Citations

Background Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) are established determinants of clinical outcomes in breast cancer. 1–6 While stromal TILs (sTILs) are commonly evaluated due to easier scoring and higher interobserver reproducibility, intraepithelial TILs may provide additional insights into anti-tumor immunity. 7 We aimed to comprehensively characterize immunotype-associated cellular landscapes in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and identify features associated with clinical outcomes. Methods 212 TNBC tumors were classified into three immunotypes based on immune infiltrate location and density: immune desert (ID), immune excluded (IE), and immune inflamed (IN). 8 Single-cell spatial transcriptomics was performed on 75 tumors to define the cellular composition and functional states of the tumor microenvironment across immunotypes. Findings were validated and integrated with bulk RNA sequencing data and clinical outcome datasets from FinXX, CALGB-40603, I-SPY 2, and Real-World Clinico-Genomic Data (RWCGD) cohorts. Results Patients with IN tumors had significantly improved outcomes compared with ID tumors. Despite high sTILs, IE tumors showed poor outcomes similar to ID tumors. Single-cell spatial analysis revealed that ID and IE tumors exhibited reduced major histocompatibility complex I/II expression and fewer tumor-resident plasmacytoid dendritic cells (pDCs) compared with IN tumors, which were enriched for interferon-alpha (IFNα) and interferon-gamma (IFNγ) responses. High IFN response scores were associated with favorable outcomes across multiple therapy types in independent datasets. Deconvolution of RWCGD bulk RNA-seq data confirmed that pDC abundance correlated with improved outcomes specifically in hormone receptor–negative subtypes. Conclusions Our study highlights pDCs and IFN signaling as hallmarks of effective anti-tumor immunity in TNBC. Immunotype-based profiling underscores the limited prognostic value of sTILs alone in immune-excluded tumors and supports pDCs and IFN pathways as potential biomarkers for prognosis and therapeutic development in TNBC.

LBA2 Background: Dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DDLS) remains a difficult disease to treat with limited systemic therapy options. Approved drugs offer modest benefit such as trabectedin (median progression-free survival [mPFS] 2.2 months [m]) or eribulin (mPFS 2.0m). The Cyclin-dependent kinase 4 (CDK4) oncogene is ubiquitously amplified in DDLS and is a rational therapeutic target. In single-arm phase 2 studies, treatment with selective CDK4 inhibitors resulted in mPFS 4.2m with palbociclib and mPFS 7.7m with abemaciclib. We hypothesized that treatment with abemaciclib would improve PFS compared to placebo in patients with recurrent or metastatic DDLS. Methods: SARC041 was a phase 3 randomized double-blind study of abemaciclib versus placebo. The study was open at 9 academic medical centers in the USA. Eligible patients (pts) had recurrent or metastatic DDLS (purely well-differentiated liposarcoma excluded), progression of disease by RECIST 1.1 in the 6 months prior to study entry, any number of prior systemic therapies, and adequate organ function and performance status. Pts were stratified by prior lines of therapy (0 vs 1 or more) and randomized 1:1 between abemaciclib 200 mg PO twice a day or matching placebo. Scans were every 6 weeks (every 12 weeks after week 36) and pts with progression of disease on placebo could cross over to open label abemaciclib. The primary endpoint was PFS. The design provided 80% power with two-sided 10% significance level to detect a hazard ratio of 0.6 by log-rank test. Secondary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR), PFS and response rate after crossover, and overall survival (OS). Data cutoff was March 1, 2026. Results: In total, 108 pts were randomized to receive abemaciclib (n = 54) or placebo (n = 54). Demographic/baseline characteristics were generally similar across treatment arms. Abemaciclib demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in PFS at 9.67m vs placebo at 1.52m (hazard ratio [HR] 0.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.25–0.59; p < 0.001). ORR was 9.3% for abemaciclib vs 0% for placebo (p = 0.057). mOS was not reached with abemaciclib vs 25.45m with placebo (HR 0.55; 95% CI, 0.28–1.07; p = 0.077). mPFS after crossover from placebo to abemaciclib was 3.44m (95% CI 2.66, 6.84). ORR after crossover was 4.3% (95% CI 0.53%, 15%). mOS after crossover was 24.03m (95% CI: 11.7, NA). Grade 3 or higher adverse event rates were similar in both arms (p > 0.99). No new safety signals were observed. Conclusions: Abemaciclib demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in PFS vs placebo in pts with dedifferentiated liposarcoma, with an encouraging OS trend. These results support abemaciclib as a new treatment option for dedifferentiated liposarcoma. Clinical trial information: NCT04967521 .

Abstract Objective Pediatric epilepsy surgery is well established, but contemporary global data on referral and presurgical evaluation practices are lacking. This International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) Pediatric Epilepsy Surgery Task Force study provides an updated overview of current trends and regional differences. Methods Group‐level data were collected from 61 epilepsy surgery programs (49 pediatric‐only) across 29 countries and six continents, identified through ILAE networks, and included all children and adolescents treated in 2023 who underwent presurgical evaluation/epilepsy surgery. Results Group‐level data were available for 2427 patients. Mean age at surgery was 9.1 ± 4.9 years; mean epilepsy duration was 5.3. At surgery, 3.2% were <1 year old (highest in Oceania: 5.1%), and 6.1% were nonpharmacoresistant (highest in Europe: 15.0%). Prior neurosurgery was reported in 14.2% (highest in North America: 28.8%), including 8.0% resections (6.1% for epilepsy, 1.5% for tumors; highest in Oceania: 16.5%), 2.3% disconnections (1.3% corpus callosotomy; highest in South America: 4.7%), and 4.2% neuromodulation (3.7% vagal nerve stimulation, .2% responsive neurostimulation, one deep brain stimulation; highest in North America: 12.2%). Developmental and epileptic encephalopathies (DEEs) at surgery included Lennox–Gastaut syndrome (7.4%), infantile epileptic spasms syndrome (5.1%), and DEE with spike–wave activation in sleep (1.5%). Presurgical investigations included fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (52.6%; highest in Oceania: 79.7%), genetic testing (46.8%; highest in Asia: 54.3%), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) postprocessing (32.4%; highest in South America: 53.0%), functional MRI (fMRI; 15.2%; highest in North America: 40.3%), magnetoencephalography (11.9%; highest in North America: 39.3%), single photon emission computed tomography (9.6%; highest in North America: 22.2%), high‐density electroencephalography (EEG; 1.9%; highest in Europe: 4.7%), source localization (1.6%; highest in Oceania: 7.6%), Wada test (1.2%; highest in North America: 3.5%), and EEG‐fMRI (.5%; highest in Europe: 1.1%). Significance Despite some early surgeries, including in infancy and before pharmacoresistance, mean epilepsy duration before surgery remains >5 years. Reoperations are common, with resection more frequent than neuromodulation. Genetic testing in nearly half of patients reflects its growing relevance, and the high rate of DEEs underscores the complexity of surgical candidates.

Background: There is growing support for high-efficacy disease-modifying therapy (DMT) in multiple sclerosis (MS), but escalation (ESC) approaches remain common. Objective: To describe decision-making in a pragmatic trial of early high-efficacy treatment (EHT) versus ESC. Methods: DELIVER-MS is a multi-center, pragmatic, randomized controlled trial (RCT) with a parallel observational study (OBS), which enrolled treatment-naïve people with RRMS in 31 UK/US sites. Primary outcome was as follows: 36-month brain volume loss according to initial treatment approach (EHT vs. ESC). Stepwise multivariable logistic regression was used to predict participation in RCT versus OBS and choice of EHT versus ESC within the OBS cohort. Results: In total, 816 people with MS were enrolled. Participants declined randomization due to preference for a particular DMT (85%), efficacy concerns (20%), and safety concerns (9%). RCT versus OBS participation was associated with lower relapse rate ( p = 0.043) and greater brain parenchymal fraction ( p = 0.002). Among 374 in the OBS cohort, 125 (33%) chose ESC and 249 (67%) chose EHT. People commencing EHT had higher education attainment ( p < 0.001) and relapse rate ( p = 0.025). Conclusion: Baseline DELIVER-MS data demonstrate that participants with milder disease are more likely to participate in RCT. The choice of EHT versus ESC was associated with demographic factors and disease activity. Clinical trial registration: NCT03535298

PURPOSE In immunoglobulin light chain (AL) amyloidosis, amyloid fibrils cause organ dysfunction. Anselamimab, a monoclonal antibody, selectively binds to amyloid fibrils, accelerating their clearance. METHODS Newly diagnosed patients with European modification of Mayo 2004 stage IIIa or IIIb AL amyloidosis were randomly assigned to receive anselamimab or placebo with cyclophosphamide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (with or without daratumumab). The primary end point was a hierarchical composite of time to all-cause mortality (ACM) and frequency of cardiovascular hospitalizations (CVHs), analyzed using the Finkelstein-Schoenfeld test and win ratio estimation. RESULTS Among 406 randomly assigned patients, the primary end point win ratio for anselamimab versus placebo was 1.11 (95% CI, 0.83, 1.50; P = .332) and the hazard ratio (HR) for ACM was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.57, 1.13; P = .290). CVH rates in the anselamimab and placebo groups were 0.59 (95% CI, 0.42, 0.83) and 0.89 (95% CI, 0.55, 1.43), respectively ( P = .145). Among patients with kappa isotype (n = 72), the win ratio was 2.06 (95% CI, 0.98, 4.31; P = .100) and anselamimab reduced ACM by 62% versus placebo (HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.17 to 0.86; nominal P = .012), and CVH by 71% (IRR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.87; nominal P = .028) with improvements in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-Overall Score. There was no clinical benefit observed in the lambda population. Anselamimab was generally well-tolerated; safety data were comparable between treatment arms overall. CONCLUSION Treatment with anselamimab, an antifibril antibody used alongside antiplasma cell dyscrasia therapy, while not meeting the primary end point in the overall population, significantly improved ACM and CVH in patients with kappa AL, potentially offering a new therapeutic option for this isotype.

Abstract Repetitive head impacts sustained during American football have been associated with neuropathological changes such as white matter shear injuries. However, the impact of specific factors, such as age of first exposure and cumulative head impact burden, on white matter integrity remains unclear. This study investigated in vivo white matter microstructural changes using diffusion tensor imaging and tract-based spatial statistics in 165 male former American football players (mean age 57.3 years, range 45–74) and 52 unexposed asymptomatic male controls (mean age 59.4 years, range 45–74) in the DIAGNOSE CTE Research Project. Compared to controls, former football players exhibited significantly higher fractional anisotropy (FA) in 1.97% of the white matter skeleton (1552 voxels; Cohen’s d = 0.587) and higher tissue-corrected FA (FAt) in 1.48% of the white matter skeleton (1004 voxels; Cohen’s d = 0.616). No significant differences were observed for mean diffusivity, axial diffusivity, radial diffusivity, or free water between football players and controls. Among football players, there were no significant differences in the white matter microstructure between players diagnosed with traumatic encephalopathy syndrome and those without the diagnosis. Lower FA was significantly associated with older age (P &lt; 0.00001) and an earlier age of first exposure to tackle football (P &lt; 0.01), while lower FAt was associated with greater cumulative head impact burden, specifically higher linear acceleration (P &lt; 0.04) and rotational force (P &lt; 0.02). This study highlights the influential role of exposure factors on white matter microstructure in former American football players, as well as the utility of diffusion tensor imaging to aid in characterizing the long-term effects of repetitive head impacts in contact sport athletes.

TPS7100 Background: Bruton tyrosine kinase covalent inhibitors (cBTKi) have been transformative in CLL treatment. Despite achieving extended remissions, in most patients disease still relapses despite cBTKi therapy, often associated with BTK C481 mutations. Non-covalent BTKi (ncBTKi), including pirtobrutinib, can overcome this resistance (Sharman et al. ASCO . 2025). Pirtobrutinib received FDA approval in Dec 2025, for R/R CLL/CLL patients pretreated with cBTKi. Rocbrutinib (LP-168) is a highly selective next-generation BTKi that can covalently bind wild-type and gatekeeper mutations (T474X, commonly seen in patients relapsed after pirtobrutinib) and non-covalently target C481-mutated BTK , with preclinical efficacy in treatment-naïve and BTKi-resistant CLL (Gordon et al. IWCLL . 2025). In the rocbrutinib phase 1 trial (NCT04775745), encouraging safety and efficacy have been observed in CLL patients with prior exposure to BTKi and/or BCL2 inhibitor (BCL2i) (Woyach et al. Blood. 2025). Presented here is the design of a phase 3 trial aiming to compare the efficacy of rocbrutinib versus pirtobrutinib in cBTKi-pretreated R/R CLL/SLL patients. Methods: ROCKET-CLL (NCT07342478) is a randomized, open-label, multicenter, phase 3 study comparing rocbrutinib (Arm 1) to pirtobrutinib (Arm 2) in R/R CLL/SLL subjects who previously received treatments including covalent BTKi. Eligible subjects must require treatment per 2018 iwCLL criteria, have measurable lesions by CT, an ECOG performance score of 0-2, and adequate hematologic and other organ functions. About 306 subjects will be randomized 1:1 based on stratification factors such as 17p deletion/ TP53 mutation presence, reasons for discontinuing prior cBTKi, prior BCL2i treatment, and geographic region. Participants assigned to each arm will receive rocbrutinib (200 mg QD) or pirtobrutinib (200 mg QD) tablets continuously until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal, or other study discontinuation criteria are met. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS), assessed by an independent review committee (IRC) per iwCLL 2018 criteria with CLL (Hallek et al. 2018) and Lugano 2014 criteria with SLL (Cheson et al. 2014). Important secondary endpoints include overall survival (OS), time to next treatment (TTNT), event-free survival (EFS), overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), PFS assessed by investigator (INV), concordance between IRC and INV PFS, safety and tolerability, and population PK. Exploratory endpoints include health-related quality of life and biomarker assessment. Recruitment is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT07342478 .

