Back to Authors

Venters, Sara J.

Mayo Clinic

University of California, San Francisco

Citations 4

Standardizing Pathologic Evaluation of Breast Carcinoma After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy
Sahoo, Sunati , Krings, Gregor , Chen, Yunn‐Yi , Carter, Jodi M. , Chen, Beiyun, Guo, Hua , Reisenbichler, Emily , Fan, Fang , Wei, Shi, Khazai, Laila , Klein, Molly, Shad, Sonal , Venters, Sara J., Borowsky, Alexander D. , Symmans, W. Fraser , Ocal, Idris Tolgay, Ocal, I Tolgay, Symmans, W Fraser , Carter, Jodi , Hibshoosh, Hanina , Balassanian, Ronald

Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine | August 17, 2022 | Volume: 147 | Issue: 5 | Pages: 591-603

10.5858/arpa.2022-0021-ep Get It

Context.— Neoadjuvant systemic therapy refers to the use of systemic agent(s) for malignancy prior to surgical treatment and has recently emerged as an option for most breast cancer patients eligible for adjuvant systemic therapy. Consequently, treated breast carcinomas have become routine specimens in pathology practices. A standard protocol has not yet been universally adopted for the evaluation and reporting of these specimens. The American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system recognizes the challenges in staging breast carcinomas after neoadjuvant treatment and provides important data points but does not currently provide detailed guidance in estimating the residual tumor burden in the breast and lymph nodes. The Residual Cancer Burden system is the only Web-based system that quantifies treatment response as a continuous variable using residual tumor burden in the breast and the lymph nodes. Objective.— To provide clarifications and guidance for evaluation and reporting of postneoadjuvant breast specimens, discuss issues with the current staging and reporting systems, and provide specific suggestions for future modifications to the American Joint Committee on Cancer system and the Residual Cancer Burden calculator. Data Sources.— English-language literature on the subject and the data from the I-SPY 2, a multicenter, adaptive randomization phase 2 neoadjuvant platform trial for early-stage, high-risk breast cancer patients. Conclusions.— This article highlights challenges in the pathologic evaluation and reporting of treated breast carcinomas and provides recommendations and clarifications for pathologists and clinicians. It also provides specific recommendations for staging and discusses future directions.
Abstract P6-10-02: Assessing biomarkers to inform treatment de-escalation: Mid-treatment biopsy cellularity predicts pCR in the I-SPY 2 Trial
Venters, Sara J., Parker, Bev, Chen, Yunn‐Yi , Cole, Kimberly, Khazai, Laila , Klein, Molly, Kokh, Dina, Krings, Gregor , Sahoo, Sunati , Wei, Jane , Veer, Laura J. van’t , Wolf, Denise M. , Swigart, Lamorna Brown , Yau, Christina , Delson, Amy , Balassanian, Ronald , Carter, Jodi M. , Esserman, Laura J. , Symmans, W. Fraser

Cancer Research | March 26, 2020 | Volume: 80 | Issue: 4_Supplement | Pages: P6-10-02-P6-10-02

10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs19-p6-10-02 Get It

Abstract Background: The I-SPY 2 TRIAL enrolls women with locally advanced, molecular high-risk breast cancer. An integrated Residual Cancer Burden (iRCB), based on MRI volume change through treatment, is used to predict pathologic complete response (pCR) in the randomization/evaluation Bayesian engine. With the goal of effective de-escalation of treatment for patients exhibiting an early response, biomarkers are being assessed for their ability to predict pCR, alone or with MR data, during treatment. Here, we present the results of a pilot study to examine if invasive tumor cellularity in mid-treatment tissue core biopsies predicts pCR in a 40-patient cohort of I-SPY 2 patients. Other pathologic variables evaluated include Ki67, tumoral histologic features, and stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (sTILs). Methods: I-SPY 2 TRIAL pathologists (N=4) were provided images of H&E-stained and Ki67 IHC- labelled (DAKO/Agilent, clone MIB-1) core biopsy sections from 40 patients at the inter-regimen time point, ~12-weeks into treatment. Of the 40 patients, 35 had 4 cores, 3 had 3 cores, and 2 had 2 cores assessed. In total, images from 153 cores were evaluated. For each core, pathologists were asked to score the % area occupied by tumor bed (treatment changes and/or residual cancer), % of viable invasive tumor (0-100%) within tumor bed (with Nottingham grading, % Ki67 labelled, and % sTILs, using standardized guidelines). As decided by the pathologist group, only cores with identified tumor bed were included in the initial analysis. Concordance between pathologists was assessed for all scored criteria, using % agreement for dichotomous variables, and Pearson correlation (r)/standard deviation (sd) for continuous variables. The maximum and average cellularity recorded over all cores/patient, averaged over all pathologists, were analyzed for association with pCR using t- tests (significance threshold: p<0.05). Fisher’s Exact test was used for dichotomous variables, and Pearson’s correlation for association of continuous variables with the residual cancer burden (RCB) index. Results: Pathologist were in general agreement about the presence or absence of tumor bed, with greater than 82% agreement between any two (83-96%), and an overall agreement of 77%. For scoring the % of the tumor bed involved by invasive cancer, correlations between pairs of pathologists ranged from 0.79-0.95 (mean(r)=0.87, sd=5%), and agreement on a binary presence/absence of invasive cancer was 78%. Both the mean (t-test: p=7.59E-05) and maximum (t-test: p=0.0012) %invasive tumor at 12 weeks, scored as an average over all pathologists, were significantly higher in patients who did not achieve pCR than in responders. We also treated %invasive cellularity as a dichotomous variable (present/absent). 90% (9/10) of patients scored by all pathologists as 0% invasive tumor cells (absent) achieved a pCR, vs only 20% (6/30) of patients scored as >0% invasive cellularity by one or more pathologists (present) (OR=32, Fisher p=0.0005); yielding a positive predictive value for pCR of 0.9. Ki67 and sTILS at 12 weeks were fairly concordant across pathologists ((r,sd)=(0.92, 8.45%) and (0.82,5.5%), respectively), but did not associate with response (p>0.05 for pCR, RCB01, or RCB index). Tumor histologic grade at 12 weeks, assessed in 29/30 patients with non-zero cellularity, trended toward association (Fisher p=0.078): 44% (4/9) with Grade 3 went on to have a pCR, vs. 15% (2/13) with Grade 2 and 0 with Grade 1. These data demonstrate the utility of invasive tumor cellularity as a predictor of pCR in a clinical setting. Conclusion: In this pilot study we demonstrate that the absence of invasive cancer cells within identified tumor bed in mid-treatment core biopsy samples is highly predictive of pCR. Citation Format: Sara J Venters, Denise M Wolf, Lamorna Brown-Swigart, Christina Yau, Amy L Delson, Bev Parker, Ron Balassanian, Jodi Carter, Yunn-Yi Chen, Kimberly Cole, Laila Khazai, Molly Klein, Dina Kokh, Gregor Krings, Sunati Sahoo, Jane Wei, I-SPY 2 TRIAL Consortium, Laura J Esserman, Laura J van't Veer, W Fraser Symmans. Assessing biomarkers to inform treatment de-escalation: Mid-treatment biopsy cellularity predicts pCR in the I-SPY 2 Trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P6-10-02.
Abstract PD2-01: Personalized serial circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis in high-risk early stage breast cancer patients to monitor and predict response to neoadjuvant therapy and outcome in the I-SPY 2 TRIAL
Magbanua, MJM, Hirst, GL, Wolf, DM, Ma, AA, Bergin, Emily, Venters, Sara J., Salari, Raheleh, Tin, T., Sawyer, Sarah , Louie, MC, Zimmermann, B, Lin, C-HJ, Liang, WS, Cuyugan, Lori, Chien, AJ, Forero, Andres , Liu, M, Delson, AL, Asare, Smita , Esserman, L., Veer, Laura van’t, Hirst, Gillian L. , Hirst, Gillian L , Swigart, Lamorna Brown , Yau, Christina , Sethi, Himanshu , Wu, Hue-Tsi , Keats, Jonathan J. , Enriquez, D, Tripathy, Debu , DeMichele, Angela

Cancer Research | May 11, 2019 | Volume: 79 | Issue: 4_Supplement | Pages: PD2-01-PD2-01

10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs18-pd2-01 Get It

Abstract ctDNA analysis offers a non-invasive approach for monitoring response and resistance to treatment. Serial ctDNA testing during neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) may provide early indicators of emerging resistance and disease progression. In this study, we analyzed ctDNA from high-risk early breast cancer patients who received NAT and definitive surgery in the I-SPY 2 TRIAL (NCT01042379). We hypothesize that (1) assessment of ctDNA levels early in treatment will improve the performance of molecular and imaging-based predictors of pathologic complete response (pCR) to NAT; and (2) levels of ctDNA after NAT are associated with residual cancer burden and recurrence [distant recurrence free survival (DRFS)]. Methods: ctDNA analysis was performed in 84 high-risk stage II and III breast cancer patients randomized to neoadjuvant investigational agent (n=52), AKT inhibitor MK-2206 (M) in combination with paclitaxel (T) followed by doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) (M+T->AC), or standard-of-care (T->AC) (n=32). HER2+ patients also received trastuzumab (H). Serial plasma was collected before NAT (T0), early treatment (3 weeks, T1), between regimens (12 weeks, T2), and after NAT prior to surgery (T3). Mutational profiles derived from pretreatment tumor biopsy and normal matched DNA whole exome sequencing were used to design personalized assays targeting 16 patient-specific somatic variants to detect ctDNA in serial plasma. Results: Of the 84 patients in this study, 43% were HR-/HER2- (TNBC), 35% HR+/HER2-, and 23% HER2+. In total, 74% (61 of 83), 35% (28 of 79), 14% (9 of 65), and 8% (5 of 61) were positive for ctDNA at timepoints T0, T1, T2, and T3, respectively. At T0, ctDNA positivity and levels (average number of mutant molecules detected per mL) were significantly associated with increased tumor burden (by clinical and MRI examination), more aggressive tumor biology (as reflected in higher Mammaprint scores and grade) and subtype (HER2+ and TNBC). Twenty-seven percent (27%) of the 84 patients achieved a pCR and all patients who were ctDNA-positive at T3 (n=5) did not achieve a pCR. Currently, data are being collected to: (1) assess the relationship of ctDNA and MRI imaging in predicting tumor response to therapy; (2) examine the relationship of ctDNA levels before and after NAT with 3-year DRFS and event-free survival (EFS). The results of these analyses will be presented at the SABCS 2018 meeting. Conclusions: Our study provides a platform to evaluate the clinical significance of ctDNA for serial monitoring of response to NAT. Accurate and early response prediction by highly sensitive ctDNA analysis can facilitate a timely and judicious change in treatment to improve patients' chances of achieving a pCR. Finally, personalized ctDNA testing may complement imaging and pathologic evaluation of tumor response to fine-tune pCR as a surrogate endpoint for improved DRFS and EFS. Citation Format: Magbanua MJM, Brown-Swigart L, Hirst GL, Yau C, Wolf D, Ma AA, Bergin E, Venters S, Sethi H, Wu H-T, Salari R, Tin T, Sawyer S, Louie M, Zimmermann B, Lin C-HJ, Keats J, Liang WS, Cuyugan L, Enriquez D, Tripathy D, Chien AJ, Forero A, DeMichele A, Liu M, Delson AL, Asare S, Esserman L, van't Veer L, I-SPY 2 Consortium. Personalized serial circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis in high-risk early stage breast cancer patients to monitor and predict response to neoadjuvant therapy and outcome in the I-SPY 2 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 PD2-01.