Search

Supplementary Figure 4. Individual ESR1 mutation detection and polyclonality in SoFEA and in EFECT

Purpose:Aromatase inhibitor (AI) treatment is the standard of care for postmenopausal women with primary estrogen receptor–positive breast cancer. The impact of duration of neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) on molecular characteristics is still unknown. We evaluated and compared changes of gene expression profiles under short-term (2-week) versus longer-term neoadjuvant AIs.Experimental Design:Global gene expression profiles from the PeriOperative Endocrine Therapy for Individualised Care (POETIC) trial (137 received 2 weeks of AIs and 47 received no treatment) and targeted gene expression from 80 patients with breast cancer treated with NET for more than 1 month (NeoAI) were assessed. Intrinsic subtyping, module scores covering different cancer pathways and immune-related genes were calculated for pretreated and posttreated tumors.Results:The differences in intrinsic subtypes after NET were comparable between the two cohorts, with most Luminal B (90.0% in the POETIC trial and 76.3% in NeoAI) and 50.0% of HER2 enriched at baseline reclassified as Luminal A or normal-like after NET. Downregulation of proliferative-related pathways was observed after 2 weeks of AIs. However, more changes in genes from cancer-signaling pathways such as MAPK and PI3K/AKT/mTOR and immune response/immune-checkpoint components that were associated with AI-resistant tumors and differential outcome were observed in the NeoAI study.Conclusions:Tumor transcriptional profiles undergo bigger changes in response to longer NET. Changes in HER2-enriched and Luminal B subtypes are similar between the two cohorts, thus AI-sensitive intrinsic subtype tumors associated with good survival might be identified after 2 weeks of AI. The changes of immune-checkpoint component expression in early AI resistance and its impact on survival outcome warrants careful investigation in clinical trials.

Supplementary Figure 2. Consort diagram of patients analysed from EFECT

Supplementary Figure 6. Progression free survival in monoclonal and polyclonal ESR1 mutations

Purpose:The STAKT study examined short-term exposure (4.5 days) to the oral selective pan-AKT inhibitor capivasertib (AZD5363) to determine if this drug can reach its therapeutic target in sufficient concentration to significantly modulate key biomarkers of the AKT pathway and tumor proliferation.Patients and Methods:STAKT was a two-stage, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, “window-of-opportunity” study in patients with newly diagnosed ER+ invasive breast cancer. Stage 1 assessed capivasertib 480 mg b.i.d. (recommended monotherapy dose) and placebo, and stage 2 assessed capivasertib 360 and 240 mg b.i.d. Primary endpoints were changes from baseline in AKT pathway markers pPRAS40, pGSK3β, and proliferation protein Ki67. Pharmacologic and pharmacodynamic properties were analyzed from blood sampling, and tolerability by adverse-event monitoring.Results:After 4.5 days' exposure, capivasertib 480 mg b.i.d. (n = 17) produced significant decreases from baseline versus placebo (n = 11) in pGSK3β (H-score absolute change: −55.3, P = 0.006) and pPRAS40 (−83.8, P < 0.0001), and a decrease in Ki67 (absolute change in percentage positive nuclei: −9.6%, P = 0.031). Significant changes also occurred in secondary signaling biomarker pS6 (−42.3, P = 0.004), while pAKT (and nuclear FOXO3a) also increased in accordance with capivasertib's mechanism (pAKT: 81.3, P = 0.005). At doses of 360 mg b.i.d. (n = 5) and 240 mg b.i.d. (n = 6), changes in primary and secondary biomarkers were also observed, albeit of smaller magnitude. Biomarker modulation was dose and concentration dependent, and no new safety signals were evident.Conclusions:Capivasertib 480 mg b.i.d. rapidly modulates key biomarkers of the AKT pathway and decreases proliferation marker Ki67, suggesting future potential as an effective therapy in AKT-dependent breast cancers.

Supplementary Data

Purpose:ESR1 mutations are acquired frequently in hormone receptor–positive metastatic breast cancer after prior aromatase inhibitors. We assessed the clinical utility of baseline ESR1 circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis in the two phase III randomized trials of fulvestrant versus exemestane.Experimental Design:The phase III EFECT and SoFEA trials randomized patients with hormone receptor–positive metastatic breast cancer who had progressed on prior nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor therapy, between fulvestrant 250 mg and exemestane. Baseline serum samples from 227 patients in EFECT, and baseline plasma from 161 patients in SoFEA, were analyzed for ESR1 mutations by digital PCR. The primary objectives were to assess the impact of ESR1 mutation status on progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in a combined analysis of both studies.Results:ESR1 mutations were detected in 30% (151/383) baseline samples. In patients with ESR1 mutation detected, PFS was 2.4 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.0–2.6] on exemestane and 3.9 months (95% CI, 3.0–6.0) on fulvestrant [hazard ratio (HR), 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39–0.89; P = 0.01). In patients without ESR1 mutations detected, PFS was 4.8 months (95% CI, 3.7–6.2) on exemestane and 4.1 months (95% CI, 3.6–5.5) on fulvestrant (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.81–1.37; P = 0.69). There was an interaction between ESR1 mutation and treatment (P = 0.02). Patients with ESR1 mutation detected had 1-year OS of 62% (95% CI, 45%–75%) on exemestane and 80% (95% CI, 68%–87%) on fulvestrant (P = 0.04; restricted mean survival analysis). Patients without ESR1 mutations detected had 1-year OS of 79% (95% CI, 71%–85%) on exemestane and 81% (95% CI, 74%–87%) on fulvestrant (P = 0.69).Conclusions:Detection of ESR1 mutations in baseline ctDNA is associated with inferior PFS and OS in patients treated with exemestane versus fulvestrant.

Supplementary Figure 1. Impact of DNA input amount on ESR1 mutation detection in EFECT

Supplementary Data from Proliferation and AKT Activity Biomarker Analyses after Capivasertib (AZD5363) Treatment of Patients with ER+ Invasive Breast Cancer (STAKT)

Supplementary Data from Impact of Duration of Neoadjuvant Aromatase Inhibitors on Molecular Expression Profiles in Estrogen Receptor–positive Breast Cancers

Supplementary Figure 5. Progression free survival by ESR1 mutation detected in ctDNA

Supplementary Figure 3. Time To Progression in EFECT by detection of ESR1 mutations in baseline serum

Supplementary Figure from Impact of Duration of Neoadjuvant Aromatase Inhibitors on Molecular Expression Profiles in Estrogen Receptor–positive Breast Cancers

Purpose Over 1 billion doses of COVID-19 vaccines have been already administered across the United States, the United Kingdom and the European Union at the time of writing. Furthermore, 1.82 million booster doses have been administered in the US since 13th August, and similar booster programmes are currently planned or under consideration in the UK and the EU beginning in the autumn of 2021. Early reports showed an association between vaccine administration and the development of ipsilateral axillary and supraclavicular lymphadenopathy, which could interfere with the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of breast cancer patients. In this paper, we review the available evidence on vaccine-related lymphadenopathy, and we discuss the clinical implications of the same on breast cancer diagnosis and management. Methods A literature search was performed - PubMed, Ovid Medline, Scopus, CINHAL, Springer Nature, ScienceDirect, Academic Search Premier and the Directory of Open Access Journals were searched for articles reporting on regional palpable or image-detected lymphadenopathy following COVID-19 vaccination. Separately, we compiled a series of case studies from the University Hospitals of Derby and Burton, United Kingdom and the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota, United States of America, to illustrate the impact that regional lymphadenopathy post-COVID-19 vaccination can have on the diagnosis and management of patients being seen in diagnostic and therapeutic breast clinics. Results From the literature search, 15 studies met the inclusion criteria (n = 2057 patients, 737 with lymphadenopathy). The incidence of lymphadenopathy ranged between 14.5% and 53% and persisted for >6 weeks in 29% of patients. Conclusions Clinicians managing breast cancer patients should be aware that the COVID-19 vaccination may result in regional lymphadenopathy in a significant number of patients, which can result in unnecessary investigations, treatment and increased patient anxiety. An accurate COVID-19 vaccination history should be collected from all patients where regional lymphadenopathy is a clinical and/or an imaging finding and then combined with clinical judgement when managing individual cases.

Endocrine therapy (ET) is recommended as first-line therapy for the majority of patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor 2-negative advanced breast cancer (ABC); however, the efficacy of ET in patients with visceral metastases (VM) versus patients whose disease is limited to non-visceral metastases (non-VM) is debated. Meta-analyses including available data from randomised controlled trials of first- and second-line endocrine monotherapies for patients with HR+ ABC were performed to address this question. In one and two-stage meta-analyses, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), clinical benefit rate (CBR) and duration of clinical benefit (DoCB) outcomes were analysed. In the first-line meta-analysis (seven trials; n = 1988) tamoxifen and fulvestrant significantly improved PFS, OS and CBR for patients with non-VM versus those whose disease included VM. The most substantial hazard ratios were observed for fulvestrant 500 mg; 0.56 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45−0.70) and 0.55 (95% CI 0.42−0.72) for PFS and OS, respectively. In the second-line meta-analysis (seven trials; n = 2324), all ET combined was more effective (in terms of PFS, OS and DoCB) for non-VM versus VM. In both meta-analyses, patients with non-liver VM had better clinical outcomes than patients with liver VM for all types of ET. Patients whose disease included non-VM sites had better clinical outcomes with endocrine monotherapy compared with patients whose disease included VM. These findings may facilitate better informed treatment decision-making.

Purpose: ESR1 mutations are acquired frequently in hormone receptor–positive metastatic breast cancer after prior aromatase inhibitors. We assessed the clinical utility of baseline ESR1 circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis in the two phase III randomized trials of fulvestrant versus exemestane. Experimental Design: The phase III EFECT and SoFEA trials randomized patients with hormone receptor–positive metastatic breast cancer who had progressed on prior nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor therapy, between fulvestrant 250 mg and exemestane. Baseline serum samples from 227 patients in EFECT, and baseline plasma from 161 patients in SoFEA, were analyzed for ESR1 mutations by digital PCR. The primary objectives were to assess the impact of ESR1 mutation status on progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in a combined analysis of both studies. Results: ESR1 mutations were detected in 30% (151/383) baseline samples. In patients with ESR1 mutation detected, PFS was 2.4 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.0–2.6] on exemestane and 3.9 months (95% CI, 3.0–6.0) on fulvestrant [hazard ratio (HR), 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39–0.89; P = 0.01). In patients without ESR1 mutations detected, PFS was 4.8 months (95% CI, 3.7–6.2) on exemestane and 4.1 months (95% CI, 3.6–5.5) on fulvestrant (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.81–1.37; P = 0.69). There was an interaction between ESR1 mutation and treatment (P = 0.02). Patients with ESR1 mutation detected had 1-year OS of 62% (95% CI, 45%–75%) on exemestane and 80% (95% CI, 68%–87%) on fulvestrant (P = 0.04; restricted mean survival analysis). Patients without ESR1 mutations detected had 1-year OS of 79% (95% CI, 71%–85%) on exemestane and 81% (95% CI, 74%–87%) on fulvestrant (P = 0.69). Conclusions: Detection of ESR1 mutations in baseline ctDNA is associated with inferior PFS and OS in patients treated with exemestane versus fulvestrant.

BackgroundEndocrine therapy reduces breast cancer mortality by 40%, but resistance remains a major clinical problem. In this study, we sought to investigate the impact of aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy on gene expression and identify gene modules representing key biological pathways that relate to early AI therapy resistance.MethodsGlobal gene expression was measured on pairs of core-cut biopsies taken at baseline and at surgery from 254 patients with ER-positive primary breast cancer randomised to receive 2-week presurgical AI (n = 198) or no presurgical treatment (controln = 56) from the POETIC trial. Data from the AI group was adjusted to eliminate artefactual process-related changes identified in the control group. The response was assessed by changes in the proliferation marker, Ki67.ResultsHigh baselineESR1expression associated with better AI response in HER2+ tumours but not HER2− tumours. In HER2− tumours, baseline expression of 48 genes associated with poor antiproliferative response (p PERPandYWHAQ, the two most significant, and the transcription co-regulators (SAP130,HDAC4, andNCOA7) which were among the top 16 most significant. Baseline gene signature scores measuring cell proliferation, growth factor signalling (ERBB2-GS, RET/GDNF-GS, andIGF-1-GS), and immune activity (STAT1-GS) were significantly higher in poor AI responders. Two weeks of AI caused downregulation of genes involved in cell proliferation and ER signalling, as expected. Signature scores of E2F activation and TP53 dysfunction after 2-week AI were associated with poor AI response in both HER2− and HER2+ patients.ConclusionsThere is a high degree of heterogeneity in adaptive mechanisms after as little as 2-week AI therapy; however, all appear to converge on cell cycle regulation. Our data support the evaluation of whether an E2F signatures after short-term exposure to AI may identify those patients most likely to benefit from the early addition of CDK4/6 inhibitors.Trial registrationISRCTN,ISRCTN63882543, registered on 18 December 2007.

Earlier detection of lung cancer is possible, but difficult and costly to achieve. Screening with Low Dose Computed Tomography (LDCT)scanning has been shown to reduce mortality by 20-25% over the past decade but uptake amongst those most likely to suffer the disease has been slow. Resource constraints and a high false positive rate have also limited adoption of LDCT in many health systems. Targeted screening of people most likely to benefit using a range of biomarkers may be one way to improve the yield and reduce the resource requirements of LDCT. Autoantibodies, which amplify the signal produced by cancer derived proteins, are present in the blood of people mounting an immune response to cancer are a potential way to select those at highest risk. We have followed up 12 208 people enrolled in the ECLS trial for three years and shown that the specificity for early stage (I &II) disease is 90.3% throughout that period. More cancers were detected in the control than the intervention arm of the trial (101V 83). Sensitivity was 77.8% after 6 months and dropped to 46.4% after 3 years. At the end of three years the hazard ratios (95%CI) for All Cause, Cancer Specific and Lung Cancer Mortality was 0.82(0.67-1.01), 0.72(0.54-0.97) and 0.70(0.46-1.08) respectively for those randomised to Early CDT testing. As a range of treatment modalities become increasingly more effective it is even more important to target LDCT on those most likely to have early stage disease. Autoantibody testing may be one method of targeting early detection on those most likely to benefit.

Background: It remains clinically important to identify ER positive breast cancers likely to respond to tamoxifen (TAM) and so we aimed to select a group of biomarkers able to predict response. We also assessed whether data from different sample types [tumor microarrays (TMAs) and core biopsies] or tumor sites could be combined for biomarker studies. Methods: A total of 123 endocrine treatment naïve patients with known ER and HER2 status treated with TAM had paraffin-embedded tumor tissue available either as TMAs (n=102) or core biopsies (n=21). TMA cores were collected from three different tumor sites, two central and one peripheral. Ten biomarkers were evaluated by immunohistochemistry, for % positivity and/or H-Score, comprising: ER, HER2, Ki67, phosphorylated forms of ER (Ser118), IGF1R, PRAS40, Akt & MAPK (ERK1/2), and PTEN & androgen receptor expression (AR). Each tumor was analysed for Akt1 E17K somatic mutation using BEAMing technology. Patient outcome was assessed by clinical benefit (CB) rate & survival analyses [time to progression (TTP) and time to death (TTD)]. Results: There was no significant difference in % positivity or H-Score between central & peripheral tumor sites for all biomarkers examined. After False Discovery Rate (FDR) correction differences (P

Background Four randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer (ABC) comparing aromatase inhibitors (AIs) versus the selective estrogen receptor modulator tamoxifen, each individually reported significantly longer progression free survival (PFS) but none showed a significant difference in overall survival (OS). In these trials between 6.8%–55% of tumours were hormone receptor (HR) status unknown or negative. This meta-analysis restricted the comparison to HR-positive (HR+) tumours. MethodsAnonymised individual patient data were obtained from three RCTs, EORTC (exemestane versus tamoxifen), Study 0027 and Study 0030 (both anastrozole versus tamoxifen). For the remaining RCT (Femara Study PO25; letrozole versus tamoxifen), odds ratio (OR) or hazard ratio (HzR), with confidence intervals were obtained from the clinical study report, for patients with HR+ tumours, in addition to published data. In total, data were obtained from 2296 patients; 1560 (68%) had HR+ ABC. FindingsThe OR for clinical benefit rate was 1·56, in favour of AIs (p[less than] 0·001). The duration of clinical benefit was not significantly increased by AIs (hazard ratio [HzR] 0·88; p=0·08). For PFS the HzR (0·82) was in favour of AIs (p=0·007). However, for OS the HzR (1·05) was not significantly different between AIs and tamoxifen (p=0·42).InterpretationAlthough third generation AIs put significantly more patients into ‘clinical benefit’, their tumours were not controlled for significantly longer. Overall, while this resulted in a significantly greater PFS in favour of the AIs, this did not translate into improvement in OS.

Purpose:Fulvestrant, the first-in-class selective estrogen receptor (ER) degrader (SERD), is clinically effective in patients with ER+ breast cancer, but it has administration and pharmacokinetic limitations. Pharmacodynamic data suggest complete ER degradation is not achieved at fulvestrant's clinically feasible dose. This presurgical study (NCT03236974) compared the pharmacodynamic effects of fulvestrant with AZD9496, a novel, orally bioavailable, nonsteroidal, potent SERD, in treatment-naïve patients with ER+ HER2− primary breast cancer awaiting curative intent surgery.Patients and Methods:Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive AZD9496 250 mg twice daily from day 1 for 5–14 days, or fulvestrant 500 mg on day 1. On-treatment imaging-guided core tumor biopsies were taken between day 5 and 14 and compared with pretreatment diagnostic biopsies. The primary objective was to compare the effects of AZD9496 and fulvestrant on ER expression. Secondary objectives included changes in progesterone receptor (PR) and Ki-67 pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relationships and safety.Results:Forty-six women received treatment (AZD9496 n = 22; fulvestrant n = 24); 35 paired biopsies were evaluable (AZD9496 n = 15; fulvestrant n = 20). The least square mean estimate for ER H-score reduction was 24% after AZD9496 versus 36% after fulvestrant treatment (P = 0.86). AZD9496 also reduced PR H-scores (−33.3%) and Ki-67 levels (−39.9%) from baseline, but was also not superior to fulvestrant (PR: −68.7%, P = 0.97; Ki-67: −75.4%, P = 0.98). No new safety findings were identified.Conclusions:This was the first presurgical study to demonstrate that an oral SERD affects its key biological targets. However, AZD9496 was not superior to fulvestrant at the dose tested.

Many patients with ER+ HER2− primary breast cancer are being deferred from surgery to neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NeoET) during the COVID-19 pandemic. We have collated data from multiple international trials of presurgical endocrine therapy in order to provide guidance on the identification of patients who may have insufficiently endocrine-sensitive tumors and should be prioritised for early surgery or neoadjuvant chemotherapy rather than NeoET during or in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic for safety or when surgical activity needs to be prioritized. For postmenopausal patients, our data provide strong support for the use of ER and PgR status at diagnosis for triaging of patients into three groups in which (taking into account clinical factors): (i) NeoET is likely to be inappropriate (Allred ER 10%) indicates a higher priority for early surgery. Too few data were available for premenopausal patients to provide a similar treatment algorithm. These guidelines should be helpful for managing patients with early ER+ HER2− breast cancer during and in the aftermath of the COVID-19 crisis.

Purpose: The STAKT study examined short-term exposure (4.5 days) to the oral selective pan-AKT inhibitor capivasertib (AZD5363) to determine if this drug can reach its therapeutic target in sufficient concentration to significantly modulate key biomarkers of the AKT pathway and tumor proliferation. Patients and Methods: STAKT was a two-stage, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, “window-of-opportunity” study in patients with newly diagnosed ER+ invasive breast cancer. Stage 1 assessed capivasertib 480 mg b.i.d. (recommended monotherapy dose) and placebo, and stage 2 assessed capivasertib 360 and 240 mg b.i.d. Primary endpoints were changes from baseline in AKT pathway markers pPRAS40, pGSK3β, and proliferation protein Ki67. Pharmacologic and pharmacodynamic properties were analyzed from blood sampling, and tolerability by adverse-event monitoring. Results: After 4.5 days' exposure, capivasertib 480 mg b.i.d. (n = 17) produced significant decreases from baseline versus placebo (n = 11) in pGSK3β (H-score absolute change: −55.3, P = 0.006) and pPRAS40 (−83.8, P < 0.0001), and a decrease in Ki67 (absolute change in percentage positive nuclei: −9.6%, P = 0.031). Significant changes also occurred in secondary signaling biomarker pS6 (−42.3, P = 0.004), while pAKT (and nuclear FOXO3a) also increased in accordance with capivasertib's mechanism (pAKT: 81.3, P = 0.005). At doses of 360 mg b.i.d. (n = 5) and 240 mg b.i.d. (n = 6), changes in primary and secondary biomarkers were also observed, albeit of smaller magnitude. Biomarker modulation was dose and concentration dependent, and no new safety signals were evident. Conclusions: Capivasertib 480 mg b.i.d. rapidly modulates key biomarkers of the AKT pathway and decreases proliferation marker Ki67, suggesting future potential as an effective therapy in AKT-dependent breast cancers.

Background Oestrogen receptor (ER) in invasive breast cancer (BC) predicts response to endocrine therapy (ET) and provides prognostic value. In this study, we investigated the value of ER expression in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in terms of outcome and the impact on ET decision. Methods In total, 643 pure DCIS, diagnosed at Nottingham University Hospitals, were assessed for ER. Clinicopathological data were correlated against ER status, together with assessment of recurrence rate. Results ER positivity was observed in 74% (475/643) of cases. ER positivity was associated with clinicopathological variables of good prognosis; however, outcome analysis revealed that ER status was not associated with local recurrence. In the intermediate- and high-grade ER-positive DCIS, 58% (11/19) and 63% (15/24) of the recurrences were invasive, respectively, comprising 7% and 6% of all ER-positive DCIS, respectively. Invasive recurrence in low-grade DCIS was infrequent (2%), and none of these patients died of BC. The ER status of the recurrent invasive tumours matched the primary DCIS ER status (94% in ipsilateral and 90% of contralateral recurrence). Conclusion The strong correlation between DCIS and invasive recurrence ER status and the clinical impact of ET justify discussion of the use of ET in ER-positive DCIS treated by breast-conserving surgery. The excellent outcome of low-grade DCIS, which was almost always ER-positive, does not, in the opinion of authors, justify the use of risk-reducing ET. Therefore, the decision on ET for DCIS should be personalised and consider grade, ER status and other characteristics.

Family history of breast cancer is a key risk factor, accounting for up to 10% of cancers. We evaluated the proactive assessment of familial breast cancer (FBC) risk in primary care. Eligible women (30 to 60 years) were recruited from eight English general practices. Practices were trained on FBC risk assessment. In four randomly-assigned practices, women were invited to complete a validated, postal family history questionnaire, which practice staff inputted into decision support software to determine cancer risk. Those with increased risk were offered specialist referral. Usual care was observed in the other four practices. In intervention practices, 1127/7012 women (16.1%) returned family history questionnaires, comprising 1105 (98%) self-reported white ethnicity and 446 (39.6%) educated to University undergraduate or equivalent qualification, with 119 (10.6%) identified at increased breast cancer risk and offered referral. Sixty-seven (56%) women recommended referral were less than 50 years old. From 66 women attending specialists, 26 (39.4%) were confirmed to have high risk and recommended annual surveillance (40–60 years) and surgical prevention; while 30 (45.5%) were confirmed at moderate risk, with 19 offered annual surveillance (40–50 years). The remaining 10 (15.2%) managed in primary care. None were recommended chemoprevention. In usual care practices, only ten women consulted with concerns about breast cancer family history. This study demonstrated proactive risk assessment in primary care enables accurate identification of women, including many younger women, at increased risk of breast cancer. To improve generalisability across the population, more active methods of engagement need to be explored. Trial registration: CRUK Clinical Trials Database 11779. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s10689-020-00188-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The international, phase III FALCON study (NCT01602380) in postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive, locally advanced/metastatic breast cancer (LA/MBC) who had not received prior endocrine therapy, demonstrated statistically significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) for patients who received fulvestrant 500 mg vs anastrozole 1 mg. This subgroup analysis evaluated PFS in Asian (randomized in China, Japan, or Taiwan) and non-Asian patients from the FALCON study. Eligible patients (estrogen receptor- and/or progesterone receptor-positive LA/MBC; World Health Organization performance status 0–2; ≥ 1 measurable/non-measurable lesion[s]) were randomized. PFS was assessed via Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1, surgery/radiotherapy for disease worsening, or death (any cause). Secondary endpoints included: objective response rate, clinical benefit rate, duration of response, and duration of clinical benefit. Consistency of effect across subgroups was assessed via hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a log-rank test. Adverse events (AEs) were evaluated. Of the 462 randomized patients, the Asian and non-Asian subgroups comprised 67 and 395 patients, respectively. In the Asian subgroup, median PFS was 16.6 and 15.9 months with fulvestrant and anastrozole, respectively (hazard ratio 0.81; 95% CI 0.44–1.50). In the non-Asian subgroup, median PFS was 16.5 and 13.8 months, respectively (hazard ratio 0.79; 95% CI 0.62–1.01). Secondary outcomes were numerically improved with fulvestrant vs anastrozole in both subgroups. AE profiles were generally consistent between Asian and non-Asian subgroups. Results of this subgroup analysis suggest that treatment effects in the Asian patient subgroup are broadly consistent with the non-Asian population.

There is clear evidence that healthcare workers (HCWs) are at increased risk of contracting COVID-19. Compared to nonessential workers, HCWs have a seven-fold increase in risk of severe COVID-19 (testing positive in hospital or death).1 Frontline, or patient-facing, HCWs have a three-fold increase in risk of testing positive for COVID-19 compared to the general population.2 Compared to non-patient facing HCWs they have a three-fold risk, and their household members have a two-fold risk of hospital admission with COVID-19.3 COVID-19 risk is also specialty dependent: ‘front-door’ speciality HCWs (A&E, medical specialties including general, acute, and geriatric medicine, and infectious diseases) are at increased risk compared to intensive care HCWs,3 who in some studies had a lower risk than other HCWs.4 The only publicly available data on COVID-19-related deaths of doctors in the UK comes from tributes in the medical press, …

Khunti and colleagues advocate integrating “the workplace, the workforce, and the individual” in “assessing risk for healthcare workers during the covid-19 pandemic.”1 The same approach is relevant to other workers, notably in social care. It also warrants highlighting that health and safety law requires a “suitable and sufficient” risk assessment and the involvement of workers and their representatives.2 The pandemic ought to encourage active and effective safety committees and …

The aim of our study was to assess various predictors for local recurrence (LR) in patients undergoing breast conservation surgery (BCS) for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS).An audit was performed of 582 consecutive patients with DCIS between Jan 1975 to June 2008. In patients undergoing BCS, local guidelines reported a margin of ≥10 mm during the above period. Guideline with regard to margin of excision changes soon after this period. We retrospectively analysed clinical and pathological risk factors for local recurrence in patients undergoing BCS. Statistical analysis was carried out using SPSS version 19, and a cox regression model for multivariate analysis of local recurrence was used.Overall 239 women had BCS for DCIS during the above period. The actuarial 5-year recurrence rate was 9.6%. The overall LR rate was 17% (40/239. LR was more common in patients ≤50 years: (10/31 patients, 32%) compared to patients 50 years (30/208, 14%, P = 0.02). Forty three per cent of patients (6/14) with5 mm margin developed LR which was significantly higher compared to patients with 5-9 mm margin (12%, 3/25) and with ≥10 mm margin (14%, 27/188, P = 0.01). On multivariate analysis age ≤50 years,5 mm pathological margin were independent prognostic factors for local recurrence.Our study shows that younger age (≤50 years) and a margin5 mm are poor prognostic factors for LR in patients undergoing breast conservation surgery for DCIS.

The introduction of mammographic screening has resulted in a rise in the detection rate of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), currently accounting for one-fifth of screen-detected breast cancers. Although 60-70% of DCIS are treated with breast-conserving surgery (BCS) with or without radiotherapy, the frequency of subsequent surgery to re-excise positive margins in order to reduce the probability of recurrences remains high. DCIS recurrence is associated not only with financial, health and psychological implications; approximately half these recurrences are invasive disease. An appropriate margin width for patients undergoing BCS for invasive breast cancer has been largely agreed. Although there is a perception that such recommendations may be applicable to DCIS, major differences exist which may affect this application. Importantly, DCIS patients often do not receive systemic adjuvant (endocrine) therapy and not all receive radiotherapy in routine practice. There is evidence that wide margins (i.e. >10 mm) confer better protection against recurrence than positive (i.e. 0 mm) margins; however, there remains a debate concerning the optimum margin width between 0 and 10 mm. Previous studies have demonstrated that radiation therapy may not compensate for lack of re-excision in those patients with positive or close margins, while wide margins will inevitably compromise cosmesis and patients' body image perception. This review aims to address the clinical question of the minimal margin width in DCIS treated with BCS that is associated with the lowest recurrence rate and when, therefore, further surgical intervention for re-excision can be safely avoided. A range of clinical circumstances that might affect this are considered.

Summary Background Aromatase inhibitors are a standard of care for hormone receptor-positive locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer. We investigated whether the selective oestrogen receptor degrader fulvestrant could improve progression-free survival compared with anastrozole in postmenopausal patients who had not received previous endocrine therapy. Methods In this phase 3, randomised, double-blind trial, we recruited eligible patients with histologically confirmed oestrogen receptor-positive or progesterone receptor-positive, or both, locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer from 113 academic hospitals and community centres in 20 countries. Eligible patients were endocrine therapy-naive, with WHO performance status 0–2, and at least one measurable or non-measurable lesion. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to fulvestrant (500 mg intramuscular injection; on days 0, 14, 28, then every 28 days thereafter) or anastrozole (1 mg orally daily) using a computer-generated randomisation scheme. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, determined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1·1, intervention by surgery or radiotherapy because of disease deterioration, or death from any cause, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety outcomes were assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of randomised treatment (including placebo). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01602380. Findings Between Oct 17, 2012, and July 11, 2014, 524 patients were enrolled to this study. Of these, 462 patients were randomised (230 to receive fulvestrant and 232 to receive anastrozole). Progression-free survival was significantly longer in the fulvestrant group than in the anastrozole group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·797, 95% CI 0·637–0·999, p=0·0486). Median progression-free survival was 16·6 months (95% CI 13·83–20·99) in the fulvestrant group versus 13·8 months (11·99–16·59) in the anastrozole group. The most common adverse events were arthralgia (38 [17%] in the fulvestrant group vs 24 [10%] in the anastrozole group) and hot flushes (26 [11%] in the fulvestrant group vs 24 [10%] in the anastrozole group). 16 (7%) of 228 patients in in the fulvestrant group and 11 (5%) of 232 patients in the anastrozole group discontinued because of adverse events. Interpretation Fulvestrant has superior efficacy and is a preferred treatment option for patients with hormone receptor-positive locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer who have not received previous endocrine therapy compared with a third-generation aromatase inhibitor, a standard of care for first-line treatment of these patients. Funding AstraZeneca.

Background Lung cancer screening can reduce lung cancer mortality by 20%. Screen-detected abnormalities may provide teachable moments for smoking cessation. This study assesses impact of pulmonary nodule detection on smoking behaviours within the first UK trial of a novel auto-antibody test, followed by chest x-ray and serial CT scanning for early detection of lung cancer (Early Cancer Detection Test–Lung Cancer Scotland Study). Methods Test-positive participants completed questionnaires on smoking behaviours at baseline, 1, 3 and 6 months. Logistic regression compared outcomes between nodule (n = 95) and normal CT groups (n = 174) at 3 and 6 months follow-up. Results No significant differences were found between the nodule and normal CT groups for any smoking behaviours and odds ratios comparing the nodule and normal CT groups did not vary significantly between 3 and 6 months. There was some evidence the nodule group were more likely to report significant others wanted them to stop smoking than the normal CT group (OR across 3- and 6-month time points: 3.04, 95% CI: 0.95, 9.73; P = 0.06). Conclusion Pulmonary nodule detection during lung cancer screening has little impact on smoking behaviours. Further work should explore whether lung cancer screening can impact on perceived social pressure and promote smoking cessation.

Current methods to identify cut-off values for tumour-associated molecules (antigens) discrimination are based on statistics and brute force. These methods applied to cancer screening problems are very inefficient, especially with large data sets with many antigens being investigated. There is a long wait to produce outcomes for clinicians, high performance computing is required, the best solution is not likely to be achieved and scalability is an issue. Cancer research is therefore limited in the number of antigens the methods can efficiently handle, and good solutions are potentially missed. We present an alternative evolutionary method based on Genetic Algorithms and Harmony Search to accelerate clinical research and to enable the consideration of a larger number of candidate antigens during the designing of the screening. We show that compared to the traditional methodology employed by clinicians, our approach is able to produce better results in a timely manner.

This study was carried out as part of a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) School for Primary Care Research (SPCR) funded academic clinical fellowship. The ECLS study was funded by the Scottish Executive and Oncimmune Ltd. The follow-up data collection was funded by University of Nottingham PhD studentships and by Oncimmune Ltd. Objectives: To determine the psychological response (thoughts, perceptions and affect) to a diagnosis of pulmonary nodules following a novel antibody blood test and computed tomography (CT) scans within a UK population. Materials and methods: This study was nested within a randomised controlled trial of a blood test (Early CDT®-Lung test), followed by a chest x-ray and serial CT-scanning of those with a positive blood test for early detection of lung cancer (ECLS Study). Trial participants with a positive Early CDT®-Lung test were invited to participate (n = 338) and those agreeing completed questionnaires assessing psychological outcomes at 1, 3 and 6 months following trial recruitment. Responses of individuals with pulmonary nodules on their first CT scan were compared to those without (classified as normal CT) at 3 and 6 months follow-up using random effects regression models to account for multiple observations per participant, with loge transformation of data where modelling assumptions were not met. Results: There were no statistically significant differences between the nodule and normal CT groups in affect, lung cancer worry, health anxiety, illness perceptions, lung cancer risk perception or intrusive thoughts at 3 or 6 months post-recruitment. The nodule group had statistically significantly fewer avoidance symptoms compared to the normal CT group at 3 months (impact of events scale avoidance (IES-A) difference between means -1.99, 95%CI -4.18, 0.21) than at 6 months (IES-A difference between means 0.88, 95%CI -1.32, 3.08; p-value for change over time = 0.003) with similar findings using loge transformed data. Conclusion: A diagnosis of pulmonary nodules following an Early CDT®-Lung test and CT scan did not appear to result in adverse psychological responses compared to those with a normal CT scan. Postprint

Background AZD9833 is an orally bioavailable selective estrogen receptor (ER) antagonist and degrader (SERD) that has shown anti-tumor efficacy in a range of preclinical breast cancer models. SERENA-1, an ongoing first-in-human study assessing AZD9833 as a monotherapy and in combination with palbociclib, established dose-dependent tolerability in pre- and post-menopausal women at doses of 25-450 mg once daily (QD), with clinical benefit and target engagement at all dose levels. Two randomized, open-label Phase 2 trials are also ongoing in women with ER+ HER2- breast cancer. SERENA-2 compares the efficacy of AZD9833 with fulvestrant in post-menopausal women with advanced breast cancer following treatment with ≤1 endocrine therapy. SERENA-3 will examine the biological effects of different doses of AZD9833 in treatment-naïve women with primary breast cancer. Methods SERENA-3 is a randomized, open-label, parallel-group, pre-surgical study to investigate the biological effects of different doses of AZD9833 in ER+, HER2- primary breast cancer. Eligible patients will be post-menopausal (and potentially pre-menopausal) women awaiting curative-intent surgery for newly diagnosed, ER+ HER2- primary breast cancer. The study is designed in two stages. In Stage 1, 24 post-menopausal women will be randomized 1:1 to receive either 75 mg or 150 mg oral AZD9833 QD for 5-7 days, followed by a minimum 5-day pre-surgery washout period; Stage 2 gives provision for additional groups depending on emerging data from Stage 1. The primary objective of this study is to explore the effect of AZD9833 on ER expression in pre- and on-treatment tumor samples from women with primary breast cancer, as assessed by immunohistochemistry and H-score. Safety and tolerability will be assessed as secondary endpoints, along with the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic effects of AZD9833 on other biomarkers. Blood will be collected at screening, on the day of biopsy and the day of surgery to assess circulating tumor DNA and exploratory biomarkers. Primary endpoint analysis will be performed on the pharmacodynamic analysis set. The study will be conducted in 20 centers across 3 countries. For more information please contact Professor John Robertson at: john.robertson@nottingham.ac.uk. Citation Format: John FR Robertson, Iain Moppett, Juan Enrique Bargalló Rocha, Giorgi Dzagnidze, Joanna Harding, Teresa Klinowska, Richard Mather, Alastair Mathewson, Rhiannon Maudsley, Christopher J Morrow, Andrew Saunders, Andy Sykes, Li Zhang, Justin PO Lindemann. A randomized, pre-surgical study to investigate the biological effects of AZD9833 doses in women with ER-positive HER2-negative primary breast cancer (SERENA-3) [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 OT-09-05.

Background: Estrogen receptor positive (ER+) breast cancer is routinely treated with endocrine therapies targeting the ER axis. However, primary and secondary resistance ultimately limits the use of these agents. Fulvestrant (FULV) is the first-in-class selective ER degrader (SERD) clinically effective in patients with ER+ breast cancer, both naïve and resistant to tamoxifen and aromatase inhibitors. FULV has low oral bioavailability, and its dose-dependent pharmacodynamic (PD) activity and clinical efficacy is limited by the currently approved maximal feasible dose (MFD) of 500 mg, which is administered monthly as two intramuscular injections. AZD9496 is an orally bioavailable, nonsteroidal, selective and potent degrader and antagonist of ER in preclinical models. This pre-surgical, window of opportunity study (NCT03236974) compared PD changes and the PD/pharmacokinetic (PK) relationships of AZD9496 with FULV in patients with newly diagnosed ER+ HER2- breast cancer awaiting curative intent surgery.Methods: In this open-label, multicenter study, patients were randomized 1:1 to receive oral AZD9496 250 mg BID from Day 1 for 5-14 days or FULV 500 mg administered intramuscularly on Day 1 only. On-treatment image-guided core tumor biopsies were taken between Days 5 and 14. The primary objective was to compare the effects of AZD9496 and FULV on ER expression in tumor tissue using pre-dose biopsies as baseline. Secondary objectives were changes in progesterone receptor (PR) and Ki-67 biomarkers, AZD9496 and FULV plasma concentrations during treatment, and safety. Immunohistochemistry was used to determine ER and PR H-scores, and Ki-67 index, and treatment effects were compared using an analysis of covariance model. Blood samples for PK analysis were taken at on-treatment biopsy and 1-2 hours afterwards. Adverse events (AEs) were monitored from screening through to a follow-up visit 28 days after the last study dose.Results: Of the 49 women enrolled, 46 received treatment (AZD9496 n=22; FULV n=24) and of these, 35 paired biopsies were evaluable (AZD9496 n=15; FULV n=20). The least square mean estimate for the reduction in ER H-score after AZD9496 treatment was 24% (80% CI: 34.4, 14.3), and after FULV treatment was 36% (44.9, 27.7), with a least square mean difference between AZD9496 and FULV of 12% (p=0.86). AZD9496 was not superior to FULV in terms of ER modulation at the tested dose. AZD9496 also reduced PR H-scores and Ki-67 levels from baseline (by 33.3% and 39.9%, respectively). These effects were not statistically superior to FULV at the tested dose (PR: -68.7%, p=0.97; Ki 67: 75.4%, p=0.98).Plasma exposure of AZD9496 (AUC -40%, Cmax -25%) was lower than predicted based on PK data from the previous phase 1 study, whereas FULV exposure was consistent with historical data. No clear exposure-response relationship for plasma concentration at biopsy and PD markers for AZD9496 or FULV were observed.The median treatment duration of AZD9496 was 9.5 days (range: 6-15), and the relative dose intensity was 100% (range: 90-125); no patients discontinued AZD9496. AZD9496 and FULV were both well tolerated, and no new safety findings were identified. No grade ≥3 toxicities or serious AEs occurred. Conclusion: AZD9496 250 mg BID reduced ER, PR and Ki-67 expression, and as such, is the first pre surgical study to demonstrate an oral SERD impacting its key biological targets. These reductions were not superior to the FULV clinically approved dose, which performed as expected based on historical data. Pre-surgical studies represent an important method to test the proof of mechanism of novel SERDs early in clinical development. Citation Format: John FR Robertson, Abigail Evans, Stephan Henschen, Cliona Kirwan, Ali Jahan, Laura Kenny, J. Michael Dixon, Peter Schmid, Ashutosh Kothari, Omar Mohamed, Peter A Fasching, Kwok-Leung Cheung, Rachel Wuerstlein, Danielle Carroll, Teresa Klinowska, Justin PO Lindemann, Alexander MacDonald, Richard Mather, Rhiannon Maudsley, Michele Moschetta, Myria Nikolaou, Martine P Roudier, Tinnu Sarvotham, Gaia Schiavon, Diansong Zhou, Li Zhou, Nadia Harbeck. A pre-surgical, window of opportunity study comparing the novel oral SERD AZD9496 with fulvestrant in patients with newly diagnosed ER+ HER2- primary breast cancer [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 P6-04-01.

Resistance to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) therapies is an emerging clinical problem. The efficacy of anti-EGFR therapies can be influenced by the presence of heregulins (HRGs), which can bind erbB3/4 receptors and can activate alternative signalling pathways. In the present study we have examined whether HRG signalling can circumvent EGFR blockade in an EGFR-positive tamoxifen-resistant MCF-7 (Tam-R) breast cancer cell line.Tam-R cells, incubated with the selective EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor gefitinib ('Iressa', ZD1839), were exposed to HRGbeta1 and the effects on erbB receptor dimerization profiles and on activation of associated downstream signalling components were assessed by immunoprecipitation, western blotting and immunocytochemistry. The effects of HRGbeta1 on gefitinib-treated Tam-R cell growth and invasion were also examined, and HRGbeta1 expression levels were assessed in breast cancer tissue by immunohistochemistry to address the potential clinical relevance of such a resistance mechanism.In Tam-R cells, HRGbeta1 promoted erbB3/erbB2 and erbB3/EGFR heterodimerization, promoted ERK1/2 and AKT pathway activation and increased cell proliferation and invasion. Gefitinib prevented HRGbeta1-driven erbB3/EGFR heterodimerization, ERK1/2 activation and Tam-R cell proliferation, but HRGbeta1-driven erbB3/erbB2 heterodimerization, AKT activation and Tam-R cell invasion were maintained. A combination of gefitinib and the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase inhibitor LY294002 effectively blocked HRGbeta1-mediated intracellular signalling activity, growth and invasion in Tam-R cells. Similarly, targeting erbB2 with trastuzumab in combination with gefitinib in Tam-R cells reduced HRGbeta1-induced erbB2 and ERK1/2 activity; however, HRGbeta1-driven AKT activity and cell growth were maintained while cell invasion was significantly enhanced with this combination. In clinical tissue all samples demonstrated cytoplasmic tumour epithelial HRGbeta1 protein staining, with expression correlating with EGFR positivity and activation of both AKT and ERK1/2.HRGbeta1 can overcome the inhibitory effects of gefitinib on cell growth and invasion in Tam-R cells through promotion of erbB3/erbB2 heterodimerization and activation of the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/AKT signalling pathway. This may have implications for the effectiveness of anti-EGFR therapies in breast cancer as HRGbeta1 is enriched in many EGFR-positive breast tumours.

To investigate the impact of sampling methodology on gene expression data from primary estrogen receptor–positive (ER+) breast cancer biopsies, global gene expression was measured in core-cut biopsies at baseline and surgery from patients randomly assigned to receive either two weeks of presurgical aromatase inhibitor (AI; n = 157) or no presurgical treatment (n = 56). Those genes most markedly altered in the AI group (eg, FOS, DUSP1, RGS1, FOSB) were similarly altered in the no treatment group; some widely investigated genes that were apparently unaffected in the AI group (eg, MYC) were counter-altered in the control group, masking actual AI-dependent changes. In the absence of a control group, these artefactual changes would likely lead to the most affected genes being the erroneous focus of research. The findings are likely relevant to all archival collections of ER+ breast cancer.

Background The phase III randomised FALCON trial (NCT01602380) demonstrated improved progression-free survival with fulvestrant 500 mg versus anastrozole 1 mg in endocrine therapy-naive postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (LA/MBC). Furthermore, overall health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was maintained and comparable for fulvestrant and anastrozole. Here, we present additional analyses of patient-reported HRQoL outcomes from FALCON. Methods Women with endocrine therapy-naive HR+ LA/MBC were randomised 1:1 to fulvestrant (days 0, 14, 28, then every 28 d) or anastrozole (daily) until disease progression or discontinuation. HRQoL was assessed by FACT-B questionnaire (TOI and FACT-B total score) at randomisation and every 12 weeks during treatment. HRQoL data post-treatment (with or without progression) were also collected. Results In total, 462 patients were randomised (fulvestrant, n = 230; anastrozole, n = 232). Compliance to FACT-B overall ranged from 60.0 to 97.4%. Mean change from baseline in TOI and FACT-B total score remained broadly stable (approximately ± 3 points to week 132) and was similar between arms during treatment. HRQoL was also maintained in FACT-B subscales. Approximately one-third of patients had improved TOI (≥+6 points) and FACT-B (≥+8 points) total scores from baseline up to week 120 and 132, respectively, of treatment with fulvestrant (ranges 26.4–45.0% and 22.4–35.8%, respectively) and anastrozole (ranges 18.6–32.9%, and 22.7–37.9%, respectively). Conclusions Mean change from baseline in TOI and FACT-B total score was maintained for fulvestrant and anastrozole; similar proportions of patients in both arms had improved TOI and FACT-B total scores.

Aims 1. To determine the variability of mutational profiles and sub-clonality in core-cut biopsies from ER+ BC and the impact of 2-weeks’ AI therapy on these. 2. To identify mutations or patterns of mutations associated with poor anti-proliferative response to AI treatment. Background DNA alterations may lead to de novo and acquired resistance to medical therapies including AIs. Assessing this requires single time-point or sequential sampling usually with core-cuts but there is little information on their ability to represent mutational profiles or sub-clonal structure. We studied this in paired biopsies from ER+ BC primaries in 60 selected postmenopausal patients from the Peri-Operative Endocrine Therapy for Individualising Care (POETIC) trial (CRUK/07/015) before and after 2-weeks’ non-steroidal AI or no AI (randomised 2:1). Methods DNA was extracted from RNAlater-preserved diagnostic and surgical 14-gauge core-cut samples and peripheral blood from 20 no AI (Control) and 40 AI-treated patients (15 poor and 25 good Ki67-responders [PR and GR, respectively]). Patients with low ER+ BC or unsuppressed estradiol on treatment were not considered. Exome sequencing (Illumina HiSeq 2000) achieved >60% coverage across the exome at 15x depth. Variants were validated by re-sequencing (median >100x) together with 79 genes of interest curated from COSMIC and selected publications. Statistically significant genes (SMGs) were determined using MuSiC. Sub-clonality was analysed by SciClone. Results Good quality exomes were obtained on 102 samples including 44 pairs (control n=14; PR n=10; GR n=20). There were 5684 mutations (including 3616 missense and 1322 silent) affecting 3261 genes. SMGs in this series were PIK3CA (35.3%), TP53 (27.5%), CDH1 (13.8%), HEATR7B2 (8.8%), GATA3 (5.9%), CENPF (5.9%), MAP3K1 (5.9%), MAP2K4 (4.9%), HTR1A (2.9%) and C22orf23 (1%). PR had more mutations than GR (median 65 vs 36, p=0.04). More PR than GR were HER2+ (5/14 vs 1/24, p=0.019) and/or TP53-mutated (5/10 vs 3/20, p=0.08) but similar proportions were PIK3CA-mutated. The correlation of diagnostic vs surgical variant allele frequencies was strong for the control (r=0.75) and treated (r=0.89) groups (for treated GR r=0.83; for treated PR r=0.65). In the treated group there were fewer mutations at surgery vs diagnosis (p Conclusion This is the largest reported study of exome reproducibility in ER+ BC for mutation profiles based on core-cut biopsy. Multiple sub-clones are identifiable in ER+ primary BC. In c.20% tumours, a single core-cut does not allow inference of all sub-clonal populations, probably due to spatial heterogeneity. TP53 mutations but not PIK3CA mutations are associated with PR. Large numbers of BC will be needed to identify any associations of lower frequency mutations with resistance. A trend to fewer mutations after just 2 weeks AI needs confirmation. Citation Format: Pascal Gellert, Corrinne V Segal, Qiong Gao, Tiandao Li, Christopher A Miller, Elaine Mardis, Lesley-Ann Martin, Christopher Holcombe, Anthony Skene, Judith Bliss, John Robertson, Ian Smith, Mitch Dowsett, POETIC Trial Management Group and Trialists. Exome sequencing of post-menopausal ER+ breast cancer (BC) treated pre-surgically with aromatase inhibitors (AIs) in the POETIC trial (CRUK/07/015) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Seventh Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2014 Dec 9-13; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(9 Suppl):Abstract nr S1-04.

ABSTRACT Kyoto Breast Cancer Consensus Conference, Kyoto, Japan, 18–20 February 2014 The loco-regional management of breast cancer is increasingly complex with application of primary systemic therapies, oncoplastic techniques and genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility. Personalization of loco-regional treatment is integral to optimization of breast cancer care. Clinical and pathological tumor stage, biological features and host factors influence loco-regional treatment strategies and extent of surgical procedures. Key issues including axillary staging, axillary treatment, radiation therapy, primary systemic therapy (PST), preoperative hormonal therapy and genetic predisposition were identified and discussed at the Kyoto Breast Cancer Consensus Conference (KBCCC2014). In the first of a two part conference scene, consensus recommendations for axillary management are presented and focus on the following topics: indications for completion axillary lymph node dissection in primary surgical patients with ≤2 macrometastases or any sentinel nodal deposits after PST; the timing of sentinel lymph node biopsy in the context of PST; use of axillary irradiation as a component of primary treatment plans and the role of intraoperative node assessment in the post-Z0011 era.

ABSTRACT Kyoto Breast Cancer Consensus Conference, Kyoto, Japan, 18–20 February 2014 The loco-regional management of breast cancer is increasingly complex with application of primary systemic therapies, oncoplastic techniques and genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility. Personalization of loco-regional treatment is integral to optimization of breast cancer care. Clinical and pathological tumor stage, biological features and host factors influence loco-regional treatment strategies and extent of surgical procedures. Key issues including axillary staging, axillary treatment, radiation therapy, primary systemic therapy (PST), preoperative hormonal therapy and genetic predisposition were identified and discussed at the Kyoto Breast Cancer Consensus Conference (KBCCC2014). In the second of a two part conference scene, consensus recommendations for radiation treatment, primary systemic therapies and management of genetic predisposition are reported and focus on the following topics: influence of both clinical response to PST and stage at presentation on recommendations for postmastectomy radiotherapy; use of regional nodal irradiation in selected node-positive patients and those with adverse pathological factors; extent of surgical resection following downstaging of tumors with PST; use of preoperative hormonal therapy in premenopausal women with larger, node-negative luminal A-like tumors and managing increasing demands for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in patients with a unilateral sporadic breast cancer.

Background: There remains a perception among many clinicians that visceral metastases (VMs) from hormone receptor positive (HR) breast cancer (BC) respond less well to endocrine therapy (ET) than non-VMs and so should receive chemotherapy as first line treatment. Patients & Methods: Four phase 3 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of first line ET, all with tamoxifen (TAM) as their control arm) have been reviewed – Exemestane (Exe), fulvestrant 250mg (F250) and two with anastrozole (Ana); the latter, were study 27 in the Rest of the World (ROW) & study 30 in North America (NA). All reported objective response (OR), clinical benefit (CB), time to progression (TTP) / progression free survival (PFS): all have been published (1-5). Only HR positive tumors were included in this review. Data have been analysed both for Tam control arms alone and also for the four different endocrine agents combined. Results: CB & OR for TAM alone in each study individually and then combined are shown in the Table. The OR and CB rates were similar for non-VMs versus VMs in all studies except study 30 (NA) where CB rates were 59% for non-VM and 33% for VM (Test for heterogeneity of CB rates was p=0.047). For the four studies combined, the CB rates for non-VM versus VMs were 64% and 57% respectively (p=0.06) while the OR rates were 34% versus 30% respectively (p= 0.28). When all endocrine agents were combined the OR rate between non-VMs and VMs was significantly different (p = 0.038) as was the CB rate (p = 0.0015). Rates of CB and OR in study 30 (NA) again appear different between non-VMs and VMs (data not shown). The Median Duration of CB on Tam appear similar between non-VMs versus VMs, both for each study individually and when combined (see Table); when combined the Medians were 420 versus 418 days respectively with a Hazard Ratio (HR)=0.952 (0.748-1.211) (p=0.69). When all endocrine therapies for the combined four studies were assessed the HR for DoCB between non-VMs and VMs was 0.922 (0.779-1.093) (p=0.35). For the TTP the HR of non-VMs versus VMs on Tam alone was 0.851 (0.715-1.011) (p=0.07) and for all endocrine therapies the HR was 0.821 (0.727-0.926) (p=0.001). Conclusions: HR+VMs which achieve clinical benefit on ET remain controlled for as long as non-VMs as shown by the DoCB results for both Tam and all endocrine therapies combined. There was no significant difference in OR rates between VMs and non-VMs with Tamoxifen. There was when all endocrine agents were combined and the difference appears to be primarily due to one study (30 – NA). There is no confirmed explanation for these differences. TTP differences appear to be due primarily to the difference in initial CB rates in study 30 (see Table). HR+ VMs have hormone sensitivity similar to non-visceral mets – they respond as well and for as long as non-VMs. In the absence of visceral crisis (ie immediately life-threatening disease) ET would appear to be the treatment of choice for VMs in the same way as it is for non-VMs. Clinical Outcome by VM and Non VM (Tamoxifen only patients) N (%)StudiesExeAna (EUR)Ana (NA)F250Combined N = 168N = 144N = 162N = 209N=683Without VM (55%)N = 88N = 71N = 82N = 135N=376CB (%)66 (75)42 (59)47 (59)87 (64)242 (64)OR (%)41 (47)26 (37)15 (19)45 (33)127 (34)TTP (Median in days)287254305234277DoCB (Median in days)343360445451420With VM (45%)N = 80N = 73N = 80N = 74N=307CB (%)64 (80)38 (52)27 (33)46 (62)175 (57)OR (%)36 (45)21 (29)13 (16)21 (28)91 (30)TTP (Median in days)340230152281238DoCB (Median in days)376505411339418 Citation Format: John FR Robertson, Robert Paridaens, Jan Bogaerts, Yuri Rukazenkov, Christine Campbell, Ian Bradbury. Visceral metastases from hormone receptor positive breast cancer are as sensitive to endocrine therapy as non-visceral metastases [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Seventh Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2014 Dec 9-13; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(9 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-13-02.

Background This pilot study aimed to test the possibility of therapeutic benefit imparted by early intervention based on sequential tumour marker (TM) measurements during follow-up of primary breast cancer (PBC) patients. Methods Patients with oestrogen receptor positive PBC with no clinical and/or radiological evidence of metastases were recruited and followed-up 3-monthly with clinical assessment and TM (CA15.3 and CEA) measurements. The clinical team was blinded to the TM results. Asymptomatic patients who developed raised TMs (based on pre-defined cut-offs) were randomised to either ‘treatment change’ (either start or change of adjuvant endocrine agent to another agent) or ‘no change’ (control). Patients who developed symptomatic metastases came off the study. The primary and secondary endpoints were intervals from randomisation to symptomatic metastases and to last follow-up/death respectively. Results Eighty-five patients (median age = 54 years (30–72)) were recruited with a median follow-up of 81 months (1–124). Sixteen patients were randomised as described. There was no significant difference (treatment change versus no change) with regards to interval from randomisation to symptomatic metastases – 23 (2–62) and 22 (1–63) months respectively (p = 0.9), as well as interval from randomisation to last follow-up/death – 36 (7–63) and 37 (10–63) months respectively (p = 0.9). Conclusions Despite long follow-up (up to 10+ years), this small study has thus far shown no significant difference in outcome. However, we have confirmed the feasibility of this study design but a larger study will be required to show if there is a benefit to this approach.

Background: Routine screening for lung cancer in high risk groups (characterised by age and smoking history) is recommended in the USA and may be implemented elsewhere. It is unclear whether being screened for lung cancer promotes smoking cessation or conversely provides false reassurance and a ‘license to smoke’. This study aimed to understand how experiences of lung cancer screening influence individual decision making about smoking. Methods: Thirty one people in Scotland, aged 51–74, took part in semi-structured interviews. They had been screened with the EarlyCDT-Lung Test (13 positive result; 18 negative) as part of the Early Cancer Detection Test–Lung Cancer Scotland (ECLS) Study and were long-term smokers when screened. Verbatim transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis. Results: Interpretations of test results was a key theme, but were often inaccurate, for example a negative result interpreted as an ‘all-clear’ from lung cancer and a positive result as meaning lung cancer will definitely develop. There was no clear pattern in decisions made about smoking in response to positive or negative test results. Emotional response to those interpretations was an overarching theme in decisions about smoking. Emotions included fear, shock, upset, worry, anxiety, guilt, relief, reassurance and indifference. Other themes included changes in perceived risk of smoking-related disease, a feeling that now is the time to stop smoking, interpersonal family influences and avoidance of thoughts about smoking. Of those who had stopped smoking, some cited screening experiences as the sole reason and some cited screening along with other coinciding factors. Cues to change were experienced at different stages of the screening process and not always immediately following a test result. Some participants indicated they underwent screening in order to try and stop smoking. Others expressed little or no desire to stop. In general, lung cancer screening was experienced as a unique opportunity, which sometimes prompted successful or unsuccessful attempts to stop smoking. Conclusion: Lung cancer screening can be a ‘teachable moment’ for smoking behaviour change. Emotional responses to test results, which can be misinterpreted, were an important theme but behavioural responses varied according to the individual. Findings should be considered within the context of a group of predominantly life-long smokers undergoing a novel blood screening test, who might already have increased motivation to stop smoking. Lung cancer screening presents an opportunity to engage high risk smokers in cessation support but our findings suggest such support may need to be available flexibly to be most effective. In collaboration with the ECLS study team.