Clinical efficacy of CDK4/6 inhibitor plus endocrine therapy in HR-positive/HER2-0 and HER2-low-positive metastatic breast cancer: a secondary analysis of PALOMA-2 and PALOMA-3 trials.

BACKGROUND: Cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors in combination with traditional endocrine therapy (ET) are now the recommended first-line treatment for hormone receptor (HR)-positive and HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC). However, the benefits of adding CDK4/6 inhibitors to ET in HER2-low-positive and HER2-0 subgroups remain unclear. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of CDK4/6 inhibitors in combination with ET in patients with HR-positive, HER2-low-positive and HER2-0 MBC. METHODS: This secondary analysis assessed progression-free survival (PFS) among HER2-low-positive and HER2-0 patients enrolled in the double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised clinical trials PALOMA-2 and PALOMA-3. The study included 1186 HER2-negative, HR-positive female patients, with available immunohistochemistry (IHC) and/or in situ hybridization (ISH) results, across 17 countries enrolled between February 2013 and August 2014. HER2-low-positive status was defined by IHC 1+ or 2+ with negative ISH, and HER2-zero by IHC 0. Data analyses were conducted between March and May 2023. In the PALOMA-2 trial, patients were randomly assigned to receive either palbociclib or placebo, in combination with letrozole in the first-line treatment for HR-positive MBC. Patients in the PALOMA-3 study, who had progression or relapse during previous ET, were randomly allocated to receive either palbociclib plus fulvestrant or placebo plus fulvestrant. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS. Kaplan-Meier approach and Cox proportional hazards model were applied to estimate the association of treatment strategies with PFS among HER2-0 and HER2-low-positive populations. The two trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01740427 and NCT01942135. FINDINGS: Of the 666 patients with MBC from the PALOMA-2 study, there were 153 HER2-0 and 513 HER2-low-positive patients. In the HER2-0 population, no significant difference in PFS was observed between the palbociclib-letrozole and placebo-letrozole groups (hazard ratio = 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48-1.30, p = 0.34). In the HER2-low-positive population, palbociclib-letrozole demonstrated a significantly lower risk of PFS than placebo-letrozole group (hazard ratio = 0.52, 95% CI 0.41-0.66, p < 0.0001). The PALOMA-3 study analysed 520 patients with MBC. Within the 153 HER2-0 patients, the palbociclib-fulvestrant group showed a significantly longer PFS than the placebo-fulvestrant group (hazard ratio = 0.54, 95% CI 0.30-0.95, p = 0.034). Among the 367 HER2-low-positive patients, palbociclib-fulvestrant improved PFS (hazard ratio = 0.39, 95% CI 0.28-0.54, p < 0.0001). INTERPRETATION: The combination of a CDK4/6 inhibitor with ET significantly improved PFS in HER2-low-positive patients, while for HER2-0 patients, benefits were primarily observed in patients who had progressed on previous ET. Furthermore, HER2-0 patients may derive limited benefits from first-line CDK4/6 inhibitor treatment. Further work is needed to validate these findings and to delineate patient subsets that are most likely to benefit from the combination of CDK4/6 inhibitors and ET as first-line treatments. FUNDING: None.

Cancer Surveillance in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients With a Pretransplant History of Malignancy: Multidisciplinary Collaborative Expert Opinion.

With improved medical treatments, the prognosis for many malignancies has improved, and more patients are presenting for transplant evaluation with a history of treated cancer. Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients with a prior malignancy are at higher risk of posttransplant recurrence or de novo malignancy, and they may require a cancer surveillance program that is individualized to their specific needs. There is a dearth of literature on optimal surveillance strategies specific to SOT recipients. A working group of transplant physicians and cancer-specific specialists met to provide expert opinion recommendations on optimal cancer surveillance after transplantation for patients with a history of malignancy. Surveillance strategies provided are mainly based on general population recurrence risk data, immunosuppression effects, and limited transplant-specific data and should be considered expert opinion based on current knowledge. Prospective studies of cancer-specific surveillance models in SOT recipients should be supported to inform posttransplant management of this high-risk population.

Digital Health Platforms for Breast Cancer Care: A Scoping Review.

Breast cancer is a significant global health concern affecting millions of women each year. Digital health platforms are an easily accessible intervention that can improve patient care, though their efficacy in breast cancer care is unknown. This scoping review aims to provide an overview of existing research on the utilization of digital health platforms for breast cancer care and identify key trends and gaps in the literature. A comprehensive literature search was conducted across electronic databases, including Ovid MEDLINE, Elsevier EMBASE, and Elsevier Scopus databases. The search strategy incorporated keywords related to "digital health platforms", "breast cancer care", and associated terminologies. After screening for eligibility, a total of 25 articles were included in this scoping review. The identified studies comprised mobile applications and web-based interventions. These platforms demonstrated various functionalities, including patient education, symptom monitoring, treatment adherence, and psychosocial support. The findings indicate the potential of digital health platforms in improving breast cancer care and patients' overall experiences. The positive impact on patient outcomes, including improved quality of life and reduced psychological distress, underscores the importance of incorporating digital health solutions into breast cancer management. Additional research is necessary to validate the effectiveness of these platforms in diverse patient populations and assess their impact on healthcare-resource utilization.

Clinical genetics in breast cancer.

As genetic testing becomes increasingly more accessible and more applicable with a broader range of clinical implications, it may also become more challenging for breast cancer providers to remain up-to-date. This review outlines some of the current clinical guidelines and recent literature surrounding germline genetic testing, as well as genomic testing, in the screening, prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of breast cancer, while identifying potential areas of further research.

Survival among patients with untreated metastatic breast cancer: "What if I do nothing?"

PURPOSE: We sought to assess survival outcomes of patients with de novo metastatic breast cancer (dnMBC) who did not receive treatment irrespective of the reason. METHODS: Adults with dnMBC were selected from the NCDB (2010-2016) and stratified based on receipt of treatment (treated = received at least one treatment and untreated = received no treatments). Overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and groups were compared. Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify factors associated with OS. RESULTS: Of the 53,240 patients with dnMBC, 92.1% received at least one treatment (treated), and 7.9% had no documented treatments, irrespective of the reason (untreated). Untreated patients were more likely to be older (median 68 y vs 61 y, p < 0.001), have higher comorbidity scores (p < 0.001), have triple-negative disease (17.8% vs 12.6%), and a higher disease burden (≥ 2 metastatic sites: 38.2% untreated vs 29.2% treated, p < 0.001). The median unadjusted OS in the untreated subgroup was 2.5 mo versus 36.4 mo in the treated subgroup (p < 0.001). After adjustment, variables associated with a worse OS in the untreated cohort included older age, higher comorbidity scores, higher tumor grade, and triple-negative (vs HR + /HER2-) subtype (all p < 0.05), while the number of metastatic sites was not associated with survival. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with dnMBC who do not receive treatment are more likely to be older, present with comorbid conditions, and have clinically aggressive disease. Similar to those who do receive treatment, survival in an untreated population is associated with select patient and disease characteristics. However, the prognosis for untreated dnMBC is dismal.

Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Pathologic Complete Response and Overall Survival in Patients With Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Treated With Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: Black women have higher rates of death from triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) than White women. We hypothesized that pathologic complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and overall survival (OS) may vary by race/ethnicity in patients with TNBC. METHODS: We identified women 18 years and older with stage I-III TNBC who received NAC followed by surgery from the National Cancer Database (2010-2019). We excluded patients without race/ethnicity or pathology data. Primary outcomes were pCR rates and OS on the basis of race/ethnicity. RESULTS: Forty thousand eight hundred ninety women with TNBC met inclusion criteria (median age [IQR], 53 [44-61] years): 26,150 Non-Hispanic White (64%, NHW), 9,672 Non-Hispanic Black (23.7%, NHB), 3,267 Hispanic (8%), 1,368 Non-Hispanic Asian (3.3%, NHA), and 433 Non-Hispanic Other (1.1%, NHO) patients. Overall, 29.8% demonstrated pCR (NHW: 30.5%, NHB: 27%, Hispanic: 32.6%, NHA: 28.8%, NHO: 29.8%). Unadjusted OS was significantly higher for those with pCR compared with those with residual disease (5-year OS, 0.917 [95% CI, 0.911 to 0.923] v 0.667 [95% CI, 0.661 to 0.673], log-rank P < .001), and this association persisted after adjustment for demographic and tumor factors. The effect of achieving pCR on OS did not differ by race/ethnicity (interaction P = .10). However, NHB patients were less likely (odds ratio [OR], 0.89 [95% CI, 0.83 to 0.95], P = .001) and Hispanic patients were more likely (OR, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.08 to 1.31], P = .001) to achieve pCR than NHW patients. After adjustment for patient and disease factors, including achievement of pCR, Hispanic (hazard ratio [HR], 0.76 [95% CI, 0.69 to 0.85], P < .001) and NHA (HR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.55 to 0.75], P < .001) race/ethnicity remained associated with OS. CONCLUSION: Odds of achieving pCR and OS in patients with TNBC appear to be associated with race/ethnicity. Additional research is necessary to understand how race/ethnicity is associated with rates of pCR and OS, whether related to socioeconomic factors or biologic variables, or both.

Anatomy Versus Biology: What Guides Chemotherapy Decisions in Older Patients With Breast Cancer?

INTRODUCTION: With the increasing utilization of genomic assays, such as the Oncotype DX recurrence score (RS), the relevance of anatomic staging has been questioned for select older patients with breast cancer. We sought to evaluate differences in chemotherapy receipt and/or survival among older patients based on RS and sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) receipt/result. METHODS: Patients aged ≥ 65 diagnosed with pT1-2/cN0/M0 hormone-receptor-positive (HR+)/HER2-breast cancer (2010-2019) were selected from the National Cancer Database. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with chemotherapy receipt. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the association of RS/SLNB group with overall survival. A cost-benefit study was also performed. RESULTS: Of the 75,428 patients included, the majority had an intermediate RS (58.2% versus 27.9% low, 13.8% high) and were SLNB- (85.1% versus 11.6% SLNB+, 3.3% none). Chemotherapy was recommended for 13,442 patients (17.8%). After adjustment, chemotherapy receipt was more likely with higher RS and SLNB+. After adjustment, SLNB receipt/result was only associated with overall survival among those with an intermediate RS. However, returning to the OR for SLNB is not cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: SLNB receipt/result was associated with survival for those with an intermediate RS, but not a low or high RS, suggesting that an SLNB may indeed be unnecessary for select older patients with breast cancer.

Axillary nodal disease burden is not associated with an elevated 21-gene recurrence score in post-menopausal women presenting with a clinically negative axilla.

BACKGROUND: The predictive and prognostic value of the recurrence score (RS) has emphasized the importance of tumor biology and has reduced the prognostic implications of limited nodal burden in post-menopausal women with HR+/HER2-invasive breast cancer (IBC). It is unclear whether routine axillary staging has a continued role in the management of small, clinically node negative (cN0) HR+/HER2- IBC. We sought to estimate the association of RS with pN stage. METHODS: Patients >50yo diagnosed with cN0, HR+/HER2- IBC (2015-2019) with an available RS were identified from the National Cancer Database. The clinicopathologic characteristics and rates of pN-stage (pN0, pN1, pN2/3) were compared for RS of ≤25 vs. >25. RESULTS: The median patient age was 64.1 (IQR 58-69) and the majority (75%) of tumors displayed ductal histology. Most (81.6%) were cT1 on presentation and pT1 (74.7%) on final pathology. There were 130,568 (86.2%) with a RS â€‹≤ â€‹25 and 20,879 (13.8%) with a RS â€‹> â€‹25. On final pathology, 128,995 (85.2%) were pN0 and 21,991 (14.5%) pN1. Of the pN1, 2699 (12.3%) yielded a RS â€‹> â€‹25. There were 461 (0.3%) patients with pN2-pN3 disease. Of those, 57 (12.4%) had RS â€‹> â€‹25. CONCLUSION: In our analysis, pN0 and pN1 tumors are biologically similar by gene expression assay in postmenopausal patients with similar proportions of high RS. These data support the notion that tumor biology examined via RS may have more prognostic and predictive value than metastatic dissemination to limited lymph nodes. These findings support the ongoing evaluation of routine axillary staging in postmenopausal patients with HR+/HER2- IBC.

Society of Surgical Oncology Breast Disease Site Working Group Statement on Contralateral Mastectomy: Indications, Outcomes, and Risks.

Rates of contralateral mastectomy (CM) among patients with unilateral breast cancer have been increasing in the United States. In this Society of Surgical Oncology position statement, we review the literature addressing the indications, risks, and benefits of CM since the society's 2017 statement. We held a virtual meeting to outline key topics and then conducted a literature search using PubMed to identify relevant articles. We reviewed the articles and made recommendations based on group consensus. Patients consider CM for many reasons, including concerns regarding the risk of contralateral breast cancer (CBC), desire for improved cosmesis and symmetry, and preferences to avoid ongoing screening, whereas surgeons primarily consider CBC risk when making a recommendation for CM. For patients with a high risk of CBC, CM reduces the risk of new breast cancer, however it is not known to convey an overall survival benefit. Studies evaluating patient satisfaction with CM and reconstruction have yielded mixed results. Imaging with mammography within 12 months before CM is recommended, but routine preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging is not; there is also no evidence to support routine postmastectomy imaging surveillance. Because the likelihood of identifying an occult malignancy during CM is low, routine sentinel lymph node surgery is not recommended. Data on the rates of postoperative complications are conflicting, and such complications may not be directly related to CM. Adjuvant therapy delays due to complications have not been reported. Surgeons can reduce CM rates by encouraging shared decision making and informed discussions incorporating patient preferences.

Germline Testing in Patients With Breast Cancer: ASCO-Society of Surgical Oncology Guideline.

PURPOSE: To develop recommendations for germline mutation testing for patients with breast cancer. METHODS: An ASCO-Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) panel convened to develop recommendations based on a systematic review and formal consensus process. RESULTS: Forty-seven articles met eligibility criteria for the germline mutation testing recommendations; 18 for the genetic counseling recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS: BRCA1/2 mutation testing should be offered to all newly diagnosed patients with breast cancer ≤65 years and select patients >65 years based on personal history, family history, ancestry, or eligibility for poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor therapy. All patients with recurrent breast cancer who are candidates for PARP inhibitor therapy should be offered BRCA1/2 testing, regardless of family history. BRCA1/2 testing should be offered to women who develop a second primary cancer in the ipsilateral or contralateral breast. For patients with prior history of breast cancer and without active disease, testing should be offered to patients diagnosed ≤65 years and selectively in patients diagnosed after 65 years, if it will inform personal and family risk. Testing for high-penetrance cancer susceptibility genes beyond BRCA1/2 should be offered to those with supportive family histories; testing for moderate-penetrance genes may be offered if necessary to inform personal and family cancer risk. Patients should be provided enough pretest information for informed consent; those with pathogenic variants should receive individualized post-test counseling. Variants of uncertain significance should not impact management, and patients with such variants should be followed for reclassification. Referral to providers experienced in clinical cancer genetics may help facilitate patient selection and interpretation of expanded testing, and provide counseling of individuals without pathogenic germline variants but with significant family history.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines.

Impact of HER2-low status for patients with early-stage breast cancer and non-pCR after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a National Cancer Database Analysis.

PURPOSE: To investigate potential differences in pathological complete response (pCR) rates and overall survival (OS) between HER2-low and HER2-zero patients with early-stage hormone receptor (HR)-positive and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy setting. METHODS: We identified early-stage invasive HER2-negative BC patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy diagnosed between 2010 and 2018 in the National Cancer Database. HER2-low was defined by immunohistochemistry (IHC) 1+ or 2+ with negative in situ hybridization, and HER2-zero by IHC0. All the methods were applied separately in the HR-positive and TNBC cohorts. Logistic regression was used to estimate the association of HER2 status with pCR (i.e. ypT0/Tis and ypN0). Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model were applied to estimate the association of HER2 status with OS. Inverse probability weighting and/or multivariable regression were applied to all analyses. RESULTS: For HR-positive patients, 70.9% (n = 17,934) were HER2-low, whereas 51.1% (n = 10,238) of TNBC patients were HER2-low. For both HR-positive and TNBC cohorts, HER2-low status was significantly associated with lower pCR rates [HR-positive: 5.0% vs. 6.7%; weighted odds ratio (OR) = 0.81 (95% CI: 0.72-0.91), p < 0.001; TNBC: 21.6% vs. 24.4%; weighted OR = 0.91 (95% CI: 0.85-0.98), p = 0.007] and improved OS [HR-positive: weighted hazard ratio = 0.85 (95% CI: 0.79-0.91), p < 0.001; TNBC: weighted hazard ratio = 0.91 (95% CI: 0.86-0.96), p < 0.001]. HER2-low status was associated with favorable OS among patients not achieving pCR [HR-positive: adjusted hazard ratio = 0.83 (95% CI: 0.77-0.89), p < 0.001; TNBC: adjusted hazard ratio = 0.88 (95% CI 0.83-0.94), p < 0.001], while no significant difference in OS was observed in patients who achieved pCR [HR-positive: adjusted hazard ratio = 1.00 (95% CI: 0.61-1.63), p > 0.99; TNBC: adjusted hazard ratio = 1.11 (95% CI: 0.85-1.45), p = 0.44]. CONCLUSION: In both early-stage HR-positive and TNBC patients, HER2-low status was associated with lower pCR rates. HER2-zero status might be considered an adverse prognostic factor for OS in patients not achieving pCR.

Implementation of a novel peer review academy by Surgery and the Association of Women Surgeons.

BACKGROUND: A novel Peer Review Academy was developed as a collaborative effort between the Association of Women Surgeons and the journal Surgery to provide formal training in peer review. We aimed to describe the outcomes of this initiative using a mixed methods approach. METHODS: We developed a year-long curriculum with monthly online didactic sessions. Women surgical trainee mentees were paired 1:1 with rotating women surgical faculty mentors for 3 formal peer review opportunities. We analyzed pre-course and post-course surveys to evaluate mentee perceptions of the academy and assessed changes in mentee review quality over time with blinded scoring of unedited reviews. Semi-structured interviews were conducted upon course completion. RESULTS: Ten women surgical faculty mentors and 10 women surgical trainees from across the United States and Canada successfully completed the Peer Review Academy. There were improvements in the mentees' confidence for all domains of peer review evaluated, including overall confidence in peer review, study novelty, study design, analytic approach, and review formatting (all, P ≤ .02). The mean score of peer review quality increased over time (59.2 ± 10.8 vs 76.5 ± 9.4; P = .02). In semi-structured interviews, important elements were emphasized across the Innovation, Implementation Process, and Individuals Domains, including the values of (1) a comprehensive approach to formal peer review education; (2) mentoring relationships between women faculty and resident surgeons; and (3) increasing diversity in the scientific peer review process. CONCLUSION: Our novel Peer Review Academy was feasible on a national scale, resulting in significant qualitative and quantitative improvements in women surgical trainee skillsets, and has the potential to grow and diversify the existing peer review pool.

BRCA1/2 mutation carriers & risk reducing mastectomy: Who undergoes surgery and potential benefits.

BACKGROUND: Risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) is the most effective breast cancer risk-reduction strategy in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. We examined factors associated with RRM and its relationship with overall survival (OS). METHODS: Patients aged 18-80y at diagnosis of their BRCA1/2 mutation were selected from our institutional database and stratified by RRM receipt. Differences were tested; unadjusted OS was estimated. RESULTS: Of the 306 patients, median age was 43y; median follow-up was 41.6mo. Patients undergoing RRM were more often married with a history of pregnancy (both p â€‹≤ â€‹0.05). Of female patients, 23.1% underwent RRM. Two patients had malignancy detected at RRM, and one developed breast cancer after RRM. Higher unadjusted OS was observed with RRM (p â€‹= â€‹0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses suggest that family-structure may play a role in a patient's decision to undergo RRM. We also demonstrated RRM is likely associated with improved survival, potentially underscoring the importance of this option for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis, Version 1.2023.

The NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis provide health care providers with a practical, consistent framework for screening and evaluating a spectrum of clinical presentations and breast lesions. The NCCN Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis Panel is composed of a multidisciplinary team of experts in the field, including representation from medical oncology, gynecologic oncology, surgical oncology, internal medicine, family practice, preventive medicine, pathology, diagnostic and interventional radiology, as well as patient advocacy. The NCCN Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis Panel meets at least annually to review emerging data and comments from reviewers within their institutions to guide updates to existing recommendations. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel's decision-making and discussion surrounding the most recent updates to the guideline's screening recommendations.

Prognostic Tools for Older Women with Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review.

Background: Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women, and older patients comprise an increasing proportion of patients with this disease. The older breast cancer population is heterogenous with unique factors affecting clinical decision making. While many models have been developed and tested for breast cancer patients of all ages, tools specifically developed for older patients with breast cancer have not been recently reviewed. We systematically reviewed prognostic models developed and/or validated for older patients with breast cancer. Methods: We conducted a systematic search in 3 electronic databases. We identified original studies that were published prior to 8 November 2022 and presented the development and/or validation of models based mainly on clinico-pathological factors to predict response to treatment, recurrence, and/or mortality in older patients with breast cancer. The PROBAST was used to assess the ROB and applicability of each included tool. Results: We screened titles and abstracts of 7316 records. This generated 126 studies for a full text review. We identified 17 eligible articles, all of which presented tool development. The models were developed between 1996 and 2022, mostly using national registry data. The prognostic models were mainly developed in the United States (n = 7; 41%). For the derivation cohorts, the median sample size was 213 (interquartile range, 81-845). For the 17 included modes, the median number of predictive factors was 7 (4.5-10). Conclusions: There have been several studies focused on developing prognostic tools specifically for older patients with breast cancer, and the predictions made by these tools vary widely to include response to treatment, recurrence, and mortality. While external validation was rare, we found that it was typically concordant with interval validation results. Studies that were not validated or only internally validated still require external validation. However, most of the models presented in this review represent promising tools for clinical application in the care of older patients with breast cancer.