Perceptions around bone-modifying agent use in patients with bone metastases from breast and castration resistant prostate cancer: a patient survey.

BACKGROUND: Optimal use of bone-modifying agent (BMA) therapy in patients with bone metastases from breast and castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) is evolving. METHODS: Patients receiving BMA for bone metastases from breast or CRPC were surveyed. Information was collected on patient and disease characteristics, BMA treatments and perceptions regarding BMA benefits and side effects. Interest in participation in trials of de-escalated BMA therapy was also gauged. RESULTS: Of 220 patients contacted, 172 eligible patients responded (response rate 78%). Median age was 67 (range: 21-91); 137 (80%) had breast cancer and 35 (20%) CRPC. Symptomatic skeletal events (SSEs) occurred prior to starting BMAs in 61% (84/137) of breast and 48% (17/35) of CRPC patients. Among breast cancer patients, 47, 33 and 13% received zoledronate, pamidronate and denosumab, respectively. Eighty-five percent (30/35) of CRPC patients received denosumab. De-escalation of therapy was more common among breast cancer patients. Although most patients correctly reported the goals of BMA therapy were to "help stop fractures" (62%) and "[improve] quality of life" (63%), 46.5% felt it prolonged survival and 54% felt it reduced bone progression. Most respondents (102/129, 79%) were comfortable with de-escalating to 6-monthly treatment after 2 years of BMA therapy. Patients considered the most important endpoints of de-escalation studies to be "stability of bone metastases" (45%), "quality of life" (22%) and "SSE rates" (14%). CONCLUSION: Twelve weekly BMA was more common in breast than in prostate cancer. There remain misconceptions about the benefits of BMAs, highlighting potential gaps in patient education. Patients were interested in further BMA de-escalation after 2 years of prior BMA and provided study endpoints that were most important to them.

Real-World Assessment of Clinical Outcomes Among First-Line Sunitinib Patients with Clear Cell Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (mRCC) by the International mRCC Database Consortium Risk Group.

BACKGROUND: International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (mRCC) Database Consortium (IMDC) risk groups are important when considering therapeutic options for first-line treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adult patients with clear cell mRCC initiating first-line sunitinib between 2010 and 2018 were included in this retrospective database study. Median time to treatment discontinuation (TTD) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Outcomes were stratified by IMDC risk groups and evaluated for those in the combined intermediate and poor risk group and separately for those in the intermediate risk group with one versus two risk factors. RESULTS: Among 1,769 patients treated with first-line sunitinib, 318 (18%) had favorable, 1,031 (58%) had intermediate, and 420 (24%) had poor IMDC risk. Across the three risk groups, patients had similar age, gender, and sunitinib initiation year. Median TTD was 15.0, 8.5, and 4.2 months in the favorable, intermediate, and poor risk groups, respectively, and 7.1 months in the combined intermediate and poor risk group. Median OS was 52.1, 31.5, and 9.8 months in the favorable, intermediate, and poor risk groups, respectively, and 23.2 months in the combined intermediate and poor risk group. Median OS (35.1 vs. 21.9 months) and TTD (10.3 vs. 6.6 months) were significantly different between intermediate risk patients with one versus two risk factors. CONCLUSION: This real-world study found a median OS of 52 months for patients with favorable IMDC risk treated with first-line sunitinib, setting a new benchmark on clinical outcomes of clear cell mRCC. Analysis of intermediate risk group by one or two risk factors demonstrated distinct clinical outcomes. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This analysis offers a contemporary benchmark for overall survival (median, 52.1 months; 95% confidence interval, 43.4-61.2) among patients with clear cell metastatic renal cell carcinoma who were treated with sunitinib as first-line therapy in a real-world setting and classified as favorable risk according to International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) risk group classification. This study demonstrates that clinical outcomes differ between IMDC risk groups as well as within the intermediate risk group based on the number of risk factors, thus warranting further consideration of risk group when counseling patients about therapeutic options and designing clinical trials.

Evaluation of Unsolicited Feedback from Patients with Cancer and Their Families as a Strategy to Improve Cancer Care Delivery.

