Breast density prediction from low and standard dose mammograms using deep learning: effect of image resolution and model training approach on prediction quality

PURPOSE

To improve breast cancer risk prediction for young women, we have developed deep learning methods to estimate mammographic density from low dose mammograms taken at approximately 1/10th of the usual dose. We investigate the quality and reliability of the density scores produced on low dose mammograms focussing on how image resolution and levels of training affect the low dose predictions. Methods: Deep learning models are developed and tested, with two feature extraction methods and an end-to-end trained method, on five different resolutions of 15,290 standard dose and simulated low dose mammograms with known labels. The models are further tested on a dataset with 296 matching standard and real low dose images allowing performance on the low dose images to be ascertained. Results: Prediction quality on standard and simulated low dose images compared to labels is similar for all equivalent model training and image resolution versions. Increasing resolution results in improved performance of both feature extraction methods for standard and simulated low dose images, while the trained models show high performance across the resolutions. For the trained models the Spearman rank correlation coefficient between predictions of standard and low dose images at low resolution is 0.951 (0.937 to 0.960) and at the highest resolution 0.956 (0.942 to 0.965). If pairs of model predictions are averaged, similarity increases. Conclusions: Deep learning mammographic density predictions on low dose mammograms are highly correlated with standard dose equivalents for feature extraction and end-to-end approaches across multiple image resolutions. Deep learning models can reliably make high quality mammographic density predictions on low dose mammograms. .

A novel preclinical model of the normal human breast

Improved screening and treatment have decreased breast cancer mortality, although incidence continues to rise. Women at increased risk of breast cancer can be offered risk reducing treatments, such as tamoxifen, but this has not been shown to reduce breast cancer mortality. New, more efficacious, risk-reducing agents are needed. The identification of novel candidates for prevention is hampered by a lack of good preclinical models. Current patient derived in vitro and in vivo models cannot fully recapitulate the complexities of the human tissue, lacking human extracellular matrix, stroma, and immune cells, all of which are known to influence therapy response. Here we describe a normal breast explant model utilising a tuneable hydrogel which maintains epithelial proliferation, hormone receptor expression, and residency of T cells and macrophages over 7 days. Unlike other organotypic tissue cultures which are often limited by hyper-proliferation, loss of hormone signalling, and short treatment windows (< 48h), our model shows that tissue remains viable over 7 days with none of these early changes. This offers a powerful and unique opportunity to model the normal breast and study changes in response to various risk factors, such as breast density and hormone exposure. Further validation of the model, using samples from patients undergoing preventive therapies, will hopefully confirm this to be a valuable tool, allowing us to test novel agents for breast cancer risk reduction preclinically.

Pathogenic variant detection rate varies considerably in male breast cancer families and sporadic cases: minimal additional contribution beyond BRCA2, BRCA1 and CHEK2

BACKGROUND

Male breast cancer (MBC) affects around 1 in 1000 men and is known to have a higher underlying component of high and moderate risk gene pathogenic variants (PVs) than female breast cancer, particularly in BRCA2. However, most studies only report overall detection rates without assessing detailed family history.

METHODS

We reviewed germline testing in 204 families including at least one MBC for BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2 c.1100DelC and an extended panel in 93 of these families. Individuals had MBC (n=118), female breast cancer (FBC)(n=80), ovarian cancer (n=3) or prostate cancer-(n=3). Prior probability of having a BRCA1/2 PV was assessed using the Manchester Scoring System (MSS).

RESULTS

In the 204 families, BRCA2 was the major contributor, with 51 (25%) having PVs, followed by BRCA1 and CHEK2, with five each (2.45%) but no additional PVs identified, including in families with high genetic likelihood on MSS. Detection rates were 85.7% (12/14) in MSS ≥40 and 65.5% with MSS 30-39 but only 12.8% (6/47) for sporadic breast cancer. PV rates were low and divided equally between BRCA1/2 and CHEK2. CONCLUSION: As expected, BRCA2 PVs predominate in MBC families with rates 10-fold those in CHEK2 and BRCA1. The MSS is an effective tool in assessing the likelihood of BRCA1/2 PVs.

Germline testing of BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2 and CHEK2 c.1100delC in 1514 triple negative familial and isolated breast cancers from a single centre, with extended testing of ATM, RAD51C and RAD51D in over 400

BACKGROUND

The identification of germline pathogenic gene variants (PGVs) in triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) is important to inform further primary cancer risk reduction and TNBC treatment strategies. We therefore investigated the contribution of breast cancer associated PGVs to familial and isolated invasive TNBC.

METHODS

Outcomes of germline BRCA1, BRCA2 and CHEK2_c.1100delC testing were recorded in 1514 women (743-isolated, 771-familial), and for PALB2 in 846 women (541-isolated, 305-familial), with TNBC and smaller numbers for additional genes. Breast cancer free controls were identified from Predicting Risk Of Cancer At Screening and BRIDGES (Breast cancer RIsk after Diagnostic GEne Sequencing) studies.

RESULTS

BRCA1_PGVs were detected in 52 isolated (7.0%) and 195 (25.3%) familial cases (isolated-OR=58.9, 95% CI: 16.6 to 247.0), BRCA2_PGVs in 21 (2.8%) isolated and 67 (8.7%) familial cases (isolated-OR=5.0, 95% CI: 2.3 to 11.2), PALB2_PGVs in 9 (1.7%) isolated and 12 (3.9%) familial cases (isolated-OR=8.8, 95% CI: 2.5 to 30.4) and CHEK2_c.1100delC in 0 isolated and 3 (0.45%) familial cases (isolated-OR=0.0, 95% CI: 0.00 to 2.11). BRCA1_PGV detection rate was >10% for all familial TNBC age groups and significantly higher for younger diagnoses (familial: <50 years, n=165/538 (30.7%); ≥50 years, n=30/233 (12.9%); p<0.0001). Women with a G3_TNBC were more likely to have a BRCA1_PGV as compared with a BRCA2 or PALB2_PGV (p<0.0001). 0/743 isolated TNBC had the CHEK2_c.1100delC PGV and 0/305 any ATM_PGV, but 2/240 (0.83%) had a RAD51D_PGV.

CONCLUSION

PGVs in BRCA1 are associated with G3_TNBCs. Familial TNBCs and isolated TNBCs <30 years have a >10% likelihood of a PGV in BRCA1. BRCA1_PGVs are associated with younger age of familial TNBC. There was no evidence for any increased risk of TNBC with CHEK2 or ATM PGVs.

Tumor circadian clock strength influences metastatic potential and predicts patient prognosis in luminal A breast cancer

Studies in shift workers and model organisms link circadian disruption to breast cancer. However, molecular circadian rhythms in noncancerous and cancerous human breast tissues and their clinical relevance are largely unknown. We reconstructed rhythms informatically, integrating locally collected, time-stamped biopsies with public datasets. For noncancerous breast tissue, inflammatory, epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT), and estrogen responsiveness pathways show circadian modulation. Among tumors, clock correlation analysis demonstrates subtype-specific changes in circadian organization. Luminal A organoids and informatic ordering of luminal A samples exhibit continued, albeit dampened and reprogrammed rhythms. However, CYCLOPS magnitude, a measure of global rhythm strength, varied widely among luminal A samples. Cycling of EMT pathway genes was markedly increased in high-magnitude luminal A tumors. Surprisingly, patients with high-magnitude tumors had reduced 5-y survival. Correspondingly, 3D luminal A cultures show reduced invasion following molecular clock disruption. This study links subtype-specific circadian disruption in breast cancer to EMT, metastatic potential, and prognosis.

Feasibility and acceptability of offering breast cancer risk assessment to general population women aged 30-39 years: a mixed-methods study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Breast cancer incidence starts to increase exponentially when women reach 30-39 years, hence before they are eligible for breast cancer screening. The introduction of breast cancer risk assessment for this age group could lead to those at higher risk receiving benefits of earlier screening and preventive strategies. Currently, risk assessment is limited to women with a family history of breast cancer only. The Breast CANcer Risk Assessment in Younger women (BCAN-RAY) study is evaluating a comprehensive breast cancer risk assessment strategy for women aged 30-39 years incorporating a questionnaire of breast cancer risk factors, low-dose mammography to assess breast density and polygenic risk. This study will assess the feasibility and acceptability of the BCAN-RAY risk assessment strategy.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study involves women undergoing risk assessment as part of the BCAN-RAY case-control study (n=750). They will be aged 30-39 years without a strong family history of breast cancer and invited to participate via general practice. A comparison of uptake rates by socioeconomic status and ethnicity between women who participated in the BCAN-RAY study and women who declined participation will be conducted. All participants will be asked to complete self-report questionnaires to assess key potential harms including increased state anxiety (State Trait Anxiety Inventory), cancer worry (Lerman Cancer Worry Scale) and satisfaction with the decision to participate (Decision Regret Scale), alongside potential benefits such as feeling more informed about breast cancer risk. A subsample of approximately 24 women (12 at average risk and 12 at increased risk) will additionally participate in semistructured interviews to understand the acceptability of the risk assessment strategy and identify any changes needed to it to increase uptake.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was granted by North West-Greater Manchester West Research Ethics Committee (reference: 22/NW/0268). Study results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, conference presentations and charitable organisations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05305963.

CDK4/6 inhibitors versus weekly paclitaxel for treatment of ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer with impending or established visceral crisis

PURPOSE

ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer (ABC) with visceral crisis (VC) or impending VC (IVC) is commonly treated with chemotherapy instead of CDK4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i). However, there is little evidence to confirm which treatment is superior. This study compared outcomes of patients with ER+/HER2- ABC and IVC/VC treated with CDK4/6i or weekly paclitaxel.

METHODS

Patients with ER+/HER2- ABC receiving first line treatment at a large tertiary UK cancer centre from 1-Mar-2017 to 30-Jun-2021 were retrospectively identified. Hospital records were screened for IVC/VC affecting the liver, lungs/mediastinum, gastrointestinal tract and/or bone marrow. Baseline demographics, clinical data and survival outcomes were recorded up to 30-Jul-2022.

RESULTS

27/396 (6.8%) patients with ABC who received CDK4/6i and 32/86 (37.2%) who received paclitaxel had IVC/VC. Median time to treatment failure (TTF), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were significantly longer in the CDK4/6i compared to paclitaxel cohort: TTF 17.3 vs. 3.5 months (HR 0.33, 95%CI 0.17-0.61, p = 0.0002), PFS 17.8 vs. 4.5 months (HR 0.38, 95%CI 0.21-0.67, p = 0.002), OS 24.6 vs. 6.7 months (HR 0.37, 95%CI 0.20-0.68, p = 0.002). The median time to first improvement in IVC/VC was similar in patients receiving CDK4/6i compared to paclitaxel (3.9 vs. 3.6 weeks, p = 0.773). Disease control at 4 months was not significantly different in the CDK4/6i and paclitaxel cohorts (77.8% vs. 59.4%, p = 0.168). In multivariate analysis, treatment with CDK4/6i was independently associated with a longer PFS compared to paclitaxel (HR 0.31, 95%CI 0.12-0.78, p = 0.015).

CONCLUSION

In this retrospective study, patients with ER+/HER2- ABC and IVC/VC treated with CDK4/6i had a significantly better survival compared to those treated with weekly paclitaxel. Further prospective studies that minimise possible selection bias are recommended.

Detection of pathogenic variants in breast cancer susceptibility genes in bilateral breast cancer

PURPOSE

To investigate the frequency of germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in women with bilateral breast cancer.

METHODS

We undertook BRCA1/2 and CHEK2 c.1100delC molecular analysis in 764 samples and a multigene panel in 156. Detection rates were assessed by age at first primary, Manchester Score, and breast pathology. Oestrogen receptor (ER) status of the contralateral versus first breast cancer was compared on 1081 patients with breast cancer with BRCA1/BRCA2 PVs.

RESULTS

764 women with bilateral breast cancer have undergone testing of BRCA1/2 and CHEK2; 407 were also tested for PALB2 and 177 for ATM. Detection rates were BRCA1 11.6%, BRCA2 14.0%, CHEK2 2.4%, PALB2 1.0%, ATM 1.1% and, for a subset of mainly very early onset tumours, TP53 4.6% (9 of 195). The highest PV detection rates were for triple negative cancers for BRCA1 (26.4%), grade 3 ER+HER2 for BRCA2 (27.9%) and HER2+ for CHEK2 (8.9%). ER status of the first primary in BRCA1 and BRCA2 PV heterozygotes was strongly predictive of the ER status of the second contralateral tumour since ~90% of second tumours were ER- in BRCA1 heterozygotes, and 50% were ER- in BRCA2 heterozygotes if the first was ER-.

CONCLUSION

We have shown a high rate of detection of BRCA1 and BRCA2 PVs in triple negative and grade 3 ER+HER2- first primary diagnoses, respectively. High rates of HER2+ were associated with CHEK2 PVs, and women ≤30 years were associated with TP53 PVs. First primary ER status in BRCA1/2 strongly predicts the second tumour will be the same ER status even if unusual for PVs in that gene.

Breast cancer polygenic risk scores derived in White European populations are not calibrated for women of Ashkenazi Jewish descent

PURPOSE

Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) are a major component of accurate breast cancer (BC) risk prediction but require ethnicity-specific calibration. Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) population is assumed to be of White European (WE) origin in some commercially available PRSs despite differing effect allele frequencies (EAFs). We conducted a case-control study of WE and AJ women from the Predicting Risk of Cancer at Screening Study. The Breast Cancer in Northern Israel Study provided a separate AJ population-based case-control validation series.

METHODS

All women underwent Illumina OncoArray single-nucleotide variation (SNV; formerly single-nucleotide polymorphism [SNP]) analysis. Two PRSs were assessed, SNV142 and SNV78. A total of 221 of 2243 WE women (discovery: cases = 111; controls = 110; validation: cases = 651; controls = 1772) and 221 AJ women (cases = 121; controls = 110) were included from the UK study; the Israeli series consisted of 2045 AJ women (cases = 1331; controls = 714). EAFs were obtained from the Genome Aggregation Database.

RESULTS

In the UK study, the mean SNV142 PRS demonstrated good calibration and discrimination in WE population, with mean PRS of 1.33 (95% CI 1.18-1.48) in cases and 1.01 (95% CI 0.89-1.13) in controls. In AJ women from Manchester, the mean PRS of 1.54 (1.38-1.70) in cases and 1.20 (1.08-1.32) in controls demonstrated good discrimination but overestimation of BC relative risk. After adjusting for EAFs for the AJ population, mean risk was corrected (mean SNV142 PRS cases = 1.30 [95% CI 1.16-1.44] and controls = 1.02 [95% CI 0.92-1.12]). This was recapitulated in the larger Israeli data set with good discrimination (area under the curve = 0.632 [95% CI 0.607-0.657] for SNV142).

CONCLUSION

AJ women should not be given BC relative risk predictions based on PRSs calibrated to EAFs from the WE population. PRSs need to be recalibrated using AJ-derived EAFs. A simple recalibration using the mean PRS adjustment ratio likely performs well.

Differential involvement of germline pathogenic variants in breast cancer genes between DCIS and low-grade invasive cancers

PURPOSE

To investigate frequency of germline pathogenic variants (PVs) in women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and grade 1 invasive breast cancer (G1BC).

METHODS

We undertook BRCA1/2 analysis in 311 women with DCIS and 392 with G1BC and extended panel testing (non-BRCA1/2) in 176/311 with DCIS and 156/392 with G1BC. We investigated PV detection by age at diagnosis, Manchester Score (MS), DCIS grade and receptor status.

RESULTS

30/311 (9.6%) with DCIS and 16/392 with G1BC (4.1%) had a BRCA1/2 PV (p=0.003), and 24/176-(13.6%) and 7/156-(4.5%), respectively, a non-BRCA1/2 PV (p=0.004). Increasing MS was associated with increased likelihood of BRCA1/2 PV in both DCIS and G1BC, although the 10% threshold was not predictive for G1GB. 13/32 (40.6%) DCIS and 0/17 with G1BC <40 years had a non-BRCA1/2 PV (p<0.001). 0/16 DCIS G1 had a PV. For G2 and G3 DCIS, PV rates were 10/98 (BRCA1/2) and 9/90 (non-BRCA1/2), and 8/47 (BRCA1/2) and 8/45 (non-BRCA1/2), respectively. 6/9 BRCA1 and 3/26 BRCA2-associated DCIS were oestrogen receptor negative-(p=0.003). G1BC population testing showed no increased PV rate (OR=1.16, 95% CI 0.28 to 4.80).

CONCLUSION

DCIS is more likely to be associated with both BRCA1/2 and non-BRCA1/2 PVs than G1BC. Extended panel testing ought to be offered in young-onset DCIS where PV detection rates are highest.

Process, structural, and outcome quality indicators to support perioperative opioid stewardship: a rapid review

Opioids are effective analgesics but can cause harm. Opioid stewardship is key to ensuring that opioids are used effectively and safely. There is no agreed set of quality indicators relating to the use of opioids perioperatively. This work is part of the Yorkshire Cancer Research Bowel Cancer Quality Improvement programme and aims to develop useful quality indicators for the improvement of care and patient outcomes at all stages of the perioperative journey.A rapid review was performed to identify original research and reviews in which quality indicators for perioperative opioid use are described. A data tool was developed to enable reliable and reproducible extraction of opioid quality indicators.A review of 628 abstracts and 118 full-text publications was undertaken. Opioid quality indicators were identified from 47 full-text publications. In total, 128 structure, process and outcome quality indicators were extracted. Duplicates were merged, with the final extraction of 24 discrete indicators. These indicators are based on five topics: patient education, clinician education, pre-operative optimization, procedure, and patient-specific prescribing and de-prescribing and opioid-related adverse drug events.The quality indicators are presented as a toolkit to contribute to practical opioid stewardship. Process indicators were most commonly identified and contribute most to quality improvement. Fewer quality indicators relating to intraoperative and immediate recovery stages of the patient journey were identified. An expert clinician panel will be convened to agree which of the quality indicators identified will be most valuable in our region for the management of patients undergoing surgery for bowel cancer.

"I don't know what I'm feeling for": young women's beliefs about breast cancer risk and experiences of breast awareness

BACKGROUND

Younger women are often diagnosed with advanced breast cancer. Beliefs about risk are instrumental in motivating many health protective behaviours, but there may be confusion around which behaviour is appropriate to detect breast cancer earlier. Breast awareness, defined as an understanding of how the breasts look and feel so changes can be identified early, is widely recommended. In contrast, breast self-examination involves palpation using a specified method. We aimed to investigate young women's beliefs about their risk and experiences of breast awareness.

METHODS

Thirty-seven women aged 30-39 years residing in a North West region of England with no family or personal history of breast cancer participated in seven focus groups (n = 29) and eight individual interviews. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Three themes were generated. "Future me's problem" describes why women perceive breast cancer as an older woman's disease. Uncertainty regarding checking behaviours highlights how confusion about self-checking behaviour advice has resulted in women infrequently performing breast checks. Campaigns as a missed opportunity highlights the potential negative effects of current breast cancer fundraising campaigns and the perceived absence of educational campaigning about breast cancer for this demographic.

CONCLUSIONS

Young women expressed low perceived susceptibility to developing breast cancer in the near future. Women did not know what breast self-checking behaviours they should be performing and expressed a lack of confidence in how to perform a breast check appropriately due to limited knowledge about what to look and feel for. Consequently, women reported disengagement with breast awareness. Defining and clearly communicating the best strategy for breast awareness and establishing whether it is beneficial or not are essential next steps.

Capivasertib in Hormone Receptor-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

AKT pathway activation is implicated in endocrine-therapy resistance. Data on the efficacy and safety of the AKT inhibitor capivasertib, as an addition to fulvestrant therapy, in patients with hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer are limited.

METHODS

In a phase 3, randomized, double-blind trial, we enrolled eligible pre-, peri-, and postmenopausal women and men with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer who had had a relapse or disease progression during or after treatment with an aromatase inhibitor, with or without previous cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitor therapy. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive capivasertib plus fulvestrant or placebo plus fulvestrant. The dual primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival assessed both in the overall population and among patients with AKT pathway-altered (PIK3CA, AKT1, or PTEN) tumors. Safety was assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, 708 patients underwent randomization; 289 patients (40.8%) had AKT pathway alterations, and 489 (69.1%) had received a CDK4/6 inhibitor previously for advanced breast cancer. In the overall population, the median progression-free survival was 7.2 months in the capivasertib-fulvestrant group, as compared with 3.6 months in the placebo-fulvestrant group (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.51 to 0.71; P<0.001). In the AKT pathway-altered population, the median progression-free survival was 7.3 months in the capivasertib-fulvestrant group, as compared with 3.1 months in the placebo-fulvestrant group (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.65; P<0.001). The most frequent adverse events of grade 3 or higher in patients receiving capivasertib-fulvestrant were rash (in 12.1% of patients, vs. in 0.3% of those receiving placebo-fulvestrant) and diarrhea (in 9.3% vs. 0.3%). Adverse events leading to discontinuation were reported in 13.0% of the patients receiving capivasertib and in 2.3% of those receiving placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Capivasertib-fulvestrant therapy resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival than treatment with fulvestrant alone among patients with hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer whose disease had progressed during or after previous aromatase inhibitor therapy with or without a CDK4/6 inhibitor. (Funded by AstraZeneca and the National Cancer Institute; CAPItello-291 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04305496.).

Subtype-specific circadian clock dysregulation modulates breast cancer biology, invasiveness, and prognosis

Studies in shift workers and model organisms link circadian disruption to breast cancer. However, molecular rhythms in non-cancerous and cancerous human breast tissues are largely unknown. We reconstructed rhythms informatically, integrating locally collected, time-stamped biopsies with public datasets. For non-cancerous tissue, the inferred order of core-circadian genes matches established physiology. Inflammatory, epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT), and estrogen responsiveness pathways show circadian modulation. Among tumors, clock correlation analysis demonstrates subtype-specific changes in circadian organization. Luminal A organoids and informatic ordering of Luminal A samples exhibit continued, albeit disrupted rhythms. However, CYCLOPS magnitude, a measure of global rhythm strength, varied widely among Luminal A samples. Cycling of EMT pathway genes was markedly increased in high-magnitude Luminal A tumors. Patients with high-magnitude tumors had reduced 5-year survival. Correspondingly, 3D Luminal A cultures show reduced invasion following molecular clock disruption. This study links subtype-specific circadian disruption in breast cancer to EMT, metastatic potential, and prognosis.

Correction: Evaluating the Acceptance and Usability of an App Promoting Weight Gain Prevention and Healthy Behaviors Among Young Women With a Family History of Breast Cancer: Protocol for an Observational Study

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.2196/41246.].

Quantifying the effects of risk-stratified breast cancer screening when delivered in real time as routine practice versus usual screening: the BC-Predict non-randomised controlled study (NCT04359420)

BACKGROUND

Risk stratification as a routine part of the NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) could provide a better balance of benefits and harms. We developed BC-Predict, to offer women when invited to the NHSBSP, which collects standard risk factor information; mammographic density; and in a sub-sample, a Polygenic Risk Score (PRS).

METHODS

Risk prediction was estimated primarily from self-reported questionnaires and mammographic density using the Tyrer-Cuzick risk model. Women eligible for NHSBSP were recruited. BC-Predict produced risk feedback letters, inviting women at high risk (≥8% 10-year) or moderate risk (≥5-<8% 10-year) to have appointments to discuss prevention and additional screening.

RESULTS

Overall uptake of BC-Predict in screening attendees was 16.9% with 2472 consenting to the study; 76.8% of those received risk feedback within the 8-week timeframe. Recruitment was 63.2% with an onsite recruiter and paper questionnaire compared to <10% with BC-Predict only (P < 0.0001). Risk appointment attendance was highest for those at high risk (40.6%); 77.5% of those opted for preventive medication.

DISCUSSION

We have shown that a real-time offer of breast cancer risk information (including both mammographic density and PRS) is feasible and can be delivered in reasonable time, although uptake requires personal contact. Preventive medication uptake in women newly identified at high risk is high and could improve the cost-effectiveness of risk stratification.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Retrospectively registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04359420).

Abstract GS3-04: GS3-04 Capivasertib and fulvestrant for patients with aromatase inhibitor-resistant hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer: results from the Phase III CAPItello-291 trial

Background: AKT pathway activation has been implicated in the development of endocrine therapy resistance in hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2–) advanced breast cancer (ABC). In the Phase II, placebo (PBO)-controlled FAKTION trial, the addition of the pan-AKT inhibitor capivasertib to fulvestrant significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival in postmenopausal women with aromatase inhibitor (AI)-resistant HR+/HER2– ABC. The Phase III, randomized, double-blind, PBO-controlled CAPItello-291 trial (NCT04305496) investigated the efficacy and safety of capivasertib + fulvestrant in patients with AI-resistant HR+/HER2– ABC. Methods: Eligible pre/peri or postmenopausal women or men with HR+/HER2– ABC that had recurred or progressed on or after AI therapy with or without a cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitor were randomized 1:1 to receive fulvestrant (per standard dosing schedule) with either PBO or capivasertib (400 mg twice daily; 4 days on, 3 days off). Randomization was stratified by the presence of liver metastases, prior use of CDK4/6 inhibitors, and geographic location. AKT pathway alteration status (at least one qualifying PIK3CA, AKT1, or PTEN alteration) was determined using next-generation sequencing in tumor tissue. The dual primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS in the overall population and in patients with AKT pathway-altered tumors. Results: A total of 708 patients were randomized: 355 to capivasertib + fulvestrant and 353 to PBO + fulvestrant. Overall, 41% of patients had AKT pathway-altered tumors (48% [n=289/602] of patients with tumor sequencing results), 22% were pre/perimenopausal and 77% postmenopausal, with 1% male. Prior therapy for advanced disease included: 87% of patients with ≥1 line of prior treatment, 69% with a prior CDK4/6 inhibitor, and 18% with prior chemotherapy. Demographic and baseline characteristics were broadly balanced between the overall and altered populations and by treatment groups. At primary analysis (data cut-off Aug 15, 2022), 551 and 236 PFS events had occurred in the overall and pathway-altered populations, respectively. Overall, the median PFS was 7.2 months with capivasertib + fulvestrant and 3.6 months with PBO + fulvestrant (hazard ratio [HR] 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.51–0.71; p&lt;0.001). In patients with AKT pathway-altered tumors, median PFS was 7.3 months with capivasertib + fulvestrant and 3.1 months with PBO + fulvestrant (HR 0.50; 95% CI 0.38–0.65; p&lt;0.001). The objective response rate in patients with measurable disease was 22.9% for capivasertib + fulvestrant vs 12.2% for PBO + fulvestrant overall and 28.8% vs 9.7% in the AKT pathway-altered population. The most frequent all-grade adverse events (AEs) with capivasertib + fulvestrant were diarrhea (72.4% vs 20.0% PBO + fulvestrant arm), rash (group term of rash, rash macular, rash maculo-papular, rash papular, rash pruritic; 38.0% vs 7.1%) and nausea (34.6% vs 15.4%). The most frequently reported grade ≥3 AEs were rash (group term; 12.1% vs 0.3%), diarrhea (9.3% vs 0.3%), and hyperglycemia (2.3% vs 0.3%); grade ≥3 stomatitis was 2.0% vs 0%. AEs leading to discontinuation of capivasertib/placebo were reported in 13.0% and 2.3% of patients, respectively. Conclusions: Capivasertib + fulvestrant significantly improved PFS compared to fulvestrant alone in the overall population, and in patients with AKT pathway-altered tumors, and may become a future treatment option in this setting. The safety profile of capivasertib + fulvestrant was generally manageable and consistent with prior data. Funding: CAPItello-291 is sponsored by AstraZeneca. Editorial acknowledgment: AstraZeneca-funded medical writing support was provided by Suzanne Patel, Ph.D., from BOLDSCIENCE Inc. Capivasertib was discovered by AstraZeneca subsequent to a collaboration with Astex Therapeutics (and its collaboration with the Institute of Cancer Research and Cancer Research Technology Limited).

Citation Format: Nicholas Turner, Mafalda Oliveira, Sacha J. Howell, Florence Dalenc, Javier Cortés, Henry Gomez, Xichun Hu, Komal Jhaveri, Sibylle Loibl, Serafin Morales Murillo, Zbigniew Nowecki, Meena Okera, Yeon H. Park, Masakazu Toi, Lyudmila Zhukova, Chris Yan, Gaia Schiavon, Andrew Foxley, Hope Rugo. GS3-04 Capivasertib and fulvestrant for patients with aromatase inhibitor-resistant hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer: results from the Phase III CAPItello-291 trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr GS3-04.

Abstract PD18-05: MEN1611, a PI3K inhibitor, combined with trastuzumab ± fulvestrant for HER2+/PIK3CA mutant advanced or metastatic breast cancer: updated safety and efficacy results from the ongoing phase 1b study (B-PRECISE-01)

Background: MEN1611 (MEN) is an oral PI3K inhibitor active on the p110α mutant and wild type, β and γ isoforms, while sparing the δ. B-PRECISE-01 is an open-label, 2-arm, phase 1b study investigating MEN1611 in combination with trastuzumab ± fulvestrant in patients with HER2 positive/PIK3CA mutated metastatic breast cancer (MBC). No dose-limiting toxicities were observed during the dose-escalation step and MEN1611 48 mg BID was selected as the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) for cohort expansion (CE). Methods: Eligible patients had HER2+/PIK3CA-mutated MBC and were treated with at least 2 prior lines of anti-HER2-based therapy in the advanced/metastatic setting including trastuzumab. Patients received MEN1611 + trastuzumab (MEN+T); hormone receptor positive (HR+) postmenopausal women received M+ T + fulvestrant (MEN+T+F). Recruitment was closed in December 2021. Pooled safety and efficacy data from the two subpopulations of CE are presented herein. Results: As of June 2022, 62 female patients were treated: 56 of them with MEN1611 48 mg BID (25 MEN+T and 31 MEN+T+F). Median age 55.5 years (range 34-78), 21% premenopausal, ECOG PS 0-1: 95.2%. Median metastatic regimens 4; 71.0% had prior pertuzumab and 91.9% had prior T-DM1. Common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs, ≥20%) were diarrhea 66.1%, nausea 45.2%, hyperglycemia 43.6%, anemia 35.5%, asthenia 29.0%, decreased appetite 27.4%, rash 25.8%, aspartate aminotransferase increased 22.6%, vomiting 22.6%, and pyrexia 22.6%. Common TEAEs with CTCAE grade ≥3 (≥10%) were hyperglycemia (22.6%) and diarrhea (11.3%). Most treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) were reversible and manageable by supportive care. TEAEs leading to permanent treatment discontinuation occurred in 9 patients (14.5%), the only TEAE occurring in more than one patient was lipase increased (3.2%). TEAEs caused temporary treatment interruptions in 32 patients (51.6%), the most common being hyperglycemia (21.0%) and diarrhea (9.7%). TEAEs leading to dose reduction occurred in 14 patients (22.6%), the most common being diarrhea (6.5%), hyperglycemia (3.2%) and stomatitis (3.2%). Serious TRAEs were experienced by 12 patients (19.4%): hyperglycemia 6 patients, diarrhea 3 patients, anemia, general physical health deterioration, generalized edema, lipase increased, ketoacidosis and pneumonitis (1 patient each). In the efficacy-evaluable population at the RP2D (n=41) 14 patients (34.1%) showed partial response (MEN+T 5/15, MEN+T+F 9/26), 1 patient (2.4%) had a complete response (MEN+T 1/15) and 23 patients (56.1%) had stable disease (MEN+T 6/15, MEN+T+F 17/26) as best response. At the RP2D, the median (95% CI) overall survival (OS) was 21.9 (11.9, NE) months and the median (95% CI) progression free survival (PFS) 5.6 (3.7, 7.2) months. In the MEN+T group, the median OS was 11.9 (5.7, NE) months and median PFS 3.9 (2.3, 6.7) months. In the MEN+T+F group the median OS was 21.9 (16.9, NE) months and median PFS 5.7 (3.7, 11.5) months. Five patients continue on treatment. Conclusions: Updated results from B-PRECISE-01 demonstrated that MEN1611 combined with trastuzumab ± fulvestrant continued to show a manageable safety profile with encouraging anti-tumor activity and duration of response in heavily pre-treated patients with HER2+/PIK3CA-mutated advanced or metastatic breast cancer.

Citation Format: Martine Piccart, Audrey Hennequin, Manuel Ruiz Borrego, Santiago Escrivá-de-Romani, Anja Williams, Begoña Jiménez Rodríguez, Gianluca Del Conte, Sacha J. Howell, Michela Palleschi, Matteo Simonelli, Francois P. Duhoux, Diego Tosi, Bernard Doger de Speville Uribe, Yolanda Jerez Gilarranz, Pierfrancesco Tassone, Giuseppe Curigliano, Simon Waters, Philippe Aftimos, Hans Wildiers, Simona Scartoni, Bartomeu Piza Vallespir, Ram Charan Shankaraiah, Krzysztof Grzegorzewski, Nassir Habboubi. MEN1611, a PI3K inhibitor, combined with trastuzumab ± fulvestrant for HER2+/PIK3CA mutant advanced or metastatic breast cancer: updated safety and efficacy results from the ongoing phase 1b study (B-PRECISE-01) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr PD18-05.

Abstract PD14-01: PD14-01 A model to assess the utility of risk-based screening algorithms

Background: Breast cancer screening recommendations vary around the world, but most are based on age or inherited genetic risk factors. For instance, the American Cancer Society recommends annual mammography plus breast MRI starting at age 30yr for women at high risk of breast cancer based mainly on family history or high-risk genes. Women at average risk (no strong family history or high-risk genes) are recommended to have the option of annual mammography starting at age 40yr. Risk-based screening, which aims to personalise screening to an individual woman’s risk of breast cancer based on a more comprehensive risk assessment than just age, family history, or high-risk genes, might improve current screening strategies.

Methods: We developed a deterministic model to estimate the incidence of advanced (node-positive) breast cancer (plus number of screens) for different risk-based screening strategies in a UK setting. The proportion of screen-detected and interval cancers was estimated for various screening intervals using a model developed by Launoy et al. and parameters for sensitivity (0.92) and annual transition rate from asymptomatic to symptomatic disease (0.25) from The Swedish Two-County Trial. The proportion of node-positive cancers was estimated for screen-detected (22%) and interval (53%) cancers, using data from the NHS Breast Screening Programme (England, 2015-18, women aged 47yr+).

Choice of mammography screening regimen was based on Tyrer-Cuzick 10yr risk (v8 including age, family history, reproductive factors, benign breast disease, SNPs and breast density). The proportion of women in each risk group was estimated from a UK cohort study investigating breast cancer risk at screening (PROCAS). In a hypothetical cohort of 3.45M women, 1M women would be identified as either high-risk (&gt;8% 10yr risk; n=241,379) or low-risk (&lt; 1.4% 10yr risk; n=758,621). In these 1M high/low-risk women, we evaluated two risk-based screening scenarios, comparing their effects with usual triennial screening starting at age 50yr (which was proposed for the 2.45M women at intermediate-risk (1.4-8% 10yr risk)).

Scenario (1): Changing screening interval based on risk (high-risk every 1yr; low-risk every 5yr) for screening between 50-70yr.

Scenario (2): Changing the starting age of screening based on risk (high-risk start annual screening at 45yr followed by triennial screening from 50yr; low-risk start triennial screening at 55yr); follow-up 45-55yr.

We assessed the trade-off between the decreased/increased number of node-positive breast cancers and increased/decreased number of screens with the high/low-risk regimens, respectively. A sensitivity analysis considered risk stratification without breast density.

Results: Scenario (1): Changing screening interval based on risk reduced the number of node-positive cancers in high-risk women by 2,194 (with 3.14M additional mammograms) and increased the number of node-positive cancers in low-risk women by 910 (with 2.28M fewer mammograms) when compared with usual screening; a difference of 1,284 fewer node-positive cancers and 862,069 additional screens.

Scenario (2): Additional annual mammograms for high-risk women at 45-49yr reduced the number of node-positive cancers by 1,392 (with 1.21M additional mammograms); starting triennial screening at 55yr rather than 50yr for low-risk women increased the number of node-positive cancers by 841 (with 1.52M fewer mammograms); a difference of 551 fewer node-positive cancers and 310,345 fewer screens.

Excluding breast density from risk assessment reduced the number identified as high or low-risk, and thus the number of advanced cancers prevented and screens required, but the overall findings were unchanged.

Conclusion: Changing the starting age of screening based on risk of breast cancer is likely to be more effective per screen required at reducing the rate of advanced breast cancer than changing the screening interval based on risk.

Table 1: Results for Scenario (1) Risk-based screening (changing screening interval based on risk: high-risk every 1 year; low-risk every 5 years) versus usual screening (every 3 years) between age 50-70 years (plus an additional 3 years of follow-up to adjust for the effect of screening on risk of breast cancer). N: Number; %: percentage; node+: Node-positive breast cancer; Δ: Difference; yr: Year; N/A: not applicable.

Table 2: Results for Scenario (2) Risk-based screening (changing the starting age of screening based on risk: high-risk start annual screening at age 45-49 years followed by triennial screening from age 50 years; low-risk start triennial screening at age 55 years) versus usual screening (triennial screening starting at age 50 years), with follow-up from age 45-55 years. n: Number; 1M: 1 million; node+: Node-positive breast cancer; Δ: Difference; yr: Year.

