Back to Authors

Alkhafaji, S.

Mayo Clinic

University of California, San Francisco

Citations 2

Abstract PS4-02-01: Differential early response to neoadjuvant endocrine therapy in lobular versus non-lobular breast cancer on the Endocrine Optimization Pilot (EOP) of the I-SPY2 Trial
Mukhtar, R., Norwood, P., Borowsky, A., Alkhafaji, S., Giridhar, K. V., Elias, A., Wei, M., Goetz, M. P., Olopade, O. I., Veer, L. J. van 't, Huppert, L. A., Symmans, W. F., Swigart, L. Brown, Wu, C., Yau, C., Yee, Don, Magbanua, M. J., Price, E., Hylton, N., Esserman, L. J., Chien, J., Norwood, Peter, Borowsky, A., Alkhafaji, Silver , Vaklavas, Christos , Elias, A., Goetz, Matthew P. , Onishi, Natsuko , Symmans, W. Fraser , Swigart, Lamorna Brown , Wu, C., Yau, C., Yee, D., Magbanua, MJM, Hylton, N. M.

Clinical Cancer Research | February 17, 2026 | Volume: 32 | Issue: 4_Supplement | Pages: PS4-02-01-PS4-02-01

10.1158/1557-3265.sabcs25-ps4-02-01 Get It

Abstract Background Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) differs from invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) in its estrogen receptor (ER) signaling pathways, response to systemic therapy, and imaging features. We evaluated differences in early change in the proliferation marker Ki67 and features on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) after novel endocrine based neoadjuvant therapy in lobular versus non-lobular cases on the I-SPY2 EOP Trial. Methods EOP is a prospective, randomized NET trial enriched for patients with ILC. Patients with stage II-III ER positive HER2 negative breast cancer with low molecular risk (Mammaprint low or Mammaprint Hi1 plus high Sensitivity to Endocrine therapy Index) were randomized to one of several endocrine therapy-based arms. Treatment arms include novel oral SERDS with or without CDK4/6 inhibitor, aromatase inhibitors, and SERMs with or without ovarian function suppression in pre-menopausal patients. Patients undergo repeat core needle biopsy with central Ki67 assessment after 3 weeks of treatment and serial breast MRI. Here, we compare endocrine therapy responsiveness as measured by change in Ki67 at 3 weeks and functional tumor volume (FTV) on pre-surgical MRI in lobular versus non-lobular cases. Results We evaluated 253 patients of whom 148 (58.5%) had non-lobular cancer (93.9% IDC), and 105 (41.5%) had lobular cancer (17.1% mixed ILC/IDC). Overall, mean age was 53.3 years, 63.8% of tumors were grade 2, and 86.5% were Mammaprint (MP) Low with the remaining being Hi1, with higher rates of MP Low in the lobular versus non-lobular cohorts (92.4% versus 83.4%, p=0.0358). At baseline, tumors in the lobular cohort had significantly lower mean Ki67 than those in the non-lobular cohort (11.2% [SD 12.8] versus 16.4% [SD 14.4%], p=0.0038). Consistent with this, the proportion with baseline tumor Ki67 <10% was significantly higher in the lobular cohort than the ductal cohort (60.4% versus 39.3%, p=0.001). At 3-week biopsy, mean Ki67 remained lower in the lobular versus non-lobular group (3.4% versus 5.4%, respectively, p=0.0415). The proportion of patients with Ki67 <10% at 3 weeks did not differ significantly between lobular and non-lobular cases (88.6% versus 79.7%, respectively, p=0.08). Among the 40 lobular cases and 88 non-lobular cases with baseline Ki67 ≥10%, week 3 Ki67 decreased to <10% in 90% of lobular cases and 72.7% of non-lobular cases (p=0.07). On MRI, mean FTV at baseline was similar among lobular and non-lobular cases (21 cc3 versus 16.3 cc3). On pre-surgical MRI, patients in the lobular cohort had significantly higher mean residual FTV than those in the non-lobular cohort (5.7 cc3 versus 3.8 cc3, p=0.034). Interestingly, when splitting the lobular cohort into mixed lobular and pure lobular, mean residual MRI FTV was 7.5 cc3 in mixed cases and 3.8 cc3 in pure lobular cases, reflecting that FTV decreased the least in mixed lobular cases (decrease of 51.1% in mixed cases, 69.7% in pure lobular cases, and 73.9% in non-lobular cases, p=0.0255). Conclusions These results highlight differences in lobular versus non-lobular breast cancer. Lobular cases had lower baseline Ki67, and similar rates of decrease in Ki67 after 3 weeks of NET than non-lobular cases. Despite this, mean FTV after completion of 6 months of NET was higher in lobular tumors. These findings may reflect differences in early versus late indicators of response to NET, or differential response patterns by histology. Alternatively, standard response measures such as Ki67 and FTV may need lobular-specific modifications. Ongoing work includes central assessment of Ki67 from surgical specimens, analysis of changes in gene expression signatures, and evaluation of surgical outcomes such as breast conservation rates by histologic subtype. Citation Format: R. Mukhtar, P. Norwood, A. Borowsky, S. Alkhafaji, K. Giridhar, C. Vaklavas, A. Elias, M. Wei, M. Goetz, N. Onishi, O. Olopade, L. Van 't Veer, L. Huppert, W. F. Symmans, L. Brown Swigart, C. Wu, C. Yau, D. Yee, M. Magbanua, E. Price, N. Hylton, L. Esserman, J. Chien. Differential early response to neoadjuvant endocrine therapy in lobular versus non-lobular breast cancer on the Endocrine Optimization Pilot (EOP) of the I-SPY2 Trial [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 PS4-02-01.
Abstract PD10-02: I- SPY2 Endocrine Optimization Pilot (EOP): Neoadjuvant vepdegestrant monotherapy or in combination with letrozole or abemaciclib in molecularly selected patients with stage 2/3 HR+ HER2-negative breast cancer (BC)
Chien, J., Mukhtar, R. M., Yau, C., Elias, A. D., Wallace, A. M., Chan, Nymph , Omene, Coral , Chen, N., Tseng, J., Trivedi, M. S., Stringer-Reasor, E., Yee, Don, Clark, A. S., Thomas, A., Han, H. S., Arora, Mukesh K., Nangia, C., Albain, K. S., Falkson, C., Isaacs, C, Rozenblit, M., Veer, L. J. van't, Swigart, L. Brown, Hirst, G., Symmans, W. F., Borowsky, A. D., Hylton, N., Alkhafaji, S., Giridhar, K. V., Wei, M., Goetz, M. P., Olopade, O. I., Huppert, L. A., Wu, C., Esserman, L. J., Mukhtar, R., Elias, A., Wallace, A.M., Chan, N., Stringer-Reasor, Erica , Yee, D., Thomas, A., Han, HS, Falkson, Carla I. , Zimmer, Alexandra S. , Swigart, Lamorna Brown , Hirst, G. L., Symmans, W. Fraser , Onishi, Natsuko , Hylton, N. M., Alkhafaji, Silver , Vaklavas, Christos , Esserman, L. J.

Clinical Cancer Research | February 17, 2026 | Volume: 32 | Issue: 4_Supplement | Pages: PD10-02-PD10-02

