Get your free personalized podcast brief

We scan new podcasts and send you the top 5 insights daily.

For high-grade, PR-negative ER+ breast cancers with very high Ki-67, oncologists may use intrinsic subtyping assays. If a 'basal-like' subtype is identified, they consider treating the patient with a triple-negative breast cancer regimen (like KEYNOTE-522) instead of standard ER+ therapy, a non-standard but biology-driven approach.

Related Insights

The ELEGANT trial enrolls all high-risk ER-positive patients, not just those with ESR1 mutations. The rationale is that unlike in metastatic disease, early breast cancer is fundamentally ER-driven. Elicestrin targets both wild-type and mutant ER, making the mutation status less critical for efficacy in this earlier setting.

Real-world data demonstrates that a subset of node-negative (N0) breast cancer patients with high-risk features has a recurrence and mortality rate nearly identical to that of node-positive (N1) patients. This finding justifies intensifying adjuvant therapy with agents like CDK4/6 inhibitors for this seemingly lower-risk group, as was done in the NATALEE trial.

Cancers with estrogen receptor (ER) expression of 50% or less, while technically HR+, often behave biologically like basal or triple-negative tumors. These cancers are not primarily endocrine-driven and show a significant benefit from the addition of immune checkpoint inhibitors, challenging traditional subtype classifications.

Trials like TaylorX and MINDACT use genomic scores to identify patients with early-stage, HR+/HER2- breast cancer who won't benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. This avoids significant toxicity for two-thirds to over 80% of patients who would have received it under older guidelines, without compromising their outcomes.

A key distinction for oncologists is that PIK3CA mutations are typically "truncal" (present from baseline), whereas ESR1 mutations are "acquired" after exposure to aromatase inhibitors. This biological difference dictates when and how to test for each biomarker throughout a patient's treatment journey.

The KEYNOTE-756 and Checkmate 7FL trials found high pathological complete response (pCR) rates with neoadjuvant immunotherapy in ER-low (1-10%) breast cancers. This suggests this unique subgroup, often excluded from triple-negative trials but behaving similarly, may benefit significantly from immunotherapy, though it is not yet standard of care.

NGS testing is revealing that acquired HER2 kinase domain mutations, not amplifications, are an emerging resistance mechanism in ER+ lobular breast cancer. This creates a targetable population for HER2 TKIs like neratinib or tucatinib, offering a new line of targeted therapy.

For high-risk early-stage breast cancer patients with a germline PALB2 mutation, clinicians would consider using an adjuvant PARP inhibitor off-label. This is justified by PALB2's biological similarity to BRCA2 and promising response data from the metastatic setting, providing an option for patients who meet Olympia trial criteria but have a different mutation.

Despite the presence of PIK3CA mutations in some triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) tumors, Phase III trials with AKT inhibitors have been negative. Currently, there is insufficient evidence to support using PI3K/AKT pathway inhibitors for TNBC in clinical practice.

The bispecific antibody Pumitamig demonstrated identical overall response rates in both PD-L1 positive and negative triple-negative breast cancer patients. This is significant as it provides a potential immunotherapy option for the two-thirds of patients who are PD-L1 negative and currently ineligible for such treatments.

Intrinsic Subtyping Unmasks 'Basal-Like' Biology in ER+ Breast Cancers, Altering Treatment | RiffOn