Pusztai, Lajos

Importance Although adding immune checkpoint inhibitors to neoadjuvant chemotherapy improves outcomes in high-risk early-stage breast cancer, opportunities remain to further enhance response. Dual checkpoint blockade offers a potential strategy to further enhance efficacy. Objective To evaluate the combination of anti−programmed cell death 1 protein (PD-1) cemiplimab and anti−lymphocyte activation gene 3 (LAG-3) added to neoadjuvant therapy in ERBB2 -negative early-stage, high-risk breast cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants The I-SPY2 (Investigation of Serial Studies to Predict Your Therapeutic Response With Imaging and Molecular Analysis 2) is an ongoing randomized clinical platform trial being conducted at multiple US clinical sites including patients with early-stage (II or III) ERBB2 -negative, high-risk breast cancer. Participants, continuously enrolled since 2010, were adaptively randomized from February 2, 2020, to December 9, 2021, to one of several experimental neoadjuvant therapies or control groups based on receptor subtypes defined by hormone receptor (HR), ERBB2 status, and MammaPrint (Agendia Inc) molecular risk, categorized as high (MP1) or ultrahigh (MP2). Data were analyzed from January 1, 2022, to August 5, 2025. Interventions Both groups received weekly paclitaxel for 12 weeks, then doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by surgery; concomitant with paclitaxel, the intervention group also received 4 doses of cemiplimab and fianlimab (PCF) every 3 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures Pathologic complete response (pCR). Treatments graduated when they achieved 85% bayesian probability of success in a subtype-specific phase 3 trial. Pathway-specific biomarkers were assessed for response prediction. Results A total of 78 participants (mean [SD] age, 47 [39-54] years) were randomized to the intervention group, with 350 participants (mean [SD] age, 48 [39-57] years) randomized to the historical control population. PCF graduated in all clinical signatures, with pCR rates vs control of 44% (95% CI, 34%-53%) vs 21% (95% CI, 17%-25%) in all ERBB2 , 53% (95% CI, 39%-67%) vs 29% (95% CI, 22%-36%) in triple-negative, and 36% (95% CI, 23%-49%) vs 14% (95% CI, 9%-19%) in HR-positive and ERBB2 -negative disease. Among the total participants, 16 (21%) experienced adrenal insufficiency, including hypophysitis (11% grade 3 or 4), mostly occurring after immunotherapy completion. PCF was found to be highly effective in the subset of patients with immune signature positive status (ImPrint positive). Conclusions and Relevance In this randomized clinical trial, the combination of PD-1 and anti−LAG-3 inhibition with standard NAC was effective in early-stage ERBB2 -negative breast cancer, particularly in patients displaying a positive ImPrint immune signature. These results warrant further definitive trials. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01042379

Abstract Introduction: Pathological complete response (pCR) is a strong prognostic marker, but survival outcomes comparing treatment to control do not reliably align with treatment-control differences in pCR rates in breast cancer. A novel Bayesian hierarchical framework models treatments within trials, allowing us to predict treatment effects on distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS) from pCR with greater accuracy. Methods: We analyzed 12 neoadjuvant breast cancer trials (6,000 patients, all HR/HER2 subtypes; including I-SPY2). The framework of Burzykowski, Molenberghs & Buyse (2005) is extended to a novel arm-based hierarchical structure providing a distribution of pCR and DRFS treatment effects controlling for subtype (HR/HER2), N and T stage, grade, and calendar year. Three held-out trials (877 patients; 26 regimens; med follow-up >4 years) validate predictions of DRFS treatment benefit from pCR. All data was used to estimate treatment-effect correlation and the surrogate threshold effect (STE). Analyses were repeated for Residual Cancer Burden Index (binary RCB01, continuous RCB). Results: Predicted probability of DRFS benefit closely matched actual DRFS follow-up (mean absolute error 0.06; Pearson r = 0.9). Across all trials, pCR showed moderate surrogacy (ρ = 0.82, R2 = 0.67). A 60% increase in pCR odds achieves ≥95% probability of DRFS benefit (STE = OR of 1.60). RCB outperforms pCR across all metrics, with 92% sensitivity and 93% specificity for detecting DRFS benefit in 26 validation regimens (Table 1). Conclusion: This novel Bayesian meta-analytic framework reveals that pCR, RCB01 and continuous RCB reliably predict survival benefit across heterogeneous trials, with RCB performing the best in an external validation. This provides a statistical foundation for accelerated approval decisions using robust early biomarkers in modern neoadjuvant trial designs by accurately predicting survival at the treatment arm level. Citation Format: Keli S. Santos-Parker, Jessica R. Santos-Parker, W. Fraser Symmans, Laura J. Esserman, Christina Yau, Angie DeMichele, Laura van't Veer, Doug Yee, Fabien Reyal, Helena Earl, Jean Abraham, David Cameron, Peter Hall, Judy Boughey, Matthew Goetz, Gabe Sonke, Miguel Martín, Sara López-Tarruella, Priyanka Sharma, Rachel Freiberg, Jane Perlmutter, Aditya Bardia, Martin Eklund, Rachel Freiberg, Lajos Pusztai. A novel statistical framework for surrogate endpoint prediction of survival in neoadjuvant breast cancer trials [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2026; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2026 Apr 17-22; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2026;86(7 Suppl):Abstract nr 1401.

Abstract Background S0221 investigated weekly vs every 2 weeks dosing of doxorubicin (A) and cyclophosphamide (C) followed by paclitaxel in patients with high-risk early breast cancer. After an interim analysis, random assignment to the 2 AC arms was stopped for futility, and the trial was modified to study only the paclitaxel schedules. Methods Between December 2003 and November 2010, a total of 2716 patients were randomly assigned in a 2 × 2 factorial design to 15 weeks of weekly A and daily C vs 6 cycles of every 2 weeks AC; and weekly paclitaxel for 12 weeks vs 6 cycles of every 2 weeks paclitaxel. Between January 2011 and January 2012, an additional 578 patients were assigned to 4 cycles of every 2 weeks AC and randomly assigned to weekly vs every 2 weeks paclitaxel. Updated survival was assessed using log-rank tests and Cox regression models. We compared outcomes by breast cancer subtype as well. Results At a median follow-up of 12.1 years, there were no statistically significant differences among the 4 treatment arms in disease-free survival (DFS) (P = .91) or overall survival (P = .34) in the original protocol. Among the 578 patients assigned AC for 4 cycles and randomly assigned to paclitaxel weekly vs every 2 weeks paclitaxel, there were no overall differences in DFS (P = .32) or overall survival (P = .42). Conclusion As there were no statistically significant outcome differences in DFS or overall survival between the studied schedules of AC and paclitaxel with extended follow-up in the original or revised protocol, either paclitaxel schedule may be recommended, with selection based on toxicity, cost, or patient preference.

Abstract Background Immune checkpoint inhibitors can result in serious, long-lasting immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Early identification of symptoms predictive of irAEs could enhance monitoring and timely intervention. This study assessed whether symptoms within the first 8 weeks of treatment could predict subsequent development of immune-related adrenal insufficiency(AI) or hypothyroidism. Methods This retrospective cohort study analyzed prospectively collected data from the I-SPY2 trial, a phase 2 platform trial for high-risk stage II/III breast cancer across 30 U.S. sites. The cohort included 482 women treated with experimental immunotherapy agents concurrent with weekly paclitaxel neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The primary outcomes were grade ≥ 1 hypothyroidism or AI, adjudicated by an independent safety group, up to 1-year post-treatment. Symptoms and irAEs were assessed using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Symptom burden was quantified as area under the curve (AUC) based on symptom grade and duration. Predictive modeling was performed using logistic regression and ROC analysis; symptom enrichment between cases and controls was evaluated using Fisher’s exact tests. Results Among 482 participants, 107 (22.2%) developed irAEs, with hypothyroidism (n = 61, 12.7%) occurring more frequently than AI (n = 38, 7.9%) at medians of 99 and 105 days from treatment initiation, respectively. Symptom enrichment analysis identified early predictive symptoms. Fatigue (17.2% vs 6.8%, p = 0.011) and rash (20.7% vs 7.8%, p = 0.0037) were predictive of hypothyroidism, while diarrhea (45.9% vs 31%, p = 0.048), constipation (5.4% vs 0.2%, p = 0.018), and taste changes (5.4% vs 0.5%, p = 0.034) were associated with AI. A predictive model demonstrated moderate performance (AUC 0.65 for AI, p < 0.0001; AUC 0.61 for hypothyroidism, p = 0.012). Model accuracy in an external validation cohort was 72.8% for AI and 74.7% for hypothyroidism. Conclusions This study presents a predictive framework to identify patients at risk for adrenal insufficiency and hypothyroidism as irAEs, enabling personalized care and proactive intervention to improve treatment outcomes and safety.

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.

Importance Breast cancer treatment is associated with cancer-related cognitive impairment (CRCI). However, the association of endocrine therapy (ET) vs chemotherapy plus endocrine therapy (CET) with CRCI is poorly understood. Objective To compare patient-reported CRCI between women with breast cancer treated with ET vs CET and to consider whether menopausal status may be associated. Design, Settings, and Participants This was a prespecified secondary analysis of RxPONDER (SWOG S1007), a multinational phase 3 randomized clinical trial of more than 5000 women with hormone receptor−positive ERBB2 -negative (formerly HER2 -negative) breast cancer with 1 to 3 involved lymph nodes and Oncotype DX (21-gene recurrence score) of 25 or less. Participants were enrolled from February 2011 to September 2017, with results first reported in December 2020. Participants were randomly assigned to CET or ET, with ongoing follow-up. This secondary analysis assessed cognitive function using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Perceived Cognitive Function Concerns (PCF) questionnaire at baseline, 6, 12, and 36 months. Data were analyzed from July 2022 to August 2025. Intervention Random assignment to CET or ET. Main Outcomes and Measures Mean PCF standardized (T) scores by menopausal status over time using generalized estimating equations analysis for continuous outcomes. Results Of the 568 patients who completed the baseline questionnaire and were included in the analysis, 139 (24%) were premenopausal (median [range] age, 47.8 [28.0-56.3] years) and 429 (76%) were postmenopausal (median [range] age, 62.3 [37.3-87.6] years). Among the 274 (48%) who received CET and the 294 (52%) who received ET alone, CET was determined to have a greater negative association with patient-reported CRCI in both the pre- and postmenopausal participants during the 36-month follow-up. In the ET alone group, PCF scores for premenopausal participants decreased from baseline to 6 and 12 months (53.53, 51.51, and 51.72, respectively) but recovered to baseline (54.36) at 36 months. For postmenopausal participants, mean PCF scores were essentially stable (51.72, 51.13, 51.11, and 51.70, respectively); however, in the CET group, PCF scores for both pre- and postmenopausal participants decreased from baseline to 6 and 12 months (premenopausal, 52.84, 49.27, 48.04; postmenopausal, 50.65, 48.39, 47.13, respectively) and did not return to baseline at 36 months (premenopausal, 49.25; postmenopausal, 48.44). The difference in longitudinal mean PCF scores over time between CET and ET groups was −3.02 (95% CI, −5.33 to −0.72; P = .01) for premenopausal and −2.37 (95% CI, −3.92 to −0.82; P = .003) for postmenopausal participants. Conclusions and Relevance This secondary analysis of the RxPONDER found that CET had a greater negative association with patient-reported CRCI compared to ET alone in both pre- and postmenopausal participants over a 36-month follow-up period. Interventions to prevent or treat CRCI are needed to improve the long-term quality of life of these patients treated with chemotherapy. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01272037

PURPOSE Neoadjuvant immunotherapy (IO) has become the standard of care for early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), but not yet for other subtypes. We previously developed a clinical-grade mRNA-based immune classifier (ImPrint) predicting response to IO that is now being used in I-SPY2.2 as part of the response predictive subtypes. We report the performance of ImPrint in hormone receptor–positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (HR+HER2–) patients from five IO arms. METHODS A total of 204 HR+HER2– (MammaPrint high-risk) patients from five IO arms (anti–PD-1, anti–PD-L1/poly [ADP-ribose] polymerase inhibitor combination, anti–PD-1/toll-like receptor 9 dual-IO combination, and anti–PD-1 ± lymphocyte activation gene 3 dual-IO combination) and 191 patients from the chemotherapy-only control arm were included in this analysis. Patients were classified as ImPrint+ (likely sensitive) versus ImPrint– (likely resistant), using pretreatment mRNA. Performance of ImPrint for predicting pathologic complete response (pCR) to IO-containing arms was characterized and compared with tumor grade (III), MammaPrint (ultra) High2 risk (MP2), and estrogen receptor (ER)-low (ER ≤ 10%). RESULTS Overall, the pCR rate across the five IO arms was 33%. 26% of HR+HER2– patients were ImPrint+, and pCR rates with IO were 75% in ImPrint+ versus 17% in ImPrint–, with the highest pCR rate >90% in a dual-IO arm. In the control arm, pCR rates were 33% in ImPrint+ and 8% in ImPrint–. Tumor grade (III), MP2, and ER-low showed pCR rates in IO of 45%, 56%, and 63%, respectively, with lower pCR odds ratios (OR < 7.5) compared with ImPrint (OR = 14.5). CONCLUSION Using an accurate selection strategy, HR+HER2– patients could achieve pCR rates similar to what is seen with best neoadjuvant therapies in TNBC and HER2+ (ie, pCR rate >65%-70%). ImPrint, an Food and Drug Administration IDE-enabled assay, may represent a way to identify HR+HER2– patients for IO that best balances likely benefit versus risk of serious immune-related adverse events.

Abstract Background The phase III RxPONDER trial has affected treatment for node-positive (1-3), hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer with a 21-gene recurrence score (RS) less than 26. We investigated how these findings apply to different racial and ethnic groups within the trial. Methods The trial randomly assigned women to endocrine therapy (ET) or to chemotherapy plus ET. The primary clinical outcome was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS), with distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) as a secondary outcome. Multivariable Cox models were used to evaluate the association between race/ethnicity and survival outcomes, adjusting for clinicopathological characteristics, RS, and treatment. Results A total of 4048 women with self-reported race/ethnicity were included: Hispanic (15.1%), non-Hispanic Black (NHB) (6.1%), Native American/Pacific Islander (0.8%), Asian (8.0%), and non-Hispanic White (NHW) (70%). No differences in RS distribution, tumor size, or number of positive nodes were observed by race/ethnicity. Relative to NHWs, IDFS was worse for NHB participants (5-year IDFS 91.6% vs 87.1%, HR = 1.37; 95% CI = 1.03 to 1.81) and better for Asians (91.6% vs 93.9%, HR = 0.64; 95% CI = 0.46 to 0.91). Relative to NHW, DRFS was worse for NHB participants (5-year DRFS 95.8% vs 91.0%, HR = 1.65; 95% CI = 1.17 to 2.32) and better for Asians (95.8% vs 96.7%, HR = 0.59; 95% CI = 0.37 to 0.95). Adjusting for clinical characteristics, particularly body mass index, diminished the effect of race on outcomes. Chemotherapy treatment efficacy did not differ by race/ethnicity. Conclusions NHB women had worse clinical outcomes compared with NHWs in the RxPONDER trial despite similar RS and comparable treatment. Our study emphasizes the persistent racial disparities in breast cancer outcomes while highlighting complex interactions among contributing factors. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01272037.

PURPOSE Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/AKT-serine threonine kinase/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway abnormalities contribute to endocrine resistance. Everolimus, an mTOR inhibitor, improved progression-free survival in hormone receptor–positive metastatic breast cancer (BC) when combined with endocrine therapy (ET). In this phase III randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we assessed the efficacy of everolimus + ET as adjuvant therapy in high-risk, hormone receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative BC after adjuvant/neoadjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to physician's choice ET and 1 year of everolimus (10 mg orally once daily) or placebo stratified by risk group. The primary end point was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) evaluated by a stratified log-rank test with the hazard ratio (HR) estimated by Cox regression. Subset analyses included preplanned evaluation by risk group and exploratory analyses by menopausal status and age. Secondary end points included overall survival (OS) and safety. Everolimus did not improve IDFS/OS when added to ET in patients with early-stage high-risk, hormone receptor–positive BC. RESULTS One thousand and nine hundred thirty-nine patients were randomly assigned with 1,792 eligible for analysis. Overall, no benefit of everolimus was seen for IDFS (HR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.14]) or OS (HR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.75 to 1.26]). The assumption of proportional hazards was not met suggesting significant variability in the HR over time since the start of treatment. In an unplanned subgroup analysis among postmenopausal patients (N = 1,221), no difference in IDFS (HR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.86 to 1.36]) or OS (HR, 1.19 [95% CI, 0.89 to 1.60]) was seen. In premenopausal patients (N = 571), everolimus improved both IDFS (HR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.44 to 0.94]) and OS (HR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.28 to 0.86]). Treatment completion rates were lower in the everolimus arm compared with placebo (48% v 73%) with higher grade 3 and 4 adverse events (35% v 7%). CONCLUSION One year of adjuvant everolimus + ET did not improve overall outcomes. Subset analysis suggests mTOR inhibition as a possible target for patients who remain premenopausal after chemotherapy.

505 Background: SWOG S1007 was a phase 3 randomized trial to evaluate the benefit of endocrine therapy alone (ET) or with chemotherapy (CET) in pts with HR+/HER2- invasive breast cancer with recurrence score (RS) ≤ 25. There was no invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) benefit for CET compared to ET in postmenopausal women However, in premenopausal women CET had an IDFS improvement compared to ET (HR=0.60; 95% 0.43-0.83). The objective was to further refine patient subgroups who benefit from CET, we measured baseline hormone levels in S1007 pts to quantify their menstrual status by serum hormone levels and associated clinical outcomes. Methods: Serum estradiol (E), progesterone (P), follicular stimulating hormone (FSH), luteinizing hormone (LH), anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH), and inhibin B (IB) were assessed on baseline serum samples from 1,015 pts who self-reported being premenopausal and age < 55. Magnetic fluorescent bead-based immunoassays ( i.e., Luminex assays) or colorimetric ELISAs were performed at the Biomarker Discovery Laboratory at the University of Kansas Medical Center to measure hormone levels. Associations of the markers (both continuous and dichotomized) with IDFS and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) were tested for prognosis and prediction of CET benefit using Cox regression. Results: Single baseline measurement of IB, P, E, LH, FSH, or combination of E/LH/FSH, was not prognostic for IDFS or predictive for chemotherapy benefit. However, AMH levels (≥10 pg/mL) showed significant interaction with chemotherapy benefit (p=0.019), and risk increased with continuous AMH with ET alone, but not CET (p=0.03). Compared to ET alone, CET was beneficial in the 79% of premenopausal patients with AMH levels ≥10 pg/mL, a standard cutoff to define normal ovarian reserve (HR=0.48; 95% 0.33-0.69, adjusting for RS). CET was not beneficial in the 21% with AMH < 10 (HR=1.21; 95% 0.60-2.43). Absolute 5-year IDFS benefit of CET for RS ≤ 25 was 7.8% (95.2%-87.4%) for AMH ≥ 10 vs. -1.7% (89.1%-90.8%) for AMH < 10. DRFS showed a similar pattern with CET benefit in AMH ≥10 pg/mL (5-year DRFS benefit: 4.4%; HR=0.41; 95% 0.25-0.68, adjusting for RS) and no benefit in AMH < 10 (5-year DRFS benefit: -0.9%, HR=1.50; 95% 0.62-3.63). Conclusions: Among self-reported premenopausal patients < age 55, pts with baseline serum AMH levels ≥10 pg/mL showed significant benefit from CET compared to patients with AMH levels <10 pg/mL. AMH levels were a better indicator of CET benefit than self-reported menopause status, age, or E/LH/FSH levels. Use of AMH-based selection of patients may inform who most benefits from the addition of adjuvant chemotherapy to ET. Clinical trial information: NCT01272037 .