Ivana Sestak, PhD, on Clinical Treatment Score From TAILORx: Predicting Distant Breast Cancer Recurrence
2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium
Ivana Sestak, PhD, of Queen Mary University of London and the Centre for Cancer Prevention, discusses study findings that confirm the prognostic ability of the Clinical Treatment Score at 5 years (CTS5) for late distant recurrence, specifically for patients older than 50 years and/or for those deemed to have intermediate- or high-risk hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative, node-negative breast cancer. The CTS5 is less prognostic in women younger than 50 who received 5 years of endocrine therapy alone (Abstract GS4-03).
Marie-Jeanne T.F.D. Vrancken Peeters, MD, PhD, of the Netherlands Cancer Institute, discusses an interim study analysis showing that ultrasound-guided core biopsies of the breast in patients with excellent response on MRI after neoadjuvant systemic therapy may not be accurate enough to safely select patients with pathologic complete response for omission of surgery (Abstract GS5-06).
Rashmi K. Murthy, MD, of The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, discusses data on the efficacy and safety of tucatinib, trastuzumab, and capecitabine, a treatment regimen under investigation for patients with advanced HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer refractory to standard-of-care regimens (Abstract GS1-01).
Javier Cortes, MD, PhD, of the IOB Institute of Oncology, discusses study findings that suggested pembrolizumab offered a prolonged survival benefit compared to chemotherapy for a subset of patients with previously treated metastatic triple-negative breast cancer. In the trial, high tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes were significantly associated with better clinical outcomes with the checkpoint inhibitor.
Icro Meattini, MD, of the University of Florence, discusses study findings that showed the less-invasive partial-breast irradiation using intensity-modulated radiotherapy after surgery may be an acceptable choice for patients with early breast cancer, as it is cost-effective, safe, and efficacious when compared with whole-breast irradiation (Abstract GS4-06).
Tari A. King, MD, of Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Dana-Farber/ Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center, discusses retrospective findings from the AURORA U.S. Network on molecular differences between primary tumors and metastases, a better understanding of which may help lead to more effective treatment of metastatic breast cancer (Abstract GS3-08).
