Intraoperative Radiation Therapy: A Large Integrated Health Care System's Approach and Outcomes.

Introduction Intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) may not be as effective in the community compared with clinical trials. Methods The authors reviewed data from the electronic health records of patients who received IORT between February 2014 and February 2020 at a single center within a large integrated health care system. The primary outcome was ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence. Results Of 5731 potentially eligible patients, 245 (4.3%) underwent IORT (mean age: 65.4 ± 0.4 years; median follow-up time: 3.5 years ± 2.2 months). According to the American Society for Radiation Oncology's accelerated partial breast irradiation guidelines based on final pathology, 51% of patients were suitable candidates for IORT, 38.4% were cautionary, and 10.6% were unsuitable. For adjuvant therapy, 6.5% had consolidative whole breast irradiation, and 66.4% received endocrine treatment. At the median follow-up time of 3.5 years, overall ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence was 3.7%. Recurrences tended to be more frequent in patients who refused or did not complete endocrine treatment than in those who received it (7.4% vs 1.9%, p = 0.07). The complication rate was 14.7%, with seroma being the most common (8.2%). Discussion The IORT ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence rate of 3.7% confirms a higher-than-expected rate compared to randomized clinical trials, possibly due to less compliance with endocrine therapy. Conclusion The authors subsequently revised their IORT protocol to require endocrine treatment as a part of the IORT treatment plan and to strongly recommend adjuvant whole breast irradiation for all patients deemed cautionary or unsuitable for IORT according to the American Society for Radiation Oncology's accelerated partial breast irradiation guidelines.

Telehealth for Preoperative Evaluation of Patients With Breast Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic drove rapid, widespread adoption of telehealth (TH). We evaluated surgical telehealth utilization and outcomes for newly diagnosed breast cancer patients during the initial pandemic period. Methods We identified patients with breast cancer diagnosed March 17, 2020 through May 17, 2020 who underwent surgery as the initial treatment. Clinicodemographic characteristics were collected. Initial consultation types (office, telephone, or video) were categorized. Outcomes included time to consultation, surgeon touchpoints, time to surgery, surgery types, and reexcision rates. Continuous variables were compared using Mann-Whitney tests or t-tests, and categorical variables were compared using χ2 or Fisher's exact tests. Results Of 158 patients, 56% had initial telehealth consultations (21% telephone, 35% video) and 42% did not have a preoperative physical examination. Age, race/ethnicity, and stage distributions were similar between initial visit types. Median time to consultation was lower in the initial telehealth group than the office group (6 days vs 9 days, p = 0.01). Other outcomes (surgeon touchpoints, time to surgery, surgery type, reconstruction) were similar between visit types. We observed higher reexcision rates in patients with initial telehealth visits (20% telehealth vs 4% office, p = 0.01), but evaluation was limited by small numbers. The reexcision rate was 13% for patients with telehealth visits and no preoperative physical exam. Discussion During the initial pandemic period, the majority of new breast cancer patients had an initial telehealth surgical consultation. Office and telehealth consultation visits had comparable numbers of postconsultation surgeon touchpoints and most outcomes. Our findings suggest that telehealth consultations may be feasible for preoperative breast cancer consultations.

Care in the time of COVID-19: impact on the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer in a large, integrated health care system.

PURPOSES: To delineate operational changes in Kaiser Permanente Northern California breast care and evaluate the impact of these changes during the initial COVID-19 Shelter-in-Place period (SiP, 3/17/20-5/17/20). METHODS: By extracting data from institutional databases and reviewing electronic medical charts, we compared clinical and treatment characteristics of breast cancer patients diagnosed 3/17/20-5/17/20 to those diagnosed 3/17/19-5/17/2019. Outcomes included time from biopsy to consultation and treatment. Comparisons were made using Chi-square or Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. RESULTS: Fewer new breast cancers were diagnosed in 2020 during the SiP period than during a similar period in 2019 (n = 247 vs n = 703). A higher percentage presented with symptomatic disease in 2020 than 2019 (78% vs 37%, p < 0.001). Higher percentages of 2020 patients presented with grade 3 (37% vs 25%, p = 0.004) and triple-negative tumors (16% vs 10%, p = 0.04). A smaller percentage underwent surgery first in 2020 (71% vs 83%, p < 0.001) and a larger percentage had neoadjuvant chemotherapy (16% vs 11%, p < 0.001). Telehealth utilization increased from 0.8% in 2019 to 70.0% in 2020. Times to surgery and neoadjuvant chemotherapy were shorter in 2020 than 2019 (19 vs 26 days, p < 0.001, and 23 vs 28 days, p = 0.03, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: During SiP, fewer breast cancers were diagnosed than during a similar period in 2019, and a higher proportion presented with symptomatic disease. Early-stage breast cancer diagnoses decreased, while metastatic cancer diagnoses remained similar. Telehealth increased significantly, and times to treatment were shorter in 2020 than 2019. Our system continued to provide timely breast cancer treatment despite significant pandemic-driven disruption.

