Regan, Meredith M.

Importance The Breast Cancer Index (BCI) previously identified premenopausal patients with tumors in which the ratio of expression of HOXB13 relative to IL17BR (hereafter, BCI [H/I]–low tumors) as likely to derive greatest benefit from ovarian function suppression (OFS)–containing adjuvant therapy in the Suppression of Ovarian Function Trial (SOFT) trial. Objectives To assess BCI as a predictive biomarker of benefit from exemestane plus OFS vs tamoxifen plus OFS and to validate BCI as a prognostic biomarker for premenopausal patients. Design, Setting, and Participants This prognostic study used a prospective-retrospective translational design within the Tamoxifen and Exemestane (TEXT) and SOFT trials (enrolled November 2003 to April 2011). Blinded BCI testing in all available tumor samples was completed in March 2024. Premenopausal women with hormone receptor–positive breast cancer randomized to tamoxifen plus OFS or exemestane plus OFS who had BCI assessed were included. Analysis occurred from March to August 2024. Exposure 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen plus OFS or exemestane plus OFS. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcomes were breast cancer-free interval (BCFI) for predictive analyses and distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI) for prognostic analyses after a median follow-up of 13 years in the TEXT cohort. Secondary objectives examined the predictive performance of BCI (H/I) in the combined TEXT and SOFT cohort overall and in prespecified clinical subgroups. Results Of 1782 patients in the TEXT study, 1034 (58.0%) had BCI (H/I)–low tumors; 915 (51.3%) of patients had N0 disease and 1077 (60.4%) were younger than 45 years. Patients with BCI (H/I)–low tumors had a 6.6% absolute benefit in 12-year BCFI (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.44-0.85) for exemestane plus OFS vs tamoxifen plus OFS, while those with BCI (H/I)–high tumors had a 6.3% absolute benefit (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.57-1.07; P for interaction = .29). Results were consistent in the combined TEXT plus SOFT cohort (2896 patients) and adjusting for clinicopathological variables. Clinical subgroup analyses consistently showed benefit of exemestane plus OFS vs tamoxifen plus OFS for BCI (H/I)–low tumors, and more variable relative treatment effects among BCI (H/I)–high tumors, including by age. Post hoc exploratory time-varying estimates suggested the treatment × BCI associations may differ in years 0 to 5 vs greater than 5 years. BCI and BCI N+ as continuous indices were prognostic for distant recurrence in N0 (HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.11-1.44; P < .001) and N1 (HR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.21-2.05; P < .001) cancers. The 12-year DRFI was 96.3%, 90.3%, and 84.9% for BCI low-, intermediate-, and high-risk N0 cancers, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance In this study of premenopausal women with hormone receptor–positive breast cancer, BCI (H/I) status did not clearly predict greater benefit of adjuvant exemestane plus OFS vs tamoxifen plus OFS for women with BCI (H/I)–low tumors than for those with BCI (H/I)–high tumors; BCI continuous indices were reconfirmed as prognostic for premenopausal women. These findings support prior results of SOFT, which compared tamoxifen-alone vs OFS with either exemestane or tamoxifen, indicating premenopausal patients with BCI (H/I)–low tumors may benefit from more intensive endocrine therapy.

Abstract Purpose: The aim of PREDICT was to confirm clinical validity and the potential for clinical utility of serial circulating tumor cell (CTC) enumeration in patients with metastatic breast cancer, focusing on its prognostic value in different breast cancer subtypes and clinical settings. Experimental Design: In total, 4,436 individual patient-level data with CTC results from both baseline and one follow-up (CellSearch; Menarini Silicon Biosystems) were analyzed to evaluate the association between CTC detection and overall survival (OS) in the full patient cohort and separately for tumor and treatment types. Results: Using the cutoff ≥1 CTC for CTC positivity, 913 (20.6%) patients had 0 CTCs at both time points (neg/neg) and 325 (7.3%) and 1,189 (26.8%) patients converted from CTC negative to CTC positive (neg/pos) or vice versa (pos/neg), whereas 2,009 (45.3%) patients had at least one CTC at both time points (pos/pos). The median OS for the neg/neg, neg/pos, pos/neg, and pos/pos group was 45.6, 26.1, 32.3, and 17.3 months, respectively (P < 0.0001, global log-rank test). CTC responders (pos/neg) showed a lower risk of death compared with CTC nonresponders (pos/pos; HR, 0.48; 95% confidence interval, 0.44–0.53). Similar results were obtained in subgroup analyses according to hormone receptor and HER2 subtype, treatment type, and with a ≥5 CTC cutoff for CTC positivity. Conclusions: Follow-up CTC assessments strongly predict OS independently from tumor subtype and treatment. New randomized trials to define the clinical utility of CTC monitoring for risk stratification and as an early response marker in metastatic breast cancer are urgently needed.

