Curigliano, Giuseppe

Abstract Background Whether outcomes of germline BRCA1/2 (gBRCA1/2)-associated breast cancer differ compared with sporadic tumors is controversial. We explored the impact of gBRCA1/2 pathogenic variant (PV) status beyond established prognostic features. Methods We conducted 2 retrospective, matched cohort studies comparing gBRCA1/2 PV carriers and noncarriers with HER2-negative, stage I-III breast cancer (Clinical Outcomes Quality Database [COQD] cohort: 185 carriers, 555 noncarriers; Young Women’s Breast Cancer Study [YWS] cohort: 113 carriers, 226 noncarriers). Matching factors were age, stage, hormone receptor status, and year of diagnosis. Clinicopathological features, treatments, and survival outcomes were compared between carriers and noncarriers. Results Most patients in COQD had stage I-II disease (87.2%), and more carriers than noncarriers had genetic testing before diagnosis (33% vs 5.6%, P < .001). In YWS, 22.7% of patients had stage III tumors, and few were tested before diagnosis (14.8% of carriers vs 1.7% of noncarriers; P < .001). Carriers in COQD received chemotherapy more often than noncarriers (81.1 vs 67.0%, P < .001), including platinum (P = .010); the proportion was similar for carriers and noncarriers in YWS. After adjusting for chemotherapy, relapse-free survival was longer in carriers than noncarriers in COQD (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.48 [95% CI = 0.26 to 0.87], P = .016), and a favorable trend was observed for other survival outcomes in both cohorts. Triple-negative tumors appeared to drive the differences. Conclusions We observed a trend toward improved outcomes in gBRCA1/2 PV carriers compared with noncarriers. These findings suggest that carriers should not receive more aggressive treatment solely based on their germline mutation status. Prospective clinical trials in this population are warranted.

RET fusions appear in 1%-2% of non–small cell lung cancers (NSCLCs). The results from the ARROW study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03037385 ) supported US Food and Drug Administration approval of pralsetinib, an oral selective RET inhibitor, for metastatic RET -altered NSCLC and RET fusion–positive thyroid cancers. ARROW was a phase I/II open-label study of pralsetinib 400 mg once daily in RET fusion–positive NSCLCs. Coprimary end points were overall response rate (ORR) and safety. Key secondary end points included duration of response, progression-free survival, and overall survival (OS). At data lock (May 20, 2024), 281 patients initiated pralsetinib (median treatment duration, 15.0 months). ORR (measurable disease patients; n = 259) was 78% (95% CI, 69 to 86) for treatment-naïve patients and 63% (95% CI, 54 to 71) for prior platinum-based chemotherapy patients. Median OS was 44.3 months (95% CI, 30.9 to 53.1), 50.1 months (95% CI, 28.3 to not reached) in treatment-naïve patients, and 39.7 months (95% CI, 27.8 to 53.2) in prior platinum patients. Common grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events were anemia (21%), hypertension (15%), and decreased neutrophils (13%). Three treatment-related deaths occurred (pneumonia, n = 2; interstitial lung disease and rhabdomyolysis, n = 1 each). Safety was consistent with previous ARROW reports; no hypersensitivity was reported in patients receiving prior immunotherapies. Pralsetinib produced robust, durable responses with manageable safety in treatment-naïve and previously treated patients with RET fusion–positive NSCLCs, confirming previous findings with longer follow-up.

