Efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in male breast cancer compared with female breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is standard for many females with breast cancer (FBC). The efficacy of NAC in male breast cancer (MaBC) is unclear. The aim of this study was to compare proportions of pathologic complete response (pCR) between MaBC and FBC by tumor subtype (TS). METHODS: MaBC and FBC treated with NAC between 2010 and 2016, with known TS, were evaluated from the National Cancer Database. Proportions of pCR (ypT0/Tis ypN0) were compared between sexes within TS by Fisher test. Multivariable logistic regression assessed the independent association of sex with pCR. Overall survival (OS) was estimated by Kaplan-Meier. RESULTS: A total of 385 MaBC and 68,065 FBC were included. Median time from initiation of NAC to surgery was 143 days in MaBC and 148 days in FBC. Proportions of pCR in MaBC and FBC by TS were: hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-): 4.9% vs 9.7%, p = .01; HR+/HER2+: 16.1% vs 33.6%, p < .001; HR-/HER2+: 44.0% vs 53.2%, p = .42; and HR-/HER2-: 21.4% vs 32.1%, p = .18, respectively. FBC had twice the odds of pCR than MaBC (adjusted odds ratio, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.5-2.8; p < .001). Five-year OS for MaBC with pCR vs not was 90% vs 64.7%; p = .02. Five-year OS for FBC with pCR vs not was 91.9% vs 75.3%; p < .01. CONCLUSIONS: Proportions and odds of pCR to NAC were numerically lower in MaBC compared with FBC for each TS and statistically significant for HR+/HER2- and HR+/HER2+. The independent association of sex with pCR was confirmed in multivariable analysis. pCR is prognostic in both MaBC and FBC.

Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing in Breast Cancer Care Delivery.

BACKGROUND: Accurate measurement of healthcare costs is required to assess and improve the value of oncology care. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine the cost of breast cancer care provision across collaborating health care organizations. METHODS: We used time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) to calculate the complete cost of breast cancer care-initial treatment planning, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, surgical resection and reconstruction, and ancillary services (e.g., psychosocial oncology, physical therapy)-across multiple hospital sites. Data were collected between December 2019 and February 2020. TDABC steps involved (1) developing process maps for care delivery pathways; (2) determine capacity cost rates for staff, medical equipment, and hospital space; (3) measure the time required for each process step, both manually through clinic observation and using data from the Real-Time Location System (RTLS); and (4) calculate the total cost of care delivery. RESULTS: Surgical care costs ranged from $1431 for a lumpectomy to $12,129 for a mastectomy with prepectoral implant reconstruction. Radiation therapy was costed at $1224 for initial simulation and patient education, and $200 for each additional treatment. Base costs for chemotherapy delivery were $382 per visit, with additional costs driven by chemotherapy agent(s) administered. Personnel expenses were the greatest contributor to the cost of surgical care, except in mastectomy with implant reconstruction, where device costs equated to up to 60% of the cost of surgery. CONCLUSION: The cost of complete breast cancer care depended on (1) treatment protocols; (2) patient choice of reconstruction; and (3) the need for ancillary services (e.g., physical therapy). Understanding the actual costs and cost drivers of breast cancer care delivery may better inform resource utilization to lower the cost and improve the quality of care.

Patterns of Medical Care Cost by Service Type for Patients With Recurrent and De Novo Advanced Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: There is limited knowledge about the cost patterns of patients who receive a diagnosis of de novo and recurrent advanced cancers in the United States. METHODS: Data on patients who received a diagnosis of de novo stage IV or recurrent breast, colorectal, or lung cancer between 2000 and 2012 from 3 integrated health systems were used to estimate average annual costs for total, ambulatory, inpatient, medication, and other services during (1) 12 months preceding de novo or recurrent diagnosis (preindex) and (2) diagnosis month through 11 months after (postindex), from the payer perspective. Generalized linear regression models estimated costs adjusting for patient and clinical factors. RESULTS: Patients who developed a recurrence <1 year after their initial cancer diagnosis had significantly higher total costs in the preindex period than those with recurrence ≥1 year after initial diagnosis and those with de novo stage IV disease across all cancers (all P < .05). Patients with de novo stage IV breast and colorectal cancer had significantly higher total costs in the postindex period than patients with cancer recurrent in <1 year and ≥1 year (all P < .05), respectively. Patients in de novo stage IV and those with recurrence in ≥1 year experienced significantly higher postindex costs than the preindex period (all P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings reveal distinct cost patterns between patients with de novo stage IV, recurrent <1-year, and recurrent ≥1-year cancer, suggesting unique care trajectories that may influence resource use and planning. Future cost studies among patients with advanced cancer should account for de novo versus recurrent diagnoses and timing of recurrence to obtain estimates that accurately reflect these care pattern complexities.