ImportanceAdjuvant ovarian function suppression (OFS) with oral endocrine therapy improves outcomes for premenopausal patients with hormone receptor–positive (HR+) breast cancer but adds adverse effects. A genomic biomarker for selecting patients most likely to benefit from OFS-based treatment is lacking.ObjectiveTo assess the predictive and prognostic performance of the Breast Cancer Index (BCI) for OFS benefit in premenopausal women with HR+ breast cancer.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis prospective-retrospective translational study used all available tumor tissue samples from female patients from the Suppression of Ovarian Function Trial (SOFT). These individuals were randomized to receive 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen alone, tamoxifen plus OFS, or exemestane plus OFS. BCI testing was performed blinded to clinical data and outcome. The a priori hypothesis was that BCI HOXB13/IL17BR ratio (BCI[H/I])–high tumors would benefit more from OFS and high BCI portended poorer prognosis in this population. Settings spanned multiple centers internationally. Participants included premenopausal female patients with HR+ early breast cancer with specimens in the International Breast Cancer Study Group tumor repository available for RNA extraction. Data were collected from December 2003 to April 2021 and were analyzed from May 2022 to October 2022.Main Outcomes and MeasuresPrimary end points were breast cancer–free interval (BCFI) for the predictive analysis and distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI) for the prognostic analyses.ResultsTumor specimens were available for 1718 of the 3047 female patients in the SOFT intention-to-treat population. The 1687 patients (98.2%) who had specimens that yielded sufficient RNA for BCI testing represented the parent trial population. The median (IQR) follow-up time was 12 (10.5-13.4) years, and 512 patients (30.3%) were younger than 40 years. Tumors were BCI(H/I)-low for 972 patients (57.6%) and BCI(H/I)-high for 715 patients (42.4%). Patients with tumors classified as BCI(H/I)-low exhibited a 12-year absolute benefit in BCFI of 11.6% from exemestane plus OFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.48 [95% CI, 0.33-0.71]) and an absolute benefit of 7.3% from tamoxifen plus OFS (HR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.48-0.97]) relative to tamoxifen alone. In contrast, patients with BCI(H/I)-high tumors did not benefit from either exemestane plus OFS (absolute benefit, −0.4%; HR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.70-1.53]; P for interaction = .006) or tamoxifen plus OFS (absolute benefit, −1.2%; HR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.72-1.54]; P for interaction = .11) compared with tamoxifen alone. BCI continuous index was significantly prognostic in the N0 subgroup for DRFI (n = 1110; P = .004), with 12-year DRFI of 95.9%, 90.8%, and 86.3% in BCI low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk N0 cancers, respectively.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this prospective-retrospective translational study of patients enrolled in SOFT, BCI was confirmed as prognostic in premenopausal women with HR+ breast cancer. The benefit from OFS-containing adjuvant endocrine therapy was greater for patients with BCI(H/I)-low tumors than BCI(H/I)-high tumors. BCI(H/I)-low status may identify premenopausal patients who are likely to benefit from this more intensive endocrine therapy.