Abstract Background: Male breast cancer (MaBC) is a rare malignancy, accounting for approximately 1% of all breast cancer cases. Our previous studies suggest that MaBC is biologically distinct from female breast cancer (FeBC), exhibiting a unique mutational profile and immune-genomic microenvironment. While the impact of these molecular alterations on site-specific metastases has been explored in FeBC, it remains poorly understood in MaBC. This gap limits accurate risk stratification and prediction of disease trajectory in male patients. In this study, we investigated site-specific genomic and immune alterations across metastatic sites in MaBC. Methods: 238 MaBC samples were tested by NGS (592, NextSeq; WES, NovaSeq) and WTS (NovaSeq; Caris Life Sciences, Phoenix, AZ). We performed analysis in hormone receptor-positive (HR+) and HER2-negative (HER2-) subtypes which are most common in male. HR+HER2- was defined as estrogen receptor (ER) or progesterone receptor (PR) positive and HER2 IHC 1+ or 2+ with negative chromogenic in situ hybridization (CISH) assay. Immune cells were estimated using WTS deconvolution (Quantiseq). Gene expression profiles were analyzed for T-cell inflamed score, interferon-gamma (IFN-gamma) score and MAPK Activation Score. We classified patients by site of biopsy/specimen site. Statistical significance was assessed with chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests, p<0.05 is considered statistically significant. Results: Our cohort included 86 HR+HER2- MaBC samples biopsied from primary breast cancer (pBC) (n=39), bone (n=15), liver (n=8), lung (n=8), lymph nodes (n=7), and skin (n=9) mets. We report here only the data on statistically significant differences, but the overall landscape has been depicted across all defined-sites investigated. pBC showed a significantly lower prevalence of PIK3CA mutations (23.6% vs. 53.3%, p<0.05) compared to bone mets. ESR1 mutations were absent in pBC but present in 25% of liver and 25% of lung mets (all comparisons p<0.05). Immune profiling revealed reduced infiltration of M2 macrophages (4.3% vs. 6%, p<0.05) and neutrophil (2.2% vs. 6.9%, p<0.05) in pBC relative to bone Mets. Further, CD4+ T cells were lower in pBC compared to lymph nodes (0% vs. 2.4%, p<0.05). pBC had lower expression of immune checkpoint genes (PDCD1LG2, HAVCR2 and CD47) compared to other mets. pBC exhibited lower MAPK pathway activation score (-1.6 vs. 0.17, p=0.03) and a trend toward lower T cell-inflamed gene expression scores (-65 vs. 8, p=0.06) compared to bone mets. Bone mets had higher infiltration of M2 macrophage compared to lung (6% vs. 4.4%, p<0.05) and lymph node (6% vs. 4.5%, p<0.05). Neutrophil infiltration was elevated in bone versus liver (6.9% vs. 2%, p<0.05) but T regulatory cells were lower in bone compared to lymph nodes (1% vs. 2.4%, p<0.05). Bone showed reduced expression of CD47 (median TPM 50.6 vs. 109.9, p<0.05) compared to skin. Further bone had lower IFN-gamma scores (-0.41 vs. -0.17, p<0.05) compared to lymph node. Data on prior number and types of cancer treatment to give a context to the findings will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: Our study highlights that each MaBC metastatic site harbors a unique genomic and immune landscape that can influence tumor behavior and potentially impact patient prognosis. Better understanding of metastatic site-specific molecular features in larger cohorts can help in the future research efforts and guiding treatment decisions. Citation Format: D. Trapani, S. Deshmukh, S. Wu, J. Xiu, N. Lin, G. Curigliano, P. Spanheimer, P. Advani, P. Barreto Coelho, M. Lustberg, G. Sledge Jr, S. Tolaney, J. Leone. Site specific Genomic and Immune Landscapes Underpinning in metastatic Male Breast Cancer [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 PS2-08-04.

Abstract Background: Most patients with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+), metastatic breast cancer (mBC) treated with endocrine therapy (ET) will ultimately develop resistance. A large unmet need exists especially when resistance occurs following treatment with a cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i), which is potentially driven by a mutation in the ERα-coding gene, ESR1. Lasofoxifene (LAS), an oral, next-generation ET and ER breast antagonist, was evaluated in two phase 2 studies of women with ER+/HER2- mBC and an ESR1 mutation who had disease progression on previous ET and CDK4/6i. In the ELAINE 1 trial, LAS monotherapy provided numerically greater progression-free survival (PFS, median 5.6 mos vs 3.7 mos; HR: 0.669 [95% CI, 0.445‒1.125], P=0.138), objective response rate (ORR, 13% vs 3%; P=0.124), and clinical benefit rate (CBR, 37% vs 22%; P=0.117) compared