Breast cancer patients' needs and perspectives on a one-on-one peer support program: quantitative and qualitative analyses.

PURPOSE: Although peer support programs as a health resource have become increasingly popular, only limited studies evaluated the added value of one-on-one peer support for breast cancer patients. This study aims to bridge the knowledge gap by focusing on two related research topics. First, we evaluated emotional well-being and (unmet) needs regarding supportive care. Second, we evaluated patients' perspectives on their experiences after having one-on-one peer support. METHODS: A quantitative analysis was conducted to provide insight in patients' symptoms of anxiety and depression (HADS), quality of life (EORTC-QLQ-C30), and supportive care needs (CaSUN-questionnaire). Furthermore, approximately 1 year after the implementation of a one-on-one peer support program, focus groups were conducted to evaluate patients' perspectives regarding one-on-one peer support. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-five of 537 patients diagnosed with breast cancer between 2019 and 2020 completed the questionnaires. Quantitative analysis showed increased symptoms of anxiety and depression among breast cancer patients and lower scores on all EORTC-QLQ-C30 domains compared to the Dutch normative population. Of all patients, 27.6% (95%CI = 0.22-0.34) reported to have unmet needs regarding emotional support and 23.1% (95%CI = 0.18-0.29) reported an unmet need to talk to someone who has experienced breast cancer. For the qualitative analysis, 19 breast cancer patients who were taking part in the one-on-one peer support program participated in three focus groups. Benefits, limitations, and wishes regarding the one-on-one peer support program were discussed. CONCLUSION: Breast cancer patients showed increased anxiety and depression and lower quality of life, physical, role, emotional, cognitive, and social functioning compared to the Dutch normative population. Almost one-third of breast cancer patients reported unmet needs regarding emotional support and a desire to talk to other breast cancer patients. These (unmet) needs can successfully be met by providing a low-threshold one-on-one peer support program.

Physical and mental health of breast cancer patients and survivors before and during successive SARS-CoV-2-infection waves.

PURPOSE: During the first SARS-CoV-2-infection wave, a deterioration in emotional well-being and increased need for mental health care were observed among patients treated or being treated for breast cancer. In this follow-up study, we assessed patient-reported quality of life (QoL), physical functioning, and psychosocial well-being during the second SARS-CoV-2-infection wave in a large, representative cohort. METHODS: This longitudinal cohort study was conducted within the prospective, multicenter UMBRELLA breast cancer cohort. To assess patient-reported QoL, physical functioning and psychosocial well-being, COVID-19-specific surveys were completed by patients during the first and second SARS-CoV-2-infection waves (April and November 2020, respectively). An identical survey was completed by a comparable reference population during the second SARS-CoV-2-infection waves. All surveys included the validated EORTC-QLQ-C30/BR23, HADS and "De Jong-Gierveld Loneliness" questionnaires. Pre-COVID-19 EORTC-QLQ-C30/BR23 and HADS outcomes were available from UMBRELLA. Response rates were 69.3% (n = 1106/1595) during the first SARS-CoV-2-infection wave and 50.9% (n = 822/1614) during the second wave. A total of 696 patients responded during both SARS-CoV-2-infection waves and were included in the analysis comparing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) during the second SARS-CoV-2-infection wave to PROs during the first wave. Moreover, PROs reported by all patients during the second SARS-CoV-2-infection wave (n = 822) were compared to PROs of a similar non-cancer reference population (n = 241) and to their pre-COVID-19 PROs. RESULTS: Patient-reported QoL, physical functioning, and psychosocial well-being of patients treated or being treated for breast cancer remained stable or improved from the first to the second SARS-CoV-2-infection wave. The proportion of emotional loneliness reduced from 37.6 to 29.9% of patients. Compared to a similar non-cancer reference population, physical, emotional, and cognitive functioning, future perspectives and symptoms of dyspnea and insomnia were worse in patients treated or being treated for breast cancer during the second SARS-CoV-2-infection wave. PROs in the second wave were similar to pre-COVID-19 PROs. CONCLUSION: Although patients scored overall worse than individuals without breast cancer, QoL, physical functioning, and psychosocial well-being did not deteriorate between the first and second wave. During the second wave, PROs were similar to pre-COVID-19 values. Overall, current findings are cautiously reassuring for future mental health of patients treated or being treated for breast cancer.

Breast cancer recurrence after immediate and delayed postmastectomy breast reconstruction-A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Oncological safety of different types and timings of PMBR after breast cancer remains controversial. Lack of stratified risk assessment in literature makes current clinical and shared decision-making complex. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate differences in oncological outcomes after immediate versus delayed postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) for autologous and implant-based PMBR separately. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Embase. The Cochrane Collaboration Handbook and Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklist were followed for data abstraction. Variability in point estimates attributable to heterogeneity was assessed using I2 -statistic. (Loco)regional breast cancer recurrence rates, distant metastasis rates, and overall breast cancer recurrence rates were pooled in generalized linear mixed models using random effects. RESULTS: Fifty-five studies, evaluating 14,217 patients, were included. When comparing immediate versus delayed autologous PMBR, weighted average proportions were: 0.03 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.02-0.03) versus 0.02 (95% CI, 0.01-0.04), respectively, for local recurrences, 0.02 (95% CI, 0.01-0.03) versus 0.02 (95% CI, 0.01-0.03) for regional recurrences, and 0.04 (95% CI, 0.03-0.06) versus 0.01 (95% CI, 0.00-0.03) for locoregional recurrences. No statistically significant differences in weighted average proportions for local, regional and locoregional recurrence rates were observed between immediate and delayed autologous PMBR. Data did not allow comparing weighted average proportions of distant metastases and total breast cancer recurrences after autologous PMBR, and of all outcome measures after implant-based PMBR. CONCLUSIONS: Delayed autologous PMBR leads to similar (loco)regional breast cancer recurrence rates compared to immediate autologous PMBR. This study highlights the paucity of strong evidence on breast cancer recurrence after specific types and timings of PMBR. LAY SUMMERY: Oncologic safety of different types and timings of postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) remains controversial. Lack of stratified risk assessment in literature makes clinical and shared decision-making complex. This meta-analysis showed that delayed autologous PMBR leads to similar (loco)regional recurrence rates as immediate autologous PMBR. Data did not allow comparing weighted average proportions of distant metastases and total breast cancer recurrence after autologous PMBR, and of all outcome measures after implant-based PMBR. Based on current evidence, oncological concerns do not seem a valid reason to withhold patients from certain reconstructive timings or techniques, and patients should equally be offered all reconstructive options they technically qualify for.

Sentinel Lymph Node Mapping in Breast Cancer Patients Through Fluorescent Imaging Using Indocyanine Green: The INFLUENCE Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to compare the (sentinel) lymph node detection rate of indocyanine green (ICG)-fluorescent imaging versus standard-of-care 99m Tc-nanocoilloid for sentinel lymph node (SLN)-mapping. BACKGROUND: The current gold standard for axillary staging in patients with breast cancer is sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) using radio-guided surgery using radioisotope technetium ( 99m Tc), sometimes combined with blue dye. A promising alternative is fluorescent imaging using ICG. METHODS: In this noninferiority trial, we enrolled 102 consecutive patients with invasive early-stage, clinically node-negative breast cancer. Patients were planned for breast conserving surgery and SLNB between August 2020 and June 2021. The day or morning before surgery, patients were injected with 99m Tc-nanocolloid. In each patient, SLNB was first performed using ICG-fluorescent imaging, after which excised lymph nodes were tested with the gamma-probe for 99m Tc-uptake ex vivo, and the axilla was checked for residual 99m Tc-activity. The detection rate was defined as the proportion of patients in whom at least 1 (S)LN was detected with either tracer. RESULTS: In total, 103 SLNBs were analyzed. The detection rate of ICG-fluorescence was 96.1% [95% confidence interval (95% CI)=90.4%-98.9%] versus 86.4% (95% CI=78.3%-92.4%) for 99m Tc-nanocoilloid. The detection rate for pathological lymph nodes was 86.7% (95% CI=59.5%-98.3%) for both ICG and 99m Tc-nanocoilloid. A median of 2 lymph nodes were removed. ICG-fluorescent imaging did not increase detection time. No adverse events were observed. CONCLUSIONS: ICG-fluorescence showed a higher (S)LN detection rate than 99m Tc-nanocoilloid, and equal detection rate for pathological (S)LNs. ICG-fluorescence may be used as a safe and effective alternative to 99m Tc-nanocoilloid for SLNB in patients with early-stage breast cancer.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on perceived access to health care and preferences for health care provision in individuals (being) treated for breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate perceived access to health care and preferences for health care provision among patients (being) treated for breast cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Longitudinal study within the prospective, multicenter UMBRELLA cohort of patients (being) treated for breast cancer. All cohort participants enrolled in UMBRELLA between October 2013 and November 2020 were sent a COVID-19-specific survey during the first and second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, i.e., April 2020 and November 2020, respectively. RESULTS: In total, 1106 (69.3%) and 822 (50.9%) cohort participants completed the survey in the first and second wave, respectively. The proportion of patients experiencing that their treatment or follow-up care was affected due to COVID-19 decreased from 28.4% (n = 198) in April 2020 to 14.8% (n = 103) in November 2020. Throughout the pandemic, one or more hospital consultations were postponed in 10.0% (n = 82) of all patients and changed into a teleconsultation in 23.1% (n = 190). The proportion of patients who experienced a higher threshold to contact their general practitioner due to COVID-19 decreased from 29.9% (n = 204) in the first wave to 20.8% (n = 145) in the second wave. In-person consultations remained most preferred in 35.2% (n = 289) of all patients. Nearly half of all patients (48.3%, n = 396) indicated that telehealth would be a useful alternative for in-person consultations in future. CONCLUSION: Perceived access to health care has improved substantially throughout the pandemic. Digital care is well received by patients (being) treated for breast cancer.

The impact of hyperbaric oxygen therapy on late radiation toxicity and quality of life in breast cancer patients.

PURPOSE: To evaluate symptoms of late radiation toxicity, side effects, and quality of life in breast cancer patients treated with hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT). METHODS: For this cohort study breast cancer patients treated with HBOT in 5 Dutch facilities were eligible for inclusion. Breast cancer patients with late radiation toxicity treated with ≥ 20 HBOT sessions from 2015 to 2019 were included. Breast and arm symptoms, pain, and quality of life were assessed by means of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and -BR23 before, immediately after, and 3 months after HBOT on a scale of 0-100. Determinants associated with persistent breast pain after HBOT were assessed. RESULTS: 1005/1280 patients were included for analysis. Pain scores decreased significantly from 43.4 before HBOT to 29.7 after 3 months (p < 0.001). Breast symptoms decreased significantly from 44.6 at baseline to 28.9 at 3 months follow-up (p < 0.001) and arm symptoms decreased significantly from 38.2 at baseline to 27.4 at 3 months follow-up (p < 0.001). All quality of life domains improved at the end of HBOT and after 3 months follow-up in comparison to baseline scores. Most prevalent side effects of HBOT were myopia (any grade, n = 576, 57.3%) and mild barotrauma (n = 179, 17.8%). Moderate/severe side effects were reported in 3.2% (n = 32) of the patients. Active smoking during HBOT and shorter time (i.e., median 17.5 vs. 22.0 months) since radiotherapy were associated with persistent breast pain after HBOT. CONCLUSION: Breast cancer patients with late radiation toxicity reported reduced pain, breast and arm symptoms, and improved quality of life following treatment with HBOT.

(Ex-)breast cancer patients with (pre-existing) symptoms of anxiety and/or depression experience higher barriers to contact health care providers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: To identify factors associated with (perceived) access to health care among (ex-)breast cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Cross-sectional study within a large prospective, multicenter cohort of (ex-)breast cancer patients, i.e., UMBRELLA. All participants enrolled in the UMBRELLA cohort between October 2013 and April 2020 were sent a COVID-19-specific survey, including the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) questionnaire. RESULTS: In total, 1051 (66.0%) participants completed the survey. During COVID-19, 284 (27.0%) participants reported clinically relevant increased levels of anxiety and/or depression, i.e., total HADS score ≥ 12. Participants with anxiety and/or depression reported statistically significant higher barriers to contact their general practitioner (47.5% vs. 25.0%, resp.) and breast cancer physicians (26.8% vs. 11.2%, resp.) compared to participants without these symptoms. In addition, a higher proportion of participants with anxiety and/or depression reported that their current treatment or (after)care was affected by COVID-19 compared to those without these symptoms (32.7% vs. 20.5%, resp.). Factors independently associated with symptoms of anxiety and/or depression during COVID-19 were pre-existent anxiety (OR 6.1, 95% CI 4.1-9.2) or depression (OR 6.0, 95% CI 3.5-10.2). CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, (ex-)breast cancer patients with symptoms of anxiety and/or depression experience higher barriers to contact health care providers. Also, they more often report that their health care was affected by COVID-19. Risk factors for anxiety and/or depression during COVID-19 are pre-existent symptoms of anxiety or depression. Extra attention-including mental health support-is needed for this group.

Internet-based cognitive rehabilitation for working cancer survivors: results of a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive problems contribute to decline in work performance. We evaluated (1) the effectiveness of basic self-management and extensive therapist-guided online cognitive rehabilitation on attainment of individually predetermined work-related goals among occupationally active cancer survivors, and (2) whether effectiveness of the programs differed for survivors with and without formal cognitive impairment. METHODS: In a 3-arm randomized controlled trial (NCT03900806), 279 non-central nervous system cancer survivors with cognitive complaints were assigned to the basic program (n = 93), the extensive program (n = 93), or a waiting-list control group (n = 93). Participants completed measurements pre-randomization (T0), 12 weeks post-randomization upon program completion (T1), and 26 weeks post-randomization (T2). Mixed-effects modeling was used to compare intervention groups with the control group on goal attainment, and on self-perceived cognitive problems, work ability, and health-related quality of life. RESULTS: Participants in the extensive program achieved their predetermined goals better than those in the control group, at short- and long-term follow-up (effect size [ES] = .49; P < .001; ES = .34; P = .014). They also had fewer recovery needs after work (ES = -.21; P = .011), more vitality (ES = .20; P = .018), and better physical role functioning (ES = .0.43 P = .015) than controls. At long-term follow-up, this finding persisted for physical role functioning (ES = .42; P = .034). The basic program elicited a small positive nonsignificant short-term (not long-term) effect on goal attainment for those with adequate adherence (ES = .28, P = .053). Effectiveness of the programs did not differ for patients with or without cognitive impairment. CONCLUSIONS: Internet-based therapist-guided extensive cognitive rehabilitation improves work-related goal attainment. Considering the prevalence of cognitive problems in survivors, it is desirable to implement this program.

Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy and Late Local Toxic Effects in Patients With Irradiated Breast Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) is proposed as treatment for late local toxic effects after breast irradiation. Strong evidence of effectiveness is lacking. Objective: To assess effectiveness of HBOT for late local toxic effects in women who received adjuvant radiotherapy for breast cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a hospital-based, pragmatic, 2-arm, randomized clinical trial nested within the prospective UMBRELLA cohort following the trials within cohorts design in the Netherlands. Participants included 189 women with patient-reported moderate or severe breast, chest wall, and/or shoulder pain in combination with mild, moderate, or severe edema, fibrosis, or movement restriction 12 months or longer after breast irradiation. Data analysis was performed from May to September 2023. Intervention: Receipt of 30 to 40 HBOT sessions over a period of 6 to 8 consecutive weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: Breast, chest wall, and/or shoulder pain 6 months postrandomization measured by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-BR23 questionnaire. Secondary end points were patient-reported fibrosis, edema, movement restriction, and overall quality of life. Data were analyzed according to intention-to-treat (ITT) and complier average causal effect (CACE) principles. Results: Between November 2019 and August 2022, 125 women (median [range] age at randomization, 56 [37-85] years) with late local toxic effects were offered to undergo HBOT (intervention arm), and 61 women (median [range] age at randomization, 60 [36-80] years) were randomized to the control arm. Of those offered HBOT, 31 (25%) accepted and completed treatment. The most common reason for not accepting HBOT was high treatment intensity. In ITT, moderate or severe pain at follow-up was reported by 58 of 115 women (50%) in the intervention arm and 32 of 52 women (62%) in the control arm (odds ratio [OR], 0.63; 95% CI, 0.32-1.23; P = .18). In CACE, the proportion of women reporting moderate or severe pain at follow-up was 32% (10 of 31) among those completing HBOT and 75% (9.7 of 12.9) among control participants expected to complete HBOT if offered (adjusted OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.15-0.80; P = .01). In ITT, moderate or severe fibrosis was reported by 35 of 107 (33%) in the intervention arm and 25 of 49 (51%) in the control arm (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.15-0.81; P = .02). There were no significant differences in breast edema, movement restriction, and quality of life between groups in ITT and CACE. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, offering HBOT to women with late local toxic effects was not effective for reducing pain, but was effective for reducing fibrosis. In the subgroup of women who completed HBOT, a significant reduction in pain and fibrosis was observed. A smaller than anticipated proportion of women with late local toxic effects was prepared to undergo HBOT. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04193722.

Intentionally curative treatment of locally recurrent rectal cancer: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of outcome data beyond local recurrence rates after primary treatment in rectal cancer, despite more information being necessary for clinical decision-making. We sought to determine patient selection, therapeutic modalities and outcomes of locally recurrent rectal cancer treated with curative intent. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE (1990-2010) using the medical subject headings "rectal neoplasms" and "neoplasm recurrence, local." Selection of cohort studies was based on the primary intention of treatment and availability of at least 1 outcome variable. RESULTS: We included 55 cohort studies comprising 3767 patients; 8 studies provided data on the rate of intentionally curative treatment from an unselected consecutive cohort of patients (481 of 1188 patients; 40%). Patients were symptomatic with pain in 50% (796 of 1607) of cases. Overall, 3088 of 3767 patients underwent resection. The R0 resection rate was 56% (1484 of 2637 patients). The rate of external beam radiotherapy was 100% in 9 studies, 0% in 5 studies, and ranged from 12% to 97% in 37 studies. Overall postoperative mortality was 2.2% (57 of 2515 patients). Five-year survival was at least 25%, with an upper limit of 41% in 11 of 18 studies including at least 50 resections. We found a significant increase in reported survival rates over time (r2 = 0.214, p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: More uniformity in treatment protocols and reporting on outcomes for locally recurrent rectal cancer is warranted. The observed improvement of reported survival rates in time is probably related to better patient selection and optimized multimodality treatment in specialized centres.

Efficacy of indocyanine green fluorescence for the identification of non-palpable breast tumours: systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Accurate tumour localization is crucial for precise surgical targeting and complete tumour removal. Indocyanine green fluorescence, an increasingly used technique in oncological surgery, has shown promise in localizing non-palpable breast tumours. The aim of this systematic review was to describe the efficacy of indocyanine green fluorescence for the identification of non-palpable breast tumours. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, including studies from 2012 to 2023. Studies reporting the proportion of breast tumours identified using indocyanine green fluorescence were included. The quality of the studies and their risk of bias were appraised using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies ('MINORS') tool. The following outcomes were collected: identification rate, clear resection margins, specimen volume, operative time, re-operation rate, adverse events, and complications. RESULTS: In total, 2061 articles were screened for eligibility, resulting in 11 studies, with 366 patients included: two RCTs, three non-randomized comparative studies, four single-arm studies, and two case reports. All studies achieved a 100 per cent tumour identification rate with indocyanine green fluorescence, except for one study, with an identification rate of 87 per cent (13/15). Clear resection margins were found in 88-100 per cent of all patients. Reoperation rates ranged from 0.0 to 5.4 per cent and no complications or adverse events related to indocyanine green occurred. CONCLUSION: Indocyanine green fluorescence has substantial theoretical advantages compared with current routine localization methods. Although a limited number of studies were available, the current literature suggests that indocyanine green fluorescence is a useful, accurate, and safe technique for the intraoperative localization of non-palpable breast tumours, with equivalent efficacy compared with other localization techniques, potentially reducing tumour-positive margins.

Sexual and urinary functioning after rectal surgery: a prospective comparative study with a median follow-up of 8.5 years.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to prospectively compare rectal resection (RR) with colonic resection on sexual, urinary and bowel function and quality of life in both short-term and long-term. METHODS: Eighty-three patients who underwent RR were compared to 53 patients who underwent a colonic resection leaving the rectum in situ (RIS). A questionnaire assessing sexual, urinary and bowel functioning with a quality of life questionnaire (SF-36) was sent to all participants preoperatively, 3 and 12 months postoperatively and approximately 8 years after the onset of the study. RESULTS: Short-term dysfunction included diminished sexual activity in female RR patients at 3 months and significantly more erectile dysfunction in RR patients 1 year postoperatively. Long-term dysfunction included more frequent and more severe erectile dysfunction in RR patients compared to RIS patients. These short-term and long-term outcomes did not influence overall quality of life. The incidence of urinary dysfunction was comparable between both groups. Bowel functioning was significantly better in the RIS group compared to the RR group 3 months and 1 year postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent RR experienced up to 1 year postoperatively more sexual and bowel function problems than RIS patients. However, short-term and long-term dysfunction did not influence overall quality of life. Erectile dysfunction in male RR patients persisted in time, whereas other aspects of sexual, urinary and bowel function after RR and colonic resection are similar after a median follow-up of 8.5 years.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Patient-Reported Outcomes of Breast Cancer Patients and Survivors.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic (officially declared on the March 11, 2020), and the resulting measures, are impacting daily life and medical management of breast cancer patients and survivors. We evaluated to what extent these changes have affected quality of life, physical, and psychosocial well-being of patients previously or currently being treated for breast cancer. METHODS: This study was conducted within a prospective, multicenter cohort of breast cancer patients and survivors (Utrecht cohort for Multiple BREast cancer intervention studies and Long-term evaLuAtion). Shortly after the implementation of COVID-19 measures, an extra survey was sent to 1595 participants, including the validated European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) core (C30) and breast cancer-specific (BR23) Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30/BR23) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) questionnaire. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were compared with the most recent PROs collected within UMBRELLA pre-COVID-19. The impact of COVID-19 on PROs was assessed using mixed model analysis, adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: 1051 patients and survivors (65.9%) completed the survey; 31.1% (n = 327) reported a higher threshold to contact their general practitioner amid the COVID-19 pandemic. A statistically significant deterioration in emotional functioning was observed (mean = 82.6 [SD = 18.7] to 77.9 [SD = 17.3]; P < .001), and 505 (48.0%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 45.0% to 51.1%) patients and survivors reported moderate to severe loneliness. Small improvements were observed in quality of life and physical, social, and role functioning. In the subgroup of 51 patients under active treatment, social functioning strongly deteriorated (77.3 [95% CI = 69.4 to 85.2] to 61.3 [95% CI = 52.6 to 70.1]; P = .002). CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, breast cancer patients and survivors were less likely to contact physicians and experienced a deterioration in their emotional functioning. Patients undergoing active treatment reported a substantial drop in social functioning. One in 2 reported loneliness that was moderate or severe. Online interventions supporting mental health and social interaction are needed during times of social distancing and lockdowns.

Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Surgical Breast Cancer Care in the Netherlands: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has put a strain on regular healthcare worldwide. In the Netherlands, the national screening programs, including for breast cancer, were halted temporarily. This posed a challenge to breast cancer care, because ∼40% of cases are detected through national screening. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to evaluate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the surgical care of patients with breast cancer in the Netherlands. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present multicenter retrospective cohort study investigated the effects of COVID-19 on patients with breast cancer who had undergone surgery from March 9 to May 17, 2020. The primary endpoints were the number of surgical procedures performed during the study period, tumor characteristics, surgery type, and route of referral. The secondary endpoint was the incidence of postoperative complications during the study period. RESULTS: A total of 217 consecutive patients with breast cancer requiring surgery were included. We found an overall decrease in the number of patients with breast cancer who were undergoing surgery. The most significant decline was seen in surgery for T1-T2 and N0 tumors. A decline in the number of referrals from both the national screening program and general practitioners was observed. The incidence of postoperative complications remained stable during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: The temporary halt of the national screening program for breast cancer resulted in fewer surgical procedures during the study period and a pronounced decrease in surgery of the lower tumor stages.

Tumor Response After Neoadjuvant Magnetic Resonance Guided Single Ablative Dose Partial Breast Irradiation.

PURPOSE: To assess the pathologic and radiologic response in patients with low-risk breast cancer treated with magnetic resonance (MR) guided neoadjuvant partial breast irradiation (NA-PBI) and to evaluate toxicity and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). METHODS AND MATERIALS: For this single-arm prospective trial, women with unifocal, non-lobular tumors with a maximum diameter of 20 mm (age, 50-70 years) or 30 mm (age, ≥70 years) and tumor-negative sentinel node(s) were eligible. Patients were treated with a single ablative dose of NA-PBI followed by breast-conserving surgery after an interval of 6 to 8 months. Target volumes were defined on radiation therapy planning computed tomography scan and additional magnetic resonance imaging. Prescribed doses to gross tumor volume and clinical target volume (gross tumor volume plus 20 mm margin) were 20 Gy and 15 Gy, respectively. Primary outcome was pathologic complete response (pCR). Secondary outcomes were radiologic response (on magnetic resonance imaging), toxicity (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events), PROs (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-BR23, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), and cosmesis (assessed by patient, radiation oncologist, and BCCT.core software). RESULTS: Thirty-six patients were treated with NA-PBI, and pCR was reported in 15 patients (42%; 95% confidence interval, 26%-59%). Radiologic complete response was observed in 15 patients, 10 of whom had pCR (positive predictive value, 67%; 95% confidence interval, 39%-87%). After a median follow-up of 21 months (range, 12-41), all patients experienced grade 1 fibrosis in the treated breast volume. Transient grade 2 and 3 toxicity was observed in 31% and 3% of patients, respectively. Local recurrences were absent. No deterioration in PROs or cosmetic results was observed. CONCLUSIONS: NA-PBI has the potential to induce pCR in a substantial proportion of patients, with acceptable toxicity. This treatment seems a feasible alternative to standard postoperative irradiation and could even result in postponement or omission of surgery if pCR can be accurately predicted in selected low-risk patients.

Neorectal irritability after short-term preoperative radiotherapy and surgical resection for rectal cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Preoperative radiotherapy followed by rectal resection with total mesorectal excision (TME) and colo-anal anastomosis severely compromises anorectal function, which has been attributed to a decrease in neorectal capacity and neorectal compliance. However, to what extent altered motility of the neorectum is involved, is still unknown. The aim of the study was to compare the motor response to (prolonged) filling of the (neo-)rectum in patients after preoperative radiotherapy and rectal resection with that in healthy volunteers (HV). METHODS: Neorectal function (J-pouch or side-to-end anastomosis) was studied in 15 patients (median age 61 years, 10 males) 5 months after short-term preoperative radiotherapy (5 x 5 Gy) and rectal resection with TME for rectal cancer and compared with that of 10 volunteers (median age 41 years, 7 males). Furthermore, patients with a colonic J-pouch anastomosis (n=6) were compared with patients with a side-to-end anastomosis (n=9). (Neo-)rectal sensitivity was assessed using a stepwise isovolumetric and isobaric distension protocol. (Neo-)rectal motility was determined during prolonged distension at the threshold of the urge to defecate. RESULTS: The neorectal volume of patients at the threshold of the urge to defecate (125 +/-45 ml) was significantly lower when compared with that of HV (272+/-87 ml, P<0.05). The pressure threshold, however, did not differ between patients (26+/-9 mm Hg) and HV (21+/-5 mm Hg) and neither did the pressure threshold differ between patients with a J-pouch and those with side-to-end anastomosis. In HV, no rectal contractions were observed during prolonged rectal distension. In contrast, in all 15 patients, prolonged isovolumetric and isobaric distension induced 3 (range 0-5) rectal contractions/10 min, which were associated with an increase in sensation in half of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent preoperative radiotherapy and rectal resection with TME, but not HV, developed contractions of the neo-rectum in response to prolonged distension. We suggest that this neorectal "irritability" represents a new pathophysiological mechanism contributing to the urgency for defecation after this multimodality treatment.