Abemaciclib plus a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor as initial therapy for HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer: Final overall survival results of MONARCH 3.

BACKGROUND: In MONARCH 2, the addition of abemaciclib to fulvestrant significantly improved both progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer (ABC) with disease progression on prior endocrine therapy (ET). In MONARCH 3, the addition of abemaciclib to a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) as initial therapy for HR+, HER2- ABC significantly improved PFS. Here, we present the prespecified final OS results for MONARCH 3. PATIENTS AND METHODS: MONARCH 3 is a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study of abemaciclib plus NSAI (anastrozole or letrozole) versus placebo plus NSAI in postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2- ABC without prior systemic therapy in the advanced setting. The primary objective was investigator-assessed PFS; OS was a gated secondary endpoint, and chemotherapy-free survival (CFS) was an exploratory endpoint. RESULTS: A total of 493 women were randomized 2:1 to receive abemaciclib plus NSAI (n = 328) or placebo plus NSAI (n = 165). After a median follow-up of 8.1 years, there were 198 OS events (60.4%) in the abemaciclib arm and 116 (70.3%) in the placebo arm (hazard ratio, 0.804; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.637-1.015; P = 0.0664, non-significant). Median OS was 66.8 versus 53.7 months for abemaciclib versus placebo. In the subgroup with visceral disease (sVD), there were 113 OS events (65.3%) in the abemaciclib arm and 65 (72.2%) in the placebo arm (hazard ratio, 0.758; 95% CI, 0.558-1.030; P = 0.0757, non-significant). Median OS was 63.7 months versus 48.8 months for abemaciclib versus placebo. The previously demonstrated PFS benefit was sustained, and CFS numerically improved with the addition of abemaciclib. No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSION: Abemaciclib combined with an NSAI resulted in clinically meaningful improvement in median OS (ITT: 13.1 months; sVD: 14.9 months) in patients with HR+ HER2- ABC; however, statistical significance was not reached.

Open questions, current challenges, and future perspectives in targeting human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-low breast cancer.

Approximately 60% of traditionally defined human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancers express low levels of HER2 [HER2-low; defined as immunohistochemistry (IHC) 1+ or IHC 2+/in situ hybridization (ISH)-]. HER2-low breast cancers encompass a large percentage of both hormone receptor-positive (up to 85%) and triple-negative (up to 63%) breast cancers. The DESTINY-Breast04 trial established that HER2-low tumors are targetable, leading to the approval of trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) as the first HER2-directed therapy for the treatment of HER2-low breast cancer in the United States and Europe. This change in the clinical landscape results in a number of questions and challenges-including those related to HER2 assessment and patient identification-and highlights the need for careful assessment of HER2 expression to identify patients eligible for T-DXd. This review provides context for understanding how to identify patients with HER2-low breast cancer with respect to sample types, scoring and reporting HER2 status, and testing methods and assays. It also discusses management of important T-DXd-related adverse events. Available evidence supports the efficacy of T-DXd in patients with any history of IHC 1+ or IHC 2+/ISH- scores; however, future research may further refine the population who could benefit from T-DXd or other HER2-directed therapies and identify novel methods for patient identification. Because HER2 expression can change with disease progression or treatment, and variability exists in scoring and interpretation of HER2 status, careful re-evaluation in certain scenarios may help to identify more patients who may benefit from T-DXd.

Prognostic value of HER2DX in early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer: a comprehensive analysis of 757 patients in the Sweden Cancerome Analysis Network-Breast dataset (SCAN-B).

BACKGROUND: The HER2DX risk-score has undergone rigorous validation in prior investigations involving patients with early-stage human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive (HER2+) breast cancer. In this study, we present the outcomes of the HER2DX risk-score within the most recent release of the Sweden Cancerome Analysis Network-Breast (SCAN-B) HER2+ cohort. This updated examination benefits from a larger patient sample, an extended follow-up duration, and detailed treatment information. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clinical and RNAseq data from the SCAN-B dataset were retrieved from Gene Expression Omnibus (GSE81538). Among the 6600 patients, 819 had HER2+ breast cancer, with 757 individuals with research-based HER2DX risk-scores and corresponding survival outcomes. The HER2DX risk-score was evaluated (i) as a continuous variable and (ii) using predefined cut-offs. The primary endpoint for this study was overall survival (OS). The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox models were used to estimate OS and a multistate model with four states was fitted to better characterize patients' follow-up. RESULTS: The median follow-up time was 7.5 years (n = 757). The most common systemic therapy was chemotherapy with trastuzumab (82.0%) and most tumors were classified as T1-T2 (97.1%). The HER2DX risk-score as a continuous variable was significantly associated with OS after adjustment for clinical variables and treatment regimen [hazard ratios (HR) per 10-unit increment = 1.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13-1.51, P < 0.001] as well as within predefined risk groups (high versus low; HR = 2.57, 95% CI 1.36-4.85, P < 0.001). Patients classified as HER2DX high-risk also had higher risk of (i) breast cancer recurrence and (ii) death without previous recurrence. Within the subgroup of HER2+ T1N0 tumors (n = 297), those classified as high-risk demonstrated inferior OS compared to low-risk tumors (7-year OS 77.8% versus 96.8%, P < 0.001). The HER2DX mRNA ERBB2 score was associated with clinical HER2 status (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.91). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with early-stage HER2+ breast cancer, HER2DX risk-score provides prognostic information beyond clinicopathological variables, including treatment regimen with or without trastuzumab.

Response-guided neoadjuvant sacituzumab govitecan for localized triple-negative breast cancer: results from the NeoSTAR trial.

BACKGROUND: Sacituzumab govitecan (SG), a novel antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) targeting TROP2, is approved for pre-treated metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC). We conducted an investigator-initiated clinical trial evaluating neoadjuvant (NA) SG (NCT04230109), and report primary results. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Participants with early-stage TNBC received NA SG for four cycles. The primary objective was to assess pathological complete response (pCR) rate in breast and lymph nodes (ypT0/isN0) to SG. Secondary objectives included overall response rate (ORR), safety, event-free survival (EFS), and predictive biomarkers. A response-guided approach was utilized, and subsequent systemic therapy decisions were at the discretion of the treating physician. RESULTS: From July 2020 to August 2021, 50 participants were enrolled (median age = 48.5 years; 13 clinical stage I disease, 26 stage II, 11 stage III). Forty-nine (98%) completed four cycles of SG. Overall, the pCR rate with SG alone was 30% [n = 15, 95% confidence interval (CI) 18% to 45%]. The ORR per RECIST V1.1 after SG alone was 64% (n = 32/50, 95% CI 77% to 98%). Higher Ki-67 and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) were predictive of pCR to SG (P = 0.007 for Ki-67 and 0.002 for TILs), while baseline TROP2 expression was not (P = 0.440). Common adverse events were nausea (82%), fatigue (76%), alopecia (76%), neutropenia (44%), and rash (48%). With a median follow-up time of 18.9 months (95% CI 16.3-21.9 months), the 2-year EFS for all participants was 95%. Among participants with a pCR with SG (n = 15), the 2-year EFS was 100%. CONCLUSIONS: In the first NA trial with an ADC in localized TNBC, SG demonstrated single-agent efficacy and feasibility of response-guided escalation/de-escalation. Further research on optimal duration of SG as well as NA combination strategies, including immunotherapy, are needed.

ESMO expert consensus statements (ECS) on the definition, diagnosis, and management of HER2-low breast cancer.

Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-low breast cancer has recently emerged as a targetable subset of breast tumors, based on the evidence from clinical trials of novel anti-HER2 antibody-drug conjugates. This evolution has raised several biological and clinical questions, warranting the establishment of consensus to optimally treat patients with HER2-low breast tumors. Between 2022 and 2023, the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) held a virtual consensus-building process focused on HER2-low breast cancer. The consensus included a multidisciplinary panel of 32 leading experts in the management of breast cancer from nine different countries. The aim of the consensus was to develop statements on topics that are not covered in detail in the current ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline. The main topics identified for discussion were (i) biology of HER2-low breast cancer; (ii) pathologic diagnosis of HER2-low breast cancer; (iii) clinical management of HER2-low metastatic breast cancer; and (iv) clinical trial design for HER2-low breast cancer. The expert panel was divided into four working groups to address questions relating to one of the four topics outlined above. A review of the relevant scientific literature was conducted in advance. Consensus statements were developed by the working groups and then presented to the entire panel for further discussion and amendment before voting. This article presents the developed statements, including findings from the expert panel discussions, expert opinion, and a summary of evidence supporting each statement.

Association of HER2DX with pathological complete response and survival outcomes in HER2-positive breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The HER2DX genomic test predicts pathological complete response (pCR) and survival outcome in early-stage HER2-positive (HER2+) breast cancer. Here, we evaluated the association of HER2DX scores with (i) pCR according to hormone receptor status and various treatment regimens, and (ii) survival outcome according to pCR status. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seven neoadjuvant cohorts with HER2DX and clinical individual patient data were evaluated (DAPHNe, GOM-HGUGM-2018-05, CALGB-40601, ISPY-2, BiOnHER, NEOHER and PAMELA). All patients were treated with neoadjuvant trastuzumab (n = 765) in combination with pertuzumab (n = 328), lapatinib (n = 187) or without a second anti-HER2 drug (n = 250). Event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) outcomes were available in a combined series of 268 patients (i.e. NEOHER and PAMELA) with a pCR (n = 118) and without a pCR (n = 150). Cox models were adjusted to evaluate whether HER2DX can identify patients with low or high risk beyond pCR status. RESULTS: HER2DX pCR score was significantly associated with pCR in all patients [odds ratio (OR) per 10-unit increase = 1.59, 95% confidence interval 1.43-1.77; area under the ROC curve = 0.75], with or without dual HER2 blockade. A statistically significant increase in pCR rate due to dual HER2 blockade over trastuzumab-only was observed in HER2DX pCR-high tumors treated with chemotherapy (OR = 2.36 (1.09-5.42). A statistically significant increase in pCR rate due to multi-agent chemotherapy over a single taxane was observed in HER2DX pCR-medium tumors treated with dual HER2 blockade (OR = 3.11, 1.54-6.49). The pCR rates in HER2DX pCR-low tumors were ≤30.0% regardless of treatment administered. After adjusting by pCR status, patients identified as HER2DX low-risk had better EFS (P < 0.001) and OS (P = 0.006) compared with patients with HER2DX high-risk. CONCLUSIONS: HER2DX pCR score and risk score might help identify ideal candidates to receive neoadjuvant dual HER2 blockade in combination with a single taxane in early-stage HER2+ breast cancer.

Associations between KIR/KIR-ligand genotypes and clinical outcome for patients with advanced solid tumors receiving BEMPEG plus nivolumab combination therapy in the PIVOT-02 trial.

Bempegaldesleukin (BEMPEG), a CD122-preferential IL2 pathway agonist, has been shown to induce proliferation and activation of NK cells. NK activation is dependent on the balance of inhibitory and excitatory signals transmitted by NK receptors, including Fc-gamma receptors (FCγRs) and killer immunoglobulin-like receptors (KIRs) along with their KIR-ligands. The repertoire of KIRs/KIR-ligands an individual inherits and the single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of FCγRs can influence NK function and affect responses to immunotherapies. In this retrospective analysis of the single-arm PIVOT-02 trial, 200 patients with advanced solid tumors were genotyped for KIR/KIR-ligand gene status and FCγR SNP status and evaluated for associations with clinical outcome. Patients with inhibitory KIR2DL2 and its ligand (HLA-C1) observed significantly greater tumor shrinkage (TS, median change -13.0 vs. 0%) and increased PFS (5.5 vs. 3.3 months) and a trend toward improved OR (31.2 vs. 19.5%) compared to patients with the complementary genotype. Furthermore, patients with KIR2DL2 and its ligand together with inhibitory KIR3DL1 and its ligand (HLA-Bw4) had improved OR (36.5 vs. 19.6%), greater TS (median change -16.1 vs. 0%), and a trend toward prolonged PFS (8.4 vs. 3.6 months) as compared to patients with the complementary genotype. FCγR polymorphisms did not influence OR/PFS/TS.These data show that clinical response to BEMPEG plus nivolumab treatment in the PIVOT-02 trial may be associated with the repertoire of KIR/KIR-ligands an individual inherits. Further investigation and validation of these results may enable KIR/KIR-ligand genotyping to be utilized prospectively for identifying patients likely to benefit from certain cancer immunotherapy regimens.

Oncology clinical trial disruption during the COVID-19 pandemic: a COVID-19 and cancer outcomes study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 disproportionately impacted patients with cancer as a result of direct infection, and delays in diagnosis and therapy. Oncological clinical trials are resource-intensive endeavors that could be particularly susceptible to disruption by the pandemic, but few studies have evaluated the impact of the pandemic on clinical trial conduct. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective, multicenter study assesses the impact of the pandemic on therapeutic clinical trials at two large academic centers in the Northeastern United States between December 2019 and June 2021. The primary objective was to assess the enrollment on, accrual to, and activation of oncology therapeutic clinical trials during the pandemic using an institution-wide cohort of (i) new patient accruals to oncological trials, (ii) a manually curated cohort of patients with cancer, and (ii) a dataset of new trial activations. RESULTS: The institution-wide cohort included 4756 new patients enrolled to clinical trials from December 2019 to June 2021. A major decrease in the numbers of new patient accruals (-46%) was seen early in the pandemic, followed by a progressive recovery and return to higher-than-normal levels (+2.6%). A similar pattern (from -23.6% to +30.4%) was observed among 467 newly activated trials from June 2019 to June 2021. A more pronounced decline in new accruals was seen among academically sponsored trials (versus industry sponsored trials) (P < 0.05). In the manually curated cohort, which included 2361 patients with cancer, non-white patients tended to be more likely taken off trial in the early pandemic period (adjusted odds ratio: 2.60; 95% confidence interval 1.00-6.63), and substantial pandemic-related deviations were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial disruptions in clinical trial activities were observed early during the pandemic, with a gradual recovery during ensuing time periods, both from an enrollment and an activation standpoint. The observed decline was more prominent among academically sponsored trials, and racial disparities were seen among people taken off trial.

Adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy for high-risk early breast cancer: safety and patient-reported outcomes from the monarchE study.

BACKGROUND: In monarchE, abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) as adjuvant treatment of hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor 2-negative, high-risk, early breast cancer (EBC) demonstrated a clinically meaningful improvement in invasive disease-free survival versus ET alone. Detailed safety analyses conducted at a median follow-up of 27 months and key patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are presented. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The safety population included all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment (n = 5591). Safety analyses included incidence, management, and outcomes of common and clinically relevant adverse events (AEs). Patient-reported health-related quality of life, ET symptoms, fatigue, and side-effect burden were assessed. RESULTS: The addition of abemaciclib to ET resulted in higher incidence of grade ≥3 AEs (49.7% versus 16.3% with ET alone), predominantly laboratory cytopenias [e.g. neutropenia (19.6%)] without clinical complications. Abemaciclib-treated patients experienced more serious AEs (15.2% versus 8.8%). Discontinuation of abemaciclib and/or ET due to AEs occurred in 18.5% of patients, mainly due to grade 1/2 AEs (66.8%). AEs were managed with comedications (e.g. antidiarrheals), abemaciclib dose holds (61.7%), and/or dose reductions (43.4%). Diarrhea was generally low grade (grade 1/2: 76%); grade 2/3 events were highest in the first month (20.5%), most were short-lived (≤7 days) and did not recur. Venous thromboembolic events (VTEs) were higher with abemaciclib + ET (2.5%) versus ET (0.6%); in the abemaciclib arm, increased VTE risk was observed with tamoxifen versus aromatase inhibitors (4.3% versus 1.8%). PROs were similar between arms, including being 'bothered by side-effects of treatment', except for diarrhea. At ≥3 months, most patients reporting diarrhea reported 'a little bit' or 'somewhat'. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with high-risk EBC, adjuvant abemaciclib + ET has an acceptable safety profile and tolerability is supported by PRO findings. Most AEs were reversible and manageable with comedications and/or dose modifications, consistent with the known abemaciclib toxicity profile.

Adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy for high-risk early breast cancer: updated efficacy and Ki-67 analysis from the monarchE study.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy (ET) previously demonstrated clinically meaningful improvement in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) in hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer at the second interim analysis, however follow-up was limited. Here, we present results of the prespecified primary outcome analysis and an additional follow-up analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This global, phase III, open-label trial randomized (1 : 1) 5637 patients to adjuvant ET for ≥5 years ± abemaciclib for 2 years. Cohort 1 enrolled patients with ≥4 positive axillary lymph nodes (ALNs), or 1-3 positive ALNs and either grade 3 disease or tumor ≥5 cm. Cohort 2 enrolled patients with 1-3 positive ALNs and centrally determined high Ki-67 index (≥20%). The primary endpoint was IDFS in the intent-to-treat population (cohorts 1 and 2). Secondary endpoints were IDFS in patients with high Ki-67, DRFS, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: At the primary outcome analysis, with 19 months median follow-up time, abemaciclib + ET resulted in a 29% reduction in the risk of developing an IDFS event [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58-0.87; nominal P = 0.0009]. At the additional follow-up analysis, with 27 months median follow-up and 90% of patients off treatment, IDFS (HR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.59-0.82; nominal P < 0.0001) and DRFS (HR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.57-0.83; nominal P < 0.0001) benefit was maintained. The absolute improvements in 3-year IDFS and DRFS rates were 5.4% and 4.2%, respectively. Whereas Ki-67 index was prognostic, abemaciclib benefit was consistent regardless of Ki-67 index. Safety data were consistent with the known abemaciclib risk profile. CONCLUSION: Abemaciclib + ET significantly improved IDFS in patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer, with an acceptable safety profile. Ki-67 index was prognostic, but abemaciclib benefit was observed regardless of Ki-67 index. Overall, the robust treatment benefit of abemaciclib extended beyond the 2-year treatment period.

Novel combinatorial strategies for boosting the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced breast cancers

The year 2019 witnessed the first approval of an immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) for the management of triple negative breast cancers (TNBC) that are metastatic and programmed death ligand (PD)-L1 positive. Extensive research has focused on testing ICI-based combinatorial strategies, with the ultimate goal of enhancing the response of breast tumors to immunotherapy to increase the number of breast cancer patients benefiting from this transformative treatment. The promising investigational strategies included immunotherapy combinations with monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER)-2 for the HER2 + tumors versus cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK)4/6 inhibitors in the estrogen receptor (ER) + disease. Multiple approaches are showing signals of success in advanced TNBC include employing Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, MEK inhibitors, phosphatidylinositol 3‑kinase (PI3K)/protein kinase B (AKT) signaling inhibitors or inhibitors of adenosine receptor, in combination with the classical PD-1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint inhibitors. Co-treatment with chemotherapy, high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) or interleukin-2-βɣ agonist have also produced promising outcomes. This review highlights the latest combinatorial strategies under development for overcoming cancer immune evasion and enhancing the percentage of immunotherapy responders in the different subsets of advanced breast cancers (AU)

Biomarker analyses in the phase III ASCENT study of sacituzumab govitecan versus chemotherapy in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The pivotal phase III ASCENT trial demonstrated improved survival outcomes associated with sacituzumab govitecan (SG), an anti-trophoblast cell-surface antigen 2 (anti-Trop-2) antibody-drug conjugate linked with the topoisomerase-inhibitor SN-38, over single-agent chemotherapy treatment of physician's choice (TPC) in previously treated metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC). This prespecified, exploratory biomarker analysis from the ASCENT trial evaluates the association between tumor Trop-2 expression and germline BRCA1/2 mutation status with clinical outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with mTNBC refractory to or progressing after two or more prior chemotherapies, with one or more in the metastatic setting, were randomized to receive SG (10 mg/kg intravenously days 1 and 8, every 21 days) or TPC (capecitabine, eribulin, vinorelbine, or gemcitabine) until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity. Biopsy or surgical specimens were collected at study entry to determine Trop-2 expression level using a validated immunohistochemistry assay and histochemical scoring. Germline BRCA1/2 mutation status was collected at baseline. RESULTS: Of 468 assessable patients, 290 had Trop-2 expression data [64% (n = 151 SG) versus 60% (n = 139 TPC)] and 292 had known BRCA1/2 mutation status [63% (n = 149 SG) versus 61% (n = 143 TPC)]. Median progression-free survival in SG- versus TPC-treated patients was 6.9, 5.6, and 2.7 months versus 2.5, 2.2, and 1.6 months for high, medium, and low Trop-2 expression, respectively. Median overall survival (14.2, 14.9, and 9.3 months versus 6.9, 6.9, and 7.6 months) and objective response rates (44%, 38%, and 22% versus 1%, 11%, and 6%) were numerically higher with SG versus TPC in patients with high, medium, and low Trop-2 expression, respectively. Efficacy outcomes were numerically higher with SG versus TPC in patients with and without germline BRCA1/2 mutations. CONCLUSIONS: SG benefits patients with previously treated mTNBC expressing high/medium Trop-2 compared with standard-of-care chemotherapy and regardless of germline BRCA1/2 mutation status. The small number of patients with low Trop-2 expression precludes definitive conclusions on the benefit of SG in this subgroup.

Novel combinatorial strategies for boosting the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced breast cancers.

The year 2019 witnessed the first approval of an immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) for the management of triple negative breast cancers (TNBC) that are metastatic and programmed death ligand (PD)-L1 positive. Extensive research has focused on testing ICI-based combinatorial strategies, with the ultimate goal of enhancing the response of breast tumors to immunotherapy to increase the number of breast cancer patients benefiting from this transformative treatment. The promising investigational strategies included immunotherapy combinations with monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER)-2 for the HER2 + tumors versus cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK)4/6 inhibitors in the estrogen receptor (ER) + disease. Multiple approaches are showing signals of success in advanced TNBC include employing Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, MEK inhibitors, phosphatidylinositol 3­kinase (PI3K)/protein kinase B (AKT) signaling inhibitors or inhibitors of adenosine receptor, in combination with the classical PD-1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint inhibitors. Co-treatment with chemotherapy, high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) or interleukin-2-ßÉ£ agonist have also produced promising outcomes. This review highlights the latest combinatorial strategies under development for overcoming cancer immune evasion and enhancing the percentage of immunotherapy responders in the different subsets of advanced breast cancers.