Importance

It is essential to refine the populations most likely to benefit from targeted chemotherapy combinations.

Background

MINDACT showed that molecularly low risk patients, as assessed by the Amsterdam 70-gene profile MammaPrint® (Agendia) (MP), did not benefit from chemotherapy. In the I-SPY2 trial, MP low risk Hormone Receptor (HR) positive/HER2 negative patients are not eligible; however, HR negative or HER2 positive patients were considered high risk and included for treatment with chemotherapy plus novel agents. The neoadjuvant setting provides an opportunity to evaluate whether molecularly low risk HER2 positive patients are good candidates for neoadjuvant chemo/anti-HER2 therapy, where pathologic complete response (pCR) and 3-year outcomes are measured. Objective: To evaluate and further characterize the fraction of and outcomes for patients molecular low-risk disease in the I-SPY2 trial.

Methods

The I-SPY2 platform trial is an ongoing multicenter phase 2 multi-arm study utilizing adaptive design and evaluating efficacy and tolerability of investigational agents in combination with standard-of-care chemotherapy for patients with high-risk anatomic stage II/III breast cancer. Patients with HR+HER2- MP low-risk tumors are not eligible. All enrolled patients undergo pretreatment biopsy for genomic evaluation of early recurrence risk with MP for risk stratification and with the 80-gene BluePrint® (Agendia) test for intrinsic subtype classification. Primary endpoint of the study is pCR in breast and lymph nodes (ypT0/is, ypN0). Secondary outcomes included event-free survival (EFS) and distant-recurrence free survival (DRFS). Following standard neoadjuvant treatment with or without a concomitant investigational agent, patients are followed for long-term outcomes. EFS and DRFS at 3 and 5 years in the pCR vs non-pCR groups within histologic and molecular subtypes are determined using the Kaplan Meier method.

Results

Of the 1038 enrolled patients by November 2016, 24 patients (3.2%) had molecular low-risk disease as determined by MP. Of these, 21 (87.5%) had HR+HER2+, 1 (4.2%) had HRHER2+, and 2 (8.4%) had HR-HER2-. BluePrint expression subtyping classified 17 as luminaltype, 6 HER2 enriched-type and 1 basal type. One patient withdrew consent for follow-up. Of the 23 remaining, none achieved pCR and only one (HR+/HER2+) had an EFS event (with median follow-up of 4.3 years). Overall, EFS and DRFS data were available for 950 of the 1038 patients (as of February 2019), with median follow-up of 3.8 years. Of the 173 HR+HER2+ in this cohort, 20 (11.6%) had molecular low-risk tumors. The EFS and DRFS for the 173 HER2+HR+ pCR group is 97% and 98% (non-pCR group 89% and 94%), respectively at 3 years. Removing the molecular low-risk HER2+ patients from the denominator reveals the worse outcome for patients with non pCR: EFS 86% and DRFS 92% at 3 years. The difference is more apparent at 5 years, changing from 74% to 66% for EFS and from 81% to 75% for DRFS. Intrinsic subtypes vary and do not predict early risk.

Conclusions

I-SPY2 focuses on women with high clinical risk with only 3.2% of enrolled patients having low molecular risk tumors. However, 12% of HER+ breast cancer enrolled patients had molecular low risk tumors of which 95% were also HR+. In this group, early recurrence is very low despite absence of pCR and irrespective of intrinsic subtype. Refining the population using molecular high-risk classification of patients reveals a greater difference between the pCR and non-pCR groups within the HR+HER2+ subtype in the EFS and DRFS analysis. Clinical trial designs could address the opportunity to find more targeted and less toxic treatments for the HER2+ low molecular risk patient population.