Citations

Abstract Objective This study explores and documents the patient experience during the prodrome phase of migraine. Background Migraine attacks can be divided into four stages: the prodrome (or premonitory phase), the aura, the headache phase, and postdrome. Qualitative data on the range of symptoms during the prodrome and their timing relative to headache onset are sparse. Prodromal symptoms may predict the onset of migraine headache pain and provide a clinically useful benchmark for initiation of treatment early in an attack before pain begins. Design/Methods Eligible participants with a clinician‐confirmed diagnosis of migraine and at least one prodromal symptom were consented, screened, and then participated in 60‐min interviews. The interview guide included open‐ended questions to elicit spontaneous reports and specific probes about prodromal symptoms based on a clinician‐established list. A theory approach was used to analyze the qualitative data collected in interviews to identify key themes and gather insights; data were analyzed using ATLAS.ti. Results Data collection for this study occurred from March 8, 2022, to May 16, 2022. Twenty interviews were conducted, and analyses demonstrated that concept saturation was achieved. Participants reported 36 unique prodromal symptoms, and each participant experienced a mean of 13 symptoms (standard deviation [SD] = 6.6) and a median of 11 symptoms (interquartile range [IQR] = 7.8–17.0) during the prodrome phase. The most commonly reported prodromal symptoms were nausea ( n = 17/20, 85%), fatigue/tiredness ( n = 16/20, 80%), sensitivity to light ( n = 13/20, 65%), neck pain/stiffness ( n = 12/20, 60%), and dizziness/vertigo/light‐headedness ( n = 10/20, 50%). Of the symptoms reported by at least four participants ( n ≥ 4/20, 20%), neck pain/stiffness was rated most bothersome (8.9 out of 10) and sensitivity to light was rated most severe (8.5 out of 10). Almost 40% of all symptoms reported occurred less than 2 h before the start of migraine headache. Of the commonly reported symptoms, nausea (0.8h), sensitivity to light (1.0 h), and dizziness/vertigo/lightheadedness (2.0 h) began closest to headache onset; fatigue/tiredness (4.0 h) and neck pain/stiffness (4.8 h) were the most remote from headache onset. Conclusion This study identified frequently reported prodromal symptoms, with participants commonly reporting that a migraine headache would follow their experience of prodrome within a 1‐ to 6‐h window. Characterizing the prodrome experience may improve measurement strategies for the burden of migraine and create opportunities to treat during the prodromal phase to prevent the onset of moderate or severe headaches.

ImportanceIndia’s goal of measles elimination remains unmet, as evidenced by significant recent outbreaks.ObjectiveTo identify seroprevalence rates among vaccinated children and to examine demographic factors that influence antibody responses.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis cross-sectional study included a highly vaccinated cohort of Indian children from the states of Kerala and Tamil Nadu between 2018 and 2023. Eligible children had received at least 2 doses of measles-containing vaccines; their mothers were recruited from various community settings, including local nursery and secondary schools, residential associations, and hospitals.ExposureMeasles-specific antibodies were quantified in serum samples.Main Outcomes and MeasuresMeasles-specific immunoglobulin G (IgG) and neutralizing antibodies were quantified in both children and mothers. Measles-specific IgM was also measured in children.ResultsThe total cohort comprised 684 children (median age, 9 years [range, 4-18 years]; 348 male [50.1%]) and 544 mothers. All children received at least 2 doses of measles-containing vaccines; 435 children (63.6%) received a third dose, and 7 (1.0%) received a fourth dose. Among the children, 621 (90.8%) had positive measles-specific IgG, and 623 (91.5%) had protective neutralizing antibodies titers, with a strong correlation between measles-specific IgG and neutralizing antibodies (r = 0.73; P < .001). Female children exhibited significantly higher titers of both measles-specific IgG and neutralizing antibodies compared with male children. While IgG and neutralizing antibody titers remained stable over time and were not associated with the number of vaccine doses in children, neutralizing antibody titers increased with age in mothers, likely due to repeated viral exposure. Notably, in 20 families with at least 2 children, differential measles-specific IgM profiles were observed between siblings despite high IgG and neutralizing antibody titers, suggesting ongoing breakthrough infections.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cross-sectional study, substantial measles immunity gaps were found despite high vaccine coverage with evidence of breakthrough infections, posing significant challenges to India’s measles elimination efforts. These results underscore the urgent need to strengthen India’s immunization program and investigate the mechanisms driving suboptimal responses to measles vaccination; without addressing these immune response deficiencies, achieving measles elimination through increased vaccine coverage alone may remain unattainable in India.

ABSTRACT Despite remarkable interest in the biomarker potential of urinary extracellular vesicles (uEVs) and the identification of numerous promising candidates, their clinical translation still presents multiple challenges. The opportunities for successful translation are obvious, yet the main roadblocks on the way have hardly been systematically considered and more coordinated approaches are needed to overcome them. In the present review article, we have identified the most relevant roadblocks of clinical translation of urinary EV‐based biomarkers and discuss possible solutions to overcome them. These roadblocks are categorized as fundamental and technical but also related to development of novel biomarker assays and clinical acceptance. In addition, hurdles within the regulatory approval process are discussed. It is clear that various roadblocks to clinical translation of urinary EV biomarkers exist; however, they are addressable by promoting rigor and reproducibility as well as collaboration between basic and clinical scientists, clinicians, industry and regulatory bodies. Moreover, knowledge of obstacles for assay development and regulatory requirements should already be considered when developing a new biomarker to maximize the chance of successful translation. This review presents not only a status quo, but also a roadmap for the further development of the field.