TPS649 Background: While advancements in early-stage breast cancer (ESBC) treatment have improved survival, disease recurrence and therapeutic resistance remain significant challenges. Current biomarkers guide initial treatment, yet novel diagnostics are required to improve risk stratification and recurrence prediction. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) offers a non-invasive method for detecting minimal residual disease (MRD), potentially enabling the identification of molecular relapse before radiographic progression. However, deeper validation of ctDNA kinetics across the treatment continuum is needed to inform precision oncology strategies in ESBC. Additionally, the logistical complexity of tissue-dependent assays presents a barrier to scalability. In order to address these gaps, the purpose of the GEMINI-BREAST study is to evaluate a methylation-based, tissue-free ctDNA assay (Tempus xM) and integrate this with comprehensive clinical and multi-omic data to determine prognostic utility for invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) and long term outcomes in patients with ESBC. Methods: GEMINI-BREAST (NCT07211178) is a prospective, non-interventional, multi-center study enrolling up to 900 participants with ESBC treated with curative intent. Eligible patients enroll into one of three analytical cohorts (n ~ 300 each): Cohort 1 enrolls pre-neoadjuvant therapy (high-risk HR+/HER2- [Stage II-III], HER2+ [Stage II-III], or TNBC [Stage I-III]); Cohort 2 enrolls post-surgery/pre-adjuvant therapy (same subtypes, no evidence of disease); and Cohort 3 enrolls long-term survivors (high-risk HR+/HER2- [Stage II-III], ≥ 5 years since diagnosis). Longitudinal blood samples for ctDNA analysis and archival tissue for NGS are collected at standard-of-care intervals, including, as applicable: pre-neoadjuvant, neoadjuvant on-treatment (weeks 3, 6, 12) and post-treatment, post-surgical/pre-adjuvant, adjuvant on-treatment (every 3 months), end of definitive therapy, surveillance for up to 5 years (every 3-6 months for Cohorts 1/2; every 6-12 months for Cohort 3), and at progression/recurrence. The primary objective is to evaluate the association between ctDNA dynamics (Cohort 1) or MRD status (Cohort 2/3) and iDFS, with secondary endpoints assessing overall survival, lead time to recurrence, and the predictive value of ctDNA clearance for pathological complete response. Recruitment is currently ongoing at U.S. sites. Clinical trial information: NCT07211178 .

e13656 Background: Effective multidisciplinary cancer care is bottlenecked by the cognitive burden of synthesizing fragmented electronic health records across different specialties. Current AI tools often function as isolated chatbots rather than integrated workflow assistants. We developed and validated "OncoSphere AI," an Agentic AI multidisciplinary clinical workflow support tool designed to autonomously orchestrate the multidisciplinary review process by deconstructing complex cases into domain-specific insights. Methods: OncoSphere AI is a novel, multi-agent large language model–driven platform that simulates a multidisciplinary tumor board for cancer care. The architecture uses a parallel reasoning framework in which eight virtual specialty agents—Medical Oncology, Radiation Oncology, Surgical Oncology, Pathology, Radiology, Pharmacy, Clinical Research, and Nurse Navigation—independently analyze structured and unstructured patient data against specialty specific guidelines and contemporary peer-reviewed literature. System performance was assessed via built-in telemetry (task completion, latency, inter-agent agreement) and blinded review by eight expert oncologists using a structured survey to rate data extraction fidelity, guideline concordance, safety, and clinical utility compared with standard manual review. Results: The study cohort (n=20, median age 59.5 years; 55% female) had a median of 2.5 (range 0-7) prior lines of therapy and multiorgan metastatic disease (median: 2, range 1–4), including lung, breast, gastrointestinal (CRC, pancreatic, hepatobiliary), and genitourinary (prostate, renal) malignancies. OncoSphere AI demonstrated high workflow utility (mean rating: 4/5) and strong extraction fidelity, with more than 90% of biomarker extractions rated as a “perfect match” by expert reviewers. Operational efficiency gains were substantial with AI processing averaged 4.7 minutes per case versus 29.3 minutes for manual review, corresponding to an 84% reduction in time (p<0.001). System telemetry revealed adaptive compute behavior, with the platform autonomously allocating 1.73-fold more reasoning tokens to complex, refractory cases than to standard scenarios. Safety review identified only one critical contraindication issue in a heavily pretreated, multi-line setting. Conclusions: OncoSphere AI effectively automates the clinical “perception layer,” consistently transforming heterogeneous longitudinal data into decision-grade insights with high fidelity and marked time savings. By operating as a coordinated ensemble of domain-specialized AI agents rather than a single generic model, it offers a scalable approach to reduce physician cognitive burden and to standardize guideline-concordant care planning in diverse, heavily pretreated oncology populations.