BACKGROUND: Unsolicited patient feedback (compliments and complaints) should allow the healthcare system to address and improve individual and overall patient, family, and staff experiences. We evaluated feedback at a tertiary cancer centre to identify potential areas for optimizing care delivery. METHODS: unsolicited feedback submitted to the Patient Relations Department, relating to the Divisions of Medical and Radiation Oncology, at the Ottawa Hospital, was analyzed. RESULTS: Of 580 individual reports submitted from 2016 to 2022, patient demographics were available for 97% (563/580). Median patient age was 65 years (range 17-101), and 53% (301/563) were female. The most common cancer types were breast (127/545, 23%) and gastrointestinal (119/545, 22%) malignancies, and most (64%, 311/486) patients had metastatic disease. Feedback was submitted mainly by patients (291/579, 50%), and predominantly negative (489/569, 86%). The main reasons for complaints included: communication (29%, 162/566) and attitude/conduct of care (28%, 159/566). While feedback rates were initially stable, an increase occurred from 2019 to 2021. CONCLUSIONS: Unsolicited feedback remains mostly negative, and relates to physician communication. If we are to drive meaningful changes in care delivery, more standardized means of assessing feedback and implementation strategies are needed. In addition, in an era of increased healthcare provider burnout, strategies to enhance formal positive feedback are also warranted.

The REthinking Clinical Trials Program Retreat 2023: Creating Partnerships to Optimize Quality Cancer Care.

Patients, families, healthcare providers and funders face multiple comparable treatment options without knowing which provides the best quality of care. As a step towards improving this, the REthinking Clinical Trials (REaCT) pragmatic trials program started in 2014 to break down many of the traditional barriers to performing clinical trials. However, until other innovative methodologies become widely used, the impact of this program will remain limited. These innovations include the incorporation of near equivalence analyses and the incorporation of artificial intelligence (AI) into clinical trial design. Near equivalence analyses allow for the comparison of different treatments (drug and non-drug) using quality of life, toxicity, cost-effectiveness, and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic data. AI offers unique opportunities to maximize the information gleaned from clinical trials, reduces sample size estimates, and can potentially "rescue" poorly accruing trials. On 2 May 2023, the first REaCT international symposium took place to connect clinicians and scientists, set goals and identify future avenues for investigator-led clinical trials. Here, we summarize the topics presented at this meeting to promote sharing and support other similarly motivated groups to learn and share their experiences.

Shorter Durations of Anti-HER2 Therapy for Patients with Early-Stage, HER2-Positive Breast Cancer: The Physician Perspective.

Despite evidence from clinical trials showing the efficacy of shorter durations of therapy, most HER2-positive early breast cancer (EBC) patients receive a year of anti-HER2 therapy. A survey of Canadian oncologists was conducted online, with electronic data collection, and the analysis is reported descriptively. Measures collected included current practices with respect to the duration of adjuvant anti-HER2 therapy, perspectives on data regarding shorter durations of treatment, and interest in further trials on this subject. Responses were received from 42 providers across Canada. Half (50%, 21/42) reported having never recommended 6 months of anti-HER2 therapy. The primary reason physicians consider a shorter duration is in response to treatment-related toxicities (76%, 31/41). Most participants (79%, 33/42) expressed the need for more data to determine which patients can be safely and effectively treated with shorter durations. Patient factors such as young age, initial stage, hormone receptor status, and type of neoadjuvant chemotherapy were attributed to reluctance to offer shorter durations of treatment. Many respondents (83%, 35/42) expressed interest in participating in the proposed clinical trial of 6 months of anti-HER2 therapy. In contemporary Canadian practice, 12 months of anti-HER2 therapy remains the primary practice. Future trials are required to better define the role of shorter treatment durations.

Key Considerations for the Treatment of Advanced Breast Cancer in Older Adults: An Expert Consensus of the Canadian Treatment Landscape.

The prevalence of breast cancer amongst older adults in Canada is increasing. This patient population faces unique challenges in the management of breast cancer, as older adults often have distinct biological, psychosocial, and treatment-related considerations. This paper presents an expert consensus of the Canadian treatment landscape, focusing on key considerations for optimizing selection of systemic therapy for advanced breast cancer in older adults. This paper aims to provide evidence-based recommendations and practical guidance for healthcare professionals involved in the care of older adults with breast cancer. By recognizing and addressing the specific needs of older adults, healthcare providers can optimize treatment outcomes and improve the overall quality of care for this population.

Evaluating the Utility and Privacy of Synthetic Breast Cancer Clinical Trial Data Sets.

