Search

Background: Therapies shown to improve outcomes in patients with recurrent cancers are commonly used in the neoadjuvant setting to optimize surgery, reduce radiation fields, and treat micro-metastatic disease. While pre-radiation chemotherapy (PRC) use has flourished in systemic cancers, it has not in glioblastomas. This review documents these trajectories and highlights the potential of PRC to rapidly and safely screen cytotoxic drugs for efficacy in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma., Methods: Prospective trials of adults with newly diagnosed systemic and brain cancers treated with PRC published between 1980 and 2023 were identified in PubMed. NCCN guidelines were used to document the standard use of PRC in patients with systemic and brain cancers., Results: Over 5,000 prospective PRC trials in solid tumors were identified. These accrued >1 million patients and resulted in neoadjuvant therapies being standard-of-care in ~28 systemic cancers. Only 50 similar trials (2,206 patients) were identified in high grade gliomas. In 13 trials containing PRC temozolomide (n=846), radiographic responses ranged from 6-53% with a median survival of ~13 months. Glioblastoma PRC trials were not associated with unexpected toxicities or major negative impacts on survival., Conclusions: PRC in patients with glioblastoma appears safe and feasible. The pre-radiation window is ideally suited to rapidly screen cytotoxic agents for efficacy. It permits radiographic response as a primary outcome, small sample sizes, and initiation of standard therapies a few months after diagnosis. PRC may be most appropriate in patients with glioblastoma who are unlikely to benefit from temozolomide., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Purpose: Long-term outcomes of patients with stage I human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer receiving adjuvant trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) remain undefined, and prognostic predictors represent an unmet need., Methods: In the ATEMPT phase II trial, patients with stage I centrally confirmed HER2-positive breast cancer were randomly assigned 3:1 to adjuvant T-DM1 for 1 year or paclitaxel plus trastuzumab (TH). Coprimary objectives were to compare the incidence of clinically relevant toxicities between arms and to evaluate invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) with T-DM1. Correlative analyses included the HER2DX genomic tool, multiomic evaluations of HER2 heterogeneity, and predictors of thrombocytopenia., Results: After a median follow-up of 5.8 years, 11 iDFS events were observed in the T-DM1 arm, consistent with a 5-year iDFS of 97.0% (95% CI, 95.2 to 98.7). At 5 years, the recurrence-free interval (RFI) was 98.3% (95% CI, 97.0 to 99.7), the overall survival was 97.8% (95% CI, 96.3 to 99.3), and the breast cancer-specific survival was 99.4% (95% CI, 98.6 to 100). Comparable iDFS was observed with T-DM1 irrespective of tumor size, hormone receptor status, centrally determined HER2 immunohistochemical score, and receipt of T-DM1 for more or less than 6 months. Although ATEMPT was not powered for this end point, the 5-year iDFS in the TH arm was 91.1%. Among patients with sufficient tissue for HER2DX testing (n = 187), 5-year outcomes significantly differed according to HER2DX risk score, with better RFI (98.1% v 81.8%, hazard ratio [HR], 0.10, P = .01) and iDFS (96.3% v 81.8%, HR, 0.20, P = .047) among patients with HER2DX low-risk versus high-risk tumors, respectively., Conclusion: Adjuvant T-DM1 for 1 year leads to outstanding long-term outcomes for patients with stage I HER2-positive breast cancer. A high HER2DX risk score predicted a higher risk of recurrence in ATEMPT.

Harmonized global collaborations are crucial to improving outcomes in hormone sensitive operable breast cancer.

Purpose: Depression is associated with poor outcomes in breast cancer survivors (BCSs), with higher prevalence among younger women. The Pathways to Wellness (PTW; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03025139) randomized controlled trial (RCT) demonstrated beneficial effects of two behavioral interventions (survivorship education [SE] and mindful awareness practices [MAPs]) on depressive symptoms in younger BCS. We conducted an exploratory secondary analysis to identify moderators of intervention effects., Methods: Women diagnosed with stage 0 to III breast cancer at or before age 50 years who completed cancer treatment were randomly assigned to 6 weeks of SE (n = 81), MAPs (n = 85), or waitlist control (WLC; n = 81). Moderators assessed at baseline included psychological distress (depression and anxiety), intervention preference, preparedness for survivorship, and time since initial diagnosis. Linear regression models tested the modifying effects of each variable on postintervention depression in SE versus WLC and MAPs versus WLC., Results: Baseline levels of depression (β = -.03, P < .01) and anxiety (β = -.64, P = .02) moderated effects of SE on depressive symptoms, as did preparedness for survivorship (β = 3.17, P = .02). Participants randomly assigned to SE who had the highest levels of depression or anxiety and who felt least prepared for survivorship showed the largest reductions in depressive symptoms from preintervention to postintervention. Similar effects were not observed for MAPs. Intervention preference and time since diagnosis did not moderate intervention effects for either SE or MAPs., Conclusion: Our 6-week, group-based SE program may be most beneficial for women with higher levels of psychological distress and those who feel least prepared for cancer survivorship. By contrast, a 6-week mindfulness awareness practice intervention appears to benefit younger BCS regardless of pretreatment characteristics.

Objective: Depression is associated with poor outcomes in breast cancer patients, with higher prevalence among younger women. Although mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) have demonstrated therapeutic effects, the mechanisms of intervention effects are poorly understood. We investigated whether rumination, self-kindness, intrusive thoughts about cancer, cancer-related worry, or a sense of meaning and peace mediated the intervention effects of an MBI, Mindful Awareness Practices (MAPs), on depressive symptoms. Additionally, we explored the same variables as mediators of a psychoeducation program, Survivorship Education (SE)., Methods: Women diagnosed with stage 0-III breast cancer at age <50 years were randomized to 6 weeks of MAPs ( n = 85), SE ( n = 81), or wait-list control (WLC; n = 81). During preintervention, postintervention, and 6-month follow-up (FU), we assessed depressive symptoms, rumination, self-kindness, intrusive thoughts, worry, and meaning and peace., Results: MAPs and SE significantly reduced depressive symptoms at postintervention, and reductions remained through 6-month FU for MAPs. Models revealed that reductions in rumination ( β = -0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -1.64 to -0.07) and intrusive thoughts ( β = 1.17, 95% CI = -2.17 to -0.37) and improvements in self-kindness ( β = -1.09, 95% CI = -2.37 to -0.28) and meaning and peace ( β = -1.09, 95% CI = -3.16 to -0.56) mediated MAPs' effects at all time points. Reductions in worry ( β = -1.34, 95% CI = -2.47 to -0.45]) mediated effects at postintervention only. Worry and intrusive thoughts mediated SE effects at postintervention and 6-month FU, respectively., Conclusions: Findings identified depression-relevant mediators of MAPs' effects, expanding the understanding of MBI mechanisms. Results highlight pathways that could be leveraged to optimize intervention outcomes., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03025139 ., (Copyright © 2024 by the American Psychosomatic Society.)

Background: In 2008, bevacizumab received accelerated Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for use in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Based on the pre-clinical and preliminary clinical activity of the trastuzumab and bevacizumab combination, ECOG-ACRIN E1105 trial was developed to determine if the addition of bevacizumab to a chemotherapy and trastuzumab combination for first-line therapy would improve progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with HER2-positive MBC., Findings: 96 patients were randomized to receive standard first-line chemotherapy and trastuzumab with or without bevacizumab between November 2007 and October 2009, and 93 began protocol therapy. Induction therapy was given for 24 weeks, followed by maintenance trastuzumab with or without bevacizumab. 60% (56/93) began carboplatin and 74% (69/93) completed 6 cycles of induction therapy. Primary endpoint was PFS. Median PFS was 11.1 and 13.8 months for placebo and bevacizumab arms, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 95%, Confidence Interval [Cl] for bevacizumab vs. placebo: 0.73 [0.43-1.23], p = 0.24), and at a median follow-up of 70.7 months, median survival was 49.1 and 63 months (HR [95% Cl] for OS: 1.09 [0.61-1.97], p = 0.75). The most common toxicities across both arms were neutropenia and hypertension, with left ventricular systolic dysfunction, fatigue, and sensory neuropathy reported more frequently with bevacizumab., Conclusions: In this trial, the addition of bevacizumab did not improve outcomes in patients with metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer. Although the trial was underpowered due to smaller than anticipated sample size, these findings corroborated other clinical trials during this time., Clinical Trial Information: NCT00520975., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Purpose: Black women experience higher rates of taxane-induced peripheral neuropathy (TIPN) compared with White women when receiving adjuvant once weekly paclitaxel for early-stage breast cancer, leading to more dose reductions and higher recurrence rates. EAZ171 aimed to prospectively validate germline predictors of TIPN and compare rates of TIPN and dose reductions in Black women receiving (neo)adjuvant once weekly paclitaxel and once every 3 weeks docetaxel for early-stage breast cancer., Methods: Women with early-stage breast cancer who self-identified as Black and had intended to receive (neo)adjuvant once weekly paclitaxel or once every 3 weeks docetaxel were eligible, with planned accrual to 120 patients in each arm. Genotyping was performed to determine germline neuropathy risk. Grade 2-4 TIPN by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v5.0 was compared between high- versus low-risk genotypes and between once weekly paclitaxel versus once every 3 weeks docetaxel within 1 year. Patient-rated TIPN and patient-reported outcomes were compared using patient-reported outcome (PRO)-CTCAE and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Oncology Group-Neurotoxicity., Results: Two hundred and forty of 249 enrolled patients had genotype data, and 91 of 117 (77.8%) receiving once weekly paclitaxel and 87 of 118 (73.7%) receiving once every 3 weeks docetaxel were classified as high-risk. Physician-reported grade 2-4 TIPN was not significantly different in high- versus low-risk genotype groups with once weekly paclitaxel (47% v 35%; P = .27) or with once every 3 weeks docetaxel (28% v 19%; P = .47). Grade 2-4 TIPN was significantly higher in the once weekly paclitaxel versus once every 3 weeks docetaxel arm by both physician-rated CTCAE (45% v 29%; P = .02) and PRO-CTCAE (40% v 24%; P = .03). Patients receiving once weekly paclitaxel required more dose reductions because of TIPN (28% v 9%; P < .001) or any cause (39% v 25%; P = .02)., Conclusion: Germline variation did not predict risk of TIPN in Black women receiving (neo)adjuvant once weekly paclitaxel or once every 3 weeks docetaxel. Once weekly paclitaxel was associated with significantly more grade 2-4 TIPN and required more dose reductions than once every 3 weeks docetaxel.

Importance: The absolute benefit of chemotherapy for all patients with stage I triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is unclear, and biomarkers are not currently available for selecting patients with an excellent outcome for whom neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy may have negligible benefit. High levels of stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (sTILs) are associated with favorable survival in TNBC, but data solely in stage I TNBC are lacking., Objective: To examine the outcomes of patients of all ages with stage I TNBC solely and who received neither neoadjuvant nor adjuvant chemotherapy, according to centrally reviewed sTIL levels at prespecified cutoffs., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used the Netherlands Cancer Registry to identify patients diagnosed with stage I TNBC between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2015, who were not treated with chemotherapy. Only patients who did not receive neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant chemotherapy were selected. The clinical data were matched with their corresponding pathology data provided by the Dutch Pathology Registry. Data analysis was performed between February and October 2023., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) at 5, 10, and 15 years for the prespecified sTIL level cutoffs of 30%, 50%, and 75%. Hematoxylin and eosin-stained slides were used for central review of histologic subtype, grade, and lymphovascular invasion. The International Immuno-Oncology Biomarker Working Group guidelines were used to score the sTIL levels; these levels were determined for 1041 patients., Results: Of a total of 4511 females with stage I TNBC, patients who were not treated with chemotherapy were selected and tissue blocks requested; sTILs were scored in 1041 patients (mean [SD] age at diagnosis, 64.4 [11.1] years, median follow-up 11.4 [95% CI, 10.9-11.9] years) who were included in the analyses.. Most tumors (952 [91.5%]) were invasive carcinomas of nonspecial histologic subtype. Most patients (548 [52.6%]) had pT1cN0 tumors. Median (range) sTIL level was 5% (1%-99%). A total of 775 patients (74.4%) had sTIL levels below 30%, 266 (25.6%) had 30% or greater, 203 (19.5%) had 50% or greater, and 141 (13.5%) had 75% or greater. Patients with pT1abN0 tumors had a more favorable outcome vs patients with pT1cN0 tumors, with a 10-year BCSS of 92% (95% CI, 89%-94%) vs 86% (95% CI, 82%-89%). In the overall cohort, sTIL levels of at least 30% were associated with better BCSS compared with sTIL levels less than 30% (96% and 87%, respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 0.45; 95% CI, 0.26-0.77). High sTIL levels of 50% or greater were associated with a better outcome than low sTIL levels of less than 50% (HR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.10-0.74) in patients with pT1C tumors, with a 10-year BCSS of 95% increasing to 98% with sTIL levels of 75% or greater., Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this study showed that patients with stage I TNBC and high level of sTILs who did not receive neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy had excellent 10-year BCSS. The findings further support the role of sTILs as integral biomarkers in prospective clinical trials of therapy optimization for this patient population.

Background: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are a better tool for evaluating the experiences of patients who have symptomatic, treatment-associated adverse events (AEs) compared with clinician-rated AEs. The authors present PROs assessing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and treatment-related neurotoxicity for adjuvant capecitabine versus platinum on the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ECOG-ACRIN) EA1131 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02445391)., Methods: Participants completed the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast Cancer Symptom Index (NFBSI-16) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Gynecologic Oncology Group neurotoxicity subscale (platinum arm only) at baseline, cycle 3 day 1 (C3D1), 6 months, and 15 months. Because of early termination, power was insufficient to test the hypothesis that HRQoL, as assessed by the NFBSI-16 treatment side-effect (TSE) subscale, would be better at 6 and 15 months in the capecitabine arm; all analyses were exploratory. Means were compared by using t-tests or the Wilcoxon rank-sum test, and proportions were compared by using the χ 2 test., Results: Two hundred ninety-six of 330 eligible patients provided PROs. The mean NFBSI-16 TSE subscale score was lower for the platinum arm at baseline (p = .02; absolute difference, 0.6 points) and for the capecitabine arm at C3D1 (p = .04; absolute difference, 0.5 points), but it did not differ at other times. The mean change in TSE subscale scores differed between the arms from baseline to C3D1 (platinum arm, 0.15; capecitabine arm, -0.72; p = .03), but not from baseline to later time points. The mean decline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Gynecologic Oncology Group neurotoxicity subscale scores exceeded the minimal meaningful change (1.38 points) from baseline to each subsequent time point (all p < .05)., Conclusions: Despite the similar frequency of clinician-rated AEs, PROs identified greater on-treatment symptom burden with capecitabine and complemented clinician-rated AEs by characterizing patients' experiences during chemotherapy., (© 2024 American Cancer Society.)

Background: Breast cancer patients experienced heightened anxiety during the pandemic. Also, modifications to clinical trial activities allowing for virtual platforms, local assessments, and greater flexibility were introduced to facilitate participation. We sought to evaluate the association between pandemic-related anxiety and willingness to participate in trials and how pandemic-era modifications to trial activities affect the decision to participate., Methods: We conducted an online survey from August to September, 2021 of patients with breast cancer assessing pandemic-related anxiety; clinical trials knowledge and attitudes; willingness to participate during and before the pandemic; and how each modification affects the decision to participate. Fisher's exact tests evaluated differences in proportions and two-sample t-tests evaluated differences in means. The association of pandemic-related anxiety with a decline in willingness to participate during compared to prior to the pandemic was modeled using logistic regression., Results: Among 385 respondents who completed the survey, 81% reported moderate-severe pandemic-related anxiety. Mean willingness to participate in a trial was lower during the pandemic than prior [2.97 (SD 1.17) vs. 3.10 (SD 1.09), (p < 0.001)]. Severe anxiety was associated with higher odds of diminished willingness to participate during the pandemic compared to prior (OR 5.07). Each of the modifications, with the exception of opting out of research-only blood tests, were endorsed by >50% of respondents as strategies that would increase their likelihood of deciding to participate., Conclusions: While pandemic-related anxiety was associated with diminished willingness to participate in trials, the leading reasons for reluctance to consider trial participation were unrelated to the pandemic but included worries about not getting the best treatment, side effects, and delaying care. Patients view trial modifications favorably, supporting continuation of these modifications, as endorsed by the National Cancer Institute and others., (© 2024 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

We report the 20-year rate of ipsilateral breast event (IBE) for patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) treated with lumpectomy without radiation on a non-randomized prospective clinical trial. Patients were enrolled in cohort 1: low- or intermediate-grade DCIS, size ≤ 2.5 cm (n = 561); or cohort 2: high-grade DCIS, size ≤ 1 cm (n = 104). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate time-to-event distributions. Cox proportional hazard methods were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and tests for significance for event times. 561 patients were enrolled in cohort 1 and 104 in cohort 2. After central pathology review, 26% in cohort 1 were recategorized as high-grade and 26% in cohort 2 as low- or intermediate-grade. Mean DCIS size was similar at 7.5 mm in cohort 1 and 7.8 mm in cohort 2. Surgical margin was ≥3 mm in 96% of patients, and about 30% received tamoxifen. Median follow-up was 19.2 years. There were 104 IBEs, of which 54 (52%) were invasive. The IBE and invasive IBE rates increased in both cohorts up to 15 years, then plateaued. The 20-year IBE rates were 17.8% for cohort 1 and 28.7% for cohort 2 (p = 0.005), respectively. Invasive IBE occurred in 9.8% and 15.1% (p = 0.09), respectively. On multivariable analysis, IBE risk increased with size and was higher in cohort 2, but grade and margin width were not significantly associated with IBE. For patients with DCIS treated with excision without radiation, the rate of IBE increased with size and assigned cohort mostly in the first 15 years., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Importance: Agents targeting programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) have demonstrated efficacy in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) when combined with chemotherapy and are now the standard of care in patients with PD-L1-positive metastatic disease. In contrast to microtubule-targeting agents, the effect of combining platinum compounds with programmed cell death 1 (PD-1)/PD-L1 immunotherapy has not been extensively determined., Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of atezolizumab with carboplatin in patients with metastatic TNBC., Design, Setting, and Participants: This phase 2 randomized clinical trial was conducted in 6 centers from August 2017 to June 2021., Interventions: Patients with metastatic TNBC were randomized to receive carboplatin area under the curve (AUC) 6 alone or with atezolizumab, 1200 mg, every 3 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects with a 3-year duration of follow-up., Main Outcome and Measures: The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included overall response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate (CBR), and overall survival (OS). Other objectives included correlation of response with tumor PD-L1 levels, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), tumor DNA- and RNA-sequenced biomarkers, TNBC subtyping, and multiplex analyses of immune markers., Results: All 106 patients with metastatic TNBC who were enrolled were female with a mean (range) age of 55 (27-79) years, of which 12 (19%) identified as African American/Black, 1 (1%) as Asian, 73 (69%) as White, and 11 (10%) as unknown. Patients were randomized and received either carboplatin (n = 50) or carboplatin and atezolizumab (n = 56). The combination improved PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.66; 95% CI, 0.44-1.01; P = .05) from a median of 2.2 to 4.1 months, increased ORR from 8.0% (95% CI, 3.2%-18.8%) to 30.4% (95% CI, 19.9%-43.3%), increased CBR at 6 months from 18.0% (95% CI, 9.8%-30.1%) to 37.5% (95% CI, 26.0%-50.6%), and improved OS (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.37-0.96; P = .03) from a median of 8.6 to 12.6 months. Subgroup analysis showed PD-L1-positive tumors did not benefit more from adding atezolizumab (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.23-1.65; P = .35). Patients with high TILs (HR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.30-0.50), high mutation burden (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.23-1.06), and prior chemotherapy (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.36-0.95) received greater benefit on the combination. Patients with obesity and patients with more than 125 mg/dL on-treatment blood glucose levels were associated with better PFS (HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.10-1.80) on the combination. TNBC subtypes benefited from adding atezolizumab, except the luminal androgen receptor subtype., Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, the addition of atezolizumab to carboplatin significantly improved survival of patients with metastatic TNBC regardless of PD-L1 status. Further, lower risk of disease progression was associated with increased TILs, higher mutation burden, obesity, and uncontrolled blood glucose levels., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03206203.

Background: Patients with inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) have overall poor clinical outcomes, with triple-negative IBC (TN-IBC) being associated with the worst survival, warranting the investigation of novel therapies. Preclinical studies implied that ruxolitinib (RUX), a JAK1/2 inhibitor, may be an effective therapy for TN-IBC., Methods: We conducted a randomized phase II study with nested window-of-opportunity in TN-IBC. Treatment-naïve patients received a 7-day run-in of RUX alone or RUX plus paclitaxel (PAC). After the run-in, those who received RUX alone proceeded to neoadjuvant therapy with either RUX + PAC or PAC alone for 12 weeks; those who had received RUX + PAC continued treatment for 12 weeks. All patients subsequently received 4 cycles of doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide prior to surgery. Research tumor biopsies were performed at baseline (pre-run-in) and after run-in therapy. Tumors were evaluated for phosphorylated STAT3 (pSTAT3) by immunostaining, and a subset was also analyzed by RNA-seq. The primary endpoint was the percent of pSTAT3-positive pre-run-in tumors that became pSTAT3-negative. Secondary endpoints included pathologic complete response (pCR)., Results: Overall, 23 patients were enrolled, of whom 21 completed preoperative therapy. Two patients achieved pCR (8.7%). pSTAT3 and IL-6/JAK/STAT3 signaling decreased in post-run-in biopsies of RUX-treated samples, while sustained treatment with RUX + PAC upregulated IL-6/JAK/STAT3 signaling compared to RUX alone. Both treatments decreased GZMB + T cells implying immune suppression. RUX alone effectively inhibited JAK/STAT3 signaling but its combination with PAC led to incomplete inhibition. The immune suppressive effects of RUX alone and in combination may negate its growth inhibitory effects on cancer cells., Conclusion: In summary, the use of RUX in TN-IBC was associated with a decrease in pSTAT3 levels despite lack of clinical benefit. Cancer cell-specific-targeting of JAK2/STAT3 or combinations with immunotherapy may be required for further evaluation of JAK2/STAT3 signaling as a cancer therapeutic target., Trial Registration: www., Clinicaltrials: gov , NCT02876302. Registered 23 August 2016., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Tumor biomarkers are regularly used to guide breast cancer treatment and clinical trial enrollment. However, there remains a lack of knowledge regarding physicians' perspectives towards biomarkers and their role in treatment optimization, where treatment intensity is reduced to minimize toxicity., Methods: Thirty-nine academic and community oncologists participated in semi-structured qualitative interviews, providing perspectives on optimization approaches to chemotherapy treatment. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed by 2 independent coders utilizing a constant comparative method in NVivo. Major themes and exemplary quotes were extracted. A framework outlining physicians' conception of biomarkers, and their comfortability with their use in treatment optimization, was developed., Results: In the hierarchal model of biomarkers, level 1 is comprised of standard-of-care (SoC) biomarkers, defined by a strong level of evidence, alignment with national guidelines, and widespread utilization. Level 2 includes SoC biomarkers used in alternative contexts, in which physicians expressed confidence, yet less certainty, due to a lack of data in certain subgroups. Level 3, or experimental, biomarkers created the most diverse concerns related to quality and quantity of evidence, with several additional modulators., Conclusion: This study demonstrates that physicians conceptualize the use of biomarkers for treatment optimization in successive levels. This hierarchy can be used to guide trialists in the development of novel biomarkers and design of future trials., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Purpose: BMI affects breast cancer risk and prognosis. In contrast to cytotoxic chemotherapy, CDK4/6 inhibitors are given at a fixed dose, irrespective of BMI or weight. This preplanned analysis of the global randomized PALLAS trial investigates the impact of BMI on the side-effect profile, treatment adherence, and efficacy of palbociclib., Methods: Patients were categorized at baseline according to WHO BMI categories. Neutropenia rates were assessed with univariable and multivariable logistic regression. Time to early discontinuation of palbociclib was analyzed with Fine and Gray competing risk models. Unstratified Cox models were used to investigate the association between BMI category and time to invasive disease-free survival (iDFS). 95% CIs were derived., Results: Of 5,698 patients included in this analysis, 68 (1.2%) were underweight, 2,082 (36.5%) normal weight, 1,818 (31.9%) overweight, and 1,730 (30.4%) obese at baseline. In the palbociclib arm, higher BMI was associated with a significant decrease in neutropenia (unadjusted odds ratio for 1-unit change, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.91 to 0.94; adjusted for age, race ethnicity, region, chemotherapy use, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group at baseline, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.92 to 0.95). This translated into a significant decrease in treatment discontinuation rate with higher BMI (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] for 10-unit change, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.83). There was no significant improvement in iDFS with the addition of palbociclib to ET in any weight category (normal weight HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.12; overweight HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.49; and obese HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.30) in this analysis early in follow-up (31 months)., Conclusion: This preplanned analysis of the PALLAS trial demonstrates a significant impact of BMI on side effects, dose reductions, early treatment discontinuation, and relative dose intensity. Additional long-term follow-up will further evaluate whether BMI ultimately affects outcome.

Purpose: Treatment-associated symptoms drive early discontinuation of adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) for breast cancer. We hypothesized that symptom monitoring with electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) during adjuvant ET will enhance symptom detection, symptom management, and persistence., Methods: Eligible patients were initiating ET for stage 0-III breast cancer. Participants completed ePRO surveys via smartphone at baseline and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. Measures included Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Anxiety, Depression, Fatigue, and Vaginal Discomfort; plus Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events items assessing joint pain, hot flashes, vaginal dryness, concentration problems, and memory problems. Scores surpassing prespecified thresholds triggered alerts, and recommended symptom management pathways were provided to clinicians. The primary objective was to evaluate feasibility, assessed by survey completion rates, with targets of >65% for the baseline survey and ≥1 follow-up survey during the first 6 months. Secondary objectives included 12-month ET discontinuation rate (target: ≤15%), describing symptoms and evaluating pathway implementation., Results: Among 250 participants, 73.2% completed the baseline survey and 69.6% completed ≥1 follow-up survey during the first 6 months. Thirty-one percent of participants had ≥1 symptom alert at baseline and 74% had ≥1 symptom alert during follow-up. The proportions of participants for whom pathway-concordant symptom management was documented at each time point ranged from 12.8% to 36.6%. Twenty-eight participants (11.2%) discontinued ET by 12 months., Conclusion: Symptom monitoring with ePROs during adjuvant ET is feasible. Despite infrequent documentation of pathway-concordant symptom management after symptom alerts, ePROs were associated with favorable short-term ET persistence.

Predictive biomarkers of response to human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-directed therapy are essential to inform treatment decisions. The TBCRC026 trial reported that early declines in tumor SUVs corrected for lean body mass (SUL max ) on 18 F-FDG PET/CT predicted a pathologic complete response (pCR) to HER2 therapy with neoadjuvant trastuzumab and pertuzumab (HP) without chemotherapy in estrogen receptor (ER)-negative, HER2-positive breast cancer. We hypothesized that 18 F-FDG PET/CT SUL max parameters would predict recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). Methods: Patients with stage II/III ER-negative, HER2-positive breast cancer received neoadjuvant HP ( n = 88). pCR after HP alone was 22% (18/83), additional nonstudy neoadjuvant therapy was administered in 28% (25/88), and the majority received adjuvant therapy per physician discretion. 18 F-FDG PET/CT was performed at baseline and at cycle 1, day 15 (C1D15). RFS and OS were summarized using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared between subgroups using logrank tests. Associations between 18 F-FDG PET/CT (≥40% decline in SUL max between baseline and C1D15, or C1D15 SUL max ≤ 3) and pCR were evaluated using Cox regressions, where likelihood ratio CIs were reported because of the small numbers of events. Results: Median follow-up was 53.7 mo (83/88 evaluable), with 6 deaths and 14 RFS events. Estimated RFS and OS at 3 y was 84% (95% CI, 76%-92%) and 92% (95% CI, 87%-98%), respectively. A C1D15 SUL max of 3 or less was associated with improved RFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.36; 95% CI, 0.11-1.05; P = 0.06) and OS (HR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.01-0.85; P = 0.03), the latter statistically significant. The association of an SUL max decline of at least 40% (achieved in 59%) with RFS and OS did not reach statistical significance. pCR was associated with improved RFS (HR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.01-1.24; P = 0.10) but did not reach statistical significance. Conclusion: For the first time, we report a potential association between a C1D15 SUL max of 3 or less on 18 F-FDG PET/CT and RFS and OS outcomes in patients with ER-negative, HER2-positive breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant HP alone. If confirmed in future studies, this imaging-based biomarker may facilitate early individualization of therapy., (© 2023 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.)

