Background: Recent data suggest that human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-low breast cancer may represent a distinct entity. We aimed to compare disease characteristics and outcomes between HER2-low and HER2-0 in estrogen receptor (ER) positive, early-stage breast cancer. Methods: A single center retrospective study comprising all women with ER positive, HER2 negative early breast cancer, for whom an Oncotype DX test was performed between 2005 and 2012. Women were grouped to HER2-low (immunohistochemistry þ1 or þ2 and in situ hybridization not amplified) or HER2-0. Clinico-pathological features and Oncotype recurrence score (RS) were collected. Data on overall-survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and distant disease-free survival (DDFS) were evaluated according to HER2 expression status. Results: 608 women were included, of which 304 women had HER2-0 and 304 had HER2-low disease. Lobular subtype was significantly more common in HER-0 compared to HER2-low disease (17% vs. 8%, p ¼ 0.005). The prevalence of other clinic-pathological characteristics and long-term prognosis were comparable between both groups. For women with high genomic risk (RS > 25), HER2-low expression was associated with significantly favorable OS (HR ¼ 0.31, 95% CI 0.11e0.78, p ¼ 0.01), DFS (HR ¼ 0.40, 95% CI 0.20e0.82, p ¼ 0.01) and DDFS (HR ¼ 0.26, 95% CI 0.11e0.63, P ¼ 0.002) compared to women with HER2-0. For women with low genomic risk (RS 25), long-term prognosis was unrelated to HER2 expression. Conclusion:The prognostic impact of HER2-low expression in early-stage luminal disease varies across the genomic risk, with significant favorable outcomes of HER2-low expression compared to HER2-0 in women with high genomic risk.

Background: There are scarce data on venous thromboembolism (VTE) rates among non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). The Khorana Score (KS), used to guide thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients, was validated in patients receiving chemotherapy.Objective: To assess VTE rates and KS performance among NSCLC patients treated with ICI or chemotherapy. Methods:We performed a retrospective cohort study of NSCLC patients starting either ICI or platinum-based chemotherapy. The 6-month cumulative incidence of VTE in the ICI and chemotherapy cohorts and hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated, using death as a competing risk. Subgroup analysis of low (0-1) and high (≥2) KS risk groups was performed. Results:The study included 345 NSCLC patients receiving single agent ICI (n = 176) or chemotherapy (n = 169). The 6-month cumulative incidence of VTE was 7.1% in the chemotherapy cohort and 4.5% in the ICI cohort (HR for chemotherapy = 1.6, 95% CI 0.66-3.9). Among chemotherapy treated patients, the high-risk KS group had a trend toward a higher VTE incidence, compared with patients with a low-risk KS (HR 3.04, 95% CI 0.82-11.22). Among ICI-treated patients, the high-risk KS group had a trend toward a lower VTE incidence compared with the low-risk group (HR 0.17, 95% CI 0.02-1.36). Conclusions: VTE rates were higher among NSCLC patients treated with platinumbased chemotherapy than those treated with ICI alone, though the precision of the relative estimate is low. The KS did not identify high-risk ICI-treated patients, suggesting that an ICI-specific risk model is warranted.

Background: Locoregional therapy (LRT) in de novo metastatic disease is controversial with inconsistent results from randomized control trials (RCTs). Methods: RCTs comparing LRT and systemic therapy to standard therapy alone in de novo metastatic breast cancer were identified. Hazard ratios (HRs) and their associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed and pooled in a meta-analysis using generic inverse variance. Overall survival (OS) and time to locoregional progression data were extracted for the intention to treat (ITT) population. Data on OS for pre-specified subgroups defined by tumor subtype and by site of metastases were also extracted. Results: Analyses included 4 trials comprising 970 patients. LRT included standard surgery to the primary breast tumor in all studies, and adjuvant radiation per standard of care was required in 3 studies. Compared to standard treatment, LRT was not associated with improved OS in the ITT population (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.72e1.29, p ¼ 0.81). However, LRT was associated with improved time to locoregional progression (HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.14e0.95, p ¼ 0.04). LRT was not associated with improved OS in any tumor subtypes, including hormone receptor positive (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.65e1.43), triple negative (HR 1.4, 95% CI 0.50e3.91) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 positive disease (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.68 e1.28). Additionally, LRT did not improve OS in bone only disease (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.58e1.62) and in visceral disease (HR ¼ 1.02, 95% CI 0.77e1.35). Our critical appraisal has identified some methodological problems in the design and conduct of the studies included that could affect the meta-analysis result. Conclusions: LRT in de novo metastatic breast cancer is not associated with improved OS. Results are consistent among different breast cancer subgroups. However, this conclusion should be interpreted with caution in view of the limitations identified in meta-analysis.

Background: Lymphovascular invasion (LVI) is considered a negative prognostic factor in early breast cancer, but its role in decision-making regarding adjuvant chemotherapy is unclear in the current era of molecular profiling. This study sought to evaluate the association of LVI status with the recurrence score (RS) on the multigene Oncotype DX (ODX) assay and its impact on outcome. Methods: Patients with early estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer who underwent ODX analysis in 2005–2012 were retrospectively identified. Clinical data were collected from the medical records. The Cox proportional-hazards ratio was used to determine recurrence rates. The prognostic significance of LVI was evaluated by competing risks analysis. Results: LVI was detected in 38 of 657 patients (6%). LVI was not associated with ODX RS (p = 0.225). However, it was significantly associated with other known prognostic factors and with worse 5-year disease-free survival (HR 2.93; 95% CI 1.02–8.39; p = 0.04). Overall survival (OS) analysis according to the ODX subgroups showed that the presence of LVI was associated with worse 5-year OS (p = 0.04) only in the intermediate-risk group, while LVI had no effect on the low- or high-risk groups. Conclusions: Although LVI was not significantly associated with a higher ODX RS, it may infer a worse outcome, especially in ODX intermediate-risk patients.