Joerg Heil, MD, PhD, of the University Hospital Heidelberg, discusses findings on how accurately this technique can diagnose residual disease and pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer. These data may help tailor, de-escalate, and potentially avoid unnecessary surgeries (Abstract GS5-03).
Joseph Sparano, MD, of the Montefiore Medical Center, discusses three challenges:
Milan Radovich, PhD, of Indiana University School of Medicine, discusses trial findings that show patients with triple-negative breast cancer who are at high risk of relapse after receiving preoperative chemotherapy can be risk-stratified based on the presence of minimal residual disease as determined by circulating tumor DNA and circulating tumor cells (Abstract GS5-02).
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).
Jack Cuzick, PhD, of Queen Mary University of London, discusses the substantially greater benefits of anastrozole as compared with tamoxifen in terms of preventing breast cancer, with no increase in fractures or other reported serious side effects (Abstract GS4-04).
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).
