Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:

Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_119_библиотеки_им_акад_М_И_Перельмана

.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
15.09.2026
Размер:
10 Мб
Скачать
☆
122
https://t.me/med1917
Mathieu, L.N., etal. (2023). FDA approval summary: Atezolizumab as adjuvant treatment follow-
ing surgical resection and platinum-based chemotherapy for stage II to IIIA NSCLC. Clinical
Cancer Research, 29, 2973–2978. Naidoo, J., etal. (2023). Brief report: Durvalumab after chemoradiotherapy in unresectable stage
III EGFR-mutant NSCLC: A post Hoc subgroup analysis from PACIFIC. Journal of Thoracic
Oncology, 18, 657–663. Naranbhai, V., etal. (2022). HLA-A*03 and response to immune checkpoint blockade in cancer:
An epidemiological biomarker study. The Lancet Oncology, 23, 172–184. Nishio, M., et al. (2021). Atezolizumab plus chemotherapy for rst-line treatment of nonsqua-
mous NSCLC: Results from the randomized phase 3 IMpower132 trial. Journal of Thoracic
Oncology, 16, 653–664. Nogami, N., etal. (2022). IMpower150 nal exploratory analyses for atezolizumab plus bevaci-
zumab and chemotherapy in key NSCLC patient subgroups with EGFR mutations or metasta-
ses in the liver or brain. Journal of Thoracic Oncology, 17, 309–323. Novello, S., etal. (2023). Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in squamous non-small-cell lung
cancer: 5-year update of the phase III KEYNOTE-407 study. Journal of Clinical Oncology,
41, 1999–2006. O’Brien, M., et al. (2022). Pembrolizumab versus placebo as adjuvant therapy for completely
resected stage IB-IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer (PEARLS/KEYNOTE-091): An interim
analysis of a randomised, triple-blind, phase 3 trial. The Lancet Oncology, 23, 1274–1286. Pai-Scherf, L., etal. (2017). FDA approval summary: Pembrolizumab for treatment of metastatic
non-small cell lung cancer: First-line therapy and beyond. The Oncologist, 22, 1392–1399. Pardoll, D.M. (2012). The blockade of immune checkpoints in cancer immunotherapy. Nature
Reviews. Cancer, 12, 252–264. Paz-Ares, L., etal. (2022). Durvalumab, with or without tremelimumab, plus platinum-etoposide
in rst-line treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: 3-year overall survival update
from CASPIAN. ESMO Open, 7, 100408. Perol, M., etal. (2022). Effectiveness of PD-(L)1 inhibitors alone or in combination with platinum-
doublet chemotherapy in rst-line (1L) non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (Nsq-
NSCLC) with PD-L1-high expression using real-world data. Annals of Oncology, 33, 511–521. Pons-Tostivint, E., etal. (2023). Real-world multicentre cohort of rst-line pembrolizumab alone
or in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer PD-L1 >/=
50. Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy, 72, 1881–1890.
Reck, M., et al. (2021a). Five-year outcomes with pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy for
metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer with PD-L1 tumor proportion score >/= 50. Journal of
Clinical Oncology, 39, 2339–2349. Reck, M., etal. (2021b). First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab with two cycles of chemotherapy
versus chemotherapy alone (four cycles) in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: CheckMate
9LA 2-year update. ESMO Open, 6, 100273. Reckamp, K.L., etal. (2022). Phase II randomized study of ramucirumab and pembrolizumab
versus standard of care in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer previously treated with
immunotherapy- lung-MAP S1800A. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 40, 2295–2306. Ren, S., et al. (2022). Camrelizumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel as rst-line treatment for
advanced squamous NSCLC (CameL-Sq): A phase 3 trial. Journal of Thoracic Oncology, 17,
544–557. Sezer, A., etal. (2021). Cemiplimab monotherapy for rst-line treatment of advanced non-small-
cell lung cancer with PD-L1 of at least 50%: A multicentre, open-label, global, phase 3, ran-
domised, controlled trial. Lancet, 397, 592–604. Siegel, R.L., Miller, K.D., & Jemal, A. (2017). Cancer statistics, 2017. CA: a Cancer Journal for
Clinicians, 67, 7–30. Socinski, M.A., etal. (2018). Atezolizumab for rst-line treatment of metastatic nonsquamous
NSCLC. The New England Journal of Medicine, 378, 2288–2301.
