Quiescent cancer cells resist T cell attack by forming an immunosuppressive niche.

Immunotherapy is a promising treatment for triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), but patients relapse, highlighting the need to understand the mechanisms of resistance. We discovered that in primary breast cancer, tumor cells that resist T cell attack are quiescent. Quiescent cancer cells (QCCs) form clusters with reduced immune infiltration. They also display superior tumorigenic capacity and higher expression of chemotherapy resistance and stemness genes. We adapted single-cell RNA-sequencing with precise spatial resolution to profile infiltrating cells inside and outside the QCC niche. This transcriptomic analysis revealed hypoxia-induced programs and identified more exhausted T cells, tumor-protective fibroblasts, and dysfunctional dendritic cells inside clusters of QCCs. This uncovered differential phenotypes in infiltrating cells based on their intra-tumor location. Thus, QCCs constitute immunotherapy-resistant reservoirs by orchestrating a local hypoxic immune-suppressive milieu that blocks T cell function. Eliminating QCCs holds the promise to counteract immunotherapy resistance and prevent disease recurrence in TNBC.

Antibody-drug conjugates: Smart chemotherapy delivery across tumor histologies.

As distinct cancer biomarkers have been discovered in recent years, a need to reclassify tumors by more than their histology has been proposed, and therapies are now tailored to treat cancers based on specific molecular aberrations and immunologic markers. In fact, multiple histology-agnostic therapies are currently adopted in clinical practice for treating patients regardless of their tumor site of origin. In parallel with this new model for drug development, in the past few years, several novel antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) have been approved to treat solid tumors, benefiting from engineering improvements in the conjugation process and the introduction of novel linkers and payloads. With the recognition that numerous surface targets are expressed across various cancer histologies, alongside the remarkable activity of modern ADCs, this drug class has been increasingly evaluated as suitable for a histology-agnostic expansion of indication. For illustration, the anti-HER2 ADC trastuzumab deruxtecan has demonstrated compelling activity in HER2-overexpressing breast, gastric, colorectal, and lung cancer. Examples of additional novel and potentially histology-agnostic ADC targets include trophoblast cell-surface antigen 2 (Trop-2) and nectin-4, among others. In the current review article, the authors summarize the current approvals of ADCs by the US Food and Drug Administration focusing on solid tumors and discuss the challenges and opportunities posed by the multihistological expansion of ADCs.

TBCRC 039: a phase II study of preoperative ruxolitinib with or without paclitaxel for triple-negative inflammatory breast cancer.

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

Overall survival with sacituzumab govitecan in hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer (TROPiCS-02): a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Sacituzumab govitecan demonstrated significant progression-free survival benefit over chemotherapy in the phase 3 TROPiCS-02 trial in patients with pretreated, endocrine-resistant hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+ and HER2-) metastatic breast cancer with limited treatment options. Here, we report the protocol-specified final analysis of overall survival and endpoints by trophoblast cell-surface antigen 2 (Trop-2) expression and other variables. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial, which took place in 91 centres across North America (the USA and Canada) and Europe (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, and the UK), patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive sacituzumab govitecan or chemotherapy (eribulin, vinorelbine, capecitabine, or gemcitabine). Patients had confirmed HR+ and HER2- locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic breast cancer and had received at least one previous endocrine therapy, a taxane, and a CDK4/6 inhibitor in any setting and two to four previous chemotherapy regimens for metastatic disease. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (previously reported and not included in this analysis), and secondary endpoints included overall survival, objective response rate (ORR), and patient-reported outcomes. Overall survival was assessed using stratified log-rank tests and Cox regression. Trop-2 expression was assessed in tumour tissue by immunohistochemistry. In the statistical testing hierarchy, ORR and patient-reported outcomes were tested sequentially if overall survival was significant. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03901339. FINDINGS: At the data cutoff date of July 1, 2022, 543 of 776 screened patients were randomly assigned between May 30, 2019, and April 5, 2021, with 272 patients in the sacituzumab govitecan group and 271 patients in the chemotherapy group. With a 12·5-month (IQR 6·4-18·8) median follow-up, 390 deaths occurred among 543 patients. Overall survival was significantly improved with sacituzumab govitecan versus chemotherapy (median 14·4 months [95% CI 13·0-15·7] vs 11·2 months [10·1-12·7]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·79, 95% CI 0·65-0·96; p=0·020); survival benefit was consistent across Trop-2 expression-level subgroups. ORR was significantly improved with sacituzumab govitecan compared with chemotherapy (57 [21%] patients vs 38 [14%]; odds ratio 1·63 [95% CI 1·03-2·56]; p=0·035), as was time to deterioration of global health status and quality of life (median 4·3 months vs 3·0 months; HR 0·75 [0·61-0·92]; p=0·0059) and fatigue (median 2·2 months vs 1·4 months; HR 0·73 [0·60-0·89]; p=0·0021). The safety profile of sacituzumab govitecan was consistent with previous studies (including the TROPiCS-02 primary analysis and the ASCENT trial). One fatal adverse event (septic shock caused by neutropenic colitis) was determined to be related to sacituzumab govitecan treatment. INTERPRETATION: Sacituzumab govitecan demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful benefit over chemotherapy, with a 3·2-month median overall survival improvement and a manageable safety profile. These data support sacituzumab govitecan as a new treatment option for patients with pretreated, endocrine-resistant HR+ and HER2- metastatic breast cancer. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences.

Health-related quality of life with sacituzumab govitecan in HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer in the phase III TROPiCS-02 trial.

BACKGROUND: The TROPiCS-02 study (NCT03901339) demonstrated that sacituzumab govitecan (SG) has superior clinical outcomes over treatment of physician's choice (TPC) chemotherapy in patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor 2 receptor-negative (HR+/HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC). Here, we present health-related quality of life (HRQoL) patient-reported outcome (PRO) findings from this study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible adults with HR+/HER2- mBC who previously received a taxane, endocrine-based therapy, a CDK4/6 inhibitor, and 2-4 lines of chemotherapy were randomized 1:1 to receive SG or TPC until progression or unacceptable toxicity. PROs were assessed at baseline and on day 1 of each cycle, using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), EQ-5D-5L, and PRO Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE). RESULTS: Compared to TPC, overall least square mean change from baseline was significantly better for SG for physical functioning and dyspnea, but worse for diarrhea. Time to first clinically meaningful worsening or death was significantly longer for SG in global health status/quality of life, physical functioning, fatigue, emotional functioning, dyspnea, insomnia, and financial difficulties of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the EQ-VAS, but longer for TPC in diarrhea. Few patients in both arms reported experiencing any worsening to level 3 or 4 treatment-related symptomatic events during treatment, as assessed by 16 PRO-CTCAE items, except for diarrhea frequency and amount of hair loss, which favored TPC. CONCLUSIONS: SG was associated with an HRQoL benefit in most symptoms and functioning, compared with TPC. This supports the favorable profile of SG as a treatment option for patients with pretreated HR+/HER2- mBC.

Baseline Tumor Size as Prognostic Index in Patients With Advanced Solid Tumors Receiving Experimental Targeted Agents.

BACKGROUND: Baseline tumor size (BTS) has been associated with outcomes in patients with cancer treated with immunotherapy. However, the prognostic impact of BTS on patients receiving targeted therapies (TTs) remains undetermined. METHODS: We reviewed data of patients with advanced solid tumors consecutively treated within early-phase clinical trials at our institution from 01/2014 to 04/2021. Treatments were categorized as immunotherapy-based or TT-based (biomarker-matched or not). BTS was calculated as the sum of RECIST1.1 baseline target lesions. RESULTS: A total of 444 patients were eligible; the median BTS was 69 mm (IQR 40-100). OS was significantly longer for patients with BTS lower versus higher than the median (16.6 vs. 8.2 months, P < .001), including among those receiving immunotherapy (12 vs. 7.5 months, P = .005). Among patients receiving TT, lower BTS was associated with longer PFS (4.7 vs. 3.1 months, P = .002) and OS (20.5 vs. 9.9 months, P < .001) as compared to high BTS. However, such association was only significant among patients receiving biomarker-matched TT, with longer PFS (6.2 vs. 3.3 months, P < .001) and OS (21.2 vs. 6.7 months, P < .001) in the low-BTS subgroup, despite a similar ORR (28% vs. 22%, P = .57). BTS was not prognostic among patients receiving unmatched TT, with similar PFS (3.7 vs. 4.4 months, P = .30), OS (19.3 vs. 11.8 months, P = .20), and ORR (33% vs. 28%, P = .78) in the 2 BTS groups. Multivariate analysis confirmed that BTS was independently associated with PFS (P = .03) and OS (P < .001) but not with ORR (P = .11). CONCLUSIONS: Higher BTS is associated with worse survival outcomes among patients receiving biomarker-matched, but not biomarker-unmatched TT.

Sacituzumab Govitecan in Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer have a poor prognosis. Sacituzumab govitecan is an antibody-drug conjugate composed of an antibody targeting the human trophoblast cell-surface antigen 2 (Trop-2), which is expressed in the majority of breast cancers, coupled to SN-38 (topoisomerase I inhibitor) through a proprietary hydrolyzable linker. METHODS: In this randomized, phase 3 trial, we evaluated sacituzumab govitecan as compared with single-agent chemotherapy of the physician's choice (eribulin, vinorelbine, capecitabine, or gemcitabine) in patients with relapsed or refractory metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. The primary end point was progression-free survival (as determined by blinded independent central review) among patients without brain metastases. RESULTS: A total of 468 patients without brain metastases were randomly assigned to receive sacituzumab govitecan (235 patients) or chemotherapy (233 patients). The median age was 54 years; all the patients had previous use of taxanes. The median progression-free survival was 5.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.3 to 6.3; 166 events) with sacituzumab govitecan and 1.7 months (95% CI, 1.5 to 2.6; 150 events) with chemotherapy (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.52; P<0.001). The median overall survival was 12.1 months (95% CI, 10.7 to 14.0) with sacituzumab govitecan and 6.7 months (95% CI, 5.8 to 7.7) with chemotherapy (hazard ratio for death, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.59; P<0.001). The percentage of patients with an objective response was 35% with sacituzumab govitecan and 5% with chemotherapy. The incidences of key treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher were neutropenia (51% with sacituzumab govitecan and 33% with chemotherapy), leukopenia (10% and 5%), diarrhea (10% and <1%), anemia (8% and 5%), and febrile neutropenia (6% and 2%). There were three deaths owing to adverse events in each group; no deaths were considered to be related to sacituzumab govitecan treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Progression-free and overall survival were significantly longer with sacituzumab govitecan than with single-agent chemotherapy among patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. Myelosuppression and diarrhea were more frequent with sacituzumab govitecan. (Funded by Immunomedics; ASCENT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02574455; EudraCT number, 2017-003019-21.).

Clinical outcomes after 1 versus 2-3 lines of neoadjuvant therapy in stage III inflammatory breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Many stage III inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) patients experience a sufficient response to first-line (1L) neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) to allow surgery, while some require additional NAC. We evaluated the pathologic complete response (pCR), breast cancer-free survival (BCFS) and overall survival (OS) among patients requiring 1 vs. 2-3 lines (L) of NAC prior to surgery. METHODS: Stage III IBC patients from 2 institutions who received 1L or 2-3L of NAC prior to surgery were identified. Hormone receptor and HER2 status, grade, and pCR were evaluated. BCFS and OS were evaluated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariable Cox models were utilized to estimate the hazard ratio (HR). RESULTS: 808 eligible patients (1997-2020) were identified (median age 51 years, median follow-up 69 months). 733 (91%) had 1L and 75 (9%) had 2-3L of NAC. Grade III, triple-negative and HER2-positive disease were more prevalent in 2-3L patients. 178 (24%) 1L and 14 (19%) 2-3L patients had pCR. 376 1L patients and 41 2-3L patients had recurrences. The 5-year BCFS was worse for the 2-3L group (33 vs. 46%, HR = 1.37; 95% CI 0.99-1.91). However, in 192 patients with a pCR, BCFS was similar (76 vs. 83% in 1L vs. 2-3L, respectively). There were 308 deaths (276 among 1L and 32 among 2-3L patients). The 5-year OS in 1L vs. 2-3L was 60 vs. 53% (HR = 1.32, 95% CI 0.91-1.93). CONCLUSIONS: Among stage III IBC patients, pCR rates were similar, irrespective of the NAC lines number, and BCFS and OS were comparable with pCR after 1L and 2-3L.

Defining the Biology of Estrogen Receptor-Low-Positive Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: We sought to better define estrogen receptor-low-positive (ER-low+) breast cancer biology and determine the utility of the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score® (RS) assay in this population. METHODS: Patients with information regarding percentage ER positivity and PAM50 subtype were identified in The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and subtype distribution was determined. Next, patients with ER-low+ (ER 1-10%), HER2- breast cancer undergoing upfront surgery with known RS result were identified in the National Cancer Database (NCDB) and our institutional Dana-Farber Brigham Cancer Center (DF/BCC) database; RS distribution was examined. Finally, patients with ER-low+, HER2- breast cancer treated at DF/BCC from 2011 to 2020 without prior RS results and in whom tissue was available to perform the assay were identified. RS results, treatment, recurrence and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) were determined. RESULTS: Of 1033 patients in TCGA, ER percentage and PAM50 subtype were available for 342 (33.1%) patients. Forty-six (13.5%) had ER-low+/HER2- tumors, among whom 82.6% were basal and 4.3% were luminal A. Among 3423 patients with ER-low+/HER2- disease in the NCDB, RS results were available for 689 (20.1%) patients; 67% had an RS ≥26. In our institutional database, only two patients with ER-low+/HER2- disease and an RS were identified, both with RS ≥26. Among 37 patients in our institutional cohort without prior RS, 35 (97.4%) had an RS ≥26, determined with testing. After a median follow-up of 40 months (range 3-106), three patients, all treated with chemotherapy, recurred. Three-year BCSS was 97.0% (95% confidence interval 96.9-97.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Most ER-low+/HER2- breast cancers are basal-like, with RS ≥26 suggesting these tumors are similar to triple-negative disease.

Impact of personalized diabetes care on distress and treatment satisfaction in people with breast cancer.

AIMS: In patients with breast cancer (BCa) and diabetes (DM), diabetes distress (DD) and treatment satisfaction (DTS) can influence BCa management and outcomes. We assessed the impact of implementing a personalized diabetes care model in patients with BCa. METHODS: Patients in active treatment or surveillance for BCa with an HbA1c > 53 mmol/mol (7%) or random blood glucose >11.1 mmol/L were included. Participants were offered continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), virtual care and a dedicated diabetes provider for 6 months. Primary outcomes included DD measured by the Diabetes Distress Survey (DDS) and DTS measured by the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ). Questionnaires were conducted at 0, 3 and 6 months. RESULTS: Thirty-one women were enrolled (median age 61, IQR 49.0-69.0). Compared to baseline, the mean DDS score was lower at both 3 months (2.2 vs. 1.8 [n = 27], p = 0.004, SD = 0.70) and 6 months (2.3 vs. 1.8 [n = 23], p = 0.002, SD = 0.70). The mean DTSQ score was higher at 3 months (baseline: 20.5 vs. 3 months: 28.7 [n = 28], p < 0.001, SD = 9.2) and 6 months (baseline: 20.4 vs. 6 months: 30.0 [n = 26], p < 0.001, SD = 9.7). CONCLUSIONS: Personalized diabetes care models that emphasize remote management and optimize access for those with BCa may lower DD and improve DTS.

Immunotherapy for Early-Stage Triple Negative Breast Cancer: Is Earlier Better?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: In this narrative review, we discuss the optimal timing of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in early triple negative breast cancer (TNBC), the landscape of predictive biomarkers for the use of immunotherapy, and the mounting literature suggesting a benefit for an early use of ICI. RECENT FINDINGS: TNBC is associated with a poor prognosis relative to other breast cancer subtypes, and until recently, the treatment of TNBC was limited to cytotoxic chemotherapy. In 2021, the immune-checkpoint inhibitor, pembrolizumab, was approved in combination with neoadjuvant chemotherapy for patients with high-risk early stage TNBC. This approval changed the treatment paradigm of early TNBC concomitantly raised several challenges in clinical practice, pertaining to patient selection, toxicity management, and post-neoadjuvant treatment, among others. The introduction of neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy has transformed the treatment landscape for early TNBC. However, several challenges, including patient selection, toxicity management, and the identification of predictive biomarkers, need to be addressed. Future research should focus on refining the timing and duration of immunotherapy, optimizing the chemotherapy partner, and exploring novel predictive biomarkers of response or toxicity.

Abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy for HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer: a plain language summary of the monarchE study.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This article summarizes the most recent results of the monarchE study. This study was completed in participants with a type of breast cancer called HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer. In this study, abemaciclib, a non-chemotherapy treatment, was administered with standard of care endocrine therapy after curative surgery. Most participants had received prior chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. The study investigated if abemaciclib helped participants live longer without their cancer returning compared with participants who only received standard of care endocrine therapy. The study participants were assigned to 1 of 2 treatment groups. Participants in Group A were assigned to receive standard of care endocrine therapy with abemaciclib for 2 years, followed by endocrine therapy for a total of at least 5 years. Participants in Group B were assigned to receive standard of care endocrine therapy only for at least 5 years. The effect of treatment was compared between these 2 groups. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: Overall, the results showed that the cancer was 34% less likely to come back after surgery in the participants in Group A (abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy) compared with those in Group B (endocrine therapy only). At 4 years since the start of the study treatment, more participants who received the combination of abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy remained free of cancer compared with participants who received endocrine therapy alone (86% versus 79%). Participants who received abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy had more side effects than those who received endocrine therapy alone, but most of these effects were mild to moderate and reversible upon the end of therapy. The most common side effects in the abemaciclib group were diarrhea, infections, low number of white blood cells, and tiredness. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: This study found that administering abemaciclib in combination with standard endocrine therapy after curative breast surgery helped lower the risk of cancer returning in people with HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer. Abemaciclib is a new treatment option for people with this diagnosis. People with high-risk early breast cancer should always talk to their doctors and nurses before making any decisions about their treatment.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03155997 (monarchE study).

