Wildiers, Hans

Abstract Background Young age is a known risk factor for breast cancer recurrence and mortality, particularly in hormone receptor-positive disease. However, no specific evidence exists on whether age at diagnosis influences clinical behavior and outcomes among carriers of germline BRCA pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants (PVs). Methods The BRCA BCY Collaboration (NCT03673306) is an international, multicenter, hospital-based, retrospective cohort study including women with germline BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 PVs and diagnosed with stage I-III breast cancer at the age of 40 years or younger between January 2000 and December 2020. The present analysis aimed to evaluate clinical features and outcomes of breast cancer in young BRCA carriers according to age at diagnosis, by comparing patients aged ≤30 years with those aged 31-35 and 36-40 years at breast cancer diagnosis. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS). Overall survival (OS) was a secondary endpoint. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs), adjusting for risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) and risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) (time-dependent), and stratifying by country, year of diagnosis, tumor size, nodal involvement, tumor grade and hormone receptor status. Results From 109 centers in 5 continents, 5350 young BRCA carriers were included, of whom 1106 (20.7%) were ≤30 years of age, 1945 (36.4%) were 31-35 years and 2299 (43.0%) were 36-40 years at the time of breast cancer diagnosis. Compared to patients aged 31-35 and 36-40 years, those aged ≤30 years were more likely to harbor BRCA1 PVs (71.3%, 62.4%, 61.1%, respectively), to present with high-grade (G3 in 71.3%, 66.6%, 65.0%, respectively), triple-negative breast cancer (56.3%, 48.1%, 46.6%, respectively), and less frequently smaller tumor size (T1: 31.7%, 36.6% and 39.5%, respectively). Consequently, chemotherapy was administered more frequently among patients aged ≤30 years (94.4%, 92.6%, 89.7%, respectively). At a median follow-up of 8.2 years (IQR, 4.7-12.8), 8-year DFS rate was 65.0% among patients aged ≤30 years, 64.7% in the 31-35 years group, and 65.8% in the 36-40 years group. No significant association between age at diagnosis and DFS outcome was observed (31-35 vs. ≤30 years: aHR 1.03, 95% CI 0.89-1.19; 36-40 vs. ≤30 years aHR 1.00, 95% CI 0.87-1.16). Similarly, no significant association between age at diagnosis and OS was observed (31-35 vs. ≤30 years: aHR 1.10, 95% CI 0.86-1.41; 36-40 vs. ≤30 years: aHR 1.11, 95% CI 0.87-1.43). Subgroup analyses by specific BRCA gene, tumor subtype, tumor size, nodal status, and chemotherapy use revealed no statistically significant interaction with age at diagnosis in terms of DFS or OS (all p for interaction > 0.05). Specifically, no significant differences between age groups were observed among patients with luminal-like tumors for both DFS and OS. Conclusions In this unique international cohort of BRCA carriers diagnosed with breast cancer at a young age (≤40 years), we found no significant differences in DFS nor OS across different age groups. Notably, very young age (≤30 years) at diagnosis was not associated with worse outcomes compared to 31-35 years or 36-40 years. Age per se should not be considered a negative prognostic factor in BRCA carriers when appropriate treatment is provided. Citation Format: E. Blondeaux, A. Meacci, M. Fragío Gil, E. Klocker, F. Coussy, H. Kim, R. Bernstein Molho, F. Hilbers, A. Di Meglio, A. Kwong, K. Pogoda, J. Bajpai, H. Wildiers, E. Agostinetto, J. Balmana, H. C. Moore, K. Phillips, A. H. Partridge, C. Rousset-Jablonski, F. A. Peccatori, A. Toss, T. Renaud, C. Anghelone, A. Benitez Cruz, S. Paluch-Shimon, J. Lee, R. Fruscio, W. Cui, S. M. Wong, M. Lee, M. Rozenblit, C. Vernieri, C. Villarreal-Garza, A. Matikas, M. Dieci, L. De Marchis, J. K. Plichta, K. J. Ruddy, D. Can Guven, F. Puglisi, Z. Kemp, P. A. Meireles, L. Del Mastro, V. Delucchi, M. Lambertini. Association between age at diagnosis and survival among young BRCA carriers with breast cancer: results from an international multicenter hospital-based cohort study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium 2025; 2025 Dec 9-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2026;32(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD4-07.

Importance Molecular analyses of biospecimens collected from study participants are essential for identifying biomarkers that can tailor treatments to specific subsets of patients who are most likely to benefit. Sharing of data and biospecimens from clinical trials enables personalized, patient-centric use of cancer therapies and accelerates the development of new treatments. Objective To describe obstacles to sharing data and biospecimens and to propose strategies to enhance access and collaboration. Evidence Review This is a Special Communication authored by 53 academic investigators and patient representatives from the breast cancer community with extensive experience in conducting clinical and translational research. The article also evaluates the impact of biomarker research on specifying responsive subpopulations in the 29 registrational clinical trials that have led to approval of a new drug for treatment of breast cancer between 2017 and 2024. Findings Clinical trial participants are increasingly asked to provide tissue and/or body fluid biospecimens for biomarker research that is typically controlled by the sponsoring pharmaceutical company, but published biomarker studies are rare. Among 29 breast cancer registrational studies reported in the past 8 years, none resulted in biomarker research that restricted a drug’s approved indication. Herein, strategies to maximize the value of clinical data and biospecimens contributed by participants are proposed, thereby supporting the shared goals of the pharmaceutical industry and academia to improve patient care. These strategies include (1) establishing coleadership structures involving academia and patients in clinical trial design and conduct, (2) ensuring that informed consent forms state that data and biospecimens will be shared with academia for future research, (3) requiring the sharing of clinical data as a condition for regulatory approval, and (4) enabling access to biospecimens and translational research data for independent studies on biomarkers that may indicate drug efficacy and toxicity. Conclusions and Relevance Data and biospecimen sharing from registrational trials has been suboptimal. Improving clinical data, biospecimens, and biospecimens’ related data sharing requires concrete actions and a multidimensional stakeholder approach to accelerate the impact of clinical cancer research on the quality of patient care.