Tokunaga, Eriko

1005 Background: In the phase 3 HER2CLIMB-05 study (NCT05132582), TUC + maintenance HP demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) vs control treatment (Tx) (hazard ratio: 0.641, P < 0.0001) in patients (pts) with HER2+ locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Here we report additional efficacy and safety outcomes by stratified subgroups. Methods: Pts with centrally confirmed HER2+ MBC without evidence of progression following chemotherapy-based induction Tx (taxane + HP) were randomly assigned 1:1 to TUC (300 mg) or PBO BID + HP. Randomization was stratified by diagnosis ( de novo /recurrent), hormone receptor (HR) status (positive/negative), and presence or history of brain metastases (BM; yes/no). Endocrine therapy (ET) is permitted for pts with HR+ disease. The primary endpoint is investigator-assessed PFS. Confirmed objective response rate (cORR), duration of response (DOR), and safety were evaluated in stratified subgroups. Results: Among pts assigned to TUC + HP (n = 326) or PBO + HP (n = 328), ∼69% had de novo MBC, ∼53% had HR+ status with ∼45% having received concurrent ET, and ∼12% had baseline BM. At data cutoff (Sep 5, 2025), median PFS was longer with TUC than PBO + HP in all stratified subgroups; TUC + HP consistently improved cORR vs PBO + HP (Table). Safety outcomes in subgroups aligned with the overall population. Conclusions: TUC + HP demonstrated clinically meaningful efficacy vs PBO + HP in pts with de novo or recurrent disease, HR+ or HR− disease, and baseline BM or not, with no new safety signals identified. Results were consistent with the overall population and support TUC + HP as a potential new maintenance therapy across pts with HER2+ MBC. Clinical trial information: NCT05132582 . Efficacy outcomes. Overall De novo Recurrent HR+ (± ET) † HR− BM (yes) BM (no) TUC+HP(n=326) PBO+HP(n=328) TUC+HP(n=227) PBO+HP(n=226) TUC+HP(n=99) PBO+HP(n=102) TUC+HP(n=168) PBO+HP(n=176) TUC+HP(n=158) PBO+HP(n=152) TUC+HP(n=41) PBO+HP(n=40) TUC+HP(n=285) PBO+HP(n=288) Median PFS, mos (95% CI) 24.9(21.3−NE) 16.3(12.6−18.7) 28.9(22.7−NE) 16.8(12.9−19.2) 21.3(15.6−27.2) 12.7(8.3−18.1) 25.0(16.5−NE) 18.1(13.0−20.8) 24.9(19.4−NE) 12.6(9.4−16.8) 8.5(4.2−16.5) 4.2(2.2−8.1) 27.2(24.3−NE) 18.1(14.8−20.7) cORR*, % (95% CI) 22.6(18.0−27.8) 15.2(11.3−19.7) 26.1(20.2−32.7) 18.5(13.5−24.4) 15.1(8.5−24.0) 7.0(2.6−14.6) 20.1(14.0−27.5) 12.9(8.2−19.0) 25.2(18.4−33.0) 17.9(11.8−25.5) 15.0(5.7−29.8) 8.3(1.8−22.5) 23.8(18.7−29.5) 16.1(11.9−12.1) Median DOR*, mos (95% CI) 20.9(16.4−NE) 16.9(12.3−NE) NR(16.4−NE) 16.3(10.4−NE) 17.9(8.3−NE) NR(7.2−NE) 20.9(12.6−NE) 18.7(7.8−NE) NR(8.6−NE) 14.5(10.4−NE) 12.6(8.1−NE) 16.3(12.5−NE) 20.9(16.4−NE) 18.7(10.4−NE) *ORR and DOR were assessed in patients with target or non-target lesions at baseline. † Data on HR+ w/ ET will be presented.

1042 Background: The primary analysis of the phase 3 HER2CLIMB-05 study (NCT05132582) showed the addition of TUC to 1L maintenance HP yielded a statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival (per investigator) versus control treatment (hazard ratio: 0.641, P < 0.0001) in patients with HER2+ MBC. Here we report our findings from an in-depth safety analysis of HER2CLIMB-05. Methods: Patients with centrally confirmed HER2+ MBC without evidence of progression following chemotherapy-based induction treatment (taxane + HP) were randomly assigned 1:1 to TUC (300 mg) or placebo (PBO) BID, both in combination with HP. The safety analysis set included all randomly assigned patients who received ≥1 dose of any study treatment. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), laboratory values, and TUC/PBO dose modifications and discontinuations were examined. Results: Among patients in the safety analysis set (TUC arm = 326; PBO arm = 324), median treatment durations of TUC and PBO were 17.1 months (range: 0.4–36.5) and 15.5 months (range: 0.5–41.3), respectively. Grade (G) ≥3 TEAEs occurred in 42.3% of patients in the TUC arm and 24.4% in the PBO arm; the most frequent G ≥3 TEAEs in the TUC arm were elevated alanine aminotransferase (ALT; 13.5%) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST; 7.1%). TUC was discontinued in 13.5% of patients due to a TEAE. Cardiac TEAEs were similar between TUC and PBO arms (4.3% vs 6.2%). TEAEs of hepatic events (43.6% vs 15.7%) and diarrhea (72.7% vs 51.2%) occurred at higher incidence in the TUC arm versus the PBO arm (Table). In the TUC arm, increased ALT (28.2%) and AST (25.8%) accounted for the majority of hepatic TEAEs. Most hepatic and diarrhea TEAEs were managed with TUC dose modifications and/or discontinuation; 7.7% of patients discontinued TUC due to hepatic TEAEs and 1.5% discontinued due to diarrhea (Table). Among the patients with a TEAE of diarrhea, 57.7% and 29.9%, respectively, in the TUC and PBO arms used antidiarrheals; the most used medication was loperamide. Further details of the in-depth safety analysis will be presented. Conclusions: TUC addition to 1L HP maintenance therapy may be an effective option for HER2+ MBC with a clinically manageable safety profile. Clinical trial information: NCT05132582 . TEAEs* Any Any hepatic Increased ALT/AST Diarrhea Arm TUC PBO TUC PBO TUC PBO TUC PBO Any G, % 99.1 96.6 43.6 15.7 28.2/25.8 7.1/9.0 72.7 51.2 G ≥3 42.3 24.4 18.1 1.2 13.5/7.1 0.6/0.6 6.1 4.0 Any G: Median time to onset (days) 34.5 85.0 11.0 32.0 Median time to resolution (days) 25.0 22.0 2.0 5.0 Any G: TUC/PBO dose hold, % 49.4 25.3 19.3 2.5 12.6/4.0 0.6/0.6 8.6 3.4 TUC/PBO dose reduction, % 29.1 11.1 16.3 0.9 11.7/2.8 0.3/0.6 6.4 3.1 TUC/PBO discontinuation, % 13.5 2.2 7.7 0 4.0/0.3 0/0 1.5 0.9 *As of data cutoff, Sep 5, 2025.

Abstract Background: The current standard of care for first-line (1L) treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2+) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) consists of induction chemotherapy combined with trastuzumab (TRAS) and pertuzumab (PERT) followed by maintenance therapy with TRAS + PERT. Although this regimen has been associated with sustained disease control, most patients eventually experience disease progression. The HER2CLIMB-05(NCT05132582) study is investigating the efficacy and safety of adding tucatinib to TRAS + PERT as maintenance therapy in patients with HER2+ MBC after completion of 1L chemotherapy-based induction therapy. Methods: Patients with centrally confirmed HER2+MBC without evidence of progression after 1L induction therapy with 4 to 8cycles of a taxane combined with TRAS + PERT, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 0 or 1, and no or asymptomatic brain metastases (BM) were enrolled in HER2CLIMB-05. Contrast-enhanced brain magnetic resonance imaging was performed at screening and regular intervals during the study. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either tucatinib 300 mg or placebo twice daily, in combination with either TRAS (6 mg/kg IV or 600 mg SC) plus PERT (420 mg/kg IV) or a SC fixed-dose combination of TRAS, PERT, and hyaluronidase administered every 21 days. Endocrine therapy was permitted for patients with hormone receptor-positive tumors. The primary endpoint is investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1. Secondary endpoints include overall survival (OS), PFS by blinded independent central review, investigator-assessed central nervous system (CNS)-PFS, and safety. Results: Between March 2022 and July 2024, 654 patients were randomly assigned to receive tucatinib (n = 326) or placebo (n = 328) with1L maintenance therapy. All patients were female (median age: 54 years [range, 24-83]);45.0% were White, 35.2% were Asian, 2.9% were Black/African American, and 19.3%were Hispanic/Latino(a)/Spanish origin. Most patients had ECOG PS of 0 (64.1%)and de novo metastatic disease (69.3%). At baseline, 12.4% of patients had presence or history of BM and 52.6% had hormone receptor-positive MBC. As of September5, 2025, PFS was statistically significantly improved with the addition of tucatinib versus placebo to 1L maintenance therapy (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.641 [95%confidence interval (CI), 0.514-0.799]; 2-sided P &lt; 0.0001). All prespecified patient subgroups demonstrated a PFS benefit with tucatinib combination 1L maintenance therapy consistent with the overall population and regardless of presence or absence of BM at baseline or hormone-receptor status. OS is still immature (observed number of deaths = 51;tucatinib arm versus control arm HR = 0.539 [95% CI, 0.303-0.957; 2-sided P= 0.032]). In the safety analysis set, the most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in the tucatinib arm (n = 326) were diarrhea (72.7%), nausea (33.1%), and elevated liver enzymes (alanine aminotransferase: 28.2%; aspartate aminotransferase:25.8%), of which 6.1%, 0.9%, 13.5%, and 7.1% were, respectively, grade ≥ 3. In the tucatinib arm, 13.5% of patients discontinued tucatinib due to TEAEs. Conclusions: In the HER2CLIMB-05 trial, the addition of tucatinib to TRAS + PERT as 1L maintenance therapy demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in PFS with a manageable safety profile in patients with HER2+ MBC. Citation Format: E. Hamilton, G. Curigliano, M. Martin, F. Lerebours, J. Tsurutani, M. Savard, K. Jerzak, X. Hu, L. Martins de Aquino Pimentel, C. O'Sullivan, E. Tokunaga, A. Okines, C. Huang, W. Jacot, J. Sohn, E. Cronemberger Silva, V. Mueller, S. Yang, G. Granata, Q. Shen, L. Santarpia, V. Dieras Her2climb-05: a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study of tucatinib versus placebo in combination with trastuzumab and pertuzumab as maintenance therapy for her2+ metastatic breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2025; 2025 Dec 9-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2026;32(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS1-01.

PURPOSE The HER2CLIMB-05 study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05132582 ) is investigating the efficacy and safety of adding tucatinib to trastuzumab and pertuzumab as first-line (1L) maintenance therapy in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–positive (HER2+) metastatic breast cancer (MBC). METHODS Patients with centrally confirmed HER2+ MBC without evidence of progression post induction therapy and no or asymptomatic brain metastases (BM) were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to tucatinib (300 mg) or placebo twice a day combined with trastuzumab/pertuzumab. The primary end point is investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS); secondary end points include overall survival (OS), PFS per blinded independent central review, CNS-PFS, and safety. RESULTS Between March 2022 and July 2024, 654 patients were randomly assigned to tucatinib (n = 326) and placebo (n = 328) arms. All patients were female (median age, 54 years), 69.3% had de novo MBC, 52.6% were hormone receptor–positive, and 12.4% had presence/history of baseline BM. In this primary analysis, PFS was statistically significantly improved with addition of tucatinib versus placebo (hazard ratio, 0.641 [95% CI, 0.514 to 0.799]; P < .0001; median PFS: 24.9 v 16.3 months); a PFS benefit was seen regardless of the presence/absence of BM or hormone receptor status. OS data remain immature. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in the tucatinib arm were diarrhea (72.7%), nausea (33.1%), and elevated liver enzymes (ALT: 28.2%; AST: 25.8%), of which 6.1%, 0.9%, 13.5%, and 7.1%, respectively, were grade ≥3. In the tucatinib arm, 13.5% discontinued tucatinib because of TEAEs. CONCLUSION Tucatinib addition to trastuzumab and pertuzumab demonstrated improvement in PFS with no new safety signals identified and may be an option for 1L maintenance therapy in patients with HER2+ MBC.

1001 Background: Imlunestrant (imlu) is a next-generation, brain-penetrant, oral selective estrogen receptor degrader. The EMBER-3 trial, in patients (pts) with ER+, HER2- ABC who had disease progression on or after aromatase inhibitor-based therapy, showed significant progression free survival (PFS) improvement with imlu vs standard therapy (SOC, fulvestrant or exemestane) in pts with ESR1 mutations ( ESR1 m), and with imlunestrant+abemaciclib (imlu+abema) vs imlu in all pts, regardless of ESR1 m. Exploratory PRO analyses are presented here. Methods: EORTC QLQ-C30 was administered at baseline (BL) and every 8 weeks until treatment discontinuation. Prespecified QLQ-C30 analysis used a longitudinal mixed model for repeated measures to calculate mean change from BL in pts with BL and ≥1 post-BL score. PRO-CTCAE (diarrhea frequency) was administered weekly, reporting 0 (never) to 4 (almost constantly). PRO-CTCAE (injection site reaction [ISR]) was administered to fulvestrant recipients weekly for 2 weeks post-injection, reporting yes/no (pain, swelling, redness). Descriptive analysis was used for PRO-CTCAE. Results: In pts with ESR1 m, imlu monotherapy was associated with many improved or maintained EORTC QLQ-C30 scores, whereas scores with SOC were declined or maintained. Specifically, pts with ESR1 m on imlu had improved global health status (GHS)/quality of life (QOL) and physical function (PF) scores, while scores with SOC declined (mean change differences between treatments: 9.9 [0.1, 19.7] and 6.2 [-0.8, 13.1], respectively). These PRO findings mirror the PFS findings in this group. In the overall population, GHS/QOL scores declined similarly with imlu vs SOC (mean change differences: 0.5 [-4.7, 5.7]), while PF scores were maintained with imlu vs a slight decline with SOC (mean change difference: 2.5 [-1.1, 6.1]). Most fulvestrant recipients (72%) reported ISR at any time while on treatment, with a mean of 31% during the first week of the first 6 cycles. Imlu+abema vs imlu showed broadly similar declines in all pts, with minimal mean change differences in GHS/QOL and PF scores (0.8 [-7.4, 5.9]; -2.2 [-6.6, 2.2], respectively). Pts reported similarly low rates of “frequent” or “almost constant” diarrhea with imlu (3%) and SOC (2%) and higher rates with imlu+abema (22%). Conclusions: PROs from EMBER-3 demonstrated that patients with ESR1 m had better GHS/QOL and PF with imlu vs SOC, mirroring efficacy results. While the frequency of CTCAE defined ISRs was low, the high rate of PRO-CTCAE ISR demonstrates that this clinically relevant adverse event is underappreciated by physicians. Additionally, all pts had generally comparable GHS/QOL and PF with imlu+abema vs imlu. Overall, these results support the efficacy and safety of imlu compared to existing SOC. Clinical trial information: NCT04975308 .

Background: Abemaciclib is the first and only cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 inhibitor approved for adjuvant treatment of hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2−), node-positive, and high-risk early breast cancer (EBC), with indications varying by geography. Premenopausal patients with HR+, HER2− tumors may have different tumor biology and treatment response compared to postmenopausal patients. Objectives: We describe the efficacy and safety of abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) for the large subgroup of premenopausal patients with HR+, HER2− EBC in monarchE. Design: Randomized patients (1:1) received adjuvant ET with or without abemaciclib for 2 years plus at least 3 additional years of ET as clinically indicated. Methods: Patients were stratified by menopausal status (premenopausal versus postmenopausal) at diagnosis. Standard ET (tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitor) with or without gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist was determined by physician’s choice. Invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) by menopausal status were assessed at data cutoff on 1 April 2021 (median follow-up of 27 months). Results: Among randomized patients, 2451 (43.5%) were premenopausal and 3181 (56.4%) were postmenopausal. The choice of ET for premenopausal patients varied considerably between countries. Treatment benefit was consistent across menopausal status, with a numerically greater effect size in premenopausal patients. For premenopausal patients, abemaciclib with ET resulted in a 42.2% and 40.3% reduction in the risk of developing IDFS and DRFS events, respectively. Absolute improvement at 3 years was 5.7% for IDFS and 4.4% for DRFS rates. Safety profile for premenopausal patients was consistent with the overall safety population. Conclusion: Abemaciclib with ET demonstrated clinically meaningful treatment benefit for IDFS and DRFS versus ET alone regardless of menopausal status and first ET, with a numerically greater benefit in the premenopausal compared to the postmenopausal population. Safety data in premenopausal patients are consistent with the overall safety profile of abemaciclib.

Abstract Background MONARCH 3, a phase III trial (NCT02246621) of postmenopausal women with hormone receptor–positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (HER2−) advanced breast cancer (ABC), previously demonstrated significantly improved progression-free survival in patients receiving abemaciclib plus a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI). This study evaluated patient-reported outcomes, including global health-related quality of life (HRQoL), functioning, and symptoms. Methods Patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive abemaciclib (150 mg twice daily; n = 328) or placebo (n = 165), plus 1 mg anastrozole or 2.5 mg letrozole daily. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 and Breast Cancer–Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire HRQoL instruments were administered at baseline, every two cycles during cycles 2 through 19 (each cycle being 28 days), every three cycles thereafter, and once at a short-term posttherapy follow-up visit (approximately 30 days after discontinuation). Longitudinal mixed regression and Cox proportional hazards models evaluated postbaseline change and time to sustained deterioration (TTSD), respectively. Results Baseline scores were similar between treatment arms. Although select scores statistically favored the placebo arm, global HRQoL, most symptoms, and functioning scales did not meet the threshold for clinically meaningful differences between treatment arms. Only diarrhea favored the placebo arm with statistically and clinically meaningful differences. There were no TTSD differences between treatment arms for global HRQoL, most symptoms (except diarrhea), or functioning. Conclusion Over a 2-year period, there were no clinically meaningful differences in global HRQoL, functioning, and most symptoms for patients receiving abemaciclib plus NSAI compared with NSAI alone. Only diarrhea favored the placebo arm, consistent with prior safety data, which has been shown to be manageable and reversible. Combined with clinical efficacy, results support treatment with abemaciclib plus NSAI for postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2− ABC. Implications for Practice The addition of abemaciclib to a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) was not associated with a clinically meaningful detriment in patient-reported global health-related quality of life, functioning, and most symptoms in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor–positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (HER2−) advanced breast cancer (ABC). Prior studies have also demonstrated clinical efficacy of abemaciclib plus NSAI compared with NSAI alone, including improved progression-free survival and objective response rate. These results also complement previously reported toxicity data, as measured by investigator-assessed adverse events. Taken together, these results support treatment with abemaciclib plus NSAI for postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2− ABC.

Abstract Background: In the MONARCH 3 trial, abemaciclib plus an aromatase inhibitor (AI) significantly improved progression free survival and overall response rate with a generally tolerable safety profile compared to placebo plus AI. Here we report patient-reported outcomes (PRO) including health-related quality of life (Qol), functioning, and symptoms. Methods: MONARCH 3 was a double-blind, randomized phase III study of abemaciclib or placebo plus an AI in 493 post-menopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer with no prior systemic therapy in the advanced setting. Two European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) questionnaires were included: Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-Core 30 (C30) and the EORTC QLQ-Breast 23 (BR23) that were assessed at baseline, every 2 cycles through cycle 19, then every 3 cycles until treatment discontinuation, and at short-term follow up. Higher scores on functional and health status/QoL outcomes indicate higher/better levels of functioning or health; conversely higher scores on symptom outcomes indicate higher/worse levels of symptom burden. Between-arm comparisons of change from baseline were conducted using mixed model methods. Statistical significance was set at 0.05 and clinical meaningfulness was set at ≥10 points on a 0-100 scale1. Results: PRO completion rates were &gt;91% through cycle 19; duration of treatment was longer for abemaciclib plus AI patients (median number of cycles 19 vs.15). Compared to the placebo arm, diarrhea PRO scores in the abemaciclib arm showed a clinically (18.68 points) and statistically significant (p&lt;0.001) increase/worsening. By-cycle analysis showed group mean diarrhea scores returned to near-baseline levels post-therapy. Other symptom PROs showed statistically significant (&lt;0.05) but not clinically meaningful differences; fatigue (4.96; p=0.004), systemic therapy side effects (4.48, p&lt;0.001), appetite loss (4.03; p=0.034), and nausea/vomiting (2.77; p=0.013). These results were consistent with the investigator-reported treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Several non-symptom results were also statistically significant but not clinically meaningful including global health/health status (-4.36; p=0.003), role function (-4.25; p=0.025), social function (-3.41, p=0.047), and body image (-5.11, p=0.009). No statistically significant between-treatment differences were observed for physical, emotional, and cognitive functioning or for symptoms of pain, dyspnea, insomnia, constipation, or financial difficulties. Conclusions: The addition of abemaciclib to an AI resulted in clinically and statistically significant changes in diarrhea without clinically meaningful differences in other symptom scores. Increased GI-related symptoms were consistent with the manageable, reversible AE profile; the highest symptom burden was reported during early visits. No clinically meaningful differences in global health status or functional scores were observed. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02246621 Reference: 1. Osoba D et al. J Clin Oncol 2002;20(14):3106-13. Citation Format: Goetz MP, Johnston S, Martin M, Tokunaga E, Park IH, Huober J, Toi M, Price GL, Boye M, Li L, Forrester T, Gainford C, Gable J, Carter GC, Sood A, DiLeo A. Health-related quality of life in MONARCH 3: Abemaciclib plus an aromatase inhibitor as initial therapy in women with HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer [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 P6-16-01.