PURPOSE: There is strong interest from patients, researchers, the pharmaceutical industry, medical journal editors, funders of research, and regulators in sharing clinical trial data for secondary analysis. However, data access remains a challenge because of concerns about patient privacy. It has been argued that synthetic data generation (SDG) is an effective way to address these privacy concerns. There is a dearth of evidence supporting this on oncology clinical trial data sets, and on the utility of privacy-preserving synthetic data. The objective of the proposed study is to validate the utility and privacy risks of synthetic clinical trial data sets across multiple SDG techniques. METHODS: We synthesized data sets from eight breast cancer clinical trial data sets using three types of generative models: sequential synthesis, conditional generative adversarial network, and variational autoencoder. Synthetic data utility was evaluated by replicating the published analyses on the synthetic data and assessing concordance of effect estimates and CIs between real and synthetic data. Privacy was evaluated by measuring attribution disclosure risk and membership disclosure risk. RESULTS: Utility was highest using the sequential synthesis method where all results were replicable and the CI overlap most similar or higher for seven of eight data sets. Both types of privacy risks were low across all three types of generative models. DISCUSSION: Synthetic data using sequential synthesis methods can act as a proxy for real clinical trial data sets, and simultaneously have low privacy risks. This type of generative model can be one way to enable broader sharing of clinical trial data.

The phosphatidylinositol 4-kinase PI4KIIIalpha is required for the recruitment of GBF1 to Golgi membranes.

Sorting from the Golgi apparatus requires the recruitment of cytosolic coat proteins to package cargo into trafficking vesicles. An important early step in the formation of trafficking vesicles is the activation of Arf1 by the guanine nucleotide exchange factor GBF1. To activate Arf1, GBF1 must be recruited to and bound to Golgi membranes, a process that requires Rab1b. However, the mechanistic details of how Rab1 is implicated in GBF1 recruitment are not known. In this study, we demonstrate that the recruitment of GBF1 also requires phosphatidylinositol 4-phosphate [PtdIns(4)P]. Inhibitors of PtdIns(4)P synthesis or depletion of PI4KIIIalpha, a phosphatidylinositol 4-kinase localized to the endoplasmic reticulum and Golgi, prevents the recruitment of GBF1 to Golgi membranes. Interestingly, transfection of dominant-active Rab1 increased the amount of PtdIns(4)P at the Golgi, as detected by GFP-PH, a PtdIns(4)P-sensing probe. We propose that Rab1 contributes to the specificity and timing of GBF1 recruitment by activating PI4KIIIalpha. The PtdIns(4)P produced then allows GBF1 to bind to Golgi membranes and activate Arf1.

Evolving Role of Risk Tailored Therapy in Early Stage HER2-Positive Breast Cancer: A Canadian Perspective.

The advent of HER2-targeted therapies has led to an important shift in the management of HER2-positive early breast cancer. However, initial treatment approaches apply uniform treatment regimens to all patients, with significant treatment-related and financial toxicities for both the patient and the health care system. Recent data demonstrates that for many patients, the chemotherapy backbone, duration and nature (mono- versus dual-targeted therapy) of the HER2 blockade can be better targeted to an individual patient's risk of recurrence. We will provide a review of current data supporting risk tailored therapy in early stage HER2-positive breast cancer along with key completed and ongoing Canadian and international risk tailored trials. Neoadjuvant systemic therapy should now be considered for patients with clinical stage 2 disease, with greater use of non-anthracycline based chemotherapy regimens. Patients with residual disease following neoadjuvant therapy should be considered for escalated treatment with adjuvant T-DM1. Patients with stage I disease can often be managed with upfront surgery and evidence-based de-escalated adjuvant chemotherapy regimens. The modest benefit of 12- versus 6 months of adjuvant HER2 therapy and/or dual adjuvant HER2 therapy should be carefully weighed against the toxicities. All patients with HER2-positive breast cancer should be enrolled in ongoing risk tailored treatment trials whenever possible. Increasing data supports risk tailored therapy in early stage HER2-positive breast cancer in place of the routine application of aggressive and toxic systemic therapy regimens to all patients. While much progress has been made towards treatment de-escalation in appropriate patients, more is needed, as we highlight in this review. Indeed, Canadian-led clinical trials are helping to lead these efforts.

Survival in Women with De Novo Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Comparison of Real-World Evidence from a Publicly-Funded Canadian Province and the United States by Insurance Status.

Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patient outcomes may vary according to distinct health care payers and different countries. We compared 291 Alberta (AB), Canada and 9429 US patients < 65 with de novo MBC diagnosed from 2010 through 2014. Data were extracted from the provincial Breast Data Mart and from the National Cancer Institute's SEER program. US patients were divided by insurance status (US privately insured, US Medicaid or US uninsured). Kaplan-Meier and log-rank analyses were used to assess differences in OS and hazard ratios (HR) were estimated using Cox models. Multivariate models were adjusted for age, surgical status, and biomarker profile. No difference in OS was noted between AB and US patients (HR = 0.92 (0.77-1.10), p = 0.365). Median OS was not reached for the US privately insured and AB groups, and was 11 months and 8 months for the US Medicaid and US uninsured groups, respectively. The 3-year OS rates were comparable between US privately insured and AB groups (53.28% (51.95-54.59) and 55.54% (49.49-61.16), respectively). Both groups had improved survival (p < 0.001) relative to the US Medicaid and US uninsured groups [39.32% (37.25-41.37) and 40.53% (36.20-44.81)]. Our study suggests that a universal health care system is not inferior to a private insurance-based model for de novo MBC.

