Lustberg, Maryam B.

PURPOSE Hot flashes are a common side effect reported by men receiving androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) for the treatment of prostate cancer. We sought to determine whether oxybutynin could improve hot flash symptoms in men with prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with prostate cancer receiving a stable regimen of ADT with at least 28 hot flashes per week were randomly assigned to receive either oxybutynin 2.5 mg twice daily, oxybutynin 5 mg twice daily, or matching placebo for 6 weeks. The primary end point was the change in patient-reported hot flash scores since baseline at 6 weeks. Additional outcomes included incidence of adverse events (AEs), changes since baseline in Hot Flash–Related Daily Interference Scale (HFRDIS) scores, and patient-reported symptoms. RESULTS Eighty-eight patients were enrolled, with the 81 participants eligible for final analysis reporting an average of 10.1 (standard deviation [SD], 5.55) hot flashes per day and an average daily hot flash score of 18.2 (SD, 13.5) included in final analysis. On average, patients on the placebo arm, 2.5 mg oxybutynin arm, and 5 mg oxybutynin arm had reductions in hot flashes/day of 2.15, 4.77 ( P = .02), and 6.89 ( P < .001), respectively. Daily hot flash scores for placebo, 2.5 mg oxybutynin, and 5 mg oxybutynin reduced by an average of 4.85, 9.94 ( P = .07), and 13.95 ( P = .002) points, respectively. No treatment-related grade 3+ AEs occurred. HFRDIS total scores improved by 14.2 and 20.7 points in the 2.5 mg ( P = .042) and 5 mg ( P < .01) oxybutynin arms, respectively, compared with a 3.1-point improvement with placebo. CONCLUSION Oxybutynin is superior to a placebo for the management of ADT-associated hot flashes in men with prostate cancer.

1114 Background: While treatment and management of TNBC has improved, there is a need for novel prognostic biomarkers to better inform outcomes and guide therapeutic options. ILF2 is a poorly characterized protein with pleiotropic functions that is highly expressed in TNBC. Here we evaluated the associations of ILF2 with 1) genomic and transcriptomic data, 2) tumor microenvironment (TME), and 3) clinical outcomes in TNBC. Methods: 15,544 breast cancer (BC) samples, including 3,038 TNBC, were tested by NGS (592, NextSeq; WES, NovaSeq) and WTS (NovaSeq; Caris Life Sciences, Phoenix, AZ). ILF2 -high (H) and ILF2 -low(L) TNBC were defined by respective quartiles. Immune cell fractions were estimated by WTS deconvolution (Quantiseq). Real world overall survival (OS) was obtained from insurance claims and calculated from tissue collection to last contact using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Statistical significance was determined by chi-square, Fisher’s exact, and Mann-Whitney U test with p-values adjustments (q < .05). Results: ILF2 expression (median Log2(TPM+1) was higher (all q < .05) in key subgroups: ductal compared to lobular carcinoma (6.4 vs 6.0); primary compared to metastatic BC (6.4 vs 6.3); African American compared to White (6.4 vs 6.3); basal compared to luminal A, luminal B, HER2 PAM50 subtypes (6.9 vs 5.8, 6.3, 6.3); and TNBC compared to HR+HER2+, HR-HER2+, HR+HER2- subtypes (6.7 vs 6.3, 6.4, 6.2). Biopsied tissues from primary TNBC (pTNBC) and metastatic TNBC (mTNBC) patients were stratified into ILF2- H and ILF2- L groups. In both mTNBC and pTNBC, ILF2- H groups had 1) higher percentage of young patients (age < 50) (pTNBC: 35.5% vs 19.8%; mTNBC: 28.1% vs 17.3%; all q < .05); 2) higher mutation frequency of TP53 (pTNBC: 94.5% vs 79.6%; mTNBC: 92.4% vs 74.4%), but lower frequencies for PIK3CA ( pTNBC: 5.1% vs 23.4% , mTNBC: 8.8% vs 27.4%), CDH1 ( pTNBC: 0.8% vs 6.1%; mTNBC: 2.8% vs 12.2%; all q < .05); 3) higher infiltration of NK cells (pTNBC: 3% vs 2.6%; mTNBC: 2.8% vs 2.6%), but lower infiltration of M2 Mφ (pTNBC: 2.5% vs 3.3%; mTNBC: 2.6% vs 3.2%) and Tregs (pTNBC: 1.5% vs 1.9%; mTNBC: 1.4% vs 1.7%; all q < .05); 4) higher expression levels of immune checkpoint ( CD274, PDCD1LG2, CTLA4, LAG3, HAVCR2, FOXP3, IDO1, CD276 , FC: 1.2-3.1; all q < .05), stem cell genes (C D44, NANOG, POU5F1, KLF4, ALDH1A1 , FC: 1.4-2.4; all q < .05), and drug efflux genes ( ABCC3, ABCC11, ABCC2, ABCB1, ABCG2, ABCC1 , FC: 1.1-4.5; all q < .05) compared to ILF2- L group. In pTNBC, ILF2- H had significantly shorter OS vs ILF2- L group (22.3 vs 28.9 months, HR 1.2 [95% CI 1-1.5], p = .03), but no significant differences were observed between mTNBC ILF2 groups (HR 1.1 [95% CI 0.93-1.3], p = .2). Conclusions: ILF2 -H TNBC patients showed differential genomic and transcriptomic alterations that relate to therapy resistance, immune suppressive TME, and shorter OS. Further studies are warranted to validate the effects of ILF2 upregulation on therapeutic efficacy.

1107 Background: Chronic stress-mediated β2-adrenergic receptor (β2-AR) signaling promotes tumor growth via immunosuppression in the tumor microenvironment (TME) in preclinical models. Blockade of β2-AR has shown higher survival benefit in patients with TNBC in observational studies compared to other breast cancer (BC) subtypes. However, the molecular and immunological features associated with ADRB2 (gene for β2-AR) gene expression in TNBC are unknown, prompting this investigation. Methods: 3,038 TNBC samples were analyzed via NGS (592-gene panel, NextSeq; WES/WTS, NovaSeq; Caris Life Sciences, Phoenix, AZ). Immune cell fractions were calculated by deconvolution of WTS: Quantiseq. TNBC ADRB2 -high(H) and ADRB2 -low(L) RNA expression were classified as above or below the 50 th percentile, respectively. Real-world overall survival (OS) was obtained from insurance claims and calculated from tissue collection to last contact using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Statistical significance was assessed using chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests with multiple comparison adjustments (q < 0.05). Results: ADRB2 gene expression was lowest in TNBC (median (TPM: 1.6) compared to N = 453 HR-HER2+ (1.9), N = 629 HR+HER2+ (2.0) and N = 4,918 HR+HER2- (2.2) BC (all q < 0.05). African American or Black patients (N = 670) had lower expression of ADRB2 compared to European American or White (N = 1,412) TNBC patients (1.3 vs 1.7, q < 0.05). ADRB2 -H TNBC had higher mutation frequency of PIK3CA (21% vs 15.4%), CDH1 (7% vs 3.5%), NF1 (8% vs 4%), AKT1 (3.5% vs 2.1%), but lower frequency of TP53 (81.6% vs 87.5%), NOTCH1 (2.5% vs 4.5%) and NOTCH3 (4.4% vs 11.7%) compared to ADRB2 -L, all q < 0.05. ADRB2 -H had greater PD-L1 (22C3) positivity (39.1% vs 30.2%, q < 0.05), higher % of B cells (4.5 vs 3.4), M1 Mφ (3.4 vs 2.8), M2 Mφ (3.9 vs 2.2), Tregs (2.2 vs 1.3), NK cells (3.1 vs 2.6), DC (3.1 vs 2.9), CD8 + T cells (0.9 vs 0.2), all q < 0.05. ADRB2 -H TNBC had higher T-cell inflamed score (95 vs -80), IFN γ score (-0.23 vs -0.37), MAPK activation score (-0.46 vs -1.7), all q < 0.05; and higher expression of immune checkpoint genes ( CD274, PDCD1, PDCD1LG2, CTLA4, LAG3, HAVCR2, FOXP3, IDO1, TNFSF14, TIGIT, BTLA, CEACAM1, CD47, CD274 ; fold change: 1.6-3.7, all q < 0.05). ADRB2 -H tumors had higher expression of genes related to inflammatory response, IFNγ response, IL6-JAK-STAT3 signaling (normalized enrichment score (NES): 1.9 – 2.1), while ADRB2 -L had enrichment of MYC targets V1, MYC targets V2, E2F targets and G2M checkpoint (NES: 2.5 – 4.2), all FDR < 0.01. ADRB2 -H TNBC had better OS (mOS: 23.6 vs 18.6 months; HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.73-0.89, p < 0.0001) compared to ADRB2 -L. Conclusions: High ADRB2 expression in TNBC is associated with better survival and an immune enriched TME, elevated immune checkpoints and other targetable vulnerabilities. Future studies are needed to investigate ADRB2 as a potential stress biomarker and therapeutic target.

1106 Background: TNBC, although an aggressive breast cancer (BC) subtype, is highly immunogenic and the only BC subtype where the ICI pembrolizumab is approved. However, predictive biomarkers for pembrolizumab benefit are limited. The chemokines CXCL9 and CXCL10 attract CD8 + T cells into the tumor microenvironment (TME) and are associated with chemotherapy benefit, but little is known about their role in prediciting pembrolizumab benefit in TNBC. We investigated the association of CXCL9 , CXCL10 and their cognate receptor CXCR3 with TME and ICI efficacy. Methods: 3,038 TNBC samples were analyzed via NGS (592-gene panel, NextSeq; WES/WTS, NovaSeq; Caris Life Sciences, Phoenix, AZ). Tumor mutational burden (TMB) totaled somatic mutations per tumor (high > 10 mt/MB). Immune cell fractions were estimated using WTS deconvolution (Quantiseq). CXCL9 / CXCL10 / CXCR3 -high (H) and -low (L) tumors were classified by RNA expression above or below the 50th percentile. Real-world overall survival (OS) was derived from insurance claims and calculated from start of pembrolizumab to last contact using Kaplan-Meier. Statistical significance was assessed using chi-square and Mann-Whitney U with multiple comparison adjustments (q < .05). Results: TNBC expressed higher levels of CXCL9 and CXCL10 (median (TPM): 5.3 and 14.7) compared to N = 1,082 HER2+ (4.8 and 10.3, p < 0.05) and N = 4,918 HR+HER2- (2.7 and 7, q < .05) BC. CXCR3 expression was higher in TNBC compared to HR+HER2- (1.9 vs 1.7, q < .05), but no difference when compared to HER2+ (1.9 vs 2, q = 0.97) BC. CXCL9 / CXCL10 / CXCR3 -H TNBC had higher median OS post pembrolizumab [ CXCL9 -H vs -L: 26.5 vs 15.7 months (mo), HR: 0.65 (95% CI 0.5-0.84); CXCL10 -H vs -L: 26.0 vs 20.6 mo, HR 0.74 (0.57-0.95); CXCR3 -H vs -L: 32.6 vs 18.3 mo, HR 0.68 (0.52-0.88), all p < 0.05 ]. CXCL9 -H, CXCL10 -H and CXCR3 -H had higher PD-L1 positivity (22C3), TMB high, higher T cell inflamed score, TP53 mutations, elevated B and CD8 + T cells infiltration, but not neutrophils, and higher expression of immune checkpoint genes (Table). Conclusions: High CXCL9 / CXCL10 / CXCR3 expression is associated with longer survival in patients with TNBC post pembrolizumab, and characterized by an immune-enriched TME. Further investigation is needed to evaluate this chemokine axis in TNBC and its potential as a therapeutic target to enhance ICI efficacy. TME characteristics by CXCL9, CXCL10 and CXCR3 expression. CXCL9 CXCL10 CXCR3 High Low q-value High Low q-value High Low q-value PD-L1 % 54 14 <.05 54 14.7 <.05 49 19 <.05 TMB high % 14.3 8 <.05 12.6 9.7 <.05 12.4 9.8 <.05 B cell (median %) 4.4 3.5 <.05 4.3 3.6 <.05 5 3.4 <.05 CD8+T cell (median %) 1.2 0 <.05 1 0 <.05 1.3 0 <.05 Neutrophil (median %) 4.2 4.5 <.05 4.2 4.4 <.05 4.2 4.3 0.2 T cell inflamed score 100 -84 <.05 98 -84 <.05 108 -100 <.05 CTLA4 (median TPM) 3.2 0.7 <.05 3 0.8 <.05 3.4 0.7 <.05 LAG3 (median TPM) 6.6 2.1 <.05 6.9 2 <.05 6.8 2 <.05 TP53 mutation % 88 81 <.05 90.5 78.6 <.05 86 83 0.08

1098 Background: Leucine-rich repeat-containing protein 15 ( LRRC15) has emerged as a potential biomarker and therapeutic target for various cancers due to its high expression in cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs) and role in tumor progression. High LRRC15 expression is associated with poor prognosis in TNBC. This study aims to define the multiomic profile of LRRC15 in TNBC. Methods: 3,038 TNBC samples were analyzed via Next-Generation Sequencing (592, NextSeq; Whole Exome Sequencing, NovaSeq) and Whole Transcriptome Sequencing (NovaSeq; Caris Life Sciences, AZ). Immune cell fractions were estimated using WTS deconvolution (Quantiseq). Stromal cell abundance in the tumor microenvironment (TME) was estimated from RNA expression profiles using MCP Counter. LRRC15 -high (H) and -low (L) tumors were classified by RNA expression above or below the 25th percentile. Real-world overall survival (OS) and treatment-related survival were derived from insurance claims and calculated from tissue collection or treatment initiation to last contact using Kaplan-Meier. Statistical significance was assessed using chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests with multiple comparison adjustments (q < .05). Results: LRRC15 -H TNBC tumors had higher frequency of PIK3CA (25.9% vs 16.8), PIK3R1 (6.2% vs 1.6%), PTEN (11.3% vs 5.8%), but lower frequency of RB1 (7.8% vs 12.1%) and KMT2D (2% vs 4.4%) compared to LRRC15 -L, all q < 0.05. LRRC15 -H had higher PD-L1 positivity (32.3% vs 24.5%, q < 0.05). Analysis of immune cells showed LRRC15 -H TNBC had higher infiltration of B cells (4.2% vs 3.5%), M1 macrophages (4.3% vs 2%), M2 macrophages (4% vs 2.5%), Tregs (1.9% vs 1.1%), neutrophils (4.9% vs 3.9%), CD8 + T cells (0.4% vs 0.1%), but lower dendritic cells (2.5% vs 3%), all q < 0.05. LRRC15 -H tumors had greater abundance of CAFs (575.6 vs 93.78, 6.14 fold change (FC)) and endothelial cells (7.3 vs 3.7, 1.97 FC), all q < 0.05. LRRC15 -H had higher T-cell inflamed score (71.5 vs -77) and IFNg score (-0.14 vs -1.72), all q < 0.05. LRRC15 -H tumors had higher expression of immune checkpoint genes ( CD274, PDCD1, PDCD1LG2, CTLA4, LAG3, HAVCR2, FOXP3, IDO1, TNFSF14, TIGIT, BTLA, CEACAM1, CD47, CD80, CD86, CD160, CD274 ; FC 1.2-2.5, q < 0.05). LRRC15 -H was associated with better OS (mOS: 24.7 vs 13.6 months; HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.53-0.7, p < 0.001). Post-pembrolizumab survival was longer for LRRC15 -H patients (mOS: 27.2 vs 19.4 months; HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.42-0.89, p = 0.01). Conclusions: LRRC15 -H TNBC exhibited better outcomes with pembrolizumab, likely due to higher immune cell fractions and increased CAFs. These findings highlight TNBC heterogeneity and position LRRC15 as a potential biomarker for tumor stratification, a possible adverse prognostic biomarker and a positive predictive biomarker. Ongoing phase I trials targeting LRRC15 show promise. Combining LRRC15 -targeted therapies with immunotherapy may improve TNBC outcomes, warranting further validation in breast cancer models.

1051 Background: Hispanics or Latinos (HL) and African Americans or Black (AA) have a higher prevalence of advanced-stage breast cancer (BC) at diagnosis compared to Non-Hispanic Whites (NHW). To understand the role of immune system, we evaluated the tumor immune microenvironment (TIME) by race/ethnicity among HL, AA, and NHW BC patients. Methods: 15544BC samples were tested by NGS (592, NextSeq; WES, NovaSeq) and WTS (NovaSeq; Caris Life Sciences, Phoenix, AZ). Race/ethnicity data is self-reported. Immune cell were estimated using WTS deconvolution (Quantiseq). Gene expression profiles were analyzed for T-cell inflammation score (TIS) and interferon-gamma (IFN-gamma) score. Real-world overall survival (OS) was obtained from insurance claims and calculated from date of tumor biopsy to last contact using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Statistical significance was determined by chi-square and Mann-Whitney U test with p -values adjusted for multiple comparisons (q < .05). Results: 7170 NHW (35.3%, N = 2528) biopsied (bx) from primary breast cancer (pBC), 64.7% (N = 4642) metastatic bx (mBC), 1,508 AA (pBC 39.3% N = 592, mBC 60.7% N = 916), and 1,754 HL (pBC 44.1% N = 774, mBC 55.9% N = 980) cases were included. By subtype, there were 1,956 (60.4% NHW, 20.7% NHB, 18.9% HL) TNBC, 3425 HR+/HER2- (72.6% NHW, 11.9% NHB, 15.6% HL), and 694 HER2+ (64.6% NHW, 15.7% NHB, 19.7% HL). Across all cases, AA (20.5%) and HL (20.4%) had greater incidence (%) of PD-L1+ cases versus (vs) NHW (17.4%), all q < .05. TMB-High (³10 mut/Mb) was similar in NHW (11.5%), AA (10.8%), and HL (10.9%). AA tumors had lower median % cell infiltration of M2-like macrophages (M2 Mφ), B cells, and neutrophils vs NHW (Table). HL had a lower fraction of M2 Mφ and higher CD8+ T cells (Table). AA had lower TIS (-8 vs 1, p = .02) while HL had lower IFN-gamma (-0.38 vs. -0.35, q < .05) vs NHW. By subtype, AA had lower neutrophils (4% vs 4.3%) and increased DC fractions (3.1% vs 2.8%) in TNBC vs NHW, all q < .05; no significant changes seen in HL vs NHW. AA had worse mOS than NHW overall (31.8 vs 36.8 months (mo)), HR 1.1, 95% CI 1 – 1.2, p = < .01), in pBC (40.3 vs 49.9 mo, HR 1.3, 95% CI 1.1 – 1.5, p = < .01), but not mBC (27.4 vs 29.1 mo, HR 1, p = 0.2). HL had similar mOS vs NHW overall (37.4 vs 36.8 mo, HR 0.9, p = 0.9) and in mBC (29.1 vs 31 mo, HR 0.96, p = 0.4), but worse mOS in pBC (44.7 vs 50.0 mo, HR 1.1, 95% CI 1 – 1.3, p = .01). Conclusions: Our study shows worse mOS in AA and HL pBC cases vs NHW, possibly from a less inflamed TIME in AA and HL and lower fraction of neutrophils and M2 Mφ despite higher % of PD-L1+. Targeting Mφ and CD8+ T cells and converting cold to hot TIME may lessen race/ethnic disparities, especially in early-stage BC. Immune cell fraction of NHW, AA and HL BC. NHW (median %) AA (median %) HL (median %) q-valueNHW vs AA q-value NHW vs HL B cell 5.2 4.8 5.0 <.05 0.7 DC 2.6 2.7 2.6 0.08 0.4 M1 Mφ 2.5 2.4 2.4 0.4 0.9 M2 Mφ 4.6 3.7 4.2 <.05 <.05 Neutrophils 3.7 3.5 3.4 <.05 <.05 NK cell 2.9 2.9 2.9 0.7 0.6 CD8+ T cell 0.1 0.15 0.26 0.8 <.05 Treg 1.5 1.5 1.6 0.6 <.05

569 Background: Several studies established the prognostic role of both the amount and locations of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in TNBC. Three distinct immunotypes were described based on the amount and locations of TILs: immune enriched (IN), immune excluded, and immune desert. Using single-cell spatial transcriptomic analysis in the Mayo Clinic TNBC cohort, our previous studies showed the central role of interferon (IFN) signaling in IN phenotype. Herein, we evaluated the association between IFN and outcomes in TNBC in 3 independent datasets. Methods: NanoString IO360 was performed in 114 samples from FinXX (NCT00114816) to generate 22-gene IFNα and 33-gene IFNγ signatures. RNA sequencing was performed in 388 samples from CALGB 40603 (NCT00861705). 3038 TNBC samples were tested by WTS (NovaSeq; Caris Life Sciences, Phoenix, AZ). Median values were used as cut-offs for high vs low IFNγ RNA expression and 18-gene IFNγ signature scores. Caris Life Science CODEai was used to evaluate real-world overall survival (OS) obtained from insurance claims and calculated from tissue collection to last contact using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Chi-square, Mann-Whitney U, ANOVA, and Cox regression were used. Results: A high 22-gene IFNα signature score was associated with significantly improved recurrence-free survival (RFS) in FinXX (hazard ratio [HR] 0.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.14-0.74, p 0.007) and OS (HR 0.28, 95%CI 0.12-0.66, p 0.003). Similar findings were observed with 33-gene IFNγ signature with significant improvement in RFS (HR 0.21, 95%CI 0.09-0.51, p < 0.001) and OS (HR 0.18, 95%CI 0.08-0.44, p < 0.001). Furthermore, in CALGB 40603, both IFNα and IFNγ scores were positively associated with pathologic complete response (pCR: IFNα p 0.019 and IFNγ p 0.007) and residual cancer burden (RCB: IFNα p 0.044 and IFNγ p 0.013). Using the Caris data platform to further validate, we identified 2899 TNBC patients (pts) with genomic and clinical outcome data. High IFNγ expression was associated with significant improvement in OS (25.95 vs 17.43 months; HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.59 – 0.72, p < 0.001). Similarly, pts with high IFNγ signature scores had significant improvement in median OS (25.79 vs 16.22 months; HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.6 – 0.73, p < 0.001). Conclusions: This study underscores the pivotal role of IFN signaling in TNBC. High IFNα and IFNγ signatures were consistently associated with improved RFS, OS, higher pCR rates, and lower RCB across clinical trial cohorts and real-world data. These findings signify IFN signaling as a potential key biomarker and therapeutic target in TNBC. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882, U24CA196171; Breast Cancer Research Foundation, Mayo Clinic Breast Cancer SPORE (P50CA116201-17), Bankhead Coley, W81XWH-15-1-0292, P50CA015083, R35CA253187; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org . Genentech. Clinical trial information: NCT00114816 and NCT00861705 .

570 Background: Major histocompatibility complex class I (MHC I) plays a critical role in immune surveillance by binding peptides derived from intracellular proteins and presenting them on the cell surface for recognition by CD8+ T cells. Loss or downregulation of MHC I expression has been identified as a key mechanism of immune evasion in cancers. Here, we evaluated MHC I expression and outcomes in all subtypes of breast cancer (BC). Methods: 9,038 BC samples were analyzed via NGS (592-gene panel, NextSeq; WES/WTS, NovaSeq; Caris Life Sciences, Phoenix, AZ), including triple-negative BC (TNBC) 3,038, HER2-positive (HER2+) 1,082, and hormone receptor-positive (HR+HER2-) 4,918. Immune cell fractions were estimated using WTS deconvolution (Quantiseq). MHC I ( HLA-A / HLA-B / HLA-C )-high (H) and -low (L) were classified by RNA expression above or below the 25th percentile. Real-world overall survival (OS) was derived from insurance claims and calculated from tissue collection to last contact using Kaplan-Meier. NanoString IO360 was performed in 114 samples from the FinXX trial (NCT00114816). Statistical significance was assessed using chi-square, Mann-Whitney U, ANOVA, and Cox regression with multiple comparison adjustments (q<.05). Results: TNBC had higher expression of HLA-A and HLA-B (median TPM: 169 and 191) compared to HER2+ (146.6 and 170, q<0.05) and HR+HER2- (141.7 and 157.5, q<0.05). However, there was no significant difference in HLA-C expression across 3 BC subtypes. In TNBC, MHC I-H tumors had higher frequencies of PD-L1 positivity (66.2% vs. 13.1%) as well as higher infiltration of B cells (4.5% vs. 3.2%), M1 macrophages (5% vs. 1.5%), M2 macrophages (4% vs. 2.1%), Tregs (2.8% vs. 0.8%), CD8 + T cells (1.8% vs. 0%), dendritic cells (3.2% vs. 2.8%), higher T-cell inflamed score (137 vs. -144), and IFN g score (0.02 vs. -0.49) compared to MHC I-L TNBC (all q<.05). MHC I-H TNBC was associated with significant improvement in median OS (30.1 vs. 15.2 months, HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.46-0.65, p<0.0001). However, this survival difference was not observed in patients with MHC I-H vs. MHC I-L in HER2+ (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.74-1.47, p = 0.81) and HR+HER2- (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.75-1.02, p= 0.09) BC subtypes. We further validated the MHC I expression in the FinXX trial. Similarly, patients with MHC I-H had significant improvement in recurrence-free survival (HR 0.27, 95%CI 0.11-0.66, p = 0.002) and OS (HR 0.23, 95% CI 0.09-0.57, p = 0.0005) compared to MHC I-L. Conclusions: Our findings demonstrate that higher MHC I expression is associated with higher immune infiltration and improved outcomes in TNBC but not in HER2+ or HR+HER2- BC subtypes. These results suggest that MHC I expression plays a critical role in the tumor microenvironment of TNBC. Future studies are needed to evaluate the prognostic value and potential therapeutic target of MHC I in TNBC. Support: Breast Cancer Research Foundation, Bankhead Coley, W81XWH-18-1-0564. Clinical trial information: NCT00114816 .

Abstract Purpose: Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a debilitating toxicity of many drugs used in cancer treatment. There are numerous available strategies for preventing or treating CIPN, but few are guideline-recommended, due to limited evidence of their effectiveness. The primary objective of this survey was to understand what strategies patients used to prevent or treat CIPN, and to understand their perceptions around CIPN prevention and treatment. Methods: The Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) Neurological Complications Study Group created a cross-sectional online survey to recruit individuals who are currently or had previously received neurotoxic chemotherapy treatment and self-reported peripheral neuropathy. Descriptive statistics were reported. Results: Most of the 447 survey participants did not use any CIPN prevention strategy (71%), though given options of any strategy the plurality preferred a prescribed medication or supplement (30%). The most common treatment strategy used was exercise (47%), with some patients trying prescription medications including non-guideline recommended gabapentin (33%) or guideline-recommended duloxetine (8%) options. Nearly half of participants (49%) used at least one non-prescribed medication for treating CIPN. Patient’s often followed suggestions of their medical oncology clinical team, but sometimes relied on the internet or other patients to recommend non-prescription strategies. Conclusion: In the absence of many guideline-recommended strategies for CIPN prevention and treatment, some patients use options with minimal evidence of effectiveness. Additional research is needed to determine which strategies are effective for prevention and treatment so these can be implemented in practice to improve treatment outcomes in patients with cancer.

Abstract Background: Eyebrow and eyelash loss, known as madarosis, can occur secondary to breast cancer-directed therapy. However, the incidence and predictors of this phenomenon are not well-known. The purpose of this study is to ascertain the proportion of breast cancer survivors who experience madarosis, potential contributing factors to eyebrow and eyelash loss, and associations between this symptom and mental health. Methods: Breast cancer survivors were invited to participate in an ongoing longitudinal cohort study, the Mayo Clinic Breast Disease Registry (MCBDR), after having been seen at least once for breast cancer at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN. Those who consented were mailed a survey approximately one year after diagnosis. Respondents were asked to report their degree of eyebrow and eyelash loss experienced since their diagnosis on a 4-point scale of “no loss” (0) to “complete loss” (3). The proportions of participants who reported eyebrow and eyelash loss were evaluated overall and according to treatment type by descriptive statistics. Relationships between eyebrow and eyelash loss and mental health scores collected using the PROMIS-10 project scales (ranging from 0-20), with the poorest mental health indicated by scores under 8, were explored. Results: 838 registry participants responded to the year 1 survey’s alopecia questions. The median age of breast cancer survivors was 59.4 years (range 22-100 years). The majority were diagnosed at stage I-II (69%). 315 (37%) had received chemotherapy (+/- endocrine therapy), 415 (50%) had received endocrine therapy only, and 108 (13%) had received neither. Nearly half reported eyebrow loss (49%) or eyelash loss (49%). Eyebrow loss was reported by 89% of chemotherapy recipients, 27% of endocrine therapy only recipients, and 19% of those not treated with chemotherapy or endocrine therapy. 102 (32%) of those with chemotherapy-associated eyebrow loss reported that it was complete. Eyelash loss was reported by 274 (87%) of chemotherapy recipients, 112 (27%) of endocrine therapy only recipients, and 23 (21%) of those who received neither. Although no formal statistical testing was performed, there was a numerically higher proportion of patients with eyebrow and/or eyelash loss who reported poor mental health. Conclusions: Madarosis is a bothersome symptom in cancer survivors, particularly after chemotherapy. Future investigation into the incidence, predictors, and treatment of anti-neoplastic medication-related madarosis is needed. Table. Global mental health scores on PROMIS scale for eyebrow and eyelash loss Citation Format: Sarah Premji, Kathryn Ruddy, Nicole Larson, Charles Loprinzi, Brittany Dulmage, Maryam Lustberg, Fergus Couch, Janet Olson, Elizabeth Cathcart-Rake. Eyebrow and eyelash loss in breast cancer survivors [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 PO5-12-10.