Chien, A. Jo

Importance Although adding immune checkpoint inhibitors to neoadjuvant chemotherapy improves outcomes in high-risk early-stage breast cancer, opportunities remain to further enhance response. Dual checkpoint blockade offers a potential strategy to further enhance efficacy. Objective To evaluate the combination of anti−programmed cell death 1 protein (PD-1) cemiplimab and anti−lymphocyte activation gene 3 (LAG-3) added to neoadjuvant therapy in ERBB2 -negative early-stage, high-risk breast cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants The I-SPY2 (Investigation of Serial Studies to Predict Your Therapeutic Response With Imaging and Molecular Analysis 2) is an ongoing randomized clinical platform trial being conducted at multiple US clinical sites including patients with early-stage (II or III) ERBB2 -negative, high-risk breast cancer. Participants, continuously enrolled since 2010, were adaptively randomized from February 2, 2020, to December 9, 2021, to one of several experimental neoadjuvant therapies or control groups based on receptor subtypes defined by hormone receptor (HR), ERBB2 status, and MammaPrint (Agendia Inc) molecular risk, categorized as high (MP1) or ultrahigh (MP2). Data were analyzed from January 1, 2022, to August 5, 2025. Interventions Both groups received weekly paclitaxel for 12 weeks, then doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by surgery; concomitant with paclitaxel, the intervention group also received 4 doses of cemiplimab and fianlimab (PCF) every 3 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures Pathologic complete response (pCR). Treatments graduated when they achieved 85% bayesian probability of success in a subtype-specific phase 3 trial. Pathway-specific biomarkers were assessed for response prediction. Results A total of 78 participants (mean [SD] age, 47 [39-54] years) were randomized to the intervention group, with 350 participants (mean [SD] age, 48 [39-57] years) randomized to the historical control population. PCF graduated in all clinical signatures, with pCR rates vs control of 44% (95% CI, 34%-53%) vs 21% (95% CI, 17%-25%) in all ERBB2 , 53% (95% CI, 39%-67%) vs 29% (95% CI, 22%-36%) in triple-negative, and 36% (95% CI, 23%-49%) vs 14% (95% CI, 9%-19%) in HR-positive and ERBB2 -negative disease. Among the total participants, 16 (21%) experienced adrenal insufficiency, including hypophysitis (11% grade 3 or 4), mostly occurring after immunotherapy completion. PCF was found to be highly effective in the subset of patients with immune signature positive status (ImPrint positive). Conclusions and Relevance In this randomized clinical trial, the combination of PD-1 and anti−LAG-3 inhibition with standard NAC was effective in early-stage ERBB2 -negative breast cancer, particularly in patients displaying a positive ImPrint immune signature. These results warrant further definitive trials. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01042379

PURPOSE Neoadjuvant immunotherapy (IO) has become the standard of care for early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), but not yet for other subtypes. We previously developed a clinical-grade mRNA-based immune classifier (ImPrint) predicting response to IO that is now being used in I-SPY2.2 as part of the response predictive subtypes. We report the performance of ImPrint in hormone receptor–positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (HR+HER2–) patients from five IO arms. METHODS A total of 204 HR+HER2– (MammaPrint high-risk) patients from five IO arms (anti–PD-1, anti–PD-L1/poly [ADP-ribose] polymerase inhibitor combination, anti–PD-1/toll-like receptor 9 dual-IO combination, and anti–PD-1 ± lymphocyte activation gene 3 dual-IO combination) and 191 patients from the chemotherapy-only control arm were included in this analysis. Patients were classified as ImPrint+ (likely sensitive) versus ImPrint– (likely resistant), using pretreatment mRNA. Performance of ImPrint for predicting pathologic complete response (pCR) to IO-containing arms was characterized and compared with tumor grade (III), MammaPrint (ultra) High2 risk (MP2), and estrogen receptor (ER)-low (ER ≤ 10%). RESULTS Overall, the pCR rate across the five IO arms was 33%. 26% of HR+HER2– patients were ImPrint+, and pCR rates with IO were 75% in ImPrint+ versus 17% in ImPrint–, with the highest pCR rate >90% in a dual-IO arm. In the control arm, pCR rates were 33% in ImPrint+ and 8% in ImPrint–. Tumor grade (III), MP2, and ER-low showed pCR rates in IO of 45%, 56%, and 63%, respectively, with lower pCR odds ratios (OR < 7.5) compared with ImPrint (OR = 14.5). CONCLUSION Using an accurate selection strategy, HR+HER2– patients could achieve pCR rates similar to what is seen with best neoadjuvant therapies in TNBC and HER2+ (ie, pCR rate >65%-70%). ImPrint, an Food and Drug Administration IDE-enabled assay, may represent a way to identify HR+HER2– patients for IO that best balances likely benefit versus risk of serious immune-related adverse events.

601 Background: EOP is an I-SPY2 neoadjuvant sub-study designed to test the tolerability and impact of novel endocrine-based strategies in stage 2/3 BC pts predicted to have lower benefit from chemotherapy. Amcenestrant (A) is an oral selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD) with activity in hormone receptor positive (HR+) HER2- metastatic BC. Methods: EOP eligibility included pts screened for the main I-SPY2 trial with HR+ HER2-, MammaPrint (MP) low risk Stage 2/3 BC. Pts with MP High risk tumor signatures were eligible if clinically node-negative (cN-). Pts were stratified by SET index and menopausal status. Pts were randomized to 3 arms: A 200 mg qd (A), A + abemaciclib 150 mg bid (AA), A + letrozole 2.5 mg qd (AL). Premenopausal pts received concurrent ovarian function suppression. Treatment was for 6 mos followed by surgery. Baseline (BL) and 3-wk biopsies were performed. Breast MRIs were conducted at BL (T0), 3 wks (T1), 12 wks (T2), 6 mos (T3). The primary endpoint was feasibility, defined as >75% of pts completing >75% study therapy. Results: Between May 2021 and Aug 2022, 74 pts were randomized: 31 A, 21 AA, 22 AL. Median age 50 years, 54% premenopausal, 38% clinically node-positive (cN+). 41% pts had ductal, 38% lobular, 11% mixed ductal/lobular histology. Mean BL tumor Ki67 (central testing) was 16.9%, 88% MP low, 76% SET index Hi. Pt and tumor characteristics were balanced across the 3 arms. Treatment in all 3 arms was feasible with 95% of pts completing >75% study therapy. Most common AEs include grade 1-2 hot flashes (69%) and fatigue (66%). Grade 3 AEs include neutropenia (2 pts) and diarrhea (1 pt) in AA. Table summarizes key response endpoints, which were similar between pre- and postmenopausal pts. Of 28 cN+ pts, 2 (7%) were pathologically node-negative (pN-). Mean MRI Functional Tumor Volume (cc) change between T0->T1, T1->T2, T2->T3, T0->T3 was -6.06 (-34.2%), -3.55 (-29.2%), -0.829 (-20.1%), -11.3 (-68.4%), respectively, similar across arms (p=0.396).ctDNA was detected in 10/59 (17%) pts at T0. ctDNA became undetectable in 6 pts, decreased in 4 pts, and went from ctDNA undetectable at baseline to detectable at T3 in 2 pts. Conclusions: Six months of neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) with the oral SERD amcenestrant is feasible, well-tolerated, and demonstrates anti-proliferative and anti-tumor activity in pre- and postmenopausal pts. NET provides a rich platform for biomarker discovery and investigating response to endocrine therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT01042379 . [Table: see text]

LBA509 Background: I-SPY2.2 is a multicenter phase 2 platform sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART) evaluating novel experimental regimens in the neoadjuvant breast cancer setting. The novel therapy is given as first in a sequence (Block A), followed by standard chemo/targeted therapies (Block B/C) if indicated. The goal is to identify agents that lead to pCR after novel targeted agents alone, or in sequence with optimal therapy assigned based on the tumor response predictive subtype (RPS). RPS incorporates expression-based immune, DNA repair deficiency (DRD), and luminal signatures with hormone receptor (HR) and HER2 status to classify patients by subtype: S1: HR+HER2-Immune-DRD-; S2: HR-HER2-Immune-DRD-; S3: HER2-Immune+; S4: HER2-Immune-DRD+; S5: HER2+/non-Luminal; S6: HER2+/Luminal. Methods: RPS S1, S2, S3 and S4 were eligible for assignment to Dato in Block A. Patients (pts) were followed by MRI during treatment (at 3, 6 and 12 weeks after start of Blocks A and B). Predicted responders by MRI and biopsy at the end of Block A or B have the option of going to surgery early, otherwise they proceed to next treatment Block (B +/- C). Randomization to Block B includes a taxane-based regimen specific to the RPS, and options include S1: paclitaxel; S2 and S3: paclitaxel + carboplatin + pembrolizumab; S4: paclitaxel + carboplatin vs. paclitaxel + carboplatin + pembrolizumab. Patients who did not go to surgery after Block B proceeded to Block C (AC or AC + Pembrolizumab if HR-HER2-). The primary endpoint is pCR. Efficacy is evaluated within each RPS and HR+HER2- and HR-HER2- signatures. To estimate the arm's efficacy as a stand-alone therapy, we use a Bayesian covariate-adjusted model to estimate the pCR rate and compare the posterior distribution to a subtype-specific fixed threshold. This model uses pCR data when available and MRI data when pCR is not. To estimate pCR rate in the context of a multi-decision treatment regimen, we use a Bayesian model based on if and when a pCR occurred in the trial. The posterior is compared to a subtype-specific dynamic control generated from historical I-SPY data. Results: 103 pts were randomly assigned to the Dato arm between August 2022 and August 2023. All patients have proceeded beyond Block A; 33 went to surgery after Dato alone. The efficacy results for Dato as a stand-alone therapy are summarized in Table. Conclusions: Dato monotherapy was active, particularly in the HR-HER2- signature, but did not meet the pre-specified threshold for graduation in I-SPY 2.2. Clinical trial information: NCT01042379 . [Table: see text]

1083 Background: T-DXd and SG are both FDA-approved treatments for patients (pts) with HER2-low MBC, but little data exists on the sequential use of these ADCs. Methods: In this multicenter retrospective cohort study, we identified pts with HER2-low MBC treated sequentially with both T-DXd and SG in either order, with or without intervening therapies (IntTx), at 5 academic centers between 2020-2023. We previously reported real-world progression free survival (rwPFS) and real-world overall survival (rwOS) by HR-status and ADC sequence order. Here we provide updated rwPFS and rwOS data, as well as new subgroup analyses by age, sites of disease, and use of IntTx between ADCs for HR- and HR+ disease. Results: 84 pts with HER2-low MBC treated with both T-DXd and SG were included, including 56 pts with HR+/HER2-low MBC (66.7%) and 28 pts with HR-/HER2-low MBC (33.3%). Prior to the start of ADC1, median age was 58 yrs and 22 pts were >65 yrs (26.2%), 65 pts (77.4%) had visceral disease, and 14 pts (16.7%) had central nervous system (CNS) disease. 36 pts (42.9%) had an IntTx between ADCs. Table 1 shows updated rwPFS and rwOS data by HR-status and ADC sequence order. For pts with HR+ and HR- MBC, there was no difference in ADC1 rwPFS or ADC2 rwPFS by age ≤65 vs. >65 yr or by presence vs. absence of visceral disease. For pts with HR- MBC, ADC1 rwPFS and rwOS was shorter for pts with CNS disease vs. pts without CNS disease (rwPFS 5.4 mo (n=6) vs. 8.5 mo (n=22), p=0.03; rwOS 11.6 mo vs. 21.1 mo, p<0.01 respectively). For pts with HR+ and HR- MBC, there was no difference in ADC2 rwPFS with or without receipt of IntTx. There was no difference in time to treatment failure for first IntTx vs. ADC2 if no InTx was given. Conclusions: This is one of the largest multicenter cohorts of pts treated with sequential ADCs for HER2-low MBC. Median rwPFS was longer for ADC1 than ADC2 in all subgroups, regardless of HR-status, ADC sequence order, age ≤65 or >65 yr, presence of visceral disease, or use of IntTx. Among pts with HR-/HER2-low MBC, pts with CNS disease had shorter ADC1 rwPFS and rwOS than pts without CNS disease. [Table: see text]

ImportanceThere has been little consideration of genomic risk of recurrence by breast cancer subtype despite evidence of racial disparities in breast cancer outcomes.ObjectiveTo evaluate associations between clinical trial end points, namely pathologic complete response (pCR) and distant recurrence–free survival (DRFS), and race and examine whether gene expression signatures are associated with outcomes by race.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis retrospective cohort study used data from the Investigation of Serial Studies to Predict Your Therapeutic Response With Imaging and Molecular Analysis 2 (I-SPY 2) multicenter clinical trial of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with novel agents and combinations for patients with previously untreated stage II/III breast cancer. Analyses were conducted of associations between race and short- and long-term outcomes, overall and by receptor subtypes, and their association with 28 expression biomarkers. The trial enrolled 990 female patients between March 30, 2010, and November 5, 2016, with a primary tumor size of 2.5 cm or greater and clinical or molecular high risk based on MammaPrint or hormone receptor (HR)-negative/ERBB2 (formerly HER2 or HER2/neu)–positive subtyping across 9 arms. This data analysis was performed between June 10, 2021, and October 20, 2022.ExposureRace, tumor receptor subtypes, and genomic biomarker expression of early breast cancer.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcomes were pCR and DRFS assessed by race, overall, and by tumor subtype using logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards regression models. The interaction between 28 expression biomarkers and race, considering pCR and DRFS overall and within subtypes, was also evaluated.ResultsThe analytic sample included 974 participants (excluding 16 self-reporting as American Indian or Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, or multiple races due to small sample sizes), including 68 Asian (7%), 120 Black (12%), and 786 White (81%) patients. Median (range) age at diagnosis was 47 (25-71) years for Asian, 49 (25-77) for Black, and 49 (23-73) years for White patients. The pCR rates were 32% (n = 22) for Asian, 30% for Black (n = 36), and 32% for White (n = 255) patients (P = .87). Black patients with HR-positive/ERBB2-negative tumors not achieving pCR had significantly worse DRFS than their White counterparts (hazard ratio, 2.28; 95% CI, 1.24-4.21; P = .01), with 5-year DRFS rates of 55% (n = 32) and 77% (n = 247), respectively. Black patients with HR-positive/ERBB2-negative tumors, compared with White patients, had higher expression of an interferon signature (mean [SD], 0.39 [0.87] and −0.10 [0.99]; P = .007) and, compared with Asian patients, had a higher mitotic score (mean [SD], 0.07 [1.08] and −0.69 [1.06]; P = .01) and lower estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor signature (mean [SD], 0.31 [0.90] and 1.08 [0.95]; P = .008). A transforming growth factor β signature had a significant association with race relative to pCR and DRFS, with a higher signature associated with lower pCR and worse DRFS outcomes among Black patients only.Conclusions and RelevanceThe findings show that women with early high-risk breast cancer who achieve pCR have similarly good outcomes regardless of race, but Black women with HR-positive/ERBB2-negative tumors without pCR may have worse DRFS than White women, highlighting the need to develop and test novel biomarker-informed therapies in diverse populations.

Abstract Purpose: The neutralizing peptibody trebananib prevents angiopoietin-1 and angiopoietin-2 from binding with Tie2 receptors, inhibiting angiogenesis and proliferation. Trebananib was combined with paclitaxel±trastuzumab in the I-SPY2 breast cancer trial. Patients and Methods: I-SPY2, a phase II neoadjuvant trial, adaptively randomizes patients with high-risk, early-stage breast cancer to one of several experimental therapies or control based on receptor subtypes as defined by hormone receptor (HR) and HER2 status and MammaPrint risk (MP1, MP2). The primary endpoint is pathologic complete response (pCR). A therapy “graduates” if/when it achieves 85% Bayesian probability of success in a phase III trial within a given subtype. Patients received weekly paclitaxel (plus trastuzumab if HER2-positive) without (control) or with weekly intravenous trebananib, followed by doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide and surgery. Pathway-specific biomarkers were assessed for response prediction. Results: There were 134 participants randomized to trebananib and 133 to control. Although trebananib did not graduate in any signature [phase III probabilities: Hazard ratio (HR)-negative (78%), HR-negative/HER2-positive (74%), HR-negative/HER2-negative (77%), and MP2 (79%)], it demonstrated high probability of superior pCR rates over control (92%–99%) among these subtypes. Trebananib improved 3-year event-free survival (HR 0.67), with no significant increase in adverse events. Activation levels of the Tie2 receptor and downstream signaling partners predicted trebananib response in HER2-positive disease; high expression of a CD8 T-cell gene signature predicted response in HR-negative/HER2-negative disease. Conclusions: The angiopoietin (Ang)/Tie2 axis inhibitor trebananib combined with standard neoadjuvant therapy increased estimated pCR rates across HR-negative and MP2 subtypes, with probabilities of superiority &gt;90%. Further study of Ang/Tie2 receptor axis inhibitors in validated, biomarker-predicted sensitive subtypes is warranted.

LBA612 Background: I-SPY2 is a multicenter, phase 2 trial using response-adaptive randomization within biomarker subtypes including MammaPrint (MP) status to evaluate novel neoadjuvant agents in high-risk breast cancer. The primary endpoint is pathologic complete response (pCR). Oral Paclitaxel and encequidar (OPE) is an oral combination of paclitaxel (P) with a p-glycoprotein pump inhibitor, encequidar. Dostarlimab (D) is an intravenous (IV) PD-1 inhibitor. Methods: Women with tumors ≥ 2.5cm and MP high risk cancers (MP1 = MP high; MP2 = MP ultra-high) were treated starting Oct 5, 2020. Treatment included OPE (Oral P 205mg/m2 + encequidar 12.9mg) on days 1-3 weekly x 12 and D 500 mg IV given q 3 weeks x 4, followed by doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (AC) q 2-3 weeks x 4. Patients with HER2+ disease received IV weekly trastuzumab (T) during the first 12 weeks. The control arm was weekly IV P x 12 with or without trastuzumab followed by AC q 2-3 weeks x 4. OPE + D was eligible to graduate [85% chance of success in a 300-person phase 3 neoadjuvant trial with a pCR endpoint] in any of the pre-defined signatures. Results: 113 (78 HR+HER2-, 17 HR-HER2- and 18 HER2+ patients) received OPE + D +/- T. The control arm included 388 historical controls (201 HR+Her2-, 156 HR-HER2-, 31 HER2+). 77 patients (70 HR+ and 7 HR-) were MP1 and 36 patients (24 HR+ and 12 HR-) were MP2. Safety events of note for OPE + D versus IV P include increased rates of nausea (85% vs. 72%) diarrhea (77% vs. 41%). There was no significant difference in rates of neutropenia (23% vs.17%). Peripheral neuropathy (37% vs. 64%) and alopecia (59% vs. 66%) were significantly decreased. Immune related adverse events (irAEs) were lower than expected. Conclusions: Although both OPE and D have both been shown to have efficacy in other settings, combination therapy with OPE + D did not graduate in any of the predefined subtypes. In the HR+ signature where we would not expect a benefit of D, we see equal response to OPE with decreased rates of peripheral neuropathy and alopecia, which suggest this oral agent may be an attractive alternative to IV P in this subgroup and is under consideration in ISPY 2.2. We did not observe the expected improvement in pCR rates seen with PD-1 inhibitors in the HR- or MP2 subtypes (over P alone historic control). In addition, the irAEs were less than expected. Together these findings suggest interference of OPE with D. A potential mechanism of interference could be change in microbiome with the use of OPE vs. IV P, as the microbiome is known to influence the efficacy of immunotherapy. The source of interference is being investigated. Clinical trial information: NCT01042379 . [Table: see text]

LBA520 Background: I-SPY 2 is a multicenter trial using response-adaptive randomization within biomarker subtypes including MammaPrint (MP) risk to evaluate novel neoadjuvant agents in high-risk breast cancer. Oral paclitaxel and encequidar (OPE) is an oral combination of paclitaxel (P) with a p-glycoprotein pump inhibitor, encequidar, to enhance gastrointestinal (GI) absorption. Dostarlimab (D) is an anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody. Methods: Women with tumors ≥ 2.5cm and MP high-risk cancers were screened and treated starting Oct 5, 2020. Treatment included Oral Paclitaxel 205mg/m2 and encequidar 12.9 mg on days 1-3, Carboplatin (Cb) AUC 1.5 on day 1 weekly x 12, and Dostarlimab (D) 500 mg every 3 weeks x 4, followed by doxorubicin/ cyclophosphamide (AC) every 2-3 weeks x 4. The control arm was IV P weekly x 12 followed by AC every 2-3 weeks x 4. For patients with HER2+ disease, weekly Trastuzumab (T) was administered during the first 12 weeks. The arm was eligible for graduation [> 85% chance of success in a 300-person phase 3 neoadjuvant trial with a pathologic complete response (pCR) endpoint] in 10 predefined signatures. Results: 106 patients (44 HR+HER2-, 56 HR-HER2- (TN), 6 HER2+) received OPE/Cb/D ± T. The control arm included 388 historical controls (201 HR+HER2-, 156 TN, 31 HER2+). 22 patients (20 HR+, 2 HR-) in OPE/Cb/D were MP1 (MP high) and 84 patients (29 HR+, 55 HR-) were MP2 (MP ultra-high). OPE/Cb/D graduated in the TN signature and accrual was stopped. Conclusions: OPE/Cb/D graduated in the TN signature with a higher predicted pCR rate compared to control. OPE and D have been, individually, shown to have efficacy in other settings. The lower-than-expected pCR rate and lower irAEs with triplet therapy (taxane, platinum, immune checkpoint inhibitor [ICI]) in TN compared to prior IV chemo + ICI arms on I-SPY 2 suggests a possible interference of OPE with ICI. Changes in gut microbiome is being investigated as an explanation. Clinical trial information: NCT01042379 . [Table: see text]

Abstract Background: We compared the predictive and prognostic value of ctDNA dynamics in high-risk hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative (HR+/HER2-) and triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) enrolled in the I-SPY 2 trial (NCT01042379). To our knowledge, this is the largest ctDNA study in breast cancer in the neoadjuvant setting. Methods: Blood samples were collected at pre-treatment (T0), during treatment (T1 at 3 weeks, and T2 at 12 weeks) and after NAC (T3 at 24 weeks) from 106 HR+/HER2- and 97 TNBC patients. Plasma samples (n=734) were analyzed using a personalized and tumor-informed mPCR NGS-based ctDNA test (SignateraTM). Patients, all high risk for recurrence by MammaPrint, received paclitaxel-based treatment +/- experimental therapy followed by anthracycline. The median follow-up was 3.0 years (0.5 to 6.5). The predictive and prognostic value of ctDNA dynamics and status at different timepoints were examined. Our analysis is exploratory and does not adjust for other biomarkers. Results: Pretreatment ctDNA positivity (Fisher p&lt;0.0001) and levels (mean tumor molecules/mL, MTM/mL, t test p=0.0062) were significantly higher in TNBC (90.7%, 14.7 MTM/mL) than in high risk HR+/HER2- (66.0%, 5.5 MTM/mL). Early and late ctDNA clearance during treatment (3 and 12 weeks of NAC) was predictive of pathologic complete response (pCR) and residual cancer burden (RCB), class 0-III, in TNBC but not HR+/HER2- (Table). In both subtypes: (1) ctDNA was a significant negative prognostic factor for distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS) at all timepoints (p&lt;0.05) except at pretreatment; (2) all patients who achieved pCR were ctDNA-negative after NAC; (3) among non-responding patients, ctDNA-negativity after NAC was associated with improved DRFS (Table). Conclusions: The predictive value of ctDNA for prediction of pCR and RCB differed between subtypes (HR+/HER2- vs. TNBC), while similar prognostic value was observed. In TNBC, early clearance of ctDNA at 3 weeks was a significant predictor of favorable response to NAC. Compared to patients who were ctDNA-positive after NAC, ctDNA-negative status in both subtypes was associated with improved DRFS even in patients with residual cancer (no pCR or RCB-II/III). These findings could inform on the design of future studies that seek to demonstrate the utility of ctDNA in the curative setting. Predictive and prognostic significance of ctDNA in early breast cancer in the neoadjuvant setting HR+HER2- (n=106) TNBC (n=97) Predictive value for prediction of pCR and RCB Fisher p-value Fisher p-value Early ctDNA clearance (between T0 and T1) and pCR 0.4521 &lt;0.0001 Late ctDNA clearance (between T0 and T2) and pCR 0.8071 0.0004 Early ctDNA clearance (between T0 and T1) and RCB (0-III) 0.1360 &lt;0.0001 Late ctDNA clearance (between T0 and T2) and RCB (0-III) 0.4869 0.0004 Early ctDNA clearance at T1 and pCR rates pCR rate pCR rate ctDNA clearance (ctDNA+ at T0/ctDNA- at T1) 21% 67% Late ctDNA clearance (betweeNo early clearance (ctDNA+ at T0/ctDNA+ at T1) 13% 14% Prognostic value for prediction of DRFS Log rank p-value Log rank p-value ctDNA at T3 and pCR vs no PCR 0.0002 &lt;0.0001 ctDNA at T3 and RCB (0-I vs II-III) 0.0110 &lt;0.0001 Timepoints: T0 - pretreatment; T1 - three weeks after treatment initiation; T2 - at 12 weeks, between paclitaxel-based and anthracycline regimens; T3- after neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to surgery Citation Format: Mark Jesus Mendoza Magbanua, Lamorna Brown Swigart, Derrick Renner, Svetlana Shchegrova, Gillian L. Hirst, Christina Yau, Denise M. Wolf, Hsin-Ta Wu, Ekaterina Kalashnikova, Amy L. Delson, A. Jo Chien, Debu Tripathy, Smita Asare, Raheleh Salari, Angel Rodriguez, Bernhard Zimmermann, Himanshu Sethi, Alexey Aleshin, Paul Billings, Rita Nanda, Hope S. Rugo, Laura J. Esserman, Minetta C. Liu, Angela DeMichele, Laura van 't Veer. Comparison of the predictive and prognostic significance of circulating tumor DNA in patients with high risk HER2-negative breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy [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 LB111.