Table 3: Results for sensitivity analysis - Scenarios (1) and (2) with risk assessment including/excluding breast density Scenario (1): Risk-based screening (changing screening interval based on risk: high-risk every 1 year; low-risk every 5 years) versus usual screening (every 3 years) between age 50-70 years (plus an additional 3 years of follow-up to adjust for the effect of screening on risk of breast cancer). Scenario (2): Risk-based screening (changing the starting age of screening based on risk: high-risk start annual screening at age 45-49 years followed by triennial screening from age 50 years; low-risk start triennial screening at age 55 years) versus usual screening (triennial screening starting at age 50 years), with follow-up from age 45-55 years. n: Number; node+: Node-positive breast cancer; Δ: Difference; yr: Year.

Citation Format: Emma C. Atakpa, Jack Cuzick, Stephen W. Duffy, D. Gareth Evans, Sacha J. Howell, Adam R. Brentnall. PD14-01 A model to assess the utility of risk-based screening algorithms [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr PD14-01.

Optimising the delivery of breast cancer risk assessment for women aged 30-39 years: A qualitative study of women's views

BACKGROUND

Identifying women aged 30-39 years at increased risk of developing breast cancer could allow them to consider screening and preventive strategies. Research is underway to determine the feasibility of offering breast cancer risk assessment to this age group. However, it is unclear how best to deliver and communicate risk estimates to these women, in order to avoid potential harms such as undue anxiety and increase benefits such as informed decision-making.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate women's views on, and requirements for, this proposed novel approach to risk assessment.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional qualitative design was used.

METHODS

Thirty-seven women aged 30-39 years with no family history or personal history of breast cancer participated in seven focus groups (n = 29) and eight individual interviews. Data were analysed thematically using a framework approach.

RESULTS

Four themes were developed. Acceptability of risk assessment service concerns the positive views women have towards the prospect of participating in breast cancer risk assessment. Promoting engagement with the service describes the difficulties women in this age group experience in relation to healthcare access, including mental load and a lack of cultural awareness, and the implications of this for service design and delivery. Impact of receiving risk results focuses on the anticipated impacts of receiving different risk outcomes, namely, complacency towards breast awareness behaviours following low-risk results, an absence of reassurance following average-risk results and anxiety for high-risk results. Women's information requirements highlights women's desire to be fully informed at invite including understanding why the service is needed. In addition, women wanted risk feedback to focus on plans for management.

CONCLUSION

The idea of breast cancer risk assessment was received favourably among this age group, providing that a risk management plan and support from healthcare professionals is available. Determinants of acceptability of a new service included minimising effort required to engage with service, co-development of invitation and risk feedback materials and the importance of educational campaigning about the potential benefits of participation in risk assessment.

Estimating the Cost of 3 Risk Prediction Strategies for Potential Use in the United Kingdom National Breast Screening Program

Background

Economic evaluations have suggested that risk-stratified breast cancer screening may be cost-effective but have used assumptions to estimate the cost of risk prediction. The aim of this study was to identify and quantify the resource use and associated costs required to introduce a breast cancer risk-stratification approach into the English national breast screening program.

Methods

A micro-costing study, conducted alongside a cohort-based prospective trial (BC-PREDICT), identified the resource use and cost per individual (£; 2021 price year) of providing a risk-stratification strategy at a woman's first mammography. Costs were calculated for 3 risk-stratification approaches: Tyrer-Cuzick survey, Tyrer-Cuzick with Volpara breast-density measurement, and Tyrer-Cuzick with Volpara breast-density measurement and testing for 142 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP). Costs were determined for the intervention as implemented in the trial and in the health service.

Results

The cost of providing the risk-stratification strategy was calculated to be £16.45 for the Tyrer-Cuzick survey approach, £21.82 for the Tyrer-Cuzick with Volpara breast-density measurement, and £102.22 for the Tyrer-Cuzick with Volpara breast-density measurement and SNP testing.

Limitations

This study did not use formal expert elicitation methods to synthesize estimates.

Conclusion

The costs of risk prediction using a survey and breast density measurement were low, but adding SNP testing substantially increases costs. Implementation issues present in the trial may also significantly increase the cost of risk prediction.

Implications

This is the first study to robustly estimate the cost of risk-stratification for breast cancer screening. The cost of risk prediction using questionnaires and automated breast density measurement was low, but full economic evaluations including accurate costs are required to provide evidence of the cost-effectiveness of risk-stratified breast cancer screening.

Highlights

Economic evaluations have suggested that risk-stratified breast cancer screening may be a cost-effective use of resources in the United Kingdom.Current estimates of the cost of risk stratification are based on pragmatic assumptions.This study provides estimates of the cost of risk stratification using 3 strategies and when these strategies are implemented perfectly and imperfectly in the health system.The cost of risk stratification is relatively low unless single nucleotide polymorphisms are included in the strategy.

Evaluating the Acceptance and Usability of an App Promoting Weight Gain Prevention and Healthy Behaviors Among Young Women With a Family History of Breast Cancer: Protocol for an Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer is the most common form of cancer in women, and around 20% of cases are associated with factors such as adult weight gain, overweight and obesity, and potentially modifiable health behaviors including high alcohol intake, smoking, lack of physical activity, and breastfeeding. Significant weight gain occurs between the ages of 18 and 35 years; hence, this age group could benefit from weight gain prevention interventions. Population studies have reported that women at increased risk of breast cancer account for a disproportionate amount of cases. Thus, there is a particular need to target weight gain prevention and other health behavior interventions for women at increased risk. A literature review identified no evidence-based apps that cover all relevant health behaviors. With patient and participant involvement from the target population, we have developed a new app to promote healthy behaviors among young women at increased risk of breast cancer. Alongside the app, a Facebook group provides peer support, and a virtual welcome event provides an overview of the project and the opportunity to meet the research team and other study participants. The aim of the intervention is to prevent weight gain via changes to eating habits and physical activity levels, and improve other health behaviors associated with breast cancer. The app includes goal setting and self-monitoring of health behaviors and provides education about breast cancer.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to assess the acceptability and usability of the app in young women at increased risk of breast cancer, and the feasibility of the study procedures for a future, larger efficacy study.

METHODS

Young women (n=35, age 18-35 years) at increased risk of breast cancer (>17% lifetime risk) will be recruited via 2 recruitment procedures: mailed invite from the local breast cancer family history, risk and prevention clinic, and advertisements on social media and websites. Participants will have access to the app and the private Facebook group for 2 months. They will complete questionnaires regarding their health behaviors and breast cancer risk belief at the start and end of the study, complete app rating scales in the middle and at the end of the study, and be invited to give feedback on the app during the study period. Approximately 20 participants will have a semistructured interview at the end of the study regarding their views on the app and trial procedures.

RESULTS

The trial is ongoing, and the publication of results is anticipated in 2023.

CONCLUSIONS

The trial will provide evidence regarding the acceptability and usability of the newly developed app for young women at increased risk of breast cancer. Feedback obtained will be used to improve the app. The trial will also assess the feasibility of the study procedures and how these can be refined for a future efficacy study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05460650; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05460650.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/41246.

Implementing Risk-Stratified Breast Screening in England: An Agenda Setting Meeting

It is now possible to accurately assess breast cancer risk at routine NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) appointments, provide risk feedback and offer risk management strategies to women at higher risk. These strategies include National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) approved additional breast screening and risk-reducing medication. However, the NHSBSP invites nearly all women three-yearly, regardless of risk. In March 2022, a one-day agenda setting meeting took place in Manchester to discuss the feasibility and desirability of implementation of risk-stratified screening in the NHSBSP. Fifty-eight individuals participated (38 face-to-face, 20 virtual) with relevant expertise from academic, clinical and/or policy-making perspectives. Key findings were presented from the PROCAS2 NIHR programme grant regarding feasibility of risk-stratified screening in the NHSBSP. Participants discussed key uncertainties in seven groups, followed by a plenary session. Discussions were audio-recorded and thematically analysed to produce descriptive themes. Five themes were developed: (i) risk and health economic modelling; (ii) health inequalities and communication with women; (iii); extending screening intervals for low-risk women; (iv) integration with existing NHSBSP; and (v) potential new service models. Most attendees expected some form of risk-stratified breast screening to be implemented in England and collectively identified key issues to be resolved to facilitate this.

Incorporating progesterone receptor expression into the PREDICT breast prognostic model

BACKGROUND

Predict Breast (www.predict.nhs.uk) is an online prognostication and treatment benefit tool for early invasive breast cancer. The aim of this study was to incorporate the prognostic effect of progesterone receptor (PR) status into a new version of PREDICT and to compare its performance to the current version (2.2).

METHOD

The prognostic effect of PR status was based on the analysis of data from 45,088 European patients with breast cancer from 49 studies in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the hazard ratio for PR status. Data from a New Zealand study of 11,365 patients with early invasive breast cancer were used for external validation. Model calibration and discrimination were used to test the model performance.

RESULTS

Having a PR-positive tumour was associated with a 23% and 28% lower risk of dying from breast cancer for women with oestrogen receptor (ER)-negative and ER-positive breast cancer, respectively. The area under the ROC curve increased with the addition of PR status from 0.807 to 0.809 for patients with ER-negative tumours (p = 0.023) and from 0.898 to 0.902 for patients with ER-positive tumours (p = 2.3 × 10-6) in the New Zealand cohort. Model calibration was modest with 940 observed deaths compared to 1151 predicted.

CONCLUSION

The inclusion of the prognostic effect of PR status to PREDICT Breast has led to an improvement of model performance and more accurate absolute treatment benefit predictions for individual patients. Further studies should determine whether the baseline hazard function requires recalibration.

The Impact of Morbidity and Disability on Attendance at Organized Breast Cancer-Screening Programs: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Individuals with morbidity experience worse breast cancer outcomes compared with those without. This meta-analysis assessed the impact of morbidity on breast cancer-screening attendance and subsequent early detection (PROSPERO pre-registration CRD42020204918). MEDLINE, PsychInfo, and CINAHL were searched. Included articles published from 1988 measured organized breast-screening mammography attendance using medical records by women with morbidity compared with those without. Morbidities were assigned to nine diagnostic clusters. Data were pooled using random-effects inverse meta-analyses to produce odds ratios (OR) for attendance. 25 study samples (28 articles) were included. Data were available from 17,755,075 individuals, including at least 1,408,246 participants with one or more conditions;16,250,556 had none. Individuals with any morbidity had lower odds of attending breast screening compared with controls [k = 25; OR, 0.76; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.70-0.81; P = <0.001; I2 = 99%]. Six morbidity clusters had lower odds of attendance. The lowest were for neurological, psychiatric, and disability conditions; ORs ranged from 0.45 to 0.59 compared with those without. Morbidity presents a clear barrier for breast-screening attendance, exacerbating health inequalities and, includes a larger number of conditions than previously identified. Consensus is required to determine a standardized approach on how best to identify those with morbidity and determine solutions for overcoming barriers to screening participation based on specific morbidity profiles.

Fulvestrant plus capivasertib versus placebo after relapse or progression on an aromatase inhibitor in metastatic, oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer (FAKTION): overall survival, updated progression-free survival, and expanded biomarker analysis from a randomised, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Capivasertib, an AKT inhibitor, added to fulvestrant, was previously reported to improve progression-free survival in women with aromatase inhibitor-resistant oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. The benefit appeared to be independent of the phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K)/AKT/phosphatase and tensin homologue (PTEN) pathway alteration status of tumours, as ascertained using assays available at the time. Here, we report updated progression-free survival and overall survival results, and a prespecified examination of the effect of PI3K/AKT/PTEN pathway alterations identified by an expanded genetic testing panel on treatment outcomes.

METHODS

This randomised, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial recruited postmenopausal adult women aged at least 18 years with ER-positive, HER2-negative, metastatic or locally advanced inoperable breast cancer and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, who had relapsed or progressed on an aromatase inhibitor, from across 19 hospitals in the UK. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intramuscular fulvestrant 500 mg (day 1) every 28 days (plus a 500 mg loading dose on day 15 of cycle 1) with either capivasertib 400 mg or matching placebo, orally twice daily on an intermittent weekly schedule of 4 days on and 3 days off, starting on cycle 1 day 15. Treatment continued until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, loss to follow-up, or withdrawal of consent. Treatment was allocated by an interactive web-response system using a minimisation method (with a 20% random element) and the following minimisation factors: measurable or non-measurable disease, primary or secondary aromatase inhibitor resistance, PIK3CA status, and PTEN status. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary endpoints shown in this Article were overall survival and safety in the intention-to-treat population, and the effect of tumour PI3K/AKT/PTEN pathway status identified by an expanded testing panel that included next-generation sequencing assays. Recruitment is complete. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01992952.

FINDINGS

Between March 16, 2015, and March 6, 2018, 183 participants were screened for eligibility and 140 (77%) were randomly assigned to receive fulvestrant plus capivasertib (n=69) or fulvestrant plus placebo (n=71). Median follow-up at the data cut-off of Nov 25, 2021, was 58·5 months (IQR 45·9-64·1) for participants treated with fulvestrant plus capivasertib and 62·3 months (IQR 62·1-70·3) for fulvestrant plus placebo. Updated median progression-free survival was 10·3 months (95% CI 5·0-13·4) in the group receiving fulvestrant plus capivasertib compared with 4·8 months (3·1-7·9) for fulvestrant plus placebo (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·56 [95% CI 0·38-0·81]; two-sided p=0·0023). Median overall survival in the capivasertib versus placebo groups was 29·3 months (95% CI 23·7-39·0) versus 23·4 months (18·7-32·7; adjusted HR 0·66 [95% CI 0·45-0·97]; two-sided p=0·035). The expanded biomarker panel identified an expanded pathway-altered subgroup that contained 76 participants (54% of the intention-to-treat population). Median progression-free survival in the expanded pathway-altered subgroup for participants receiving capivasertib (n=39) was 12·8 months (95% CI 6·6-18·8) compared with 4·6 months (2·8-7·9) in the placebo group (n=37; adjusted HR 0·44 [95% CI 0·26-0·72]; two-sided p=0·0014). Median overall survival for the expanded pathway-altered subgroup receiving capivasertib was 38·9 months (95% CI 23·3-50·7) compared with 20·0 months (14·8-31·4) for those receiving placebo (adjusted HR 0·46 [95% CI 0·27-0·79]; two-sided p=0·0047). By contrast, there were no statistically significant differences in progression-free or overall survival in the expanded pathway non-altered subgroup treated with capivasertib (n=30) versus placebo (n=34). One additional serious adverse event (pneumonia) in the capivasertib group had occurred subsequent to the primary analysis. One death, due to atypical pulmonary infection, was assessed as possibly related to capivasertib treatment.

INTERPRETATION

Updated FAKTION data showed that capivasertib addition to fulvestrant extends the survival of participants with aromatase inhibitor-resistant ER-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. The expanded biomarker testing suggested that capivasertib predominantly benefits patients with PI3K/AKT/PTEN pathway-altered tumours. Phase 3 data are needed to substantiate the results, including in patients with previous CDK4/6 inhibitor exposure who were not included in the FAKTION trial.

FUNDING

AstraZeneca and Cancer Research UK.

Antiprogestins reduce epigenetic field cancerization in breast tissue of young healthy women

Background

Breast cancer is a leading cause of death in premenopausal women. Progesterone drives expansion of luminal progenitor cells, leading to the development of poor-prognostic breast cancers. However, it is not known if antagonising progesterone can prevent breast cancers in humans. We suggest that targeting progesterone signalling could be a means of reducing features which are known to promote breast cancer formation.

Methods

In healthy premenopausal women with and without a BRCA mutation we studied (i) estrogen and progesterone levels in saliva over an entire menstrual cycle (n = 20); (ii) cancer-free normal breast-tissue from a control population who had no family or personal history of breast cancer and equivalently from BRCA1/2 mutation carriers (n = 28); triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) biopsies and healthy breast tissue taken from sites surrounding the TNBC in the same individuals (n = 14); and biopsies of ER+ve/PR+ve stage T1–T2 cancers and healthy breast tissue taken from sites surrounding the cancer in the same individuals (n = 31); and (iii) DNA methylation and DNA mutations in normal breast tissue (before and after treatment) from clinical trials that assessed the potential preventative effects of vitamins and antiprogestins (mifepristone and ulipristal acetate; n = 44).

Results

Daily levels of progesterone were higher throughout the menstrual cycle of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, raising the prospect of targeting progesterone signalling as a means of cancer risk reduction in this population. Furthermore, breast field cancerization DNA methylation signatures reflective of (i) the mitotic age of normal breast epithelium and (ii) the proportion of luminal progenitor cells were increased in breast cancers, indicating that luminal progenitor cells with elevated replicative age are more prone to malignant transformation. The progesterone receptor antagonist mifepristone reduced both the mitotic age and the proportion of luminal progenitor cells in normal breast tissue of all control women and in 64% of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. These findings were validated by an alternate progesterone receptor antagonist, ulipristal acetate, which yielded similar results. Importantly, mifepristone reduced both the TP53 mutation frequency as well as the number of TP53 mutations in mitotic-age-responders.

Conclusions

These data support the potential usage of antiprogestins for primary prevention of poor-prognostic breast cancers.

Trial registration

Clinical trial 1 Mifepristone treatment prior to insertion of a levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine system for improved bleeding control – a randomized controlled trial, clinicaltrialsregister.eu, 2009-009014-40; registered on 20 July 2009.

Clinical trial 2 The effect of a progesterone receptor modulator on breast tissue in women with BRCA1 and 2 mutations, clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01898312; registered on 07 May 2013.

Clinical trial 3 A pilot prevention study of the effects of the anti- progestin Ulipristal Acetate (UA) on surrogate markers of breast cancer risk, clinicaltrialsregister.eu, 2015-001587-19; registered on 15 July 2015.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13073-022-01063-5.

Breast cancer risk stratification in women of screening age: Incremental effects of adding mammographic density, polygenic risk, and a gene panel

PURPOSE

There is great promise in breast cancer risk stratification to target screening and prevention. It is unclear whether adding gene panels to other risk tools improves breast cancer risk stratification and adds discriminatory benefit on a population basis.

METHODS

In total, 10,025 of 57,902 women aged 46 to 73 years in the Predicting Risk of Cancer at Screening study provided DNA samples. A case-control study was used to evaluate breast cancer risk assessment using polygenic risk scores (PRSs), cancer gene panel (n = 33), mammographic density (density residual [DR]), and risk factors collected using a self-completed 2-page questionnaire (Tyrer-Cuzick [TC] model version 8). In total, 525 cases and 1410 controls underwent gene panel testing and PRS calculation (18, 143, and/or 313 single-nucleotide polymorphisms [SNPs]).

RESULTS

Actionable pathogenic variants (PGVs) in BRCA1/2 were found in 1.7% of cases and 0.55% of controls, and overall PGVs were found in 6.1% of cases and 1.3% of controls. A combined assessment of TC8-DR-SNP313 and gene panel provided the best risk stratification with 26.1% of controls and 9.7% of cases identified at <1.4% 10-year risk and 9.01% of controls and 23.3% of cases at ≥8% 10-year risk. Because actionable PGVs were uncommon, discrimination was identical with/without gene panel (with/without: area under the curve = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.64-0.70). Only 7 of 17 PGVs in cases resulted in actionable risk category change. Extended case (n = 644)-control (n = 1779) series with TC8-DR-SNP143 identified 18.9% of controls and only 6.4% of stage 2+ cases at <1.4% 10-year risk and 20.7% of controls and 47.9% of stage 2+ cases at ≥5% 10-year risk.

CONCLUSION

Further studies and economic analysis will determine whether adding panels to PRS is a cost-effective strategy for risk stratification.

Susceptibility to hormone-mediated cancer is reflected by different tick rates of the epithelial and general epigenetic clock

Background

A variety of epigenetic clocks utilizing DNA methylation changes have been developed; these clocks are either tissue-independent or designed to predict chronological age based on blood or saliva samples. Whether discordant tick rates between tissue-specific and general epigenetic clocks play a role in health and disease has not yet been explored.

Results

Here we analyze 1941 cervical cytology samples, which contain a mixture of hormone-sensitive cervical epithelial cells and immune cells, and develop the WID general clock (Women’s IDentification of risk), an epigenetic clock that is shared by epithelial and immune cells and optimized for cervical samples. We then develop the WID epithelial clock and WID immune clock, which define epithelial- and immune-specific clocks, respectively. We find that the WID-relative-epithelial-age (WID-REA), defined as the difference between the epithelial and general clocks, is significantly reduced in cervical samples from pre-menopausal women with breast cancer (OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.28-5.72). We find the same effect in normal breast tissue samples from pre-menopausal women at high risk of breast cancer and show that potential risk reducing anti-progesterone drugs can reverse this. In post-menopausal women, this directionality is reversed. Hormone replacement therapy consistently leads to a significantly lower WID-REA in cancer-free women, but not in post-menopausal women with breast or ovarian cancer.

Conclusions

Our findings imply that there are multiple epigenetic clocks, many of which are tissue-specific, and that the differential tick rate between these clocks may be an informative surrogate measure of disease risk.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13059-022-02603-3.

Abstract P1-18-10: A clinical study of samuraciclib (CT7001), a first-in-class, oral, selective inhibitor of CDK7, in patients with advanced triple negative breast cancer (TNBC)

Background: CDK7 inhibition is a promising therapeutic strategy in cancer. CDK7 is a key kinase, regulating cell division, transcription and nuclear receptor function [1]. Although recent advances have been made in the treatment of TNBC this disease is still one of significant unmet need. Materials and Methods: Tolerability and efficacy of Samuraciclib were assessed in a TNBC expansion cohort of the first in human study of Samuraciclib. These patients had metastatic or locally advanced TNBC and had received prior taxane and anthracycline therapy including at least one line of chemotherapy for metastatic or locally advanced disease. Results: From 29th January 2019 to 12th April 2021, 23 women with advanced TNBC were recruited and dosed with Samuraciclib 360mg OD. Treatment has generally been well tolerated with all patients remaining on treatment until disease progression. The most common adverse drug reactions (AE) were: G1-2 Nausea (96%), Vomiting (52%) and Diarrhea (91%). There were 4 dose reductions to manage upper GI adverse events of nausea and/or vomiting. G3 events were as follows: 2 Grade 3 Diarrhea, 1 Grade 3 Vomiting, 1 Grade 3 Fatigue, 1 Grade 3 Stomatitis, 1 Grade 3 Anaemia and 1 Grade 4 Thrombocytopenia21 patients have had follow-up evaluations for assessment of efficacy. Stable disease was achieved in 14 patients, 1 with partial response (being on treatment for 72 weeks) and 7 patients with progressive disease; two additional patients remain on compassionate use treatment, following disease progression by RECIST. 5 patients have been on treatment for at least 24 weeks of whom 3 have exceeded 1 year. Conclusions: Samuraciclib demonstrated an acceptable safety and tolerability profile with evidence of antitumour activity in advanced TNBC. References1.Patel et al. ICEC0942, an Orally Bioavailable Selective Inhibitor of CDK7 for Cancer Treatment. Mol Cancer Ther. 2018. doi: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-16-0847. PMID:29545334.

Citation Format: Sacha J Howell, Laura M Kenny, Simon Lord, Matthew G Krebs, Tobias Arkenau, Richard Baird, Iain R MacPherson, Ash Bahl, Glen Clack, Edward Ainscow, Anthony GM Barrett, Paul A Dickinson, Matthew J Fuchter, Manfred Lehnert, Simak Ali, Stuart McIntosh, Charles Coombes. A clinical study of samuraciclib (CT7001), a first-in-class, oral, selective inhibitor of CDK7, in patients with advanced triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-18-10.

The importance of ethnicity: Are breast cancer polygenic risk scores ready for women who are not of White European origin?

Polygenic risk scores (PRS) for disease risk stratification show great promise for application in general populations, but most are based on data from individuals of White European origin. We assessed two well validated PRS (SNP18, SNP143) in the Predicting-Risk-of-Cancer-At-Screening (PROCAS) study in North-West England for breast cancer prediction based on ethnicity. Overall, 9475 women without breast cancer at study entry, including 645 who subsequently developed invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ provided DNA. All were genotyped for SNP18 and a subset of 1868 controls were genotyped for SNP143. For White Europeans both PRS discriminated well between individuals with and without cancer. For n = 395 Black (n = 112), Asian (n = 119), mixed (n = 44) or Jewish (n = 120) women without cancer both PRS overestimated breast cancer risk, being most marked for women of Black and Jewish origin (P < .001). SNP143 resulted in a potential mean 40% breast cancer risk overestimation in the combined group of non-White/non-European origin. SNP-PRS that has been normalized based on White European ethnicity for breast cancer should not be used to predict risk in women of other ethnicities. There is an urgent need to develop PRS specific for other ethnicities, in order to widen access of this technology.

Breast Cancer Risk Assessment and Primary Prevention Advice in Primary Care: A Systematic Review of Provider Attitudes and Routine Behaviours

Implementing risk-stratified breast cancer screening is being considered internationally. It has been suggested that primary care will need to take a role in delivering this service, including risk assessment and provision of primary prevention advice. This systematic review aimed to assess the acceptability of these tasks to primary care providers. Five databases were searched up to July-August 2020, yielding 29 eligible studies, of which 27 were narratively synthesised. The review was pre-registered (PROSPERO: CRD42020197676). Primary care providers report frequently collecting breast cancer family history information, but rarely using quantitative tools integrating additional risk factors. Primary care providers reported high levels of discomfort and low confidence with respect to risk-reducing medications although very few reported doubts about the evidence base underpinning their use. Insufficient education/training and perceived discomfort conducting both tasks were notable barriers. Primary care providers are more likely to accept an increased role in breast cancer risk assessment than advising on risk-reducing medications. To realise the benefits of risk-based screening and prevention at a population level, primary care will need to proactively assess breast cancer risk and advise on risk-reducing medications. To facilitate this, adaptations to infrastructure such as integrated tools are necessary in addition to provision of education.

Time-resolved single-cell analysis of Brca1 associated mammary tumourigenesis reveals aberrant differentiation of luminal progenitors

It is unclear how genetic aberrations impact the state of nascent tumour cells and their microenvironment. BRCA1 driven triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) has been shown to arise from luminal progenitors yet little is known about how BRCA1 loss-of-function (LOF) and concomitant mutations affect the luminal progenitor cell state. Here we demonstrate how time-resolved single-cell profiling of genetically engineered mouse models before tumour formation can address this challenge. We found that perturbing Brca1/p53 in luminal progenitors induces aberrant alveolar differentiation pre-malignancy accompanied by pro-tumourigenic changes in the immune compartment. Unlike alveolar differentiation during gestation, this process is cell autonomous and characterised by the dysregulation of transcription factors driving alveologenesis. Based on our data we propose a model where Brca1/p53 LOF inadvertently promotes a differentiation program hardwired in luminal progenitors, highlighting the deterministic role of the cell-of-origin and offering a potential explanation for the tissue specificity of BRCA1 tumours.

Breast cancer incidence and early diagnosis in a family history risk and prevention clinic: 33-year experience in 14,311 women

PURPOSE

Women at increased familial breast cancer risk have been offered screening starting at an earlier age and increased frequency than national Screening Programmes for over 30 years. There are limited data on longer-term largescale implementation of this approach on cancer diagnosis.

METHODS

Women at our institution at ≥ 17% lifetime breast cancer risk have been offered enhanced screening with annual mammography starting at age 35 or 5-years younger than youngest affected relative, with upper age limit 50 for moderate and 60 for high-risk. Breast cancer pathology, stage and receptor status were assessed as well as survival from cancer diagnosis by Kaplan-Meier analysis.

RESULTS

Overall 14,311 women were seen and assessed for breast cancer risk, with 649 breast cancers occurring in 129,119 years follow up (post-prevalent annual incidence = 4.55/1000). Of 323/394 invasive breast cancers occurring whilst on enhanced screening, most were lymph-node negative (72.9%), T1 (≤ 20 mm, 73.2%) and stage-1 (61.4%), 126/394 stage2-4 (32%). 10-year breast cancer specific survival was 91.3% (95% CI 87.4-94.0) better than the 75.9% (95% CI 74.9-77.0) published for England in 2013-2017. As expected, survival was significantly better for women with screen detected cancers (p < 0.001). Ten-year survival was particularly good for those diagnosed ≤ 40 at 93.8% (n = 75; 95% CI 84.2-97.6). Women with lobular breast cancers had worse 10-year survival at 85.9% (95% CI 66.7-94.5). Breast cancer specific survival was good for 119 BRCA1/2 carriers with 20-year survival in BRCA1:91.2% (95% CI 77.8-96.6) and 83.8% (62.6-93.5) for BRCA2.

CONCLUSIONS

Targeted breast screening in women aged 30-60 years at increased familial risk is associated with good long-term survival that is substantially better than expected from population data.

Targeting STAT3 signaling using stabilised sulforaphane (SFX-01) inhibits endocrine resistant stem-like cells in ER-positive breast cancer

Estrogen receptor (ER) positive breast cancer is frequently sensitive to endocrine therapy. Multiple mechanisms of endocrine therapy resistance have been identified, including cancer stem-like cell (CSC) activity. Here we investigate SFX-01, a stabilised formulation of sulforaphane (SFN), for its effects on breast CSC activity in ER+ preclinical models. SFX-01 reduced mammosphere formation efficiency (MFE) of ER+ primary and metastatic patient samples. Both tamoxifen and fulvestrant increased MFE and aldehyde dehydrogenase (ALDH) activity of patient-derived xenograft (PDX) tumors, which was reversed by combination with SFX-01. SFX-01 significantly reduced tumor-initiating cell frequency in secondary transplants and reduced the formation of spontaneous lung micrometastases by PDX tumors in mice. Mechanistically, we establish that both tamoxifen and fulvestrant induce STAT3 phosphorylation. SFX-01 suppressed phospho-STAT3 and SFN directly bound STAT3 in patient and PDX samples. Analysis of ALDH+ cells from endocrine-resistant patient samples revealed activation of STAT3 target genes MUC1 and OSMR, which were inhibited by SFX-01 in patient samples. Increased expression of these genes after 3 months' endocrine treatment of ER+ patients (n = 68) predicted poor prognosis. Our data establish the importance of STAT3 signaling in CSC-mediated resistance to endocrine therapy and the potential of SFX-01 for improving clinical outcomes in ER+ breast cancer.

Fulvestrant plus capivasertib versus placebo after relapse or progression on an aromatase inhibitor in metastatic, oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer (FAKTION): a multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Capivasertib (AZD5363) is a potent selective oral inhibitor of all three isoforms of the serine/threonine kinase AKT. The FAKTION trial investigated whether the addition of capivasertib to fulvestrant improved progression-free survival in patients with aromatase inhibitor-resistant advanced breast cancer.

METHODS

In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial, postmenopausal women aged at least 18 years with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 and oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, metastatic or locally advanced inoperable breast cancer who had relapsed or progressed on an aromatase inhibitor were recruited from 19 hospitals in the UK. Enrolled participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intramuscular fulvestrant 500 mg (day 1) every 28 days (plus a loading dose on day 15 of cycle 1) with either capivasertib 400 mg or matching placebo, orally twice daily on an intermittent weekly schedule of 4 days on and 3 days off (starting on cycle 1 day 15) until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, loss to follow-up, or withdrawal of consent. Treatment allocation was done using an interactive web-response system using a minimisation method (with a 20% random element) and the following minimisation factors: measurable or non-measurable disease, primary or secondary aromatase inhibitor resistance, PIK3CA status, and PTEN status. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival with a one-sided alpha of 0·20. Analyses were done by intention to treat. Recruitment is complete, and the trial is in follow-up. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01992952.

FINDINGS

Between March 16, 2015, and March 6, 2018, 183 patients were screened for eligibility, of whom 140 (76%) were eligible and were randomly assigned to receive fulvestrant plus capivasertib (n=69) or fulvestrant plus placebo (n=71). Median follow-up for progression-free survival was 4·9 months (IQR 1·6-11·6). At the time of primary analysis for progression-free survival (Jan 30, 2019), 112 progression-free survival events had occurred, 49 (71%) in 69 patients in the capivasertib group compared with 63 (89%) of 71 in the placebo group. Median progression-free survival was 10·3 months (95% CI 5·0-13·2) in the capivasertib group versus 4·8 months (3·1-7·7) in the placebo group, giving an unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0·58 (95% CI 0·39-0·84) in favour of the capivasertib group (two-sided p=0·0044; one-sided log rank test p=0·0018). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were hypertension (22 [32%] of 69 patients in the capivasertib group vs 17 [24%] of 71 in the placebo group), diarrhoea (ten [14%] vs three [4%]), rash (14 [20%] vs 0), infection (four [6%] vs two [3%]), and fatigue (one [1%] vs three [4%]). Serious adverse reactions occurred only in the capivasertib group, and were acute kidney injury (two), diarrhoea (three), rash (two), hyperglycaemia (one), loss of consciousness (one), sepsis (one), and vomiting (one). One death, due to atypical pulmonary infection, was assessed as possibly related to capivasertib treatment. One further death in the capivasertib group had an unknown cause; all remaining deaths in both groups (19 in the capivasertib group and 31 in the placebo group) were disease related.

INTERPRETATION

Progression-free survival was significantly longer in participants who received capivasertib than in those who received placebo. The combination of capivasertib and fulvestrant warrants further investigation in phase 3 trials.

FUNDING

AstraZeneca and Cancer Research UK.

Risk of Contralateral Breast Cancer in Women with and without Pathogenic Variants in BRCA1, BRCA2, and TP53 Genes in Women with Very Early-Onset (<36 Years) Breast Cancer

Early age at diagnosis of breast cancer is a known risk factor for hereditary predisposition and some studies show a high risk of contralateral breast cancer in BRCA1 carriers diagnosed at very young ages. However, little is published on the risk of TP53 carriers. 397 women with breast cancer diagnosed <36 years of age were obtained from three sources: (i) a population-based study of 283 women diagnosed sequentially from 1980-1997 in North-West England, (ii) referrals to the Genomic Medicine Department at St Mary's Hospital from 1990-2018, and (iii) individuals from (i) and the Family History Clinic at Wythenshawe Hospital South Manchester who tested negative for pathogenic variants (PV) in all three genes. Sequencing of BRCA1, BRCA2, and TP53 genes was carried out alongside tests for copy number for PV on all referred women. Rates of contralateral breast cancer were censored at death, last assessment, or risk-reducing mastectomy. In total, 47 TP53, 218 BRCA1, and 132 BRCA2 PV carriers were identified with breast cancer diagnosed aged 35 years and under, as well as a representative sample of 261 not known to carry a PV in BRCA1, BRCA2, and TP53. Annual rates of contralateral breast cancer (and percentage of synchronous breast cancers) were TP53: 7.03% (4.3%), BRCA1: 3.57% (1.8%), and BRCA2: 2.63% (1.5%). In non-PV carriers, contralateral rates in isolated presumed/tested non-carrier cases with no family history were 0.56%, and for those with a family history, 0.69%. Contralateral breast cancer rates are substantial in TP53, BRCA1, and BRCA2 PV carriers diagnosed with breast cancer aged 35 and under. Women need to be advised to help make informed decisions on contralateral mastectomy, guided by life expectancy from their index tumor.

Microenvironmental IL1β promotes breast cancer metastatic colonisation in the bone via activation of Wnt signalling

Dissemination of tumour cells to the bone marrow is an early event in breast cancer, however cells may lie dormant for many years before bone metastases develop. Treatment for bone metastases is not curative, therefore new adjuvant therapies which prevent the colonisation of disseminated cells into metastatic lesions are required. There is evidence that cancer stem cells (CSCs) within breast tumours are capable of metastasis, but the mechanism by which these colonise bone is unknown. Here, we establish that bone marrow-derived IL1β stimulates breast cancer cell colonisation in the bone by inducing intracellular NFkB and CREB signalling in breast cancer cells, leading to autocrine Wnt signalling and CSC colony formation. Importantly, we show that inhibition of this pathway prevents both CSC colony formation in the bone environment, and bone metastasis. These findings establish that targeting IL1β-NFKB/CREB-Wnt signalling should be considered for adjuvant therapy to prevent breast cancer bone metastasis.

Breast cancer pathology and stage are better predicted by risk stratification models that include mammographic density and common genetic variants

Purpose

To improve breast cancer risk stratification to enable more targeted early detection/prevention strategies that will better balance risks and benefits of population screening programmes.

Methods

9362 of 57,902 women in the Predicting-Risk-Of-Cancer-At-Screening (PROCAS) study who were unaffected by breast cancer at study entry and provided DNA for a polygenic risk score (PRS). The PRS was analysed alongside mammographic density (density-residual-DR) and standard risk factors (Tyrer-Cuzick-model) to assess future risk of breast cancer based on tumour stage receptor expression and pathology.

Results

195 prospective incident breast cancers had a prediction based on TC/DR/PRS which was informative for subsequent breast cancer overall [IQ-OR 2.25 (95% CI 1.89–2.68)] with excellent calibration-(0.99). The model performed particularly well in predicting higher stage stage 2+ IQ-OR 2.69 (95% CI 2.02–3.60) and ER + BCs (IQ-OR 2.36 (95% CI 1.93–2.89)). DR was most predictive for HER2+ and stage 2+ cancers but did not discriminate as well between poor and extremely good prognosis BC as either Tyrer-Cuzick or PRS. In contrast, PRS gave the highest OR for incident stage 2+ cancers, [IQR-OR 1.79 (95% CI 1.30–2.46)].

Conclusions

A combined approach using Tyrer-Cuzick/DR/PRS provides accurate risk stratification, particularly for poor prognosis cancers. This provides support for reducing the screening interval in high-risk women and increasing the screening interval in low-risk women defined by this model.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s10549-019-05210-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.