Virtual Molecular and Precision Medicine Clinic to Improve Access to Clinical Trials for Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer: An Academic/Community Collaboration.

PURPOSE: There is a demand for improved care delivery surrounding genomic testing and clinical trial enrollment among patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). We sought to improve the current process via real-time informal consultation and prescreening assessment for patients with MBC treated by community and academic medical oncologists by implementing a virtual molecular and precision medicine (vMAP) clinic. METHODS: The vMAP program used a virtual referral system directed to a multidisciplinary team with precision medicine expertise. Providers contacted vMAP regarding patients with MBC, and on receipt of referral, the vMAP team engaged in discussion to identify if further diagnostics were needed (including genomic testing) and to identify potential clinical trials or standard treatment options. Recommendations were then sent to the referring provider within 72 hours. Pre-/postsurveys were issued to network physicians to assess for barriers, clinical trial access, and vMAP referral experience. Program implementation was evaluated with the Squire 2.0 reporting guidelines for quality improvement in health care as a framework. RESULTS: Eighty-one cases from 22 providers were referred to vMAP over a 26-month period. The average response time to the referring provider with a finalized recommendation was 1.90 ± 1.82 days. A total of 86.4% of cases had clinical trial options on vMAP prescreen, with 40.7% initiating formal screening assessments and 27 patients (33.3%) ultimately enrolling on trials. On resurvey, 92% of survey responses across community oncology referring providers said that they were very likely to use vMAP again. CONCLUSION: In the initial 2-year period, vMAP demonstrated an efficient means to offer real-time interpretation of genomic testing and identification of clinical trials for patients with MBC, with effective clinical trial enrollment and high rates of referring provider satisfaction.

Immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with breast cancer.

Purpose: To explore the immunogenicity of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines in patients with breast cancer based on type of anticancer treatment. Methods: Patients with breast cancer had anti-spike antibody concentrations measured ⩾14 days after receiving a full SARS-CoV-2 vaccination series. The primary endpoint was IgA/G/M anti-spike antibody concentration. Multiple regression analysis was used to analyze log10-transformed antibody titer concentrations. Results: Between 29 April and 20 July 2021, 233 patients with breast cancer were enrolled, of whom 212 were eligible for the current analysis. Patients who received mRNA-1273 (Moderna) had the highest antibody concentrations [geometric mean concentration (GMC) in log10: 3.0 U/mL], compared to patients who received BNT162b2 (Pfizer) (GMC: 2.6 U/mL) (multiple regression adjusted p = 0.013) and Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson & Johnson/Janssen) (GMC: 2.6 U/mL) (p = 0.071). Patients receiving cytotoxic therapy had a significantly lower antibody titer GMC (2.5 U/mL) compared to patients on no therapy or endocrine therapy alone (3.0 U/mL) (p = 0.005). Patients on targeted therapies (GMC: 2.7 U/mL) also had a numerically lower GMC compared to patients not receiving therapy/on endocrine therapy alone, although this result was not significant (p = 0.364). Among patients who received an additional dose of vaccine (n = 31), 28 demonstrated an increased antibody response that ranged from 0.2 to >4.4 U/ mL. Conclusion: Most patients with breast cancer generate detectable anti-spike antibodies following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, though systemic treatments and vaccine type impact level of response. Further studies are needed to better understand the clinical implications of different antibody levels, the effectiveness of additional SARS-CoV-2 vaccine doses, and the risk of breakthrough infections among patients with breast cancer.

Immunogenicity and Reactogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines in Patients With Cancer: The CANVAX Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: The immunogenicity and reactogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with cancer are poorly understood. METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study of adults with solid-organ or hematologic cancers to evaluate anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin A/M/G spike antibodies, neutralization, and reactogenicity ≥ 7 days following two doses of mRNA-1273, BNT162b2, or one dose of Ad26.COV2.S. We analyzed responses by multivariate regression and included data from 1,638 healthy controls, previously reported, for comparison. RESULTS: Between April and July 2021, we enrolled 1,001 patients; 762 were eligible for analysis (656 had neutralization measured). mRNA-1273 was the most immunogenic (log10 geometric mean concentration [GMC] 2.9, log10 geometric mean neutralization titer [GMT] 2.3), followed by BNT162b2 (GMC 2.4; GMT 1.9) and Ad26.COV2.S (GMC 1.5; GMT 1.4; P < .001). The proportion of low neutralization (< 20% of convalescent titers) among Ad26.COV2.S recipients was 69.9%. Prior COVID-19 infection (in 7.1% of the cohort) was associated with higher responses (P < .001). Antibody titers and neutralization were quantitatively lower in patients with cancer than in comparable healthy controls, regardless of vaccine type (P < .001). Receipt of chemotherapy in the prior year or current steroids were associated with lower antibody levels and immune checkpoint blockade with higher neutralization. Systemic reactogenicity varied by vaccine and correlated with immune responses (P = .002 for concentration, P = .016 for neutralization). In 32 patients who received an additional vaccine dose, side effects were similar to prior doses, and 30 of 32 demonstrated increased antibody titers (GMC 1.05 before additional dose, 3.17 after dose). CONCLUSION: Immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are modestly impaired in patients with cancer. These data suggest utility of antibody testing to identify patients for whom additional vaccine doses may be effective and appropriate, although larger prospective studies are needed.

Systematic tissue collection during clinical breast biopsy is feasible, safe and enables high-content translational analyses.

Systematic collection of fresh tissues for research at the time of diagnostic image-guided breast biopsy has the potential to fuel a wide variety of innovative studies. Here we report the initial experience, including safety, feasibility, and laboratory proof-of-principle, with the collection and analysis of research specimens obtained via breast core needle biopsy immediately following routine clinical biopsy at a single institution over a 14-month period. Patients underwent one or two additional core biopsies following collection of all necessary clinical specimens. In total, 395 patients were approached and 270 consented to the research study, yielding a 68.4% consent rate. Among consenting patients, 238 lesions were biopsied for research, resulting in 446 research specimens collected. No immediate complications were observed. Representative research core specimens showed high diagnostic concordance with clinical core biopsies. Flow cytometry demonstrated consistent recovery of hundreds to thousands of viable cells per research core. Among a group of HER2 + tumor research specimens, HER2 assessment by flow cytometry correlated highly with immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining, and in addition revealed extensive inter- and intra-tumoral variation in HER2 levels of potential clinical relevance. Suitability for single-cell transcriptomic analysis was demonstrated for a triple-negative tumor core biopsy, revealing substantial cellular diversity in the tumor immune microenvironment, including a prognostically relevant T cell subpopulation. Thus, collection of fresh tissues for research purposes at the time of diagnostic breast biopsy is safe, feasible and efficient, and may provide a high-yield mechanism to generate a rich tissue repository for a wide variety of cross-disciplinary research.

Locally Recurrent Secretory Carcinoma of the Breast with NTRK3 Gene Fusion.

Enhanced understanding of the molecular events underlying oncogenesis has led to the development of "tumor-agnostic" treatment strategies, which aim to target a tumor's genomic profile regardless of its anatomic site of origin. A classic example is the translocation resulting in an ETV6-NTRK3 gene fusion, a characteristic driver of a histologically diverse array of cancers. The chimeric ETV6-NTRK3 fusion protein elicits constitutive activation of the tropomyosin receptor kinase (TRK) C protein, leading to increased cell survival, growth, and proliferation. Two TRK inhibitors, larotrectinib and entrectinib, are currently approved for use in the metastatic setting for the treatment of advanced solid tumors harboring NTRK fusions. Here we report a rare case of recurrent secretory carcinoma of the breast (SCB) with NTRK3 gene fusion. Whereas most cases of SCB represent slow-growing tumors with favorable outcomes, the case detailed here is the first to the authors' knowledge of recurrence within 1 year of surgery. We review the molecular findings and potential clinical significance. KEY POINTS: The translocation resulting in the ETV6-NTRK3 gene fusion is a known oncogenic driver characteristic of secretory carcinoma of the breast (SCB). Whereas most cases of SCB represent slow-growing tumors with favorable outcomes, the case here with ETV6-NTRK3 gene fusion had local recurrence within 1 year of surgery. Two tropomyosin receptor kinase (TRK) inhibitors, larotrectinib and entrectinib, are approved to treat NTRK fusion-positive tumors, demonstrating sustained high overall response rates in the metastatic setting. Approval of TRK inhibitors necessitates optimization of NTRK fusion detection assays, including detection with liquid biopsies.