Barriers and facilitators to measuring patient reported outcomes in an academic breast cancer clinic: An application of the RE-AIM framework.

BACKGROUND: Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are important for patient-centered, value-based care; however, implementation into surgical practice remains limited. We aimed to demonstrate feasibility of measuring PROMs in an academic breast cancer clinic. METHODS: We conducted a pilot study implementing the patient-reported outcome measure BREAST-Q among patients with Stage 0-III breast cancer at a single institution from 06/2019-03/2023 using the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. Barriers and facilitators were characterized. Survey completion was assessed pre-operatively and up to 12 months post-operatively. RESULTS: Barriers included limited time and lack of incorporation into the electronic medical record. Facilitators included utilizing trained team members and an automated workflow. Among eligible patients, 74% completed BREAST-Q at 2-weeks post-operatively and 55% at 12 months post-operatively. CONCLUSIONS: We describe the implementation of a PROM using the RE-AIM framework, highlighting facilitators and barriers that may assist others in collecting patient-reported outcome data.

Information transparency with immediate release: Oncology clinician and patient perceptions.

INTRODUCTION: As part of the 21st Century Cures Act (April 2021), electronic health information (EHI) must be immediately released to patients. In this study, we sought to evaluate clinician and patient perceptions regarding this immediate release. METHODS: After surveying 33 clinicians and 30 patients, semi-structured interviews were conducted with a subset of the initial sample, comprising 8 clinicians and 12 patients. Open-ended questions explored clinicians' and patients' perceptions of immediate release of EHI and how they adjusted to this change. RESULTS: Ten themes were identified: Interpreting Results, Strategies for Patient Interaction, Patient Experiences, Communication Strategies, Provider Limitations, Provider Experiences, Health Information Interfaces, Barriers to Patient Understanding, Types of Results, and Changes due to Immediate Release. Interviews demonstrated differences in perceived patient distress and comprehension, emphasizing the impersonal nature of electronic release and necessity for therapeutic clinician-patient communication. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians and patients have unique insights on the role of immediate release. Understanding these perspectives will help improve communication and develop patient-centered tools (glossaries, summary pages, additional resources) to aid patient understanding of complex medical information.

Characterizing informational needs and information seeking behavior of patients with breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Appropriate information may facilitate adjustment to cancer diagnoses. Our study aims to characterize informational satisfaction in breast cancer patients and assess resources used by patients to gain information. METHODS: Newly diagnosed Stage 0-III breast cancer patients seen at an academic medical center between May and September 2020 received questionnaires assessing information satisfaction. Patients indicated resources used to obtain information along with satisfaction with information received in various topics. A subset of questionnaire respondents completed semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: Fifty-two (35 â€‹%) patients completed the questionnaire. Patients received information from physicians (96 â€‹%), the internet (81 â€‹%), nurses (79 â€‹%), and fellow breast cancer patients (54 â€‹%). Interview participants preferred receiving information from providers when making medical decisions but found patient forums and social media to be important adjuncts for receiving information. CONCLUSION: Patients are satisfied with information received about diagnosis and treatment, but finances, sexual health, and fertility are less frequently discussed.

Are Diagnostic Delays Associated with Distress in Breast Cancer Patients?

