Khan, Seema A.

TPS655 Background: Early (14-28 day) on-treatment suppression of tumor proliferation during neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) is strongly associated with favorable long-term outcomes in estrogen receptor–positive (ER+) HER2– breast cancer. In premenopausal women, tamoxifen with or without ovarian function suppression (OFS) results in suboptimal Ki-67 suppression compared with aromatase inhibitor + OFS. (Z)-endoxifen (ENDX), the active metabolite of tamoxifen, dually inhibits ER signaling and PKCβ1-mediated AKT activation, supporting its evaluation as an alternative NET strategy in this population. Methods: EVANGELINE (NCT05607004) is an ongoing, multicenter, open-label Phase 2 study evaluating daily 40 mg ENDX plus goserelin administered every 28 days as neoadjuvant therapy in premenopausal women with ER+/HER2–, cT2–3, cN0–1 breast cancer. The primary objective is to determine the proportion of patients with baseline Ki-67 >10% who achieve Ki-67 ≤10% after 4 weeks of therapy. A Simon two-stage design is used to test whether the Week 4 Ki-67 ≤10% rate is at least 65%, with 20 patients enrolled into the first stage and, if promising, another 25 patients enrolled into the second stage (cohort A). A parallel cohort of 20 patients with baseline Ki-67 ≤10% (cohort B) is enrolled to assess objective response rate (ORR) at 24 weeks per RECIST v1.1. Secondary objectives include examining safety and tolerability, residual cancer burden, and PEPI score. Correlative analyses include examining effect of treatment on select tumor and plasma biomarkers. Clinical trial information: NCT05607004 .

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian, Pancreatic, and Prostate are intended to serve as a resource for health care providers to identify individuals who may benefit from cancer risk assessment and genetic counseling and testing; help guide decisions related to genetic testing; and facilitate a multidisciplinary approach in the comprehensive care of individuals at increased risk for hereditary breast, ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancer. The current guidelines focus primarily on assessment of pathogenic and likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants associated with increased risk of breast, ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancer and recommended approaches to genetic counseling/testing and care strategies in individuals with these P/LP variants associated with increased risk of these cancers. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel’s most recent recommendations regarding screening for prostate cancer and pancreas cancer, as well as testing criteria for nonepithelial ovarian cancer.

10544 Background: Incorporation of Polygenic Risk Scores (PRS) can refine traditional breast cancer risk assessment models to provide precise estimates of breast cancer risk. However, the impact of such an integrated model on clinical decision-making related to breast cancer surveillance and preventive strategies is not fully understood. Methods: The GENRE-2 is a prospective single-arm multisite clinical trial (NCT04474834) incorporating PRS into standard breast cancer risk assessment models to determine the impact of PRS on clinical decisions on breast cancer prevention and surveillance. Women at high risk of breast cancer due to NCI-BCRAT 5-year risk of ≥ 3%, or IBIS (Tyrer-Cuzik) 10-year breast cancer risk of ≥5%, biopsy-proven high-risk breast lesion, or a pathogenic variant (PV) in ATM , BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2 or PALB2 , were enrolled from five sites in the United States. All women were invited to complete surveys on their breast surveillance and cancer prevention decisions based on pre-PRS standard risk models and post-PRS risk estimation, and further annual surveys are planned for 10 years. Results: Among 902 women enrolled in the study, 605 (median age: 52 years) received PRS results and completed a survey to date. Of those who received PRS results,195 (32.2%) were PV carriers. Among non-carriers, the median 10-year and lifetime pre-PRS IBIS-based risk was 10.0% and 28.7%, respectively. Among PV carriers, the CanRisk-based 10-year and lifetime pre-PRS risk estimates were 6.3% and 25.2% for ATM , 22.3% and 77.6% for BRCA1 , 18.5% and 77.7% for BRCA2 , 7.1% and 25.7% for CHEK2 , and 16.8% and 38.0% for PALB2 PV carriers, respectively. After the incorporation of PRS, the lifetime risk of breast cancer increased by at least 10% in 31% of non-carriers and 7.7% of PV carriers and decreased by at least 10% in 10.7% of non-carriers and 7.7% of PV carriers. The proportion of non-carriers with lifetime risk < 20% or > 40% changed from 17.3% and 22.0%, respectively, in the pre-PRS evaluation to 24.4% and 32.9%, in the post-PRS evaluation. A higher lifetime post-PRS score was associated with intent to take preventive action (surgery or endocrine agents). In non-carriers, the proportion of women with a lifetime risk < 20% with intent to take preventive action was 11%, compared to 36.8% of those with a lifetime risk > 40% (p < 0.001). Similarly, in PV carriers, the proportion of women with lifetime risk < 20% with intent to take preventive action was 20.8% compared to 41.1% of those with lifetime risk > 40% (p = 0.015). Conclusions: The GENRE-2 trial demonstrates that the incorporation of PRS into breast cancer risk assessment models in high-risk women is feasible and leads to clinically meaningful changes in breast cancer risk estimates and decision-making regarding preventive strategies. Evaluation of the implementation of breast cancer risk management strategies in study participants is ongoing and will be reported. Clinical trial information: NCT04474834 .

Importance Oral tamoxifen citrate benefits women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), but concern about toxic effects has limited acceptance. Previous pilot studies have suggested transdermal 4-hydroxytamoxifen gel has equivalent antiproliferative efficacy to oral tamoxifen, with low systemic exposure. Objective To demonstrate that 4-hydroxytamoxifen gel applied to the breast skin is noninferior to oral tamoxifen in its antiproliferative effect in DCIS lesions. Design, Setting, and Participants This randomized, double-blind, phase 2 preoperative window trial was performed at multicenter breast surgery referral practices from May 31, 2017, to January 27, 2021. Among 408 women with estrogen receptor–positive DCIS who were approached, 120 consented and 100 initiated study treatment. The most common reasons for nonparticipation were surgical delay, disinterest in research, and concerns about toxic effects. Data were analyzed from January 26, 2021, to October 5, 2022. Intervention Random assignment to oral tamoxifen citrate, 20 mg/d, and gel placebo or 4-hydroxytamoxifen gel, 2 mg/d per breast, and oral placebo, for 4 to 10 weeks, followed by DCIS resection. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end point was absolute change in DCIS Ki-67 labeling index (Ki67-LI). Secondary end points included 12-gene DCIS Score, breast tissue tamoxifen metabolite concentrations, tamoxifen-responsive plasma protein levels, and patient-reported symptoms. Noninferiority of Ki67-LI reduction by 4-hydroxytamoxifen gel was tested using analysis of covariance; within- and between-arm comparisons were performed with paired t tests for mean values or the Wilcoxon rank sum test for medians. Results Of 90 participants completing treatment (mean [SD] age, 55 [11] years; 8 [8.9%] Asian, 16 [17.8%] Black, 8 [8.9%] Latina, and 53 [58.9%] White), 15 lacked residual DCIS in the surgical sample, leaving 75 evaluable for the primary end point analysis (40 in the oral tamoxifen group and 35 in the 4-hydroxytamoxifen gel group). Posttreatment Ki67-LI was 3.3% higher (80% CI, 2.1%-4.6%) in the 4-hydroxytamoxifen gel group compared with the oral tamoxifen group, exceeding the noninferiority margin (2.6%). The DCIS Score decreased more with oral tamoxifen treatment (−16 [95% CI, −22 to −9.4]) than with 4-hydroxytamoxifen gel (−1.8 [95% CI, −5.8 to 2.3]). The median 4-hydroxytamoxifen concentrations deep in the breast were nonsignificantly higher in the oral tamoxifen group (5.7 [IQR, 4.0-7.9] vs 3.8 [IQR, 1.3-7.9] ng/g), whereas endoxifen was abundant in the oral tamoxifen group and minimal in the 4-hydroxytamoxifen gel group (median, 13.0 [IQR, 8.9-20.6] vs 0.3 [IQR, 0-0.3] ng/g; P &amp;lt; .001). Oral tamoxifen caused expected adverse changes in plasma protein levels and vasomotor symptoms, with minimal changes in the transdermal group. Conclusions and Relevance In this randomized clinical trial, antiproliferative noninferiority of 4-hydroxytamoxifen gel to oral tamoxifen was not confirmed, potentially owing to endoxifen exposure differences. New transdermal approaches must deliver higher drug quantities and/or include the most potent metabolites. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02993159

Abstract Background: Adjuvant oral tamoxifen (TAM) benefits women with DCIS, but toxicity concerns have limited its acceptance. Transdermal therapy with 4-hydroxy tamoxifen (4-OHT) gel applied to the breast skin is a possible solution. Previous pilot data suggest equivalent anti-proliferative efficacy of TAM and 4-OHT gel, but minimal systemic exposure with transdermal therapy. We report a prospective double blinded randomized phase 2 trial comparing TAM to 4-OHT gel in women with DCIS. Methods: 107 women with estrogen receptor positive (≥10%) DCIS were randomized to TAM (20 mg/day + placebo gel) or 4-OHT gel (2mg 4-OHT gel/breast, bilaterally + oral placebo), for 4-10 weeks prior to surgery. The primary endpoint was reduction in DCIS Ki67 labeling index (LI). Secondary endpoints included the 12-gene DCIS Score assay (Exact Sciences), breast tissue and plasma concentrations of 4-OHT and endoxifen, TAM-responsive circulating proteins, and patient reported symptoms (Breast Eight Symptom Scale). We estimated that 80 evaluable participants would provide 80.5% power to establish non-inferiority of 4-OHT, defined as relative Ki67-LI decline &gt;35% and absolute decline &gt;2.6%, with one-sided 𝛼=0.10. Non-inferiority of 4-OHT gel for Ki67-LI reduction was tested using an ANCOVA model. Statistical comparisons within- and between-arms were calculated with paired t-test and Welch Two Sample t-test, respectively. Results: 72 of 87 women adhered to the protocol, and were evaluable for the primary endpoint (39 TAM and 33 4-OHT gel). Mean treatment duration was 47 days for TAM and 44 days for 4-OHT gel (p=0.2). The median absolute decline in Ki67 labeling index was significant in the oral TAM (-3.7%, p&lt; 0.001) but not in 4-OHT gel arm (-1.3%, p=0.2) (p=0.002). Ki67 results following menopausal stratification also favored the TAM arm: (-1.3%; p=0.06 in 37 premenopausal women and -3.7%; p=0.02 in 35 postmenopausal women). Similarly, DCIS score showed a significantly greater reduction in the TAM (-14, p&lt; 0.001) but not in the 4-OHT gel arm (-4, p=0.1). Tissue 4-OHT concentrations were non-significantly higher in the TAM arm and were similar between superficial and deep sampling locations (superficial 6.1 and 4.2 ng/g for TAM and 4-OHT gel, respectively, p= 0.55; deep 5.7 and 3.8 ng/g, respectively, p= 0.06), whereas plasma 4-OHT concentration was markedly lower in the gel group (2 ng/mL and 0.24 ng/mL for TAM and 4-OHT gel, respectively, P &lt; 0.001). Endoxifen was abundant in plasma (11 ng/mL) and deep tissue (13 ng/g) of the TAM arm, but present in trace amounts in the 4-OHT gel arm (undetectable in plasma and 0.31 ng/g in tissue; p &lt; 0.001). Circulating TAM responsive markers (insulin like growth factor 1, sex hormone binding globulin, von Willebrand factor, and protein S total) and vasomotor symptoms were significantly and unfavorably modulated by TAM, but not by 4-OHT gel therapy. Conclusions: The non-inferiority of transdermal 4-OHT gel to Tam in terms of anti-proliferative effect in DCIS lesions was not demonstrated at the doses used for this study. DCIS Score analysis gave similar results. Tissue 4-OHT concentration in 4-OHT gel and Tam-treated subjects was roughly similar. However, endoxifen exposure was higher with oral TAM therapy and may partially explain the observed differences in major endpoints. In future studies, use of higher 4-OHT gel doses, longer duration of treatment, or different formulation may overcome these. Citation Format: Oukseub Lee, Xinlei Mi, Yanfei Xu, Luis Blanco, Azza M. Akasha, Kelly Benante, Shanshan Zhang, Carissa LaBoy, Thomas Helland, Melissa Pilewskie, Amy Degnim, Zahraa Al-Hilli, Amanda L. Amin, E Shelley Hwang, Joseph M. Guenther, Simon Steinar Hustad, Demirkan B. Gursel, Masha Kocherginsky, Gunnar Mellgren, Eileen Dimond, Marjorie Perloff, Brandy M. Heckman-Stoddard, Seema Khan. PD15-12 A pre-surgical window trial of oral tamoxifen versus transdermal 4-hydroxytamoxifen gel in women with estrogen receptor positive duct carcinoma in situ (DCIS) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr PD15-12.

PURPOSE Distant metastases are present in 6% or more of patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. In this context, locoregional therapy for the intact primary tumor has been hypothesized to improve overall survival (OS), but clinical trials have reported conflicting results. METHODS Women presenting with metastatic breast cancer and an intact primary tumor received systemic therapy for 4-8 months; if no disease progression occurred, they were randomly assigned to locoregional therapy for the primary site (surgery and radiotherapy per standards for nonmetastatic disease) or continuing sysmetic therapy. The primary end point was OS; locoregional control and quality of life were secondary end points. The trial design provided 85% power to detect a 19.3% absolute difference in the 3-year OS rate in randomly assigned patients. The stratified log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards model were used to compare OS between arms. Cumulative incidence of locoregional progression was compared using Gray's test. Quality-of-life assessment used standard instruments. RESULTS Of 390 participants enrolled, 256 were randomly assigned: 131 to continued systemic therapy and 125 to early locoregional therapy. The 3-year OS was 67.9% without and 68.4% with early locoregional therapy (hazard ratio = 1.11; 90% CI, 0.82 to 1.52; P = .57). The median OS was 53.1 months (95% CI, 47.9 to not estimable) in the systemic therapy arm and 54.9 months (95% CI, 46.7 to not estimable) in the locoregional therapy arm. Locoregional progression was less frequent in those randomly assigned to locoregional therapy (3-year rate: 16.3% v 39.8%; P < .001). Quality-of-life measures were largely similar between arms. CONCLUSION Early locoregional therapy for the primary site did not improve survival in patients presenting with metastatic breast cancer. Although it was associated with improved locoregional control, this had no overall impact on quality of life.

LBA2 Background: About 6% of newly diagnosed breast cancer patients present with Stage IV disease and an intact primary tumor (IPT). Locoregional treatment (LRT) for the IPT is hypothesized to improve survival based on retrospective analyses, but randomized trials have provided conflicting data. We now report the results of E2108, a Phase 3 trial that examined the worth of LRT for the IPT following initial systemic therapy. Methods: Stage IV patients with IPT were registered, treated with optimal systemic therapy (OST) based on patient and tumor characteristics; those who did not progress during 4-8 months of OST were randomized to LRT for the IPT, or no LRT. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), with locoregional disease control as a secondary endpoint. Stratified log rank test and Cox proportional hazard model were used to compare OS between treatment groups. Cumulative incidence of locoregional recurrence/progression was estimated and Gray test was used for treatment group comparisons. The trial was designed to detect an improvement in 3 year OS rate from 30% with OST alone to 49.3% for OST+LRT (power 95%, 1-sided alpha 0.05) with full information expected after 152 deaths; the data monitoring committee recommended data release after 80% of full information. Results: 390 patients were enrolled between 2/8/11 and 7/23/15, and received OST. Of these, 256 eligible patients were randomized to either continued OST alone (N = 131) or OST+LRT (N = 125).There were 121 deaths and 43 locoregional progression events after a median follow up 59 months (range: 0-91). There was no significant difference in OS (3-year OS rate 68.4% in OST+LRT vs. 67.9% OST alone arm, stratified log-rank p = 0.63, HR = 1.09, 90% CI: 0.80, 1.49) or in progression-free survival (p = 0.40). The locoregional recurrence/progression was significantly higher in the OST alone arm (3-year rate 25.6% vs 10.2%, Gray test p = 0.003). Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measured by FACT-B Trial Outcome Index was significantly worse in the OST+LRT arm than OST alone arm at 18 months post randomization (60% completion, Wilcoxon rank sum test p = 0.01), but no difference was observed at time points 6 months (74% completion) or 30 months (56% completion). Conclusions: Early local therapy does not improve survival in patients with de novo metastatic breast cancer and an IPT. Although there was a 2.5-fold higher risk of local disease progression without LRT, LRT of the IPT did not lead to improved HRQOL. Clinical trial information: NCT01242800 .

PURPOSE To update the ASCO guideline on pharmacologic interventions for breast cancer risk reduction and provide guidance on clinical issues that arise when deciding to use endocrine therapy for breast cancer risk reduction. METHODS An Expert Panel conducted targeted systematic literature reviews to identify new studies. RESULTS A randomized clinical trial that evaluated the use of anastrozole for reduction of estrogen receptor–positive breast cancers in postmenopausal women at increased risk of developing breast cancer provided the predominant basis for the update. UPDATED RECOMMENDATIONS In postmenopausal women at increased risk, the choice of endocrine therapy now includes anastrozole (1 mg/day) in addition to exemestane (25 mg/day), raloxifene (60 mg/day), or tamoxifen (20 mg/day). The decision regarding choice of endocrine therapy should take into consideration age, baseline comorbidities, and adverse effect profiles. Clinicians should not prescribe anastrozole, exemestane, or raloxifene for breast cancer risk reduction to premenopausal women. Tamoxifen 20 mg/day for 5 years is still considered standard of care for risk reduction in premenopausal women who are at least 35 years old and have completed childbearing. Data on low-dose tamoxifen as an alternative to the standard dose for both pre- and postmenopausal women with intraepithelial neoplasia are discussed in the Clinical Considerations section of this article. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines .