptor, metastatic breast cancer, ER mutation, ESR1 mutation. combination therapy Corresponding author: Hazel.Weir@astrazeneca.com Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest: All authors are present or past employees of AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals Tables: 1 Figures: 6 Supplementary Tables:4 Supplementary Figures: 7 Precis: This article discloses the structure and pharmacology of an oral non-steroidal small molecule which is potent against wild-type and mutant forms of the estrogen receptor, producing anti-tumour efficacy either as a monotherapy or in combination with PI3K or cell cycle inhibitors in vivo. 1 38 39 40 Abstract 41 Fulvestrant is an estrogen receptor (ER) antagonist administered to breast cancer patients by 42 monthly intramuscular injection. Given its present limitations of dosing and route of 43 administration, a more flexible orally available compound has been sought to pursue the 44 potential benefits of this drug in patients with advanced metastatic disease. Here we report 45 the identification and characterization of AZD9496, a non-steroidal small molecule inhibitor 46 of ERα which is a potent and selective antagonist and down-regulator of ERα in vitro and in 47 vivo in ER-positive models of breast cancer. Significant tumour growth inhibition was 48 observed as low as 0.5 mg/kg dose in the estrogen-dependent MCF-7 xenograft model, where 49 this effect was accompanied by a dose-dependent decrease in PR protein levels demonstrating 50 potent antagonist activity. Combining AZD9496 with PI3K pathway and CDK4/6 inhibitors 51 led to further growth inhibitory effects compared to monotherapy alone. Tumour regressions 52 were also seen in a long-term estrogen-deprived breast model, where significant down- 53 regulation of ERα protein was observed. AZD9496 bound and down-regulated clinically 54 relevant ESR1 mutants in vitro and inhibited tumour growth in an ESR1-mutant patient- 55 derived xenograft model that included a D538G mutation. Collectively, the pharmacological 56 evidence showed that AZD9496 is an oral, non-steroidal, selective estrogen receptor 57 antagonist and down-regulator in ER-positive breast cells that could provide meaningful 58 benefit to ER-positive breast cancer patients. AZD9496 is currently being evaluated in a 59 Phase 1 clinical trial. 60 2 61 62 Introduction 63 With over 70% of breast cancers expressing the estrogen receptor alpha (ERα), 64 treatment with anti-hormonal therapies that directly antagonise ER function (e.g. tamoxifen) 65 or therapies that block the production of the ligand, estrogen (e.g. aromatase inhibitors) are 66 key to management of the disease both in adjuvant and metastatic settings (1, 2). Despite 67 initial efficacy seen with endocrine therapies, the development of acquired resistance 68 ultimately limits the use of these agents although the majority of tumours continue to require 69 ERα for growth. Through the use of pre-clinical models and cell lines, changes in growth 70 factor receptors have been implicated in driving resistance in cells e.g. receptor tyrosine 71 kinases (HER2), epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and their downstream signalling 72 pathways, Ras/Raf/MAPK and phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K)/protein kinase B (AKT) 73 signalling (3, 4, 5). In some instances signalling from different growth factor receptor kinases 74 leads to phosphorylation of various proteins in the ER pathway, including ER itself, leading 75 to ligand–independent activation of the ER pathway (6). 76 In the metastatic setting, 500 mg fulvestrant, given as 2 x 250 mg intramuscular 77 injections, has been shown to offer additional benefit over the 250mg dose with improved 78 median overall survival (7, 8). Recent analysis of pre-surgical data from a number of trials 79 showed a dose-dependent effect on key biomarkers such as ER, progesterone receptor (PR) 80 and Ki67 labeling index (9). Although fulvestrant is clearly effective in this later treatment 81 setting, there are still perceived limitations in its overall clinical benefit due to very low 82 bioavailability, the time taken to achieve plasma steady-state of 3-6 months and ultimately 83 the level of ERα reduction seen in clinical samples (10, 11). It is widely believed that a 84 potent, orally bioavailable SERD that could achieve higher steady-state free drug levels more 3 85 rapidly would have the potential for increased receptor knock-down and lead to quicker 86 clinical responses, reducing the possibility of early relapses (12). Moreover, the recent 87 discovery of ESR1 mutations in metastatic breast cancer patients that had received prior 88 endocrine treatments, where the mutated receptor is active in the absence of estrogen, 89 highlights an important potential resistance mechanism. Pre-clinical in vitro and in vivo 90 studies have shown a reduction in signalling from ESR1 mutants by tamoxifen and fulvestrant 91 but at higher doses than required to inhibit the wild type receptor which implies that more 92 potent SERDs may be required to treat these patients or to used in the adjuvant setting to 93 limit the emergence of mutations (13, 14, 15). Achieving oral bioavailability has remained a key challenge in the design of ER 94 95 down-regulators and until now no oral estrogen receptor down-regulators, other than GDC- 96 0810 and RAD1901, have progressed into clinical trials, despite encouraging reports from 97 others of pre-clinical activity in mouse xenograft models (16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21). Here we 98 describe a chemically novel, non-steroidal ERα antagonist and down-regulator, AZD9496, 99 that can be administered orally and links increased tumour growth inhibition to enhanced 100 biomarker modulation compared to fulvestrant in a preclinical in vivo model of breast cancer. 101 Moreover we show that AZD9496 is a potent inhibitor of ESR1 mutant receptors and can 102 drive tumour growth inhibition in a patient-derived ESR1 mutant in vivo model (PDX). Hence 103 AZD9496 is anticipated to yield improved bioavailability and clinical benefit through 104 enhanced ER pathway modulation. 105 Methods 106 Cell lines and culture 107 All AZ cell lines were tested and authenticated by short-tandem repeat (STR) analysis. MCF- 108 7 was obtained from DSMZ and last STR tested February 2013. MDA-MB-361 (STR tested 4 109 October 2011), MDA-MB-134 (STR tested October 2010), T47D (STR tested June 2012), 110 CAMA-1 (STR tested March 2012) HCC1428 (STR tested December 2011) HCC70 (STR 111 tested October 2013), LnCAP (STR tested August 2011), MDA-MB-468 (STR tested March 112 2014), BT474 (STR tested July 2013), PC3 (STR tested October 2012), HCT116 (STR 113 tested August 2011) were all obtained from the ATCC. HCC1428-LTED cell line (STR 114 tested November 2012) was kindly provided by Carlos Arteaga (22). Cells were cultured in 115 RPMI-1640 media (Corning) supplemented with 10% heat-inactivated foetal calf serum 116 (FCS) or charcoal/dextran-treated CCS to deplete hormone and 2mmol/L L-glutamine 117 (Corning).. Stable MCF-7 cell lines expressing FLAG-tagged ESR1 mutant proteins in 118 pTRIPZ lentiviral vectors (GE Healthcare) under the control of the doxycycline inducible Tet 119 promoter were generated by lentiviral infection using standard techniques. 120 121 Biochemical and in vitro cell assays 122 Binding, ER agonism, antagonism, down-regulation and cell proliferation assays were carried 123 out as described previously (23). BIAcore affinity measurements and immunoblotting from 124 compound treated cells are described in Supplementary Methods. 125 126 Protein production, crystallization and structure determination 127 Protein expression, purification and crystallization of the ERα ligand-binding domain was 128 carried out as previously described (24). X-ray diffraction data were collected at the ESRF on 129 beamline ID23-1 on an ADSC detector. Data were processed using XDS (25) as implemented 130 within EDNA (26) and scaled and merged using SCALA (27). The structure of ERα in 131 complex with AZD9496 was solved by molecular replacement using AmoRE and an internal 132 ERα structure as the search model (28). Quality checks on the protein structures were carried 5 133 out using the validation tools in Coot (29). The final structure has been deposited in the 134 Protein Databank (PDB) with the ID code given in Supplementary Table S1. 135 136 SILAC and mass spectrometry 137 SILAC assays were carried out as previously described (30) and detailed in Supplementary 138 methods. Compound treated samples were analysed by mass spectrometry using relative 139 peptide quantification by selected reaction monitoring (SRM). Degradation half-life was 140 measured using the one-phase exponential decay equation in GraphPad PRISM (Y=Span.e- 141 K.X 142 decreases to Plateau with a rate constant K. +Plateau) where X is time and Y is response which starts out as Span+Plateau and 143 144 Rat Uterine and Xenograft Studies 145 All studies involving animals in the United Kingdom were conducted in accordance with UK 146 Home Office legislation, the Animal Scientific procedures Act 1986 (ASPA) and 147 AstraZeneca Global Bioethics policy or with US federal, state and Institutional guidelines in 148 an AAALAC-accredited facility. The rat uterine weight assay for the measurement of 149 estrogenic activity were performed as described previously (31). Details of individual 150 models, protein analysis of tumour fragments and pharmacokinetic analysis of plasma 151 samples are included in Supplementary Methods. 6 152 153 Results 154 AZD9496 is a selective ERα antagonist, down-regulator and inhibitor of ER positive 155 tumour cell growth 156 157 AZD9496 ((E)-3-(3,5-difluoro-4-((1R,3R)-2-(2-fluoro-2-methylpropyl)-3-methyl-2,3,4,9- 158 tetrahydro-1H-pyrido[3,4-b]indol-1-yl)phenyl)acrylic acid, Fig. 1A) was identified through 159 structure based design and iterative medicinal chemistry structure-activity-relationship (SAR) 160 studies from a novel ER binding motif (32). A directed ER binding screen was established to 161 identify novel binding motifs that could then be optimised for both cellular phenotype and 162 potency while maintaining good pharmacokinetic properties (23). Unlike fulvestrant, and 163 other well known historical modulators of the ER receptor, including hydroxy-tamoxifen 164 (Fig. 1B), AZD9496 lacks a phenolic moiety in which the phenol mimics the A-ring phenol 165 group of the endogenous ligand estradiol but gains its potency through a different series of 166 novel interactions with the ER protein (Fig. 1C). The indole NH picks up an interaction by 167 forming a hydrogen bond to the carbonyl of Leu-346, with additional lipophilic interactions 168 achieved by both the chiral methyl substituent, adjacent to the ring nitrogen and the N- 169 substituted isopropyl fluoro side-chain occupying a “lipophilic hole” in the ER protein. The 170 acrylic acid side chain picks up an unusual acid-acid co-localization with Asp-351 in the 171 Helix-12 region of the ER that has been proposed to be crucial for achieving a down- 172 regulator-antagonist profile (33). AZD9496 showed high oral bioavailability across three 173 species (F% 63, 91 and 74, rat, mouse and dog, respectively) with generally low volume and 174 clearance across species, albeit a higher clearance in mouse. The percent free levels in human 175 plasma of 0.15% were 5 fold higher than those measured for fulvestrant. 176 177 The key characteristics of a SERD is the ability to both antagonise and downregulate ER protein without inducing any partial agonist effects in breast cells. A series of in 7 178 vitro cell assays were developed specifically to measure ERα down-regulation, agonism and 179 antagonism through simultaneous measurement of ER and PR protein levels in cells after 180 treatment with AZD9496 (23). PR expression is known to be regulated by ER transcription 181 and was measured as a marker of ER activation in cells (34). The potency of AZD9496 182 approached that observed with fulvestrant in achieving pM IC50 in ERα binding, down- 183 regulation and antagonism and significant cell growth inhibition in hormone-depleted growth 184 conditions. Adding 250 nM tamoxifen significantly lowered the IC50 value, as expected, if 185 AZD9496 and tamoxifen are competing for binding to the LBD (Table 1A). The potent 186 down-regulation of ERα was also verified by immunoblotting techniques (Supplementary 187 Fig. S1). 188 To understand the binding kinetics of AZD9496 to human ERα ligand binding 189 domain (LBD), binding studies were performed in the presence of increasing concentrations 190 of AZD9496 and association (kass) and dissociation (kdiss) rate constants were calculated. 191 AZD9496 was calculated as having an apparent dissociation rate constant (kdiss) for ERα 192 LBD of 0.00043 sec-1, at 25 ºC equating to a half-life (t ½) of 27 ± 2 min and the affinity 193 derived from the ratio of the rate constants gave a KD of 0.33 nM (Supplementary Table 194 S2). This is in good agreement with the binding IC50 of 0.82 nM and correlates well with 195 previously published data on estrogen and tamoxifen binding to ER LBD (35). AZD9496 196 showed pM equipotent binding to both ERα and ERβ isoforms as expected given their high 197 sequence homology and similarity in tertiary structure in their LBDs (36) and highly selective 198 binding compared to progesterone (~650 fold), glucocorticoid (~11223 fold) and androgen 199 (~36375 fold) receptor LBDs (Supplementary Table S3). Selectivity for ER was also 200 evident by measuring cell growth inhibition in a panel of ER +ve and ER -ve cell lines 201 (Supplementary Table S4). No significant growth inhibition was seen in any ER -ve cell 202 lines (EC50 >10 μM) in contrast to the low nM activity seen in a range of ER +ve cell lines. 8 203 204 205 AZD9496 directly targets ERα for down-regulation in vitro To measure the rate at which AZD9496 down-regulated ERα, stable isotope 206 labelling of amino acids (SILAC) experiments were performed in MCF-7 cells using mass 207 spectroscopy analysis to detect ERα protein levels after treatment with compounds. Addition 208 of AZD9496 or fulvestrant increased the rate of degradation of the isotope-labelled ERα 209 compared to DMSO control. Levels of newly synthesised ERα peptide were also reduced 210 following AZD9496 and fulvestrant treatment, presumably due to on-going degradation of 211 newly-synthesised ERα protein by compound present, whereas ERα protein levels continued 212 to increase over time in the presence of tamoxifen or DMSO (Fig 2). The t½ of ERα was 213 decreased from 3 hours, in the presence of DMSO, to 0.75 hours with 100 nM AZD9496 and 214 0.6 hours with 100 nM fulvestrant. (Supplementary Fig. S2). Down-regulation of ER occurs 215 through the 26S proteosomal pathway as no decrease in ERα protein level in MCF-7 cells 216 was seen in the presence of the proteosome inhibitor MG132 (Supplementary Fig. S3). 217 Additionally, ERα down-regulation was shown to be reversible in compound wash-out 218 experiments, where ERα levels increased in a time-dependent manner back to basal levels 219 over a 48 hour period following compound removal. (Supplementary Fig. S4). 220 Agonism of ERα in human breast and uterine cells 221 In contrast to an AstraZeneca reference compound (AZ10557841) which has known ERα 222 agonist activity in breast cells, AZD9496 was shown to cause no increase in PR protein levels 223 but rather a slight decrease below the detected basal levels (Fig. 3A). Some endocrine 224 therapies, such as tamoxifen, can act as partial ER agonists in certain tissues e.g. 225 endometrium, due to conformational changes that take place at the ER and the resulting effect 226 on co-factor recruitment and transcriptional gene activation from the tamoxifen-bound 9 227 receptor (37). To test if AZD9496 could act as a partial agonist in other tissues, agonist 228 effects were measured in vivo in a previously validated immature female rat model designed 229 to detect agonistic properties of test compounds by measuring increases in uterine weight 230 (31). AZD9496, given once daily orally at 5 and 25 mg/kg produced statistically significant 231 increases in uterine weight compared to the fulvestrant control (p<0.001) but significantly 232 lower than tamoxifen (p=0.001) (Fig. 3B). Histological staining of uterine tissue samples 233 also showed that the lengthening of the endometrial cells in the rat uteri appeared to have 234 decreased compared to tamoxifen (Fig. 3C). In further studies, ERα protein levels were 235 reduced with fulvestrant and AZD9496, but not tamoxifen, compared to relevant vehicle 236 controls, whereas PR levels were significantly increased with tamoxifen alone (Fig. 3D). 237 238 AZD9496 is a potent, oral inhibitor of breast tumour growth in vivo 239 The effect of chronic, oral dosing of AZD9496 was explored in MCF7 human breast 240 xenografts, as a representative ER+/PR+/HER2+ breast cancer model. Good bioavailability 241 and high clearance gave a terminal t½ of 5-6 hours after oral dosing in the mouse and resulted 242 in significant dose-dependent tumour growth inhibition with 96% inhibition at 50 mg/kg and 243 no toxicity or weight loss relative to the vehicle control group (Fig. 4A). To confirm that 244 AZD9496 was targeting the ER pathway, PR protein levels were measured in tumour samples 245 taken at the end of the study and a significant reduction in PR was seen which correlated with 246 tumour growth inhibition. A >90% reduction in PR was seen with both 10 and 50 mg/kg 247 doses and a 75% decrease even with the 0.5 mg/kg dose, demonstrating that AZD9496 can 248 clearly antagonise the ER pathway (Fig. 4B). Dosing 5 mg/kg of AZD9496, the minimal 249 dose required to see significant tumour inhibition, gave greater tumour growth inhibition 250 compared to 5 mg/mouse fulvestrant given 3x weekly and tamoxifen given 10 mg/kg orally, 251 daily (Fig. 4C). A series of pharmacodynamic in vivo studies were conducted to measure 10 252 time taken to reach maximal inhibition of PR levels and time taken to recover back to basal 253 levels. Three days of dosing with 5 mg/kg of AZD9496 gave 98% reduction of PR protein 254 and continued to suppress protein levels at 48 hours (Fig. 4D) with full recovery by 72 hours 255 (data not shown) which indicates a long pharmacological half life in vivo. Fulvestrant, given 256 as 3 x 5 mg/mouse doses over one week, gave a 60% reduction in PR protein over a 257 prolonged period with measured plasma levels ~8-fold higher than those achieved clinically, 258 at steady state, with 500 mg fulvestrant (Fig. 4E). As estrogen itself is known to down- 259 regulate ER protein (38, 39), we were unable to detect further decreases in ERα protein 260 compared to control animals with AZD9496 or fulvestrant in the MCF-7 model presumably 261 due to the high circulating plasma levels of estrogen from implanted pellets at the time 262 tumour samples were taken (Supplementary Fig. S5). A mouse specific metabolite of 263 AZD9496 was detected in circulating plasma at similar levels to AZD9496 and showed a 264 similar pharmacokinetic profile. Testing this metabolite in the in vitro MCF-7 assays resulted 265 in ~5 fold lower ERα antagonism activity and 7 fold lower ERα down-regulation activity 266 than AZD9496 (data not shown). Using a PK/PD model based on PR inhibition data, at the 5 267 mg/kg dose in vivo, which gives 98 % inhibition of PR, the inhibitory activity that could be 268 attributed to the parent compound alone was 85% when the activity of the metabolite was 269 discounted. 270 To explore mechanistic effects on ER pathway regulation further, a gene 271 expression analysis study was performed using tumour samples dosed at 10 mg/kg for 3 days 272 with AZD9496 or tamoxifen and fulvestrant given as a single dose 5 mg dose 273 subcutaneously. Tumours were taken 24 hours after the last dose of AZD9496 and tamoxifen 274 and mRNA levels measured using a Human Transcriptome Array (HTA 2.0). A number of 275 known ER regulated genes were examined to see if AZD9496 could antagonise these genes 276 in a similar manner to Fulvestrant and tamoxifen (40-42). The heap map shows that 11 277 AZD9496 could indeed down-regulate the mRNA levels of estrogen responsive genes 278 (Supplementary Fig. S6A). As differences in the levels of mRNA down-regulation in vivo 279 could be due to different PK profiles of the molecules, the effects of compounds on the 280 mRNA levels of a subset of estrogen regulated genes were also measured in MCF-7 cells that 281 had been treated with or without estrogen (Supplementary Fig. 6 B-E). For two of these 282 genes, TFF1 and AREG, tamoxifen was shown to increase mRNA levels in the absence of 283 estrogen but not with either fulvestrant or AZD9496 (Supplementary Fig. 6 D, E). Where 284 transcript levels were increased to varying levels in the presence of estrogen, fulvestrant and 285 AZD9496 inhibited transcript levels in a dose dependent fashion compared to tamoxifen. No 286 significant effects were seen in ESR1 mRNA levels in vitro indicating that the protein down- 287 regulation described previously is due to down-regulation of the protein and not a decrease in 288 transcript levels per se (Supplementary Fig. 6F). 289 290 AZD9496 causes tumour regressions in combination with PI3K pathway and CDK4/6 291 inhibitors and in an estrogen deprived ER +ve model of resistance 292 Acquired resistance to aromatase inhibitors and antiestrogens is driven through 293 a variety of mechanisms which include effects on the ER pathway itself i.e. down-regulation 294 of ER expression and altered expression of ER co-regulators, as well as activation of 295 alternative pro-survival or proliferative pathways and cross-talk between growth factor 296 receptors and ER pathways. This has led to a number of clinical trials with PIK3, mTOR, 297 AKT inhibitors, as well as CDK4/6 inhibitors in combination with aromatase inhibitors or 298 fulvestrant and early results have showed increased progression-free survival (PFS) in many 299 cases (43). Combinations of AZD9496 with AZD2014 (dual mTORC1/2), AZD8835 300 (PIK3Cα/δ) and Palbociclib (CDK4/6) inhibitors were tested in the MCF-7 in vivo model and 301 in all cases tumour regressions seen with the combination arms alone compared to tumour 12 302 stasis with monotherapy (Fig. 5A-C). AZD9496 was also tested in a long-term estrogen 303 deprived model (LTED), using the HCC-1428 LTED cell line that was previously adapted to 304 grow in the absence of estrogen and as such represents a model of aromatase inhibitor 305 resistance (22). Tumour regressions were seen with both AZD9496 and fulvestrant (Fig. 5D) 306 and both compounds completed ablated ER protein levels in the end of study tumours 307 (Supplementary Fig. S7). 308 309 AZD9496 antagonises and down-regulates mutant ER in vitro and in vivo 310 The recent identification of ESR1 mutations in patients that had received one or more 311 endocrine therapy treatments has led to the discovery that these mutations can drive cell 312 proliferation in the absence of estrogen and may constitute a resistance mechanism to some 313 endocrine agents. In vitro binding studies were performed using wt, D538G and Y537S 314 LBDs and both AZD9496 and fulvestrant were able to bind to mutant LBD with nM potency 315 although 2-3 fold reduced compared to wt (Table 1B). The different IC50 values obtained for 316 binding of AZD9496 and fulvestrant to wt ERα compared to the value in Table 1A is likely 317 due to different sources of protein used in the Lanthascreen kit assays versus the laboratory 318 derived wt and ESR1 mutant proteins. Down-regulation of ER mutant proteins was measured 319 using MCF-7 doxycycline inducible stable cell lines in vitro. ER protein levels increased on 320 induction with 1 μg/ml doxycyline and led to increased levels of PR in the absence of 321 estrogen. AZD9496 and fulvestrant were able to down-regulate all mutant ER proteins and 322 decreased PR levels whereas tamoxifen appeared to stabilise ER protein levels and reduced 323 PR levels to a lesser extent (Fig. 6A). To explore activity against an ESR1 mutant in vivo, 324 tumour growth inhibition studies were performed in a patient-derived xenograft (PDX) 325 model, CTC-174, which harbours a D538G mutation in the LBD and constituted 31% of the 326 transcripts variants identified by RNA-seq analysis. Tumours were grown from implanted 13 327 tumour fragments either with or without estrogen and in both cases viable tumours grew. 328 Given published data that higher doses of SERM/SERDs may be needed to inhibit ESR1 329 mutants (14, 15), 25mg/kg of AZD9496 was used alongside 5mg/mouse of fulvestrant which 330 was known to achieve higher PK levels in mouse than the current clinical dose. AZD9496 331 and fulvestrant inhibited tumour growth by 66% and 59% respectively, compared to 332 tamoxifen which gave 28% inhibition. Efficacy correlated with antagonism of the pathway 333 with AZD9496 giving a 94% decrease in PR levels compared to 63% with fulvestrant (Fig. 334 6B and C). In the absence of estrogen, and given the significant PR changes seen with 335 25mg/kg, the dose of AZD9496 was lowered but a 5 mg/kg dose still achieved growth 336 inhibition of ~70% and led to a significant decrease of 73% in ERα protein levels at the end 337 of study (Fig. 6D and E). Given the similarities in growth inhibition either with or without 338 estrogen, residual tumour growth is likely to be due to either additional mutations (e.g. 339 PIKCA N345K) and/or growth factor signalling pathways involved in driving tumour growth 340 in addition to the ER pathway. 341 342 Discussion 343 Despite the enhanced clinical benefits of directly antagonising and down-regulating ER and 344 thereby targeting any ligand-independent ER driven pathways, the pharmacokinetic and IHC 345 biomarker data for ER, PR and Ki67 from clinical trials with fulvestrant would suggest that a 346 plateau of effect has not been reached, and there is scope to further improve on the 50% 347 reduction in ER levels seen after 6 months of treatment (8, 12). As one of the potential draw- 348 backs associated with fulvestrant is the very low bioavailability which is seen both in patients 349 and in pre-clinical animal models, a potent, orally bioavailable SERD could have the 350 potential to significantly antagonise ER activity and increase ERα receptor knockdown 351 versus fulvestrant due to higher exposures. Our approach focused on identifying novel ER 14 352 motifs with established drug-like properties that could then be optimized for cellular 353 phenotype and potency and led to the identification of AZD9496 which showed pM potency 354 in vitro in ER+ve cell lines only. Previous structural analysis of a number of SERMs with 355 ERα LBD identified key interactions with Asp 351 which was shown to be critical for the 356 antagonist activity of anti-estrogens such as raloxifene, lasofoxifene and GW5638 through 357 shielding or neutralisation of the negative charge. Unlike tamoxifen however, GW5638 358 repositioned residues Helix-12 through its acrylate side chain, increasing the exposed 359 hydrophobic surface of ERα resulting in destabilisation and ultimately 26S proteosomal 360 degradation of the receptor. The acrylic acid moiety of AZD9496 is co-localized with the Asp 351 361 residue in the helix-12 region of ER, in an unusual acid-acid interaction and it is therefore proposed 362 that AZD9496 also repositions residues associated with the helix-12 via specific contacts with the N- 363 terminus region resulting in a mixed antagonist and down-regulator profile (33, 44). Evidence that 364 AZD9496 was directly binding and down-regulating the receptor at the same site as other 365 anti-estrogens was seen by the reduced potency observed on prior addition of tamoxifen to 366 the down-regulation assay (Table 1A). Mechanistically we have shown that AZD9496 has 367 very similar effects on antagonism, ERα down-regulation and agonism to fulvestrant. Even 368 where ERα was over-expressed in MCF-7 cells, unlike tamoxifen, AZD9496 was able to 369 down-regulate and antagonise the over-expressed receptor (Fig 6A). Our transcriptional 370 studies in both MCF-7 cells and the in vivo model also demonstrated antagonism of the 371 transcriptional activity of the receptor as seen by decreased mRNA levels of ER-activated 372 genes in a dose dependent manner (Supplementary Fig. 6). 373 Unlike fulvestrant, AZD9496 did show some degree of agonism in endometrial 374 tissue (Fig. 3). This effect was dose independent and would indicate that there are subtle 375 differences in how AZD9496 interacts with ERα compared to tamoxifen and fulvestrant and 376 therefore the extent to which tissue specific co-activators can interact with the receptor. 15 377 Given the widespread use of tamoxifen in the adjuvant setting for 5-10 years, the low level of 378 agonism seen with AZD9496 is not viewed as a deterrent for clinical development. A number 379 of studies have looked at the incidence of endometrial cancer in patients taking tamoxifen 380 over a number of years and despite the small increase in the incidence of endometrial cancer, 381 the benefits of tamoxifen greatly outweigh any risks of developing uterine malignancy in 382 post-menopausal patients (45, 46). 383 A PK-PD-efficacy model was established, integrating diverse endpoints such as 384 drug exposure, PR modulation and inhibition of tumour growth (data not shown). The model 385 reflected relative contributions of AZD9496 and its active mouse metabolite to the overall 386 biomarker modulation and efficacy. Given the half life of the parent drug and metabolite are 387 around 5 hours, to explain the prolonged PD effect observed with AZD9496 at 48 hours, an 388 indirect response model for PR was developed which estimated a degradation rate constant of 389 around 23 hours for PR. This modulation in PR was linked directly to tumour growth 390 inhibition by a proportional decrease of the tumour growth constant, and correlated well with 391 the wide range of measured efficacies. 392 We consistently saw enhanced tumour growth inhibition of AZD9496 393 compared to fulvestrant in the MCF-7 in vivo model (Fig. 4). This model contains high 394 circulating levels of plasma estradiol over the dosing period of the study as a result of the 395 estrogen pellets used to drive growth of the MCF-7 cells as a xenograft. With plasma levels 396 between 750 and 1000 pg/ml over day 21-35, this model is more representative of the pre- 397 menopausal setting where estrogen levels can vary between 20 – 400 pg/ml (47). As the 398 receptor binding data does not suggest a significant difference in affinity for the receptor 399 between AZD9496 and fulvestrant, increased efficacy is likely due to the higher free drug 400 levels of AZD9496 versus fulvestrant in this model. It would therefore be interesting to test 16 401 the activity of potent oral SERDs, such as AZD9496, in the pre-menopausal setting where 402 there is no enhanced risk of endometrial cancer observed for tamoxifen. 403 We were unable to detect a reduction in ER protein levels in the MCF-7 in vivo 404 model with AZD9496 at any dose tested (data not shown). Having shown in vitro that 405 estradiol can efficiently down-regulate ERα protein, we postulate that down-regulation of 406 ERα by estradiol is already taking place in vivo given the high levels of circulating estrogen 407 and that any additional changes by addition of a SERD are difficult to detect using the 408 current methods. This was supported by measuring ERα down-regulation in in vivo models, 409 such as CTC-174 and HCC1428LTED, not requiring estrogen supplements, and showing 410 potent down-regulation of ERα by AZD9496 (Fig. 6E, Supplementary Fig. S7). The level of 411 ERα reduction seen in the HCC1428 model is greater than seen clinically, with PK levels 5 412 fold higher than steady state plasma levels of 500 mg fulvestrant, and supports the concept 413 that if increased plasma levels of an active SERD agent could be achieved clinically, greater 414 ERα knock-down may be possible. Pre-clinically, this appears to translate to enhanced 415 tumour growth inhibition. 416 Achieving increased serum levels of a biologically active SERD could be 417 particularly beneficial in the recently identified ESR1 mutant patient setting. Pre-clinical in 418 vivo studies using PDX models derived from ESR1 mutant patients grown in the absence of 419 estrogen supplementation have shown that high doses of fulvestrant (>500 mg/kg) can lead to 420 tumour regression and significant decreases in ER protein levels but at significantly higher 421 doses than could be achieved clinically (48). Our preclinical data would indicate that both 422 AZD9496 and fulvestrant can potently bind and down-regulate D538G and Y537C/N/S ERα 423 proteins in vitro and significant tumour growth inhibition rather than regression seen in vivo. 424 This is in contrast to published work showing relatively little down-regulation of Y537N 425 mutant protein in vitro with increasing doses of fulvestrant (15) but could be attributed to 17 426 different expression systems and cell lines used for the analysis. It is notable that the Dox- 427 inducible mutant receptors do not appear to be constitutively down-regulated in a similar 428 manner to wt ER exposed to estradiol (Supplementary Fig. S1). This may due to the level of 429 over-expression of the receptor in each stable cell line and it will be interesting to compare 430 these findings from engineered expression systems to those from genetically altered mutant 431 cell lines where expression is under control of the native promoter. Although very high doses 432 of both compounds were not tested in the PDX CTC-174 ESR1 mutant model, the lack of any 433 significant dose response might indicate the need to inhibit other growth factor activated 434 pathways in addition to the ER pathway to achieve significant anti-tumour growth. As trials 435 commence to explore treatment of ESR1 mutant patients with new oral SERDs, data will 436 hopefully emerge that will indicate whether lack of response is due to inability to fully inhibit 437 mutated ER receptors or whether in these advanced metastatic patients, other mutations and 438 pathways are or become dominant in driving tumour growth. 439 In metastatic breast cancer the median survival time is still around two years as 440 a result of acquired endocrine resistance, highlighting the need for additional therapies (43). 441 This has led to a number of clinical trials using PI3K-Akt-mTOR pathway inhibitors in 442 combination with AIs as well as cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitors such as palbociclib which 443 was recently approved for combination treatment with letrozole in the metastatic breast 444 cancer. Results from Phase III BOLERO-2 trial also demonstrated the PFS benefits of a 445 steroidal AI plus everolimus in patients that had progressed on a non-steroidal AI (49). More 446 recently further trials have been initiated using fulvestrant as the combination endocrine 447 partner which will allow analysis and understanding of any additional benefit from 448 combination with a SERD versus AIs in this setting. Our data clearly demonstrated enhanced 449 combination effects on tumour growth of an oral SERD agent with either dual mTORC1/2, 450 PIKCα/δ or CDK4/6 inhibitors and furthermore opens up the possibility of using a combined 18 451 endocrine and targeted inhibitor approach with longer term dosing in the adjuvant setting, 452 assuming emerging data from on-going metastatic trials supports the testing of combinations 453 in early breast disease. The identification of a potent, orally bioavailable compound such as 454 AZD9496 is a step forward in the next generation of SERD agents to undergo clinical 455 evaluation as a future monotherapy or combination partner of choice. 456 457 Acknowledgements 458 The authors would like to thank Elaine Hurt, Haifeng Bao, Sanjoo Jalla for access to the 459 CTC-174 in vivo model developed at MedImmune, Gaithersburg MD 20878.The authors 460 thank Paul Hemsley and Emma Linney for providing ER mutant binding assay data, Helen 461 Gingell for supporting the crystallography work and Zara Ghazoui and Henry Brown for the 462 transcript data and analysis at AstraZeneca, Alderley Park, Macclesfield, UK. The authors 463 also thank Carlos Arteaga for use of the HCC1428-LTED cell line. 464 465 References 466 467 468 469 1. Davies C, Godwin J, Gray R, Clarke M, Cutter D, et al. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group (EBCTCG), Relevance of breast cancer hormone receptors and other factors to the efficacy of adjuvant tamoxifen: patient-level meta-analysis of randomised trials. Lancet 2011;378:771-84. 470 471 472 2. Cuzick J, Sestak I, Baum M, Buzdar A, Howell A, Dowsett M, et al. Effect of anastrozole and tamoxifen as adjuvant treatment for early-stage breast cancer: 10-year analysis of the ATAC trial. Lancet Oncol 2010;11:1135-41. 473 474 475 3. Nicholson RI, Hutcheson IR, Jones HE, Hiscox SE, Giles M, Taylor KM, et al. Growth factor signalling in endocrine and anti-growth factor resistant breast cancer. Rev Endocr Metab Disord 2007;8:241-53. 476 477 478 4. Lupien M, Meyer CA, Bailey ST, Eeckhoute J, Cook J, Westerling T, et al. Growth factor stimulation induces a distinct ER(alpha) cistrome underlying breast cancer endocrine resistance. Genes Dev. 2010 Oct 1;24(19):2219-27. 479 480 481 5. Massarweh S, Schiff R. Resistance to endocrine therapy in breast cancer: exploiting estrogen receptor/growth factor signaling crosstalk. Endocr Relat Cancer. 2006 Dec;13 Suppl 1:S15-24. 19 482 483 6. Ali S, Coombes RC. Endocrine-responsive breast cancer and strategies for combating resistance. Nat Rev Cancer 2002;2:101-12. 484 485 486 7. Di Leo A, Jerusalem G, Petruzelka L, Torres R, Bondarenko IN, Khasanov R, et al. Final overall survival: fulvestrant 500 mg vs 250 mg in the randomized CONFIRM trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2014;106:337. 487 488 489 8. Kuter I, Gee JM, Hegg R, Singer CF, Badwe RA, Lowe ES, et al. Dose-dependent change in biomarkers during neoadjuvant endocrine therapy with fulvestrant: results from NEWEST, a randomized Phase II study. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2012;133:237-46. 490 491 9. Robertson JF, Lindemann J, Garnett S, Anderson E, Nicholson RI, Kuter I, et al. A good drug made better: the fulvestrant dose-response story. Clin Breast Cancer 2014;14:381-9. 492 493 10. Robertson JF, Harrison M. Fulvestrant: pharmacokinetics and pharmacology. Br J Cancer 2004;90 Suppl 1:S7-10. 494 495 11. Howell A, Sapunar F. Fulvestrant revisited: efficacy and safety of the 500-mg dose. Clin Breast Cancer 2011;11:204-10. 496 497 12. Robertson JF. Fulvestrant (Faslodex) -- how to make a good drug better. Oncologist 2007;12:774-84. 498 499 500 13. 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. 501 502 14. 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. 503 504 505 506 15. Jeselsohn R, Yelensky R, Buchwalter G, Frampton G, Meric-Bernstam F, GonzalezAngulo 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. 507 508 509 16. Willson TM, Henke BR, Momtahen TM, Charifson PS, Batchelor KW, Lubahn DB, et al. 3-[4-(1,2-Diphenylbut-1-enyl)phenyl]acrylic acid: a non-steroidal estrogen with functional selectivity for bone over uterus in rats. J Med Chem 1994;37:1550-2. 510 511 512 17. Hoffmann J, Bohlmann R, Heinrich N, Hofmeister H, Kroll J, Kunzer H, et al. Characterization of new estrogen receptor destabilizing compounds: effects on estrogensensitive and tamoxifen-resistant breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96:210-8. 513 514 515 18. Tan Q, Blizzard TA, Morgan JD, Birzin ET, Chan W, Yang YT, et al. Estrogen receptor ligands. Part 10: Chromanes: old scaffolds for new SERAMs. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 2005;15:1675-81. 516 517 19. Suzuki N, Liu X, Laxmi YR, Okamoto K, Kim HJ, Zhang G, et al. Anti-breast cancer potential of SS5020, a novel benzopyran antiestrogen. Int J Cancer 2011;128:974-82. 20 518 519 520 521 20. Lai A, Kahraman M, Govek S, Nagasawa J, Bonnefous C, Julien J, et al. Identification of GDC-0810 (ARN-810), an orally bioavailable Selective Estrogen Receptor Degrader (SERD) that demonstrates robust activity in tamoxifen-resistant breast cancer xenografts. J Med Chem 2015[Epub ahead of print]. 522 523 524 21 Garner F, Shomali M, Paquin D, Lyttle R, Hattersley G. RAD1901: a novel, orally bioavailable selective estrogen receptor degrader that demonstrates antitumour activity in breast cancer xenograft models. Anti-Cancer Drugs 2015;26:948-956. 525 526 527 528 22. Miller TW, Balko JM, Ghazoui Z, Dunbier A, Anderson H, Dowsett M, et al. A gene expression signature from human breast cancer cells with acquired hormone independence identifies MYC as a mediator of antiestrogen resistance. Clin Cancer Res 2011;17:202434. 529 530 531 23. Callis R, Rabow A, Tonge M, Bradbury R, Challinor M, Roberts K, et al. A Screening Assay Cascade to Identify and Characterize Novel Selective Estrogen Receptor Downregulators (SERDs). J Biomol Screen 2015 [Epub ahead of print]. 532 533 534 24. Degorce SL, Bailey A, Callis R, De Savi C, Ducray R, Lamont G, et al. Investigation of (E)-3-[4-(2-Oxo-3-aryl-chromen-4-yl)oxyphenyl]acrylic Acids as Oral Selective Estrogen Receptor Down-Regulators. J Med Chem 2015;58:3522-33. 535 25. Kabsch W. Xds. Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr 2010;66:125-32. 536 537 538 26. Incardona MF, Bourenkov GP, Levik K, Pieritz RA, Popov AN, Svensson O. EDNA: a framework for plugin-based applications applied to X-ray experiment online data analysis. J Synchrotron Radiat 2009;16:872-9. 539 540 27. Evans P. Scaling and assessment of data quality. Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr 2006;62:72-82. 541 542 28. Navaza J. Implementation of molecular replacement in AMoRe. Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr 2001;57:1367-72. 543 544 29. Emsley P, Lohkamp B, Scott WG, Cowtan K. Features and development of Coot. Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr. 2010;66:486-501. 545 546 30. Ong S, Mann M. A practical recipe for stable isotope labeling by amino acids in cell culture (SILAC). Nat Protocols. 2007;1:2650-2660. 547 548 549 31. Wakeling AE, O'Connor KM, Newboult E. Comparison of the biological effects of tamoxifen and a new antioestrogen (LY 117018) on the immature rat uterus. J Endocrinol 1983;99:447-53. 550 551 552 553 554 32. Bradbury R, De Savi C, Rabow A, Norman R, de Almeida C, Andrews D. Optimization of a novel binding motif to (E)-3-(3,5-difluoro-4-((1R,3R)-2-(2-fluoro-2-methylpropyl)-3methyl-2,3,4,9-tetrahydro-1H-pyrido[3,4-b]indol-1-yl)phenyl)acrylic acid (AZD9496), a potent and orally bioavailable selective estrogen receptor downregulator and antagonist. J Med. Chem 2015 manuscript submitted. 21 555 556 33. Wu YL, Yang X, Ren Z, McDonnell DP, Norris JD, Willson TM, et al. Structural basis for an unexpected mode of SERM-mediated ER antagonism. Mol Cell 2005;18:413-24. 557 558 559 34. Horwitz KB, McGuire WL. Estrogen control of progesterone receptor in human breast cancer. Correlation with nuclear processing of estrogen receptor. J Biol Chem 1978;253:2223-8. 560 561 562 35. Rich RL, Hoth LR, Geoghegan KF, Brown TA, LeMotte PK, Simons SP, et al. Kinetic analysis of estrogen receptor/ligand interactions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2002;99:856267. 563 564 565 36. Pike AC, Brzozowski AM, Hubbard RE, Bonn T, Thorsell AG, Engstrom O, et al. Structure of the ligand-binding domain of oestrogen receptor beta in the presence of a partial agonist and a full antagonist. EMBO J 1999;18:4608-18. 566 567 568 37. Grese TA, Sluka JP, Bryant HU, Cullinan GJ, Glasebrook AL, Jones CD, et al. Molecular determinants of tissue selectivity in estrogen receptor modulators. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1997;94:14105-10. 569 570 571 38. Lonard DM, Nawaz Z, Smith CL, O'Malley BW. The 26S proteasome is required for estrogen receptor-alpha and coactivator turnover and for efficient estrogen receptor-alpha transactivation. Mol Cell. 2000; 5:939-48. 572 573 574 39. Reid G, Hübner MR., Métivier R, Brand H et al. Cyclic, proteosome-mediated turnover of unliganded and liganded ERα on responsive promoters is an integral feature of estrogen signaling. Mol Cell 2003; 11:695-707. 575 576 40. Ghosh MG, Thompson DA, Weigel RJ. PDZK1 and GREB1 are estrogen-regulated genes expressed in hormone-responsive breast cancer. Cancer Res 2000;60:6367-75. 577 578 41. Sauve K, Lepage J, Sanchez M, Heveker N, Tremblay A. Positive feedback activation of estrogen receptors by the CXCL12-CXCR4 pathway. Cancer Res 2009;69:5793-800. 579 580 581 582 42. Vendrell JA, Magnino F , Danis E, Duchesne MJ , Pinloche S, Pons S , et al. Estrogen regulation in human breast cancer cells of new downstream gene targets involved in estrogen metabolism, cell proliferation and cell transformation. J Mol Endocrinology 2004;32:397-414. 583 584 585 43. Austreid E, Lonning PE, Eikesdal HP. The emergence of targeted drugs in breast cancer to prevent resistance to endocrine treatment and chemotherapy. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2014;15:681-700. 586 587 588 44 . Liu H, Park W, Bentrem DJ, McKian KP, De Los Reyes A, Loweth JA et al. Structurefunction relationship of the raloxifene-estrogen receptor-α complex for regulating transforming growth factor-α in breast cancer cells. J Biol Chem 2002; 277:9189-9198. 589 590 591 592 45. Davies C, Pan H, Godwin J, Gray R, Arriagada R, Raina V, et al. Long-term effects of continuing adjuvant tamoxifen to 10 years versus stopping at 5 years after diagnosis of oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer: ATLAS, a randomised trial. Lancet 2013;381:805-16. 22 593 594 46. Bergman L, Beelen ML, Gallee MP, Hollema H, Benraadt J, van Leeuwen FE. Risk and prognosis of endometrial cancer after tamoxifen for breast cancer. Lancet 2000;356:881-7. 595 596 47. Folkerd E, Dowsett M. Sex hormones and breast cancer risk and prognosis. Breast 2013;22 Suppl 2:S38-43. 597 598 599 48. Sen T, Li S, Shao J, Crowder R, Kitchen R, Ellis MJ. Patient-derived xenograft study reveals the pharmacology and the role of ESR1gene aberrations in endocrine therapy resistance of ER positive breast cancer. Can Res 2014;74:5544. 600 601 602 603 49. Piccart M, Hortobagyi GN, Campone M, Pritchard KI, Lebrun F, Ito Y, et al. Everolimus plus exemestane for hormone-receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor2-negative advanced breast cancer: overall survival results from BOLERO-2. Ann Oncol 2014;25:2357-62. 604 605 23 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 Tables Table 1 A In vitro ERα binding, ERα down-regulation, ERα antagonism and MCF-7 cell growth inhibition data for AZD9496 vs. fulvestrant AZD9496 fulvestrant ERα binding IC50 nM 0.82 0.8 ERα down-regulation IC50 nM 0.14 0.06 ERα down-regulation IC50 nM + 250 nM tamoxifen 11.16 1.91 ERα antagonism IC50 nM 0.28 0.21 MCF-7 cell growth inhibition EC50 nM 0.04 0.1 LogD 2.9 Not measureable Solubility μM 110 (crystalline) <0.9 Human % free 0.15 0.03 Table 1 B In vitro binding to ERα mutant LBDs ERα LBD binding IC50 nM AZD9496 nM fulvestrant nM wt 0.2 1.6 D538G 0.5 3.3 Y537S 0.6 3.8 613 614 615 Tables 1A and B. Summary of in vitro cellular potency and phenotype of AZD9496. A - 616 A series of in vitro assays were performed in MCF-7 cell in hormone-depleted medium to 617 show AZD9496 effects on ER binding, down-regulation, antagonism and inhibition of cell 618 proliferation as described in (20) using a fluorescence end-point for measured of ER and PR 619 protein levels; data shown are representative of the mean IC50 or EC50 from at least four 620 independent experiments. B - IC50s for binding of AZD9496 and fulvestrant to ERα wt and 621 mutant LBDs; data shown are representative of the mean IC50 from three independent 622 experiments. 623 24 624 625 626 627 Figure legends 628 AZD9496 (A) Two-dimensional chemical representation of AZD9496. (B) Two-dimensional 629 chemical representation of 4-hydroxy tamoxifen. (C) Three-dimensional structure of the 630 complex between AZD9496 and the ligand-binding domain of ERα. The protein and ligand 631 structures are represented as sticks with carbon and fluorine atoms coloured grey and light 632 blue respectively. The van der Waals radii of the protein atoms are shown as a continuous 633 surface highlighting the ligand-binding pocket of the ERα. Key protein residues are labelled 634 and polar interactions are shown as dotted lines. Figure 1. Crystal structure of the ligand-binding domain of ERα in complex with 635 636 Figure 2. Effect of AZD9496, fulvestrant and tamoxifen on ERα peptide turnover in 637 MCF-7 cells 638 Cells were grown in steroid-free conditions in SILAC media containing 13C615N4 L-arginine 639 to label ERα peptide as “heavy” (blue line) and then switched to grow in media containing 640 unlabelled L-arginine to label newly synthesised protein as “normal” (red line) with (A) 0.1% 641 DMSO, (B) 300 nM tamoxifen, (C) 100 nM AZD9496 or (D) 100 nM fulvestrant for the time 642 indicated. Data shown is representative of two independent experiments. 643 644 Figure 3. ERα mediated agonism in MCF-7 cells and immature female rat endometrial 645 tissue. (A) MCF-7 cells were treated with AZD9496 or a known agonist compound 646 AZ10557841 and PR levels (response) measured using in-cell immunofluorescence 647 quantification using an Acumen Ex3 platform. Data was normalised for cell number by 648 analysing a ratio of fluorescence resulting from stimulation of two emission wavelengths and 649 used to perform curve fitting analysis. A concentration response was plotted using non- 650 linear regression analysis. (B, C) Immature female rats were dosed orally with AZD9496 or 25 651 tamoxifen or subcutaneously with fulvestrant for 3 days. PEG/Captisol, polysorbate and 652 peanut oil were used as vehicle controls for AZD9496, tamoxifen and fulvestrant 653 respectively. Uterine tissue was removed 24 hrs after the final dose and weighed before 654 tissues were formalin-fixed and paraffin embedded to allow histological staining of the 655 endometrial tissue. Significant differences in mean uterine weight are shown: ***p<0.001 656 and ** p<0.01 (D). Tissue was subsequently analysed by Western blot for levels of ERα, PR 657 and vinculin. Protein levels were measured by chemiluminescent and quantified using 658 Syngene software. ER and PR protein levels were normalised to vinculin as a loading control 659 and plotted as shown, Statistically significant differences in PR levels are shown: 660 ***p<0.001, ** p<0.01 and * p<0.05. 661 662 663 664 Figure 4. In vivo efficacy of AZD9496 in MCF-7 xenograft model 665 (vehicle) or AZD9496 at doses shown (A). Tumour growth was measured by caliper at 666 regular intervals and mean tumour volumes plotted for each dosed group. Tumours from 667 treated mice collected at the end of study were analysed by Western blot for levels of PR and 668 vinculin. Protein levels were measured by chemiluminescent and quantified using Syngene 669 software. PR protein levels were normalised to vinculin as a loading control and plotted as 670 shown with standard error bars * p<0.05, *** p<0.001(B). MCF-7 xenografts were also 671 dosed daily with 5 mg/kg AZD9496, 10 mg/kg tamoxifen or 5 mg/mouse 3x weekly with 672 fulvestrant subcutaneously (C). For acute dosing studies, MCF-7 xenografts were dosed for 3 673 days with doses shown of AZD9496 and tumours collected at 24 or 48 hrs after the last dose 674 (D) or dosed with 3 doses of 5 mg/mouse of fulvestrant over 5 days and tumours collected at 675 24, 48 and 96 hours after the last dose (E). PR and vinculin protein levels in the tumours were 676 analysed and plotted as described above. MCF-7 xenografts, grown in male SCID mice, were dosed daily with either PEG/captisol 26 677 678 679 680 681 682 Figure 5. Tumour regressions with AZD9496 in combination with mTOR, PIKC and CDK4/6 inhibitors in MCF-7 xenograft model and in HCC1428 LTED model. 683 with or without AZD2014 dosed at 20 mg/kg twice daily (b.i.d) 2 days out of 7, (A) with or 684 without AZD8835 dosed at 50 mg/kg b.i.d. on day1 and 4 (B) with or without Palbociclib 685 dosed daily at 50 mg/kg (C) HCC1428LTED engrafts were grown in ovariectomised NSG 686 mice and were dosed daily with either AZD9496 or once weekly with fulvestrant at doses 687 shown (D). Tumour growth was measured by caliper at regular intervals and mean tumour 688 volumes plotted for each dosed group. MCF-7 xenografts, grown in male SCID mice, were dosed daily with AZD9496 at 5mg/kg 689 690 Figure 6: AZD9496 is efficacious against ESR1 mutants in vitro and in vivo. 691 Stable MCF-7 cell lines containing either pTRIPZ vector alone or vector containing ESR1 692 mutants shown were induced to express mutant protein with 1μg/ml doxycycline for 24hrs 693 before treating with either 0.1% DMSO (vehicle) or 100nM of fulvestrant, AZD9496 or 694 tamoxifen for 24hrs. Immunoblotting was performed to detect expression of ERα, PR and 695 GAPDH levels (A). CTC-174 tumour fragments were grown in female NSG mice implanted 696 with estrogen pellets and dosed daily with either PEG/captisol (vehicle) or AZD9496, 697 tamoxifen and Fulvestrant at doses shown. Tumour growth was measured by caliper at 698 regular intervals and mean tumour volumes plotted for each dosed group (B). Tumours from 699 treated mice collected at the end of study were analysed by Western blot for levels of PR and 700 vinculin. Protein levels were measured by chemiluminescent and quantified using Syngene 701 software. PR protein levels were normalised to vinculin as a loading control and plotted as 702 shown ***p<0.001(C). CTC-174 tumour fragments were grown in female NSG mice without 703 estrogen pellets to enable measurement of ER levels and dosed daily with either PEG/captisol 704 (vehicle) or AZD9496 at doses shown (D). Tumours from treated mice collected at the end of 27 705 study were analysed by Western blot for levels of ERα and vinculin and measured as 706 described above * p<0.05 (E) 707 28 A B C Figure 1. Crystal structure of the ligand-binding domain of ERa in complex with AZD9496 A B C D Figure 2. Effect of AZD9496, fulvestrant and tamoxifen on ERa peptide turnover in MCF-7 cells A B 0 .1 5 AZD9496 AZ10557841 0 .1 0 R esponse AZD9496 AZ10557841 0 .0 5 0 .0 0 -1 0 -8 -6 -4 C o n c e n t r a t io n lo g 1 0 ( M ) - 0 .0 5 C x 10 Immature rat: control x 20 Fulvestrant x 20 AZD9496 x 20 Tamoxifen D Figure 3 ERα mediated agonism in MCF-7 cells and immature female rat endometrial tissue. A B C D E Figure 4. In vivo efficacy of AZD9496 in MCF-7 xenograft model. A C B D Figure 5. Tumour regressions with AZD9496 in combination with mTOR, PIKC and CDK4/6 inhibitors in MCF-7 xenograft model and HCC1428 LTED model B D AZD9496 AZD9496 Tamoxifen AZD9496 Y537N Fulvestrant Vehicle Tamoxifen AZD9496 Y537C Fulvestrant Vehicle Tamoxifen D538G Fulvestrant Vehicle Tamoxifen WT Fulvestrant Vehicle Tamoxifen AZD9496 Empty Vector Fulvestrant Vehicle Tamoxifen AZD9496 Fulvestrant Vehicle A Y537S ERa PR GAPDH C E Figure 6: AZD9496 is efficacious against ESR1 mutants in vitro and in vivo.