Baseline radiological staging in primary breast cancer: impact of educational interventions on adherence to published guidelines.

RATIONALE: The purpose of baseline radiological staging in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients is to rule out overt metastatic disease. We have previously compared the use of radiological staging at our institution with the recommendations of the Cancer Care Ontario Practice Guidelines Initiative (CCOPGI). Our results demonstrated that between January 2000 to December 2002, a high proportion of our cohort (n = 135) of patients underwent unnecessary investigations. OBJECTIVES: To implement and assess an educational intervention to encourage staging guideline utilization in a cohort of early breast cancer patients. METHODS: In January 2003, multidisciplinary educational rounds were held, highlighting the CCOPGI guidelines, and reporting results of the audit of staging investigations. The staging guidelines were then included in the Clinical Practice Guidelines of the Breast Disease Site Group, Toronto-Sunnybrook Regional Cancer Centre. A retrospective chart review was completed that assessed staging investigations from a random sample of a similar group of patients (n = 134) from January 2003 to April 2005, to explore the effects of these educational interventions on clinical practice. RESULTS: For patients with Stage I breast cancer, there was a significant decrease (P < 0.004) in each type of investigation: a twofold decrease in chest X-rays; 2.5-fold decrease bone scans and fourfold decrease in the number of abdominal ultrasounds. For patients in Stage II, there was no significant change in the proportion of patients undergoing radiological investigations. There was a non-significant trend towards appropriately receiving all three investigations for patients with Stage III disease. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that prior to the educational intervention, many patients with early breast cancer were undergoing inappropriate radiological staging. Since 2003 however, for Stage I patients there has been a significant improvement in adherence with the guidelines. We hypothesize that our educational intervention had a positive impact on improving the utilization of baseline radiological staging in patients with primary breast cancer.

Phase II trial evaluating the palliative benefit of second-line zoledronic acid in breast cancer patients with either a skeletal-related event or progressive bone metastases despite first-line bisphosphonate therapy.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated whether additional palliative benefits could be derived from the second-line use of the more potent bisphosphonate zoledronic acid in metastatic breast cancer patients with either progressive bone metastases or skeletal-related events (SRE), despite first-line therapy with either pamidronate or clodronate. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective study evaluated the impact of second-line zoledronic acid on pain, quality of life, and markers of bone turnover (for example, urinary N-telopeptide [NTX]). Patients received monthly zoledronic acid (4 mg) for 3 months. Study evaluations were made weekly during the first month and again at week 8. No changes in chemotherapy or endocrine therapy were allowed in the month before or after commencing study treatment. RESULTS: Thirty-one women completed this study. By week 8, patients had experienced significant improvements in pain control (P < .001). There was a downward trend in urinary NTX levels over the same time period (P = .008). Overall, there was a trend towards a positive correlation between improvement in pain control and reduction in week one urinary NTX relative to baseline (Spearman's rho r = 0.27; P = .15). CONCLUSION: This is the first study to demonstrate that patients with either progressive bone metastases or SREs while on clodronate or pamidronate can have relevant palliative benefits with a switch to the more potent bisphosphonate zoledronic acid. This is reflected by significant improvements in pain control and bone turnover markers. If confirmed in randomized trials, these findings have major implications to the use of bisphosphonates in both the metastatic and adjuvant settings.

Bisphosphonate use for the management of breast cancer patients with bone metastases: a survey of Canadian Medical Oncologists.

BACKGROUND: The use of bisphosphonates (BP) in breast cancer patients with bone metastases (BM) has been shown to reduce bone pain and lower the risk of skeletal-related events (SREs). Many practice guidelines exist for the use of BPs in patients with BM. Unfortunately, none clearly address whether the benefits of BP use apply equally to all subgroups of patients, the duration of therapy, and when to discontinue BP therapy. A questionnaire was therefore developed and administered to determine how medical oncologists in Canada use BPs in clinical practice. METHODS: A structured mailing strategy was adopted. The population consisted of 100 medical oncologists with active breast cancer practices in Canada. All regions of Canada were represented. The questionnaire was developed to capture data on respondent demographics, BPs used, major factors influencing decision making, and clinical practice in situations where there is a lack of high-quality data. RESULTS: Completed questionnaires were returned by 76 medical oncologists. All treated breast cancer and the majority (68%) were based at teaching hospitals. Ninety-six percent of respondents regularly prescribed BPs, initiating therapy at the time the patient presented with BM. Although 79% of respondents recognized that there was no clear data to support the continued use of BP after bony progression, 53% stated that they rarely or never discontinue a BP once started. In situations where a BP was discontinued, the majority of respondents report the reason for discontinuation was a decrease in patient performance status. In the patient with clearly progressive visceral metastases and an estimated prognosis of less than 6 months, 75% of respondents would still commence BP therapy. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms that most medical oncologists in Canada, while acknowledging lack of evidence, maintain patients on BP therapy when patients have an expected survival of less than 6 months or even after patients progress while on a BP. More research is needed to determine the role of continuing, switching, or discontinuing BP therapy in the context of disease progression or shortened expected survival.

Do physicians follow systemic treatment and funding policy guidelines?

BACKGROUND: The use of bisphosphonates for the prevention of skeletal related events in women with bone metastases from breast cancer is well established. We undertook an evaluation of bisphosphonate use in clinical practice in three Canadian cancer centres. In addition we assessed whether or not physicians at these centres are following their local treatment guidelines and funding policies. METHODS: Charts and electronic files of patients who had received either clodronate or pamidronate at any time between January 2000 and December 2001 at three Canadian cancer centres were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: There has been a marked improvement in the time between the diagnosis of bone metastases and the commencement of bisphosphonates from a median of 155 days in 1998 to 24 days in 2001. However, despite a local funding policy requiring that oral clodronate be the first bisphosphonate used, this was the case in only 67% of patients. In addition, despite one centre's guidelines recommending that bisphosphonates be stopped once the patient was progressing, 90% of their patients remained on bisphosphonates until they died. CONCLUSIONS: A considerable amount of effort is spent on the creation of "evidence based" treatment guidelines. Funding agencies develop policies based on these treatment guidelines, but often funding is more restrictive than the treatment guideline would suggest. It is clear from this review that physicians still appear to manage a substantial proportion of patients outside of funding policies, but within evidence based recommendations. Therefore, a need exists for either the creation of guidelines and policies that physicians will follow or the implementation of methods to ensure that restrictive policies are actually followed.