Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Novel Estrogen Receptor-Targeted Agents for Breast Cancer

  • Published:
Current Treatment Options in Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Opinion statement

It has become clear that patients whose cancers have progressed post-CDK4/6 inhibitor therapy (CDK4/6i) are not deriving the same magnitude of benefit to subsequent standard endocrine therapy as historical studies would suggest. For example, anticipated duration of benefit to fulvestrant prior to CDK4/6i historically was ~ 5–6 months, and data from the VERONICA and EMERALD trials report less than 2 months. This has magnified our need for novel endocrine agents. Some have argued that patients post-CDK4/6i may just have more endocrine-resistant tumors and perhaps should just receive chemotherapy. While this may be appropriate for some, we do not currently have an assay that reliably predicts whose cancers remain endocrine sensitive and whose are endocrine resistant. ESR1 mutations can enrich for patients whose tumors are more likely to be heavily dependent on estrogen, but this is certainly not the whole answer and many patients without ESR1 mutations continue to derive benefit from subsequent endocrine agents. Most patients would strongly prefer the side effect profile of endocrine agents compared to chemotherapy, and thus, premature use of cytotoxic agents when subsequent ER targeting can control disease is not preferred. These novel ER targeting agents (PROTAC, SERD, SERCA, CERAN) hold great promise to not only outperform standard agents like fulvestrant, but also offer the promise of agents with a different side effect profile that may be more advantageous when compared to menopausal symptoms, hot flashes, arthralgias, and sexual side effects so commonly seen with AIs. We also are likely to see these novel agents move to earlier lines, whether that be 1st line in combination with CDK4/6i or even adjuvant disease.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

AE:

Adverse event

AI:

Aromatase inhibitor

BC:

Breast cancer

CBR:

Clinical benefit rate

CDK4/6i:

Cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor

CERAN:

Complete estrogen receptor antagonist

ctDNA:

Circulating tumor DNA

DLTs:

Dose-limiting toxicities

EBC:

Early-stage breast cancer

ER:

Estrogen receptor

ET:

Endocrine therapy

FIH:

First-in-human

G:

Grade

HR:

Hazard ratio

HR + :

Hormone receptor-positive

iDFS:

Invasive disease-free survival

1L:

1st line

2-3L:

2nd or 3rd line

MBC:

Metastatic breast cancer

ORR:

Overall response rate

OS:

Overall survival

PFS:

Progression-free survival

PROTAC:

Proteolysis targeting chimera

SERCA:

Selective estrogen receptor covalent antagonist

SERD:

Selective estrogen receptor degrader

SERM:

Selective estrogen receptor modulator

WT:

Wild type

References and Recommended Reading

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Patel HK, Bihani T. Selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) and selective estrogen receptor degraders (SERDs) in cancer treatment. Pharmacol Ther. 2018;186:1–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Heldring N, Pike A, Andersson S, et al. Estrogen receptors: how do they signal and what are their targets. Physiol Rev. 2007;87:905–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Hall JM, McDonnell DP. Coregulators in nuclear estrogen receptor action: from concept to therapeutic targeting. Mol Interv. 2005;5:343–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Carroll JS, Meyer CA, Song J, Li W, Geistlinger TR, Eeckhoute J. Genome- wide analysis of estrogen receptor binding sites. Nat Genet. 2006;38:1289–97.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ikeda K, Horie-Inuoe K, Inuoe S. Identification of estrogen-responsive genes based on DNA binding properties of estrogen receptors using high-throughput sequencing technology. Acta Pharmacol Sin. 2015;36:24–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gottardis MM, Robinson SP, Satyaswaroop PG, Jordan VC. Contrasting actions of tamoxifen on endometrial and breast tumor growth in the athymic mouse. Cancer Res. 1988;48:812–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Love RR, Mazess RB, Barden HS, et al. Effects of tamoxifen on bone mineral density in postmenopausal women with breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1992;326:852–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. McDonnell DP, Wardell SE, Norris JD. Oral selective estrogen receptor downregulators (SERDs), a breakthrough endocrine therapy for breast cancer. J Med Chem. 2015;58:4883–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Musgrove EA, Sutherland RL. Biological determinants of endocrine resistance in breast cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 2009;9:631–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Jeselsohn R, Yelensky R, Buchwalter G, et al. Emergence of constitutively active estrogen receptor-α mutations in pretreated advanced estrogen receptor positive breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2014;20:1757–67.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Toy W, Shen Y, Won H, et al. ESR1 ligand binding domain mutations in hormone resistant breast cancer. Nat Genet. 2013;45:1439–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Fawell SE, White R, Hoare S, et al. Inhibition of estrogen receptor-DNA binding by the "pure" antiestrogen ICI 164,384 appears to be mediated by impaired receptor dimerization. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1990;87:6883–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Dauvois S, White R, Parker MG. The antiestrogen ICI 182780 disrupts estrogen receptor nucleocytoplasmic shuttling. J Cell Sci. 1993;106:1377–88.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Osborne C, Wakeling A, Nicholson R. Fulvestrant: an oestrogen receptor antagonist with a novel mechanism of action. Br J Cancer. 2004;90:S2–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Long X, Nephew KP. Fulvestrant (ICI 182,780)-dependent interacting proteins mediate immobilization and degradation of estrogen receptor. J Biol Chem. 2006;281:9607–15.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Di Leo A, Jerusalem G, Petruzelka L, et al. Results of the CONFIRM Phase III Trial comparing fulvestrant 250 mg with fulvestrant 500 mg in postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor–positive advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:4594–600.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Robertson JF, Lindemann J, Garnett S, et al. A good drug made better: the fulvestrant dose-response story. Clin Breast Cancer. 2014;14:381–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Fribbens C, O’Leary B, Kilburn L, et al. Plasma ESR1 mutations and the treatment of estrogen receptor–positive advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:2961–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Harrison M, Laight A, Clarke D, et al. Pharmacokinetics and metabolism of fulvestrant after oral, intravenous and intramuscular administration in healthy volunteers. Eur J Cancer Suppl. 2003;1:S171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Mottamal M, Kang B, Peng X, Wang G. From pure antagonists to pure degraders of the estrogen receptor: evolving strategies for the same target. ACS Omega. 2021;6:9334–43. A mini-review discussing the chemical structure anti-estrogen therapies and the development of oral SERDs.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Bentrem DJ, Dardes RC, Liu H, et al. Molecular mechanism of action at estrogen receptor α of a new clinically relevant antiestrogen (GW7604) related to tamoxifen1. Endocrinology. 2001;142:838–46.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Wu YL, Yang X, Ren Z, McDonnell DP, et al. Structural basis for an unexpected mode of SERM-mediated ER antagonism. Molecular Cell. 2005;18:413–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Connor CE, Norris JD, Broadwater G, et al. Circumventing tamoxifen resistance in breast cancers using antiestrogens that induce unique conformational changes in the estrogen receptor. Cancer Res. 2001;61:2917–22.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Dardes RC, O'Regan RM, Gajdos C, et al. Effects of a new clinically relevant antiestrogen (GW5638) related to tamoxifen on breast and endometrial cancer growth in vivo. Clin Cancer Res. 2002;8:1995–2001.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Wardell SE, Ellis MJ, Alley HM, et al. Efficacy of SERD/SERMhybrid-CDK4/6 inhibitor combinations in models of endocrine therapy-resistant breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2015a;21:5121–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Garner F, Shomali M, Paquin D, et al. RAD1901: A novel, orally bioavailable selective estrogen receptor degrader that demonstrates antitumor activity in breast cancer xenograft models. Anticancer Drugs. 2015;26:948–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Bihani T, Patel HK, Arlt H, et al. Elacestrant (RAD1901), a selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD), has antitumor activity in multiple ER1 breast cancer patient-derived xenograft models. Clin Cancer Res. 2017;23:4793–804.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Wardell SE, Nelson ER, Chao CA, et al. Evaluation of the pharmacological activities of RAD1901, a selective estrogen receptor degrader. Endocr-Relat Cancer. 2015b;22:713–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Bardia A, Kaklamani V, Wilks S, et al. Phase I study of elacestrant (RAD1901), a novel selective estrogen receptor degrader, in ER-Positive, HER2-Negative advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2021;39:1360–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Bidard F-C, Kaklamani VG, Neven P, et al. Elacestrant (oral selective estrogen receptor degrader) versus standard endocrine therapy for estrogen receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative advanced breast cancer: results from the randomized phase III EMERALD trial. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40(28):3246–56. Results from the first phase III trial of an oral SERD compared to standard of care endocrine therapy in ER+/HER2- MBC.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Sanchez KG, Nangia JR, Schiff R, Rimawi MF. Elacestrant and the promise of oral SERDs. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40(28):3227–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Kaklamani VG, Bardia A, Aftimos PG et al. Subgroup analysis of patients with no prior chemotherapy in EMERALD: a phase 3 trial evaluating elacestrant, an oral selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD), versus investigator’s choice of endocrine monotherapy for ER+/HER2-advanced/metastatic breast cancer (mBC). J Clin Oncol 2021;40(no. 16_suppl):1100.

  33. Metcalfe C, Ingalla E, Blake R, et al. GDC-9545: A novel ER antagonist and clinical candidate that combines desirable mechanistic and pre-clinical DMPK attributes. Cancer Res. 2019;79:P5-04-07. Abstract P5-04-07.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Liang J, Zbieg JR, Blake RA, et al. GDC-9545 (Giredestrant): A potent and orally bioavailable selective estrogen receptor antagonist and degrader with an exceptional preclinical profile for ER+ breast cancer. J Med Chem. 2021;64(16):11841–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Jhaveri K, Boni V, Sohn J. Safety and activity of single-agent giredestrant (GDC-9545) from a phase Ia/b study in patients (pts) with estrogen receptorpositive (ER+), HER2-negative locally advanced/metastatic breast cancer (LA/mBC). J Clin Oncol. 2021;39:(no. 15_suppl):1017–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Lim E, Jhaveri KL, Perez-Fidalgo JA, et al. A phase Ib study to evaluate the oral selective estrogen receptor degrader GDC- 9545 alone or combined with palbociclib in metastatic ER-positive HER2- negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(15_suppl):1023.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Martin JM, Lim E, Chavez MM, et al. Giredestrant (GDC-9545) vs physician choice of endocrine monotherapy (PCET) in patients (pts) with ER+, HER2–locally advanced/metastatic breast cancer (LA/mBC): primary analysis of the phase II, randomised, open-label acelERA BC study. Ann Oncol. 2022;33(suppl_7):S88–S121.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Shomali M, Cheng J, Sun F, et al. SAR439859, a novel selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD), demonstrates effective and broad antitumor activity in wild-type and mutant ER-positive breast cancer models. Mol Cancer Ther. 2021;20(2):250–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Linden HM, Campone M, Bardia A, et al. A phase 1/2 study of amcenestrant (SAR439859), an oral selective estrogen receptor (ER) degrader (SERD), as monotherapy and in combination with other anti-cancer therapies in postmenopausal women with ER-positive (ER+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2–) metastatic breast cancer (mBC): AMEERA-1. Cancer Res. 2021;81(4_suppl):PD8-08.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Tolaney SM, Chan A, Petrakova K, et al. AMEERA-3, a phase II study of amcenestrant (AMC) versus endocrine treatment of physician’s choice (TPC) in patients (pts) with endocrine-resistant ER+/HER2− advanced breast cancer (aBC). Ann Oncol. 2022;33(suppl_7):S88–S121.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Chandarlapaty S, Linden HM, Neven P, et al. AMEERA-1: Phase 1/2 study of amcenestrant (SAR439859), an oral selective estrogen receptor (ER) degrader (SERD), with palbociclib (palbo) in postmenopausal women with ER+/ human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC). J Clin Oncol. 2021;39(no. 15_suppl):1058–8.

  42. Scott JS, Moss T, Stokes S, et al. Abstract 5674: Discovery of AZD9833, an oral small molecule selective degrader of the estrogen receptor (SERD). Cancer Res. 2020;80(16_suppl):5674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Baird R, Oliveira M, Ciruelos EM, et al. Updated data from SERENA-1: a phase 1 dose escalation and expansion study of the next generation oral SERD AZD9833 as a monotherapy and in combination with palbociclib, in women with ER-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2021;81(4_Suppl):PS11-05.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Oliveira M, Hamilton EP, Incorvati J et al. Serena-1: Updated analyses from a phase 1 study (parts C/D) of the next-generation oral SERD camizestrant (AZD9833) in combination with palbociclib, in women with ER-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2022;40(no. 16_suppl):1032.

  45. Oliveira M, Pominchuk D, Nowecki Z, et al. Camizestrant, a next-generation oral SERD vs fulvestrant in post-menopausal women with advanced ER-positive HER2-negative breast cancer: results of the randomized, multi-dose phase 2 SERENA-2 trial. Presented at SABCS 2022. December 6-10, 2022. Abstract GS3-02. Randomized phase 2 data of a novel oral SERD vs standard endocrine therapy in ER+/HER2- MBC.

  46. Jhaveri K, Juric D, Yap Y-S, et al. A phase I study of LSZ102, an oral selective estrogen receptor degrader, with or without ribociclib or alpelisib, in patients with estrogen receptor–positive breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2021;27(21):5760–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Aftimos P, Neven P, Pegram M, et al. Rintodestrant (G1T48), an oral selective estrogen receptor degrader in ER+/HER2- locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer: updated phase 1 results and dose selection. Cancer Res. 2021;81(4 suppl):Abstract nr PS12-04.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Kalinksy K, Abramson V, Chalasani P, et al. ZN-c5, an oral selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD), in women with advanced estrogen receptor-positive (ER+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-) breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2022;82(4_suppl):P1-17-02.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Bidard FC, Hardy-Bessard AC, Dalenc F, et al. Switch to fulvestrant and palbociclib versus no switch in advanced breast cancer with rising ESR1 mutation during aromatase inhibitor and palbociclib therapy (PADA-1): a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2022;23(11):1367–77. First proof of concept trial that demonstrated the benefit of utilizing plasma ctDNA monitoring to guide treatment strategy in ER+/HER2-MBC.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Di Leo A, Jerusalem G, Petruzelka L, et al. Results of the CONFIRM phase III trial comparing fulvestrant 250 mg with fulvestrant 500 mg in postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(30):4594–600.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Hurvitz SA, Park YH, Bardia A et al. LBA14 Neoadjuvant giredestrant (GDC-9545) + palbociclib (palbo) vs anastrozole (A) + palbo in post-menopausal women with oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, untreated early breast cancer (ER+/HER2– eBC): Interim analysis of the randomised, open-label, phase II coopERA BC study Ann Oncol 2021;32:S1285–6.

  52. Campone M, Dong Y, Ling B, et al. AMEERA-4: a preoperative window-of-opportunity (WOO) study to assess the pharmacodynamic (PD) activity of amcenestrant or letrozole in postmenopausal patients with ER+/HER2− primary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2022;40(no. 16_suppl):528−8.

