Citations

The FAITH! (Fostering African-American Improvement in Total Health) Cardiovascular Health and Wellness Program is more than a decade-long community-based participatory research initiative aimed at addressing cardiovascular health disparities among African-Americans in Minnesota. Founded in 2013, the program employs a culturally tailored, community-driven approach by partnering with African-American faith communities to promote cardiovascular health through education, digital health tools, and multilevel interventions targeting the social determinants of health. Grounded in community-based participatory research principles, FAITH! prioritizes equitable academic-community partnerships, co-learning, community capacity building, and shared ownership in all aspects of research and implementation. The program’s exemplary innovations include the NIH-funded FAITH! Trial, a randomized clinical trial, testing a mobile health intervention (the FAITH! App) co-created with the African-American community, and the Techquity by FAITH! study. Techquity by FAITH! evaluates the effectiveness of a culturally relevant, community-informed mHealth intervention supported by a Digital Health Advocate network to improve overall cardiovascular health and digital health literacy. During its evolution, FAITH! has addressed emergent public health crises, including the COVID-19 pandemic, by adapting programming to provide emergency preparedness resources, health education, and vaccine outreach. Key outcomes include sustainable church-based health ministries, increased research participation, and successful translation of research into practice. The program has also contributed to research workforce development by mentoring and training diverse early-career scholars and community leaders in community-based participatory research and cardiovascular health equity research. Lessons learned highlight the transformative impact of community-based participatory research in building trust, facilitating culturally relevant dissemination, and sustaining health equity initiatives. The FAITH! model demonstrates a scalable, community-led strategy for advancing cardiovascular health in underserved populations and provides a blueprint for future initiatives aiming to reduce racial health disparities.

Abstract Introduction: CFT7455 is a highly potent and novel Ikaros Family Zinc Finger Protein 1/3 (IKZF1/3) degrader. In xenograft models, CFT7455 has more potent IKZF1/3 degradation compared to other degraders. Early observations from the FIH clinical trial (NCT04756726) along with supporting translational studies are presented here. Methods: Pre-clinical studies comparing CFT7455 and CC-92480 in both in vitro and xenograft models were performed. The pre-clinical studies’ results coincided with observations from the on-going clinical trial. The clinical trial is an open-label, Phase 1/2, multi-center, FIH study in heavily pretreated relapsed/refractory (R/R) MM and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL) patients evaluating safety, tolerability, and PK of CFT7455. Eligible MM patients are R/R to therapy and are not candidates for regimens known to provide clinical benefit. A starting dose of 50 μg QD 21 days on/7 days off (21/7) in 28-day cycles was administered. Results: CFT7455 and CC-92480 showed similar cereblon binding profiles and in vitro IKZF1/3 degradation kinetics, translating into sub-nanomolar GI50 values in proliferation assays across a panel of MM cell lines. In the NCI-H929 xenograft model, 100 μg/kg/day of CFT7455 resulted in durable tumor regressions, while 1000 μg/kg/day of CC-92480 gave tumor stasis. Similar results were seen in a systemic model of MM, MM1.S. Both compounds achieved >95% IKZF3 degradation in tumors 4h post dose. At 48h post dose, CFT7455 was more effective than CC-92480 in maintaining IKZF3 degradation (65% vs. 6% respectively). When levels of CFT7455 and CC-92480 in plasma and tumor were compared, CFT7455 concentrations were > DC80 in tumor 48h post dose, while CC-92480 levels were undetectable in tumor and plasma, demonstrating CFT7455 has longer exposure resulting in sustained IKZF1/3 degradation in pre-clinical models. In cohort A, 5 heavily pre-treated MM patients (pts) received single agent CFT7455. 4 pts have received at least 3 cycles, with 2 pts receiving 5 cycles. Neutropenia (grade 4) was observed in 3/5 pts without coincident fever or infection. Additionally, a 2-4 fold accumulation in plasma CFT7455 exposure at steady state was observed. Early pharmacodynamic (PD) data demonstrates deep persistent degradation of IKZF3 (~100%) and serum free light chain reduction (up to 72%) in response to treatment. Stable disease has been observed in 34 pts, suggesting clinical benefit. Conclusions: While CFT7455 showed clinical benefit at 50 ug with deep target degradation, neutropenia was dose limiting. PK/PD modeling suggests alternative dosing regimens may result in increased tolerability with preserved efficacy, and evaluation of them is underway. Updated results will be presented at the meeting. Citation Format: Sagar Lonial, Shambavi Richard, Jeffrey V Matous, Andrew J. Yee, Urvi Shah, Neha Mehta-Shah, Thomas Martin, Eli Muchtar, Sikander Ailawadhi, Paul G. Richardson, Manisha Bhutani, Samantha Perino, Jason Kirby, Roman V. Agafonov, Prasoon Chaturvedi, Bradley Class, Matthew Schnaderbeck, Michael R. Palmer, Cathleen Gorman, Oliver Schoenborn-Kellenberger, Amanda Hoerres, Stewart L. Fisher, Roy M. Pollock, Adam Crystal, Michelle Mahler, Jesus Bardeja. Pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of a novel IKZF1/3 degrader, CFT7455, enables significant potency advantage over other IKZF1/3 degraders in models of multiple myeloma (MM) and the results of the initial treatment cohort from a first-in-human (FIH) phase 1/2 study of CFT7455 in MM [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2022; 2022 Apr 8-13. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(12_Suppl):Abstract nr CT186.

Significance Statement The only treatment approved for PKD inhibits production of cAMP, the main PKA activator. It is only partially effective, likely because side effects restrict dosing and because other sources of cAMP and mechanisms of cAMP-independent PKA activation exist. Which PKA isozyme(s) promotes PKD is uncertain and selective PKA inhibitors usable in vivo have not been available. Experiments in a mouse model show PKA-I is the main PKA isozyme promoting cystogenesis and that constitutive PKA-I downregulation and a novel, highly selective PKA inhibitor ameliorate PKD. The dose of PKA inhibitor used had no detectable adverse effects. This information provides a strong rationale for a strategy that may be more effective, or substantially increase the efficacy of the currently approved treatment. Background Upregulation of cAMP-dependent and cAMP-independent PKA signaling is thought to promote cystogenesis in polycystic kidney disease (PKD). PKA-I regulatory subunit RI α is increased in kidneys of orthologous mouse models. Kidney-specific knockout of RI α upregulates PKA activity, induces cystic disease in wild-type mice, and aggravates it in Pkd1 RC/RC mice. Methods PKA-I activation or inhibition was compared with EPAC activation or PKA-II inhibition using Pkd1 RC/RC metanephric organ cultures. The effect of constitutive PKA (preferentially PKA-I) downregulation in vivo was ascertained by kidney-specific expression of a dominant negative RIαB allele in Pkd1 RC/RC mice obtained by crossing Prkar1α R1αB/WT , Pkd1RC/RC , and Pkhd1- Cre mice (C57BL/6 background). The effect of pharmacologic PKA inhibition using a novel, selective PRKACA inhibitor (BLU2864) was tested in mIMCD3 3D cultures, metanephric organ cultures, and Pkd1RC/RC mice on a C57BL/6 × 129S6/Sv F1 background. Mice were sacrificed at 16 weeks of age. Results PKA-I activation promoted and inhibition prevented ex vivo P-Ser133 CREB expression and cystogenesis. EPAC activation or PKA-II inhibition had no or only minor effects. BLU2864 inhibited in vitro mIMCD3 cystogenesis and ex vivo P-Ser133 CREB expression and cystogenesis. Genetic downregulation of PKA activity and BLU2864 directly and/or indirectly inhibited many pro-proliferative pathways and were both protective in vivo . BLU2864 had no detectable on- or off-target adverse effects. Conclusions PKA-I is the main PKA isozyme promoting cystogenesis. Direct PKA inhibition may be an effective strategy to treat PKD and other conditions where PKA signaling is upregulated. By acting directly on PKA, the inhibition may be more effective than or substantially increase the efficacy of treatments that only affect PKA activity by lowering cAMP.