Introduction: Receiving a new breast cancer diagnosis can cause anxiety and distress, which can lead to psychologic morbidity, decreased treatment adherence, and worse clinical outcomes. Understanding sources of distress is crucial in providing comprehensive care. This study aims to evaluate the relationship between delays in breast cancer diagnosis and patient-reported distress. Secondary outcomes include assessing patient characteristics associated with delay. Methods: Newly diagnosed breast cancer patients who completed a distress screening tool at their initial evaluation at an academic institution between 2014 and 2019 were retrospectively evaluated. The tool captured distress levels in the emotional, social, health, and practical domains with scores of "high distress" defined by current clinical practice guidelines. Delay from mammogram to biopsy, whether diagnostic or screening mammogram, was defined as >30 days. Result: 745 newly diagnosed breast cancer patients met inclusion criteria. Median time from abnormal mammogram to core biopsy was 12 days, and 11% of patients experienced a delay in diagnosis. The non-delayed group had higher emotional (p = 0.04) and health (p = 0.03) distress than the delayed group. No statistically significant differences in social distress were found between groups. Additionally, patients with higher practical distress had longer time interval between mammogram and surgical intervention compared to those with lower practical distress. Older age, diagnoses of invasive lobular carcinoma or ductal carcinoma in situ, and clinical anatomic stages 0-I were associated with diagnostic delay. Conclusion: Patients with higher emotional or health-related distress were more likely to have timely diagnoses of breast cancer, suggesting that patients with higher distress may seek healthcare interventions more promptly. Improved understanding of sources of distress will permit early intervention regarding the devastating impact of breast cancer diagnosis.

Postoperative Outcomes After Staged Versus Coordinated Breast Surgery and Bilateral Salpingo-Oophorectomy.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to compare postoperative complication rates and healthcare charges between patients who underwent coordinated versus staged breast surgery and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The MarketScan administrative database was used to identify adult female patients with invasive breast cancer or BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations who underwent BSO and breast surgery (lumpectomy or mastectomy with or without reconstruction) between 2010 and 2015. Patients were assigned to the coordinated group if a breast operation and BSO were performed simultaneously or assigned to the staged group if BSO was performed separately. Primary outcomes were (1) incidence of 90-day postoperative complications and (2) 2-year aggregate perioperative healthcare charges. Fisher's exact tests, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, and multivariable regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: Of the 4228 patients who underwent breast surgery and BSO, 412 (9.7%) were in the coordinated group and 3816 (90.3%) were in the staged group. The coordinated group had a higher incidence of postoperative complications (24.0% vs. 17.7%, p < 0.01), higher risk-adjusted odds of postoperative complications [odds ratio (OR) 1.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.06-1.76, p = 0.02], and similar aggregate healthcare charges before (median charges: $106,500 vs. $101,555, p = 0.96) and after risk-adjustment [incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.00, 95% CI 0.93-1.07; p = 0.95]. In a subgroup analysis, incidence of postoperative complications (12.9% for coordinated operations vs. 11.7% for staged operation, p = 0.73) was similar in patients whose breast operation was a lumpectomy. CONCLUSIONS: While costs were similar, coordinating breast surgery with BSO was associated with more complications in patients who underwent mastectomy, but not in patients who underwent lumpectomy. These data should inform shared decision-making in high-risk patients.

Changes in Surgical Management of the Axilla Over 11 Years - Report on More Than 1500 Breast Cancer Patients Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy on the Prospective I-SPY2 Trial.

BACKGROUND: Axillary surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is becoming less extensive. We evaluated the evolution of axillary surgery after NAC on the multi-institutional I-SPY2 prospective trial. METHODS: We examined annual rates of sentinel lymph node (SLN) surgery with resection of clipped node, if present), axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), and SLN and ALND in patients enrolled in I-SPY2 from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2021 by clinical N status at diagnosis and pathologic N status at surgery. Cochran-Armitage trend tests were calculated to evaluate patterns over time. RESULTS: Of 1578 patients, 973 patients (61.7%) had SLN-only, 136 (8.6%) had SLN and ALND, and 469 (29.7%) had ALND-only. In the cN0 group, ALND-only decreased from 20% in 2011 to 6.25% in 2021 (p = 0.0078) and SLN-only increased from 70.0% to 87.5% (p = 0.0020). This was even more striking in patients with clinically node-positive (cN+) disease at diagnosis, where ALND-only decreased from 70.7% to 29.4% (p < 0.0001) and SLN-only significantly increased from 14.6% to 56.5% (p < 0.0001). This change was significant across subtypes (HR-/HER2-, HR+/HER2-, and HER2+). Among pathologically node-positive (pN+) patients after NAC (n = 525) ALND-only decreased from 69.0% to 39.2% (p < 0.0001) and SLN-only increased from 6.9% to 39.2% (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Use of ALND after NAC has significantly decreased over the past decade. This is most pronounced in cN+ disease at diagnosis with an increase in the use of SLN surgery after NAC. Additionally, in pN+ disease after NAC, there has been a decrease in use of completion ALND, a practice pattern change that precedes results from clinical trials.

Breast Conservation Surgery and Mastectomy Have Similar Locoregional Recurrence After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Results From 1462 Patients on the Prospective, Randomized I-SPY2 Trial.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) increases rates of successful breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in patients with breast cancer. However, some studies suggest that BCS after NAC may confer an increased risk of locoregional recurrence (LRR). We assessed LRR rates and locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS) in patients enrolled on I-SPY2 (NCT01042379), a prospective NAC trial for patients with clinical stage II to III, molecularly high-risk breast cancer. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate associations between surgical procedure (BCS vs mastectomy) and LRFS adjusted for age, tumor receptor subtype, clinical T category, clinical nodal status, and residual cancer burden (RCB). In 1462 patients, surgical procedure was not associated with LRR or LRFS on either univariate or multivariate analysis. The unadjusted incidence of LRR was 5.4% after BCS and 7.0% after mastectomy, at a median follow-up time of 3.5 years. The strongest predictor of LRR was RCB class, with each increasing RCB class having a significantly higher hazard ratio for LRR compared with RCB 0 on multivariate analysis. Triple-negative receptor subtype was also associated with an increased risk of LRR (hazard ratio: 2.91, 95% CI: 1.8-4.6, P < 0.0001), regardless of the type of operation. In this large multi-institutional prospective trial of patients completing NAC, we found no increased risk of LRR or differences in LRFS after BCS compared with mastectomy. Tumor receptor subtype and extent of residual disease after NAC were significantly associated with recurrence. These data demonstrate that BCS can be an excellent surgical option after NAC for appropriately selected patients.

Clinical implications of receptor conversions in breast cancer patients who have undergone neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: In this study, we aimed to determine the incidence of receptor conversions after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for breast cancer and assess the rate at which receptor conversion leads to changes in adjuvant therapy regimens. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of female breast cancer patients treated with NAC at an academic breast center between January 2017 and October 2021. Patients with residual disease on surgical pathology and complete receptor status information for both pre-NAC and post-NAC specimens were included. Incidence of receptor conversions, defined as a change in at least one hormone receptor (HR) or HER2 status compared to preoperative specimens, was tabulated, and adjuvant therapy modalities were reviewed. Factors associated with receptor conversion were analyzed using chi-square tests and a binary logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the 240 patients with residual disease after NAC, 126 (52.5%) had receptor testing repeated. After NAC, 37 specimens (29%) had a receptor conversion. Receptor conversion resulted in the addition or removal of an adjuvant therapy in 8 patients (6%), indicating a number needed to screen of 16. Prior history of cancer, receipt of initial biopsy at an outside site, HR-positive tumors, and a pathologic stage of II or lower were factors associated with receptor conversions. CONCLUSION: HR and HER2 expression profiles frequently change after NAC and drive adjustments in adjuvant therapy regimens. Repeat testing of HR and HER2 expression should be considered in patients who receive NAC, especially in patients with early stage, HR-positive tumors whose initial biopsies were performed externally.

Surgical Nipple Delay and its Expanded Indications for Nipple-sparing Mastectomy.

Necrosis of the nipple-areolar complex (NAC) or surrounding skin has been reported in 6%-30% of nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) patients, with higher rates associated with larger breasts, previous breast surgery, previous radiation, and active smoking. The nipple delay (ND) procedure is known to improve viability of the NAC in NSM patients with high-risk factors. Methods: A single-institution retrospective review was done of patients who underwent ND and NSM or NSM alone from 2012 to 2022. Patient demographics, risk factors, and outcomes were compared. Results: Forty-two breasts received ND-NSM and 302 breasts received NSM alone. The ND-NSM group had significantly more high-risk factors, including elevated BMI (26.3 versus 22.9; P < 0.001), elevated prior breast surgery (50% versus 25%; P < 0.001), and greater mastectomy specimen weight (646.6 versus 303.2 g; P < 0.001). ND-NSM was more likely to have undergone preparatory mammoplasty before NSM (27% versus 1%; P < 0.001). There was no delay in NSM treatment from decision to pursue NSM (P = 0.483) or difference in skin necrosis (P = 0.256), NAC necrosis (P = 0.510), hematoma (P = 0.094), seroma (P = 0.137), or infection (P = 0.437) between groups. ND-NSM and NSM patients differed in total NAC necrosis (0% versus 3%) and implant loss (0% vs 13%), but not significantly. Conclusions: We demonstrated no NAC necrosis and no significant delay of treatment in higher risk ND-NSM patients. ND may allow higher risk patients to undergo NSM with similar morbidity as lower risk patients.

Financial Toxicity of Breast Cancer Care: The Patient Perspective Through Surveys and Interviews.

INTRODUCTION: Although the economic burden of cancer care is an emerging concern in the United States, the potential financial toxicity of breast cancer care at the patient level remains poorly understood. This study aims to characterize the scope of the contributors to financial distress on breast cancer patients and the resources utilized to address them. METHODS: Adult female patients diagnosed with invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ between 2014 and 2019 at a single institution were retrospectively evaluated. Those who enrolled in copay assistance or indicated financial concerns on an intake distress screen were provided a web-based survey assessing financial changes, resources used, and financial engagement with providers. Semi-structured interviews further explored sources of financial distress and were analyzed by two researchers using grounded theory methodology. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients completed the online survey, 15 of the 68 also participated in semi-structured phone interviews. On the online survey 74% of participants endorsed a financial distress score ≥5 on a scale of 0-10. Seventy-four percent changed their budget, 72% used their savings, and 60% cut down on spending. However, only 40% used resources such as financial counseling or financial assistance. Interviews revealed three major contributors to financial distress: (1) unexpected medical and nonmedical expenses, (2) lost revenue from missed work, and (3) altered budgeting. CONCLUSIONS: Many breast cancer patients experience significant financial distress without access to the resources they need. This study highlights the need for financial transparency, supportive financial services counseling at the time of diagnosis, throughout treatment and beyond.

Association of Residual Ductal Carcinoma In Situ With Breast Cancer Recurrence in the Neoadjuvant I-SPY2 Trial.

Importance: Pathologic complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in breast cancer strongly correlates with overall survival and has become the standard end point in neoadjuvant trials. However, there is controversy regarding whether the definition of pCR should exclude or permit the presence of residual ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Objective: To examine the association of residual DCIS in surgical specimens after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer with survival end points to inform standards for the assessment of pathologic complete response. Design, Setting, and Participants: The study team analyzed the association of residual DCIS after NAC with 3-year event-free survival (EFS), distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS), and local-regional recurrence (LRR) in the I-SPY2 trial, an adaptive neoadjuvant platform trial for patients with breast cancer at high risk of recurrence. This is a retrospective analysis of clinical specimens and data from the ongoing I-SPY2 adaptive platform trial of novel therapeutics on a background of standard of care for early breast cancer. I-SPY2 participants are adult women diagnosed with stage II/III breast cancer at high risk of recurrence. Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive taxane and anthracycline-based neoadjuvant therapy with or without 1 of 10 investigational agents, followed by definitive surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures: The presence of DCIS and EFS, DRFS, and LRR. Results: The study team identified 933 I-SPY2 participants (aged 24 to 77 years) with complete pathology and follow-up data. Median follow-up time was 3.9 years; 337 participants (36%) had no residual invasive disease (residual cancer burden 0, or pCR). Of the 337 participants with pCR, 70 (21%) had residual DCIS, which varied significantly by tumor-receptor subtype; residual DCIS was present in 8.5% of triple negative tumors, 15.6% of hormone-receptor positive tumors, and 36.6% of ERBB2-positive tumors. Among those participants with pCR, there was no significant difference in EFS, DRFS, or LRR based on presence or absence of residual DCIS. Conclusions and Relevance: The analysis supports the definition of pCR as the absence of invasive disease after NAC regardless of the presence or absence of DCIS. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01042379.

No One-Size-Fits-All: Sexual Health Education Preferences in Patients with Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Using explanatory mixed methods, we characterize the education that patients with breast cancer received about potential sexual health effects of treatment and explore preferences in format, content, and timing of education. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult patients with stage 0-IV breast cancer seen at an academic breast center during December 2020 were emailed questionnaires assessing sexual health symptoms experienced during treatment. Patients interested in further study involvement were invited to participate in semistructured interviews. These interviews explored sexual health education provided by the oncology team and patient preferences in content, format, and timing of education delivery. RESULTS: Eighty-seven (32%) patients completed the questionnaire. Most patients reported decreased sexual desire (69%), vaginal dryness (63%), and less energy for sexual activity (62%) during/after treatment. Sixteen patients participated in interviews. Few women reported receiving information about potential sexual effects of breast cancer treatment; patients who did reported a focus on menopausal symptoms or fertility rather than sexual function. Regarding preferences in format, patients were in favor of multiple options being offered rather than a one-size-fits-all approach, with particular emphasis on in-person options and support groups. Patients desired education early and often throughout breast cancer treatment, not only about sexual side effects but also on mitigation strategies, sexual function, dating and partner intimacy, and body image changes. CONCLUSION: Few patients received information about the sexual health effects of breast cancer treatment, though many experienced symptoms. Potential adverse effects should be discussed early and addressed often throughout treatment, with attention to strategies to prevent and alleviate symptoms and improve overall sexual health.

Patient comprehension of breast pathology report terminology: The need for patient-centered resources.

BACKGROUND: As health care continues to evolve toward information transparency, an increasing number of patients have access to their medical records, including result reports that were not originally designed to be patient-facing. Previous studies have demonstrated that patients have poor understanding of medical terminology. However, patient comprehension of terminology specific to breast pathology reports has not been well studied. We assessed patient understanding of common medical terms found in breast pathology reports. METHODS: A survey was administered electronically to patients scheduled for a screening mammogram within a multisite health care system. Participants were asked to objectively define and interpret 8 medical terms common to breast biopsy pathology reports. Patient perception of the utility of various educational tools was also assessed. Demographic information including health literacy, education level, previous cancer diagnosis, and primary language was collected. RESULTS: In total, 527 patients completed the survey. Terms including "malignant" and "benign" were the most correctly defined at 80% and 73%, respectively, whereas only 1% correctly defined "high grade." Factors including race/ethnicity and education level were correlated with more correct scores. Patients preferred educational tools that were specific to their diagnosis and available at the time they were reviewing their results. CONCLUSION: Patient comprehension of common medical terminology is poor. Potential assumptions of understanding based on patient factors including education, past medical history, and occupation are misinformed. With the newly mandated immediate release of information to patients, there is a pressing need to develop and integrate educational tools to support patients through all aspects of their care.

De-implementation of Axillary Dissection in Women With Breast Cancer is Largely Driven By Site-level Contextual Effects.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the contribution of unknown institutional factors (contextual effects) in the de-implementation of cALND in women with breast cancer. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Women included in the National Cancer Database with invasive breast carcinoma from 2012 to 2016 that underwent upfront lumpectomy and were found to have a positive sentinel node. METHODS: A multivariable mixed effects logistic regression model with a random intercept for site was used to determine the effect of patient, tumor, and institutional variables on the risk of cALND. Reference effect measureswere used to describe and compare the contribution of contextual effects to the variation in cALND use to that of measured variables. RESULTS: By 2016, cALND was still performed in at least 50% of the patients in a quarter of the institutions. Black race, younger women and those with larger or hormone negative tumors were more likely to undergo cALND. However, the width of the 90% reference effect measures range for the contextual effects exceeded that of the measured site, tumor, time, and patient demographics, suggesting institutional contextual effects were the major drivers of cALND de-implementation. For instance, a woman at an institution with low-risk of performing cALND would have 74% reduced odds of havinga cALND than if she was treated at a median-risk institution, while a patient at a high-risk institution had 3.91 times the odds. CONCLUSION: Compared to known patient, tumor, and institutional factors, contextual effects had a higher contribution to the variation in cALND use.

Patient and clinician perceptions of the immediate release of electronic health information.

OBJECTIVES: The 21st Century Cures Act requires that institutions release all electronic health information (EHI) to patients immediately. We aimed to understand patient and clinician attitudes toward the immediate release of EHI to patients. METHODS: Patients and clinicians representing distinct specialties at a single academic medical center completed a survey to assess attitudes toward the immediate release of results. Differences between patient and clinician responses were compared using chi-square and student's t-test for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. A two-sided significance level of 0.05 was used for all statistical tests. RESULTS: 69 clinicians and 57 patients completed the survey. Both patients (89.7%) and clinicians (80.6%) agreed or strongly agreed-here after referred to as agreed, that providing patients with access to their health information is necessary in delivering high-quality care. However, 62.7% of clinicians agreed that results released immediately would be more confusing than helpful, whereas the minority of patients agreed with this statement (15.8%) (p < 0.05). Providers were also more likely to disagree that patients are comfortable independently interpreting blood work results (p < 0.05), radiology results (p < 0.05) and pathology reports (p < 0.05). With regard to timing, the majority of patients (75.1%) felt their provider should contact them within 24 h of the release of an abnormal result, whereas only 9.0% of clinicians agreed with this timeframe (p < 0.05). DISCUSSIONS: Patients and clinicians value information transparency. However, the immediate release of results is controversial, especially among clinicians. The discrepancy between patient and clinician perceptions underlines the importance of setting expectations about the communication of results. Additionally, our results emphasize the need to implement strategies to help improve patient comprehension, decrease patient distress and improve clinician workflows.

Patient Perceptions of Changes in Breast Cancer Care and Well-Being During COVID-19: A Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Widespread healthcare restructuring due to the COVID-19 pandemic led to modifications in the timing and delivery of care for breast cancer patients. Our study explores patient concerns relating to COVID-19, breast cancer, and changes to breast cancer care. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Breast cancer patients who presented for surgical consultation at an academic, multidisciplinary clinic completed the electronically distributed validated COVID-19 Impact and Healthcare Related Quality of Life questionnaire between August 2020 and February 2021. This questionnaire uses Likert score responses to assess COVID-specific concerns within domains, including distress and financial hardship. Scale scores were determined by averaging items within each domain, and scores > 2 indicated greater disruption. Semistructured interviews were conducted with patients who indicated interest in participating in the questionnaire. RESULTS: Of 381 patients recruited, 133 patients completed the questionnaire and 20 patients completed interviews. Sixty-three percent of survey participants reported attending a telemedicine appointment for their cancer care, and the majority (67%) were satisfied with their experience. Half of the participants (50%) reported fear about how the COVID-19 pandemic will impact their cancer care or recovery, and 66% reported anxiety about contracting COVID-19. Twenty-two percent of participants reported decreased income due to COVID-19. Patient interviews revealed tangible changes to care and provided in-depth information on the advantages and disadvantages of telehealth. CONCLUSIONS: Breast cancer patients report anxiety about COVID-19 infection and potential care modifications. Our study identifies impacts on patients' care and quality of life. Further investigation will inform interventions to improve psychosocial outcomes for patients and the telehealth experience.