Prospective Study Testing a Simplified Paclitaxel Premedication Regimen in Patients with Early Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: In early trials, hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to paclitaxel were common, thus prompting the administration of antihistamines and corticosteroids before every paclitaxel dose. We tested the safety of omitting corticosteroids after cycle 2 during the paclitaxel portion of the dose-dense (DD) doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide (AC)-paclitaxel regimen. PATIENTS, MATERIALS, AND METHODS: In this prospective, single-arm study, patients who completed four cycles of DD-AC for stage I-III breast cancer received paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 every 2 weeks for four cycles. Patients received a standard premedication protocol containing dexamethasone, diphenhydramine, and a histamine H2 blocker prior to the first two paclitaxel cycles. Dexamethasone was omitted in cycles three and four if there were no HSRs in previous cycles. We estimated the rate of grade 3-4 HSRs. RESULTS: Among 127 patients enrolled, 125 received more than one dose of protocol therapy and are included in the analysis. Fourteen (11.2%; 90% confidence interval, 6.9%-20.0%) patients had any-grade HSRs, for a total of 22 (4.5%; 3.1%-6.4%) HSRs over 486 paclitaxel cycles. Any-grade HSRs occurred in 1.6% (0.3%-5.0%), 6.5% (3.3%-11.3%), 7.4% (3.9%-12.5%), and 2.6% (0.7%-6.6%) of patients after paclitaxel cycles 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. Dexamethasone use was decreased by 92.8% in cycles 3 and 4. Only one patient experienced grade 3 HSR in cycles 3 or 4, for a rate of grade 3/4 HSR 0.4% (0.02%-2.0%) (1/237 paclitaxel infusions). That patient had grade 2 HSR during cycle 2, and the subsequent grade 3 event occurred despite usual dexamethasone premedication. A sensitivity analysis restricted to patients not known to have received dexamethasone in cycles 3 and 4 found that any-grade HSRs occurred in 2.7% (3/111; 0.7%-6.8%) and 0.9% (1/109; 0.05%-4.3%) of patients in cycle 3 and 4, respectively. CONCLUSION: Corticosteroid premedication can be safely omitted in cycles 3 and 4 of dose-dense paclitaxel if HSRs are not observed during cycles 1 and 2. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Because of the potential for hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to paclitaxel, corticosteroids are routinely prescribed prior to each dose, on an indefinite basis. This prospective study, including 125 patients treated with 486 paclitaxel cycles, demonstrates that corticosteroids can be safely omitted in future cycles if HSRs did not occur during cycles 1 and 2 of paclitaxel and that this strategy reduces the use of corticosteroids in cycles 3 and 4 by 92.8% relative to current standard of care.

Twenty-year risks of breast cancer-specific mortality for stage III breast cancer in the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results registry.

PURPOSE: We aimed to report the 20-year risk of breast cancer-specific mortality (BCSM), report the risk of BCSM conditional on having survived 5 years, and identify factors associated with late deaths in stage III breast cancer. METHODS: Using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data, we included women with stage III breast cancer diagnosed from 1990 to 2005. We excluded women with unknown hormone receptor (HR) status, women who did not undergo resection of the primary tumor or axillary nodes, or unknown cause of death. We estimated risks of BCSM using cumulative incidence function and used Fine and Gray regression to identify factors associated with late deaths. RESULTS: Final sample was 36,500 patients with 14 years of median follow-up. For each stage subgroup, the risk of BCSM at 20 years was significantly higher for HR-negative vs HR-positive tumors (IIIA: 49.8% vs 43.2%, P < 0.0001; IIIB: 60.9% vs 47.6%, P < 0.0001; IIIC: 68.7% vs 63.1%, P < 0.0001). Compared with the risks of non-BCSM, the risks of BCSM at 20 years were four times higher in stage IIIC HR-positive disease and seven times higher in stage IIIC HR-negative disease. Risks of BCSM conditional on having survived 5 years depended on tumor size, nodal status, race, and tumor grade for HR-positive disease and depended on tumor size, nodal status, and age for HR-negative disease. CONCLUSIONS: In stage III breast cancer, the risk of BCSM at 20 years is very high and remains important even beyond the first 5 years in both HR-positive and HR-negative disease. Late BCSM depends on traditional clinicopathologic factors.

Factors associated with late risks of breast cancer-specific mortality in the SEER registry.

PURPOSE: Most reports describing the risk of late relapse in breast cancer (BC) have been based on selected patients enrolled into clinical trials. We examined population-based long-term risks of BC-specific mortality (BCSM), the risks of BCSM conditional on having survived 5 years, and factors associated with late BCSM. METHODS: Using SEER, we identified women diagnosed with BC (T1-T2, N0-N2, M0) between 1990 and 2005 with known hormone receptor (HR) status. Kaplan-Meier analyses determined cumulative risks of BCSM. We performed Fine and Gray regression stratified by HR status. RESULTS: We included 202,080 patients (median follow-up of 14.17 years). Of all BC deaths, the proportion that occurred after 5 years was 65% for HR-positive vs 28% for HR-negative (p < 0.001) BC. In HR-positive BC, the cumulative risks of BCSM during years 5-20 were 9.9%, 21.9%, and 38% for N0, N1, and N2 disease. For HR-negative BC, the risks were 7.9%, 12.2%, and 19.9%, respectively. For T1a/b, N0, HR-positive BC, the risk of BCSM was 6 times lower than the risk of non-BCSM. In N2, HR-positive BC, the risk of BCSM was 43% higher than the risk of non-BCSM. In adjusted Fine and Gray models stratified by HR status, the risks of BCSM conditional on having survived 5 years for both HR-positive and HR-negative depended on T-N status, age, and year of diagnosis. In HR-positive, the risks also depended on race and grade. CONCLUSION: The risks of BCSM beyond 5 years, although different, remain important for both HR-positive and HR-negative BC. Strategies to prevent early and late recurrences are warranted.

Sociodemographic Factors Associated With Rapid Relapse in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: A Multi-Institution Study.

BACKGROUND: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) accounts for disproportionately poor outcomes in breast cancer, driven by a subset of rapid-relapse TNBC (rrTNBC) with marked chemoresistance, rapid metastatic spread, and poor survival. Our objective was to evaluate clinicopathologic and sociodemographic features associated with rrTNBC. METHODS: We included patients diagnosed with stage I-III TNBC in 1996 through 2012 who received chemotherapy at 1 of 10 academic cancer centers. rrTNBC was defined as a distant metastatic recurrence event or death ≤24 months after diagnosis. Features associated with rrTNBC were included in a multivariable logistic model upon which backward elimination was performed with a P<.10 criterion, with a final multivariable model applied to training (70%) and independent validation (30%) cohorts. RESULTS: Among all patients with breast cancer treated at these centers, 3,016 fit the inclusion criteria. Training cohort (n=2,112) bivariable analyses identified disease stage, insurance type, age, body mass index, race, and income as being associated with rrTNBC (P<.10). In the final multivariable model, rrTNBC was significantly associated with higher disease stage (adjusted odds ratio for stage III vs I, 16.0; 95% CI, 9.8-26.2; P<.0001), Medicaid/indigent insurance, lower income (by 2000 US Census tract), and younger age at diagnosis. Model performance was consistent between the training and validation cohorts. In sensitivity analyses, insurance type, low income, and young age were associated with rrTNBC among patients with stage I/II but not stage III disease. When comparing rrTNBC versus late relapse (>24 months), we found that insurance type and young age remained significant. CONCLUSIONS: Timing of relapse in TNBC is associated with stage of disease and distinct sociodemographic features, including insurance type, income, and age at diagnosis.

Leveraging mobile health technology and research methodology to optimize patient education and self-management support for advanced cancer pain.

PURPOSE: Patient education is critical for management of advanced cancer pain, yet the benefits of psychoeducational interventions have been modest. We used mobile health (mHealth) technology to better meet patients' needs. METHODS: Using the Agile and mHealth Development and Evaluation Frameworks, a multidisciplinary team of clinicians, researchers, patients, and design specialists followed a four-phase iterative process to develop comprehensive, tailored, multimedia cancer pain education for a patient-facing smartphone application. The target population reviewed the content and provided feedback. RESULTS: The resulting application provides comprehensive cancer pain education spanning pharmacologic and behavioral aspects of self-management. Custom graphics, animated videos, quizzes, and audio-recorded relaxations complemented written content. Computable algorithms based upon daily symptom surveys were used to deliver brief, tailored motivational messages that linked to more comprehensive teaching. Patients found the combination of pharmacologic and behavioral support to be engaging and helpful. CONCLUSION: Digital technology can be used to provide cancer pain education that is engaging and tailored to individual needs. A replicable interdisciplinary and patient-centered approach to intervention development was advantageous. mHealth interventions may be a scalable approach to improve cancer pain. Frameworks that merge software and research methodology can be useful in developing interventions.

Empirical power comparison of statistical tests in contemporary phase III randomized controlled trials with time-to-event outcomes in oncology.

BACKGROUND: More than 95% of recent cancer randomized controlled trials used the log-rank test to detect a treatment difference making it the predominant tool for comparing two survival functions. As with other tests, the log-rank test has both advantages and disadvantages. One advantage is that it offers the highest power against proportional hazards differences, which may be a major reason why alternative methods have rarely been employed in practice. The performance of statistical tests has traditionally been investigated both theoretically and numerically for several patterns of difference between two survival functions. However, to the best of our knowledge, there has been no attempt to compare the performance of various statistical tests using empirical data from past oncology randomized controlled trials. So, it is unknown whether the log-rank test offers a meaningful power advantage over alternative testing methods in contemporary cancer randomized controlled trials. Focusing on recently reported phase III cancer randomized controlled trials, we assessed whether the log-rank test gave meaningfully greater power when compared with five alternative testing methods: generalized Wilcoxon, test based on maximum of test statistics from multiple weighted log-rank tests, difference in t-year event rate, and difference in restricted mean survival time with fixed and adaptive τ. METHODS: Using manuscripts from cancer randomized controlled trials recently published in high-tier clinical journals, we reconstructed patient-level data for overall survival (69 trials) and progression-free survival (54 trials). For each trial endpoint, we estimated the empirical power of each test. Empirical power was measured as the proportion of trials for which a test would have identified a significant result (p value < .05). RESULTS: For overall survival, t-year event rate offered the lowest (30.4%) empirical power and restricted mean survival time with fixed τ offered the highest (43.5%). The empirical power of the other types of tests was almost identical (36.2%-37.7%). For progression-free survival, the tests we investigated offered numerically equivalent empirical power (55.6%-61.1%). No single test consistently outperformed any other test. CONCLUSION: The empirical power assessment with the past cancer randomized controlled trials provided new insights on the performance of statistical tests. Although the log-rank test has been used in almost all trials, our study suggests that the log-rank test is not the only option from an empirical power perspective. Near universal use of the log-rank test is not supported by a meaningful difference in empirical power. Clinical trial investigators could consider alternative methods, beyond the log-rank test, for their primary analysis when designing a cancer randomized controlled trial. Factors other than power (e.g. interpretability of the estimated treatment effect) should garner greater consideration when selecting statistical tests for cancer randomized controlled trials.

How Do the Accrual Pattern and Follow-Up Duration Affect the Hazard Ratio Estimate When the Proportional Hazards Assumption Is Violated?

In randomized clinical trials, the magnitude of the treatment effect is often reported using the hazard ratio (HR) even when the proportional hazards (PH) assumption is not met. Conducting numerical studies, this commentary illustrates how/why the HR estimate via the standard Cox's procedure is difficult to interpret even as an "average" treatment effect for non­PH cases.

Estrogen-receptor status and risk of contralateral breast cancer following DCIS.

PURPOSE: As local therapies improve, contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk for women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) may exceed the risk of a second ipsilateral breast cancer. We sought to determine whether estrogen-receptor (ER) status influenced CBC risk. METHODS: We identified women aged 40-79 with DCIS diagnosed between 1990 and 2002 using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. We used multivariable competing risk regression to examine predictors of time from index DCIS to CBC (invasive or in situ). RESULTS: Multivariable competing risk regression found ER status to be a highly significant predictor of CBC. The 10-year cumulative incidence was estimated to be 5.3% (95% CI 4.8-5.8%) among ER positive (ER+) cases and 3.3% (95% CI 2.6-4.0%) among ER negative (ER-). CONCLUSIONS: This finding suggests that ER+ DCIS may represent a field effect that confers increased propensity for developing cancer across breast tissue, regardless of laterality. In contrast, ER- DCIS may represent an isolated local event. Given that the majority of DCIS is ER+, and only a minority of DCIS patients receive hormonal therapy, consideration of ER status may influence treatment and surveillance approaches.

Variation in guideline-concordant care for elderly patients with metastatic breast cancer in the United States.

PURPOSE: Prior studies have identified shortcomings in the quality of care for early-stage breast cancer. Guidelines recommend systemic therapy for metastatic breast cancer (MBC), but few studies have examined guideline concordance for these patients. METHODS: We used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data to identify patients aged ≥ 66 diagnosed in 2010-2011 with de novo MBC who were continuously enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare. We described initial care (within 6 months of diagnosis) for hormone receptor (HR)-positive/human epidermal receptor-2 (HER2)-negative, HER2-positive, and triple-negative (TN) tumors. We identified factors independently associated with receiving no initial systemic therapy, and compared hospice and hospital utilization for treated versus untreated patients. RESULTS: Among 446 patients, 65% were HR-positive, 21% were HER2-positive, and 14% were TN. Most patients (76.9%) received initial systemic treatment. Among treated HR-positive patients, 15% received chemotherapy as initial treatment; among treated HER2-positive patients, 34% did not receive HER2-targeted initial therapy. Factors independently associated with receiving no initial systemic therapy included older age (ORage continuous/year = 1.08, 95% CI 1.04-1.11), being not married (ORnot married vs. married = 2.87, 95% CI 1.42-5.81), and subtype (ORTN vs. HR+ = 4.95, 95% CI 2.53-9.71). Of patients who did not receive initial systemic therapy, 41.1% did not receive hospice services. CONCLUSIONS: In this population-based MBC cohort, almost one quarter did not receive initial systemic therapy and a substantial proportion of treated patients did not receive guideline-concordant first-line therapy. Further research should explore underuse of chemotherapy and HER2-targeted therapies, investigate whether patterns of care are consistent with patient preferences, and identify opportunities to optimize hospice utilization for patients not receiving treatment.

Clinical risk score to predict likelihood of recurrence after ductal carcinoma in situ treated with breast-conserving surgery.

PURPOSE: A majority of women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) receive breast-conserving surgery (BCS) but then face a risk of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) which can be either recurrence of DCIS or invasive breast cancer. We developed a score to provide individualized information about IBTR risk to guide treatment decisions. METHODS: Data from 2762 patients treated with BCS for DCIS at centers within the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) were used to identify statistically significant non-treatment-related predictors for 5-year IBTR. Factors most associated with IBTR were estrogen-receptor status of the DCIS, presence of comedo necrosis, and patient age at diagnosis. These three parameters were used to create a point-based risk score. Discrimination of this score was assessed in a separate DCIS population of 301 women (100 with IBTR and 200 without) from Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC). RESULTS: Using NCCN data, the 5-year likelihood of IBTR without adjuvant therapy was 9% (95% CI 5-12%), 23% (95% CI 13-32%), and 51% (95% CI 26-75%) in the low, intermediate, and high-risk groups, respectively. Addition of the risk score to a model including only treatment improved the C-statistic from 0.69 to 0.74 (improvement of 0.05). Cross-validation of the score resulted in a C-statistic of 0.76. The score had a c-statistic of 0.67 using the KPNC data, revealing that it discriminated well. CONCLUSIONS: This simple, no-cost risk score may be used by patients and physicians to facilitate preference-based decision-making about DCIS management informed by a more accurate understanding of risks.

Treating Second Breast Events After Breast-Conserving Surgery for Ductal Carcinoma in Situ.

Background: Because of screening mammography, the number of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) survivors has increased dramatically. DCIS survivors may face excess risk of second breast events (SBEs). However, little is known about SBE treatment or its relationship to initial DCIS care. Methods: Among a prospective cohort of women who underwent breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for DCIS from 1997 to 2008 at institutions participating in the NCCN Outcomes Database, we identified SBEs, described patterns of care for SBEs, and examined the association between DCIS treatment choice and SBE care. Using multivariable regression, we identified features associated with use of mastectomy, radiation therapy (RT), or antiestrogen therapy (AET) for SBEs. Results: Of 2,939 women who underwent BCS for DCIS, 83% received RT and 40% received AET. During the median follow-up of 4.2 years, 200 women (6.8%) developed an SBE (55% ipsilateral, 45% invasive). SBEs occurred in 6% of women who underwent RT for their initial DCIS versus 11% who did not. Local treatment for these events included BCS (10%), BCS/RT (30%), mastectomy (53%), or none (6%); only 28% of patients received AET. Independent predictors of RT or mastectomy for SBEs included younger age, shorter time to SBE diagnosis, and RT or AET for the initial DCIS. Conclusions: A sizable proportion of patients with SBEs were treated with mastectomy, most especially those who previously received RT for their initial DCIS and those who developed an ipsilateral SBE. Despite the occurrence of an SBE, relatively few patients received AET. Future studies should investigate optimal treatment approaches for SBEs, including the benefit of mastectomy versus lumpectomy for an ipsilateral SBE and the benefit of AET for a hormone-receptor-positive SBE contingent on AET use for the initial DCIS diagnosis.

Detecting Lung and Colorectal Cancer Recurrence Using Structured Clinical/Administrative Data to Enable Outcomes Research and Population Health Management.

INTRODUCTION: Recurrent cancer is common, costly, and lethal, yet we know little about it in community-based populations. Electronic health records and tumor registries contain vast amounts of data regarding community-based patients, but usually lack recurrence status. Existing algorithms that use structured data to detect recurrence have limitations. METHODS: We developed algorithms to detect the presence and timing of recurrence after definitive therapy for stages I-III lung and colorectal cancer using 2 data sources that contain a widely available type of structured data (claims or electronic health record encounters) linked to gold-standard recurrence status: Medicare claims linked to the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance study, and the Cancer Research Network Virtual Data Warehouse linked to registry data. Twelve potential indicators of recurrence were used to develop separate models for each cancer in each data source. Detection models maximized area under the ROC curve (AUC); timing models minimized average absolute error. Algorithms were compared by cancer type/data source, and contrasted with an existing binary detection rule. RESULTS: Detection model AUCs (>0.92) exceeded existing prediction rules. Timing models yielded absolute prediction errors that were small relative to follow-up time (<15%). Similar covariates were included in all detection and timing algorithms, though differences by cancer type and dataset challenged efforts to create 1 common algorithm for all scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: Valid and reliable detection of recurrence using big data is feasible. These tools will enable extensive, novel research on quality, effectiveness, and outcomes for lung and colorectal cancer patients and those who develop recurrence.

Variation in breast cancer care quality in New York and California based on race/ethnicity and Medicaid enrollment.

BACKGROUND: Racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities persist in part because our current understanding of the care provided to minority and disadvantaged populations is limited. The authors evaluated the quality of breast cancer care in 2 large states to understand the disparities experienced by African Americans, Hispanics, Asian/Pacific Islanders (APIs), and Medicaid enrollees and to prioritize remediation strategies. METHODS: Statewide cancer registry data for 80,436 women in New York and 121,233 women in California who were diagnosed during 2004 to 2009 with stage 0 through III breast cancer were used to assess underuse and overuse of surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, and hormone therapy based on 34 quality measures. Concordance values were compared across racial/ethnic and Medicaid-enrollment groups. Multivariable models were used to quantify disparities across groups for each treatment in each state. RESULTS: Overall concordance was 76% for underuse measures and 87% for overuse measures. The proportions of patients who received care concordant with all relevant measures were 35% in New York and 33% in California. Compared with whites, African Americans were less likely to receive recommended surgery, radiation, and hormone therapy; Hispanics and APIs were usually more likely to receive recommended chemotherapy. Across states, the same racial/ethnic groups did not always experience the same disparities. Medicaid enrollment was associated with decreased likelihood of receiving all recommended treatments, except chemotherapy, in both states. Overuse was evident for hormone therapy and axillary surgery but was not associated with race/ethnicity or Medicaid enrollment. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-level measures of quality identify substantial problems with care quality and meaningful disparities. Remediating these problems will require prioritizing low-performing measures and targeting high-risk populations, possibly in different ways for different regions.

Characteristics of second breast events among women treated with breast-conserving surgery for DCIS in the community.

We examined the clinical/pathologic features of ipsilateral second breast cancers (IP-SBCs) following breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for DCIS among community-treated patients and ascertained the degree of correlation between the features of index DCIS and IP-SBC events. From a Cancer Research Network cohort of DCIS patients diagnosed 1990-2001 and treated with BCS, we identified women who subsequently developed an ipsilateral DCIS or invasive breast cancer. All index DCIS tumors underwent expert pathology review. Pathologic characteristics of IP-SBCs were abstracted from available medical records. Logistic regression was used to examine associations between pathologic characteristics and identify factors associated with invasive versus non-invasive IP-SBC. Of 1969 DCIS patients, 182 developed an IP-SBC within a median of 38 months (range 6-160). IP-SBCs were slightly more commonly non-invasive (53 %) versus invasive (47 %). Of invasive IP-SBCs, 31 % were high grade, 67 % were <20 mm, 74 % were estrogen receptor positive, 7 % were HER2 positive, and 16 % were node positive. Of non-invasive IP-SBCs, 33 % were high grade. Comparing index DCIS and IP-SBC specimens, there was moderate-high correlation for HR status and grade. Among patients with IP-SBCs, those who were younger and whose index DCIS tumors were HR negative had shorter intervals (within 3 years) between index and IP-SBC diagnoses. No index DCIS feature was statistically significantly associated with an IP-SBC that was invasive versus non-invasive. Understanding the characteristics of SBCs and identifying correlations between these and index DCIS events could influence treatment choices for DCIS, and may help patients and providers develop treatment paradigms for SBCs.

Trends in the use of mastectomy in women with small node-negative breast cancer treated at US academic centers.

Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) provides equivalent survival outcomes to unilateral mastectomy. There is no survival advantage to bilateral mastectomy in average risk breast cancer. Among a cohort of breast cancer patients expected to be candidates for BCS, we examined choice of surgery and factors associated with it. A prospective cohort study of unilateral clinical Stage I breast cancer patients treated at National Comprehensive Cancer Network centers from 2000 to 2009 was performed. The proportion of patients who initially underwent mastectomy versus BCS and time to definitive surgery and chemotherapy were examined. Of 10,249 patients, 23 % underwent mastectomy as an initial surgery. No decline in the use of mastectomy as initial surgery was found. There was significant institutional variation, with rates of initial mastectomy ranging from 14 to 30 % (adjusted odds ratio: 0.42-1.38). Tumor characteristics were associated with surgical option, but with small absolute differences. Of those who received initial mastectomy, 22 % had bilateral mastectomy, with an increase over time (2000:13 % vs. 2009:30 %) and substantial institutional variation (11-34 %). Women treated with initial mastectomy had longer median times from diagnosis to complete definitive surgery (6 vs. 4 weeks) and to start of adjuvant chemotherapy (12 vs. 11 weeks). Among Stage I breast cancer, the overall use of mastectomy did not change significantly over 10 years; however, an increasing proportion of women with unilateral cancer had bilateral mastectomy, and there was wide variation in type of surgery by institution. Further studies to assess reasons for the observed wide variation are warranted.