A novel biosignature identifies DCIS patients with a poor biologic subtype with an unacceptably high rate of local recurrence after breast conserving surgery and radiotherapy.

Authors

null

Frank Vicini

NRG Oncology, and 21st Century Oncology, Pontiac, MI

Frank Vicini , Chirag Shah , Pat W. Whitworth , Steven C Shivers , Fredrik Warnberg , Bruce Mann , Troy Bremer

Organizations

NRG Oncology, and 21st Century Oncology, Pontiac, MI, William Beaumont Hospital, Troy, MI, Nashville Breast Center, Nashville, TN, PreludeDx, Laguna Hills, CA, Regional Oncologic Centre, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden, The Royal Melbourne and Royal Women's Hospital, Parkville, Australia

Research Funding

Pharmaceutical/Biotech Company
PreludeDx.

Background: There is an unmet need to identify women diagnosed with DCIS who have a low recurrence risk and could omit radiotherapy (RT) after breast conserving surgery (BCS), or an elevated recurrence risk after treatment with BCS plus RT. DCISionRT and its response subtype (Rst) biosignature were evaluated in a contemporary cohort treated with BCS with or without RT to identify these risk groups. Methods: Pathology, clinical data, and FFPE tissue samples were evaluable for 485 women diagnosed with DCIS at centers in Sweden (1996-2004), the USA (1999-2008), and Australia (2006-2011). Patients were treated with BCS (negative margins) with or without whole breast RT. Ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) included DCIS or invasive breast cancer (IBC) that was local, regional, or metastatic. The patients were classified into Low and Elevated risk groups to assess IBTR and IBC rates. Patients in the Elevated risk group were categorized by two subtypes: a good response subtype (good Rst) or a poor response subtype (poor Rst) after BCS plus RT. Biosignatures were calculated using biomarkers (p16/INK4A, Ki-67, COX-2, PgR, HER2, FOXA1, SIAH2) assayed using IHC on FFPE tissue. Hazard ratios and 10-year risks were calculated using Cox proportional hazards (CPH) and Kaplan-Meier analyses. Results: In the DCISionRT Elevated risk group, RT was associated with significantly reduced recurrence rates, but only for those patients with a good Rst (Table, IBTR HR=0.18, p<0.001, IBC HR=0.15, p=0.003, n=241). For Elevated risk group patients with a poor Rst, no benefit to RT was noted (Table). Additionally, irrespective of RT, patients with a poor Rst had 10-year IBTR/IBC rates of 25%/16%, which were much higher than good Rst rates of 6.6%/4.5% (IBE HR=3.6, p=0.02, IBC HR=4.4, p=0.04, n=190). For patients in the Low risk group, there was no significant difference in 10-year IBTR/IBC rates with and without RT (Table, IBTR p=0.4, IBC p=0.9, n=177). The distribution of clinicopathologic risk factors (age <50 years, grade 3, size >2.5 cm) did not identify poor vs. good response subtypes, and multivariable analysis (n=485) indicated these traditional clinicopathologic factors and endocrine therapy were not significantly associated with IBTR (p≥0.22) or IBC (p≥0.34). Conclusions: Biosignatures identified a Low risk patient group with low 10-year recurrence rates with or without RT who may be candidates for omitting adjuvant RT. Biosignatures also identified an Elevated risk group receiving BCS plus RT with a poor response subtype that had unacceptably high recurrence rates, warranting potential intensified or alternate therapy.


Low Risk Group

Elevated Risk Group
n
%10-year Rate
IBTR/IBC
n
%10-year Rate
IBTR/IBC
BCS without RT
91
4.1/2.9
BCS without RT, all
118
29/18
BCS plus RT
86
6.3/2.7
BCS plus RT; good Rst
141
6.6/4.5



BCS plus RT; poor Rst
49
25/16

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2021 ASCO Annual Meeting

Session Type

Poster Discussion Session

Session Title

Breast Cancer—Local/Regional/Adjuvant

Track

Breast Cancer

Sub Track

Adjuvant Therapy

Citation

J Clin Oncol 39, 2021 (suppl 15; abstr 513)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2021.39.15_suppl.513

Abstract #

513

Abstract Disclosures