Search

Radiomics, analysing quantitative features from medical imaging, has rapidly become an emerging field in translational oncology. Radiomics has been investigated in several neoplastic malignancies as it might allow for a non-invasive tumour characterization and for the identification of predictive and prognostic biomarkers. Over the last few years, evidence has been accumulating regarding potential clinical applications of machine learning in many crucial moments of cancer patients' history. However, the incorporation of radiomics in clinical decision-making process is still limited by low data reproducibility and study variability. Moreover, the need for prospective validations and standardizations is emerging. In this narrative review, we summarize current evidence regarding radiomic applications in high-incidence cancers (breast and lung) for screening, diagnosis, staging, treatment choice, response, and clinical outcome evaluation. We also discuss pro and cons of the radiomic approach, suggesting possible solutions to critical issues which might invalidate radiomics studies and propose future perspectives., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest AF reports advisory boards/honoraria/speakers’ fee/consultant from BMS, MSD, Roche; MVD reports personal fees for consultancy/advisory role from Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Novartis, Seagen, Gilead, MSD, Exact Sciences, AstraZeneca, Roche, Daiichi Sankyo, Roche; FM reports fees from Roche, Novartis, Seagen, Pfizer, Lilly, Gilead and MSD; LB reports speaker fee/advisory board: Astra-Zeneca, MSD, BMS, Roche, Novartis, Lilly; steering committee and coordinating PI: Astra-Zeneca; local PI: Astra-Zeneca, Roche, MSD, BMS, Janssen, Pharmamar, OSEimmunotherapeutics; unconditioned research support: Astra-Zeneca; VG reports personal fees for advisory board membership for AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Exact Sciences, Gilead, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Olema Oncology, Pierre Fabre; personal fees as an invited speaker for AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Exact Sciences, Gilead, GSK, Novartis, Roche and Zentiva; personal fees for expert testimony for Eli Lilly; GG reports personal fees as invited speaker from Eli Lilly, Novartis and MSD, advisory boards for Gilead, Seagen and Menarini; GP reports advisory boards/honoraria/speakers’ fee/consultant from Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Eli Lilly, Jansenn, MSD, Novartis, Roche and unconditioned research support From AstraZeneca, Roche, MSD. The remaining authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Young women with breast cancer (BC) have an increased chance of carrying germline BRCA pathogenic variants (PVs). Limited data exist on the prognostic impact of tumor histology (i.e. ductal versus lobular) in hereditary breast cancer., Methods: This multicenter retrospective cohort study included women aged ≤40 years with early-stage breast cancer diagnosed between January 2000 and December 2020 and known to carry germline PVs in BRCA1/2. Histology was locally assessed in each center. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression analysis were used to assess disease-free survival and overall survival., Results: Of 4628 patients included from 78 centers worldwide, 3969 (86%) had pure ductal, 135 (3%) pure lobular, and 524 (11%) other histologies. Compared with ductal tumors, lobular tumors were more often grade 1/2 (57.7% versus 22.1%), stage III (29.6% versus 18.5%), and luminal A-like (42.2% versus 12.2%). Lobular tumors were more often associated with BRCA2 PVs (71.1% BRCA2), while ductal tumors were more often associated with BRCA1 PVs (65.7% BRCA1). Patients with lobular tumors more often had mastectomy (68.9% versus 58.3%), and less often received chemotherapy (83.7% versus 92.9%). With a median follow-up of 7.8 years, no significant differences were observed in disease-free survival (adjusted hazard ratio 1.01, 95% confidence interval 0.74-1.37) or overall survival (hazard ratio 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.62-1.50) between patients with ductal versus lobular tumors. No significant survival differences were observed according to specific BRCA gene, breast cancer subtype, or body mass index., Conclusions: In this large global cohort of young BRCA carriers with breast cancer, the incidence of pure lobular histology was low and associated with higher disease stage at diagnosis, luminal-like disease and BRCA2 PVs. Histology did not appear to impact prognosis., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Hormone receptor-positive (HR)+/HER2- breast cancer (BC) is highly heterogeneous, with PI3K/PTEN/mTOR pathway alterations emerging as possible players within this complexity. We longitudinally tracked PI3K/PTEN/mTOR pathway dynamics from baseline biopsy to residual disease (RD)-and to metastases in case of relapse-in HR+/HER2- BC patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT)., Methods: HR+/HER2- BC patients with RD after NACT were identified. We assessed PIK3CA mutational, Pten-loss and phosphorylation levels of mTOR and its substrates (p70S6K and 4EBP1) on baseline biopsies and matched RD samples; in case of disease relapse, we also assessed PIK3CA mutational status on metastatic samples. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) was adopted as endpoint., Results: 92 patient were included. The conversion rate of PIK3CA mutational status was 12.8%; 1 patient acquired PIK3CA mutation at relapse; the rate of Pten conversion was 33.3%; mTOR phosphorylation levels significantly increased from baseline biopsy to RD, while its substrates significantly decreased. Baseline phosphorylated-mTOR significantly predicted poorer RFS in patients with PIK3CA wild-type status; baseline phosphorylated-70S6K was positively associated with RFS., Conclusions: We observed that PI3K/PTEN/mTOR pathway is highly dynamic under NACT exposure and the assessment of PIK3CA mutations may capture only a small fraction of such complexity. In this context, mTOR activation trough alternative pathways with respect to PIK3CA signalling may have a crucial role in shaping the molecular landscape of HR+/HER2- BC with RD after NACT. It is imperative to further elucidate the role of PIK3CA and mTOR-dependent pathways in shaping chemoresistance and endocrine resistance in high-risk HR+/HER2- early/locally advanced BC patients., Competing Interests: Competing interests: FM received personal fee from Roche, Novartis and Gilead, outside the submitted manuscript. GG reports personal fee from Novartis, Eli Lilly, and Gilead outside the submitted work. VG reports personal fees for advisory board membership from Eisai, Eli Lilly, Exact Sciences, Gilead, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Olema Oncology and Sanofi; personal fees as an invited speaker from Amgen, Eli Lilly, GSK, Astra Zeneca, Novartis; personal fees for expert testimony from Eli Lilly; institutional funding as a local PI from AstraZeneca, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, MSD, Nerviano, Novartis, Roche and Synton Biopharmaceutical. MF has been involved in consulting/advisory roles in Astellas Pharma, Tesaro, MSD, Pierre Fabre, Astra Zeneca, Incyte, GlaxoSmithKline, Diaceutics and Roche, received research funding from Astellas Pharma, QED Therapeutics, and Macrophage Pharma and is supported by grants from the Italian Health Ministry/Veneto region research program NET-2016-02363853 and AIRC 5 per mille 2019 (ID. 22759 programme). MVD reports personal fees from Eli Lilly, MSD, Exact Sciences, Novartis, Pfizer, Seagen, outside the submitted work., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Only a handful of somatic alterations have been linked to endocrine therapy resistance in hormone-dependent breast cancer, potentially explaining ∼40% of relapses. If other mechanisms underlie the evolution of hormone-dependent breast cancer under adjuvant therapy is currently unknown. In this work, we employ functional genomics to dissect the contribution of cis-regulatory elements (CRE) to cancer evolution by focusing on 12 megabases of noncoding DNA, including clonal enhancers, gene promoters, and boundaries of topologically associating domains. Parallel epigenetic perturbation (CRISPRi) in vitro reveals context-dependent roles for many of these CREs, with a specific impact on dormancy entrance and endocrine therapy resistance. Profiling of CRE somatic alterations in a unique, longitudinal cohort of patients treated with endocrine therapies identifies a limited set of noncoding changes potentially involved in therapy resistance. Overall, our data uncover how endocrine therapies trigger the emergence of transient features which could ultimately be exploited to hinder the adaptive process. Significance: This study shows that cells adapting to endocrine therapies undergo changes in the usage or regulatory regions. Dormant cells are less vulnerable to regulatory perturbation but gain transient dependencies which can be exploited to decrease the formation of dormant persisters., (©2024 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: Hormone receptor expression is a known positive prognostic and predictive factor in breast cancer; however, limited evidence exists on its prognostic impact on prognosis of young patients harboring a pathogenic variant (PV) in the BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 genes., Patients and Methods: This international, multicenter, retrospective cohort study included young patients (aged ≤40 years) diagnosed with invasive breast cancer and harboring germline PVs in BRCA genes. We investigated the impact of hormone receptor status on clinical behavior and outcomes of breast cancer. Outcomes of interest [disease-free survival (DFS), breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS), and overall survival (OS)] were first investigated according to hormone receptor expression (positive versus negative), and then according to breast cancer subtype [luminal A-like versus luminal B-like versus triple-negative versus human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer]., Results: From 78 centers worldwide, 4709 BRCA carriers were included, of whom 2143 (45.5%) had hormone receptor-positive and 2566 (54.5%) hormone receptor-negative breast cancer. Median follow-up was 7.9 years. The rate of distant recurrences was higher in patients with hormone receptor-positive disease (13.1% versus 9.6%, P < 0.001), while the rate of second primary breast cancer was lower (9.1% versus 14.7%, P < 0.001) compared to patients with hormone receptor-negative disease. The 8-year DFS was 65.8% and 63.4% in patients with hormone receptor-positive and negative disease, respectively. The hazard ratio of hormone receptor-positive versus negative disease changed over time for DFS, BCSS, and OS (P < 0.05 for interaction of hormone receptor status and survival time). Patients with luminal A-like breast cancer had the worst long-term prognosis in terms of DFS compared to all the other subgroups (8-year DFS: 60.8% in luminal A-like versus 63.5% in triple-negative versus 65.5% in HER2-positive and 69.7% in luminal B-like subtype)., Conclusions: In young BRCA carriers, differences in recurrence pattern and second primary breast cancer among hormone receptor-positive versus negative disease warrant consideration in counseling patients on treatment, follow-up, and risk-reducing surgery., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Breast cancer (BC) in women aged ≤40 years carrying germline pathogenetic variants (PVs) in BRCA1/2 genes is infrequent but often associated with aggressive features. Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-low-expressing BC has recently emerged as a novel therapeutic target but has not been characterized in this rare patient subset., Methods: Women aged ≤40 years with newly diagnosed early-stage HER2-negative BC (HER2-0 and HER2-low) and germline BRCA1/2 PVs from 78 health care centers worldwide were retrospectively included. Chi-square test and Student t-test were used to describe variable distribution between HER2-0 and HER2-low. Associations with HER2-low status were assessed with logistic regression. Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression analysis were used to assess disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival. Statistical significance was considered for p ≤ .05., Results: Of 3547 included patients, 32.3% had HER2-low BC, representing 46.3% of hormone receptor-positive and 21.3% of triple-negative (TN) tumors. HER2-low vs. HER2-0 BC were more often of grade 1/2 (p < .001), hormone receptor-positive (p < .001), and node-positive (p = .003). BRCA2 PVs were more often associated with HER2-low than BRCA1 PVs (p < .001). HER2-low versus HER2-0 showed better DFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76-0.97) in the overall population and more favorable DFS (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.64-0.95) and overall survival (HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.46-0.93) in the TN subgroup. Luminal A-like tumors in HER2-low (p = .014) and TN and luminal A-like in HER2-0 (p = .019) showed the worst DFS., Conclusions: In young patients with HER2-negative BC and germline BRCA1/2 PVs, HER2-low disease was less frequent than expected and more frequently linked to BRCA2 PVs and associated with luminal-like disease. HER2-low status was associated with a modestly improved prognosis., (© 2024 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Cancer Society.)

Background: The cut-off of < 1% positive cells to define estrogen receptor (ER) negativity by immunohistochemistry (IHC) in breast cancer (BC) is debated. We explored the tumor immune microenvironment and gene-expression profile of patients with early-stage HER2-negative ER-low (ER 1-9%) BC, comparing them to ER-negative (ER < 1%) and ER-intermediate (ER 10-50%) tumors., Patients and Methods: Among 921 patients with early-stage I-III, ER ≤ 50%, HER2-negative BCs, tumors were classified as ER-negative (n = 712), ER-low (n = 128), or ER-intermediate (n = 81). Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) were evaluated. CD8+, FOXP3+ cells, and PD-L1 status were assessed by IHC and quantified by digital pathology. We analyzed 776 BC-related genes in 116 samples. All tests were 2-sided at < 0.05 significance level., Results: ER-low and ER-negative tumors exhibited similar median TILs, significantly higher than ER-intermediate tumors. CD8/FOXP3 ratio and PD-L1 positivity rates were comparable between ER-low and ER-negative groups. These groups showed similar enrichment in Basal-like intrinsic subtypes and comparable expression of immune-related genes. ER-low and ER-intermediate tumors showed significant transcriptomic differences. High TILs (≥30%) were associated with improved relapse-free survival (RFS) in ER-low (5-year RFS 78.6% vs 66.2%, log-rank p = .033, hazard ratio (HR) 0.37 [95% CI 0.15-0.96]) and ER-negative patients (5-year RFS 85.2% vs 69.8%, log-rank p < .001, HR 0.41 [95% CI 0.27-0.60])., Conclusions: ER-low and ER-negative tumors are similar biological and molecular entities, supporting their comparable clinical outcomes and treatment responses, including to immunotherapy. Our findings contribute to the growing evidence calling for a reevaluation of ER-positive BC classification and management, aligning ER-low and ER-negative tumors more closely., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) represents the standard of care for almost all hormone receptor (HR)+/HER2- breast cancers, and different agents and durations are currently available. In this context, the tailoring and optimization of adjuvant endocrine treatment by reducing unnecessary toxic treatment while taking into account the biological heterogeneity of HR+/HER2- breast cancer represents a clinical priority. There is therefore a significant need for the integration of biological biomarkers in the choice of adjuvant ET beyond currently used clinicopathological characteristics. Several gene expression assays have been developed to identify patients with HR+/HER2- breast cancer who will not derive benefit from the addition of adjuvant chemotherapy. By enhancing risk stratification and predicting therapeutic response, genomic assays have also shown to be a promising tool for optimizing endocrine treatment decisions. In this study, we review evidence supporting the use of most common commercially available gene expression assays [Oncotype DX, MammaPrint, Breast Cancer Index (BCI), Prosigna, and EndoPredict] in tailoring adjuvant ET. Available data on the use of genomic tests to inform extended adjuvant treatment choice based on the risk of late relapse and on the estimated benefit of a prolonged ET are discussed. Moreover, preliminary evidence regarding the use of genomic assays to inform de-escalation of endocrine treatment, such as shorter durations or omission, for low-risk patients is reviewed. Overall, gene expression assays are emerging as potential tools to further personalize adjuvant treatment for patients with HR+/HER2- breast cancers., (©2024 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

The emerging era of precision medicine is characterized by an increasing availability of targeted anticancer therapies and by the parallel development of techniques to obtain more refined molecular data, whose interpretation may not always be straightforward. Molecular tumor boards gather various professional figures, in order to leverage the analysis of molecular data and provide prognostic and predictive insights for clinicians. In addition to healthcare development, they could also become a tool to promote knowledge and research spreading. A growing body of evidence on the application of molecular tumor boards to clinical practice is forming and positive signals are emerging, although a certain degree of heterogeneity exists. This work analyzes molecular tumor boards' potential workflows, figures involved, data sources, sample matrices and eligible patients, as well as available evidence and learning examples. The emerging concept of multi-institutional, disease-specific molecular tumor boards is also considered by presenting two ongoing nationwide experiences., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Giulia Buzzatti reports personal fees for consultancy/advisory role from Novartis, Eli Lilly and AstraZeneca. Umberto Malapelle reports personal fees for consultancy/advisory role from Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, MSD, Amgen, ThermoFisher Scientific, Eli Lilly, Diaceutics, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck and AstraZeneca; personal fees for speakers’ bureau from Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Roche, MSD, Amgen, Merck, ThermoFisher Scientific, Eli Lilly, Diaceutics, GlaxoSmithKline and QIAGEN. Carmine De Angelis reports personal fees as consultant and/or speakers' bureau from Roche, Eli Lilly, GSK, Novartis, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Gilead and Seagen; research grant to the Institution from Novartis. Maria Vittoria Dieci reports personal fees for consultancy/advisory role from Eli Lilly, Exact Sciences, Novartis, Pfizer, Seagen, Gilead, MSD, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo and Roche. Matteo Lambertini reports personal fees for advisory role from Roche, Eli Lilly, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Seagen, Gilead, MSD and Exact Sciences; speaker honoraria from Roche, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Libbs, Daiichi Sankyo and Takeda; travel grants from Gilead; research support (to the Institution) from Gilead. Angela Toss reports personal fees for consultancy/advisory role from Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Seagen, Gilead, MSD, AstraZeneca and Daiichi Sankyo. Alberto Farolfi reports personal fees for consultancy/advisory role from AstraZeneca, GSK-Tesaro, Clovis and Janssen. Sandro Pignata reports speaker honoraria from AstraZeneca, Roche, PharmaMar, Tesaro, Pfizer and MSD; personal fees for consultancy/advisory role from AstraZeneca, Roche, PharmaMar, Pfizer, Tesaro and Clovis Oncology; research funding (to the Institution) from Roche, AstraZeneca, MSD and Pfizer. Michele Bartoletti reports personal fees for advisory board from GSK, MSD and EISAI; speaker fees from GSK and AstraZeneca; research grant from AstraZeneca and Roche; data monitoring committee for Novartis. Lorenzo Gerratana reports advisory/consultancy fees from AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Incyte, Novartis, Pfizer, MSD, Menarini Stemline, Abbvie; research funding from Menarini Silicon Biosystems; travel expenses from Menarini Stemline. Fabio Puglisi reports speaker honoraria from Roche, MSD, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Pfizer and Exact Sciences; consulting or advisory role for Roche, Amgen, Novartis, Pfizer, Eisai, Seagen, Pierre Fabre, AstraZeneca/Daiichi Sankyo, Viatris, Eli Lilly, Gilead Sciences and Daiichi Sankyo Europe GmbH; research funding (to the Institution) from Eisai, AstraZeneca and Roche; travel and accommodation expenses fees from Roche, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Amgen, AstraZeneca, MSD, Novartis, Eli Lilly and Pfizer. All reported potential conflicts of interest are outside the submitted work. All other authors have declared no potential conflicts of interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Immunotherapy has revolutionized cancer therapy and now represents a standard of care for many tumor types, including triple-negative breast cancer. Despite the positive results that have led to the approval of immunotherapy in both early- and advanced-stage triple-negative breast cancer, pivotal clinical trials cannot address the myriad questions arising in everyday clinical practice, often falling short in delivering all the information that clinicians require. In this manuscript, we aim to address some of these practical questions, with the purpose of providing clinicians with a guide for optimizing the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in the management of breast cancer patients and identifying opportunities for future research to clarify unresolved questions., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Importance: The association of tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) abundance in breast cancer tissue with cancer recurrence and death in patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) who are not treated with adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy is unclear., Objective: To study the association of TIL abundance in breast cancer tissue with survival among patients with early-stage TNBC who were treated with locoregional therapy but no chemotherapy., Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective pooled analysis of individual patient-level data from 13 participating centers in North America (Rochester, Minnesota; Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada), Europe (Paris, Lyon, and Villejuif, France; Amsterdam and Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Milan, Padova, and Genova, Italy; Gothenburg, Sweden), and Asia (Tokyo, Japan; Seoul, Korea), including 1966 participants diagnosed with TNBC between 1979 and 2017 (with follow-up until September 27, 2021) who received treatment with surgery with or without radiotherapy but no adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy., Exposure: TIL abundance in breast tissue from resected primary tumors., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was invasive disease-free survival [iDFS]. Secondary outcomes were recurrence-free survival [RFS], survival free of distant recurrence [distant RFS, DRFS], and overall survival. Associations were assessed using a multivariable Cox model stratified by participating center., Results: This study included 1966 patients with TNBC (median age, 56 years [IQR, 39-71]; 55% had stage I TNBC). The median TIL level was 15% (IQR, 5%-40%). Four-hundred seventeen (21%) had a TIL level of 50% or more (median age, 41 years [IQR, 36-63]), and 1300 (66%) had a TIL level of less than 30% (median age, 59 years [IQR, 41-72]). Five-year DRFS for stage I TNBC was 94% (95% CI, 91%-96%) for patients with a TIL level of 50% or more, compared with 78% (95% CI, 75%-80%) for those with a TIL level of less than 30%; 5-year overall survival was 95% (95% CI, 92%-97%) for patients with a TIL level of 50% or more, compared with 82% (95% CI, 79%-84%) for those with a TIL level of less than 30%. At a median follow-up of 18 years, and after adjusting for age, tumor size, nodal status, histological grade, and receipt of radiotherapy, each 10% higher TIL increment was associated independently with improved iDFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.92 [0.89-0.94]), RFS (HR, 0.90 [0.87-0.92]), DRFS (HR, 0.87 [0.84-0.90]), and overall survival (0.88 [0.85-0.91]) (likelihood ratio test, P < 10e-6)., Conclusions and Relevance: In patients with early-stage TNBC who did not undergo adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy, breast cancer tissue with a higher abundance of TIL levels was associated with significantly better survival. These results suggest that breast tissue TIL abundance is a prognostic factor for patients with early-stage TNBC.

Background: Even with contemporary treatment strategies, more than 10% of HER2-positive early stage breast cancer patients may experience distant metastasis as first event during follow-up. Tools for predicting unique patterns of metastatic spread are needed to plan personalized surveillance. We evaluated how molecular heterogeneity affects the pattern of distant relapse in HER2-positive breast cancer., Methods: A total of 677 HER2-positive stage I-III breast cancer patients from ShortHER trial, Cher-LOB trial, and 2 institutional cohorts were included. PAM50 molecular subtypes and research-based HER2DX scores were evaluated. The cumulative incidence of distant relapse as the first event (any site and site specific) was evaluated using competing risk analysis. Median follow-up was 8.4 years. Tests of statistical significance are 2-sided., Results: Stage III and high HER2DX risk score identified patients at the highest risk of distant relapse as first event (10-year incidence 24.5% and 19.7%, respectively). Intrinsic molecular subtypes were associated with specific patterns of metastatic spread: compared with other subtypes, HER2-enriched tumors were more prone to develop brain metastases (10-year incidence 3.8% vs 0.6%, P = .005), basal-like tumors were associated with an increased risk of lung metastases (10-year incidence 11.1% vs 2.6%, P = .001), and luminal tumors developed more frequently bone-only metastases (10-year incidence 5.1% vs 2.0%, P = .042). When added to stage or HER2DX risk score in competing risk regression models, intrinsic subtype maintained an independent association with site-specific metastases., Conclusions: The integration of intrinsic molecular subtypes with stage or HER2DX risk score predicts site-specific metastatic risk in HER2-positive breast cancer, with potential implications for personalized surveillance and clinical trials aimed at preventing site-specific recurrence., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Importance: Young women with breast cancer who have germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1 or BRCA2 face unique challenges regarding fertility. Previous studies demonstrating the feasibility and safety of pregnancy in breast cancer survivors included limited data regarding BRCA carriers., Objective: To investigate cumulative incidence of pregnancy and disease-free survival in young women who are BRCA carriers., Design, Setting, and Participants: International, multicenter, hospital-based, retrospective cohort study conducted at 78 participating centers worldwide. The study included female participants diagnosed with invasive breast cancer at age 40 years or younger between January 2000 and December 2020 carrying germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1 and/or BRCA2. Last delivery was October 7, 2022; last follow-up was February 20, 2023., Exposure: Pregnancy after breast cancer., Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary end points were cumulative incidence of pregnancy after breast cancer and disease-free survival. Secondary end points were breast cancer-specific survival, overall survival, pregnancy, and fetal and obstetric outcomes., Results: Of 4732 BRCA carriers included, 659 had at least 1 pregnancy after breast cancer and 4073 did not. Median age at diagnosis in the overall cohort was 35 years (IQR, 31-38 years). Cumulative incidence of pregnancy at 10 years was 22% (95% CI, 21%-24%), with a median time from breast cancer diagnosis to conception of 3.5 years (IQR, 2.2-5.3 years). Among the 659 patients who had a pregnancy, 45 (6.9%) and 63 (9.7%) had an induced abortion or a miscarriage, respectively. Of the 517 patients (79.7%) with a completed pregnancy, 406 (91.0%) delivered at term (≥37 weeks) and 54 (10.4%) had twins. Among the 470 infants born with known information on pregnancy complications, 4 (0.9%) had documented congenital anomalies. Median follow-up was 7.8 years (IQR, 4.5-12.6 years). No significant difference in disease-free survival was observed between patients with or without a pregnancy after breast cancer (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.81-1.20). Patients who had a pregnancy had significantly better breast cancer-specific survival and overall survival., Conclusions and Relevance: In this global study, 1 in 5 young BRCA carriers conceived within 10 years after breast cancer diagnosis. Pregnancy following breast cancer in BRCA carriers was not associated with decreased disease-free survival., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03673306.