A plain language summary of the TROPiCS-02 study in patients with breast cancer (HR-positive/HER2-negative).

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: Sacituzumab govitecan (brand name: TRODELVY®) is a new treatment for certain types of advanced or metastatic breast cancer. One common type of breast cancer has at least 1 of 2 hormone receptors (HR positive) and does not have human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2 negative). The HR and HER2 receptors are known to influence how severe a case of breast cancer is. Certain treatments will only work if a specific receptor is present on breast cancer cells. HR-positive/HER2-negative advanced or metastatic breast cancer can be treated with sacituzumab govitecan. This is a summary of the results of the TROPiCS-02 study. This study compared sacituzumab govitecan with standard chemotherapy in participants with HR-positive/HER2-negative advanced or metastatic breast cancer. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: The study showed that participants treated with sacituzumab govitecan lived significantly longer without their cancer getting worse than participants treated with chemotherapy. Participants also survived significantly longer and their tumors became significantly smaller in more participants treated with sacituzumab govitecan than with chemotherapy. In general, participants treated with sacituzumab govitecan were more likely to have side effects and had more severe side effects. These side effects included low levels of a type of white blood cell known as neutrophils and diarrhea. Oncologists (doctors that treat cancer) know of these side effects as they are common among people being treated for cancer. Doctors can control these side effects by following standard treatment guidelines and the package insert for sacituzumab govitecan. Participants treated with sacituzumab govitecan maintained their sense of well-being and ability to do daily activities (quality of life) longer than participants treated with chemotherapy. It also took longer for fatigue and other symptoms of cancer to worsen in participants treated with sacituzumab govitecan compared with chemotherapy. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: Sacituzumab govitecan is more effective than standard chemotherapies for people who have already received multiple treatments for HR-positive/ HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. The side effects from sacituzumab govitecan could generally be managed well by doctors. Although there were more side effects with sacituzumab govitecan than with chemotherapy, they were generally mild to moderate.

Summary of quality of life in the ASCENT phase 3 clinical trial for people with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: A medicine called sacituzumab govitecan (brand name TRODELVY®) has been proven to be an effective treatment for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC for short). Metastatic breast cancer is cancer that has spread to other parts of the body. In mTNBC, the breast cancer cells do not have 3 common proteins on the cell surface, called receptors. mTNBC is more difficult to treat and more likely to come back than other types of breast cancer. The ASCENT study showed that participants with mTNBC treated with sacituzumab govitecan had a higher likelihood of living longer and delayed progression (worsening) of their cancer than those treated with standard chemotherapy. Here, we summarize the quality of life of participants with mTNBC in the ASCENT study. We compared quality of life between 236 participants treated with sacituzumab govitecan and 183 participants treated with standard chemotherapy. All participants previously received 2 or more chemotherapies that no longer controlled their cancer. WHAT ARE THE KEY TAKEAWAYS?: This analysis showed that participants treated with sacituzumab govitecan had better overall quality of life than participants treated with standard chemotherapy. They also had better "physical functioning", which is the ability to walk and do physical activities. Participants treated with sacituzumab govitecan maintained their overall quality of life for a longer time than those treated with standard chemotherapy. Participants treated with sacituzumab govitecan had less pain and were less tired than those treated with standard chemotherapy. On the other hand, participants treated with sacituzumab govitecan had worse diarrhea (loose or watery stools) and were more likely to have nausea/vomiting (feel sick or throw up) than participants treated with standard chemotherapy. WHAT WERE THE MAIN CONCLUSIONS REPORTED BY THE RESEARCHERS?: Participants treated with sacituzumab govitecan had a higher likelihood of living longer and delayed progression (worsening) of their cancer. Participants also had a better overall quality of life, which was maintained (did not get worse) for a longer time. However, they experienced worsening of diarrhea and/or nausea/vomiting.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02574455 (ASCENT) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

OptimICE-RD: sacituzumab govitecan + pembrolizumab vs pembrolizumab (± capecitabine) for residual triple-negative breast cancer.

Patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) with residual invasive disease after neoadjuvant therapy have a high risk of recurrence even with neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment with pembrolizumab. Sacituzumab govitecan, a Trop-2-directed antibody-drug conjugate with a topoisomerase I inhibitor payload, improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy in patients with pre-treated metastatic TNBC. Moreover, preclinical data suggest that topoisomerase I inhibitors may enhance the effects of immune checkpoint inhibitors through activation of the cGAS-STING pathway. Here we describe the international randomized phase III AFT-65/ASCENT-05/OptimICE-RD trial, which evaluates the efficacy and safety of sacituzumab govitecan plus pembrolizumab versus treatment of physician's choice (pembrolizumab ± capecitabine) among patients with early-stage TNBC with residual invasive disease after neoadjuvant therapy.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05633654 (ClinicalTrials.gov)Other Study ID Number(s): Gilead Study ID: GS-US-595-6184Registration date: 1 December 2022Study start date: 12 December 2022Recruitment status: Recruiting.

AFT-65/ASCENT-05/OptimICE-RD is an ongoing clinical trial that is testing a new treatment combination for patients with stage II or III triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Stage II­III means the cancer is confined to the breast and/or nearby lymph nodes and can be surgically removed. However, there remains a risk that the cancer could recur after surgery. To reduce this risk, patients with stage II­III TNBC receive anti-cancer medication before and after surgery. For some patients, receipt of anti-cancer medication before surgery produces a pathologic complete response (pCR), meaning there is no observable cancer left behind at surgery. Patients with a pCR have a lower risk of recurrence than patients with residual disease.The AFT-65/ASCENT-05/OptimICE-RD trial includes people with stage II-III TNBC who have residual cancer after completing their course of pre-surgery anti-cancer medication. All participants have any remaining cancer in their breast and/or lymph nodes removed surgically, after which they are randomly assigned to receive one of two treatments. The experimental therapy consists of pembrolizumab along with a medication called sacituzumab govitecan, which kills cancer cells directly and may strengthen the anti-cancer immune response. Pembrolizumab strengthens the anti-cancer immune response, so the hypothesis of this trial is that the two medications will be more effective together. The control therapy consists of pembrolizumab, alone or in combination with a chemotherapy medication called capecitabine, which is the current standard of care. To study the effectiveness of each treatment, the researchers are following up with all participants to learn if and when their breast cancer returns.

Abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy for hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer (monarchE): results from a preplanned interim analysis of a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy previously showed a significant improvement in invasive disease-free survival and distant relapse-free survival in hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2; also known as ERBB2)-negative, node-positive, high-risk, early breast cancer. Here, we report updated results from an interim analysis to assess overall survival as well as invasive disease-free survival and distant relapse-free survival with additional follow-up. METHODS: In monarchE, an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial, adult patients (aged ≥18 years) who had hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, node-positive, early breast cancer at a high risk of recurrence with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were recruited from 603 sites including hospitals and academic and community centres in 38 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by means of an interactive web-based response system (block size of 4), stratified by previous chemotherapy, menopausal status, and region, to receive standard-of-care endocrine therapy of physician's choice for up to 10 years with or without abemaciclib 150 mg orally twice a day for 2 years (treatment period). All therapies were administered in an open-label manner without masking. High-risk disease was defined as either four or more positive axillary lymph nodes, or between one and three positive axillary lymph nodes and either grade 3 disease or tumour size of 5 cm or larger (cohort 1). A smaller group of patients were enrolled with between one and three positive axillary lymph nodes and Ki-67 of at least 20% as an additional risk feature (cohort 2). This was a prespecified overall survival interim analysis planned to occur 2 years after the primary outcome analysis for invasive disease-free survival. Efficacy was assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all treated patients. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03155997, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between July 17, 2017, and Aug 12, 2019, 5637 patients were randomly assigned (5601 [99·4%] were women and 36 [0·6%] were men). 2808 were assigned to receive abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy and 2829 were assigned to receive endocrine therapy alone. At a median follow-up of 42 months (IQR 37-47), median invasive disease-free survival was not reached in either group and the invasive disease-free survival benefit previously reported was sustained: HR 0·664 (95% CI 0·578-0·762, nominal p<0·0001). At 4 years, the absolute difference in invasive disease-free survival between the groups was 6·4% (85·8% [95% CI 84·2-87·3] in the abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy group vs 79·4% [77·5-81·1] in the endocrine therapy alone group). 157 (5·6%) of 2808 patients in the abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy group died compared with 173 (6·1%) of 2829 patients in the endocrine therapy alone group (HR 0·929, 95% CI 0·748-1·153; p=0·50). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (in 548 [19·6%] of 2791 patients receiving abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy vs 24 [0·9%] of 2800 patients in the endocrine therapy alone group), leukopenia (318 [11·4%] vs 11 [0·4%]), and diarrhoea (218 [7·8%] vs six [0·2%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 433 (15·5%) of 2791 patients receiving abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy versus 256 (9·1%) of 2800 receiving endocrine therapy. There were two treatment-related deaths in the abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy group (diarrhoea and pneumonitis) and none in the endocrine therapy alone group. INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant abemaciclib reduces the risk of recurrence. The benefit is sustained beyond the completion of treatment with an absolute increase at 4 years, further supporting the use of abemaciclib in patients with high-risk hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer. Further follow-up is needed to establish whether overall survival can be improved with abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy in these patients. FUNDING: Eli Lilly.