Abstract Background: Despite many treatment options, multiple myeloma (MM) remains largely incurable with poor outcomes among patients who progress after treatment with a protease inhibitor, immunomodulatory imide drugs (IMiDs), and/or an anti-CD38 antibody. Multiple targeted therapies have been developed for different subtypes of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL); however, these therapies are typically not curative for patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) disease. IMiDs are a standard of care for treatment of MM and have shown activity in some NHL subtypes. However, given that many patients treated with these agents frequently develop disease progression, an unmet need remains. CFT7455 is a next-generation IKZF1/3 degrader, which is more potent and catalytically active than other approved agents targeting the cereblon E3 ligase complex that degrade IKZF1/3. CFT7455 is orally bioavailable and selective for IKZF1 (Ikaros) and IKZF3 (Aiolos). Depletion of these targets from malignant B cells result in tumor cell death, and depletion from the tumor microenvironment results in T-cell activation. In i n vitro and in vivo models of MM and NHL, including anaplastic large cell lymphoma, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, and mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), CFT7455 demonstrated greater activity than other agents in similar classes. These results provided rationale for a first-in-human, phase 1 study to evaluate CFT7455. Study Design: This is an open-label, multicenter, phase 1 clinical trial with dose escalation and dose expansion phases. The dose escalation phase, beginning with a starting dose of 50 mcg daily, may include single-participant cohorts at initial dose levels, after which 3-6 patients are enrolled per cohort using a Bayesian logistic regression model. After initial exploration of single-agent CFT7455 in a mixed cohort of patients with R/R MM or select NHLs, dose escalation is split to perform dose determination in R/R MM separate NHL. Once a safe dose of CFT7455 in R/R MM is determined, the combination of CFT7455 with dexamethasone will be explored in R/R MM. CFT7455 is dosed orally in 28-day cycles, on a 21-day on, 7-day off schedule, until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. Expansion cohorts of single-agent CFT7455 and CFT7455 plus dexamethasone in R/R MM, and single-agent CFT7455 for peripheral T-cell lymphoma and MCL are planned. Primary objectives include: safety and tolerability, randomized phase 2 dose (RP2D)/maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of CFT7455, and estimation of antitumor activity of CFT7455. Secondary objectives include assessment of pharmacokinetics. Exploratory objectives include characterization of target engagement and IKZF1/3 degradation and assessing the immunomodulatory effects of CFT7455. For MM patients, key inclusion criteria include histologically/cytologically-confirmed MM that is R/R. Patients must not be candidates for regimens known to provide clinical benefit, defined as having received ≥3 prior anti-myeloma regimens including ≥2 consecutive cycles of lenalidomide, pomalidomide, a proteasome inhibitor, a glucocorticoid, and an anti-CD38 antibody. Key exclusion criteria include the presence of central nervous system malignancy, recent venous thromboembolism or inability to undergo its prophylaxis. Plasma cell leukemia is excluded. For NHL patients, key inclusion criteria include histologically/cytologically-confirmed NHL that is R/R. Patients mustn't be candidates for regimens known to provide clinical benefit, defined as the requisite prior lines of therapy according to an indication-specific basis. Key exclusion criteria include the presence of central nervous system malignancy, recent venous thromboembolism or inability to undergo its prophylaxis. Several lymphoma subtypes less likely to benefit are excluded (eg, Richter transformation, Burkitt lymphoma, Sezary syndrome, and lymphoblastic lymphoma). Approximately 164 patients at approximately 13 US sites will be enrolled. This trial is registered with clinicaltrials.gov as NCT04756726, enrollment is ongoing. Disclosures Berdeja: Legend Biotech: Consultancy; Incyte: Research Funding; Ichnos Sciences: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding; SecuraBio: Consultancy; EMD Serono: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bluebird bio: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Consultancy; CRISPR Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celularity: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Poseida: Research Funding; Acetylon: Research Funding; Teva: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy. Ailawadhi: GSK: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy; Cellectar: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Beigene: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ascentage: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Medimmune: Research Funding. Horwitz: Millennium /Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kura Oncology: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Tubulis: Consultancy; Myeloid Therapeutics: Consultancy; Affimed: Research Funding; Aileron: Research Funding; Vividion Therapeutics: Consultancy; ONO Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; Acrotech Biopharma: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Forty Seven, Inc.: Research Funding; Trillium Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; C4 Therapeutics: Consultancy; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; SecuraBio: Consultancy, Research Funding; Shoreline Biosciences, Inc.: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Verastem: Research Funding. Matous: Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mehta-Shah: C4 Therapeutics: Consultancy; Kiowa Hakko Kirin: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Ono Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Secura Bio: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Innate Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Corvus Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Verastem: Research Funding. Martin: GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Sanofi: Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Amgen: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Richardson: Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy; Secura Bio: Consultancy; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Regeneron: Consultancy; Protocol Intelligence: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding. Richard: Karyopharm, Janssen: Honoraria. Bhutani: Sanofi: Consultancy; Amgen, BMS, Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Janssen, MedImmune, Takeda, Celgene, BMS, Cerecor, Celularity: Research Funding. Yee: Takeda: Consultancy; Adaptive: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; GSK: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Palmer: C4 Therapeutics: Current Employment. Gorman: C4 Therapeutics: Current Employment. Schoenborn-Kellenberger: C4 Therapeutics: Current Employment. Bilic: C4 Therapeutics: Current Employment. Crystal: C4 Therapeutics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Mahler: C4 Therapeutics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Lonial: Merck: Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AMGEN: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

467 Background: Recent tumor-agnostic drug approvals have resulted in a paradigm shift in cancer treatment away from organ/histology specific indications to biomarker-guided tumor-agnostic approaches. Pralsetinib is a potent and selective RET inhibitor, which has recently been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of adults with metastatic RET fusion–positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and is under New Drug Application review for RET mutant thyroid cancers by the FDA. RET fusions occur in up to approximately 7‒8% of patients with gastrointestinal malignancies, including pancreatic, liver, and colorectal cancers. There are currently no approved selective RET inhibitors for patients with RET fusion–positive solid tumors other than NSCLC and thyroid cancer. Here, we present data on the clinical activity of pralsetinib in patients with RET fusion–positive solid tumor types other than NSCLC enrolled in the Phase I/II ARROW study (NCT03037385). Methods: ARROW consists of a phase I dose escalation (30–600 mg once [QD] or twice daily) followed by a phase II expansion (400 mg QD) in patients with advanced RET-altered solid tumors. Primary objectives are overall response rate (ORR), per RECICT v1.1 and safety. Results: A total of 13 patients with RET fusion–positive thyroid cancer (12 papillary, 1 poorly differentiated; enrollment cutoff July 11, 2019) and 14 patients with RET fusion–positive solid tumors other than NSCLC and thyroid (3 pancreatic, 3 colon, 2 cholangiocarcinoma, 6 other; enrollment cutoff November 19, 2019) were enrolled in ARROW and received pralsetinib. At the February 13, 2020, data cutoff, the ORR (blinded central review) in response-evaluable patients with RET fusion–positive thyroid cancer was 91% (10/11; 95% CI: 59‒100) and disease control rate was 100% (95% CI: 72‒100). Treatment was ongoing in 7 of 11 patients. In RET fusion–positive solid tumors other than NSCLC and thyroid, ORR (investigator’s assessment) was 50% (6/12; 95% CI: 21‒79) and responses were observed in all patients with pancreatic cancer (3/3) and cholangiocarcinoma (2/2). Treatment was ongoing in 6 of 12 patients, including 2 of 3 patients with pancreatic cancer and 1 of 2 patients with cholangiocarcinoma. Responses were observed across multiple fusion genotypes. In the 27 patients with RET fusion–positive tumors other than NSCLC, most frequent treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were grade 1–2, and included anemia (33%), increased aspartate aminotransferase (33%), decreased white blood cell count (33%), hypertension (30%), increased alanine aminotransferase (26%), hyperphosphatemia (19%), and neutropenia (19%). No patients discontinued due to TRAEs. Conclusions: Pralsetinib demonstrated broad and durable antitumor activity across multiple advanced solid tumor types, regardless of RET fusion genotype, and was well tolerated. The study is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT03037385.

109 Background: RET gene fusions are targetable oncogenic drivers in multiple tumor types, including up to 20% of papillary thyroid cancers (PTC). Pralsetinib is an investigational, highly potent, selective inhibitor of oncogenic RET alterations. In the registration-enabling Phase 1/2 ARROW study (NCT03037385), pralsetinib demonstrated an overall response rate (ORR; response-evaluable patients [REP], central review) of 73% (19/26) in treatment-naïve patients and 61% (49/80; 2 pending confirmation) in platinum-exposed patients with RET fusion+ non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and was well tolerated (data cut-off November 18, 2019). We provide an update on the clinical activity of pralsetinib in other RET fusion+ solid tumor types. Methods: ARROW consists of a phase 1 dose escalation (30–600 mg once [QD] or twice daily) followed by a phase 2 expansion (400 mg QD) in patients with advanced RET-altered solid tumors. Primary objectives were ORR and safety. Results: As of November 18, 2019, 29 patients with metastatic solid tumor types other than NSCLC (16 PTC, 1 undifferentiated thyroid, 3 pancreatic, 3 colon, 6 other) bearing a RET fusion have received pralsetinib. Efficacy data are presented for REP enrolled by July 11, 2019. In patients with thyroid cancer that is RET fusion+, ORR (investigator assessment) was 75% (9/12; all confirmed). Median (range) duration of response (DOR) was 14.5 (3.7+, 16.8) months (mo), with 67% of responding patients continuing treatment. Two patients with stable disease were continuing treatment at 11.5+ and 19.3+ mo. In other RET fusion+ cancers, ORR was 60% (3/5; all confirmed) with partial responses in 2/2 patients with pancreatic cancer (DOR 5.5, 7.4+ mo) and 1 patient with intrahepatic bile duct carcinoma (DOR 7.5 mo). Two patients with colon cancer had stable disease for 7.3 and 9.3 mo. Responses were observed across multiple fusion genotypes. In the entire safety population (all patients treated with 400 mg QD pralsetinib, regardless of diagnosis; n = 354), most treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were grade 1-2, and included increased aspartate aminotransferase (31%), anemia (22%), increased alanine aminotransferase (21%), constipation (21%) and hypertension (20%). Only 4% of patients in the safety population discontinued due to TRAEs. Conclusions: Pralsetinib demonstrated broad and durable antitumor activity across multiple advanced solid tumor types, regardless of RET fusion genotype, and was well tolerated. The study is ongoing and still enrolling patients in this cohort. Clinical trial information: NCT03037385.