  53. Komm BS, Chines AA. An update on selective estrogen receptor modulators for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. Maturitas. 2012;71(3):221–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. LaCroix AZ, Powles T, Osborne CK, et al. Breast cancer incidence in the randomized pearl trial of lasofoxifene in postmenopausal osteoporotic women. JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2010;102:1706–15.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Gardner M, Taylor A, Wei G, et al. Clinical pharmacology of multiple doses of lasofoxifene in postmenopausal women. J Clin Pharmacol. 2006;46:52–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Laine M, Greene M, Chang Y-F, et al. Lasofoxifene decreases breast cancer lung and liver metastasis in a mammary intraductal (MIND) xenograft model of mutant ERα+ breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2019;79(4 Suppl): Abstract nr PD7-09.

  57. Goetz M, Plourde P, Stover DG, et al. Open-label, randomized study of lasofoxifene (LAS) vs fulvestrant (Fulv) for women with locally advanced/metastatic ER+/HER2- breast cancer (mBC), an estrogen receptor 1 (ESR1) mutation, and disease progression on aromatase (AI) and cyclindependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6i) inhibitors. Ann Oncol. 2022;33:S1387–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Damodaran S, Plourde PV, Moore HCF, et al. Open-label, phase 2, multicenter study of lasofoxifene (LAS) combined with abemaciclib (Abema) for treating pre- and postmenopausal women with locally advanced or metastatic ER+/HER2− breast cancer and an ESR1 mutation after progression on prior therapies. J Clin Oncol 2022;40(no. 16_suppl):1022. Preliminary data showing that combination of a novel SERM and CDK 4/6 inhibitor improves median PFS in ESR1 mutant ER+/HER2- MBC after progression on prior CDK 4/6i and fulvestrant.

  59. Békés M, Langley DR, Crews CM. PROTAC targeted protein degraders: the past is prologue. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2022;21:181–200.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Hamilton E, Vahdat L, Han HS, et al. First-in-human safety and activity of ARV-471, a novel PROTAC® estrogen receptor degrader, in ER+/HER2- locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2022;82(4 suppl): Abstract nr PD13-08.

  61. Hurvitz S, Schott AF, Ma C et al. ARV-471, a PROTAC® estrogen receptor (ER) degrader in advanced ER-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer: phase 2 expansion (VERITAC) of a phase 1/2 study. Presented at SABCS 2022. December 6-10, 2022. Abstract GS3-03.

  62. He W, Zhang H, Perkins L et al. Abstract PS18-09: novel chimeric small molecule AC682 potently degrades estrogen receptor with oral anti-tumor efficacy superior to fulvestrant. Cancer Res. 2021;81(4_suppl): PS18 09.

  63. Korpal M, Puyang X, Furman C, et al. Development of a first-in-class oral selective ERα covalent antagonist (SERCA) for the treatment of ERαWT and ERαMUT breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2018;78(4 suppl): Abstract nr P1-10-08.

  64. Puyang X, Furman C, Banka D, et al. Discovery of selective estrogen receptor covalent antagonists for the treatment of ER alpha WT and ER alpha MUT breast cancer. Cancer Discov. 2018;8:1176–93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Hamilton EP, Wang JS, Pluard T, et al. Phase I/II trial of H3B-6545, a novel selective estrogen receptor covalent antagonist (SERCA), in estrogen receptor positive (ER+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-)advanced breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2021;81(4 suppl): Abstract nr PD8-06.

  66. Hodges-Gallagher L, Sun R, Myles D, et al. OP-1250: a potent orally available complete antagonist of estrogen receptor-mediated signaling that shrinks wild type and mutant breast tumors. Eur J Cancer. 2020;138:S55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Patel M, Alemany C, Mitri Z et al Preliminary data from a phase I/II, multicenter, dose escalation study of OP-1250, an oral CERAN/SERD, in subjects with advanced and/or metastatic estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, HER2-negative breast cancerCancer Res 2022;82 (4_suppl):P1-17-12.

  68. Alemany C, Patel M, Mitri Z, et al. A phase 1/2 dose escalation and expansion study of OP-1250 in adults with advanced and/or metastatic hormone receptorpositive (HR+), HER2-negative (HER2-) Breast Cancer (NCT04505826). Mol Cancer Ther. 2021;20(12_suppl):P037.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Hamilton E, Meisel J, Alemany C, et al. Phase 1b results from OP-1250-001, a dose escalation and dose expansion study of OP-1250, an oral CERAN, in subjects with advanced and/or metastatic estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer (NCT04505826). Eur J Cancer. 2022;174:S36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Osborne C, Richards DA, Wilks ST et al. SABCS 2020 A phase 1 study of D-0502, an orally bioavailable SERD, for advanced or metastatic HR-positive and HER2-negative breast cancer. Cancer Res 2021;81(4 suppl): Abstract nr PS11-26.

  71. Jhaveri K, Jeselsohn R, Lim E et al. A phase 1a/b trial of imlunestrant (LY3484356), an oral selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD) in ER-positive (ER+) advanced breast cancer (aBC) and endometrial endometrioid cancer (EEC): monotherapy results from EMBER. J Clin Oncol 2022;40(no. 16_suppl):1021.

  72. Maglakelidze M, Bulat I, Ryspayeva D, et al. Rintodestrant (G1T48), an oral selective estrogen receptor degrader, in combination with palbociclib for ER+/HER2– advanced breast cancer: phase 1 results. J Clin Oncol 2021;39(no. 15_suppl):1063.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville, TN, USA

    Mythili Shastry PhD & Erika Hamilton MD

  2. Tennessee Oncology, 335 24th Ave North, Suite 300, Nashville, TN, 37203, USA

    Erika Hamilton MD

Authors
  1. Mythili Shastry PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Erika Hamilton MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Erika Hamilton MD.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Mythili Shastry reports no conflict of interest.

Erika Hamilton’s institution has received research funding from multiple entities (see below).

