Vij, Kiran R

566 Background: Endocrine therapy (ET) resistance (ETR) remains a primary challenge in ER+ breast cancer. Analyzing pretreatment tumor transcriptomes across trials with early response endpoints can reveal shared and specific ETR signatures. This study utilizes baseline RNA data from the Phase III ALTERNATE trial (Alliance A011106, NCT01953588; Anastrozole [A], Fulvestrant [F], or AF) and the ACOSOG Z1031B trial (NCT00824941) to identify predictors of early Ki67 response in postmenopausal ER+/HER2– patients. Methods: ETR was defined as week-4 on-treatment Ki67 >10%. Baseline gene expression from ALTERNATE was analyzed to identify differentially expressed (DE) genes (Wilcoxon test, P<0.05) and Hallmark pathways associated with ETR, both across and within individual treatment arms. Feature selection was performed using mixOmics. A Pan-Endocrine Therapy Signature (PETS) was developed by uniting DE genes identified across all three ALTERNATE arms and Z1031B. All statistical analyses were conducted in R (P<0.05). Results: Overall ETR rate in the ALTERNATE RNA-seq cohort (n=733) was 26%. ETR was associated with high Risk of Recurrence (ROR), Oncotype RS, and Mammaprint scores (calculated from RNA-seq data in research setting). In luminal tumors (n=649), ETR was linked to chr 3q13.33, 8q24.13, and 20q13.12 cytoband upregulation and 17q21, 18q23, 3p21.1, and 10q24.32 cytoband downregulation. ETR tumors showed T-cell, E2F target, and interferon-γ enrichment; sensitive tumors favored early estrogen response and muscle differentiation. At individual gene level, high MYBL2 , PIF1 , TROAP and with low HJURP predicted ETR across all samples (AUC>0.70). A deep learning model using all protein-coding genes achieved AUC 0.82 (training) and 0.79 (test) in predicting ETR. Cross-trial integration identified ETR-associated PETS, enriched for genomic instability. PETS performed comparably to established signatures and strongly correlated with MYBL2 signature (r=0.93). Top ETR predictors were MYBL2 , AURKB , and EME1 for Arm A and IL4I1 , TNFAIP6 , and ANLN for Arm AF. AF-resistant tumors were enriched for systemic lupus and RIG-I–like receptor signaling; sensitive tumors favored PI3K–AKT, EGFR TKI resistance, AMPK, and insulin signaling. Conclusions: Baseline transcriptomics identify shared and therapy-specific ETR markers. The 15-gene PETS defines a convergent resistance signature, performing similar to established signatures in predicting ETR and correlating with MYBL2. Enrichment of cell-cycle and immune pathways in resistant tumors may suggest patient stratification approach for alternative or combinatorial strategies to overcome early ETR in ER+ breast cancer. Acknowledgement: https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24CA1. Clinical trial information: NCT01953588 .

Abstract Somatic mutations in hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (clonal hematopoiesis) are known to alter the immune milieu and can result in autoimmune disorders including VEXAS (Vacuoles, E1 enzyme, X-linked, Autoinflammatory, Somatic) syndrome. There are currently no curative strategies for CH-linked autoimmune disorders besides allogenic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Recent work has shown a high prevalence of autoimmune syndromes among patients with IDH1/2 mutant myeloid neoplasms (MN). We thus hypothesized that IDH1/2-mutant CH might drive a subset of autoimmune disorders. To further characterize a possible association between IDH-mutant CH and autoimmune disease, we used data from two observational cohort studies, the UK Biobank (N=454,218) and All of Us (N=414,830). We observed 264 individuals with IDH1/2-mutant CH. IDH1/2 CH was associated with autoimmune disease (OR=1.8, p=4e-3), and, when compared to other CH genes with at least 100 carriers, showed the strongest effect size. When comparing autoimmune subtypes, we observed significant associations with polymyalgia rheumatica (OR=4.0, p=1e-3) and giant cell arteritis (OR=8.1, p=1e-6). IDH1/2 CH carriers had elevated CRP levels compared to other CH-carriers (p=1e-2) and non-carriers (p=8e-3). IDH1/2 CH was associated with lower neutrophil counts and higher monocyte counts. While most (68%) had blood counts outside the normal range, only a minority (11%) had severe cytopenias that met criteria for CCUS. Since IDH1/2 CH is associated with both autoimmune disease and blood count abnormalities, we sought to define the frequency, clinical presentation, and outcomes of IDH1/2-associated autoimmune disease among individuals with bone marrow biopsy confirmed CCUS. We used data from three CCUS cohorts: first, a multi-institutional cohort of CCUS patients with systemic autoinflammatory disease (SAID) who were UBA1-negative, second, a hospital-based cohort at Mayo Clinic, and third, a cohort of IDH1 carriers enrolled on a phase II clinical trial of ivosidenib (NCT05030441). Within 193 SAID patients who were free of myeloid neoplasm at the time of recruitment, IDH1/2 pathogenic variants were the most observed CH driver, occurring in 2% of individuals. These individuals (N=4) all had recurrent fevers and dermatologic manifestations, requiring chronic glucocorticoid treatment with 75% having inflammatory arthritis requiring multiple Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs (range 1-7, median=5). Within the Mayo Clinic cohort, 275 patients with CCUS were serially ascertained. Among those 8 (2.9%) were IDH1-mutant of whom 50% had autoimmune disease (three with seronegative rheumatoid arthritis and one with Sweet syndrome). At last follow up (median 16 months), 2 (25%) of 8 patients had progressed to MN. Within our open-label decentralized trial of ivosidenib (IDH1 inhibitor) in CCUS, we enrolled 20 patients, of whom 5 (25%) had a diverse array of pre-existing autoimmune disorders, including two cases of seronegative rheumatoid arthritis and one case each of Sweet syndrome, polymyalgia rheumatica, and Sjögren's syndrome. Underlying the clinical presentation of all five cases was episodic joint pain, with half also experiencing episodic dermatologic manifestations. The majority (58%, 11/19) of the IDH1mt-CCUS patients had an elevated hsCRP (&gt;=5; range 6.91–46.2) including all four with co-occurring autoimmune disorders (range 7.97–46.2). Out of the 20 enrolled patients, 17 received at least 8 weeks of therapy, of which 9 had elevated hsCRP at baseline. Most of these (7/9) had normalization of hsCRP (falling below 5 mg/L) while on treatment (median time to hsCRP normalization of 58 days). Among the four patients with autoimmune disease, all had subjective improvement in their autoimmune symptoms following treatment with ivosidenib. In conclusion, we show that IDH1/2 CH is associated with autoimmune disorders and is particularly enriched among IDH1/2 CH carriers with co-occurring cytopenias. IDH1/2-associated autoimmune disease can range from classic rheumatic conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis to more severe VEXAS like presentations. IDH inhibition demonstrates efficacy for improving inflammatory manifestations within an ongoing clinical trial. Together these results nominate IDH mutant CH as a driver of autoimmune diseases with therapeutic implications.

Abstract BACKGROUND Ivosidenib is an oral inhibitor of mutant isocitrate dehydrogenase type I (IDH1) currently approved for the treatment of IDH1 mutated acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). Hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells carrying preleukemic mutations, referred to as clonal hematopoiesis (CH), are the origin of myeloid neoplasms (MN). Individuals who have cytopenias and CH, but do not meet diagnostic criteria for a hematologic malignancy, are classified as having Clonal Cytopenias of Undetermined Significance (CCUS), a condition associated with a high risk of progression to MN. While CCUS patients (pts) can have multiple mutations, they show lower mutational burden on average compared to MN. Thus, we hypothesized that treatment with ivosidenib would improve cytopenias in IDH1-mutant CCUS. METHODS; We performed a decentralized phase II single-arm study to characterize the safety and efficacy of ivosidenib in IDH1-mutant CCUS (NCT0503044). Drug was shipped to pts with local oncologists performing standard-of-care clinical exams supplemented by study team lead interviews for adverse event monitoring. Research labs were drawn by local providers or through Quest. QT corrected interval (QTc) was monitored through a mobile electrocardiogram device (AliveCor). Eligible patients were aged ≥ 18 years and had confirmed IDH1-mutant CCUS with at least 6 months of unexplained cytopenias (hemoglobin&lt;10 g/dL, platelets&lt;100 x109/L or absolute neutrophil count &lt;1.8 x109/L). The primary endpoint was hematologic response of at least 8 weeks in duration based on the IWG 2006 criteria for MDS. RESULTS 20 pts with IDH1-mutant CCUS have been enrolled. Most were male (70%) with a median age of 66 (range 41-79). Overall, 74% had a self-reported race of non-Hispanic white, 11% of Hispanic white, 5% of Asian and 11% of black or African American. Most pts presented with neutropenia (95%) including some with co-occurring thrombocytopenia (21%). One pt presented with anemia and thrombocytopenia without neutropenia. Prior to treatment, the average number of co-mutations beyond IDH1 was 2 (range 0-3), with most pts (74%) harboring a co-occurring spliceosome gene mutation. The IDH1 variant allele fraction (VAF) was lower in the blood (mean=19%, range 3-35%) than in the bone marrow (mean=31%, range 18-43%) in most (93%) patients. Out of the 20 enrolled pts, 17 received at least 8 weeks of therapy at the time of our data cutoff (7/29/2025) and were included in the efficacy analysis. Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) occurred in five patients (26%) including two with grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events (pancytopenia and sepsis in the first pt, rash in the second pt). The most common all-grade treatment-related adverse events were nausea (n=5, 26%), prolonged QTc (n=3, 16%), anemia (n=3, 16%), and diarrhea (n=3, 16%). There were no instances of reported differentiation syndrome. Overall, 82% of pts achieved a hematologic response (14/17) including improvement in neutropenia (88%) and thrombocytopenia (75%). With a median follow-up of 16 months (range 0.6-24 months), the median duration of hematologic response was not reached. Among responders, 86% had a continued response at one year. Two pts progressed to MDS after 4 and 17 months of treatment characterized by recurrence of cytopenias and the emergence of new clones. A surveillance bone marrow biopsy was performed at 18 cycles for the 8 pts who remained on treatment with none showing disease progression. Most pts (90%, N=9/10) treated for at least 12 months had a decrease in IDH1-mutant CH VAF over time and 40% (N=4/10) showed IDH1 mutation clearance (VAF &lt;2%) with a median time to clearance of 9 months. Among those with decreasing IDH1 clonal burden, all had a corresponding decrease in other co-occurring mutations present at baseline with one responder showing emergence of a newly detectable CHEK2 mutation without disease progression. CONCLUSIONS Decentralized trials represent a feasible solution for the conduct of clinical trials in rare hematologic neoplasms and precursor conditions. Ivosidenib was well-tolerated and induced durable hematologic remissions in IDH1-mutant CCUS. Most pts showed a reduction in clonal burden with mutation clearance commonly seen with long-term treatment demonstrating that ivosidenib modifies the natural history of IDH1-mutant CCUS.

Abstract Recent introduction of 2 different lymphoma classifications has raised concerns about consistency in diagnosis, management, and clinical trial enrollment. Data from a large cohort reflecting real-world clinical practice suggest that differences between the classifications will affect &lt;1% of non-Hodgkin lymphomas.

Importance Adding fulvestrant to anastrozole (A+F) improved survival in postmenopausal women with advanced estrogen receptor (ER)–positive/ERBB2 (formerly HER2)–negative breast cancer. However, the combination has not been tested in early-stage disease. Objective To determine whether neoadjuvant fulvestrant or A+F increases the rate of pathologic complete response or ypT1-2N0/N1mic/Ki67 2.7% or less residual disease (referred to as endocrine-sensitive disease) over anastrozole alone. Design, Setting, and Participants A phase 3 randomized clinical trial assessing differences in clinical and correlative outcomes between each of the fulvestrant-containing arms and the anastrozole arm. Postmenopausal women with clinical stage II to III, ER-rich (Allred score 6-8 or &amp;gt;66%)/ERBB2-negative breast cancer were included. All analyses were based on data frozen on March 2, 2023. Interventions Patients received anastrozole, fulvestrant, or a combination for 6 months preoperatively. Tumor Ki67 was assessed at week 4 and optionally at week 12, and if greater than 10% at either time point, the patient switched to neoadjuvant chemotherapy or immediate surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was the endocrine-sensitive disease rate (ESDR). A secondary outcome was the percentage change in Ki67 after 4 weeks of neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) (week 4 Ki67 suppression). Results Between February 2014 and November 2018, 1362 female patients (mean [SD] age, 65.0 [8.2] years) were enrolled. Among the 1298 evaluable patients, ESDRs were 18.7% (95% CI, 15.1%-22.7%), 22.8% (95% CI, 18.9%-27.1%), and 20.5% (95% CI, 16.8%-24.6%) with anastrozole, fulvestrant, and A+F, respectively. Compared to anastrozole, neither fulvestrant-containing regimen significantly improved ESDR or week 4 Ki67 suppression. The rate of week 4 or week 12 Ki67 greater than 10% was 25.1%, 24.2%, and 15.7% with anastrozole, fulvestrant, and A+F, respectively. Pathologic complete response/residual cancer burden class I occurred in 8 of 167 patients and 17 of 167 patients, respectively (15.0%; 95% CI, 9.9%-21.3%), after switching to neoadjuvant chemotherapy due to week 4 or week 12 Ki67 greater than 10%. PAM50 subtyping derived from RNA sequencing of baseline biopsies available for 753 patients (58%) identified 394 luminal A, 304 luminal B, and 55 nonluminal tumors. A+F led to a greater week 4 Ki67 suppression than anastrozole alone in luminal B tumors (median [IQR], −90.4% [−95.2 to −81.9%] vs −76.7% [−89.0 to −55.6%]; P &amp;lt; .001), but not luminal A tumors. Thirty-six nonluminal tumors (65.5%) had a week 4 or week 12 Ki67 greater than 10%. Conclusions and Relevance In this randomized clinical trial, neither fulvestrant nor A+F significantly improved the 6-month ESDR over anastrozole in ER-rich/ERBB2-negative breast cancer. Aromatase inhibition remains the standard-of-care NET. Differential NET response by PAM50 subtype in exploratory analyses warrants further investigation. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01953588

AbstractTo address the current and long‐term unmet health needs of the growing population of non‐Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) patients, we established the Lymphoma Epidemiology of Outcomes (LEO) cohort study (NCT02736357; https://leocohort.org/). A total of 7735 newly diagnosed patients aged 18 years and older with NHL were prospectively enrolled from 7/1/2015 to 5/31/2020 at 8 academic centers in the United States. The median age at diagnosis was 62 years (range, 18–99). Participants came from 49 US states and included 538 Black/African‐Americans (AA), 822 Hispanics (regardless of race), 3386 women, 716 age <40 years, and 1513 rural residents. At study baseline, we abstracted clinical, pathology, and treatment data; banked serum/plasma (N = 5883, 76.0%) and germline DNA (N = 5465, 70.7%); constructed tissue microarrays for four major NHL subtypes (N = 1189); and collected quality of life (N = 5281, 68.3%) and epidemiologic risk factor (N = 4489, 58.0%) data. Through August 2022, there were 1492 deaths. Compared to population‐based SEER data (2015–2019), LEO participants had a similar distribution of gender, AA race, Hispanic ethnicity, and NHL subtype, while LEO was underrepresented for patients who were Asian and aged 80 years and above. Observed overall survival rates for LEO at 1 and 2 years were similar to population‐based SEER rates for indolent B‐cell (follicular and marginal zone) and T‐cell lymphomas, but were 10%–15% higher than SEER rates for aggressive B‐cell subtypes (diffuse large B‐cell and mantle cell). The LEO cohort is a robust and comprehensive national resource to address the role of clinical, tumor, host genetic, epidemiologic, and other biologic factors in NHL prognosis and survivorship.

Introduction: The use of standardized, evidence-based classification systems is crucial for the accurate diagnosis and treatment of diseases. Moreover, standardized classification facilitates research and epidemiologic studies and promotes consistency in communication among healthcare professionals. Since 2016, the revised 4 th edition of the World Health Organization classification (WHO-HAEM4R) has been the global standard for diagnosis of lymphoid malignancies. With the emergence of new data, 2 new classification systems were developed and published in 2022: the 5 th edition of the WHO Classification (WHO-HAEM5) and the International Consensus Classification (ICC). Both WHO-HAEM5 and ICC maintain a shared fundamental concept of disease classification that integrates clinical, pathologic, and molecular data. However, they differ on nomenclature, establishment of new entities, and/or diagnostic criteria for some disease categories. To evaluate the impact of these differences on real-world diagnosis of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), we examined the diagnostic classification of NHL in the Lymphoma Epidemiology of Outcomes (LEO) Cohort Study (NCT02736357). Methods: Initiated in 2015, LEO is an ongoing prospective observational study of patients aged ≥18 years with newly diagnosed NHL. Patients are enrolled at 8 major U.S. medical centers. Clinical, epidemiologic, pathologic, and treatment data are abstracted at baseline and active follow-up is conducted for all patients. Lymphoma subtype is coded for each case based on expert hematopathology re-review of the diagnostic pathology slides, the pathology report, biomarker data, and clinical data. Of note, NHL subtype distribution is similar to SEER data. We studied all patients enrolled in LEO between 7/1/2016 (the date LEO pathology review started using WHO-HAEM4R diagnostic codes) and 5/31/2020. WHO-HAEM4R diagnoses and additional clinicopathologic data, when relevant, were used to map cases into the corresponding WHO-HAEM5 and ICC diagnoses. Differences between WHO-HAEM5 and ICC were annotated for each case as: None - same disease entity; Minor - difference in nomenclature with similar diagnostic criteria; Major - difference in disease category and/or diagnostic criteria; or Unevaluable - insufficient data to assign WHO-HAEM5 and/or ICC diagnosis. Results: LEO enrolled 6143 patients during the study period. Of these, comparison between WHO-HAEM5 and ICC was evaluable in 5730 (93.3%). Unevaluable cases included those without a specific WHO-HAEM4R diagnosis at enrollment (N=384; e.g., patients with a low-grade B-cell lymphoma that could not be definitively sub-classified) and those with a specific WHO-HAEM4R diagnosis, but with insufficient clinicopathologic data to assign a specific WHO-HAEM5 and/or ICC diagnosis (N=29). Of the 5730 evaluable cases, 5376 (93.8%) showed no difference between WHO-HAEM5 and/or ICC diagnosis, 311 (5.4%) showed minor differences (nomenclature only), and 43 (0.8%) showed major differences (Table 1). The 43 major differences all involved B-cell NHLs; 20 (46.5%) were attributable to different approaches to classifying double-hit lymphomas, 21 (48.9%) to classification of splenic/leukemic B-cell lymphomas, and 2 (4.6%) to classification of B-cell lymphomas occurring at specific anatomic sites (Table 2). Conclusion: In a large, prospective lymphoma cohort reflecting real-world clinical practice at 8 major U.S. medical centers, major diagnostic differences in the classification of NHL using WHO-HAEM5 or ICC classification criteria were seen in 0.8%, whereas the remaining 99.2% of diagnoses were either the same or showed differences in nomenclature only. The existence of 2 concurrent classification systems presents potential for discrepancies in pathologic diagnosis, clinical practice, clinical trials, and other lymphoma research. Furthermore, some of the differences between WHO-HAEM5 and ICC are clinically and potentially therapeutically significant, and their resolution requires further study. Nevertheless, our findings argue that the proportion of patients affected would be small in real-world practice settings. This appears largely related to incidence rates of specific lymphoma subtypes, with major differences between the 2 classifications predominantly affecting rare entities, while there is general concordance on the most common forms of NHL.

Background: High Grade B cell Lymphoma (HGBL) with MYC and BCL2 and/or BCL6 rearrangements(R) was introduced as an entity in 2016 by the WHO revised 4 th edition. In 2022, both the WHO 5 th edition (beta version) and the International Consensus Classification (ICC) separated DHL- BCL2 (+/- BCL6-R)from DHL- BCL6 given differences in biology . However, while the ICC has maintainedDHL- BCL6 as a provisional entity, the WHO has removed the category, thus removing the requirement to FISH for BCL6-R in this setting. Clinical data on DHL- BCL6 is much more limited, as these cases represent only 10-20% of DHL and have been combined with BCL2-R cases in prior studies. Outcomes are variable in retrospective studies with no consistent data on prognosis or optimal therapeutic strategies. By retaining the category of DHL-BCL6 as a provisional entity, the ICC emphasized the need for further, multicenter, prospective studies evaluating the clinical and biological features of this disease. We herein report a comprehensive comparison of clinical characteristics and outcomes in patients with DHL- BCL6 compared to diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), not otherwise specified (NOS); DLBCL with MYC rearrangement only; DHL- BCL2; and HGBL, NOS in a large, multicenter, prospective cohort of patients from Lymphoma Epidemiology of Outcomes (LEO). Methods: Adult patients with newly diagnosed large B-cell or HGBL were enrolled within 6 months of diagnosis at one the 8 LEO cohort academic medical centers in the US between 2015 and 2020. Baseline characteristics were abstracted at the time of diagnosis per protocol. Based on FISH data patients were further sub mgrouped into DLBCL, NOS (without MYC rearrangement); MYC-R DLBCL, NOS; HGBL, NOS; DHL- BCL2 and DHL- BCL6. Event-free survival (EFS) was defined as the time from diagnosis until progression/relapse, retreatment, or death. Overall survival (OS) was defined as the time from diagnosis until death due to any cause. Results: A total of 1526 eligible patients were identified during this time period. All FISH data was available at the time of diagnosis and the choice of treatment was based on physician discretion. Median age at diagnosis was 63 years (IQR 53-72), with 148 (10%) patients in the AYA category, and 128 (8%) patients &gt; 80 years. 58% (891) were male, 11% self identified as Hispanic or Latino, and 7% as Black/African American. The median diagnosis to treatment interval (DTI) was 20 days (IQR 12-32), and 33% had DTI &lt; 14 days. The FISH-based subgroups were MYC-negative DLBCL, NOS (N=1146, 75%), MYC-R DLBCL,NOS 227 (N = 96, 6%), DHL- BCL2 (N=154, 10%), DHL- BCL6 (N=38, 3%), and HGBL, NOS (N=92, 6%). When available, COO by Hans algorithm was 92% GCB in DHL- BCL2 and 50% GCB in DHL- BCL6. Clinical characteristics can be found in the table. At a median follow-up of 49 months (IQR 36-67), 490 patients (32%) had an event and 356 patients (23%) died. EFS at 24 months (EFS24) was 75% (95% CI: 73-77). Patients with DHL- BCL6 were younger at diagnosis (median 60 years), had more extranodal site involvement (40%), more often stage III/IV disease (70%), and more often treated with a higher intensity regimen than R-CHOP (69%) compared to DLBCL,NOS and MYC-R DLBCL. DHL- BCL6 also had fewer patients that were males (47%), with DTI &lt;=14 days (33%), NCCN IPI ≥ 4 (45%), elevated LDH (53%) than HGBL, NOS and DHL- BCL2. The 2-year EFS and OS rates were noted to be significantly better in the DHL- BCL6 (EFS 79%, 95% CI: 67-93; OS 92%, 95% CI: 84-100) as compared to DHL- BCL2 (EFS 58%, 95% CI: 50-66; OS 70%, 95% CI 63 - 78) and HGBL, NOS (EFS 74%, 95% CI: 65-84; OS 74%, 95% CI: 65-84 ), (Figure 1) but were comparable to that of DLBCL, NOS (EFS 78%, 95% CI: 76-81; OS 87%, 95% CI: 86-89). Conclusions: Our data support separating DHL- BCL6 from DHL -BCL2 as these patients form a unique subgroup with some clinical characteristics comparable to both DLBCL, NOS as well as HGBL, NOS and DHL- BCL2 subtypes. In this cohort, clinical outcomes are more comparable to DLBCL, NOS than DHL- BCL2 or HGBCL, NOS. More frequent use of intensive chemotherapy in DHL- BCL6 compared with DLBCL may account for this finding, although larger multicenter studies are needed. Our results support continued identification of DHL- BCL6 in the clinical setting to better understand optimal therapy and biology of this cohort.

Abstract Introduction: The ALTERNATE trial randomized postmenopausal women with ER Allred 6-8 HER2- breast cancer to 6 months of NET with anastrozole (A), fulvestrant (F) or the combination (A+F). Biopsies were taken preNET and after 4-weeks(wks). Patients with Ki67 values &gt;10% at 4-wks were offered triage to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Patients with on-treatment Ki67 ≤ 10% who completed NET underwent surgery and Ki67 was reassessed. The primary endpoint was endocrine-sensitive disease rate (ESDR). ESD is defined as pCR or PEPI-0 residual disease (pT1-2, pN0, Ki67 ≤ 2.7%). We previously reported that the ESDR difference between the F-containing arms and the A arm was not &gt;10% (ASCO 2020) and that baseline RNA-seq-based intrinsic subtypes predicted outcomes overall (SABCS 2021). Herein we describe relationships between PAM50 intrinsic subtype and Ki67 values by treatment arm because comparative drug effectiveness in adjuvant endocrine therapy studies in ER+ HER2- breast cancer can be predicted by the degree of Ki67 suppression (PMC3518447). Methods: 743 of the 1297 eligible patients (A: 264; F: 231; A+F: 248) had RNA extracted from preNET frozen tumor biopsies with &gt;50% tumor content and subjected to RNA seq. Intrinsic subtypes were then assigned as LumA, LumB, and NonLum (Basal or HER2-E) using open-source PAM50-based informatics. Differences in the proportion with wk4 Ki67 &gt; 10%, % change in wk4 ki67, and surgical CCCA (Ki67 ≤ 2.7%) rate (sxCCCA) between treatments and by intrinsic subtype was assessed using stratified logistic regression, Wilcoxon rank sum test, and Fisher’s exact test, respectively. Analysis of sxCCCA excluded those who failed to complete NET for reasons other than disease progression or early Ki67 &gt;10%. Results: Amongst the 358 LumA cases there were no significant differences in Ki67-based endpoints between treatments. Among the 292 LumB cases, the wk4 ki67 &gt; 10% rate was lower with A+F (19.4%) than A (43%) (P=0.0002) and was somewhat lower in F (31%) versus A (P=0.076). The % change in wk4 Ki67 in LumB cases, adjusted for baseline Ki67, showed markedly superior suppression for A+F versus A (-90% vs. -77%; P=&lt;0.0001) and versus F (-90% vs. -80%; P=0.0026). Furthermore sxCCCA rates were significantly higher with A+F than A (53% vs. 25% P = &lt;0.0001) and somewhat higher for F (37%) than A (p=0.068), indicating that superior antiproliferative effects for A+F persist after 6 months on therapy. Lack of Ki67 suppression in response to treatment was observed in the majority of 43 NonLum samples regardless of treatment. Conclusion: The combination of A+F was significantly more effective than either drug alone for the control of LumB breast cancer cell proliferation. This suggests that A+F may be a more effective adjuvant endocrine therapy than A alone in LumB disease. The lower Ki67 suppression with A alone also suggests that poorer outcome in some LumB tumors may be due to insufficient ER targeting rather than ER-independent tumor growth Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24CA196171, UG1CA189856, U10CA180868 (NRG), NCI BIQSFP, BCRF, Genentech, AstraZeneca. https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org. (MJE) CPRIT RR140033, P50-CA186784, P50-CA58223, U01-CA214125, U24-CA210954, Gift from Ralph and Lisa Eads, McNair Scholarship. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01953588 Citation Format: Matthew J. Ellis, Meenakshi Anurag, Jeremy Hoog, Aranzazu Fernandez-Martinez, Cheng Fan, Richard Gibbs, Souzan Sanati, Kiran Vij, Mark Watson, Travis Dockter, Olwen Hahn, Joseph Guenther, Abigail Caudle, Erica Crouch, Amy Tiersten, Monica Mita, Wajeeha Razaq, Tina J. Hieken, Yang Wang, A. Marilyn Leitch, Gary W. Unzeitig, Eric Winer, Anna Weiss, Kelly Hunt, Ann H. Partridge, Charles M. Perou, Vera Suman, Cynthia X. Ma, Lisa A. Carey. The effect of intrinsic subtype on inhibition of tumor growth by anastrozole vs. fulvestrant vs. the combination: Results from the Alliance neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) ALTERNATE trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2022; 2022 Apr 8-13. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(12_Suppl):Abstract nr CT026.