Profiling Tests May Predict Chemo Efficacy in Early-Stage Breast Cancer

News
Article

Future research may focus on the relationship between neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens, pathologic complete response, and whole transcriptome changes in patients with hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative early-stage breast cancer.

“The real-world data demonstrate [that] MammaPrint and BluePrint (have) clinical utility to predict the likelihood of achieving pCR after NCT in HR+ HER2-ESBC,” according to the study authors.

“The real-world data demonstrate [that] MammaPrint and BluePrint (have) clinical utility to predict the likelihood of achieving pCR after NCT in HR+ HER2-ESBC,” according to the study authors.

Use of the MammaPrint and BluePrint genomic tests may predict responses to neoadjuvant chemotherapy among patients with hormone receptor (HR)–positive, HER2-negative early-stage breast cancer (ESBC), according to findings from the real-world FLEX study presented during the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium (SABCS).

The MammaPrint test classifies patients with breast cancer into high and low risk of cancer recurrence, as genomic signatures have potential to predict chemosensitivity and advanced treatment compared to standard clinical subtypes. In past trials, MammaPrint-determined high-risk subtypes tended to have higher pCR rates when using specific treatments.

“The real-world date demonstrates (that) MammaPrint and BluePrint (have) clinical utility to predict the likelihood of achieving pCR after NCT in HR+ HER2-ESBC,” the researches stated in their poster presentation.

FLEX is a trial consisting of 12,328 patients, all with ESBC, who were tested by MammaPrint with or without BluePrint. This study focuses on MammaPrint’s High 1 (H1) and High 2 (H2) statuses as biomarkers for neoadjuvant chemosensitivity within the patient population (patients with HR-positive, HER2-negative ESBC) who had been enrolled in the FLEX study (n=214).

Within the study, MammaPrint identified two subtypes, H1 (n=142) and H2 (n=72), in patients with early-stage breast cancer. Characteristics such as age, menopausal status, race, tumor stage and lymph node status were also analyzed.

MammaPrint, H1, H2, BluePrint and pCR were adjusted and analyzed through age, race, grade, T stage, N stage and NCT regimen, according to findings from the study.

Fifty-nine percent of grade 3 tumors were categorized in the H2 tumor subgroup, while 98% of H1 tumors were Luminal B. Within the Luminal B (a type of breast cancer that responds to the hormone estrogen, while also having the HER2 gene) subgroup, only 51% were H2 tumors and 49% were basal-type (an aggressive molecular subtype of breast cancer), according to BluePrint.

The H2 tumor subgroup had a higher pCR rate, at 29.2%, in comparison to H1 tumors, at 6.3% (p<0.01). Among the 35 patients within the basal-type H2 subgroup the pCR rate was 37.1% (p<0.001).

“Although both MP High Risk groups exhibit chemosensitivity, High 2 tumors have higher chemosensitivity than High 1 tumors. Future studies will evaluate the correlation between NCT regimens (TC vs AC-T) pCR, and whole transcriptome changes to understand the underlying biology of treatment response,” the researchers noted.

Within BluePrint Luminal B tumors, patients with MammaPrint H2 tumors had a higher pCR rate (21.6%) compared to MammaPrint H1 tumors (5.8%; p=0.03). MP H2 (OR=4.91, p=0.003) and BluePrint Basal-Type (OR=3.54, p=0.03) tumors were also associated with a chance of pCR.

“Response to neoadjuvant immunotherapy is currently being evaluated in patients with HR+ HER2-, stage II-III, MP High 2 breast cancer in the SWOG 2206 trial (NCT06058377) that is open to accrual,” the researchers said.

Reference

O'Shaughnessy J, Pusztai L, Graham C, etl al. MammaPrint index predicts neoadjuvant chemosensitivity in patients with HR+HER2- early-stage breast cancer in the real-world evidence FLEX study. Presented at: San Antonio Breast Cancer Conference; December 5-9, 2023; San Antonio, TX. Abstract: PO5-15-04.

Recent Videos
A third of patients had a response [to lifileucel], and of the patients who have a response, half of them were alive at the 4-year follow-up.
We are seeing that, in those patients who have relapsed/refractory melanoma with survival measured as a few weeks and no effective treatments, about a third of these patients will have a response.
We have the current CAR [T-cell therapies], which target CD19; however, we need others.
“Every patient [with multiple myeloma] should be offered CAR T before they’re offered a bispecific, with some rare exceptions,” said Barry Paul, MD.
Barry Paul, MD, listed cilta-cel, anito-cel, and arlo-cel as 3 of the CAR T-cell therapies with the most promising efficacy in patients with multiple myeloma.
Jose Sandoval Sus, MD, discussed standard CAR T-cell therapies in patients across multiple high-risk lymphoma indications.
Elucidating nonresponses to bispecific T-cell engagers may be an important research consideration in the multiple myeloma field.
Barriers to access and financial toxicities are challenges that must be addressed for CAR T-cell therapies in LBCL, according to Jose Sandoval Sus, MD.
Fixed treatment durations with bispecific antibodies followed by observation may help in mitigating infection-related AEs, according to Shebli Atrash, MD.
Shebli Atrash, MD, stated that MRD should be considered carefully as an end point, given potential recurrence despite MRD negativity.
Related Content