10.1158/1557-3265.sabcs25-pd10-02 Get It

Abstract BACKGROUND: EOP is an I-SPY2 sub-study designed to test novel endocrine-based strategies in patients (pts) predicted to have modest benefit from chemotherapy. Vepdegestrant is a selective oral PROTAC estrogen receptor (ER) degrader that has demonstrated efficacy in mutant ER+ HER2-negative MBC. METHODS: EOP eligibility included pts with Stage 2/3 HR+ HER2-negative, MammaPrint (MP) Low Risk BC. Patients with MP High1 signatures were eligible if clinically node-negative or SET 2,3 High. Pts were randomized to one of 3 oral treatment (tx) arms: vepdegestrant 200 mg/d (V), vepdegestrant 200 mg/d +letrozole (VL), vepdegestrant 200 mg/d + abemaciclib 150 mg bid (VA). Pts received tx for six 28-day cycles followed by surgery. Premenopausal (PreMN) pts received ovarian function suppression (OFS) starting C1D1 in the VL arm, and C2D1 in the V and VA arms. The primary endpoint was feasibility, defined as >75% of pts completing >75% of study therapy. Breast MRI functional tumor volume (FTV) and ctDNA (tumor-informed assay) were assessed at baseline (T0), 3 weeks (T1), 12 weeks (T2), and 6 months (T3). Ki67 and ER/PR by IHC were centrally assessed from tumor biopsies at T0, T1, and the surgical specimen. Results: Between 4/2023 and 1/2025, 121 pts were enrolled: 40 in V, 41 in VL, and 40 in VA. Median age was 54 years, 50% preMN. 60% of pts had ductal, 35% lobular, 5% mixed histology. 55% were cN+, and 59% were not breast conservation surgery (BCS) candidates at baseline. Mean baseline Ki67 was 12.5%, 85.1% had MP Low Risk signature, 79.3% were SET 2,3 High. All 3 tx arms met the primary endpoint with 88%, 88%, and 83% completing > 75% study therapy in V, VL, and VA (thus far), respectively. Most common all grade (AG) TRAEs in V and VL arms include fatigue (53% V, 71% VL), hot flashes (48% V, 71% VL), arthralgias (33% V, 49% VL), all G1 or G2 except for 1 G3 fatigue in VL arm. G2 and G3 neutropenia was seen in 1 pt each in V and VL arms. The most common AG TRAEs in VA include diarrhea (80%), fatigue (65%), nausea (58%), hot flashes (50%), neutropenia (43%). High grade TRAEs in VA include neutropenia (23% G3, 5% G4), ovarian cyst requiring surgery (5% G3), diarrhea (15% G3), nausea (3% G3), transaminitis (3% G3), thromboembolic event (8% G3), acute kidney injury (3% G3). Table 1 summarizes key response endpoints by tx arm. CONCLUSION: Six months of neoadjuvant vepdegestrant, alone or in combination with letrozole or abemaciclib, is feasible and demonstrates robust ER/PR degradation. Encouraging anti-tumor activity through reduction of Ki67 and MRI FTV, ctDNA clearance, and achievement of BCS was seen in pre- and postMN women. The neoadjuvant setting provides a rich platform to identify the dynamic range of response and non-response using a multi-modal approach and can be leveraged to inform future trial design and adjuvant therapy. Citation Format: J. Chien, R. M. Mukhtar, C. Yau, A. D. Elias, A. M. Wallace, N. Chan, C. Omene, N. Chen, J. Tseng, M. S. Trivedi, E. Stringer-Reasor, D. Yee, A. S. Clark, A. Thomas, H. Han, M. Arora, C. Nangia, K. Albain, C. Falkson, C. Isaacs, A. Zimmer, M. Rozenblit, L. van't Veer, L. Brown Swigart, G. Hirst, W. Symmans, A. D. Borowsky, N. Onishi, N. Hylton, S. Alkhafaji, K. V. Giridhar, C. Vaklavas, M. Wei, M. P. Goetz, O. Olopade, L. Huppert, C. Wu, L. J. Esserman. I- SPY2 Endocrine Optimization Pilot (EOP): Neoadjuvant vepdegestrant monotherapy or in combination with letrozole or abemaciclib in molecularly selected patients with stage 2/3 HR+ HER2-negative breast cancer (BC) [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 PD10-02.