Ixabepilone-associated peripheral neuropathy: data from across the phase II and III clinical trials.

PURPOSE: Dose-limiting neuropathy is a major adverse event associated with most of the microtubule-stabilizing agent-based chemotherapy regimens. Ixabepilone, a semisynthetic analogue of the natural epothilone B, has activity against a wide range of tumor types. Peripheral neuropathy (PN), associated with ixabepilone treatment, is usually mild to moderate, predominantly sensory and cumulative. Preclinical studies demonstrate that ixabepilone and taxanes produce a similar neurotoxicity profile. METHODS: We searched databases of phase II/III clinical trials involving patients receiving ixabepilone as a monotherapy or in combination with capecitabine for incidences of neuropathy. Potential risk factors for grade 3/4 PN were identified by a Cox regression analysis on a dataset of 1,540 patients with different tumor types across multiple studies. RESULTS: Rates for incidence of ixabepilone-induced severe PN (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 3/4) ranged from 1% in early untreated breast cancer up to 24% in heavily pretreated metastatic breast cancer; grade 4 PN was rare (≤ 1%). Common symptoms included numbness, paresthesias, and sometimes dysesthesias. Cox regression analysis identified only preexisting neuropathy as a risk factor for increased ixabepilone-associated PN. The management of PN has been primarily through dose adjustments (dose delays and/or dose reduction). Patients had resolution of their neuropathy within a median time of 5 to 6 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: PN is a dose-limiting toxicity associated with ixabepilone treatment, is reversible in most patients, and can be managed with dose reduction and delays.

Phase III trial evaluating weekly paclitaxel versus docetaxel in combination with capecitabine in operable breast cancer.

PURPOSE: We investigated whether capecitabine and docetaxel followed by fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC) or weekly paclitaxel (WP) followed by FEC would improve relapse-free survival (RFS) in operable breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this single-institution study, patients with clinical stages I to IIIC breast cancer were randomly assigned on a 1:1 basis to WP 80 mg/m(2) for 12 weeks followed by fluorouracil 500 mg/m(2), epirubicin 100 mg/m(2), and cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m(2) (FEC-100) every 3 weeks for four cycles or docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) on day 1 and capecitabine (XT) 1,500 mg/m(2) on days 1 through 14 every 3 weeks for four cycles followed by FEC for four cycles and stratified by timing of chemotherapy (preoperative v adjuvant). Accrual was stopped short of 930 patients on the basis of a Bayesian predictive calculation that additional accrual would be unlikely to change the qualitative comparison of the two regimens. RESULTS: After enrollment of 601 patients and a median follow-up of 50 months, we observed no improvement in RFS between XT (87.5%; 95% CI, 82.7% to 91.1%) and WP (90.7%; 95% CI, 86.4% to 93.7%; P = .51). In the preoperative group, the pathologic complete response rate was 19.8% and 16.4% in the XT and WP arms, respectively (P = .45). Rates of breast-conserving surgery were similar between the two groups (P = .48). The XT arm had a significantly higher incidence of stomatitis (P < .001), hand-foot syndrome (P < .001), and neutropenic infection (P < .001). CONCLUSION: There was no difference in efficacy between WP and XT as used in this randomized phase III trial. XT was associated with higher GI, skin, and neutropenic-related toxicities.

Activity of ixabepilone in oestrogen receptor-negative and oestrogen receptor-progesterone receptor-human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer.

Oestrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast cancer, including oestrogen receptor-, progesterone receptor- and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (ER/PR/HER2-negative) breast cancer, is more aggressive than ER-positive disease. A major limitation in the treatment of ER-negative disease subtypes is the inherent insensitivity to hormonal agents (tamoxifen, aromatase inhibitors) that are widely used in the treatment of breast cancer. Thus, therapeutic options for poor prognosis patients with ER-negative breast cancer are limited to a handful of chemotherapeutic agents, and new agents are needed to improve the treatment of this disease. Ixabepilone, a novel epothilone B analogue with low susceptibility to cellular mechanisms that confer resistance to taxanes and other chemotherapeutic agents, has demonstrated potent preclinical antitumour activity in multiple models, including those with primary or acquired drug resistance. This review summarises the results of a prospective subset analysis from a phase III clinical trial evaluating ixabepilone for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC), in which efficacy and safety were evaluated in patients with ER-negative and ER/PR/HER2-negative disease.

Ixabepilone plus capecitabine for metastatic breast cancer progressing after anthracycline and taxane treatment.

PURPOSE: Effective treatment options for patients with metastatic breast cancer resistant to anthracyclines and taxanes are limited. Ixabepilone has single-agent activity in these patients and has demonstrated synergy with capecitabine in this setting. This study was designed to compare ixabepilone plus capecitabine versus capecitabine alone in anthracycline-pretreated or -resistant and taxane-resistant locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seven hundred fifty-two patients were randomly assigned to ixabepilone 40 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1 of a 21-day cycle plus capecitabine 2,000 mg/m(2) orally on days 1 through 14 of a 21-day cycle, or capecitabine alone 2,500 mg/m(2) on the same schedule, in this international phase III study. The primary end point was progression-free survival evaluated by blinded independent review. RESULTS: Ixabepilone plus capecitabine prolonged progression-free survival relative to capecitabine (median, 5.8 v 4.2 months), with a 25% reduction in the estimated risk of disease progression (hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.88; P = .0003). Objective response rate was also increased (35% v 14%; P < .0001). Grade 3/4 treatment-related sensory neuropathy (21% v 0%), fatigue (9% v 3%), and neutropenia (68% v 11%) were more frequent with combination therapy, as was the rate of death as a result of toxicity (3% v 1%, with patients with liver dysfunction [>/= grade 2 liver function tests] at greater risk). Capecitabine-related toxicities were similar for both treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Ixabepilone plus capecitabine demonstrates superior efficacy to capecitabine alone in patients with metastatic breast cancer pretreated or resistant to anthracyclines and resistant to taxanes.

Significantly higher pathologic complete remission rate after neoadjuvant therapy with trastuzumab, paclitaxel, and epirubicin chemotherapy: results of a randomized trial in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive operable breast cancer.

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to determine whether the addition of trastuzumab to chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting could increase pathologic complete response (pCR) rate in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -positive disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-two patients with HER2-positive disease with operable breast cancer were randomly assigned to either four cycles of paclitaxel followed by four cycles of fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide or to the same chemotherapy with simultaneous weekly trastuzumab for 24 weeks. The primary objective was to demonstrate a 20% improvement in pCR (assumed 21% to 41%) with the addition of trastuzumab to chemotherapy. The planned sample size was 164 patients. RESULTS: Prognostic factors were similar in the two groups. After 34 patients had completed therapy, the trial's Data Monitoring Committee stopped the trial because of superiority of trastuzumab plus chemotherapy. pCR rates were 25% and 66.7% for chemotherapy (n = 16) and trastuzumab plus chemotherapy (n = 18), respectively (P = .02). The decision was based on the calculation that, if study continued to 164 patients, there was a 95% probability that trastuzumab plus chemotherapy would be superior. Of the 42 randomized patients, 26% in the chemotherapy arm achieved pCR compared with 65.2% in the trastuzumab plus chemotherapy arm (P = .016). The safety of this approach is not established, although no clinical congestive heart failure was observed. A more than 10% decrease in the cardiac ejection fraction was observed in five and seven patients in the chemotherapy and trastuzumab plus chemotherapy arms, respectively. CONCLUSION: Despite the small sample size, these data indicate that adding trastuzumab to chemotherapy, as used in this trial, significantly increased pCR without clinical congestive heart failure.

Clinically relevant pneumonitis after sequential paclitaxel-based chemotherapy and radiotherapy in breast cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Taxane-based chemotherapy has been associated with an increased risk of radiation pneumonitis in patients with breast cancer. To obtain additional information about this association, we investigated the association between paclitaxel chemotherapy and radiation pneumonitis in patients participating in a phase III randomized study. METHODS: Five hundred and twenty-four breast cancer patients were prospectively and randomly assigned to receive either four cycles of paclitaxel followed by four cycles of 5-fluorouracil, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide (FAC) or eight cycles of FAC. One hundred and eighty-nine of these patients (100 in the paclitaxel-FAC group and 89 in the FAC group) subsequently underwent radiation therapy in our institution and had medical records available to review for pulmonary symptoms. In addition, a radiologist who was unaware of the type of treatment scored chest x-ray changes after radiation treatment. Crude rates of radiation pneumonitis were compared with chi-square or Fisher's exact test, and actuarial rates were assessed with Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: No difference in the rate of clinically relevant radiation pneumonitis was observed between the two groups (5.0% in the paclitaxel-FAC group versus 4.5% in the FAC group; difference = 0.5%, 95% CI = -6.6% to 5.5%; P = 1.00). Oral steroids for pneumonitis were taken by two patients in the paclitaxel-FAC group but by none in the FAC group, and no patient was hospitalized for or died of radiation pneumonitis. The paclitaxel-FAC group (39.3%) had a higher rate of radiographic changes after irradiation than the FAC group (23.7%; difference = 15.6%, 95% CI = -0.11% to 28.8%; P = .034). CONCLUSION: Patients with breast cancer treated with sequential paclitaxel, FAC, and radiation therapy appeared to have a very low rate of clinically relevant radiation pneumonitis that was no different from that of patients treated with FAC alone.