with the ER degrader fulvestrant (fulv), with a favorable safety profile (Goetz MP et al. Ann Oncol 2023;34:1141‒51). The single-arm, ELAINE 2 trial showed that LAS combined with abemaciclib (Abema) was well tolerated with a median PFS of ∼13 mos, ORR of 56%, and CBR of 66% (Damodaran S et al. Ann Oncol 2023;34:1131‒40). The phase 3, registrational, ELAINE 3 trial was initiated based on these promising earlier-phase data. Recent results from postMONARCH confirmed superior efficacy of fulv/Abema over fulv/placebo (mPFS 6.0 mos vs 5.3 mos, HR 0.73 [0.57‒0.95], nominal P-value 0.017) in non-biomarker‒selected, mBC patients after progression on a prior CDK4/6i and aromatase inhibitor (AI), with similar HR in an ESR1-mutated cohort (Kalinsky K et al. J Clin Oncol 2025;43:1101‒12). Additionally, recent data from EMBER-3 demonstrated meaningful PFS with a novel ET combined with abemaciclib after progression on AI/CDK4/6i (Jhaveri KL et al. N Engl J Med 2025;392:1189‒202). The ELAINE 3, global trial will compare LAS/Abema with fulv/Abema in a post-CDK4/6i, ESR1-mutation‒selected, mBC population. Methods: ELAINE 3 (NCT05696626) is an open-label, phase 3, multicenter study evaluating the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of LAS plus Abema versus fulv plus Abema. Patients are being enrolled at approximately 152 sites in 13 countries (Australia, Belgium, Canada, China, France, Italy, Israel, Poland, Romania, Spain, Taiwan, United Kingdom, United States). Key inclusion criteria are pre- and postmenopausal women and men aged ≥18 yrs; ER+/HER2-, locally advanced and/or mBC (measurable and/or non-measurable disease); ≥1 acquired ESR1 mutation; progression on an AI plus palbociclib or ribociclib as their first hormonal treatment for advanced/mBC; and ≤1 line of chemotherapy in the advanced/metastatic setting. Patients will be randomized 1:1 to receive LAS 5 mg/day plus Abema 150 mg BID, or fulv 500 mg IM (days 1, 15, and 29, then once monthly) plus Abema 150 mg BID. Treatment will continue until progression, death, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal from the study. The primary endpoint is PFS per RESIST 1.1 by blinded independent central review (BICR); key secondary endpoints are ORR, overall survival, CBR, duration of response, and time to response. Safety, time to cytotoxic chemotherapy, and quality of life (including vaginal health) will also be evaluated. Blood samples for circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) will be collected for genomic analyses at screening, at weeks 4 and 8 and every 8 weeks thereafter, and at the final visit. Outcomes with LAS/Abema and fulv/Abema will be compared using a stratified Cox proportional hazards model and stratified logrank test with an expected PFS hazard ratio of 0.68 at final analysis. Enrollment is currently ongoing to meet the target sample size of 500 patients. Citation Format: M. P. Goetz, S. A. Wander, T. Bachelot, G. Curigliano, A. de Nonneville, E. N. Gal-Yam, K. Jhaveri, S. L. Sammons, S. Shen, C. J. Twelves, G. Gasper, P. V. Plourde, D. J. Portman, S. Damodaran. Open-label, randomized, multicenter, phase 3, ELAINE 3 study of the efficacy and safety of lasofoxifene plus abemaciclib for treating ER+/HER2-, locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer with an ESR1 mutation [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 PS5-07-30.

Abstract Background: Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) are increasingly used in the treatment of breast cancer due to their superior efficacy compared to conventional chemotherapy. The management of male breast cancer is largely extrapolated from clinical data in females and evidence regarding the efficacy of ADCs in men remains limited. This study aimed to compare survival outcomes between male and female breast cancer patients treated with ADCs across the spectrum of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) expression. Methods: We included total of 2,954 (Male: 34, Female: 2,920 breast cancer samples) from patients who underwent treatment with ADCs. We excluded patients with triple-negative breast cancer status due to the rarity of this subtype in males and the worse prognosis of triple-negative breast cancer, so that the cohorts would be more homogeneous without overrepresentation of triple-negative breast cancer in females. We categorized patients by HER2 status as: HER2-null (if there was 0% stain on HER2 IHC), HER2-ultra low (if HER2 IHC was 0 but with stain 1-10%), HER2-low (if HER2 IHC was 1+ or 2+ with a negative chromogenic in situ hybridization [CISH] assay), and HER2-positive (if HER2 IHC was 3+ or 2+ with a positive CISH assay). Real-world median overall survival was derived from insurance claims and calculated from the start of first ADC with either trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) or trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) or sacituzumab govitecan (SG) to last contact using Kaplan-Meier. Statistical significance was assessed using chi-square and Mann-Whitney U. Results: The distribution of sex by HER2 expression group was: HER2-null: 8 males vs 612 females; HER2-ultra low 6 males vs 467 females; HER2-low 11 males vs 903 females; HER2-positive 9 males vs 938 females. Median survival from treatment initiation with either T-DXd or SG in the HER2-null cohort was 21.31 months in males vs 15.72 months in females (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.33 - 2.01, p=0.67); in the HER2-ultra low cohort was 17.73 months in males vs 14.47 months in females (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.26 - 2.63, p=0.76); in the HER2-low cohort was 11.08 months in males vs 18.62 months in females (HR 1.53, 95% CI 0.63 - 3.7; p=0.34). In the HER2-positive cohort, 5/9 males (55.5%) and 544/938 females (58%) were treated with T-DXd. Median survival from treatment initiation with either T-DXd or T-DM1 in the HER2-positive cohort was 36.55 months in males vs 46.52 months in females (HR 1.77, 95% CI 0.84 - 3.74, p=0.12). Conclusions: In this study, survival appears to be comparable between males and females with breast cancer across the spectrum of HER2 expression when both are treated with ADCs, although the survival in the HER2-positive cohort appears numerically lower in males, consistent with data on HER2-positive MaBC. An important limitation is the small sample size of the male breast cancer cohorts, and the lack of a categorization of HER2 in HR+ vs HR-, for the small MaBC sample size. However, to our knowledge this is the first analysis evaluating outcomes of men treated with ADCs across the spectrum of HER2 expression. Citation Format: D. Trapani, S. Deshmukh, S. Wu, J. Xiu, N. Lin, G. Curigliano, P. Spanheimer, S. Gandhi, S. Chumsri, S. Graff, M. Lustberg, G. Sledge Jr, S. Tolaney, J. Leone. Comparative efficacy of antibody drug conjugates (ADCs) in male versus female breast cancer across the spectrum of HER2 expression [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 PS4-01-13.

Abstract Background: The current standard of care for first-line (1L) treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2+) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) consists of induction chemotherapy combined with trastuzumab (TRAS) and pertuzumab (PERT) followed by maintenance therapy with TRAS + PERT. Although this regimen has been associated with sustained disease control, most patients eventually experience disease progression. The HER2CLIMB-05(NCT05132582) study is investigating the efficacy and safety of adding tucatinib to TRAS + PERT as maintenance therapy in patients with HER2+ MBC after completion of 1L chemotherapy-based induction therapy. Methods: Patients with centrally confirmed HER2+MBC without evidence of progression after 1L induction therapy with 4 to 8cycles of a taxane combined with TRAS + PERT, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 0 or 1, and no or asymptomatic brain metastases (BM) were enrolled in HER2CLIMB-05. Contrast-enhanced brain magnetic resonance imaging was performed at screening and regular intervals during the study. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either tucatinib 300 mg or placebo twice daily, in combination with either TRAS (6 mg/kg IV or 600 mg SC) plus PERT (420 mg/kg IV) or a SC fixed-dose combination of TRAS, PERT, and hyaluronidase administered every 21 days. Endocrine therapy was permitted for patients with hormone receptor-positive tumors. The primary endpoint is investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1. Secondary endpoints include overall survival (OS), PFS by blinded independent central review, investigator-assessed central nervous system (CNS)-PFS, and safety. Results: Between March 2022 and July 2024, 654 patients were randomly assigned to receive tucatinib (n = 326) or placebo (n = 328) with1L maintenance therapy. All patients were female (median age: 54 years [range, 24-83]);45.0% were White, 35.2% were Asian, 2.9% were Black/African American, and 19.3%were Hispanic/Latino(a)/Spanish origin. Most patients had ECOG PS of 0 (64.1%)and de novo metastatic disease (69.3%). At baseline, 12.4% of patients had presence or history of BM and 52.6% had hormone receptor-positive MBC. As of September5, 2025, PFS was statistically significantly improved with the addition of tucatinib versus placebo to 1L maintenance therapy (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.641 [95%confidence interval (CI), 0.514-0.799]; 2-sided P < 0.0001). All prespecified patient subgroups demonstrated a PFS benefit with tucatinib combination 1L maintenance therapy consistent with the overall population and regardless of presence or absence of BM at baseline or hormone-receptor status. OS is still immature (observed number of deaths = 51;tucatinib arm versus control arm HR = 0.539 [95% CI, 0.303-0.957; 2-sided P= 0.032]). In the safety analysis set, the most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in the tucatinib arm (n = 326) were diarrhea (72.7%), nausea (33.1%), and elevated liver enzymes (alanine aminotransferase: 28.2%; aspartate aminotransferase:25.8%), of which 6.1%, 0.9%, 13.5%, and 7.1% were, respectively, grade ≥ 3. In the tucatinib arm, 13.5% of patients discontinued tucatinib due to TEAEs. Conclusions: In the HER2CLIMB-05 trial, the addition of tucatinib to TRAS + PERT as 1L maintenance therapy demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in PFS with a manageable safety profile in patients with HER2+ MBC. Citation Format: E. Hamilton, G. Curigliano, M. Martin, F. Lerebours, J. Tsurutani, M. Savard, K. Jerzak, X. Hu, L. Martins de Aquino Pimentel, C. O'Sullivan, E. Tokunaga, A. Okines, C. Huang, W. Jacot, J. Sohn, E. Cronemberger Silva, V. Mueller, S. Yang, G. Granata, Q. Shen, L. Santarpia, V. Dieras Her2climb-05: a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study of tucatinib versus placebo in combination with trastuzumab and pertuzumab as maintenance therapy for her2+ metastatic breast cancer [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 GS1-01.

PURPOSE The HER2CLIMB-05 study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05132582 ) is investigating the efficacy and safety of adding tucatinib to trastuzumab and pertuzumab as first-line (1L) maintenance therapy in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–positive (HER2+) metastatic breast cancer (MBC). METHODS Patients with centrally confirmed HER2+ MBC without evidence of progression post induction therapy and no or asymptomatic brain metastases (BM) were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to tucatinib (300 mg) or placebo twice a day combined with trastuzumab/pertuzumab. The primary end point is investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS); secondary end points include overall survival (OS), PFS per blinded independent central review, CNS-PFS, and safety. RESULTS Between March 2022 and July 2024, 654 patients were randomly assigned to tucatinib (n = 326) and placebo (n = 328) arms. All patients were female (median age, 54 years), 69.3% had de novo MBC, 52.6% were hormone receptor–positive, and 12.4% had presence/history of baseline BM. In this primary analysis, PFS was statistically significantly improved with addition of tucatinib versus placebo (hazard ratio, 0.641 [95% CI, 0.514 to 0.799]; P < .0001; median PFS: 24.9 v 16.3 months); a PFS benefit was seen regardless of the presence/absence of BM or hormone receptor status. OS data remain immature. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in the tucatinib arm were diarrhea (72.7%), nausea (33.1%), and elevated liver enzymes (ALT: 28.2%; AST: 25.8%), of which 6.1%, 0.9%, 13.5%, and 7.1%, respectively, were grade ≥3. In the tucatinib arm, 13.5% discontinued tucatinib because of TEAEs. CONCLUSION Tucatinib addition to trastuzumab and pertuzumab demonstrated improvement in PFS with no new safety signals identified and may be an option for 1L maintenance therapy in patients with HER2+ MBC.

AbstractBackgroundThe management of early breast cancer (BC) has witnessed an uprise in the use of neoadjuvant therapy and a remarkable reshaping of the systemic therapy postneoadjuvant treatment in the last few years, with the evolution of many controversial clinical situations that require consensus.MethodsDuring the 14th Breast‐Gynecological and Immuno‐Oncology International Cancer Conference held in Egypt in 2022, a panel of 44 BC experts from 13 countries voted on statements concerning debatable challenges in the neo/adjuvant treatment setting. The recommendations were subsequently updated based on the most recent data emerging. A modified Delphi approach was used to develop this consensus. A consensus was achieved when ≥75% of voters selected an answer.Results and ConclusionsThe consensus recommendations addressed different escalation and de‐escalation strategies in the setting of neoadjuvant therapy for early BC. The recommendations recapitulate the available clinical evidence and expert opinion to individualize patient management and optimize therapy outcomes. Consensus was reached in 63% of the statements (52/83), and the rationale behind each statement was clarified.

