App-based support for breast cancer patients to reduce psychological distress during therapy and survivorship - a multicentric randomized controlled trial.

Introduction: The negative impact of unmanaged psychological distress on quality of life and outcome in breast cancer survivors has been demonstrated. Fortunately, studies indicate that distress can effectively be addressed and even prevented using evidence-based interventions. In Germany prescription-based mobile health apps, known as DiGAs (digital health applications), that are fully reimbursed by health insurances, were introduced in 2020. In this study, the effectiveness of an approved breast cancer DiGA was investigated: The personalized coaching app PINK! Coach supports and accompanies breast cancer patients during therapy and follow-up. Methods: PINK! Coach was specifically designed for breast cancer (BC) patients from the day of diagnosis to the time of Follow-up (aftercare). The app offers individualized, evidence-based therapy and side-effect management, mindfulness-based stress reduction, nutritional and psychological education, physical activity tracking, and motivational exercises to implement lifestyle changes sustainably in daily routine. A prospective, intraindividual RCT (DRKS00028699) was performed with n = 434 patients recruited in 7 German breast cancer centers from September 2022 until January 2023. Patients with BC were included independent of their stage of diseases, type of therapy and molecular characteristics of the tumor. Patients were randomized into one of two groups: The intervention group got access to PINK! over 12 weeks; the control group served as a waiting-list comparison to "standard of care." The primary endpoint was psychological distress objectified by means of Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). Subgroups were defined to investigate the app's effect on several patient groups such as MBC vs. EBC patients, patients on therapy vs. in aftercare, patients who received a chemotherapy vs. patients who did not. Results: Efficacy analysis of the primary endpoint revealed a significant reduction in psychological distress (least squares estimate -1.62, 95% confidence interval [1.03; 2.21]; p<0.001) among intervention group patients from baseline to T3 vs, control group. Subgroup analysis also suggested improvements across all clinical situations. Conclusion: Patients with breast cancer suffer from psychological problems including anxiety and depression during and after therapy. Personalized, supportive care with the app PINK! Coach turned out as a promising opportunity to significantly improve psychological distress in a convenient, accessible, and low-threshold manner for breast cancer patients independent of their stage of disease (EBC/MBC), therapy phase (aftercare or therapy) or therapy itself (chemotherapy/other therapy options). The app is routinely available in Germany as a DiGA. Clinical Trial Registration: DRKS Trial Registry (DRKS00028699).

Budget Impact of the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score® Test in Patients with Early Primary Hormone-Receptor-Positive, HER2-Negative, Node-Positive Breast Cancer in Germany.

Background: Gene expression tests can inform decisions on whether to recommend or omit chemotherapy for patients with early HR+, HER2- breast cancer. The benefit of these tests is well established and fully reimbursed by sickness funds for lymph node-negative (pN0) patients in Germany. A budget impact model was built to evaluate the effect of using the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score® test also for node-positive (pN1: 1-3 positive lymph nodes) patients. Methods: The prospective randomized clinical trial, RxPONDER, defined conditions (Recurrence Score result 0-25 for postmenopausal patients with 1-3 positive lymph nodes) under which omitting chemotherapy does not significantly impact invasive disease-free survival with results currently reported for 5-year follow-up. The present budget impact model calculates average total cost per node-positive patient versus no testing from a sickness funds perspective, taking into account not only the budgetary impact of avoiding chemotherapy and associated side effects, but also the costs of treating those patients who develop distant metastasis. The stability of the results was investigated by probabilistic multivariate sensitivity analysis. Results: After deducting testing cost, applying the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score test yielded an average savings per node-positive patient of EUR 4,272. Without the test costs, the greatest savings resulted from reductions in direct treatment costs and costs arising from the treatment of chemotherapy-related side effects, which together averaged EUR 6,677. The targeted use of chemotherapy after testing also resulted in slightly lower costs for treatment of distant metastasis, if it did occur. The multivariate sensitivity analysis also almost exclusively resulted in cost savings. Conclusion: Analogous to the pN0 situation, this budget impact model demonstrates that the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score test can also reduce healthcare costs in Germany in treatment of node-positive (pN1: 1-3 positive lymph nodes) patients by minimizing both unnecessary chemotherapy and undertreatment. Additional benefits to patients would include reduced morbidity and improved quality of life for those patients who can safely avoid chemotherapy or undertreatment.

