Symmans, W Fraser

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.

PURPOSE In light of evolving evidence that some patients with node-positive estrogen receptor–positive (ER+) disease may receive less benefit from chemotherapy, this study reports 12-year outcomes of the C9741 trial overall, and by the sensitivity to endocrine therapy (SET2,3) test index, a biomarker measuring endocrine transcriptional activity, to identify patients most likely to benefit from dose-dense chemotherapy. METHODS In all, 1,973 patients were randomly assigned to dose-dense versus conventional chemotherapy. Hazard ratios (HRs) for prognosis and for predictive interaction with chemotherapy schedule were estimated from Cox models of long-term disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). SET2,3 was tested on the 682 banked RNA samples from ER+ cancers. RESULTS Dose-dense chemotherapy improved DFS in the overall study population by 23% (HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.66 to 0.90]) and OS by 20% (HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.67 to 0.95]); the benefits of dose-dense therapy were seen for ER+ and ER-negative subsets, without significant interaction between treatment arm and ER status. Low SET2,3 status was highly prognostic, but also predicted improved outcomes from dose-dense chemotherapy (interaction P = .0998 for DFS; 0.027 for OS), independent of menopausal status. Specifically, low endocrine transcriptional activity predicted benefit from dose-dense chemotherapy, whereas tumor burden and proliferation-driven signatures for molecular subtype classification did not. CONCLUSION At 12-year follow-up, C9741 confirmed the sustained long-term benefit of adjuvant dose-dense chemotherapy for node-positive breast cancer. SET2,3 identified patients with ER+ breast cancer who benefited from dose-dense chemotherapy, and specifically, this benefit was predicted by low endocrine activity in the cancer, rather than tumor burden, molecular subtype, or menopausal status.

AbstractBackgroundPatient‐reported outcomes (PROs) are a better tool for evaluating the experiences of patients who have symptomatic, treatment‐associated adverse events (AEs) compared with clinician‐rated AEs. The authors present PROs assessing health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) and treatment‐related neurotoxicity for adjuvant capecitabine versus platinum on the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group‐American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ECOG‐ACRIN) EA1131 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02445391).MethodsParticipants completed the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Breast Cancer Symptom Index (NFBSI‐16) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Gynecologic Oncology Group neurotoxicity subscale (platinum arm only) at baseline, cycle 3 day 1 (C3D1), 6 months, and 15 months. Because of early termination, power was insufficient to test the hypothesis that HRQoL, as assessed by the NFBSI‐16 treatment side‐effect (TSE) subscale, would be better at 6 and 15 months in the capecitabine arm; all analyses were exploratory. Means were compared by using t‐tests or the Wilcoxon rank‐sum test, and proportions were compared by using the χ2 test.ResultsTwo hundred ninety‐six of 330 eligible patients provided PROs. The mean NFBSI‐16 TSE subscale score was lower for the platinum arm at baseline (p = .02; absolute difference, 0.6 points) and for the capecitabine arm at C3D1 (p = .04; absolute difference, 0.5 points), but it did not differ at other times. The mean change in TSE subscale scores differed between the arms from baseline to C3D1 (platinum arm, 0.15; capecitabine arm, −0.72; p = .03), but not from baseline to later time points. The mean decline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Gynecologic Oncology Group neurotoxicity subscale scores exceeded the minimal meaningful change (1.38 points) from baseline to each subsequent time point (all p < .05).ConclusionsDespite the similar frequency of clinician‐rated AEs, PROs identified greater on‐treatment symptom burden with capecitabine and complemented clinician‐rated AEs by characterizing patients’ experiences during chemotherapy.

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 &gt;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.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) increases rates of successful breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in patients with breast cancer. However, some studies suggest that BCS after NAC may confer an increased risk of locoregional recurrence (LRR). We assessed LRR rates and locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS) in patients enrolled on I-SPY2 (NCT01042379), a prospective NAC trial for patients with clinical stage II to III, molecularly high-risk breast cancer. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate associations between surgical procedure (BCS vs mastectomy) and LRFS adjusted for age, tumor receptor subtype, clinical T category, clinical nodal status, and residual cancer burden (RCB). In 1462 patients, surgical procedure was not associated with LRR or LRFS on either univariate or multivariate analysis. The unadjusted incidence of LRR was 5.4% after BCS and 7.0% after mastectomy, at a median follow-up time of 3.5 years. The strongest predictor of LRR was RCB class, with each increasing RCB class having a significantly higher hazard ratio for LRR compared with RCB 0 on multivariate analysis. Triple-negative receptor subtype was also associated with an increased risk of LRR (hazard ratio: 2.91, 95% CI: 1.8–4.6, P < 0.0001), regardless of the type of operation. In this large multi-institutional prospective trial of patients completing NAC, we found no increased risk of LRR or differences in LRFS after BCS compared with mastectomy. Tumor receptor subtype and extent of residual disease after NAC were significantly associated with recurrence. These data demonstrate that BCS can be an excellent surgical option after NAC for appropriately selected patients.

ImportancePathologic complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in breast cancer strongly correlates with overall survival and has become the standard end point in neoadjuvant trials. However, there is controversy regarding whether the definition of pCR should exclude or permit the presence of residual ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS).ObjectiveTo examine the association of residual DCIS in surgical specimens after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer with survival end points to inform standards for the assessment of pathologic complete response.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThe study team analyzed the association of residual DCIS after NAC with 3-year event-free survival (EFS), distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS), and local-regional recurrence (LRR) in the I-SPY2 trial, an adaptive neoadjuvant platform trial for patients with breast cancer at high risk of recurrence. This is a retrospective analysis of clinical specimens and data from the ongoing I-SPY2 adaptive platform trial of novel therapeutics on a background of standard of care for early breast cancer. I-SPY2 participants are adult women diagnosed with stage II/III breast cancer at high risk of recurrence.InterventionsParticipants were randomized to receive taxane and anthracycline-based neoadjuvant therapy with or without 1 of 10 investigational agents, followed by definitive surgery.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe presence of DCIS and EFS, DRFS, and LRR.ResultsThe study team identified 933 I-SPY2 participants (aged 24 to 77 years) with complete pathology and follow-up data. Median follow-up time was 3.9 years; 337 participants (36%) had no residual invasive disease (residual cancer burden 0, or pCR). Of the 337 participants with pCR, 70 (21%) had residual DCIS, which varied significantly by tumor-receptor subtype; residual DCIS was present in 8.5% of triple negative tumors, 15.6% of hormone-receptor positive tumors, and 36.6% of ERBB2-positive tumors. Among those participants with pCR, there was no significant difference in EFS, DRFS, or LRR based on presence or absence of residual DCIS.Conclusions and RelevanceThe analysis supports the definition of pCR as the absence of invasive disease after NAC regardless of the presence or absence of DCIS.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01042379.

Context.— Neoadjuvant systemic therapy refers to the use of systemic agent(s) for malignancy prior to surgical treatment and has recently emerged as an option for most breast cancer patients eligible for adjuvant systemic therapy. Consequently, treated breast carcinomas have become routine specimens in pathology practices. A standard protocol has not yet been universally adopted for the evaluation and reporting of these specimens. The American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system recognizes the challenges in staging breast carcinomas after neoadjuvant treatment and provides important data points but does not currently provide detailed guidance in estimating the residual tumor burden in the breast and lymph nodes. The Residual Cancer Burden system is the only Web-based system that quantifies treatment response as a continuous variable using residual tumor burden in the breast and the lymph nodes. Objective.— To provide clarifications and guidance for evaluation and reporting of postneoadjuvant breast specimens, discuss issues with the current staging and reporting systems, and provide specific suggestions for future modifications to the American Joint Committee on Cancer system and the Residual Cancer Burden calculator. Data Sources.— English-language literature on the subject and the data from the I-SPY 2, a multicenter, adaptive randomization phase 2 neoadjuvant platform trial for early-stage, high-risk breast cancer patients. Conclusions.— This article highlights challenges in the pathologic evaluation and reporting of treated breast carcinomas and provides recommendations and clarifications for pathologists and clinicians. It also provides specific recommendations for staging and discusses future directions.