Citations

Abstract Background Black race is associated with worse outcomes in early breast cancer. We evaluated clinicopathologic characteristics, the 21-gene recurrence score (RS), treatment delivered, and clinical outcomes by race and ethnicity among women who participated in the Trial Assigning Individualized Options for Treatment. Methods The association between clinical outcomes and race (White, Black, Asian, other or unknown) and ethnicity (Hispanic vs non-Hispanic) was examined using proportional hazards models. All P values are 2-sided. Results Of 9719 eligible women with hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative, node-negative breast cancer, there were 8189 (84.3%) Whites, 693 (7.1%) Blacks, 405 (4.2%) Asians, and 432 (4.4%) with other or unknown race. Regarding ethnicity, 889 (9.1%) were Hispanic. There were no substantial differences in RS or ESR1, PGR, or HER2 RNA expression by race or ethnicity. After adjustment for other covariates, compared with White race, Black race was associated with higher distant recurrence rates (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.60, 95% confidence intervals [CI] = 1.07 to 2.41) and worse overall survival in the RS 11-25 cohort (HR = 1.51, 95% CI = 1.06 to 2.15) and entire population (HR = 1.41, 95% CI = 1.05 to 1.90). Hispanic ethnicity and Asian race were associated with better outcomes. There was no evidence of chemotherapy benefit for any racial or ethnic group in those with a RS of 11-25. Conclusions Black women had worse clinical outcomes despite similar 21-gene assay RS results and comparable systemic therapy in the Trial Assigning Individualized Options for Treatment. Similar to Whites, Black women did not benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy if the 21-gene RS was 11-25. Further research is required to elucidate the basis for this racial disparity in prognosis.

1021 Background: At 5 years, AT did not improve disease free survival or overall survival and RS was a more accurate predictor of relapse than standard clinicopathologic characteristics for patients with hormone receptor (HR) positive tumors. Methods: A Phase III Intergroup trial tested adjuvant AT vs. AC. Women with 1-3 N + or N - and T-size > 1cm were randomized to 4 cycles of AT (60 mg/m2/60 mg/ m2) or AC (60 mg/m2/600 mg/m2) q 3 wk x 4. Patients(pts) with ER + and/ or PR + tumors received tam for 5 yrs. Pts were stratified by nodal, HR (ER+ PR+, ER+PR-, ER-PR+, ER-PR-, ER/PR unk) and menopausal status. The primary endpoint was DFS. A sample of 465 pts with HR + breast cancer with 0 to 3 positive axillary nodes who did (N =116) or did not have a recurrence had tumor tissue evaluated using the 21- gene assay. Grade and HR expression were evaluated locally and centrally. Results: 2952 pts were randomized between 7/30/98 and 1/21/00. 2883 were eligible and analyzable. Arms were balanced for age, HR, menopause, nodes, surgery, grade and T-size: median age 51; 64% ER +; 65% LN-; grade: 10% low, 38% int., 46% high; and median T-size - 2.0 cm. At a median follow-up of 11.5 years the DFS/OS results are shown in the table below. RS was a highly significant predictor of recurrence including node negative and node positive disease (P < .0001) and predicted recurrence more accurately than clinical variables. Conclusions: At 11.5 yrs. median follow-up, there remains no difference in DFS or OS, although there continue to be fewer events in the AT arm in the prespecified ER/PR negative subgroup. At 10 years, the RS continues to be a more accurate predictor of relapse than standard clinical features. [Table: see text]

1005 Background: We previously reported that in the E5194 clinical trial patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) treated with wide local excision (WLE) without radiation (RT), the DCIS Score was significantly associated with 10 year risk of an ipsilateral breast event (IBE - recurrence of in situ or invasive carcinoma), whether evaluated as a continuous or categorical variable (P=0.02 for both). Here we evaluate correlation between DCIS Score and clinicopathologic (CP) features and if DCIS Score provides independent recurrence risk information. Methods: The study population included 327 women with DCIS prospectively selected for treatment with WLE without RT, including low-intermediate grade tumors ≤2.5 cm or high-grade ≤1 cm. CP variables included age, menopausal status, tamoxifen treatment (used in 29%) and expert centrally determined tumor size, grade, comedo necrosis, tumor type, and margin status. The association between DCIS Score and CP variables was examined by spearman rank correlation, and proportional hazards regression models were used to determine variables significantly associated with IBE. Results: Lesion size (p=0.009) and menopausal status (p=0.03) were significantly associated with IBE, while grade (p=0.69) and comedo necrosis (p=0.47) were not. DCIS Score was significantly associated with IBE after adjustment for CP features and tamoxifen use (p=0.02). DCIS Score was moderately correlated with grade (rs=0.46; 95% CI 0.37,0.54), percentage comedo necrosis (rs=0.49; CI 0.41,0.57), and lesion size (rs=0.18; CI 0.08,0.29) but not other features. Exploratory analyses in all CP subgroups, including the multicomponent Van Nuys Prognostic Index, showed a wide range of DCIS Scores in each subgroup. Concordance of the grades among readers was low: local vs parent central, 68%; local vs central nuclear grade, 45%; parent central vs central nuclear grade, 37%. Conclusions: DCIS Score is moderately correlated with grade, comedo necrosis, and tumor size. DCIS Score provides recurrence risk information independent of these features and identifies subjects with DCIS who are at high risk for local invasive and in-situ local recurrence after WLE alone.

AbstractImmune checkpoint inhibitor therapies targeting PD‐1/PD‐L1 are now the standard of care in oncology across several hematologic and solid tumor types, including triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). Patients with metastatic or locally advanced TNBC with PD‐L1 expression on immune cells occupying ≥1% of tumor area demonstrated survival benefit with the addition of atezolizumab to nab‐paclitaxel. However, concerns regarding variability between immunohistochemical PD‐L1 assay performance and inter‐reader reproducibility have been raised. High tumor‐infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) have also been associated with response to PD‐1/PD‐L1 inhibitors in patients with breast cancer (BC). TILs can be easily assessed on hematoxylin and eosin–stained slides and have shown reliable inter‐reader reproducibility. As an established prognostic factor in early stage TNBC, TILs are soon anticipated to be reported in daily practice in many pathology laboratories worldwide. Because TILs and PD‐L1 are parts of an immunological spectrum in BC, we propose the systematic implementation of combined PD‐L1 and TIL analyses as a more comprehensive immuno‐oncological biomarker for patient selection for PD‐1/PD‐L1 inhibition‐based therapy in patients with BC. Although practical and regulatory considerations differ by jurisdiction, the pathology community has the responsibility to patients to implement assays that lead to optimal patient selection. We propose herewith a risk‐management framework that may help mitigate the risks of suboptimal patient selection for immuno‐therapeutic approaches in clinical trials and daily practice based on combined TILs/PD‐L1 assessment in BC. © 2020 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Abstract Background: Black race is associated with worse outcomes in localized hormone receptor (HR)-positive breast cancer in population-based and in clinical trial cohorts, whether using self-identified race (Albain et al. JNCI 2009 [PMID: 19584328; Sparano et al. JNCI 2012 [PMID: 22250182) or genetically-identified race (Schneider et al. J Precision Oncol 2017 [PMID: 29333527]). This disparity persists after adjustment for treatment delivery parameters (Hershman et al. JCO 2009 [PMID:19307504]). We evaluated clinicopathologic characteristics, treatment delivered and clinical outcomes in the Trial Assigning Individualized Options for Treatment (TAILORx) by race and ethnicity (Sparano et al. NEJM 2018 [PMID: 29860917]). Methods: The analysis included 9719 evaluable TAILORx participants. The association between clinical outcomes and race (white, black, Asian, other/unknown) and ethnicity (Hispanic vs. non-Hispanic) was examined, including invasive disease-free survival (iDFS), distant relapse-free interval (DRFI), relapse-free interval (RFI), and overall survival (OS). Proportional hazards models were fit including age (5 categories), tumor size (&gt;2 cm vs. &lt;=2 cm), histologic grade (high vs. medium vs. low vs. unknown), continuous recurrence score (RS), race, and ethnicity in the overall population and randomized treatment arms in the RS 11-25 cohort. Results: The study population included 8189 (84%) whites, 693 (7%) blacks, 405 (4%) Asians, and 432 (4%) with other/unknown race. Regarding ethnicity, 7635 (79%) were non-Hispanic, 889 (9%) Hispanic, and 1195 (12%) unknown. There was no significant difference in RS distribution (p=0.22) in blacks compared with whites, or in median (17 vs. 17) or mean RS (19.1 vs. 18.2). There was likewise no difference in Hispanic vs. non-Hispanic ethnicity for RS distribution (p=0.72) or median (17 vs. 17) or mean RS (18.5 vs. 18.0). Black race (39% vs. 30%) and Hispanic ethnicity (39% vs. 30%) were both associated with younger age (&lt;/=50 years) at diagnosis. The use and type of adjuvant chemotherapy and endocrine therapy, and duration of endocrine therapy, were similar in black (vs. white) and Hispanic (vs. non-Hispanic) populations. In proportional hazards models, black race (compared with white race) was associated with worse clinical outcomes in the entire population and in those with a RS 11-25 (see table). Hispanic ethnicity was generally associated with better outcomes (compared with non-Hispanic ethnicity). For the cohort with a RS of 11-25, there was no evidence for chemotherapy benefit for any racial or ethnic group. Race (black vs.white) and clinical outcomes in proportional hazards modelsClinical endpointEntire Population (N=693 black) Hazard ratio for eventRS 11-25 (N=471 black) Hazard ratio for eveniDFS1.33 (p=0.005)1.49 (p=0.001)DRFI1.21 (p=0.28)1.60 (p=0.02)RFI1.39 (p=0.02)1.80 (p&lt;0.001)OS1.52 (p=0.005)1.67 (p=0.003 Conclusions: In patients eligible and selected for participation in TAILORx, black women had worse clinical outcomes despite similar 21-gene assay RS results and comparable systemic therapy. This adds to an emerging body of evidence suggesting a biologic basis or other factors contributing to racial disparities in HR-positive breast cancer that requires further evaluation. Citation Format: Albain K, Gray RJ, Sparano JA, Makower DF, Pritchard KI, Hayes DF, Geyer, Jr. CE, Dees EC, Goetz MP, Olson, Jr. JA, Lively T, Badve SS, Saphner TJ, Wagner LI, Whelan TJ, Ellis MJ, Paik S, Wood WC, Ravdin PM, Keane MM, Gomez HL, Reddy PS, Goggins TF, Mayer IA, Brufsky AM, Toppmeyer DL, Kaklamani VG, Berenberg JL, Abrams J, Sledge, Jr. GW. Race, ethnicity and clinical outcomes in hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, node-negative breast cancer: results from the TAILORx trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS4-07.

Assessment of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in histopathologic specimens can provide important prognostic information in diverse solid tumor types, and may also be of value in predicting response to treatments. However, implementation as a routine clinical biomarker has not yet been achieved. As successful use of immune checkpoint inhibitors and other forms of immunotherapy become a clinical reality, the need for widely applicable, accessible, and reliable immunooncology biomarkers is clear. In part 1 of this review we briefly discuss the host immune response to tumors and different approaches to TIL assessment. We propose a standardized methodology to assess TILs in solid tumors on hematoxylin and eosin sections, in both primary and metastatic settings, based on the International Immuno-Oncology Biomarker Working Group guidelines for TIL assessment in invasive breast carcinoma. A review of the literature regarding the value of TIL assessment in different solid tumor types follows in part 2. The method we propose is reproducible, affordable, easily applied, and has demonstrated prognostic and predictive significance in invasive breast carcinoma. This standardized methodology may be used as a reference against which other methods are compared, and should be evaluated for clinical validity and utility. Standardization of TIL assessment will help to improve consistency and reproducibility in this field, enrich both the quality and quantity of comparable evidence, and help to thoroughly evaluate the utility of TILs assessment in this era of immunotherapy.

Assessment of the immune response to tumors is growing in importance as the prognostic implications of this response are increasingly recognized, and as immunotherapies are evaluated and implemented in different tumor types. However, many different approaches can be used to assess and describe the immune response, which limits efforts at implementation as a routine clinical biomarker. In part 1 of this review, we have proposed a standardized methodology to assess tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in solid tumors, based on the International Immuno-Oncology Biomarkers Working Group guidelines for invasive breast carcinoma. In part 2 of this review, we discuss the available evidence for the prognostic and predictive value of TILs in common solid tumors, including carcinomas of the lung, gastrointestinal tract, genitourinary system, gynecologic system, and head and neck, as well as primary brain tumors, mesothelioma and melanoma. The particularities and different emphases in TIL assessment in different tumor types are discussed. The standardized methodology we propose can be adapted to different tumor types and may be used as a standard against which other approaches can be compared. Standardization of TIL assessment will help clinicians, researchers and pathologists to conclusively evaluate the utility of this simple biomarker in the current era of immunotherapy.