Abstract Background. The phase 3 PALLAS trial (NCT02513394) compared two years of the CDK4/6 inhibitor palbociclib with endocrine therapy of provider choice, versus endocrine therapy alone, as adjuvant treatment for patients with Stage II-III hormone receptor-positive HER2-negative (HR+/HER2-) breast cancer. Genomic subtype (PAM50 intrinsic subtype) measured from whole-transcriptome RNA sequencing data was defined in the protocol of the PALLAS trial as the primary biomarker for analysis of prediction and prognosis. Clinical data have been previously presented (Gnant et al, JCO 2022), and the trial now has 5-year median follow-up. Methods. As part of trial eligibility, all participants in PALLAS provided a tumor tissue block prior to randomization (surgical if primary resection, core biopsy if neoadjuvant treatment) for translational analyses (TRANS-PALLAS). The biorepository and laboratory were blinded to identity and processed samples in random order, to minimize bias. Nucleic acids were extracted from samples with sufficient tumor tissue and cellularity (>25 mm2 with ≥20% cancer nuclei). The Genome Sequencing Center at Washington University St. Louis performed whole-transcriptome RNA sequencing. Libraries were prepared from 1 µg DNase-1 treated total RNA, if total RNA DV200 >28 (Agilent Bioanalyzer), using an unbiased library protocol of RNA HyperPrep kit with RiboErase (HMR) (Kapa Biosystems, Wilmington, MA). 100 bp paired-end sequencing was performed on NovaSeq 6000 using S4 Reagent Kit (Illumina, San Diego, CA), with 48 libraries pooled per lane. Intrinsic subtype was determined using Bioclassifier package (Research PAM50 script, Parker et al.) only for the analysis population of primary breast cancer samples that had not been exposed to prior neoadjuvant therapy. Invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) will be visualized using Kaplan-Meier plots, with log-rank test between groups. Cox models of proportional hazards will be developed to evaluate prognosis adjusted for known clinical covariates, or for predictive interactions. The pre-defined level of significance is a two-sided 0.05. Results. From the total study population of 5796 enrolled patients, 4655 tissue blocks had sufficient tumor content to process for RNA, with 3931 yielding sufficient RNA for sequencing, and 2669/4655 (57.3%) submitted tissue blocks had DV200 ≥28 and were successfully sequenced. Clinical unblinding revealed 2370 unique patients (1182 in the palbociclib treatment arm and 1188 in the control arm) with intrinsic subtype defined from their untreated primary tumor: 1555 (65.6%) luminal A, 287 (12.1%) luminal B, 167 (7.0%) HER2-enriched, 310 (13.1%) basal-like, 51 (2.2%) normal-like. We will report the results for association of molecular subtype, proliferation score, and Risk of Recurrence (ROR) scores with invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) by treatment arm at the meeting. Conclusions. The TRANS-PALLAS cohort represents one of the largest biorepositories of HR+/HER2- early breast cancer reflecting contemporary systemic management in the framework of a prospectively randomized global trial. Required tumor block submission in this phase 3 trial yielded data from unbiased whole-transcriptome RNA sequencing of the primary tumor prior to treatment from 41% of the PALLAS participants. The proportion of luminal A cancers was unexpectedly high (66%), indicating a lower-risk distribution of cancers in this population. The planned analyses of prediction and prognosis are ongoing and those results will be presented at the time of the meeting. Support: AFT, ABCSG, Pfizer, ECOG-ACRIN, NSABP Foundation, GBG, BIG; Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02513394; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org Citation Format: Daniel Stover, Dominik Hlauschek, Erica Mayer, W. Fraser Symmans, Mark Watson, Iros Barozzi, Martin Filipits, Karla Ballman, Meritxell Bellet- Ezquerra, Justin Balko, Gabor Rubovszky, Nicholas Zdenkowski, Adam Brufsky, Guenther Steger, Claudine Isaacs, Sibylle Loibl, Fernando Henao, Meredith Regan, Yuan Liu, Christian Fesl, Patrick O'Brien, Angela DeMichele, Michael Gnant, Otto Metzger. Protocol-defined biomarker analysis in the PALLAS (AFT-05) adjuvant trial: Genomic subtype derived from RNA sequencing of HR+/HER2- early breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr GS03-07.

PURPOSE The Standardized Definitions for Efficacy End Points (STEEP) criteria, established in 2007 and updated in 2021 (STEEP 2.0), provide standardized definitions of adjuvant breast cancer (BC) end points. STEEP 2.0 identified a need to separately address end points for neoadjuvant clinical trials. The multidisciplinary NeoSTEEP working group of experts was convened to critically evaluate and align neoadjuvant BC trial end points. METHODS The NeoSTEEP working group concentrated on neoadjuvant systemic therapy end points in clinical trials with efficacy outcomes—both pathologic and time-to-event survival end points—particularly for registrational intent. Special considerations for subtypes and therapeutic approaches, imaging, nodal staging at surgery, bilateral and multifocal diseases, correlative tissue collection, and US Food and Drug Administration regulatory considerations were contemplated. RESULTS The working group recommends a preferred definition of pathologic complete response (pCR) as the absence of residual invasive cancer in the complete resected breast specimen and all sampled regional lymph nodes (ypT0/Tis ypN0 per AJCC staging). Residual cancer burden should be a secondary end point to facilitate future assessment of its utility. Alternative end points are needed for hormone receptor–positive disease. Time-to-event survival end point definitions should pay particular attention to the measurement starting point. Trials should include end points originating at random assignment (event-free survival and overall survival) to capture presurgery progression and deaths as events. Secondary end points adapted from STEEP 2.0, which are defined from starting at curative-intent surgery, may also be appropriate. Specification and standardization of biopsy protocols, imaging, and pathologic nodal evaluation are also crucial. CONCLUSION End points in addition to pCR should be selected on the basis of clinical and biologic aspects of the tumor and the therapeutic agent investigated. Consistent prespecified definitions and interventions are paramount for clinically meaningful trial results and cross-trial comparison.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported. The combined analysis of SOFT-TEXT compared outcomes in 4,690 premenopausal women with estrogen/progesterone receptor–positive (ER/PgR+) early breast cancer randomly assigned to 5 years of exemestane + ovarian function suppression (OFS) versus tamoxifen + OFS. After a median follow-up of 9 years, exemestane + OFS significantly improved disease-free survival (DFS) and distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI), but not overall survival, compared with tamoxifen + OFS. We now report DFS, DRFI, and overall survival after a median follow-up of 13 years. In the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, the 12-year DFS (4.6% absolute improvement, hazard ratio [HR], 0.79; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.90; P < .001) and DRFI (1.8% absolute improvement, HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.98; P = .03), but not overall survival (90.1% v 89.1%, HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.11), continued to be significantly improved for patients assigned exemestane + OFS over tamoxifen + OFS. Among patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative tumors (86.0% of the ITT population), the absolute improvement in 12-year overall survival with exemestane + OFS was 2.0% (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.04) and 3.3% in those who received chemotherapy (45.9% of the ITT population). Overall survival benefit was clinically significant in high-risk patients, eg, women age < 35 years (4.0%) and those with > 2 cm (4.5%) or grade 3 tumors (5.5%). These sustained reductions of the risk of recurrence with adjuvant exemestane + OFS, compared with tamoxifen + OFS, provide guidance for selecting patients for whom exemestane should be preferred over tamoxifen in the setting of OFS. [Media: see text]

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported. The Suppression of Ovarian Function Trial (SOFT; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00066690 ) randomly assigned premenopausal women with hormone receptor–positive breast cancer to 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen, tamoxifen plus ovarian function suppression (OFS), or exemestane plus OFS. The primary analysis compared disease-free survival (DFS) between tamoxifen plus OFS versus tamoxifen alone; exemestane plus OFS versus tamoxifen was a secondary objective. After 8 years, SOFT reported a significant reduction in recurrence and improved overall survival (OS) with adjuvant tamoxifen plus OFS versus tamoxifen alone. Here, we report outcomes after median follow-up of 12 years. DFS remained significantly improved with tamoxifen plus OFS versus tamoxifen (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.98) with a 12-year DFS of 71.9% with tamoxifen, 76.1% with tamoxifen plus OFS, and 79.0% with exemestane plus OFS. OS was improved with tamoxifen plus OFS versus tamoxifen (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.01) and was 86.8% with tamoxifen, 89.0% with tamoxifen plus OFS, and 89.4% with exemestane plus OFS at 12 years. Among those who received prior chemotherapy for human epidermal growth factor receptor-2–negative tumors, OS was 78.8% with tamoxifen, 81.1% with tamoxifen plus OFS, and 84.4% with exemestane plus OFS. In conclusion, after 12 years, there remains a benefit from including OFS in adjuvant endocrine therapy, with an absolute improvement in OS more apparent with higher baseline risk of recurrence. [Media: see text]

Abstract Tamoxifen (T) is a pro-drug that undergoes CYP2D6-mediated metabolic activation to metabolites that more potently inhibit estrogen stimulated growth compared to the parent drug. While many studies have examined the role of CYP2D6 genotype in T-treated postmenopausal women, the role of CYP2D6 metabolism in premenopausal women (pre-MW) receiving T, with or without ovarian function suppression (OFS) or exemestane (E) and OFS is unknown. Methods: SOFT randomized 3066 (pre-MW) from 2003-2011 in 27 countries, stratified according to prior receipt or nonreceipt of chemotherapy and nodal status, to receive 5 years of T, T+OFS, or E+OFS. We designed a pharmacogenetics substudy (activated October 2010) to collect blood DNA from North American (NA) patients (pts) or to extract non-tumor DNA from available formalin fixed paraffin embedded (FFPE) tissue blocks. For pts with a blood sample, CYP2D6 was genotyped beginning with the Luminex Tag-It Mutation Detection Kit and when needed, with a copy number variation assay and/or sequencing assays. For pts with FFPE-derived DNA, CYP2D6 genotyping for *3, *4, *6, *9, *10, *17 and *41 was performed using a Taqman Allelic Discrimination Assay. CYP2D6 phenotypes were called by classifying pts on the basis of a combination of poor (PM: *3, *4, *5, *6, *7, *8), slow (SM: *10), intermediate (IM: *9, *17, *29, *41) and extensive metabolizer alleles (EM; all others). Activity scores (AS) from phenotypes assigned for each allele: 0 if PM, 0.25 if SM, 0.5 if IM and 1 if EM allele, and multiplied x2 or x3 if duplicate or triplicate. With concomitant use of potent CYP2D6 inhibitor, AS=0; use of weak inhibitor subtracted 0.5. Metabolizer status was defined by CYP2D6 genotype alone or in combination with CYP2D6 inhibitor use at randomization from the AS: extensive (AS 1.25 to 3), intermediate (AS &gt;0.5 to &lt;1.25), slow/poor (AS 0 to 0.5) metabolizer status. The laboratory was blinded to all clinical data. The substudy primary objective was to assess the association between disease-free survival (DFS) and CYP2D6 metabolizer status in the T arm, and secondarily in the T + OFS, and E + OFS arms. A Cox model estimated hazard ratios comparing status according to treatment assignment, with prespecified prognostic factors. Results: 1200/3047 (39%) randomized pts in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population had successful CYP2D6 genotyping and 50% received prior chemotherapy. Following randomization, 435/1023 (42%) NA pts provided a blood sample and CYP2D6 genotypes were derived in 435/435. Non-tumor tissue was macrodissected from 1277 available FFPE blocks, resulting in DNA concentrations of &gt; 0.3 ng/ml in 1053, and successfully derived CYP2D6 genotypes for 765/3047 pts (25%). 182 (15%) pts had DFS events after 8 yrs median follow-up. Metabolizer status from genotype was 57% extensive, 29% intermediate, 15% slow/poor. Metabolizer status was not associated with DFS in pts assigned T alone (P=0.60; Table), nor in pts assigned T+OFS (P=0.41) or E+OFS (P=0.30). 11% of pts used CYP2D6 inhibitors concomitantly at randomization; for 8% it changed the metabolizer status. The results using this definition were consistent. Conclusion: This retrospective-prospective SOFT pharmacogenetics substudy found no relation of CYP2D6 metabolizer status with DFS in premenopausal pts receiving T, T + OFS, or E + OFS. Given that 50% were pretreated with chemotherapy, further study is needed regarding the role of CYP2D6 metabolism in patients treated with T monotherapy. TableTreatment GroupN pts (N events)Comparison (N pts)Hazard Ratio95% CITamoxifen324 (56)Intermediate (114) vs Extensive (210)0.780.43-1.39Tamoxifen265 (52)Slow/Poor (55) vs Extensive (210)1.110.58-2.13Tamoxifen + OFS357 (46)Intermediate (122) vs Extensive (235)0.730.38-1.40Tamoxifen + OFS299 (45)Slow/Poor (64) vs Extensive (235)1.250.64-2.43Exemestane + OFS344 (46)Intermediate (107) vs Extensive (237)0.590.28-1.22Exemestane + OFS293 (47)Slow/Poor (56) vs Extensive (237)1.130.56-2.27 Citation Format: Matthew P. Goetz, Gini F. Fleming, Mary Kuffel, John R. Hawse, John L. Black, Richard Weinshilboum, James N. Ingle, Patrizia dell’Orto, Olivia Biasi, Roswitha Kammler, Sherene Loi, Marco Colleoni, Giuseppe Viale, Prudence A Francis, Meredith M Regan. The role of CYP2D6 mediated tamoxifen metabolism in the suppression of ovarian function trial (SOFT) [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 PD2-09.

Abstract Background: Several studies suggest clinical utility of serial circulating tumor cell (CTC) enumeration as a means of assessing response status in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). The aim of this study is to conduct a comprehensive pooled analysis comprising globally available data to further define and explore the role of CTC enumeration as a tool for early treatment monitoring in patients with MBC with a focus on the predictive power in different breast cancer subtypes and clinical settings. Methods: In a global effort, peer-reviewed published studies with data on repeated CTC assessments (CellSearch® technology; Menarini Silicon Biosystems; Bologna, Italy) in MBC patients were screened and investigators were asked to provide individual patient data for this pooled analysis. 2761 cases from 32 data sets with data on both baseline and one follow up CTC assessments were included in the analysis (median time interval between the two CTC assessments 35 days). Data were analyzed using log rank tests and Cox regressions to evaluate the association between serial CTC enumeration results and overall survival (OS) in the full patient cohort and defined subgroups. Results: 588 (21.3%) patients had no CTCs at both time points (neg/neg), 236 (8.5%) patients were CTC negative at baseline and CTC positive at follow up (neg/pos), 712 (25.8%) patients converted from CTC positive at baseline to CTC negative (pos/neg), and 1225 (44.4%) patients had at least one CTC at both time points (pos/pos). Log rank tests showed significant differences in OS between these four CTC change groups (p &lt; 0.0001 for all pairwise comparisons except for the comparison between neg/pos and pos/neg, p = 0.015). Median OS for the neg/neg, neg/pos, pos/neg and pos/pos group was 45.6, 26.1, 34.6, and 17.6 months, respectively. Hazard ratios (HR) (reference group neg/neg) were 1.38 (95% CI 1.16 - 1.64) for the pos/neg group, 1.78 (95% CI 1.43 - 2.22) for the neg/pos group, and 3.06 (95% CI 2.63 - 3.56) for the pos/pos group. Results were similar if a cutoff of 5 CTCs was used for CTC positivity (pos/neg group: HR 1.43, 95% CI 1.25 - 1.63; neg/pos group: HR 2.39, 95% CI 1.91 - 2.99; pos/pos group: HR 3.54, 95% CI 3.12 - 4.02). In total, 2586 patients could be assigned to different tumor subtypes based on known hormone receptor (ER) and HER2 status of the primary tumor: 1513 (58.5%) patients had a luminal-like tumor (ER positive, HER2 negative), 682 (26.4%) patients had a HER2-positive tumor, and 391 (15.1%) patients had a triple-negative tumor. In patients with luminal-like tumors, the hazard ratios were 1.67 (95% CI 1.29 - 2.17), 2.01 (95% CI 1.45 - 2.77), and 3.87 (95% CI 3.09 - 4.83) for the pos/neg, neg/pos, and pos/pos group, respectively. In patients with HER2-positive tumors, the neg/pos group (HR 1.68, 95% CI 1.12 - 2.53) and the pos/pos group (HR 2.11, 95% CI 1.58 - 2.83) showed significantly worse OS compared to the neg/neg group, while in triple-negative patients, the pos/pos group had a significantly shorter OS compared to the neg/neg group (HR 2.99, 95% CI 2.11 - 4.24). The results will be up-dated by inclusion of additional large data sets (CALGB 40502, CALGB 40503, COMET, SWOG S0500, TBCRC 001) for the analysis to be presented at SABCS 2020. Conclusion: This large pooled analysis confirms that at a median of 35 days after treatment initiation, follow-up CTC assessments strongly predict overall survival. These results suggest potential clinical utility of CTC monitoring as early response marker in MBC, especially in luminal-like tumors. Citation Format: Wolfgang J Janni, Tracy C. Yab, Daniel F. Hayes, Massimo Cristofanilli, Francois-Clement Bidard, Michail Ignatiadis, Meredith M. Regan, Catherine Alix-Panabières, William E. Barlow, Carlos Caldas, Lisa A. Carey, Luc Dirix, Tanja Fehm, Jose A. Garcia-Saenz, Paola Gazzaniga, Daniele Generali, Lorenzo Gerratana, Rafael Gisbert-Criado, William Jacot, Zefei Jiang, Evi Lianidou, Mark J.M. Magbanua, Luis Manso, Dimitrios Mavroudis, Volkmar Müller, Elisabetta Munzone, Klaus Pantel, Jean-Yves Pierga, Brigitte Rack, Sabine Riethdorf, Hope S. Rugo, Kostandinos Sideras, Stefan Sleijfer, Jeffrey Smerage, Justin Stebbing, Leon W.M.M. Terstappen, José Vidal-Martínez, Rita Zamarchi, Karthik Giridhar, Thomas W.P. Friedl, Minetta C. Liu. Clinical utility of repeated circulating tumor cell (CTC) enumeration as early treatment monitoring tool in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) - a global pooled analysis with individual patient data [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 GS4-08.