Wood, Marie

Abstract Background: Metformin may impact tumorigenesis directly, through effects on AMP kinase, and indirectly, through reduction in circulating growth factors such as insulin. To examine the potential preventive effects of metformin, we analyzed MD, a known risk factor for breast cancer, in participants enrolled in the NCIC MA.32 trial, a randomized, placebo-controlled trial investigating the effects of 5 years of metformin on invasive disease-free survival in women with early breast cancer. The primary aim of this companion to MA.32 (Alliance A211201) was to examine the effects of 1 year of metformin vs placebo on MD in women treated for estrogen receptor negative (ER-) breast cancer. Methods: Eligible women were enrolled on MA.32, had ER- breast cancer, had >25% MD at baseline, and had an unaffected contralateral breast. MD was calculated on the contralateral breast using Cumulus software and analyzed at baseline, 1 and 2 years. The aim was to achieve a sample size of 274 (137 per arm), which would have at least 85% power to detect a 4% difference between study arms, i.e., 5% change from baseline to one year of treatment for metformin vs. 1% for placebo, using a two-sided two-sample t-test at a significance level of 5%. The current study was activated in the United States on 8/22/2012. Enrollment was halted on 10/13/2017 with 177 participants enrolled. Results: 146 women were evaluable (66 on metformin and 80 on placebo). The mean age of evaluable women was 53.6 years (standard deviation [SD] 9.4), 88.4% were white, 31.5% had a body mass index greater than or equal to 30 kg/m2, 99.3% of participants received chemotherapy. The proportions of white women and HER2+ participants in the metformin group were higher compared to placebo ([white 92.4% vs. 85.0%] and [HER2+ 21.2% vs. 11.3%], respectively). The mean MD at baseline was 22.7% (SD 14.1%) for the group as a whole (24.5% (SD 14.5%) for the metformin group and 21.2% (SD 13.6%) for the placebo group. This is lower than the eligibility criteria (>25%MD), due to difference in methods of calculation of MD (BIRADs for eligibility and Cumulus for study analysis). At 1 year, MD decreased by 0.7% (SD 7.6%) in the metformin group and 0.2% (SD 7.3%) in the placebo group (p = 0.58). At 2 years, MD decreased by 0.7% (SD 8.0%) in the metformin group and 0.8% (SD 7.1%) in the placebo group (p=0.60). Conclusions: In a cohort of women with early ER- breast cancer, there was no significant difference in the change in MD in women treated with metformin vs. placebo. There was a non-significant trend toward decreased MD while on metformin after 1 year of treatment. The arms were well balanced, though with more white and HER2+ participants in the metformin arm. The sample size for this study was about half of what was intended thus limiting power to detect a significant difference. Additional limitations include low mean MD, which may have limited our ability to detect the benefit in those at the highest risk, and further, the Cumulus method of MD determination can be imprecise. Interestingly, trends toward decreased MD with metformin were seen in Alliance A211102, and it might be reasonable to consider further study of metformin in a select population (highest MD or atypical hyperplasia). Support: UG1CA189823, U10CA180863, CCS 707213; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org.Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT01666171. Citation Format: M. Wood, M. I. Elsaid, L. J. Grimm, H. Liu, C. Oswold, C. S. Kuzma, I. Bedrosian, J. Ligibel, P. J. Goodwin. Change in mammographic density (MD) with metformin use: Alliance A211201, A companion study to NCIC study MA.32 [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 PS3-01-30.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian, Pancreatic, and Prostate are intended to serve as a resource for health care providers to identify individuals who may benefit from cancer risk assessment and genetic counseling and testing; help guide decisions related to genetic testing; and facilitate a multidisciplinary approach in the comprehensive care of individuals at increased risk for hereditary breast, ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancer. The current guidelines focus primarily on assessment of pathogenic and likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants associated with increased risk of breast, ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancer and recommended approaches to genetic counseling/testing and care strategies in individuals with these P/LP variants associated with increased risk of these cancers. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel’s most recent recommendations regarding screening for prostate cancer and pancreas cancer, as well as testing criteria for nonepithelial ovarian cancer.

Abstract Background Reference sets are needed to evaluate performance of multi-cancer detection (MCD) assays. The National Cancer Institute funded the Alliance reference set study to assess MCDs for use in future trials. Methods Individuals with cancer and controls were recruited; blood specimens were collected prior to cancer treatment. A performance evaluation study was designed utilizing reference set samples. Companies (n = 6) were selected to participate based on review of performance data and ability to utilize the blood collection tube. Companies received samples from cancer types their assay was designed to detect (“targeted”), plus additional “non-targeted” and control samples. Companies reported positive/negative calls, risk scores, and tissue-of-origin (TOO) predictions. Sensitivity was computed for early (I-II) and late (III-IV) stage cases, based on positive/negative calls (SEPN) and at fixed 98% specificity (SE98). Specificity and TOO accuracy were computed. Results Five hundred and forty nine cases (encompassing 13 cancer types) and 413 controls from the reference set were included in the study. Companies assessed samples from median 6 (range 5-9) targeted cancer types and median 8 (range: 7-11) overall cancer types. Median (range) specificity was 92.3% (76.5%-98.5%). Median (range) SEPN was 32% (25%-42%) for early stage and 73% (48%-89%) for late stage; while median (range) SE98 was 19% (8%-35%) for early stage and 66% (13%-79%) for late stage. Median sensitivity for non-targeted types was 40% (early stage) and 52% (late stage). Median (range) TOO accuracy (primary predicted site) was 75% (64%-78%). Conclusions Sensitivity and specificity varied widely across assays with early-stage sensitivity substantially lower than late-stage sensitivity. Clinical Trial Registration Number ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT05334069.

PURPOSE To develop recommendations for germline mutation testing for patients with breast cancer. METHODS An ASCO–Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) panel convened to develop recommendations based on a systematic review and formal consensus process. RESULTS Forty-seven articles met eligibility criteria for the germline mutation testing recommendations; 18 for the genetic counseling recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS BRCA1/ 2 mutation testing should be offered to all newly diagnosed patients with breast cancer ≤65 years and select patients >65 years based on personal history, family history, ancestry, or eligibility for poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor therapy. All patients with recurrent breast cancer who are candidates for PARP inhibitor therapy should be offered BRCA1/ 2 testing, regardless of family history. BRCA1/ 2 testing should be offered to women who develop a second primary cancer in the ipsilateral or contralateral breast. For patients with prior history of breast cancer and without active disease, testing should be offered to patients diagnosed ≤65 years and selectively in patients diagnosed after 65 years, if it will inform personal and family risk. Testing for high-penetrance cancer susceptibility genes beyond BRCA1/ 2 should be offered to those with supportive family histories; testing for moderate-penetrance genes may be offered if necessary to inform personal and family cancer risk. Patients should be provided enough pretest information for informed consent; those with pathogenic variants should receive individualized post-test counseling. Variants of uncertain significance should not impact management, and patients with such variants should be followed for reclassification. Referral to providers experienced in clinical cancer genetics may help facilitate patient selection and interpretation of expanded testing, and provide counseling of individuals without pathogenic germline variants but with significant family history. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines .

The NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian, and Pancreatic focus primarily on assessment of pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants associated with increased risk of breast, ovarian, pancreatic, and prostate cancer, including BRCA1 , BRCA2 , CDH1 , PALB2 , PTEN , and TP53 , and recommended approaches to genetic counseling/testing and care strategies in individuals with these P/LP variants. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize important updates regarding: (1) a new section for transgender, nonbinary and gender diverse people who have a hereditary predisposition to cancer focused on risk reduction strategies for ovarian cancer, uterine cancer, prostate cancer, and breast cancer; and (2) testing criteria and management associated with TP53 P/LP variants and Li-Fraumeni syndrome.

6509 Background: Accrual of underrepresented populations (URPs-racial and ethnic minorities, women, rural populations, and younger and older populations) to clinical trials has been historically low, hampering progress in cancer treatment, symptom intervention and prevention for all. In 2018, the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology (Alliance), as a part of the NCI's National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) and a Research Base for the NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) began a multi-pronged strategy to increase accrual of underrepresented minorities by race and ethnicity (URMs) to both treatment and cancer control trials conducted by the Alliance. Methods: Alliance leadership set a goal of 20% accrual for racial and ethnic minorities to all trials in 2018. The Health Disparities Committee (HDC) implemented several strategies over time including leadership promotion/expectation of goals; funding junior investigators and special projects focusing on URPs; working groups for specific populations in HDC; HDC co-chairs to selected protocols; translation services of patient facing materials; opening studies at NCORP Minority Underserved Sites; real time monitoring of accrual demographics, by Alliance and by site; protocols addressing aims for specific populations; closing protocol enrollment to majority populations; and increasing the study sample size to enroll additional minority participants to allow for analyzing intervention effects by subgroups. Results: Accrual data from 117 NCTN and NCORP trials led by Alliance was included from 2014-2022. Over time, accrual of racial and ethnic minorities increased from 13.6% to 25.3% for treatment and 13% to 21.5% for cancer control trials. This results in overall increase from 13.5 % to 23.6% of URMs for all trials, a 74.8% improvement. Conclusions: Intentional approaches to increase URMs has led to an increase in URM accruals to Alliance trials. Future strategies include implementation of the Alliance Patient Questionnaire to prospectively measure the prevalence of specific social determinants of health among patients enrolled to further expand the understanding and address the needs of unique population accrued to Alliance trials. In addition, accrual of women, rural populations, and younger and older adults (65+ years) are now being monitored over time to increase all URP accruals.

Abstract Current therapies for breast cancer prevention only prevent estrogen receptor positive (ER+) disease and toxicity limits use of these agents. Vitamin D is a potential prevention therapy for both ER+ and ER− disease and is safe with few side effects. This study evaluates the effect of 1-year of vitamin D supplementation on mammographic density (MD), a biomarker of breast cancer risk in a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Premenopausal women with ≥25% MD and no history of cancer were randomly assigned to 2,000 international units (IU) of vitamin D or placebo orally daily for 1 year. Change in percent MD was evaluated using Cumulus software after all participants completed treatment. Three hundred women enrolled between January 2011 and December 2013 with a mean age of 43 and diverse ethnicity [14% Hispanic, 12% African American (AA)]. Supplementation significantly increased vitamin D levels compared with placebo (14.5 ng/mL vs. −1.6 ng/mL; P < 0.0001) with all participants on the vitamin D arm achieving vitamin D sufficiency at 12 months. Vitamin D was safe and well tolerated. After adjustment for baseline MD, the mean between-arm difference (vitamin D vs. placebo) at 1 year was −0.75 (−0.26, 1.76; P = 0.56). A greater effect was seen for women with ≥50% MD and AA women, although neither reached significance. This randomized controlled trial demonstrated significant improvement in vitamin D levels with 2,000 IU for 1 year, with 100% of supplemented women achieving sufficiency. However, a null effect was seen regarding change in MD for premenopausal women (the primary outcome of the study). Prevention Relevance: Current therapies for breast cancer prevention only prevent estrogen receptor positive (ER+) disease and are underutilized due to toxicity and side effects. Vitamin D is a potential prevention therapy for both ER+ and ER− disease and is safe with few side effects.

TPS1608 Background: Metformin may have growth inhibitory effects on many cancer types including breast cancer. NCIC MA.32 is a randomized placebo-controlled trial examining the effects of 5 years of metformin in women with breast cancer ( http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01101438 ). This trial offers us the opportunity to explore the effects of metformin on breast cancer biomarkers to gain an understanding of the potential chemo preventive effects of this drug. The primary aim of this companion to MA.32 (Alliance trial # A211201) is to examine the effects of 1 year of metformin vs placebo on breast density for women with Estrogen Receptor negative (ER-) breast cancer. Secondary aims of this study include: evaluation of breast density following 2 years of metformin use, and correlation of density with fasting insulin, glucose and Homeostasis Model Assessment (HOMA). Exploratory aims include examination of the effects of metformin on second cancer rates. Methods: Eligible women must have been enrolled on MA.32 (North America accrual completed January 23, 2013), have hormone receptor-negative breast cancer, and breast composition on mammography >25% glandular density, have a digital mammogram within 12 months of registration on MA.32 and have an intact, unaffected contralateral breast. Women enrolled on this study must provide menstrual cycle data (if premenopausal) and digital mammograms. All other study related information is gathered through participation in MA.32. Mammographic density will be calculated using Cumulus software (the Boyd method). Our accrual goal is 458 patients (229 per arm) and with an assumption of 20% drop out due to drug intolerance and another 20% due to ineligibility. Therefore, with a sample size of 274 (137 per arm) we will have at least 85% power to detect a 4% difference between study arms, i.e., 5% change from baseline to one year of treatment for metformin vs. 1% for placebo, using the two-sided two-sample t-test at a significance level of 5%. This study was activated in the United States on 8/22/2012 and 15 patients have been accrued to date. This study is sponsored by the NCI and the Alliance for clinical trials. Clinical trial information: NCT01666171.

PURPOSE: ASCO is the premier and largest global professional society for oncology care professionals. In 2015, ASCO launched a longitudinal Learning Cohort Pilot Project to catalog and better understand the learning behaviors and preferences of oncology health care providers. A secondary goal was to assess learner preferences and utilization related to ASCO’s portfolio of educational resources. METHODS: The Learning Cohort Pilot Project was conducted between November 2015 and August 2016 with 49 ASCO members. Participants were selected via convenience sampling and stratified random sampling to generate a cohort that mirrored the demographic distribution of overall ASCO membership. Participants completed a different ASCO resource-specific feedback activity each month, which measured professional educational needs, sources sought, and preferences for educational resources. Responses were organized by demographic variables in our participant pool to identify trends in provider learning preferences. Fisher’s exact test was used to assess the association between participant demographics and practice setting and responses. Holm’s procedure was used to adjust for multiple testing. RESULTS: The Learning Cohort Pilot Project revealed statistically significant relationships between participant demographic variables and learning preferences. Age and practice setting were the demographic variables most consistently associated with the different preferences explored throughout the targeted activities. CONCLUSION: The results of this pilot cohort reinforced the hypothesis that oncology care providers have different professional educational needs and preferences that can be potentially anticipated and met with tailored resources. Delivering solutions to meet these needs represents an opportunity for further research and resource development.

PURPOSETo estimate age-specific relative and absolute cancer risks of breast cancer and to estimate risks of ovarian, pancreatic, male breast, prostate, and colorectal cancers associated with germline PALB2 pathogenic variants (PVs) because these risks have not been extensively characterized.METHODSWe analyzed data from 524 families with PALB2 PVs from 21 countries. Complex segregation analysis was used to estimate relative risks (RRs; relative to country-specific population incidences) and absolute risks of cancers. The models allowed for residual familial aggregation of breast and ovarian cancer and were adjusted for the family-specific ascertainment schemes.RESULTSWe found associations between PALB2 PVs and risk of female breast cancer (RR, 7.18; 95% CI, 5.82 to 8.85; P = 6.5 × 10−76), ovarian cancer (RR, 2.91; 95% CI, 1.40 to 6.04; P = 4.1 × 10−3), pancreatic cancer (RR, 2.37; 95% CI, 1.24 to 4.50; P = 8.7 × 10−3), and male breast cancer (RR, 7.34; 95% CI, 1.28 to 42.18; P = 2.6 × 10−2). There was no evidence for increased risks of prostate or colorectal cancer. The breast cancer RRs declined with age ( P for trend = 2.0 × 10−3). After adjusting for family ascertainment, breast cancer risk estimates on the basis of multiple case families were similar to the estimates from families ascertained through population-based studies ( P for difference = .41). On the basis of the combined data, the estimated risks to age 80 years were 53% (95% CI, 44% to 63%) for female breast cancer, 5% (95% CI, 2% to 10%) for ovarian cancer, 2%-3% (95% CI females, 1% to 4%; 95% CI males, 2% to 5%) for pancreatic cancer, and 1% (95% CI, 0.2% to 5%) for male breast cancer.CONCLUSIONThese results confirm PALB2 as a major breast cancer susceptibility gene and establish substantial associations between germline PALB2 PVs and ovarian, pancreatic, and male breast cancers. These findings will facilitate incorporation of PALB2 into risk prediction models and optimize the clinical cancer risk management of PALB2 PV carriers.