PURPOSE Long-term outcomes of patients with stage I human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)–positive breast cancer receiving adjuvant trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) remain undefined, and prognostic predictors represent an unmet need. METHODS In the ATEMPT phase II trial, patients with stage I centrally confirmed HER2-positive breast cancer were randomly assigned 3:1 to adjuvant T-DM1 for 1 year or paclitaxel plus trastuzumab (TH). Coprimary objectives were to compare the incidence of clinically relevant toxicities between arms and to evaluate invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) with T-DM1. Correlative analyses included the HER2DX genomic tool, multiomic evaluations of HER2 heterogeneity, and predictors of thrombocytopenia. RESULTS After a median follow-up of 5.8 years, 11 iDFS events were observed in the T-DM1 arm, consistent with a 5-year iDFS of 97.0% (95% CI, 95.2 to 98.7). At 5 years, the recurrence-free interval (RFI) was 98.3% (95% CI, 97.0 to 99.7), the overall survival was 97.8% (95% CI, 96.3 to 99.3), and the breast cancer-specific survival was 99.4% (95% CI, 98.6 to 100). Comparable iDFS was observed with T-DM1 irrespective of tumor size, hormone receptor status, centrally determined HER2 immunohistochemical score, and receipt of T-DM1 for more or less than 6 months. Although ATEMPT was not powered for this end point, the 5-year iDFS in the TH arm was 91.1%. Among patients with sufficient tissue for HER2DX testing (n = 187), 5-year outcomes significantly differed according to HER2DX risk score, with better RFI (98.1% v 81.8%, hazard ratio [HR], 0.10, P = .01) and iDFS (96.3% v 81.8%, HR, 0.20, P = .047) among patients with HER2DX low-risk versus high-risk tumors, respectively. CONCLUSION Adjuvant T-DM1 for 1 year leads to outstanding long-term outcomes for patients with stage I HER2-positive breast cancer. A high HER2DX risk score predicted a higher risk of recurrence in ATEMPT.

Importance The association of tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) abundance in breast cancer tissue with cancer recurrence and death in patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) who are not treated with adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy is unclear. Objective To study the association of TIL abundance in breast cancer tissue with survival among patients with early-stage TNBC who were treated with locoregional therapy but no chemotherapy. Design, Setting, and Participants Retrospective pooled analysis of individual patient-level data from 13 participating centers in North America (Rochester, Minnesota; Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada), Europe (Paris, Lyon, and Villejuif, France; Amsterdam and Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Milan, Padova, and Genova, Italy; Gothenburg, Sweden), and Asia (Tokyo, Japan; Seoul, Korea), including 1966 participants diagnosed with TNBC between 1979 and 2017 (with follow-up until September 27, 2021) who received treatment with surgery with or without radiotherapy but no adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Exposure TIL abundance in breast tissue from resected primary tumors. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was invasive disease-free survival [iDFS]. Secondary outcomes were recurrence-free survival [RFS], survival free of distant recurrence [distant RFS, DRFS], and overall survival. Associations were assessed using a multivariable Cox model stratified by participating center. Results This study included 1966 patients with TNBC (median age, 56 years [IQR, 39-71]; 55% had stage I TNBC). The median TIL level was 15% (IQR, 5%-40%). Four-hundred seventeen (21%) had a TIL level of 50% or more (median age, 41 years [IQR, 36-63]), and 1300 (66%) had a TIL level of less than 30% (median age, 59 years [IQR, 41-72]). Five-year DRFS for stage I TNBC was 94% (95% CI, 91%-96%) for patients with a TIL level of 50% or more, compared with 78% (95% CI, 75%-80%) for those with a TIL level of less than 30%; 5-year overall survival was 95% (95% CI, 92%-97%) for patients with a TIL level of 50% or more, compared with 82% (95% CI, 79%-84%) for those with a TIL level of less than 30%. At a median follow-up of 18 years, and after adjusting for age, tumor size, nodal status, histological grade, and receipt of radiotherapy, each 10% higher TIL increment was associated independently with improved iDFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.92 [0.89-0.94]), RFS (HR, 0.90 [0.87-0.92]), DRFS (HR, 0.87 [0.84-0.90]), and overall survival (0.88 [0.85-0.91]) (likelihood ratio test, P &amp;lt; 10e-6). Conclusions and Relevance In patients with early-stage TNBC who did not undergo adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy, breast cancer tissue with a higher abundance of TIL levels was associated with significantly better survival. These results suggest that breast tissue TIL abundance is a prognostic factor for patients with early-stage TNBC.