Veer, Laura van ‘t

Abstract Background: We compared the predictive and prognostic value of ctDNA dynamics in high-risk hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative (HR+/HER2-) and triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) enrolled in the I-SPY 2 trial (NCT01042379). To our knowledge, this is the largest ctDNA study in breast cancer in the neoadjuvant setting. Methods: Blood samples were collected at pre-treatment (T0), during treatment (T1 at 3 weeks, and T2 at 12 weeks) and after NAC (T3 at 24 weeks) from 106 HR+/HER2- and 97 TNBC patients. Plasma samples (n=734) were analyzed using a personalized and tumor-informed mPCR NGS-based ctDNA test (SignateraTM). Patients, all high risk for recurrence by MammaPrint, received paclitaxel-based treatment +/- experimental therapy followed by anthracycline. The median follow-up was 3.0 years (0.5 to 6.5). The predictive and prognostic value of ctDNA dynamics and status at different timepoints were examined. Our analysis is exploratory and does not adjust for other biomarkers. Results: Pretreatment ctDNA positivity (Fisher p<0.0001) and levels (mean tumor molecules/mL, MTM/mL, t test p=0.0062) were significantly higher in TNBC (90.7%, 14.7 MTM/mL) than in high risk HR+/HER2- (66.0%, 5.5 MTM/mL). Early and late ctDNA clearance during treatment (3 and 12 weeks of NAC) was predictive of pathologic complete response (pCR) and residual cancer burden (RCB), class 0-III, in TNBC but not HR+/HER2- (Table). In both subtypes: (1) ctDNA was a significant negative prognostic factor for distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS) at all timepoints (p<0.05) except at pretreatment; (2) all patients who achieved pCR were ctDNA-negative after NAC; (3) among non-responding patients, ctDNA-negativity after NAC was associated with improved DRFS (Table). Conclusions: The predictive value of ctDNA for prediction of pCR and RCB differed between subtypes (HR+/HER2- vs. TNBC), while similar prognostic value was observed. In TNBC, early clearance of ctDNA at 3 weeks was a significant predictor of favorable response to NAC. Compared to patients who were ctDNA-positive after NAC, ctDNA-negative status in both subtypes was associated with improved DRFS even in patients with residual cancer (no pCR or RCB-II/III). These findings could inform on the design of future studies that seek to demonstrate the utility of ctDNA in the curative setting. Predictive and prognostic significance of ctDNA in early breast cancer in the neoadjuvant setting HR+HER2- (n=106) TNBC (n=97) Predictive value for prediction of pCR and RCB Fisher p-value Fisher p-value Early ctDNA clearance (between T0 and T1) and pCR 0.4521 <0.0001 Late ctDNA clearance (between T0 and T2) and pCR 0.8071 0.0004 Early ctDNA clearance (between T0 and T1) and RCB (0-III) 0.1360 <0.0001 Late ctDNA clearance (between T0 and T2) and RCB (0-III) 0.4869 0.0004 Early ctDNA clearance at T1 and pCR rates pCR rate pCR rate ctDNA clearance (ctDNA+ at T0/ctDNA- at T1) 21% 67% Late ctDNA clearance (betweeNo early clearance (ctDNA+ at T0/ctDNA+ at T1) 13% 14% Prognostic value for prediction of DRFS Log rank p-value Log rank p-value ctDNA at T3 and pCR vs no PCR 0.0002 <0.0001 ctDNA at T3 and RCB (0-I vs II-III) 0.0110 <0.0001 Timepoints: T0 - pretreatment; T1 - three weeks after treatment initiation; T2 - at 12 weeks, between paclitaxel-based and anthracycline regimens; T3- after neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to surgery Citation Format: Mark Jesus Mendoza Magbanua, Lamorna Brown Swigart, Derrick Renner, Svetlana Shchegrova, Gillian L. Hirst, Christina Yau, Denise M. Wolf, Hsin-Ta Wu, Ekaterina Kalashnikova, Amy L. Delson, A. Jo Chien, Debu Tripathy, Smita Asare, Raheleh Salari, Angel Rodriguez, Bernhard Zimmermann, Himanshu Sethi, Alexey Aleshin, Paul Billings, Rita Nanda, Hope S. Rugo, Laura J. Esserman, Minetta C. Liu, Angela DeMichele, Laura van 't Veer. Comparison of the predictive and prognostic significance of circulating tumor DNA in patients with high risk HER2-negative breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2022; 2022 Apr 8-13. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(12_Suppl):Abstract nr LB111.

514 Background: The remarkable increase of novel Immuno-Oncology drugs in many malignancies has led to the need for biomarkers to identify who would benefit. Various predictive biomarkers have been developed (PD-1/PD-L1 expression, mutations in mismatch repair genes and microsatellite instability, tumor mutational burden and immune infiltration), none have consistently predicted efficacy. The I-SPY2 consortium qualified several expression-based immune biology related signatures that predict response to PD1 checkpoint inhibition. Here we assessed whole transcriptome data of high-risk early-breast cancer (EBC) patients who received Pembrolizumab within the neoadjuvant biomarker-rich I-SPY2 trial (NCT01042379), aiming to migrate the I-SPY2 research findings to a robust clinical grade platform signature to predict sensitivity to PD1 checkpoint inhibition. Methods: Whole transcriptome microarray data were available from pre-treatment biopsies of 69 HER2- patients enrolled in the Pembrolizumab (4 cycles) arm of the I-SPY2 trial. All patients had a High-Risk 70-gene MammaPrint profile. Pathologic complete response (pCR) was defined as no residual invasive cancer in breast or nodes at the time of surgery. Of the 69 patients, 31 had a pCR (12 HR (hormonal receptor)+HER2-, 19 Triple Negative (TN)), while 38 (28 HR+HER2-, 10 TN) had residual disease (RD). To identify the most predictive genes associated with pCR, gene selection was performed comparing pCR and RD groups by iteratively splitting the dataset in training and test, balancing for HR status. Due to limited sample size, leave one out cross validation was used for performance assessment. Genes with effect size > 0.45 were considered significant. Results: A signature of 53 genes, named ImPrint, was identified with overall sensitivity and specificity > 90% and > 80% for predicting pCR to pembrolizumab in all patients. Sensitivity and specificity in TN were > 95% and ≥70%, and in HR+HER2- > 80% and > 85%, respectively. The Positive Predictive Value (PPV) is 77% for the HR+HER2- subgroup. Biological annotation of the 53 genes showed that over 90% of the genes have known immune system related functions, of which 63% were previously known to be involved in immune response (including genes coding PD-L1 and PD-1, as well as those identified in I-SPY2). Conclusions: In the signature development phase, ImPrint predicts pCR to Pembrolizumab in a set of 69 high risk EBC with high sensitivity and specificity. The signature features genes with immune-related functions known to be involved in immune response indicating that it might aid identifying patients with an immune-active phenotype. Importantly, ImPrint appears effective in identifying a subset of HR+HER2- patients who could benefit from immunotherapy. External validation in independent dataset(s) is ongoing and will be presented at the time of the meeting.

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.

Abstract Background Transcriptomic immune-related gene signatures have been associated with achievement of pathologic complete response (pCR) and prognosis in the neoadjuvant setting. I-SPY 2 is a multicenter, phase 2 platform trial using response-adaptive randomization within subtypes defined by receptor status (HR/HER2) and MammaPrint (MP) risk to evaluate novel agents as neoadjuvant therapy for women with high-risk breast cancer. Given racial disparities in mortality from breast cancer and the paucity of racial demographic data from clinical trials, we aimed to evaluate the association between racial groups and baseline characteristics, including expression-based subtypes and immune signatures, treatment response, and prognosis of patients enrolled in the I-SPY 2 TRIAL. Methods Our study population included 990 I-SPY 2 patients. 15 patients identified as part of a racial group with <10 patients enrolled in the trial and were excluded from analysis. Pre-treatment expression data was available for 971 patients. Follow-up data was available for 907 patients; median follow-up time of 4.4 yrs. Chi-square test was used to assess associations between racial groups and pre-treatment SBR grade, HR/HER2 defined subtypes, intrinsic subtype (defined by BluePrint 80-gene molecular subtyping) and residual cancer burden (RCB) class. Logistic regression was used to evaluate race association with pCR. Cox proportional hazard modeling was used to assess the association between racial groups and event free survival (EFS) in a univariate setting, adjusting for pCR status. Association between racial groups and 28 expression signatures related to immune, proliferation, ER and HER2 pathway was analyzed using ANOVA with post-hoc Tukey test in the overall population and in each receptor subtype. Results Of 975 patients included in our analysis, 787 (81%) were White, 68 (7%) were Asian, and 120 (12%) were Black or African American. No significant associations between race and pre-treatment SBR grade (p=0.49), HR/HER2 defined subtypes (p=0.09), or expression-based subtypes (p=0.25) were observed. pCR rates do not significantly differ by racial groups (Odds ratio of pCR relative to White: 1.00 for Asian and 0.89 for Black or African American); and no significant differences in RCB class distribution by race was observed (p=0.88). Event free survival was not associated with patient racial group in a univariate Cox model (Hazard ratio relative to White: 1.10, p=0.73 for Asian and 1.37, p=0.13 for Black or African American). Among the 28 expression signatures evaluated, four were differentially expressed among racial groups within the overall population (F-test p<0.05): IFN module, B cell signature, Dendritic cell signature, and Mitotic score. Pairwise comparisons between racial groups with post-hoc Tukey test identified significant differences in IFN module expression between Black or African American vs. White (p=0.019) and Dendritic cell signature expression between Asian vs White (p=0.047). Among patients in the TNBC subtype, three signatures (dendritic cell signature, macrophage signature and ERBB2 module) were differentially expressed between Black or African American and White patients (p=0.002, 0.016 and 0.007). Conclusion Our analysis demonstrates that among women with high risk breast cancer, race does not affect subtype specific response rates nor event free survival. Distribution of subtypes previously shown to be associated with pCR in the I-SPY2 trial did not significantly differ among racial groups indicating race is less likely than tumor biology to predict response. The decreased expression of immune signatures observed in Black or African American women with TNBC suggests possible differential sensitivity to immunotherapy plus combination chemotherapy. Tumor immune multiplex studies are underway to further investigate. Citation Format: Beverly Kyalwazi, Christina Yau, Olufunmilayo Olopade, A. Jo Chien, Anne Wallace, Andres Forero-Torres, Lajos Pusztai, Erin Ellis, Kathy Albain, Anne Blaes, Barbara Haley, Judy Boughey, Anthony Elias, Amy Clark, Claudine Isaacs, Rita Nanda, Hyo Han, Rachel Yung, Debu Tripathy, Kristen Edmiston, Rebecca Viscusi, Donald Northfelt, Qamar Khan, Ashish Sanil, Scott Berry, Smita Asare, Amy Wilson, Gillian Hirst, Nola Hylton, Michelle Melisko, Jane Perlmutter, Hope Rugo, Fraser Symmans, Laura van ‘t Veer, Donald Berry, Laura Esserman. Analysis of clinical outcomes and expression-based immune signatures by race in 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 GS4-02.

Abstract Background: There is no clinical equipoise on the best upfront management of patients with early-stage hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/HER2-negative (HER2-) breast cancer (BC) that is high-risk by clinicopathologic criteria, and low-risk based on molecular profiling. These patients are unlikely to respond to chemotherapy. However, these patients still have risk, often risk of late recurrence, despite standard adjuvant endocrine therapy. Novel endocrine-based strategies that are more effective and tolerable than current standard therapies are needed for this population. Next-generation orally-bioavailable selective estrogen receptor degraders (oSERDs) with improved pharmacokinetic (PK) properties are promising potential therapies for HR+ BC. The oSERD amcenestrant has demonstrated a favorable safety profile and encouraging efficacy in a phase I/II dose escalation and expansion trial for heavily pre-treated patients with HR+ metastatic BC and is an attractive agent for assessment in the neoadjuvant BC setting. The neoadjuvant setting offers a unique opportunity to study novel agents and to assess early biological endpoints. However, one of the challenges in studying endocrine-based strategies in the neoadjuvant setting is the lack of a robust surrogate endpoint to reliably predict response and benefit. The I-SPY2 Endocrine Optimization Protocol (EOP) is a pilot sub-study within the main I-SPY2 TRIAL that will test amcenestrant alone or in combination with abemaciclib or letrozole. EOP will test the feasibility of using the I-SPY2 platform to test novel endocrine-based strategies in the neoadjuvant setting in patients with clinical high-risk, molecular low-risk, HR+/HER2- tumors, and will generate a rich database of imaging, molecular, and pathologic correlative endpoints that may potentially inform the improved assessment of response to neoadjuvant endocrine therapy. Trial Design/Eligibility/Accrual: The I-SPY2 EOP is a prospective, randomized, open-label trial specifically for patients with HR+/HER2-negative MammaPrint (MP) low-risk tumors that are at least 2.5 cm in size. Eligible patients are identified during the screening process for the parent I-SPY2 trial. The planned total accrual for the EOP is 120 patients. Patients are randomized 1:1:1 to one of 3 oral treatment arms: 1) amcenestrant 200 mg daily; 2) amcenestrant 200 mg daily + abemaciclib 150 mg bid; 3) amcenestrant 200 mg daily + letrozole 2.5 mg daily. Patients are treated for 6 months prior to surgery. Premenopausal women must receive concomitant monthly ovarian suppression. Serial breast MRIs, breast biopsies, blood, and patient reported outcomes (PROs) are being collected, and patients will be followed for 10 years for recurrence and survival. Serial dedicated breast PET (dbPET) scans and PKs will be assessed in a subset of patients. Objectives/Statistics: The primary objective of the EOP is to investigate the feasibility of enrolling and treating molecularly-selected patients with early stage HR+/HER2- MP low-risk BC in a randomized neoadjuvant trial using an oral-SERD backbone. Treatment will be determined to be feasible if ≥75% of enrolled patients complete ≥75% of assigned study therapy. Secondary objectives include the safety, tolerability, PROs, and PKs related to amcenestrant +/- abemacilcib and letrozole, as well as the assessment of imaging, pathologic, and molecular correlative endpoints as potential biomarkers of response to neoadjuvant endocrine therapy. Status: This study opened in May 2021. Accrual is ongoing. Citation Format: A. Jo Chien, Kevin M Kalinsky, Julissa Molina-Vega, Rita Mukhtar, Karthik Giridhar, Olufunmilayo I Olopade, Amrita Basu, Smita M Asare, Paul Henderson, Gillian Hirst, Ruixiao Lu, Ella Jones, Nola Hylton, Lamorna Brown-Swigart, Laura J van 't Veer, Douglas Yee, Ingrid Mayer, Laura J Esserman. I-SPY2 endocrine optimization protocol (EOP): A pilot neoadjuvant endocrine therapy study with amcenestrant as monotherapy or in combination with abemacicilib or letrozole in molecularly selected HR+/HER2- clinical stage 2/3 breast cancer [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 OT1-10-02.

Abstract Background: Disseminated tumor cells (DTCs) in bone marrow detected after treatment may represent occult residual disease. We enumerated DTCs after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in patients (pts) diagnosed with high-risk early stage breast cancer and examined the relationship of these cells with response and survival. Methods: I-SPY SURMOUNT is a sub-study of the I-SPY 2 TRIAL (NCT01042379). Pts enrolled on I-SPY 2, who signed consent for this sub-study, had bone marrow aspirates (BMA) collected after NACT at the time of surgery. DTCs were isolated and enumerated from BMA using immunomagnetic enrichment/flow cytometry (IE/FC). DTCs were defined as EPCAM-positive and CD45-negative nucleated cells. Samples were considered positive using a predetermined threshold of >4 DTCs per mL (Magbanua et al, unpublished data). Pathologic response was assessed using the residual cancer burden (RCB) method at local sites, and pts underwent standard adjuvant therapy if indicated and follow up for recurrence events and death. Relationship of DTCs with clinicopathologic variables was examined using Chi-squared test. Group means were compared using t tests. The log-rank test was used to compare survival curves. Results: A total of 73 patients were enrolled, 51 of whom had successful DTC assessment. The median DTC per mL was 4 (interquartile range 1.2-11.6). 24/51 (47%) were DTC-positive. Clinical characteristics by DTC status are shown in the table. DTC-positive pts were significantly younger (p=0.02) and had larger pretreatment tumors (longest diameter by magnetic resonance imaging) compared to DTC-negative pts (p=0.032). DTCs were not associated with receptor subtype. Thirty pts (41%) achieved a pathologic complete response (pCR). DTCs were not associated with pCR (p= 0.166); however, DTC-positive patients were significantly more likely to have residual cancer (RCB-II/III) after NACT compared to DTC-negative patients (OR 3.3, p=0.037). Median follow up of this cohort was 2.8 years (range: 0.9-4.8). Interim survival analysis showed that DTCs were not significantly correlated with EFS (p=0.6) or DRFS (p=0.41). Conclusions: Detection of DTCs at surgery after NACT is significantly more common in young patients, those with larger tumors, and those with residual disease at surgery. While these associations suggest higher risk for later recurrence, larger studies and longer follow up are necessary to determine if DTCs add prognostic value over pathologic evaluation alone for pts receiving NACT. Citation Format: Mark Jesus M Magbanua, Laura van 't Veer, Amy Clark, A. Jo Chien, Judy Boughey, Heather Han, Anne Wallace, Heather Beckwith, Minetta Liu, Christina Yau, E. Paul Wileyto, Lamorna Brown Swigart, Jane Perlmutter, Lauren Bayne, Shannon Deluca, Stephanie Yee, Erica Carpenter, Laura Esserman, John Park, Lewis Chodosh, Angela DeMichele. Outcomes associated with disseminated tumor cells at surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk early stage breast cancer: The I-SPY SURMOUNT study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PS2-07.

Abstract Background: In the I-SPY 2 TRIAL, the addition of P to standard NAC resulted in more than doubling of the pathologic complete response (pCR) rates for both hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/HER2- and triple-negative (TN) early breast cancer (EBC) patients (pts) compared to NAC only (Nanda et al, JAMA Oncol, 2020). At 3 years, distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS) rates in pts with pCR following NAC+P was >95%. We hypothesized that ctDNA can serve as a predictive biomarker of response and survival in pts treated with NAC. Methods: A personalized ctDNA test (Signatera) was performed on 511 serial plasma samples from 138 pts with high-risk HR+/HER2- (n=77) or TN (n=61) stage II/III EBC. Pts received P with paclitaxel (Tx) followed by AC (P arm, n=42) or standard NAC only (n=96), an exploratory subset of pts evaluated for P efficacy. Plasma was collected; pretreatment (T0), 3 weeks after treatment initiation (T1), between Tx+/-P and AC regimens (T2), and prior to surgery (T3). ctDNA was deemed positive with a minimum of 2 of the pt specific tumor mutation fragments detected in cfDNA. Association of ctDNA with response and survival was analyzed using logistic and Cox regressions with pCR and DRFS as endpoints. Median follow-up was 2.8 years. Results: Detection of ctDNA decreased over time (P arm: T0-81%, T1-50%, T2-19%, T3-3%) and NAC only: T0-82%, T1-65%, T2-26%, T3-10%). ctDNA data at T0 and T1 was available for 96% (132/138) of pts in P arm or NAC only (Table). Among ctDNA+ patients at baseline, clearance at T1 was significantly associated with pCR (OR=1.92, ctDNA+/-; OR=0.27, ctDNA+/+; LR p<0.001). This association remained significant after adjustment for HR status and treatment (LR p<0.001) and P arm or NAC only (P: LR p=0.03; NAC: LR p=0.01). ctDNA data at T0, T1, and T2 was available for 86% (118/138) pts. (Table). Among all ctDNA+ pts at baseline, dynamics through T2 was associated with pCR (OR=1.44, ctDNA+/-/-; OR=0.33, ctDNA+/+/-, OR=0.12, ctDNA+/+/+; LR p=0.0011). This association remained significant when adjusted for HR status and treatment (LR p<0.001). Analysis within individual treatments showed significant association for NAC (LR p=0.040) and a non-significant trend in NAC+P (LR p=0.063), likely due to smaller sample size. All pts who achieved pCR were ctDNA- at T3 (n=34). Among those who failed to achieve pCR (n=81), DRFS was significantly better in ctDNA- (n=72/81; 20 in P and 52 in NAC) versus ctDNA+ pts (n=9/81; 1 in P and 8 in NAC) (adjusted HR 0.13; 95% CI 0.05-0.37). Conclusions: These exploratory results align with our previous findings that early clearance of ctDNA during NAC treatment was significantly associated with increased likelihood of achieving pCR. Additionally, we show that ctDNA clearance can be an early surrogate marker for therapy response assessment. Residual ctDNA after neoadjuvant treatment was a significant predictor of metastatic recurrence and death. Personalized monitoring of ctDNA during the course of NAC is feasible and provides information that can be combined with imaging and pathology, and may help to optimize decision making for de-escalation or escalation of therapy. Larger studies are ongoing. ctDNA dynamics and pCRctDNA status at T0 and T1 (n=132)ctDNA status at T0, T1, and T2 (n=118)ctDNA-/-ctDNA+/-ctDNA+/+ctDNA-/-/-ctDNA+/-/-ctDNA+/+/-ctDNA+/+/+Total, n (%)24 (18)28 (21)80 (61)22 (19)24 (20)43 (36)27 (23)pCR, n (%)9 (38)15 (54)11 (14)9 (41)12 (50)8 (19)2 (7)No pCR, n (%)15 (63)13 (46)69 (86)13 (59)12 (50)35 (81)25 (93) Citation Format: Mark Jesus M Magbanua, Denise Wolf, Derrick Renner, Svetlana Shchegrova, Lamorna Brown Swigart, Christina Yau, Gillian Hirst, Hsin-Ta Wu, Ekaterina Kalashnikova, Antony Tin, Amy Delson, Douglas Yee, Angela DeMichele, Raheleh Salari, Angel Rodriguez, Bernhard Zimmermann, Himanshu Sethi, Alexey Aleshin, Paul Billings, Laura Esserman, Minetta Liu, Rita Nanda, Laura van ‘t Veer, I-SPY 2 Investigators. Personalized ctDNA as a predictive biomarker in high-risk early stage breast cancer (EBC) treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) with or without pembrolizumab (P) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD9-02.

Abstract Background: Pathologic complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in patients with breast cancer is associated with improved survival. Further assessment of the extent of residual disease, using the pathological anatomic American Joint Committee on Cancer staging method (ypStage) or the Residual Cancer Burden (RCB) method, have been shown to add prognostic information for patients with residual disease. Neo-Bioscore, an alternate system to classify response to NAC, includes clinical stage at diagnosis and biology and defines eight prognostic groups. The goal of this study was to compared three scoring systems (anatomic ypStage (7th ed), RCB Class and Neo-Bioscore) and assess whether RCB Class and Neo-Bioscore provide additional prognostic value in the context above anatomic ypStage, the most commonly used method for post-neoadjuvant residual disease assessment. Methods: Data from 5161 patients treated with NAC was pooled from 12 sites. Patients without clinical and pathological staging were excluded, as were patients with HER2+ breast cancer who did not receive neoadjuvant HER2-targeted therapy, leaving 3730 for analysis. PCR was defined as no residual invasive tumor in breast and nodes, i.e. RCB-0 or ypT0/Tis and ypN0. Patients with discordant pCR status by RCB Class vs ypStage (n=9) were excluded. Associations between each scoring system and event-free survival (EFS) were evaluated using the log rank test. EFS at 5 years was estimated using the Kaplan Meier method. Associations between Neo-Bioscore and EFS were assessed in the pCR group. For patients with residual disease, we assessed RCB and Neo-Bioscore within each ypStage. Analysis was performed overall and within subtype. Subgroups with <5 patients were excluded from the survival analyses. Results: ypAJCC staging, RCB class and Neo-Bioscore were all associated with EFS in the overall population and within each subtype (log rank p<0.0001). Of note, 13 patients with a Neo-Bioscore of 7 all recurred or died within 19 months of follow-up. Overall, 34% (1264/3721) of patients achieved a pCR. Their Neo-Bioscore ranges from 0-5, where 3% (37/1264) has a Neo-Bioscore of 5 despite achieving pCR. The Neo-Bioscore was not associated with EFS in case of a pCR, with EFS estimates at 5 years of 95%, 94%, 92%, 93%, 90% and 92% for Neo-Bioscores 0-5 respectively. As HR and HER2 status are components of the score, the range of Neo-Bioscore in the pCR group differs by subtype. However, similar to the overall analysis, the Neo-Bioscore was not prognostic within subtypes in case of pCR. Overall, among the patients who did not achieve pCR, both RCB class and Neo-Bioscore were associated with EFS within ypStages I, II and III. However, the ypStage within which RCB and Neo-Bioscore are prognostic is different for each subtype. RCB class was prognostic in ypStage I in both HR+ subtypes: patients with ypStage-I/RCB-I had significantly improved survival compared to patients with ypStage-I/RCB-II (5-year EFS: 100% vs 83% in HR+HER2- and 95% vs 77% in HR+HER2+). In contrast, for patients with triple negative breast cancer, RCB class was prognostic within ypStage II and III. Analysis by clinical stage and the components of the three systems that contribute most to prognosis will be presented. Conclusions: The degree of response to NAC adds important information to pCR versus residual disease. The Neo-Bioscore was not prognostic among patients with pCR, suggesting that clinical stage (including subtype and grade) adds little information in the setting of a pCR. In contrast, both RCB and Neo-Bioscore provide additional prognostic information to the conventional ypAJCC staging among non-pCR patients, suggesting that clinical stage, tumor biology as well as extent of residual disease all contribute to prognosis in the setting of residual disease after NAC. Citation Format: Marieke EM van der Noordaa, Christina Yau, Sonal Shad, Marie Osdoit, Tessa G Steenbruggen, Diane de Croze, Anne-Sophie Hamy, Marick Lae, Fabien Reyal, Maria Del Monte-Millán, Miguel Martin, Sara Lopez Tarruella, I-SPY 2 TRIAL Consortium, Judy C Boughey, Matthew Goetz, Tanya Hoskin, Rebecca Gould, Vincent Valero, Gabe Sonke, Maartje van Seijen, Jelle Wesseling, John Bartlett, Stephan Edge, Mi-Ok Kim, Jean Abraham, Carlos Caldas, Helena Earl, Elena Provenzano, Stephen-John Sammut, David Cameron, Ashley Graham, Peter Hall, Lorna MacKintosh, Fang Fan, Andrew K Godwin, Kelsey Schwensen, Priyanka Sharma, Angela DeMichele, Janet Dunn, Louise Hiller, Larry Hayward, Jeremy Thomas, Kimberley Cole, Lajos Pusztai, Laura van 't Veer, Fraser Symmans, Laura Esserman. Assessing prognosis after neoadjuvant therapy: A comparison between anatomic ypAJCC staging, residual cancer burden class and neo-bioscore [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS4-07.

Abstract Background: A variety of investigational HER2-inhibitor agents/combinations have been tested in I-SPY 2, including neratinib (N), TDM1 combined with pertuzumab (P) (TDM1/P), and trastuzumab (H) combined with pertuzumab (H/P; prior to this combination becoming standard of care), all with trastuzumab as control (Ctr). All three experimental arms graduated, showing improved efficacy over control in one or more receptor subsets (HR+HER2+, HR-HER2+, or/and HER2+). Here we assess 10 biomarkers in the HER2, ER/PR, and proliferation pathways on multiple levels of resolution (expression, protein, phospho-protein) as predictors of response in these four arms, hypothesizing that highly HER2-activated, proliferative tumors may be more sensitive to HER2-inhibition than those that are more luminal and quiescent. Methods: 192 HER2+ patients were considered in this analysis: (31 Ctr, 65 N, 52 TDM1/P, and 44 H/P). 10 biomarkers relating to HER2, ER, or proliferation were evaluated from pre-treatment biopsies: HER2 IHC (n=145), 3 expression signatures (n=192), BluePrint subtype (n=192), and 5 protein/phospho-protein analytes by RPPA (n=175). Each biomarker was tested for association with pCR in the whole population and within each arm using a logistic model. This analysis was adjusted for HR status and treatment arm as covariates, and performed within receptor subtypes. This analysis does not adjust for multiplicities of other biomarkers. Results: In the population as a whole, HER2 and HER2-signaling biomarkers, evaluated at multiple levels of resolution: IHC, total-/phospho-protein by RPPA, and mRNA (HER2 amplicon module) - are highly correlated (rho=0.8 [0.65-0.92]). Higher HER2 levels and activity are associated with response: HER2 IHC 3+ status (LR p=0.00032), total quantitative ERBB2 protein by RPPA (LR p=5.4E-09), ERBB2 activation levels (LR p=6.58E-06 (pERBB2 (Y1248)) and 9.95E-06 (pEGFR Y1173)), and the ERBB2 amplicon expression signature (LR p=2.38E-08). In contrast, higher average ER/PR expression associates with non-response to HER2-targeted therapy (LR p=4.28E-08). Both HER2 and ER/PR signaling phenotypes are captured by BluePrint subtyping; and consistent with the individual pathway markers, tumors classified Luminal-type had a lower pCR rate relative to those classified as Her2-type (or Basal-type) (LR p=4.84E-11). These associations all retain significance in a model adjusting for HR status and treatment arm, and in the HR+HER2+ subset. In addition, we quantitatively assessed proliferation markers at the total protein (RPPA: Ki67), phospho-protein (pAURKA) and mRNA (proliferation signature Module11_Prolif) levels. All three proliferation biomarkers predict response overall; but this association is strongest within the HR+HER2+ subset (LR p=0.0012 (Module11_prolif), 0.0036 (pAURK), and 0.045 (Ki67)). None of the biomarkers tested were associated with response in the HR-HER2+ subset. Numbers are small within individual arms. Within the HR+HER2+ subtype, higher HER2 and lower ER/PR is observed in responders in all experimental arms; but the proliferation markers Module11_Prolif (LR p=0.0031) and Ki67 total protein (LR p=0.0029) are associated with response to TDM1/P but not H/P or N. Conclusion: High HER2 signaling at the expression, protein, and phospho-protein levels, and low ER signaling, all predict response to HER2-inhibition across treatment arms. Proliferation markers may be useful for prioritizing therapies in the HR+HER2+ subset. Citation Format: Denise M Wolf, Christina Yau, Julia Wulfkuhle, Lamorna Brown-Swigart, Smita M. Asare, Gillian L. Hirst, Laura Sit, Jane Perlmutter, I-SPY 2 TRIAL Consortium, Minetta Liu, John Park, Angela DeMichele, Douglas Yee, Don Berry, Laura Esserman, Emanuel Petricoin, Laura van t' Veer. HER2 signaling, ER, and proliferation biomarkers predict response to multiple HER2-targeted agents/combinations plus standard neoadjuvant therapy 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 P4-10-02.