Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Activating ESR1 mutations in hormone-resistant metastatic breast cancer

Nature Genetics volume 45, pages 1446–1451 (2013)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Breast cancer is the most prevalent cancer in women, and over two-thirds of cases express estrogen receptor-α (ER-α, encoded by ESR1). Through a prospective clinical sequencing program for advanced cancers, we enrolled 11 patients with ER-positive metastatic breast cancer. Whole-exome and transcriptome analysis showed that six cases harbored mutations of ESR1 affecting its ligand-binding domain (LBD), all of whom had been treated with anti-estrogens and estrogen deprivation therapies. A survey of The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) identified four endometrial cancers with similar mutations of ESR1. The five new LBD-localized ESR1 mutations identified here (encoding p.Leu536Gln, p.Tyr537Ser, p.Tyr537Cys, p.Tyr537Asn and p.Asp538Gly) were shown to result in constitutive activity and continued responsiveness to anti-estrogen therapies in vitro. Taken together, these studies suggest that activating mutations in ESR1 are a key mechanism in acquired endocrine resistance in breast cancer therapy.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Clinical timelines for the six index ER-positive metastatic breast cancer patients harboring ESR1 mutations.
Figure 2: Schematic of ESR1 alterations identified in this study.
Figure 3: ESR1 with acquired mutations encodes constitutively active protein.
Figure 4: Acquired ESR1 mutations result in maintained sensitivity to anti-estrogen therapies.

Similar content being viewed by others

Article 23 September 2019

Nadia Harbeck, Frédérique Penault-Llorca, … Fatima Cardoso

References

  1. Chin, L., Andersen, J.N. & Futreal, P.A. Cancer genomics: from discovery science to personalized medicine. Nat. Med. 17, 297–303 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Meyerson, M., Gabriel, S. & Getz, G. Advances in understanding cancer genomes through second-generation sequencing. Nat. Rev. Genet. 11, 685–696 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Roychowdhury, S. et al. Personalized oncology through integrative high-throughput sequencing: a pilot study. Sci. Transl. Med. 3, 111ra121 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Welch, J.S. et al. Use of whole-genome sequencing to diagnose a cryptic fusion oncogene. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 305, 1577–1584 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Gorre, M.E. et al. Clinical resistance to STI-571 cancer therapy caused by BCR-ABL gene mutation or amplification. Science 293, 876–880 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Korpal, M. et al. An F876L mutation in androgen receptor confers genetic and phenotypic resistance to MDV3100 (enzalutamide). Cancer Discov. 3, 1030–1043 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Joseph, J.D. et al. A clinically relevant androgen receptor mutation confers resistance to 2nd generation anti-androgens enzalutamide and ARN-509. Cancer Discov. 3, 1020–1029 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Ariazi, E.A., Ariazi, J.L., Cordera, F. & Jordan, V.C. Estrogen receptors as therapeutic targets in breast cancer. Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 6, 181–202 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Riggins, R.B., Schrecengost, R.S., Guerrero, M.S. & Bouton, A.H. Pathways to tamoxifen resistance. Cancer Lett. 256, 1–24 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Lønning, P.E. & Eikesdal, H.P. Aromatase inhibition 2013: clinical state of the art and questions that remain to be solved. Endocr. Relat. Cancer 20, R183–R201 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ingle, J.N. et al. Fulvestrant in women with advanced breast cancer after progression on prior aromatase inhibitor therapy: North Central Cancer Treatment Group Trial N0032. J. Clin. Oncol. 24, 1052–1056 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Osborne, C.K. & Schiff, R. Mechanisms of endocrine resistance in breast cancer. Annu. Rev. Med. 62, 233–247 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Wu, Y.M. et al. Identification of targetable FGFR gene fusions in diverse cancers. Cancer Discov. 3, 636–647 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Nik-Zainal, S. et al. Mutational processes molding the genomes of 21 breast cancers. Cell 149, 979–993 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Feil, R., Wagner, J., Metzger, D. & Chambon, P. Regulation of Cre recombinase activity by mutated estrogen receptor ligand-binding domains. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 237, 752–757 (1997).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. TCGA. Comprehensive molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 490, 61–70 (2012).