550 Background: 5187 postmenopausal women were originally randomized to NCIC CTG MA.17 to receive letrozole (LET) or placebo (PLAC) after 5 years of tamoxifen. The hazard ratio (HR) for disease-free survival (DFS) was 0.58 (0.450.76, p=0.00004) after a median follow-up of 30 months (mo). The trial was unblinded in October 2003 after the first interim analysis. Women randomized to PLAC were offered LET at the time of unblinding. The goal of this analysis was to determine whether women switching from PLAC to LET benefit in terms of disease outcome and to evaluate treatment related toxicities. Methods: LET and PLAC-LET have been compared to PLAC, based on the hazard ratio and adjusting for baseline patient and disease variables including, among others, tumor size, nodal status and prior adjuvant chemotherapy. Results: Information about their follow-up treatment after unblinding was available on 2268 women originally assigned to PLAC and who were free of recurrence and alive at the time of unblinding. Among them, 1655 crossed over from PLAC to LET while 613 elected no treatment. With 54 mo f/up the HR for DFS was 0.31 (0.18, 0.55: p<0.0001) favoring patients who crossed over to LET compared to those who stayed on no treatment. The treatment switch was well tolerated with no significant difference in bone fractures or cardiovascular events. An updated analysis of DFS, DDFS and OS by nodal and tumor receptor status, prior chemotherapy, menopausal status at the start of tamoxifen, and duration of prior tamoxifen therapy will be presented at the meeting. Conclusion: Women with hormone dependent breast cancer prescribed LET after a prolonged delay from completing tamoxifen experienced a significant improvement in outcome (DFS, DDFS, OS) and should be considered for this therapy. [Table: see text]

549 Background: MA.17 evaluated letrozole (LET) or placebo (PLAC) after 5 years of tamoxifen (Tam) and showed [median follow-up 30 months (mos)] significant improvement in disease-free survival (DFS) for LET [hazard ratio (HR) 0.57, p = 0.00008]. The trial was unblinded and PLAC patients (pts) were offered LET. An ITT analysis of all outcomes, before and after unblinding, based on the original randomization was performed. Methods: A stratified log-rank test was used to compare DFS, distant (D)DFS, overall survival (OS) and incidence of contra-lateral breast cancer (CBC). The Cox regression model used baseline stratification variables and two prespecified factors, menopausal status at the start of Tam and time on Tam. Subgroup analyses for DFS and OS were performed for the two prespecified subsets. All p-values were two-sided Results: 5187 pts were randomized at baseline and, at unblinding, 1655 of 2268 PLAC pts accepted LET. At median follow-up of 54 mos (range,16–86) 363 recurrences or CBC’s (144 LET and 219 PLAC) occurred; 118 LET and 176 PLAC pts had recurrent disease and 26 LET and 43 PLAC pts had CBC. 4 year DFS was 94.3% (LET) and 91.4% (PLAC) (HR 0.64; 95% CI, 0.52 - 0.79; p = 0.00002). Corresponding 4 year DDFS was 96.2% and 94.9% (HR 0.76; 0.58–0.99; p = 0.041). 4 year OS was 95.0% (LET) and 95.1% (PLAC) (HR 1.00; 0.78–1.28; p = 0.99). LET was equally effective in node +ve and -ve pts (i.e., similar HRs) in DFS. OS was not significantly different for LET and PLAC in any subgroup. The annual rate of CBC was 0.29% LET (0.18–0.40) and 0.47% PLAC (0.34–0.61); HR 0.61 (0.38–0.98) p = 0.037. 255 pts had died as of the data cut-off (128 LET and 127 PLAC). Conclusions: In this ITT analysis, pts originally randomized to LET within 3 months of stopping Tam did better than PLAC pts in DFS, DDFS and CBC, despite 73% of PLAC pts crossing to LET after unblinding. This highlights the strong beneficial effect of extended adjuvant therapy with LET. [Table: see text]