Akinhanmi, Margaret

533 Background: Current guidelines define TNBC as complete absence of estrogen (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR), without HER2 amplification. However, the prognostic impact of clinical and histopathological factors, sTILs, and AdjCT in TNBC meeting these strict criteria is unknown. Methods: From a cohort of 9985 women who underwent upfront surgery for M0 breast cancer (BC) at Mayo Clinic Rochester from 1985-2012, 1159 pts with ER negative or low (≤10%) BC were identified for central ER/PR/HER2 staining and HER2 FISH (IHC2+ only) to select those with TNBC by modern definitions. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the impact of clinicopathological variables on invasive disease-free (IDFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: Tumors from 605 pts (median age 56.3 yrs) met criteria for TNBC (ER < 1%, PR < 1% and HER2 0, 1 or 2+ and FISH negative). 51% were T1, 65% N0, 88% grade 3, and 75% had Ki67 > 15%. Histologically, 39% were anaplastic, 26% invasive ductal, 16% medullary, 8% metaplastic, 6% apocrine and 5% others. Median sTILs was 20% (0-90%). 55% pts received AdjCT [21% anthracycline (A), 19% A + taxane, and 15% other]. Median follow-up for IDFS and OS were 7.4 and 10.6 yrs, respectively. Multivariate analyses demonstrated that higher N stage (p < 0.01), lower sTILs (p = 0.01) and no AdjCT (p < 0.01) were independently associated with worse IDFS and OS. Histology (medullary subtype) was associated with better IDFS in univariate (HR 0.56, 95% CI, 0.35-0.89) but not in multivariate analyses, once sTILs were accounted for. Among systemically untreated pts (n = 182), higher N (p < 0.01) and lower sTILs (p = 0.04) were associated with worse IDFS. For systemically untreated T1N0 pts (n = 111), the 5-yr IDFS was 70% (95% CI, 61-81) [T1a: 83% (95% CI, 63-100), T1b: 68% (95% CI, 52-88) and T1c: 67% (95% CI, 55-83)], compared to 78% (95% CI, 68-84) for T1N0 pts treated with AdjCT. Conclusions: In TNBC pts, N stage, sTILs and receipt of AdjCT were independently prognostic for IDFS and OS. sTILs remained prognostic for IDFS in systemically untreated TNBC. In N0 TNBC, the risk of recurrence or death was substantial in the absence of chemotherapy, even for those with T1 tumors.

Objectives Health disparities between individuals of African and European ancestry are well documented. The disparities in bipolar disorder may be driven by racial bias superimposed on established factors contributing to misdiagnosis, including: evolving empirically based diagnostic criteria (International Classification of Diseases [ ICD ], Research Diagnostic Criteria [ RDC ] and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual [ DSM ]), multiple symptom domains (i.e. mania, depression and psychosis), and multimodal medical and additional psychiatric comorbidity. Methods For this paper, we reviewed the phenomenological differences between bipolar individuals of African and European ancestry in the context of diagnostic criteria and clinical factors that may contribute to a potential racial bias. Results Published data show that bipolar persons of African ancestry, compared with bipolar persons of non‐African ancestry, are more often misdiagnosed with a disease other than bipolar disorder (i.e. schizophrenia). Additionally, studies show that there are disparities in recruiting patients of African ancestry to participate in important genomic studies. This gap in biological research in this underrepresented minority may represent a missed opportunity to address potential racial differences in the risk and course of bipolar illness. Conclusion A concerted effort by the research community to increase inclusion of diverse persons in studies of bipolar disorder through community engagement may facilitate fully addressing these diagnostic and treatment disparities in bipolar individuals of African ancestry.

Abstract Clinical genetic testing panels are broadly used to gather information about cancer predisposition in individuals with personal and/or family history of breast cancer. However, the involvement of several of the genes on clinical testing panels in predisposition to breast cancer, such as MRE11A and RAD50, has recently come into question. In addition, accurate risk estimates for breast and other cancer are not well defined for the majority of genes on testing panels. We studied 60,000 women diagnosed with breast cancer who were tested for germline cancer predisposing mutations using hereditary cancer gene panels. Information on personal and family cancer history, age of diagnosis, and ethnicity of patients was obtained from test requisition forms. Greater than 90% met National Comprehensive Cancer Network HBOC testing criteria. To estimate gene-specific risks for breast cancer, case-control analyses were performed comparing the frequencies of pathogenic mutations from Caucasian cancer cases with frequencies from Caucasian, non-Finnish, non-TCGA controls from the Exome Aggregation Consortium (ExAC) database. Mutations were detected in 9% of breast cancer patients. Twelve genes displayed a significant association (p&lt;0.05) with breast cancer. Nine of these genes, including ATM, RAD51D, NF1, and MSH6, were associated with moderate risk (RR&gt;2.0) of breast cancer and three genes (BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2) were associated with high risk (RR&gt;5.0) of breast cancer. Cumulative age-dependent risk models were developed for each gene. This large clinical testing dataset of 60,000 women with breast cancer provides useful data for many predisposition genes previously lacking risk estimates, and should prove useful for clinical risk management of patients with inherited mutations in these genes. Citation Format: Couch FJ, Hu C, Lilyquist J, Shimelis H, Akinhanmi M, Na J, Polley EC, Hart SN, McFarland R, LaDuca H, Huether R, Goldgar DE, Dolinsky JS. Breast cancer risks associated with mutations in cancer predisposition genes identified by clinical genetic testing of 60,000 breast cancer patients [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr S2-01.

Abstract Clinical genetic testing of individuals with a personal or family history of breast and ovarian cancer using panels for BRCA1/2 and other candidate cancer predisposition genes has become routine clinical practice. Several of the genes on hereditary cancer testing panels have been strongly associated with specific subtypes of breast cancer. In particular, individuals with germline mutations in BRCA1 predominantly develop estrogen receptor (ER)-negative and triple negative (TN) (estrogen receptor negative, progesterone receptor negative, HER2 negative) breast tumors. In contrast, CHEK2 and ATM mutations have been associated with ER-positive breast cancer. In this study, associations between mutations in panel genes and breast cancer subtypes were evaluated. A cohort of 60,000 breast cancer patients tested for germline cancer predisposing mutations using hereditary cancer gene panels was utilized. Information on personal and family cancer history, age of diagnosis, tumor pathology, and ethnicity of patients was obtained from test requisition forms or by follow up with ordering health care providers. Mutations in each gene were combined into four histological subtypes (triple negative; HER2 positive; ER-positive,HER2-positive; and ER-positive,HER2 negative). Associations for each subtype were estimated by case-control analyses comparing the frequencies of pathogenic mutations in each subtype with frequencies from non-TCGA controls from the Exome Aggregation Consortium (ExAC) database. In addition, case-case analyses were conducted to assess enrichment of gene mutations in specific breast cancer subtypes. Among the observed associations between genes and breast cancer subtypes, mutations in CHEK2 and ATM were highly enriched in luminal breast cancers and BARD1 was specifically associated with TN breast cancer. Refining the spectrum of pathological correlates with mutations in hereditary breast cancer genes will aid gene specific cancer risk management, and may accelerate the development of novel gene-specific therapeutic interventions. Citation Format: Couch FJ, Lilyquist J, Na J, Hu C, Polley EC, Shimelis H, Akinhanmi M, McFarland R, LaDuca H, Goldgar DE, Dolinsky JS. Associations between breast cancer subtypes and mutations in cancer predisposition genes identified by clinical genetic testing of breast cancer patients [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-09-03.