Search

We measure tissue blood flow markers in breast tumors during neoadjuvant chemotherapy and investigate their correlation to pathologic complete response in a pilot longitudinal patient study (n  =  4). Tumor blood flow is quantified optically by diffuse correlation spectroscopy (DCS), and tissue optical properties, blood oxygen saturation, and total hemoglobin concentration are derived from concurrent diffuse optical spectroscopic imaging (DOSI). The study represents the first longitudinal DCS measurement of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in humans over the entire course of treatment; it therefore offers a first correlation between DCS flow indices and pathologic complete response. The use of absolute optical properties measured by DOSI facilitates significant improvement of DCS blood flow calculation, which typically assumes optical properties based on literature values. Additionally, the combination of the DCS blood flow index and the tissue oxygen saturation from DOSI permits investigation of tissue oxygen metabolism. Pilot results from four patients suggest that lower blood flow in the lesion-bearing breast is correlated with pathologic complete response. Both absolute lesion blood flow and lesion flow relative to the contralateral breast exhibit potential for characterization of pathological response. This initial demonstration of the combined optical approach for chemotherapy monitoring provides incentive for more comprehensive studies in the future and can help power those investigations.

Purpose: We previously demonstrated the clinical significance of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in patients with HER2-negative breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). Here, we compared its predictive and prognostic value with cell-free DNA (cfDNA) concentration measured in the same samples from the same patients., Experimental Design: 145 patients with hormone receptor (HR)-positive/HER2-negative and 138 triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) with ctDNA data from a previous study were included in the analysis. Associations of serial cfDNA concentration with residual cancer burden (RCB) and distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS) were examined., Results: In TNBC, we observed a modest negative correlation between cfDNA concentration 3 weeks after treatment initiation and RCB, but none of the other timepoints showed significant correlation. In contrast, ctDNA was significantly positively correlated with RCB at all timepoints (all R > 0.3 and P < 0.05). In the HR-positive/HER2-negative group, cfDNA concentration did not associate with response to NAC, but survival analysis showed that high cfDNA shedders at pretreatment had a significantly worse DRFS than low shedders (hazard ratio, 2.12; P = 0.037). In TNBC, the difference in survival between high versus low cfDNA shedders at all timepoints was not statistically significant. In contrast, as previously reported, ctDNA at all timepoints was significantly correlated with DRFS in both subtypes., Conclusions: In TNBC, cfDNA concentrations during therapy were not strongly correlated with response or prognosis. In the HR-positive/HER2-negative group, pretreatment cfDNA concentration was prognostic for DRFS. Overall, the predictive and prognostic value of cfDNA concentration was more limited than that of ctDNA., (©2024 American Association for Cancer Research.)

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

Purpose: The neutralizing peptibody trebananib prevents angiopoietin-1 and angiopoietin-2 from binding with Tie2 receptors, inhibiting angiogenesis and proliferation. Trebananib was combined with paclitaxel±trastuzumab in the I-SPY2 breast cancer trial., Patients and Methods: I-SPY2, a phase II neoadjuvant trial, adaptively randomizes patients with high-risk, early-stage breast cancer to one of several experimental therapies or control based on receptor subtypes as defined by hormone receptor (HR) and HER2 status and MammaPrint risk (MP1, MP2). The primary endpoint is pathologic complete response (pCR). A therapy "graduates" if/when it achieves 85% Bayesian probability of success in a phase III trial within a given subtype. Patients received weekly paclitaxel (plus trastuzumab if HER2-positive) without (control) or with weekly intravenous trebananib, followed by doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide and surgery. Pathway-specific biomarkers were assessed for response prediction., Results: There were 134 participants randomized to trebananib and 133 to control. Although trebananib did not graduate in any signature [phase III probabilities: Hazard ratio (HR)-negative (78%), HR-negative/HER2-positive (74%), HR-negative/HER2-negative (77%), and MP2 (79%)], it demonstrated high probability of superior pCR rates over control (92%-99%) among these subtypes. Trebananib improved 3-year event-free survival (HR 0.67), with no significant increase in adverse events. Activation levels of the Tie2 receptor and downstream signaling partners predicted trebananib response in HER2-positive disease; high expression of a CD8 T-cell gene signature predicted response in HR-negative/HER2-negative disease., Conclusions: The angiopoietin (Ang)/Tie2 axis inhibitor trebananib combined with standard neoadjuvant therapy increased estimated pCR rates across HR-negative and MP2 subtypes, with probabilities of superiority >90%. Further study of Ang/Tie2 receptor axis inhibitors in validated, biomarker-predicted sensitive subtypes is warranted., (©2023 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Molecular subtyping of breast cancer is based mostly on HR/HER2 and gene expression-based immune, DNA repair deficiency, and luminal signatures. We extend this description via functional protein pathway activation mapping using pre-treatment, quantitative expression data from 139 proteins/phosphoproteins from 736 patients across 8 treatment arms of the I-SPY 2 Trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01042379). We identify predictive fit-for-purpose, mechanism-of-action-based signatures and individual predictive protein biomarker candidates by evaluating associations with pathologic complete response. Elevated levels of cyclin D1, estrogen receptor alpha, and androgen receptor S650 associate with non-response and are biomarkers for global resistance. We uncover protein/phosphoprotein-based signatures that can be utilized both for molecularly rationalized therapeutic selection and for response prediction. We introduce a dichotomous HER2 activation response predictive signature for stratifying triple-negative breast cancer patients to either HER2 or immune checkpoint therapy response as a model for how protein activation signatures provide a different lens to view the molecular landscape of breast cancer and synergize with transcriptomic-defined signatures., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests J.W. reports honoraria from DAVA Oncology, consults for Baylor College of Medicine, has ownership in Theralink, and is co-inventor of RPPA technology and p-HER2 and -EGFR response predictors with filed patents. C.Y. consults for NantOmics, LLC. M.C.L. reports support from Eisai, Genentech, GRAIL, Menarini Silicon Biosystems, Merck, Novartis, Seattle Genetics, and Tesaro. W.F.S. is a co-founder of Delphi Diagnostics and co-inventor/patent holder for a free residual cancer burden calculator, holds shares in IONIS Pharmaceuticals and Eiger Biopharmaceuticals, and is an unpaid advisor/steering committee member for Roche trials. H.S.R. reports support from Pfizer, Merck, Novartis, Lilly, Roche, Daiichi, Seattle Genetics, Macrogenics, Sermonix, Boehringer Ingelheim, Polyphor, AstraZeneca, Astellas, and Gilead; honoraria from Puma Biotechnology, Samsung, Chugai, Blueprint, and NAPO; and travel support from GE Healthcare. C.I. consults for Seattle Genetics, Genentech, AstraZeneca, Novartis, PUMA, Pfizer, and Esai. A.M.D. reports support from Novartis, Pfizer, Genentech, Calithera, and Menarini. D.Y. receives unrelated support from Boehringer Ingleheim and consults with Martell Diagnostics unrelated to this topic. P.R.P. reports leadership and stock in Immunonet BioSciences and honoraria from ASCO, Dava Oncology, OncLive (Courses), and Frontiers (Editorship); consults for Personalized Cancer Therapy, Immunonet BioSciences, Sirtex, CARIS Lifesciences, OncoPlex Diagnostics, Pfizer, Heron, Puma, AbbVie, BOLT, and SEAGEN; and is an occasional speaker for Genentech and Roche. G.L.H. is a partner and holds stock (<1%) in NanoString, Moderna, Gilead Sciences, and Exact Sciences. L.J.E. is an unpaid member of the board of directors of Quantum Leap Healthcare Collaborative, received grant support for the I-SPY 2 trial, is on the Blue Cross/Blue Shield Medical Advisory Panel and receives support for time and travel, and receives unrelated research support from Merck. L.J.v.V. is a part-time employee and stockholder of Agendia, NV. E.F.P. reports leadership, stock/ownership, and consulting/advisory and travel funds from Theralink Technologies, Inc., Perthera, Inc., and Ceres Nanosciences, Inc.; support from Ceres Nanosciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Abbvie, Symphogen, Deciphera Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Springworks Therapeutics, Inc, Mirati, Inc. and Genentech; patents/royalties from NIH; and patents/roylaties for anti-HER2/EGFR and anti-mTOR response predictors., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: There has been little consideration of genomic risk of recurrence by breast cancer subtype despite evidence of racial disparities in breast cancer outcomes., Objective: To evaluate associations between clinical trial end points, namely pathologic complete response (pCR) and distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS), and race and examine whether gene expression signatures are associated with outcomes by race., Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used data from the Investigation of Serial Studies to Predict Your Therapeutic Response With Imaging and Molecular Analysis 2 (I-SPY 2) multicenter clinical trial of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with novel agents and combinations for patients with previously untreated stage II/III breast cancer. Analyses were conducted of associations between race and short- and long-term outcomes, overall and by receptor subtypes, and their association with 28 expression biomarkers. The trial enrolled 990 female patients between March 30, 2010, and November 5, 2016, with a primary tumor size of 2.5 cm or greater and clinical or molecular high risk based on MammaPrint or hormone receptor (HR)-negative/ERBB2 (formerly HER2 or HER2/neu)-positive subtyping across 9 arms. This data analysis was performed between June 10, 2021, and October 20, 2022., Exposure: Race, tumor receptor subtypes, and genomic biomarker expression of early breast cancer., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were pCR and DRFS assessed by race, overall, and by tumor subtype using logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards regression models. The interaction between 28 expression biomarkers and race, considering pCR and DRFS overall and within subtypes, was also evaluated., Results: The analytic sample included 974 participants (excluding 16 self-reporting as American Indian or Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, or multiple races due to small sample sizes), including 68 Asian (7%), 120 Black (12%), and 786 White (81%) patients. Median (range) age at diagnosis was 47 (25-71) years for Asian, 49 (25-77) for Black, and 49 (23-73) years for White patients. The pCR rates were 32% (n = 22) for Asian, 30% for Black (n = 36), and 32% for White (n = 255) patients (P = .87). Black patients with HR-positive/ERBB2-negative tumors not achieving pCR had significantly worse DRFS than their White counterparts (hazard ratio, 2.28; 95% CI, 1.24-4.21; P = .01), with 5-year DRFS rates of 55% (n = 32) and 77% (n = 247), respectively. Black patients with HR-positive/ERBB2-negative tumors, compared with White patients, had higher expression of an interferon signature (mean [SD], 0.39 [0.87] and -0.10 [0.99]; P = .007) and, compared with Asian patients, had a higher mitotic score (mean [SD], 0.07 [1.08] and -0.69 [1.06]; P = .01) and lower estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor signature (mean [SD], 0.31 [0.90] and 1.08 [0.95]; P = .008). A transforming growth factor β signature had a significant association with race relative to pCR and DRFS, with a higher signature associated with lower pCR and worse DRFS outcomes among Black patients only., Conclusions and Relevance: The findings show that women with early high-risk breast cancer who achieve pCR have similarly good outcomes regardless of race, but Black women with HR-positive/ERBB2-negative tumors without pCR may have worse DRFS than White women, highlighting the need to develop and test novel biomarker-informed therapies in diverse populations.

Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis may improve early-stage breast cancer treatment via non-invasive tumor burden assessment. To investigate subtype-specific differences in the clinical significance and biology of ctDNA shedding, we perform serial personalized ctDNA analysis in hormone receptor (HR)-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in the I-SPY2 trial. ctDNA positivity rates before, during, and after NAC are higher in TNBC than in HR-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer patients. Early clearance of ctDNA 3 weeks after treatment initiation predicts a favorable response to NAC in TNBC only. Whereas ctDNA positivity associates with reduced distant recurrence-free survival in both subtypes. Conversely, ctDNA negativity after NAC correlates with improved outcomes, even in patients with extensive residual cancer. Pretreatment tumor mRNA profiling reveals associations between ctDNA shedding and cell cycle and immune-associated signaling. On the basis of these findings, the I-SPY2 trial will prospectively test ctDNA for utility in redirecting therapy to improve response and prognosis., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests R.W.S. owns stock in Pfizer Inc., AstraZeneca, and Moderna Inc. D.R., E.K., A.R., H.S., A.A., M.C.L., and M.R. are employees of and/or hold stock or stock options in Natera Inc. A.L.D. reports honoraria from the Department of Defense and the California Breast Cancer Research Program (CBCRP). M.C.L. reports funding from Eisai, Exact Sciences, Genentech, Genomic Health, GRAIL, Menarini Silicon Biosystems, Merck, Novartis, and Seattle Genetics; participation on advisory boards (no personal compensation) of Adela, Astra Zeneca, Celgene, Roche/Genentech, Genomic Health, GRAIL, Ionis, Merck, Pfizer, Seattle Genetics, Syndax; meeting support from Agena, Astra Zeneca, Celgene, Cynvenio, Genomic Health, GRAIL, Ionis, Menarini Silicon Biosystems, Merck, Pfizer. KA reports support from Merck, Seattle Genetics, Amgen, Genentech-Roche; Daiichi Sankyo, and AstraZeneca; participation on an advisory board for Genomic Health/Exact Sciences, Genentech-Roche, and a data and safety monitoring board for Seattle Genetics/Axio. A.J.C. reports funding from Novartis. A.F.-T. is an employee of Seagen. C.I. reports funding from Tesaro/GlaxoSmithKline, Seattle Genetics, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Genentech, Novartis, PUMA, Eisai, Sanofi, ION, and Gilead. R.N. reports funding from Arvinas, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Corcept Therapeutics, Genentech/Roche, Gilead/Immunomedics, Merck, OBI Pharma Inc., OncoSec Medical, Pfizer, Relay Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics, Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Taiho Pharmaceutica, BeyondSpring Inc., FUJIFILM Pharmaceuticals, Infintiy Pharmaceuticals Inc., ITeos Therapeutics, and Seagen. J.P. reports honoraria from Methods in Clinical Research. W.F.S. reports funding from AstraZeneca and Pfizer; owns stock in IONIS Pharmaceuticals and Eiger Biopharmaceuticals; and receives royalties for patents licensed by the MD Anderson Cancer Center to Delphi Diagnostics, Inc. D.Y. reports funding from Fusion Pharmaceutical, Boehringer Ingelheim, Martell Diagnostics, and Akston Biosciences. L.J.E. reports funding from Merck & Co.; participation on an advisory board for Blue Cross Blue Shield; and personal fees from UpToDate. A.M.D. reports funding from Pfizer, Genentech, Novartis, Inivata Ltd., and Calithera Biosciences. H.S.R. reports funding from Pfizer, Merck, Novartis, Lilly, Roche, Daiichi, Seattle Genetics, Macrogenics, Sermonix, Boehringer Ingelheim, Polyphor, AstraZeneca, Ayala, Astellas, Gilead, Puma, Samsung, Chugai, Blueprint, NAPO, and GE Healthcare. L.J.v.V. is a part-time employee and owns stock in Agendia. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Cancer and its treatments accelerate biological aging. This analysis tested the hypothesis that exercise and diet reduce oxidative stress and prevent telomere shortening in breast cancer survivors., Methods: In a 2 × 2 factorial design, 342 breast cancer survivors who were insufficiently physically active and had overweight or obesity at enrollment were randomized to one of four treatment groups for 52 weeks: control, exercise alone, diet alone, or exercise plus diet. The endpoints of this analysis were the change from baseline to week 52 in 8-iso-prostaglandin F 2α (8-iso-PGF 2α ) and lymphocyte telomere length., Results: Baseline telomere length was shorter than age-adjusted normative values (median difference: - 1.8 kilobases; 95% CI - 2.4, - 1.1); equivalent to 21 years (95% CI 17, 25) of accelerated chronological aging. Compared to control, exercise alone did not change 8-iso-PGF 2α [9.9%; 95% confidence interval (CI) - 1.0, 20.8] or telomere length (13.8%; 95% CI - 15.6, 43.3). Compared to control, diet alone was associated with reduced 8-iso-PGF 2α (- 10.5%; 95% CI - 19.5, - 1.5) but did not change telomere length (12.1%; 95% CI - 17.2, 41.3). Compared to control, exercise plus diet was associated with reduced 8-iso-PGF 2α (- 9.8%; 95% CI - 18.7, - 0.9) but did not change telomere length (- 8.5%; 95% CI - 32.1, 15.2). Change in 8-iso-PGF 2α did not correlate with change in telomere length (r = 0.07; 95% CI - 0.07, 0.20)., Conclusion: In breast cancer survivors, diet alone or exercise plus diet were associated with reduced oxidative stress but did not change telomere length. This analysis may inform future trials that aim to optimize healthy aging in cancer survivors., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Purpose: Cyclin D/CDK4/6 is critical in controlling the G1 to S checkpoint. CCND, the gene encoding cyclin D, is known to be amplified in a variety of solid tumors. Palbociclib is an oral CDK4/6 inhibitor, approved in advanced breast cancer in combination with endocrine therapy. We explored the efficacy of palbociclib in patients with nonbreast solid tumors containing an amplification in CCND1, 2, or 3., Patients and Methods: Patients with tumors containing a CCND1, 2, or 3 amplification and expression of the retinoblastoma protein were assigned to subprotocol Z1B and received palbociclib 125 mg once daily for 21 days of a 28-day cycle. Tumor response was assessed every two cycles., Results: Forty patients were assigned to subprotocol Z1B; 4 patients had outside assays identifying the CCND1, 2, or 3 amplification and were not confirmed centrally; 3 were ineligible and 2 were not treated (1 untreated patient was also ineligible), leaving 32 evaluable patients for this analysis. There were no partial responses; 12 patients (37.5%) had stable disease as best response. There were seven deaths on study, all during cycle 1 and attributable to disease progression. Median progression-free survival was 1.8 months. The most common toxicities were leukopenia (n = 21, 55%) and neutropenia (n = 19, 50%); neutropenia was the most common grade 3/4 event (n = 12, 32%)., Conclusions: Palbociclib was not effective at treating nonbreast solid tumors with a CCND1, 2, or 3 amplification in this cohort. These data do not support further investigation of single-agent palbociclib in tumors with CCND1, 2, or 3 amplification., (©2023 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

HSP90 inhibitors destabilize oncoproteins associated with cell cycle, angiogenesis, RAS-MAPK activity, histone modification, kinases and growth factors. We evaluated the HSP90-inhibitor ganetespib in combination with standard chemotherapy in patients with high-risk early-stage breast cancer. I-SPY2 is a multicenter, phase II adaptively randomized neoadjuvant (NAC) clinical trial enrolling patients with stage II-III breast cancer with tumors 2.5 cm or larger on the basis of hormone receptors (HR), HER2 and Mammaprint status. Multiple novel investigational agents plus standard chemotherapy are evaluated in parallel for the primary endpoint of pathologic complete response (pCR). Patients with HER2-negative breast cancer were eligible for randomization to ganetespib from October 2014 to October 2015. Of 233 women included in the final analysis, 140 were randomized to the standard NAC control; 93 were randomized to receive 150 mg/m 2 ganetespib every 3 weeks with weekly paclitaxel over 12 weeks, followed by AC. Arms were balanced for hormone receptor status (51-52% HR-positive). Ganetespib did not graduate in any of the biomarker signatures studied before reaching maximum enrollment. Final estimated pCR rates were 26% vs. 18% HER2-negative, 38% vs. 22% HR-negative/HER2-negative, and 15% vs. 14% HR-positive/HER2-negative for ganetespib vs control, respectively. The predicted probability of success in phase 3 testing was 47% HER2-negative, 72% HR-negative/HER2-negative, and 19% HR-positive/HER2-negative. Ganetespib added to standard therapy is unlikely to yield substantially higher pCR rates in HER2-negative breast cancer compared to standard NAC, and neither HSP90 pathway nor replicative stress expression markers predicted response. HSP90 inhibitors remain of limited clinical interest in breast cancer, potentially in other clinical settings such as HER2-positive disease or in combination with anti-PD1 neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple negative breast cancer.Trial registration: www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01042379., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Difference in pathologic complete response (pCR) rate after neoadjuvant chemotherapy does not capture the impact of treatment on downstaging of residual cancer in the experimental arm. We developed a method to compare the entire distribution of residual cancer burden (RCB) values between clinical trial arms to better quantify the differences in cytotoxic efficacy of treatments., Patients and Methods: The Treatment Efficacy Score (TES) reflects the area between the weighted cumulative distribution functions of RCB values from two trial arms. TES is based on a modified Kolmogorov-Smirnov test with added weight function to capture the importance of high RCB values and uses the area under the difference between two distribution functions as a statistical metric. The higher the TES the greater the shift to lower RCB values in the experimental arm. We developed TES from the durvalumab + olaparib arm (n = 72) and corresponding controls (n = 282) of the I-SPY2 trial. The 11 other experimental arms and control cohorts (n = 947) were used as validation sets to assess the performance of TES. We compared TES to Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Mann-Whitney, and Fisher's exact tests to identify trial arms with higher cytotoxic efficacy and assessed associations with trial arm level survival differences. Significance was assessed with a permutation test., Results: In the validation set, TES identified arms with a higher pCR rate but was more accurate to identify regimens as less effective if treatment did not reduce the frequency of high RCB values, even if the pCR rate improved. The correlation between TES and survival was higher than the correlation between the pCR rate difference and survival., Conclusions: TES quantifies the difference between the entire distribution of pathologic responses observed in trial arms and could serve as a better early surrogate to predict trial arm level survival differences than pCR rate difference alone., Competing Interests: Disclosure RN: Consulting from Cardinal Health, Clovis, Fujifilm, G1 Therapeutics, Genentech, Immunomedics/Gilead, iTeos, MacroGenics, Merck, OncoSec, Pfizer, Seattle Genetics; Research Funding to Institution from Arvinas, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Corcept Therapeutics, Genentech/Roche, Immunomedics/Gilead, Merck, OBI Pharma, Odonate Therapeutics, OncoSec, Pfizer, Seattle Genetics, Taiho. BAP: Consulting from BioAtla Inc, Samumed LLC, Dare Biosciences; Stock of Merck; Research Funding to Institution from Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Genentech/Roche, Oncternal. KSA: Grants from Seattle Genetics, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca. RKM: Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board of Genomic Health/Exact Sciences, Genentech-Roche, Seattle Genetics/Axio; Grants from Seattle Genetics, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca; Support from Quantum Leap Healthcare Collaborative, Merck, Seattle Genetics, Amgen, Genentech-Roche. JCB: Research Funding from Eli Lilly. MCL: Funding from Eisai, Exact Sciences, Genentech, Genomic Health, GRAIL, Menarini Silicon Biosystems, Merck, Novartis, Seattle Genetics, Tesaro; Support for attending meetings and/or travel from AstraZeneca, Genomic Health, Ionis; Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board of AstraZeneca, Celgene, Roche/Genentech, Genomic Health, GRAIL, Ionis, Merck, Pfizer, Seattle Genetics, Syndax. ASC: Institutional Research Funds from Novartis. HSR: Funding from Pfizer, Merck, Novartis, Lilly, Roche, Daiichi, Seattle Genetics, MacroGenics, Sermonix, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Ayala, Gilead, and Ayala; Honoraria from Puma, Merck, Samsung, NAPO. JP: Honoraria from Methods in Clinical Research; Support for attending meetings from ASCO, SABCS; Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board of University of Wisconsin Specialized Programs of Research Excellence, VIVLI, Quantum Leap Healthcare Collaborative, Patient Centered Outcomes Institute. DAB: Employee/Leadership, Stock/Ownership, and Consulting/Advisory Board of Berry Consultants; Research Funding from Daiichi Sankyo; Travel/Accommodations/Expenses from Berry Consultants. LV: part-time employee and stockholder of Agendia NV. WFS: Stock owner in Delphi Diagnostics; Patent - “Method of measuring residual cancer and predicting patient survival” (US Patent 7711494B2). LE: Research Funding from Merck; Medical Advisory Panel member of Blue Cross Blue Shield; Website Author of UpToDate. LP: Consulting fees and honoraria from Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Merck, Novartis, Genentech, Eisai, Pieris, Immunomedics, Seattle Genetics, Almac, Biotheranostics, and Natera. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 European Society for Medical Oncology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Insufficient physical activity and obesity are associated with an increased risk of cancer recurrence and death in breast cancer survivors. Sex steroid hormones may mediate these associations. This study tested the hypothesis that exercise and diet, as compared to control, favorably change sex steroid hormones. This analysis of data from a subset of participants in a 2 × 2 factorial trial compares 269 postmenopausal breast cancer survivors who were insufficiently physically active and had overweight or obesity and were randomized to one of four treatment groups for 52 weeks: control, exercise alone, diet alone, or exercise plus diet. Secondary sex steroid hormone endpoints included estradiol, sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG), and testosterone. Treatment effects were quantified using a mixed model for repeated measures. Compared to control, exercise alone did not significantly change estradiol (-1.9%; 95% CI: -12.6, 8.8), SHBG (2.4%; 95% CI: -9.9, 14.6), or testosterone (1.2%; 95% CI: -12.2, 14.5). Compared to control, diet alone did not significantly change estradiol (-7.8%; 95% CI: -17.6, 1.9), SHBG (8.2%; 95% CI: -4.2, 20.6), or testosterone (-0.8%; 95% CI: -13.6, 12.0). Compared to control, exercise plus diet did not significantly change estradiol (-6.3%; 95% CI: -16.3, 3.6), SHBG (8.8%; 95% CI: -4.0, 21.7), or testosterone (-5.3%; 95% CI: -18.0, 7.4). In postmenopausal breast cancer survivors who were insufficiently physically active and had overweight or obesity, randomization to exercise alone, diet alone, or exercise plus diet did not statistically significantly change sex steroid hormone concentrations at week 52.

Using pre-treatment gene expression, protein/phosphoprotein, and clinical data from the I-SPY2 neoadjuvant platform trial (NCT01042379), we create alternative breast cancer subtypes incorporating tumor biology beyond clinical hormone receptor (HR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2) status to better predict drug responses. We assess the predictive performance of mechanism-of-action biomarkers from ∼990 patients treated with 10 regimens targeting diverse biology. We explore >11 subtyping schemas and identify treatment-subtype pairs maximizing the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate over the population. The best performing schemas incorporate Immune, DNA repair, and HER2/Luminal phenotypes. Subsequent treatment allocation increases the overall pCR rate to 63% from 51% using HR/HER2-based treatment selection. pCR gains from reclassification and improved patient selection are highest in HR + subsets (>15%). As new treatments are introduced, the subtyping schema determines the minimum response needed to show efficacy. This data platform provides an unprecedented resource and supports the usage of response-based subtypes to guide future treatment prioritization., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests C.Y. consulted for NantOmics LLC. J.W. reports honoraria from DAVA Oncology; consults for Baylor College of Medicine; has ownership in Theralink; and is co-inventor of the RPPA technology, and phospho-HER2 and -EGFR response predictors with filed patents. M.C.L. reports support from Eisai, Genentech, GRAIL, Menarini Silicon Biosystems, Merck, Novartis, Seattle Genetics, and Tesaro. P.P. reports leadership and stock in Immunonet BioSciences; honoraria from ASCO, Dava Oncology, OncLive (courses), and Frontiers (editorship); consulting for Personalized Cancer Therapy, Immunonet BioSciences, Sirtex, CARIS Lifesciences, OncoPlex Diagnostics, Pfizer, Heron, Puma, AbbVie, BOLT, and SEAGEN; and is an occasional speaker for Genentech and Roche. W.F.S. is a co-founder of Delphi Diagnostics; is a co-inventor/patent holder for a (free) residual cancer burden calculator; holds shares in IONIS Pharmaceuticals and Eiger Biopharmaceuticals; and is an unpaid advisor/steering committee for Roche trials. H.S.R. reports support from Pfizer, Merck, Novartis, Lilly, Genentech, Odonate, Daiichi, Seattle Genetics, Eisai, Macrogenics, Sermonix, Boehringer Ingelheim, Polyphor, AstraZeneca, and Immunomedics; and has received honoraria from Puma Biotechnology, Mylan, and Samsung. C.I. reports consulting for Seattle Genetics, Genentech, AstraZeneca, Novartis, PUMA, Pfizer, and Esai. A.M.D. reports honoraria or consulting for Pfizer and Context Therapeutics and reports support from Novartis, Pfizer, Genentech, Calithera, and Menarini. D.Y. reports unrelated support from Boehringer Ingleheim. D.A.B. is co-owner of Berry Consultants LLC, a company that designs adaptive clinical trials (including I-SPY2). L.P. reports consulting fees and honoraria from AstraZeneca, Merck, Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genentech, Eisai, Pieris, Immunomedics, Seattle Genetics, Clovis, Syndax, H3Bio, and Daiichi. E.F.P. reports leadership, stock/ownership, consulting/advisory, and travel funds from Perthera and Ceres Nanosciences; stock and consulting/advisory for Avant Diagnostics; consulting/advisory for AZGen; support from Ceres Nanosciences, GlaxoSmithKline, AbbVie, Symphogen, and Genentech; patents/royalties from NIH; and filed patents for phospho-HER2 and -EGFR response predictors. L.J.E. is an unpaid member of the board of directors of Quantum Leap Healthcare Collaborative (QLHC) and has received grant support from QLHC for the I-SPY2 trial; is on the Blue Cross/Blue Shield Medical Advisory Panel and receives reimbursement for her time and travel; and received unrelated research support from Merck. L.J.v.V. is a co-inventor of the MammaPrint signature and a part-time employee and stockholder of Agendia NV., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Enthusiasm for precision oncology may obscure the psychosocial and ethical considerations associated with the implementation of tumor genetic sequencing., Methods: Patients with advanced cancer undergoing tumor-only genetic sequencing in the National Cancer Institute Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice (MATCH) trial were randomized to a web-based genetic education intervention or usual care. The primary outcomes were knowledge, anxiety, depression, and cancer-specific distress collected at baseline (T0), posteducation (T1) and after results (T2). Two-sided, 2-sample t tests and univariate and multivariable generalized linear models were used., Results: Five hundred ninety-four patients (80% from NCI Community Oncology Research Program sites) were randomized to the web intervention (n = 293) or usual care (n = 301) before the receipt of results. Patients in the intervention arm had greater increases in knowledge (P for T1-T0 < .0001; P for T2-T0 = .003), but there were no significant differences in distress outcomes. In unadjusted moderator analyses, there was a decrease in cancer-specific distress among women (T0-T1) in the intervention arm but not among men. Patients with lower health literacy in the intervention arm had greater increases in cancer-specific distress and less decline in general anxiety (T0-T1) and greater increases in depression (T0-T2) in comparison with those receiving usual care., Conclusions: Web-based genetic education before tumor-only sequencing results increases patient understanding and reduces distress in women. Refinements to the intervention could benefit low-literacy groups and men., (© 2021 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Cancer Society.)

Background: Previous studies have independently validated the prognostic relevance of residual cancer burden (RCB) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. We used results from several independent cohorts in a pooled patient-level analysis to evaluate the relationship of RCB with long-term prognosis across different phenotypic subtypes of breast cancer, to assess generalisability in a broad range of practice settings., Methods: In this pooled analysis, 12 institutes and trials in Europe and the USA were identified by personal communications with site investigators. We obtained participant-level RCB results, and data on clinical and pathological stage, tumour subtype and grade, and treatment and follow-up in November, 2019, from patients (aged ≥18 years) with primary stage I-III breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery. We assessed the association between the continuous RCB score and the primary study outcome, event-free survival, using mixed-effects Cox models with the incorporation of random RCB and cohort effects to account for between-study heterogeneity, and stratification to account for differences in baseline hazard across cancer subtypes defined by hormone receptor status and HER2 status. The association was further evaluated within each breast cancer subtype in multivariable analyses incorporating random RCB and cohort effects and adjustments for age and pretreatment clinical T category, nodal status, and tumour grade. Kaplan-Meier estimates of event-free survival at 3, 5, and 10 years were computed for each RCB class within each subtype., Findings: We analysed participant-level data from 5161 patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy between Sept 12, 1994, and Feb 11, 2019. Median age was 49 years (IQR 20-80). 1164 event-free survival events occurred during follow-up (median follow-up 56 months [IQR 0-186]). RCB score was prognostic within each breast cancer subtype, with higher RCB score significantly associated with worse event-free survival. The univariable hazard ratio (HR) associated with one unit increase in RCB ranged from 1·55 (95% CI 1·41-1·71) for hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative patients to 2·16 (1·79-2·61) for the hormone receptor-negative, HER2-positive group (with or without HER2-targeted therapy; p<0·0001 for all subtypes). RCB score remained prognostic for event-free survival in multivariable models adjusted for age, grade, T category, and nodal status at baseline: the adjusted HR ranged from 1·52 (1·36-1·69) in the hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative group to 2·09 (1·73-2·53) in the hormone receptor-negative, HER2-positive group (p<0·0001 for all subtypes)., Interpretation: RCB score and class were independently prognostic in all subtypes of breast cancer, and generalisable to multiple practice settings. Although variability in hormone receptor subtype definitions and treatment across patients are likely to affect prognostic performance, the association we observed between RCB and a patient's residual risk suggests that prospective evaluation of RCB could be considered to become part of standard pathology reporting after neoadjuvant therapy., Funding: National Cancer Institute at the US National Institutes of Health., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests AKG reports personal fees from Sinochips Diagnostics. CC reports institutional funding from Genentech, Roche, Servier, and AstraZeneca; and participation in a data and safety monitoring advisory board for iMED External Science Panel. CY reports institutional funding from Quantum Leap Healthcare Collaborative. DC reports institutional research funding from Novartis, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Roche, Eli-Lilly, Puma Biotechnology, Daiichi Sankyo, Synthon, Seagen, Zymeworks, Elsevier, European Cancer Organisation, Celgene, Succinct Medical Communications, Prima BioMed (now Immutep), Oncolytics Biotech (US), Celldex Therapeutics, San Antonio Breast Cancer Consortium, Highfield Communication, Samsung Bioepis, prIME Oncology, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Prima BioMed (now Immutep), RTI Health Solutions, and Eisai. WFS owns stocks in Delphi Diagnostics; and reports the patent “method of measuring residual cancer and predicting patient survival” (US Patent and Trademark Office [USPTO] number 7711494B2). GSS reports institutional research funding from AstraZeneca, Merck, Novartis, and Roche. HE reports institutional research funding from Roche Sanofi-Aventis; is a consultant for Daiichi-Sankyo, AstraZeneca, Intas Pharmaceuticals, and prIME Oncology; and reports travel support from Daiichi-Sankyo, AstraZeneca, Intas Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer, and Amgen. JEA reports institutional research funding from AstraZeneca; and honoraria from Pfizer and Eisai. JMSB reports grants from Thermo Fisher Scientific, Geoptix, Agendia, NanoString Technologies, Stratifyer, and Biotheranostics; is a consultant for Insight Genetics, BioNTech, Biotheranostics, Pfizer, RNA Diagnostics, and OncoXchange; reports honoraria from NanoString Technology, Oncology Education, and Biotheranostics; reports travel support from Biotheranostics and Nanostring Technologies; reports patents “histone gene module predicts anthracycline benefit” (Patent Cooperation Treaty [PCT] number CA2016/000247); “95-gene signature of residual risk following endocrine treatment” (PCT number CA2016/000304); “immune gene signature predicts anthracycline benefit” (PCT number CA2016/000305); and applied for patents “methods and devices for predicting anthracycline treatment efficacy” (USPTO application number 15/325,472; European Patent Office number 15822898.1; Canada, not yet assigned) and “systems, devices and methods for constructing and using a biomarker” (USPTO application number 15/328,108; European Patent Office number 15824751.0; Canada, not yet assigned). JCB reports institutional research funding from Eli Lilly. LP is a consultant for and receives honoraria from AstraZeneca, Merck, Novartis, Genentech, Eisai, Pieris, Immunomedics, Seattle Genetics, Almac, H3 Biomedicine, Clovis, and Syndax; and reports the patent “method of measuring residual cancer and predicting patient survival” (US Patent Number 7711494B2). LaH reports individual research grants from Roche and Sanofi-Aventis; and travel support from Roche, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, and Sanofi-Aventis. LJE reports institutional research funding from Merck; participation in an advisory board for Blue Cross Blue Shield; and personal fees from UpToDate. LJvV is an employee of and owns stock in Agendia. MPG reports individual research grants from Pfizer, Sermonix, and Eli Lilly; and is a consultant for Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Biotheranostics, Sermonix, Context Therapeutics, and Eagle Therapeutics. MM reports grants from Roche, Puma, and Novartis; is a consultant for AstraZeneca, Amgen, Glaxo, Taiho Oncology, Roche, Novartis, PharmaMar, Eli Lilly, Puma Biotechnology, Daiichi Sankyo, and Pfizer; reports honoraria from AstraZeneca, Amgen, Roche, Novartis, and Pfizer; and reports personal fees from Pfizer and Eli Lilly. PS reports institutional research funding from Novartis, Merck, and Bristol Myers Squibb; and is a consultant for Merck, Novartis, Seattle Genetics, Gilead Immunomedics, AstraZeneca, and ExactSciences. SL-T has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Novartis, Roche, Pfizer, Celgene, Pierre-Fabre, Eisai, and Eli Lilly; reports honoraria from Eli Lilly; and reports travel support from Novartis, Celgene, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Roche, and Pfizer. SBE reports institutional research funding from Pfizer. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

HER2-targeted therapy dramatically improves outcomes in early breast cancer. Here we report the results of two HER2-targeted combinations in the neoadjuvant I-SPY2 phase 2 adaptive platform trial for early breast cancer at high risk of recurrence: ado-trastuzumab emtansine plus pertuzumab (T-DM1/P) and paclitaxel, trastuzumab and pertuzumab (THP). Eligible women have >2.5 cm clinical stage II/III HER2 + breast cancer, adaptively randomized to T-DM1/P, THP, or a common control arm of paclitaxel/trastuzumab (TH), followed by doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide, then surgery. Both T-DM1/P and THP arms 'graduate' in all subtypes: predicted pCR rates are 63%, 72% and 33% for T-DM1/P (n = 52), THP (n = 45) and TH (n = 31) respectively. Toxicity burden is similar between arms. Degree of HER2 pathway signaling and phosphorylation in pretreatment biopsy specimens are associated with response to both T-DM1/P and THP and can further identify highly responsive HER2 + tumors to HER2-directed therapy. This may help identify patients who can safely de-escalate cytotoxic chemotherapy without compromising excellent outcome., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Importance: Residual cancer burden (RCB) distributions may improve the interpretation of efficacy in neoadjuvant breast cancer trials., Objective: To compare RCB distributions between randomized control and investigational treatments within subtypes of breast cancer and explore the relationship with survival., Design, Setting, and Participants: The I-SPY2 is a multicenter, platform adaptive, randomized clinical trial in the US that compares, by subtype, investigational agents in combination with chemotherapy vs chemotherapy alone in adult women with stage 2/3 breast cancer at high risk of early recurrence. Investigational treatments graduated in a prespecified subtype if there was 85% or greater predicted probability of higher rate of pathologic complete response (pCR) in a confirmatory, 300-patient, 1:1 randomized, neoadjuvant trial in that subtype. Evaluation of a secondary end point was reported from the 10 investigational agents tested in the I-SPY2 trial from March 200 through 2016, and analyzed as of September 9, 2020. The analysis plan included modeling of RCB within subtypes defined by hormone receptor (HR) and ERBB2 status and compared control treatments with investigational treatments that graduated and those that did not graduate., Interventions: Neoadjuvant paclitaxel plus/minus 1 of several investigational agents for 12 weeks, then 12 weeks of cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin chemotherapy followed by surgery., Main Outcomes and Measures: Residual cancer burden (pathological measure of residual disease) and event-free survival (EFS)., Results: A total of 938 women (mean [SD] age, 49 [11] years; 66 [7%] Asian, 103 [11%] Black, and 750 [80%] White individuals) from the first 10 investigational agents were included, with a median follow-up of 52 months (IQR, 29 months). Event-free survival worsened significantly per unit of RCB in every subtype of breast cancer (HR-positive/ERBB2-negative: hazard ratio [HZR], 1.75; 95% CI, 1.45-2.16; HR-positive/ERBB2-positive: HZR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.18-2.05; HR-negative/ERBB2-positive: HZR, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.64-3.49; HR-negative/ERBB2-negative: HZR, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.71-2.31). Prognostic information from RCB was similar from treatments that graduated (HZR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.57-2.55; 254 [27%]), did not graduate (HZR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.61-2.17; 486 [52%]), or were control (HZR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.42-2.26; 198 [21%]). Investigational treatments significantly lowered RCB in HR-negative/ERBB2-negative (graduated and nongraduated treatments) and ERBB2-positive subtypes (graduated treatments), with improved EFS (HZR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.41-0.93) in the exploratory analysis., Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, the prognostic significance of RCB was consistent regardless of subtype and treatment. Effective neoadjuvant treatments shifted the distribution of RCB in addition to increasing pCR rate and appeared to improve EFS. Using a standardized quantitative method to measure response advances the interpretation of efficacy., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01042379.

Background: Obesity is a chronic, relapsing, and progressive disease; it is associated with poor health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in survivors of breast cancer., Methods: In this 2 × 2 factorial trial, 351 survivors of breast cancer with overweight or obesity were randomized to 1 of 4 treatment groups for 52 weeks: control, exercise alone, diet alone, or exercise plus diet. HRQOL end points were measured at baseline and at week 52 using the 36-Item Medical Outcomes Survey-Short Form (SF-36). Repeated measures analysis of covariance quantified the estimated treatment difference (ETD)., Results: At baseline, participants had a mean (SD) age of 59.4 years (8.7), body mass index of 34.0 kg/m 2 (5.9), and 71 participants (20.2%) self-reported fair or poor general health. After 52 weeks, compared with control, the exercise plus diet improved the physical health summary score (ETD: 5.39; 95% CI, 0.55-10.22); exercise alone (ETD: -1.91; 95% CI, -6.60 to 2.79) and diet alone (ETD: 3.16; 95% CI, -1.52 to 7.83) did not change the physical health summary score. Compared with control, exercise alone (ETD: -0.27; 95% CI, -6.60 to 2.79), diet alone (ETD: 3.25; 95% CI, -1.41 to 7.91), and the exercise plus diet (ETD: 1.75; 95% CI, -2.90 to 6.39) did not change the mental health summary score. Exercise alone did not impact any HRQOL subscale; diet alone improved the vitality subscale; exercise plus diet improved the physical functioning, role-physical and vitality subscales., Conclusion: In survivors of breast cancer with overweight or obesity, exercise plus diet improved select HRQOL end points at week 52., (© 2021 American Cancer Society.)

Purpose: Patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and residual invasive disease (RD) after completion of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) have a high-risk for recurrence, which is reduced by adjuvant capecitabine. Preclinical models support the use of platinum agents in the TNBC basal subtype. The EA1131 trial hypothesized that invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) would not be inferior but improved in patients with basal subtype TNBC treated with adjuvant platinum compared with capecitabine., Patients and Methods: Patients with clinical stage II or III TNBC with ≥ 1 cm RD in the breast post-NAC were randomly assigned to receive platinum (carboplatin or cisplatin) once every 3 weeks for four cycles or capecitabine 14 out of 21 days every 3 weeks for six cycles. TNBC subtype (basal v nonbasal) was determined by PAM50 in the residual disease. A noninferiority design with superiority alternative was chosen, assuming a 4-year iDFS of 67% with capecitabine., Results: Four hundred ten of planned 775 participants were randomly assigned to platinum or capecitabine between 2015 and 2021. After median follow-up of 20 months and 120 iDFS events (61% of full information) in the 308 (78%) patients with basal subtype TNBC, the 3-year iDFS for platinum was 42% (95% CI, 30 to 53) versus 49% (95% CI, 39 to 59) for capecitabine. Grade 3 and 4 toxicities were more common with platinum agents. The Data and Safety Monitoring Committee recommended stopping the trial as it was unlikely that further follow-up would show noninferiority or superiority of platinum., Conclusion: Platinum agents do not improve outcomes in patients with basal subtype TNBC RD post-NAC and are associated with more severe toxicity when compared with capecitabine. Participants had a lower than expected 3-year iDFS regardless of study treatment, highlighting the need for better therapies in this high-risk population., Competing Interests: Ingrid A. MayerConsulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, AstraZeneca, Lilly, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Immunomedics, Macrogenics, Pfizer, AbbVie, Seattle Genetics, Puma Biotechnology, Cyclacel, Blueprint MedicinesResearch Funding: Novartis, Pfizer, Genentech Carlos L. ArteagaLeadership: American Association for Cancer ResearchStock and Other Ownership Interests: Provista Diagnostics, Y-Trap IncConsulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, Lilly, Sanofi, Radius Health, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Puma Biotechnology, Merck, H3 Biomedicine, Symphogen, Origimed, Petra Pharma, Third Rock Ventures, Immunomedics, Daiichi Sankyo, Athenex, G1 Therapeutics, Clovis OncologyResearch Funding: Puma Biotechnology, Pfizer, Lilly, Radius Health, Takeda, BayerOther Relationship: Susan G. Komen for the Cure William F. SymmansStock and Other Ownership Interests: ISIS Pharmaceuticals, Nuvera Biosciences, Delphi Diagnostics, Eiger BioPharmaceuticalsConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck, Almac DiagnosticsPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Intellectual Property, Intellectual Property (expired)Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Luminex, MerckUncompensated Relationships: Delphi Diagnostics Ben H. ParkLeadership: LoxoStock and Other Ownership Interests: Loxo, CelcuityHonoraria: AstraZenecaConsulting or Advisory Role: Horizon Discovery, Foundation Medicine, Loxo, Casdin Capital, H3 Biomedicine, Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine, Lilly, Celcuity, Sermonix Pharmaceuticals, PathovaxResearch Funding: AbbVie, Pfizer, GE Healthcare, LillyPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Royalties paid through inventions at Johns Hopkins University by Horizon Discovery LtdTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Lilly, LoxoUncompensated Relationships: Tempus Amye J. TevaarwerkOther Relationship: Epic Systems Karen L. SmithStock and Other Ownership Interests: AbbVie, Abbott LaboratoriesHonoraria: ASiM CMEResearch Funding: Pfizer Margaret BlockConsulting or Advisory Role: Theranostics Health Bernard TawfikOther Relationship: Ipsen Lisa E. FlaumConsulting or Advisory Role: Seattle Genetics, NovartisSpeakers' Bureau: Seattle Genetics, Novartis, AstraZeneca Erica L. MayerConsulting or Advisory Role: Lilly, Novartis, Sanofi, Eisai, AstraZenecaResearch Funding: Pfizer William M. SikovHonoraria: UpToDateSpeakers' Bureau: Lilly, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Seagen Lynne I. WagnerStock and Other Ownership Interests: Johnson & Johnson, Lilly, Gilead SciencesConsulting or Advisory Role: Celgene, AthenexTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Celgene Angela M. DeMicheleResearch Funding: Pfizer, Genentech, Calithera Biosciences, Novartis Joseph A. SparanoStock and Other Ownership Interests: MetastatConsulting or Advisory Role: Genentech/Roche, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Lilly, Celldex, Pfizer, Prescient Therapeutics, Juno Therapeutics, Merrimack, Adgero Biopharmaceuticals, Cardinal Health, GlaxoSmithKline, CStone Pharmaceuticals, Epic Sciences, Daiichi Sankyo, BMSiSpeakers' Bureau: Eisai, CertaraResearch Funding: Prescient Therapeutics, Deciphera, Genentech/Roche, Merck, Novartis, Merrimack, Radius Health, Olema PharmaceuticalsTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Menarini Silicon Biosystems, Roche/Genentech, Adgero Biopharmaceuticals, Myriad Genetics, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Rhenium Medical Antonio C. WolffConsulting or Advisory Role: Ionis PharmaceuticalsPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Antonio Wolff has been named as inventor on one or more issued patents or pending patent applications relating to methylation in breast cancer, and has assigned his rights to JHU, and participates in a royalty sharing agreement with JHUOpen Payments Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/357301/summary Kathy D. MillerConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck, Genentech/Roche, Athenex, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb/CelgeneResearch Funding: Taiho Pharmaceutical, Novartis, Seattle Genetics, Pfizer, Astex Pharmaceuticals, British Biotech, CytomX TherapeuticsNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Purpose: Obesity increases the risk of cancer recurrence and death in survivors of breast cancer. This study tested the hypothesis that exercise alone, diet alone, and the combination of exercise plus diet reduce body weight and improve body composition in survivors of breast cancer., Methods: In this 2 × 2 factorial trial, 351 survivors of breast cancer with overweight or obesity were randomized to one of four treatment groups for 52 weeks: control, exercise alone, diet alone, or exercise plus diet. Endpoints included body weight and body composition measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry., Results: After 52 weeks, compared with control, diet alone [- 5.39 kg (95% CI - 7.24, - 3.55);- 6.0% (95% CI - 8.0, - 3.9)] and exercise plus diet [- 6.68 kg (95% CI - 8.46, - 4.90);- 7.4% (95% CI - 9.4, - 5.4)] reduced body weight; exercise alone did not change body weight. Compared with control, diet alone [- 3.59 kg (95% CI - 5.00, - 2.17)] and exercise plus diet [- 4.28 kg (95% CI - 5.71, - 2.84)] reduced fat mass; exercise alone did not change fat mass. Compared with control, diet alone [- 0.82 kg (95% CI - 1.50, - 0.15)] and exercise plus diet [- 1.24 kg (95% CI - 1.92, - 0.56)] reduced lean mass; exercise alone did not change lean mass. Compared with control, exercise alone, diet alone, and exercise plus diet did not change bone mineral density., Conclusion: In survivors of breast cancer with overweight or obesity, diet alone or diet plus exercise produced clinically meaningful weight loss at week 52. The majority of weight loss was fat mass., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

The combination of PD-L1 inhibitor durvalumab and PARP inhibitor olaparib added to standard paclitaxel neoadjuvant chemotherapy (durvalumab/olaparib/paclitaxel [DOP]) was investigated in the phase II I-SPY2 trial of stage II/III HER2-negative breast cancer. Seventy-three participants were randomized to DOP and 299 to standard of care (paclitaxel) control. DOP increased pathologic complete response (pCR) rates in all HER2-negative (20%-37%), hormone receptor (HR)-positive/HER2-negative (14%-28%), and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) (27%-47%). In HR-positive/HER2-negative cancers, MammaPrint ultra-high (MP2) cases benefited selectively from DOP (pCR 64% versus 22%), no benefit was seen in MP1 cancers (pCR 9% versus 10%). Overall, 12.3% of patients in the DOP arm experienced immune-related grade 3 adverse events versus 1.3% in control. Gene expression signatures associated with immune response were positively associated with pCR in both arms, while a mast cell signature was associated with non-pCR. DOP has superior efficacy over standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-negative breast cancer, particularly in a highly sensitive subset of high-risk HR-positive/HER2-negative patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests L. Pusztai has received consulting fees and honoraria from Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Merck, Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb Genentech, Eisai, Pieris, Immunomedics, Seattle Genetics, Clovis, Syndax, H3Bio, and Daiichi, and Nanostring research support to his institution from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Merck, Seagen, and Bristol Myers Squibb. H.S. Han: research funding to institution from GlaxoSmithKline, Abbvie, Prescient, G1 Therapeutics, Marker Therapeutics, Novartis, Horizon Pharma, Quantum Leap Healthcare Collaborative, Pfizer, Seattle Genetics, Arvinas, Zymeworks; grants from the Department of Defense, Speaker’s Bureau - Lilly. E. String-Reasor: Consulting Lilly; Susan G. Komen, BCRFA, V Foundation research funding. J.C. Boughey: research funding from Eli Lilly. A.J. Chien: institutional research funding from Seagen, Merck, Amgen, and Puma. R. Nanda: research funding from Arvinas, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Corcept Therapeutics, Genentech/Roche, Immunomedics/Gilead, Merck, OBI Pharm, Inc., Odonate Therapeutics, OncoSec, Pfizer, Taiho, SeaGen. A.S. Clark: research funding from Novartis. K. Kalinsky has disclosed advisory/consulting funding from Eli-Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis, Eisai, AstraZeneca, Immunomedics, Merck, Seattle Genetics, OncoSec, 4D Pharma, DaicchiSankyo, and Cyclocel. Dr. Kalinsky also reports financial disclosures for his spouse (stock): Grail, Array BioPharma and Pfizer (prior employee). C. Isaacs has received consulting fees from Seattle Genetics, Genentech, AstraZeneca, Novartis, PUMA, Pfizer, and Esai. A. Thomas declares research support (paid to the institution) from Seattle Genetics, Sanofi; stock ownership in Johnson and Johnson, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, and Gilead; and participation in DSMB (BeyondSpring Pharmaceuticals; and royalties from Up-to-Date). A. Forero-Torres became a Seattle Genetics employee in 2018, and holds stock option from this employment. M.C. Liu received clinical trial research support from Eisai, Genentech, GRAIL, Menarini Silicon Biosystems, Merck, Novartis, Seattle Genetics, and Tesaro. M. Melisko received research funding to the institution from AstraZeneca, Novartis, KCRN Research, and Puma, and consulting fees from Biotheranostics, their spouse received honoraria from Genentech and has stock ownership in Merrimack. E.F. Petricoin: leadership roles in Perthera, Ceres Nanosciences; stock and other ownership interests in Perthera, Ceres Nanosciences, Avant Diagnostics; consulting or advisory roles in Perthera, Ceres Nanosciences, AZGen, Avant Diagnostics; research funding from Ceres Nanosciences (Inst), GlaxoSmithKline (Inst), Abbvie (Inst), Symphogen (Inst), Genentech (Inst); patents, royalties, other intellectual property (National Institutes of Health patents licensing fee distribution/royalty; co-inventor on filed George Mason University–assigned patents related to phosphorylated HER2 and EGFR response predictors for HER family-directed therapeutics, as such can receive royalties and licensing distribution on any licensed IP; travel, accommodations, and expenses from Perthera, Ceres Nanosciences. J.D. Wulfkuhle received honoraria from DAVA Oncology and consults for Baylor College of Medicine, and has disclosed stock ownership in Theralink Technologies, Inc. H.S. Rugo has received research support for clinical trials through the University of California from Pfizer, Merck, Novartis, Lilly, Genentech, Odonate, Daiichi, Seattle Genetics, Eisai, Macrogenics, Sermonix, Boehringer Ingelheim, Polyphor, AstraZeneca, and Immunomedics; and Honoraria from Puma, Mylan, and Samsung. L.J. van’t Veer is employed by and a stockholder of Agendia NV. L.J. Esserman is an unpaid member of the board of directors of Quantum Leap Healthcare Collaborative, and received grant funding from QLHC for the I-SPY TRIAL; and is a member of the Blue Cross/Blue Shield Medical Advisory Panel and receives reimbursement for her time and travel. She has a grant from Merck for an Investigator initiated trial of DCIS. The following authors declare no competing interests: C.Y., D.M.W., L.D., A.M.W., A.D., E.H.B., K.S.A., R. Shatsky, L.S., S.M.A., A.W., R. Singhrao, L.S., G.L.H., S.M.B., A.A., J.P., R.B.S., D.Y., N.M.H., K. Kemmer, T.L.H., A.S., J.B.M., W.F.S., A.M.D., and D.A.B., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Patients with cancer have high mortality from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and the immune parameters that dictate clinical outcomes remain unknown. In a cohort of 100 patients with cancer who were hospitalized for COVID-19, patients with hematologic cancer had higher mortality relative to patients with solid cancer. In two additional cohorts, flow cytometric and serologic analyses demonstrated that patients with solid cancer and patients without cancer had a similar immune phenotype during acute COVID-19, whereas patients with hematologic cancer had impairment of B cells and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific antibody responses. Despite the impaired humoral immunity and high mortality in patients with hematologic cancer who also have COVID-19, those with a greater number of CD8 T cells had improved survival, including those treated with anti-CD20 therapy. Furthermore, 77% of patients with hematologic cancer had detectable SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell responses. Thus, CD8 T cells might influence recovery from COVID-19 when humoral immunity is deficient. These observations suggest that CD8 T cell responses to vaccination might provide protection in patients with hematologic cancer even in the setting of limited humoral responses., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature America, Inc.)

Circulating tumor cells (CTC) are prognostic in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). The CTC-endocrine therapy index (CTC-ETI), consisting of CTC-ER (estrogen receptor), BCL2, human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER2), and Ki67 expression, might predict resistance to endocrine therapy (ET) in patients with ER-positive MBC. One hundred twenty-one patients with ER-positive/HER2-negative MBC initiating a new ET after ≥1 lines of ET were enrolled in a prospective, multi-institutional clinical trial. CTC-ETI and clinical/imaging follow-up were performed at baseline and serial time points. Progression-free survival (PFS) and rapid progression (RP; determined at the 3-month time point) were primary endpoints. Associations with clinical outcomes used logrank and Fisher's exact tests. At baseline, 36% (38/107) of patients had ≥5 CTC/7.5 ml whole blood (WB). Patients with ≥5 vs. <5 CTC/7.5 ml WB had significantly worse PFS (median 3.3 vs. 5.9 months, P = 0.03). Elevated CTC at 1 month was associated with even worse PFS (1.9 vs. 5.0 months from the 1-month sample, P < 0.001). Low, intermediate, and high CTC-ETI were observed in 71 (66%), 8 (8%), and 28 (26%) patients, with median PFS of 6.9, 8.5, and 2.8 months, respectively (P = 0.008). Patients with high vs. low CTC and CTC-ETI more frequently experienced RP (CTC: 66% vs. 41%; P = 0.03; CTC-ETI: 79% vs. 40%; P = 0.002). In conclusion, CTC enumeration and the CTC-ETI assay are prognostic at baseline and follow-up in patients with ER-positive/HER2-negative MBC starting new ET. CTC at first follow-up might identify a group of patients with ER-positive MBC that could forego ET, but CTC-ETI did not contribute further.

Cyclophosphamide is associated with chemotherapy-related ovarian failure (CROF) in breast cancer survivors, however little is known about predicting individual risks. We sought to identify genetic alleles as biomarkers for risk of CROF after cyclophosphamide treatment. One hundred fifteen premenopausal women with newly diagnosed breast cancer were genotyped for single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes involved in cyclophosphamide activation ( CYP3A4 and CYP2C19) and detoxification ( GSTP1 and GSTA1 ). Patients prospectively completed menstrual diaries. With median follow up of 808 days, 28% experienced CROF. Survivors homozygous for the GSTA1 minor allele had lower hazards for developing CROF (HR 0.22 [95% CI 0.05-0.94], p =.04), while survivors homozygous for the CYP2C19 minor allele had higher hazards for developing CROF (HR 4.5 [95% CI 1.5-13.4], p =.007) compared to patients with at least one major allele. In separate multivariable models adjusting for age and tamoxifen use, the associations were no longer statistically significant ( GSTA1 HR 0.24 [95% CI 0.06-1.0], p =.05; CYP2C19 HR 2.5 [0.8-7.6], p =.11). CYP3A4 and GSTP1 SNPs were not significantly related to CROF. In younger breast cancer survivors undergoing cyclophosphamide-based chemotherapy, genetic variation in CYP2C19 and GSTA1 merits further study to determine its relationship with CROF.IMPACT STATEMENT What is already known on this subject? Young breast cancer survivors face important potential implications of chemotherapy-related ovarian failure (CROF). Little is known about individual risk for CROF. Cyclophosphamide, a particularly gonadotoxic drug commonly used in breast cancer treatment, is metabolised by various cytochrome p450 enzymes. Studies have shown genetic variation in p450 enzymes is associated with differential clinical outcomes after cyclophosphamide treatment: breast cancer patients homozygous for GSTA1 minor allele had improved overall survival; lupus patients homozygous for CYP2C19 minor allele had increased risk for CROF; and CYP3A4*1B I was associated with decreased risk for CROF. What do the results of this study add? We show a surprising opposite trend for the risk of CROF in breast cancer patients with GSTA1 and CYP2C19 variants, while we did not show a significant risk for genetic variation in CYP3A4 (which had previously been shown to have a protective effect) or GSTP1 . What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? This study shows the complexity of genetic variation in predicting outcomes to treatment. We advocate for future replicative studies to potentially validate GSTA1 and CYP2C19 and definitively negate CYP3A4 and GSTP1 as biomarkers for risk of CROF after cyclophosphamide treatment. Understanding genetic variation in chemotherapy metabolism has the potential to individualise treatment regimens to maximise efficacy and minimise toxicity.

Tremendous progress has been made in treating patients with metastatic melanoma over the past decade. In that timeframe, the FDA has approved 12 novel treatments for patients with advanced unresectable melanoma, comprising both kinase-targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), and five treatments for adjuvant (postoperative) use in patients with high-risk resectable stage III melanoma. It is not known whether outcomes can be further improved by administering kinase inhibitors or ICI in the neoadjuvant (presurgical) setting in patients with high-risk resectable melanomas. Noting research community interest in exploring the neoadjuvant approach for treating melanoma and recognizing that early harmonization of methodologies may expedite the development of therapeutics in this space, the FDA and Melanoma Research Alliance convened a public workshop on November 6, 2019, in National Harbor, Maryland, to discuss key issues. The workshop consisted of 23 faculty and included more than 250 live participants. Topics discussed included opportunities for advancing novel endpoints for regulatory purposes as well as translational research, clinical trial design considerations, and strategies for optimizing patient selection while mitigating risk., (©2020 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Importance: Pathologic complete response (pCR) is a known prognostic biomarker for long-term outcomes. The I-SPY2 trial evaluated if the strength of this clinical association persists in the context of a phase 2 neoadjuvant platform trial., Objective: To evaluate the association of pCR with event-free survival (EFS) and pCR with distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS) in subpopulations of women with high-risk operable breast cancer treated with standard therapy or one of several novel agents., Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter platform trial of women with operable clinical stage 2 or 3 breast cancer with no prior surgery or systemic therapy for breast cancer; primary tumors were 2.5 cm or larger. Women with tumors that were ERBB2 negative/hormone receptor (HR) positive with low 70-gene assay score were excluded. Participants were adaptively randomized to one of several different investigational regimens or control therapy within molecular subtypes from March 2010 through 2016. The analysis included participants with follow-up data available as of February 26, 2019., Interventions: Standard-of-care neoadjuvant therapy consisting of taxane treatment with or without (as control) one of several investigational agents or combinations followed by doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide., Main Outcomes and Measures: Pathologic complete response and 3-year EFS and DRFS., Results: Of the 950 participants (median [range] age, 49 [23-77] years), 330 (34.7%) achieved pCR. Three-year EFS and DRFS for patients who achieved pCR were both 95%. Hazard ratios for pCR vs non-pCR were 0.19 for EFS (95% CI, 0.12-0.31) and 0.21 for DRFS (95% CI, 0.13-0.34) and were similar across molecular subtypes, varying from 0.14 to 0.18 for EFS and 0.10 to 0.20 for DRFS., Conclusions and Relevance: The 3-year outcomes from the I-SPY2 trial show that, regardless of subtype and/or treatment regimen, including 9 novel therapeutic combinations, achieving pCR after neoadjuvant therapy implies approximately an 80% reduction in recurrence rate. The goal of the I-SPY2 trial is to rapidly identify investigational therapies that may improve pCR when validated in a phase 3 confirmatory trial. Whether pCR is a validated surrogate in the sense that a therapy that improves pCR rate can be assumed to also improve long-term outcome requires further study., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01042379.

Purpose: Women with breast cancer have a 4%-16% lifetime risk of a second primary cancer. Whether mutations in genes other than BRCA1/2 are enriched in patients with breast and another primary cancer over those with a single breast cancer (S-BC) is unknown., Patients and Methods: We identified pathogenic germline mutations in 17 cancer susceptibility genes in patients with BRCA1/2 -negative breast cancer in 2 different cohorts: cohort 1, high-risk breast cancer program (multiple primary breast cancer [MP-BC], n = 551; S-BC, n = 449) and cohort 2, familial breast cancer research study (MP-BC, n = 340; S-BC, n = 1,464). Mutation rates in these 2 cohorts were compared with a control data set (Exome Aggregation Consortium [ExAC])., Results: Overall, pathogenic mutation rates for autosomal, dominantly inherited genes were higher in patients with MP-BC versus S-BC in both cohorts (8.5% v 4.9% [ P = .02] and 7.1% v 4.2% [ P = .03]). There were differences in individual gene mutation rates between cohorts. In both cohorts, younger age at first breast cancer was associated with higher mutation rates; the age of non-breast cancers was unrelated to mutation rate. TP53 and MSH6 mutations were significantly enriched in patients with MP-BC but not S-BC, whereas ATM and PALB2 mutations were significantly enriched in both groups compared with ExAC., Conclusion: Mutation rates are at least 7% in all patients with BRCA1/2 mutation-negative MP-BC, regardless of age at diagnosis of breast cancer, with mutation rates up to 25% in patients with a first breast cancer diagnosed at age < 30 years. Our results suggest that all patients with breast cancer with a second primary cancer, regardless of age of onset, should undergo multigene panel testing., Competing Interests: The following represents disclosure information provided by authors of this manuscript. All relationships are considered compensated unless otherwise noted. Relationships are self-held unless noted. I = Immediate Family Member, Inst = My Institution. Relationships may not relate to the subject matter of this manuscript. For more information about ASCO's conflict of interest policy, please refer to www.asco.org/rwc or ascopubs.org/po/author-center. Open Payments is a public database containing information reported by companies about payments made to US-licensed physicians (Open Payments). Joseph VijaiPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Title: Diagnosis & Treatment of ERCC3-Mutant Cancer; inventors: Joseph Vijai, Sabine Topka, Kenneth Offit; US National Stage Patent Application No.: 16/493,214; filing date: September 11, 2019 (Inst)Kasmintan A. SchraderConsulting or Advisory Role: Pfizer, AstraZeneca Research Funding: AstraZeneca (Inst)Mark E. RobsonConsulting or Advisory Role: Change Health Care Research Funding: AstraZeneca (Inst), InVitae (Inst), AbbVie (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Merck (Inst) Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Merck Other Relationship: Research to Practice, Clinical Care Options, Physician Education Resource Uncompensated Relationships: Merck, Pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo, Epic Sciences Open Payments Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/612669/summaryJames M. FordResearch Funding: Genentech (Inst), AstraZeneca (Inst), Puma Biotechnology (Inst), Pfizer (Inst)Judy E. GarberConsulting or Advisory Role: Novartis (I), GTx (I), Helix BioPharma, Konica Minolta, Aleta BioTherapeutics (I), H3 Biomedicine (I), Kronos Bio (I) Research Funding: Novartis (I), Ambry Genetics, Invitae Genetics, Myriad Genetics Other Relationship: Susan G. Komen for the Cure (I), American Association for Cancer Research, Diane Helis Henry Medical Foundation (I), James P. Wilmot Foundation (I), Adrienne Helis Malvin Medical Research Foundation (I), Breast Cancer Research Foundation, Facing our Risk of Cancer EmpoweredPayal D. ShahStock and Other Ownership Interests: Johnson & Johnson (I), Novartis (I), Novo Nordisk (I), Pfizer (I), Merck (I), Amgen, Johnson & Johnson, Novo Nordisk Consulting or Advisory Role: Tmunity TherapeuticsAngela R. BradburyConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, MerckAngela M. DeMicheleConsulting or Advisory Role: Context Therapeutics, Pfizer (I) Research Funding: Pfizer (Inst), Genentech (Inst), Calithera Biosciences (Inst), Menarini (Inst), Silicon Biosystems (Inst)Jeffrey N. WeitzelSpeakers’ Bureau: AstraZenecaFergus J. CouchConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca Speakers’ Bureau: Ambry Genetics, QIAGEN Research Funding: Grail Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Grail, QIAGEN Other Relationship: Ambry GeneticsSusan M. DomchekHonoraria: AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology, Bristol Myers Squibb Research Funding: AstraZeneca (Inst), Clovis Oncology (Inst) Open Payments Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/917904 No other potential conflicts of interest were reported., (© 2020 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Palbociclib is a cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor indicated for treatment of hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer in combination with endocrine therapy. We investigated the efficacy and safety of palbociclib in patients enrolled in North America during two-phase 3 trials: PALOMA-2 (n = 267, data cutoff: May 31, 2017) and PALOMA-3 (n = 240, data cutoffs: April 13, 2018, for overall survival, October 23, 2015, for all other outcomes). In PALOMA-2, treatment-naïve postmenopausal patients with advanced breast cancer were randomized 2:1 to palbociclib (125 mg/d; 3 weeks on/1 week off [3/1]) plus letrozole (2.5 mg/d, continuous) or placebo plus letrozole. In PALOMA-3, patients who progressed on prior endocrine therapy were randomized 2:1 to palbociclib (125 mg/d; 3/1) plus fulvestrant (500 mg, per standard of care) or placebo plus fulvestrant; pre/perimenopausal patients received ovarian suppression with goserelin. Palbociclib plus endocrine therapy prolonged median progression-free survival vs placebo plus endocrine therapy in North American patients (PALOMA-2: 25.4 vs 13.7 months, hazard ratio, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.40-0.74], P < .0001; PALOMA-3: 9.9 vs 3.5 months, hazard ratio, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.38-0.72], P < .0001). Objective response and clinical benefit response rates were greater with palbociclib vs placebo in North American patients in both trials. While overall survival data are not yet mature for PALOMA-2, median overall survival was increased in PALOMA-3 (32.0 vs 24.7 months, hazard ratio, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.53-1.04]), though this did not reach statistical significance (P = .0869). Safety profiles in North American patients were similar to those of the overall populations; neutropenia was the most common treatment-emergent adverse event. No new safety signals were observed. In summary, palbociclib plus endocrine therapy is an effective treatment option for North American women with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer., (© 2019 The Authors. The Breast Journal published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: Arthralgia is a common and debilitating toxicity of aromatase inhibitors (AI) that leads to premature drug discontinuation. We sought to evaluate the clinical and genetic risk factors associated with AI-associated arthralgia (AIAA)., Methods: We performed a cross-sectional study among postmenopausal women with stage 0-III breast cancer who were prescribed a third-generation AI for adjuvant therapy. The primary outcome was patient-reported AIAA occurrence. We extracted and assayed germline DNA for single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of genes implicated in estrogen and inflammation pathways. Multivariable logistic regression models examined the association between demographic, clinical, and genetic factors and AIAA. Analyses were restricted to White participants., Results: Among 1049 White participants, 543 (52%) reported AIAA. In multivariable analyses, women who had a college education [Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) 1.49, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.00-2.20], had a more recent transition into menopause (<10 years) (5-10 years AOR 1.55, 95% CI 1.09-2.22; <5 years AOR 1.78, 95% CI 1.18-2.67), were within one year of starting AIs (AOR 1.61, 95% CI 1.08-2.40), and those who received chemotherapy (AOR 1.38, 95% CI 1.02-1.88) were significantly more likely to report AIAA. Additionally, SNP rs11648233 (HSD17B2) was significantly associated with higher odds of AIAA (AOR 2.21, 95% CI 1.55-3.16)., Conclusions: Time since menopause and start of AIs, prior chemotherapy, and SNP rs11648233 within the HSD17B2 gene in the estrogen pathway were significantly associated with patient-reported AIAA. These findings suggest that clinical and genetic factors involved in estrogen withdrawal increase the risk of AIAA in postmenopausal breast cancer survivors., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The CDK 4/6 inhibitor palbociclib rapidly and reversibly inhibits the cell cycle. The goal of this study was to exploit the cell cycle through intermittent, alternating dosing with palbociclib/paclitaxel to enhance efficacy. We determined the combination dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) in patients with Rb protein-expressing, advanced breast cancer., Patients and Methods: This open-label, phase I trial (NCT01320592) enrolled patients to sequential cohorts of palbociclib orally dosed intermittently between days 1 and 19 of a 28-day cycle alternating with weekly paclitaxel. Dose escalation proceeded in a standard 3 + 3 design. Ten additional patients received the combination at the recommended phase II dose (RP2D). Those who reached response plateau ≥6 cycles could continue on palbociclib alone on a 3 week on/1 week off schedule at one dose level above their combination dose., Results: Twenty-seven patients enrolled. Although there was only 1 DLT (grade 3 alanine aminotransferase/aspartate aminotransferase at 125 mg), neutropenia (NTP) requiring dose modification in cycle 1 (C1) resulted in an RP2D of 75 mg palbociclib/80 mg/m 2 paclitaxel. During C1, the most common adverse event was NTP, occurring in 15 patients (55.6%); grade 1 or 2 nausea and peripheral neuropathy were also observed in 8 patients each (29.6%). The clinical benefit rate was 55% at the RP2D; benefit was observed across all receptor subtypes., Conclusions: Alternating sequential palbociclib/paclitaxel in patients with Rb + advanced breast cancer is feasible and safe, without evidence of additive toxicity. This represents a new application for CDK 4/6 inhibitors in Rb + breast cancer regardless of subtype; efficacy trials are warranted., (©2019 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose The Society for Integrative Oncology (SIO) produced an evidence-based guideline on use of integrative therapies during and after breast cancer treatment that was determined to be relevant to the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) membership. ASCO considered the guideline for endorsement. Methods The SIO guideline addressed the use of integrative therapies for the management of symptoms and adverse effects, such as anxiety and stress, mood disorders, fatigue, quality of life, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, lymphedema, chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, pain, and sleep disturbance. Interventions of interest included mind and body practices, natural products, and lifestyle modifications. SIO systematic reviews focused on randomized controlled trials that were published from 1990 through 2015. The SIO guideline was reviewed by ASCO content experts for clinical accuracy and by ASCO methodologists for developmental rigor. On favorable review, an ASCO Expert Panel was convened to review the guideline contents and recommendations. Results The ASCO Expert Panel determined that the recommendations in the SIO guideline-published in 2017-are clear, thorough, and based on the most relevant scientific evidence. ASCO endorsed the guideline with a few added discussion points. Recommendations Key recommendations include the following: Music therapy, meditation, stress management, and yoga are recommended for anxiety/stress reduction. Meditation, relaxation, yoga, massage, and music therapy are recommended for depression/mood disorders. Meditation and yoga are recommended to improve quality of life. Acupressure and acupuncture are recommended for reducing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Acetyl-l-carnitine is not recommended to prevent chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy because of a possibility of harm. No strong evidence supports the use of ingested dietary supplements to manage breast cancer treatment-related adverse effects. Additional information is available at: www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines .

A dysbiotic microbiome can potentially contribute to the pathogenesis of many different diseases including cancer. Breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in women. Thus, we investigated the diversity of the microbiome in the four major types of breast cancer: endocrine receptor (ER) positive, triple positive, Her2 positive and triple negative breast cancers. Using a whole genome and transcriptome amplification and a pan-pathogen microarray (PathoChip) strategy, we detected unique and common viral, bacterial, fungal and parasitic signatures for each of the breast cancer types. These were validated by PCR and Sanger sequencing. Hierarchical cluster analysis of the breast cancer samples, based on their detected microbial signatures, showed distinct patterns for the triple negative and triple positive samples, while the ER positive and Her2 positive samples shared similar microbial signatures. These signatures, unique or common to the different breast cancer types, provide a new line of investigation to gain further insights into prognosis, treatment strategies and clinical outcome, as well as better understanding of the role of the micro-organisms in the development and progression of breast cancer.

Background: Black women are more likely to experience adverse effects from cancer treatment such as lymphedema. Thus, black women may particularly benefit from research regarding interventions to improve lymphedema. Herein, the authors report the challenges and strategies related to the recruitment of minority survivors of breast cancer and to the recruitment of survivors of breast cancer with lymphedema into the Women In Steady Exercise Research (WISER) Survivor Clinical Trial., Methods: Subjects for this community-based trial were recruited from the Philadelphia area through active (mailings) and passive (printed materials and Web site) recruitment strategies. In addition, education sessions coordinated through partner hospitals in communities with a predominantly minority population were conducted to increase awareness of lymphedema in survivors of breast cancer. Women who were interested in the study were screened for lymphedema via telephone questionnaire and invited to see a study-related certified lymphedema therapist to confirm the presence of lymphedema., Results: Screening was conducted among 2295 women: 628 were eligible, 450 consented, and 351 were randomized. Minority women comprised 38% of the study population. Letters to women on state and hospital registries resulted in a 0.4% randomization rate; education sessions yielded a 10% randomization rate. The authors observed that approximately 23.6% of the study sample had no previous diagnosis of lymphedema., Conclusions: The WISER Survivor Clinical Trial faced multiple recruitment challenges and used unique strategies to successfully enroll minority survivors of breast cancer into a lifestyle intervention. Cancer 2018;124:95-104. © 2017 American Cancer Society., (© 2017 American Cancer Society.)

Chimeric antigen receptors (CAR) are synthetic molecules that provide new specificities to T cells. Although successful in treatment of hematologic malignancies, CAR T cells are ineffective for solid tumors to date. We found that the cell-surface molecule c-Met was expressed in ∼50% of breast tumors, prompting the construction of a CAR T cell specific for c-Met, which halted tumor growth in immune-incompetent mice with tumor xenografts. We then evaluated the safety and feasibility of treating metastatic breast cancer with intratumoral administration of mRNA-transfected c-Met-CAR T cells in a phase 0 clinical trial (NCT01837602). Introducing the CAR construct via mRNA ensured safety by limiting the nontumor cell effects (on-target/off-tumor) of targeting c-Met. Patients with metastatic breast cancer with accessible cutaneous or lymph node metastases received a single intratumoral injection of 3 × 10 7 or 3 × 10 8 cells. CAR T mRNA was detectable in peripheral blood and in the injected tumor tissues after intratumoral injection in 2 and 4 patients, respectively. mRNA c-Met-CAR T cell injections were well tolerated, as none of the patients had study drug-related adverse effects greater than grade 1. Tumors treated with intratumoral injected mRNA c-Met-CAR T cells were excised and analyzed by immunohistochemistry, revealing extensive tumor necrosis at the injection site, cellular debris, loss of c-Met immunoreactivity, all surrounded by macrophages at the leading edges and within necrotic zones. We conclude that intratumoral injections of mRNA c-Met-CAR T cells are well tolerated and evoke an inflammatory response within tumors. Cancer Immunol Res; 5(12); 1152-61. ©2017 AACR ., (©2017 American Association for Cancer Research.)