Loibl, Sibylle

Background Polygenic risk score (PRS), calculated based on genome-wide association studies (GWASs), can improve breast cancer (BC) risk assessment. To date, most BC GWASs have been performed in individuals of European (EUR) ancestry, and the generalisation of EUR-based PRS to other populations is a major challenge. In this study, we examined the performance of EUR-based BC PRS models in Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) women. Methods We generated PRSs based on data on EUR women from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC). We tested the performance of the PRSs in a cohort of 2161 AJ women from Israel (1437 cases and 724 controls) from BCAC (BCAC cohort from Israel (BCAC-IL)). In addition, we tested the performance of these EUR-based BC PRSs, as well as the established 313-SNP EUR BC PRS, in an independent cohort of 181 AJ women from Hadassah Medical Center (HMC) in Israel. Results In the BCAC-IL cohort, the highest OR per 1 SD was 1.56 (±0.09). The OR for AJ women at the top 10% of the PRS distribution compared with the middle quintile was 2.10 (±0.24). In the HMC cohort, the OR per 1 SD of the EUR-based PRS that performed best in the BCAC-IL cohort was 1.58±0.27. The OR per 1 SD of the commonly used 313-SNP BC PRS was 1.64 (±0.28). Conclusions Extant EUR GWAS data can be used for generating PRSs that identify AJ women with markedly elevated risk of BC and therefore hold promise for improving BC risk assessment in AJ women.

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]

518 Background: Body Mass Index (BMI) impacts breast cancer risk and prognosis. Conflicting results have been published regarding BMI as a predictive factor for endocrine therapy benefit. CDK4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) in combination with endocrine treatment (ET) are standard-of-care treatments for metastatic hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. In contrast to cytotoxic chemotherapy, CDK4/6i are given at a fixed dose irrespective of BMI or weight. The PALLAS trial compared the combination of the CDK4/6i palbociclib and adjuvant ET to ET alone in the early breast cancer setting. This analysis investigates the impact of BMI on the efficacy and the side effect profile of palbociclib (P) in the PALLAS trial. Methods: In this pre-planned analysis, patients (pts) enrolled in PALLAS were categorized according to BMI as underweight (BMI <18.5 kg/m2), normal weight (BMI 18.5-24.9 kg/m2), overweight (BMI 25-29.9 kg/m2) and obese (³30 kg/m2), respectively. Adverse event differences were assessed with Chi-squared tests. Time to early discontinuation of P was analyzed with Fine and Gray competing risk models. Cox models were used to investigate the association between BMI category and time to invasive disease-free survival (iDFS). Results: Of a total of 5698 pts included in this analysis, 68 (1.2%) were underweight, 2082 (36.5%) normal weight, 1818 (31.9%) overweight and 1730 (30.4%) obese at baseline. Significantly different rates of all grade neutropenia were observed in normal weight, overweight and obese pts with regard to total (88.5%, 85.7% and 74.7%), as well as grade 3 (64.1%, 62.0% and 43.9%) and grade 4 neutropenia (7.0%, 3.6% and 2.0%), respectively. The lower frequency and severity of neutropenia observed in overweight and obese pts was associated with a significant lower treatment discontinuation rate over time when compared to normal weight patients (overweight vs normal weight: HR 0.73 CI 0.63-0.84, p<0.0001, and obese vs normal weight: HR 0.65 CI 0.56-0.75, p<0.0001). In pts treated with P, neutropenia was the primary toxicity leading to treatment discontinuation in 21.1% of normal weight pts, 14.0% of overweight pts and 5.9% obese pts, respectively. Despite these observations, there was no statistically significant improvement in iDFS with the addition of P to ET in any weight category (normal weight HR 0.84 CI 0.63-1.12, overweight HR 1.10 CI 0.82-1.49 and obese HR 0.95 CI 0.69-1.30). Conclusions: This pre-planned analysis of outcomes by BMI in the PALLAS trial demonstrates significantly less frequent and less severe neutropenia in overweight and obese pts compared to those with normal weight, leading to significant lower treatment discontinuation rates. However, no difference in iDFS outcomes by BMI was observed. Additional long-term follow-up will further evaluate whether BMI ultimately impacts outcome. Clinical trial information: NCT02513394.

Abstract Background: Quality of life (QOL) in breast cancer patients (pts) can be greatly impacted by initial treatment and ongoing therapy, particularly if side effects and symptoms are not well tolerated. The PALLAS trial investigated whether the addition of 2 years of palbociclib (palbo) to adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) improved invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) over adjuvant ET alone. We report on the main patient-reported outcome (PRO) quality of life (QOL) and symptom severity results of this trial by treatment arm. Methods: PALLAS is an ongoing multicenter, open label phase 3 trial that enrolled hormone receptor positive, HER2-negative, stage II-III breast cancer patients at 406 cancer centers across 21 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either 2 years of palbo (125mg/day, 3 weeks on 1 week off) plus ongoing provider or patient-choice adjuvant ET (palbo+ET) versus ongoing ET alone. The primary study endpoint was iDFS. Treatment with palbo in all pts stopped at the time of the second interim analysis (5/2020) due to futility; all pts then moved to follow up. The PRO analyses were triggered for completion after awareness of the pre-specified 469 iDFS cases in November 2020. Eight PRO endpoints were measured serially (i.e., day 1 of each monthly cycle for the first 3 months, then every 3 months for the first 2 years, and once at year 3). The endpoints were the EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status/QOL score, the Brief Fatigue Inventory score, the modified Brief Pain Inventory severity and pain interference scores, the EORTC QLQ-BR23 alopecia score, and the Breast Cancer Prevention Trial hot flash symptoms, vaginal problems, and musculoskeletal pain scores. Linear mixed models compared the average difference between arms across time points during the initial 2-year treatment period adjusting for cycle 1 day 1 (C1D1) PRO scores, demographic and clinical variables. The average differences between arms (palbo+ET vs ET alone) and the two-sided (1-[0.05/8]) x 100% confidence intervals, adjusted for multiple comparisons, were calculated. Analysis of covariance compared the average between-arm differences by endpoint at 3 years. Results: The PRO intention to collect population included 4688 (81%) of the overall trial pts, and was clinically and demographically representative of the remaining 1073 pts. Each analysis population, with measures at C1D1 and at least 1 post-C1D1 assessment for each PRO endpoint, comprised ≥ 89% of the 4688 pts and the proportions were similar between arms. After adjustment for baseline covariates, on average, no clinically important differences between arms were observed for any of the eight endpoints over the 2 year treatment period (Table 1). All effect sizes were below the pre-specified 0.2 threshold. These PRO results were similar at the 3 year time point. Conclusions: No clinically significant differences in either patient-reported QOL or symptom severity were found, on average, between participants in the two PALLAS treatment arms while either taking palbo+ET or ET alone, or after study-wide termination of palbo. In general, the addition of palbociclib in the adjuvant breast cancer setting did not contribute to increased symptom burden within this survivorship population. Further analyses will examine the relationship between PROs and treatment discontinuation by arm and study time point. Support: AFT, Pfizer, https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org Table 1.Results of the Patient-Reported QOL and Symptom Severity Analyses Between the Two Treatment Arms During the First 2 Years of PALLASPRO Endpoint *Palbo + ET Adjusted average score (95% CI)ET alone Adjusted average score (95% CI)Average Difference + (Palbo + ET vs ET alone)[99.38% CI] Clinically ++ Important DifferenceEORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/QOL71.7 (71.2, 72.2)74.0 (73.5, 74.5)-2.3 (-3.3, -1.4)**NoBrief Fatigue Inventory Score2.3 (2.2, 2.3)2.1 (2.0, 2.1)0.2 (0.1, 0.3)NoModified Brief Pain Inventory - Severity Score2.3 (2.2, 2.3)2.4 (2.4, 2.5)-0.2 (-0.3, -0.1)NoModified Brief Pain Inventory - Interference Score1.7 (1.6, 1.7)1.7 (1.6, 1.7)0.0 (-0.1, 0.1)NoEORTC QLQ-BR23 Alopecia1.4 (1.4, 1.4)1.3 (1.3, 1.3)0.1 (0.1, 0.1)NoBreast Cancer Prevention Trial - Hot Flash Symptoms1.2 (1.2, 1.3)1.2 (1.2, 1.3)0.0 (-0.1, 0.1)NoBreast Cancer Prevention Trial - Vaginal Problems0.8 (0.8, 0.8)0.8 (0.7, 0.8)0.0 (0.0, 0.1)NoBreast Cancer Prevention Trial - Musculoskeletal Pain1.2 (1.2, 1.2)1.3 (1.3, 1.3)-0.1 (-0.2, 0.0)No* For the EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/QOL subscale, higher scores indicate better QOL. For all other PRO endpoints, higher scores indicate worse symptom levels. ** The lower bound of the one-sided CI (adjusted for multiple comparisons) was -3.3. Because the lower limit is greater than the pre-specified non-inferiority margin of -3.44, non-inferiority of palbo+ET relative to ET-alone was concluded. The non-inferiority margin corresponds to a 0.2 SD in the EORTC QLQ-C30 global health/QOL score. +The average difference was adjusted for the following baseline covariates: Cycle 1 day 1 score, region (if applicable), age category, first adjuvant ET, race, ethnicity, N-stage, T-stage, histological grade, PgR, prior chemotherapy, ECOG Performance Status. ++Based on each instrument’s published clinically relevant cut-offs, if available. After calculating Cohen’s d treatment effect sizes, (i.e. by dividing the average difference by the ET-alone arm standard deviation from cycle 1 day 1), all effect sizes were below the pre-specified 0.2 threshold, and would not be considered clinically important. Citation Format: Michelle Joy Naughton, David Zahrieh, Michael Gnant, Nicholas Zdenkowski, Julie Lemieux, Jun J Mao, Vesna Bjelic-Radisic, Eileen Shinn, Marija Balic, Christoph Thomssen, Jane Neisel, Manuel Ruiz-Echarri, Sibylle Loibl, Claudine Isaacs, David Cameron, Fernando Manuel Henao Carrasco, Matthew Goetz, Viktor Wette, Gustavo Werutsky, Hope Rugo, Marcus Vetter, Ling-Ming Tseng, Kathy Miller, Florian Fitzal, Juan Miguel Gil Gil, Haeseong Park, Barbro Linderholm, Emilio Bajetta, Zoneddy Dayao, Aleix Prat, Karin Ehrhardt, Otto Metzger, Amal Arahmani, Ernest Law, Ann Partridge, Lisa Carey, Alex Zoroufy, Amylou Dueck, Dominik Hlauschek, Angela DeMichele, Erica Mayer. Quality of life and symptom severity in the PALLAS randomized trial of palbociclib with adjuvant endocrine therapy in early breast cancer (AFT-05) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-10-01.

Abstract Background: BRCA1/2 genes play a central role in DNA repair. Therefore, pts harboring gBRCA1/2m treated with chemotherapy might be at higher risk of acute hematological toxicities due to the lower level of functional BRCA1/2 protein potentially resulting in more toxicity. Published results are discordant, further data are needed. Methods: Pts with early TNBC and known gBRCA1/2m treated with anthracycline-taxane based NACT in the GeparQuinto (n=487), GeparSixto (n=291) and GeparOcto (n=393) studies were included. Primary G-CSF prophylaxis was foreseen only for the iddETC arm in GeparOcto. Primary objective was the rate of neutropenia grade (G)3-4 after cycle 1; secondary objectives were the rate of other hematological toxicities G3-4 and the overall toxicity rate after cycle 1 as well as hematological toxicities in gBRCA1/2 pts during the taxane part of chemotherapy. Results: 209/1171 evaluated pts (17.8%) had a gBRCA1/2m (177 gBRCA1m, 33 gBRCA2m). Median age was 48yrs [21-78]. The rate of neutropenia G3-4 after cycle 1 in gBRCA1/2 wildtype (wt) pts was 35.7% vs 37.4% in gBRCA1/2m (p=0.683), 35.9% in gBRCA1m (p=1.000), 44.8% in gBRCA2m (p=0.330). gBRCA1/2 mutational status did not predict neutropenia G3-4 at univariate (OR=1.08, 95%CI 0.78-1.48 p=0.658) or multivariate analysis adjusted for age, BMI and treatment (OR=1.26, 95%CI 0.87-1.82 p=0.226). The overall rate and the rates of other hematological toxicities are shown in the table. gBRCA1/2 mutational status did also not predict for any other hematological toxicities G3-4 (univariate OR=0.94, 95%CI 0.64-1.40 p=0.773; multivariate OR=0.94, 95%CI 0.62-1.43 p=0.779). gBRCA1/2 mutational status predicted for hematological toxicities G3-4 under taxane treatment (univariate OR=1.94, 95%CI 1.35-2.77 p&lt;0.001; multivariate OR=2.91, 95%CI 1.55-5.45 p=0.001). During taxane treatment, the overall rate of hematological toxicities G3-4 in wt pts was 43.1% (n=270) vs 59.5% (n=91) in gBRCA1/2m, p&lt;0.001; anemia G3-4 2.6% (n=16) vs 3.3% (n=5), p=0.584; leucopenia G3-4 32.7% (n=203) vs 47.1% (n=72), p=0.001; neutropenia G3-4 35.8% (n=219) vs 49.3% (n=73), p=0.003; thrombopenia G3-4 1.4% (n=9) vs 4.6% (n=7), p=0.024; febrile neutropenia 5.9% (n=37) vs 4.6% (n=7), p=0.696. Conclusions: Overall, gBRCA1/2 mutation is not associated with a significantly higher risk of severe hematological toxicities. Under taxane therapy, pts with gBRCA1/2 demonstrate a higher rate of hematological toxicities G3-4, especially neutropenia, compared to wildtype pts, and should therefore be carefully monitored. Hematological toxicities after cycle 1wildtypegBRCA1/2mp-valuegBRCA1mp-valuegBRCA2mp-valueN%N%N%N%neutropenia G3-432635.77437.40.6836135.91.0001344.80.330febrile neutropenia171.831.41.00010.60.33726.10.130leucopenia G3-424425.83818.20.0212815.80.0041030.30.548anemia G3-420.200.01.00000.01.00000.01.000thrombopenia G3-4111.210.50.70510.60.70400.01.000any hematological toxicities G1-477782.617081.70.76314180.10.4533090.90.344any hematological toxicities G3-442846.38843.60.5337241.90.3171651.60.587 Citation Format: Jenny Furlanetto, Volker Möbus, Andreas Schneeweiss, Kerstin Rhiem, Hans Tesch, Jens-Uwe Blohmer, Kristina Lübbe, Michael Untch, Christoph Salat, Jens Huober, Peter Klare, Rita Schmutzler, Fergus J Couch, Bianca Lederer, Bernd Gerber, Dirk-Michael Zahm, Ingo Bauerfeind, Valentina Nekljudova, Claus Hanusch, Christian Jackisch, Theresa Link, Sibylle Loibl, Peter A Fasching. Germline (g)BRCA1/2 mutations (m) and hematological toxicities in patients (pts) with triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) [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 P6-10-03.

AbstractImmune checkpoint inhibitor therapies targeting PD‐1/PD‐L1 are now the standard of care in oncology across several hematologic and solid tumor types, including triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). Patients with metastatic or locally advanced TNBC with PD‐L1 expression on immune cells occupying ≥1% of tumor area demonstrated survival benefit with the addition of atezolizumab to nab‐paclitaxel. However, concerns regarding variability between immunohistochemical PD‐L1 assay performance and inter‐reader reproducibility have been raised. High tumor‐infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) have also been associated with response to PD‐1/PD‐L1 inhibitors in patients with breast cancer (BC). TILs can be easily assessed on hematoxylin and eosin–stained slides and have shown reliable inter‐reader reproducibility. As an established prognostic factor in early stage TNBC, TILs are soon anticipated to be reported in daily practice in many pathology laboratories worldwide. Because TILs and PD‐L1 are parts of an immunological spectrum in BC, we propose the systematic implementation of combined PD‐L1 and TIL analyses as a more comprehensive immuno‐oncological biomarker for patient selection for PD‐1/PD‐L1 inhibition‐based therapy in patients with BC. Although practical and regulatory considerations differ by jurisdiction, the pathology community has the responsibility to patients to implement assays that lead to optimal patient selection. We propose herewith a risk‐management framework that may help mitigate the risks of suboptimal patient selection for immuno‐therapeutic approaches in clinical trials and daily practice based on combined TILs/PD‐L1 assessment in BC. © 2020 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Abstract Purpose: Endocrine based therapy is an effective strategy to manage hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC). However, nearly all patients exhibit/develop either de novo or acquired resistance. While prognostic biomarkers of endocrine responsiveness are well established for the adjuvant treatment in ER+ breast cancer, less is known regarding prognostic and predictive biomarkers of response in the first line ABC setting. We sought to develop a clinical calculator based on clinical criteria for predicting progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of women with HR+/HER2- ABC who will be receiving endocrine monotherapy as first-line treatment for ABC. Methods: The development of the clinical calculator will be based on data from modern clinical trials in women with HR+/HER2- ABC. The studies to be included in the final analyses are given in Table 1. The control arm data from trials1-6 will form the training dataset (N = 1,223) and be used to construct the clinical prediction models. Variables considered include age, race, ECOG status, disease measurability, body mass index, disease-free interval, number of metastatic sites, locations of metastatic sites, prior endocrine therapy, and prior chemotherapy. Missing values will be imputed using single imputation with all variables included in the imputation model. For continuous variables, restricted cubic splines will be used to determine if non-linear effects may be more appropriate. The Lasso regression will be used as a variable selection technique to reduce the dimensionality of covariates; initially all pairwise interactions will be included in the model. Following Lasso regression, the multivariable Cox proportional hazards models will be constructed for PFS and OS including only variables retained in Lasso. The final model will be internally validated for discrimination and calibration using 10-fold cross-validation. External validation will be performed using control arm data from EGF 30008 (N = 536). Results: To date, control arm data from four trials (trials 1-4) have been received. The preliminary results presented here are based on pooled data from C40503 and LEA, for which data elements have been harmonized. Models for predicting PFS and OS have good calibration and are associated with bias-corrected C-indices of 0.61 and 0.65, respectively. These models will be updated using pooled data from trials 1-6. Conclusions: Our preliminary data demonstrate that clinical calculators based on baseline clinical factors can provide accurate prediction of PFS and OS in patients with HR+/HER2- ABC treated with first-line ET. If validated, these tools may be used for risk stratification in future clinical trials and to identify patients who may require more or less aggressive therapy. Table 1:Studies to be includedTrial NumberTrial NameTrial PISample Size in Control Arm1C40503Maura Dickler152 (letrozole)2LEAMiguel Martin179 (letrozole)3FACTJonas Bergh188 (anastrozole)4FALCONJohn Robertson194 (anastrozole)5S0226Rita Mehta345 (anastrozole)6MONARCH 3Matthew Goetz165 (nonsteroidal AI)7EGF 30008Stephen Johnston536 (letrozole) Citation Format: Polley M-YC, Dickler MN, Johnston S, Goetz MP, de la Haba J, Loibl S, Mehta RS, Bergh J, Roberston J, Barlow W, Liu H, Tenner K, Martin M. A clinical calculator to predict disease outcomes in women with hormone receptor-positive advanced stage breast cancer treated with first-line endocrine therapy [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-07-05.

Abstract Background: Pre-clinical data and results from early phase clinical trials point to synergistic antitumor activity and potential efficacy of palbociclib when given in combination with anti-HER2 therapy (tx). The aim of PATINA is to determine the effect of adding palbociclib to anti-HER2 and ET maintenance after induction tx in the 1st line setting for HR+/HER2+ MBC. Trial Design: The PATINA trial (AFT-38/NCT02947685) is a pivotal, open-label, international, phase III study. Following 6-8 cycles of chemotherapy (taxane or vinorelbine) with anti-HER2 tx for MBC participants will be randomized 1:1 to standard anti-HER2 tx (trastuzumab +/- pertuzumab) in combination with ET with or without palbociclib until disease progression. ET options are either an aromatase inhibitor or fulvestrant. Premenopausal patients (pts) must receive ovarian suppression. The trial is open to men or women with histologically confirmed HR+/HER2+ MBC provided they are without evidence of disease progression by local assessment after induction tx. Total planned accrual is 496 pts. Primary objective is to demonstrate that the combination of palbociclib with anti-HER2 tx plus ET is superior to anti-HER2 tx plus ET alone in prolonging progression-free survival (PFS). Key secondary objectives are measures of tumor control, overall survival, safety and Quality of Life. The main translational science objective is to compare PFS estimates according to PIK3CA mutation status. The study has a 90% power to detect a hazard ratio of 0.667 in favor of the palbociclib arm. All pts approached to participate in PATINA will be asked to share remaining biospecimens and clinical data with the Mastering Breast Cancer Initiative. This initiative was created in order to understand the natural history of MBC and how it envolves over time with the aim to develop new treatments for this patient population. Recruitment has started in 07/2017 and is planned for approximately 22 months in 140 sites in Australia, Germany, Italy, France, New Zealand, Spain, and the US. 69 pts have been recruited so far. The study is sponsored by Alliance Foundation Trials (AFT) and financially supported by Pfizer Citation Format: Metzger O, Mandrekar S, Loibl S, Mundhenke C, Seiler S, Valagussa P, Lim E, Tripathy D, Winer EP, Huang C, Carey L, Francis P, Miller K, Goetz MP, Prat A, Loi S, Krop I, Gianni L, Delalogue S, Vaz-Luis I, Dockter T, Lanzillotti J, Ciruelos E, DeMichele AM. PATINA: A randomized, open label, phase III trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of palbociclib + anti-HER2 therapy + endocrine therapy (ET) vs. anti-HER2 therapy + ET after induction treatment for hormone receptor positive (HR+)/HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr OT3-02-07.

Assessment of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in histopathologic specimens can provide important prognostic information in diverse solid tumor types, and may also be of value in predicting response to treatments. However, implementation as a routine clinical biomarker has not yet been achieved. As successful use of immune checkpoint inhibitors and other forms of immunotherapy become a clinical reality, the need for widely applicable, accessible, and reliable immunooncology biomarkers is clear. In part 1 of this review we briefly discuss the host immune response to tumors and different approaches to TIL assessment. We propose a standardized methodology to assess TILs in solid tumors on hematoxylin and eosin sections, in both primary and metastatic settings, based on the International Immuno-Oncology Biomarker Working Group guidelines for TIL assessment in invasive breast carcinoma. A review of the literature regarding the value of TIL assessment in different solid tumor types follows in part 2. The method we propose is reproducible, affordable, easily applied, and has demonstrated prognostic and predictive significance in invasive breast carcinoma. This standardized methodology may be used as a reference against which other methods are compared, and should be evaluated for clinical validity and utility. Standardization of TIL assessment will help to improve consistency and reproducibility in this field, enrich both the quality and quantity of comparable evidence, and help to thoroughly evaluate the utility of TILs assessment in this era of immunotherapy.

Assessment of the immune response to tumors is growing in importance as the prognostic implications of this response are increasingly recognized, and as immunotherapies are evaluated and implemented in different tumor types. However, many different approaches can be used to assess and describe the immune response, which limits efforts at implementation as a routine clinical biomarker. In part 1 of this review, we have proposed a standardized methodology to assess tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in solid tumors, based on the International Immuno-Oncology Biomarkers Working Group guidelines for invasive breast carcinoma. In part 2 of this review, we discuss the available evidence for the prognostic and predictive value of TILs in common solid tumors, including carcinomas of the lung, gastrointestinal tract, genitourinary system, gynecologic system, and head and neck, as well as primary brain tumors, mesothelioma and melanoma. The particularities and different emphases in TIL assessment in different tumor types are discussed. The standardized methodology we propose can be adapted to different tumor types and may be used as a standard against which other approaches can be compared. Standardization of TIL assessment will help clinicians, researchers and pathologists to conclusively evaluate the utility of this simple biomarker in the current era of immunotherapy.