Kaklamani, Virginia

10520 Background: Therapeutic options for breast cancer (BC) prevention for high-risk women remain limited, and not all eligible patients opt for endocrine therapy due to concerns related to adverse events (AEs). GLP1RAs are widely used for obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus; their role in BC primary prevention (PP) in high-risk women with obesity has not been evaluated. Methods: Using the TriNetX Global Network (150 million patients, 108 organizations), we analyzed de-identified records of high-risk women aged 18–90 years with a BMI ≥ 30 who had health care encounters between January 1, 2000, and January 1, 2025, identified via ICD-10 codes. High risk was defined as at least one of the following: genetic predisposition to BC, family history of BC, atypical ductal hyperplasia, atypical lobular hyperplasia, lobular carcinoma in situ, or dense breasts. Patients were grouped as having GLP1-RA use or no GLP-1RA use. Patients with a prior history of BC or use of endocrine therapy were excluded. GLP-1RA users were propensity score-matched 1:1 with non-users based on demographics, comorbidities, social determinants of health, lifestyle factors, BMI, HbA1c, and prior breast imaging. Incident BC served as the primary endpoint, with key AEs as secondary measures. Kaplan–Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards models were utilized to assess outcomes, which were further validated through subgroup and sensitivity analyses. Results: Among 80,480 high-risk women with a BMI ≥ 30, 46,581 were assigned to each cohort. Baseline demographics were balanced between cohorts (mean age: 46 years, 70% White, 21% Black). Median follow-up was 2,790 vs 2,630 days for GLP-1RA users and non-users, respectively. BC incidence was 2.95% in GLP-1RA users (1,164/39,495 cases) vs 3.01% in non-users (1,200/39,057 cases) (3.27 vs. 3.57 cases per 1,000 person-years; HR 0.844; 95% CI, 0.779–0.915). GLP-1RA users exhibited an increased risk of endometrial cancer (HR 1.273; 95% CI, 1.088–1.491) and osteoporosis (HR 1.124; 95% CI, 1.054–1.199). No significant association was observed for venous thromboembolism. Gastrointestinal AEs were significantly higher in the GLP-1RA cohort. Conclusions: GLP-1RA use was associated with a modest reduction in BC incidence among high-risk women with obesity in this real-world study. Prospective randomized trials are needed to validate these associations.

PURPOSE Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/AKT-serine threonine kinase/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway abnormalities contribute to endocrine resistance. Everolimus, an mTOR inhibitor, improved progression-free survival in hormone receptor–positive metastatic breast cancer (BC) when combined with endocrine therapy (ET). In this phase III randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we assessed the efficacy of everolimus + ET as adjuvant therapy in high-risk, hormone receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative BC after adjuvant/neoadjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to physician's choice ET and 1 year of everolimus (10 mg orally once daily) or placebo stratified by risk group. The primary end point was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) evaluated by a stratified log-rank test with the hazard ratio (HR) estimated by Cox regression. Subset analyses included preplanned evaluation by risk group and exploratory analyses by menopausal status and age. Secondary end points included overall survival (OS) and safety. Everolimus did not improve IDFS/OS when added to ET in patients with early-stage high-risk, hormone receptor–positive BC. RESULTS One thousand and nine hundred thirty-nine patients were randomly assigned with 1,792 eligible for analysis. Overall, no benefit of everolimus was seen for IDFS (HR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.14]) or OS (HR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.75 to 1.26]). The assumption of proportional hazards was not met suggesting significant variability in the HR over time since the start of treatment. In an unplanned subgroup analysis among postmenopausal patients (N = 1,221), no difference in IDFS (HR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.86 to 1.36]) or OS (HR, 1.19 [95% CI, 0.89 to 1.60]) was seen. In premenopausal patients (N = 571), everolimus improved both IDFS (HR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.44 to 0.94]) and OS (HR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.28 to 0.86]). Treatment completion rates were lower in the everolimus arm compared with placebo (48% v 73%) with higher grade 3 and 4 adverse events (35% v 7%). CONCLUSION One year of adjuvant everolimus + ET did not improve overall outcomes. Subset analysis suggests mTOR inhibition as a possible target for patients who remain premenopausal after chemotherapy.

Abstract Background: Latin Americans are more likely to be diagnosed with aggressive early-stage breast cancer compared to Non-Hispanic White. Multiple factors may contribute to this, including metabolic factors and ancestry. In a previous study, we identified upregulated immune pathway genes in Luminal B tumors from obese Black patients compared to matched White patients. In this study, we report clinical and transcriptomic profiles of breast tumors from Latin and White patients to enhance understanding of factors contributing to aggressive tumor biology in Latin patients. Methods: We matched 311 Latin and 311 White breast cancer patients enrolled in FLEX by age, T stage, N stage and clinical subtype (ER/PR and HER2 status). FLEX (NCT03053193) is a prospective, observational trial that includes stage I-III breast cancer patients who receive MammaPrint (with or without BluePrint) as standard of care and consent to whole transcriptome and clinical data collection. MammaPrint is a 70-gene risk of distant recurrence signature that classifies patients as Low Risk or High Risk. BluePrint is an 80-gene molecular subtyping signature, categorizes tumors as Luminal-, HER2- or Basal-Type. MammaPrint further groups Luminal into A (Low Risk) and B (High Risk). ImPrint is a 53-gene signature that has been shown to predict the likelihood of achieving pCR with PD1-PDL1 immune checkpoint inhibitors. Statistical analyses on groups were conducted using arsenal R package and p-value < 0.05 was considered significant. Whole transcriptome comparisons were made, using limma R package, between Latin and White patients stratified by BluePrint subtype Luminal and weight categories normal (body-mass-index (BMI) 18.5 to < 25) and obese (BMI ≥30). Significant differentially expressed genes had an adjusted p-value < 0.05. Gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) was conducted using fgsea R package. Results: Latin patients had significantly higher percentage of type 2 diabetes (23.3% vs 8.5%), BMI obese (49.0% vs 39.4%), BluePrint Basal (14.8% vs 9.3%) and ImPrint Immune Sensitive (12.0% vs 5.1%) compared to matched White patients. When comparing whole transcriptome of tumors from Latin and White patients, only tumors stratified by Luminal B and obesity resulted in differentially expressed genes: Latin patients had higher expression (>2-fold change) of 42 immunoglobulin genes compared to White, with only IGKV6-21 being statistically significant. Additional immune related genes such as IKZF1 and AGER, as well as UTS2 (gene encoding a vasoconstrictor agent and contributor of angiogenesis) were significantly upregulated in Latin patients. Upregulation of immune related pathways such as inflammatory response, interferon alpha/gamma response and downregulation of adipogenesis, oxidative phosphorylation and MYC targets were identified in Latin patients compared to White using GSEA Hallmarks gene sets. Conclusion: There were additional clinical and genomic differences between tumors from Latin and White patients, even when controlling for age, T stage, N stage and clinical subtype. Particularly, there were more type 2 diabetes, BMI obese, BluePrint Basal, and ImPrint Immune Sensitive among Latin patients. In addition, transcriptomic differences between obese Latin and matched White patients were found in Luminal B subgroup that may contribute to the aggressive tumor biology; immunoglobulin genes and immune related pathways were associated with higher expression in Latin patients. This study suggests that biological differences in breast tumors, particularly from obese patients, may result from shared background and reflects the need for inclusion of diverse patient groups in clinical trials. Citation Format: Marcela Mazo-Canola, Virginia Kaklamani, Pooja Advani, Sailaja Kamaraju, Alfredo A. Santillan-Gomez, Robert Maganini, Julie Barone, Sahra Uygun, Lavanya Samraj, William Audeh, Joyce O'Shaughnessy, FLEX Investigators' Group. Racial disparities in breast cancer and effect of obesity: MammaPrint, BluePrint and whole transcriptome analyses of tumors in Latin American patients in FLEX trial [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 PS18-04.

Background: Limited information is available for patients with breast cancer (BC) and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), especially among underrepresented racial/ethnic populations. Methods: This is a COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry-based retrospective cohort study of females with active or history of BC and laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection diagnosed between March 2020 and June 2021 in the US. Primary outcome was COVID-19 severity measured on a five-level ordinal scale, including none of the following complications, hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, and all-cause mortality. Multivariable ordinal logistic regression model identified characteristics associated with COVID-19 severity. Results: 1383 female patient records with BC and COVID-19 were included in the analysis, the median age was 61 years, and median follow-up was 90 days. Multivariable analysis revealed higher odds of COVID-19 severity for older age (aOR per decade, 1.48 [95% CI, 1.32–1.67]); Black patients (aOR 1.74; 95 CI 1.24–2.45), Asian Americans and Pacific Islander patients (aOR 3.40; 95 CI 1.70–6.79) and Other (aOR 2.97; 95 CI 1.71–5.17) racial/ethnic groups; worse ECOG performance status (ECOG PS ≥2: aOR, 7.78 [95% CI, 4.83–12.5]); pre-existing cardiovascular (aOR, 2.26 [95% CI, 1.63–3.15])/pulmonary comorbidities (aOR, 1.65 [95% CI, 1.20–2.29]); diabetes mellitus (aOR, 2.25 [95% CI, 1.66–3.04]); and active and progressing cancer (aOR, 12.5 [95% CI, 6.89–22.6]). Hispanic ethnicity, timing, and type of anti-cancer therapy modalities were not significantly associated with worse COVID-19 outcomes. The total all-cause mortality and hospitalization rate for the entire cohort was 9% and 37%, respectively however, it varied according to the BC disease status. Conclusions: Using one of the largest registries on cancer and COVID-19, we identified patient and BC-related factors associated with worse COVID-19 outcomes. After adjusting for baseline characteristics, underrepresented racial/ethnic patients experienced worse outcomes compared to non-Hispanic White patients. Funding: This study was partly supported by National Cancer Institute grant number P30 CA068485 to Tianyi Sun, Sanjay Mishra, Benjamin French, Jeremy L Warner; P30-CA046592 to Christopher R Friese; P30 CA023100 for Rana R McKay; P30-CA054174 for Pankil K Shah and Dimpy P Shah; KL2 TR002646 for Pankil Shah and the American Cancer Society and Hope Foundation for Cancer Research (MRSG-16-152-01-CCE) and P30-CA054174 for Dimpy P Shah. REDCap is developed and supported by Vanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research grant support (UL1 TR000445 from NCATS/NIH). The funding sources had no role in the writing of the manuscript or the decision to submit it for publication. Clinical trial number: CCC19 registry is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04354701 .

ImportanceSystematic data on the association between anticancer therapies and thromboembolic events (TEEs) in patients with COVID-19 are lacking.ObjectiveTo assess the association between anticancer therapy exposure within 3 months prior to COVID-19 and TEEs following COVID-19 diagnosis in patients with cancer.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis registry-based retrospective cohort study included patients who were hospitalized and had active cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Data were accrued from March 2020 to December 2021 and analyzed from December 2021 to October 2022.ExposureTreatments of interest (TOIs) (endocrine therapy, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors/tyrosine kinase inhibitors [VEGFis/TKIs], immunomodulators [IMiDs], immune checkpoint inhibitors [ICIs], chemotherapy) vs reference (no systemic therapy) in 3 months prior to COVID-19.Main Outcomes and MeasuresMain outcomes were (1) venous thromboembolism (VTE) and (2) arterial thromboembolism (ATE). Secondary outcome was severity of COVID-19 (rates of intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, 30-day all-cause mortality following TEEs in TOI vs reference group) at 30-day follow-up.ResultsOf 4988 hospitalized patients with cancer (median [IQR] age, 69 [59-78] years; 2608 [52%] male), 1869 had received 1 or more TOIs. Incidence of VTE was higher in all TOI groups: endocrine therapy, 7%; VEGFis/TKIs, 10%; IMiDs, 8%; ICIs, 12%; and chemotherapy, 10%, compared with patients not receiving systemic therapies (6%). In multivariable log-binomial regression analyses, relative risk of VTE (adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.33; 95% CI, 1.04-1.69) but not ATE (aRR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.56-1.16) was significantly higher in those exposed to all TOIs pooled together vs those with no exposure. Among individual drugs, ICIs were significantly associated with VTE (aRR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.01-2.07). Also noted were significant associations between VTE and active and progressing cancer (aRR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.01-2.03), history of VTE (aRR, 3.10; 95% CI, 2.38-4.04), and high-risk site of cancer (aRR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.14-1.75). Black patients had a higher risk of TEEs (aRR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.03-1.50) than White patients. Patients with TEEs had high intensive care unit admission (46%) and mechanical ventilation (31%) rates. Relative risk of death in patients with TEEs was higher in those exposed to TOIs vs not (aRR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.91-1.38) and was significantly associated with poor performance status (aRR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.30-2.40) and active/progressing cancer (aRR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.13-2.13).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cohort study, relative risk of developing VTE was high among patients receiving TOIs and varied by the type of therapy, underlying risk factors, and demographics, such as race and ethnicity. These findings highlight the need for close monitoring and perhaps personalized thromboprophylaxis to prevent morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19–related thromboembolism in patients with cancer.

Abstract Background: Late recurrence of breast cancer after 5 years accounts for about 50% of recurrences in hormone receptor (HR)-positive early breast cancer (EBC). TAILORx established non-inferiority of adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) given for at least 5 years to chemotherapy plus ET (CET) in EBC and a 21-gene recurrence score (RS) of 11-25, although there was some chemotherapy benefit in women Methods: Eligibility criteria included women 18-75 years with HR-positive, HER2-negative, T1b-T2N0 EBC who agreed to have CT assigned or randomized based on the RS assay. The primary endpoint was invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) in the RS 11-25 group. The “primary analysis” refers to the original prespecified analysis for the primary IDFS endpoint (836 IDFS events at full information in the RS 11-25 group) after a median of 7.5 years. The “updated analysis” was performed after a median followup of 11.0 and 10.4 years in the randomized and overall populations, respectively. Results:10,253 eligible women enrolled between 4/7/06-10/6/10.The updated analysis includes substantially more events that the primary analysis, including IDFS events (1819 vs. 1210), distant recurrences (561 vs. 384), locoregional +/- distant recurrences (764 vs. 543), and deaths (910 vs. 499). The table provides 5 and 12-year event rates (and standard errors) for all arms, and comparisons of the randomized arms. The primary trial conclusions remain unchanged: ET was non-inferior to CET in the randomized group with a RS 11-25. Although recurrence occurred in < 10% by 12 years for a RS 0-25, late recurrence events beyond 5 years exceeded earlier recurrence. Non-recurrence events occurred in about 13% at 12 years (~1%/year), contributing substantially to the IDFS rates. For women Conclusions: The current updated analysis confirms findings from the original primary analysis that ET is non-inferior to CET in HR-positive, HER2-negative, node-negative EBC and a RS 11-25. As in the original primary analysis, the subgroup of women Citation Format: Joseph Sparano, Robert J. Gray, Della Makower, Kathy S. Albain, Daniel F. Hayes, Charles Geyer, Elizabeth Dees, Matthew P. Goetz, John A. Olson Jr, Tracy G. Lively, Sunil Badve, Thomas Saphner, Lynne I. Wagner, Timothy Whelan, Virginia Kaklamani, George Sledge. Trial Assigning Individualized Options for Treatment (TAILORx): An Update Including 12-Year Event Rates [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr GS1-05.

Abstract BACKGROUND: Abnormalities of the PI3kinase/AKT/mTOR signaling network are common in breast cancer (BC) and are associated with endocrine resistance. Everolimus, an mTOR-inhibitor increased PFS when combined with endocrine therapy (ET) in the metastatic setting and is thought to revert endocrine resistance. S1207 is a phase III randomized, placebo-controlled trial evaluating the role of everolimus in combination with ET in the adjuvant setting among patients with high-risk hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative BC (NCT01674140). METHODS: Eligible patients were >18 years of age with histologically confirmed invasive hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative high-risk BC. Four risk groups were defined as: 1) > 2cm node-negative disease (or pN1mi), and either an Oncotype DX® Recurrence Score (RS) > 25 or MammaPrint® high-risk category (MP high); 2) 1-3 positive nodes and either RS >25, MP high or a pathological grade 3 tumor; 3) >4 positive lymph nodes. Patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy were eligible if: 4) after surgery had >1 lymph node involvement. Patients were randomized 1:1 to physician’s choice adjuvant ET in combination with one year of everolimus (10 mg PO daily) or ET plus placebo stratified by risk group. The primary endpoint was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) evaluated by a stratified log-rank test. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and safety. The hazard ratio (HR) for treatment efficacy was estimated using Cox regression with stratification by risk groups. Subset analyses included preplanned evaluation within risk group and exploratory analyses of menopausal status and age. RESULTS: 1,939 patients were randomized between September 2013 and May 2019, of them 1,792 were eligible and included in the analysis (896 per arm). Primary reason for ineligibility was timing after chemotherapy/radiation or not high risk. Median age was 54 years (22-85) and 32% were premenopausal. With a median follow-up of 50.5 months, there were 389 IDFS events as of May 2022 (data cutoff). 5-year IDFS was 74.8% among patients treated with everolimus and 73.9% among patients treated with placebo, HR=0.93 (95% CI 0.76-1.14). However, the proportional hazards assumption was violated (p=0.02) suggesting differential treatment effect over time. The HR during the one year of treatment was 0.72 (95% CI 0.47-1.10) while after one year it was 1.00 (95% CI 0.80-1.26). The 5-year OS was 87.6% in the everolimus arm and 85.5% in the placebo arm, HR=0.98 (95% CI 0.75-1.28). Analysis by risk group did not show higher everolimus benefit as risk increased. No difference in IDFS or OS was seen among postmenopausal patients (IDFS HR=1.08 [95% CI 0.85-1.36], OS HR=1.19 [95% CI 0.87-1.61]). Among premenopausal patients, everolimus was associated with improved IDFS (HR=0.63 [95% CI 0.43-0.93]) and OS (HR=0.48 [95% CI 0.26-0.88]). Treatment completion of randomized therapy was lower in the everolimus arm compared to placebo (47.9% v 72.7%). Grade 3 and 4 toxicities were noted in 6.5% and 0.5% of patients in the placebo arm and in 31.2% and 3.7% in the everolimus arm respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of one year of adjuvant everolimus to standard adjuvant ET did not improve IDFS or OS and was associated with low completion rate and increased AEs. Among premenopausal patients there was a benefit in IDFS and OS that is hypothesis generating. Future translational studies will evaluate potential predictors of everolimus benefit and drug toxicity. Citation Format: Marianna Chavez, Jieling Miao, Lajos Pusztai, Matthew P. Goetz, Priya Rastogi, Patricia A. Ganz, Eleftherios (Terry) Mamounas, Soonmyung Paik, Hanna Bandos, Wajeeha Razaq, Anne O’Dea, Virginia Kaklamani, Andrea L.M. Silber, Lisa E. Flaum, Eleni Andreopolu, Joseph Baar, Albert G. Wendt, Jennifer F. Carney, Priyanka Sharma, Julie R. Gralow, Danika L. Lew, William E. Barlow, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi. Results from a phase III randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial evaluating adjuvant endocrine therapy +/- 1 year of everolimus in patients with high-risk hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer: SWOG S1207 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr GS1-07.

ImportanceCytokine storm due to COVID-19 can cause high morbidity and mortality and may be more common in patients with cancer treated with immunotherapy (IO) due to immune system activation.ObjectiveTo determine the association of baseline immunosuppression and/or IO-based therapies with COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm in patients with cancer.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis registry-based retrospective cohort study included 12 046 patients reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry from March 2020 to May 2022. The CCC19 registry is a centralized international multi-institutional registry of patients with COVID-19 with a current or past diagnosis of cancer. Records analyzed included patients with active or previous cancer who had a laboratory-confirmed infection with SARS-CoV-2 by polymerase chain reaction and/or serologic findings.ExposuresImmunosuppression due to therapy; systemic anticancer therapy (IO or non-IO).Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was a 5-level ordinal scale of COVID-19 severity: no complications; hospitalized without requiring oxygen; hospitalized and required oxygen; intensive care unit admission and/or mechanical ventilation; death. The secondary outcome was the occurrence of cytokine storm.ResultsThe median age of the entire cohort was 65 years (interquartile range [IQR], 54-74) years and 6359 patients were female (52.8%) and 6598 (54.8%) were non-Hispanic White. A total of 599 (5.0%) patients received IO, whereas 4327 (35.9%) received non-IO systemic anticancer therapies, and 7120 (59.1%) did not receive any antineoplastic regimen within 3 months prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. Although no difference in COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm was found in the IO group compared with the untreated group in the total cohort (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.56-1.13, and aOR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.41-1.93, respectively), patients with baseline immunosuppression treated with IO (vs untreated) had worse COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm (aOR, 3.33; 95% CI, 1.38-8.01, and aOR, 4.41; 95% CI, 1.71-11.38, respectively). Patients with immunosuppression receiving non-IO therapies (vs untreated) also had worse COVID-19 severity (aOR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.36-2.35) and cytokine storm (aOR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.42-3.79).Conclusions and RelevanceThis cohort study found that in patients with cancer and COVID-19, administration of systemic anticancer therapies, especially IO, in the context of baseline immunosuppression was associated with severe clinical outcomes and the development of cytokine storm.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04354701