Background: The UK National Health Service's Predict is a clinical tool widely used to estimate the prognosis of early-stage breast cancer. The performance of Predict for a second primary breast cancer is unknown., Methods: Women 18 years of age or older diagnosed with a first or second invasive breast cancer between 2000 and 2013 and followed for at least 5 years were identified from the US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Model calibration of Predict was evaluated by comparing predicted and observed 5-year breast cancer-specific mortality separately by estrogen receptor status for first vs second breast cancer. Receiver operating characteristic curves and areas under the curve were used to assess model discrimination. Model performance was also evaluated for various races and ethnicities., Results: The study population included 6729 women diagnosed with a second breast cancer and 357 204 women with a first breast cancer. Overall, Predict demonstrated good discrimination for first and second breast cancers (areas under the curve ranging from 0.73 to 0.82). Predict statistically significantly underestimated 5-year breast cancer mortality for second estrogen receptor-positive breast cancers (predicted-observed = ‒6.24%, 95% CI = ‒6.96% to ‒5.49%). Among women with a first estrogen receptor-positive cancer, model calibration was good (predicted-observed = ‒0.22%, 95% CI = ‒0.29% to ‒0.15%), except in non-Hispanic Black women (predicted-observed = ‒2.33%, 95% CI = ‒2.65% to ‒2.01%) and women 80 years of age or older (predicted-observed = ‒3.75%, 95% CI = ‒4.12% to ‒3.41%). Predict performed well for second estrogen receptor-negative cancers overall (predicted-observed = ‒1.69%, 95% CI = ‒3.99% to 0.16%) but underestimated mortality among those who had previously received chemotherapy or had a first cancer with more aggressive tumor characteristics. In contrast, Predict overestimated mortality for first estrogen receptor-negative cancers (predicted-observed = 4.54%, 95% CI = 4.27% to 4.86%)., Conclusion: The Predict tool underestimated 5-year mortality after a second estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer and in certain subgroups of women with a second estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Introduction: Prospective data about quality of life (QoL) in men with breast cancer (BC) are lacking. A prospective registry (EORTC10085) of men with all BC stages, including a QoL correlative study, was performed as part of the International Male Breast Cancer Program., Methods: Questionnaires at BC diagnosis included the EORTC QLQ-C30 and BR23 (BC specific module), adapted for men. High functioning and global health/QoL scores indicate high functioning levels/high QoL; high symptom-focused measures scores indicate high symptoms/problems levels. EORTC reference data for healthy men and women with BC were used for comparisons., Results: Of 422 men consenting to participate, 363 were evaluable. Median age was 67 years, and median time between diagnosis and survey was 1.1 months. A total of 114 men (45%) had node-positive early disease, and 28 (8%) had advanced disease. Baseline mean global health status score was 73 (SD: 21), better than in female BC reference data (62, SD: 25). Common symptoms in male BC were fatigue (22, SD: 24), insomnia (21, SD: 28), and pain (16, SD: 23), for which women's mean scores indicated more burdensome symptoms at 33 (SD: 26), 30 (SD: 32), and 29 (SD: 29). Men's mean sexual activity score was 31 (SD: 26), with less sexual activity in older patients or advanced disease., Conclusions: QoL and symptom burden in male BC patients appears no worse (and possibly better) than that in female patients. Future analyses on impact of treatment on symptoms and QoL over time, may support tailoring of male BC management., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Purpose.—: To update the American Society of Clinical Oncology-College of American Pathologists (ASCO-CAP) recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) testing in breast cancer. An Update Panel is aware that a new generation of antibody-drug conjugates targeting the HER2 protein is active against breast cancers that lack protein overexpression or gene amplification., Methods.—: The Update Panel conducted a systematic literature review to identify signals for updating recommendations., Results.—: The search identified 173 abstracts. Of 5 potential publications reviewed, none constituted a signal for revising existing recommendations., Recommendations.—: The 2018 ASCO-CAP recommendations for HER2 testing are affirmed., Discussion.—: HER2 testing guidelines have focused on identifying HER2 protein overexpression or gene amplification in breast cancer to identify patients for therapies that disrupt HER2 signaling. This update acknowledges a new indication for trastuzumab deruxtecan when HER2 is not overexpressed or amplified but is immunohistochemistry (IHC) 1+ or 2+ without amplification by in situ hybridization. Clinical trial data on tumors that tested IHC 0 are limited (excluded from DESTINY-Breast04), and evidence is lacking that these cancers behave differently or do not respond similarly to newer HER2 antibody-drug conjugates. Although current data do not support a new IHC 0 versus 1+ prognostic or predictive threshold for response to trastuzumab deruxtecan, this threshold is now relevant because of the trial entry criteria that supported its new regulatory approval. Therefore, although it is premature to create new result categories of HER2 expression (eg, HER2-Low, HER2-Ultra-Low), best practices to distinguish IHC 0 from 1+ are now clinically relevant. This update affirms prior HER2 reporting recommendations and offers a new HER2 testing reporting comment to highlight the current relevance of IHC 0 versus 1+ results and best practice recommendations to distinguish these often subtle differences. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines., Competing Interests: Authors’ disclosures of potential conflicts of interest are shown after the references., (Copyright 2023 College of American Pathologists and the American Society of Clinical Oncology. This guideline update was developed through collaboration among the College of American Pathologists and the American Society of Clinical Oncology and has been jointly published by invitation and consent in the Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine and the Journal of Clinical Oncology. It has been edited in accordance with style standards established at the Journal of Clinical Oncology. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Clinical trials reported 25% to 30% pathologic complete response (pCR) rates in HER2+ patients with breast cancer treated with anti-HER2 therapies without chemotherapy. We hypothesize that a multiparameter classifier can identify patients with HER2-"addicted" tumors who may benefit from a chemotherapy-sparing strategy., Experimental Design: Baseline HER2+ breast cancer specimens from the TBCRC023 and PAMELA trials, which included neoadjuvant treatment with lapatinib and trastuzumab, were used. In the case of estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) tumors, endocrine therapy was also administered. HER2 protein and gene amplification (ratio), HER2-enriched (HER2-E), and PIK3CA mutation status were assessed by dual gene protein assay (GPA), research-based PAM50, and targeted DNA-sequencing. GPA cutoffs and classifier of response were constructed in TBCRC023 using a decision tree algorithm, then validated in PAMELA., Results: In TBCRC023, 72 breast cancer specimens had GPA, PAM50, and sequencing data, of which 15 had pCR. Recursive partitioning identified cutoffs of HER2 ratio ≥ 4.6 and %3+ IHC staining ≥ 97.5%. With PAM50 and sequencing data, the model added HER2-E and PIK3CA wild-type (WT). For clinical implementation, the classifier was locked as HER2 ratio ≥ 4.5, %3+ IHC staining ≥ 90%, and PIK3CA-WT and HER2-E, yielding 55% and 94% positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values, respectively. Independent validation using 44 PAMELA cases with all three biomarkers yielded 47% PPV and 82% NPV. Importantly, our classifier's high NPV signifies its strength in accurately identifying patients who may not be good candidates for treatment deescalation., Conclusions: Our multiparameter classifier differentially identifies patients who may benefit from HER2-targeted therapy alone from those who need chemotherapy and predicts pCR to anti-HER2 therapy alone comparable with chemotherapy plus dual anti-HER2 therapy in unselected patients., (©2023 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: To update ASCO-College of American Pathologists (CAP) recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) testing in breast cancer. The Panel is aware that a new generation of antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) targeting the HER2 protein is active against breast cancers that lack protein overexpression or gene amplification., Methods: An Update Panel conducted a systematic literature review to identify signals for updating recommendations., Results: The search identified 173 abstracts. Of five potential publications reviewed, none constituted a signal for revising existing recommendations., Recommendations: The 2018 ASCO-CAP recommendations for HER2 testing are affirmed., Discussion: HER2 testing guidelines have focused on identifying HER2 protein overexpression or gene amplification in breast cancer to identify patients for therapies that disrupt HER2 signaling. This update acknowledges a new indication for trastuzumab deruxtecan when HER2 is not overexpressed or amplified but is immunohistochemistry (IHC) 1+ or 2+ without amplification by in situ hybridization. Clinical trial data on tumors that tested IHC 0 are limited (excluded from DESTINY-Breast04), and evidence is lacking that these cancers behave differently or do not respond similarly to newer HER2 ADCs. Although current data do not support a new IHC 0 versus 1+ prognostic or predictive threshold for response to trastuzumab deruxtecan, this threshold is now relevant because of the trial entry criteria that supported its new regulatory approval. Therefore, while it is premature to create new result categories of HER2 expression (eg, HER2-Low, HER2-Ultra-Low), best practices to distinguish IHC 0 from 1+ are now clinically relevant. This Update affirms prior HER2 reporting recommendations and offers a new HER2 testing reporting comment to highlight the current relevance of IHC 0 versus 1+ results and best practice recommendations to distinguish these often subtle differences.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines.

Background: Controversy exists regarding the optimal duration of the extended adjuvant endocrine treatment (ET) in patients with early-stage breast-cancer (eBC). We performed a systematic review and trial-level meta-analysis of all randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing a "limited-extended" adjuvant ET (defined as more than 5 but less than 7.5 years of treatment overall) versus a "full-extended" adjuvant ET (defined as more than 7.5 years of treatment overall) in eBC., Methods: To be eligible, RCTs had to i) compare a "limited-extended" adjuvant ET versus a "full-extended" adjuvant ET in patients with eBC; and ii) report disease-free survival (DFS) hazard ratio (HR) according to the disease nodal-status [i.e., nodal-negative (N-ve) versus nodal-positive (N + ve)]. The primary endpoint was to assess the difference in efficacy of full-versus limited-extended ET, measured in terms of the difference in DFS log-HR, according to the disease nodal-status. Secondary endpoint was the difference in efficacy of full-versus limited-extended ET according to tumor size (i.e., pT1 vs pT2/3/4), histological grade (i.e., G1/G2 vs G3), patients' age (i.e., ≤60 vs > 60 years) and previous type of ET (i.e., aromatase inhibitors vs tamoxifen vs switch strategy)., Results: Three phase III RCTs fulfilled the inclusion criteria. A total of 6689 patients were included in the analysis, of which 3506 (53%) had N + ve disease. The full-extended ET provided no DFS-benefit as compared with the limited-extended ET in patients with N-ve disease (pooled DFS-HR = 1.04, 95%CI: 0.89 to 1.22; I 2  = 18%). Conversely, in patients with N + ve disease the full-extended ET significantly improved DFS, with a pooled DFS-HR of 0.85 (95%CI: 0.74 to 0.97; I 2  = 0%). There was a significant interaction between the disease nodal-status and the efficacy of the full-versus limited-extended ET (p-heterogeneity = 0.048). The full-extended ET provided no significant DFS-benefit as compared with the limited-extended ET in all the other subgroups analyzed., Conclusions: Patients with eBC and N + ve disease can obtain a significant DFS-benefit from the full-extended as compared with the limited-extended adjuvant ET., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest All other authors declare no conflicts of interest. The lead author (FC) affirms that this manuscript is an honest, accurate, and transparent account of the study being reported; that no important aspects of the study have been omitted; and that any discrepancies from the study as planned have been explained., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Racial and ethnic differences in survival after a first cancer are well established but have not been examined after a second primary cancer (SPC) despite the increasing incidence among survivors., Methods: We examined 39 029 female breast cancer survivors who developed an SPC between 2000 and 2014 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results 18 database. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression for competing risks data was used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for cancer and cardiovascular disease mortality after SPCs comparing Hispanic, Non-Hispanic Asian, and Non-Hispanic Black survivors with Non-Hispanic White survivors. Models were adjusted for sociodemographics, tumor characteristics, and treatments of the first and second cancer. Analyses were stratified by SPC type., Results: During 17 years of follow-up, there were 15 117 deaths after SPCs. The risk of cancer death was 12% higher among Non-Hispanic Black survivors (HR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.05 to 1.19) and 8% higher among Hispanic survivors (HR = 1.08, 95% CI = 1.00 to 1.16) compared with Non-Hispanic White survivors. In subgroup analyses, the strongest associations were observed among Non-Hispanic Black survivors with a second breast or uterine cancer and among Hispanic survivors with a second breast cancer. Non-Hispanic Black survivors also experienced a 44% higher risk of cardiovascular disease death after SPC diagnosis than Non-Hispanic White survivors (HR = 1.44, 95% CI = 1.20 to 1.74)., Conclusions: Higher cancer mortality among Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic survivors and higher cardiovascular mortality among Non-Hispanic Black survivors exist among women who survive a first breast cancer to develop an SPC. Studies focused on identifying the contributors to these disparities are needed to enable implementation of effective mitigation strategies., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Survivorship care plans (SCPs) communicate cancer-related information from oncology providers to patients and primary care providers. SCPs may limit overuse testing by specifying necessary follow-up care. From a randomized, controlled trial of SCP delivery, we examined whether cancer-related tests not specified in SCPs, but conducted after SCP receipt, were appropriate or consistent with overuse., Methods: Survivors of breast, colorectal, or prostate cancer treated at urban-academic or rural-community health systems were randomized to one of three SCP delivery arms. Tests during 18 months after SCP receipt were classified as consistent with overuse if they were (1) not included in SCPs and (2) on a guideline-based predetermined list of "not recommended surveillance." After chart abstraction, physicians performed review and adjudication of potential overuse. Descriptive analyses were conducted of tests consistent with overuse. Negative binomial regression models determined if testing consistent with overuse differed across study arms., Results: Among 316 patients (137 breast, 67 colorectal, 112 prostate), 140 individual tests were identified as potential overuse. Upon review, 98 were deemed to be consistent with overuse: 78 tumor markers and 20 imaging tests. The majority of overuse testing was breast cancer-related (95%). Across sites, 27 patients (9%) received ≥1 test consistent with overuse; most were breast cancer patients (22/27). Exploratory analyses of overuse test frequency by study arm showed no significant difference., Conclusions: This analysis identified practice patterns consistent with overuse of surveillance testing and can inform efforts to improve guideline-concordant care. Future interventions may include individual practice patterns and provider education., (© 2022 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: We aimed to report on long-term outcomes of patients with small, node-negative, HER2-positive breast cancer treated with adjuvant paclitaxel and trastuzumab and to establish potential biomarkers to predict prognosis., Methods: In this open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study, patients aged 18 years or older, with small (≤3 cm), node-negative, HER2-positive breast cancer, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, were recruited from 16 institutions in 13 cities in the USA. Eligible patients were given intravenous paclitaxel (80 mg/m 2 ) with intravenous trastuzumab (loading dose of 4 mg/kg, subsequent doses 2 mg/kg) weekly for 12 weeks, followed by trastuzumab (weekly at 2 mg/kg or once every 3 weeks at 6 mg/kg) for 40 weeks to complete a full year of trastuzumab. The primary endpoint was 3-year invasive disease-free survival. Here, we report 10-year survival outcomes, assessed in all participants who received protocol-defined treatment, with exploratory analyses using the HER2DX genomic tool. This study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00542451, and is closed to accrual., Findings: Between Oct 29, 2007, and Sept 3, 2010, 410 patients were enrolled and 406 were given adjuvant paclitaxel and trastuzumab and included in the analysis. Mean age at enrolment was 55 years (SD 10·5), 405 (99·8%) of 406 patients were female and one (0·2%) was male, 350 (86·2%) were White, 28 (6·9%) were Black or African American, and 272 (67·0%) had hormone receptor-positive disease. After a median follow-up of 10·8 years (IQR 7·1-11·4), among 406 patients included in the analysis population, we observed 31 invasive disease-free survival events, of which six (19·4%) were locoregional ipsilateral recurrences, nine (29·0%) were new contralateral breast cancers, six (19·4%) were distant recurrences, and ten (32·3%) were all-cause deaths. 10-year invasive disease-free survival was 91·3% (95% CI 88·3-94·4), 10-year recurrence-free interval was 96·3% (95% CI 94·3-98·3), 10-year overall survival was 94·3% (95% CI 91·8-96·8), and 10-year breast cancer-specific survival was 98·8% (95% CI 97·6-100). HER2DX risk score as a continuous variable was significantly associated with invasive disease-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] per 10-unit increment 1·24 [95% CI 1·00-1·52]; p=0·047) and recurrence-free interval (1·45 [1·09-1·93]; p=0·011)., Interpretation: Adjuvant paclitaxel and trastuzumab is a reasonable treatment standard for patients with small, node-negative, HER2-positive breast cancer. The HER2DX genomic tool might help to refine the prognosis for this population., Funding: Genentech., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests SMT has received grant support (paid to institution) from AstraZeneca, Merck, Nektar, Novartis, Pfizer, Genentech (Roche), Gilead, Exelixis, BMS, Eisai, NanoString, Cyclacel, Sanofi, Seagen, and Eli Lilly; and has received consulting or advisory board fees (paid to self) from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Genentech (Roche), Gilead, BMS, Eisai, Sanofi, SeaGen, Daiichi-Sankyo, Athenex, OncoPep, Kyowa Kirin Pharma, CytomX, Certara, Mersana Therapeutics, Ellipses Pharma, 4D Pharma, OncoSec, Infinity Therapeutics, BeyondSpring Pharma, OncXerna, Zymeworks, Zentalis, ARC Therapeutics, Reveal Genomics, Blueprint Medicines, Myovant, Umoja Biopharma, Stemline (Menarini), and Artios Biopharma. PT has received consulting or advisory board fees from AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Lilly and has received payment or honoraria for educational events from AstraZeneca and Daiichi-Sankyo. NT has received honoraria for a Clinical Research Workshop at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium. LP is an employee of Reveal Genomics and has a patent (EP 20 382 679.7—in vitro method for the prognosis of patients suffering from HER2-positive breast cancer). GV has received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers’ bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from MSD, GSK, Pierre Fabre, and Pfizer and has participated on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AstraZeneca. CTD has received research funding from Genentech (Roche) and Puma and has received consulting fees from Daiichi-Sankyo, Novartis, Pfizer, Gilead, Seagen, and Genentech (Roche). DAY has received funding (paid to institution) for the present manuscript from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute; grant support (paid to institution) from Ambrx, Amgen, BIOMARIN, Biothera Pharmaceuticals, Clovis Pharma, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Lilly, Genentech (Roche), G1 Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, Incyte, Innocrin Pharmaceuticals, Macrogenics, MedImmune, Medivation, Merck, Merrimack Pharmaceuticals, Nektar Therapeutics, Novartis, the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project, Pfizer, and Polyphor; and has received consulting fees (paid to institution) from AstraZeneca, Athenex, bioTheranostics, G1 Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, Immunomedics, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi-Aventis. PKM has received support (paid to institution) for the present manuscript from Genentech; has participated on a data safety monitoring board for Genentech (Roche); has stock or stock options in Veracyte; and was a full-time employee of Veracyte at time of manuscript submission. KSA has received funding (paid to institution) for the present manuscript from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute for data management support. HSR has received grant funding (paid to UC Regents only) from Ambrx, Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, Genentech (Roche), Gilead Sciences, GSK, Lilly, Merck & Co, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, OBI Pharma, Pfizer, Pionyr Immunotherapeutics, Seattle Genetics, Sermonix Pharmaceuticals, Taiho Oncology, and Veru; has received consulting fees from Puma, Napo Pharmaceuticals, and Blueprint; and has received support for attending meetings and travel from Merck, AstraZeneca, and Gilead. MJE has reported a PAM50 Bioinformatics for Prosigna royalty-bearing license to Veracyte; and and has been an employee of AstraZeneca since March 7, 2022 (AstraZeneca had no role in this study and the author's involvement in this study preceded his employment with AstraZeneca). LAC has received research funding (paid to institution) from Syndax, Novartis, NanoString Technologies, Seattle Genetics, Veracyte, and AstraZeneca and declares participation in uncompensated consulting activities for Eisai (to self), Sanofi (to self), Lilly (to self), Seagen (to self), Novartis (to institution), G1 Therapeutics (to institution), Genentech (Roche; to institution), GSK (to institution), AstraZeneca (to institution), and Daiichi-Sankyo (to institution). RBS has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Libbs, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis, MSD, and Roche; has received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers’ bureaus, manuscript writing, or education events from AstraZeneca, Libbs, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis, MSD, and Roche; has received support for attending meetings and travel from Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli Lilly, MSD, and Roche; has participated on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Roche; and is a member of the Clinical Research Committee of the Brazilian Society of Clinical Oncology. JGTZ has stock or stock options in Loncar Cancer Immunotherapy ETF, iShares Genomics Immunology and Healthcare ETF, iShares Biotechnology ETF, SPDR S&P Biotech ETF, Adaptive Biotechnologies, 2seventy bio, and bluebird bio. NW has received grant support from AstraZeneca; has received consulting fees from Relay Therapeutics, Flare Therapeutics, Eli Lilly, and Section 32; has received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers’ bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Genentech; and has stock or stock options in Relay Therapeutics and Flare Therapeutics. AHP has received royalties from UpToDate. AGW has received grant support (paid to institution) from Macrogenics, Genentech, and Merck and has received consulting fees (paid to self) from AstraZeneca. CAH is Chief Executive Officer at the American Society of Clinical Oncology, which pays 100% of the author's personal annual earned income. IEK has received support for the present manuscript from Genentech (Roche); has received grant support from Macrogenics and Pfizer; has received consulting fees from Daiichi-Sankyo, Macrogenics, Roche, Seagen, and AstraZeneca; and has participated on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Novartis, Merck, Daiichi-Sankyo, Macrogenics, Roche, Seagen, and AstraZeneca. AP has received funding for the present manuscript from Reveal Genomics; has received grants (paid to institution) from Roche, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Reveal Genomics; has received royalties or licenses from Reveal Genomics (paid to institution); has received consulting fees (paid to self) from Roche, Novartis, Daiicki-Sankyo, and AstraZeneca; has patents licensed to Reveal Genomics: HER2DX, ERBB2, and DNADX genomic tools; and has stock or stock options in Reveal Genomics and Oncolytics Biotech. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: We previously demonstrated that high levels of circulating methylated DNA are associated with subsequent disease progression in women with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). In this study, we evaluated the clinical utility of a novel liquid biopsy-breast cancer methylation (LBx-BCM) prototype assay using the GeneXpert cartridge system for early assessment of disease progression in MBC., Experimental Design: The 9-marker LBx-BCM prototype assay was evaluated in TBCRC 005, a prospective biomarker study, using plasma collected at baseline, week 4, and week 8 from 144 patients with MBC., Results: At week 4, patients with MBC with high cumulative methylation (CM) had a significantly shorter median PFS (2.88 months vs. 6.60 months, P = 0.001) and OS (14.52 months vs. 22.44 months, P = 0.005) compared with those with low CM. In a multivariable model, high versus low CM was also associated with shorter PFS (HR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.20-3.01; P = 0.006). Change in CM from baseline to week 4 (OR, 4.60; 95% CI, 1.77-11.93; P = 0.002) and high levels of CM at week 4 (OR, 2.78; 95% CI, 1.29-5.99; P = 0.009) were associated with progressive disease at the time of first restaging. A robust risk model based on week 4 circulating CM levels was developed to predict disease progression as early as 3 months after initiating a new treatment., Conclusions: The automated LBx-BCM prototype assay is a promising clinical tool for detecting disease progression a month after initiating treatment in women with MBC undergoing routine care. The next step is to validate its clinical utility for specific treatments., (©2022 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: Most metastatic recurrences of triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) occur within five years of diagnosis, yet late relapses of TNBC (lrTNBC) do occur. Our objective was to develop a risk prediction model of lrTNBC using readily available clinicopathologic and sociodemographic features., Methods: We included patients diagnosed with stage I-III TNBC between 1998 and 2012 at ten academic cancer centers. lrTNBC was defined as relapse or mortality greater than 5 years from diagnosis. Features associated with lrTNBC were included in a multivariable logistic model using backward elimination with a p < 0.10 criterion, with a final multivariable model applied to training (70%) and independent validation (30%) cohorts., Results: A total 2210 TNBC patients with at least five years follow-up and no relapse before 5 years were included. In final multivariable model, lrTNBC was significantly associated with higher stage at diagnosis (adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR] for stage III vs I, 10.9; 95% Confidence Interval [CI], 7.5-15.9; p < 0.0001) and BMI (aOR for obese vs normal weight, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.0-1.8; p = 0.03). Final model performance was consistent between training (70%) and validation (30%) cohorts., Conclusions: A risk prediction model incorporating stage, BMI, and age at diagnosis offers potential utility for identification of patients at risk of development of lrTNBC and warrants further investigation., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: As outcomes improve in early-stage breast cancer, clinical trials are undergoing a paradigm shift from intensification trials (more therapy) to improve survival to optimization trials, which assess the potential for using less toxic therapy while preserving survival outcomes. However, little is known about physician perspectives in community and academic settings about possible barriers and facilitators that could affect accrual to optimization clinical trials and the generalizability of future findings., Methods: We conducted a qualitative study with semistructured interviews of medical oncologists from different academic and community practices to assess their perspectives on optimization trials. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Three independent coders used a content analysis approach to analyze transcripts using NVivo. Major themes and exemplary quotes were extracted., Results: All 39 physicians reported that they would enroll patients in optimization clinical trials. Oncologists highlighted specific reasons to consider optimization trials. These included quality-of-life improvement by reducing toxicity, reduction in financial toxicity, fertility preservation, ability to avoid chemotherapy, minimization of overtreatment in patients with comorbid conditions, personalized treatment, opportunities to test novel therapies, and leveraging the availability of targeted therapies. Oncologists also identified accrual barriers, such as tumor-specific biology, individual (host) factors, prognostic markers of risk, access to therapies, provider experience, and system constraints. They voiced recommendations regarding preliminary data, trial design, and tools to support enrollment in optimization trials., Conclusion: Although oncologists are generally willing to enroll patients on optimization clinical trials, barriers affect their acceptance. A scientific focus on overcoming these barriers is needed to support future enrollment on trials tailoring therapy on the basis of risk and potential benefit to allow true personalization of treatment.

Background: The Pathways to Wellness trial tested the efficacy of 2 interventions for younger breast cancer survivors: mindful awareness practices (MAPs) and survivorship education (SE). This planned secondary analysis examines intervention effects on stress, positive psychological outcomes, and inflammation (Clincaltrials.gov NCT03025139)., Methods: Women diagnosed with breast cancer at or before age 50 years who had completed treatment and had elevated depressive symptoms were randomly assigned to 6 weeks of MAPs, SE, or wait-list control (WLC). Assessments conducted at pre- and postintervention and at 3- and 6-month follow-up measured general stress perceptions, cancer-related intrusive thoughts and worry, positive affect, meaning and peace in life, altruism and empathy, and markers of inflammation. Analyses compared change in outcomes over time in each intervention group relative to WLC using linear mixed models., Results: A total 247 women were randomly assigned to MAPs (n = 85), SE (n = 81), or WLC (n = 81). MAPs statistically significantly decreased intrusive thoughts and worry at postintervention and 3-month follow-up relative to WLC (P < .027) and statistically significantly increased positive affect and meaning and peace at postintervention, with positive affect persisting at 3-month follow-up (P < .027). SE statistically significantly decreased intrusive thoughts at 3-month follow-up and statistically significantly increased positive affect at 6-month follow-up relative to WLC (P < .01). Proinflammatory gene expression increased in WLC relative to MAPs (P = .016) but did not differ from SE. There were no intervention effects on other outcomes., Conclusion: MAPs had beneficial effects on psychological and immune outcomes in younger breast cancer survivors and is a promising approach for enhancing biobehavioral health., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The AURORA US Metastasis Project was established with the goal to identify molecular features associated with metastasis. We assayed 55 females with metastatic breast cancer (51 primary cancers and 102 metastases) by RNA sequencing, tumor/germline DNA exome and low-pass whole-genome sequencing and global DNA methylation microarrays. Expression subtype changes were observed in ~30% of samples and were coincident with DNA clonality shifts, especially involving HER2. Downregulation of estrogen receptor (ER)-mediated cell-cell adhesion genes through DNA methylation mechanisms was observed in metastases. Microenvironment differences varied according to tumor subtype; the ER + /luminal subtype had lower fibroblast and endothelial content, while triple-negative breast cancer/basal metastases showed a decrease in B and T cells. In 17% of metastases, DNA hypermethylation and/or focal deletions were identified near HLA-A and were associated with reduced expression and lower immune cell infiltrates, especially in brain and liver metastases. These findings could have implications for treating individuals with metastatic breast cancer with immune- and HER2-targeting therapies., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Historically, clinical trials involved adding novel agents to standard of care to improve survival. There has been a shift to an individualized approach with testing less intense treatment, particularly in breast cancer where risk of recurrence is low. Little is known about physician perspectives on delivering less intense treatment for patients who are not well represented in clinical trials., Methods: Open-ended, individual qualitative interviews with medical oncologists explored their perspectives on trials that test less intense treatment for patients with cancer, with a focus on breast cancer. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Four independent coders utilized a content analysis approach to analyze transcripts using NVivo. Major themes and exemplary quotes were extracted., Results: Of the 39 participating physicians, 61.5% felt comfortable extrapolating, 30.8% were hesitant, and 7.7% would not feel comfortable extrapolating trial outcomes to underrepresented populations. Facilitators of comfort included the sentiment that "biology is biology" (such that the cancer characteristics were what mattered), the strength of the evidence, inclusion of subset analysis on underrepresented populations, and prior experience making decisions with limited data. Barriers to extrapolation included potential harm over the patient's lifetime, concerns about groups that had minimal participants, application to younger patients, and extending findings to diverse populations. Universally, broader inclusion in trials testing lowering chemotherapy was desired., Conclusions: The majority (92%) of physicians reported that they would de-implement treatment for patients poorly represented in clinical trials testing less treatment, while expressing concerns about applicability to specific subpopulations. Further work is needed to increase clinical trial representation of diverse populations to safely and effectively optimize treatment for patients with cancer., Trial Registration: NCT03248258., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press.)

In the ATEMPT trial, adjuvant trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) compared to paclitaxel plus trastuzumab (TH) for stage I HER2-positive breast cancer improved patient-reported outcomes (PROs), while maintaining excellent disease outcomes. We report treatment discontinuation and use multivariable models to compare, patient-reported toxicity and quality-of-life (QOL) by age (≤50, >50) and treatment arm at 18 months post-enrollment among 366 eligible participants randomized in a 3:1 ratio to T-DM1 or TH. T-DM1 discontinuation was higher among women >50 vs. ≤50 (23% vs. 9%, p = 0.003, Fisher's Exact test) with 4%, 8%, and 17% of older patients discontinuing treatment by 3, 6, and 9 months, respectively. Superior QOL with T-DM1 vs. TH was observed among women ≤50 with estimated mean difference of 6.48 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51-12.46) and driven by better social/family well-being and breast cancer-specific sub-scores. Among women >50, T-DM1 was associated with superior physical well-being and less activity impairment, with no differences in global QOL. Older women had decreased neuropathy with T-DM1 vs. TH. De-escalated treatment regimens for HER2 positive breast cancer may have age-varying impact on treatment tolerance, toxicities and subsequent QOL, which should be considered when selecting therapy options.Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01853748., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Importance: The pathologic complete response (pCR) is supported by regulatory agencies as a surrogate end point for long-term patients' clinical outcomes in the accelerated approval process of new drugs tested in neoadjuvant randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for early breast cancer (BC). However, a meaningful association between pCR and patients' survival has been proven only at the patient level (ie, significantly better survival of patients who achieved pCR compared with those who did not), but not at trial level (ie, poor association between degree of improvement in pCR rate and survival reported across trials)., Observations: We critically discuss the potential reasons of such discrepancy between pCR surrogacy value at the patient and trial level, as well as the relevant implications for both clinical research and drug regulatory policy. We also describe alternative surrogate end points, including combined end points that jointly analyzed pathological response and event-free survival data, or the assessment of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA). Such proposed surrogate end points could overcome limits of pCR and provide a reasonable trade-off between the 2 conflicting needs to have access to effective therapies rapidly, and to reliably assess patients' clinical benefit., Conclusions and Relevance: Using surrogate end points to grant drug approvals is justified only when they can provide accurate prediction of a drug's effect on the long-term patient outcomes. Evidence currently available does not support pCR used alone as a reliable surrogate end point in regulatory neoadjuvant RCTs for BC. The surrogacy value at trial level of potentially more robust surrogate end points needs to be urgently tested.

Purpose: We assessed breast cancer clinicians' perspectives on how the COVID-19 pandemic and increased use of telehealth affected their clinical communication about sexual heath., Methods: Breast cancer clinicians participating in a sexual health communication intervention study (N = 29; 76% female; 66% oncologists; 34% advanced practice clinicians) completed an online survey. Data analysis consisted of descriptive statistics and thematic analysis., Results: All clinicians were using telehealth, with most (66%) using it for up to half of their clinic appointments. Although only 14% of clinicians reported having shorter clinic visits, 28% reported having less time to discuss sexual health; 69% reported no change; and 3% said they had more time. Forty-one percent reported sexual health was less of a priority; 55% reported no change; and 3% said it was more of a priority. Thirty-five percent reported telehealth was less conducive to discussing sexual health; 59% reported no change; and 7% reported more conducive. Qualitative analysis revealed key issues underlying the perceived impact of the pandemic on discussions of sexual health including heightened clinician discomfort discussing such issues via telehealth, the less personal nature and privacy issues in telehealth visits, increased concerns about risk of COVID-19 infection and other health concerns (e.g., missing recurrence, mental health) taking priority, and clinician-perceived patient factors (e.g., discomfort, decreased priority) in discussing sexual concerns., Conclusion: Pandemic-related changes in breast cancer clinicians' practice could be exacerbating challenges to discussing sexual health. Methods for integrating sexual health into cancer care are needed, regardless of the mode of delivery., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Obesity following breast cancer diagnosis is associated with poor overall survival. Understanding weight trajectories will help inform breast cancer survivors at greater risk of weight gain, and those who would benefit from earlier anti-obesity interventions. We performed a retrospective chart review of women from the Breast Cancer Program Longitudinal Repository (BCPLR) at Johns Hopkins diagnosed with hormone receptor-positive Stage I-III breast cancer from 2010 to 2020. We investigated obesity (measured by body mass index [BMI]) over time, patient and tumor characteristics, as well as treatment and recurrence. We observed a significant ≥5% increase in BMI from diagnosis to most recent follow-up ( p = 0.009), particularly among those who were overweight at diagnosis ( p = 0.003). Additionally, among those up to 5 years since diagnosis, there was a significant association between experiencing a ≥0.1 kg/m 2 increase per year since diagnosis and baseline BMI status ( p = 0.009). A ≥0.6 kg/m 2 decrease in BMI was observed for participants with obesity at diagnosis ( p = 0.006). Our study highlights (i) the significant burden of obesity in women with a history of breast cancer and (ii) higher risks for increases in BMI and shifts in class of obesity among women who are overweight at diagnosis.

Current molecular liquid biopsy assays to detect recurrence or monitor response to treatment require sophisticated technology, highly trained personnel, and a turnaround time of weeks. We describe the development and technical validation of an automated Liquid Biopsy for Breast Cancer Methylation (LBx-BCM) prototype, a DNA methylation detection cartridge assay that is simple to perform and quantitatively detects nine methylated markers within 4.5 h. LBx-BCM demonstrated high interassay reproducibility when analyzing exogenous methylated DNA (75-300 DNA copies) spiked into plasma (Coefficient of Variation, CV = 7.1 - 10.9%) and serum (CV = 19.1 - 36.1%). It also demonstrated high interuser reproducibility (Spearman r = 0.887, P < 0.0001) when samples of metastatic breast cancer (MBC, N = 11) and normal control ( N = 4) were evaluated independently by two users. Analyses of interplatform reproducibility indicated very high concordance between LBx-BCM and the reference assay, cMethDNA, among 66 paired plasma samples (MBC N = 40, controls N = 26; Spearman r = 0.891; 95% CI = 0.825 - 0.933, P < 0.0001). LBx-BCM achieved a ROC AUC = 0.909 (95% CI = 0.836 - 0.982), 83% sensitivity and 92% specificity; cMethDNA achieved a ROC AUC = 0.896 (95% CI = 0.817 - 0.974), 83% sensitivity and 92% specificity in test set samples. The automated LBx-BCM cartridge prototype is fast, with performance levels equivalent to the highly sensitive, manual cMethDNA method. Future prospective clinical studies will evaluate LBx-BCM detection sensitivity and its ability to monitor therapeutic response during treatment for advanced breast cancer.

Background: Poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (PARPi) are active in patients with germline BRCA1/2 (gBRCA1/2)-mutated breast cancer, accounting for 5% to 10% of all breast cancers. Another 5% to 10% harbor somatic BRCA1/2 (sBRCA1/2) mutations or mutations in non-BRCA1/2, homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes but until recently, there were no data for the use of PARPi in these patients. This study examines the use of olaparib in patients with metastatic breast cancer harboring sBRCA1/2 or germline or somatic non-BRCA1/2, HRR mutations and demonstrates potential activity of PARPi in this setting., Methods: In this retrospective, single institution study, patients who were treated with off-label, off-protocol olaparib for metastatic breast cancer harboring sBRCA1/2 or germline or somatic non-BRCA1/2, HRR mutations were identified. The primary aim was to describe these patients' demographics, tumor characteristics, mutations, safety and tolerability, response rates, progression free survival, PARPi-associated survival and subsequent treatment., Results: Seven patients were treated off-label, off-trial with olaparib for sBRCA1/2-mutated cancers (n = 4) or non-BRCA1/2, HRR-mutated cancers (n = 3). All patients with sBRCA1/2-mutated cancers responded to PARP inhibition; patients with non-BRCA1/2, HRR-mutated cancers did not respond. The median progression free survival in patients with a sBRCA1/2 mutation was 6.5 months (range 5-9 months) vs. 3 months (range 2-4 months) in patients with non-BRCA1/2, HRR mutations., Conclusion: This single institution experience adds to recent larger reports confirming evidence for PARPi therapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer harboring sBRCA1/2 mutations. No activity was observed in patients with either germline or somatic non-BRCA1/2, HRR-mutated cancers., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Purpose: To update recommendations on appropriate use of breast cancer biomarker assay results to guide adjuvant endocrine and chemotherapy decisions in early-stage breast cancer., Methods: An updated literature search identified randomized clinical trials and prospective-retrospective studies published from January 2016 to October 2021. Outcomes of interest included overall survival and disease-free or recurrence-free survival. Expert Panel members used informal consensus to develop evidence-based recommendations., Results: The search identified 24 studies informing the evidence base., Recommendations: Clinicians may use Onco type DX, MammaPrint, Breast Cancer Index (BCI), and EndoPredict to guide adjuvant endocrine and chemotherapy in patients who are postmenopausal or age > 50 years with early-stage estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative (ER+ and HER2-) breast cancer that is node-negative or with 1-3 positive nodes. Prosigna and BCI may be used in postmenopausal patients with node-negative ER+ and HER2- breast cancer. In premenopausal patients, clinicians may use Onco type in patients with node-negative ER+ and HER2- breast cancer. Current data suggest that premenopausal patients with 1-3 positive nodes benefit from chemotherapy regardless of genomic assay result. There are no data on use of genomic tests to guide adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with ≥ 4 positive nodes. Ki67 combined with other parameters or immunohistochemistry 4 score may be used in postmenopausal patients without access to genomic tests to guide adjuvant therapy decisions. BCI may be offered to patients with 0-3 positive nodes who received 5 years of endocrine therapy without evidence of recurrence to guide decisions about extended endocrine therapy. None of the assays are recommended for treatment guidance in individuals with HER2-positive or triple-negative breast cancer. Treatment decisions should also consider disease stage, comorbidities, and patient preferences.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines., Competing Interests: Fabrice AndreStock and Other Ownership Interests: PegacsyResearch Funding: AstraZeneca (Inst), Novartis (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Lilly (Inst), Roche (Inst), Daiichi (Inst).Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Novartis, Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca Nofisat IsmailaEmployment: GlaxoSmithKline (I)Stock and Other Ownership Interests: GlaxoSmithKline (I) Kimberly H. AllisonConsulting or Advisory Role: MammotomeExpert Testimony: Kaiser Permanente William E. BarlowResearch Funding: Merck (Inst), AstraZeneca (Inst). Deborah E. CollyarHonoraria: PfizerConsulting or Advisory Role: Parexel, MaxisIT, Kinnate BiopharmaTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Parexel Senthil DamodaranResearch Funding: EMD Serono (Inst), Guardant Health (Inst), Taiho Pharmaceutical (Inst), Novartis (Inst), Sermonix Pharmaceuticals (Inst) N. Lynn HenryResearch Funding: Blue Note Therapeutics (Inst)Open Payments Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/27894/summary Komal JhaveriConsulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Jounce Therapeutics, Synthon, Intellisphere, Bristol Myers Squibb, Genentech, AbbVie, Lilly, BluePrint Medicines, Seattle Genetics, Daiichi Sankyo, Biotheranostics, SunPharma Pvt Ltd, Taiho Oncology, SanofiResearch Funding: Novartis (Inst), Genentech (Inst), Debiopharm Group (Inst), ADC Therapeutics (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Novita Pharmaceuticals (Inst), Clovis Oncology (Inst), Lilly (Inst), Zymeworks (Inst), Immunomedics (Inst), Puma Biotechnology (Inst), VelosBio/Merck (Inst), AstraZeneca (Inst)Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Taiho Pharmaceutical, Jounce Therapeutics, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Intellisphere Kevin KalinskyStock and Other Ownership Interests: Array BioPharma, Pfizer, GRAILConsulting or Advisory Role: bioTheranostics, Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis, Eisai, AstraZeneca, Genentech/Roche, Immunomedics, Ipsen, Merck, Seattle Genetics, Cyclacel, Oncosec, 4D Pharma, Daiichi Sankyo/Astra Zeneca, Puma BiotechnologySpeakers' Bureau: LillyResearch Funding: Incyte (Inst), Novartis (Inst), Genentech/Roche (Inst), Lilly (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Calithera Biosciences (Inst), Immunomedics (Inst), Acetylon Pharmaceuticals (Inst), Seattle Genetics (Inst), Amgen (Inst), Zeno Pharmaceuticals (Inst), CytomX Therapeutics (Inst)Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Lilly, AstraZeneca, PfizerOther Relationship: Immunomedics, Genentech Nicole M. KudererEmployment: Self-employedConsulting or Advisory Role: Janssen, BeyondSpring Pharmaceuticals, Invitae, Bristol Myers Squibb, Samsung Bioepis, G1 Therapeutics, Sandoz-Novartis, BeyondSpring Pharmaceuticals, Teva, MerckResearch Funding: AmgenTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen, Mylan, Agendia, Bayer, Spectrum Pharmaceuticals Anna LitvakConsulting or Advisory Role: Bristol Myers Squibb, bioTheranostics Erica L. MayerConsulting or Advisory Role: Lilly, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Gilead SciencesResearch Funding: Pfizer (Inst) Lajos PusztaiHonoraria: bioTheranostics, Natera, OncoCyte, AthenexConsulting or Advisory Role: H3 Biomedicine, Merck, Novartis, Seattle Genetics, Syndax, AstraZeneca, Roche/Genentech, Bristol Myers Squibb, Clovis Oncology, Immunomedics, Eisai, Almac Diagnostics, PfizerResearch Funding: Merck (Inst), Genentech (Inst), Seattle Genetics (Inst), AstraZeneca (Inst), Bristol Myers Squibb (Inst), Pfizer (Inst)Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: AstraZenecaUncompensated Relationships: NanoString Technologies, Foundation MedicineOpen Payments Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/110878 Antonio C. WolffThis author is an Associate Editor for Journal of Clinical Oncology. Journal policy recused the author from having any role in the peer review of this manuscript.Consulting or Advisory Role: Ionis PharmaceuticalsPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Antonio Wolff has been named as inventor on one or more issued patents or pending patent applications relating to methylation in breast cancer, and has assigned his rights to JHU, and participates in a royalty sharing agreement with JHUOpen Payments Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/357301/summary Vered StearnsConsulting or Advisory Role: NovartisResearch Funding: AbbVie (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Novartis (Inst), Puma Biotechnology (Inst), Biocept (Inst)Other Relationship: Immunomedics, AstraZenecaNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported. Fabrice AndreStock and Other Ownership Interests: PegacsyResearch Funding: AstraZeneca (Inst), Novartis (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Lilly (Inst), Roche (Inst), Daiichi (Inst).Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Novartis, Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca Nofisat IsmailaEmployment: GlaxoSmithKline (I)Stock and Other Ownership Interests: GlaxoSmithKline (I) Kimberly H. AllisonConsulting or Advisory Role: MammotomeExpert Testimony: Kaiser Permanente William E. BarlowResearch Funding: Merck (Inst), AstraZeneca (Inst). Deborah E. CollyarHonoraria: PfizerConsulting or Advisory Role: Parexel, MaxisIT, Kinnate BiopharmaTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Parexel Senthil DamodaranResearch Funding: EMD Serono (Inst), Guardant Health (Inst), Taiho Pharmaceutical (Inst), Novartis (Inst), Sermonix Pharmaceuticals (Inst) N. Lynn HenryResearch Funding: Blue Note Therapeutics (Inst)Open Payments Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/27894/summary Komal JhaveriConsulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Jounce Therapeutics, Synthon, Intellisphere, Bristol Myers Squibb, Genentech, AbbVie, Lilly, BluePrint Medicines, Seattle Genetics, Daiichi Sankyo, Biotheranostics, SunPharma Pvt Ltd, Taiho Oncology, SanofiResearch Funding: Novartis (Inst), Genentech (Inst), Debiopharm Group (Inst), ADC Therapeutics (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Novita Pharmaceuticals (Inst), Clovis Oncology (Inst), Lilly (Inst), Zymeworks (Inst), Immunomedics (Inst), Puma Biotechnology (Inst), VelosBio/Merck (Inst), AstraZeneca (Inst)Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Taiho Pharmaceutical, Jounce Therapeutics, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Intellisphere Kevin KalinskyStock and Other Ownership Interests: Array BioPharma, Pfizer, GRAILConsulting or Advisory Role: bioTheranostics, Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis, Eisai, AstraZeneca, Genentech/Roche, Immunomedics, Ipsen, Merck, Seattle Genetics, Cyclacel, Oncosec, 4D Pharma, Daiichi Sankyo/Astra Zeneca, Puma BiotechnologySpeakers' Bureau: LillyResearch Funding: Incyte (Inst), Novartis (Inst), Genentech/Roche (Inst), Lilly (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Calithera Biosciences (Inst), Immunomedics (Inst), Acetylon Pharmaceuticals (Inst), Seattle Genetics (Inst), Amgen (Inst), Zeno Pharmaceuticals (Inst), CytomX Therapeutics (Inst)Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Lilly, AstraZeneca, PfizerOther Relationship: Immunomedics, Genentech Nicole M. KudererEmployment: Self-employedConsulting or Advisory Role: Janssen, BeyondSpring Pharmaceuticals, Invitae, Bristol Myers Squibb, Samsung Bioepis, G1 Therapeutics, Sandoz-Novartis, BeyondSpring Pharmaceuticals, Teva, MerckResearch Funding: AmgenTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen, Mylan, Agendia, Bayer, Spectrum Pharmaceuticals Anna LitvakConsulting or Advisory Role: Bristol Myers Squibb, bioTheranostics Erica L. MayerConsulting or Advisory Role: Lilly, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Gilead SciencesResearch Funding: Pfizer (Inst) Lajos PusztaiHonoraria: bioTheranostics, Natera, OncoCyte, AthenexConsulting or Advisory Role: H3 Biomedicine, Merck, Novartis, Seattle Genetics, Syndax, AstraZeneca, Roche/Genentech, Bristol Myers Squibb, Clovis Oncology, Immunomedics, Eisai, Almac Diagnostics, PfizerResearch Funding: Merck (Inst), Genentech (Inst), Seattle Genetics (Inst), AstraZeneca (Inst), Bristol Myers Squibb (Inst), Pfizer (Inst)Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: AstraZenecaUncompensated Relationships: NanoString Technologies, Foundation MedicineOpen Payments Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/110878 Antonio C. WolffThis author is an Associate Editor for Journal of Clinical Oncology. Journal policy recused the author from having any role in the peer review of this manuscript.Consulting or Advisory Role: Ionis PharmaceuticalsPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Antonio Wolff has been named as inventor on one or more issued patents or pending patent applications relating to methylation in breast cancer, and has assigned his rights to JHU, and participates in a royalty sharing agreement with JHUOpen Payments Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/357301/summary Vered StearnsConsulting or Advisory Role: NovartisResearch Funding: AbbVie (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Novartis (Inst), Puma Biotechnology (Inst), Biocept (Inst)Other Relationship: Immunomedics, AstraZenecaNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Many patients discontinue endocrine therapy for breast cancer due to intolerance. Identification of patients at risk for discontinuation is challenging. The minimal important difference (MID) is the smallest change in a score on a patient-reported outcome (PRO) that is clinically significant. We evaluated the association between treatment-emergent symptoms detected by worsening PRO scores in units equal to the MID with discontinuation. We enrolled females with stage 0-III breast cancer initiating endocrine therapy in a prospective cohort. Participants completed PROs at baseline, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 months. Measures included PROMIS pain interference, fatigue, depression, anxiety, physical function, and sleep disturbance; Endocrine Subscale of the FACT-ES; and MOS-Sexual Problems (MOS-SP). We evaluated associations between continuous PRO scores in units corresponding to MIDs (PROMIS: 4-points; FACT-ES: 5-points; MOS-SP: 8-points) with time to endocrine therapy discontinuation using Cox proportional hazards models. Among 321 participants, 140 (43.6%) initiated tamoxifen and 181 (56.4%) initiated aromatase inhibitor (AI). The cumulative probability of discontinuation was 23% (95% CI 18-27%) at 48 months. For every 5- and 4-point worsening in endocrine symptoms and sleep disturbance respectively, participants were 13 and 14% more likely to discontinue endocrine therapy respectively (endocrine symptoms HR 1.13, 95% CI 1.02-1.25, p = 0.02; sleep disturbance HR 1.14, 95% CI 1.01-1.29, p = 0.03). AI treatment was associated with greater likelihood of discontinuation than tamoxifen. Treatment-emergent endocrine symptoms and sleep disturbance are associated with endocrine therapy discontinuation. Monitoring for worsening scores meeting or exceeding the MID on PROs may identify patients at risk for discontinuation., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

The excellent outcomes seen in patients treated with adjuvant trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) in the ATEMPT trial and the favorable toxicity profile associated with this agent make T-DM1 a potential therapeutic option for select patients with stage I HER2-positive breast cancer. Moreover, T-DM1 is an established adjuvant treatment for patients with HER2-positive breast cancer with the residual invasive disease after neoadjuvant therapy. Given that cardiotoxicity is the most significant adverse event of trastuzumab, which is a main molecular component of T-DM1, we conducted a sub-analysis of the ATEMPT trial to determine the cardiac safety of adjuvant T-DM1. In this analysis, the incidence of grade 3-4 left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) in T-DM1 or trastuzumab plus paclitaxel arms were respectively 0.8 and 1.8%. In addition, three (0.8%) patients in the T-DM1 arm and six (5.3%) patients in the adjuvant paclitaxel with trastuzumab (TH) arm experienced a significant asymptomatic left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) decline that per-protocol required holding T-DM1 or trastuzumab. All patients with available follow-up data experienced full resolution of cardiac symptoms and LVEF normalization. Furthermore, we performed an exploratory analysis to assess the relationship between age, baseline LVEF, and body mass index with cardiac outcomes. No significant association between these baseline characteristics and the incidence of significant asymptomatic LVEF decline or symptomatic LVSD was identified. The low incidence of significant cardiac adverse events in this population during therapy with adjuvant T-DM1 suggests that studies on the cost-effectiveness of cardiac monitoring during adjuvant therapy using anthracycline-free regimens are needed.Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01853748., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Systemic inflammation is believed to contribute to the distant recurrence of breast cancer. We evaluated serum samples obtained at diagnosis from 249 case:control pairs with stage II-III Her2-negative breast cancer with or without subsequent distant recurrence. Conditional logistic regression analysis, with models fit via maximum likelihood, were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and test for associations of cytokines with distant recurrence risk. The only biomarker associated with a significantly increased distant recurrence risk when adjusted for multiple testing was the proinflammatory cytokine IL-6 (HR 1.37, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 1.15, 1.65, p = 0.0006). This prospective-retrospective study provides evidence indicating that higher levels of the cytokine IL-6 at diagnosis are associated with a significantly higher distant recurrence risk., (© 2022. The Author(s).)