PURPOSE: To guide clinicians and policymakers in three global resource-constrained settings on treating patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) when Maximal setting–guideline recommended treatment is unavailable. METHODS: A multidisciplinary, multinational panel reviewed existing ASCO guidelines and conducted modified ADAPTE and formal consensus processes. RESULTS: Four published resource-agnostic guidelines were adapted for resource-constrained settings; informing two rounds of formal consensus; recommendations received ≥75% agreement. RECOMMENDATIONS: Clinicians should recommend treatment according to menopausal status, pathological and biomarker features when quality results are available. In first-line, for hormone receptor (HR)–positive MBC, when a non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor and CDK 4/6 inhibitor combination is unavailable, use hormonal therapy alone. For life-threatening disease, use single-agent chemotherapy or surgery for local control. For premenopausal patients, use ovarian suppression or ablation plus hormone therapy in Basic settings. For human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)–positive MBC, if trastuzumab, pertuzumab, and chemotherapy are unavailable, use trastuzumab and chemotherapy; if unavailable, use chemotherapy. For HER2-positive, HR-positive MBC, use standard first-line therapy, or endocrine therapy if contraindications. For triple-negative MBC with unknown PD-L1 status, or if PD-L1–positive and immunotherapy unavailable, use single-agent chemotherapy. For germline BRCA1/ 2 mutation–positive MBC, if poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor is unavailable, use hormonal therapy (HR-positive MBC) and chemotherapy (HR-negative MBC). In second-line, for HR-positive MBC, Enhanced setting recommendations depend on prior treatment; for Limited, use tamoxifen or chemotherapy. For HER2-positive MBC, if trastuzumab deruxtecan is unavailable, use trastuzumab emtansine; if unavailable, capecitabine and lapatinib; if unavailable, trastuzumab and/or chemotherapy (hormonal therapy alone for HR-positive MBC). Additional information is available at www.asco.org/resource-stratified-guidelines . It is ASCO's view that healthcare providers and system decision-makers should be guided by the recommendations for the highest stratum of resources available. The guideline is intended to complement but not replace local guidelines.

Background: About 10,000 women are diagnosed with breast cancer and about 2000 women are diagnosed with ovarian cancer each year in Romania. There is an insufficient number of genetic studies in the Romanian population to identify patients at high risk of inherited breast and ovarian cancer. Methods: We evaluated 250 women of Romanian ethnicity with BC and 240 women of Romanian ethnicity with ovarian cancer for the presence of damaging germline mutations in breast cancer genes 1 and 2 (BRCA1 and BRCA2, respectively) using Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) technology. Results: Of the 250 breast cancer patients, 47 carried a disease-predisposing BRCA mutation (30 patients (63.83%) with a BRCA1 mutation and 17 patients (36.17%) with a BRCA2 mutation). Of the 240 ovarian cancer patients, 60 carried a BRCA mutation (43 patients (72%) with a BRCA1 mutation and 17 patients (28%) with a BRCA2 mutation). In the BRCA1 gene, we identified 18 variants (4 in both patient groups (ovarian and breast cancer patients), 1 mutation variant in the BC patient group, and 13 mutation variants in the ovarian cancer patient group). In the BRCA2 gene, we identified 17 variants (1 variant in both ovarian and breast cancer patients, 6 distinct variants in BC patients, and 10 distinct variants in ovarian cancer patients). The prevailing mutation variants identified were c.3607C>T (BRCA1) (18 cases) followed by c.5266dupC (BRCA1) (17 cases) and c.9371A>T (BRCA2) (12 cases). The most prevalent mutation, BRCA1 c.3607C>T, which is less common in the Romanian population, was mainly associated with triple-negative BC and ovarian serous adenocarcinoma. Conclusion: The results of our analysis may help to establish specific variants of BRCA mutations in the Romanian population and identify individuals at high risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome by genetic testing.

In Romania, breast cancer (BC) is the most common malignancy in women. However, there is limited data on the prevalence of predisposing germline mutations in the population in the era of precision medicine, where molecular testing has become an indispensable tool in cancer diagnosis, prognosis, and therapeutics. Therefore, we conducted a retrospective study to determine the prevalence, mutational spectrum, and histopathological prediction factors for hereditary breast cancer (HBC) in Romania. A cohort of 411 women diagnosed with BC selected upon NCCN v.1.2020 guidelines underwent an 84-gene NGS-based panel testing for breast cancer risk assessment during 2018–2022 in the Department of Oncogenetics of the Oncological Institute of Cluj-Napoca, Romania. A total of 135 (33%) patients presented pathogenic mutations in 19 genes. The prevalence of genetic variants was determined, and demographic and clinicopathological characteristics were analyzed. We observed differences among BRCA and non-BRCA carriers regarding family history of cancer, age of onset, and histopathological subtypes. Triple-negative (TN) tumors were more often BRCA1 positive, unlike BRCA2 positive tumors, which were more often the Luminal B subtype. The most frequent non-BRCA mutations were found in CHEK2, ATM, and PALB2, and several recurrent variants were identified for each gene. Unlike other European countries, germline testing for HBC is still limited due to the high costs and is not covered by the National Health System (NSH), thus leading to significant discrepancies related to the screening and prophylaxis of cancer.

PURPOSE: Breast cancer civil society organizations have emerged in Eastern Europe and Central Asia to raise awareness about cancer as a survivable disease and provide patient support. We explored the experiences and priorities of these organizations with the goal of making recommendations to advance cancer advocacy and improve cancer care. METHODS: We conducted in-depth interviews and focus group discussions with representatives of civil society organizations attending the 7th Women’s Empowerment Cancer Advocacy Network Summit in Romania in 2015. Interviews were audiorecorded, transcribed, coded, and analyzed for key themes. Findings were discussed at the 8th Women’s Empowerment Cancer Advocacy Network Summit in Ukraine in 2017 to ensure accuracy. RESULTS: We conducted nine in-depth interviews and three focus group discussions with a total of 36 participants. Survivor- and oncologist-led organizations played an important role in filling existing gaps in public health care systems through awareness raising, patient support, and advocacy to improve early detection and access to treatment. Barriers to these efforts included persistent stigma, mistrust of patients toward the public health care system, limited access to evidence-based guidelines, difficulty adapting existing best practices to their setting, and insufficient involvement of policymakers. Key facilitators of advocacy efforts included effective local and international partnerships with physicians, like-minded organizations, and policymakers to facilitate access to educational resources, improve breast cancer early detection and care, and catalyze meaningful policy change. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight the value of providing opportunities for advocates to connect and share experiences. To advance cancer advocacy and improve cancer care, the following needs were identified: dissemination of resource-adapted information for improving outcomes; needs assessments; improved program-monitoring practices; and fostering and promotion of collaboration between advocates, medical professionals, and local governments.

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is an aggressive malignancy that disproportionately affects young women. The integration of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has significantly improved outcomes in both early-stage and metastatic TNBC, shifting attention toward long-term survivorship issues, particularly endocrine function and fertility. However, the reproductive safety profile of ICIs remains insufficiently characterized. This narrative review synthesizes current preclinical and clinical evidence on ICI-associated reproductive toxicity, focusing on both direct immune-mediated gonadal injury and indirect disruption of the hypothalamic–pituitary–gonadal axis. Experimental models consistently demonstrate immune cell infiltration of ovarian and testicular tissue, cytokine-driven inflammatory cascades, follicular atresia, impaired spermatogenesis, and altered steroidogenesis following PD-1/PD-L1 and CTLA-4 blockade. Emerging clinical data report cases of immune-related orchitis, azoospermia, testosterone deficiency, diminished ovarian reserve, and premature ovarian insufficiency. Secondary hypogonadism due to immune-mediated hypophysitis represents an additional and frequently underdiagnosed mechanism. We further discuss the oncofertility challenges faced by young patients with TNBC treated with chemoimmunotherapy, emphasizing the uncertainty of fertility risk stratification and the importance of early fertility counseling and individualized fertility preservation strategies. To illustrate the potential clinical impact, we present the case of a 34-year-old nulliparous woman who developed premature ovarian insufficiency two years after neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy including atezolizumab, despite ovarian suppression. In conclusion, while ICIs have transformed the therapeutic landscape of TNBC, their potential long-term impact on reproductive and endocrine health represents a clinically significant concern. A precautionary, multidisciplinary oncofertility approach and prospective clinical registries are essential to define the true incidence and mechanisms of ICI-associated reproductive toxicity.

Background: Breast cancer (BC) is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in women and the leading cause of cancer-related deaths in women globally. Carriers of P/LP variants in the BRCA1, BRCA2, TP53, PTEN, CDH1, PALB2, and STK11 genes have an increased risk of developing BC, which is why more and more guidelines recommend prophylactic mastectomy in this group of patients. Because traditional genetic testing is expensive and can cause delays in patient management, radiomics based on diagnostic imaging could be an alternative. This study aims to evaluate whether ultrasound-based radiomics features can predict P/LP variant status in BC patients. Methods: This retrospective study included 88 breast tumors in patients tested with multigene panel tests, including all seven above-mentioned genes. Ultrasound images were acquired prior to any treatment, and the tumoral and peritumoral areas were used to extract radiomics data. The study population was divided into P/LP and non-P/LP variant groups. Radiomics features were analyzed using machine learning models, alone or in combination with clinical features, with the aim of predicting the genetic status of BC patients. Results: We observed significant differences in radiomics features between P/LP- and non-P/LP-variant-driven tumors. The developed radiomics model achieved a maximum mean accuracy of 85.7% in identifying P/LP variant carriers. Including features from the peritumoral area yielded the same maximum accuracy. Conclusions: Radiomics models based on ultrasound images of breast tumors may provide a promising alternative for predicting P/LP variant status in BC patients. This approach could reduce dependence on costly genetic testing and expedite the diagnostic process. However, further validation in larger and more diverse populations is needed.