AGO Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Locally Advanced and Metastatic Breast Cancer: Update 2023.

The Breast Committee of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie (German Gynecological Oncology Group, AGO) presents the 2023 update of the evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer (mBC).

Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Early Breast Cancer: Update 2023.

Background: Each year the interdisciplinary Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie (AGO), German Gynecological Oncology Group Breast Committee on Diagnosis and Treatment of Breast Cancer provides updated state-of-the-art recommendations for early and metastatic breast cancer. Summary: The updated evidence-based treatment recommendation for early and metastatic breast cancer has been released in March 2023. Key Messages: This paper concisely captures the updated recommendations for early breast cancer chapter by chapter.

Is the (Neo)adjuvant Therapy of Patients with Primary HER2-positive Breast Cancer Cost-Covering?: Process Cost Analysis of Neoadjuvant and Post-Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy of Patients with Primary HER2-positive Breast Cancer.

Introduction HER2 positivity is one of the most important predictive factors in the treatment of breast cancer patients. Thanks to new targeted anti-HER2 drugs, the prognosis for HER2-positive breast cancer patients has been significantly improved, and the treatment can now be designed according to the risk situation and the response to treatment. At the same time, these innovative targeted anti-HER2 drugs are associated with high costs and require long and involved patient care. Materials and Methods In this paper, we compare the treatment costs of three post-neoadjuvant treatment regimens (trastuzumab vs. trastuzumab/pertuzumab vs. T-DM1) in early stage HER2-positive breast cancer from the perspective of the oncological outpatient clinic of a certified breast center at a university hospital, and evaluate the cost coverage. Results The highest costs in systemic therapy were the material costs. These were the highest for dual blockade with trastuzumab/pertuzumab, followed by T-DM1 and trastuzumab monotherapy. According to our study, all three of these post-neoadjuvant therapy variants achieve a positive contribution margin. While all three models have similar contribution margins, the treatment pathway with T-DM1 is associated with a 30% lower contribution margin. Conclusions Although these model calculations are associated with limitations in view of the introduction of biosimilar antibodies, it can be shown that modern therapeutic approaches do not always have to be associated with lower profits.

Localization Techniques for Non-Palpable Breast Lesions: Current Status, Knowledge Gaps, and Rationale for the MELODY Study (EUBREAST-4/iBRA-NET, NCT 05559411).

BACKGROUND: Surgical excision of a non-palpable breast lesion requires a localization step. Among available techniques, wire-guided localization (WGL) is most commonly used. Other techniques (radioactive, magnetic, radar or radiofrequency-based, and intraoperative ultrasound) have been developed in the last two decades with the aim of improving outcomes and logistics. METHODS: We performed a systematic review on localization techniques for non-palpable breast cancer. RESULTS: For most techniques, oncological outcomes such as lesion identification and clear margin rate seem either comparable with or better than for WGL, but evidence is limited to small cohort studies for some of the devices. Intraoperative ultrasound is associated with significantly higher negative margin rates in meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Radioactive techniques were studied in several RCTs and are non-inferior to WGL. Smaller studies show higher patient preference towards wire-free localization, but little is known about surgeons' and radiologists' attitudes towards these techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Large studies with an additional focus on patient, surgeon, and radiologist preference are necessary. This review aims to present the rationale for the MELODY (NCT05559411) study and to enable standardization of outcome measures for future studies.

Real-world patient-reported outcomes and physician satisfaction with poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors versus chemotherapy in patients with germline BRCA1/2-mutated human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer from the United States, Europe, and Israel.

BACKGROUND: In clinical trials, poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) versus chemotherapy resulted in significantly improved progression-free survival, manageable adverse event profiles, and favorable patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC) and germline BRCA1/2 mutations (gBRCA1/2mut). The objective of this study was to evaluate PROs and physician satisfaction with treatment in patients with gBRCA1/2mut HER2- ABC receiving PARPi or physician's choice of chemotherapy in a multi-country, real-world setting. METHODS: This retrospective analysis used data from the Adelphi Real World ABC Disease Specific Programmes in the United States, European Union, and Israel. PROs were assessed at a single timepoint using the EuroQol 5-Dimensions 5-Level (EQ-5D-5L) scale, Cancer Therapy Satisfaction Questionnaire (CTSQ), and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the breast cancer-specific module (QLQ-BR23). Baseline PROs were not assessed. Physician satisfaction with treatment scores was dichotomized to a 0/1 variable (0 = very dissatisfied/dissatisfied/moderately satisfied; 1 = satisfied/very satisfied). Scores were compared using inverse-probability-weighted regression adjustment, controlling for multiple confounding factors. RESULTS: The study included 96 patients (PARPi, n = 38; platinum/non-platinum-based chemotherapy, n = 58). Patients receiving PARPi versus chemotherapy reported significantly better scores on the EQ-5D-5L Health Utility Index. On the EORTC QLQ-C30 functional scales, patients receiving PARPi reported significantly better scores (mean ± SE) for physical functioning (80.0 ± 2.4 vs 71.9 ± 3.4; p < 0.05) and social functioning (82.0 ± 6.2 vs 63.6 ± 3.7; p < 0.05) and, on the symptom scales, reported significantly better scores for constipation (1.9 ± 1.8 vs 18.7 ± 3.2; p < 0.001), breast symptoms (0.4 ± 3.9 vs 13.3 ± 2.6; p < 0.01), arm symptoms (2.6 ± 1.3 vs 11.4 ± 2.4; p = 0.001), and systemic therapy side effects (13.5 ± 1.8 vs 29.4 ± 2.3; p < 0.001). In contrast, patients receiving chemotherapy scored significantly better on the nausea/vomiting scale (18.3 ± 2.8 vs 34.5 ± 5.1; p < 0.01). Patients receiving PARPi reported numerically better satisfaction scores on the CTSQ scales. Physicians were more likely to be satisfied/very satisfied with PARPi versus chemotherapy (95.4% ± 7.3% vs 40.8% ± 6.2%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The PRO findings in this real-world population of patients with gBRCA1/2mut HER2- ABC complement those from the pivotal clinical trials, providing further support for treatment with PARPi in these patients.

PERFORM: a non-interventional study assessing the patients' treatment starting with 1L palbociclib in HR+/HER2- ABC.

The prospective, non-interventional PERFORM study describes and analyzes the effectiveness of palbociclib in combination with endocrine therapy (aromatase inhibitor or fulvestrant) as first-line treatment for patients with locally advanced or metastatic HR+/HER2- breast cancer in the real-world setting in Germany and Austria. PERFORM will reflect current patient characteristics and routine treatment patterns including treatment sequences and time to subsequent (chemo)therapy. Besides, second-line treatment effectiveness and patient-relevant end points such as longitudinal patient-reported outcome measurements beyond disease progression will be analyzed. Accounting for the heterogenous real-world patient population, data on clinicopathologic subgroups underrepresented in clinical trials such as elderly or male will be analyzed. Taken together, PERFORM will close knowledge gaps from clinical trials in real world.

Palbociclib in combination with endocrine therapy is the standard first-line treatment for patients with advanced HR+/HER2- breast cancer. Data from clinical trials have shown high response rates and good tolerability. To support these data and close potential knowledge gaps, we conduct the multicenter, observational PERFORM study to evaluate the effectiveness and patient-reported outcomes in patients with advanced HR+/HER2- breast cancer treated with endocrine-based palbociclib therapy in routine clinical practice in Germany. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04767594 (ClinicalTrials.gov) Sponsor: Pfizer Pharma GmbH, Linkstraße 10, D-10785 Berlin, Germany.

Real-world study of patients with germline BRCA1/2-mutated human epidermal growth factor receptor 2‒Negative advanced breast cancer: Patient demographics, treatment patterns, adverse events, and physician-reported satisfaction in the United States, Europe, and Israel.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines for the treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2‒negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC) are informed by tumor characteristics and include platinum- and non-platinum-based chemotherapy, chemotherapy plus immunotherapy, endocrine monotherapy, or endocrine therapy plus a targeted therapy. In addition, poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) have recently demonstrated improved clinical and patient-reported outcomes and manageable toxicity profiles compared with chemotherapy in patients with germline breast cancer susceptibility gene 1 or 2 (gBRCA1/2)‒mutated HER2- ABC in clinical trials and are now approved to treat this patient population. This study provides complementary real-world data regarding treatment patterns, adverse events, and physician-reported treatment satisfaction in this population. METHODS: This retrospective analysis using the Adelphi Real World ABC Disease Specific Programme in the United States, European Union, and Israel included patients aged ≥18 years receiving therapy for stage IIIb or IV gBRCA1/2-mutated HER2- ABC. Oncologists completed a patient record form detailing patient demographics, clinical assessments, and treatment history and a survey regarding their use of and satisfaction with treatments. RESULTS: Among the 543 patients, mean age was 55 years, 25% were premenopausal, 70% had hormone receptor‒positive (HR+) ABC, and 30% had triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). PARPi were used in 5%, 11%, and 12% of first-line, second-line, and third-line therapies, respectively, for patients with HR+ ABC; for TNBC, percentages were 18%, 44%, and 36%. Across treatment lines, neutropenia, anemia, and nausea occurred in 16%, 24%, and 32% of patients receiving PARPi, respectively; 22%, 38%, and 33% of patients receiving platinum chemotherapy; and 20%, 20%, and 33% of patients receiving non-platinum-based chemotherapy. Physician satisfaction was highest with PARPi and with chemotherapy plus immunotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Findings in this real-world population complement clinical trial observations and provide further support for treatment of patients with PARPi in gBRCA1/2-mutated HER2- ABC.

BRCA1/2 Mutation Testing in Patients with HER2-Negative Advanced Breast Cancer: Real-World Data from the United States, Europe, and Israel.

Poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitors are approved to treat patients harboring a germline breast cancer susceptibility gene 1 or 2 mutation (BRCA1/2mut) with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2­negative (HER2−) advanced breast cancer (ABC). This study evaluated differences in patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and BRCA1/2mut testing within the United States (US), European Union 4 (EU4; France, Germany, Italy, and Spain), and Israel in a real-world population of patients with HER2− ABC. Oncologists provided chart data from eligible patients from October 2019 through March 2020. In the US, EU4, and Israel, 73%, 42%, and 99% of patients were tested for BRCA1/2mut, respectively. In the US and the EU4, patients who were not tested versus tested for BRCA1/2mut were more likely to have hormone receptor­positive (HR+)/HER2− ABC (US, 94% vs. 74%, p < 0.001; EU4, 96% vs. 78%, p < 0.001), less likely to have a known family history of BRCA1/2-related cancer (US, 6% vs. 19%, p = 0.002; EU4, 10% vs. 28%, p < 0.001), and were older (US, 68.9 vs. 62.5 years, p < 0.001; EU4, 66.7 vs. 58.0 years, p < 0.001). Among tested patients, genetic counseling was received by 45%, 53%, and 98% with triple-negative breast cancer, and 36%, 36%, and 98% with HR+/HER2− ABC in the US, EU4, and Israel, respectively. Efforts should be made to improve BRCA1/2 testing rates in the US and Europe.

AGO Recommendations for the Surgical Therapy of Breast Cancer: Update 2022.

The recommendations of the AGO Breast Committee on the surgical therapy of breast cancer were last updated in March 2022 (www.ago-online.de). Since surgical therapy is one of several partial steps in the treatment of breast cancer, extensive diagnostic and oncological expertise of a breast surgeon and good interdisciplinary cooperation with diagnostic radiologists is of great importance. The most important changes concern localization techniques, resection margins, axillary management in the neoadjuvant setting and the evaluation of the meshes in reconstructive surgery. Based on meta-analyses of randomized studies, the level of recommendation of an intraoperative breast ultrasound for the localization of non-palpable lesions was elevated to "++". Thus, the technique is considered to be equivalent to wire localization, provided that it is a lesion which can be well represented by sonography, the surgeon has extensive experience in breast ultrasound and has access to a suitable ultrasound device during the operation. In invasive breast cancer, the aim is to reach negative resection margins ("no tumor on ink"), regardless of whether an extensive intraductal component is present or not. Oncoplastic operations can also replace a mastectomy in selected cases due to the large number of existing techniques, and are equivalent to segmental resection in terms of oncological safety at comparable rates of complications. Sentinel node excision is recommended for patients with cN0 status receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy after completion of chemotherapy. Minimally invasive biopsy is recommended for initially suspect lymph nodes. After neoadjuvant chemotherapy, patients with initially 1 - 3 suspicious lymph nodes and a good response (ycN0) can receive the targeted axillary dissection and the axillary dissection as equivalent options.

AGO Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Early Breast Cancer: Update 2022.

Introduction: The AGO (Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie, German Gynecological Oncology Group) Task Force on Diagnosis and Treatment of Breast Cancer as an interdisciplinary team consists of specialists from gynecological oncology, pathology, diagnostic radiology, medical oncology, and radiation oncology with a special focus on breast cancer. Methods: The updated evidence-based treatment recommendation 2022 for early breast cancer (EBC) and metastatic breast cancer of the AGO Task Force has been released. Results and Conclusion: This paper captures the update of EBC.

Treatment Patterns, Safety, and Patient Reported Outcomes among Adult Women with Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Advanced Breast Cancer with or without, or with Unknown, BRCA1/2 Mutation(s): Results of a Real-World Study from the United States, United Kingdom, and four EU Countries.

Introduction: This real-world study assessed the breast cancer susceptibility gene 1 or 2 mutation (BRCA1/2mut) status on treatment patterns, safety, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in women with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC) in the USA, the UK, and EU4 countries. Methods: Oncologists abstracted data from medical charts of adult women who presented with HER2- ABC from February to May 2015 and from March to July 2017. Data were collected using a physician-reported form and a patient-reported form, which included questions on breast cancer history/treatment and questions from PRO instruments (EuroQol 5-Dimensions 3-Levels [EQ-5D-3L], Brief Pain Inventory [BPI], European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer [EORTC] Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 and its breast cancer module). Results: In total, 742 oncologists provided data for 6,161 patients; 27.5% were tested for BRCA1/2mut. Out of the total patient population, 3.8% had BRCA1/2mut, 16.6% BRCA1/2 wild-type (BRCA1/2wt), and 79.5% were BRCA1/2 unknown (BRCA1/2unk). Hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/HER2- ABC was more frequent within the BRCA1/2wt versus BRCA1/2mut group and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) within the BRCA1/2mut versus BRCA1/2wt group. More patients with HR+/HER2- ABC with BRCA1/2mut received chemotherapy (with or without targeted or endocrine therapy) versus BRCA1/2wt (66.0% vs. 50.4%; p < 0.01); more patients had ≥1 AE (58.0% vs. 39.1%; p < 0.001). Among patients with BRCA1/2mut versus BRCA1/2wt, a significantly higher proportion had some problems or worse pain discomfort (p = 0.021) and anxiety/depression (p = 0.007) as measured by the EQ-5D-3L; role functioning (p < 0.01) and dyspnea (p < 0.05) measured by EORTC were worse with BRCA1/2mut. Pain scores by BPI were similar between groups. Conclusions: In patients with HER2- ABC in the real-world setting, more patients with BRCA1/2mut had TNBC; received chemotherapy; had >1 AE; and experienced increased discomfort, anxiety, and dyspnea and diminished role functioning versus patients with BRCA1/2wt.

Use of prognostic gene expression profiling tests in primary breast cancer treatment: a German real-world patient survey.

Aims: In primary breast cancer, gene expression profiling tests can support adjuvant chemotherapy treatment decisions. Real-world test use in Germany was investigated in an online survey of female breast cancer patients (n = 475). Materials & methods: Relationships between three groups were examined for clinical and statistical relevance: no test indication (n = 353), test indication and tested (n = 65), and test indication but not tested (n = 57). Results: A total of 47% of participants with a test indication were not tested. Test rates increased by 23% from 2012-2018 (49%) to 2019-2021 (60%). A total of 65% of patients without testing received chemotherapy, whereas only 38% of tested patients received chemotherapy. Conclusion: The use of gene expression profiling tests correlates with a real-world chemotherapy reduction. Gene expression profiling testing may improve patient confidence in the decision for or against chemotherapy.

In many cases, breast cancer can be removed by surgery. In addition to surgery, breast cancer patients may also receive chemotherapy; however, chemotherapy is not always useful. A gene expression profiling test can help physicians and patients decide if chemotherapy should be used. In a survey, 475 breast cancer patients in Germany were asked if they received such a test and chemotherapy. A total of 65% of patients who were not tested received chemotherapy compared with 38% of patients who were tested. Patients who received a test also felt more certain about their treatment decision. However, four of ten patients who were diagnosed between 2019 and 2021 and for whom a test would have helped in the treatment decision did not receive a test. Therefore, there is still room to increase the use of gene expression profiling tests for the benefit of breast cancer patients in Germany.

The Impasse on Overall Survival in Oncology Reimbursement Decision-Making: How Can We Resolve This?

Mature overall survival (OS) data are often unavailable at the time of regulatory and reimbursement decisions for a new cancer treatment. For patients with early-stage cancers treated with potentially curative treatments, demonstrating an OS benefit may take years and may be confounded by subsequent lines of therapy or crossover to the investigational treatment. For patients with advanced-stage cancers, mature OS data may be available but difficult to interpret for similar reasons. There are strong opinions about approval and reimbursement in the absence of mature OS data, with concerns over delay in patient access set against concerns about uncertainty in long-term benefit. This position paper reflects our individual views as patient advocate, clinician or health economist on one aspect of this debate. We look at payer decisions in the absence of mature OS data, considering when and how non-OS trial outcomes could inform decision-making and how uncertainty can be addressed beyond the trial, supporting these views with evidence from the literature. We consider when it is reasonable for payers to expect or not expect mature OS data at the initial reimbursement decision (based on criteria such as cancer stage and treatment efficacy) acknowledging that there are settings in which mature OS data are expected. We propose flexible strategies for generating and appraising patient-relevant evidence, including context-relevant endpoints and quality of life measures, when survival rates are good and mature OS data are not expected. We note that fair reimbursement is important; this means valuing patient benefit as shown through prespecified endpoints and reappraising if there is ongoing uncertainty or failure to show a sustained benefit. We suggest that reimbursement systems continue to evolve to align with scientific advances, because innovation is only meaningful if readily accessible to patients. The proposed strategies have the potential to promote thorough assessment of potential benefit to patients and lead to timely access to effective medicines.

Correction: AGO Recommendations for the Surgical Therapy of the Axilla After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: 2021 Update.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1055/a-1499-8431.].

AGO Recommendations for the Surgical Therapy of the Axilla After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: 2021 Update.

For many decades, the standard procedure to treat breast cancer included complete dissection of the axillary lymph nodes. The aim was to determine histological node status, which was then used as the basis for adjuvant therapy, and to ensure locoregional tumour control. In addition to the debate on how to optimise the therapeutic strategies of systemic treatment and radiotherapy, the current discussion focuses on improving surgical procedures to treat breast cancer. As neoadjuvant chemotherapy is becoming increasingly important, the surgical procedures used to treat breast cancer, whether they are breast surgery or axillary dissection, are changing. Based on the currently available data, carrying out SLNE prior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy is not recommended. In contrast, surgical axillary management after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is considered the procedure of choice for axillary staging and can range from SLNE to TAD and ALND. To reduce the rate of false negatives during surgical staging of the axilla in pN+ CNB stage before NACT and ycN0 after NACT, targeted axillary dissection (TAD), the removal of > 2 SLNs (SLNE, no untargeted axillary sampling), immunohistochemistry to detect isolated tumour cells and micro-metastases, and marking positive lymph nodes before NACT should be the standard approach. This most recent update on surgical axillary management describes the significance of isolated tumour cells and micro-metastasis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and the clinical consequences of low volume residual disease diagnosed using SLNE and TAD and provides an overview of this year's AGO recommendations for surgical management of the axilla during primary surgery and in relation to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Biosimilars in oncology: Effects on economy and therapeutic innovations.

AIM: The introduction of new and innovative treatment options for cancer patients is accompanied by a tremendous increase in healthcare costs. Consequently, new financing approaches are strongly needed to reduce the burden on the healthcare system. The introduction of biosimilars - biological drugs containing the active substance of an already approved reference biological drug - can potentially relieve the burden on healthcare systems. Calculating the costs for three frequently used biosimilars, we simulated the health-economic impact of biosimilars in the real world for the German healthcare system. METHODS: Based on available health-economic analyses, the actual prescription and cost containment potential of biosimilars compared to the originator were calculated exemplarily for the cost-intensive therapies trastuzumab in breast cancer, rituximab in follicular lymphoma and G-CSF in supportive care. Incidence calculations were based e.g. on data from the Robert-Koch-Institution, Munich Cancer Registry, and quality indicators of certified centres. Cost calculation was based on Lauer-Taxe® (official reference for pharmaceutical price information). RESULTS: The application of biosimilars would generate potential annual savings for the chosen examples of up to 4.9 Mio EUR for rituximab in follicular lymphoma, 40.5 Mio EUR for filgrastim, 56.4 Mio EUR for pegfilgrastim, and between 95.9 and 120.5 Mio EUR for trastuzumab. CONCLUSIONS: The consequent use of biosimilars allows a considerable reduction of overall treatment costs, especially for cost-intensive long-term maintenance treatments and therapies with high incidences. If the option of biosimilar usage is fully exploited, enormous resources could be released within the healthcare system in order to offset financing new innovative therapies.

[Are men and women with breast cancer treated equally in Germany?] / Werden Männer und Frauen mit Brustkrebs in Deutschland gleichbehandelt?

INTRODUCTION: Within the statutory health insurance system of the Federal Republic of Germany, a system of quality assurance has been implemented and operationalised through the measurement of quality indicators. For breast surgery, these quality indicators are mainly based on recommendations of the German clinical guideline for screening, diagnosis, therapy and follow-up of breast cancer. The 2018 update of this guideline includes a new chapter on breast cancer in men. The aim of this analysis is to examine whether male and female patients with breast cancer are treated equally where appropriate and recommended by the clinical guideline, as measured by the quality indicators. METHOD: Data of ten quality assurance indicators were analysed, for each indicator separately, stratified by sex and pooled over a 5-year period to gain statistical power. This dataset constitutes the largest data pool of men with surgical interventions for breast neoplasm in Germany. Indicator results were then compared between male and female cases. Additional subgroup analyses were carried out for two quality indicators with substantial outcome difference between male and female cases in order to detect possible differences in the treatment of breast cancer between different medical departments. RESULTS: The database of the ten quality assurance indicators comprised 551,221 patients (546,324 females and 4,897 males) between 2014 and 2018. Pooled data of nine quality indicators (QIs) showed statistically significant outcome differences between male and female cases. In spite of pooling, the male sample size of four QIs was too small to allow for statistically reliable comparisons between male and female patients. Outcome differences in the remaining five QIs may, on the one hand, be explained by anatomical differences and different extent of the surgery, and on the other hand they confirm international data for lower HER2-positivity rates in male breast cancer patients. However, two process indicators, aiming at pretherapeutic biopsy and sentinel lymph node biopsy in invasive breast cancer recommended by the clinical guideline, show substantial differences of more than 6 percentage points between the sexes: although recommended by the clinical guideline, both procedures are carried out less often in male cases. Further analysis regarding the medical departments that recorded the treatment revealed that risk for non-adherence to guideline recommendation was high if treatment took place in non-gynaecological departments. Compared to gynaecological departments, procedures such as pretherapeutic biopsy and sentinel lymph node biopsy were carried out less frequently if cases were documented to be handled by surgery or plastic surgery departments. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Analysis of breast surgery quality indicators reveals a lower level of adherence to guideline recommendations for men with breast cancer compared to women in some aspects of the guideline, as measured by statutory quality indicators in breast surgery. Male breast cancer might be a rare disease, but nevertheless, awareness-rising is needed in diagnostics, treatment and interdisciplinarity in order to avoid inequality between the sexes.