Factors Influencing Implementation of the Commission on Cancer's Breast Synoptic Operative Report (Alliance A20_Pilot9).

BACKGROUND: The technical aspects of cancer surgery have a significant impact on patient outcomes. To monitor surgical quality, in 2020, the Commission on Cancer (CoC) revised its accreditation standards for cancer surgery and introduced the synoptic operative reports (SORs). The standardization of SORs holds promise, but successful implementation requires strategies to address key implementation barriers. This study aimed to identify the barriers and facilitators to implementing breast SOR within diverse CoC-accredited programs. METHODS: In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with 31 health care professionals across diverse CoC-accredited sites. The study used two comprehensive implementation frameworks to guide data collection and analysis. RESULTS: Successful SOR implementation was impeded by disrupted workflows, surgeon resistance to change, low prioritization of resources, and poor flow of information despite CoC's positive reputation. Participants often lacked understanding of the requirements and timeline for breast SOR and were heavily influenced by prior experiences with templates and SOR champion relationships. The perceived lack of monetary benefits (to obtaining CoC accreditation) together with the significant information technology (IT) resource requirements tempered some of the enthusiasm. Additionally, resource constraints and the redirection of personnel during the COVID-19 pandemic were noted as hurdles. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeon behavior and workflow change, IT and personnel resources, and communication and networking strategies influenced SOR implementation. During early implementation and the implementation planning phase, the primary focus was on achieving buy-in and initiating successful roll-out rather than effective use or sustainment. These findings have implications for enhancing standardization of surgical cancer care and guidance of future strategies to optimize implementation of CoC accreditation standards.

National Cancer Database trends in surgical resection of the breast primary for stage IV breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Survival benefit after resection of the breast primary for women with metastatic breast cancer reported in retrospective studies has not been uniformly confirmed by randomized controlled trials. To assess the need for dissemination of trial results by the ACS Cancer Research Program Dissemination and Implementation (ACS CRP D&I) committee, we analyzed trends and predictors of surgery and other therapies for stage IV breast cancer. METHODS: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried to identify women diagnosed with clinical stage IV breast cancer of ductal, lobular, or metaplastic histology between 2004 and 2017. Trends in utilization of breast surgery and other treatments and possible predictors of breast surgery were examined in univariable and multivariable analyses. RESULTS: We identified 87,331 cases meeting inclusion criteria. Rates of surgical resection rose until 2009, peaking at 37%, then declined to a rate of 18% in 2017. The largest decline was seen in the hormone receptor positive (HR+), HER2 negative (HER2-) subgroup with up to 70% of patients undergoing surgery in 2007, down to 15% in 2017. In 2004, the rate of systemic therapy alone was slightly more common than locoregional therapy (surgery and/or radiation) with or without systemic therapy (48% vs 37%). However, by 2017, systemic therapy alone was by far more common (69% vs 20%). CONCLUSION: Rates of surgical resection of the breast primary for stage IV breast cancer have been on the decline in recent years, suggesting that providers at Commission on Cancer accredited hospitals are becoming more selective about who will be offered surgical resection.

Psychosocial Impact of Cancer Care Disruptions in Women With Breast Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic caused significant disruptions in cancer care, and preliminary research suggests that these disruptions are associated with increased levels of psychosocial distress among cancer survivors. The purpose of this study was to offer a descriptive report of the psychosocial functioning, perceived risk and fear of cancer progression, and COVID-19 pandemic impact and experiences in a unique, high-risk patient cohort: breast cancer survivors whose cancer treatment was delayed and/or changed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: This cross-sectional study included 50 women with dual carcinoma in situ, lobular carcinoma in situ, or invasive breast cancer whose cancer surgery was postponed due to the pandemic. As they awaited delayed surgery or shortly after they received delayed surgery, participants completed questionnaires on psychosocial functioning (depression, anxiety, sleep, and quality of life), their perceived risk and fear of cancer progression, patient-provider communication about disruptions in their care, personal impact of the pandemic, worry/threat about COVID-19, and COVID-19 symptoms/diagnoses. Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations were computed among continuous study variables. Independent samples t-tests explored group differences in psychosocial functioning between survivors who were still awaiting delayed surgery and those who had recently received it. Results: Overall, the sample denied that the pandemic seriously negatively impacted their finances or resource access and reported low-to-moderate levels of psychosocial distress and fear about COVID-19. Twenty-six percent had clinically significant levels of fear of cancer progression, with levels comparable to other recent work. About a third were still awaiting delayed cancer surgery and this group reported lower satisfaction with communication from oncology providers but overall did not seem to report more psychosocial difficulties than those who already had surgery. Conclusion: Shortly before or after primary breast cancer surgery that was delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic, this sample of survivors appears to be generally managing well psychosocially. However, many psychosocial difficulties (e.g., fear of cancer recurrence/progression) typically have an onset after the completion of treatment, therefore, research should continue to follow this cohort of cancer survivors as the pandemic's direct impact on their care likely increases their risk for these difficulties later in survivorship.

Uptake of Breast Cancer Clinical Trials at Minority Serving Cancer Centers.

BACKGROUND: Most minorities receive cancer care at minority-serving hospitals (MSHs) that have been associated with disparate treatment between Black and White patients. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to examine the uptake of clinical trials that have changed axillary management in breast cancer patients at MSH and non-MSH cancer centers. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients eligible for the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z0011 and Z1071 trials, and mastectomy patients fulfilling the European AMAROS trial. Uptake of trial results (omission of axillary lymph node dissection) was analyzed between patients treated at MSHs and non-MSHs and adjusted for patient, tumor, and facility factors. MSHs were defined as the top decile of hospitals according to the proportion of Black and Hispanic patients treated. RESULTS: Of 7167 patients eligible for Z0011, 4546 for Z0171, and 9433 for AMAROS from 2015 to 2016, clinical trial uptake was seen in 1195 (74.6%) MSH and 4056 (72.9%) non-MSH patients (p = 0.173) for Z0011, 588 (41.9%) MSH and 1366 (43.5%) non-MSH patients for Z1071 (p = 0.302), and 272 (11.7%) MSH and 996 (14.0%) non-MSH patients (p = 0.005) for AMAROS. On adjusted analyses, MSH status was not significant for uptake of any of the three trials. Black race, socioeconomic status, and insurance were not associated with clinical trial uptake. CONCLUSION: The uptake of three landmark clinical trials of axillary management in breast cancer was not different at MSH and non-MSH centers despite adjustment for social determinants of health. At the Commission on Cancer-accredited centers in this analysis, MSH status did not affect the uptake of evidence-based care.

Phase II Single-Arm Study of Preoperative Letrozole for Estrogen Receptor-Positive Postmenopausal Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: CALGB 40903 (Alliance).

PURPOSE: Primary endocrine therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) as a potential alternative to surgery has been understudied. This trial explored the feasibility of a short-term course of letrozole and sought to determine whether treatment results in measurable radiographic and biologic changes in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive DCIS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A phase II single-arm multicenter cooperative-group trial was conducted in postmenopausal patients diagnosed with ER-positive DCIS without invasion. Patients were treated with letrozole 2.5 mg per day for 6 months before surgery. Breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was obtained at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months. The primary end point was change in 6-month MRI enhancement volume compared with baseline. RESULTS: Overall, 79 patients were enrolled and 70 completed 6 months of letrozole. Of these, 67 patients had MRI data available for each timepoint. Baseline MRI volumes ranged from 0.004 to 26.3 cm3. Median reductions from baseline MRI volume (1.4 cm3) were 0.6 cm3 (61.0%) at 3 months (P < .001) and 0.8 cm3 (71.7%) at 6 months (P < .001). Consistent reductions were seen in median baseline ER H-score (228; median reduction, 15.0; P = .005), progesterone receptor H-score (15; median reduction, 85.0; P < .001), and Ki67 score (12%; median reduction, 6.3%; P = .007). Of the 59 patients who underwent surgery per study protocol, persistent DCIS remained in 50 patients (85%), invasive cancer was detected in six patients (10%), and no residual DCIS or invasive cancer was seen in nine patients (15%). CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of postmenopausal women with ER-positive DCIS, preoperative letrozole resulted in significant imaging and biomarker changes. These findings support future trials of extended endocrine therapy as primary nonoperative treatment of some DCIS.

Challenges in Clinical Trial Implementation: Results from a Survey of the National Accreditation Program of Breast Centers (NAPBC).

BACKGROUND: Although the results of clinical trials often guide best practices, changing clinical practice based on clinical trial results can be challenging. The objective of this study was to examine provider-reported barriers to adopting best clinical practices according to clinical trial data. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted of providers from the National Accreditation Program for Breast Centers about barriers that prevent the incorporation of trial findings. Descriptive analyses and multivariable analyses were performed to determine provider characteristics that were significantly associated with reported barriers. RESULTS: Overall, 383 institutions participated (63.5% response rate), with a total of 1226 physicians responding to the survey (80% response rate). Providers identified national guidelines and meetings as the most compelling way to receive practice-changing information. They reported the following internal barriers to trial implementation: patient preference (45%), strongly held beliefs by partners/colleagues (37%), and insufficient time to discuss new practices (30%). External barriers preventing trial implementation included a lack of agreement from multidisciplinary tumor boards (32%), fear of reimbursement loss (23%), and resistance from clinical staff (20%). Reported barriers differed by provider specialty, with plastic surgeons and radiation oncologists reporting that strongly held beliefs by partners/colleagues and disagreement from multidisciplinary tumor boards were the most significant factors preventing clinical trial implementation. CONCLUSIONS: Physician beliefs and patient preferences are the most frequently reported barriers to clinical trial implementation. Tactics to better educate providers about how to explain new clinical trial data to their patients and colleagues are needed.

ACS CRP Dissemination and Implementation Committee issues call for participants in pilot project.

According to HHS, dissemination and implementation research is designed "to bridge the gap between public health, clinical research, and everyday practice by building a knowledge base about how health information, interventions, and new clinical practices and policies are transmitted and translated for public health and health care service use in specific settings".

Dense Breasts: What Do Our Patients Need to Be Told and Why?

More than 50 % of states have state-mandated density notification for patients with heterogeneously or extremely dense breasts. Increased breast density carries a risk of masking a cancer and delaying diagnosis. Supplemental imaging is optional and often recommended for certain patients. There are no evidence-based consensus guidelines for screening patients with density as their only risk factor. Breast cancer risk assessment and breast cancer prevention strategies should be discussed with women with dense breasts.

What is a Breast Surgeon Worth? A Salary Survey of the American Society of Breast Surgeons.

BACKGROUND: Breast surgeons negotiating employment agreements have little national data available. To reduce this knowledge gap, the Education Committee of the American Society of Breast Surgeons conducted a survey of its membership. METHODS: In 2014, survey questionnaires were sent to society members. Data collected included gender, type of practice, percentage devoted to breast surgery, volume of breast cases, work relative value units, location, benefits, and salary. Descriptive statistics were provided, and a multinomial logistic regression was performed to analyze the impact of various potential factors on salary. RESULTS: Of the 2784 members, a total of 843 observations were included. Overall, 54% of respondents dedicated 100 % of their practice to breast surgery, 64.3% were female, and 40% were fellowship-trained in breast surgery or surgical oncology. The mean income in 2013 was $330.7k. Results from a multinomial model showed gender (p < 0.0001), ownership (p = 0.03), years of practice (p < 0.0001), practice setting (p < 0.0001), practice volume (p < 0.0001), and geographic location (p = 0.05) were statistically significant. After adjusting for other variables, the expected income was higher for males ($378k vs. $310k). The lowest expected income by practice setting was in solo private practice ($249.2k), followed by single-specialty private practice ($285.8k), and academic ($308.5k), with the highest being multispecialty group private practice ($346.6k) and hospital-employed practice ($368.0k). Practice 100% dedicated to breast surgery had a lower than expected income ($326k vs. $343k). CONCLUSIONS: Salary-specific data for breast surgeons are limited, and differences in salary were seen across geographic regions, type of practice, and gender. This type of breast-surgeon-specific data may be helpful in ensuring equitable compensation.

Performance and Practice Guideline for the Use of Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy in the Management of Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: The American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) sought to provide an evidence-based guideline on the use of neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) in the management of clinical stage II and III invasive breast cancer. METHODS: A comprehensive nonsystematic review was performed of selected peer-reviewed literature published since 2000. The Education Committee of the ASBrS convened to develop guideline recommendations. RESULTS: A performance and practice guideline was prepared to outline the baseline assessment and perioperative management of patients with clinical stage II-III breast cancer under consideration for NST. RECOMMENDATIONS: Preoperative or NST is emerging as an important initial strategy for the management of invasive breast cancer. From the surgeon's perspective, the primary goal of NST is to increase the resectability of locally advanced breast cancer, increase the feasibility of breast-conserving surgery and sentinel node biopsy, and decrease surgical morbidity. To ensure optimal patient selection and efficient patient care, the guideline recommends: (1) baseline breast and axillary imaging; (2) minimally invasive biopsies of breast and axillary lesions; (3) determination of tumor biomarkers; (4) systemic staging; (5) care coordination, including referrals to medical oncology, radiation oncology, plastic surgery, social work, and genetic counseling, if indicated; (6) initiation of NST; (7) post-NST breast and axillary imaging; and (8) decision for surgery based on extent of disease at presentation, patient choice, clinical response to NST, and genetic testing results, if performed.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer: a history and current clinical recommendations.

The advent of sentinel lymph node biopsy changed the way the surgical community treated breast cancer. It also reduced the post operative morbidity for millions of patients. Now that sentinel lymph node biopsy has become the mainstay of treatment, new clinical questions have arisen and continued research is being done to answer these questions. This report details a brief history of sentinel lymph node biopsy and how it was applied in the treatment a breast cancer. This report also includes a review of the current literature regarding unique clinical scenarios involving sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer including the ACOSOG Z011 trial.

Breast cancer care in the community: challenges, opportunities, and outcomes.

In the USA, 80% of patients with breast cancer are treated by community breast surgeons. NCDB data indicate that there are only small differences in outcomes between lower volume cancer programs and higher volume programs. There is some evidence that breast cancer patients of high-volume breast focused surgeons may have improved outcomes. This article discusses the challenges community breast surgeons face and some ways that the quality of care could be monitored and improved. Quality reporting programs of the Commission on Cancer and Mastery of Breast Surgery Program of the American Society of Breast Surgeons are recommended as tools to track and improve outcomes in breast cancer care.

Partial vs. whole breast irradiation in a community hospital: a retrospective cohort analysis of 200 patients.

PURPOSE: We compared patients undergoing partial breast irradiation (PBI) with the MammoSite applicator (Cytyc Corp., Marlborough, MA) to a similar group of patients who underwent whole breast irradiation with external beam radiotherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Stage 0-IIA breast cancer patients satisfying American Brachytherapy Society selection criteria and receiving accelerated PBI with the MammoSite system (n=100) were compared for toxicities with similarly staged patients receiving whole breast irradiation using tangential portals (n=100). The MammoSite applicator treatment was prescribed to a total dose of 34 Gy. External beam doses generally ranged from 60 to 66 Gy. RESULTS: Based on common toxicity criteria scores for acute toxicities, MammoSite patients experienced less cutaneous toxicity, fatigue, and breast pain and had higher Karnofsky performance status scores during the acute period than external beam patients but experienced more seroma pain during followup. These results were both statistically significant and clinically meaningful. CONCLUSIONS: In our institutional experience, PBI using the MammoSite applicator produces less acute toxicity than external beam radiotherapy of the whole breast but is associated with an increased incidence of seroma pain. The rate of disease recurrence in both cohorts was low.

Calciphylaxis mimicking inflammatory breast cancer.

Calciphylaxis is a rare disorder characterized by microcalcification of small- and medium-sized blood vessels causing cutaneous and soft tissue necrosis. Patients usually present with painful, violaceous skin discoloration in a livedo reticularis pattern. We present a case of a 59-year-old woman with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) who manifested signs and symptoms of inflammatory breast cancer. The patient underwent an open biopsy and subsequent mastectomy, with final pathology results of calciphylaxis. Due to recurrent hyperparathyroidism, she underwent a re-parathyroidectomy with reimplantation. To our knowledge, this is the first reported case of calciphylaxis recurrence after subtotal parathyroidectomy. We propose that those patients with ESRD who develop breast pathology consistent with inflammation and necrosis, and have no malignancy, be evaluated for secondary hyperparathyroidism. Total parathyroidectomy with reimplantation should be performed. Mastectomy should be performed for unresolving symptoms, necrosis or infection.

Analysis of Epstein-Barr virus reservoirs in paired blood and breast cancer primary biopsy specimens by real time PCR.

INTRODUCTION: Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) is present in over 90% of the world's population. This infection is considered benign, even though in limited cases EBV is associated with infectious and neoplastic conditions. Over the past decade, the EBV association with breast cancer has been constantly debated. Adding to this clinical and biological uncertainty, different techniques gave contradictory results for the presence of EBV in breast carcinoma specimens. In this study, minor groove binding (MGB)-TaqMan real time PCR was used to detect the presence of EBV DNA in both peripheral blood and tumor samples of selected patients. METHODS: Peripheral blood and breast carcinoma specimens from 24 patients were collected. DNA was extracted and then amplified by MGB-TaqMan real time PCR. RESULTS: Of 24 breast tumor specimens, 11 (46%) were positive for EBV DNA. Of these 11 breast tumor specimens, 7 (64%) were also positive for EBV DNA in the peripheral blood, while 4 (36%) were positive for EBV DNA in the tumor, but negative in the blood. CONCLUSION: EBV was found at extremely low levels, with a mean of 0.00004 EBV genomes per cell (range 0.00014 to 0.00001 EBV genomes per cell). Furthermore, our finding of the presence of EBV in the tumor specimens coupled to the absence of detection of EBV genomic DNA in the peripheral blood is consistent with the epithelial nature of the virus. Because of the low levels of viral DNA in tumor tissue, further studies are needed to assess the biological input of EBV in breast cancer.