Back to Authors

Mukhtar, RA

Mayo Clinic

Inova Health System

Citations 2

Abstract P2-14-01: The impact of local therapy on locoregional recurrence in women with high risk breast cancer in the neoadjuvant I-SPY2 TRIAL
Suleiman, Linda I. , Price, ER, Singhrao, Ruby , Albain, KS, Chien, AJ, Forero‐Torres, Andres , Wallace, AM, Ellis, ED, Elias, AD, Lang, JE, Lu, Jinghui , Han, HS, Clark, AS, Korde, LA, Nanda, Rita , Northfelt, DW, Khan, QJ, Viscusi, RK, Euhus, DM, Edmiston, KK, Chui, SY, Kemmer, KA, Wood, WC, Liu, MC, Olopade, OI, Leyland-Jones, B, Moulder, SL, Rugo, HS, Schwab, Richard B. , Lo, Simon S. , Beckwith, Heather , Berry, DA, Asare, SM, Esserman, LJ, Boughey, JC , Mukhtar, RA, Khan, Qamar J. , Silverstein, J, Suleiman, L, Yau, Christina , Price, Erin, Yee, Douglas , DeMichele, Angela , Isaacs, Claudine , Pusztai, Lajos , Park, JW, Tripathy, Debu , Helsten, Teresa L.

Cancer Research | May 11, 2019 | Volume: 79 | Issue: 4_Supplement | Pages: P2-14-01-P2-14-01

10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs18-p2-14-01 Get It

Abstract Background: In women with breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy, residual cancer burden (RCB) predicts distant recurrence and survival. In those with high risk tumors, locoregional recurrence (LRR) remains a concern, and has been associated with type of local therapy received. We evaluated the impact of local therapy on LRR in the ISPY-2 TRIAL. Methods: Data were analyzed in Stata 14.2, using Chi2 test, log rank test, and a Cox proportional hazards model. RCB was considered a categorical variable (0/1 versus 2/3), as described in prior publications. Breast surgery categories were lumpectomy +/- radiotherapy, or mastectomy +/- radiotherapy. Axillary surgery was defined as sentinel lymph node (SLN) surgery (≤6 nodes removed) or axillary dissection (>6 nodes). Results: Follow up data from the I-SPY2 TRIAL were available for 630 patients (median follow up 2.76 yrs, range 0.4-7.2). Type of local therapy was significantly associated with clinical stage at presentation, with stage III patients most frequently undergoing mastectomy + radiation (p<0.001). Women with higher RCB were more likely to undergo mastectomy than those with lower RCB (61.3% vs 48.8% mastectomy rate, p=0.002), and more likely to receive adjuvant radiotherapy (62.0% vs 53.9%, p=0.048). There was no association between clinical stage, type of surgery, or radiotherapy and LRR (Table). Higher RCB was significantly associated with LRR, with 3 year locoregional recurrence free rate of 95.1% in RCB 0/1 versus 89.9% in RCB 2/3 (p=0.003). In a Cox model adjusting for clinical stage, tumor subtype, surgical therapy, RCB status, nodal radiation, and age, significant predictors for LRR were tumor subtype and RCB status. Hazard ratio (HR) for LRR in those with RCB 0/1 was 0.39 compared to those with RCB 2/3 (95% CI 0.17-0.87, p=0.021). There was no difference in LRR between breast conservation and mastectomy; within the breast conservation group, those who had lumpectomy alone had higher hazard of LRR compared to those having lumpectomy + radiation (HR 3.1, 95% CI 1.1-9.2, p=0.043). Conclusions: Extent of surgical therapy was not associated with local tumor control, regardless of advanced tumor stage at presentation. Rather, tumor biology and response to therapy were the best predictors of LRR. These data highlight the opportunity to minimize the morbidity of extensive surgical therapy for patients with excellent response to systemic therapy. LRR rates by clinical features and treatment status FrequencyLRR RateP valueClinical Stage 0.5I240 (47.5%)5.8% II185 (36.6%)8.7% III80 (15.8%)6.3% Tumor Subtype 0.014ER+PR+Her2-161 (26.4%)3.1% ER+PR-Her2-56 (9.2%)3.6% Her2+176 (28.9%)6.3% Triple negative216 (35.5%)11.1% Local therapy 0.169Lumpectomy85 (13.5%)11.8% Lumpectomy with radiation198 (31.4%)5.6% Mastectomy173 (27.5%)5.2% Mastectomy with radiation174 (27.6%)8.6% Axillary surgery 0.23None5 (0.8%)20% SLN329 (52.2%)5.8% ALND296 (47%)8.5% Axillary radiation 0.535Yes42 (6.7%)9.5% No588 (93.3%)7.0% Axillary management 0.2No surgery or radiation5 (0.8%)20.0% SLN312 (50%)5.3% SLN+Axillary radiation17 (2.7%)8.3% ALND271 (43%)10.3% ALND+Axillary radiation25 (4%)5.4% RCB 0.0020/1293 (50.1%)3.8% 2/3292 (49.9%)10.3% Citation Format: Silverstein J, Suleiman L, Yau C, Price ER, Singhrao R, Yee D, DeMichele A, Isaacs C, Albain KS, Chien AJ, Forero-Torres A, Wallace AM, Pusztai L, Ellis ED, Elias AD, Lang JE, Lu J, Han HS, Clark AS, Korde L, Nanda R, Northfelt DW, Khan QJ, Viscusi RK, Euhus DM, Edmiston KK, Chui SY, Kemmer K, Wood WC, Park JW, Liu MC, Olopade O, Leyland-Jones B, Tripathy D, Moulder SL, Rugo HS, Schwab R, Lo S, Helsten T, Beckwith H, I-SPY 2 TRIAL Consortium, Berry DA, Asare SM, Esserman LJ, Boughey JC, Mukhtar RA. The impact of local therapy on locoregional recurrence in women with high risk breast cancer in the neoadjuvant I-SPY2 TRIAL [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-14-01.
Abstract PD7-06: Molecular subtypes of invasive lobular breast cancer in the I-SPY2 TRIAL
Zhu, Zhenyu , Chien, AJ, Haddad, TC, Esserman, LJ, Veer, Laura van’t, Mukhtar, RA, Yau, C

Cancer Research | May 11, 2019 | Volume: 79 | Issue: 4_Supplement | Pages: PD7-06-PD7-06

10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs18-pd7-06 Get It

Abstract Background: Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) of the breast has distinct histological and molecular variations compared to invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC), including absence of the adhesion protein E-cadherin. Recently, molecular subtypes within ILC have been described, with an analysis from The Cancer Genome Atlas (Ciriello et al) identifying three distinct groups within ILC based on gene expression—reactive-like, immune-related, and proliferative. In this study, we applied this 60-gene classifier to a locally advanced cohort of ILC and mixed ILC/IDC cases from patients screening for the I-SPY 2 neoadjuvant chemotherapy trial. Methods: The I-SPY 2 TRIAL is open to women with more locally advanced, clinically/molecularly (as assessed by MammaPrint) high risk breast cancer. HR+HER2- MammaPrint Low risk patients ineligible for I-SPY 2 randomization are invited to join a MP Low risk registry. 131 ILC and mixed ILC/IDC tumors from these cohorts (I-SPY 2: n=80; low risk registry: n=51) with pre-treatment Agilent microarrays were available for analysis. We used the Classification to Nearest Centroid technique to assign TCGA subtype to our cohort. We assessed association between TCGA subtype, clinical covariates and response to therapy using a chi-square test. We also evaluated the Euclidean distance between each sample and the three subtype centroids. In an exploratory analysis, we used consensus clustering based on the 1000 most varying genes within the HR+HER2- I-SPY ILC cases to generate new unsupervised groupings, and assessed the concordance with the TCGA reactive-like, immune-related and proliferative subtype assignments. Results: Of the 131 patients included, most (79%) were HR+HER2-, 11% were HR+HER2+, 2% were HR-HER2+ and 8% were HR-HER2- for a total of 10% HR-. 66 were pure ILC, while 65 were mixed ILC/IDC. Upon applying the TCGA 60-gene classifier, the distribution of ILC subtypes was as follows: 33 (25%) were classified as reactive-like, 50 (38%) were immune-related, and 48 (37%) were proliferative. 64% of triple negative cases were reactive-like; while the HR+HER2- and HER2+ cases were more likely to be in the proliferative or immune-related subtype (p=0.037). Among the 80 I-SPY 2 cases, the overall pathologic complete response rate was low (16%) but equivalent to the overall HR+HER2- I-SPY2 population (16%). This did not differ across the groups defined by the TCGA ILC subtypes (p=0.79). Interestingly, a subset of cases assigned as reactive-like and immune-related were of similar distance to the proliferative subtype centroid as patients assigned to the proliferative subtype. When we used consensus clustering to identify new subsets within our locally advanced ILC cohort, our unsupervised groupings had only 32% concordance with the TCGA ILC subtype assignments. Conclusion: The low concordance between our consensus cluster groupings and the TCGA subtype groupings may reflect underlying differences within a locally advanced cohort of ILC cases, like I-SPY, that may not be captured in the 60-gene classifier developed from the overall lower stage TCGA cohort. These findings suggest that considerable molecular heterogeneity exists in lobular cancers, which merits further investigation. Citation Format: Zhu Z, Yau C, Chien AJ, Haddad T, Esserman LJ, van't Veer L, Mukhtar RA, I-SPY2 Consortium. Molecular subtypes of invasive lobular breast cancer in the I-SPY2 TRIAL [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD7-06.