Sentinel lymph node biopsy before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in cN0 breast cancer patients: impact on axillary morbidity and survival-a propensity score cohort study.

PURPOSE: In patients with clinically lymph node-negative (cN0) breast cancer, performing sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) has been preferentially embraced in comparison to before NACT. However, survival outcomes associated with both strategies remain understudied. We aimed to compare the axillary lymphadenectomy (ALND) rate, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS), between two strategies. METHODS: We included 310 patients in a retrospective observational study. SNLB was performed before NACT from December 2006 to April 2014 (107 cases) and after NACT from May 2014 to May 2020 (203 patients). An inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method was applied to homogenize both groups. Hazard ratios (HR) and odd ratios (OR) are reported with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI). RESULTS: The lymphadenectomy rate was 29.9% before NACT and 7.4% after NACT (p < 0.001), with an OR of 5.35 95%CI (2.7-10.4); p = .002. After 4 years of follow-up, SLNB after NACT was associated with lower risk for DFS, HR 0.42 95%CI (0.17-1.06); p = 0.066 and better OS, HR 0.21 CI 95% (0.07-0.67); p = 0.009 than SLNB before NACT. After multivariate analysis, independent adverse prognostic factors for OS included SLNB before NACT, HR 3.095 95%CI (2.323-4.123), clinical nonresponse to NACT, HR 1.702 95% CI (1.012-2.861), and small tumors (cT1) with high proliferation index, HR 1.889 95% (1.195-2.985). CONCLUSION: Performing SLNB before NACT results in more ALND and has no benefit for patient survival. These findings support discontinuing the practice of SLNB before NACT in patients with cN0 breast cancer.

Elderly patients with hormone receptor-positive HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer treated with CDK4/6 inhibitors in a multicentre cohort.

INTRODUCTION: Cyclin-dependent kinases 4/6 inhibitors (CDK 4/6i) combined with endocrine therapy have become the gold standard in hormone receptor-positive (HR +) HER2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC). However, there is a significant lack of data regarding the efficacy and safety of these treatments in elderly patients. We present the results of a real-world data (RWD) cohort stratified by age at treatment initiation (≥ 70 years compared to patients < 70 years). METHODS: Clinico-pathological data of HR + HER2- MBC patients who were candidates for CDK4/6i therapy between January 2017 and December 2020 at the Institut Català d'Oncologia (Spain) were retrospectively collected. The primary goal was to assess Progression-Free Survival (PFS), Overall Survival (OS), and safety outcomes within this patient population. RESULTS: A total of 274 patients with MBC who received CDK4/6i treatment were included in the study. Among them, 84 patients (30.8%) were aged ≥ 70 years, with a mean age of 75, while 190 patients (69.2%) were under the age of 70, with a mean age of 55.7 years. The most frequently observed grade 3-4 toxicity was neutropenia, with similar rates in both the < 70 group (43.9%) and the ≥ 70 group (47.9%) (p = 0.728). The median Progression-Free Survival (mPFS) for the first-line CDK4/6i treatment was 22 months (95% CI, 15.4-39.8) in the < 70 group and 20.8 months (95% CI 11.2-NR) in the ≥ 70 group (p = 0.67). Similarly, the median PFS for the second-line CDK4/6i treatment was 10.4 months (95% CI, 7.4-15.1) and 7.1 months (95% CI 4.4-21.3) (p = 0.79), respectively. Median overall survival (mOS) was not reached either for the first- and second-line treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Our RWD suggests that elderly patients, when compared to those under 70, experience similar survival outcomes and exhibit comparable tolerance for CDK4/6i therapy.

TROPION-Breast01: Datopotamab deruxtecan vs chemotherapy in pre-treated inoperable or metastatic HR+/HER2- breast cancer.

Improving the prognosis for patients with metastatic HR+/HER2- breast cancer remains an unmet need. Patients with tumors that have progressed on endocrine therapy and/or are not eligible for endocrine therapy had limited treatment options beyond chemotherapy. Antibody-drug conjugates are a novel and promising treatment class in this setting. Datopotamab deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) consists of a TROP2-directed humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody attached via a serum-stable cleavable linker to a topoisomerase I inhibitor payload. TROPION-Breast01 is an ongoing phase III study that is evaluating the efficacy and safety of Dato-DXd compared with investigator's choice of standard-of-care chemotherapy in patients with inoperable or metastatic HR+/HER2- breast cancer who have received one or two prior lines of systemic chemotherapy in the inoperable or metastatic setting. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05104866 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Antibody-drug conjugates are a type of drug with two parts: an antibody that directs the drug to the cancer cells and a cancer-cell killing toxic payload. By binding to cancer cells before releasing the payload, treatment is directed to the site of action so there are fewer side effects in the rest of the body. Datopotamab deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) is an antibody-drug conjugates made up of datopotamab (antibody) and DXd (payload) which are joined together via a stable linker. Datopotamab binds to a protein found on cancer cells called TROP2; it then goes inside and releases the DXd payload to kill the tumor cells. DXd may leak out to surrounding cancer cells and kill those as well. The TROPION-Breast01 study is comparing Dato-DXd with standard-of-care chemotherapy. Around 700 patients will take part, who have: Tumors that cannot be surgically removed. Tumors that are hormone receptor-positive and do not have HER2 overexpression. Had one or two lines of previous chemotherapy (after the tumor could not be surgically removed, or had spread). Had tumor growth despite hormonal therapy or are ineligible for hormonal therapy. Patients who meet the entry criteria will be randomly assigned to a treatment group in equal numbers to either Dato-DXd or an appropriate chemotherapy, out of four options chosen by the treating doctor. At the end of the study, researchers will look at whether the patients who receive Dato-DXd live longer without their breast cancer getting worse, compared with patients who receive chemotherapy. This study is also looking at how the treatment affects patients' quality of life.

Developing Cardio-Oncology Programs in the New Era: Beyond Ventricular Dysfunction Due to Cancer Treatments.

Cardiovascular disease is a common problem in cancer patients that is becoming more widely recognized. This may be a consequence of prior cardiovascular risk factors but could also be secondary to the anticancer treatments. With the goal of offering a multidisciplinary approach to guaranteeing optimal cancer therapy and the early detection of related cardiac diseases, and in light of the recent ESC Cardio-Oncology Guideline recommendations, we developed a Cardio-Oncology unit devoted to the prevention and management of these specific complications. This document brings together important aspects to consider for the development and organization of a Cardio-Oncology program through our own experience and the current evidence.

SEOM–GEICAM–SOLTI clinical guidelines in advanced breast cancer (2022)

Advanced breast cancer represents a challenge for patients and for physicians due its dynamic genomic changes yielding to a resistance to treatments. The main goal is to improve quality of live and survival of the patients through the most appropriate subsequent therapies based on the knowledge of the natural history of the disease. In these guidelines, we summarize current evidence and available therapies for the medical management of advanced breast cancer (AU)

Axillary lymph node dissection versus radiotherapy in breast cancer with positive sentinel nodes after neoadjuvant therapy (ADARNAT trial).

Introduction: Breast cancer surgery currently focuses on de-escalating treatment without compromising patient survival. Axillary radiotherapy (ART) now replaces axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in patients with limited sentinel lymph node (SLN) involvement during the primary surgery, and this has significantly reduced the incidence of lymphedema without worsening the prognosis. However, patients treated with neoadjuvant systemic treatment (NST) cannot benefit from this option despite the low incidence of residual disease in the armpit in most cases. Data regarding the use of radiotherapy instead of ALND in this population are lacking. This study will assess whether ART is non-inferior to ALND in terms of recurrence and overall survival in patients with positive SLN after NST, including whether it reduces surgery-related adverse effects. Methods and analyses: This multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial will enroll 1660 patients with breast cancer and positive SLNs following NST in approximately 50 Spanish centers over 3 years. Patients will be stratified by NST regimen and nodal involvement (isolated tumoral cells or micrometastasis versus macrometastasis) and randomly assigned 1:1 to ART without ALND (study arm) or ALND alone (control arm). Level 3 and supraclavicular radiotherapy will be added in both arms. The primary outcome is the 5-year axillary recurrence determined by clinical and radiological examination. The secondary outcomes include lymphedema or arm dysfunction, quality of life based (EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR23 questionnaires), disease-free survival, and overall survival. Discussion: This study aims to provide data to confirm the efficacy and safety of ART over ALND in patients with a positive SLN after NST, together with the impact on morbidity. Ethics and dissemination: The Research Ethics Committee of Bellvitge University Hospital approved this trial (Protocol Record PR148/21, version 3, 1/2/2022) and all patients must provide written informed consent. The involvement of around 50 centers across Spain will facilitate the dissemination of our results. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier number NCT04889924.

Ten-year experience of bone SBRT in breast cancer: analysis of predictive factors of effectiveness

Purpose Data on the benefit of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in patients with breast cancer (BC) and bone metastases remain limited. The purpose of this study is to report our 10-year experience of bone SBRT, analyzing toxicity and prognostic factors for local control (LC); progression-free survival, and overall survival (OS). Methods/patients We analyzed all spine and non-spine bone SBRT performed in patients with BC during the 2012–2022 period at our institution. Treatments carried out with ablative intent in stereotactic conditions with dose/fraction ≥ 5 Gy in 5 or fewer sessions were considered. Demographic, treatment, and toxicity data were recorded according to CTCAEv4. Risk factors were assessed through univariate and multivariate analysis by Cox regression. Results 60 bone SBRT treatments were performed during the study period. 75% were spine SBRT and 25% were non-spine SBRT (median BED4Gy was 80 Gy4). The median age was 52.5 years (34–79). The median tumor volume was 2.9 cm3 (0.5–39.4). The median follow-up was 32.4 months (1.2–101.7). 1 and 2 years LC were 92.9 and 86.6%, respectively. 1 and 2 years OS were 100 and 90.6%, respectively. Multivariate analysis (MVA) associated volume of the treated lesion ≥ 13 cm3 with worse LC (p = 0.046; HR 12.1, 95%CI = 1.1–140.3). In addition, deferring SBRT > 3 months after lesion diagnosis to prioritize systemic treatment showed a significant benefit, improving the 2 years LC up to 96.8% vs. 67.5% for SBRT performed before this period (p = 0.031; HR 0.1, 95%CI = 0.01–0.8). Hormonal receptors, the total number of metastases, and CA15-3 value were significantly associated with OS in MVA. During follow-up, three non-spine fractures (5%) were observed. Conclusions According to our data, bone SBRT is a safe and effective technique for BC. Upfront systemic treatment before SBRT offers a benefit in LC. Therefore, SBRT should be considered after prior systemic treatment in this population (AU)

SEOM-GEICAM-SOLTI clinical guidelines in advanced breast cancer (2022).

Advanced breast cancer represents a challenge for patients and for physicians due its dynamic genomic changes yielding to a resistance to treatments. The main goal is to improve quality of live and survival of the patients through the most appropriate subsequent therapies based on the knowledge of the natural history of the disease. In these guidelines, we summarize current evidence and available therapies for the medical management of advanced breast cancer.

HOPE (SOLTI-1903) breast cancer study: real-world, patient-centric, clinical practice study to assess the impact of genomic data on next treatment decision-choice in patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer.

Background: Metastatic breast cancer (mBC) causes nearly all BC-related deaths. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies allow for the application of personalized medicine using targeted therapies that could improve patients' outcomes. However, NGS is not routinely used in the clinical practice and its cost induces access-inequity among patients. We hypothesized that promoting active patient participation in the management of their disease offering access to NGS testing and to the subsequent medical interpretation and recommendations provided by a multidisciplinary molecular advisory board (MAB) could contribute to progressively overcome this challenge. We designed HOPE (SOLTI-1903) breast cancer trial, a study where patients voluntarily lead their inclusion through a digital tool (DT). The main objectives of HOPE study are to empower mBC patients, gather real-world data on the use of molecular information in the management of mBC and to generate evidence to assess the clinical utility for healthcare systems. Trial design: After self-registration through the DT, the study team validates eligibility criteria and assists patients with mBC in the subsequent steps. Patients get access to the information sheet and sign the informed consent form through an advanced digital signature. Afterwards, they provide the most recent (preferably) metastatic archival tumor sample for DNA-sequencing and a blood sample obtained at the time of disease progression for ctDNA analysis. Paired results are reviewed by the MAB, considering patient's medical history. The MAB provides a further interpretation of molecular results and potential treatment recommendations, including ongoing clinical trials and further (germline) genetic testing. Participants self-document their treatment and disease evolution for the next 2 years. Patients are encouraged to involve their physicians in the study. HOPE also includes a patient empowerment program with educational workshops and videos about mBC and precision medicine in oncology. The primary endpoint of the study was to describe the feasibility of a patient-centric precision oncology program in mBC patients when a comprehensive genomic profile is available to decide on a subsequent line of treatment. Clinical trial registration: www.soltihope.com, identifier NCT04497285.

Management of the axilla in postmenopausal patients with cN0 hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant endocrine therapy and its prognostic impact.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the differences in nodal positivity if the sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is performed before or after neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) in breast cancer patients, and its impact on prognosis. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed in a single center including 91 postmenopausal cases with clinically node-negative and hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative (HR + /HER2-) breast cancer, treated with NET and SLNB. SLNB was done pre-NET until 2014, and post-NET thereafter. Axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) was indicated only in SLNB macrometastasis, although in selected elderly patients, it was omitted. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were estimated in relation to the status of the axilla, and the differences assessed using the log-rank test. RESULTS: Between December 2006 and March 2022, SLNB was performed pre-NET in 14 cases and post-NET in 77. Both groups were similar in baseline tumor and patient characteristics. SLNB positivity was similar regardless of whether SLNB was performed before (5/14, 35.7%) or after NET (27/77, 37%), with 2/14 SLN macrometastases in the pre-NET cohort and 17/77 in the post-NET cohort. Only three patients (18.7%) with SLN macrometastasis had > 3 positive nodes following ALND. The 5-year overall survival and distant disease-free survival were 92.4% and 94.8%, respectively, with no significant differences according to SLNB status (p 0.5 and 0.8, respectively). CONCLUSION: SLN positivity did not differ according to its timing (before or after NET). Therefore, NET has no effect on lymph node clearance. Furthermore, the prognosis is good regardless of the axillary involvement. Therefore, factors other than axillary involvement may affect the prognosis in these patients.

Ten-year experience of bone SBRT in breast cancer: analysis of predictive factors of effectiveness.

PURPOSE: Data on the benefit of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in patients with breast cancer (BC) and bone metastases remain limited. The purpose of this study is to report our 10-year experience of bone SBRT, analyzing toxicity and prognostic factors for local control (LC); progression-free survival, and overall survival (OS). METHODS/PATIENTS: We analyzed all spine and non-spine bone SBRT performed in patients with BC during the 2012-2022 period at our institution. Treatments carried out with ablative intent in stereotactic conditions with dose/fraction ≥ 5 Gy in 5 or fewer sessions were considered. Demographic, treatment, and toxicity data were recorded according to CTCAEv4. Risk factors were assessed through univariate and multivariate analysis by Cox regression. RESULTS: 60 bone SBRT treatments were performed during the study period. 75% were spine SBRT and 25% were non-spine SBRT (median BED4Gy was 80 Gy4). The median age was 52.5 years (34-79). The median tumor volume was 2.9 cm3 (0.5-39.4). The median follow-up was 32.4 months (1.2-101.7). 1 and 2 years LC were 92.9 and 86.6%, respectively. 1 and 2 years OS were 100 and 90.6%, respectively. Multivariate analysis (MVA) associated volume of the treated lesion ≥ 13 cm3 with worse LC (p = 0.046; HR 12.1, 95%CI = 1.1-140.3). In addition, deferring SBRT > 3 months after lesion diagnosis to prioritize systemic treatment showed a significant benefit, improving the 2 years LC up to 96.8% vs. 67.5% for SBRT performed before this period (p = 0.031; HR 0.1, 95%CI = 0.01-0.8). Hormonal receptors, the total number of metastases, and CA15-3 value were significantly associated with OS in MVA. During follow-up, three non-spine fractures (5%) were observed. CONCLUSIONS: According to our data, bone SBRT is a safe and effective technique for BC. Upfront systemic treatment before SBRT offers a benefit in LC. Therefore, SBRT should be considered after prior systemic treatment in this population.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and Novel Immunotherapy Approaches for Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To critically review the existing evidence on immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in early-stage and metastatic breast cancer and discuss emerging strategies in the different breast cancer subtypes. RECENT FINDINGS: Immunotherapy has become one of the major milestones in contemporary oncology, revolutionizing the treatment of multiple solid tumors. ICI agents combined with chemotherapy have demonstrated significant efficacy in both early-stage and metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. However, only a subgroup of patients responds to those agents and some associated toxicities, although infrequent, can be life-disabling. Emerging data from immunotherapy studies in advanced hormone receptor-positive (HR +) breast cancer as well as HER2-positive disease are arising with mixed results. Although breast cancer has not classically been considered a hot tumor, ICIs have proven to be effective in a subset of breast cancer patients. However, much remains to be learned, and the identification of new biomarkers beyond PD-L1 expression is essential not only to improve the efficacy of ICI but also to identify patients who can avoid them, together with their toxicities and costs.

Management of patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer following pembrolizumab-based neoadjuvant therapy: What are the evidences?

New therapy options have changed the treatment landscape of early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) in recent years. Most patients are candidates for neoadjuvant chemotherapy, which helps to downstage the tumor and tailor adjuvant systemic therapy based on pathologic response. Capecitabine, pembrolizumab, and olaparib have been incorporated into the armamentarium of adjuvant treatment for selected patients. The KEYNOTE-522 trial, that demonstrated the benefit of pembrolizumab, given in addition to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and adjuvantly after surgery, represented a paradigm shift for early-stage TNBC treatment. Pembrolizumab was continued in the adjuvant setting irrespective of response to neoadjuvant therapy, and other adjuvant therapies were not administered in the trial. Many questions were then raised on the selection of adjuvant therapy regimens for patients with residual disease (RD). Prior to the routine use of immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), the value of adjuvant capecitabine for patients with RD after neoadjuvant polychemotherapy was demonstrated. Given the poor prognosis of some patients with RD after neoadjuvant chemo-immunotherapy, while the survival advantage of adding capecitabine during the adjuvant phase of pembrolizumab is unknown, it does appear safe and can be considered. Regarding patients harboring germline BRCA mutations with RD after neoadjuvant ICI-containing regimens, the combination of olaparib with pembrolizumab can be an option based on existing safety data.

Early on-treatment transcriptional profiling as a tool for improving pathological response prediction in HER2-positive inflammatory breast cancer.

Background: Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is a rare and understudied disease, with 40% of cases presenting with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive subtype. The goals of this study were to (i) assess the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate of short-term neoadjuvant dual-HER2-blockade and paclitaxel, (ii) contrast baseline and on-treatment transcriptional profiles of IBC tumor biopsies associated with pCR, and (iii) identify biological pathways that may explain the effect of neoadjuvant therapy on tumor response. Patients and Methods: A single-arm phase II trial of neoadjuvant trastuzumab (H), pertuzumab (P), and paclitaxel for 16 weeks was completed among patients with newly diagnosed HER2-positive IBC. Fresh-frozen tumor biopsies were obtained pretreatment (D1) and 8 days later (D8), following a single dose of HP, prior to adding paclitaxel. We performed RNA-sequencing on D1 and D8 tumor biopsies, identified genes associated with pCR using differential gene expression analysis, identified pathways associated with pCR using gene set enrichment and gene expression deconvolution methods, and compared the pCR predictive value of principal components derived from gene expression profiles by calculating and area under the curve for D1 and D8 subsets. Results: Twenty-three participants were enrolled, of whom 21 completed surgery following neoadjuvant therapy. Paired longitudinal fresh-frozen tumor samples (D1 and D8) were obtained from all patients. Among the 21 patients who underwent surgery, the pCR and the 4-year disease-free survival were 48% (90% CI 0.29-0.67) and 90% (95% CI 66-97%), respectively. The transcriptional profile of D8 biopsies was found to be more predictive of pCR (AUC = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.7993-1) than the D1 biopsies (AUC = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.5905-0.9822). Conclusions: In patients with HER2-positive IBC treated with neoadjuvant HP and paclitaxel for 16 weeks, gene expression patterns of tumor biopsies measured 1 week after treatment initiation not only offered different biological information but importantly served as a better predictor of pCR than baseline transcriptional analysis. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01796197 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01796197); registered on February 21, 2013.

Clinical trial data and emerging strategies: HER2-positive breast cancer.

A deeper insight into tumor biology and HER2 signaling has led to the development of novel anti-HER2 drugs that have significantly improved the prognosis of patients with HER2-positive breast cancer. The breast cancer immune microenvironment has emerged as a potential prognostic factor. Moreover, the host immune system not only seems to play a critical role in the prognosis of HER2-positive breast cancer, but also seems to modulate treatment response to some HER2-targeted agents. Here, we review the latest evidence of the role of immunotherapy in HER2-positive breast cancer and present emerging strategies.

Metformin and Breast Cancer: Where Are We Now?

Breast cancer is the most prevalent cancer and the leading cause of cancer-related death among women worldwide. Type 2 diabetes-associated metabolic traits such as hyperglycemia, hyperinsulinemia, inflammation, oxidative stress, and obesity are well-known risk factors for breast cancer. The insulin sensitizer metformin, one of the most prescribed oral antidiabetic drugs, has been suggested to function as an antitumoral agent, based on epidemiological and retrospective clinical data as well as preclinical studies showing an antiproliferative effect in cultured breast cancer cells and animal models. These benefits provided a strong rationale to study the effects of metformin in routine clinical care of breast cancer patients. However, the initial enthusiasm was tempered after disappointing results in randomized controlled trials, particularly in the metastatic setting. Here, we revisit the current state of the art of metformin mechanisms of action, critically review past and current metformin-based clinical trials, and briefly discuss future perspectives on how to incorporate metformin into the oncologist's armamentarium for the prevention and treatment of breast cancer.

Genomic characterization and tumor evolution in paired samples of metaplastic breast carcinoma.

Metaplastic breast carcinomas are a rare and heterogeneous group of tumors (0.5-2%). They are mainly triple negative tumors but they present poorer chemotherapy responses and worse prognosis than other triple negative tumors. The aim of our study was to characterize the molecular profile and tumor evolution in matched (primary-relapse) tumor samples from patients with early-stage metaplastic breast carcinomas who had disease recurrence/progression. We performed genomic profiling of tumor biopsies at least from two different time points of their tumor evolution. Tumor samples were analyzed by DNA-Next Generation Sequencing (Illumina 2 x 75bp) using the Action OncoKitDX panel (Imegen-Health in Code group), which includes point mutations in 50 genes, CNVs, and fusion genes. Only pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants were considered for analysis and they were categorized following the ComPerMed criteria. We analyzed 21 matched tumor samples (8 primary and 13 relapse/progression samples). Genomic profiling of matched tumor samples revealed that mutations present in primary tumors are generally maintained in the relapse/disease progression. We did not find a significant increase in point mutations between primary and relapse/progression samples, although gene amplifications were found more frequently in relapse/progression samples. Tumor samples harbored high frequency of TP53 (100%) and TERT promoter (29%) mutations, and of MYC amplifications (80% of which in relapse/progression samples). No PI3KCA mutations were found, but PTEN variations were enriched in 38% of samples (10% mutations and 28% deletions). FGFR1 amplifications were identified in 13% of samples (primary tumor only). Neither ERBB2 nor EGFR gene amplifications were detected. The most frequent pathogenic alterations occurred in cycle regulation's genes, including TP53 and TERT promoter mutations, and MYC amplifications. Relapse/progression samples were highly enriched for MYC amplification. Larger studies are required to better characterize these tumors, and identify new strategies to improve the prognosis of these patients.

Clinical Profile and Prognosis of a Real-World Cohort of Patients With Moderate or Severe Cancer Therapy-Induced Cardiac Dysfunction.

Introduction and Objectives: Cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction (CTRCD) is a common cause of cancer treatment withdrawal, related to the poor outcomes. The cardiac-specific treatment could recover the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). We analyzed the clinical profile and prognosis of patients with CTRCD in a real-world scenario. Methods: A retrospective study that include all the cancer patients diagnosed with CTRCD, defined as LVEF < 50%. We analyzed the cardiac and oncologic treatments, the predictors of mortality and LVEF recovery, hospital admission, and the causes of mortality (cardiovascular (CV), non-CV, and cancer-related). Results: We included 113 patients (82.3% women, age 49.2 ± 12.1 years). Breast cancer (72.6%) and anthracyclines (72.6%) were the most frequent cancer and treatment. Meantime to CTRCD was 8 months, with mean LVEF of 39.4 ± 9.2%. At diagnosis, 27.4% of the patients were asymptomatic. Cardiac-specific treatment was started in 66.4% of patients, with LVEF recovery-rate of 54.8%. Higher LVEF at the time of CTRCD, shorter time from cancer treatment to diagnosis of CTRCD, and younger age were the predictors of LVEF recovery. The hospitalization rate was 20.4% (8.8% linked to heart failure). Treatment with trastuzumab and lower LVEF at diagnosis of CTRCD were the predictors of mortality. Thirty point nine percent of patients died during the 26 months follow-up. The non-CV causes and cancer-related were more frequent than CV ones. Conclusions: Cardiac-specific treatment achieves LVEF recovery in more than half of the patients. LVEF at the diagnosis of CTRCD, age, and time from the cancer treatment initiation to CTRCD were the predictors of LVEF recovery. The CV-related deaths were less frequent than the non-CV ones. Trastuzumab treatment and LVEF at the time of CTRCD were the predictors of mortality.