AbbVie

Research funding—paid to institution

Acerta Pharma

Research funding—paid to institution

Accutar Biotechnology

Research funding—paid to institution

ADC Therapeutics

Research funding—paid to institution

AKESOBIO Australia

Research funding—paid to institution

Amgen

Research funding—paid to institution

Aravive

Research funding—paid to institution

ArQule

Research funding—paid to institution

Artios

Research funding—paid to institution

Arvinas

Research funding—paid to institution

Astra Zeneca

Research funding—paid to institution

AtlasMedx

Research funding—paid to institution

BeiGene

Research funding—paid to institution

Black Diamond

Research funding—paid to institution

Bliss BioPharmaceuticals

Research funding—paid to institution

Boehringer Ingelheim

Research funding—paid to institution

Cascadian Therapeutics

Research funding—paid to institution

Clovis

Research funding—paid to institution

Compugen

Research funding—paid to institution

Context Therapeutics

Research funding—paid to institution

Cullen-Florentine

Research funding—paid to institution

Curis

Research funding—paid to institution

CytomX

Research funding—paid to institution

Daiichi Sankyo

Research funding—paid to institution

Dana Farber Cancer Inst

Research funding—paid to institution

Dantari

Research funding—paid to institution

Deciphera

Research funding—paid to institution

Duality Biologics

Research funding—paid to institution

eFFECTOR Therapeutics

Research funding—paid to institution

Ellipses Pharma

Research funding—paid to institution

Elucida Oncology

Research funding—paid to institution

EMD Serono

Research funding—paid to institution

Fujifilm

Research funding—paid to institution

G1 Therapeutics

Research funding—paid to institution

H3 Biomedicine

Research funding—paid to institution

Harpoon

Research funding—paid to institution

Hutchison MediPharma

Research funding—paid to institution

Immunogen

Research funding—paid to institution

Immunomedics

Research funding—paid to institution

Incyte

Research funding—paid to institution

Infinity Pharmaceuticals

Research funding—paid to institution

InventisBio

Research funding—paid to institution

Jacobio

Research funding—paid to institution

K-Group Beta

Research funding—paid to institution

Karyopharm

Research funding—paid to institution

Kind Pharmaceuticals

Research funding—paid to institution

Leap Therapeutics

Research funding—paid to institution

Lilly

Research funding—paid to institution

Loxo Oncology

Research funding—paid to institution

Lycera

Research funding—paid to institution

MabSpace Biosciences

Research funding—paid to institution

MacroGenics

Research funding—paid to institution

MedImmune

Research funding—paid to institution

Mersana

Research funding—paid to institution

Merus

Research funding—paid to institution

Millennium

Research funding—paid to institution

Molecular Templates

Research funding—paid to institution

Novartis

Research funding—paid to institution

NuCana

Research funding—paid to institution

Olema

Research funding—paid to institution

OncoMed

Research funding—paid to institution

Onconova Therapeutics

Research funding—paid to institution

Oncothyreon

Research funding—paid to institution

ORIC Pharmaceuticals

Research funding—paid to institution

Orinove

Research funding—paid to institution

Orum Therapeutics

Research funding—paid to institution

Pfizer

Research funding—paid to institution

PharmaMar

Research funding—paid to institution

Pieris Pharmaceuticals

Research funding—paid to institution

Pionyr Immunotherapeutics

Research funding—paid to institution

Plexxikon

Research funding—paid to institution

Prelude Therapeutics

Research funding—paid to institution

Profound Bio

Research funding—paid to institution

Radius Health

Research funding—paid to institution

Regeneron

Research funding—paid to institution

Relay Therapeutics

Research funding—paid to institution

Repertoire Immune Medicine

Research funding—paid to institution

Rgenix

Research funding—paid to institution

Roche/Genentech

Research funding—paid to institution

Seagen

Research funding—paid to institution

Sermonix Pharmaceuticals

Research funding—paid to institution

Shattuck Labs

Research funding—paid to institution

StemCentRx

Research funding—paid to institution

Sutro

Research funding—paid to institution

Syndax

Research funding—paid to institution

Syros

Research funding—paid to institution

Taiho

Research funding—paid to institution

TapImmune

Research funding—paid to institution

Tesaro

Research funding—paid to institution

Tolmar

Research funding—paid to institution

Torque Therapeutics

Research funding—paid to institution

Treadwell Therapeutics

Research funding—paid to institution

Verastem

Research funding—paid to institution

Vincerx Pharma

Research funding—paid to institution

Zenith Epigenetics

Research funding—paid to institution

Zymeworks

Research funding—paid to institution

Erika Hamilton’s institution has received consulting fees from multiple entities (see below).

Time frame: past 36 months

Arcus

Consulting—paid to institution

Astra Zeneca

Consulting—paid to institution

Daiichi Sankyo

Consulting—paid to institution

Ellipses Pharma

Consulting—paid to institution

Greenwich LifeSciences

Consulting—paid to institution

iTeos

Consulting—paid to institution

Janssen

Consulting—paid to institution

Lilly

Consulting—paid to institution

Loxo

Consulting—paid to institution

Mersana

Consulting—paid to institution

Novartis

Consulting—paid to institution

Olema Pharmaceuticals

Consulting—paid to institution

Orum Therapeutics

Consulting—paid to institution

Pfizer

Consulting—paid to institution

Relay Therapeutics

Consulting—paid to institution

Roche/Genentech

Consulting—paid to institution

Seagen

Consulting—paid to institution

Stemline Therapeutics

Consulting—paid to institution

Tubulis

Consulting—paid to institution

Verascity Science

Consulting—paid to institution

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shastry, M., Hamilton, E. Novel Estrogen Receptor-Targeted Agents for Breast Cancer. Curr. Treat. Options in Oncol. 24, 821–844 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11864-023-01079-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11864-023-01079-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation