Rugo, Hope S.

1083 Background: T-DXd and SG are both FDA-approved treatments for patients (pts) with HER2-low MBC, but little data exists on the sequential use of these ADCs. Methods: In this multicenter retrospective cohort study, we identified pts with HER2-low MBC treated sequentially with both T-DXd and SG in either order, with or without intervening therapies (IntTx), at 5 academic centers between 2020-2023. We previously reported real-world progression free survival (rwPFS) and real-world overall survival (rwOS) by HR-status and ADC sequence order. Here we provide updated rwPFS and rwOS data, as well as new subgroup analyses by age, sites of disease, and use of IntTx between ADCs for HR- and HR+ disease. Results: 84 pts with HER2-low MBC treated with both T-DXd and SG were included, including 56 pts with HR+/HER2-low MBC (66.7%) and 28 pts with HR-/HER2-low MBC (33.3%). Prior to the start of ADC1, median age was 58 yrs and 22 pts were >65 yrs (26.2%), 65 pts (77.4%) had visceral disease, and 14 pts (16.7%) had central nervous system (CNS) disease. 36 pts (42.9%) had an IntTx between ADCs. Table 1 shows updated rwPFS and rwOS data by HR-status and ADC sequence order. For pts with HR+ and HR- MBC, there was no difference in ADC1 rwPFS or ADC2 rwPFS by age ≤65 vs. >65 yr or by presence vs. absence of visceral disease. For pts with HR- MBC, ADC1 rwPFS and rwOS was shorter for pts with CNS disease vs. pts without CNS disease (rwPFS 5.4 mo (n=6) vs. 8.5 mo (n=22), p=0.03; rwOS 11.6 mo vs. 21.1 mo, p<0.01 respectively). For pts with HR+ and HR- MBC, there was no difference in ADC2 rwPFS with or without receipt of IntTx. There was no difference in time to treatment failure for first IntTx vs. ADC2 if no InTx was given. Conclusions: This is one of the largest multicenter cohorts of pts treated with sequential ADCs for HER2-low MBC. Median rwPFS was longer for ADC1 than ADC2 in all subgroups, regardless of HR-status, ADC sequence order, age ≤65 or >65 yr, presence of visceral disease, or use of IntTx. Among pts with HR-/HER2-low MBC, pts with CNS disease had shorter ADC1 rwPFS and rwOS than pts without CNS disease. [Table: see text]

Abstract Introduction: Interstitial Lung Disease (ILD) is a known adverse event associated with Antibody Drug Conjugates (ADCs), causing fibrosis of the lung. In the DESTINY-Breast 04, TROPICS-02, and ASCENT trials the rate of ILD/Pneumonitis was 12.1%, 0.4%, and 0% respectively. In these studies, the time to first cross-sectional imaging after initiation of ADC was 6 weeks. However, prior treatment with a topoisomerase-1 inhibitor ADC was not permitted in these studies, so the influence of sequential ADC treatments remains unknown. Here, we aimed to characterize the frequency and management of ILD in sequential use of ADCs in a multi-institution retrospective analysis. Methods: We identified patients (pts) with HR+/HER2-low and HR-/HER2-low MBC who had received both Trastuzumab-deruxtecan (T-DXd) and Sacituzumab govitecan (SG) monotherapy (in either order, with or without intervening therapies) who were treated at five academic centers between 2020-2023. Patients had received treatment with the ADC in either routine clinical treatment or as a prior participant on a clinical trial with ADC monotherapy. Information regarding ILD diagnosis, imaging, timing of onset, peak and resolution along with management information was collected and analyzed. Retrospective assessment of ILD toxicity was graded using CTCAE v5.0, based on available clinical and radiographic reports. Results: 10/60 pts who received ADC therapy in this multi-institutional cohort were diagnosed with ILD (all grades). No differences in age or BMI were observed in those who developed ILD versus those who did not, and 9/10 pts were White, 1 was Asian, with a median age of 59 years (47-79 years). Pertinent history in these pts included 3/10 had a prior smoking history, 8/10 had a prior cardiac or pulmonary comorbidity (including sleep apnea, lung cancer, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, thrombosis, or stroke). Prior to receiving their first ADC, 7/10 patients had metastatic disease to the lung. All 10 patients were diagnosed with ILD during treatment with T-DXd. 4 pts initially received T-DXd, then developed ILD and then upon recovery, subsequently received SG. The remaining 6 pts initially received SG (with no reports of ILD), and then received T-DXd and subsequently developed ILD. In the entire cohort, the median time from ADC initiation to first CT scan was 8 weeks (range 1-22 weeks). Within the cohort that developed ILD, the median time from initiation of T-DXd to first CT scan was also 8 weeks (range 6-13 weeks). The median time to diagnoses of ILD was 3 months after initiation of T-DXd (range 0.4-14.5 months). Dyspnea was the most common presenting symptom in 9/10 pts and at diagnosis of ILD, dyspnea was graded as III in 6/10 pts, II in 3/10 pts, and I in 1/10 pts. Diagnostic evaluation included CT chest (9/10), pulmonary consultation (8/10), pulmonary function testing (2/10), and bronchoscopy (1/10). 4/10 patients presented at their highest-grade toxicity at diagnosis. All patients stopped T-DXd treatment, 7 were hospitalized, 7 required supplemental oxygen, and 8 were prescribed steroids for treatment. Of those receiving steroids, the most common starting dose was prednisone 1 mg/kg and doses ranged from 0.5 mg/kg to 9mg/kg prednisone equivalents. No patient received a secondary immunosuppressive agent. The steroid treatment duration ranged from 1-4 months. None of the 10 pts underwent re-challenge with T-DXd and 3/10 developed grade V ILD (death). Conclusion: We observed a 16.6% incidence of all grade ILD (5% grade V ILD) with T-DXd and 0% with SG. In this small cohort study, we did not observe a clear increased risk for ILD with sequential treatment of ADCs. Practice patterns were consistent with recommended diagnostic evaluation and steroid management. Additional strategies are needed to characterize pts most at risk for developing ILD and to identify situations where re-challenge may be safe. Citation Format: Sarah Premji, Laura Huppert, Reshma Mahtani, Samantha Fisch, Naomi Dempsey, Angelina Raimonde-Taylor, Saya Jacob, Laura Quintal, Jo Chien, Michelle Melisko, Ana Sandoval-Leon, Lauren Carcas, Manmeet Ahluwalia, Natasha Harpalani, Jenna Hoppenworth, Dame Idossa, Ruta Rao, Hope Rugo, Karthik Giridhar. Interstitial Lung Disease (ILD) in Sequential Antibody Drug Conjugate (ADC) use in patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer (MBC): A Multi-Institutional experience [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PO4-12-06.

Abstract Introduction. T-DXd is FDA-approved for patients (pts) with hormone receptor positive (HR+) or HR- HER2-low (IHC 1+ or 2+, ISH-) MBC and SG is FDA-approved for pts with HR+/HER2- and triple negative MBC. However, several outstanding questions impact the use of these drugs in clinic, including: 1) what is the efficacy and safety of these agents in real-world populations with diverse pt characteristics not well represented in the pivotal phase III trials, and 2) what is the impact of sequential treatment with ADCs on the efficacy and safety of these agents. Methods. In this multicenter retrospective cohort study, we identified pts with HR+/HER2-low and HR-/HER2-low MBC who had received both T-DXd and SG monotherapy (in either order, with or without intervening therapies) treated at 5 academic centers between 2020-2023. Pts received treatment per standard of care or on a clinical trial with ADC monotherapy. We describe pt demographic and clinical characteristics, treatment history, key safety parameters, and response and survival data by HR+ status and ADC sequence order. Results. Sixty pts with MBC treated sequentially with T-DXd and SG were included in this analysis, including 45 pts with HR+/HER2-low MBC (75.0%) and 15 pts with HR-/HER2-low MBC (25.0%). Most pts were female (n=59; 98.3%), non-Hispanic (n=49, 81.7%), and white (n=43, 71.7%). Median age at start of ADC #1 was 56.6 years (range 23-82). Prior to treatment with ADC #1, most pts had visceral disease (n=45, 75.0%) and 16 (26.7%) had central nervous system metastases. Among pts with HR+/HER2-low MBC, median time from MBC diagnosis to treatment with ADC #1 was 49.0 months, with 4 median lines of prior therapy in the metastatic setting (2 endocrine, 2 chemo). Approximately half of the HR+ pts received T-DXd prior to SG (n=22, 48.9%; median 3.0 prior lines of therapy for MBC, range 1-9) while the other half received SG prior to T-DXd (n=23, 51.1%; median 4.5 prior lines of therapy for MBC, range 1-10). 44% (n=20) received an intervening therapy between ADCs. For HR+ pts who received T-DXd prior to SG, response and survival data is as follows for T-DXd and SG respectively: Overall response rate (ORR) [54.5% and 21.1%], time to next treatment (TTNT) [4.3 mo and 1.6 mo], and real-world overall survival (rwOS) [19.8 mo and 4.9 mo]. For HR+ pts who received SG prior to T-DXd, response and survival data is as follows for SG and T-DXd respectively: ORR [78.3% and 42.9%], TTNT [8.6 mo and 2.8 mo], and rwOS [22.3 mo and 7.3 mo]. Among pts with HR-/HER2-low MBC, median time from MBC diagnosis to treatment with ADC #1 was 8.2 months with 2 median lines of prior therapy in the metastatic setting (2 chemotherapy); 66.7% (n=10) received prior immunotherapy. Most HR- pts received SG prior to T-DXD (n=14, 93.3%) and 40.0% (n=6) received an intervening therapy between ADCs. For HR- pts who received SG prior to T-DXd, response and survival data is as follows for SG and T-DXd respectively: ORR [64.3% and 38.5%], TTNT [6.2 mo and 2.7 mo, and rwOS [15.7 mo and 6.5 mo]. In terms of key safety parameters during treatment with T-DXd, 13.3% of pts (8/60) required a dose reduction. 16.7% (10/60) were diagnosed with interstitial lung disease (ILD)/pneumonitis of any grade including 3 pts with grade 3-4 ILD (5.0%) and 3 pts with grade 5 ILD (5.0%). During treatment with SG, 40.0% of pts (24/60) required a dose reduction. 83.3% (50/60) received growth factor support (24 pts primary prophylaxis; 26 pts secondary prophylaxis); 9 pts (15%) required treatment delay due to neutropenia. Conclusion. This study represents the largest multicenter series to date of pts treated with sequential ADCs for HR+/HER2-low or HR-/HER2-low. ORR was higher and TTNT was longer for ADC #1 than ADC #2 in all subgroups, regardless of HR+ status and ADC sequence order. An additional ~30 pts will be reported at time of final analysis. Future prospective studies are planned to further clarify the efficacy and safety of sequential ADC use and to identify biomarkers of response and resistance. Key demographic, clinical and treatment characteristics in pts with HR+ and HR- HER2-low MBC treated sequentially with T-DXd and SG (in either order, with or without intervening therapies) Abbreviations: T-DXd (trastuzumab deruxtecan), SG (sacituzumab govitecan), MBC (metastatic breast cancer), ADC (antibody drug conjugate), HR (hormone receptor), HER2 (human epidermal growth factor receptor 2), CNS (central nervous system), ET (endocrine therapy), ORR (overall response rate), TTNT (time to next treatment), rwOS (real world overall survival), CI (confidence interval) * Several pts on ADC #2 with ongoing treatment and first scan pending, hence smaller denominator for response assessment Citation Format: Laura Huppert, Reshma Mahtani, Samantha Fisch, Naomi Dempsey, Sarah Premji, Angelina Raimonde-Taylor, Saya Jacob, Laura Quintal, Jo Chien, Michelle Melisko, Ana Sandoval-Leon, Lauren Carcas, Manmeet Ahluwalia, Natasha Harpalani, Jenna Hoppenworth, Dame Idossa, Ruta Rao, Karthik Giridhar, Hope Rugo. Multicenter retrospective cohort study of the sequential use of the antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) and sacituzumab govitecan (SG) in patients with HER2-low metastatic breast cancer (MBC) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PS08-04.

Abstract Background: Patients with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) metastatic breast cancer (BC) may develop resistance to endocrine therapy (ET), particularly following treatment with a cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i), potentially driven by a mutation in the ERa-coding gene, ESR1. Lasofoxifene, an oral, next-generation ET and ER breast antagonist, had potent activity in mBC xenograft models expressing ESR1 mutations, either as a single agent or combined with a CDK4/6i. Subsequently, two phase 2 studies evaluated lasofoxifene in women with ER+/HER2- metastatic BC and an ESR1 mutation who had disease progression on previous ET and CDK4/6i. The ELAINE 1 trial showed numerically greater progression-free survival (PFS, median ~6 vs 4 months; P=0.138), objective response rate (ORR, 13% vs 3%; P=0.124), and clinical benefit rate (CBR, 37% vs 22%; P=0.117) with lasofoxifene monotherapy versus the ER degrader fulvestrant, with a favorable safety profile (Goetz MP, et al. Ann Oncol. 2022;33:S1387). The single-arm, ELAINE 2 trial demonstrated that lasofoxifene combined with abemaciclib was well tolerated with a median PFS of ~13 months, ORR of 56%, and CBR of 66% (Damodaran S, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2023;41:suppl 16; abstr 1057). Based on these data, the phase 3, registrational, ELAINE 3 trial was initiated. Methods: ELAINE 3 (NCT05696626) is an open-label, phase 3, multicenter study evaluating the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of lasofoxifene plus abemaciclib versus fulvestrant plus abemaciclib. Key inclusion criteria are pre- and postmenopausal women and men aged ≥18 years; ER+/HER2-, locally advanced and/or metastatic BC (measurable and/or non-measurable disease); ≥1 acquired ESR1 mutation; progression on an aromatase inhibitor plus palbociclib or ribociclib as their first hormonal treatment for advanced/metastatic BC; and ≤1 line of chemotherapy in the advanced/metastatic setting. Patients will be randomized 1:1 to receive lasofoxifene 5 mg/day plus abemaciclib 150 mg BID, or fulvestrant 500 mg IM on days 1, 15, and 29, then 4 weekly plus abemaciclib 150 mg BID. Treatment will continue until progression, death, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal from the study. The primary endpoint is PFS; key secondary endpoints are ORR, overall survival, CBR, duration of response, and time to response. Time to cytotoxic chemotherapy, quality of life, and safety will also be evaluated. Blood samples for circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) will be collected at screening, at weeks 4 and 8 and every 8 weeks thereafter, and at the final visit for genomic analyses. Outcomes with lasofoxifene/abemaciclib and fulvestrant/abemaciclib will be compared using a stratified Cox proportional hazards model and stratified logrank test. Expected PFS is ≥10.3 months for lasofoxifene/abemaciclib and 7 months for fulvestrant/abemaciclib (PFS hazard ratio of 0.68 at final analysis). The target sample size is 400, to achieve 90% power with a one-sided type I error rate of 0.025 after 285 PFS events. Full recruitment is expected to occur over 18 months at 125 global sites. Citation Format: Matthew Goetz, Seth Wander, Thomas Bachelot, Gerald Batist, Javier Cortés, Massimo Cristofanilli, Giuseppe Curigliano, Alexandre de Nonneville, Einav Nili-Gal Yam, Komal Jhaveri, Cynthia Ma, Heather Parsons, Hope Rugo, Sarah Sammons, Daniel Stover, Chris Twelves, Aditya Bardia, Paul V. Plourde, David J Portman, Senthil Damodaran. Trial in progress: Open-label, randomized, multicenter, phase 3, ELAINE 3 study of the efficacy and safety of lasofoxifene plus abemaciclib for treating locally advanced or ER+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer with an ESR1 mutation [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PO1-18-12.

