Tracking the development of disability provides new and important insights into the disability experience in older men and women that are potentially relevant in planning preventive, intervention, and long-term care strategies.

As distinct cancer biomarkers have been discovered in recent years, a need to reclassify tumors by more than their histology has been proposed, and therapies are now tailored to treat cancers based on specific molecular aberrations and immunologic markers. In fact, multiple histology‐agnostic therapies are currently adopted in clinical practice for treating patients regardless of their tumor site of origin. In parallel with this new model for drug development, in the past few years, several novel antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) have been approved to treat solid tumors, benefiting from engineering improvements in the conjugation process and the introduction of novel linkers and payloads. With the recognition that numerous surface targets are expressed across various cancer histologies, alongside the remarkable activity of modern ADCs, this drug class has been increasingly evaluated as suitable for a histology‐agnostic expansion of indication. For illustration, the anti‐HER2 ADC trastuzumab deruxtecan has demonstrated compelling activity in HER2‐overexpressing breast, gastric, colorectal, and lung cancer. Examples of additional novel and potentially histology‐agnostic ADC targets include trophoblast cell‐surface antigen 2 (Trop‐2) and nectin‐4, among others. In the current review article, the authors summarize the current approvals of ADCs by the US Food and Drug Administration focusing on solid tumors and discuss the challenges and opportunities posed by the multihistological expansion of ADCs.

Background Breast cancers that harbor mismatch-repair (MMR) deficiency and/or microsatellite instability (MSI) might be sensitive to immune checkpoint blockade, but there are currently no specific guidelines for assessing MMR status in breast cancer. Here, we sought to define the clinical value of MMR immunohistochemistry (IHC) and MSI analysis in breast cancers. Methods We subjected 444 breast cancers to MMR IHC and MSI analysis. Cases were classified as MMR-proficient (pMMR), MMR-deficient (dMMR), and MMR-heterogeneous (hMMR) based on the loss of immunoreactivity; MSI was defined by instability in the five indicators recommended by the National Cancer Institute for endometrial and colorectal cancers. Correlation of MMR status with patients’ survival was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier estimator. Statistical tests were two-sided. Results Loss of MMR proteins was homogeneous (dMMR) in 75 patients (17%) and heterogeneous (hMMR) in 55 (12%). Among luminal breast cancers, there were similar frequencies of dMMR and hMMR tumors. Overall, the rate of discrepancy between IHC and MSI analysis was high (91%). Women with Luminal B-like dMMR carcinomas (n = 44) showed shorter overall survival (median = 77 months, range = 0–115 months) than those with pMMR (n = 205) or hMMR (n = 35) tumors (median = 84 months, range = 0–127 months) (P = .008). On the contrary, patients with estrogen receptor-negative breast cancers treated with chemotherapy lived longer in cases of dMMR (n = 9) than pMMR (n = 33) or hMMR (n = 7) tumors, with 87 months of median survival (range = 73–123 months) for the former compared with 79 months (range = 8–113 months) for the latter two categories (P < .001). Conclusions Immunohistochemistry and MSI are not interchangeable tests in breast carcinomas. MMR protein loss is a more common event than MSI and shows intra-tumor heterogeneity. MMR IHC allows the identification of clinically relevant subclasses of breast cancer patients, provided that multiple areas of the tumor are analyzed.