Sonke, Gabe S.

Importance Molecular analyses of biospecimens collected from study participants are essential for identifying biomarkers that can tailor treatments to specific subsets of patients who are most likely to benefit. Sharing of data and biospecimens from clinical trials enables personalized, patient-centric use of cancer therapies and accelerates the development of new treatments. Objective To describe obstacles to sharing data and biospecimens and to propose strategies to enhance access and collaboration. Evidence Review This is a Special Communication authored by 53 academic investigators and patient representatives from the breast cancer community with extensive experience in conducting clinical and translational research. The article also evaluates the impact of biomarker research on specifying responsive subpopulations in the 29 registrational clinical trials that have led to approval of a new drug for treatment of breast cancer between 2017 and 2024. Findings Clinical trial participants are increasingly asked to provide tissue and/or body fluid biospecimens for biomarker research that is typically controlled by the sponsoring pharmaceutical company, but published biomarker studies are rare. Among 29 breast cancer registrational studies reported in the past 8 years, none resulted in biomarker research that restricted a drug’s approved indication. Herein, strategies to maximize the value of clinical data and biospecimens contributed by participants are proposed, thereby supporting the shared goals of the pharmaceutical industry and academia to improve patient care. These strategies include (1) establishing coleadership structures involving academia and patients in clinical trial design and conduct, (2) ensuring that informed consent forms state that data and biospecimens will be shared with academia for future research, (3) requiring the sharing of clinical data as a condition for regulatory approval, and (4) enabling access to biospecimens and translational research data for independent studies on biomarkers that may indicate drug efficacy and toxicity. Conclusions and Relevance Data and biospecimen sharing from registrational trials has been suboptimal. Improving clinical data, biospecimens, and biospecimens’ related data sharing requires concrete actions and a multidimensional stakeholder approach to accelerate the impact of clinical cancer research on the quality of patient care.

Abstract BRCA-associated homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) is present in ~ 50% of high-grade serous carcinomas (HGSC) and predicts sensitivity to platinum-based therapy. However, there is little understanding of why some patients with BRCA-deficient tumors experience unexpectedly poor outcomes. We profiled 154 tumors, enriched for patients with BRCA-deficient tumors that experienced short overall survival (≤ 3 years, n = 42), using whole-genome, transcriptome, and methylation analyses. All but one BRCA-deficient tumor exceeded an accepted HRD genomic scarring threshold. However, patients with BRCA1-deficient HGSC with a more elevated HRD score survived significantly longer. Patients with BRCA2-deficient HGSC and loss of NF1 survived twice as long as those without NF1 loss, whereas PIK3CA or RAD21 amplification defined BRCA2-deficient HGSC with exceptionally short survival. BRCA1-deficient tumors in short survivors had evidence of immunosuppressive c-kit signaling and EMT. In a large HGSC cohort (n = 1,389) including 282 individuals with pathogenic germline BRCA variants (gBRCApv), the location of the mutation within functional domains stratified clinical outcomes. Notably, residual disease after primary surgery had limited prognostic effect in gBRCApv-carriers compared to non-carriers. Our findings indicate that tumor HR proficiency in the context of therapy response and survival is not a binary property, and highlight genomic and immune modifiers of outcomes in BRCA-deficient HGSC.

ImportanceThe absolute benefit of chemotherapy for all patients with stage I triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is unclear, and biomarkers are not currently available for selecting patients with an excellent outcome for whom neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy may have negligible benefit. High levels of stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (sTILs) are associated with favorable survival in TNBC, but data solely in stage I TNBC are lacking.ObjectiveTo examine the outcomes of patients of all ages with stage I TNBC solely and who received neither neoadjuvant nor adjuvant chemotherapy, according to centrally reviewed sTIL levels at prespecified cutoffs.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis cohort study used the Netherlands Cancer Registry to identify patients diagnosed with stage I TNBC between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2015, who were not treated with chemotherapy. Only patients who did not receive neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant chemotherapy were selected. The clinical data were matched with their corresponding pathology data provided by the Dutch Pathology Registry. Data analysis was performed between February and October 2023.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary end point was breast cancer–specific survival (BCSS) at 5, 10, and 15 years for the prespecified sTIL level cutoffs of 30%, 50%, and 75%. Hematoxylin and eosin–stained slides were used for central review of histologic subtype, grade, and lymphovascular invasion. The International Immuno-Oncology Biomarker Working Group guidelines were used to score the sTIL levels; these levels were determined for 1041 patients.ResultsOf a total of 4511 females with stage I TNBC, patients who were not treated with chemotherapy were selected and tissue blocks requested; sTILs were scored in 1041 patients (mean [SD] age at diagnosis, 64.4 [11.1] years, median follow-up 11.4 [95% CI, 10.9-11.9] years) who were included in the analyses.. Most tumors (952 [91.5%]) were invasive carcinomas of nonspecial histologic subtype. Most patients (548 [52.6%]) had pT1cN0 tumors. Median (range) sTIL level was 5% (1%-99%). A total of 775 patients (74.4%) had sTIL levels below 30%, 266 (25.6%) had 30% or greater, 203 (19.5%) had 50% or greater, and 141 (13.5%) had 75% or greater. Patients with pT1abN0 tumors had a more favorable outcome vs patients with pT1cN0 tumors, with a 10-year BCSS of 92% (95% CI, 89%-94%) vs 86% (95% CI, 82%-89%). In the overall cohort, sTIL levels of at least 30% were associated with better BCSS compared with sTIL levels less than 30% (96% and 87%, respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 0.45; 95% CI, 0.26-0.77). High sTIL levels of 50% or greater were associated with a better outcome than low sTIL levels of less than 50% (HR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.10-0.74) in patients with pT1C tumors, with a 10-year BCSS of 95% increasing to 98% with sTIL levels of 75% or greater.Conclusions and RelevanceResults of this study showed that patients with stage I TNBC and high level of sTILs who did not receive neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy had excellent 10-year BCSS. The findings further support the role of sTILs as integral biomarkers in prospective clinical trials of therapy optimization for this patient population.

Objective Animal data suggest that exercise during chemotherapy is cardioprotective, but clinical evidence to support this is limited. This study evaluated the effect of exercise during chemotherapy for breast cancer on long-term cardiovascular toxicity. Methods This is a follow-up study of two previously performed randomised trials in patients with breast cancer allocated to exercise during chemotherapy or non-exercise controls. Cardiac imaging parameters, including T1 mapping (native T1, extracellular volume fraction (ECV)), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and global longitudinal strain (GLS), cardiorespiratory fitness, and physical activity levels, were acquired 8.5 years post-treatment. Results In total, 185 breast cancer survivors were included (mean age 58.9±7.8 years), of whom 99% and 18% were treated with anthracyclines and trastuzumab, respectively. ECV and Native T1 were 25.3%±2.5% and 1026±51 ms in the control group, and 24.6%±2.8% and 1007±44 ms in the exercise group, respectively. LVEF was borderline normal in both groups, with an LVEF<50% prevalence of 22.5% (n=40/178) in all participants. Compared with control, native T1 was statistically significantly lower in the exercise group (β=−20.16, 95% CI −35.35 to −4.97). We found no effect of exercise on ECV (β=−0.69, 95% CI −1.62 to 0.25), LVEF (β=−1.36, 95% CI −3.45 to 0.73) or GLS (β=0.31, 95% CI −0.76 to 1.37). Higher self-reported physical activity levels during chemotherapy were significantly associated with better native T1 and ECV. Conclusions In long-term breast cancer survivors, exercise and being more physically active during chemotherapy were associated with better structural but not functional cardiac parameters. The high prevalence of cardiac dysfunction calls for additional research on cardioprotective measures, including alternative exercise regimens. Trial registration number NTR7247.

AbstractBackgroundCyclin E1 (CCNE1) is a potential predictive marker and therapeutic target in tubo‐ovarian high‐grade serous carcinoma (HGSC). Smaller studies have revealed unfavorable associations for CCNE1 amplification and CCNE1 overexpression with survival, but to date no large‐scale, histotype‐specific validation has been performed. The hypothesis was that high‐level amplification of CCNE1 and CCNE1 overexpression, as well as a combination of the two, are linked to shorter overall survival in HGSC.MethodsWithin the Ovarian Tumor Tissue Analysis consortium, amplification status and protein level in 3029 HGSC cases and mRNA expression in 2419 samples were investigated.ResultsHigh‐level amplification (>8 copies by chromogenic in situ hybridization) was found in 8.6% of HGSC and overexpression (>60% with at least 5% demonstrating strong intensity by immunohistochemistry) was found in 22.4%. CCNE1 high‐level amplification and overexpression both were linked to shorter overall survival in multivariate survival analysis adjusted for age and stage, with hazard stratification by study (hazard ratio [HR], 1.26; 95% CI, 1.08‐1.47, p = .034, and HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.05‐1.32, p = .015, respectively). This was also true for cases with combined high‐level amplification/overexpression (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.09‐1.47, p = .033). CCNE1 mRNA expression was not associated with overall survival (HR, 1.00 per 1‐SD increase; 95% CI, 0.94‐1.06; p = .58). CCNE1 high‐level amplification is mutually exclusive with the presence of germline BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants and shows an inverse association to RB1 loss.ConclusionThis study provides large‐scale validation that CCNE1 high‐level amplification is associated with shorter survival, supporting its utility as a prognostic biomarker in HGSC.

12081 Background: A common conception is that exercise training is cardioprotective for patients with breast cancer receiving adjuvant chemotherapy, but evidence to support this assertion is limited. This study aims to evaluate the effect of exercise training during adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer on long-term structural and functional cardiac outcomes. Methods: This is a follow-up study of two previously performed randomized studies in breast cancer patients; the PACT (N = 204) and PACES (N = 230) study. Cardiac outcomes, including extracellular volume fraction (ECV), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) on cardiac MRI and global longitudinal strain (GLS) on echocardiography, were evaluated in patients allocated to moderate-to high-intensity exercise and non-exercise controls using linear and logistic regression models, adjusted for relevant confounders. Additionally, we explored the influence of self-reported PA during chemotherapy on cardiac outcomes, regardless of treatment allocation. Results: In total, 185 breast cancer survivors were included (mean age 58.9±7.8 years, mean time since treatment 8.5±1.1 years). Mean ECV was 25.3±2.5 in the control group and 24.6±2.8 in the exercise group. Mean LVEF was borderline normal in both (54.6±4.9 and 53.0±7.8) with an LVEF < 50% of 17.1% and 27.8% in control and exercise group, respectively. Compared to control, no significant effect of exercise during chemotherapy on ECV (β = -0.61, 95%CI: -1.55;0.32) or on abnormal ECV (OR = 0.80, 95%CI: 0.26;2.45) was found. Native T1 was statistically significantly lower in the exercise group compared to control (β = -16.75%CI: -31.5 ;-1.93). The odds of having an abnormal native T1 appeared lower in the exercise group (OR 0.58, 95%CI: 0.28;1.17). We found no benefit of exercise for LVEF or GLS (β = -1.82, 95%CI: -4.06;0.42 and β = 0.21, 95%CI: -0.87;1.28), nor on the likelihood of having an abnormal LVEF or GLS (OR = 1.78, 95%CI: 0.79;4.16); OR = 1.21, 95%CI: 0.56;2.63), respectively. Higher self-reported physical activity levels during chemotherapy tended to be associated with better cardiac outcomes. Conclusions: Exercise training during chemotherapy was not associated with long-term cardioprotection in patients with early-stage breast cancer. The high prevalence of cardiac abnormalities years post-chemotherapy suggests the need to include cardiac assessment in long-term follow-up programs for breast cancer survivors and calls for more research on cardioprotective measures during adjuvant chemotherapy, including alternative exercise dosing regimens and pharmacological adjuncts. Clinical trial information: NTR7247.

Abstract Background: Achieving a pathologic complete response (pCR) has been shown on the patient level to predict excellent long-term event-free survival outcomes. Residual cancer burden (RCB) quantifies the extent of residual disease for patients who did not achieve pCR. We have previously observed in the I-SPY 2 TRIAL that while metastatic events outside the central nervous system (CNS) were dramatically reduced in the setting of pCR, the incidence of CNS metastasis remained similar across RCB classes, raising the possibility that these CNS events may be independent of response in the breast. In this study, we evaluate the type and sites of recurrences by RCB in a large pooled dataset, which allows for analysis within subtype, to validate these findings. Methods: 5161 patients pooled across 12 institutions/trials with available RCB and event-free survival (EFS) data were included in this analysis. EFS was calculated as the interval between treatment initiation, and locoregional recurrence, distant recurrence or death from any cause; patients without event are censored at time of last follow-up. The median follow-up is 4.6 years. We summarized the EFS event type, further sub-dividing the distant recurrence events (DR) by their site of relapse (CNS-only, CNS and other sites, Non-CNS). We used a competing risk (Fine-Gray) model to assess which of these site-specific relapses differ between RCB classes and estimated the cumulative incidence of CNS-only and non-CNS events at 5 years. Analyses were performed across the entire study population and within HR/HER2 defined subtypes. Results: Among the 5161 subjects, there were 1164 EFS events, including 92 (7.9%) local recurrences (without distant recurrence and/or death) and 1072 distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS) events. Among the DRFS events, 158 patients died without a distant recurrence. 914 experienced distant recurrences, including 90 (9.8%) with CNS-only, 145 (15.9%) with CNS and other sites, 664 (72.6%) with non-CNS distant recurrence; 15 (1.6%) patients had missing recurrence site information. Table 1 summarizes the cumulative incidence of CNS-only and non-CNS recurrence at 5 years and the proportion of CNS-only recurrences among DR events by RCB class overall and within each HR/HER2 subtypes. The incidence of CNS-only recurrences was low and similar across RCB classes. In contrast, the incidence of non-CNS recurrences increases with increasing RCB. As a result, CNS-only recurrences are proportionally higher within the RCB-0 and RCB-I than in the RCB-II and RCB-III groups, largely because of the low DR event rate and relative low frequency of non-CNS recurrence events within the RCB-0 and RCB-I classes. Overall, 27% of the recurrences in the setting of pCR (RCB-0) are due to CNS-only recurrences.Conclusions: Consistent with previous studies, our large pooled analysis confirmed that CNS-only recurrences are uncommon but appear similar across RCB groups, independent of response, suggesting that the CNS is a treatment sanctuary site. In contrast, non-CNS recurrence rates increase as RCB increases. These findings suggest that inclusion of CNS-only recurrences as an outcome event may impact the association between neoadjuvant therapy response and long-term outcomes in the context of current therapies. Novel therapies that cross the blood brain barrier will be needed to impact CNS recurrence rates. Table 1: Cumulative Incidence of CNS Only and non-CNS Distant Recurrences at 5 years and proportion of CNS-only events among DR eventsRCB Class0IIIIIIpOverall (5161)N16766622017806Cum. Inc. CNS Only2%2%2%1%0.627Cum. Inc. Non-CNS3%6%16%27%&lt;0.001# CNS-Only / # DR events (%)26/96 (27%)14/74 (19%)39/443 (9%)11/301 (4%)HR-HER2- (1774)N770212590202Cum. Inc. CNS Only2%3%2%4%0.298Cum. Inc. Non-CNS4%11%19%42%&lt;0.001# CNS-Only / # DR events (%)13/50 (26%)6/32 (19%)13/148 (9%)8/111 (7%)HR-HER2+ (572)N3766710029Cum. Inc. CNS Only1%5%5%0%0.022Cum. Inc. Non-CNS2%5%18%38%&lt;0.001# CNS-Only / # DR events (%)4/17 (24%)3/10 (30%)6/31 (19%)0/13 (0%)HR+HER2+ (858)N31317229182Cum. Inc. CNS Only1%1%2%0%0.37Cum. Inc. Non-CNS2%3%15%26%&lt;0.001# CNS-Only / # DR events (%)3/10 (30%)2/16 (12%)7/68 (10%)0/29 (0%)HR+HER2- (1957)N2172111036493Cum. Inc. CNS Only3%2%1%0.2%0.087Cum. Inc. Non-CNS5%4%13%20%&lt;0.001# CNS-Only / # DR events (%)6/19 (32%)3/16 (19%)13/196 (7%)3/148 (2%) Citation Format: Sonal Shad, Marieke van der Noordaa, Marie Osdoit, Diane de Croze, Anne-Sophie Hamy, Marick Lae, Fabien Reyal, Miguel Martin, María Del Monte-Millán, Sara López-Tarruella, I-SPY 2 TRIAL Consortium, Judy C Boughey, Matthew P Goetz, Tanya Hoskin, Rebekah Gould, Vicente Valero, Gabe Sonke, Tessa G Steenbruggen, Maartje van Seijen, Jelle Wesseling, John Bartlett, Stephen Edge, Mi-Ok Kim, Jean Abraham, Carlos Caldas, Helena Earl, Elena Provenzano, Stephen-John Sammut, David Cameron, Ashley Graham, Peter Hall, Lorna Mackintosh, Fan Fang, Andrew K Godwin, Kelsey Schwensen, Priyanka Sharma, Angela DeMichele, Janet Dunn, Louise Hiller, Larry Hayward, Jeremy Thomas, Kimberly Cole, Lajos Pusztai, Laura Van't Veer, Fraser Symmans, Laura Esserman, Christina Yau. Site of recurrence after neoadjuvant therapy: A multi-center pooled analysis [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD13-02.

Abstract Background: Pathologic complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in patients with breast cancer is associated with improved survival. Further assessment of the extent of residual disease, using the pathological anatomic American Joint Committee on Cancer staging method (ypStage) or the Residual Cancer Burden (RCB) method, have been shown to add prognostic information for patients with residual disease. Neo-Bioscore, an alternate system to classify response to NAC, includes clinical stage at diagnosis and biology and defines eight prognostic groups. The goal of this study was to compared three scoring systems (anatomic ypStage (7th ed), RCB Class and Neo-Bioscore) and assess whether RCB Class and Neo-Bioscore provide additional prognostic value in the context above anatomic ypStage, the most commonly used method for post-neoadjuvant residual disease assessment. Methods: Data from 5161 patients treated with NAC was pooled from 12 sites. Patients without clinical and pathological staging were excluded, as were patients with HER2+ breast cancer who did not receive neoadjuvant HER2-targeted therapy, leaving 3730 for analysis. PCR was defined as no residual invasive tumor in breast and nodes, i.e. RCB-0 or ypT0/Tis and ypN0. Patients with discordant pCR status by RCB Class vs ypStage (n=9) were excluded. Associations between each scoring system and event-free survival (EFS) were evaluated using the log rank test. EFS at 5 years was estimated using the Kaplan Meier method. Associations between Neo-Bioscore and EFS were assessed in the pCR group. For patients with residual disease, we assessed RCB and Neo-Bioscore within each ypStage. Analysis was performed overall and within subtype. Subgroups with &lt;5 patients were excluded from the survival analyses. Results: ypAJCC staging, RCB class and Neo-Bioscore were all associated with EFS in the overall population and within each subtype (log rank p&lt;0.0001). Of note, 13 patients with a Neo-Bioscore of 7 all recurred or died within 19 months of follow-up. Overall, 34% (1264/3721) of patients achieved a pCR. Their Neo-Bioscore ranges from 0-5, where 3% (37/1264) has a Neo-Bioscore of 5 despite achieving pCR. The Neo-Bioscore was not associated with EFS in case of a pCR, with EFS estimates at 5 years of 95%, 94%, 92%, 93%, 90% and 92% for Neo-Bioscores 0-5 respectively. As HR and HER2 status are components of the score, the range of Neo-Bioscore in the pCR group differs by subtype. However, similar to the overall analysis, the Neo-Bioscore was not prognostic within subtypes in case of pCR. Overall, among the patients who did not achieve pCR, both RCB class and Neo-Bioscore were associated with EFS within ypStages I, II and III. However, the ypStage within which RCB and Neo-Bioscore are prognostic is different for each subtype. RCB class was prognostic in ypStage I in both HR+ subtypes: patients with ypStage-I/RCB-I had significantly improved survival compared to patients with ypStage-I/RCB-II (5-year EFS: 100% vs 83% in HR+HER2- and 95% vs 77% in HR+HER2+). In contrast, for patients with triple negative breast cancer, RCB class was prognostic within ypStage II and III. Analysis by clinical stage and the components of the three systems that contribute most to prognosis will be presented. Conclusions: The degree of response to NAC adds important information to pCR versus residual disease. The Neo-Bioscore was not prognostic among patients with pCR, suggesting that clinical stage (including subtype and grade) adds little information in the setting of a pCR. In contrast, both RCB and Neo-Bioscore provide additional prognostic information to the conventional ypAJCC staging among non-pCR patients, suggesting that clinical stage, tumor biology as well as extent of residual disease all contribute to prognosis in the setting of residual disease after NAC. Citation Format: Marieke EM van der Noordaa, Christina Yau, Sonal Shad, Marie Osdoit, Tessa G Steenbruggen, Diane de Croze, Anne-Sophie Hamy, Marick Lae, Fabien Reyal, Maria Del Monte-Millán, Miguel Martin, Sara Lopez Tarruella, I-SPY 2 TRIAL Consortium, Judy C Boughey, Matthew Goetz, Tanya Hoskin, Rebecca Gould, Vincent Valero, Gabe Sonke, Maartje van Seijen, Jelle Wesseling, John Bartlett, Stephan Edge, Mi-Ok Kim, Jean Abraham, Carlos Caldas, Helena Earl, Elena Provenzano, Stephen-John Sammut, David Cameron, Ashley Graham, Peter Hall, Lorna MacKintosh, Fang Fan, Andrew K Godwin, Kelsey Schwensen, Priyanka Sharma, Angela DeMichele, Janet Dunn, Louise Hiller, Larry Hayward, Jeremy Thomas, Kimberley Cole, Lajos Pusztai, Laura van 't Veer, Fraser Symmans, Laura Esserman. Assessing prognosis after neoadjuvant therapy: A comparison between anatomic ypAJCC staging, residual cancer burden class and neo-bioscore [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS4-07.

Abstract Background: Recent studies have demonstrated independent validation of the prognostic relevance of residual cancer burden (RCB) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. However, a pooled subject-level analysis of multiple cohorts is needed to determine estimates of long-term prognosis for each class of RCB in each phenotypic subtype of breast cancer (BC) to better inform on patient outcomes. Also, a pooled subject-level analysis allows more detailed analyses of generalizability of the prognostic meaning of RCB assessments in a broader experience of practice settings. Method: Subject-level RCB results, with relevant clinical and pathologic stage, tumor subtype and grade, demographic, treatment and follow-up data from 11 institutes/trials are being collected for combined analysis. The association between the continuous RCB index and event-free survival (EFS), and distant recurrence free survival (DRFS) were assessed using mixed effect Cox models with the incorporation of random RCB coefficients to account for between-study heterogeneity. We will also allow for differences in baseline hazard across biological BC subtypes and, if needed, across studies as well. In addition to this stratified mixed effect model, a multivariate analysis adjusting for age, T-category, nodal status and grade was performed within each subtype. In addition, mixed effect Cox models will be employed to evaluate association between RCB index with EFS and DRFS within each HR/HER2 subtype. Kaplan Meier estimates of EFS and DRFS at 5 and 10 years were computed for each RCB class within subtype. Results: We analyzed subject-level data from 9 institutes/trials representing 4077 patients currently available from an anticipated final total of 4,800 patients (to be presented at the meeting). There were 950 EFS and 876 DRFS events during follow up (median 65 months, IQR: 70 months). RCB index (continuous) was independently prognostic within each subtype: HR+/HER2- (EFS HR (per unit increase in RCB index) =1.64, 95%CI 1.48-1.82; DRFS HR=1.68, 1.51-1.87), HR+/HER2+ (EFS HR=1.80, 1.57-2.05; DRFS HR=1.93, 1.67-2.24), HR-/HER2+ (EFS HR=2.15, 1.76-2.62; DRFS HR=2.10, 1.77-2.50), and HR-/HER2- (EFS HR=2.05, 1.89-2.22; DRFS HR=2.16, 1.90-2.46); and remained prognostic in multivariate models adjusting for age, grade, and clinical T and N stage at diagnosis. Table 1 contains the response rate and estimated EFS at 5 years and 10 years for each RCB class within each HR/HER2 phenotype (DRFS results were similar). Conclusions: Long-term prognosis after pCR was similarly excellent in all phenotypic subtypes. RCB index and classification was independently and strongly prognostic in all subtypes, and generalizable to multiple practice settings. Prognostic differences by RCB class occurred within 5 years in HR- BC, but extended to 10 years in HR+ BC. RCB-I had slightly worse EFS than pCR in HR- BC and HR+/HER2+ BC (after 5 years), but the same EFS as pCR in HR+/HER2- BC. Complete analysis of all subjects, including neoadjuvant treatments, will be presented at the meeting. PhenotypeOutcomepCRRCB-IRCB-IIRCB-IIIHR+/HER2-Frequency (%)11%10%52%27%(N=1467)5 yr EFS (95% CI)91% (86-96)93% (89-98)82% (79-85)70% (65-75)10 yr EFS (95% CI)84% (75-93)88% (82-95)71% (67-75)52% (46-58)HR+/HER2+Frequency (%)38%18%35%9%(N=762)5 yr EFS (95% CI)94% (91-97)93% (88-98)78% (73-84)49% (37-65)10 yr EFS (95% CI)91% (86-96)79% (70-90)65% (59-73)42% (29-60)HR-/HER2+Frequency (%)66%11%18%5%(N=550)5 yr EFS (95% CI)93% (90-96)88% (79-97)60% (50-71)45% (30-69)10 yr EFS (95% CI)90% (86-94)84% (74-95)56% (46-68)45% (30-69)HR-/HER2-Frequency (%)41%13%33%13%(N=1293)5 yr EFS (95% CI)92% (90-94)85% (79-91)68% (63-72)28% (21-36)10 yr EFS (95% CI)87% (82-91)80% (72-88)63% (58-68)24% (18-33) Citation Format: Christina Yau, Marieke van der Noordaa, Jane Wei, Marie Osdoit, Fabien Reyal, Anne-Sophie Hamy, Marick Lae, Miguel Martin, Maria del Monte, I-SPY 2 TRIAL Consortium, Judy C Boughey, Rebekah Gould, Jelle Wesseling, Tessa Steenbruggen, Maartje van Seijen, Gabe Sonke, Stephen Edge, Stephen-John Sammut, Elena Provenzano, Jean Abraham, Peter Hall, Ashley Graham, Lorna Mackintosh, David Cameron, Alice Wang, Priyanka Sharma, Kimberly Cole, Lajos Pusztai, Mi-Ok Kim, Laura van ‘t Veer, Laura Esserman, W. Fraser Symmans. Residual cancer burden after neoadjuvant therapy and long-term survival outcomes in breast cancer: A multi-center pooled analysis [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS5-01.