Physician recommendations regarding tamoxifen and patient utilization of tamoxifen after surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ.

BACKGROUND: To date, the impact of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-24 trial reported in 1999 on the use of tamoxifen after surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is unknown. The current study was designed to evaluate the impact of NSABP B-24 on current practices at a comprehensive cancer center. METHODS: The records of 350 consecutive patients with DCIS who were treated at the authors' institution between July 1999 and June 2002 were obtained from a prospective database and analyzed. Whether patients were offered tamoxifen, whether patients accepted tamoxifen, and the associated reasons were recorded along with tamoxifen-related side effects and patient compliance with therapy. Clinical and pathologic factors were evaluated for their impact on recommendations regarding tamoxifen. Differences were assessed by chi-square analysis. RESULTS: Of the 350 patients, 73 were excluded because of evidence of invasive carcinoma on final pathology review. Of the remaining 277 patients, 166 patients (60%) were offered tamoxifen, and 90 patients (54%) chose to take tamoxifen. Of 111 patients who were not offered tamoxifen, 39 patients (35%) had documented explanations, which included bilateral mastectomy (n = 25 patients), medical reasons (n = 10 patients), and already received tamoxifen for other reasons at the time of diagnosis (n = 4 patients). Of 94 patients who received tamoxifen, 20 patients (21%) discontinued use because of side effects or complications. Tamoxifen was more likely to be recommended for women who underwent segmental resection compared with women who underwent total mastectomy (P = 0.002) and for women with smaller pathologic DCIS tumors (P = 0.001). In addition, these two factors were interrelated. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians and patients remain cautious regarding the use of tamoxifen after local treatment for DCIS. The current findings have implications for current trials evaluating aromatase inhibitors and other chemopreventive agents for this disease.

Total RNA yield and microarray gene expression profiles from fine-needle aspiration biopsy and core-needle biopsy samples of breast carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Gene expression profiling should be applicable to needle biopsy samples if microarray technology is to become practically useful for clinical research or management of breast carcinoma. This study compared gene expression profiles derived from fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) and from core needle biopsy (CBX). METHODS: Total RNA was extracted from single FNAB and CBX samples. Corresponding pairs of FNAB and CBX were analyzed for similarity of gene expression profiles using cDNA microarrays that contain 30721 human sequences. A subset of genes that distinguished CBX samples from FNAB samples was evaluated in a larger group of needle biopsy samples and in a published genomic database derived from 78 sporadic breast carcinomas with known clinical outcome. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients with newly diagnosed breast carcinoma were included in the current study. Sixty-five patients underwent FNAB (17 had both FNAB and CBX) and 3 underwent CBX only. Extracted RNA was of suitable quality for hybridization in 46 (71%) FNABs and 15 (75%) CBXs. Total RNA yield in those samples was similar for single-pass FNAB (mean = 3.6 microg and median = 2.2 microg; n = 46) and CBX (mean = 2.8 microg and median = 2.0 microg; n = 15), with 1 microg or more of total RNA in all cases. Transcriptional profiling was performed successfully in all cases when it was attempted, in a total of 50 samples (38 FNABs and 12 CBXs), including matched FNAB and CBX samples from 10 patients. There were differences in gene expression profiles in 10 matched FNAB and CBX sample pairs. Genes that were expressed differently in CBX samples, compared with FNAB samples, were recognized as being predominantly from the endothelium, fibroblasts, myofibroblasts or smooth muscle, and histiocytes. Corresponding microscopic cell counts from FNABs demonstrated means of 80% tumor cells, 15% lymphocytes, and 5% stromal cells, whereas CBXs contained 50% tumor cells, 20% lymphocytes, and 30% stromal cells. Considering that CBXs are approximately six-fold richer in nonlymphoid stromal cells than FNABs and that CBXs differentially express a set of recognized stromal genes, the authors used these biopsies to define a transcriptional profile of breast carcinoma stroma. A set of 120 genes differentially expressed in CBXs was assessed independently in a published breast carcinoma genomic database to classify breast carcinomas based on stromal gene expression. Subgroups of tumors with low or high stromal signal were identified, but there was no correlation with the development of systemic metastases within 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: Both FNAB and CBX yield a similar quality and quantity of total RNA and are suitable for cDNA microarray analyses in approximately 70-75% of single-pass samples. Transcriptional profiles from FNAB and CBX of the same tumor generally are similar and are driven by the tumor cell population. The authors concluded that each technique has relative advantages. The FNABs provide transcriptional profiles that are a purer representation of the tumor cell population, whereas transcriptional profiles from CBXs include more representation from nonlymphoid stromal elements. Selection of the preferred needle biopsy sampling technique for genomic studies of breast carcinomas should depend on whether variable stromal gene expression is desirable in the samples.