Does the Time of Day at Which Endocrine Therapy Is Taken Affect Breast Cancer Patient Outcomes?

BACKGROUND: Non-compliance and non-persistence with endocrine therapy for breast cancer is common and usually related to treatment-induced side effects. There are anecdotal reports that simply changing the time of day when taking endocrine therapy (i.e., changing morning dosing to evening dosing or vice versa) can reduce side effects. LITERATURE REVIEW: We conducted a literature review to evaluate whether changing the timing of tamoxifen and/or aromatase inhibitor administration impacted patient outcomes. No randomized control trials or prospective cohort studies that looked at time of day of endocrine therapy were identified through our review of literature from 1947 until August 2020. CONCLUSIONS: Given the rates of endocrine therapy non-compliance and non-persistence reported in the literature, ranging from 41-72% and 31-73%, respectively, simply changing the time of day when medications are taken could be an important strategy. We could identify no trials evaluating the effect of changes in timing of administration of endocrine therapy on breast cancer patient outcomes. Randomized control trials are clearly indicated for this simple and cost-effective intervention.

Management Strategies for Older Patients with Low-Risk Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Physician Survey.

When managing older patients with lower-risk hormone-receptor-positive (HR+), HER2 negative (HER2-) early-stage breast cancer (EBC), the harms and benefits of adjuvant therapies should be taken into consideration. A survey was conducted among Canadian oncologists on the definitions of "low risk" and "older", practice patterns, and future trial designs. We contacted 254 physicians and 21% completed the survey (50/242). Most respondents (68%, 34/50) agreed with the definition of "low risk" HR+/HER2- EBC being node-negative and either: ≤3 cm and low histological grade, ≤2 cm and intermediate grade, or ≤1 cm and high grade. The most popular chronological and biological age definition for older patients was ≥70 (45%, 22/49; 45% 21/47). In patients ≥ 70 with low risk EBC, most radiation and medical oncologists would recommend post-lumpectomy radiotherapy (RT) and endocrine therapy (ET). Seventy-eight percent (38/49) felt that trials are needed to evaluate RT and ET's role in patients ≥ 70. The favored design was ET alone, vs. RT plus ET (39%, 15/38). The preferred primary and secondary endpoints were disease-free survival and quality of life, respectively. Although oncologists recommended both RT and ET, there is interest in performing de-escalation trials in patients ≥ 70.

De-escalating adjuvant therapies in older patients with lower risk estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer treated with breast-conserving surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Radiation therapy (RT) and endocrine therapy (ET) are standard treatments for hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). However, many older patients are at greater risk of treatment-related toxicities and non-cancer related death, and less likely to benefit from these standard treatments. A systematic review was performed evaluating outcomes of omitting RT or ET in older patients aged ≥50 treated with BCS for lower-risk breast cancer. METHODS: Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials were queried from 1980 to April 30th, 2020 for randomized controlled studies (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies (PCSs) evaluating omission of RT and/or ET compared to RT plus ET in patients. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effects models with findings reported as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: From 3860 citations, 10 prospective studies met eligibility criteria. Omission of RT alone was evaluated in 7 RCTs (n = 4604) and one PCS (n = 667); omission of ET alone was assessed in 1 PCS (n = 271); and omission of either ET or RT was compared to ET plus RT in 1 RCT (n = 495). Adjuvant RT compared to no RT reduced 5- and 10-year in-breast tumor recurrence [5-year: RR 0.16, 95 %CI 0.09-0.27 l 10-year: 0.28, 95 %CI 0.16-0.5], but had no effect on survival [5-year: RR 0.94, 95 %CI 0.77-1.15; 10-year: 1.01, 95 %CI 0.9-1.12]. CONCLUSION: The current body of evidence suggests that RT can be omitted in older patients with lower-risk disease. However, more trials on the omission of ET are required to better inform treatment decisions.

Experiences and Perceptions of Older Adults with Lower-Risk Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer about Adjuvant Radiotherapy and Endocrine Therapy: A Patient Survey.

Older patients with lower-risk hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancer are frequently offered both radiotherapy (RT) and endocrine therapy (ET) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). A survey was performed to assess older patients' experiences and perceptions regarding RT and ET, and participation interest in de-escalation trials. Of the 130 patients approached, 102 eligible patients completed the survey (response rate 78%). The median age of respondents was 74 (interquartile range 71-76). Most participants (71%, 72/102) received both RT and ET. Patients felt the role of RT and ET, respectively, was to: reduce ipsilateral tumor recurrence (91%, 90/99 and 62%, 61/99) and improve survival (56%, 55/99 and 49%, 49/99). More patients had significant concerns regarding ET (66%, 65/99) than RT (39%, 37/95). When asked which treatment had the most negative effect on their quality of life, the results showed: ET (35%, 25/72), RT (14%, 10/72) or both (8%, 6/72). Participants would rather receive RT (57%, 41/72) than ET (43%, 31/72). Forty-four percent (44/100) of respondents were either, "not comfortable" or "not interested" in participating in potential de-escalation trials. Although most of the adjuvant therapy de-escalation trials evaluate the omission of RT, de-escalation studies of ET are warranted and patient centered.

An Update on Predictive Biomarkers in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

One of the major challenges of personalized oncology lies in identifying predictive biomarkers of response to therapy that are practical in the clinical setting. Although many new targeted and immune-based treatments have emerged in recent years as effective systemic therapy options in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), optimizing the selection and sequencing of treatments for any individual patient with this disease remains a significant challenge. The CheckMate-214 trial demonstrated that the International mRCC Database Consortium risk model is an effective predictive biomarker in the first-line treatment of mRCC. To date this remains the only prospectively validated predictive biomarker in mRCC. A number of other promising biomarker candidates are under active investigation but require prospective validation before widespread clinical adoption. PATIENT SUMMARY: The International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium risk model is currently the only validated tool that can help clinicians in determining which patients should receive sunitinib versus a combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab as a first treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Other tools are being actively investigated.

Redrawing the Lines: The Next Generation of Treatment in Metastatic Breast Cancer.

Although not considered curative in nature, new therapeutic advances in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) have substantially improved patient outcomes. This article discusses the state-of-the-art and emerging therapeutic options for management of MBC. BC systemic therapy targets multiple key pathways, including estrogen receptor signaling, HER2 signaling, and phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K)/protein kinase B (AKT)/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) signaling. Other therapeutic strategies include targeting DNA repair, inhibiting immune checkpoints, and developing antibody-drug conjugates. Although surgery historically was reserved for palliation of symptomatic, large, or ulcerating masses, some data suggest a possibly expanding role for more aggressive locoregional therapy in combination with systemic therapy. As technology develops, biomarker-specific, line-agnostic, and receptor-agnostic treatment strategies will redraw the current lines of MBC care. However, tumor heterogeneity remains a challenge. To effectively reshape our approach to MBC, careful consideration of the patient perspective, the costs and value of novel treatments, and accessibility (especially in developing countries) is paramount.

Cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors as first-line treatment for post-menopausal metastatic hormone receptor-positive breast cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of phase III randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: To compare the efficacy and toxicity of the combination of cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK 4/6) inhibitors and nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors (AI) versus AI alone as first-line therapy for patients with advanced hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Phase III randomized clinical trials (RCT) were identified after a systematic review of electronic databases. A random-effect model was used to determine the pooled hazard ratio (HR) for progression-free survival (PFS) using the inverse-variance method. The Mantel-Haenszel method was used to calculate the pooled odds ratio (OR) for overall response, clinical benefit rate and treatment-related side effects. Heterogeneity was measured using the tau-squared and I2 statistics. RESULTS: After a systematic search, three phase III RCT (n = 1827) were included. The use of CDK 4/6 inhibitors (abemaciclib, palbociclib, and ribociclib) in combination with an AI was significantly associated with longer PFS compared to the use of letrozole or anastrozole alone (HR: 0.57; 95% CI 0.50-0.65; p < 0.00001), with no significant heterogeneity among trials. Similarly, overall response rate and clinical benefit rate were higher for patients who received the combination therapy than for patients allocated to AI alone. Grade 3 or higher treatment-related side effects were more frequently reported for patients who received CDK 4/6 inhibitors (OR: 7.51; 95% CI 6.01-9.38; p < 0.00001), these included mainly neutropenia, leukopenia and anemia. CONCLUSION: The addition of CDK 4/6 inhibitors (either abemaciclib, palbociclib, or ribociclib) to an AI (anastrozole or letrozole) significantly improved PFS, overall response rate, and clinical benefit rate in comparison with a nonsteroidal AI alone.