Real-world tumor BRCA testing patterns and PARP inhibitor use in HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer.

1113 Background: Testing for BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations (BRCAm) aids systemic treatment decisions for patients (pts) with metastatic breast cancer (mBC). This retrospective study explored real-world germline/tumor (g/t) BRCA testing patterns and PARP inhibitor (PARPi) use in US pts with mBC. Methods: Data from pts ≥18 years old diagnosed with HER2-negative mBC from 2014–2022 were captured in the nationwide Flatiron Health electronic health record-derived deidentified database. Patterns and timing of prospective or incidental BRCA testing were compared across mBC subtypes (hormone receptor-positive HR+ mBC/triple-negative mBC mTNBC) and disease stage (recurrent/ de novo). BRCAm prevalence was compared by testing modality and mBC subtype. PARPi initiation was assessed in pts with mBC diagnosed from 2018 onwards and a positive BRCAm test result. Clinical characteristics were compared by receipt of a BRCA test, testing modality, and PARPi initiation. Real-world overall survival (OS) by PARPi use was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Of 15,006 pts (including 12,349 with HR+ mBC; 1998 with mTNBC), 8178 (54.5%) did not receive any type of BRCA test, 4654 (31.0%) received a gBRCA test, 3075 (20.5%) received a tumor tissue DNA (ttDNA) test, and 1418 (9.4%) received a circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) test. BRCA testing prevalence was numerically higher in pts with mTNBC (n=1164; 58.3%) than in pts with HR+ mBC (n=5323; 43.1%). As expected, testing prevalence was higher with ttDNA than with ctDNA (mTNBC: n=569 28.5% vs n=137 6.9%; HR+ mBC: n=2339 18.9% vs n=1224 9.9%). Over 93% of pts (recurrent and de novo) who received a tBRCA test were tested after an mBC diagnosis, and >1/3 were tested after first-line therapy, with median times from diagnosis to a ttDNA and ctDNA test of 127 and 431 days, respectively. Both gBRCA and tBRCA testing rates increased from 2014–2022, and testing occurred earlier in pts with recurrent than de novo disease. Among pts with tBRCAm, 66.0% had HR+ mBC, and 25.6% had mTNBC. BRCA1 mutations were more common in mTNBC (59.0%) than in HR+ mBC (22.9%) tumors. Of 219 pts with tBRCAm tumors who were diagnosed with mBC from 2018 onwards, PARPi was initiated in 39/74 (52.7%) pts with gBRCAm, 15/71 (21.1%) pts who were gBRCAm-negative, and 19/74 (25.7%) pts with gBRCAm status unknown. Among pts with g or tBRCAm and available OS data, median OS was numerically longer in pts who received PARPi (32.3 months 95% CI: 24.2, 47.4, n=128) versus pts who did not (29.0 months 95% CI: 21.9, 31.9, n=204; median follow-up time 23.2 months). Conclusions: While NCCN guidelines recommend gBRCA testing for all pts with mBC, more than half of pts with HER2-negative mBC (56.9% of pts with HR+ mBC) did not receive any BRCA test. Among pts with tBRCAm, ~2/3 had HR+ disease. Despite the potential benefits of PARPi for pts with BRCAm mBC, utilization remained low from 2018–2022.