Racial Differences in Germline Genetic Testing Completion Among Males With Pancreatic, Breast, or Metastatic Prostate Cancers.

BACKGROUND: Germline genetic testing is a vital component of guideline-recommended cancer care for males with pancreatic, breast, or metastatic prostate cancers. We sought to determine whether there were racial disparities in germline genetic testing completion in this population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included non-Hispanic White and Black males with incident pancreatic, breast, or metastatic prostate cancers between January 1, 2019, and September 30, 2021. Two nationwide cohorts were examined: (1) commercially insured individuals in an administrative claims database, and (2) Veterans receiving care in the Veterans Health Administration. One-year germline genetic testing rates were estimated by using Kaplan-Meier methods. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to test the association between race and genetic testing completion. Causal mediation analyses were performed to investigate whether socioeconomic variables contributed to associations between race and germline testing. RESULTS: Our cohort consisted of 7,894 males (5,142 commercially insured; 2,752 Veterans). One-year testing rates were 18.0% (95% CI, 16.8%-19.2%) in commercially insured individuals and 14.2% (95% CI, 11.5%-15.0%) in Veterans. Black race was associated with a lower hazard of testing among commercially insured individuals (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.73; 95% CI, 0.58-0.91; P=.005) but not among Veterans (aHR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.75-1.32; P=.960). In commercially insured individuals, income (aHR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.86-0.96) and net worth (aHR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.86-0.98) mediated racial disparities, whereas education (aHR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.94-1.01) did not. CONCLUSIONS: Overall rates of guideline-recommended genetic testing are low in males with pancreatic, breast, or metastatic prostate cancers. Racial disparities in genetic testing among males exist in a commercially insured population, mediated by net worth and household income; these disparities are not seen in the equal-access Veterans Health Administration. Alleviating financial and access barriers may mitigate racial disparities in genetic testing.

On-Site Nurse-Led Cancer Genetics Program Increases Cancer Genetic Testing Completion in Black Veterans.

PURPOSE: Telegenetics services can expand access to guideline-recommended cancer genetic testing. However, access is often not distributed equitably to all races and ethnicities. We evaluated the impact of an on-site nurse-led cancer genetics service in a diverse Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC) oncology clinic on likelihood of germline testing (GT) completion. METHODS: We conducted an observational retrospective cohort study of patients who were referred for cancer genetics services at the Philadelphia VAMC between October 1, 2020, and February 28, 2022. We evaluated the association between genetics service (on-site v telegenetics) and likelihood of GT completion in a subcohort of new consults, excluding patients with prior consults and those referred for known history of germline mutations. RESULTS: A total of 238 Veterans, including 108 (45%) seen on site, were identified for cancer genetics services during the study period, with the majority referred for a personal (65%) or family (26%) history of cancer. In the subcohort of new consults, 121 Veterans (54% self-identified race/ethnicity [SIRE]-Black), including 60 (50%) seen on site, were included in the analysis of germline genetic testing completion. In a univariate analysis, patients who were seen by the on-site genetics service had 3.2-fold higher likelihood of completing GT (relative risk, 3.22; 95% CI, 1.89 to 5.48) compared with the telegenetics service. In multivariable regression analysis, the on-site genetics service was associated with higher likelihood of GT completion, but this association was only statistically significant in SIRE-Black compared with SIRE-White Veterans (adjusted RR, 4.78; 95% CI, 1.53 to 14.96; P < .001; P-interaction of race × genetics service = .016). CONCLUSION: An on-site nurse-led cancer genetics service embedded in a VAMC Oncology practice was associated with higher likelihood of germline genetic testing completion than a telegenetics service among self-identified Black Veterans.

Triplet Strategies in Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Worthy Option in the First-Line Setting?

Significant strides have been made in the frontline treatment of patients with advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). There are multiple standard-of-care doublet regimens consisting of either the combined dual immune checkpoint inhibitors, ipilimumab and nivolumab, or combinations of a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor and an immune checkpoint inhibitor. Currently, there is an emergence of clinical trials examining triplet combinations. In COSMIC-313, a randomized phase III trial for patients with untreated advanced ccRCC, the triplet combination of ipilimumab, nivolumab, and cabozantinib was compared with a contemporary control arm of ipilimumab and nivolumab. While patients receiving the triplet regimen demonstrated improved progression-free survival, these patients also experienced greater toxicity and the overall survival data are still maturing. In this article, we discuss the role of doublet therapy as standard of care, the current data available for the promise of triplet therapy, the rationale to continue pursuing trials with triplet combinations, and factors for clinicians and patients to consider when choosing among frontline treatments. We present ongoing trials with an adaptive design that may serve as alternative methods for escalating from doublet to triplet regimens in the frontline setting and explore clinical factors and emerging predictive biomarkers (both baseline and dynamic) that may guide future trial design and frontline treatment for patients with advanced ccRCC.

Risk Assessment and Considerations for Proper Management of Elderly Men with Advanced Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.

CONTEXT: Treatment decisions for elderly men with prostate cancer are complicated by the intersection of competing risks of cancer, potential complications of treatment, and individual patients' comorbidities. OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review of data guiding the assessment of elderly prostate cancer patients that addresses the risk from cancer and treatment, and to discuss a patient-centered approach to incorporating these factors into decision making. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Evidence was gathered via a systematic review of the current literature. The search strategy used the terms prostate cancer, elderly, geriatric, >75 yr of age, risk assessment, and treatment in several combinations, and was limited to phase ≥ II clinical trials published between January 2008 and November 2018. Additional supporting literature for the discussion was pulled by hand search. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The benefits of treatment identified for systemic therapies commonly used to treat men with prostate in general extend to elderly patients. Evidence supports a multifaceted assessment of the risks of cancer and aging, and an understanding of the side effects of treatment to optimally guide therapeutic decision making for elderly patients. There is little evidence defining a geriatric risk stratification system specific to prostate cancer, and recommendations are predominantly based on adapted geriatric oncology approaches and expert consensus. CONCLUSIONS: The care of elderly men with prostate cancer should incorporate a review of cancer risk, an assessment of aging, and an understanding of the effects of treatment to provide the patient with thorough and personalized guidance for treatment decisions. Future studies of elderly men with prostate cancer can define and validate ideal risk stratification methods as well as management approaches that may be distinct from those for younger populations. PATIENT SUMMARY: Treatment decisions for elderly men with prostate cancer require consideration of the risk posed by the cancer coupled with an understanding of the patient's general health status.