Citations

AbstractSchwann cells are the nerve ensheathing cells of the peripheral nervous system. Absence, loss and malfunction of Schwann cells or their myelin sheaths lead to peripheral neuropathies such as Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease in humans. During Schwann cell development and myelination chromatin is dramatically modified. However, impact and functional relevance of these modifications are poorly understood. Here, we analyzed histone H2B monoubiquitination as one such chromatin modification by conditionally deleting the Rnf40 subunit of the responsible E3 ligase in mice. Rnf40-deficient Schwann cells were arrested immediately before myelination or generated abnormally thin, unstable myelin, resulting in a peripheral neuropathy characterized by hypomyelination and progressive axonal degeneration. By combining sequencing techniques with functional studies we show that H2B monoubiquitination does not influence global gene expression patterns, but instead ensures selective high expression of myelin and lipid biosynthesis genes and proper repression of immaturity genes. This requires the specific recruitment of the Rnf40-containing E3 ligase by Egr2, the central transcriptional regulator of peripheral myelination, to its target genes. Our study identifies histone ubiquitination as essential for Schwann cell myelination and unravels new disease-relevant links between chromatin modifications and transcription factors in the underlying regulatory network.

Abstract Background: Accurate circulating biomarkers for detecting residual disease can help guide therapy decisions, particularly in early-stage cancer patients. However, currently available methods lack the sensitivity required to confidently assess the presence of residual disease in patients with low tumor burden. To address this need, we have developed TARDIS (Targeted Digital Sequencing), a personalized, multiplexed amplicon sequencing method capable of tracking as many as 100 or more mutations simultaneously. Methods: We obtained tumor biopsies and longitudinal plasma samples from patients with early-stage breast cancer, glioblastoma, and pancreatic cancer. Each tumor biopsy was analyzed whole-exome sequencing. Founder mutations were selected, accounting for copy number alterations (analyzed using sequenza) and a consensus allele fraction approach that combined pyclone and custom in-house methods. Patient-specific TARDIS primers were designed to detect these mutations in plasma cfDNA. Error suppression in TARDIS was achieved using a combination of unique molecular identifiers and fragment sizes to group sequencing reads into read families. Results: In 33 patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant therapy, we targeted between 3 and 116 (mean 30) mutations per patient and analyzed between 1 and 4 longitudinal plasma samples using TARDIS. Prior to treatment, we detected ctDNA in 100% patients with Stage I-III breast cancer (n=32, 95% CI= 89%-100%). We detected tumor-specific mutations in 100% of baseline breast cancer plasma samples. After completion of neoadjuvant therapy and before surgery, ctDNA levels were significantly lower in patients with pathologic complete response (pathCR, no evidence of disease at surgery) compared to patients with residual disease (median tumor fractions 0.003% and 0.017%, respectively, p=0.0058, AUC=0.83). Conclusions: TARDIS enables highly sensitive detection of ctDNA in patients with nonmetastatic cancers. Analysis of longitudinal plasma samples using TARDIS holds promise for personalizing the extent of treatment in patients with curable disease. Multiple clinical validation studies across cancer types are ongoing to define quantitative thresholds for changes in ctDNA levels that could improve clinical decision making. Citation Format: Bradon R. McDonald, Tania Contente-Cuomo, Stephen-John Sammut, Michelle D. Stephens, Ahuva Odenheimer-Bergman, Brenda Ernst, Nieves Perdigones, Suet-Feung Chin, Maria Farooq, Rosa Mejia, Patricia A. Cronin, Karen S. Anderson, Heidi E. Kosiorek, Donald W. Northfelt, Ann E. McCullough, Bhavika K. Patel, Jeffrey N. Weitzel, Thomas P. Slavin, Carlos Caldas, Barbara A. Pockaj, Muhammed Murtaza. Personalized monitoring of treatment response using Targeted Digital Sequencing of circulating tumor DNA [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference on Advances in Liquid Biopsies; Jan 13-16, 2020; Miami, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2020;26(11_Suppl):Abstract nr A51.

AbstractBackground and ObjectivesNeoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) for ER+ breast cancer can downstage primary tumors. We evaluated NET efficacy in node‐positive patients.MethodsNode‐positive patients undergoing NET for ER+ breast cancer from 2012 to 2019 were reviewed. Primary endpoints included rates of axillary lymphadenectomy (ALND), pathologic complete response (pCR), and final nodal staging.ResultsThirty‐nine patients were included. Before NET, all were clinically node‐positive (cN1 = 36, 94%; cN2 = 2, 5%; cN3 = 1, 3%; Stage II = 23, 59%, Stage III = 16, 41%). After NET, nine (23%) had clinically persistent axillary disease necessitating ALND. The remaining 30 (77%) underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). Of these, 25 (83%) were SLNB+ on frozen section, undergoing immediate ALND. Five patients were negative on frozen section: one had a confirmed axillary pCR, and four had residual nodal disease on permanent pathology. One underwent delayed ALND, and for the remaining three patients, decision was made to forgo ALND. Final overall axillary staging was: N0 (pCR) = 1, 3%, pN1mic = 1, 3%, pN1 = 20, 51%, pN2 = 12, 30%, pN3 = 5, 13%; Stage II = 16, 41%, Stage III = 23, 59%.ConclusionsWhile NET is reported to downstage primary tumors, downstaging of the axilla was unsuccessful in the majority of patients.

Abstract Introduction New treatment strategies are improving outcomes for patients with Hodgkin (HL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) but achieving durable responses and cure in the relapsed patient remain a challenge. Both the mTORC1 inhibitor everolimus (RAD001) and the IMiD, lenalidomide (LEN) have efficacy as single agents in patients with relapsed and refractory (R/R) HL and NHL. Individually, LEN and RAD present a low toxicity profile and in combination may offer synergistic therapeutic efficacy by unique mechanisms of action. A phase I/II clinical trial of RAD and LEN was designed to explore the tolerability, toxicity and to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of this combination for the Phase II study. The results of phase I/II data are reported here. Methods MC0981 was activated on January 10, 2011. In phase I, the study enrolled a total of 25 patients and RAD 5 mg daily + LEN 10 mg/d X 21d in a 28-day cycle was defined as the MTD. The phase II opened on May 14, 2013, and closed on Feb 19, 2014, during which 33 patients were enrolled and were treated until progression of disease. Eligibility required age ≥18, biopsy proven relapsed or refractory NHL or HL, ECOG PS 0- 2, measurable disease, Hb >9g/dl, ANC ≥1200/uL, platelet ≥ 50,000/uL, creatinine ≤1.5xULN and willingness to sign informed consent. Women of child bearing potential had pregnancy testing and all patients followed recommendations for contraception. Follow up data was analyzed as of July 2014. Results A total of 58 patients were enrolled to this study and fifty five are evaluable for analysis (2 never started therapy, 1 deemed ineligible). The median age was 62 years (21-82) and 38 (69.1%) were male. Sixty-five percent had stage IV disease and 42% had 4 or more prior treatments including stem cell transplantation in 49%. Histologies included HL (n=10) and NHL (n=45 with 23 DLBCL, 2 FL-III, 5 LPL, 3 MCL, 2 MF, and 3 other). At least 1 Gr≥3 adverse event was seen in 74.5% of patients. The most common Gr≥3 toxicities were hematologic - neutropenia (30.9%), and thrombocytopenia (21.8%), and anemia (10.9%). Nine of 55 patients (16%) had Gr≥3 infection; 2 with skin infection, 1 with cholecystitis, 1 with lung infection, 1 with pharyngitis 1 with otitis externa, 1 with otitis media, and 1 with pleural infection and 1 with upper respiratory tract infection. Seven patients discontinued treatment due to adverse events. At this time, 44% (25/55) remain progression-free. A documented tumor response, as overall response rate (ORR) was seen in 20% (11/55) with 1CR, 8PR, and 2MR; 17 remain on therapy; and 22 deaths have occurred with a median survival of 15.0 months (95% CI 7.5-NR). Median follow up time was 5.5 (range, 0.7- 41.0) months. The median duration of response (DOR) in those responding is 19.4 months. Conclusions In a heavily pretreated population with baseline compromised bone marrow function, the combination of everolimus and lenalidomide is feasible with a modest ORR and a surprisingly long DOR. Future studies in more defined groups of NHL or HL are necessary to better predict which patients will be long-term responders. This trial is sponsored by Novartis and Celgene Disclosures Off Label Use: mTORC1 inhibitor (Everolimus) and the Immunomodulatory (IMiD) drug Lenalidomide for patients with Heavily Pretreated Relapsed Lymphoma . Mikhael:Onyx: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Nowakowski:Celgene, Morphosis: Consultancy. Witzig:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Reeder:Millennium, Celgene, Novartis: Research Funding.

Abstract Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), the primary cause of non-relapse mortality (NRM) following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, does not always respond to treatment with high dose systemic corticosteroids. We have recently shown that a combination of three biomarkers (TNFR1, ST2, and REG3α) measured at onset of GVHD can predict day 28 response to treatment and 6-month NRM (Levine, Lancet Haem, 2015). Our goal in the current study was to determine if the same biomarker-based Ann Arbor GVHD algorithm can alsopredict treatment response andmortality whenapplied after one week of systemic corticosteroid treatment. The study population consisted of 378 patients (pts) with acute GVHD from 11 centers in the Mount Sinai Acute GVHD International Consortium. All pts were treated with systemic steroids and provided a plasma or serum sample obtained after one week of treatment (±3 days). The median starting dose of systemic steroids for Grade II-IV GVHD was 2.0 mg/kg/day and for Grade I was 1.0 mg/kg/day, after which treatment varied. Patients were divided into test (n=236) and validation (n=142) cohorts. We applied the Ann Arbor GVHD algorithm to concentrations of TNFR1, ST2, and REG3α measured after one week of treatment to generate a predicted probability of 6-month NRM, which we term the treatment score (TS). We employed unsupervised k-medoidclustering to partition TS values from the test cohort into two groups (high and low). This unbiased approach identified a high score group made up of 25% of pts (n=58) in the test cohort. We observed that the day 28 response rate (complete, CR + partial, PR) was significantly lower in pts with high scores compared to low scores in the test cohort (24% vs 65%, p<0.0001) (Fig 1A). Analysis of the validation cohort using the same TS definitions showed similar differences in response rates (22% vs 61%, p<0.0001) (Fig 1B). Further, nearly four times as many pts with high scores in both cohorts died within 6 months from non-relapse causes compared to pts with low scores (test: 57% vs 17%, p<0.0001; validation: 57% vs 14%, p<0.0001) (Fig 1C/D). As expected, the majority of non-relapse deaths in pts treated for GVHD were directly attributable to GVHD (test: 95%; validation: 89%). Relapse rates for high and low score pts were similar (data not shown), and thus pts with a high TS experienced significantly worse overall survival in both cohorts (test: 37% vs 72%, p<0.0001; validation: 38% vs 79%, p<0.0001) (Fig 1E/F). Approximately half of the pts in each cohort (test: 48%; validation: 44%) responded (CR+PR) to the first week of steroids and these ptshad significantly lower 6-month NRM than non-responders (NR) (test: 17% vs 36%, p=0.0002; validation: 13% vs 36%, p=0.0014). Yet the TS continued to stratify mortality risk independently of clinical response. In the test cohort, pts with a high score comprised 16% of all early responders and experienced more than twice the NRM of early responders with a low score (33% vs 13%, p=0.022) (Fig 2A). Conversely, test cohort pts who did not respond by day 7, but had a low score, fared much better than non-responders with a high score (NRM 21% vs 68%, p<0.0001) (Fig 2B). Two thirds of early non-responders comprised this more favorable group. These highly significant results reproduced in the independent validation cohort in similar proportions (CR+PR: 45% vs 6%, p=0.0003; NR: 61% vs 22%, p=0.0001) (Fig 2C/D). Finally, a subset analysis revealed that pts classified as NR after one week of steroids due to isolated, yet persistent, grade I skin GVHD (24/378, 6%) overwhelmingly had low treatment scores (22/24, 92%) and experienced rates of NRM (9%) comparable to responders with low scores, thus forming a distinct, albeit small, subset of pts with non-responsive GVHD that fares particularly well (Fig 3). In conclusion, a treatment score based on three GVHD biomarkers measured after one week of steroids stratifies pts into two groups with distinct risks for treatment failure and 6-month NRM. It is particularly noteworthy that the TS identifies two subsets of pts with steroid refractory (SR) GVHD who have highly different outcomes (Fig 2B/D). The much larger group, approximately two thirds of all SR pts, may not need the same degree of treatment escalation as is traditional for clinical non-response, and thus overtreatment might be avoided. Because the TSis measured at a common decision making time point, it may prove useful to guide risk-adapted therapy. Disclosures Mielke: Novartis: Consultancy; MSD: Consultancy, Other: Travel grants; Celgene: Other: Travel grants, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Other: Travel grants; JAZZ Pharma: Speakers Bureau. Kroeger:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding. Chen:Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Jagasia:Therakos: Consultancy. Kitko:Therakos: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Ferrara:Viracor: Patents & Royalties: GVHD biomarker patent. Levine:Viracor: Patents & Royalties: GVHD biomarker patent.

Abstract No laboratory test can predict non-relapse mortality (NRM) after hematopoietic cellular transplantation (HCT) prior to the onset graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). Recently, we have shown that a signature of three GVHD plasma biomarkers (TNFR1, ST2, and REG3α) can predict response to GVHD therapy and NRM at the onset of clinical GVHD (Levine, Lancet Haem, 2015). Our goal in the current study was to identify a blood biomarker signature that could predict lethal GVHD and six-month NRM well in advance of the onset of GVHD symptoms. Patient samples on day +7 after HCT were obtained from 1,287 patients from 11 HCT centers in the Mount Sinai Acute GVHD International Consortium (MAGIC). Samples from two large centers (n = 929) were combined and randomly assigned to a training set (n = 620) and test set (n = 309). 358 patients from nine others centers constituted an independent validation set. The overall cumulative incidences of 6-month NRM were 11%, 12%, and 13% for the training, test, and validation sets respectively. The incidence of lethal GVHD, defined as death without preceding relapse while under steroid treatment for acute GVHD, were 18%, 24%, and 14% in the same groups, respectively. The median day of GVHD onset was 28 days in the training set and 29 days in the test and validation sets. We measured four GVHD related biomarkers [ST2, REG3α, TNFR1, and IL2Rα] in all samples and used the training set alone to develop competing risks regression models that used all 13 possible combinations of one to four biomarkers to predict 6-month NRM. The best algorithm, which we rigorously confirmed through Monte Carlo cross-validation of 75 different combinations of training sets, included ST2 and REG3α. No combination of one, three, or four biomarkers was superior to the combination of these two biomarkers. The day 7 algorithm identified high risk (HR) and low risk (LR) groups with 6-month NRMs of 28% and 7%, respectively (p<0.001) (Fig 1A). The relapse rates did not differ between risk groups so that overall survival (OS) was 60% for HR and 84% for LR (p<0.001) (Fig 1B). When applied to the test set (Fig 1C/D), the algorithm identified 54/309 (17%) of the patients as HR with an NRM of 33% vs 7% for LR patients (p<0.001) and 6-month OS of 57% and 81% for HR and LR patients, respectively (p<0.001). In the independent validation set (Fig 1 E/F), the algorithm identified 72/358 (20%) of the patients as HR with an NRM of 26% vs 10% for LR patients (p<0.001) and OS of 68% and 85% for HR and LR patients, respectively (p<0.001). High risk patients were three times more likely to die from GVHD than LR patients in each cohort (p<0.001) (Fig 2). The GI tract is the GVHD target organ that is most resistant to treatment and represents a major cause of NRM, and we observed twice as much severe GI GVHD (stage 3 or 4) in HR patients as in LR patients (p<0.001, data not shown). The algorithm successfully separated HR and LR strata for 6 month NRM in several groups with differing risks for GVHD and NRM, including donor type, degree. of HLA-match, age group, and conditioning regimen intensity (Fig 3). In conclusion, we have developed a blood biomarker algorithm that predicts the development of lethal GVHD seven days after HCT, which performed successfully in large multicenter validation sets. The GVH reaction is already in progress by day +7, even though clinical symptoms may not occur until days or weeks later. We speculate that the blood biomarker concentrations at this early time point reflect subclinical GI pathology, a notion that is reinforced by the fact that ST2 and REG3α, the two biomarkers in the algorithm, are closely associated with GI GVHD. The algorithm identified HR and LR strata in several patient groups with different overall risk for lethal GVHD (donor, HLA match, conditioning regimen intensity, age). This day +7 algorithm should prove useful in clinical BMT research by identifying patients at high risk for lethal GVHD who might benefit from aggressive preemptive treatment strategies. Disclosures Chen: Novartis: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Jagasia:Therakos: Consultancy. Kitko:Therakos: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Kroeger:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding. Levine:Viracor: Patents & Royalties: GVHD biomarkers patent. Ferrara:Viracor: Patents & Royalties: GVHD biomarkers patent.

Abstract Clinical GVHD staging varies between centers and is not agreed upon by independent reviewers (Weisdorf, BBMT 2003). These inconsistencies help explain why promising GVHD treatments from single center studies have not reproduced in multicenter trials. To address this issue, our international GVHD research consortium has developed guidance that has been refined through consensus following case discussions, resulting in uniform and reproducible GVHD clinical symptom reporting. We record all raw target organ symptom data and apply staging based upon this data (Table 1). Only areas of erythema, bullae and desquamation are quantified because other skin changes are not typical of active GVHD rash. Upper GI symptoms must meet thresholds to diagnose GVHD: anorexia with associated weight loss, nausea and/or 2+ vomiting episodes/day lasting 3+ days. For lower GI GVHD we collect stool volumes excluding formed/mostly-formed stools. Unquantified episodes are counted at 200 ml per episode (3 ml/kg for children <50kg) based upon a chart review of 300 patients with post-BMT diarrhea from any cause. Non-GVHD rectal bleeding that results in flecks or streaks of blood in the stool are ignored for staging. We use the highest daily stool output in the 3 days prior to the diagnosis of lower GI GVHD to determine onset stage and, when available, a 3-day average stool volume for subsequent staging to smooth daily variability. We classify biopsy report interpretation into four standardized categories: Positive (unequivocal presence of GVHD), Equivocal (findings suggestive of GVHD, but the pathologist cannot confirm the diagnosis), Non-diagnostic (no abnormalities or subtle findings insufficient to determine etiology), and Non-GVHD etiology (definitive evidence of another diagnosis without concomitant features suggestive of GVHD). We then combine the biopsy interpretation with clinical decision making to assign an overall confidence level to the diagnosis of GVHD in each target organ (Table 2): Confirmed (positive biopsy, regardless of clinician treatment decision), Probable (GVHD diagnosis is sufficiently favored that treatment is given without a positive biopsy), Possible (symptoms present without a positive biopsy; not treated as GVHD), Negative (no symptoms or symptoms are present but a GVHD diagnosis is not entertained and a non-GVHD etiology is identified). Uniform clinical data collection is essential for future GVHD trials and requires application of clear guidance. While still subject to refinement, these guidelines, in use for 2 years by an international research consortium, are designed to be clear, easy to apply, and for clinical trial use. Table 1. GVHD Target Organ Staging Stage Skin (active erythema only) Liver (bilirubin) Upper GI Lower GI (stool output/day) 0 No active (erythematous) GVHD rash < 2 mg/dl No or intermittent nausea, vomiting or anorexia Adult: < 500 ml/day or <3 episodes/day Child: < 10 ml/kg/day or <4 episodes/day 1 Rash < 25% BSA 2-3 mg/dl Persistent nausea, vomiting or anorexia Adult: 500-999 ml/day or 3-4 episodes/day Child: 10 -19.9 ml/kg/day or 4-6 episodes/day 2 Rash 25 - 50% BSA 3.1-6 mg/dl - Adult: 1000-1500 ml/day or 5-7 episodes/day Child: 20 - 30 ml/kg/day or 7-10 episodes/day 3 Rash > 50% BSA 6.1-15 mg/dl - Adult: >1500 ml/day or >7 episodes/day Child: > 30 ml/kg/day or >10 episodes/day 4 Generalized rash (>50% BSA) and bullous formation or desquamation > 5% BSA >15 mg/dl - Severe abdominal pain with or without ileus, or grossly bloody stool (volume independent) Table 2. Confidence Levels Pathologic evidence Clinician assessment Treatment for acute GVHD Comments Confirmed Unequivocal evidence of GVHD GVHD is the etiology for symptoms Not required GVHD is clearly present even if other etiologies co-exist simultaneously Probable Not required (includes equivocal and non-diagnostic biopsies) GVHD most likely etiology for symptoms Yes GVHD is most likely present but other etiologies may also explain the symptoms and there insufficient evidence to make a confirmed diagnosis Possible GVHD in differential diagnosis (but no treatment is being provided) No GVHD may be present, but other etiologies are favored Negative Unequivocal evidence of a diagnosis other than GVHD (e.g., drug rash) GVHD is not considered as an explanation for the symptoms No and the symptoms resolve without GVHD treatment A "negative" biopsy (e.g., normal skin) is not unequivocal evidence of a diagnosis other than GVHD Disclosures Devine: Genzyme: Research Funding. Chen:Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding. Porter:Novartis: Patents & Royalties, Research Funding. Levine:Novartis: Consultancy.

Abstract Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPIs) have led to dramatic improvement in outcome of several cancers. Program death ligand1 (PD-L1) staining and tumor mutational burden (TMB) have emerged as independent predictive biomarkers of ICPIs in lung cancer. Here we examine the landscape of TMB and PD-L1 expression in breast cancer and present a case of patient with high TMB and PD-L1 negative breast cancer with exceptional response to ICPIs. Methods: Hybrid-capture based comprehensive genomic profiling of 395 cancer related genes using the FoundationOne assay was performed on 14,867 breast carcinomas sequenced in the course of routine clinical care. Ventana (SP-263) PD-L1 status (n=1425) and hormone receptor status was available for a subset of patients. Subgroup analyses were performed based on histological type [invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC, n=740)], molecular subtypes [ER-positive (ER+; n= 1371), HER2-amplified (HER2+; n=1522), and TNBC (n=917)], patient age (≤45, 46-60, ≥61), and local vs. metastatic disease (n=5241 and 6710). Results: Consistent with previous reports, the rates of positive PD-L1 staining are highest in TNBC (14%) and lowest in HER2+, ILC, and ER+ disease (6.0%, 5.1%, 2.3%). Interestingly, the rate of PD-L1 positivity, defined as ≥1% tumor staining, was significantly lower in metastatic disease vs. local disease (6.3% vs. 11.1%; p = 0.005). The frequency of high TMB, defined as &gt;10 mutations/mb, was greatest in ILC and HER2+ disease (13.6% and 9.9%) and lowest in TNBC and ER+ disease (7.0% and 6.9%). Rates of high TMB were associated with increased patient age (3.7%, 9.3%, and 12.8% frequency in patients ≤45, 46-60, and ≥61) and were significantly higher in metastatic vs. local disease (11.1% vs 5.3%; p&lt;2E-23). PD-L1 positive and TMB high populations were not significantly co-occurrent (OR = 1.02, p = 0.87). Similar percentages of PD-L1 positivity were observed in both TMB low (9.3%) and TMB high (9.5%). However, among patients with very high TMB (&gt;20 mut/mb), there was a significant association between TMB and PD-L1 positivity (OR = 2.6, p = 0.023). Nevertheless, even with high cutoff, 79% of the TMB high samples were PD-L1 negative. We also report on a stage IIIb (T4, N2, M0) ER+ HER2- breast cancer patient with high TMB (40muts/mb) and negative PD-L1 IHC who previously progressed on aromatase inhibitor with CDK4/6 inhibitor and chemotherapy but achieved durable complete response of &gt; 1 year with nivolumab in combination with capecitabine. Conclusions: Predictive biomarkers for ICPIs are critical to identify a subset of breast cancer patients who may respond to immunotherapy. TMB high and PD-L1 positivity do not significantly co-occur and the majority of TMB high cases were PD-L1 negative. Nevertheless, this group of patients may still benefit with ICPIs. Further studies are needed to evaluate this subset of patients. Citation Format: Ethan Sokol, Lee Albacker, Aixa Soyano, Ricardo Parrondo, Brenda Ernst, Emmanuel Gabriel, Garrett Frampton, Jeffrey Ross, Siraj Ali, Jon Chung, Saranya Chumsri. Incidence of high tumor mutation burden (TMB) and PD-L1 positivity in breast cancers and potential response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPIs) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2019; 2019 Mar 29-Apr 3; Atlanta, GA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 4894.