Patterns of failure and outcomes in triple-negative compared to estrogen receptor–positive breast cancer.

T Tanun Jitwatcharakomol (Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand) Y Yevgeniya Gokun J Jacob Eckstein (Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH) T Therese Andraos (Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH) V Virginia F. Borges (University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Center, Aurora, CO) H Hatem Hussein Soliman (H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL) B Bodour Salhia K Kathy D. Miller (Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Cancer Center, Indianapolis, IN) V V. Morgan Jones (Markey Cancer Center, Lexington, KY) S Stephen B. Edge C Craig D. Shriver P Patrick Michael Dillon (University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA) S Sneha Deepak Phadke (University of Iowa Holden Cancer Center, Iowa City, IA) K Kelly Hewitt (University of Utah Health and Huntsman Cancer Institute, Salt Lake City, UT) C Coral Omene (Rutgers Cancer Institute, New Brunswick, NJ) W Wajeeha Razaq (Oklahoma University Stephenson Cancer Center, Oklahoma City, OK) R Robert J. Rounbehler (Aster Insights, Hudson, FL) M Michelle L. Churchman (Aster Insights, Hudson, FL) S Sachin R. Jhawar S Sasha Jasmine Beyer (Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH)

Abstract

e12760 Background: Advances in molecular classification have led to subtype-specific treatments for breast cancer, improving outcomes while revealing distinct recurrence patterns. This study compares outcomes and failure patterns between triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and estrogen receptor–positive (ER-positive) disease. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis using whole dataset of the Oncology Research Information Exchange Network (ORIEN), including women with non-metastatic breast cancer. Patients were categorized as TNBC or ER-positive. Outcomes included overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), locoregional control, and patterns of failure. Results: A total of 1,277 patients with stage I–III breast cancer were included, comprising 276 patients with TNBC and 1,001 with ER-positive disease. The median age was 52 years (interquartile range [IQR], 44–62). Most patients were White (83.3%) and non-Hispanic (84.5%). HER2 was positive in 13.4% of ER-positive disease. Compared with TNBC, ER-positive patients more frequently presented with clinical stage I (37.8% vs. 31.9%) and stage II disease (43.0% vs. 39.9%). In contrast, clinical stage III disease was more common among patients with TNBC than those with ER-positive disease (15.2% vs. 8.0%). Neoadjuvant systemic therapy was administered to 154 patients, including 62 (22.5%) with TNBC and 92 (9.2%) with ER-positive disease. Pathological complete response after neoadjuvant systemic therapy was observed in 14 (9.1%) patients (6 TNBC and 8 ER-positive). Adjuvant systemic therapy was delivered to 641 patients, including 108 (39.1%) with TNBC and 533 (53.2%) with ER-positive disease. Among the ER-positive patients who received adjuvant systemic therapy (n = 533), 498 (93.4%) received adjuvant endocrine therapy. Radiation therapy was delivered to approximately two-thirds of patients in both groups. Among those treated with radiation, 83.7% received whole-breast or chest wall irradiation with nodal coverage. Lymph node irradiation was administered in 36.8% of patients, not administered in 33.7%, and was unknown in 29.5%. With a median follow-up of 75.2 months (range, 0–393.7 months), TNBC was associated with significantly worse overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] 2.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.04–3.96), disease-free survival (HR 2.10, 95% CI 1.56–2.83), and distant metastasis–free survival (HR 2.28, 95% CI 1.25–4.16) compared with ER-positive disease. No significant differences were observed in local control (HR 1.17, 95% CI 0.51–2.70) or regional control (HR 2.28, 95% CI 0.85–6.11) between the two groups. Conclusions: TNBC was associated with significantly worse survival outcomes and higher rates of distant failure compared with ER-positive disease. These results highlight distant metastasis as the dominant pattern of failure in TNBC and support the need for more effective systemic therapies.

Article Details

Volume / Issue Vol. 44, Issue 16_suppl
Published June 01, 2026
ISSN 0732-183X
Publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Journal Info

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

ISSN: 0732-183X Health Sciences

Authors (20)

T

Tanun Jitwatcharakomol

Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand

Y

Yevgeniya Gokun

J

Jacob Eckstein

Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH

T

Therese Andraos

Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH

V

Virginia F. Borges

University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Center, Aurora, CO

H

Hatem Hussein Soliman

H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL

B

Bodour Salhia

K

Kathy D. Miller

Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Cancer Center, Indianapolis, IN

V

V. Morgan Jones

Markey Cancer Center, Lexington, KY

S

Stephen B. Edge

C

Craig D. Shriver

P

Patrick Michael Dillon

University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA

S

Sneha Deepak Phadke

University of Iowa Holden Cancer Center, Iowa City, IA

K

Kelly Hewitt

University of Utah Health and Huntsman Cancer Institute, Salt Lake City, UT

C

Coral Omene

Rutgers Cancer Institute, New Brunswick, NJ

W

Wajeeha Razaq

Oklahoma University Stephenson Cancer Center, Oklahoma City, OK

R

Robert J. Rounbehler

Aster Insights, Hudson, FL

M

Michelle L. Churchman

Aster Insights, Hudson, FL

S

Sachin R. Jhawar

S

Sasha Jasmine Beyer

Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH