A multicentre, randomised trial comparing schedules of G-CSF (filgrastim) administration for primary prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in early stage breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The optimal duration of filgrastim as primary febrile neutropenia (FN) prophylaxis in early breast cancer patients is unknown, with 5, 7 or 10 days being commonly prescribed. This trial evaluates whether 5 days of filgrastim was non-inferior to 7/10 days. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this randomised, open-label trial, early breast cancer patients who were to receive filgrastim as primary FN prophylaxis were randomly allocated to 5 versus 7 versus 10 days of filgrastim for all chemotherapy cycles. A protocol amendment in November 2017 allowed subsequent patients (N = 324) to be randomised to either 5 or 7/10 days. The primary outcome was a composite of either FN or treatment-related hospitalisations. Secondary outcomes included chemotherapy dose reductions, delays and discontinuations. Analyses were carried out by per protocol (primary) and intention-to-treat, and the non-inferiority margin was set at 3% for the risk of having FN and/or hospitalisation per cycle of chemotherapy. RESULTS: Patients (N = 466) were randomised to receive 5 (184, 39.5%), or 7/10 (282, 60.5%) days of filgrastim. In our primary analysis, the difference in risk of either FN or treatment-related hospitalisation per cycle was -1.52% [95% confidence interval (CI): -3.22% to 0.19%] suggesting non-inferiority of a 5-day filgrastim schedule compared with 7/10-days. The difference in events per cycle for FN was 0.11% (95% CI: -1.05 to 1.27) while for treatment-related hospitalisations it was -1.68% (95% CI: -2.73% to -0.63%). The overall proportions of patients having at least one occurrence of either FN or treatment-related hospitalisation were 11.8% and 14.96% for the 5- and 7/10-day groups, respectively (risk difference: -3.17%, 95% CI: -9.51% to 3.18%). CONCLUSION: Five days of filgrastim was non-inferior to 7/10 days. Given the cost and toxicity of this agent, 5 days should be considered standard of care. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV REGISTRATION: NCT02428114 and NCT02816164.

An evaluation of DistillerSR's machine learning-based prioritization tool for title/abstract screening - impact on reviewer-relevant outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews often require substantial resources, partially due to the large number of records identified during searching. Although artificial intelligence may not be ready to fully replace human reviewers, it may accelerate and reduce the screening burden. Using DistillerSR (May 2020 release), we evaluated the performance of the prioritization simulation tool to determine the reduction in screening burden and time savings. METHODS: Using a true recall @ 95%, response sets from 10 completed systematic reviews were used to evaluate: (i) the reduction of screening burden; (ii) the accuracy of the prioritization algorithm; and (iii) the hours saved when a modified screening approach was implemented. To account for variation in the simulations, and to introduce randomness (through shuffling the references), 10 simulations were run for each review. Means, standard deviations, medians and interquartile ranges (IQR) are presented. RESULTS: Among the 10 systematic reviews, using true recall @ 95% there was a median reduction in screening burden of 47.1% (IQR: 37.5 to 58.0%). A median of 41.2% (IQR: 33.4 to 46.9%) of the excluded records needed to be screened to achieve true recall @ 95%. The median title/abstract screening hours saved using a modified screening approach at a true recall @ 95% was 29.8 h (IQR: 28.1 to 74.7 h). This was increased to a median of 36 h (IQR: 32.2 to 79.7 h) when considering the time saved not retrieving and screening full texts of the remaining 5% of records not yet identified as included at title/abstract. Among the 100 simulations (10 simulations per review), none of these 5% of records were a final included study in the systematic review. The reduction in screening burden to achieve true recall @ 95% compared to @ 100% resulted in a reduced screening burden median of 40.6% (IQR: 38.3 to 54.2%). CONCLUSIONS: The prioritization tool in DistillerSR can reduce screening burden. A modified or stop screening approach once a true recall @ 95% is achieved appears to be a valid method for rapid reviews, and perhaps systematic reviews. This needs to be further evaluated in prospective reviews using the estimated recall.

Taxane acute pain syndrome (TAPS) in patients receiving chemotherapy for breast or prostate cancer: a prospective multi-center study.

BACKGROUND: Taxane acute pain syndrome (TAPS) is characterized by myalgias and arthralgias starting 2-3 days after taxane-based chemotherapy and lasting up to 7 days. In the absence of validated tools, many studies use the presence of both the myalgia and arthralgia components of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) to define TAPS. The present study prospectively evaluated the frequency, severity, and impact of TAPS in patients with breast or prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this prospective, non-randomized study, patients with breast or prostate cancer commencing taxane-based chemotherapy completed the CTCAE (version 4.03), the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Taxane (FACT-T), and Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) questionnaires at baseline and once between days 5 and 7 of each chemotherapy cycle. RESULTS: From March 2015 to April 1, 2016, 75 patients (breast n = 66, prostate n = 9) were enrolled; 83% received docetaxel and 16% paclitaxel and 1% withdrew. After the first cycle of taxane, TAPS was reported by 25/69 (36.2%) patients; a further 8/69 (18.2%) reporting TAPS after a subsequent chemotherapy treatment. Overall incidence of TAPS was 33/75 (44%). While associated with detrimental scores on FACT-T and BPI as well as increased use of analgesics in 63% (21/33) of patients with TAPS, TAPS did not lead to alterations in chemotherapy dosing. CONCLUSIONS: TAPS is common after taxane-based chemotherapy, and its presence is associated with reduced quality of life and increased analgesic requirements. Prospective patient-reported outcome assessments are crucial to help individualize treatment strategies and improve management of TAPS.

Network geometry of evidence from randomised controlled trials addressing donor selection and source of haematopoietic progenitor cells used in allogeneic transplantation: a systematic scoping review.

BACKGROUND AND METHODS: A scoping review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) addressing source of cells and choice of donor for allogeneic haematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) was performed to create a network of best evidence that allows us to identify new potential indirect comparisons for the strategic development of future studies that connect to the existing evidence network. RESULTS: A total of 19 eligible RCTs (2589 total patients) were identified. Nine studies (1566 patients) compared clinical outcomes following the use of peripheral blood progenitor cells (PBPCs) with bone marrow (BM) from matched related donors (eight studies) or matched unrelated donors (one study). The remaining studies compared BM or PBPCs with various methods of BM stimulation or manipulation (six studies), compared different methods of surface molecule-based selection and/or depletion of grafts (two studies) or compared the optimal number of units for paediatric cord blood transplantation (two studies). No published RCTs compared different types of donors. The geometry of the evidence network was analysed to identify opportunities for potential novel indirect comparisons and to identify opportunities to expand the network. Few indirect comparisons are currently feasible due to small sample size and heterogeneity in patient diagnoses and demographics between treatment nodes in the network. CONCLUSION: More RCTs that enrol greater numbers of similar patients are needed to leverage the current evidence network concerning donor choice and source of cells used in allogeneic HCT.

Estrogen, progesterone, and HER2/neu receptor discordance between primary and metastatic breast tumours-a review.

Discordance in estrogen (ER), progesterone (PR), and HER2/neu status between primary breast tumours and metastatic disease is well recognized. In this review, we highlight how receptor discordance between primary tumours and paired metastasis can help elucidate the mechanism of metastasis but can also effect patient management and the design of future trials. Discordance rates and ranges were available from 47 studies (3384 matched primary and metastatic pairs) reporting ER, PR, and HER2/neu expression for both primary and metastatic sites. Median discordance rates for ER, PR, and HER2/neu were 14 % (range 0-67 %, IQR 9-25 %), 21 % (range 0-62 %, IQR 15-41 %), and 10 % (range 0-44 %, IQR 4-17 %), respectively. Loss of receptor expression was more common (9.17 %) than gain (4.51 %). Discordance rates varied amongst site of metastasis with ER discordance being highest in bone metastases suggesting that discordance is a true biological phenomenon. Discordance rates vary for both the biomarker and the metastatic site. Loss of expression is more common than gain. This can affect patient management as it can lead to a reduction in both the efficacy and availability of potential therapeutic agents. Future studies are recommended to explore both the mechanisms of discordance as well as its impact on patient outcome and management.

Should de-escalation of bone-targeting agents be standard of care for patients with bone metastases from breast cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: De-escalation of bone-targeted agents, such as bisphosphonates and denosumab, from 4- to 12-weekly dosing is an increasingly used strategy in patients with bone metastases from breast cancer. It is unclear whether there is sufficient evidence to support de-escalation as a standard of care. METHODS: A systematic review of randomized trials comparing standard 4-weekly administration of bone-targeted agents with de-escalated (Q12-weekly) dosing in breast cancer patients was carried out. Medline, PubMed and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception until November 2014 for relevant studies. Outcomes of interest included skeletal-related event (SRE) rates, bone pain, adverse events (AEs) and bone turnover biomarkers. Random-effects meta-analyses were carried out. RESULTS: A total of nine citations representing seven unique studies were eligible. One study is ongoing with no reported data. Six studies reported data for at least one outcome of interest. Data were available comparing standard versus de-escalated therapy for pamidronate (1 study, 38 patients), zoledronate (3 studies, 1117 patients) and denosumab (2 studies, 284 patients). Meta-analysis of five trials reporting data for on-study SRE rates between standard (61/443 patients) and de-escalated (49/392 patients) arms produced a summary risk ratio of 0.90 (95% confidence interval 0.63-1.29). Meta-analyses of data for AEs and bone turnover biomarkers also showed no statistically significant differences between standard and de-escalated arms, though only limited numbers of patients and events were present for most analyses. CONCLUSION: In this systematic review of studies of bisphosphonates and denosumab, there appears to be no difference in SREs or pain with de-escalated therapy. While a large, hopefully definitive study is ongoing, the data presented so far are consistent with de-escalation of bone-targeting agents becoming a standard of care for patients with bone metastases from breast cancer.

Comparative effectiveness of interventions for cancer treatment-related cognitive impairment in adult cancer survivors: protocol for a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Cancer treatment-related cognitive impairment (CTRCI) can substantially reduce the quality of life of cancer survivors. Many treatments of CTRCI have been evaluated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), including psychological interventions, pharmacologic interventions, and other therapies. There is a pressing need to establish the benefits and harms of previously studied CTRCI treatments. The proposed systematic review and network meta-analyses will assess the relative efficacy and safety of competing interventions for the management of CTRCI. METHODS: In consultation with the review team, an experienced medical information specialist will draft electronic search strategies for MEDLINE®, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Trials Registry. We will seek RCTs of interventions for the treatment of CTRCI in adults with any cancer, except cancers/metastases of the central nervous system. Due to the anticipated high search yields, dual independent screening of citations will be expedited by use of an artificial intelligence/machine learning tool. The co-primary outcomes of interest will be subjective and objective cognitive function. Secondary outcomes of interest will include measures of quality of life, mental and physical health symptoms, adherence to treatment, and harms (overall and treatment-related harms and harms associated with study withdrawal), where feasible, random-effects meta-analyses and network meta-analyses will be pursued. We will address the anticipated high clinical and methodological heterogeneity through meta-regressions, subgroup analyses, and/or sensitivity analyses. DISCUSSION: The proposed systematic review will deliver a robust comparative evaluation of the efficacy and safety of existing therapies for the management of CTRCI. These findings will inform clinical decisions, identify evidence gaps, and identify promising therapies for future evaluation in RCTs.

Advanced quantitative evaluation of PET systems using the ACR phantom and NiftyPET software.

PURPOSE: A novel phantom-imaging platform, a set of software tools, for automated and high-precision imaging of the American College of Radiology (ACR) positron emission tomography (PET) phantom for PET/magnetic resonance (PET/MR) and PET/computed tomography (PET/CT) systems is proposed. METHODS: The key feature of this platform is the vector graphics design that facilitates the automated measurement of the knife-edge response function and hence image resolution, using composite volume of interest templates in a 0.5 mm resolution grid applied to all inserts of the phantom. Furthermore, the proposed platform enables the generation of an accurate µ $\mu$ -map for PET/MR systems with a robust alignment based on two-stage image registration using specifically designed PET templates. The proposed platform is based on the open-source NiftyPET software package used to generate multiple list-mode data bootstrap realizations and image reconstructions to determine the precision of the two-stage registration and any image-derived statistics. For all the analyses, iterative image reconstruction was employed with and without modeled shift-invariant point spread function and with varying iterations of the ordered subsets expectation maximization (OSEM) algorithm. The impact of the activity outside the field of view (FOV) was assessed using two acquisitions of 30 min each, with and without the activity outside the FOV. RESULTS: The utility of the platform has been demonstrated by providing a standard and an advanced phantom analysis including the estimation of spatial resolution using all cylindrical inserts. In the imaging planes close to the edge of the axial FOV, we observed deterioration in the quantitative accuracy, reduced resolution (FWHM increased by 1-2 mm), reduced contrast, and background uniformity due to the activity outside the FOV. Although it slows convergence, the PSF reconstruction had a positive impact on resolution and contrast recovery, but the degree of improvement depended on the regions. The uncertainty analysis based on bootstrap resampling of raw PET data indicated high precision of the two-stage registration. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that phantom imaging using the proposed methodology with the metric of spatial resolution and multiple bootstrap realizations may be helpful in more accurate evaluation of PET systems as well as in facilitating fine tuning for optimal imaging parameters in PET/MR and PET/CT clinical research studies.

Lysine analogue use during cancer surgery: a survey from a Canadian tertiary care centre.

Background: When used during surgery, antifibrinolytic hemostatic agents such as lysine analogues are effective at reducing blood loss and the need for transfusions. Despite proven efficacy, use of hemostatic agents remains low during some surgeries. Our objective was to explore surgeon opinions about, and use of lysine analogues in, oncologic surgeries at a large tertiary care academic institution. Methods: We administered a survey to surgeons who perform high-transfusion-risk oncologic surgeries at a large academic hospital in Ottawa, Ontario. Design and distribution of the survey followed a modified Dillman method. To ensure that the survey questionnaire was relevant, clear, and concise, we performed informant interviews, cognitive interviews, and pilot-testing. The final survey consisted of 19 questions divided into 3 sections: respondent demographics, use of hemostatic agents, and potential clinical trial opinions. Results: Of 28 surgeons, 24 (86%) participated. When asked to indicate the frequency of lysine analogue use, "never" accounted for 46% of the responses, and "rarely" (<10% of the time) accounted for 23% of the responses. Reasons for never using included "unfamiliar with benefits" and "prefer alternatives." Fifteen surgeons (63%) felt that a trial was needed to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of lysine analogues in their cancer field. Conclusions: Our survey found that lysine analogues are infrequently used during oncologic surgeries at our institution. Many surgeons are unfamiliar with the benefits and side effects of lysine analogues and, alternatively, use topical hemostatic agents. Our results demonstrate that future trials exploring the efficacy and safety of lysine analogues in oncologic surgery are needed.

Psychosocial and pharmacologic interventions for methamphetamine addiction: protocol for a scoping review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Methamphetamine use and harms are rising rapidly. Management of patients with methamphetamine use disorder (MUD) and problematic methamphetamine use (PMU) is challenging, with no clearly established best approach; both psychosocial and pharmacologic interventions have been described. Furthermore, given the diversity of individuals that use methamphetamines, there is a need to assess evidence for treatments for subgroups including youths; gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men; individuals with mental health comorbidities; and individuals in correction services. Establishing awareness of the messages regarding treatment from recent clinical practice guidelines (CPG) in the field is also of value. The first study objective will be to establish a greater understanding of the methods, populations, and findings of controlled studies for psychosocial and pharmacologic treatments for MUD and PMU. Investigation of this information can help establish the potential for advanced syntheses of the evidence (such as network meta-analysis) to compare therapies for this condition and to identify gaps related to key populations where more primary research is needed. Summarizing the recommendations regarding treatment of MUD/PMU from recent CPGs and systematic reviews will be an important secondary objective. METHODS: A scoping review will be performed. Using the OVID platform, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and relevant Cochrane databases from EBM Reviews will be searched (from databases' inception onwards). Eligibility criteria will include individuals described as having MUD or PMU, with designs of interest including randomized trials, non-randomized trials, and controlled cohort studies with three or more months of follow-up; systematic reviews and CPGs will also be sought. Two reviewers (with support from automation tools) will independently screen all citations, full-text articles, and chart data. Different approaches to handling and summarizing the data will be implemented for each type of study design. Tables and graphics will be used to map evidence sources and identify evidence gaps. DISCUSSION: This research will enhance awareness of evidence addressing the effects of psychosocial and pharmacologic interventions for MUD/PMU overall and in sub-populations, both in terms of recent CPGs/reviews and primary studies; inspection of the latter will also help establish the feasibility of future syntheses to compare treatments, such as network meta-analysis. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/9wy8p ).

A randomized trial of individualized versus standard of care antiemetic therapy for breast cancer patients at high risk for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

PURPOSE: Despite triple antiemetic therapy use for breast cancer patients receiving emetogenic chemotherapy, nausea remains a clinical challenge. We evaluated adding olanzapine (5 mg) to triple therapy on nausea control in patients at high personal risk of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). METHODS: This multi-centre, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial randomized breast cancer patients scheduled to receive neo/adjuvant chemotherapy with anthracycline-cyclophosphamide or platinum-based chemotherapy to olanzapine (5 mg, days 1-4) or placebo. Primary endpoint was frequency of self-reported significant nausea, repeated for all cycles of chemotherapy. Secondary endpoints included: duration of nausea, overall total control of CINV, Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) using FLIE questionnaire, use of rescue mediation and treatment-related adverse events. RESULTS: 218 eligible patients were randomised to placebo (105) or olanzapine (113). From days 0-5 following each cycle of chemotherapy, 41.3% (95%CI: 36.1-46.7%) of patients in the placebo group reported significant nausea compared to 27.7% (95%CI: 23.2-32.4%) in the olanzapine group (p = 0.001). Across all cycles of chemotherapy, patients receiving olanzapine experienced a statistically significant improvement in HRQoL (p < 0.001). Grade 1/2 sedation was the most commonly side effect reported at 40.8% in the placebo group vs. 54.1% with olanzapine (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In patients at high personal risk of CINV, the addition of olanzapine 5 mg daily to standard antiemetic therapy significantly improves the control of nausea, HRQoL, with no unexpected toxicities.

Home telehealth for diabetes management: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIM: It is estimated that more than 180 million people worldwide have diabetes. Health-care providers can remotely deliver health services to this patient population using information and communication technology, also known as home telehealth. Home telehealth may be classified into two subtypes: home telemonitoring (HTM) and telephone support (TS). The research objective was to systematically review the literature and perform meta-analyses to assess the potential benefits of home telehealth compared with usual care (UC) for patients with diabetes. METHODS: An electronic literature search was conducted to identify studies on home telehealth and patients with diabetes that were published between 1998 and 2008 using Medline, Medline In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, BIOSIS Previews and EMBASE. RESULTS: Twenty-six studies (n = 5069 patients) on home telehealth for diabetes were selected. Twenty-one studies evaluated HTM and 5 randomized controlled trials assessed TS. HTM had a positive effect on glycaemic control [as measured by lower glycated haemoglobin level] compared with UC (weighted mean difference =-0.21; 95% confidence interval -0.35 to -0.08), but the results were mixed for TS. Study results indicated that home telehealth helps to reduce the number of patients hospitalized, hospitalizations and bed days of care. Home telehealth was similar or favourable to UC across studies for quality-of-life and patient satisfaction outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In general, home telehealth had a positive impact on the use of numerous health services and glycaemic control. More studies of higher methodological quality are required to give more precise insights into the potential clinical effectiveness of home telehealth interventions.

Design of a novel slit-slat collimator system for SPECT imaging of the human brain.

We present three novel multi-slit-slat (MSS) system designs which allow for the acquisition of data with variable multiplexing in order to optimize the use of a high intrinsic resolution detector for clinical brain SPECT. In this paper we first study the relationship between the geometric parameters of a MSS collimator system and the resulting resolution and sensitivity for an on-axis point at the centre of the field-of-view (FOV), assuming a continuous cylindrical detector model. The model predicts that for optimal system sensitivity and resolution, the ratio of the detector radius to slit collimator radius should be 1.3-1.5, as any further increase in this ratio results in significant deterioration in both system resolution and sensitivity. The analytical results were used to fix the geometric parameters for the three novel MSS system designs. Comparison of the three designs, asymmetric rotating collimator (ARC), asymmetric rotating detector (ARD) and symmetric rotating collimator (SRC) with variable slit spacing, suggests that the SRC system performs better in terms of the system sensitivity (5.1 x 10(-4)) for the same average resolution (6.0 mm) in comparison to designs based on an ARC (3.7 x 10(-4)) and ARD (4.2 x 10(-4)).

Knowledge Synthesis in Evidence-Based Medicine.

Systematic reviews are the most common form of knowledge synthesis and remain a cornerstone of the practice of evidence-based medicine. They offer enhanced rigor and validity relative to traditional narrative review articles by reducing bias and increasing objectivity. In answering focused research questions, systematic reviews are directly applicable to clinical practice as well as the development of clinical guidelines and the identification of knowledge gaps, which may drive future primary research directions. Typically, such a rigorous process necessarily requires substantive time to carefully and systematically identify, screen, and synthesize all relevant available primary research on a topic. Further, other knowledge synthesis methods have emerged to address the varying needs of decision makers with respect to condensed timelines and more diverse research questions, as well as to allow incorporation of already synthesized evidence into reviews. These alternative methods include rapid reviews, scoping reviews, and overviews of systematic reviews, which are being used with increasing frequency by clinicians, decision-makers, and researchers. We encourage clinicians and researchers in nuclear medicine and other imaging sciences to acquire a greater familiarity with these methods and to consider them in clinical decision making, the development of clinical guidelines, and the planning of future research activities.

Evaluation of a low-dose/slow-rotating SPECT-CT system.

The 4-slice CT that forms part of the GE Infinia Hawkeye-4 SPECT-CT scanner (Hawkeye) is evaluated against the diagnostic 16-slice CT that is incorporated in the GE Discovery ST PET-CT system (DST). The x-ray tube of the slow-rotating Hawkeye system (23 s/rotation) operates at approximately a third of the dose of diagnostic systems as used for conventional diagnostic imaging. Image reconstruction is optimized for low noise. High-contrast spatial resolution significantly falls behind diagnostic figures: the average of MTF(50) and MTF(10) (resolution where the MTF has fallen to 50% and 10%) is 2.8 +/- 0.1 cm(-1) for Hawkeye and 5.3 +/- 0.1 cm(-1) for the DST (standard reconstruction filters). Resolution in the direction of the couch movement (z coordinate) is governed by the fixed Hawkeye slice width of 5 mm. Reconstruction accuracy is found to be increased by reducing the default z increment from 4.4 mm to 2.2 mm. Low-contrast object detectability is superior compared with diagnostic systems operating in the Hawkeye dose range. In the diagnostic dose regime, however, small low-contrast details remain visible in DST that are not detectable with Hawkeye. Although not of diagnostic quality, the low-dose Hawkeye provides appropriate data for SPECT attenuation correction and anatomical localization capability.

Optimizing vascular access for patients receiving intravenous systemic therapy for early-stage breast cancer-a survey of oncology nurses and physicians.

Background: Despite advances in systemic therapy choices for patients with early-stage breast cancer, optimal practices for intravenous (IV) access remain unknown. That lack of knowledge holds particularly true for the use of central venous access devices (cvads) such as peripherally inserted central catheters (piccs) and implanted vascular access devices (ports). Methods: Using a survey of Canadian oncologists and oncology nurses responsible for the care of breast cancer patients, we evaluated current access practices, perceptions of complications, and perceptions of risk, and we estimated complication rates and evaluated perceived risk factors for lymphedema. Results: Survey responses were received from 25 physicians and 57 oncology nurses. Administration of trastuzumab or an anthracycline was associated with a higher likelihood of a cvad being recommended. Other factors associated with recommendation of a cvad included prior difficult IV access and a recommendation from the chemotherapy nurse. Although the complication rates perceived to be associated with the use of piccs and ports remained high, respondents felt that cvads might improve patient quality of life. Risk factors perceived to be associated with the risk of lymphedema were axillary lymph node dissection, radiation to the axilla, and line-associated infection. Factors known to be unrelated to lymphedema risk (specifically, blood draws and blood pressure measurement) continue to be perceived as posing a higher risk. Conclusions: Despite widespread use of chemotherapy for patients with breast cancer, the type of venous access used for treatment varies significantly, as do perceptions about the risks of cvad use and the risk for lymphedema development. Further prospective studies are needed to identify best-practice strategies.

Perceptions of vascular access for intravenous systemic therapy and risk factors for lymphedema in early-stage breast cancer-a patient survey.

Background: The choice of vascular access for systemic therapy administration in breast cancer remains an area of clinical equipoise, and patient preference is not consistently acknowledged. Using a patient survey, we evaluated the patient experience with vascular access during treatment for early-stage breast cancer and explored perceived risk factors for lymphedema. Methods: Patients who had received systemic therapy for early-stage breast cancer were surveyed at 2 Canadian cancer centres. Results: Responses were received from 187 patients (94%). The route of vascular access was peripheral intravenous line (IV) in 24%, a peripherally inserted central catheter (picc) in 42%, and a surgically inserted central catheter (port) in 34%. Anthracycline-based regimens were associated with a greater use of central vascular access devices (cvads- that is, a picc or port; 86/97, 89%). Trastuzumab use was associated with greater use of ports (49/64, 77%). Although few patients (7%) reported being involved in the decisions about vascular access, most were satisfied or very satisfied (88%) with their access type. Patient preference centred mainly on avoiding delays in the initiation of chemotherapy. Self-reported rates of complications (183 evaluable responses) were infiltration with peripheral IVs (9/44, 20%), local skin infections with piccs (7/77, 9%), and thrombosis with ports (4/62, 6%). Perceived risk factors for lymphedema included use of the surgical arm for blood draws (117/156, 75%) and blood pressure measurement (115/156, 74%). Conclusions: Most patients reported being satisfied with the vascular access used for their treatment. Improved education and understanding about the evidence-based requirements for vascular access are needed. Perceived risk factors for lymphedema remain variable and are not evidence-based.

Optimal sequence of adjuvant endocrine and radiation therapy in early-stage breast cancer - A systematic review.

IMPORTANCE: Clinical equipoise exists around the optimal time to start adjuvant endocrine therapy in patients who will receive post-operative radiotherapy for breast cancer. Concerns continue to exist regarding potential reduced efficacy, or increased toxicity, when radiation, and endocrine therapy are administered concurrently. OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review of studies comparing outcomes between sequential and concurrent adjuvant radiation and endocrine therapy in early-stage breast cancer. All modalities of radiation therapy were considered, and endocrine therapy could be either tamoxifen or an aromatase inhibitor. Outcomes of interest included; local, regional or distant recurrence, overall survival and treatment-related toxicities. EVIDENCE REVIEWED: PubMed, Ovid Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from 1946 to December 2017. Two reviewers independently assessed each citation using the criteria outlined above. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for prospective studies, and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for retrospective studies. FINDINGS: Of 2137 unique citations identified, 13 met eligibility criteria. Eleven were unique studies (7569 patients), while 2 of the studies were updated analyses of previous studies. Studies evaluated the timing of adjuvant radiation, and tamoxifen (5 studies, 1550 patients), or aromatase inhibitors (6 studies, 6019 patients). We identified 1 complete randomized clinical trial (150 patients), and 5 retrospective studies (1580 patients), in addition to conference abstracts (5 studies, 5839 patients). Overall, none of the studies showed a significant difference in efficacy, or toxicity, with concurrent versus sequential treatment. However, given the significant heterogeneity of the study populations, it was not possible to conduct a meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In the absence of high quality data, adequately powered randomized trials are required to answer this important clinical question.