Evidence of decreased long-term risk of cervical pre-cancer after negative primary HPV screens compared to negative cytology screens in a longitudinal cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Growing use of primary HPV cervical cancer screening requires determining appropriate screening intervals to avoid overtreatment of transient disease. This study examined the long-term risk of cervical precancer after HPV screening to inform screening interval recommendations. METHODS: This longitudinal cohort study (British Columbia, Canada, 2008-2022) recruited women and individuals with a cervix (WIC) who received 1-2 negative HPV screen(s) (HPV1 cohort, N = 5,546, HPV2 cohort, N = 6,624) during a randomized trial and WIC with 1-2 normal cytology result(s) (BCS1 cohort, N = 782,297, BCS2 cohort, N = 673,778) extracted from the provincial screening registry. All participants were followed through the registry for 14 years. Long-term risk of cervical precancer or worse (CIN2+) was compared between HPV and cytology cohorts. RESULTS: Cumulative risks of CIN2+ were 3.2/1000 (95% CI: 1.6 to 4.7) in HPV1 and 2.7/1000 (CI: 1.2 to 4.2) in HPV2 after eight years. This was comparable to the risk in the cytology cohorts after 3 years (BCS1: 3.3/1000, [CI: 3.1 to 3.4]; BCS2: 2.5, [CI: 2.4 to 2.6]). The cumulative risk of CIN2+ after 10 years was low in HPV cohorts (HPV1: 4.7/1000, [CI: 2.6 to 6.7]; HPV2: 3.9, [CI: 1.1 to 6.6]). CONCLUSIONS: Risk of CIN2+ eight years after negative screen in HPV cohorts was comparable to risk after 3 years in cytology cohorts (the benchmark for acceptable risk). IMPACT: These findings suggest that primary HPV screening intervals could be extended beyond the current five-year recommendation potentially reducing barriers to screening.

Colposcopy referral rates post-introduction of primary screening with human papillomavirus testing: evidence from a large British Columbia cohort study.

Background: Shifting from cytology to human papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervical cancer screening will initially increase colposcopy referrals. The anticipated impact on health systems has been raised as a concern for implementation. It is unclear if the higher rate of colposcopy referrals is sustained after initial HPV-based screens or reverts to new lower baselines due to earlier detection and treatment of precancer. This study aimed to investigate long-term rates of colposcopy referrals after participation in HPV-based screening. Methods: Participants of HPV for Cervical Cancer Screening trial (HPV FOCAL) received one (HPV1, N = 6204) or two (HPV2, N = 9540) HPV-based screens. After exit, they returned to British Columbia's (BC) cytology screening program. A comparison cohort from the BC screening population (BCS, N = 1,140,745) was identified, mirroring trial inclusion criteria. All participants were followed for 10-14 years through the provincial screening registry. Colposcopy referral rates per 1000 screens were calculated for each group. Trial colposcopy referrals for HPV1 and HPV2 were calculated under two referral scenarios: (1) all HPV positive referred to colposcopy; (2) cytology triage with ASCUS or greater referred to colposcopy. Colposcopy referrals from post-trial screens in HPV1 an HPV2 and all screens in BCS were based on actual recommendations from the screening program. A multivariable flexible survival regression model compared hazard ratios (HR) throughout follow-up. Findings: Scenario 2 referral rates were higher during initial HPV screen(s) vs cytology screen (HPV1: 28 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 24, 33), HPV2: 32 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 29, 36), BCS: 8 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 8.9)). However, post-trial rates in HPV1 and HPV2 were significantly lower than in BCS. Cumulative rates in HPV1 and HPV2 approached the cumulative rate in BCS 11-12 years after HPV-based screening (HPV1: 11 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 10, 12), HPV2: 16 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 15-17), BCS: 11 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 10, 11)). Adjusted models demonstrated reductions in referral rates in HPV1 (HR = 0.6, 95% CI: 0.5, 0.7) and HPV2 (HR = 0.7, 95% CI: 0.6, 0.8) relative to BCS by 54 and 72 months post-final HPV screen respectively. Interpretation: Reduced colposcopy referral rates were observed after initial rounds of HPV-based screening. After initial HPV screening, referral rates to colposcopy after cytology triage were below the current rates seen in a centralized cytology program after approximately four years. Any expected increase in referrals at initiation of HPV-based screening could be countered by staged program implementation. Funding: This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (R01 CA221918), Michael Smith Health Research BC (RT-2021-1595), and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (MCT82072).

Does age affect outcome with breast cancer?

Prior data about the influence of age at diagnosis of breast cancer on patient outcomes and survival has been conflicting. Using the Breast Cancer Outcomes Unit database at BC Cancer, this retrospective population-based study identified a cohort of 24,469 patients diagnosed with invasive breast cancer between 2005 and 2014. Median follow-up was 11.5 years. We analyzed clinical and pathological features at diagnosis and treatment specific variables compared across the following age cohorts: <35, 35-39, 40-49, 50-59, 60-69, 70-79, and 80 years of age and older. We assessed the impact of age on breast cancer specific survival (BCSS) and overall survival (OS) by age and subtype. There were distinct clinical-pathological and treatment pattern differences at both extremes of age at diagnosis. Patients <35 and 35-39 years old were more likely to present with higher risk features, HER2 positive or triple-negative biomarkers, and more advanced TNM stage at diagnosis. They were more likely to undergo treatment with mastectomy, axillary lymph node dissection, radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Conversely, patients ≥80 years old were generally more likely to have hormone-sensitive HER2-negative disease, and lower TNM stage at diagnosis. They were less likely to undergo surgery or be treated with radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Both younger and elderly age at breast cancer diagnosis were independent risk factors for poorer prognosis after controlling for subtype, LVI, stage, and treatment factors. This work will help clinicians to more accurately estimate patient outcomes, patterns of relapse, and provide evidence-based treatment recommendations.

Lower Energy-Adjusted Nutrient Intakes Occur Among Food Energy Under-Reporters With Poor Mental Health.

Background: Food energy under-reporting is differentially distributed among populations. Currently, little is known about how mental health state may affect energy-adjusted nutrient intakes among food energy under-reporters. Methods: Stratified analysis of energy-adjusted nutrient intake by mental health (poor vs. good) and age/sex was conducted using data from Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) respondents (14-70 years; n = 8,233) who were deemed as under-reporters based on Goldberg's cutoffs. Results: Most were experiencing good mental health (95.2%). Among those reporting poor mental health, significantly lower energy-adjusted nutrient intakes tended to be found for fiber, protein, vitamins A, B2, B3, B6, B9, B12, C, and D, and calcium, potassium, and zinc (probability measures (p) < 0.05). For women (51-70 years), all micronutrient intakes, except iron, were significantly lower among those reporting poor mental health (p < 0.05). For men (31-50 years), B vitamin and most mineral intakes, except sodium, were significantly lower among those reporting poor mental health (p < 0.05). Among women (31-50 years) who reported poor mental health, higher energy-adjusted intakes were reported for vitamin B9 and phosphorus (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Among food energy under-reporters, poor mental health tends to lower the report of specific energy-adjusted nutrient intakes that include ones critical for mental health. Future research is needed to discern if these differences may be attributed to deviations in the accurate reports of food intakes, measurement errors, or mental health states.

Locoregional Recurrence and Survival Outcomes in Breast Cancer Treated With Modern Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Contemporary Population-based Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Data guiding radiotherapy (RT) decisions after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is largely retrospective, based on older treatment approaches without molecular subtype information. This study evaluated outcomes in breast cancer patients treated with modern NAC by molecular subtype and locoregional treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: There were 949 patients diagnosed between 2005 and 2016 treated with NAC followed by surgery ± locoregional radiotherapy (LRRT). Outcomes were 7-year locoregional relapse-free survival (LRRFS), breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Median follow-up was 6.5 years, 92% had cT2-4 and 72% cN1-3 disease. Subtypes were: 21% Luminal A, 18% Luminal B, 35% Her2+, and 21% triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Combined taxane and anthracycline-based NAC was used in 91.7% of cases. All patients with Her2+ disease received anti-Her2 therapy. After NAC, the majority (84.9%) underwent mastectomy, and received LRRT (86.1%). Only 11% had mastectomy without RT. Pathologic complete response (pCR) rates were 2.5% for Luminal A, 14.4% Luminal B, 27% TNBC, and 35.1% Her2+. Overall, adjuvant LRRT was associated with improved outcomes but was most significant for improved LRRFS in TNBC (92.5% vs. 68.5%, P < .001; Her2+ 95.4% vs. 93.6%, P = .81; Luminal A 97.4% vs. 100%, P = .49; Luminal B 89.7% vs. 100%, P = .17). On multivariable analysis, factors associated with reduced LRRFS were grade 3 histology (HR 4.96, P = .009) and no pCR (HR 7.0, P = .0008). Predictors of lower BCSS and OS were age >50, grade 3, cT3-4, lack of pCR, LRRT omission, and TNBC and Her2+ subtypes. CONCLUSION: In this analysis of patients treated with modern NAC, pCR rates varied by molecular subtype. Patients who did not receive LRRT, particularly those with TNBC, had lower survival compared to those treated with LRRT. These findings support the need for prospective studies to evaluate the safety of de-escalating RT after NAC.

Cervical cancer patient reported gastrointestinal outcomes: intensity/volumetric modulated vs. 3D conformal radiation therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate gastrointestinal (GI) patient reported outcomes (PROs) in cervical cancer patients treated with definitive radiotherapy (RT), comparing 3D conformal RT (3DCRT) vs. intensity modulated/volumetric modulated arc therapy (IMRT/VMAT). METHODS: An analysis of patients treated with definitive RT between 2015-2018 was performed. GI PROs were prospectively collected at baseline, during RT (acute), ≤12 weeks after RT (subacute), and >12 weeks after RT (late). GI PROs evaluated three symptom domains: bowel problems (BPs), bowel bother (BB), and abdominal problems (APs). Multiple linear regression analysis was performed to investigate associations between mean changes of symptom scores with clinical and dosimetric variables. RESULTS: The cohort included 167 patients. A total of 100 (60%) patients were treated with IMRT/VMAT and 67 (40%) with 3DCRT. In the subacute phase, the mean change of symptom scores from baseline in 3DCRT vs. IMRT/VMAT were +0.9 vs. -1.15 (p=0.004) for BP, +2.18 vs. -0.10 (p=0.019) for BB, and +1.41 vs. -0.38 (p=0.021) for AP. Likewise, in the late phase, mean changes were +0.72 vs. -0.82 (p=0.014) for BP, +1.98 vs. -0.03 (p=0.008) for BB, and +1.29 vs. -0.31 (p<0.001) for AP. On multiple linear regression, use of 3DCRT vs. IMRT/VMAT was associated with greater mean changes in subacute BP (p=0.023) and late phase AP (p=0.019). A higher small bowel V50Gy was associated increased symptom scores in late AP (p=0.012). CONCLUSION: 3DCRT was associated with significantly greater worsening of GI PRO symptom scores in the subacute and late phase. These data support the ongoing use of IMRT/VMAT in routine practice.

Willingness to Self-Collect a Sample for HPV-Based Cervical Cancer Screening in a Well-Screened Cohort: HPV FOCAL Survey Results.

Self-collection may provide an opportunity for innovation within population-based human papillomavirus (HPV) cervical cancer screening programs by providing an alternative form of engagement for all individuals. The primary objective was to determine willingness to self-collect a vaginal sample for primary HPV screening and factors that impact willingness in individuals who participated in the Human Papillomavirus For Cervical Cancer (HPV FOCAL) screening trial, a large randomized controlled cervical screening trial. A cross-sectional online survey was distributed between 2017 and 2018 to 13,176 eligible participants exiting the FOCAL trial. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression assessed factors that influence willingness to self-collect on 4945 respondents. Overall, 52.1% of respondents indicated willingness to self-collect an HPV sample. In multivariable analysis, the odds of willingness to self-collect were significantly higher in participants who agreed that screening with an HPV test instead of a Pap test was acceptable to them (odds ratio (OR): 1.45 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.15, 1.82), those who indicated that collecting their own HPV sample was acceptable to them (p < 0.001), and those with higher educational ascertainment (OR: 1.31, 95% CI: 1.12, 1.54). The findings offer insight into the intentions to self-collect in those already engaged in screening, and can inform cervical cancer screening programs interested in offering alternative approaches to HPV-based screening.

Human papillomavirus-based screening at extended intervals missed fewer cervical precancers than cytology in the HPV For Cervical Cancer (HPV FOCAL) trial.

While cervix screening using cytology is recommended at 2- to 3-year intervals, given the increased sensitivity of human papillomavirus (HPV)-based screening to detect precancer, HPV-based screening is recommended every 4- to 5-years. As organized cervix screening programs transition from cytology to HPV-based screening with extended intervals, there is some concern that cancers will be missed between screens. Participants in HPV FOr CervicAL Cancer (HPV FOCAL) trial received cytology (Cytology Arm) at 24-month intervals or HPV-based screening (HPV Arm) at 48-month intervals; both arms received co-testing (cytology and HPV testing) at exit. We investigated the results of the co-test to identify participants with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher (CIN2+) who would not have had their precancer detected if they had only their arm's respective primary screen. In the Cytology Arm, 25/62 (40.3%) identified CIN2+s were missed by primary screen (ie, normal cytology/positive HPV test) and all 25 had normal cytology at the prior 24-month screen. In the HPV arm, three CIN2+s (3/49, 6.1%) were missed by primary screen (ie, negative HPV test/abnormal cytology). One of these three misses had low-grade cytology findings and would also not have been referred to colposcopy outside of the trial. Multiple rounds of cytology did not detect some precancerous lesions detected with one round of HPV-based screening. In our population, cytology missed more CIN2+, even at shorter screening intervals, than HPV-based screening. This assuages concerns about missed detection postimplementation of an extended interval HPV-based screening program. We recommend that policymakers consider a shift from cytology to HPV-based cervix screening.

pN0(i+) and pN1mi Breast Cancer: Treatment and Outcomes in Comparison With pN0 and pN1a in the Modern Era.

PURPOSE: Locoregional recurrence risk and the role of locoregional radiation therapy (LRRT) in pN0(i+) and pN1mi breast cancer are unclear. This study compares locoregional relapse-free survival (LRRFS) in patients with pN0(i+) and pN1mi relative to pN0 and pN1a disease and evaluates LRRFS according to locoregional treatment. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We studied 10,271 patients referred between 2006 and 2011 with newly diagnosed pT1-T2, pN0, pN0(i+), pN1mi, or pN1a, M0 breast cancer. Outcomes were 10-year Kaplan-Meier LRRFS, relapse-free survival (RFS), distant relapse-free survival, and breast cancer-specific survival. Multivariable analysis of LRRFS and RFS was performed in pN0(i+) and pN1mi cohorts. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 9.3 years. In patients with pN0 (n = 7492), pN0(i+) (n = 305), pN1mi (n = 619), and pN1a (n = 1855) disease, LRRT was used in 1.1%, 24.3%, 45.7%, and 71.1%, respectively. Ten-year outcomes were LRRFS 96%, 92%, 97%, and 96% (P < .001), distant RFS 94%, 91%, 90%, and 84% (P < .001), and breast cancer-specific survival 95%, 90%, 93%, and 87% (P < .001), respectively. Ten-year LRRFS for patients treated with breast-conserving surgery alone, with breast RT, and with LRRT were 81%, 93%, and 91% for patients with pN0(i+) (P = .16) and 94%, 96%, and 100% for patients with pN1mi (P = .02), respectively. Among patients treated with mastectomy, 10-year LRRFS with surgery alone and with LRRT were 93% and 100% for patients with pN0(i+) (P = .12) and 95% and 99% for patients with pN1mi (P = .09). On multivariable analysis of patients with pN0(i+) and pN1mi, systemic therapy was associated with improved LRRFS in patients with pN0(i+) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.2; [0.06-0.6]; P = .005) and patients with pN1mi (HR, 0.1; [0.03-0.5]; P = .006). In patients with pN1mi, LRRT was associated with a trend toward increased LRRFS (HR, 0.2; [0.03-1.1]; P = .07). LRRT was not significantly associated with improved RFS in pN0(i+) or pN1mi disease. CONCLUSIONS: In the era of sentinel node staging and modern systemic therapy, patients with pN0(i+) and PN1mi treated with LRRT experienced 10-year LRR risks ≤10% after breast-conserving surgery or mastectomy and RT. LRRT was associated with a trend toward increased LRRFS in pN1mi but not pN0(i+) disease.

Breast Tangent Beam Energy, Surgical Bed-to-Skin Distance and Local Recurrence After Breast-Conserving Treatment.

PURPOSE: Higher energy (>6 MV) photons reduce dose inhomogeneity with breast tangent beams, thereby reducing late breast toxicity, but skin and superficial tissue sparing by higher energy beams raises concerns about local recurrence (LR) risk. This study aimed to determine whether beam energy and surgical bed-to-skin distance affect LR. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This population-based study included newly diagnosed invasive breast cancers without skin involvement (pT1-4a, any-N, M0) treated with breast-conserving surgery and adjuvant whole breast radiation therapy without bolus or beam spoilers. The primary endpoint was the cumulative incidence of LR (CILR). Multivariable analysis (MVA) included mean beam energy, age, T-stage, nodal status, overall stage, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), grade, margin status, extensive intraductal component (EIC), breast cancer subtype, hormone therapy, and chemotherapy. In a subgroup with contoured surgical beds, another MVA included surgical bed-to-skin distance. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 10,083 women treated from 2002 to 2011: 327 with 4 MV, 6006 with 6 MV, 2083 with >6 to 10 MV, and 1667 with >10 MV tangents. The median follow-up time was 11.1 years. The 10-year CILR was 3.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6-5.4) with 4 MV, 2.8% (2.4-3.3) with 6 MV, 4.2% (3.4-5.3) with >6 to 10 MV, and 2.6% (1.9-3.5) with >10 MV. On MVA of the entire cohort, LR risk was increased with positive margins, LVI, EIC, and lack of hormone therapy, but was not associated with beam energy (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% CI, 0.96-1.05; P = .8). On MVA of 3359 patients with contoured surgical beds, LR risk was not associated with surgical bed-to-skin distance (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.99-1.02; P = .8). CONCLUSIONS: Use of higher breast tangent beam energies is not associated with increased risk of LR, including in cases with surgical beds that are close to the skin.

Association Between Regional Nodal Irradiation and Breast Cancer Recurrence-Free Interval for Patients With Low-Risk, Node-Positive Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Randomized clinical trials have shown that regional nodal irradiation (RNI) in patients with unselected N1 breast cancer improves breast cancer-specific survival. However, the benefit of RNI in women with biologically low-risk N1 breast cancer is uncertain. We conducted a population-based study to determine whether RNI is associated with improved breast cancer recurrence-free interval (BCRFI) in this population. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients aged 40 to 79 years with pT1-2 pN1 (node-positive) breast cancer diagnosed between 2005 and 2014 were identified. The inclusion criteria were modeled off of the TAILOR RT study, which is a randomized noninferiority clinical trial designed to assess the value of RNI in patients with low-risk N1 disease. Eligible patients had breast-conserving surgery or mastectomy and axillary lymph node dissection with 1 to 3 positive nodes, breast-conserving surgery and sentinel lymph node biopsy with 1 to 2 positive nodes, or mastectomy and sentinel lymph node biopsy with 1 positive node. Additionally, patients had luminal A breast cancers, as approximated by estrogen receptor positive (Allred 6-8/8), progesterone receptor (PR) positive (Allred 6-8/8), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, and grade 1 to 2 immunohistochemical testing. All patients were prescribed hormonal treatment. The primary endpoint of BCRFI, the time to any breast cancer recurrence or breast cancer-related death, was analyzed using a multivariate competing risks analysis. RESULTS: The cohort included 1169 women with a median follow-up of 9.2 years. Radiation treatments were not performed in 151 women treated with mastectomy alone, were delivered to the breast only in 133 women, and were delivered locoregionally in 885 women. Patients undergoing RNI were younger (median age: 58 vs 62 years), more likely to have 2 to 3 macroscopic lymph nodes involved, and more often received chemotherapy (all P < .05). The 10-year estimate of BCRFI was 90% without RNI versus 90% with RNI (P = .5). On multivariable analysis, RNI was not a significant predictor of BCRFI (hazard ratio: 1.0; P = .9). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective analysis, RNI was not associated with improved BCRFI for women with biologically low-risk N1 breast cancer. We advocate accrual to the ongoing TAILOR RT study.

Impact of TAILORx on chemotherapy prescribing and 21-gene recurrence score-guided treatment costs in a population-based cohort of patients with breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The trial assigning individualized options for treatment (Rx) (TAILORx) confirmed the predictive value of the 21-gene recurrence score (RS) assay in hormone receptor (HR)-positive, HER2-negative, node-negative breast cancer and established thresholds for chemotherapy benefit in younger and older patients. Real-world chemotherapy use and RS-guided treatment costs in British Columbia post-TAILORx were examined. METHODS: The authors assembled 3 cohorts of HR-positive, HER2-negative, node-negative patients with breast cancer defined by diagnosis: before RS funding (cohort 1 [C1]: January 2013-December 2013), after introduction of public RS funding (cohort 2 [C2]: July 2015-June 2016), and after TAILORx results (cohort 3 [C3]: July 2018-June 2019). Chemotherapy use was compared between cohorts by age and RS. Budgetary impacts of RS testing on chemotherapy costs were evaluated pre- and post-TAILORx. RESULTS: Among the 2066 patients included, chemotherapy use declined by 19% after RS funding was introduced and by an additional 23% after TAILORx publication (P = .001). Reduction in chemotherapy use was significant for RS 11-20 tumors (C3 vs C2, P = .004). There was no significant change in chemotherapy use in patients >50 years old (C2:12% vs C3:10%, P = .22). RS testing was associated with higher cost savings post-TAILORx, except in patients 70 to 80 years old, where testing led to excess costs when adjusting for the low rate of RS-concordant chemotherapy prescribed. CONCLUSIONS: TAILORx has had population-based impacts on chemotherapy prescribing in intermediate RS tumors and patients ≤50 years old. The lower clinical use of RS and increased spending in patients 70-80 years old highlights the importance of careful selection of older candidates for high-cost genomic testing. LAY SUMMARY: The 21-gene recurrence score (RS) test helps predict whether patients with hormone-positive, HER2-negative, lymph node-negative breast cancer are likely to benefit from chemotherapy. The recent trial assigning individualized options for treatment (Rx) (TAILORx) found that patients with intermediate RS tumors did not benefit from chemotherapy. The authors assessed whether TAILORx results translated to real-world changes in chemotherapy prescribing patterns. In this study, chemotherapy use decreased by 23% after TAILORx, with the greatest reductions seen among intermediate RS tumors and younger patients. In contrast, RS testing had lower clinical value and increased treatment costs in elderly patients, which requires further study to ensure optimal care for this age group.

Current Attitudes toward Unfunded Cancer Therapies among Canadian Medical Oncologists.

BACKGROUND: Despite successes in the development of innovative anticancer therapies, the fiscal and capacity restraints of the Canadian public healthcare system result in challenges with drug access. A meaningful proportion of systemic therapies ultimately do not receive public funding despite supporting clinical evidence. In this study, we assessed Canadian medical oncologists' current attitudes toward discussing publicly unfunded cancer treatments with patients and predictors of different practices. METHODS: A web-based survey consisting of multiple choice and case-based scenarios was distributed to medical oncologists identified through the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada directory. RESULTS: A total of 116 responses were received. Almost all respondents reported discussing publicly unfunded treatments, including those who did so for Health Canada (HC) approved treatments (50%) and those who discussed off-label treatments (i.e., not HC approved) as guided by national guidelines (48%). Respondents in practice for over 15 years versus less than 5 years (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.04-0.50, p = 0.002) and those who worked in a community practice versus comprehensive cancer center (OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.03-0.91, p = 0.04) were significantly less likely to discuss off-label treatment options with their patients. Almost half of respondents (47%) indicated that their institution did not permit the administration of unfunded treatments. CONCLUSIONS: There is variability in medical oncologists' practices when it comes to discussing unfunded therapies. Given the limitations within Canada's publicly funded healthcare system, physicians are faced with the challenge of navigating an increasingly complex balance between patient care and available resources. Engagement of relevant stakeholders and policy makers is crucial in the continued evaluation of Canada's drug funding process.

Women's acceptability of and experience with primary human papillomavirus testing for cervix screening: HPV FOCAL trial cross-sectional online survey results.

OBJECTIVE: To study participant's acceptability of and attitudes towards human papillomavirus (HPV) testing compared with cytology for cervical cancer screening and what impact having an HPV positive result may have in future acceptability of screening. DESIGN: Cross-sectional online survey of clinical trial participants. SETTING: Primary care, population-based Cervix Screening Program, British Columbia, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 5532 participants from the HPV FOCAL trial, in which women received HPV and cytology testing at study exit, were included in the analysis. Median age was 54 years. The median time of survey completion was 3 years after trial exit. OUTCOME MEASURES: Acceptability of HPV testing for primary cervical cancer screening (primary); attitudes and patient perceptions towards HPV testing and receipt of HPV positive screen results (secondary). RESULTS: Most respondents (63%) were accepting of HPV testing, with the majority (69%) accepting screening to begin at age 30 years with HPV testing. Only half of participants (54%) were accepting of an extended screening interval of 4-5 years. In multivariable logistic regression, women who received an HPV positive screen test result during the trial (OR=1.41 95% CI 1.11 to 1.80) or were older (OR=1.01, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.02) were more likely to report HPV testing as acceptable. CONCLUSIONS: In this evaluation of acceptability and attitudes regarding HPV testing for cervix screening, most are accepting of HPV testing for screening; however, findings indicate heterogeneity in concerns and experiences surrounding HPV testing and receipt of HPV positive results. These findings provide insights for the development of education, information and communication strategies during implementation of HPV-based cervical cancer screening. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: ISRCTN79347302 and NCT00461760.

Higher adenoma detection, sessile serrated lesion detection and proximal sessile serrated lesion detection are associated with physician specialty and performance on Direct Observation of Procedural Skills.

OBJECTIVE: Adenoma detection rate (ADR) and sessile serrated lesion detection rate (SSLDR) vary among physicians. We sought to determine physician characteristics associated with ADR and SSLDR in a population-based colon screening programme. DESIGN: Retrospective study of 50-74 year olds with positive faecal immunochemical test and colonoscopy from 15/11/2013 to 31/12/2018. Physician characteristics included: gender, specialty, year and country of medical school graduation, colonoscopy volume and Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS) performance. Multivariable regression was performed on the following dependent variables: ADR, advanced ADR, proximal and distal ADR, SSLDR, proximal and distal SSLDR. RESULTS: 104 326 colonoscopies were performed by 261 physicians. A higher ADR was associated with gastroenterology (OR for general surgery 0.87, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.95; OR for general/family/internal medicine 0.70, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.88), fewer years since graduation (OR for graduation >2000 10.48, 95% CI 1.30 to 1.69 compared with <1980) and DOPS performance (OR for lowest DOPS performance 0.64, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.82 compared with highest DOPS performance). SSLDR was associated with gastroenterology (OR for general surgery 0.89, 95%, CI 0.81 to 0.97; OR for general/family/internal medicine 0.67, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.92) and DOPS performance (OR for lowest DOPS performance 0.71, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.99 compared with highest DOPS performance). Proximal SSLDR was associated with gastroenterology (OR for general surgery 0.90, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.99; OR for general/family/internal medicine 0.69, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.97) and DOPS performance (OR for lowest DOPS performance 0.68, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.99). CONCLUSION: Higher ADR, SSLDR and proximal SSLDR was associated with gastroenterology specialty and improved performance on DOPS.

Long-term cervical precancer outcomes after a negative DNA- or RNA-based human papillomavirus test result.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer, a preventable disease associated with the human papillomavirus, is responsible for significant morbidity and mortality globally. Primary human papillomavirus testing is more sensitive in detecting precancerous cervical lesions than cytologic screening and can be conducted using either DNA- or RNA-based assays. Screening programs must select the most appropriate assay from several available assays for their population. It is not yet known whether these assays perform equivalently in the long term, particularly among women with a negative human papillomavirus test result. This study aims to compare long-term safety after a negative human papillomavirus test result across both DNA- and RNA-based testing assays. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare long-term high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (grade 2 or higher and grade 3 or higher) outcomes of 2 DNA-based assays (Digene Hybrid Capture 2 High-Risk HPV DNA Test and cobas 4800 HPV Test) and 1 messenger RNA-based assay (Aptima HPV Assay) using data from the Human Papillomavirus For Cervical Cancer Trial-DECADEl (FOCAL-DECADE) cohort, by first comparing the positive and negative rates between the assays and then investigating the cumulative incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 and higher and grade 3 or higher detection among participants in the FOCAL DECADE cohort over follow-up according to human papillomavirus testing assays. STUDY DESIGN: The FOCAL Trial was a randomized controlled trial that evaluated human papillomavirus testing for primary cervical cancer screening. The FOCAL-DECADE cohort subsequently followed FOCAL Trial participants passively through the British Columbia Cervix Screening Program Database for approximately 10 years after the FOCAL Trial study exit to examine the rates of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher and grade 3 or higher. For this study, eligible participants had baseline human papillomavirus-negative results from at least 1 assay and had 1 or more cytologic screens after baseline (9509 participants for DNA-based and 3473 participants for DNA- vs RNA-based assay comparisons). We constructed cumulative incidence curves and compared the hazard ratios for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher and grade 3 or higher detection according to the assays. RESULTS: Over 10 years of follow-up, the cumulative incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher and grade 3 or higher did not significantly differ between the DNA-based assays (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.06; P=.35 and hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.66-1.01; P=.06 for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or higher, respectively) or between the DNA- and RNA-based assays (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.87-1.06; P=.48 and hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.79-1.13; P=.52 for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or higher, respectively). CONCLUSION: Among participants who tested negative for human papillomavirus at baseline, the long-term risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher and grade 3 or higher did not significantly differ regardless of whether DNA- or RNA-based human papillomavirus testing assays were used. Screening program decision makers can be confident that for women who test negative for human papillomavirus, DNA- and RNA-based assays exhibit similar cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher outcomes over several years.

Impact of surveillance among patients with resected pancreatic cancer following adjuvant chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic adenocarcinoma carries a high risk of recurrence even after surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. Current guidelines do not endorse routine surveillance imaging due to lack of evidence supporting a survival benefit. With current first-line palliative chemotherapy options, it is unclear whether surveillance allows for early detection of asymptomatic disease and therefore an improved opportunity to offer chemotherapy to fit patients. We sought to describe patterns of surveillance of resected pancreatic cancer at British Columbia (BC) Cancer and determine whether utilization of computerized tomography (CT) scans affected likelihood of receiving palliative chemotherapy at the time of recurrence. METHODS: A retrospective review was completed to identify patients treated at BC Cancer centres between 2010-2016 who had undergone curative intent resection and received at least one cycle of adjuvant chemotherapy. Information was collected on baseline characteristics, imaging scans done between adjuvant chemotherapy and recurrence, and receipt of palliative chemotherapy. Two cohorts were defined based on number of scans done between completion of adjuvant chemotherapy and recurrence: those with only 1 scan were defined as "symptomatic" recurrences and patients who had undergone more than 1 scan were considered "surveillance" recurrences. RESULTS: In total, 142 patients were included of which 115 (81%) patients developed recurrence. There were 22 patients (19%) in the "symptomatic" cohort and 93 patients (81%) in the "surveillance" cohort. Median time to recurrence 274 days (9.1 months) in the symptomatic cohort compared to 471 days (15.7 months) in the surveillance group. Patients who underwent surveillance scans were more likely to receive palliative chemotherapy at the time of recurrence, though statistical significance was not reached: 51% in surveillance group versus 27% in symptomatic group [odds ratio (OR) 2.11, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.75-6.58, P=0.17]. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the absence of surveillance recommendations, the majority of patients underwent surveillance imaging. We demonstrated a non-significant increase in the likelihood of receiving palliative chemotherapy among patients who underwent surveillance scans. With more efficacious palliative chemotherapy options available, studies to determine whether receipt of chemotherapy in asymptomatic recurrences translates into improved survival and/or quality of life are warranted.

Sentinel Node Biopsy Should Not be Routine in Older Patients with ER-Positive HER2-Negative Breast Cancer Who Are Willing and Able to Take Hormone Therapy.

BACKGROUND: The SSO Choosing Wisely campaign recommended selective sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in clinically node-negative women aged ≥ 70 years with ER+ breast cancer. We sought to assess the association of SLNB positivity, adjuvant treatment, and survival in a population-based cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women aged ≥ 70 years treated for ER+ HER2- breast cancer between 2010 and 2016 were identified in our prospective provincial database. Overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the association of SLNB positivity with use of adjuvant treatments and survival outcomes. RESULTS: We identified 2662 patients who met study criteria. SLNB was positive in 25%. Increased use of chemotherapy (ChT), hormone therapy (HT), and radiotherapy (RT) was significantly associated with SLNB positivity. Five-year OS was 86%, and BCSS was 96% with median follow-up of 4.3 years. BCSS was worse with grade 3 disease (HR 4.1, 95% CI 2.1-8.1, p < 0.0001) and better with HT (HR 0.5 95% CI 0.3-0.9, p = 0.01). Patients with a positive SLNB treated without adjuvant therapy had lower BCSS (HR 3.2 95% CI 1.2-8.4, p = 0.017) than those with a negative SLNB, but patients with a positive SLNB treated with any combination of ChT, HT, and/or RT, had similar BCSS to those with a negative SLNB. CONCLUSIONS: BCSS in this population was excellent at 96%, and BCSS was similar with negative and positive SLNB when patients received HT. SLNB can be omitted in elderly patients willing to take HT.

The Effect of Bolus on Local Control for Patients Treated With Mastectomy and Radiation Therapy.

PURPOSE: Bolus use during postmastectomy radiation therapy doubles the risk of grade 2 and 3 skin toxicity. Despite its unknown benefit, bolus is often prescribed during postmastectomy radiation therapy for patients without skin involvement. METHODS AND MATERIALS: For women with breast cancer receiving photon 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy, bolus was used routinely for chest walls but was omitted for breast reconstructions by about half of radiation oncologists from 2007 to 2011. Eligible patients had newly diagnosed invasive breast cancers without skin involvement (pT1-4a, any-N, M0) treated with adjuvant or neoadjuvant radiation therapy. For the bolus and no-bolus groups, we compared the cumulative incidence of local recurrence (LR) and locoregional recurrence (LRR) with distant recurrence and death as competing risks and breast cancer mortality (BCM). Multivariable analysis of LR and BCM included stage, subtype, lymphovascular invasion, grade, margin status, beam energy, bolus use, hormone therapy, chemotherapy, and reconstruction. RESULTS: Systemic therapy was used for 98% of the 1887 patients. The bolus group had 1569 patients and the no-bolus group had 318 patients. Bolus was used in 51% (281/550) of patients treated with reconstruction and 96% (1288/1337) of patients treated without reconstruction. The 10-year outcomes (95% confidence interval) in patients treated with and without bolus were, respectively: LR 1.9% (1.3-2.7) versus 0.9% (0.3-2.6), LRR 3.1% (2.3-4.0) versus 3.2% (1.6-5.5), and BCM 19.4% (17.3-21.6) versus 18.3% (13.9-23.2). On multivariable analysis, bolus use was not associated with better LR (hazard ratio = 1.4 [0.3-6.4]) or BCM (hazard ratio = 0.8 [0.5-1.2]). CONCLUSIONS: For patients treated with mastectomy, radiation therapy, and modern systemic therapy, the cumulative incidence of LR was low, with or without bolus. Because bolus use increases toxicity and does not reduce LR or BCM, it should no longer be used routinely for patients without skin involvement who receive systemic therapy.