Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) benefits some patients with triple-negative breast cancer, but what distinguishes responders from non-responders is unclear¹. Because ICB targets cell–cell interactions², we investigated the impact of multicellular spatial organization on response, and explored how ICB remodels the tumour microenvironment. We show that cell phenotype, activation state and spatial location are intimately linked, influence ICB effect and differ in sensitive versus resistant tumours early on-treatment. We used imaging mass cytometry³ to profile the in situ expression of 43 proteins in tumours from patients in a randomized trial of neoadjuvant ICB, sampled at three timepoints (baseline, n = 243; early on-treatment, n = 207; post-treatment, n = 210). Multivariate modelling showed that the fractions of proliferating CD8⁺TCF1⁺T cells and MHCII⁺ cancer cells were dominant predictors of response, followed by cancer–immune interactions with B cells and granzyme B⁺ T cells. On-treatment, responsive tumours contained abundant granzyme B⁺ T cells, whereas resistant tumours were characterized by CD15⁺ cancer cells. Response was best predicted by combining tissue features before and on-treatment, pointing to a role for early biopsies in guiding adaptive therapy. Our findings show that multicellular spatial organization is a major determinant of ICB effect and suggest that its systematic enumeration in situ could help realize precision immuno-oncology.

Trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) intracranial activity has been observed in small or retrospective patient cohorts with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–positive (HER2⁺) advanced/metastatic breast cancer (mBC) and stable or active (untreated/previously treated and progressing) brain metastases (BMs). The phase 3b/4 DESTINY-Breast12 study investigated T-DXd in patients with HER2⁺ mBC and is, to our knowledge, the largest prospective study of T-DXd in patients with BMs in this setting. Patients (stable/active BMs (n = 263) and no BMs (n = 241)) treated with one or more prior anti-HER2–based regimens received T-DXd (5.4 mg per kg). Primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS; BMs cohort) and objective response rate (ORR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (non-BMs cohort). Additional endpoints included central nervous system (CNS) PFS, ORR, time to second progression, CNS ORR (BMs cohort), incidence of new symptomatic CNS metastases (non-BMs cohort), time to progression, duration of response, overall survival and safety (both cohorts). No formal hypothesis testing was conducted for this single-arm, open-label study. In the BMs cohort, 12-month PFS was 61.6% (95% confidence interval (CI): 54.9–67.6), and 12-month CNS PFS was 58.9% (95% CI: 51.9–65.3). In the non-BMs cohort, ORR was 62.7% (95% CI: 56.5–68.8). Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 51% (BMs cohort) and 49% (non-BMs cohort) of patients. Investigator-reported interstitial lung disease/pneumonitis occurred in 16% (grade ≥3: 3%) of patients with BMs and 13% (grade ≥3: 1%) of patients without BMs. These data show substantial and durable overall and intracranial activity for T-DXd, supporting its use in previously treated patients with HER2⁺ mBC irrespective of stable/active baseline BMs. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04739761.

Trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) demonstrated significantly improved efficacy over trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) in DESTINY-Breast03 (median follow-up, 28 months). We report updated efficacy and safety analyses, including secondary and exploratory efficacy endpoints (median follow-up, 41 months) of DESTINY-Breast03. Patients with advanced HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer previously treated with taxane and trastuzumab were randomized to T-DXd (5.4 mg per kg (261 patients)) or T-DM1 (3.6 mg per kg (263 patients)). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review and was previously reported. The key secondary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Other secondary endpoints included objective response rate, duration of response and PFS (all by investigator assessment) and safety. At data cutoff, 20 November 2023, median PFS by investigator assessment was 29.0 versus 7.2 months (hazard ratio (HR), 0.30; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.24–0.38), the 36-month PFS rate was 45.7% versus 12.4% and median OS was 52.6 versus 42.7 months (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.56–0.94) with T-DXd versus T-DM1, respectively. Treatment-emergent adverse events were consistent with the previous analyses. No new instances of grade ≥3 interstitial lung disease or pneumonitis occurred (all grade rate, 16.7% (T-DXd) versus 3.4% (T-DM1)). With longer follow-up, T-DXd continued to demonstrate superior efficacy over T-DM1 with a manageable safety profile. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT03529110.

For decades, the systemic treatment of localized triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) has exclusively relied on chemotherapy. Recent advancements, however, are rapidly reshaping the treatment algorithms for this disease. The addition of pembrolizumab to neoadjuvant chemotherapy has indeed shown to significantly improve event-free survival for stage II–III TNBC, leading to its establishment as new standard of care in this setting. This landmark advancement has however raised several important scientific questions. Indeed, we desperately need strategies to identify upfront patients deriving benefit from the addition of immunotherapy. Moreover, the best integration of pembrolizumab with further recent advancements (capecitabine, olaparib) is yet to be defined. Lastly, extensive efforts are needed to minimize the impact on patients of immune-related adverse events and financial toxicity. The next decade of clinical research will be key to overcome these challenges, and ultimately learn how to optimally integrate immunotherapy in the treatment landscape of TNBC.

PURPOSE: Cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) combined with endocrine therapy (ET) are the standard first-line treatment for hormone receptor–positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (HER2–) advanced breast cancer (ABC); however, disease progression occurs in almost all patients and additional treatment options are needed. Herein, we report outcomes of the postMONARCH trial investigating a switch in ET with/without CDK4/6 inhibition with abemaciclib after disease progression on CDK4/6i. METHODS: This double-blind, randomized phase III study enrolled patients with disease progression on previous CDK4/6i plus aromatase inhibitor as initial therapy for advanced disease or recurrence on/after adjuvant CDK4/6i + ET. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to abemaciclib + fulvestrant or placebo + fulvestrant. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included PFS by blinded independent central review, objective response rate (ORR), and safety. RESULTS: This study randomly assigned 368 patients (abemaciclib + fulvestrant, n = 182 placebo + fulvestrant, n = 186). At the primary analysis (258 events), the hazard ratio (HR) was 0.73 (95% CI, 0.57 to 0.95; nominal P = .017), with median PFS 6.0 (95% CI, 5.6 to 8.6) versus 5.3 (95% CI, 3.7 to 5.6) months and 6-month PFS rates of 50% and 37% in the abemaciclib + fulvestrant and placebo + fulvestrant arms, respectively. These results were supported by BICR-assessed PFS (HR, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.39 to 0.77]; nominal P < .001). A consistent treatment effect was seen across major clinical and genomic subgroups, including with/without ESR1 or PIK3CA mutations. Among patients with measurable disease, investigator-assessed ORR was improved with abemaciclib + fulvestrant versus placebo + fulvestrant (17% v 7%; nominal P = .015). No new safety signals were observed, with findings consistent with the known safety profile of abemaciclib. CONCLUSION: Abemaciclib + fulvestrant significantly improved PFS after disease progression on previous CDK4/6i + ET in patients with HR+, HER2– ABC, offering an additional targeted therapy option for these patients.