Benign breast diseases (BBDs) are common throughout a woman’s lifetime, from early reproductive life to the postmenopausal part of life, making it a potential health concern to a large number of women.^1-6 The etiology and risk of BBDs have not been extensively studied, despite an increasing incidence of BBDs detected by population-based mammographic screening.^7,8 However, the exact incidence rates are unexplored. Moreover, previous studies^1,2,9 on BBDs have often been small, inconsistent in their pathological disease classification, and conducted before mammographic screening programs were introduced. Consequently, to our knowledge, there are no up-to-date studies of the incidences of distinct BBD subtypes, and risk factors have not been well established. Furthermore, given that the risk of BBD diagnosis extends throughout several decades in a woman’s life, it is important to understand how age influences the risk.

Purpose: Anti-EGFR antibodies show limited response in breast cancer, partly due to activation of compensatory pathways. Furthermore, despite the clinical success of cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors in hormone receptor–positive tumors, aggressive triple-negative breast cancers (TNBC) are largely resistant due to CDK2/cyclin E expression, whereas free CDK2 inhibitors display normal tissue toxicity, limiting their therapeutic application. A cetuximab-based antibody drug conjugate (ADC) carrying a CDK inhibitor selected based on oncogene dysregulation, alongside patient subgroup stratification, may provide EGFR-targeted delivery. Experimental Design: Expressions of G1/S-phase cell cycle regulators were evaluated alongside EGFR in breast cancer. We conjugated cetuximab with CDK inhibitor SNS-032, for specific delivery to EGFR-expressing cells. We assessed ADC internalization and its antitumor functions in vitro and in orthotopically grown basal-like/TNBC xenografts. Results: Transcriptomic (6,173 primary, 27 baseline, and matched post-chemotherapy residual tumors), single-cell RNA sequencing (150,290 cells, 27 treatment-naïve tumors), and spatial transcriptomic (43 tumor sections, 22 TNBCs) analyses confirmed expression of CDK2 and its cyclin partners in basal-like/TNBCs, associated with EGFR. Spatiotemporal live-cell imaging and super-resolution confocal microscopy demonstrated ADC colocalization with late lysosomal clusters. The ADC inhibited cell cycle progression, induced cytotoxicity against high EGFR-expressing tumor cells, and bystander killing of neighboring EGFR-low tumor cells, but minimal effects on immune cells. Despite carrying a small molar fraction (1.65%) of the SNS-032 inhibitor, the ADC restricted EGFR-expressing spheroid and cell line/patient-derived xenograft tumor growth. Conclusions: Exploiting EGFR overexpression, and dysregulated cell cycle in aggressive and treatment-refractory tumors, a cetuximab–CDK inhibitor ADC may provide selective and efficacious delivery of cell cycle–targeted agents to basal-like/TNBCs, including chemotherapy-resistant residual disease.

PURPOSE: To assess the long-term (20-year) endocrine therapy benefit in premenopausal patients with breast cancer. METHODS: Secondary analysis of the Stockholm trial (STO-5, 1990-1997) randomly assigning 924 premenopausal patients to 2 years of goserelin (3.6 mg subcutaneously once every 28 days), tamoxifen (40 mg orally once daily), combined goserelin and tamoxifen, or no adjuvant endocrine therapy (control) is performed. Random assignment was stratified by lymph node status; lymph node–positive patients (n = 459) were allocated to standard chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil). Primary tumor immunohistochemistry (n = 731) and gene expression profiling (n = 586) were conducted in 2020. The 70-gene signature identified genomic low-risk and high-risk patients. Kaplan-Meier analysis, multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression, and multivariable time-varying flexible parametric modeling assessed the long-term distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI). Swedish high-quality registries allowed a complete follow-up of 20 years. RESULTS: In estrogen receptor–positive patients (n = 584, median age 47 years), goserelin, tamoxifen, and the combination significantly improved long-term distant recurrence-free interval compared with control (multivariable hazard ratio [HR], 0.49; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.75, HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.87, and HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.94, respectively). Significant goserelin-tamoxifen interaction was observed ( P = .016). Genomic low-risk patients (n = 305) significantly benefitted from tamoxifen (HR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.60), and genomic high-risk patients (n = 158) from goserelin (HR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.54). Increased risk from the addition of tamoxifen to goserelin was seen in genomic high-risk patients (HR, 3.36; 95% CI, 1.39 to 8.07). Moreover, long-lasting 20-year tamoxifen benefit was seen in genomic low-risk patients, whereas genomic high-risk patients had early goserelin benefit. CONCLUSION: This study shows 20-year benefit from 2 years of adjuvant endocrine therapy in estrogen receptor–positive premenopausal patients and suggests differential treatment benefit on the basis of tumor genomic characteristics. Combined goserelin and tamoxifen therapy showed no benefit over single treatment. Long-term follow-up to assess treatment benefit is critical.

Background: Use of immunohistochemistry-based surrogates of molecular breast cancer subtypes is common in research and clinical practice, but information on their comparative validity and prognostic capacity is scarce. Methods: Data from 2 PAM50-subtyped Swedish breast cancer cohorts were used: Stockholm tamoxifen trial–3 with 561 patients diagnosed 1976-1990 and Clinseq with 237 patients diagnosed 2005-2012. We evaluated 3 surrogate classifications; the immunohistochemistry-3 surrogate classifier based on estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2 and the St. Gallen and Prolif surrogate classifiers also including Ki-67. Accuracy, kappa, sensitivity, and specificity were computed as compared with PAM50. Alluvial diagrams of misclassification patterns were plotted. Distant recurrence-free survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier plots, and tamoxifen treatment benefit for luminal subtypes was modeled using flexible parametric survival models. Results: The concordance with PAM50 ranged from poor to moderate (kappa = 0.36-0.57, accuracy = 0.54-0.75), with best performance for the Prolif surrogate classification in both cohorts. Good concordance was only achieved when luminal subgroups were collapsed (kappa = 0.71-0.69, accuracy = 0.90-0.91). The St. Gallen surrogate classification misclassified luminal A into luminal B; the reverse pattern was seen with the others. In distant recurrence-free survival, surrogates were more similar to each other than PAM50. The difference in tamoxifen treatment benefit between luminal A and B for PAM50 was not replicated with any surrogate classifier. Conclusions: All surrogate classifiers had limited ability to distinguish between PAM50 luminal A and B, but patterns of misclassifications differed. PAM50 subtyping appeared to yield larger separation of survival between luminal subtypes than any of the surrogate classifications.

The metastatic potential of estrogen receptor (ER)‐positive breast cancers is heterogeneous and distant recurrences occur months to decades after primary diagnosis. We have previously shown that patients with tumors classified as ultralow risk by the 70‐gene signature have a minimal long‐term risk of fatal breast cancer. Here, we evaluate the previously unexplored underlying clinical and molecular characteristics of ultralow risk tumors in 538 ER‐positive patients from the Stockholm tamoxifen randomized trial (STO‐3). Out of the 98 ultralow risk tumors, 89% were luminal A molecular subtype, whereas 26% of luminal A tumors were of ultralow risk. Compared to other ER‐positive tumors, ultralow risk tumors were significantly (Fisher's test, P < .05) more likely to be of smaller tumor size, lower grade, progesterone receptor (PR)‐positive, human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2)‐negative and have low Ki‐67 levels (proliferation‐marker). Moreover, ultralow risk tumors showed significantly lower expression scores of multi‐gene modules associated with the AKT/mTOR‐pathway, proliferation (AURKA), HER2/ERBB2‐signaling, IGF1‐pathway, PTEN‐loss and immune response (IMMUNE1 and IMMUNE2) and higher expression scores of the PIK3CA‐mutation‐associated module. Furthermore, 706 genes were significantly (FDR < 0.001) differentially expressed in ultralow risk tumors, including lower expression of genes involved in immune response, PI3K/Akt/mTOR‐pathway, histones, cell cycle, DNA repair, apoptosis and higher expression of genes coding for epithelial‐to‐mesenchymal transition and homeobox proteins, among others. In conclusion, ultralow risk tumors, associated with minimal long‐term risk of fatal disease, differ from other ER‐positive tumors, including luminal A molecular subtype tumors. Identification of these characteristics is important to improve our prediction of nonfatal vs fatal breast cancer.

The clinical impact of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) is less known for breast cancer patients with the estrogen receptor-positive (ER+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor-negative (HER−) subtype. Here, we explored the prognostic and predictive value of TILs regarding distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) in 763 postmenopausal patients randomized to receive tamoxifen vs. no systemic treatment. TILs were assessed in whole section tumor samples stained with H&E and divided into low (<10%), intermediate (10–39%), or high (≥40%). High TILs were associated with poor prognostic variables and good prognoses for all patients, but not within the ER+/HER2− group. Within the ER+/HER2− group, high gene expression of CD19 and PD-L1 and high IMMUNE1 score indicated good prognosis in multivariable analysis while high CD8 and CD19 gene expression and high IMMUNE1 score were associated with less tamoxifen benefit. These results indicate that within the ER+/HER2− subtype there could be subsets of patients where expression of specific TIL markers might be used to reveal candidates for immune therapy interventions upon failure of the endocrine therapy.