Nadia Harbeck, MD, of the University of Munich, discusses the first outcome data from the phase III ADAPT HR+/HER– trial, which combined both static and dynamic biomarkers to optimize the adjuvant therapy approach in patients with intermediate- or high-risk luminal early breast cancer (Abstract GS4-04).
Sara A. Hurvitz, MD, of the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, discusses phase III data from the ASCENT study of the antibody-drug conjugate sacituzumab govitecan vs chemotherapy in patients with previously treated metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (Abstract GS3-06).
Chirag Shah, MD, of the Cleveland Clinic, discusses the impact of DCISionRT testing on radiation therapy recommendations for patients with ductal carcinoma in situ following lumpectomy. His study found that despite using traditional favorable-risk criteria, radiation recommendations were changed in more than 40% of patients (Abstract PS6-17).
Joyce V. Lee, PhD, of the University of California, San Francisco, discusses data that suggest the MYC oncogene may indicate whether a patient with triple-negative breast cancer will respond to immunotherapy. Dr. Lee’s study is the first to describe MYC downregulation of MHC-I and to demonstrate translatable approaches that may overcome immune evasion (Abstract GS1-08).
In her recent study, Debra A. Pratt, MD, of the Cleveland Clinic, showed that when breast cancer treatment using any of three modalities takes longer than 38 weeks, it is associated with a decrease in survival, regardless of the receptor status. Patients with breast cancer who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy were more likely to take longer than 38 weeks to complete treatment than those undergoing surgery first (Abstract S11-34 ).
Roisin M. Connolly, MD, of University College Cork, discusses phase III results from the E2112 trial, which showed exemestane plus entinostat did not improve survival in aromatase inhibitor–resistant advanced HR-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer (Abstract GS4-02).
