Citations

Abstract Background: The clinical utility of routine annual mammogram after curative-intent treatment for male breast cancer is uncertain. There is potentially greater value after lumpectomy (as surveillance for ipsilateral recurrence) than mastectomy (as screening for a new contralateral cancer). The goal of this study was to assess real world use of mammography in men during the first year after lumpectomy or mastectomy to treat breast cancer. Methods: Administrative claims data from OptumLabs Data Warehouse (a large US database that includes privately insured patients and Medicare Advantage-insured enrollees from all 50 states and of all ages and ethnic and racial groups) were used to identify men treated with breast surgery for a new diagnosis of breast cancer between 2007 and 2017. We required continuous coverage starting at least 6 months prior to the non-metastatic breast cancer diagnosis and continuing until at least 13 months after the breast surgery. Our primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who had at least one mammogram during the year (13-month period, to allow for scheduling and other logistical delays) after lumpectomy or mastectomy. Univariate and multivariate testing were performed to identify predictors of mammography (with p<0.05 used as the threshold for statistical significance for both). Our secondary endpoint was the proportion with at least one mammogram within 24 months of surgery, performed in a subset who maintained their insurance coverage for at least that duration. Results: The 13-month analysis included 730 men with a median age at diagnosis of 62 years (Range: 25 to 87 years) and a median follow-up duration of 35 months (Range: 13 to 134 months). 209 (29%) of these men underwent mammography within 13 months after surgery. The characteristics of patients who underwent mammography and those who did not are shown in Table 1. Mammography was more likely after lumpectomy than mastectomy (41% vs. 27%) and after radiation therapy (41% vs. 32% in those who did not receive radiation). In a multivariate logistic regression model, more recent diagnosis (2015+) was associated with lower odds of undergoing mammography, while receipt of radiation was associated with higher odds of undergoing mammography. In the subset of patients with two or more years of post-surgery coverage (n=527), the proportion who had at least one mammogram during that 24-month period was 49% after lumpectomy and 40% after mastectomy. Conclusions: In this insured cohort, 73% of men did not undergo mammography within a year after mastectomy, and 59% did not within a year after lumpectomy. Mammography was less likely in patients diagnosed more recently (perhaps due to acknowledgment of the unique aspects of male breast cancer including a relatively low risk of contralateral second primary tumors), and more likely in those who received radiation. These variations in practice likely result from the paucity of evidence-based guidelines for male breast cancer survivorship care. More research is needed pertaining to whether or not mammograms improve clinical outcomes after curative intent treatment for male breast cancer. Table 1: Patient characteristics associated with receipt of mammogram within first 13 months after male breast cancer surgeryUnivariate AnalysisMultivariate AnalysisNo Mammogram (N=521)Mammogram (N=209)P-value, chi-square testOdds Ratio (OR) and 95% CIP-value for ORAge Group:0.1225-4966 (12.7%)32 (15.3%)Reference50-64216 (41.5%)98 (46.9%)0.99 (0.60, 1.63)0.9665-74112 (21.5%)44 (21.1%)0.87 (0.48, 1.57)0.6575+127 (24.4%)35 (16.7%)0.57 (0.30, 1.07)0.08Census Region:0.52Midwest138 (26.5%)59 (28.2%)ReferenceNortheast97 (18.6%)47 (22.5%)1.10 (0.68, 1.78)0.69South223 (42.8%)79 (37.8%)0.74 (0.49, 1.11)0.15West63 (12.1%)24 (11.5%)0.83 (0.47, 1.47)0.51Year of diagnosis:0.072007-2010126 (24.2%)65 (31.1%)Reference2011-2014199 (38.2%)82 (39.2%)0.80 (0.54, 1.20)0.292015+196 (37.6%)62 (29.7%)0.63 (0.41, 0.96)0.03Elixhauser Category:0.250148 (28.4%)69 (33.0%)Reference1-2218 (41.8%)74 (35.4%)0.85 (0.56, 1.28)0.433+155 (29.8%)66 (31.6%)1.18 (0.75, 1.87)0.47Surgery Type:0.005Lumpectomy55 (10.6%)38 (18.2%)ReferenceMastectomy466 (89.4%)171 (81.8%)1.57 (0.97, 2.55)0.07Chemotherapy:0.79No301 (57.8%)123 (58.9%)ReferenceYes220 (42.2%)86 (41.1%)0.79 (0.54, 1.16)0.23Radiation:0.02No355 (68.1%)124 (59.3%)ReferenceYes166 (31.9%)85 (40.7%)1.51 (1.03, 2.20)0.03 Citation Format: Siddhartha Yadav, Lindsey Sangaralingham, Stephanie R. Payne, Karthik V. Giridhar, Tina J. Hieken, Judy C. Boughey, Robert W. Mutter, John R. Hawse, Rafael E. Jimenez, Rachel A. Freedman, Sadia Choudhery, Fergus J. Couch, Celine M. Vachon, Nilay Shah, Roberto A. Leon-Ferre, Kathryn J. Ruddy. Surveillance mammography after treatment for male breast cancer [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 P4-17-08.

Abstract Background: Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) is typically strongly hormone receptor (HR) positive, with unique characteristics. It has been shown to have poor response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and recent studies describe the benefits of neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET). We sought to determine how the primary management strategy in ILC has changed over time, and the impact of ILC tumor biology on its management. Specifically, we hypothesized that use of NAC has decreased, while NET use increased. Additionally, we investigated whether NET is associated with higher rates of breast conservation surgery (BCS) than other primary management strategies. Methods: We queried the NCDB from 2010-2016 and identified all women with ILC who underwent surgical therapy. Patients with stage IV disease were excluded. First course of treatment was classified as: NAC (chemotherapy starting 31-365 days before surgery), NET (short course defined as 7-30 days before surgery; long course defined as 31-365 days before surgery), and primary surgery. Tumors were considered HR+ if they were estrogen receptor and/or progesterone receptor positive. Trends over time in first treatment strategy were compared using Cochrane-Armitage tests. The association between first treatment strategy and use of BCS was assessed using multivariable logistic regression. Results: Among 79,709 women with ILC, 94.0% were HR+/HER2-, 4.7% were HER2+, and 1.3% were triple negative. The most common primary treatment strategy was surgery (92.3%), but the percent undergoing systemic treatment before surgery increased from 7.1% in 2010 to 8.8% in 2016 (p<0.001). The use of NAC increased significantly over the study period in patients with triple negative (12.1% in 2010 to 23.7% in 2016, p=0.007) and HER2+ (12.2% in 2010 to 29.1% in 2016, p<0.001) ILC tumors. Among patients with HR+/HER2- tumors, however, the use of NAC decreased from 4.7% in 2010 to 4.2% in 2016, p=0.007, and the use of long course NET increased significantly, from 1.6% in 2010 to 2.7% in 2016, p<0.001. The use of short course NET in HR+/HER2- patients remained very low over the study period (0.4% in 2010 to 0.5% in 2016, p=0.14). Analyzing the HR+/HER2- subset, 48.4% (295/609) of patients undergoing long course NET with a cT2 tumor underwent BCS compared to 35.3% for primary surgery, 27.3% for NAC, and 24.8% for short course NET (p<0.001). Long course NET was also associated with a higher BCS rate in cT3/cT4 tumors: 22.6% BCS for long course NET, 8.3% BCS for primary surgery, 9.6% BCS for NAC, 7.8% BCS for short course NET (p<0.001). In multivariable analysis including a clinical T category by treatment interaction, long course NET was the only treatment that was associated with higher rates of BCS compared to primary surgery in cT2 (OR 1.51, 95% CI: 1.27-1.79) tumors, while both long course NET (OR 2.52, 95% CI: 1.97-3.22) and NAC (OR 1.54, 95% CI: 1.27-1.88) were associated with increased use of BCS in cT3/cT4 tumors, see Table. Conclusions: The primary management of ILC is slowly evolving over time with a decrease in primary surgery. NAC use has increased appropriately in tumor subtypes with greatest potential benefit (i.e., triple negative or HER2 positive). In HR+/HER2- disease, NAC use has decreased, however NET use has increased and in cT2+ tumors NET was associated with higher rates of BCS. Variable1Odds ratio for BCS (95% CI)p-valueAge, per 1 year increase1.04 (1.03-1.04)<0.001Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score<0.0011 vs 00.86 (0.82-0.90)2+ vs 00.72 (0.66-0.79)Grade2<0.001Moderately/Poorly vsWell Differentiated0.91 (0.88-0.95)Clinical N category2<0.001cN1 vs cN00.49 (0.46-0.52)cN2/cN3 vs cN00.41 (0.35-0.47)Multicentric<0.001Yes vs No0.36 (0.34-0.38)Primary treatment by clinical T category2<0.001For cT1 tumorsLong course NET vs primary surgery0.65 (0.51-0.83)NAC vs Primary surgery0.31 (0.24-0.41)Short course NET vs primary surgery0.85 (0.58-1.24)For cT2 tumorsLong course NET vs primary surgery1.51 (1.27-1.79)NAC vs primary surgery1.04 (0.90-1.20)Short course NET vs primary surgery0.53 (0.33-0.85)For cT3/cT4 tumorsLong course NET vs primary surgery2.52 (1.97-3.22)NAC vs primary surgery1.54 (1.27-1.88)Short course NET vs primary surgery0.79 (0.31-2.02)1Model additionally adjusted for year of diagnosis, race, ethnicity, and insurance status.2Unknown level included in the model but not reported Citation Format: Rita A Mukhtar, Tanya L. Hoskin, Elizabeth B. Habermann, Judy C. Boughey. Trends in primary management of invasive lobular carcinoma: An analysis of the National Cancer Database (NCDB) [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 P4-13-01.

Abstract Background: I-SPY2 is a multicenter, phase 2 trial using response-adaptive randomization within biomarker subtypes to evaluate novel agents as neoadjuvant therapy for high-risk breast cancer. The primary endpoint is pathologic complete response (pCR) at surgery. The goal is to identify (graduate) regimens with ≥ 85% Bayesian predictive probability of success (i.e., demonstrating superiority to control) in a future 300-patient phase 3 1:1 randomized neoadjuvant trial with pCR endpoint within signatures defined by hormone-receptor (HR), HER2, and MammaPrint (MP) status. Regimens may leave the trial for futility (< 10% probability of success), maximum sample size accrual (with probability of success ≥ 10% and < 85%), or safety concerns as recommended by the independent DSMB. For HER2+ patients, the I-SPY2 control arm was 12 weekly cycles of paclitaxel+trastuzumab (TH, control) followed by doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (AC) q2-3 weeks x4 and surgery. Patritumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody that inhibits HER3. In this experimental arm for HER2+ patients, patritumab was given q3w x 4 cycles (18mg/kg loading dose followed by 9mg/kg/dose) concurrent with paclitaxel and trastuzumab q1w x 12 weeks (PTH, treatment), followed by AC q2-3w. Methods: Women with tumors ≥ 2.5cm were eligible for screening. MP low/HR+ tumors were ineligible. MRI scans (baseline, 3 weeks after start of therapy, prior to AC, and prior to surgery) were used in a longitudinal statistical model to predict pCR for individual patients. Analysis was intention to treat. Patients who switched to non-protocol therapy count as non-pCR. Patients on treatment arm therapy at the time of arm closure are non-evaluable. Graduation potential was in 3 of 10 pre-defined signatures: all HER2+, HR-/HER2+, and HR+/HER2+. Results: The PTH regimen was stopped at the recommendation of the Safety Working Group and DSMB based on a safety event (bilateral sensorineural hearing loss, Gr 3) observed in one patient. At the time of arm closure, N=31 patients had received PTH treatment; 4 patients receiving PTH were changed to non-protocol therapy and removed from the analysis. The final estimated pCR report will consider 27 PTH and 31 TH as evaluable patients. Accrual was insufficient to assess graduation, however, there appears to be good signal in the HER2+HR- but not HER2+HR+ signatures. I-SPY 2 TRIAL Est. pCR at time of arm closureSignaturesPTH (Treatment)N= 31TH (Control)N = 31All (HER2+)0.40 (0.22 - 0.59), n=310.23 (0.09 - 0.37), n=31HR-/HER2+0.64 (0.36 - 0.91), n=110.30 (0.12 - 0.47), n=12HR+/HER2+0.28 (0.08 - 0.48), n=200.20 (0.06 - 0.34), n=19 HR+/HER2+0.28 (0.08 - 0.48), n=200.20 (0.06 - 0.34), n=19The patient who developed Gr3 sensorineural hearing loss 6 days after the 2nd patritumab (and 4th paclitaxel/trastuzumab) treatment, did not recover her hearing after patritumab was stopped, and also reported Gr3 vulvovaginal pain, vulvitis, and vaginal inflammation. Other gynecological symptoms in the PTH arm include: 1 pt with Gr1 vaginal hemorrhage, and 1 pt with Gr2 dyspareunia. There was a higher frequency of Gr3 hypokalaemia (12.5% vs. 3.2%). One pt in the PTH arm reported Gr3 small intestinal obstruction which resolved with conservative management. Conclusion: The I-SPY 2 study aims to assess the probability that investigational regimens will be successful in a phase 3 neoadjuvant trial; PTH was stopped due to safety concerns, although there was activity in the HER2+ HR- signature. This is the first report of Gr3 hearing loss associated with patritumab/paclitaxel/trastuzumab, and thus attribution is uncertain. Citation Format: Teresa L Helsten, Shelly S Lo, Christina Yau, Kevin Kalinsky, Anthony D Elias, Anne M Wallace, A. Jo Chien, Janice Lu, Julie E Lang, Kathy S Albain, Erica Stringer-Reasor, Amy S Clark, Judy C Boughey, Erin D Ellis, Douglas Yee, Angela DeMichele, Claudine Isaacs, Jane Perlmutter, Hope S Rugo, Richard Schwab, Nola M. Hylton, W. Fraser Symmans, Michelle E Melisko, Laura J van't Veer, Amy Wilson, Ruby Singhrao, Smita M Asare, Ashish Sanil, Donald A Berry, Laura J Esserman. Evaluation of patritumab/paclitaxel/trastuzumab over standard paclitaxel/trastuzumab in early stage, high-risk HER2 positive breast cancer: Results from the neoadjuvant I-SPY 2 trial [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 P3-11-02.

Abstract Background: I-SPY2 is a multicenter, response-adaptive randomization phase 2 trial to evaluate novel agents when added to standard neoadjuvant therapy for women with high-risk stage II/III breast cancer - weekly paclitaxel + investigational treatment x 12 wks followed by doxorubicin & cyclophosphamide(AC) q3 wks x 4 vs. weekly paclitaxel/AC (control). The primary endpoint is pathologic complete response (pCR). The goal for all investigational arms is to identify/graduate regimens with ≥85% Bayesian predictive probability of success (i.e. demonstrating superiority to control) in a future 300-patient phase 3 1:1 randomized neoadjuvant trial with a pCR endpoint within signatures defined by hormone-receptor (HR) & HER2 status & MammaPrint (MP). Findings from the graduated, previously reported Pembro4 arm (Nanda et al, ASCO 2017) supported investigation of de-escalating therapy, and determining if pembrolizumab (an anti-PD-1 antibody) alone q3 wks x 4 after weekly paclitaxel x 12 wks + pembrolizumab q3 wks x 4 was sufficient to sustain response without AC. Methods: Women with tumors ≥2.5cm were eligible for screening. MP low/HR+ were ineligible. MRI scans (at baseline, 3 wks, 12 wks, and prior to surgery) were used in a longitudinal statistical model to predict pCR for individual patients (pts). Pts who receive non-protocol therapy (e.g., carboplatin or AC for the Pembro8-noAC arm) count as non-pCR. Pembro8-noAC was open to HER2- pts for evaluation in 3 of 10 pre-defined signatures: HER2-, HR+/HER2-, and HR-/HER2-. Regimens exit the trial for futility (<10% probability of success), maximum sample size accrual (10% <probability of success <85%), or safety as recommended by the independent DSMB. Results: Pembro8-noAC was randomized to 73 pts, 3 of whom progressed while receiving pembrolizumab alone on study. Randomization to this arm continued after the first report because the rate of progression during AC over the course of the trial was estimated to be 6.5% based on serial MRI studies. However, notification of the third case prompted the study team to ask the DSMB for the summary response for this arm. Although it did not meet formal stopping rules for either graduation or futility, Pembro8-noAC was not near the target threshold pCR rates of 60% for HR-/HER2- and 30% for HR+/HER2+. As a result of this information, combined with the on-treatment progressions, assignment to Pembro8-noAC was discontinued. Treatment with pembrolizumab alone was no longer allowed due to the potential concern for progression, and investigators were given the option to administer AC with pembrolizumab or proceed with definitive surgery following the 12 weeks of paclitaxel + pembrolizumab. 34 pts had surgery results at the time the study was closed. Of the remaining 39 pts, 34 pts have on-therapy MRI assessments. Estimated pCR rates were based on all pts with information at the time (see table). Immune-related adverse events included grade 3 colitis (n=2), grade 3 pneumonitis (n=1), grade 3 transaminitis (n=1), grade 3 hypothyroidism (n=1), and grade 1-2 adrenal insufficiency (n=5). Conclusion: Although Pembro8-noAC is performing at least as well as standard paclitaxel/AC, the likelihood is very low that the regimen would be successful in a phase 3 trial. Pembrolizumab alone following 12 weeks of paclitaxel + pembrolizumab was not sufficient to sustain a response. This was quickly assessed with a small number of patients. Estimated pCR rateSignature(95% prob interval)Pembro8-noACControlHER2-0.210.2(0.09-0.32)(0.15-0.25)HR-/HER2-0.270.27(0.09-0.45)(0.19-0.35)HR+/HER2-0.150.15(0.01-0.29)(0.09-0.20) Citation Format: Minetta C. Liu, Patricia A Robinson, Christina Yau, Anne M Wallace, A. Jo Chien, Erica Stringer-Reasor, Rita Nanda, Douglas Yee, Kathy S Albain, Judy C Boughey, Heather S Han, Anthony D Elias, Kevin Kalinsky, Amy S Clark, Kathleen Kemmer, Claudine Isaacs, Julie E Lang, Janice Lu, Tara Sanft, Angela DeMichele, Nola M Hylton, Michelle E Melisko, Jane Perlmutter, Hope S Rugo, Richard Schwab, W. Fraser Symmans, Laura J van't Veer, Patricia K Haugen, Amy Wilson, Ruby Singhrao, Smita Asare, Ashish Sanil, Donald A Berry, Laura J Esserman. Evaluation of a novel agent plus standard neoadjuvant therapy in early stage, high-risk HER2 negative breast cancer: Results from the I-SPY 2 TRIAL [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 P3-09-02.

Abstract Background: Patients who achieve a pathological complete response (pCR- defined as no invasive cancer) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for breast cancer (BC) have improved outcomes, but there is still controversy about the significance of residual ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) on local recurrence rate (LRR). The I-SPY 2 TRIAL is an adaptive neoadjuvant platform trial evaluating novel experimental regimens in comparison to standard chemotherapy in women with high-risk breast cancer. The purpose of this study is to determine if residual DCIS after NAC in early BC affects LRR in patients with or without residual invasive disease in the I-SPY 2 TRIAL. Methods: 933 I-SPY 2 patients with residual cancer burden (RCB) and follow-up data were included in this analysis. Residual DCIS was defined as any carcinoma in situ > 0% on RCB evaluation. Local recurrence was defined as recurrence in breast, chest wall or locoregional nodes and/or skin and subcutaneous tissue. We stratified our cohort into four groups: those without residual invasive disease (defined as RCB0) ± residual DCIS, and those with residual invasive disease (RCB>0) ± residual DCIS. We estimated LRR within each group using the Kaplan Meier method; and used Cox proportional hazards models to assess LRR differences between groups, with: patients with no residual disease (invasive or in situ) as reference group. Results: Among 933 patients assessed, median follow up time was 3.9 years. RCB 0 status was achieved in 337 patients (36%). Of these, 267 (29%) had no residual DCIS, which represents our reference group, and 70 (7%) had residual DCIS. Among 596 (64%) patients who had RCB>0, 296 (32%) had residual DCIS. For patients with RCB0 without DCIS and RCB0 with DCIS, the LRR at 3 years were similar: 2% vs 3% respectively (Hazard ratio: 1.29 [0.26-6.39]). Results were also similar in the RCB>0 group, with a LRR of 10% at 3 years in those without residual DCIS, and 11% in those with residual DCIS. Both RCB>0 groups had significantly higher LRR when compared to the patients with RCB0 without DCIS (Hazard ratio: 5.25 [2.20-12.5]) and HR 5.85 [2.47-13.9] respectively). Conclusion: There was no association between residual DCIS and LRR after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, regardless of resolution of invasive disease. Further work is needed to determine whether residual DCIS should drive locoregional therapy decisions after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for invasive breast cancer. Citation Format: Marie Osdoit, Christina Yau, W. Fraser Symmans, Judy C. Boughey, Smita M. Asare, Ron Balassanian, Jodi M. Carter, Yunn-Yi Chen, Kimberly Cole, Laila Khazai, Molly Klein, Dina Kokh, Gregor Krings, Sunati Sahoo, Gretchen Ahrendt, Akiko Chiba, Cheryl Ewing, Constantine Godellas, Nora Jaskowiak, Brigid Killelea, Helen Krontiras, Rachael Lancaster, Julie Lang, M. Catherine Lee, Arpana Naik, Roshni Rao, Julia Tchou, Shannon Tierney, Eleni Tousimis, Tod Tuttle, Anne Wallace, I-SPY 2 TRIAL Consortium, Bev Parker, Laura J. Esserman, Rita A. Mukhtar. The impact of residual ductal carcinoma in situ on breast cancer recurrence in the neoadjuvant I-SPY2 TRIAL [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 P3-08-16.

Abstract Background: Achieving a pathologic complete response (pCR) has been shown on the patient level to predict excellent long-term event-free survival outcomes. Residual cancer burden (RCB) quantifies the extent of residual disease for patients who did not achieve pCR. A high proportion of metastatic events to the central nervous system (CNS), a known chemotherapy sanctuary site, was previously observed among the small number of relapses in patients achieving a pCR (Symmans et al 2017), raising the possibility that these CNS events may be independent of response in the breast. I-SPY2 is an adaptively randomized, phase II, platform trial that evaluates new drugs and combinations in the neoadjuvant setting for women with high-risk primary breast cancer. In this study, we evaluated the type and sites of recurrences by RCB classes in the I-SPY 2 TRIAL. Methods: I-SPY 2 patients enrolled prior to 11/2016 across 9 experimental and control arms, with available RCB and event-free survival (EFS) data were included in this analysis. The median follow-up is 3.8 years. We summarized the EFS event type, further sub-dividing the distant recurrence events by their site of relapse (CNS-only, CNS and other sites, Non-CNS). We estimated the overall and site-specific distant recurrence incidence in each RCB class at 3 years using a competing risk (Fine-Gray) model. In addition, we assessed the association between RCB and distant recurrence free survival including all distant recurrences (DRFS), as well as excluding the CNS-only recurrences (non-CNS DRFS) using a Cox model. Our statistics do not adjust for multiplicities beyond variables evaluated in this study. Results: Among 938 subjects, there were 180 EFS events, including 28 (16%) local recurrences (without distant recurrence and/or death) and 152 DRFS events. Among the DRFS events, 25 patients died without a distant recurrence. 127 experienced distant recurrences, including 22 (17.3%) with CNS-only, 16 (12.6%) with CNS and other sites, 87 (68.5%) with non-CNS distant recurrence; 2 (1.6%) patients had missing recurrence site information. Incidence of CNS-only recurrences are low and are similar across RCB classes (pCR/RCB-0 (n=338): 1%, RCB-I (n=129): 3%, RCB-II (n=328): 2%, RCB-III (n=143): 2% at 3 years). In contrast, the incidence of non-CNS recurrences increase with increasing RCB (RCB-0: 2%, RCB-I: 4%, RCB-II: 11%, RCB-III: 19% at 3 years). DRFS of RCB-I patients do not significantly differ from those achieving a pCR/RCB-0 (DRFS at 3 years: 92% vs. 95%, hazard ratio: 1.77 (0.87-3.63)); the small numerical difference is further reduced when the CNS-only recurrences are excluded (non-CNS DRFS at 3 years: 95% vs. 96%, hazard ratio: 1.48 (0.61-3.58)). CNS recurrences among DRFS events are proportionally higher within the pCR (5/16 (31%)) and RCB-I (5/12 (42%)) than in the RCB-II (8/57 (14%)) and RCB-III (4/42 (9%)) groups largely because of the relative low frequency of non-CNS recurrence events. Conclusions: In our high-risk I-SPY 2 cohort, CNS-only recurrences are uncommon but appear similar across RCB groups, independent of response, suggesting that the CNS is a treatment sanctuary site. In contrast, non-CNS recurrence rates increase as RCB increases. These findings, if confirmed, support the use of RCB to identify patients with excellent outcomes beyond those achieving a pCR; and suggest that inclusion of CNS only recurrences as an outcome event may impact the association between neoadjuvant therapy response and long-term outcome. Citation Format: Christina Yau, Angela DeMichele, W. Fraser Symmans, Lajos Pusztai, Douglas Yee, Amy S. Clark, Christos Hatzis, Jeffrey B. Matthews, Jodi Carter, Yunn-Yi Chen, Kimberly Cole, Laila Khazai, Molly Klein, Dina Kokh, Gregor Krings, Sunati Sahoo, Kathy S. Albain, A. Jo Chien, Kirsten K. Edmiston, Anthony D. Elias, Erin D. Ellis, David M. Euhus, Heather S. Han, Claudine Isaacs, Qamar J. Khan, Julie E. Lang, Janice Lu, Jane L. Meisel, Zaha Mitri, Rita Nanda, Donald W. Northfelt, Tara Sanft, Erica Stringer-Reasor, Rebecca K. Viscusi, Anne M. Wallace, Rachel Yung, Nola M. Hylton, Judy C. Boughey, Michelle E. Melisko, Jane Perlmutter, Hope S. Rugo, Richard Schwab, Laura J. van' t Veer, Donald A. Berry, Laura J. Esserman. Site of recurrence after neoadjuvant therapy: Clues to biology and impact on endpoints [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 P2-20-02.

Abstract Background: Recent studies have demonstrated independent validation of the prognostic relevance of residual cancer burden (RCB) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. However, a pooled subject-level analysis of multiple cohorts is needed to determine estimates of long-term prognosis for each class of RCB in each phenotypic subtype of breast cancer (BC) to better inform on patient outcomes. Also, a pooled subject-level analysis allows more detailed analyses of generalizability of the prognostic meaning of RCB assessments in a broader experience of practice settings. Method: Subject-level RCB results, with relevant clinical and pathologic stage, tumor subtype and grade, demographic, treatment and follow-up data from 11 institutes/trials are being collected for combined analysis. The association between the continuous RCB index and event-free survival (EFS), and distant recurrence free survival (DRFS) were assessed using mixed effect Cox models with the incorporation of random RCB coefficients to account for between-study heterogeneity. We will also allow for differences in baseline hazard across biological BC subtypes and, if needed, across studies as well. In addition to this stratified mixed effect model, a multivariate analysis adjusting for age, T-category, nodal status and grade was performed within each subtype. In addition, mixed effect Cox models will be employed to evaluate association between RCB index with EFS and DRFS within each HR/HER2 subtype. Kaplan Meier estimates of EFS and DRFS at 5 and 10 years were computed for each RCB class within subtype. Results: We analyzed subject-level data from 9 institutes/trials representing 4077 patients currently available from an anticipated final total of 4,800 patients (to be presented at the meeting). There were 950 EFS and 876 DRFS events during follow up (median 65 months, IQR: 70 months). RCB index (continuous) was independently prognostic within each subtype: HR+/HER2- (EFS HR (per unit increase in RCB index) =1.64, 95%CI 1.48-1.82; DRFS HR=1.68, 1.51-1.87), HR+/HER2+ (EFS HR=1.80, 1.57-2.05; DRFS HR=1.93, 1.67-2.24), HR-/HER2+ (EFS HR=2.15, 1.76-2.62; DRFS HR=2.10, 1.77-2.50), and HR-/HER2- (EFS HR=2.05, 1.89-2.22; DRFS HR=2.16, 1.90-2.46); and remained prognostic in multivariate models adjusting for age, grade, and clinical T and N stage at diagnosis. Table 1 contains the response rate and estimated EFS at 5 years and 10 years for each RCB class within each HR/HER2 phenotype (DRFS results were similar). Conclusions: Long-term prognosis after pCR was similarly excellent in all phenotypic subtypes. RCB index and classification was independently and strongly prognostic in all subtypes, and generalizable to multiple practice settings. Prognostic differences by RCB class occurred within 5 years in HR- BC, but extended to 10 years in HR+ BC. RCB-I had slightly worse EFS than pCR in HR- BC and HR+/HER2+ BC (after 5 years), but the same EFS as pCR in HR+/HER2- BC. Complete analysis of all subjects, including neoadjuvant treatments, will be presented at the meeting. PhenotypeOutcomepCRRCB-IRCB-IIRCB-IIIHR+/HER2-Frequency (%)11%10%52%27%(N=1467)5 yr EFS (95% CI)91% (86-96)93% (89-98)82% (79-85)70% (65-75)10 yr EFS (95% CI)84% (75-93)88% (82-95)71% (67-75)52% (46-58)HR+/HER2+Frequency (%)38%18%35%9%(N=762)5 yr EFS (95% CI)94% (91-97)93% (88-98)78% (73-84)49% (37-65)10 yr EFS (95% CI)91% (86-96)79% (70-90)65% (59-73)42% (29-60)HR-/HER2+Frequency (%)66%11%18%5%(N=550)5 yr EFS (95% CI)93% (90-96)88% (79-97)60% (50-71)45% (30-69)10 yr EFS (95% CI)90% (86-94)84% (74-95)56% (46-68)45% (30-69)HR-/HER2-Frequency (%)41%13%33%13%(N=1293)5 yr EFS (95% CI)92% (90-94)85% (79-91)68% (63-72)28% (21-36)10 yr EFS (95% CI)87% (82-91)80% (72-88)63% (58-68)24% (18-33) Citation Format: Christina Yau, Marieke van der Noordaa, Jane Wei, Marie Osdoit, Fabien Reyal, Anne-Sophie Hamy, Marick Lae, Miguel Martin, Maria del Monte, I-SPY 2 TRIAL Consortium, Judy C Boughey, Rebekah Gould, Jelle Wesseling, Tessa Steenbruggen, Maartje van Seijen, Gabe Sonke, Stephen Edge, Stephen-John Sammut, Elena Provenzano, Jean Abraham, Peter Hall, Ashley Graham, Lorna Mackintosh, David Cameron, Alice Wang, Priyanka Sharma, Kimberly Cole, Lajos Pusztai, Mi-Ok Kim, Laura van ‘t Veer, Laura Esserman, W. Fraser Symmans. Residual cancer burden after neoadjuvant therapy and long-term survival outcomes in breast cancer: A multi-center pooled analysis [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 GS5-01.

Abstract Importance: It is essential to refine the populations most likely to benefit from targeted chemotherapy combinations. Background: MINDACT showed that molecularly low risk patients, as assessed by the Amsterdam 70-gene profile MammaPrint® (Agendia) (MP), did not benefit from chemotherapy. In the I-SPY2 trial, MP low risk Hormone Receptor (HR) positive/HER2 negative patients are not eligible; however, HR negative or HER2 positive patients were considered high risk and included for treatment with chemotherapy plus novel agents. The neoadjuvant setting provides an opportunity to evaluate whether molecularly low risk HER2 positive patients are good candidates for neoadjuvant chemo/anti-HER2 therapy, where pathologic complete response (pCR) and 3-year outcomes are measured. Objective: To evaluate and further characterize the fraction of and outcomes for patients molecular low-risk disease in the I-SPY2 trial. Methods: The I-SPY2 platform trial is an ongoing multicenter phase 2 multi-arm study utilizing adaptive design and evaluating efficacy and tolerability of investigational agents in combination with standard-of-care chemotherapy for patients with high-risk anatomic stage II/III breast cancer. Patients with HR+HER2- MP low-risk tumors are not eligible. All enrolled patients undergo pretreatment biopsy for genomic evaluation of early recurrence risk with MP for risk stratification and with the 80-gene BluePrint® (Agendia) test for intrinsic subtype classification. Primary endpoint of the study is pCR in breast and lymph nodes (ypT0/is, ypN0). Secondary outcomes included event-free survival (EFS) and distant-recurrence free survival (DRFS). Following standard neoadjuvant treatment with or without a concomitant investigational agent, patients are followed for long-term outcomes. EFS and DRFS at 3 and 5 years in the pCR vs non-pCR groups within histologic and molecular subtypes are determined using the Kaplan Meier method. Results: Of the 1038 enrolled patients by November 2016, 24 patients (3.2%) had molecular low-risk disease as determined by MP. Of these, 21 (87.5%) had HR+HER2+, 1 (4.2%) had HR-HER2+, and 2 (8.4%) had HR-HER2-. BluePrint expression subtyping classified 17 as luminal-type, 6 HER2 enriched-type and 1 basal type. One patient withdrew consent for follow-up. Of the 23 remaining, none achieved pCR and only one (HR+/HER2+) had an EFS event (with median follow-up of 4.3 years). Overall, EFS and DRFS data were available for 950 of the 1038 patients (as of February 2019), with median follow-up of 3.8 years. Of the 173 HR+HER2+ in this cohort, 20 (11.6%) had molecular low-risk tumors. The EFS and DRFS for the 173 HER2+HR+ pCR group is 97% and 98% (non-pCR group 89% and 94%), respectively at 3 years. Removing the molecular low-risk HER2+ patients from the denominator reveals the worse outcome for patients with non pCR: EFS 86% and DRFS 92% at 3 years. The difference is more apparent at 5 years, changing from 74% to 66% for EFS and from 81% to 75% for DRFS. Intrinsic subtypes vary and do not predict early risk. Conclusions: I-SPY2 focuses on women with high clinical risk with only 3.2% of enrolled patients having low molecular risk tumors. However, 12% of HER+ breast cancer enrolled patients had molecular low risk tumors of which 95% were also HR+. In this group, early recurrence is very low despite absence of pCR and irrespective of intrinsic subtype. Refining the population using molecular high-risk classification of patients reveals a greater difference between the pCR and non-pCR groups within the HR+HER2+ subtype in the EFS and DRFS analysis. Clinical trial designs could address the opportunity to find more targeted and less toxic treatments for the HER2+ low molecular risk patient population. Citation Format: Paula R Pohlmann, Christina Yau, Angela DeMichele, Claudine Isaacs, Judy C Boughey, Nola Hylton, Michelle E Melisko, Jane Perlmutter, Hope S Rugo, W. Fraser Symmans, I-SPY 2 TRIAL Consortium, Donald A Berry, Laura Esserman. Amsterdam 70-gene profile (MammaPrint) low risk, even in the HER2 positive subset, identifies a population of women with lower early risk for recurrence despite low response rates to chemotherapy and to HER2 targeted therapy [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 P6-10-06.

5510 Background: Transcriptional profiling of ovarian cancers has proven to be complex. As such it has been difficult to validate existing signatures across studies. Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) researchers have identified four molecular subtypes of high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC). However, survival duration did not differ significantly for the TCGA subtypes. Potential limitations of the TCGA data include short clinical follow-up (45% were alive at the time of last follow-up) and the need to unify gene expression measures from multiple platforms. Methods: Clinically annotated stage-II–IV HGSOC samples (n = 175) with >70% tumor cell content were profiled using the Agilent Whole Human Genome 4 x 44K chip. To identify subtypes non-negative matrix factorization (NMF) of mRNA expression was performed using ~2000 genes with the highest variability across patients. In parallel differentially expressed genes were identified using the Rosetta Similarity Search Tool as well as analysis of variance based on genes known to be involved in epithelial to mesenchymal transition. Results: Median follow-up time was 35 months (range, 0–202 months, 12% were alive at the time of last follow-up). NMF clustering confirmed four HGSOC subtypes (immunoreactive, differentiated, proliferative, and mesenchymal) on the basis of gene content in the clusters. Pathway signatures with therapeutic potential were identified for individual or multiple subtypes. Survival differed significantly between the four molecular subgroups in univariate (Hazard Ratio [HR] 2.4, 95% CI 1.5-4.1, p = 0.007) and multivariate (HR 2.3, 95% CI 1.3-4.0, p = 0.003) analyses when accounting for age, stage, grade, and postoperative residual tumor. Using the supervised clustering approach two distinct molecular subtypes of HGSOC based on epithelial and mesenchymal gene expression signatures were identified with significantly different survival outcomes. Conclusions: Here we independently validate and expand upon the molecular TCGA classification of HGSOC. The potential of these two prognostic classifiers may lie in their ability to recognize categories of patients that are more likely to respond to particular therapies.

564 Background: Our group previously examined if baseline patient/tumor characteristics, or prior treatment affected cause of death in MA.17, a placebo controlled extended adjuvant trial of the aromatase inhibitor (AI) letrozole. We now examine factor effects on all cause mortality in MA.27. Methods: MA.27 was an adjuvant phase III superiority trial of 5 yrs of exemestane vs anastrozole, in ER+ postmenopausal breast cancer accrued between 2003 and 2008; event free survival was similar. We examined by intention-to-treat, the multivariate time-to-breast cancer-specific (BrCa), cardiovascular (Cardio), and other causes (OT) of death with log-normal survival analysis adjusted by treatment and stratification factors (lymph node status, adjuvant chemotherapy, celecoxib, aspirin, and trastuzumab). We tested whether factors were associated with 1) all cause mortality, and if so, 2) cause-specific mortality. We also fit step-wise forward cause-specific adjusted models. Results: 7,576 women (median age 64.1 years; 5417 (71.5%) <70 yrs and 2159 (28.5%) >70 yrs) were enrolled and followed for a median of 4.1 yrs. The 432 deaths comprised: 187 (43.3%) BrCa, 66 (15.3%) Cardiovascular, and 179 (41.4%) OT MA.27 therapy was not associated with mortality (p=0.84). Five baseline factors were differentially associated with cause of death. Older age was associated with greater BrCa (p=0.03), Cardio (p<0.001), and OT (p<0.001) mortality. Pre-existing cardiovascular history led to worse Cardio mortality (p<0.001). Worse ECOG performance status led to worse OT death (p<0.001). T1 tumors were associated with less BrCa mortality (p<0.001). PgR+ tumors were also associated with less BrCa mortality (p<0.001). There were fewer BrCa deaths with Node –ve disease (p<0.001), ER+ tumors (p=0.001) and without adjuvant chemotherapy (p=0.005); there was worse Cardio mortality (p=0.01) with receipt of trastuzumab; worse OT (p=0.03) for non-whites, and without adjuvant radiotherapy (p=0.003). Conclusions: 56.7% of deaths in MA.27 patients were non-breast cancer related. We showed baseline patient and tumor characteristics, and prior treatment differentially affected cause of death. Clinical trial information: NCT00066573.