Search

Background: Outcomes in patients with hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer worsen after one or more lines of endocrine-based therapy. Trastuzumab deruxtecan has shown efficacy in patients with metastatic breast cancer with low expression of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) after previous chemotherapy., Methods: We conducted a phase 3, multicenter, open-label trial involving patients with hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer with low HER2 expression (a score of 1+ or 2+ on immunohistochemical [IHC] analysis and negative results on in situ hybridization) or ultralow HER2 expression (IHC 0 with membrane staining) who had received one or more lines of endocrine-based therapy and no previous chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive trastuzumab deruxtecan or the physician's choice of chemotherapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival (according to blinded independent central review) among the patients with HER2-low disease. Secondary end points included progression-free survival among all the patients who had undergone randomization, overall survival, and safety., Results: Of the 866 patients who underwent randomization, 713 had HER2-low disease, and 153 had HER2-ultralow disease. Among the patients with HER2-low disease, the median progression-free survival was 13.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.4 to 15.2) in the trastuzumab deruxtecan group and 8.1 months (95% CI, 7.0 to 9.0) in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.75; P<0.001); the results were consistent in the exploratory HER2-ultralow population. Data for overall survival were immature. Adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 52.8% of the patients in the trastuzumab deruxtecan group and in 44.4% of those in the chemotherapy group. Adjudicated interstitial lung disease or pneumonitis occurred in 49 patients (11.3%; three events were grade 5 in severity) and in 1 patient (0.2%; grade 2), respectively., Conclusions: Among patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-low or HER2-ultralow metastatic breast cancer who had received one or more lines of endocrine-based therapy, treatment with trastuzumab deruxtecan resulted in longer progression-free survival than chemotherapy. No new safety signals were identified. (Funded by AstraZeneca and Daiichi Sankyo; DESTINY-Breast06 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04494425.)., (Copyright © 2024 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

This manuscript describes the Advanced Breast Cancer (ABC) international consensus guidelines updated at the last two ABC international consensus conferences (ABC 6 in 2021, virtual, and ABC 7 in 2023, in Lisbon, Portugal), organized by the ABC Global Alliance. It provides the main recommendations on how to best manage patients with advanced breast cancer (inoperable locally advanced or metastatic), of all breast cancer subtypes, as well as palliative and supportive care. These guidelines are based on available evidence or on expert opinion when a higher level of evidence is lacking. Each guideline is accompanied by the level of evidence (LoE), grade of recommendation (GoR) and percentage of consensus reached at the consensus conferences. Updated diagnostic and treatment algorithms are also provided. The guidelines represent the best management options for patients living with ABC globally, assuming accessibility to all available therapies. Their adaptation (i.e. resource-stratified guidelines) is often needed in settings where access to care is limited., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Matti S. Aapro: Consultant for Accord Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Clinigen Group, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai Co.Ltd, Eli Lilly, Genomic Health (Exact Sciences), G1 Therapeutics, Inc., GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Helsinn Healthcare SA, Hospira (Pfizer), Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Merck Serono (Merck KGaA), Mundipharma International Limited, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Sandoz, Tesaro (GSK), Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd., Vifor Pharma. Received honoraria for lectures at symposia of Accord Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Astellas, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals (Schering), Biocon, Boeringer Ingelheim, Cephalon, Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai Co., Ltd., Dr Reddy's Laboratories, Genomic Health (Exact Sciences), Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Limited, GSK, Helsinn Healthcare SA, Hospira (Pfizer), Ipsen, Janssen Biotech, Kyowa Kirin Group, Merck, Merck Serono (Merck KGaA), Mundipharma International Limited, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, Tesaro (GSK), Taiho Pharmaceutical, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Vifor Pharma. Grant/Research supports: Amgen, Eisai, Genomic Health (Exact Sciences), Helsinn, Hospira, Novartis, Merck, Mundipharma, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Tesaro, Teva, Vifor. Jyoti Bajpai: Institutional financial interests for conducting research: Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Paxman Coolers Ltd, Samsung Bioepis co. Ltd, Sun Pharma. Carlos H. Barrios: Receipt of grants/research supports: (to the institution) Nektar, Pfizer, Polyphor, Amgen, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi, Exelixis, Regeneron, Novartis, GSK, Janssen, OBI Pharma, Lilly, Seagen, Roche, BMS, MSD, Merck Serono, AstraZeneca, Novocure, Aveo Oncology, Takeda, TRIO, PharmaMar, Celgene, PPD, Syneos Health, Labcorp, ICON, IQVIA, Parexel, Nuvisan, PSI, Worldwide, Gilead Sciences, Bayer, Servier. Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: Advisory Boards and Consulting: Boehringer-Ingelheim, GSK, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, Eisai, Bayer, MSD, AstraZeneca, Zodiac, Lilly, Sanofi, Daiichi. Stock shareholder: Ownership or stocks: Tummi, MEDSir. Jonas Bergh: Receipt of grants/research supports: Research grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Merck, Pfizer, Roche & Sanofi-Aventis to Karolinska Institutet and/or University Hospital. No personal payments. Other support: Payment for a chapter in UpToDate on breast cancer prediction to Asklepios Medicin HB. Laura Biganzoli: Personal financial interests (Honoraria, consultancy or advisory role): Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Exact Sciences, Gilead, Lilly, Menarini, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Sanofi, SeaGen. Institutional financial interests: Celgene, Genomic Health, Novartis. Travel grants: AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo. Fatima Cardoso: Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: Amgen, Astellas/Medivation, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, GE Oncology, Genentech, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Iqvia, Macrogenics, Medscape, Merck-Sharp, Merus BV, Mylan, Mundipharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre-Fabre, prIME Oncology, Roche, Sanofi, Samsung Bioepis, Seagen, Teva, Touchime. Maria-Joao Cardoso: Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: AstraZeneca, Merck-Sharp, Novartis and Roche. Lisa A. Carey: Other support: Research funding (institution): NanoString Technologies, Seagen, Veracyte, AstraZeneca. Uncompensated relationships: Lilly, Seagen, Novartis, Genentech/Roche, GlaxoSmithKline. Mariana Chavez-MacGregor: Receipt of grants/research supports: BCRF, Susan G Komen. Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: Astra Zeneca, Pfizer, Lilly, Roche, Merck. Javier Cortés: Receipt of grants/research supports: Roche, Celgene, Cellestia, AstraZeneca, Seattle Genetics, Daiichi Sankyo, Erytech, Athenex, Polyphor, Lilly, Merck Sharp&Dohme, GSK, Leuko, Bioasis, Clovis Oncology, Boehringer Ingelheim, Ellipses, Hibercell, BioInvent, Gemoab, Gilead, Menarini, Zymeworks, Reveal Genomics, Expres2ion Biotechnologies. Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: Roche, Novartis, Celgene, Eisai, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, Lilly, Merck Sharp&Dohme, Daiichi Sankyo, Astrazeneca. Stock shareholder: MedSIR, Nektar Pharmaceuticals, Leuko (relative). Other support: Research funding to the Institution: Roche, Ariad pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Baxalta GMBH/Servier Affaires, Bayer healthcare, Eisai, F.Hoffman-La Roche, Guardanth health, Merck Sharp&Dohme, Pfizer, Piqur Therapeutics, Puma C, Queen Mary University of London. Travel, accommodation, expenses: Roche, Novartis, Eisai, pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo, Astrazeneca, Gilead. Patents: Pharmaceutical Combinations of a Pi3k Inhibitor and A Microtubule Destabilizing Agent. Javier Cortés Castán, Alejandro Piris Giménez, Violeta Serra Elizalde. WO 2014/199294 A. ISSUED. Her2 as a predictor of response to dual HER2 blockade in the absence of cytotoxic therapy. Aleix Prat, Antonio Llombart, Javier Cortés.US 2019/0338368 A1. LICENSED. Giuseppe Curigliano: Receipt of grants/research supports: Merck. Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: Merck, Lilly, Pfizer, Daichi Sankyo, Seagen, Novartis, Roche, Astra Zeneca, Ellipsis. Participation in a sponsored speakers' bureau: Seagen, Novartis, Lilly, Pfizer, Daichii Sankyo. Rebecca A. Dent: Receipt of grants/research supports: AstraZeneca, Roche. Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: AstraZeneca, DKSH, Eisai, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche. Nagi S. El Saghir: Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: Roche, Novartis, Lilly. Alexandru Eniu: Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: Astra Zeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Gilead, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, SeaGen. Receipt of grants/research supports: AstraZeneca. Full or part-time employment: European School of Oncology (ESO). Lesley Fallowfield: Receipt of grants/research supports: Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Lilly. Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: Voluntis, Genomic Health, NanoString Technologies, Novartis, Pfizer, MSD, Novartis, Abbvie, Clovis Oncology, Puma Biotechnology, AstraZeneca, Takeda, Genomic Health/Exact Sciences, Lilly, Seagen, Roche. Sandra X. Franco Millan: Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: Novartis, Pfizer, Eli Lilly. Participation in a sponsored speakers' bureau: Novartis, Pfizer, Eli Lilly. Karen Gelmon: Receipt of grants/research supports: Pfizer, AstraZeneca. Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: Pfizer, Lilly, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Merck, Gilead, Seagen. Jenny Gilchrist: Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: Eli-Lilly, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Pfizer, MSD, Gilead, Juniper Biologics. Joseph Gligorov: Receipt of grants/research supports: Eisai, Exact Science, Guardant, Roche Genentech. Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: Astra Zeneca, Daiichi, Eisai, Evapharma, Exact Science, Gilead, Guardant Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Onxeo, Pfizer, Roche Genentech, Seattle Genetics. Participation in a sponsored speakers' bureau: Eisai, Eva Pharm, Novartis, Roche Genentech, Seattle Genetics. Other support (please specify): Institutional: Institut Universitaire de Cancérologie AP-HP Sorbonne Université; French breast cancer guidelines St Paul. Nadia Harbeck: Receipt of grants/research supports: all to institution. Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, Gilead, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, PierreFabre, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Seagen, Viatris, Zuelligpharma. Participation on a sponsored speakers' bureau: EPG Communication, MEDSCAPE, Springer. Stock shareholder: WSG minority ownership. Spouse/Partner: Consulting for WSG. Ranjit Kaur: Receipt of grants/research supports: Novartis, Roche, Pfizer, Astrazeneca. Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: Novartis, Roche, Pfizer, Astrazeneca. Participation in a sponsored speakers' bureau: Novartis, Roche, Pfizer, Astrazeneca. Belinda Kiely: Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: Speakers fees: Novartis, Eisai. Advisory boards: Roche, Gilead, Novartis. Other support (please specify): meeting registrations fees: Novartis, Pfizer, MSD. Sung-Bae Kim: Receipt of grants/research supports: Novartis, Sanofi-Aventis, and DongKook Pharm Co. Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: Novartis, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Dae Hwa Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd, ISU Abxis, OBI pharma, Beigene and Daiichi-Sankyo. Stock shareholder: Genopeaks. Smruti Koppikar: Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: Eli Lilly, Novartis, Cipla, Roche. Participation in a sponsored speakers' bureau: Eli Lilly, Novartis, Cipla, Roche. Marion Kuper-Hommel: Receipt of honoraria or consulting fees: Astra Zeneca. Ginny Mason: Participation in a sponsored speakers' bureau: Novartis. Volkmar Mueller: Receipt of grants/research supports: Institutional research support from Novartis, Roche, Seagen, Genentech, Astra Zeneca. Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: Speaker honoraria: Astra Zeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, GSK, Pfizer, MSD, Medac, Novartis, Roche, Seagen, Onkowissen, high5 Oncology, Medscape, Gilead, Pierre Fabre. Consultancy honoraria from Roche, Pierre Fabre, Amgen, ClinSol, Novartis, MSD, DaiichiSankyo, Eisai, Lilly, Sanofi, Seagen, Gilead, Stemline, ClinSol. Other support (please specify): Travel grants: Roche, Pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo, Gilead. Claire Myerson: Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: Novartis Pharma. Silvia Neciosup: Receipt of grants/research supports: Roche, Pfizer. Participation in a sponsored speakers' bureau: Tecnofarma, AZ, Roche, Pfizer. Larry Norton: Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: Blackrock QLS Advisors, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, UNC Breast Spore EAB Meeting, Codagenix Scientific Advisory Board Meeting, Martell Diagnostic Laboratories, Inc., Celgene, Agenus, Immix Biopharma, Inc. Shinji Ohno: Participation in a sponsored speakers' bureau: Chugai, Lilly, MSD, Nippon Kayaku. Shani Paluch-Shimon: Receipt of grants/research supports: Pfizer. Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: Pfizer, Lily, Novartis, Astra Zeneca, Roche, MSD, Gilead, Rhenium/Exact Sciences, Stemline, Daichi Sankyo. Participation in a sponsored speakers' bureau: Pfizer, Lily, Novartis, Astra Zeneca, Roche, MSD, Gilead. Ann H. Partridge: Uptodate Royalties. Aleix Prat: Receipt of grants/research supports: Boehringer, Novartis, Roche, Nanostring, Sysmex Europa GmbH, Medica Scientia inno. Research, SL, Celgene, Astellas and Pzifer. Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: Roche, Pfizer, Novartis, Amgen, BMS, Puma, Oncolytics Biotech, MSD, Guardan Health, Peptomyc and Lilly, Nanostring Technologies and Daiichi Sankyo. Other support: Clinical trials: Boehringer, Lilly, Roche, Novartis, Amgen and Daiichi Sankyo. Hope S. Rugo: Receipt of grants/research supports: Astellas Pharma Inc.; AstraZeneca; Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.; F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG/Genentech, Inc.; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; GlaxoSmithKline; Lilly; Merck & Co., Inc.; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation; Pfizer; Pionyr Immunotherapeutics; Sermonix Pharmaceuticals Inc.; Taiho Oncology, Inc. and Veru Inc. Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: Puma, NAPO, Blueprint, and Scorpion Therapeutics Daichi Sankyo. Elzbieta Senkus: Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: AstraZeneca, Curio Science, Egis, Eli Lilly, Gilead, high5md, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Swixx. Other support: travel support: AstraZeneca, Egis, Gilead, Novartis, Roche. Contracted research: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Novartis, OBI Pharma, Roche, Samsung, Seagen. Medical writing: AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly. Royalties: Springer. Sandra M. Swain: Receipt of grants/research supports: Kailos Genetics, Genentech/Roche. Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: Athenex, AstraZeneca, Biotheranostics, Natera, Exact Sciences, Lilly, Merck, Genentech/Roche, Sanofi, Daiichi Sankyo, Molecular Templates, Napo Pharmaceuticals. Stock shareholder: SEAGEN. Other support: CO- PI of INAVO 122 Genentech/Roche with in-kind travel to investigator meetings, Travel related expenses in kind Sanofi and Daiichi Sankyo. Peter Vuylsteke: Receipt of grants/research supports: UICC grant. Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: Roche, Novartis and MSD. Theresa Wiseman: Receipt of grants/research supports: Receiver of SPCC Pfizer grant. Binghe Xu: Receipt of grants/research supports: sponsored research to my institution from Roche, AstraZeneca and Pfizer. Receipt of honoraria or consultation fees: advisory or consultancy fees from Novartis and Roche. Participation in a sponsored speakers' bureau: speakers’ bureau fees from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Roche, Eisai. Elizabeth Bergsten-Nordström, Alberto Costa, Runcie C. W. Chidebe, Prudence A. Francis, Xichun Hu, Renate Haidinger, Leonor Matos, Shirley A. Mertz, Birgitte V. Offersen, Olivia Pagani, Eva Schumacher-Wulf, Daniel A. Vorobiof, Frédéric E. Lecouvet, and Eric P. Winer reported no significant relationships. William J. Gradishar, George W. Sledge and Christoph Thomssen have not submitted a disclosure of interests’ form., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To analyze marital outcomes, divorce or separation, and its association with demographic, socioeconomic, and clinicopathological factors among breast cancer (BC) survivors after 2-years of diagnosis., Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of marital status at baseline and at years 1 and 2 of follow-up of women aged ≥ 18 years diagnosed with invasive BC participating in the AMAZONA III (GBECAM0115) study. The BC diagnosis occurred between January 2016 and March 2018 at 23 institutions in Brazil., Results: Of the 2974 women enrolled in AMAZONA III, 599 were married or living under common law at baseline. Divorce or separation occurred in 35 (5.8%) patients at 2 years of follow-up. In the multivariate analysis, public health insurance coverage was associated with a higher risk of marital status change (8.25% vs. 2.79%, RR 3.09, 95% CI 1.39 - 7.03, p = 0.007). Women who underwent mastectomy, adenomastectomy or skin-sparing mastectomy were associated with a higher risk of divorce or separation (8.1% vs. 4.49%, RR 1.97, 95 CI 1.04 - 3.72, p = 0.0366) than those who underwent breast-conserving surgery., Conclusion: Women covered by the public health system and those who underwent mastectomy, adenomastectomy or skin-sparing mastectomy were associated with a higher risk of divorce or separation. This evidence further supports the idea that long-term marital stability is associated with a complex interplay between socioeconomic conditions and stressors, such as BC diagnosis and treatment. ClinicalTrials Registration: NCT02663973., Competing Interests: Conflicts to interest: none to declare

Background: Breast cancer is the leading cause of cancer death among women worldwide. Studies about the genomic landscape of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) have predominantly originated from developed nations. There are still limited data on the molecular epidemiology of MBC in low- and middle-income countries. This study aims to evaluate the prevalence of mutations in the PI3K-AKT pathway and other actionable drivers in estrogen receptor (ER)+/HER2- MBC among Brazilian patients treated at a large institution representative of the nation's demographic diversity., Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study using laboratory data (OC Precision Medicine). Our study included tumor samples from patients with ER+/HER2- MBC who underwent routine tumor testing from 2020 to 2023 and originated from several Brazilian centers within the Oncoclinicas network. Two distinct next-generation sequencing (NGS) assays were used: GS Focus (23 genes, covering PIK3CA , AKT1 , ESR1 , ERBB2 , BRCA1 , BRCA2 , PALB2 , TP53 , but not PTEN ) or GS 180 (180 genes, including PTEN, tumor mutation burden [TMB] and microsatellite instability [MSI])., Results: Evaluation of tumor samples from 328 patients was undertaken, mostly (75.6%) with GS Focus. Of these, 69% were primary tumors, while 31% were metastatic lesions. The prevalence of mutations in the PI3K-AKT pathway was 39.3% (95% confidence interval, 33% to 43%), distributed as 37.5% in PIK3CA and 1.8% in AKT1 . Stratification by age revealed a higher incidence of mutations in this pathway among patients over 50 (44.5% vs 29.1%, p=0.01). Among the PIK3CA mutations, 78% were canonical (included in the alpelisib companion diagnostic non-NGS test), while the remaining 22% were characterized as non-canonical mutations (identifiable only by NGS test). ESR1 mutations were detected in 6.1%, exhibiting a higher frequency in metastatic samples (15.1% vs 1.3%, p=0.003). Additionally, mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2 , or PALB2 were identified in 3.9% of cases, while mutations in ERBB2 were found in 2.1%. No PTEN mutations were detected, nor were TMB high or MSI cases., Conclusion: We describe the genomic landscape of Brazilian patients with ER+/HER2- MBC, in which the somatic mutation profile is comparable to what is described in the literature globally. These data are important for developing precision medicine strategies in this scenario, as well as for health systems management and research initiatives., Competing Interests: Authors TR, AG, MP, LO, CR, LL, CB, MM, & RD were employed by the company Oncoclínicas & Co. TR – Research funding: AstraZeneca, Libbs. Speaker honoraria/advisory board: AstraZeneca, Daichi-Sankyo, Novartis, MSD, Lilly, Libbs. RD declares advisory role for Roche, Foundation Medicine, received a speaker’s fee from Roche, Ipsen, Amgen, Servier, Sanofi, Libbs, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Lilly, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Takeda, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Gilead, research grants from Merck, Novartis, Daiichi-Sankyo, GlaxoSmithKline and AstraZeneca, and is investor in Trialing Health, S.L. CB - Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Biomarker, MedSIR, Tummi. Speaker Honoraria: Novartis, Roche/Genentech, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eisai. Consulting or Advisory Role: Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche/Genentech, Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, Eisai,Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Libbs, MSD Oncology, United Medical. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Reinert, do Rego, Silva, Rodrigues, Koyama, Gonçalves, Pauletto, de Carvalho Oliveira, de Resende, Landeiro, Barrios, Mano and Dienstmann.)

Competing Interests: Declaration of interests CEC reports grants from Breast Cancer Now, Cancer Research UK (CRUK), Addenbrooke's Charitable Trust, and the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR); participation in the Independent Data Monitoring Committees for the UK PivotalBoost trial (chair), the PROTIS phase III sinonasal proton versus IMRT trial (member), the TORPEdO Proton Beam Therapy trial (member); and a leadership role for the Lancet Breast Cancer Commission (chair). CHB reports grants and research support from AbbVie, Nektar Therapeutics, Pfizer, Polyphor, Amgen, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi, Exelixis, Regeneron, Novartis, Henlius, Shanghai Henlius Biotech, GSK, Janssen, OBI Pharma, Eli Lilly, Seagen, Checkpoint Therapeutics, Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, MSD, Merck Serono, AstraZeneca, Novocure, Aveo Oncology, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, TRIO Pharmaceuticals, PharmaMar, Celgene, Myovant, PPD, Syneos Health, DOCS, Labcorp, ICON, IQVIA, Parexel, Nuvisan, PSI, and Medpace; ownership or stocks in Tummi and MEDSir; and participation in advisory boards and consulting activities for Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Novartis, Pfizer, Genentech, Eisai, Bayer, MSD, AstraZeneca, Zodiac, Eli Lilly, Sanofi, and Daiichi Sankyo. DAC reports research grants and support from Exact Sciences and Novartis; consulting fees from Eli Lilly, Novartis, Seagen, Daiichi Sankyo, Erytech Pharma, Carnall Farrar, Sapience, and Sanofi; payment or honoraria for lectures and presentations from Exact Sciences, Gilead, Eli Lilly, and Pfizer; participation on data safety monitoring or advisory boards for Novartis, AstraZeneca, and Grail; unremunerated leadership roles for Make Seconds Count (chair of charity trustees) and the Breast International Group (chair of board of not-for-profit research organisation); and receipt of funding for analysis and medical writing for Eli Lilly and Novartis. FC reports payment or honoraria for lectures and presentations and support for attending meetings and travel from Amgen, Astellas/Medivation, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, GE Oncology, Genentech, Gilead, GSK, IQVIA, Macrogenics, Medscape, MSD, Merus, Mylan, Mundipharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, prIME Oncology, Roche, Sanofi, Samsung Bioepis, Seagen, Teva Pharmaceuticals, and Touch Independent Medical Education; institutional financial support for clinical trials from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Fresenius, Genentech, Gilead, GSK, Ipsen, Incyte, Nektar Therapeutics, Nerviano, Novartis, Macrogenics, MediGene, MedImmune, MSD, Millenium, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Sanofi, Sonus, Tesaro, Tigris, Wilex, and Wyeth; a leadership role for the ABC Global Alliance and ABC Consensus Conference and Guidelines (president); and membership of ESMO, ESO, EORTC-BCG, IBCSG, SOLTI, ASCO, AACR, EACR, SIS, and ASPIC. WC reports honoraria from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, MSD, and Eisai. PAF reports a former role in the scientific advisory committee of Breast Cancer Trials Australia and New Zealand cooperative group (chair). RJ reports support from the Susan G Komen Foundation; grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, the Greenwall Foundation, and the American Cancer Society; serving as an expert witness for Kleinbard and Hawks Quindel Law; roles in the Board of Directors of ASCO (former member), ASTRO's Ethics Committee (chair), and the Women in Radiation Oncology Affinity Group (chair); membership on the Medical Advisory Board for Blue Cross Blue Shield Association; stock options for their advisory board role in Equity Quotient; and personal fees from the NIH, Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, and the Greenwall Foundation. FMK reports research grants from the ABC Global Alliance, Breast Cancer Now, Merck Serono WHO, MSD, Avon Cosmetics, the US Cancer Pain Relief Committee, and the Medical Research Council; consulting fees from Merck Serono and Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey Mexico; and leadership roles for the Board of Directors of Women in Global Health (unpaid member), Tómatelo a Pecho (unpaid president and founder), the Mexican Health Foundation (unpaid Senior Economist), and the Board of Directors of the International Association for Hospice and Palliative Care (unpaid member). SAMcI reports grant funding from the NIHR, CRUK, and Breast Cancer Now; honoraria from Roche, MSD, AstraZeneca, Becton, Dickinson and Company; travel and conference support from Roche, Eli Lilly, and MSD; membership of advisory boards for Eli Lilly, MSD, Roche, and Novartis; and roles for the UK National Cancer Research Institute Breast Research Group (unpaid chair) and the Royal College of Surgeons Breast Surgical Specialty Lead (unpaid). K-AP reports clinical trial funding from AstraZeneca (paid to institution) and unremunerated previous participation in AstraZeneca advisory boards. LR reports grants from the European Commission Horizon 2020 and the German Research Foundation and a role in the International Association for Hospice and Palliative Care (Chair of Board of Directors). MKT reports grants from Addenbrooke's Charitable Trust and CRUK. FA reports grants from Novartis, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Daiichi Sankyo, and Roche and consulting fees from MedImmune, Gilead, Relay Therapeutics, and Guardant Health. JEA reports speaker honoraria from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Novartis, and Eisai and conference travel support from AstraZeneca. ISB reports participation in the Roche advisory board for ESMO. JMB reports research grants from Breast Cancer Now, AstraZeneca, MSD, Puma Biotechnology, Clovis Oncology, Pfizer, Janssen-Cilag, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Roche, CRUK, and the NIHR. MAF is funded by a Conquer Cancer Breast Cancer Research Foundation Career Development Award for Diversity and Inclusion supported by the Breast Cancer Research Foundation and reports financial support from the WeShare project. AF reports consultancy work for Oxford Immune Algorithmics; grants from Addenbrooke's Charitable Trust and the Ann McLaren Building Preclinical Imaging Suite of the University of Cambridge; and travel support from the University of Cambridge. DIR reports support from the University of Chicago Center for Global Health. DN reports research support from Cepheid; a grant from the US National Cancer Institute; and an unpaid leadership role with the WHO Global Breast Cancer Initiative. WER reports grants from the Cambia Health Foundation, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and the Rita and Alex Hillman Foundation; and book royalties from Springer Publishing and Jones & Bartlett Learning. JR reports funding from the NIHR and support from AstraZeneca for attendance at a teaching event. DS reports a leadership role at the Jamaica Cancer Care and Research Institute (co-director). HS reports membership of the Breast Cancer Now Tissue Bank Advisory Board and voluntary patient membership of the Independent Cancer Patients' Voice charity; an honorarium from the CRUK Precision Grand Challenge; and support for travel expenses from Breast Cancer Now, CRUK, the Association of Breast Surgeons UK, and Breast International Group. IV-L reports grants from Resilience; consulting fees from Novartis, AstraZeneca, and Amgen; payment or honoraria for lectures and presentations from Novartis, Sandoz, Amgen, AstraZeneca, and Pfizer; and support for travel and attending meetings from Novartis. CV-G reports grants from AstraZeneca and Roche; consulting fees from Roche, Novartis, Pfizer, and Eli Lilly; honoraria from Roche, Myriad Genetics, and Novartis; and support for attending meetings and travel from Roche, MSD Oncology, and Pfizer. All other authors declare no competing interests.

Background: In KEYNOTE-355 (NCT02819518), the addition of pembrolizumab to chemotherapy led to statistically significant improvements in progression-free survival and overall survival in patients with advanced triple-negative breast cancer with tumor programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) combined positive score of at least 10. We report patient-reported outcomes from KEYNOTE-355., Methods: Patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles plus investigator's choice chemotherapy (nab-paclitaxel, paclitaxel, or gemcitabine plus carboplatin). The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30), Breast Cancer-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire, and EuroQol 5-Dimension questionnaire visual analog scale were prespecified. Patient-reported outcomes were analyzed for patients who received at least 1 dose of study treatment and completed at least 1 patient-reported outcome assessment. Changes in patient-reported outcome scores from baseline were assessed at week 15 (latest time point at which completion and compliance rates were at least 60% and at least 80%, respectively). Time to deterioration in patient-reported outcomes was defined as time to first onset of at least a 10-point worsening in score from baseline., Results: Patient-reported outcome analyses included 317 patients with tumor PD-L1 combined positive score of at least 10 (pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy: n = 217; placebo plus chemotherapy: n = 100). There were no between-group differences in change from baseline to week 15 in QLQ-C30 global health status/quality of life (QOL; least-squares mean difference = -1.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -6.92 to 3.30), emotional functioning (least-squares mean difference = -1.43, 95% CI = -7.03 to 4.16), physical functioning (least-squares mean difference = -1.05, 95% CI = -6.59 to 4.50), or EuroQol 5-Dimension questionnaire visual analog scale (least-squares mean difference = 0.18, 95% CI = -5.04 to 5.39) and no between-group difference in time to deterioration in QLQ-C30 global health status/QOL, emotional functioning, or physical functioning., Conclusions: Together with the efficacy and safety findings, patient-reported outcome results from KEYNOTE-355 support pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy as a standard of care for patients with advanced triple-negative breast cancer with tumor PD-L1 expression (combined positive score ≥10)., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Nivolumab plus cabozantinib (NIVO + CABO) was approved for first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) based on superiority versus sunitinib (SUN) in the phase III CheckMate 9ER trial (18.1 months median survival follow-up per database lock date); efficacy benefit was maintained with an extended 32.9 months of median survival follow-up. We report updated efficacy and safety after 44.0 months of median survival follow-up in intent-to-treat (ITT) patients and additional subgroup analyses, including outcomes by International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) prognostic risk score., Patients and Methods: Patients with treatment-naïve aRCC received NIVO 240 mg every 2 weeks plus CABO 40 mg once daily or SUN 50 mg for 4 weeks (6-week cycles), until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity (maximum NIVO treatment, 2 years). Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) per blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) per BICR, and safety and tolerability., Results: Overall, 323 patients were randomised to NIVO + CABO and 328 to SUN. Median PFS was improved with NIVO + CABO versus SUN [16.6 versus 8.4 months; hazard ratio (HR) 0.59; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49-0.71]; median OS favoured NIVO + CABO versus SUN (49.5 versus 35.5 months; HR 0.70; 95% CI 0.56-0.87). ORR (95% CI) was higher with NIVO + CABO versus SUN [56% (50% to 62%) versus 28% (23% to 33%)]; 13% versus 5% of patients achieved complete response, and median duration of response was 22.1 months versus 16.1 months, respectively. PFS and OS favoured NIVO + CABO over SUN across intermediate, poor and intermediate/poor IMDC risk subgroups; higher ORR and complete response rates were seen with NIVO + CABO versus SUN regardless of IMDC risk subgroup. Any-grade (grade ≥3) treatment-related adverse events occurred in 97% (67%) versus 93% (55%) of patients treated with NIVO + CABO versus SUN., Conclusions: After extended follow-up, NIVO + CABO maintained survival and response benefits; safety remained consistent with previous follow-ups. These results continue to support NIVO + CABO as a first-line treatment for aRCC., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03141177., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Clinical research is the cornerstone of improvements in cancer care. However, it has been conducted predominantly in high-income countries with few clinical trials available in Brazil and other low-and-middle-income countries (LMIC). Of note, less than one-third of registered clinical trials addressing some of the most commonly diagnosed cancers (breast, lung and cervical) recruited patients from LMIC in the last years. The Institute Project CURA promoted the fourth CURA meeting, discussing barriers to cancer clinical research and proposing potential solutions. A meeting was held in São Paulo, Brazil, in June 2023 with representatives from different sectors: Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency (Anvisa), National Commission of Ethics in Research (CONEP), non-governmental organisations, such as the Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, the Brazilian Society of Clinical Oncology (SBOC), Contract Research Organisations, pharmaceutical companies and investigators. A total of 16 experts pointed out achievements as shortening the time of regulatory processes involving Anvisa and CONEP, development of staff training programs, maintenance of the National Program of Oncological Attention (PRONON), and the foundation of qualified centres in North and Northeast Brazilian regions. Participants also highlighted the need to be more competitive in the field, which requires optimising ongoing policies and implementing new strategies as decentralisation of clinical research centres, public awareness campaigns, community-centered approaches, collaborations and partnerships, expansion of physicians-directed policies, exploring the role of the steering committee. Active and consistent reporting of the initiatives might help to propagate ongoing advances, increasing Brazilian participation in clinical cancer research. Engagement of all players is crucial to maintain continuous progress with further improvements in critical points including regulatory timelines and increments in qualified human resources which aligned with new educational initiatives focused on physicians and the general population will expand access to cancer clinical trials in Brazil., Competing Interests: Heloisa Resende has received research funding from Novartis and Roche, all outside the scope of this manuscript. Gustavo Werutsky has received research funding from AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Bristol-Myers Squibb Brazil, Pfizer, Roche and Roche/Genentech, all outside the scope of this manuscript. Has consulting or advisory role at Merck. Carlos H Barrios has received research funding from AB Science, Abbvie, Abraxis BioScience, Amgen, Asana Biosciences, Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Biomarin, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Clinica Atlantis, Covance, Daiichi Sankyo, Exelixis, GlaxoSmith-Kline, Halozyme, ImClone Systems, INC Research, inVentiv Health, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Lilly, Medivation, Merck, Merck KGaA, Merrimack, Millennium, Mylan, Novartis, Pfizer, PharmaMar, Polyphor, Roche/Genentech, Sanofi, Shanghai Henlius Biotech and Taiho Pharmaceutical, all outside the scope of this manuscript. Has consulting or advisory role at AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eisai, GlaxoSmithKline, Libbs, Lilly, MSD Oncology, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech and United Medical. Has stock and other ownership interests in MedSIR and Tummi. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (© the authors; licensee ecancermedicalscience.)

Purpose: To evaluate a triplet regimen combining immune checkpoint blockade, AKT pathway inhibition, and (nab-) paclitaxel as first-line therapy for locally advanced/metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC)., Patients and Methods: The single-arm CO40151 phase Ib study (NCT03800836), the single-arm signal-seeking cohort of IPATunity130 (NCT03337724), and the randomized phase III IPATunity170 trial (NCT04177108) enrolled patients with previously untreated mTNBC. Triplet therapy comprised intravenous atezolizumab 840 mg (days 1 and 15), oral ipatasertib 400 mg/day (days 1-21), and intravenous paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 (or nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/m2; days 1, 8, and 15) every 28 days. Exploratory translational research aimed to elucidate mechanisms and molecular markers of sensitivity and resistance., Results: Among 317 patients treated with the triplet, efficacy ranged across studies as follows: median progression-free survival (PFS) 5.4 to 7.4 months, objective response rate 44% to 63%, median duration of response 5.6 to 11.1 months, and median overall survival 15.7 to 28.3 months. The safety profile was consistent with the known toxicities of each agent. Grade ≥3 adverse events were more frequent with the triplet than with doublets or single-agent paclitaxel. Patients with PFS >10 months were characterized by NF1, CCND3, and PIK3CA alterations and increased immune pathway activity. PFS <5 months was associated with CDKN2A/CDKN2B/MTAP alterations and lower predicted phosphorylated AKT-S473 levels., Conclusions: In patients with mTNBC receiving an ipatasertib/atezolizumab/taxane triplet regimen, molecular characteristics may identify those with particularly favorable or unfavorable outcomes, potentially guiding future research efforts., (©2023 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: To guide clinicians and policymakers in three global resource-constrained settings on treating patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) when Maximal setting-guideline recommended treatment is unavailable., Methods: A multidisciplinary, multinational panel reviewed existing ASCO guidelines and conducted modified ADAPTE and formal consensus processes., Results: Four published resource-agnostic guidelines were adapted for resource-constrained settings; informing two rounds of formal consensus; recommendations received ≥75% agreement., Recommendations: Clinicians should recommend treatment according to menopausal status, pathological and biomarker features when quality results are available. In first-line, for hormone receptor (HR)-positive MBC, when a non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor and CDK 4/6 inhibitor combination is unavailable, use hormonal therapy alone. For life-threatening disease, use single-agent chemotherapy or surgery for local control. For premenopausal patients, use ovarian suppression or ablation plus hormone therapy in Basic settings. For human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive MBC, if trastuzumab, pertuzumab, and chemotherapy are unavailable, use trastuzumab and chemotherapy; if unavailable, use chemotherapy. For HER2-positive, HR-positive MBC, use standard first-line therapy, or endocrine therapy if contraindications. For triple-negative MBC with unknown PD-L1 status, or if PD-L1-positive and immunotherapy unavailable, use single-agent chemotherapy. For germline BRCA1 / 2 mutation-positive MBC, if poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor is unavailable, use hormonal therapy (HR-positive MBC) and chemotherapy (HR-negative MBC). In second-line, for HR-positive MBC, Enhanced setting recommendations depend on prior treatment; for Limited, use tamoxifen or chemotherapy. For HER2-positive MBC, if trastuzumab deruxtecan is unavailable, use trastuzumab emtansine; if unavailable, capecitabine and lapatinib; if unavailable, trastuzumab and/or chemotherapy (hormonal therapy alone for HR-positive MBC).Additional information is available at www.asco.org/resource-stratified-guidelines. It is ASCO's view that healthcare providers and system decision-makers should be guided by the recommendations for the highest stratum of resources available. The guideline is intended to complement but not replace local guidelines.

Background: Epidemiological and clinical cancer research is essential to understanding tumour behaviour and developing new therapies in oncology. However, several countries including Brazil as well as many other regions of the world have limited participation in cancer research. Despite 625,000 new cancer cases recorded in Brazil in 2022, only 2.2% of ongoing cancer clinical trials are available in the country. We conducted an online survey to describe physician engagement with research and to identify the main barriers precluding participation in and conduct of clinical cancer research in the country., Methods: An anonymous online survey of 23 objective questions was sent by e-mail to Brazilian members of the Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group and the Brazilian Society of Clinical Oncology. The first 13 questions addressed demographic information, medical training and previous research participation. In the second part, the main barriers to engagement and participation in clinical trials in Brazil were addressed. Continuous variables were measured by median and range. Analyses were performed using SAS statistical software (version 9.4; SAS Institute, Inc. Cary, NC)., Results: 109 physicians answered the survey. Most participants were oncologists ( N = 98, 89.9%), living in capital cities ( N = 84, 77.1%), were from the Southeast region of Brazil ( N = 63, 57.8%) and worked at institutions providing exclusively private healthcare ( N = 59, 54.1%). Of the 109 respondents, 83 (76.1%) reported working in research centres (as investigators or sub-investigators). Surprisingly, 31.2% of physicians recognised they invite less than 1% of their patients to participate in clinical trials, even though 98 (89.9%) considered the participation of patients in clinical trials extremely relevant. The main barriers compromising the conduct of research in the country were the low number of available trials (48.2%) and the lack of qualified human resources to staff research sites (22.9%). Other reported barriers were the lengthy regulatory approval process (42.2%), followed by a lack of awareness of clinical research by patients resulting in low recruitment rates (24.1%). Of the 26 (23.8%) respondents not working with research, 25 (96.1%) reported interest in being involved, 31.8% have tried participating in research and 62.4% reported limited knowledge of trial procedures., Conclusion: These results suggest a clear need to further engage physicians in clinical research activities in Brazil. Patient education strategies should improve the low recruitment rates and secondarily increase the number of proposed trials in the country., Competing Interests: Heloisa Resende has received research funding from Novartis and Roche, all outside the scope of this manuscript. Taiane Francieli Rebelatto has no relationships to disclose. Gustavo Werutsky has received research funding from AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Bristol-Myers Squibb Brazil, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and Roche/Genentech, all outside the scope of this manuscript. Has consulting or advisory role at Merck. Gustavo Gössling has received research funding from AstraZeneca/Merck and Janssen Oncology, all outside the scope of this manuscript. Vinícius Aguiar has no relationships to disclose. Guilherme Lopes has no relationships to disclose. Biazi Assis has no relationships to disclose. Lilian Arruda has no relationships to disclose. Carlos H Barrios has received research funding from AB Science, Abbvie, Abraxis BioScience, Amgen, Asana Biosciences, Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Biomarin, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Clinica Atlantis, Covance, Daiichi Sankyo, Exelixis, GlaxoSmithKline, Halozyme, ImClone Systems, INC Research, inVentiv Health, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Lilly, Medivation, Merck, Merck KGaA, Merrimack, Millennium, Mylan, Novartis, Pfizer, PharmaMar, Polyphor, Roche/Genentech, Sanofi, Shanghai Henlius Biotech and Taiho Pharmaceutical, all outside the scope of this manuscript. Has consulting or advisory role at AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eisai, GlaxoSmithKline, Libbs, Lilly, MSD Oncology, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech and United Medical. Has stock and other ownership interests in MedSIR and Tummi., (© the authors; licensee ecancermedicalscience.)

Breast cancer (BC) is the most common neoplasm in women worldwide and one of the leading causes of female death. The triple-negative subtype, characterized by the absence of hormone receptor (HR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), tends to occur in younger patients, be more aggressive and less differentiated. Furthermore, this subtype is considered the most immunogenic and associated with higher levels of tumor cell infiltration, mainly lymphocytes. Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) play a crucial role in the interaction of the host's immune system and cancer cells. The microenvironment is critical in tumor development and progression. Assessment of infiltrating lymphocytes can provide valuable information about the immune response and, given the lack of biomarkers to guide treatment decisions and predict outcomes in triple-negative tumors and can be considered as a potential biomarker. Some evidence suggests that higher levels of these lymphocytes are associated with better responses to systemic treatment, longer progression-free survival and overall survival (OS). However, treatment escalation or de-escalation strategies for triple-negative BC (TNBC) currently do not consider the presence or density of TILs for therapeutic decisions. TILs appear to be useful predictive and prognostic indicators. Further clinical studies are needed to confirm these relationships and integrate TILs as a biomarker consistently into clinical practice. This article summarizes key concepts relating to the role of the immune infiltrate in BC, along with the current status and future prospects regarding TILs as a predictive and prognostic biomarker., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://tbcr.amegroups.org/article/view/10.21037/tbcr-23-43/coif). C.H.B. has received grants or contracts to the institution from Nektar, Pfizer, Polyphor, Amgen, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi, Exelixis, Regeneron, Novartis, GSK, Janssen, OBI Pharma, Lilly, Seagen, Roche, BMS, MSD, Merck Serono, AstraZeneca, Novocure, Aveo Oncology, Takeda, TRIO, PharmaMar, Celgene, PPD, Syneos Health, Labcorp, ICON, IQVIA, Parexel, Nuvisan, PSI, Worldwide, Gilead Sciences, Bayer, Servier; consulting fees from Boehringer-Ingelheim, GSK, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, Eisai, Bayer, MSD, AstraZeneca, Zodiac, Lilly, Sanofi, Daiichi; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Boehringer-Ingelheim, GSK, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, Eisai, Bayer, MSD, Astra Zeneca, Zodiac, Lilly, Sanofi, Daiichi; support for attending meetings and/or travel from Novartis, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, MSD, Astra Zeneca, Lilly, Daiichi; participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board from Roche; stock from Thummi and MEDSIR. T.R. has received speaker’s honoraria from Daiichi-Sankyo, AstraZeneca, Gilead Libbs, Pfizer, MSD and Novartis; consulting fees for advisory boards from AstraZeneca, Lilly, MSD and Novartis; research funding from AstraZeneca, FAPESP, Libbs, PRONOM/MS. G.S. has received speaker’s honoraria from Daiichi-Sankyo, AstraZeneca, and Novartis; and consulting fees for advisory boards, and support for attending meetings from AstraZeneca. M.G. has received speaker’s honoraria from Daiichi-Sankyo, AstraZeneca and Novartis; consulting fees for advisory boards from AstraZeneca and Novartis; research funding from AstraZeneca and Libbs. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (2024 Translational Breast Cancer Research. All rights reserved.)

99m Tc-EDDA/HYNIC-TOC is an easily available and cheaper radionuclide that could be used for somatostatin-receptor-based imaging of neuroendocrine tumours (NETs). We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of 99m Tc-EDDA/HYNIC-TOC compared to 111 In-DTPA-octreotide in patients (pts) with NETs. We performed a prospective diagnostic study including pts with biopsy-confirmed NET and at least one visible lesion at conventional imaging. Two independent nuclear medicine physicians evaluated pts who underwent 99m Tc and 111 In scans and images. The primary outcome was comparative diagnostic accuracy of 99m Tc and 111 In. Secondary outcomes include safety. Nine pts were included and performed 14 paired scans. Overall, 126 lesions were identified. 99m Tc demonstrated superior sensitivity both when all images were analysed (93.7, 95% CI 88.1% - 96.8% versus 74.8%, 95% CI 66.6 - 81.6%, p < 0.001) and when liver-specific images were analysed (97.8%, 95% CI 92.7% - 99.5% versus 85.1%, 95% CI 76.6% - 91.0%, p < 0.001). 99m Tc was also associated with a lower negative likelihood ratio (LR) (0.002, 95% CI 0.009 - 0.1 versus 0.19, 95% CI 0.12 - 0.42, p = 0.009) when evaluating hepatic lesions. Adverse events happened in 3 pts after 111 In and in 2 pts after 99m Tc, all grade 1. The 99m Tc demonstrated a higher sensitivity overall and a better negative LR in liver-specific images compared to 111 In in pts with NETs. Our findings suggest that 99m Tc is an alternative to 111 In and is especially useful in ruling out liver metastases. NCT02691078., Competing Interests: Dr Moriguchi-Jeckel and Dr Werutsky report grants from Financiadora de Estudos e Projetos (FINEP) for the conduct of the study. Drs R. Madke, Viana, Nabinger, and Fernandes report employment relationships with the RPH Group. Dr. Werutsky reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beigene, Daiichi Sankyo, Genentech/Roche, GSK, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Seattle Genetics outside the submitted work. The other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (© the authors; licensee ecancermedicalscience.)

Background: Ribociclib has demonstrated a statistically significant overall survival benefit in pre- and postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer. New Adjuvant Trial with Ribociclib [LEE011] (NATALEE) is a trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of adjuvant ribociclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) versus ET alone in patients with HR+/HER2- early nonmetastatic breast cancer (EBC)., Methods/design: NATALEE is a multicenter, randomized, open-label, Phase III trial in patients with HR+/HER2- EBC. Eligible patients include women, regardless of menopausal status, and men aged ⩾18 years. Select patients with stage IIA, stage IIB, or stage III disease (per the anatomic classification in the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual , 8th edition) with an initial diagnosis ⩽18 months prior to randomization are eligible. Patients receiving standard (neo)adjuvant ET are eligible if treatment was initiated ⩽12 months before randomization. Patients undergo 1:1 randomization to ribociclib 400 mg/day (3 weeks on/1 week off) +ET (letrozole 2.5 mg/day or anastrozole 1 mg/day [investigator's discretion] plus goserelin [men or premenopausal women]) or ET alone. Ribociclib treatment duration is 36 months; ET treatment duration is ⩾60 months. The primary end point is invasive disease-free survival., Discussion: The 36-month treatment duration of ribociclib in NATALEE is extended compared with that in other adjuvant cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitor trials and is intended to maximize efficacy due to longer duration of CDK4/6 inhibition. Compared with the 600-mg/day dose used in advanced breast cancer, the reduced ribociclib dose used in NATALEE may improve tolerability while maintaining efficacy. NATALEE includes the broadest population of patients with HR+/HER2- EBC of any Phase III trial currently evaluating adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibitor treatment., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03701334 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03701334)., Competing Interests: Dr. Slamon reports stock ownership from BioMarin, Pfizer, Amgen, Seattle Genetics, TORL BioTherapeutics, 1200 Pharma; travel support from BioMarin, Pfizer, Novartis; personal fees from Novartis, Eli Lilly; grants from Pfizer, Novartis; founder of 1200 Pharma, TORL BioTherapeutics. Dr. Fasching reports personal fees from Novartis, Pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca, Eisai, MSD, Lilly, Pierre Fabre, Seagen, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Hexal, Agendia, Sanofi, Gilead; institutional funding from BioNTech, Pfizer, Cepheid; research grant from Pfizer. Dr. Hurvitz has nothing to disclose. Dr. Chia reports personal fees and grants to institution from Novartis, Pfizer, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Eli Lilly. Prof. Crown has nothing to disclose. Dr. Martín reports personal fees from Lilly, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Roche/Genentech, GSK, PharmaMar, Taiho Oncology; research grants from Novartis, Roche-Genentech. Dr. Barrios reports institutional research grants from Pfizer, PharmaMar, Polyphor, Henlius Biotech, Shanghai, Merck KGaA, Millennium, LEO Pharma, ImClone Systems, Exelixis, Medivation, Asana Biosciences, AB Science, Abraxis Biosciences, Daiichi Sankyo, Bristol Myers Squibb, BioMarin, Astellas Pharma, AbbVie, Merck (MSD), Merrimack, Mylan, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Sanofi, GSK, Roche/Genentech, Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Amgen, Pfizer; personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Sanofi, Lilly, Zodiac, AstraZeneca, MSD, Bayer, Eisai, Roche/Genentech, Pfizer, Novartis, GSK, Daiichi Sankyo; stock from MEDSIR, Thummi. Dr. Bardia reports research grants to institution from Genentech, Novartis, Pfizer, Merck, Sanofi, Radius Health, Immunomedics, Mersana, Innocrin; personal fees from Biothermostics, Pfizer, Novartis, Genentech, Merck, Radius Health, Immunomedics, Spectrum Pharma, Taiho, Sanofi, Daiichi Sankyo, Puma. Dr. Im reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, Novartis, Hanmi, Pfizer, Eisai, Amgen, Roche, Lilly, GSK, MSD; research grants from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Eisai, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Daewoong Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Yardley reports research funding to institution from Daiichi Sankyo/Lilly, Eisai, Roche/Genentech, Novartis, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, Immunomedics, InventisBio, Lilly, MedImmume, Medivation, Merck, Oncothyreon, Pfizer, Syndax, Tesaro; personal fees from Biotheranostics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo/Lilly, Eisai, Roche/Genentech, Novartis, NanoString Technologies. Dr. Untch has nothing to disclose. Dr. Huang reports grants to institution from Novartis, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca, EirGenix, Eli Lilly, MSD, OBI Pharma, Pfizer, F. Hoffmann-La Roche; personal fees from Novartis, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, F. Hoffmann-La Roche; nonfinancial support from AstraZeneca, EirGenix, Eli Lilly, OBI Pharma, Roche, Novartis. Dr. Stroyakovskii has nothing to disclose. Dr. Xu reports personal fees from Novartis, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Roche, Eisai. Dr. Moroose reports personal fees from Gilead, Lilly, Pfizer, Seagen, Genentech, Johnson & Johnson. Dr. Loi reports research funding grants to institution from Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Puma Biotechnology, Eli Lilly, Nektar Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Roche/Genentech, Seagen; uncompensated consultant for Seagen, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Gilead Therapeutics, Roche/Genentech; consultant with fees paid to institution from Aduro Biotech, Novartis, GSK, Roche/Genentech, AstraZeneca, Silverback Therapeutics, G1 Therapeutics, PUMA Biotechnologies, Pfizer, Gilead Therapeutics, Seagen, Daiichi Sankyo, Merck, Amunix, Tallac Therapeutics, Eli Lilly, Bristol Myers Squibb. Ms. Visco has nothing to disclose. Ms. Bee-Munteanu has nothing to disclose. Ms. Afenjar has nothing to disclose. Dr. Fresco reports other advising institution is contracted by Novartis as CRO conducting the NATALEE trial. Dr. Taran, Dr. Chakravartty, Dr. Zarate, Dr. Lteif report employment and stock ownership. Dr. Hortobagyi reports personal fees and grants to institution from Novartis., (© The Author(s), 2023.)

Background: ExteNET showed that neratinib, an irreversible pan-HER tyrosine kinase inhibitor, given for 1 year after trastuzumab-based therapy significantly improved invasive disease-free survival in women with early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer. We report the final analysis of overall survival in ExteNET., Methods: In this international, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, women aged 18 years or older with stage 1-3c (amended to stage 2-3c) HER2-positive breast cancer who had completed neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy plus trastuzumab were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned to oral neratinib 240 mg/day or placebo for 1 year. Randomisation was stratified according to hormone receptor (HR) status (HR-positive vs. HR-negative), nodal status (0, 1-3 or 4+), and trastuzumab regimen (sequentially vs. concurrently with chemotherapy). Overall survival was analysed by intention to treat. ExteNET is registered (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00878709) and is complete., Results: Between July 9, 2009, and October 24, 2011, 2840 women received neratinib (n = 1420) or placebo (n = 1420). After a median follow-up of 8.1 (IQR, 7.0-8.8) years, 127 patients (8.9%) in the neratinib group and 137 patients (9.6%) in the placebo group in the intention-to-treat population had died. Eight-year overall survival rates were 90.1% (95% CI 88.3-91.6) with neratinib and 90.2% (95% CI 88.4-91.7) with placebo (stratified hazard ratio 0.95; 95% CI 0.75-1.21; p = 0.6914)., Conclusions: Overall survival in the extended adjuvant setting was comparable for neratinib and placebo after a median follow-up of 8.1 years in women with early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: SD declares institutional grants from Puma Biotechnology Inc. during the conduct of the study, institutional grants from Pfizer, Novartis, AstraZeneca, RocheGenentech, Lilly, Myriad, Orion, Amgen, Sanofi, Genomic Health, GE, Servier, MSD, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pierre Fabre, Seagen, Exact Sciences, Rappta, Besins, European Commission, French Government, Fondation ARC, Taiho, and Elsan, and non-financial support from Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and RocheGenentech outside the submitted work. BE is a Medical Director of the Danish Breast Cancer Group, and has received a personal grant from the Danish Cancer Society, and institutional grants from Samsung Bioepis, MSD, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca. HI declares institutional grants from Chugai, Eli Lilly, Nihon Kayaku, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca, Taiho, Pfizer, MSD, Sanofi, Novartis, Bayer, and Boehringer Ingelheim, personal consulting fees from Chugai, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, and Daiichi Sankyo, and personal payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Chugai, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Taiho, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, and Kyowa Kirin. MG has received consulting fees from Lifebrain, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Veracyte, Novartis, and MSD, payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers' bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, and Pierre Fabre, support for attending meetings and/or travel from Eli Lilly, and declares that his spouse is employed by Sandoz. MB is a stockholder of the International Drug Development Institute. CHB declares support from Puma Biotechnology for work completed for the present manuscript, institutional grants or contracts from Abbvie, Nektar, Pfizer, Polyphor, Amgen, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi, Exelixis, Regeneron, Novartis, Henlius, Shanghai, GSK, Janssen, OBI Pharma, Lilly, Seagen, Checkpoint Therapeutics, Roche, BMS, MSD, Merck Serono, AstraZeneca, Novocure, Aveo Oncology, Takeda, TRIO, PharmaMar, Celgene, Myovant, PPD, Syneos Health, Docs, Labcorp, ICON, IQVIA, Parexel, Nuvisan, PSI, and Medpace, advisory board or consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, Eisai, Bayer, MSD, AstraZeneca, Zodiac, Lilly, Sanofi, and Daiichi Sankyo, payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers' bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, Eisai, Bayer, MSD, AstraZeneca, Zodiac, Lilly, Sanofi, and Daiichi Sankyo, support for attending meetings and/or travel from Daiichi Sankyo, participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for Roche/Genentech, and is a member of the BIG Executive Board. TS received payments for lectures, presentations and educational events from Novartis, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Roche, Amgen, Sandoz, Abbot, and AstraZeneca, support for attending symposia from Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche, and received drugs for patient treatment through market access programmes from Novartis, Pfizer, and Puma Biotechnology Inc. RŠ received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers' bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Pfizer, Novartis, Roche, and Astellas, and support for attending meetings and/or travel from Novartis and Roche. AGZ reports an institutional grant from Pfizer, consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Pierre Fabre, Novartis, Exact Sciences, and Lilly, payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers' bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Novartis, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Exact Sciences, support for attending meetings and/or travel from Novartis, Pfizer, and Lilly, and a leadership or fiduciary role in GEICAM. ND declares support for the present manuscript, grants or contracts from the US Oncology Network, support for attending meetings and/or travel for a Seattle Genetics advisory board, participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for Alliance, leadership or fiduciary role at the Arlington Free Clinic, and stock or stock options with AstraZeneca (employee currently). DP declares a leadership or fiduciary role on the Board of Directors, Community Oncology Alliance. EG has received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers' bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from BMS, Pfizer, Roche, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Amgen, Gilead, Lilly, Astellas, and GEN Ilac Ve Saglik Urunleri Sanayi Ve Ticaret, payment for expert testimony from BMS, Pfizer, Roche, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Amgen, Gilead, and Lilly, support for attending meetings and/or travel from BMS, Roche, Pfizer, Astellas, and Abdi Ibrahim, participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for BMS, Pfizer, Roche, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Amgen, Gilead, Lilly, and Astellas. IG declares funding for the trial, provision of study drug and manuscript support from Puma Biotechnology Inc., clinical trial support from Pfizer and AstraZeneca, and stock or stock options for Pfizer and Merck. SL declares institutional grants or contracts from Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Gilead, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche, royalties or licenses paid to institution from VM Scope GmbH, payments or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events paid to institution from AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Gilead, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche, patents pending and issued paid to institution (EP14153692.0, EP21152186.9, EP15702464.7, EP19808852.8), participation on Data Safety Monitoring Boards or Advisory Boards paid to institution for Abbvie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Eirgenix, GSK, Gilead, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Sanofi, and Seagen, and medical writing (non-financial) for Daiichi Sankyo, Gilead, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Seagen. NM declares grants or contracts from Chugai, Eli Lilly, Astra Zeneca, Pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo, MSD, Eisai, Novartis, Sanofi, Kyowa-Kirin, and Nippon-Kayaku, payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Chugai, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, and Eisai, and is a representative director (unpaid) of JBCRG (Japan Breast Cancer Research Group). KP has received consulting fees from Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, AstraZeneca, and MSD, payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers' bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Eli Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca, and support for attending meetings and/or travel from Gilead. DDP is a full-time employee at Puma Biotechnology Inc., and has ownership interest (stock, stock options) in Puma Biotechnology Inc. AW is a full-time employee at Puma Biotechnology Inc., and has ownership interest (stock, stock options) in Puma Biotechnology Inc. MM declares an institutional grant from Puma Biotechnology Inc. for work completed for the present manuscript, consulting fees from Roche, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Seagen, Lilly, and Sanofi, payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers' bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Seagen, Lilly, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo, and Roche, and that he is Chairman of GEICAM, and Member of Board of Directors of TRIO. All remaining authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Tumor boards (TB) are synonymous with quality of care but have been occasionally misunderstood and underutilized. This survey aimed to evaluate health professionals' perceptions of TBs in Brazil. Materials & methods: The survey was sent electronically. Results: Of 206 respondents, 67.8% attended TBs at least once and 82.4% dedicated at least 1 h weekly to them; 64.2% preferred a more &educational' model over case discussions only; 63.1% had institutional leadership capable of promoting multidisciplinarity; 21.1 and 32.7% of the physicians and nonphysicians, respectively, felt intimidated to express their opinions; 91.6% believed that TBs improve cancer outcomes. Postpandemic, 52.7% preferred a hybrid (virtual/face-to-face) model. Conclusion: This study provides a glimpse of the reality of TBs in Brazil, with potential implications for clinical practice.

Purpose: Pazopanib is an oral angiogenesis inhibitor targeting vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, platelet-derived growth factor receptor, and c-Kit. This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III study evaluated efficacy and safety of pazopanib monotherapy in treatment-naive and cytokine-pretreated patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC)., Patients and Methods: Adult patients with measurable, locally advanced, and/or metastatic RCC were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive oral pazopanib or placebo. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included overall survival, tumor response rate (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors), and safety. Radiographic assessments of tumors were independently reviewed., Results: Of 435 patients enrolled, 233 were treatment naive (54%) and 202 were cytokine pretreated (46%). PFS was significantly prolonged with pazopanib compared with placebo in the overall study population (median, PFS 9.2 v 4.2 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.46; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.62; P < .0001), the treatment-naive subpopulation (median PFS 11.1 v 2.8 months; HR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.60; P < .0001), and the cytokine-pretreated subpopulation (median PFS, 7.4 v 4.2 months; HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.84; P < .001). The objective response rate was 30% with pazopanib compared with 3% with placebo ( P < .001). The median duration of response was longer than 1 year. The most common adverse events were diarrhea, hypertension, hair color changes, nausea, anorexia, and vomiting. There was no evidence of clinically important differences in quality of life for pazopanib versus placebo., Conclusion: Pazopanib demonstrated significant improvement in PFS and tumor response compared with placebo in treatment-naive and cytokine-pretreated patients with advanced and/or metastatic RCC.

Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease, and the estrogen receptor (ER) remains the most important biomarker in breast oncology. Most guidelines set a positive expression threshold of 1% staining in immunohistochemistry (IHC) to define ER positivity. However, different expression levels may be associated with diverse degrees of sensitivity to endocrine therapy as ER expression may impact breast cancer molecular biology as a continuous variable. ER -lo tumors, defined as those with 1-10% ER expression, represent a relatively small subgroup of breast cancer patients, with an estimated prevalence of 2-7%. These tumors are similar to ER neg disease in their molecular landscape, clinicopathological characteristics, prognosis, and response to therapy. Nevertheless, a proportion may retain some degree of ER signaling dependency, and the possibility of responding to some degree to endocrine therapy cannot be completely ruled out. This review article discusses the most important considerations regarding the definition of ER positivity, pathology assessment, prognosis, and therapeutic implication of ER lo breast cancer from the medical oncology perspective., Competing Interests: The authors declare the following potential conflicts of interest, although none are directly related to the writing and publication of the present manuscript. TR- Research funding: AstraZeneca, Libbs Speaker honoraria: AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Novartis, MSD, Daichi-Sankyo, Libbs, Lily Advisory board: AstraZeneca, Daichii-Sankyo, Novartis, MSD. CR- Speaker honoraria: AstraZeneca, BMS, Daiichi-Sankyo, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, United Medical Advisory board: BMS, Roche. AG- Speaker honoraria: Roche, Novartis, Eisai, Eli-Lilly, Pfizer; Daichii Sankyo, Astrazeneca Advisory board: Roche, Eli-Lilly, United Medical, Pfizer. CB- Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Biomarker, MedSIR, Tummi Speaker Honoraria: Novartis, Roche/Genentech, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eisai Consulting or Advisory Role: Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche/Genentech, Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, Eisai, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Libbs, MSD Oncology, United Medical Research Funding: Pfizer, Novartis, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, Roche/Genentech, Lilly, Sanofi, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Mylan, Merrimack, Merck, AbbVie, Astellas Pharma, Biomarin, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Abraxis BioScience, AB Science, Asana Biosciences, Medivation, Exelixis, ImClone Systems, LEO Pharma, Millennium, Janssen, Atlantis Clinica, INC Research, Halozyme, Covance, Celgene, inVentiv HealthT Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Roche/Genentech, Novartis, Pfizer, BMS Brazil, AstraZeneca, MSD Oncology. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Reinert, Cascelli, Resende, Gonçalves, Godo and Barrios.)

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) has the highest rate of distant metastasis and poorest overall survival among breast cancer subtypes. In a phase II study, adagloxad simolenin (AdaSim), a synthetic Globo H conjugate vaccine administered with adjuvant OBI-821, was shown to induce IgM and IgG anti-Globo H humoral responses in patients with metastatic breast cancer overexpressing the glycosphingolipid Globo H. GLORIA is an ongoing phase III, randomized, open-label clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of AdaSim and the quality of life (QoL) of patients receiving AdaSim plus standard of care (SOC) versus SOC alone in high-risk, early-stage TNBC. The primary end point is invasive progression-free survival; secondary end points include overall survival, QoL, breast cancer-free interval, distant disease-free survival, safety, and tolerability.

Patient-reported outcomes data assessing patients' experience of immunotherapy treatment burden in potentially curable early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) are lacking. These patient-reported data inform clinical benefit and decision-making for adding atezolizumab to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage TNBC. IMpassion031 (NCT03197935) randomly assigned patients with stage II/III TNBC (T2-T4d primary tumors) to 5 cycles (4 weeks/cycle) of every 2-week neoadjuvant atezolizumab 840 mg or placebo with weekly nab-paclitaxel (3 cycles) followed by every 2-week dose-dense doxorubicin+cyclophosphamide (2 cycles). After surgery, the atezolizumab-chemotherapy arm received atezolizumab 1200 mg every 3 weeks (11 cycles). The placebo-chemotherapy arm was observed under standard of care. To assess treatment burden from the patients' perspective, which comprised measures of the treatment-related impact on patients' functioning and health-related quality of life (HRQoL), as well as patients' experience of treatment-related symptoms plus their associated bother, patients completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G single-item GP5. Predefined secondary endpoints included mean and mean change from baseline values in the QLQ-C30 function (role and physical) and global health status/quality of life scales. Exploratory endpoints included mean and mean change from baseline in treatment-related symptoms, and treatment side effect bother. Mean physical, role function, and HRQoL were similar between arms at baseline and throughout treatment. In the neoadjuvant period, both arms exhibited clinically meaningful declines of similar magnitude from baseline in physical, role function, and HRQoL, and reported similar treatment side effect to bother at each visit. Improved pathologic complete response from adding atezolizumab to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage TNBC occurred without imposing additional treatment burden on patients., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Tumor mutational burden (TMB) is being explored as a predictive biomarker for cancer immunotherapy outcomes in non-small cell lung cancer. BFAST (NCT03178552)-an open-label, global, multicohort trial-evaluated the safety and efficacy of first-line targeted therapies or immunotherapy in patients with unresectable Stage IIIB or IV advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer who were selected for biomarker status using blood-based targeted next-generation sequencing. In the Phase 3 cohort C evaluating blood-based (b)TMB as a biomarker of atezolizumab efficacy, patients with bTMB of ≥10 (N = 471) were randomized 1:1 to receive atezolizumab or platinum-based chemotherapy per local standard of care. Cohort C did not meet its primary endpoint of investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the population with bTMB of ≥16 (hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% confidence interval: 0.59, 1.00; P = 0.053). Adverse events leading to treatment withdrawal occurred in 10% of patients in the atezolizumab arm and 20% in the chemotherapy arm. Adverse events of special interest occurred in 42% of patients in the atezolizumab arm and 26% in the chemotherapy arm. A prespecified exploratory analysis compared the bTMB clinical trial assay with the FoundationOne Liquid Companion Diagnostic assay and showed high concordance between assays. Additional exploration of bTMB to identify optimal cutoffs, confounding factors, assay improvements or cooperative biomarkers is warranted., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Purpose: Combining standard of care (pertuzumab-trastuzumab [PH], chemotherapy) with cancer immunotherapy may potentiate antitumor immunity, cytotoxic activity, and patient outcomes in high-risk, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive early breast cancer. We report the phase III IMpassion050 primary analysis of neoadjuvant atezolizumab, PH, and chemotherapy in these patients., Methods: Patients with a primary tumor of > 2 cm and histologically confirmed, positive lymph node status (T2-4, N1-3, M0) were randomly assigned 1:1 to atezolizumab/placebo with dose-dense doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide, followed by paclitaxel, and PH. After surgery, patients were to continue atezolizumab/placebo and PH (total: 1 year of HER2-targeted therapy); those with residual disease could switch to ado-trastuzumab emtansine with atezolizumab/placebo. Coprimary efficacy end points were pathologic complete response (pCR; ypT0/is ypN0) rates in intention-to-treat (ITT) and programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive populations., Results: At clinical cutoff (February 5, 2021), pCR rates in the placebo and atezolizumab groups in the ITT populations were 62.7% (n = 143/228) and 62.4% (n = 141/226), respectively (difference -0.33%; 95% CI, -9.2 to 8.6; P = .9551). The pCR rates in the placebo and atezolizumab groups in patients with PD-L1-positive tumors were 72.5% (n = 79/109) and 64.2% (n = 70/109), respectively (difference -8.26%; 95% CI, -20.6 to 4.0; P = .1846). Grade 3-4 and serious adverse events were more frequent in the atezolizumab versus placebo group. Five grade 5 adverse events occurred (four neoadjuvant, one adjuvant; two assigned to study treatment), all with atezolizumab. Overall, the safety profile was consistent with that of atezolizumab in other combination studies., Conclusion: Atezolizumab with neoadjuvant dose-dense doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide-paclitaxel and PH for high-risk, HER2-positive early breast cancer did not increase pCR rates versus placebo in the ITT or PD-L1-positive populations. PH and chemotherapy remains standard of care; longer follow-up may help to inform the long-term impact of atezolizumab.

Background: In an interim analysis of this phase 3 trial, the addition of pembrolizumab to chemotherapy resulted in longer progression-free survival than chemotherapy alone among patients with advanced triple-negative breast cancer whose tumors expressed programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) with a combined positive score (CPS; the number of PD-L1-staining tumor cells, lymphocytes, and macrophages, divided by the total number of viable tumor cells, multiplied by 100) of 10 or more. The results of the final analysis of overall survival have not been reported., Methods: We randomly assigned patients with previously untreated locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer in a 2:1 ratio to receive pembrolizumab (200 mg) every 3 weeks plus the investigator's choice of chemotherapy (nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel, paclitaxel, or gemcitabine-carboplatin) or placebo plus chemotherapy. The primary end points were progression-free survival (reported previously) and overall survival among patients whose tumors expressed PD-L1 with a CPS of 10 or more (the CPS-10 subgroup), among patients whose tumors expressed PD-L1 with a CPS of 1 or more (the CPS-1 subgroup), and in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was also assessed., Results: A total of 847 patients underwent randomization: 566 were assigned to the pembrolizumab-chemotherapy group, and 281 to the placebo-chemotherapy group. The median follow-up was 44.1 months. In the CPS-10 subgroup, the median overall survival was 23.0 months in the pembrolizumab-chemotherapy group and 16.1 months in the placebo-chemotherapy group (hazard ratio for death, 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55 to 0.95; two-sided P = 0.0185 [criterion for significance met]); in the CPS-1 subgroup, the median overall survival was 17.6 and 16.0 months in the two groups, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.04; two-sided P = 0.1125 [not significant]); and in the intention-to-treat population, the median overall survival was 17.2 and 15.5 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.05 [significance not tested]). Adverse events of grade 3, 4, or 5 that were related to the trial regimen occurred in 68.1% of the patients in the pembrolizumab-chemotherapy group and in 66.9% in the placebo-chemotherapy group, including death in 0.4% of the patients in the pembrolizumab-chemotherapy group and in no patients in the placebo-chemotherapy group., Conclusions: Among patients with advanced triple-negative breast cancer whose tumors expressed PD-L1 with a CPS of 10 or more, the addition of pembrolizumab to chemotherapy resulted in significantly longer overall survival than chemotherapy alone. (Funded by Merck Sharp and Dohme; KEYNOTE-355 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02819518.)., (Copyright © 2022 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Background: Despite the large number of patients with early breast cancer (EBC) who have been treated with capecitabine in randomised trials, no individual patient data meta-analysis has been conducted. The primary objective was to examine the effect of capecitabine on disease-free survival (DFS), and the secondary objectives were to analyse distant DFS (DDFS), overall survival (OS), pathological complete response (for neoadjuvant studies) and the interaction between capecitabine-related toxicity and treatment effect., Methods: www., Clinicaltrials: gov and www.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov were searched using the following criteria: use of capecitabine for EBC as adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy; multicentre randomised trial with >100 patients; recruitment completed, and outcomes available. Required data were available for 13 trials., Results: Individual data from 15,993 patients were collected. Cox regression analyses of all included patients revealed that the addition of capecitabine did not alter DFS significantly compared with treatment without capecitabine (hazard ratio [HR] 0.952; 95% CI 0.895-1.012; P value = 0.115). There was also no effect on DFS in the subset of studies where capecitabine was given instead of another drug (HR 1.035; 95% CI 0.945-1.134; P = 0.455). However, capecitabine administered in addition to the standard systemic treatment improved DFS (HR 0.888; 95% CI 0.817-0.965; P = 0.005). An OS improvement was observed in the entire cohort (HR 0.892; 95% CI 0.824-0.965, P = 0.005) and in the subset of capecitabine addition (HR 0.837; 95% CI 0.751, 0.933, P = 0.001). Subgroup analyses revealed that triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients benefitted from treatment with capecitabine overall and in addition to other systemic treatments in terms of DFS and OS., Conclusion: Capecitabine was able to improve DFS and OS in patients with TNBC and in all patients with EBC when administered in addition to systemic treatment., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement M.v.M. reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Genomic Health, personal fees from Gilead, personal fees from GSK, personal fees from Lilly, personal fees from Molecular Health, personal fees from Mylan, personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Roche, personal fees from Pierre Fabre, personal fees from Seagen, outside the submitted work; V.M. reports speaker honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Roche, Teva, consultancy honoraria from Roche, Amgen, TESARO and Myelo Therapeutics; J.O.S. reports personal fees from AbbVie, personal fees from Agendia, personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, personal fees from Celgene, personal fees from Eisai, personal fees from Genentech, personal fees from Immunomedics, personal fees from Ipsen, personal fees from Jounce, personal fees from Lilly, personal fees from Merck, personal fees from Myriad, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Ondonate Therapeutics, personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Puma, personal fees from Roche, personal fees from Seattle Genetics, personal fees from Prime Oncology, outside the submitted work; M.M. has received research grants from Roche, PUMA and Novartis, consulting/advisory fees from AstraZeneca, Amgen, Taiho Oncology, Roche/Genentech, Novartis, PharmaMar, Eli Lilly, PUMA, Taiho Oncology, Daiichi Sankyo and Pfizer and speakers' honoraria from AstraZeneca, Lilly, Amgen, Roche/Genentech, Novartis and Pfizer, outside the submitted work. H.J. reports personal fees from Orion Pharma, personal fees from Neutron Therapeutics, other from Orion Pharma, other from Sartar Therapeutics, outside the submitted work. M.U. reports personal fees and non-financial support from AbbVie, personal fees and non-financial support from Amgen GmbH, personal fees and non-financial support from Astra Zeneca, personal fees from BMS, personal fees and non-financial support from Celgene GmbH, personal fees and non-financial support from Daiichi Sankyo, personal fees and non-financial support from Eisai GmbH, personal fees from Lilly Deutschland, personal fees and non-financial support from Lilly Int., personal fees and non-financial support from MSD Merck, personal fees and non-financial support from Mundipharma, personal fees and non-financial support from Myriad Genetics, personal fees and non-financial support from Odonate, personal fees and non-financial support from Pfizer GmbH, personal fees from PUMA Biotechnology, personal fees and non-financial support from Roche Pharma AG, personal fees and non-financial support from Sanofi Aventis Deutschland GmbH, personal fees and non-financial support from TEVA Pharmaceuticals Ind Ltd, personal fees and non-financial support from Novartis, personal fees from Pierre Fabre, personal fees and non-financial support from Clovis Oncology, personal fees from Seattle Genetics, outside the submitted work; U.N. reports grants and personal fees from Agendia, grants and personal fees from Amgen, grants and personal fees from Celgene, grants, personal fees and other from Genomic Health, grants and personal fees from NanoString Technologies, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees and other from Pfizer, grants, personal fees and other from Roche/Genentech, personal fees from Teva, grants from Sanofi, outside the submitted work. G.S. reports personal fees and non-financial support from Roche, personal fees and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, personal fees and non-financial support from Novartis, personal fees from Lilly, non-financial support from TEVA, personal fees and non-financial support from Pfizer, outside the submitted work. C.H.B. reports grants/research support from (to the institution) Pfizer, Novartis, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, Roche/Genentech, Lilly, Sanofi, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Mylan, Merrimack, Merck, AbbVie, Astellas Pharma, BioMarin, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Abraxis BioScience, AB Science, Asana Biosciences, Medivation, Exelixis, ImClone Systems, LEO Pharma, Millennium, Merck KGaA, Shanghai Henlius Biotech, Polyphor, PharmaMar; Advisory boards and consulting: Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, Eisai, Bayer, MSD, Astra Zeneca, Zodiac, Lilly, Sanofi. HDB reports other from Merck, other from Pfizer, other from AbbVie, outside the submitted work. M.T. reports grants and personal fees from Chugai, grants and personal fees from Takeda, grants and personal fees from Pfizer, grants and personal fees from Kyowa-Hakko-Kirin, grants and personal fees from C & C Res Lab, grants and personal fees from Taiho, grants from JBCRG association, grants and personal fees from Eisai, grants and personal fees from Daiichi-Sankyo, grants and personal fees from Astra Zeneca, personal fees from Eli Lilly, personal fees from MSD, personal fees from Genomic Health, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Konica Minolta, grants from Astellas, outside the submitted work; and Board of directors; JBCRG association, Organisation for Oncology and Translational Research, Kyoto Breast cancer Research Network. H.M. reports grants from NCI grant to Alliance/CALGB, during the conduct of the study. T.R. reports personal fees from Roche, during the conduct of the study. S.L. reports grants and other from Roche, during the conduct of the study; grants and other from AbbVie, grants and other from Celgene, other from Seattle Genetics, other from PriME/Medscape, personal fees from Chugai, grants and other from Daiichi-Sankyo, other from Lilly, other from Samsung, other from BMS, other from Puma, grants from Immunomedics, grants and other from AstraZeneca, other from Pierre Fabre, other from Merck, other from GlaxoSmithKline, other from EirGenix, grants and other from Bayer, grants and other from Amgen, grants and other from Novartis, grants and other from Pfizer, outside the submitted work; In addition, S.L. has a patent EP14153692.0 pending. All remaining authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: To evaluate the effects of the global coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on lung cancer trials, we surveyed investigators and collected aggregate enrollment data for lung cancer trials across the world before and during the pandemic., Methods: A Data Collection Survey collected aggregate monthly enrollment numbers from 294 global lung cancer trials for 2019 to 2020. A 64-question Action Survey evaluated the impact of COVID-19 on clinical trials and identified mitigation strategies implemented., Results: Clinical trial enrollment declined from 2019 to 2020 by 14% globally. Most reductions in enrollment occurred in April to June where we found significant decreases in individual site enrollment (p = 0.0309). Enrollment was not significantly different in October 2019 to December of 2019 versus 2020 (p = 0.25). The most frequent challenges identified by the Action Survey (N = 172) were fewer eligible patients (63%), decrease in protocol compliance (56%), and suspension of trials (54%). Patient-specific challenges included access to trial site (49%), ability to travel (54%), and willingness to visit the site (59%). The most frequent mitigation strategies included modified monitoring requirements (47%), telehealth visits (45%), modified required visits (25%), mail-order medications (25%), and laboratory (27%) and radiology (21%) tests at nonstudy facilities. Sites that felt the most effective mitigation strategies were telehealth visits (85%), remote patient-reported symptom collection (85%), off-site procedures (85%), and remote consenting (89%)., Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic created many challenges for lung cancer clinical trials conduct and enrollment. Mitigation strategies were used and, although the pandemic worsened, trial enrollment improved. A more flexible approach may improve enrollment and access to clinical trials, even beyond the pandemic., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Breast cancer represents an urgent global priority. While this is a universal issue, and as the burden of the disease is increasing globally, current estimates indicate that in the next couple of decades, much of the incidence and mortality related to breast cancer will be seen in underserved populations. The fragile and ill-prepared healthcare systems in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) need to address this challenge and find solutions with their limited resources. Significant disparities can be identified in stage at presentation as the ability to detect the disease in earlier stages is compromised in these scenarios leading to worse outcomes associated to late diagnoses. Furthermore, access to healthcare in general and to basic surgical, radiotherapy and systemic care is suboptimal additionally limiting treatment results. With a small portion of their budget allocated to healthcare, LMIC need to make the most of their resources prioritizing cost-effective strategies that could offer the best possible results. Countries that invest in women's health do develop into healthier, more educated, and importantly, more productive societies with benefits seen across generations. Finally, recognition of inequities should stimulate a concerted effort engaging all involved stakeholders to find context-adapted solutions to improve healthcare outcomes., (Copyright © 2022 The Author. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)