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 co-primary 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. Two years of adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy (ET) resulted in a significant improvement in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) that persisted beyond the 2-year treatment period in patients with hormone receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer (EBC). Here, we report 5-year efficacy results from a prespecified overall survival (OS) interim analysis. In the intent-to-treat population, with a median follow-up of 54 months, the benefit of abemaciclib was sustained with hazard ratios of 0.680 (95% CI, 0.599 to 0.772) for IDFS and 0.675 (95% CI, 0.588 to 0.774) for DRFS. This persistence of abemaciclib benefit translated to continuous separation of the curves with a deepening in 5-year absolute improvement in IDFS and DRFS rates of 7.6% and 6.7%, respectively, compared with rates of 6% and 5.3% at 4 years and 4.8% and 4.1% at 3 years. With fewer deaths in the abemaciclib plus ET arm compared with the ET-alone arm (208 v 234), statistical significance was not reached for OS. No new safety signals were observed. In conclusion, abemaciclib plus ET continued to reduce the risk of developing invasive and distant disease recurrence beyond the completion of treatment. The increasing absolute improvement at 5 years is consistent with a carryover effect and further supports the use of abemaciclib in patients with high-risk EBC.

Abstract Purpose: The neutralizing peptibody trebananib prevents angiopoietin-1 and angiopoietin-2 from binding with Tie2 receptors, inhibiting angiogenesis and proliferation. Trebananib was combined with paclitaxel±trastuzumab in the I-SPY2 breast cancer trial. Patients and Methods: I-SPY2, a phase II neoadjuvant trial, adaptively randomizes patients with high-risk, early-stage breast cancer to one of several experimental therapies or control based on receptor subtypes as defined by hormone receptor (HR) and HER2 status and MammaPrint risk (MP1, MP2). The primary endpoint is pathologic complete response (pCR). A therapy “graduates” if/when it achieves 85% Bayesian probability of success in a phase III trial within a given subtype. Patients received weekly paclitaxel (plus trastuzumab if HER2-positive) without (control) or with weekly intravenous trebananib, followed by doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide and surgery. Pathway-specific biomarkers were assessed for response prediction. Results: There were 134 participants randomized to trebananib and 133 to control. Although trebananib did not graduate in any signature [phase III probabilities: Hazard ratio (HR)-negative (78%), HR-negative/HER2-positive (74%), HR-negative/HER2-negative (77%), and MP2 (79%)], it demonstrated high probability of superior pCR rates over control (92%–99%) among these subtypes. Trebananib improved 3-year event-free survival (HR 0.67), with no significant increase in adverse events. Activation levels of the Tie2 receptor and downstream signaling partners predicted trebananib response in HER2-positive disease; high expression of a CD8 T-cell gene signature predicted response in HR-negative/HER2-negative disease. Conclusions: The angiopoietin (Ang)/Tie2 axis inhibitor trebananib combined with standard neoadjuvant therapy increased estimated pCR rates across HR-negative and MP2 subtypes, with probabilities of superiority &gt;90%. Further study of Ang/Tie2 receptor axis inhibitors in validated, biomarker-predicted sensitive subtypes is warranted.

369 Background: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are a valuable component to understand treatment tolerability and toxicity. We have implemented an electronic system for monitoring PROs and quality of life (QOL) for patients enrolled in the I-SPY2 trial, a phase II trial evaluating the effect of novel neoadjuvant therapies for breast cancer. We associated patient demographic factors with symptoms, decline in physical function (PF), and tolerability to treatment. Methods: Study population for this analysis includes 259 enrolled patients receiving combinations of experimental immunotherapy and chemotherapy. Patients completed PRO-CTCAE/PROMIS/FACT surveys reflecting symptom severity, symptom frequency, tolerability of drug, and physical function at baseline through follow up (12 months). CTCAE 5.0 was collected weekly at these timepoints to assess adverse events (AE). Odds ratio and regularized multi-variate regression was used to evaluate early symptoms predictive of a clinically significant decline in PF from baseline to post-treatment follow-up. Results: Of 259 patients, 160 (58%) were White, 13 (5%) were Asian, 26 (10%) were African American (AA), and 25 (9.3%) were Hispanic. 25% of all patients had a clinically significant decline in PF between baseline and pre-surgery/follow-up. Symptom predictors of decline included high frequency of diarrhea and severity of joint pain. African American (AA) patients had higher severity of joint pain than White patients (OR = 14.9, P < 0.05). 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). Overall, patients that reported lower tolerance to therapy had higher grade of AE. While patients with low-grade adverse events were less bothered by their side effects at follow-up, higher grade adverse events such as hypothyroidism impacted distress levels by more than double. Conclusions: Among I-SPY2 participants, when higher grade of symptoms is persistent through follow up, it impacts physical function and tolerability even after end of therapy. Our study can allow physicians to be more diligent in active and post treatment monitoring. Clinical trial information: NCT01042379 .

PURPOSE BMI affects breast cancer risk and prognosis. In contrast to cytotoxic chemotherapy, CDK4/6 inhibitors are given at a fixed dose, irrespective of BMI or weight. This preplanned analysis of the global randomized PALLAS trial investigates the impact of BMI on the side-effect profile, treatment adherence, and efficacy of palbociclib. METHODS Patients were categorized at baseline according to WHO BMI categories. Neutropenia rates were assessed with univariable and multivariable logistic regression. Time to early discontinuation of palbociclib was analyzed with Fine and Gray competing risk models. Unstratified Cox models were used to investigate the association between BMI category and time to invasive disease-free survival (iDFS). 95% CIs were derived. RESULTS Of 5,698 patients included in this analysis, 68 (1.2%) were underweight, 2,082 (36.5%) normal weight, 1,818 (31.9%) overweight, and 1,730 (30.4%) obese at baseline. In the palbociclib arm, higher BMI was associated with a significant decrease in neutropenia (unadjusted odds ratio for 1-unit change, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.91 to 0.94; adjusted for age, race ethnicity, region, chemotherapy use, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group at baseline, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.92 to 0.95). This translated into a significant decrease in treatment discontinuation rate with higher BMI (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] for 10-unit change, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.83). There was no significant improvement in iDFS with the addition of palbociclib to ET in any weight category (normal weight HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.12; overweight HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.49; and obese HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.30) in this analysis early in follow-up (31 months). CONCLUSION This preplanned analysis of the PALLAS trial demonstrates a significant impact of BMI on side effects, dose reductions, early treatment discontinuation, and relative dose intensity. Additional long-term follow-up will further evaluate whether BMI ultimately affects outcome.

ASCO Rapid Recommendations Updates highlight revisions to select ASCO guideline recommendations as a response to the emergence of new and practice-changing data. The rapid updates are supported by an evidence review and follow the guideline development processes outlined in the ASCO Guideline Methodology Manual . The goal of these articles is to disseminate updated recommendations, in a timely manner, to better inform health practitioners and the public on the best available cancer care options. See the Appendix for disclaimers and other important information ( Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 , online only).

PURPOSE The Standardized Definitions for Efficacy End Points (STEEP) criteria, established in 2007 and updated in 2021 (STEEP 2.0), provide standardized definitions of adjuvant breast cancer (BC) end points. STEEP 2.0 identified a need to separately address end points for neoadjuvant clinical trials. The multidisciplinary NeoSTEEP working group of experts was convened to critically evaluate and align neoadjuvant BC trial end points. METHODS The NeoSTEEP working group concentrated on neoadjuvant systemic therapy end points in clinical trials with efficacy outcomes—both pathologic and time-to-event survival end points—particularly for registrational intent. Special considerations for subtypes and therapeutic approaches, imaging, nodal staging at surgery, bilateral and multifocal diseases, correlative tissue collection, and US Food and Drug Administration regulatory considerations were contemplated. RESULTS The working group recommends a preferred definition of pathologic complete response (pCR) as the absence of residual invasive cancer in the complete resected breast specimen and all sampled regional lymph nodes (ypT0/Tis ypN0 per AJCC staging). Residual cancer burden should be a secondary end point to facilitate future assessment of its utility. Alternative end points are needed for hormone receptor–positive disease. Time-to-event survival end point definitions should pay particular attention to the measurement starting point. Trials should include end points originating at random assignment (event-free survival and overall survival) to capture presurgery progression and deaths as events. Secondary end points adapted from STEEP 2.0, which are defined from starting at curative-intent surgery, may also be appropriate. Specification and standardization of biopsy protocols, imaging, and pathologic nodal evaluation are also crucial. CONCLUSION End points in addition to pCR should be selected on the basis of clinical and biologic aspects of the tumor and the therapeutic agent investigated. Consistent prespecified definitions and interventions are paramount for clinically meaningful trial results and cross-trial comparison.