Purpose: Ribociclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) demonstrated a statistically significant progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) benefit in the phase III MONALEESA-7 trial of pre-/perimenopausal patients with hormone receptor (HR)-positive (HR+), HER2-negative (HER2−) advanced breast cancer (ABC). The median OS was not reached in the ribociclib arm in the protocol-specified final analysis; we hence performed an exploratory OS and additional outcomes analysis with an extended follow-up (median, 53.5 months). Patients and Methods: Patients were randomized to receive ET [goserelin plus nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) or tamoxifen] with ribociclib or placebo. OS was evaluated with a stratified Cox proportional hazard model and summarized with Kaplan–Meier methods. Results: The intent-to-treat population included 672 patients. Median OS was 58.7 months with ribociclib versus 48.0 months with placebo [hazard ratio = 0.76; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.61–0.96]. Kaplan–Meier estimated OS at 48 months was 60% and 50% with ribociclib and placebo, respectively. Subgroup analyses were generally consistent with the OS benefit, including patients who received NSAI and patients aged less than 40 years. Subsequent antineoplastic therapies following discontinuation were balanced between the ribociclib (77%) and placebo (78%) groups. Use of cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors after discontinuation was higher with placebo (26%) versus ribociclib (13%). Time to first chemotherapy was significantly delayed with ribociclib versus placebo. No drug–drug interactions were observed between ribociclib and either NSAI. Conclusions: Ribociclib plus ET continued to show significantly longer OS than ET alone in pre-/perimenopausal patients, including patients aged less than 40 years, with HR+/HER2− ABC with 53.5 months of median follow-up (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02278120).

Optimal treatment outcomes for breast cancer are dependent on a timely diagnosis followed by an organized, multidisciplinary approach to care. However, in many low‐ and middle‐income countries, effective care management pathways can be difficult to follow because of financial constraints, a lack of resources, an insufficiently trained workforce, and/or poor infrastructure. On the basis of prior work by the Breast Health Global Initiative, this article proposes a phased implementation strategy for developing sustainable approaches to enhancing patient care in limited‐resource settings by creating roadmaps that are individualized and adapted to the baseline environment. This strategy proposes that, after a situational analysis, implementation phases begin with bolstering palliative care capacity, especially in settings where a late‐stage diagnosis is common. This is followed by strengthening the patient pathway, with consideration given to a dynamic balance between centralization of services into centers of excellence to achieve better quality and decentralization of services to increase patient access. The use of resource checklists ensures that comprehensive therapy or palliative care can be delivered safely and effectively. Episodic or continuous monitoring with established process and quality metrics facilitates ongoing assessment, which should drive continual process improvements. A series of case studies provides a snapshot of country experiences with enhancing patient care, including the implementation of national cancer control plans in Kenya, palliative care in Romania, the introduction of a 1‐stop clinic for diagnosis in Brazil, the surgical management of breast cancer in India, and the establishment of a women's cancer center in Ghana.

PURPOSE: A head-to-head comparison of efficacy between a cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor plus endocrine therapy (ET) versus combination chemotherapy (CT) has never been reported in patients with clinically aggressive hormone receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (HR+/HER2–) advanced breast cancer (ABC). METHODS: In this open-label, multicenter, randomized phase II trial, pre/perimenopausal women with clinically aggressive HR+/HER2– ABC were randomly assigned 1:1 to first-line ribociclib (600 mg once daily; 3 weeks on, 1 week off) plus letrozole/anastrozole and goserelin or investigator's choice of combination CT (docetaxel plus capecitabine, paclitaxel plus gemcitabine, or capecitabine plus vinorelbine). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Among 222 patients randomly assigned to ribociclib plus ET (n = 112) or combination CT (n = 110), 150 (67.6%) had symptomatic visceral metastases, 41 (18.5%) had rapid disease progression per investigator's judgment, and 31 (14.0%) had symptomatic nonvisceral disease. Overall, 106 (47.7%) patients had investigator-assessed visceral crisis. The median follow-up time was 37.0 months. At data cutoff, 31.3% (ribociclib arm) and 15.5% (CT arm) of patients had completed study treatment and transitioned to post-trial access. The median PFS was 21.8 months (ribociclib plus ET; [95% CI, 17.4 to 26.7]) and 12.8 months (combination CT; [95% CI, 10.1 to 18.4); hazard ratio, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.43 to 0.87]; P = .003. The overall response rates and the median time to response in the ribociclib versus CT arms, respectively, were 66.1% and 61.8% and 4.9 months and 3.2 months (hazard ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.55 to 1.06]). Lower rates of symptomatic adverse events were observed in the ribociclib versus CT arm. CONCLUSION: First-line ribociclib plus ET showed a significant PFS benefit, similar response rates, and better tolerability over combination CT in patients with clinically aggressive HR+/HER2– ABC.

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.

PURPOSE: Around 50% of patients with breast cancer in low- or middle-income countries are younger than 50 years, a poor prognostic variable. We report the outcome of patients with breast cancer 40 years and younger. METHODS: We reviewed 386 patients with breast cancer 40 years and younger and retrieved demographic, clinicopathologic, treatment-related, disease progression, and survival data from electronic medical records. RESULTS: The median age at diagnosis was 36 years, and infiltrating ductal carcinoma was present in 94.3% of patients, infiltrating lobular carcinoma in 1.3%, and ductal carcinoma in situ in 4.4%. Grade 1 disease was present in 8.5% of patients, grade 2 in 35.5%, and grade 3 in 53.4%; 25.1% had human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)–positive, 74.6% had hormone receptor (HR)+, and 16.6% had triple-negative breast cancer. Early breast cancer (EBC) constituted 63.6% (stage I, 22.4%; stage II, 41.2%) of patients, whereas 23.2% had stage III, and 13.2% had metastatic disease at diagnosis. Of patients with EBC, 51% had partial mastectomy and 49.0% had total mastectomy. And 77.1% had chemotherapy with or without anti-HER2 therapy. All HR+ patients received adjuvant hormonal therapy. The disease-free survival at 5 years was 72.5% and 55.9% at 10 years. The overall survival (OS) was 89.4% at 5 years and 76% at 10 years. Patients with stages I/II had an OS of 96.0% at 5 years and 87.1% at 10 years. Patients with stage III had an OS of 88.3% at 5 years and 68.7% at 10 years. The OS of patients with stage IV was 64.5% at 5 years and 48.4% at 10 years. CONCLUSION: We report survival rates of 89% at 5 years and 76% at 10 years with modern multidisciplinary management. Best results were seen in EBC: OS rates of 96% and 87% at 5 years and 10 years.