  17. Ellis, M.J. et al. Whole-genome analysis informs breast cancer response to aromatase inhibition. Nature 486, 353–360 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Huang, H.J., Norris, J.D. & McDonnell, D.P. Identification of a negative regulatory surface within estrogen receptor α provides evidence in support of a role for corepressors in regulating cellular responses to agonists and antagonists. Mol. Endocrinol. 16, 1778–1792 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Shiau, A.K. et al. The structural basis of estrogen receptor/coactivator recognition and the antagonism of this interaction by tamoxifen. Cell 95, 927–937 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Skafar, D.F. Formation of a powerful capping motif corresponding to start of “helix 12” in agonist-bound estrogen receptor-α contributes to increased constitutive activity of the protein. Cell Biochem. Biophys. 33, 53–62 (2000).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Carlson, K.E., Choi, I., Gee, A., Katzenellenbogen, B.S. & Katzenellenbogen, J.A. Altered ligand binding properties and enhanced stability of a constitutively active estrogen receptor: evidence that an open pocket conformation is required for ligand interaction. Biochemistry 36, 14897–14905 (1997).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Weis, K.E., Ekena, K., Thomas, J.A., Lazennec, G. & Katzenellenbogen, B.S. Constitutively active human estrogen receptors containing amino acid substitutions for tyrosine 537 in the receptor protein. Mol. Endocrinol. 10, 1388–1398 (1996).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Pearce, S.T., Liu, H. & Jordan, V.C. Modulation of estrogen receptor α function and stability by tamoxifen and a critical amino acid (Asp-538) in helix 12. J. Biol. Chem. 278, 7630–7638 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Zhao, C. et al. Mutation of Leu-536 in human estrogen receptor-α alters the coupling between ligand binding, transcription activation, and receptor conformation. J. Biol. Chem. 278, 27278–27286 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Ellis, M.J. et al. Lower-dose vs high-dose oral estradiol therapy of hormone receptor–positive, aromatase inhibitor–resistant advanced breast cancer: a phase 2 randomized study. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 302, 774–780 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Swaby, R.F. & Jordan, V.C. Low-dose estrogen therapy to reverse acquired antihormonal resistance in the treatment of breast cancer. Clin. Breast Cancer 8, 124–133 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Sokolosky, M.L. et al. Involvement of Akt-1 and mTOR in sensitivity of breast cancer to targeted therapy. Oncotarget 2, 538–550 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Kan, Z. et al. Diverse somatic mutation patterns and pathway alterations in human cancers. Nature 466, 869–873 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Shrestha, Y. et al. PAK1 is a breast cancer oncogene that coordinately activates MAPK and MET signaling. Oncogene 31, 3397–3408 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Barone, I., Brusco, L. & Fuqua, S.A. Estrogen receptor mutations and changes in downstream gene expression and signaling. Clin. Cancer Res. 16, 2702–2708 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Kandoth, C. et al. Integrated genomic characterization of endometrial carcinoma. Nature 497, 67–73 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Fisher, B. et al. Endometrial cancer in tamoxifen-treated breast cancer patients: findings from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-14. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 86, 527–537 (1994).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Dawson, S.J. et al. Analysis of circulating tumor DNA to monitor metastatic breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 368, 1199–1209 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Diehl, F. et al. Circulating mutant DNA to assess tumor dynamics. Nat. Med. 14, 985–990 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Kim, D. & Salzberg, S.L. TopHat-Fusion: an algorithm for discovery of novel fusion transcripts. Genome Biol. 12, R72 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Trapnell, C. et al. Differential gene and transcript expression analysis of RNA-seq experiments with TopHat and Cufflinks. Nat. Protoc. 7, 562–578 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Li, H. et al. The Sequence Alignment/Map format and SAMtools. Bioinformatics 25, 2078–2079 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Koboldt, D.C. et al. VarScan 2: somatic mutation and copy number alteration discovery in cancer by exome sequencing. Genome Res. 22, 568–576 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Wang, K., Li, M. & Hakonarson, H. ANNOVAR: functional annotation of genetic variants from high-throughput sequencing data. Nucleic Acids Res. 38, e164 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Lonigro, R.J. et al. Detection of somatic copy number alterations in cancer using targeted exome capture sequencing. Neoplasia 13, 1019–1025 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank D. Miller, T. Barrette and D. Gibbs for hardware and database management, K. Giles for assistance with manuscript preparation, physicians M. Wicha, L. Pierce, D. Smith, K. Levin and F. Feng for referring patients, and C. Betts and J. Athanikar for assistance with tumor boards. We also thank the larger MI-ONCOSEQ team, including clinical research coordinator E. Williams, pathologist R. Mehra, genetic counselors J. Everett, S. Gustafson and V. Raymond, and radiologists E. Higgins, E. Caoili and R. Dunnick. This project is supported in part by the Prostate Cancer Foundation with funding for our sequencing infrastructure, the National Cancer Institute Early Detection Research Network (U01 CA111275), National Human Genome Research Institute Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER) Consortium (1UM1HG006508), US Department of Defense contract W81XWH-12-1-0080 and a Department of Defense Era of Hope Scholar Award. A.M.C. is also supported by the Alfred A. Taubman Institute, the American Cancer Society, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute and a Doris Duke Charitable Foundation Clinical Scientist Award.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Dan R Robinson and Yi-Mi Wu: These authors contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Michigan Center for Translational Pathology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

    Dan R Robinson, Yi-Mi Wu, Pankaj Vats, Fengyun Su, Robert J Lonigro, Xuhong Cao, Shanker Kalyana-Sundaram, Rui Wang, Yu Ning, Lynda Hodges, Amy Gursky, Javed Siddiqui, Scott A Tomlins, Lakshmi P Kunju & Arul M Chinnaiyan

  2. Department of Pathology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

    Dan R Robinson, Yi-Mi Wu, Pankaj Vats, Fengyun Su, Shanker Kalyana-Sundaram, Rui Wang, Yu Ning, Amy Gursky, Javed Siddiqui, Scott A Tomlins, Lakshmi P Kunju & Arul M Chinnaiyan

  3. Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

    Robert J Lonigro, James M Rae & Arul M Chinnaiyan

  4. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

    Xuhong Cao & Arul M Chinnaiyan

  5. Department of Internal Medicine, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA

    Sameek Roychowdhury

  6. Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA

    Kenneth J Pienta

  7. Center for Bioethics and Social Science in Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

    Scott Y Kim

  8. Department of Health Behavior & Health Education, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

    J Scott Roberts

  9. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

    James M Rae, Catherine H Van Poznak, Daniel F Hayes, Rashmi Chugh, Moshe Talpaz & Anne F Schott

  10. Department of Urology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

    Arul M Chinnaiyan

  11. Center for Computational Medicine and Biology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

    Arul M Chinnaiyan

Authors
  1. Dan R Robinson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yi-Mi Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Pankaj Vats
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Fengyun Su
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Robert J Lonigro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Xuhong Cao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Shanker Kalyana-Sundaram
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Rui Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Yu Ning
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Lynda Hodges
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Amy Gursky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Javed Siddiqui
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Scott A Tomlins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Sameek Roychowdhury
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Kenneth J Pienta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Scott Y Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. J Scott Roberts
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. James M Rae
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  19. Catherine H Van Poznak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  20. Daniel F Hayes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  21. Rashmi Chugh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  22. Lakshmi P Kunju
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  23. Moshe Talpaz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  24. Anne F Schott
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  25. Arul M Chinnaiyan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

D.R.R., Y.-M.W. and A.M.C. conceived the experiments. D.R.R., Y.-M.W., X.C., R.W., F.S. and Y.N. performed exome and transcriptome sequencing. P.V., R.J.L., S.K.-S. and D.R.R. carried out bioinformatics analysis of high-throughput sequencing data for somatic mutation, copy number and tumor content determination and performed gene expression and gene fusion analysis. D.R.R., Y.-M.W. and F.S. generated ESR1 constructs and carried out in vitro experiments. L.H. coordinated patients for clinical research. J.S. and A.G. collected and processed clinical tissue samples for next-generation sequencing. L.P.K. and S.A.T. provided pathology review. J.M.R. provided experimental analysis. C.H.V.P., D.F.H., R.C. and A.F.S. enrolled patients and provided clinical data and consultation at tumor boards. D.R.R., X.C., Y.-M.W., P.V., R.J.L., S.K.-S., S.Y.K., J.S.R., S.R., M.T., K.J.P. and A.M.C. developed the integrated clinical sequencing protocol. D.R.R., Y.-M.W. and A.M.C. prepared the manuscript, which was reviewed by all authors.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arul M Chinnaiyan.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Text and Figures

Supplementary Figures 1–7 and Supplementary Tables 1–5 (PDF 12863 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Robinson, D., Wu, YM., Vats, P. et al. Activating ESR1 mutations in hormone-resistant metastatic breast cancer. Nat Genet 45, 1446–1451 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.2823

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.2823

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing: Cancer

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Cancer newsletter — what matters in cancer research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get what matters in cancer research, free to your inbox weekly. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Cancer