Hershman, Dawn L.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned coprimary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical trial updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported. Metformin has been associated with lower cancer risk in epidemiologic and preclinical research. In the MA.32 randomized adjuvant breast cancer trial, metformin ( v placebo) did not affect invasive disease-free or overall survival. Here, we report metformin effects on the risk of new cancer. Between 2010 and 2013, 3,649 patients with breast cancer younger than 75 years without diabetes with high-risk T1-3, N0-3 M0 breast cancer (any estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2) were randomly assigned to metformin 850 mg orally twice a day or placebo twice a day for 5 years. New primary invasive cancers (outside the ipsilateral breast) developing as a first event were identified. Time to events was described by the competing risks method; two-sided likelihood ratio tests adjusting for age, BMI, smoking, and alcohol intake were used to compare metformin versus placebo arms. A total of 184 patients developed new invasive cancers: 102 metformin and 82 placebo, hazard ratio (HR), 1.25; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.68; P = .13. These included 48 contralateral invasive breast cancers (27 metformin v 21 placebo), HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.72 to 2.27; P = .40 and 136 new nonbreast primary cancers (75 metformin v 61 placebo), HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.74; P = .21. Metformin did not reduce the risk of new cancer development in these nondiabetic patients with breast cancer.

ImportanceSystematic data on the association between anticancer therapies and thromboembolic events (TEEs) in patients with COVID-19 are lacking.ObjectiveTo assess the association between anticancer therapy exposure within 3 months prior to COVID-19 and TEEs following COVID-19 diagnosis in patients with cancer.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis registry-based retrospective cohort study included patients who were hospitalized and had active cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Data were accrued from March 2020 to December 2021 and analyzed from December 2021 to October 2022.ExposureTreatments of interest (TOIs) (endocrine therapy, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors/tyrosine kinase inhibitors [VEGFis/TKIs], immunomodulators [IMiDs], immune checkpoint inhibitors [ICIs], chemotherapy) vs reference (no systemic therapy) in 3 months prior to COVID-19.Main Outcomes and MeasuresMain outcomes were (1) venous thromboembolism (VTE) and (2) arterial thromboembolism (ATE). Secondary outcome was severity of COVID-19 (rates of intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, 30-day all-cause mortality following TEEs in TOI vs reference group) at 30-day follow-up.ResultsOf 4988 hospitalized patients with cancer (median [IQR] age, 69 [59-78] years; 2608 [52%] male), 1869 had received 1 or more TOIs. Incidence of VTE was higher in all TOI groups: endocrine therapy, 7%; VEGFis/TKIs, 10%; IMiDs, 8%; ICIs, 12%; and chemotherapy, 10%, compared with patients not receiving systemic therapies (6%). In multivariable log-binomial regression analyses, relative risk of VTE (adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.33; 95% CI, 1.04-1.69) but not ATE (aRR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.56-1.16) was significantly higher in those exposed to all TOIs pooled together vs those with no exposure. Among individual drugs, ICIs were significantly associated with VTE (aRR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.01-2.07). Also noted were significant associations between VTE and active and progressing cancer (aRR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.01-2.03), history of VTE (aRR, 3.10; 95% CI, 2.38-4.04), and high-risk site of cancer (aRR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.14-1.75). Black patients had a higher risk of TEEs (aRR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.03-1.50) than White patients. Patients with TEEs had high intensive care unit admission (46%) and mechanical ventilation (31%) rates. Relative risk of death in patients with TEEs was higher in those exposed to TOIs vs not (aRR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.91-1.38) and was significantly associated with poor performance status (aRR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.30-2.40) and active/progressing cancer (aRR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.13-2.13).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cohort study, relative risk of developing VTE was high among patients receiving TOIs and varied by the type of therapy, underlying risk factors, and demographics, such as race and ethnicity. These findings highlight the need for close monitoring and perhaps personalized thromboprophylaxis to prevent morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19–related thromboembolism in patients with cancer.

611 Background: Patient reported outcomes (PROs) capture direct feedback from patients in clinical trials. The NIH Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is an open source and validated PRO platform. Data on PROMIS score trajectories over time for breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) are limited. Methods: We administered paper surveys to patients enrolled on the I-SPY2 trial, a multicenter, randomized phase 2 trial comparing novel agents to standard NAC in high-risk breast cancer. PRO domains included PROMIS Physical Function, Anxiety, Depression, Applied Cognition and Fatigue. Surveys were administered at baseline (post-consent), C1D1, inter-regimen (~12 wks into NAC), pre-surgery and at 1, 6, 12, and 24 months post-surgery. Responses were scored using the HealthMeasures Scoring Service to generate a standardized T score, with a score of 50 representing the general US population mean. Higher Anxiety, Depression and Fatigue scores represent worse symptoms; higher Physical Function and Applied Cognition scores represent better symptoms. We calculated average scores by time-point and compared changes from baseline to various grouped time points using a paired t-test. Results: From 1/2012 to 7/2020, 1631 patients enrolled in I-SPY 2 with 959 completing the baseline survey. 62% had at least two “on-treatment” surveys, and 52% had at least one follow-up time-point. Average baseline PROMIS scores for Physical Function, Anxiety, Depression, Applied Cognition and Fatigue were 46.7, 55.1, 47.2, 53.3 and 46.0 respectively. Between baseline and the latest on-treatment time point we observed improvement in Anxiety (-5.2) and worsening in Physical Function, Applied Cognition and Fatigue (-5.4, -6.9 and +8.2 respectively). Between baseline and the latest post-surgery time point, we saw improved Anxiety (-5.9) and worsened Physical Function, Applied Cognition and Fatigue (-5.9, -3.6 and +4.3). Depression changed minimally. Conclusions: Using PROMIS, patients on I-SPY2 experienced worse Physical Function, Applied Cognition and Fatigue but improved Anxiety during and after treatment compared to baseline. While changes in Applied Cognition and Fatigue recovered partially after treatment, Physical Function scores did not, suggesting potential for longer term impact on quality of life. Clinical trial information: NCT01042379 . [Table: see text]

ImportanceThe American Institute for Cancer Research and American Cancer Society regularly publish modifiable lifestyle recommendations for cancer prevention. Whether these recommendations have an impact on high-risk breast cancer survival remains unknown.ObjectiveTo investigate whether adherence to cancer prevention recommendations before, during, and 1 and 2 years after breast cancer treatment was associated with disease recurrence or mortality.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThe Diet, Exercise, Lifestyles, and Cancer Prognosis Study (DELCaP) was a prospective, observational cohort study designed to assess lifestyles before diagnosis, during treatment, and at 1 and 2 years after treatment completion, implemented ancillary to the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) S0221 trial, a multicenter trial that compared chemotherapy regimens in breast cancer. Participants were chemotherapy-naive patients with pathologic stage I to III high-risk breast cancer, defined as node-positive disease with hormone receptor–negative tumors larger than 1 cm or any tumor larger than 2 cm. Patients with poor performance status and comorbidities were excluded from S0221. The study was conducted from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2010; mean (SD) follow-up time for those not experiencing an event was 7.7 (2.1) years through December 31, 2018. The analyses reported herein were performed from March 2022 to January 2023.ExposureAn aggregated lifestyle index score comprising data from 4 time points and 7 lifestyles, including (1) physical activity, (2) body mass index, (3) fruit and vegetable consumption, (4) red and processed meat intake, (5) sugar-sweetened beverage consumption, (6) alcohol consumption, and (7) smoking. Higher scores indicated healthier lifestyle.Main Outcomes and MeasuresDisease recurrence and all-cause mortality.ResultsA total of 1340 women (mean [SD] age, 51.3 [9.9] years) completed the baseline questionnaire. Most patients were diagnosed with hormone-receptor positive breast cancer (873 [65.3%]) and completed some education beyond high school (954 [71.2%]). In time-dependent multivariable analyses, patients with highest vs lowest lifestyle index scores experienced a 37.0% reduction in disease recurrence (hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.48-0.82) and a 58.0% reduction in mortality (hazard ratio, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.30-0.59).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this observational study of patients with high-risk breast cancer, strongest collective adherence to cancer prevention lifestyle recommendations was associated with significant reductions in disease recurrence and mortality. Education and implementation strategies to help patients adhere to cancer prevention recommendations throughout the cancer care continuum may be warranted in breast cancer.

Abstract Background. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly recognized as a valuable component to understand treatment tolerability and toxicity among patients on clinical trials. We have implemented a system for monitoring patient reported outcomes (PROs), symptoms, and quality of life (QOL) using electronic PRO (ePRO) instruments for patients enrolled in the I-SPY2 trial. I-SPY2 is a phase II multi-site clinical trial evaluating the effect of novel neoadjuvant therapies for locally advanced breast cancer. We correlated patient demographic factors with symptoms, investigated the trajectory of symptoms throughout treatment, and sought to characterize symptoms associated with decline in physical function (PF). Methods. Our study population included 259 I-SPY2 patients that completed surveys on one of 9 study arms (including novel oral taxane/immunotherapy combinations, IV paclitaxel, checkpoint inhibitor+/- LAG3 inhibitor, and control IV paclitaxel +/- trastuzumab/pertuzumab). After the 12 week period of investigational agents, most patients received standard adriamycin and cyclophosphamide (AC). Symptom severity, frequency, and interference was assessed weekly using 33 items from the PRO-CTCAE item bank. PF was assessed using the NIH PROMIS instrument and was evaluated at baseline, inter-regimen (after 12 weeks of treatment), pre-surgery, and 1 and 6 months at follow-up. An odds ratio was used to assess univariate associations between age and race, and symptoms. Regularized multi-variate regression was used to evaluate early symptoms (prior to week 6) predictive of a clinically significant (>5 point T-score) decline in PF from baseline to post-treatment follow-up among all races and age groups. Results. Of 259 patients (mean age (SD) = 46.8 (13.6)), 160 (58%) were White, 13 (5%) were Asian, 26 (10%) were African American (AA), 25 (9.3%) were Hispanic, and 35 (13.5%) self-reported “Other”. At baseline, AA patients had a higher severity of joint pain than White patients (OR = 14.9, P < 0.05). During study treatment with paclitaxel and/or novel agent within the first 12 weeks of treatment, AA patients and non-white (NW) patients were more likely to report severe vomiting than White patients (OR =13.22 and 12.72, P< 0.05 and P< 0.03 respectively). During treatment with AC, NW patients were more likely to report higher severity of neuropathy than White patients (OR = 5.43, P< 0.03). Among all patients, in analysis of early symptoms predictive of a clinically significant decline in PF between baseline and 1 month post treatment, predictors included high frequency of diarrhea, severity of itching, and severity of joint pain. Further analysis of symptom trajectories revealed that frequency of diarrhea reported rose sharply between baseline and Cycle 2 with 9 patients (7%) reporting occasional or frequent diarrhea to 39 patients (28%) reporting occasional to almost constant diarrhea and remained stable at that proportion for the remainder of treatment. Frequency of diarrhea declined slightly during AC (17%) and dropped to baseline levels by follow-up. In contrast, severity of joint pain persisted post-treatment, rising consistently from baseline through follow- up with 3 patients (2%) reporting moderate to severe joint pain at baseline to 18 patients (35%) reporting moderate to severe joint pain at follow-up. Conclusion. Among I-SPY2 participants, when higher grade of diarrhea is persistent (or uncontrolled), it impacts physical function even after end of therapy. In some cases, race was also a determinant in symptom trajectory, although a higher enrollment of AA and NW patients will enable more robust estimates to be computed. While some of these early symptom predictors are transient and resolve by the time of follow-up, others persist long-term and contribute more directly towards impaired physical function at follow-up. Citation Format: Amrita Basu, Saumya Umashankar, Kaylee Blevins, Anna Northrop, Anika Christofferson, Ebunoluwa Olunuga, Jaeyoon Cha, Ananya Mittal, Julissa Molina-Vega, Laura Sit, Thelma Brown, Bev Parker, Diane Heditsian, Susie Brain, Carol Simmons, Alessandra Taboada, Tina J. Hieken, Kathryn Ruddy, Carolina Salvador, Candace Mainor, Anosheh Afghahi, Sarah Tevis, Anne Blaes, Irene M. Kang, Jane Perlmutter, Hope Rugo, Sai Kanaparthi, Garry Peterson, Lisa T. Weiss, Adam Asare, Laura J. Esserman, Michelle Melisko, Dawn Hershman. The Association Between Symptom Severity and Physical Function among Participants in I-SPY2 [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 P5-07-03.

Abstract Background: Despite evidence of substantial breast cancer risk reduction, few high-risk women adopt chemopreventive medications such as selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) or aromatase inhibitors (AIs). Women with benign breast disease, such as atypical hyperplasia (AH) or lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS), have an increased risk of developing breast cancer and derive a greater benefit from antiestrogens compared to other high-risk women. Reasons for low uptake of chemoprevention include insufficient patient and clinician knowledge about antiestrogens, time constraints during the clinical encounter, and concerns about side effects. To address these barriers, we have developed patient and provider web-based decision support tools to improve informed choice about breast cancer chemoprevention among women with AH or LCIS. Study design: We are conducting a cluster-randomized controlled trial of clinical decision support to improve chemoprevention informed choice among women with AH or LCIS and their treating providers. Twenty-six U.S. sites through the SWOG Cancer Research Network were randomly assigned 1:1 to standard educational materials alone or in combination with the patient-centered decision aid (RealRisks) and provider decision support tool (BNAV). A total of 415 patients and 200 healthcare providers will be recruited from these sites. RealRisks consists of interactive modules to calculate personalized breast cancer risk and elicit preferences on chemoprevention. The modules are available in English and Spanish. BNAV is comprised of self-directed case-based learning modules on breast cancer risk assessment and chemoprevention. Patients complete questionnaires at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Providers complete surveys at baseline and after their enrolled patient’s 6-month clinical encounter. The primary endpoint is chemoprevention informed choice at 6 months, using a measure combining knowledge, attitude, and intention scales. Secondary endpoints include perceived breast cancer risk/worry, chemoprevention knowledge/intention, decision conflict/regret, shared decision-making, and chemoprevention uptake. For patients who begin chemoprevention, adherence and reasons for discontinuation are assessed annually for up to 5 years. Barriers and facilitators to implementing RealRisks and BNAV into clinic workflow will be assessed by conducting patient and provider interviews at baseline and mid-implementation. Eligibility criteria: Eligible patients include women, age 35-74 years, with AH or LCIS, no history of breast cancer, no prior use of SERMs or AIs, no bilateral mastectomies, English or Spanish-speaking, and access to the internet. Eligible providers include breast surgeons, medical oncologists, primary care providers, and physician extenders who see patients with AH or LCIS. Statistical methods: We have 90% power to detect a 15% increase in the frequency of chemoprevention informed choice with a 1-sided 0.025 level test, assuming an intraclass correlation (ICC) of 0.02 to account for clustering, roughly equal accrual at each site, 10% loss to follow-up, and ≤10% event rate in the control arm. Current/target accrual: The trial was activated on 9/1/2020. As of 7/7/2022, all 26 sites have been randomized, 157/200 providers and 184/415 patients have been enrolled. Discussion: Our hybrid effectiveness/implementation study seeks to evaluate the effectiveness of a multi-level intervention in promoting informed decision-making about breast cancer chemoprevention. Study results will provide valuable insights on how the decision support tools are integrated in diverse clinical settings. Citation Format: Katherine D. Crew, Garnet Anderson, Kathryn Arnold, Andrew Stieb, Jacquelyn N. Amenta, Cynthia Law, Ana Sandoval-Leon, Sarah Colonna, Tari King, Debra Mangino, Sandhya Pruthi, Maria Grosse Perdekamp, Christa Braun-Inglis, Stacy Krisher, Lisa Yee, Danielle Bertoni, Samantha Seaward, Kari B. Wisinski, Justin Floyd, Corrine Zarwan, Tarah J. Ballinger, Lindi VanderWalde, Masey M. Ross, Preston Steen, Shelly Lo, Alison Conlin, Kathleen Yost, John Ellerton, Erin Lin, Holly J. Pederson, Sagar Sardesai, Cheryl Jernigan, Dawn Hershman, Marian L. Neuhouser, Banu K. Arun, Rita Kukafka. SWOG 1904: Cluster-randomized controlled trial of patient and provider decision support to increase chemoprevention informed choice among women with atypical hyperplasia or lobular carcinoma in situ (MiCHOICE) [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 OT1-15-01.

ImportanceCytokine storm due to COVID-19 can cause high morbidity and mortality and may be more common in patients with cancer treated with immunotherapy (IO) due to immune system activation.ObjectiveTo determine the association of baseline immunosuppression and/or IO-based therapies with COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm in patients with cancer.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis registry-based retrospective cohort study included 12 046 patients reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry from March 2020 to May 2022. The CCC19 registry is a centralized international multi-institutional registry of patients with COVID-19 with a current or past diagnosis of cancer. Records analyzed included patients with active or previous cancer who had a laboratory-confirmed infection with SARS-CoV-2 by polymerase chain reaction and/or serologic findings.ExposuresImmunosuppression due to therapy; systemic anticancer therapy (IO or non-IO).Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was a 5-level ordinal scale of COVID-19 severity: no complications; hospitalized without requiring oxygen; hospitalized and required oxygen; intensive care unit admission and/or mechanical ventilation; death. The secondary outcome was the occurrence of cytokine storm.ResultsThe median age of the entire cohort was 65 years (interquartile range [IQR], 54-74) years and 6359 patients were female (52.8%) and 6598 (54.8%) were non-Hispanic White. A total of 599 (5.0%) patients received IO, whereas 4327 (35.9%) received non-IO systemic anticancer therapies, and 7120 (59.1%) did not receive any antineoplastic regimen within 3 months prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. Although no difference in COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm was found in the IO group compared with the untreated group in the total cohort (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.56-1.13, and aOR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.41-1.93, respectively), patients with baseline immunosuppression treated with IO (vs untreated) had worse COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm (aOR, 3.33; 95% CI, 1.38-8.01, and aOR, 4.41; 95% CI, 1.71-11.38, respectively). Patients with immunosuppression receiving non-IO therapies (vs untreated) also had worse COVID-19 severity (aOR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.36-2.35) and cytokine storm (aOR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.42-3.79).Conclusions and RelevanceThis cohort study found that in patients with cancer and COVID-19, administration of systemic anticancer therapies, especially IO, in the context of baseline immunosuppression was associated with severe clinical outcomes and the development of cytokine storm.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04354701

Abstract Background: I-SPY 2 is a multicenter, phase 2 trial using response-adaptive randomization within molecular subtypes defined by receptor status and MammaPrint (MP) risk to evaluate novel agents as neoadjuvant therapy for women with high-risk breast cancer. Tucatinib is a potent HER2 (ErbB2) tyrosine kinase inhibitor, selective for HER2 vs. epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and is active vs. brain metastases. Safety and efficacy of tucatinib combined with paclitaxel, pertuzumab, and trastuzumab are unknown and were tested in a planned 10 patient (pt) safety run-in of the I-SPY 2 trial. Methods: Women with tumors ≥ 2.5cm were eligible for screening. Only pts with tumors that were HER2+ by FISH were eligible for this treatment. Treatment included tucatinib (max dose 300 mg) BID for 12 weeks with weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 and trastuzumab (2 mg/kg weekly following loading), and pertuzumab (420 mg every 3 weeks following loading), followed by doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (AC) every 2 weeks x 4. The control arm was weekly paclitaxel and trastuzumab with pertuzumab for 12 weeks followed by AC every 2 weeks x 4. All pts undergo serial MR imaging and response at 3 & 12 weeks is combined with real time pCR data to estimate, and continuously update, the predicted pCR rate for each trial arm. The goal of the trial is to identify/graduate regimens with ≥85.% Bayesian predictive probability of success (i.e. demonstrating superiority to control) in a future 300-patient phase 3 neoadjuvant trial with a pCR endpoint. This run-in arm was conducted to determine safety of combining tucatinib with paclitaxel/trastuzumab/pertuzumab, monitoring special adverse events of interest including LFT elevations and gastrointestinal toxicities.Methods: The I-SPY 2 methods have been previously published. Results: 20 pts were evaluable in tucatinib treatment arm. The control arm included 329 historical controls enrolled since April 2010. The initial tucatinib dose was 300 mg BID. After enrollment of the first 8 pts, there were 3 pts with grade 3 LFT elevations, 2 pts with grade 2/3 diarrhea, 1 pt with grade 2 neutropenia, and 1 pt with grade 3 nausea. After this safety review, the tucatinib dose was lowered to 250 mg BID. Among 5 additional pts enrolled, 3 developed grade 2/3 LFT abnormalities. The protocol was then modified to tucatinib 150 mg BID days 1-28 and then 250 mg BID days 29-84; 7 pts were treated. Safety data were reviewed after 20 pts were enrolled; the arm was then suspended due to similar LFT elevations regardless of tucatinib dose reduction or schedule. 7 of 20 pts (35%) had reversible Grade 3 or higher ALT/AST elevation (Table). No pt met criteria for Hy’s Law. In terms of efficacy, 12 of 14 evaluable pts had > 80% reduction of tumor volume by 12 weeks, measured by MRI assessment of functional tumor volume (FTV). Conclusion: The goal of the run-in arm was to determine the safety of adding tucatinib to the combination of paclitaxel/trastuzumab/pertuzumab. The addition of tucatinib resulted in unacceptable but reversible LFT elevations despite tucatinib dose reduction. Tucatinib containing therapy resulted in >80% decline in tumor volume at 12 weeks in 86% of pts. Tucatinib showed a high level of activity when combined with paclitaxel/trastuzumab/pertuzumab, but the combination is not feasible. Table: Number of pts with grade 2, 3, and 4 LFT elevations by treatment schedule (highest grade per patient per event, ALT or Treatment scheduleGrade 2 LFT elevationGrade 3 LFT elevationGrade 4 LFT elevationTucatinib 300 mg BID030Tucatinib 250 mg BID210Tucatinib 150 mg BID days 1-28 followed by 250 mg BID days 29 to 84112 Citation Format: David A Potter, Erin Roesch, Christina Yau, Ruixiao Lu, Denise Wolf, Susan Samson, Debra Stafford, Kathy S Albain, Claudine Isaacs, Meghana Trivedi, Douglas Yee, Judy Boughey, Alexandra Thomas, A. Jo Chien, Nola Hylton, Wen Li, Angela DeMichele, Jane Perlmutter, W. Fraser Symmans, Dawn L Hershman, Michelle Melisko, Laura J van 't Veer, Amy Wilson, Smita M Asare, Donald A Berry, Richard Schwab, Hope S Rugo, Laura J Esserman. Evaluation of Tucatinib + (Paclitaxel + Pertuzumab + Trastuzumab) followed by AC in high-risk HER2 positive (HER2+) stage II/III breast cancer: Results from the I-SPY 2 TRIAL [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD8-07.