Pediatric central nervous system tumors are the leading cause of cancer-related deaths in children. The five-year survival rate for high-grade glioma in children is less than 20%. The development of new treatments is dependent upon multi-institutional collaborative clinical trials requiring reproducible and accurate centralized response assessment. We present the results of the BraTS-PEDs 2023 challenge, the first Brain Tumor Segmentation (BraTS) challenge focused on pediatric brain tumors. This challenge utilized data acquired from multiple international consortia dedicated to pediatric neuro-oncology and clinical trials. BraTS-PEDs 2023 aimed to evaluate volumetric segmentation algorithms for pediatric brain gliomas from magnetic resonance imaging using standardized quantitative performance evaluation metrics employed across the BraTS 2023 challenges. The top-performing AI approaches for pediatric tumor analysis included ensembles of nnU-Net and Swin UNETR, Auto3DSeg, or nnU-Net with a self-supervised framework. The BraTS-PEDs 2023 challenge fostered collaboration between clinicians (neuro-oncologists, neuroradiologists) and AI/imaging scientists, promoting faster data sharing and the development of automated volumetric analysis techniques. These advancements could significantly benefit clinical trials and improve the care of children with brain tumors.

BACKGROUND: Small, randomized trials of patients with cervical artery dissection showed conflicting results regarding optimal stroke prevention strategies. We aimed to compare outcomes in patients with cervical artery dissection treated with antiplatelets versus anticoagulation. METHODS: This is a multicenter observational retrospective international study (16 countries, 63 sites) that included patients with cervical artery dissection without major trauma. The exposure was antithrombotic treatment type (anticoagulation versus antiplatelets), and outcomes were subsequent ischemic stroke and major hemorrhage (intracranial or extracranial hemorrhage). We used adjusted Cox regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting to determine associations between anticoagulation and study outcomes within 30 and 180 days. The main analysis used an as-treated crossover approach and only included outcomes occurring with the above treatments. RESULTS: The study included 3636 patients (402 [11.1%] received exclusively anticoagulation and 2453 [67.5%] received exclusively antiplatelets). By day 180, there were 162 new ischemic strokes (4.4%) and 28 major hemorrhages (0.8%); 87.0% of ischemic strokes occurred by day 30. In adjusted Cox regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting, compared with antiplatelet therapy, anticoagulation was associated with a nonsignificantly lower risk of subsequent ischemic stroke by day 30 (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.71 [95% CI, 0.45–1.12]; P =0.145) and by day 180 (adjusted HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.28–2.24]; P =0.670). Anticoagulation therapy was not associated with a higher risk of major hemorrhage by day 30 (adjusted HR, 1.39 [95% CI, 0.35–5.45]; P =0.637) but was by day 180 (adjusted HR, 5.56 [95% CI, 1.53–20.13]; P =0.009). In interaction analyses, patients with occlusive dissection had significantly lower ischemic stroke risk with anticoagulation (adjusted HR, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.18–0.88]; P interaction =0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Our study does not rule out the benefit of anticoagulation in reducing ischemic stroke risk, particularly in patients with occlusive dissection. If anticoagulation is chosen, it seems reasonable to switch to antiplatelet therapy before 180 days to lower the risk of major bleeding. Large prospective studies are needed to validate our findings.

PURPOSE Tumor treating fields (TTFields) use alternating electric fields to disrupt cancer cell proliferation. Feasibility of TTFields therapy with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel was previously demonstrated in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. PANOVA-3 was designed to confirm safety and efficacy of TTFields in patients with unresectable locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (LA-PAC). METHODS In this global phase III trial, 571 patients with newly diagnosed LA-PAC were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m 2 and nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m 2 by intravenous infusion once a day on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle with or without TTFields. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), local PFS, pain-free survival, and overall response rate (ORR). Distant PFS was analyzed post hoc. RESULTS OS was significantly prolonged using TTFields with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel versus gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (median, 16.2 months [95% CI, 15.0 to 18.0] v 14.2 months [95% CI, 12.8 to 15.4]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.82 [95% CI, 0.68 to 0.99]; P = .039). PFS, local PFS, and ORR were not improved. Pain-free survival was significantly prolonged with TTFields with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (median, 15.2 months [95% CI, 10.3 to 22.8] v 9.1 months [95% CI, 7.4 to 12.7]; HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.56 to 0.97]; P = .027), as was distant PFS (median, 13.9 months [95% CI, 12.2 to 16.8] v 11.5 months [95% CI, 10.4 to 12.9]; HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.57 to 0.96]; P = .022). Device-related skin adverse events (AEs) were experienced by 76.3% of patients. Most device-related skin AEs were mild to moderate, with 7.7% of patients reporting a grade 3 AE. CONCLUSION This study demonstrated significant OS, pain-free survival, and distant PFS benefits for TTFields with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel versus gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel in patients with unresectable LA-PAC, with no additive systemic toxicity.

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

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

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 .