Adjuvant paclitaxel and trastuzumab for node-negative, HER2-positive breast cancer: final 10-year analysis of the open-label, single-arm, phase 2 APT trial.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to report on long-term outcomes of patients with small, node-negative, HER2-positive breast cancer treated with adjuvant paclitaxel and trastuzumab and to establish potential biomarkers to predict prognosis. METHODS: In this open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study, patients aged 18 years or older, with small (≤3 cm), node-negative, HER2-positive breast cancer, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, were recruited from 16 institutions in 13 cities in the USA. Eligible patients were given intravenous paclitaxel (80 mg/m2) with intravenous trastuzumab (loading dose of 4 mg/kg, subsequent doses 2 mg/kg) weekly for 12 weeks, followed by trastuzumab (weekly at 2 mg/kg or once every 3 weeks at 6 mg/kg) for 40 weeks to complete a full year of trastuzumab. The primary endpoint was 3-year invasive disease-free survival. Here, we report 10-year survival outcomes, assessed in all participants who received protocol-defined treatment, with exploratory analyses using the HER2DX genomic tool. This study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00542451, and is closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between Oct 29, 2007, and Sept 3, 2010, 410 patients were enrolled and 406 were given adjuvant paclitaxel and trastuzumab and included in the analysis. Mean age at enrolment was 55 years (SD 10·5), 405 (99·8%) of 406 patients were female and one (0·2%) was male, 350 (86·2%) were White, 28 (6·9%) were Black or African American, and 272 (67·0%) had hormone receptor-positive disease. After a median follow-up of 10·8 years (IQR 7·1-11·4), among 406 patients included in the analysis population, we observed 31 invasive disease-free survival events, of which six (19·4%) were locoregional ipsilateral recurrences, nine (29·0%) were new contralateral breast cancers, six (19·4%) were distant recurrences, and ten (32·3%) were all-cause deaths. 10-year invasive disease-free survival was 91·3% (95% CI 88·3-94·4), 10-year recurrence-free interval was 96·3% (95% CI 94·3-98·3), 10-year overall survival was 94·3% (95% CI 91·8-96·8), and 10-year breast cancer-specific survival was 98·8% (95% CI 97·6-100). HER2DX risk score as a continuous variable was significantly associated with invasive disease-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] per 10-unit increment 1·24 [95% CI 1·00-1·52]; p=0·047) and recurrence-free interval (1·45 [1·09-1·93]; p=0·011). INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant paclitaxel and trastuzumab is a reasonable treatment standard for patients with small, node-negative, HER2-positive breast cancer. The HER2DX genomic tool might help to refine the prognosis for this population. FUNDING: Genentech.

Nodal positivity and systemic therapy among patients with clinical T1-T2N0 human epidermal growth factor receptor-positive breast cancer: Results from two international cohorts.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment strategy for patients with small human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive tumors is based on nodal status. The authors' objective was to evaluate pathologic nodal disease (pathologic lymph node-positive [pN-positive] and pathologic lymph node-positive after preoperative systemic therapy [ypN-positive]) rates in patients who had clinical T1-T2 (cT1-cT2)N0M0, HER2-positive breast cancer treated with upfront surgery or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). METHODS: Two databases were queried for patients who had cT1-cT2N0M0, HER2-positive breast cancer: (1) the Dana-Farber Brigham Cancer Center (DF/BCC) from February 2015 to October 2020 and (2) the Hospital Clinic of Barcelona and the Hospital Clinico of Valencia (HCB/HCV) from January 2012 to September 2021. The pN-positive/ypN-positive and axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) rates were compared between patients who underwent upfront surgery versus those who received NAC. RESULTS: Among 579 patients from the DF/BCC database, 368 underwent upfront surgery, and 211 received NAC; the rates of nodal positivity were 19.8% and 12.8%, respectively (p = .021). The pN-positive rates increased by tumor size (p < .001), reaching 25% for those with cT1c tumors. The ypN-positive rates did not correlate with tumor size. NAC was associated with decreased nodal positivity (odds ratio, 0.411; 95% confidence interval, 0.202-0.838), but the ALND rates were similar (22 of 368 patients [6.0%] who underwent upfront surgery vs. 18 of 211 patients [8.5%] who received NAC; p = .173). Among 292 patients from the HCB/HCV database, 119 underwent upfront surgery, and 173 received NAC; the rates of nodal positivity were 21% and 10.4%, respectively (p = .012). The pN-positive rates increased with tumor size (p = .011). The ALND rates were equivalent by treatment strategy (23 of 119 patients [19.3%] who underwent upfront surgery vs. 24 of 173 patients [13.9%] who received NAC; p = .213). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients who had cT1-cT2N0M0, HER2-positive breast cancer, approximately 20% who underwent upfront surgery were pN-positive, and the rate reached 25% for those with cT1c tumors. Given the opportunity for tailored therapy among lymph node-positive, HER2-positive patients, these data provide rationale for future analyses investigating the utility of routine axillary imaging in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer.

Adjuvant Olaparib for Germline BRCA Carriers With HER2-Negative Early Breast Cancer: Evidence and Controversies.

In the OlympiA study, 1 year of adjuvant olaparib significantly extended invasive disease-free survival and overall survival. The benefit was consistent across subgroups, and this regimen is now recommended after chemotherapy for germline BRCA1/2 mutation (gBRCA1/2m) carriers with high-risk, HER2-negative early breast cancer. However, the integration of olaparib in the landscape of agents currently available in the post(neo)adjuvant setting-ie, pembrolizumab, abemaciclib, and capecitabine-is challenging, as there are no data suggesting how to select, sequence, and/or combine these therapeutic approaches. Furthermore, it is unclear how to best identify additional patients who could benefit from adjuvant olaparib beyond the original OlympiA criteria. Since it is unlikely that new clinical trials will answer these questions, recommendations for clinical practice can be made through indirect evidence. In this article, we review available data that could help guide treatment decisions for gBRCA1/2m carriers with high-risk, early-stage breast cancer.

Nodal Positivity in Early-Stage Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Implications for Preoperative Immunotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Adding pembrolizumab to preoperative chemotherapy improves event-free survival in patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). However, owing to potential toxicities, the risk-benefit ratio of pembrolizumab must be considered. There is consensus that the addition of immunotherapy should be recommended in node-positive patients. This study is undertaken to determine nodal positivity rates in patients with TNBC presenting with cT1-2N0 disease undergoing upfront surgery and to evaluate the utility of axillary ultrasound and biopsy in the setting of a negative clinical examination. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with cT1-2N0 TNBC undergoing upfront surgery were identified from our institutional database (January 2016-February 2021; n = 343) and from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) (n = 46,015). Pathologic nodal status was determined. A second cohort of patients with cT1-T2 TNBC with a negative clinical examination was defined in our institutional database (n = 499), and utilization of axillary ultrasound was examined. RESULTS: For patients undergoing upfront surgery, pathologically positive nodes were found in 14.6% patients of our institutional cohort: 9.4% cT1a/b, 14.9% cT1c, and 20.8% cT2 tumors. In the NCDB cohort, 13.7% patients were node positive: 4.9% cT1a/b, 11.4% cT1c, and 19.7% cT2 tumors. For patients with a normal clinical examination undergoing axillary ultrasound, 7.5% of cT1c and 8.7% of cT2 had suspicious nodes biopsied and confirmed positive for metastasis. CONCLUSIONS: Pathologic node-positive disease is found in > 10 and 20% patients with cT1cN0 and cT2N0 TNBC, respectively. Axillary ultrasound can be used to identify patients presenting with a normal clinical examination for whom preoperative pembrolizumab should be considered.