PACE: A Randomized Phase II Study of Fulvestrant, Palbociclib, and Avelumab After Progression on Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 4/6 Inhibitor and Aromatase Inhibitor for Hormone Receptor-Positive/Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6is) are an important component of treatment for hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (MBC), but it is not known if patients might derive benefit from continuation of CDK4/6i with endocrine therapy beyond initial tumor progression or if the addition of checkpoint inhibitor therapy has value in this setting. METHODS: The randomized multicenter phase II PACE trial enrolled patients with hormone receptor-positive/HER2- MBC whose disease had progressed on previous CDK4/6i and aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy. Patients were randomly assigned 1:2:1 to receive fulvestrant (F), fulvestrant plus palbociclib (F + P), or fulvestrant plus palbociclib and avelumab (F + P + A). The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) in patients treated with F versus F + P. RESULTS: Overall, 220 patients were randomly assigned between September 2017 and February 2022. The median age was 57 years (range, 25-83 years). Most patients were postmenopausal (80.9%), and 40% were originally diagnosed with de novo MBC. Palbociclib was the most common previous CDK4/6i (90.9%). The median PFS was 4.8 months on F and 4.6 months on F + P (hazard ratio [HR], 1.11 [90% CI, 0.79 to 1.55]; P = .62). The median PFS on F + P + A was 8.1 months (HR v F, 0.75 [90% CI, 0.50 to 1.12]; P = .23). The difference in PFS with F + P and F + P + A versus F was greater among patients with baseline ESR1 and PIK3CA alterations. CONCLUSION: The addition of palbociclib to fulvestrant did not improve PFS versus fulvestrant alone among patients with hormone receptor-positive/HER2- MBC whose disease had progressed on a previous CDK4/6i plus AI. The increased PFS seen with the addition of avelumab warrants further investigation in this patient population.

BIRC5 expression by race, age and clinical factors in breast cancer patients.

PURPOSE: Survivin/BIRC5 is a proliferation marker that is associated with poor prognosis in breast cancer and an attractive therapeutic target. However, BIRC5 has not been well studied among racially diverse populations where aggressive breast cancers are prevalent. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We studied BIRC5 expression in association with clinical and demographic variables and as a predictor of recurrence in 2174 participants in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study (CBCS), a population-based study that oversampled Black (n = 1113) and younger (< 50 years; n = 1137) participants with breast cancer. For comparison, similar analyses were conducted in The Cancer Genome Atlas [TCGA N = 1094, Black (n = 183), younger (n = 295)]. BIRC5 was evaluated as a continuous and categorical variable (highest quartile vs. lower three quartiles). RESULTS: Univariate, continuous BIRC5 expression was higher in breast tumors from Black women relative to non-Black women in both estrogen receptor (ER)-positive and ER-negative tumors and in analyses stratified by stage (i.e., within Stage I, Stage II, and Stage III/IV tumors). Within CBCS and TCGA, BIRC5-high was associated with young age (< 50 years) and Black race, as well as hormone receptor-negative tumors, non-Luminal A PAM50 subtypes, advanced stage, and larger tumors (> 2 cm). Relative to BIRC5-low, BIRC5-high tumors were associated with poor 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) among ER-positive tumors, both in unadjusted models [HR (95% CI): 2.7 (1.6, 4.6)] and after adjustment for age and stage [Adjusted HR (95% CI): 1.87 (1.07, 3.25)]. However, this relationship was not observed among ER-negative tumors [Crude HR (95% CI): 0.7 (0.39, 1.2); Adjusted HR (95% CI): 0.67 (0.37, 1.2)]. CONCLUSION: Black and younger women with breast cancer have a higher burden of BIRC5-high tumors than older and non-Black women. Emerging anti-survivin treatment strategies may be an important future direction for equitable breast cancer outcomes.

Value of next generation sequencing (NGS) testing in advanced cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: The availability of targeted therapies for oncology patients is increasing. Available genomic tests to identify treatment-eligible patients include single gene tests and gene panel tests, including the whole-exome, whole-transcriptome OncoExTra test. We assessed the costs and clinical benefits of test choice. METHODS: A Microsoft Excel-based model was developed to evaluate test choice in patients with advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer. Treatment pathways were based on NCCN guidelines and medical expert opinion. Inputs were derived from published literature. Annual economic results and lifetime clinical results with OncoExTra testing were projected per-tested-patient and compared with single gene testing and no testing. Separately, results were estimated for a US health plan without the OncoExTra test and with its use in 5% of patients. RESULTS: Compared with no genomic testing, OncoExTra test use increased costs by $4,915 per patient; however, 82%-92% of individuals across tumour types were identified as eligible for targeted therapy or a clinical trial. Compared with single gene testing, OncoExTra test use decreased costs by $9,966 per-patient-tested while increasing use of approved or investigational targeted therapies by 20%. When considering a hypothetical health plan with 1 million members, 858 patients were eligible for genomic testing. Using the OncoExTra test in 5% of those eligible, per-member per-month costs decreased by $0.003, ranging from cost-savings of $0.026 in NSCLC patients to a $0.009 increase in prostate cancer patients. Cost-savings were driven by reduced treatment costs with increased clinical trial enrolment and reduced direct and indirect medical costs associated with targeted treatments. LIMITATIONS: Limitations include the required simplifications in modelling complex conditions that may not fully reflect evolving real-world testing and treatment patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to single-gene testing, results indicate that using next generation sequencing test such as OncoExTra identified more actionable alterations, leading to improved outcomes and reduced costs.

Disparities in OncotypeDx Testing and Subsequent Chemotherapy Receipt by Geography and Socioeconomic Status.

BACKGROUND: OncotypeDx is a prognostic and predictive genomic assay used in early-stage hormone receptor positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) breast cancer. It is used to inform adjuvant chemotherapy decisions, but not all eligible women receive testing. We aimed to assess variation in testing by demographics and geography, and to determine whether testing was associated with chemotherapy. METHODS: For 1,615 women in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study with HR+/HER2-, Stage I-II tumors, we estimated prevalence differences (PDs) and 95% CIs for receipt of OncotypeDx genomic testing in association with and sociodemographic characteristics. We assessed associations between testing and chemotherapy receipt overall and by race. Finally, we calculated the proportion of eligible women receiving OncotypeDx by county-level rurality, census tract-level socioeconomic status, and Area Health Education Center (AHEC) regions. RESULTS: 38% (N=609) of potentially eligible women were tested, with lower testing prevalences in Black (31%; PD = -11%, 95% CI: -16%, 6%) and low-income women (24%; PD = -20%, 95% CI: -29%, -11%) relative to non-Black and higher income women. Urban participants were less likely to be tested than rural participants, though this association varied by region. Among women with low genomic risk tumors, tested participants were 29% less likely to receive chemotherapy than untested participants (95% CI: -40%, -17%). Racial differences in chemotherapy were restricted to untested women. CONCLUSIONS: Both individual and area-level socioeconomics predict likelihood of OncotypeDx testing. IMPACT: Variable adoption of OncotypeDx by socioeconomics and across geographic settings may contribute to excess chemotherapy among HR+/HER2- patients.

From Race to Racism and Disparities to Equity: An Actionable Biopsychosocial Approach to Breast Cancer Outcomes.

PURPOSE: Racial disparities in outcomes of breast cancer in the United States have widened over more than 3 decades, driven by complex biologic and social factors. In this review, we summarize the biological and social narratives that have shaped breast cancer disparities research across different scientific disciplines in the past, explore the underappreciated but crucial ways in which these 2 strands of the breast cancer story are interwoven, and present 5 key strategies for creating transformative interdisciplinary research to achieve equity in breast cancer treatment and outcomes. DESIGN: We first review the key differences in tumor biology in the United States between patients racialized as Black versus White, including the overrepresentation of triple-negative breast cancer and differences in tumor histologic and molecular features by race for hormone-sensitive disease. We then summarize key social factors at the interpersonal, institutional, and social structural levels that drive inequitable treatment. Next, we explore how biologic and social determinants are interwoven and interactive, including historical and contemporary structural factors that shape the overrepresentation of triple-negative breast cancer among Black Americans, racial differences in tumor microenvironment, and the complex interplay of biologic and social drivers of difference in outcomes of hormone receptor positive disease, including utilization and effectiveness of endocrine therapies and the role of obesity. Finally, we present 5 principles to increase the impact and productivity of breast cancer equity research. RESULTS: We find that social and biologic drivers of breast cancer disparities are often cyclical and are found at all levels of scientific investigation from cells to society. To break the cycle and effect change, we must acknowledge and measure the role of structural racism in breast cancer outcomes; frame biologic, psychosocial, and access factors as interwoven via mechanisms of cumulative stress, inflammation, and immune modulation; take responsibility for the impact of representativeness (or the lack thereof) in genomic and decision modeling on the ability to accurately predict the outcomes of Black patients; create research that incorporates the perspectives of people of color from inception to implementation; and rigorously evaluate innovations in equitable cancer care delivery and health policies. CONCLUSIONS: Innovative, cross-disciplinary research across the biologic and social sciences is crucial to understanding and eliminating disparities in breast cancer outcomes.

The Evolving Landscape of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and Antibody Drug Conjugates in the Treatment of Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

For decades, chemotherapy has been the mainstay of breast cancer treatment. Novel therapies are expanding the therapeutic options and altering the treatment algorithms to manage this disease. The use and approval of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) represent a few areas of progress. These therapies initially gained attention in the metastatic setting but have subsequently found a role in early-stage breast cancer. Although human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) is at the center of ADC development, other surface antigens with a differential expression between tumor and normal cells may be appropriate for ADC targeting. This has led to the discovery of new ADCs targeting other receptors, including TROP-2, HER-3, and LIV-1, to name a few. Similarly, the addition of pembrolizumab in treating early-stage triple-negative breast cancer has led to exploring other ICIs in this setting. However, it has also raised important scientific questions regarding optimal patient selection, biomarkers that predict the success of ICIs, ideal chemotherapy partners, and the financial implications of bringing newer therapies to the forefront. In this review, we discuss the evolving landscape of ICIs and ADCs in managing early-stage breast cancer and provide an overview of potential future advancement in the field.

Advances in the Management of Early-Stage Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a subtype of breast cancer with both inter- and intratumor heterogeneity, thought to result in a more aggressive course and worse outcomes. Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) has become the preferred treatment modality of early-stage TNBC as it allows for the downstaging of tumors in the breast and axilla, monitoring early treatment response, and most importantly, provides important prognostic information that is essential to determining post-surgical therapies to improve outcomes. It focuses on combinations of systemic drugs to optimize pathologic complete response (pCR). Excellent response to NAT has allowed surgical de-escalation in ideal candidates. Further, treatment algorithms guide the systemic management of patients based on their pCR status following surgery. The expanding knowledge of molecular pathways, genomic sequencing, and the immunological profile of TNBC has led to the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted agents, including PARP inhibitors, further revolutionizing the therapeutic landscape of this clinical entity. However, subgroups most likely to benefit from these novel approaches in TNBC remain elusive and are being extensively studied. In this review, we describe current practices and promising therapeutic options on the horizon for TNBC, surgical advances, and future trends in molecular determinants of response to therapy in early-stage TNBC.

Newly Approved and Emerging Agents in HER2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer.

Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer (HER2+ BC) is an aggressive tumor type, accounting for 15% to 20% of the approximately 300,000 new BC cases in the United States each year. The goal of this review is to discuss the evolving landscape of therapies for HER2+ metastatic BC (mBC). Targeted therapies that have been the standard of care (SOC) for HER2+ mBC for almost a decade have greatly improved patient outcomes. The SOC for the first-line treatment of HER2+ mBC continues to be HER2-targeted monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) + a taxane, but recent updates in the second-line setting favor use of a newer HER2-targeted antibody-drug conjugate (ADC), trastuzumab deruxtecan, versus the prior SOC ADC, trastuzumab emtansine. Numerous options are now available in the third line and beyond, including tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) regimens, newer mAbs, and other ADCs. The optimal course of treatment for individual patients can be guided by location of metastases, prior therapies, concomitant biomarkers, and monitoring and management of adverse events. Ongoing trials will further the evolution of the HER2+ mBC treatment landscape. Furthermore, next-generation ADCs, TKIs, and classes of drugs that have not been approved for the treatment of HER2+ mBC, including immune checkpoint inhibitors and cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors, are also being evaluated for their efficacy in the first and second line. Although the influx of new drugs may complicate treatment decisions for physicians, having a multitude of options will undoubtedly further improve patient outcomes and patient-centered care.

The budget impact of utilizing the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score test from a US healthcare payer perspective.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score test is used to estimate distant recurrence risk of hormone receptor-positive (HR+) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) early-stage breast cancer and inform decisions on the use of adjuvant chemotherapy. A model-based budget impact analysis compared the Oncotype DX test in combination with clinical-pathological risk against using clinical-pathological risk alone for HR+/HER2- node-negative (N0) and node-positive (N1; 1-3 axillary lymph nodes) early-stage breast cancer patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Test and medical costs associated with treatment of breast cancer were assessed through a US healthcare payer perspective. Distributions of patients by Recurrence Score result and distant recurrence probabilities with chemo-endocrine and endocrine therapy were derived from the TAILORx (N0) and RxPONDER (N1) trials. Changes in budget impact were evaluated over a 5-year horizon for a 1,000,000-member hypothetical health plan. RESULTS: With the Oncotype DX test, there was an incremental budget impact of $261,067 (per member per month (PMPM): $0.004), in the N0 population, and $56,143 (PMPM: $0.001) in the N1 population over the 5-year period. The largest budget impact reduction in the N0 population was attributed to reduced breast cancer recurrence costs (incremental: -$633,457, PMPM: -$0.011), while chemotherapy sparing reduced costs in the N1 population (incremental: -$94,884, PMPM: -$0.002). CONCLUSION: The clinical benefit of using the Oncotype DX test to inform adjuvant chemotherapy decisions has been shown in multiple randomized controlled trials. This analysis demonstrated that while using the Oncotype DX test to inform adjuvant chemotherapy decisions may slightly increase US healthcare costs over an initial 5-year time horizon (driven by a cost increase in the first year with cost savings reflected in remaining 4 years), there is significant scope for cost savings when assessing beyond this period due to avoided downstream costs of distant recurrence and long-term chemotherapy adverse events. PMPM costs also remain low across all populations examined, demonstrating a close-to-neutral budget impact.

A phase II single-arm trial of memantine for prevention of cognitive decline during chemotherapy in patients with early breast cancer: Feasibility, tolerability, acceptability, and preliminary effects.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive difficulties have been described after chemotherapy for breast cancer, but there is no standard of care to improve cognitive outcomes in these patients. This trial examined the feasibility, tolerability, acceptability, and preliminary effects of memantine to prevent cognitive decline during chemotherapy for breast cancer. METHODS: Patients with stage I-III breast cancer, scheduled for neo/adjuvant chemotherapy, completed a cognitive battery prior to and 4 weeks after completing chemotherapy. Memantine (10 mg BID) was administered concurrent with chemotherapy. Our primary cognitive outcome was visual working memory assessed by the Delayed Matching to Sample test. We used the Brief Medication Questionnaire to assess acceptability. RESULTS: Of 126 patients approached, 56 (44%) enrolled. Forty-five (80%) received ≥1 dose of memantine and completed pre-post assessments. Seventy-six percent reported taking ≥90% of scheduled doses. Participants were mean age of 56, 77% White, and 57% had stage I disease. Sixty-four percent had stable or improved Delayed Matching to Sample test scores. Stable or improved cognition was observed in 87%-91% across objective cognitive domain composite measures. Sixty-six percent self-reported stable or improved cognitive symptoms. There were seven greater than or equal to grade 3 adverse events; two were possibly related to memantine. Only 5% reported that taking memantine was a disruption to their lives. CONCLUSIONS: Memantine was well-tolerated and consistently taken by a large majority of patients receiving breast cancer chemotherapy. The majority demonstrated stable or improved cognition from pre- to post-assessment. Randomized trials are needed to determine memantine's efficacy to ameliorate cognitive loss. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04033419.

Immunotherapy in triple negative breast cancer: beyond checkpoint inhibitors.

The development of immunotherapy agents has revolutionized the field of oncology. The only FDA-approved immunotherapeutic approach in breast cancer consists of immune checkpoint inhibitors, yet several novel immune-modulatory strategies are being actively studied and appear promising. Innovative immunotherapeutic strategies are urgently needed in triple negative breast cancer (TNBC), a subtype of breast cancer known for its poor prognosis and its resistance to conventional treatments. TNBC is more primed to respond to immunotherapy given the presence of more tumor infiltrating lymphocytes, higher PD-L1 expression, and higher tumor mutation burden relative to the other breast cancer subtypes, and therefore, immuno-oncology represents a key area of promise for TNBC research. The aim of this review is to highlight current data and ongoing efforts to establish the safety and efficacy of immunotherapeutic approaches beyond checkpoint inhibitors in TNBC.

Germline Genetic Testing in Breast Cancer: Systemic Therapy Implications.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: In this article, we discuss recent advances in germline genetic testing for patients with breast cancer and highlight current limitations and impacts on clinical care. We also provide an update on the therapeutic implications of having a germline mutation, including targeted systemic therapy options for treating early and metastatic breast cancer. RECENT FINDINGS: Approximately 5 to 10% of women diagnosed with breast cancer have a pathogenic variant in a hereditary cancer susceptibility gene, which has significant implications for managing these patients. Previously, testing was done mainly to inform screening and risk-reduction treatment; however, more recently, germline genetic results have significant systemic therapy implications that can meaningfully improve outcomes in breast cancer patients, especially with oral poly-ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. These systemic therapy advances implore a shift in paradigm for whom to test moving forward and how to modify the existing testing models to meet the increasing demand for germline testing, which is expected to grow exponentially.

Left sided breast cancer is associated with aggressive biology and worse outcomes than right sided breast cancer.

Breast cancer is more common on the left side than the right side. We aim to evaluate differences in clinicopathological and genomic characteristics based on laterality. We analyzed survival outcomes and clinical characteristics of 881,320 patients recorded by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program. The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) was used to explore genomic and clinical features from 1,062 patients. Gene expression data was used to quantitate cytolytic activity and hallmark gene-sets were used for gene set enrichment analysis. An institutional retrospective review was conducted on 155 patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). Patient characteristics were summarized by pathological complete response (pCR). Left sided tumors were found to be more prevalent than right sided tumors. No major clinicopathological differences were noted by laterality. Left sided breast cancer demonstrated poorer outcomes versus right sided tumors (HR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01-1.08; p = 0.011). Cell proliferation gene sets, including E2F Targets, G2M Checkpoint, Mitotic spindle, and MYC Targets, were enriched on the left side compared to the right. Left sided tumors had lower pCR rates versus right sided tumors (15.4% versus 29.9%, p = 0.036). Our findings suggest that left sided breast cancer is associated with aggressive biology and worse outcomes compared to right sided breast cancer.

The Landscape of Immune Microenvironments in Racially Diverse Breast Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy is a rapidly evolving treatment option in breast cancer; However, the breast cancer immune microenvironment is understudied in Black and younger (<50 years) patients. METHODS: We used histologic and RNA-based immunoprofiling methods to characterize the breast cancer immune landscape in 1,952 tumors from the Carolina Breast Cancer Study (CBCS), a population-based study that oversampled Black (n = 1,030) and young women (n = 1,039). We evaluated immune response leveraging markers for 10 immune cell populations, compared profiles to those in The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) Project [n = 1,095 tumors, Black (n = 183), and young women (n = 295)], and evaluated in association with clinical and demographic variables, including recurrence. RESULTS: Consensus clustering identified three immune clusters in CBCS (adaptive-enriched, innate-enriched, or immune-quiet) that varied in frequency by race, age, tumor grade and subtype; however, only two clusters were identified in TCGA, which were predominantly comprised of adaptive-enriched and innate-enriched tumors. In CBCS, the strongest adaptive immune response was observed for basal-like, HER2-positive (HER2+), triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), and high-grade tumors. Younger patients had higher proportions of adaptive-enriched tumors, particularly among estrogen receptor (ER)-negative (ER-) cases. Black patients had higher frequencies of both adaptive-enriched and innate-enriched tumors. Immune clusters were associated with recurrence among ER- tumors, with adaptive-enriched showing the best and innate-enriched showing the poorest 5-year recurrence-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that immune microenvironments are intricately related to race, age, tumor subtype, and grade. IMPACT: Given higher mortality among Black and young women, more defined immune classification using cell-type-specific panels could help explain higher recurrence and ultimately lead to targetable interventions.

Racial differences in CD8+ T cell infiltration in breast tumors from Black and White women.

BACKGROUND: African American/Black women with breast cancer have poorer survival than White women, and this disparity persists even after adjusting for non-biological factors. Differences in tumor immune biology have been reported between Black and White women, and the tumor immune milieu could potentially drive racial differences in breast cancer etiology and outcome. METHODS: We examined the association of CD8+ cytotoxic T cells with clinical-pathological variables in the Women's Circle of Health Study (WCHS) population of predominantly Black breast cancer patients. We evaluated 688 invasive breast tumor samples (550 Black, 138 White) using immunohistochemical staining of tissue microarray slides. CD8+ T cells were scored for each patient tumor sample with digital image analysis. RESULTS: Black women had a significantly higher percentage of high-grade, estrogen receptor (ER)-negative, and triple-negative tumors than White women and significantly higher CD8+ T cell density (median 87.6/mm2 vs. 53.1/mm2; p < 0.001). Within the overall population and in the population of Black women only, CD8+ T cell density was significantly higher in younger patients and patients with high-grade and ER/PR-negative tumors. No significant associations were observed between CD8+ T cell density and overall survival or breast cancer-specific survival in the overall population, or when Black patients were analyzed as a separate group. However, when stratified by subtype, Black women with triple-negative breast cancer and high CD8+ T cell density showed a trend towards better overall survival in comparison with patients with low CD8+ T cell density (HR = 0.51; 95% CI 0.25-1.04). CONCLUSIONS: Our data raise the possibility that distinct mechanisms of immune cell action may occur in different racial groups.

COVID-19 and Cancer: a Comprehensive Review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The outbreak of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has emerged to be the biggest global health threat worldwide, which has now infected over 1.7 million people and claimed more than 100,000 lives around the world. Under these unprecedented circumstances, there are no well-established guidelines for cancer patients. RECENT FINDINGS: The risk for serious disease and death in COVID-19 cases increases with advancing age and presence of comorbid health conditions. Since the emergence of the first case in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, tremendous research efforts have been underway to understand the mechanisms of infectivity and transmissibility of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), a fatal virus responsible for abysmal survival outcomes. To minimize the mortality rate, it becomes prudent to identify symptoms promptly and employ treatments appropriately. Even though no cure has been established, multiple clinical trials are underway to determine the most optimal strategy. Managing cancer patients under these circumstances is rather challenging, given their vulnerable status and the aggressive nature of their underlying disease. In this comprehensive review, we discuss the impact of COVID-19 on health and the immune system of those affected, reviewing the latest treatment approaches and ongoing clinical trials. Additionally, we discuss challenges faced while treating cancer patients and propose potential approaches to manage this vulnerable population during this pandemic.

Mechanism-based treatment of cancer with immune checkpoint inhibitor therapies.

Immune checkpoints are cell surface molecules that initiate regulatory pathways which have powerful control of CD8+ cytolytic T cell activity. Antagonistic and agonistic antibodies engaging these molecules have demonstrated profound impact on immune activation and have entered clinical use for the treatment of a variety of diseases. Over the past decade, antagonistic antibodies known as immune checkpoint inhibitors have become a new pillar of cancer treatment and have reshaped the therapeutic landscape in oncology. These agents differ in their mechanism of action and toxicity profiles compared to more traditional systemic cancer treatments such as chemo- and targeted therapies. This article reviews the pharmacology of this new class of agents.

Significance of the Genomic Landscape of a De Novo Endocrine-Resistant Metastatic Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer.

Endocrine therapy with or without CDK4/6 inhibitors is the most commonly used frontline treatment option for metastatic hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. Approximately, 25% to 30% of women may have resistance to endocrine therapy, especially in the setting of certain genomic mutations in the tumor. This prompts the need to identify those patients who may benefit from frontline chemotherapy over endocrine therapy. Here, we present a case of a patient who presented with a de novo metastatic hormone receptor-positive breast cancer with visceral involvement (including bone marrow) as well as multiple somatic genomic alterations. The patient was treated with upfront chemotherapy, resulting in clinical and radiographic response, but rapidly progressed when she was transitioned to hormonal therapy. This report focuses on the role of upfront chemotherapy in the setting of visceral crisis including bone marrow involvement, the role of genomic alterations in contributing to endocrine resistance, and the need for biomarker-driven treatment options for hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.

Combination of pembrolizumab and imatinib in a patient with double KIT mutant melanoma: A case report.

RATIONALE: The treatment of metastatic melanoma has been revolutionized in the past decade because of the development of immunotherapies and targeted therapies. Despite these developments, there is still an unmet clinical need for more advanced combination therapies for the subset of patients who remain resistant to immunotherapy or targeted therapy alone. To our knowledge, no reports have been published on combinations of PD-1 blockades and c-KIT inhibitors in melanoma patients. Furthermore, data are limited regarding the safety and efficacy of this combination in patients harboring KIT mutations. PATIENT CONCERNS AND DIAGNOSIS: We report a case of an 82-year-old female with metastatic melanoma who was found to have double KIT mutations at V559 and N822I. INTERVENTIONS: She was treated with a combination of c-KIT inhibitor and PD-1 blockade after being resistant to anti-PD-1 monotherapy. OUTCOMES: Patient developed two episodes of grade 2 liver toxicity requiring treatment breaks followed by a dose reduction. Her transaminitis eventually resolved and patient remained on combination treatment for almost two years with good control of her disease prior to progression. LESSONS: Treatment options for patients who progress after PD-1 inhibitors are very limited; therefore, there is a high unmet clinical need for this patient population. Combining Imatinib with checkpoint inhibitors may be efficacious in patients with metastatic melanoma and KIT mutations. This novel combination can cause additional toxicities which seem to be overall manageable.

Primary and secondary breast angiosarcoma: single center report and a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Primary and secondary breast angiosarcoma is a rare and aggressive malignancy with limited published literature. Optimal management is mostly based on expert opinion. Our study aims to describe a single institution experience with breast angiosarcoma and evaluate other publications on this topic to further clarify prognostic outcomes and treatment modalities in this disease. METHODS: Twenty two cases of breast angiosarcoma from Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center were retrospectively analyzed. Additionally, a systemic review and meta-analysis was conducted to study the association between survival outcomes, overall survival (OS), and recurrence-free survival (RFS) in both primary (PAS) and secondary breast angiosarcoma (SAS). RESULTS: 9 PAS patients (41%) and 13 SAS patients (59%) were retrospectively analyzed. No significant differences were noted in tumor characteristics and survival outcomes between PAS and SAS. Treatment modality had no significant effects on survival outcomes although adjuvant chemotherapy demonstrated a trend towards improved RFS in high grade tumors. 380 PAS and 595 SAS patients were included in the outcome meta-analysis. Survival outcomes were significantly worse with high grade tumors and tumor size of > 5 cm. Adjuvant radiation therapy demonstrated significantly better RFS, while adjuvant chemotherapy had no effect on survival outcomes. CONCLUSION: Tumor size and grade seem to be reliable predictors of survival in both PAS and SAS. Mastectomy does not seem to be adding any additional benefit to BCS. Adjuvant radiation therapy showed statistically significant RFS benefit, while adjuvant chemotherapy can be beneficial in high grade tumors.