A. Dimou and K. Leventakos
9 Signicance ofImmune Checkpoints inLung Cancer
https://t.me/med1917
Spigel, D.R., etal. (2022). Five-year survival outcomes from the PACIFIC trial: Durvalumab after
chemoradiotherapy in stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 40,
1301–1311. Thummalapalli, R., etal. (2023). Clinical and molecular features of long-term response to immune
checkpoint inhibitors in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Clinical Cancer
Research, 29(21), 4408–4418. Velcheti, V., etal. (2014). Programmed death ligand-1 expression in non-small cell lung cancer.
Laboratory Investigation, 94, 107–116. Wakelee, H., etal. (2023). Perioperative pembrolizumab for early-stage non-small-cell lung can-
cer. The New England Journal of Medicine, 389, 491–503. Wang, J., etal. (2021). Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy vs chemotherapy alone as rst-line treat-
ment for advanced squamous non-small-cell lung cancer: A phase 3 randomized clinical trial.
JAMA Oncology, 7, 709–717. West, H., etal. (2019). Atezolizumab in combination with carboplatin plus nab-paclitaxel chemo-
therapy compared with chemotherapy alone as rst-line treatment for metastatic non-squamous
non-small-cell lung cancer (IMpower130): A multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3
trial. The Lancet Oncology, 20, 924–937. Yang, Y., etal. (2020). Efcacy and safety of Sintilimab plus pemetrexed and platinum as rst-line
treatment for locally advanced or metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC: A randomized, double-
blind, phase 3 study (Oncology pRogram by InnovENT anti-PD-1-11). Journal of Thoracic
Oncology, 15, 1636–1646. Yang, H., etal. (2022). EGFR mutation status in non-small cell lung cancer receiving PD-1/PD-L1
inhibitors and its correlation with PD-L1 expression: A meta-analysis. Cancer Immunology,
Immunotherapy, 71, 1001–1016. Zhao, B., Qi, H., Wu, J., & Ma, W. (2023). Cemiplimab plus chemotherapy could be a rst-line
option for advanced and metastatic NSCLC: Results from the phase 3 EMPOWER-lung 3 part
2 trial. Journal of Thoracic Oncology, 18, e72–e73. Zhou, C., et al. (2021). Sintilimab plus platinum and gemcitabine as rst-line treatment for
advanced or metastatic squamous NSCLC: Results from a randomized, double-blind, phase 3
trial (ORIENT-12). Journal of Thoracic Oncology, 16, 1501–1511. Zhou, C., et al. (2023). Camrelizumab plus carboplatin and pemetrexed as rst-line treatment
for advanced nonsquamous NSCLC: Extended follow-up of CameL phase 3 trial. Journal of
Thoracic Oncology, 18, 628–639.
123
Chapter 10
https://t.me/med1917
Immunotherapy inBreast Cancer
JennaHoppenworth andRobertoA.Leon-Ferre
Abstract Breast cancer affects 12% of women worldwide. Although advances in
systemic, surgical, and radiation therapy approaches will cure a large proportion of women with breast cancer, a signicant subset will experience disease relapse and die as a result of their disease. Of the three main breast cancer subtypes, triple­negative breast cancer poses a special challenge to clinicians and researchers due to its aggressive features and the paucity of targetable alterations. Recent progress in immunotherapy and novel therapeutics has transformed the treatment of this breast cancer subtype. In this chapter, we introduce the reader to the biology and classica­tion of breast cancer and review the modern multidisciplinary approaches to man­agement, with special emphasis on the incorporation of immunotherapy in the early-stage and metastatic settings. We also review the emerging role of immuno­therapy biomarkers and other modern treatments, including monoclonal antibodies and antibody-drug conjugates.
Keywords Breast cancer · Risk factors · Breast cancer subtypes · Triple-negative breast cancer · HER2-negative breast cancer · Early-stage breast cancer · Metastatic breast cancer · Immunotherapy · Chemotherapy · PD-L1 · KEYNOTE-522 · KEYNOTE-355 · Antibody-drug conjugates · Monoclonal antibodies · Tumor-inltrating lymphocytes
Introduction
Breast cancer will affect approximately 313,510 people in the Unites States in 2024. Of those affected with breast cancer in 2024, 42,780 will die as a result of their breast cancer diagnosis (Siegel etal., 2024). Despite the prevalence, the death rate has steadily declined since the 1990s, mostly credited to early detection and more
J. Hoppenworth · R. A. Leon-Ferre (*) Division of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA e-mail: leonferre.roberto@mayo.edu
H. Dong, S. N. Markovic (eds.), The Basics of Cancer Immunotherapy,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-59475-5_10
125© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024
126
https://t.me/med1917
effective treatments (Siegel etal., 2024). The recent introduction of immunotherapy has transformed the way we are treating patients with breast cancer, particularly the triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) subtype. This chapter will look at the current role of immunotherapy strategies in the treatment of localized and of metastatic breast cancer, with special emphasis on TNBC, as well as novel approaches being investigated that may be incorporated into the clinical management of breast cancer in the future.
J. Hoppenworth and R. A. Leon-Ferre
Risk Factors
One in eight women will be diagnosed with breast cancer in their lifetime (Siegel etal., 2024). The risk of developing breast cancer may increase under certain cir­cumstances, such as older age, history of benign breast disease, dense breast tissue, and being a carrier for inherited genetic mutations such as BRCA 1/BRCA 2, PALB2, and others (Antoniou etal., 2003; Rahman etal., 2007); having a family history of breast or ovarian cancer (Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer, 2001); prior receipt of hormone replacement therapy; reproductive factors such as earlier onset of menses, late menopause (Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer, 2012), older age at rst full-time pregnancy, or nulliparity (Rosner etal., 1994); postmenopausal obesity (Morimoto etal., 2002); excessive alcohol use or smoking (Gram etal., 2015; Cao etal., 2015); and prior radiation to the chest at a young age (Henderson etal., 2010); among others. Risk­reducing measures include maintaining a healthy weight, abstaining from the use of alcohol/tobacco, and limiting estrogen replacement therapy, among others.
Basics ofBreast Cancer
Breast cancer evolves when atypical cells develop and divide in an uncontrolled manner. Benign breast diseases such as atypical ductal or lobular hyperplasia may progress into ductal or lobular carcinoma in situ or eventually become invasive dis­eases (with the potential to spread to distant organs). To decrease the risk of poten­tial spread, invasive cancers may require treatment with chemotherapy. Ductal carcinoma in situ and lobular carcinoma in situ are noninvasive cancers (without the potential to spread) and are often referred to as stage 0 cancer. Given that they typi­cally remain localized, chemotherapy is not recommended.
Breast cancers are classied biologically by the presence or absence of several markers, most importantly estrogen, progesterone, and HER2 (human epidermal growth factor receptor 2) receptors. Other features such as their appearance under the microscope (known as histologic subtype), grade (how mature or immature cells look in a biopsy specimen), and Ki-67 (a marker of cell proliferation) help breast cancer specialists determine the most effective and appropriate treatment.
10 Immunotherapy inBreast Cancer
https://t.me/med1917
127
Breast Cancer Subtypes
Breast cancer can be categorized into three major subtypes, according to the pres­ence of three major markers within tumors, as outlined in Fig.10.1 and below:
• Hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: It is characterized by the expression
of the estrogen and/or progesterone receptors. In this subtype, growth is stimu-
lated by estrogen and the activation of its receptor. Antiestrogen therapy is a
major component of the treatment of patients with this tumor subtype. In certain
situations, chemotherapy may also be necessary.
• HER2-positive breast cancer: These tumors are characterized by excessive
amounts of HER2, a normal protein involved in normal cell division. In this
breast cancer subtype, the presence of an abnormally high number of HER2
proteins contributes to excessive growth of cancer cells. To treat these tumors,
therapies targeting the HER2 signaling pathway have been developed. These
drugs are typically combined with chemotherapy.
• Triple-negative breast cancer: These tumors are characterized by absence of the
estrogen and progesterone receptor and lack HER2 overexpression. This subtype
Fig. 10.1 Breast cancer subtypes. The three main breast cancer subtypes are classied according to the presence or absence of the hormone receptors (estrogen and progesterone receptors) and the presence or absence of excessive HER2 signaling. Hormone receptor-positive breast cancers are the least susceptible to the effects of the immune system, while triple-negative breast cancers (lack­ing all three features) are the most susceptible to the effects of the immune system
128
https://t.me/med1917
is the most aggressive type of breast cancer. For many years, chemotherapy has
been the main form of treatment. However, this subtype has benetted the most
from the development of immunotherapy.
Each of these subtypes of breast cancer has a different biology and clinical behavior, requiring different treatment approaches as introduced briey here. Importantly, immunotherapy approaches have demonstrated the greatest degree of clinical activity in the TNBC subtype. Given this, we will focus our subsequent discussions primarily on TNBC.
J. Hoppenworth and R. A. Leon-Ferre
Early-Stage Breast Cancer: Multidisciplinary Approaches toTreatment
Early-stage breast cancer (breast cancer that is conned to the breast and regional lymph nodes and has not spread distantly) can be eradicated and treated with the goal of cure. To achieve this, specialists from different medical disciplines work together. These include surgical oncologists, radiation oncologists, medical oncolo­gists, geneticists, physical therapists, and plastic surgeons, among others. It is important to understand the role each discipline plays in the treatment of breast cancer and the contribution of each treatment modality in cancer eradication and prevention of recurrence or metastatic disease. Advances in each treatment modality and in the integration of multidisciplinary care have led to substantial improvements in recurrence rates and breast cancer survival (Poortmans et al., 2015; Whelan etal., 2015).
Treatments specically targeting the tumor within the breast and affected lymph nodes are called “locoregional therapies” and include surgery and radiation therapy (Fig. 10.2). Medications aiming to treat not only the breast and affected lymph nodes but also any breast cancer cells that may have spread to the rest of the body are called “systemic therapies” and are managed by the medical oncologist. Cancer cells that are not eradicated from the breast can lead to local recurrence (reappear­ance of tumor in the same breast). Cancer cells that have accessed the circulation or lymphatic networks can lead to regional recurrence (reappearance of tumor in the draining lymph nodes) or distant recurrence (spread to other organs, which is often incurable). Cancer cells that have spread before colonizing organs are often micro­scopic and not detectable by traditional imaging. As such, the multidisciplinary team evaluates the risk for potential microscopic metastatic disease and based on this makes recommendations for the need of different treatment modalities.
Immunotherapy is primarily considered a form of systemic therapy, with their main goal being to help activate the immune system’s inherent ability to recognize and eliminate abnormal cells (in this case cells that have become cancerous). However, certain local immunotherapies have also been developed and are under investigation (examples of these include injections of medications or immune stim­ulants into the tumor or lymph nodes).
10 Immunotherapy inBreast Cancer
https://t.me/med1917
129
Fig. 10.2 Locoregional and systemic therapies for breast cancer. Surgery and radiotherapy are considered locoregional therapies, while medications including chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and targeted therapies are considered systemic therapies
How Are theDifferent Treatment Modalities Integrated?
Over the last decade, the multidisciplinary management paradigm of early-stage breast cancer, particularly for TNBC and HER2-positive breast cancer, has shifted away from doing surgery rst and systemic therapy after surgery (called “adjuvant” systemic therapy) to a preference for administering systemic therapy before surgery (called “neoadjuvant” systemic therapy). This strategy of giving systemic therapy rst has allowed clinicians to evaluate the sensitivity of the cancer to the treatment as it is administered and make adjustments as needed. The administration of neoad­juvant chemotherapy has several direct benets to the patient with breast cancer, including (1) potential for less extensive breast and axillary surgery, in turn leading to decreased surgical morbidity and complications, given that tumors and lymph nodes often shrink or even disappear after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (Piltin etal.,
2020; Boughey et al., 2018), allowing surgeons to remove smaller amounts of
130
https://t.me/med1917
affected tissue; (2) better ability to estimate future risk of recurrence (Cortazar etal.,
2014; Symmans etal., 2007; Boughey etal., 2017; Symmans etal., 2017; Yau etal.,
2022), given that the degree of response of the breast tumor and lymph nodes to
systemic therapy is strongly associated with the subsequent risk of cancer recur­rence; (3) opportunity to individualize postoperative treatment decisions, allowing clinicians to selectively recommend additional medications to patients with more resistant tumors, and avoiding those medicines in patients with more sensitive tumors that were eradicated prior to surgery; and (4) more rapid evaluation of newer drugs, as clinical trials testing new drugs while the tumor has not been removed yet allows to quickly evaluate their efcacy (Masuda etal., 2017; Tutt etal., 2021a).
In breast cancer, the response to neoadjuvant systemic therapy has repeatedly been shown to strongly correlate with long-term outcomes, including risk of recur­rence and long-term survival (Cortazar etal., 2014; Symmans etal., 2007; Boughey etal., 2017; Symmans etal., 2017; Yau et al., 2022). Patients whose tumors are completely eradicated by the end of neoadjuvant systemic therapy (called a patho­logic complete response or pCR) enjoy very favorable long-term survival, with recurrence and mortality rates of <10% (Symmans etal., 2017). On the other hand, patients whose tumors or parts of their tumors survive after neoadjuvant systemic therapy (called residual disease) experience higher rates of disease recurrence and death—with the risk increasing as the amount of residual disease increases (Yau etal., 2022). This risk can be mitigated by administering additional medications after surgery for patients who have residual disease.
J. Hoppenworth and R. A. Leon-Ferre
Breast Cancer andtheImmune System
As elaborated throughout this book, immunotherapy has transformed the treatment landscape and prognosis of aggressive malignancies that previously had limited sys­temic therapy options. In breast cancer, patients with TNBC have derived the largest benets from immunotherapy. This is in part due to TNBC tumors being better able to trigger immune system responses than HER2-positive or hormone receptor­positive breast cancer (Cortes etal., 2020; Loibl etal., 2019; Mittendorf etal., 2020; Nanda etal., 2020; Schmid etal., 2020). Importantly, TNBC tumors that generate more robust immune responses generally have better clinical outcomes than TNBC tumors with weaker immune responses. For example, a measure of the ability of a tumor to trigger immune responses is the observation of immune system cells such as lymphocytes invading within the tumor tissues. These immune system cells, often called “tumor-inltrating lymphocytes” (TILs), have the ability to recognize cancer cells and—if appropriately stimulated—eradicate them. Compared with TNBC that contains low levels of TILs, patients with TNBC that contains high lev­els of TILs have better survival following adjuvant systemic therapy (Loi etal.,
2019), higher rates of pCR following neoadjuvant systemic therapy (Denkert etal.,
2018), and in select cases (such as in stage I TNBC) better survival even without
systemic therapy (Leon-Ferre etal., 2018; Park et al., 2019; de Jong etal., 2022;
10 Immunotherapy inBreast Cancer
https://t.me/med1917
Leon-Ferre etal., 2024). TIL levels are also associated with prognosis and response to systemic therapy in HER2-positive breast cancer (Loi etal., 2014) but less so in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer (Criscitiello etal., 2020). As such, TILs and other features of immune activation are promising biomarkers that may allow clinicians to optimize systemic therapy for TNBC and possibly HER2-positive breast cancer in the future.
In the clinic, expression of a protein called programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) in the tumor microenvironment is currently used to identify patients with metastatic TNBC who may benet from immunotherapy. This protein can be found on the surface of tumor cells and in immune cells. When activated and through interactions with another protein (called programmed cell death protein 1 or PD-1), it sends a signal to T cells from the immune system to stop attacking the tumor cells, shielding them from eradication by the immune system. PD-1 and PD-L1 blocking medica­tions effectively release the breaks from the immune system and restore the ability of T cells to recognize and attack breast cancer tumor cells.
Several studies have shown that in patients with metastatic TNBC, the addition of immunotherapy to chemotherapy only benets patients whose tumors express PD-L1, whereas patients with tumors that are negative for PD-L1 do not appear to derive benet. However, in patients with localized TNBC treated with multimodal­ity approaches, the use of immunotherapy appears to benet patients regardless of whether their tumors express PD-L1 or not. For this reason, testing for PD-L1 expression is only recommended in the setting of metastatic TNBC and not in early­stage TNBC. However, challenges with this biomarker remain, as there are multiple assays, methodologies and cutoff points to determine “positivity” versus “negativ­ity” (Gonzalez-Ericsson etal., 2020).
131
Chemoimmunotherapy forEarly-Stage Triple-Negative Breast Cancer
TNBC is more aggressive than other breast cancer subtypes and has historically been associated with higher and earlier rates of disease recurrence and death (Lin etal., 2012; Cortes et al., 2022; Bardia et al., 2021a). TNBC represents approxi­mately 15% of all breast cancer cases and more often affects younger women and racial and ethnic minority groups including Black, Latina, and Indian women (Lin etal., 2012; Friebel-Klingner etal., 2021; DeSantis etal., 2019; Du, 2022; Kulkarni etal., 2020). As elaborated previously, modern management of early-stage TNBC generally favors administration of systemic therapy prior to surgery for several rea­sons, including the ability to assess the effect of the treatment on the tumor cells prior to being surgically removed. In TNBC, it has become very clear that attain­ment of pCR is strongly associated with lower recurrence rates and decreased mor­tality (Cortazar etal., 2014; Symmans etal., 2007; Boughey etal., 2017; Symmans etal., 2017; Yau etal., 2022). As such, one of the major goals of systemic therapy
132
https://t.me/med1917
J. Hoppenworth and R. A. Leon-Ferre
optimization has been to incorporate drugs that can increase pCR and subsequently improve long-term outcomes. Patients who do not achieve pCR can then be offered additional systemic therapy to further decrease risk of recurrence (Masuda etal., 2017).
Until recently, the mainstay of systemic therapy for TNBC was cytotoxic chemo­therapy, often including a combination of an anthracycline (such as doxorubicin or epirubicin, among others) paired with cyclophosphamide and followed by (or pre­ceded by) a taxane (such as paclitaxel or docetaxel). Several studies tested whether incorporating additional agents could improve the rates of pCR and long-term out­comes. The incorporation of immunotherapy agents (particularly pembrolizumab) to neoadjuvant chemotherapy has been one of the major advances of the manage­ment of early-stage TNBC, leading to improvements both on pCR rates and event­free survival (the time between treatment and the occurrence of a new “event” such as recurrence, a new primary cancer or death). The KEYNOTE-522 clinical trial evaluated the addition of pembrolizumab to a chemotherapy backbone consisting of carboplatin + paclitaxel followed by an anthracycline and cyclophosphamide (Schmid etal., 2020). In this trial, 1174 patients with newly diagnosed stage 2 or 3 TNBC were randomly assigned (in a 2:1 fashion) to receive IV pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (paclitaxel and carboplatin followed by doxorubicin and cyclophos­phamide) versus standard of care with chemotherapy plus placebo. Eligibility patients had newly diagnosed node-positive TNBC or tumors measuring ≥2 cm (regardless of nodal involvement). Patients with both PD-L1-positive and PD-L1­negative TNBC were eligible (although 84% in the treatment arm were PD-L1 posi­tive). Following surgery, patients received nine additional cycles of adjuvant pembrolizumab or placebo every three weeks regardless of treatment response.
The incorporation of pembrolizumab to neoadjuvant chemotherapy increased the proportion of patients achieving a pCR (63%) compared to chemotherapy alone (56%), leading to an improvement in pCR rates of 7%. Furthermore, patients who received pembrolizumab displayed an improved event-free survival (85% with pembrolizumab compared to 77% with chemotherapy alone, an improvement of 8%). While patients who achieved pCR in either treatment arm had very similarly favorable outcomes (three-year EFS of 94% vs. 93% with or without immunother­apy), patients who had residual disease following treatment with immunotherapy had improved three-year event-free survival (67%) compared to those who received chemotherapy alone (57%).
As previously mentioned, PD-L1 expression does not appear to help distinguish which patients with early-stage TNBC benet from the addition of pembrolizumab (unlike in the metastatic setting). However, in KEYNOTE-522, patients with TNBC expressing higher levels of PD-L1 demonstrated higher rates of pCR (both with and without immunotherapy).
Several outstanding questions remain in the eld regarding the optimal incorpo­ration of immunotherapy for early-stage TNBC. These are being actively research and include the following: