Pusztai, Lajos

Abstract Background: Neoadjuvant immunotherapy (IO) has become standard of care for early-stage triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). I-SPY2 was the first randomized trial to examine the efficacy of IO therapy in high-risk HR+HER2- breast cancer, where most IO arms showed improved efficacy relative to control. We also previously showed immune-gene expression signatures associate with pathologic complete response (pCR) in HR+HER2- treated with IO; and developed a clinically applicable Immune classifier (ImPrint) predicting response to IO that is now being used in I-SPY2.2 as part of the Response Predictive Subtypes. Here we report the performance of ImPrint in HR+HER2- patients from 5 IO arms. Methods: 204 HR+HER2- (MammaPrint high risk) patients from 5 IO arms (anti-PD1, anti-PDL1/PARPi, anti-PD1/TLR9 dual-IO, and anti-PD1 +/- LAG3 dual-IO) and 191 patients from the control arm were included in this analysis. Patients were classified ImPrint+ (likely sensitive) vs. ImPrint- (likely resistant), by Agendia, Inc, using pre-treatment mRNA. Performance of ImPrint for predicting pCR to IO was characterized and compared to that of MammaPrint (ultra) High2 risk (MP2) and tumor grade (III). Based on the DRFS of pCR vs. non-pCR HR+HER2-/ImPrint+ patients (median follow up ~4.5yr), we predicted the DRFS in the IO vs. control arms using an exponential model as a function of the pCR rates. Results: Overall, the pCR rate over the 5 IO arms was 33%. 28% of HR+HER2- patients were ImPrint+; and pCR rates with IO were 76% in ImPrint+ vs. 16% 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-. Based on the pCR rates in the IO vs. control (76% vs. 33%), the predicted DRFS of HR+HER2-/ImPrint+ patients are 91% vs 80% at 5 years, respectively. This translates to a risk reduction of 52% for the IO arm relative to standard chemotherapy in HR+HER2-/ImPrint+ patients. We also compared MP2 and tumor grade (III) to ImPrint+ as pCR predictors, as these markers have been used or proposed as selection markers for neoadjuvant IO trials in HR+HER2-. The pCR rates for MP2, Grade III, at 56%, 45%, respectively, are much smaller than that for ImPrint+ at 75% pCR; thus ImPrint appears to be a more precise predictive biomarker for neoadjuvant IO therapy in the HR+HER2- breast cancers. Conclusion: These results suggest that a subset of high risk HR+HER2- breast cancers is highly sensitive to immunotherapy, and by using a specific and sensitive selection strategy patients could achieve pCR rates similar to what is seen with best neoadjuvant therapies in TNBC and HER2+ (i.e., pCR rate > 65-70%). ImPrint, an FDA IDE-enabled assay currently being further evaluated in I-SPY2, may represent the way to identify patients for IO that best balances likely benefit vs risk of serious immune-related adverse events. Citation Format: Denise M. Wolf, Christina Yau, Lajos Pusztai, Rita Nanda, Jo Chien, Erica Stringer-Reasor, Rebecca Shatsky, Claudine Isaacs, MInetta Liu, Hyo Han, Hatem Soliman, Michael Campbell, Annuska Glas, Andrei Barcaru, Lorenza Mittempergher, Midas Kuilman, Lamorna Brown Swigart, Gillian Hirst, Hongmei Yu, Philip Beineke, Amrita Basu, I-SPY2 Investigators, Douglas Yee, W. Fraser Symmans, Angela DeMichele, Jane Perlmutter, Amy Delson, Laura Huppert, Hope Rugo, Amy Clark, Nola Hylton, Paula Pohlmann, Laura Esserman, Laura van 't Veer. Immune subtyping identifies a subset of HR+HER2- early-stage breast cancer patients with a very high likelihood of response to neoadjuvant immunotherapy (IO): Results from 5 IO arms of the I-SPY2 TRIAL [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2024; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(6_Suppl):Abstract nr 1207.

Abstract Recent advances in the field of immuno‐oncology have brought transformative changes in the management of cancer patients. The immune profile of tumours has been found to have key value in predicting disease prognosis and treatment response in various cancers. Multiplex immunohistochemistry and immunofluorescence have emerged as potent tools for the simultaneous detection of multiple protein biomarkers in a single tissue section, thereby expanding opportunities for molecular and immune profiling while preserving tissue samples. By establishing the phenotype of individual tumour cells when distributed within a mixed cell population, the identification of clinically relevant biomarkers with high‐throughput multiplex immunophenotyping of tumour samples has great potential to guide appropriate treatment choices. Moreover, the emergence of novel multi‐marker imaging approaches can now provide unprecedented insights into the tumour microenvironment, including the potential interplay between various cell types. However, there are significant challenges to widespread integration of these technologies in daily research and clinical practice. This review addresses the challenges and potential solutions within a structured framework of action from a regulatory and clinical trial perspective. New developments within the field of immunophenotyping using multiplexed tissue imaging platforms and associated digital pathology are also described, with a specific focus on translational implications across different subtypes of cancer. © 2024 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

ImportanceThere has been little consideration of genomic risk of recurrence by breast cancer subtype despite evidence of racial disparities in breast cancer outcomes.ObjectiveTo evaluate associations between clinical trial end points, namely pathologic complete response (pCR) and distant recurrence–free survival (DRFS), and race and examine whether gene expression signatures are associated with outcomes by race.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis retrospective cohort study used data from the Investigation of Serial Studies to Predict Your Therapeutic Response With Imaging and Molecular Analysis 2 (I-SPY 2) multicenter clinical trial of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with novel agents and combinations for patients with previously untreated stage II/III breast cancer. Analyses were conducted of associations between race and short- and long-term outcomes, overall and by receptor subtypes, and their association with 28 expression biomarkers. The trial enrolled 990 female patients between March 30, 2010, and November 5, 2016, with a primary tumor size of 2.5 cm or greater and clinical or molecular high risk based on MammaPrint or hormone receptor (HR)-negative/ERBB2 (formerly HER2 or HER2/neu)–positive subtyping across 9 arms. This data analysis was performed between June 10, 2021, and October 20, 2022.ExposureRace, tumor receptor subtypes, and genomic biomarker expression of early breast cancer.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcomes were pCR and DRFS assessed by race, overall, and by tumor subtype using logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards regression models. The interaction between 28 expression biomarkers and race, considering pCR and DRFS overall and within subtypes, was also evaluated.ResultsThe analytic sample included 974 participants (excluding 16 self-reporting as American Indian or Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, or multiple races due to small sample sizes), including 68 Asian (7%), 120 Black (12%), and 786 White (81%) patients. Median (range) age at diagnosis was 47 (25-71) years for Asian, 49 (25-77) for Black, and 49 (23-73) years for White patients. The pCR rates were 32% (n = 22) for Asian, 30% for Black (n = 36), and 32% for White (n = 255) patients (P = .87). Black patients with HR-positive/ERBB2-negative tumors not achieving pCR had significantly worse DRFS than their White counterparts (hazard ratio, 2.28; 95% CI, 1.24-4.21; P = .01), with 5-year DRFS rates of 55% (n = 32) and 77% (n = 247), respectively. Black patients with HR-positive/ERBB2-negative tumors, compared with White patients, had higher expression of an interferon signature (mean [SD], 0.39 [0.87] and −0.10 [0.99]; P = .007) and, compared with Asian patients, had a higher mitotic score (mean [SD], 0.07 [1.08] and −0.69 [1.06]; P = .01) and lower estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor signature (mean [SD], 0.31 [0.90] and 1.08 [0.95]; P = .008). A transforming growth factor β signature had a significant association with race relative to pCR and DRFS, with a higher signature associated with lower pCR and worse DRFS outcomes among Black patients only.Conclusions and RelevanceThe findings show that women with early high-risk breast cancer who achieve pCR have similarly good outcomes regardless of race, but Black women with HR-positive/ERBB2-negative tumors without pCR may have worse DRFS than White women, highlighting the need to develop and test novel biomarker-informed therapies in diverse populations.

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 >90%. Further study of Ang/Tie2 receptor axis inhibitors in validated, biomarker-predicted sensitive subtypes is warranted.

Abstract Modern histologic imaging platforms coupled with machine learning methods have provided new opportunities to map the spatial distribution of immune cells in the tumor microenvironment. However, there exists no standardized method for describing or analyzing spatial immune cell data, and most reported spatial analyses are rudimentary. In this review, we provide an overview of two approaches for reporting and analyzing spatial data (raster versus vector‐based). We then provide a compendium of spatial immune cell metrics that have been reported in the literature, summarizing prognostic associations in the context of a variety of cancers. We conclude by discussing two well‐described clinical biomarkers, the breast cancer stromal tumor infiltrating lymphocytes score and the colon cancer Immunoscore, and describe investigative opportunities to improve clinical utility of these spatial biomarkers. © 2023 The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

AbstractThe clinical significance of the tumor‐immune interaction in breast cancer is now established, and tumor‐infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) have emerged as predictive and prognostic biomarkers for patients with triple‐negative (estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2‐negative) breast cancer and HER2‐positive breast cancer. How computational assessments of TILs might complement manual TIL assessment in trial and daily practices is currently debated. Recent efforts to use machine learning (ML) to automatically evaluate TILs have shown promising results. We review state‐of‐the‐art approaches and identify pitfalls and challenges of automated TIL evaluation by studying the root cause of ML discordances in comparison to manual TIL quantification. We categorize our findings into four main topics: (1) technical slide issues, (2) ML and image analysis aspects, (3) data challenges, and (4) validation issues. The main reason for discordant assessments is the inclusion of false‐positive areas or cells identified by performance on certain tissue patterns or design choices in the computational implementation. To aid the adoption of ML for TIL assessment, we provide an in‐depth discussion of ML and image analysis, including validation issues that need to be considered before reliable computational reporting of TILs can be incorporated into the trial and routine clinical management of patients with triple‐negative breast cancer. © 2023 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

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.

ImportanceLittle is known about regional nodal irradiation (RNI) practice patterns or rates of locoregional recurrence (LRR) with and without RNI in patients with limited nodal disease and favorable biology treated with modern surgical and systemic therapy, including approaches that de-escalate those latter treatments.ObjectiveTo investigate how often patients with low–recurrence score breast cancer with 1 to 3 nodes involved receive RNI, incidence and predictors of LRR, and associations between locoregional therapy and disease-free survival.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsIn this secondary analysis of the SWOG S1007 trial, patients with hormone receptor-positive, ERBB2-negative breast cancer, and a Oncotype DX 21-gene Breast Recurrence Score assay result of no more than 25, were randomized to endocrine therapy alone vs chemotherapy then endocrine therapy. Prospectively collected radiotherapy information was collected from 4871 patients treated in diverse settings. Data were analyzed June 2022 to April 2023.ExposureReceipt of RNI (targeting at least the supraclavicular region).Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s)Cumulative incidence of LRR was calculated by locoregional treatment received. Analyses were assessed for associations between invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and locoregional therapy, adjusted for menopausal status, treatment group, recurrence score, tumor size, nodes involved, and axillary surgery. Radiotherapy information was recorded in the first year after randomization, so survival analyses were landmarked as starting at 1 year among those still at risk.ResultsOf 4871 female patients (median [range] age, 57 [18-87] years) with radiotherapy forms, 3947 (81.0%) reported radiotherapy receipt. Of 3852 patients who received radiotherapy and had complete information on targets, 2274 (59.0%) received RNI. With a median follow-up of 6.1 years, the cumulative incidence of LRR by 5 years was 0.85% among patients who received breast-conserving surgery and radiotherapy with RNI; 0.55% after breast-conserving surgery with radiotherapy without RNI; 0.11% after mastectomy with postmastectomy radiotherapy; and 1.7% after mastectomy without radiotherapy. Similarly low LRR was observed within the group assigned to endocrine therapy without chemotherapy. The rate of IDFS did not differ by RNI receipt (premenopausal: hazard ratio [HR], 1.03; 95% CI, 0.74-1.43; P = .87; postmenopausal: HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.68-1.07; P = .16).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this secondary analysis of a clinical trial, RNI use was divided in the setting of biologically favorable N1 disease, and rates of LRR were low even in patients who did not receive RNI. Disease-free survival was not associated with RNI receipt; omission of chemotherapy among patients similar to those enrolled in the S1007 trial is not an independent indication for use of RNI.

Abstract BACKGROUND: Abnormalities of the PI3kinase/AKT/mTOR signaling network are common in breast cancer (BC) and are associated with endocrine resistance. Everolimus, an mTOR-inhibitor increased PFS when combined with endocrine therapy (ET) in the metastatic setting and is thought to revert endocrine resistance. S1207 is a phase III randomized, placebo-controlled trial evaluating the role of everolimus in combination with ET in the adjuvant setting among patients with high-risk hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative BC (NCT01674140). METHODS: Eligible patients were >18 years of age with histologically confirmed invasive hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative high-risk BC. Four risk groups were defined as: 1) > 2cm node-negative disease (or pN1mi), and either an Oncotype DX® Recurrence Score (RS) > 25 or MammaPrint® high-risk category (MP high); 2) 1-3 positive nodes and either RS >25, MP high or a pathological grade 3 tumor; 3) >4 positive lymph nodes. Patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy were eligible if: 4) after surgery had >1 lymph node involvement. Patients were randomized 1:1 to physician’s choice adjuvant ET in combination with one year of everolimus (10 mg PO daily) or ET plus placebo stratified by risk group. The primary endpoint was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) evaluated by a stratified log-rank test. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and safety. The hazard ratio (HR) for treatment efficacy was estimated using Cox regression with stratification by risk groups. Subset analyses included preplanned evaluation within risk group and exploratory analyses of menopausal status and age. RESULTS: 1,939 patients were randomized between September 2013 and May 2019, of them 1,792 were eligible and included in the analysis (896 per arm). Primary reason for ineligibility was timing after chemotherapy/radiation or not high risk. Median age was 54 years (22-85) and 32% were premenopausal. With a median follow-up of 50.5 months, there were 389 IDFS events as of May 2022 (data cutoff). 5-year IDFS was 74.8% among patients treated with everolimus and 73.9% among patients treated with placebo, HR=0.93 (95% CI 0.76-1.14). However, the proportional hazards assumption was violated (p=0.02) suggesting differential treatment effect over time. The HR during the one year of treatment was 0.72 (95% CI 0.47-1.10) while after one year it was 1.00 (95% CI 0.80-1.26). The 5-year OS was 87.6% in the everolimus arm and 85.5% in the placebo arm, HR=0.98 (95% CI 0.75-1.28). Analysis by risk group did not show higher everolimus benefit as risk increased. No difference in IDFS or OS was seen among postmenopausal patients (IDFS HR=1.08 [95% CI 0.85-1.36], OS HR=1.19 [95% CI 0.87-1.61]). Among premenopausal patients, everolimus was associated with improved IDFS (HR=0.63 [95% CI 0.43-0.93]) and OS (HR=0.48 [95% CI 0.26-0.88]). Treatment completion of randomized therapy was lower in the everolimus arm compared to placebo (47.9% v 72.7%). Grade 3 and 4 toxicities were noted in 6.5% and 0.5% of patients in the placebo arm and in 31.2% and 3.7% in the everolimus arm respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of one year of adjuvant everolimus to standard adjuvant ET did not improve IDFS or OS and was associated with low completion rate and increased AEs. Among premenopausal patients there was a benefit in IDFS and OS that is hypothesis generating. Future translational studies will evaluate potential predictors of everolimus benefit and drug toxicity. Citation Format: Marianna Chavez, Jieling Miao, Lajos Pusztai, Matthew P. Goetz, Priya Rastogi, Patricia A. Ganz, Eleftherios (Terry) Mamounas, Soonmyung Paik, Hanna Bandos, Wajeeha Razaq, Anne O’Dea, Virginia Kaklamani, Andrea L.M. Silber, Lisa E. Flaum, Eleni Andreopolu, Joseph Baar, Albert G. Wendt, Jennifer F. Carney, Priyanka Sharma, Julie R. Gralow, Danika L. Lew, William E. Barlow, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi. Results from a phase III randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial evaluating adjuvant endocrine therapy +/- 1 year of everolimus in patients with high-risk hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer: SWOG S1207 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr GS1-07.

Background: The potential gonadotoxicity of anti-HER2 agents remains largely unknown, and limited, conflicting evidence exists for taxanes. Antimüllerian hormone (AMH) is an established biomarker of ovarian reserve that may aid in quantifying anticancer treatment–induced gonadotoxicity. Patients and Methods: The present biomarker analysis of the randomized phase III neoadjuvant NeoALTTO trial included premenopausal women aged ≤45 years at diagnosis of HER2-positive early breast cancer with available frozen serum samples at baseline (ie, before anticancer treatments), at week 2 (ie, the “biological window” of anti-HER2 therapy alone), and/or at the time of surgery (ie, after completing paclitaxel + anti-HER2 therapy, before starting adjuvant chemotherapy). Results: The present analysis included 130 patients with a median age of 38 years (interquartile ratio [IQR], age 33–42 years). AMH values at the 3 time points differed significantly (P<.001). At baseline, median AMH levels were 1.29 ng/mL (IQR, 0.56–2.62 ng/mL). At week 2, a small but significant reduction in AMH levels was observed (median, 1.10 ng/mL; IQR, 0.45–2.09 ng/mL; P<.001). At surgery, a larger significant decline in AMH levels was observed (median, 0.01 ng/mL; IQR, 0.01–0.03 ng/mL; P<.001). Although the type of anti-HER2 treatment (trastuzumab and/or lapatinib) did not seem to impact the results, age and pretreatment ovarian reserve had a major influence on treatment-induced gonadotoxicity risk. Conclusions: This NeoALTTO biomarker analysis showed that anti-HER2 therapies alone had limited gonadotoxicity but that the addition of weekly paclitaxel resulted in marked AMH decline with possible negative implications for subsequent ovarian function and fertility.