Go to The Journal of Clinical Investigation
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Journal stats
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Transfers
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact
  • Physician-Scientist Development
  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • By specialty
    • COVID-19
    • Cardiology
    • Immunology
    • Metabolism
    • Nephrology
    • Oncology
    • Pulmonology
    • All ...
  • Videos
  • Collections
    • In-Press Preview
    • Resource and Technical Advances
    • Clinical Research and Public Health
    • Research Letters
    • Editorials
    • Perspectives
    • Physician-Scientist Development
    • Reviews
    • Top read articles

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Specialties
  • In-Press Preview
  • Resource and Technical Advances
  • Clinical Research and Public Health
  • Research Letters
  • Editorials
  • Perspectives
  • Physician-Scientist Development
  • Reviews
  • Top read articles
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Journal stats
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Transfers
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact
Pharmacogenomics of aromatase inhibitors in postmenopausal breast cancer and additional mechanisms of anastrozole action
Junmei Cairns, James N. Ingle, Tanda M. Dudenkov, Krishna R. Kalari, Erin E. Carlson, Jie Na, Aman U. Buzdar, Mark E. Robson, Matthew J. Ellis, Paul E. Goss, Lois E. Shepherd, Barbara Goodnature, Matthew P. Goetz, Richard M. Weinshilboum, Hu Li, Mehrab Ghanat Bari, Liewei Wang
Junmei Cairns, James N. Ingle, Tanda M. Dudenkov, Krishna R. Kalari, Erin E. Carlson, Jie Na, Aman U. Buzdar, Mark E. Robson, Matthew J. Ellis, Paul E. Goss, Lois E. Shepherd, Barbara Goodnature, Matthew P. Goetz, Richard M. Weinshilboum, Hu Li, Mehrab Ghanat Bari, Liewei Wang
View: Text | PDF
Research Article Oncology Therapeutics

Pharmacogenomics of aromatase inhibitors in postmenopausal breast cancer and additional mechanisms of anastrozole action

  • Text
  • PDF
Abstract

Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) reduce breast cancer recurrence and prolong survival, but up to 30% of patients exhibit recurrence. Using a genome-wide association study of patients entered on MA.27, a phase III randomized trial of anastrozole versus exemestane, we identified a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in CUB And Sushi multiple domains 1 (CSMD1) associated with breast cancer–free interval, with the variant allele associated with fewer distant recurrences. Mechanistically, CSMD1 regulates CYP19 expression in an SNP- and drug-dependent fashion, and this regulation is different among 3 AIs: anastrozole, exemestane, and letrozole. Overexpression of CSMD1 sensitized AI-resistant cells to anastrozole but not to the other 2 AIs. The SNP in CSMD1 that was associated with increased CSMD1 and CYP19 expression levels increased anastrozole sensitivity, but not letrozole or exemestane sensitivity. Anastrozole degrades estrogen receptor α (ERα), especially in the presence of estradiol (E2). ER+ breast cancer organoids and AI- or fulvestrant-resistant breast cancer cells were more sensitive to anastrozole plus E2 than to AI alone. Our findings suggest that the CSMD1 SNP might help to predict AI response, and anastrozole plus E2 serves as a potential new therapeutic strategy for patients with AI- or fulvestrant-resistant breast cancers.

Authors

Junmei Cairns, James N. Ingle, Tanda M. Dudenkov, Krishna R. Kalari, Erin E. Carlson, Jie Na, Aman U. Buzdar, Mark E. Robson, Matthew J. Ellis, Paul E. Goss, Lois E. Shepherd, Barbara Goodnature, Matthew P. Goetz, Richard M. Weinshilboum, Hu Li, Mehrab Ghanat Bari, Liewei Wang

×

Figure 7

The comparison of efficacy between anastrozole plus E2 versus fulvestrant.

Options: View larger image (or click on image) Download as PowerPoint
The comparison of efficacy between anastrozole plus E2 versus fulvestran...
(A) Effects of anastrozole + E2 in fulvestrant-resistant cells. Fulvestrant (F) versus Ana, P = 0.0009; F versus Ana + 10E2, P < 0.0001; F versus Ana + 100E2, P < 0.0001; F versus Ana + 500E2, P < 0.0001; Ana versus Ana + 10E2, P = 0.0288; Ana versus Ana + 100E2, P < 0.0001; Ana versus Ana + 500E2, P < 0.0001. Quantitative analysis of survival cells corrected back to vehicle treatment was performed after 3 days of treatment with indicated drugs, as shown in the bar graph. **P < 0.01. Two-way ANOVA plus Tukey. (B and C) Comparison of anastrozole + E2 with fulvestrant in anastrozole-resistant MCF7/AnaR and 3 AI-naive cell lines (B), as well as in PDX-derived organoids (C). Quantitative analysis of survival cells corrected back to vehicle treatment was performed, as shown in the bar graph 3 days after treatment. Data are represented by ± SEM of 3 independent experiments. MCF7/AnaR: F versus Ana, P < 0.0001; F versus Ana + 100E2, P = 0.2093; Ana versus Ana + 100E2, P < 0.0001. MCF7AC1: F versus Ana + 100E2, P < 0.0001; Ana versus Ana + 100E2, P = 0.0013. ZR-75-1: F versus Ana + 100E2, P < 0.0001; Ana versus Ana + 100E2, P < 0.0001. T47D: F versus Ana + 100E2, P < 0.0001; Ana versus Ana + 100E2, P < 0.0001. Organoid-1-1: F versus Ana + 100E2, P < 0.0001; Ana versus Ana + 100E2, P = 0.0002; Ana versus F, P = 0.02. Organoid-1-2: F versus Ana + 100E2, P = 0.0013; Ana versus Ana + 100E2, P < 0.0001; Ana versus F, P = 0.013. Organoid-2: F versus Ana + 100E2, P < 0.0001; Ana versus Ana + 100E2, P = 0.0002; Ana versus F, P = 0.0026. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01. Two-way ANOVA plus Tukey.

Copyright © 2026 American Society for Clinical Investigation
ISSN 2379-3708

Sign up for email alerts