Citations

Clear

29 citation(s) found for "Sharma, Priyanka".

Evaluation of European-based polygenic risk score for breast cancer in Ashkenazi Jewish women in Israel
Yerushalmi, Rinat , Yablonski‐Peretz, Tamar, Wang, Qin , Bolla, Manjeet K. , Michailidou, Kyriaki , Ahearn, Thomas U. , Andrulis, Irene L. , Antoniou, Antonis C. , Auvinen, Päivi , Freeman, Laura Beane, Beckmann, Matthias W. , Bermisheva, Marina , Bodelón, Clara , Bogdanova, Natalia , Bojesen, Stig E. , Byers, Helen, Camp, Nicola J. , Chang‐Claude, Jenny , Chirlaque, María‐Dolores , Collaborators, NBCS, Collée, Margriet J., Dörk, Thilo , Eccles, Diana , Evans, D. Gareth , Fasching, Peter A. , Flyger, Henrik, García‐Closas, Montserrat , Goldberg, Mark S. , Guénel, Pascal , Hamann, Ute, He, Wei , Hillemanns, Peter , Hoppe, Reiner , Hopper, John L. , Investigators, ABCTB, Jakovchevska, Simona, John, Esther M. , Johnson, Nichola , Jones, Michael E. , Kristensen, Vessela N. , Kurian, Allison W. , Lambrechts, Diether , Lejbkowicz, Flavio, Lindblom, Annika , Loibl, Sibylle , Lori, Adriana , Mannermaa, Arto, Manoochehri, Mehdi, Mavroudis, Dimitrios, Menon, Usha , Nevelsteen, Ines, Obi, Nadia , Offit, Ken, Plaseska‐Karanfilska, Dijana , Park‐Simon, Tjoung‐Won , Patel, Alpa V. , Rack, Brigitte , Rhenius, Valerie , Romero, Atocha , Schwentner, Lukas , Shah, Mitul , Stone, Jennifer , Taylor, Jack A. , Kolk, Lizet E. van der, Wendt, Camilla, Yang, Xiaohong R. , Zheng, Wei , Pharoah, Paul D.P. , Easton, Douglas F. , Ben-Sachar, Shay, Elefant, Naama , Shamir, Ron , Elkon, Ran , Lambrechts, Diether , Michailidou, Kyriaki , Antoniou, Antonis C , Devilee, Peter , Eccles, Diana , Newman, William G , Radice, Paolo , Elkon, Ran , Dörk, Thilo , Lambrechts, Diether , Hillemanns, Peter , Pharoah, Paul D P , Menon, Usha , Evans, D Gareth , John, Esther M , Jones, Michael E , Lambrechts, Diether , Guénel, Pascal , Romero, Atocha , García-Closas, Montserrat , Bogdanova, Natalia V , Taylor, Jack A , Zheng, Wei , Kurian, Allison W , Stone, Jennifer , Bojesen, Stig E , Lindblom, Annika , Plaseska-Karanfilska, Dijana , Levi, Hagai , Carmi, Shai , Rosset, Saharon , Zick, Aviad , Dennis, Joe , Lush, Michael J. , Anton‐Culver, Hoda , Arndt, Volker , Augustinsson, Annelie , Behrens, Sabine , Brenner, Hermann , Castelao, Jose E. , Chung, Wendy K. , Clarke, Christine L. , Collaborators, NBCS, Collée, Margriet , Colonna, Sarah V. , Couch, Fergus J. , Cox, Angela , Cross, Simon S. , Czene, Kamila , Daly, Mary Beryl , Devilee, Peter , Dossus, Laure , Eliassen, A. Heather , Eriksson, Mikael , Fletcher, Olivia , Fritschi, Lin , Gabrielson, Marike , Gago-Domínguez, Manuela , García-Sáenz, José Á. , Genkinger, Jeanine M. , Giles, Graham G. , Hall, Per N , Hollestelle, Antoinette , Investigators, ABCTB, Jakubowska, Anna , Jernström, Helena , Vijai, Joseph , Kaaks, Rudolf , Хуснутдинова, Э. К. , Kitahara, Cari M. , Koutros, Stella , Lacey, James V. , Marchand, Loı̈c Le , Lubiński, Jan , Mannermaa, Arto, Mulligan, Anna Marie , Murphy, Rachel A. , Newman, William G. , O’Brien, Katie M. , Olshan, Andrew F. , Olson, Janet E. , Panico, Salvatore , Peterlongo, Paolo , Radice, Paolo , Rennert, Gad , Saloustros, Emmanouil , Sandler, Dale P. , Schmidt, Marjanka K. , Sharma, Priyanka , Simard, Jacques , Southey, Melissa C. , Tapper, William , Teras, Lauren R. , Toland, Amanda Ewart , Troester, Melissa A. , Truong, Thérèse , Weinberg, Clarice R. , Ziogas, Argyrios , Dunning, Alison M.

Mayo Clinic

Journal of Medical Genetics | July 14, 2023 | Volume: 60 | Issue: 12 | Pages: 1186-1197

10.1136/jmg-2023-109185 | PMID 37451831 Get It

Background Polygenic risk score (PRS), calculated based on genome-wide association studies (GWASs), can improve breast cancer (BC) risk assessment. To date, most BC GWASs have been performed in individuals of European (EUR) ancestry, and the generalisation of EUR-based PRS to other populations is a major challenge. In this study, we examined the performance of EUR-based BC PRS models in Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) women. Methods We generated PRSs based on data on EUR women from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC). We tested the performance of the PRSs in a cohort of 2161 AJ women from Israel (1437 cases and 724 controls) from BCAC (BCAC cohort from Israel (BCAC-IL)). In addition, we tested the performance of these EUR-based BC PRSs, as well as the established 313-SNP EUR BC PRS, in an independent cohort of 181 AJ women from Hadassah Medical Center (HMC) in Israel. Results In the BCAC-IL cohort, the highest OR per 1 SD was 1.56 (±0.09). The OR for AJ women at the top 10% of the PRS distribution compared with the middle quintile was 2.10 (±0.24). In the HMC cohort, the OR per 1 SD of the EUR-based PRS that performed best in the BCAC-IL cohort was 1.58±0.27. The OR per 1 SD of the commonly used 313-SNP BC PRS was 1.64 (±0.28). Conclusions Extant EUR GWAS data can be used for generating PRSs that identify AJ women with markedly elevated risk of BC and therefore hold promise for improving BC risk assessment in AJ women.
Radiotherapy Use and Incidence of Locoregional Recurrence in Patients With Favorable-Risk, Node-Positive Breast Cancer Enrolled in the SWOG S1007 Trial
Connolly, Eileen P. , Mahtani, Reshma , Shumway, Dean A. , Zhang, Hong , Shumway, Dean, Jagsi, Reshma , Barlow, William E. , Woodward, Wendy A , Speers, Corey , Stecklein, Shane Richard , Zeidan, Youssef H. , Sharma, Priyanka , Pusztai, Lajos , Hortobágyi, Gabriel N. , Kalinsky, Kevin M.

Mayo Clinic

JAMA Oncology | July 6, 2023 | Volume: 9 | Issue: 8 | Pages: 1083

10.1001/jamaoncol.2023.1984 | PMID 37410451 Get It

ImportanceLittle is known about regional nodal irradiation (RNI) practice patterns or rates of locoregional recurrence (LRR) with and without RNI in patients with limited nodal disease and favorable biology treated with modern surgical and systemic therapy, including approaches that de-escalate those latter treatments.ObjectiveTo investigate how often patients with low–recurrence score breast cancer with 1 to 3 nodes involved receive RNI, incidence and predictors of LRR, and associations between locoregional therapy and disease-free survival.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsIn this secondary analysis of the SWOG S1007 trial, patients with hormone receptor-positive, ERBB2-negative breast cancer, and a Oncotype DX 21-gene Breast Recurrence Score assay result of no more than 25, were randomized to endocrine therapy alone vs chemotherapy then endocrine therapy. Prospectively collected radiotherapy information was collected from 4871 patients treated in diverse settings. Data were analyzed June 2022 to April 2023.ExposureReceipt of RNI (targeting at least the supraclavicular region).Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s)Cumulative incidence of LRR was calculated by locoregional treatment received. Analyses were assessed for associations between invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and locoregional therapy, adjusted for menopausal status, treatment group, recurrence score, tumor size, nodes involved, and axillary surgery. Radiotherapy information was recorded in the first year after randomization, so survival analyses were landmarked as starting at 1 year among those still at risk.ResultsOf 4871 female patients (median [range] age, 57 [18-87] years) with radiotherapy forms, 3947 (81.0%) reported radiotherapy receipt. Of 3852 patients who received radiotherapy and had complete information on targets, 2274 (59.0%) received RNI. With a median follow-up of 6.1 years, the cumulative incidence of LRR by 5 years was 0.85% among patients who received breast-conserving surgery and radiotherapy with RNI; 0.55% after breast-conserving surgery with radiotherapy without RNI; 0.11% after mastectomy with postmastectomy radiotherapy; and 1.7% after mastectomy without radiotherapy. Similarly low LRR was observed within the group assigned to endocrine therapy without chemotherapy. The rate of IDFS did not differ by RNI receipt (premenopausal: hazard ratio [HR], 1.03; 95% CI, 0.74-1.43; P = .87; postmenopausal: HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.68-1.07; P = .16).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this secondary analysis of a clinical trial, RNI use was divided in the setting of biologically favorable N1 disease, and rates of LRR were low even in patients who did not receive RNI. Disease-free survival was not associated with RNI receipt; omission of chemotherapy among patients similar to those enrolled in the S1007 trial is not an independent indication for use of RNI.
Abstract GS1-07: Results from a phase III randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial evaluating adjuvant endocrine therapy +/- 1 year of everolimus in patients with high-risk hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer: SWOG S1207
Chavez, Marianna, Rastogi, Priya , Mamounas, Eleftherios P. , Bandos, Hanna , Razaq, Wajeeha, O’Dea, Anne , Kaklamani, Virginia , Silber, Andrea L.M., Flaum, Lisa , Andreopolu, Eleni, Baar, Joseph , Wendt, Albert G., Carney, Jennifer F. , Lew, Danika L., Miao, Jieling , Pusztai, Lajos , Goetz, Matthew P. , Ganz, Patricia A. , Mamounas, Eleftherios P. , Paik, Soonmyung , Carney, Jennifer Fu , Sharma, Priyanka , Gralow, Julie R. , Barlow, William E. , Hortobágyi, Gabriel N.

Mayo Clinic

Cancer Research | March 2, 2023 | Volume: 83 | Issue: 5_Supplement | Pages: GS1-07-GS1-07

10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs22-gs1-07 Get It

Abstract BACKGROUND: Abnormalities of the PI3kinase/AKT/mTOR signaling network are common in breast cancer (BC) and are associated with endocrine resistance. Everolimus, an mTOR-inhibitor increased PFS when combined with endocrine therapy (ET) in the metastatic setting and is thought to revert endocrine resistance. S1207 is a phase III randomized, placebo-controlled trial evaluating the role of everolimus in combination with ET in the adjuvant setting among patients with high-risk hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative BC (NCT01674140). METHODS: Eligible patients were >18 years of age with histologically confirmed invasive hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative high-risk BC. Four risk groups were defined as: 1) > 2cm node-negative disease (or pN1mi), and either an Oncotype DX® Recurrence Score (RS) > 25 or MammaPrint® high-risk category (MP high); 2) 1-3 positive nodes and either RS >25, MP high or a pathological grade 3 tumor; 3) >4 positive lymph nodes. Patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy were eligible if: 4) after surgery had >1 lymph node involvement. Patients were randomized 1:1 to physician’s choice adjuvant ET in combination with one year of everolimus (10 mg PO daily) or ET plus placebo stratified by risk group. The primary endpoint was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) evaluated by a stratified log-rank test. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and safety. The hazard ratio (HR) for treatment efficacy was estimated using Cox regression with stratification by risk groups. Subset analyses included preplanned evaluation within risk group and exploratory analyses of menopausal status and age. RESULTS: 1,939 patients were randomized between September 2013 and May 2019, of them 1,792 were eligible and included in the analysis (896 per arm). Primary reason for ineligibility was timing after chemotherapy/radiation or not high risk. Median age was 54 years (22-85) and 32% were premenopausal. With a median follow-up of 50.5 months, there were 389 IDFS events as of May 2022 (data cutoff). 5-year IDFS was 74.8% among patients treated with everolimus and 73.9% among patients treated with placebo, HR=0.93 (95% CI 0.76-1.14). However, the proportional hazards assumption was violated (p=0.02) suggesting differential treatment effect over time. The HR during the one year of treatment was 0.72 (95% CI 0.47-1.10) while after one year it was 1.00 (95% CI 0.80-1.26). The 5-year OS was 87.6% in the everolimus arm and 85.5% in the placebo arm, HR=0.98 (95% CI 0.75-1.28). Analysis by risk group did not show higher everolimus benefit as risk increased. No difference in IDFS or OS was seen among postmenopausal patients (IDFS HR=1.08 [95% CI 0.85-1.36], OS HR=1.19 [95% CI 0.87-1.61]). Among premenopausal patients, everolimus was associated with improved IDFS (HR=0.63 [95% CI 0.43-0.93]) and OS (HR=0.48 [95% CI 0.26-0.88]). Treatment completion of randomized therapy was lower in the everolimus arm compared to placebo (47.9% v 72.7%). Grade 3 and 4 toxicities were noted in 6.5% and 0.5% of patients in the placebo arm and in 31.2% and 3.7% in the everolimus arm respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of one year of adjuvant everolimus to standard adjuvant ET did not improve IDFS or OS and was associated with low completion rate and increased AEs. Among premenopausal patients there was a benefit in IDFS and OS that is hypothesis generating. Future translational studies will evaluate potential predictors of everolimus benefit and drug toxicity. Citation Format: Marianna Chavez, Jieling Miao, Lajos Pusztai, Matthew P. Goetz, Priya Rastogi, Patricia A. Ganz, Eleftherios (Terry) Mamounas, Soonmyung Paik, Hanna Bandos, Wajeeha Razaq, Anne O’Dea, Virginia Kaklamani, Andrea L.M. Silber, Lisa E. Flaum, Eleni Andreopolu, Joseph Baar, Albert G. Wendt, Jennifer F. Carney, Priyanka Sharma, Julie R. Gralow, Danika L. Lew, William E. Barlow, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi. Results from a phase III randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial evaluating adjuvant endocrine therapy +/- 1 year of everolimus in patients with high-risk hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer: SWOG S1207 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr GS1-07.
Abstract GS2-07: Updated results from a phase 3 randomized clinical trial in participants (pts) with 1-3 positive lymph nodes (LN), hormone receptor-positive (HR+) and HER2-negative (HER2-) breast cancer (BC) with recurrence score (RS) ≤ 25 randomized to e
Albain, Kathy S. , Hayes, Daniel F. , Perez, Edith A. , Goldstein, Lori A, Chia, Stephen , Dhesy‐Thind, Sukhbinder , Rastogi, Priya , Ruíz‐Borrego, Manuel, Arce-Salinas, Claudia , Pierga, Jean‐Yves , Ramos-Vasquez, Manuel, Ferrero, Jean-­Marc , Schott, Anne F. , Shak, Steven , Lew, Danika L., Tripathy, Debasish , Hortobagyi, Gabriel, Dhesy-Thind, Sukhbinder , Kalinsky, Kevin M. , Barlow, William E. , Gralow, Julie R. , Meric‐Bernstam, Funda , Lin, Nancy U. , Alba, Emilio , Delaloge, Suzette , Martı́n, Miguel , Kelly, Catherine M. , Gil‐Gil, Miguel , Brain, Etienne G.C. , Lee, Eun Sook , Bermejo, Begoña , Jung, Kyung Hae , Sharma, Priyanka , Miao, Jieling , Pusztai, Lajos , Hortobágyi, Gabriel N.

Mayo Clinic

Cancer Research | March 8, 2022 | Volume: 82 | Issue: 4_Supplement | Pages: GS2-07-GS2-07

10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs21-gs2-07 Get It

Abstract Background: We previouslyreported that invasive disease-free survival (IDFS), the primary outcome, and distantdisease-free survival (DDFS), a secondary outcome, differed by menopausalstatus in a pre-specified analysis. Here,we report updates on IDFS and DDFS with additional follow-up, as well as distantrecurrence-free interval (DRFI) and post hoc analyses in premenopausal women.Methods: Eligibilitycriteria included women > 18 years of age with HR+, HER2-BC and 1-3 +LN and no contraindications to taxane and/or anthracycline basedCT. DRFI was defined as time to distant recurrence or death from breast cancer.Analyses were intent-to-treat among eligible pts. We performed a post hocanalysis evaluating IDFS between treatment arms in premenopausal pts with pN1mi.In addition, we conducted a two-year landmarked IDFS analysis by ovarianfunction suppression (OFS) or not in the ET arm, as well as by regularmenstrual periods or not in both treatment arms.Results: Among the 4,984eligible pts, there were 553 IDFS events and median follow-up of 6.1 years.Postmenopausal women do not have any IDFS or DDFS benefit with CT; however, 5-yearabsolute benefits for IDFS and DDFS with CT for premenopausal pts were 5.9% and3.3%, respectively. In pre-menopausal pts, CT was associated with improved DRFIfor all RS values < 25, with an absolute improvement of 2.3% for RS0-13 and of 2.8% for RS 14-25. Among premenopausal pts, 12.4% (n=206) had pNmi)disease. In a post hoc analysis, there was a trend for CT benefit for thosewith pNmi [hazard ratio (HR)=0.44, confidence interval (CI)=0.18-1.08]. Therewere only 22 IDFS events. Only 17.2% of premenopausal pts assigned to ETunderwent OFS in the first 24 months and in two-year landmarked analysis, therewas no IDFS difference in those who underwent OFS or not (HR=0.88,CI=0.47-1.63). In premenopausal women assigned to ET, 58.9% stopped havingperiods within the first 24 months, and have anumerically improved IDFS compared to those who continued regular periods (HR=1.48,CI: 0.92-2.40). Among premenopausal assigned to CT followed by ET, 80.8%stopped having periods within the first 24 months and have a numericallyimproved IDFS compared to those who continue to have regular periods (HR=1.56, CI:0.85-2.86).Discussion: In accordancewith the differential IDFS and DDFS benefit based upon menopausal status inS1007, premenopausal pts with 1-3+LN and RS < 25 had a statisticallysignificant improvement in DRFI with the addition of CT. A small proportion of S1007premenopausal participants underwent OFS. The role of OFS as it relates to CTbenefit cannot be determined from this study. A future randomized trial should address the clinical question if OFScan replace CT in premenopausal pts with HR+/HER2-, node-positive breast cancer.Funding: Supported by National Cancer Institute grants U10CA180888, U10CA180819,U10CA180820, U10CA180821, U10CA180868, U10CA180863, and in part by Susan G.Komen for the Cure® Research Program, The Hope Foundation for Cancer Research,Breast Cancer Research Foundation, and Genomic Health, Inc. Citation Format: Kevin M Kalinsky, William E Barlow, Julie R Gralow, Funda Meric-Bernstam, Kathy S Albain, Daniel F Hayes, Nancy U Lin, Edith A Perez, Lori A Goldstein, Stephen KL Chia, Sukhbinder Dhesy-Thind, Priya Rastogi, Emilio Alba, Suzette Delaloge, Miguel Martin, Catherine M Kelly, Manuel Ruiz-Borrego, Miguel Gil-Gil, Claudia H Arce-Salinas, Etienne GC Brain, Eun Sook Lee, Jean-Yves Pierga, Begoña Bermejo, Manuel Ramos-Vasquez, Kyung Hae Jung, Jean-Marc Ferrero, Anne Schott, Steven Shak, Priyanka Sharma, Danika Lew, Jieling Miao, Debasish Tripathy, Lajos Pusztai, Gabriel Hortobagyi. Updated results from a phase 3 randomized clinical trial in participants (pts) with 1-3 positive lymph nodes (LN), hormone receptor-positive (HR+) and HER2-negative (HER2-) breast cancer (BC) with recurrence score (RS) ≤ 25 randomized to endocrine therapy (ET) +/- chemotherapy (CT): SWOG S1007 (RxPONDER) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS2-07.
21-Gene Assay to Inform Chemotherapy Benefit in Node-Positive Breast Cancer
Kalinsky, Kevin, Barlow, William E., Gralow, Julie R., Meric-Bernstam, Funda, Albain, Kathy S., Hayes, Daniel F., Lin, Nancy U., Perez, Edith A., Goldstein, Lori J., Chia, Stephen K.L., Dhesy-Thind, Sukhbinder, Rastogi, Priya, Alba, Emilio, Delaloge, Suzette, Kelly, Catherine M., Ruiz-Borrego, Manuel, Gil-Gil, Miguel, Arce-Salinas, Claudia H., Brain, Etienne G.C., Lee, Eun-Sook, Pierga, Jean-Yves, Bermejo, Begoña, Ramos-Vazquez, Manuel, Jung, Kyung-Hae, Ferrero, Jean-Marc, Schott, Anne F., Shak, Steven, Sharma, Priyanka, Lew, Danika L., Miao, Jieling, Tripathy, Debasish, Pusztai, Lajos, Alba, Emilio , Tripathy, Debu , Kelly, Catherine M. , Dhesy‐Thind, Sukhbinder , Martin, Miguel , Hortobagyi, Gabriel N , Tripathy, Debasish , Dhesy-Thind, Sukhbinder , Alba, Emilio , Kalinsky, Kevin, Barlow, William E., Gralow, Julie R., Meric-Bernstam, Funda, Albain, Kathy S., Hayes, Daniel F., Lin, Nancy U., Perez, Edith A., Goldstein, Lori J., Chia, Stephen K.L., Rastogi, Priya, Delaloge, Suzette, Kelly, Catherine M., Ruiz-Borrego, Manuel, Gil-Gil, Miguel, Arce-Salinas, Claudia H., Brain, Etienne G.C., Lee, Eun-Sook, Pierga, Jean-Yves, Bermejo, Begoña, Ramos-Vazquez, Manuel, Jung, Kyung-Hae, Ferrero, Jean-Marc, Schott, Anne F., Shak, Steven, Sharma, Priyanka, Lew, Danika L., Miao, Jieling, Pusztai, Lajos

Mayo Clinic

New England Journal of Medicine | December 1, 2021 | Volume: 385 | Issue: 25 | Pages: 2336-2347

10.1056/nejmoa2108873 | PMID 34914339 Get It

Abstract GS3-00: First results from a phase III randomized clinical trial of standard adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) +/- chemotherapy (CT) in patients (pts) with 1-3 positive nodes, hormone receptor-positive (HR+) and HER2-negative (HER2-) breast cancer (
Albain, Kathy S. , Hayes, Daniel F. , Perez, Edith A. , Goldstein, Lori J. , Chia, Stephen , Dhesy-Thind, Subkhbinder, Rastogi, Priya , Gil, Miguel Gil, Arce-Salinas, Claudia , Pierga, Jean‐Yves , Lluch, Ana Hernandez, Vasquez, Manuel Ramos, Borrego, Manuel Ruíz, Ferrero, Jean-­Marc , Schott, Anne F. , Shak, S., Lew, Danika L., Miao, Jieling, Dhesy‐Thind, Sukhbinder , Dhesy-Thind, Sukhbinder , Kalinsky, Kevin M. , Barlow, William E. , Meric‐Bernstam, Funda , Gralow, Julie R. , Lin, Nancy U. , Alba, Emilio , Delaloge, Suzette , Martín, Miguel , Brain, Etienne G.C. , Park, In Hae , Jung, Kyung Hae , Sharma, Priyanka , Miao, Jieling , Tripathy, Debu , Hortobágyi, Gabriel N. , Pusztai, Lajos

Mayo Clinic

Cancer Research | February 15, 2021 | Volume: 81 | Issue: 4_Supplement | Pages: GS3-00-GS3-00

10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs20-gs3-00 Get It

Abstract Funding: Supported by National Cancer Institute grants U10CA180888, U10CA180819, U10CA180820, U10CA180821, U10CA180868, U10CA180863; and in part by Susan G. Komen for the Cure® Research Program, The Hope Foundation for Cancer Research, Breast Cancer Research Foundation, and Genomic Health, Inc. Acknowledgement: The authors wish to thank Dr. Ana M. Gonzalez-Angulo, MD, for her invaluable contributions to the design and implementation of this study. Background: The clinical utility of the RS to determine CT benefit is well established in pts with HR+, HER2-, axillary lymph node (LN)-negative BC. Retrospective analyses from SWOG S8814 support the potential prognostic and predictive role of RS for CT benefit in postmenopausal pts with LN+ BC. SWOG S1007 is a prospective, randomized trial of endocrine therapy (ET) vs. chemoendocrine therapy (CET) in women with 1-3 +LN and a RS < 25 (NCT01272037). Methods: Eligibility criteria included women > 18 years of age with HR+, HER2- BC and 1-3 +LN and no contraindications to taxane and/or anthracycline based CT. Women with a RS < 25 were randomized to receive ET or CET in 1:1 randomization using 3 stratification factors: (1) RS (0-13 vs.14-25); (2) menopausal status; and (3) axillary nodal dissection vs. sentinel node biopsy. The primary objective was to determine the effect of CT on invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and whether the effect depended on the RS. The primary analysis was to test for a significant interaction of the treatment arm and continuous RS using a Cox regression model for IDFS, adjusting for treatment, RS, and menopausal status. A total of 832 IDFS events were expected for the final analysis. Secondary objectives included overall survival (OS). The protocol specified that interaction between treatment and the stratification variables was to be tested and, if significant, separate analyses performed by stratum. Annual interim analyses were planned starting at 24% of events. At the third interim analysis with 410 IDFS events, the Data and Safety Monitoring Committee recommended reporting results, with a decision by the NCI’s Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, the study sponsor. Results: Of the 9,383 women screened from 2/28/11-9/29/17, 5,083 pts (54.2%) were randomized. With a median follow-up of 5.1 years, 447 IDFS events have been observed. For the primary analysis, the interaction test for CT benefit and continuous RS was not statistically significant, p=0.30. In a model with CT, RS, and menopausal status (no interaction term), higher continuous RS was associated with worse IDFS [HR 1.06, 2-sided p<0.001, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.04-1.07], and CT was associated with an improvement in IDFS (HR 0.81, p=0.026, 95% CI 0.67-0.98). In a pre-specified analysis, a significant interaction was identified between CT and menopausal status (p=0.004), necessitating separate analyses by menopausal status. In postmenopausal pts (N=3350, 67%), adjusting for continuous RS, the HR for CET vs. ET was not significant (HR=0.97, p=0.82, 95% CI 0.78-1.22; 5-year IDFS 91.6% vs. 91.9%) indicating no benefit from CT. In premenopausal pts (N=1665, 33%), the HR (0.54) was statistically significant (p=0.0004, 95% CI 0.38-0.76; 5-year IDFS 94.2% vs. 89.0%), indicating CT benefit. In premenopausal pts, ovarian suppression was performed in 15.9% vs. 3.7% (ET vs. CET), and 47.9% vs. 26.4% reported menstruation after 6 months of treatment. Although the number of events is limited, the HR for treatment adjusted by RS for OS in premenopausal pts was 0.47 (p=0.032, 95% CI 0.24-0.94). At this time, there is no differential effect with CT in regard to other stratification factors. Conclusions: There is a significant differential treatment effect of CT benefit based on RS for premenopausal vs. postmenopausal women requiring separate analyses. While only 54% of the protocol specified events are recorded and pts will be followed for 15 years, the current data show that adjuvant therapy can be de-escalated to ET alone in postmenopausal pts with a RS < 25 and 1-3 +LN. However, there is a strong IDFS benefit for CET in premenopausal pts, with an early indication of an OS improvement. Citation Format: Kevin Kalinsky, William E Barlow, Funda Meric-Bernstam, Julie R Gralow, Kathy S Albain, Daniel Hayes, Nancy Lin, Edith A Perez, Lori J Goldstein, Stephen Chia, Subkhbinder Dhesy-Thind, Priya Rastogi, Emilio Alba, Suzette Delaloge, Miguel Martín, Miguel Gil Gil, Claudia Arce-Salinas, Etienne Brain, In Hae Park, Jean-Yves Pierga, Ana Hernandez Lluch, Manuel Ramos Vasquez, Manuel Ruiz Borrego, Kyung Hae Jung, Jean-Marc Ferrero, Anne Schott, Steve Shak, Priyanka Sharma, Danika L Lew, Jieling Miao, Debu Tripathy, Gabriel Hortobagyi, Lajos Pusztai. First results from a phase III randomized clinical trial of standard adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) +/- chemotherapy (CT) in patients (pts) with 1-3 positive nodes, hormone receptor-positive (HR+) and HER2-negative (HER2-) breast cancer (BC) with recurrence score (RS) < 25: SWOG S1007 (RxPonder) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS3-00.
Abstract PD13-02: Site of recurrence after neoadjuvant therapy: A multi-center pooled analysis
Shad, Sonal , Noordaa, Marieke van der, Croze, Diane De, Reyal, Fabien , Monte-Millán, Marı́a del , Gould, Rebekah , Valero, Vicente , Steenbruggen, Tessa G. , Seijen, Maartje van , Bartlett, John M.S. , Edge, Stephen B. , Provenzano, Elena , Graham, A , Mackintosh, Lorna, Fang, Fan, Schwensen, Kelsey, Hayward, Larry , Thomas, Jeremy , Cole, Kimberly, Veer, Laura van’t, Symmans, Fraser, Esserman, Laura, Noordaa, Marieke E. M. van der, Osdoit, Marie , Hamy, Anne‐Sophie , Laé, Marick , Martín, Miguel , López‐Tarruella, Sara , Boughey, Judy C. , Goetz, Matthew P. , Hoskin, Tanya L. , Sonke, Gabe S. , Wesseling, Jelle , Kim, Mi‐Ok , Abraham, Jean , Caldas, Carlos , Earl, Helena , Sammut, Stephen‐John , Cameron, David , Graham, Ashley, Hall, Peter S , Fang, Fan, Godwin, Andrew K. , Sharma, Priyanka , DeMichele, Angela , Dunn, Janet , Hiller, Louise , Pusztai, Lajos , Yau, Christina

Mayo Clinic

Cancer Research | February 15, 2021 | Volume: 81 | Issue: 4_Supplement | Pages: PD13-02-PD13-02

10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs20-pd13-02 Get It

Abstract Background: Achieving a pathologic complete response (pCR) has been shown on the patient level to predict excellent long-term event-free survival outcomes. Residual cancer burden (RCB) quantifies the extent of residual disease for patients who did not achieve pCR. We have previously observed in the I-SPY 2 TRIAL that while metastatic events outside the central nervous system (CNS) were dramatically reduced in the setting of pCR, the incidence of CNS metastasis remained similar across RCB classes, raising the possibility that these CNS events may be independent of response in the breast. In this study, we evaluate the type and sites of recurrences by RCB in a large pooled dataset, which allows for analysis within subtype, to validate these findings. Methods: 5161 patients pooled across 12 institutions/trials with available RCB and event-free survival (EFS) data were included in this analysis. EFS was calculated as the interval between treatment initiation, and locoregional recurrence, distant recurrence or death from any cause; patients without event are censored at time of last follow-up. The median follow-up is 4.6 years. We summarized the EFS event type, further sub-dividing the distant recurrence events (DR) by their site of relapse (CNS-only, CNS and other sites, Non-CNS). We used a competing risk (Fine-Gray) model to assess which of these site-specific relapses differ between RCB classes and estimated the cumulative incidence of CNS-only and non-CNS events at 5 years. Analyses were performed across the entire study population and within HR/HER2 defined subtypes. Results: Among the 5161 subjects, there were 1164 EFS events, including 92 (7.9%) local recurrences (without distant recurrence and/or death) and 1072 distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS) events. Among the DRFS events, 158 patients died without a distant recurrence. 914 experienced distant recurrences, including 90 (9.8%) with CNS-only, 145 (15.9%) with CNS and other sites, 664 (72.6%) with non-CNS distant recurrence; 15 (1.6%) patients had missing recurrence site information. Table 1 summarizes the cumulative incidence of CNS-only and non-CNS recurrence at 5 years and the proportion of CNS-only recurrences among DR events by RCB class overall and within each HR/HER2 subtypes. The incidence of CNS-only recurrences was low and similar across RCB classes. In contrast, the incidence of non-CNS recurrences increases with increasing RCB. As a result, CNS-only recurrences are proportionally higher within the RCB-0 and RCB-I than in the RCB-II and RCB-III groups, largely because of the low DR event rate and relative low frequency of non-CNS recurrence events within the RCB-0 and RCB-I classes. Overall, 27% of the recurrences in the setting of pCR (RCB-0) are due to CNS-only recurrences.Conclusions: Consistent with previous studies, our large pooled analysis confirmed that CNS-only recurrences are uncommon but appear similar across RCB groups, independent of response, suggesting that the CNS is a treatment sanctuary site. In contrast, non-CNS recurrence rates increase as RCB increases. These findings suggest that inclusion of CNS-only recurrences as an outcome event may impact the association between neoadjuvant therapy response and long-term outcomes in the context of current therapies. Novel therapies that cross the blood brain barrier will be needed to impact CNS recurrence rates. Table 1: Cumulative Incidence of CNS Only and non-CNS Distant Recurrences at 5 years and proportion of CNS-only events among DR eventsRCB Class0IIIIIIpOverall (5161)N16766622017806Cum. Inc. CNS Only2%2%2%1%0.627Cum. Inc. Non-CNS3%6%16%27%<0.001# CNS-Only / # DR events (%)26/96 (27%)14/74 (19%)39/443 (9%)11/301 (4%)HR-HER2- (1774)N770212590202Cum. Inc. CNS Only2%3%2%4%0.298Cum. Inc. Non-CNS4%11%19%42%<0.001# CNS-Only / # DR events (%)13/50 (26%)6/32 (19%)13/148 (9%)8/111 (7%)HR-HER2+ (572)N3766710029Cum. Inc. CNS Only1%5%5%0%0.022Cum. Inc. Non-CNS2%5%18%38%<0.001# CNS-Only / # DR events (%)4/17 (24%)3/10 (30%)6/31 (19%)0/13 (0%)HR+HER2+ (858)N31317229182Cum. Inc. CNS Only1%1%2%0%0.37Cum. Inc. Non-CNS2%3%15%26%<0.001# CNS-Only / # DR events (%)3/10 (30%)2/16 (12%)7/68 (10%)0/29 (0%)HR+HER2- (1957)N2172111036493Cum. Inc. CNS Only3%2%1%0.2%0.087Cum. Inc. Non-CNS5%4%13%20%<0.001# CNS-Only / # DR events (%)6/19 (32%)3/16 (19%)13/196 (7%)3/148 (2%) Citation Format: Sonal Shad, Marieke van der Noordaa, Marie Osdoit, Diane de Croze, Anne-Sophie Hamy, Marick Lae, Fabien Reyal, Miguel Martin, María Del Monte-Millán, Sara López-Tarruella, I-SPY 2 TRIAL Consortium, Judy C Boughey, Matthew P Goetz, Tanya Hoskin, Rebekah Gould, Vicente Valero, Gabe Sonke, Tessa G Steenbruggen, Maartje van Seijen, Jelle Wesseling, John Bartlett, Stephen Edge, Mi-Ok Kim, Jean Abraham, Carlos Caldas, Helena Earl, Elena Provenzano, Stephen-John Sammut, David Cameron, Ashley Graham, Peter Hall, Lorna Mackintosh, Fan Fang, Andrew K Godwin, Kelsey Schwensen, Priyanka Sharma, Angela DeMichele, Janet Dunn, Louise Hiller, Larry Hayward, Jeremy Thomas, Kimberly Cole, Lajos Pusztai, Laura Van't Veer, Fraser Symmans, Laura Esserman, Christina Yau. Site of recurrence after neoadjuvant therapy: A multi-center pooled analysis [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD13-02.
Abstract GS4-07: Assessing prognosis after neoadjuvant therapy: A comparison between anatomic ypAJCC staging, residual cancer burden class and neo-bioscore
Noordaa, Marieke EM van der, Shad, Sonal , Steenbruggen, Tessa G. , Croze, Diane De, Reyal, Fabien , Monte-Millán, Marı́a del , Valero, Vincent, Seijen, Maartje van , Bartlett, John, Edge, S.B., Provenzano, Elena , Graham, Ashley , Mackintosh, Lorna, Fan, Fang , Schwensen, Kelsey, Hayward, Larry , Thomas, Jeremy , Cole, Kimberley, Veer, Laura van ‘t , Symmans, Fraser, Noordaa, Marieke E. M. van der, Yau, Christina , Osdoit, Marie , Hamy, Anne‐Sophie , Laé, Marick , Martín, Miguel , López‐Tarruella, Sara , Boughey, Judy C. , Goetz, Matthew Bidwell , Hoskin, Tanya L. , Gould, Rebecca, Sonke, Gabe S. , Wesseling, Jelle , Bartlett, John, Kim, Mi‐Ok , Abraham, Jean , Caldas, Carlos , Earl, Helena , Sammut, Stephen‐John , Cameron, David , Graham, Ashley, Hall, Peter S , Godwin, Andrew K. , Sharma, Priyanka , DeMichele, Angela , Dunn, Janet , Hiller, Louise , Pusztai, Lajos , Veer, Laura J. van’t , Esserman, Laura J.

Mayo Clinic

Cancer Research | February 15, 2021 | Volume: 81 | Issue: 4_Supplement | Pages: GS4-07-GS4-07

10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs20-gs4-07 Get It

Abstract Background: Pathologic complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in patients with breast cancer is associated with improved survival. Further assessment of the extent of residual disease, using the pathological anatomic American Joint Committee on Cancer staging method (ypStage) or the Residual Cancer Burden (RCB) method, have been shown to add prognostic information for patients with residual disease. Neo-Bioscore, an alternate system to classify response to NAC, includes clinical stage at diagnosis and biology and defines eight prognostic groups. The goal of this study was to compared three scoring systems (anatomic ypStage (7th ed), RCB Class and Neo-Bioscore) and assess whether RCB Class and Neo-Bioscore provide additional prognostic value in the context above anatomic ypStage, the most commonly used method for post-neoadjuvant residual disease assessment. Methods: Data from 5161 patients treated with NAC was pooled from 12 sites. Patients without clinical and pathological staging were excluded, as were patients with HER2+ breast cancer who did not receive neoadjuvant HER2-targeted therapy, leaving 3730 for analysis. PCR was defined as no residual invasive tumor in breast and nodes, i.e. RCB-0 or ypT0/Tis and ypN0. Patients with discordant pCR status by RCB Class vs ypStage (n=9) were excluded. Associations between each scoring system and event-free survival (EFS) were evaluated using the log rank test. EFS at 5 years was estimated using the Kaplan Meier method. Associations between Neo-Bioscore and EFS were assessed in the pCR group. For patients with residual disease, we assessed RCB and Neo-Bioscore within each ypStage. Analysis was performed overall and within subtype. Subgroups with <5 patients were excluded from the survival analyses. Results: ypAJCC staging, RCB class and Neo-Bioscore were all associated with EFS in the overall population and within each subtype (log rank p<0.0001). Of note, 13 patients with a Neo-Bioscore of 7 all recurred or died within 19 months of follow-up. Overall, 34% (1264/3721) of patients achieved a pCR. Their Neo-Bioscore ranges from 0-5, where 3% (37/1264) has a Neo-Bioscore of 5 despite achieving pCR. The Neo-Bioscore was not associated with EFS in case of a pCR, with EFS estimates at 5 years of 95%, 94%, 92%, 93%, 90% and 92% for Neo-Bioscores 0-5 respectively. As HR and HER2 status are components of the score, the range of Neo-Bioscore in the pCR group differs by subtype. However, similar to the overall analysis, the Neo-Bioscore was not prognostic within subtypes in case of pCR. Overall, among the patients who did not achieve pCR, both RCB class and Neo-Bioscore were associated with EFS within ypStages I, II and III. However, the ypStage within which RCB and Neo-Bioscore are prognostic is different for each subtype. RCB class was prognostic in ypStage I in both HR+ subtypes: patients with ypStage-I/RCB-I had significantly improved survival compared to patients with ypStage-I/RCB-II (5-year EFS: 100% vs 83% in HR+HER2- and 95% vs 77% in HR+HER2+). In contrast, for patients with triple negative breast cancer, RCB class was prognostic within ypStage II and III. Analysis by clinical stage and the components of the three systems that contribute most to prognosis will be presented. Conclusions: The degree of response to NAC adds important information to pCR versus residual disease. The Neo-Bioscore was not prognostic among patients with pCR, suggesting that clinical stage (including subtype and grade) adds little information in the setting of a pCR. In contrast, both RCB and Neo-Bioscore provide additional prognostic information to the conventional ypAJCC staging among non-pCR patients, suggesting that clinical stage, tumor biology as well as extent of residual disease all contribute to prognosis in the setting of residual disease after NAC. Citation Format: Marieke EM van der Noordaa, Christina Yau, Sonal Shad, Marie Osdoit, Tessa G Steenbruggen, Diane de Croze, Anne-Sophie Hamy, Marick Lae, Fabien Reyal, Maria Del Monte-Millán, Miguel Martin, Sara Lopez Tarruella, I-SPY 2 TRIAL Consortium, Judy C Boughey, Matthew Goetz, Tanya Hoskin, Rebecca Gould, Vincent Valero, Gabe Sonke, Maartje van Seijen, Jelle Wesseling, John Bartlett, Stephan Edge, Mi-Ok Kim, Jean Abraham, Carlos Caldas, Helena Earl, Elena Provenzano, Stephen-John Sammut, David Cameron, Ashley Graham, Peter Hall, Lorna MacKintosh, Fang Fan, Andrew K Godwin, Kelsey Schwensen, Priyanka Sharma, Angela DeMichele, Janet Dunn, Louise Hiller, Larry Hayward, Jeremy Thomas, Kimberley Cole, Lajos Pusztai, Laura van 't Veer, Fraser Symmans, Laura Esserman. Assessing prognosis after neoadjuvant therapy: A comparison between anatomic ypAJCC staging, residual cancer burden class and neo-bioscore [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS4-07.
Abstract GS5-01: Residual cancer burden after neoadjuvant therapy and long-term survival outcomes in breast cancer: A multi-center pooled analysis
Noordaa, Marieke van der, Wei, Jane , Reyal, Fabien , Laé, Marick , Monte, Maria del, Gould, Rebekah , Steenbruggen, Tessa G. , Seijen, Maartje van , Edge, Stephen B. , Sammut, Stephen‐John , Provenzano, Elena , Graham, Ashley , Mackintosh, Lorna, Wang, Alice , Cole, Kimberly, Veer, Laura van ‘t , Yau, Christina , Noordaa, Marieke E. M. van der, Osdoit, Marie , Hamy, Anne‐Sophie , Martín, Miguel , Boughey, Judy C. , Wesseling, Jelle , Sonke, Gabe S. , Abraham, Jean , Hall, Peter S , Graham, Ashley, Cameron, David , Sharma, Priyanka , Pusztai, Lajos , Kim, Mi‐Ok , Veer, Laura J. van’t , Esserman, Laura J. , Symmans, W. Fraser

Mayo Clinic

Cancer Research | March 26, 2020 | Volume: 80 | Issue: 4_Supplement | Pages: GS5-01-GS5-01

10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs19-gs5-01 Get It

Abstract Background: Recent studies have demonstrated independent validation of the prognostic relevance of residual cancer burden (RCB) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. However, a pooled subject-level analysis of multiple cohorts is needed to determine estimates of long-term prognosis for each class of RCB in each phenotypic subtype of breast cancer (BC) to better inform on patient outcomes. Also, a pooled subject-level analysis allows more detailed analyses of generalizability of the prognostic meaning of RCB assessments in a broader experience of practice settings. Method: Subject-level RCB results, with relevant clinical and pathologic stage, tumor subtype and grade, demographic, treatment and follow-up data from 11 institutes/trials are being collected for combined analysis. The association between the continuous RCB index and event-free survival (EFS), and distant recurrence free survival (DRFS) were assessed using mixed effect Cox models with the incorporation of random RCB coefficients to account for between-study heterogeneity. We will also allow for differences in baseline hazard across biological BC subtypes and, if needed, across studies as well. In addition to this stratified mixed effect model, a multivariate analysis adjusting for age, T-category, nodal status and grade was performed within each subtype. In addition, mixed effect Cox models will be employed to evaluate association between RCB index with EFS and DRFS within each HR/HER2 subtype. Kaplan Meier estimates of EFS and DRFS at 5 and 10 years were computed for each RCB class within subtype. Results: We analyzed subject-level data from 9 institutes/trials representing 4077 patients currently available from an anticipated final total of 4,800 patients (to be presented at the meeting). There were 950 EFS and 876 DRFS events during follow up (median 65 months, IQR: 70 months). RCB index (continuous) was independently prognostic within each subtype: HR+/HER2- (EFS HR (per unit increase in RCB index) =1.64, 95%CI 1.48-1.82; DRFS HR=1.68, 1.51-1.87), HR+/HER2+ (EFS HR=1.80, 1.57-2.05; DRFS HR=1.93, 1.67-2.24), HR-/HER2+ (EFS HR=2.15, 1.76-2.62; DRFS HR=2.10, 1.77-2.50), and HR-/HER2- (EFS HR=2.05, 1.89-2.22; DRFS HR=2.16, 1.90-2.46); and remained prognostic in multivariate models adjusting for age, grade, and clinical T and N stage at diagnosis. Table 1 contains the response rate and estimated EFS at 5 years and 10 years for each RCB class within each HR/HER2 phenotype (DRFS results were similar). Conclusions: Long-term prognosis after pCR was similarly excellent in all phenotypic subtypes. RCB index and classification was independently and strongly prognostic in all subtypes, and generalizable to multiple practice settings. Prognostic differences by RCB class occurred within 5 years in HR- BC, but extended to 10 years in HR+ BC. RCB-I had slightly worse EFS than pCR in HR- BC and HR+/HER2+ BC (after 5 years), but the same EFS as pCR in HR+/HER2- BC. Complete analysis of all subjects, including neoadjuvant treatments, will be presented at the meeting. PhenotypeOutcomepCRRCB-IRCB-IIRCB-IIIHR+/HER2-Frequency (%)11%10%52%27%(N=1467)5 yr EFS (95% CI)91% (86-96)93% (89-98)82% (79-85)70% (65-75)10 yr EFS (95% CI)84% (75-93)88% (82-95)71% (67-75)52% (46-58)HR+/HER2+Frequency (%)38%18%35%9%(N=762)5 yr EFS (95% CI)94% (91-97)93% (88-98)78% (73-84)49% (37-65)10 yr EFS (95% CI)91% (86-96)79% (70-90)65% (59-73)42% (29-60)HR-/HER2+Frequency (%)66%11%18%5%(N=550)5 yr EFS (95% CI)93% (90-96)88% (79-97)60% (50-71)45% (30-69)10 yr EFS (95% CI)90% (86-94)84% (74-95)56% (46-68)45% (30-69)HR-/HER2-Frequency (%)41%13%33%13%(N=1293)5 yr EFS (95% CI)92% (90-94)85% (79-91)68% (63-72)28% (21-36)10 yr EFS (95% CI)87% (82-91)80% (72-88)63% (58-68)24% (18-33) Citation Format: Christina Yau, Marieke van der Noordaa, Jane Wei, Marie Osdoit, Fabien Reyal, Anne-Sophie Hamy, Marick Lae, Miguel Martin, Maria del Monte, I-SPY 2 TRIAL Consortium, Judy C Boughey, Rebekah Gould, Jelle Wesseling, Tessa Steenbruggen, Maartje van Seijen, Gabe Sonke, Stephen Edge, Stephen-John Sammut, Elena Provenzano, Jean Abraham, Peter Hall, Ashley Graham, Lorna Mackintosh, David Cameron, Alice Wang, Priyanka Sharma, Kimberly Cole, Lajos Pusztai, Mi-Ok Kim, Laura van ‘t Veer, Laura Esserman, W. Fraser Symmans. Residual cancer burden after neoadjuvant therapy and long-term survival outcomes in breast cancer: A multi-center pooled analysis [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS5-01.
Transcriptome‐wide association study of breast cancer risk by estrogen‐receptor status
Feng, Helian , Gusev, Alexander , Wu, Lang , Abu-Full, Zomoroda, Aittomäki, Kristiina, Andrulis, Irene L. , Antoniou, Antonis C. , Arason, Aðalgeir , Arndt, Volker , Aronson, Kristan J. , Asseryanis, Ella, Auer, Paul L. , Azzollini, Jacopo , Barkardóttir, Rósa B. , Barrowdale, Daniel , Beckmann, Matthias W. , Bermisheva, Marina , Białkowska, Katarzyna , Bogdanova, Natalia , Bojesen, Stig E. , Bolla, Manjeet K. , Borg, Åke , Brauch, Hiltrud , Brenner, Hermann , Brüning, Thomas , Burwinkel, Barbara , Caldés, Trinidad , Canisius, Sander , Campa, Daniele , Carter, Brian D., Castelao, Jose E. , Chang‐Claude, Jenny , Christiansen, Hans , Claes, Kathleen , Collaborators, GEMO Study, Collaborators, EMBRACE, Collaborators, GC‐HBOC study, Cox, Angela , Daly, Mary B., Leeneer, Kim De , Dörk, Thilo , Dwek, Miriam , Eccles, Diana M., Ejlertsen, Bent , Engel, Christoph , Fasching, Peter A. , Flyger, Henrik, Friedman, Eitan , Frost, Debra, Gabrielson, Marike , Ganz, Patricia A. , Gapstur, Susan M. , García‐Closas, Montserrat , Gaudet, Mia M. , Glendon, Gord , Goldberg, Mark S. , Goldgar, David E., González‐Neira, Anna , Greene, Mark H. , Guénel, Pascal , Haiman, Christopher A. , Hamann, Ute, Hake, Christopher R., He, Wei , Heyworth, Jane , Hogervorst, Frans B.L., Hooning, Maartje J. , Hoover, Robert N. , Hopper, John L. , Huang, Guanmengqian, Hulick, Peter J. , Humphreys, Keith , Imyanitov, Evgeny N., Investigators, ABCTB, Investigators, HEBON, Investigators, BCFR, Investigators, OCGN, Jakimovska, Milena , Jakubowska, Anna , James, Paul A. , Janavicius, Ramunas, Jankowitz, Rachel C. , John, Esther M. , Johnson, Nichola , Jung, Audrey , Kiiski, Johanna I. , Konstantopoulou, Irene , Kristensen, Vessela N. , Laitman, Yael , Lambrechts, Diether , Leroux, Dominique, Lester, Jenny, Lesueur, Fabienne , Lindor, Noralane M. , Lindström, Sara, Lo, Wing‐Yee, Loud, Jennifer T. , Makalic, Enes , Mannermaa, Arto, Manoochehri, Mehdi, Manoukian, Siranoush , Margolin, Sara , Matricardi, Laura , Maurer, Tabea, Mavroudis, Dimitrios, McGuffog, Lesley, Meindl, Alfons , Menon, Usha , Michailidou, Kyriaki , Kapoor, Pooja M., Montagna, Marco , Moreno, Fernando , Muranen, Taru , Nathanson, Katherine L. , Nevelsteen, Ines, Ņikitina-Zaķe, Liene , Offit, Kenneth, Oláh, Edith , Olopade, Olufunmilayo I. , Olsson, Håkan , Osório, Ana , Papp, J., Park‐Simon, Tjoung‐Won , Pedersen, Inge Søkilde , Peixoto, Ana , Peterlongo, Paolo , Peto, Julian , Phillips, Kelly‐Anne , Plaseska‐Karanfilska, Dijana , Poppe, Bruce , Pradhan, Nisha , Prajzendanc, Karolina , Punie, Kevin , Pylkäs, Katri , Rantala, Johanna, Rashid, Muhammad Usman , Rennert, Gad , Romero, Atocha , Saloustros, Emmanouil , Sandler, Dale P. , Santos, Catarina , Sawyer, Elinor J. , Schmutzler, Rita K., Schoemaker, Minouk J. , Scott, Rodney J. , Simard, Jacques , Skytte, Anne‐Bine , Soucy, Penny, Spinelli, John J. , Stone, Jennifer , Tapper, William , Taylor, Jack A. , Teixeira, Manuel R. , Terry, Mary Beth , Teulé, Àlex , Thomassen, Mads , Thöne, Kathrin , Thull, Darcy L. , Tollenaar, Rob A.�E.�M. , Torres, Diana , Vachon, Celine M. , Ouweland, Ans M.W. van den, Vega, Ana , Viel, Alessandra , Vieiro‐Balo, Paula, Wang, Qin , Wappenschmidt, Barbara , Weinberg, Clarice R. , Weitzel, Jeffrey N. , Wendt, Camilla, Winqvist, Robert , Yang, Xiaohong R., Easton, Douglas F. , Chenevix‐Trench, Georgia , Durocher, Francine , Eccles, Diana , Janavičius, Ramūnas , Khaw, Kay‐Tee , Lambrechts, Diether , Lindor, Noralane, Dörk, Thilo , Lambrechts, Diether , Hulick, Peter J , James, Paul , Lesueur, Fabienne , Peterlongo, Paolo , Rennert, Gad , Sandler, Dale P , Teixeira, Manuel R , Eccles, Diana , Menon, Usha , Vega, Ana , Weitzel, Jeffrey N , Claes, Kathleen B M , Azzollini, Jacopo , John, Esther M , Konstantopoulou, Irene , Matricardi, Laura , Olopade, Olufunmilayo I , Arndt, Volker , Jakubowska, Anna , Lambrechts, Diether , Brenner, Hermann , Cox, Angela , Guénel, Pascal , Muranen, Taru A , Romero, Atocha , Saloustros, Emmanouil , Torres, Diana , García-Closas, Montserrat , Makalic, Enes , Michailidou, Kyriaki , Bogdanova, Natalia V , Taylor, Jack A , Nathanson, Katherine L , Arason, Adalgeir , Barrowdale, Daniel , Engel, Christoph , Montagna, Marco , Viel, Alessandra , Simard, Jacques , Chenevix-Trench, Georgia , Jung, Audrey Y , Gabrielson, Marike , Stone, Jennifer , Pylkäs, Katri , Rashid, Muhammad U , De Leeneer, Kim , Manoukian, Siranoush , Bojesen, Stig E , Schoemaker, Minouk J , Weinberg, Clarice R , Phillips, Kelly-Anne , Terry, Mary Beth , Brauch, Hiltrud , Plaseska-Karanfilska, Dijana , Sawyer, Elinor J , Paşaniuc, Bogdan , Long, Jirong , Anton‐Culver, Hoda , Arun, Banu , Balmañà, Judith , Barnes, Daniel R. , Behrens, Sabine , Benı́tez, Javier , Blanco, Ana , Blomqvist, Carl , Boeckx, Bram , Bonanni, Bernardo , Borg, Åke , Briceño, Ignacio , Broeks, Annegien , Cai, Qiuyin , Caligo, Maria A. , Campbell, Ian , Carter, Jonathan , Chanock, Stephen Jacob , Chung, Wendy K. , Clarke, Christine L. , Collaborators, GEMO Study, Collaborators, EMBRACE, Collaborators, GC‐HBOC study, Couch, Fergus J. , Cross, Simon S. , Cybulski, Cezary , Czene, Kamila , Hoya, Miguel de la , Dennis, Joe , Devilee, Peter , Dı́ez, Orland , Domchek, Susan M. , dos‐Santos‐Silva, Isabel , Dunning, Alison M. , Ellberg, Carolina , Eriksson, Mikael , Fletcher, Olivia , Fostira, Florentia , Fritschi, Lin , Garber, Judy E. , García-Sáenz, José Á. , Giles, Graham G. , Godwin, Andrew K. , Goldgar, David E., Gronwald, Jacek , Hall, Per N , Hollestelle, Antoinette , Investigators, ABCTB, Investigators, HEBON, Investigators, BCFR, Investigators, OCGN, Isaacs, Claudine , Vijai, Joseph , Karlan, Beth Y. , Хуснутдинова, Э. К. , Lázaro, Conxi , Leslie, Goska , Lubiński, Jan , Mannermaa, Arto, Martens, John W.M. , Martı́nez, Marı́a Elena , Meindl, Alfons , Kapoor, Pooja M., Miller, Austin , Moserle, Lidia , Mulligan, Anna Marie , Neuhausen, Susan L. , Nevanlinna, Heli , Nielsen, Finn Cilius , Parsons, Michael T. , Pharoah, Paul D.P. , Presneau, Nadège , Radice, Paolo , Risch, Harvey A. , Robson, Mark E. , Schmidt, Marjanka K. , Schmidt, Daniel F. , Sharma, Priyanka , Shu, Xiao‐Ou , Singer, Christian F. , Southey, Melissa C. , Spurdle, Amanda B. , Swerdlow, Anthony J. , Tischkowitz, Marc D. , Toland, Amanda Ewart , Truong, Thérèse , Tung, Nadine , Vachon, Celine M. , Asperen, Christi J. van , Rensburg, Elizabeth J. van , Yannoukakos, Drakoulis , Ziogas, Argyrios , Milne, Roger L. , Zheng, Wei , Kraft, Peter , Jiang, Xia

Mayo Clinic

Genetic Epidemiology | March 2, 2020 | Volume: 44 | Issue: 5 | Pages: 442-468

10.1002/gepi.22288 | PMID 32115800 Get It

AbstractPrevious transcriptome‐wide association studies (TWAS) have identified breast cancer risk genes by integrating data from expression quantitative loci and genome‐wide association studies (GWAS), but analyses of breast cancer subtype‐specific associations have been limited. In this study, we conducted a TWAS using gene expression data from GTEx and summary statistics from the hitherto largest GWAS meta‐analysis conducted for breast cancer overall, and by estrogen receptor subtypes (ER+ and ER−). We further compared associations with ER+ and ER− subtypes, using a case‐only TWAS approach. We also conducted multigene conditional analyses in regions with multiple TWAS associations. Two genes, STXBP4 and HIST2H2BA, were specifically associated with ER+ but not with ER– breast cancer. We further identified 30 TWAS‐significant genes associated with overall breast cancer risk, including four that were not identified in previous studies. Conditional analyses identified single independent breast‐cancer gene in three of six regions harboring multiple TWAS‐significant genes. Our study provides new information on breast cancer genetics and biology, particularly about genomic differences between ER+ and ER− breast cancer.