Mode of Detection of Second Breast Cancers in Patients Undergoing Surveillance After Treatment of Ductal Carcinoma in Situ.

BACKGROUND: For patients undergoing posttreatment surveillance after ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer recommend annual breast imaging and physical examination every 6 to 12 months for 5 years, and then annually. The aim of our study was to evaluate the modes of detection (imaging, patient reported, or physical examination) of second cancers in a cohort of patients undergoing surveillance after primary DCIS treatment to better inform surveillance recommendations. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients with DCIS treated between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2011, within a large integrated health care system. Information on patient demographics, index DCIS treatment, tumor characteristics, and mode of detection of second breast cancer was obtained from the electronic health record or chart review. RESULTS: Our study cohort consisted of 1,550 women, with a median age of 59 years at diagnosis. Surgical treatment of DCIS included lumpectomy (75.0%; n=1,162), unilateral mastectomy (21.1%; n=327), or bilateral mastectomy (3.9%; n=61), with or without sentinel lymph node biopsy. Additionally, 44.4% (n=688) and 28.3% (n=438) received radiation and endocrine therapies, respectively. Median follow-up was 10 years, during which 179 (11.5%) women were diagnosed with a second breast cancer. Of the second cancers, 43.0% (n=77) were ipsilateral and 54.8% (n=98) contralateral, and 2.2% (n=4) presented with distant metastases; 61.5% (n=110) were invasive, 36.3% (n=65) were DCIS, and 2.2% (n=4) were Paget's disease. Second breast cancers were imaging-detected in 74.3% (n=133) of cases, patient-detected in 20.1% (n=36), physician-detected in 2.2% (n=4), and detected incidentally on imaging or pathology from procedures unrelated to oncologic care in 3.4% (n=6). CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort of patients undergoing surveillance following diagnosis and treatment of DCIS, 2% of second breast cancers were detected by a clinical breast examination. This suggests that survivorship care should prioritize mammography and patient education regarding breast self-examination and symptoms that warrant evaluation to detect second breast cancers.

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.

Economic Impact of Reducing Reexcision Rates after Breast-Conserving Surgery in a Large, Integrated Health System.

BACKGROUND: Reexcision after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is costly for patients, but few studies have captured the economic burden to a healthcare system. We quantified operating room (OR) charges as well as OR time and then modeled expected savings of a reexcision reduction initiative. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort review of all breast cancer patients with BCS between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2020. Operating room charges of disposable supplies and implants as well as operative time were calculated. RESULTS: During the 5-year period, the 8804 patients who underwent BCS, 1628 (18.5%) required reexcision. The reexcision cohort was younger (61 vs. 64 years, p < 0.001), more likely to have ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) (23.7% vs. 15.2%, p < 0.001), and had larger tumors (T1+T2 73.2% vs. 83.1%, p < 0.001). Reexcision costs represented 39% of total costs, the cost per patient for surgery was fourfold higher for reexcision patients. Reexcision operations comprised 14% of total operating room (OR) time (1848 of 13,030 hours). The reexcision rate for 54 surgeons varied from 7.2-39.0% with 46% (n = 25) having a reexcision rate >20%. A model simulating reducing reexcision rates to 20% or below for all surgeons reduced the reexcision rate to 16.2% overall. Using per procedure data, the model predicted a decrease in reexcision operations by 18% (327 operations), OR costs by 14% ($287,534), and OR time by 11% (204 hours). CONCLUSIONS: Reexcision after BCS represents 39% of direct OR costs and 14% of OR time in our healthcare system. Modest improvements in surgeon reexcision rates may lead to significant economic and OR time savings.

Implementation of Intraoperative Ultrasound Localization for Breast-Conserving Surgery in a Large, Integrated Health Care System is Feasible and Effective.

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative ultrasound (IUS) localization for breast cancer is a noninvasive localization technique. In 2015, an IUS program for breast-conserving surgery (BCS) was initiated in a large, integrated health care system. This study evaluated the clinical results of IUS implementation. METHODS: The study identified breast cancer patients with BCS from 1 January to 31 October 2015 and from 1 January to 31 October 2019. Clinicopathologic characteristics were collected, and localization types were categorized. Clinical outcomes were analyzed, including localization use, surgeon adoption of IUS, day-of-surgery intervals, and re-excision rates. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate predictors of re-excision. RESULTS: The number of BCS procedures increased 23%, from 1815 procedures in 2015 to 2226 procedures in 2019. The IUS rate increased from 4% of lumpectomies (n = 79) in 2015 to 28% of lumpectomies (n = 632) in 2019 (p < 0.001). Surgeons using IUS increased from 6% (5 of 88 surgeons) in 2015 to 70% (42 of 60 surgeons) in 2019. In 2019, 76% of IUS surgeons performed at least 25% of lumpectomies with IUS. The mean time from admission to incision was shorter with IUS or seed localization than with wire localization (202 min with IUS, 201 with seed localization, 262 with wire localization in 2019; p < 0.001). The IUS re-excision rates were lower than for other localization techniques (13.6%, vs 19.6% for seed localization and 24.7% for wire localization in 2019; p = 0.006), and IUS predicted lower re-excision rates in a multivariable model (odds ratio [OR], 0.59). CONCLUSIONS: In a high-volume integrated health system, IUS was adopted for BCS by a majority of surgeons. The use of IUS decreased the time from admission to incision compared with wire localization, and decreased re-excision rates compared with other localization techniques.

Adoption of Opioid-Sparing and Non-Opioid Regimens After Breast Surgery in a Large, Integrated Health Care Delivery System.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative prescriptions have contributed to the opioid epidemic. In response, a large, integrated health care delivery system implemented initiatives to reduce outpatient opioid prescriptions. We evaluated the impact of these interventions on opioid-prescribing practices after breast surgery. METHODS: We examined postoperative prescribing practices before and after the 2016-2018 intervention period. Primary endpoints were the use of non-opioid regimens (NORs) and morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) prescribed for postoperative pain management, while secondary endpoints were emergency department (ED) visits and readmissions within 7 days of surgery. RESULTS: In a survey of breast surgeons, 23% reported using NORs in 2017 versus 79% in 2019 (p < 0.001). Comparing 1917 breast operations from 2016 with 2166 operations from 2019, NORs increased from 9% in 2016 to 39% in 2019 (p < 0.001). Average discharge MMEs per operation decreased from 190 in 2016 to 106 in 2019 (p < 0.001). NOR failure (defined as an additional opioid prescription within 2 weeks of surgery) was < 1%. Significantly fewer postoperative ED visits occurred in the NOR group (1.9% NOR vs. 3.4% opioid regimen [OR]; p < 0.001). The 7-day readmission rates for NOR and OR patients were similar (0.49% NOR vs. 0.32% OR; p = 0.45). CONCLUSION: Between 2016 and 2019, breast surgeons in a large, integrated health care delivery system adopted NORs for nearly 40% of breast operations, and prescribed significantly fewer MMEs, with no increases in ED visits or readmissions for NOR patients. This suggests that initiatives to decrease opioid prescribing were successful and that a NOR for pain management after breast surgery is feasible.

Implementation of a Post-mastectomy Home Recovery Program in a Large, Integrated Health Care Delivery System.

BACKGROUND: The number of outpatient mastectomies, with and without reconstruction, has increased nationwide. In well-selected patient populations, same-day surgery for mastectomy is a safe option. A pilot project was initiated within the Kaiser Permanente Northern California healthcare system to facilitate surgical home recovery (SHR) for mastectomy patients, including patients undergoing implant-based reconstruction and bilateral mastectomies. METHODS: Surgical home recovery for mastectomy patients was implemented in October 2017. Specific measures in this initiative included management of patient expectations at initial consultation, education about postoperative home care, multimodality pain management, and timely post-discharge follow-up. All patients undergoing mastectomy were included, except those undergoing autologous tissue reconstructions. After a 6-month implementation period, rate of same day discharge over 6 months was compared before and after the SHR initiative. We also compared emergency department (ED) visits, reoperations, and readmissions within 7 days. RESULTS: Twenty-one medical centers participated in this initiative. Before implementing SHR, 164 of the 717 (23%) mastectomies were outpatient procedures, compared with 403 of the 663 (61%) after the implementation period. Although the rate of outpatient mastectomy increased significantly, there were no statistically significant differences in ED visits (5.2% vs. 5.1%, p = 0.98), reoperation (3.5% vs. 3.5%, p = 0.99), or readmission rates (1.4% vs. 2.7%, p = 0.08). CONCLUSIONS: By implementing standard expectations and sharing best practices, there was a significant increase in the rate of home recovery for mastectomy without compromising quality of patient care. The success of this pilot program supports SHR for mastectomy.

Benign Papillary Breast Mass Lesions: Favorable Outcomes with Surgical Excision or Imaging Surveillance.

BACKGROUND: There is no consensus regarding the management of benign papillary breast lesions diagnosed on image-guided core needle biopsy (IGCNB). METHODS: This is a retrospective review of 407 patients within Kaiser Permanente Northern California diagnosed between 2012 and 2013. The study focused on patients presenting with a mass lesion and who were diagnosed with a benign papillary breast lesion (BPBL) on IGCNB. Patients who did not have surgical excision of the IGCNB papilloma were followed for at least 2 years. RESULTS: A total of 327 patients (80%) underwent surgical excision, 61 patients (15%) had follow-up imaging, and 19 patients (5%) had no surgery or imaging. Overall among women with surgical excision, 9.5% had a high-risk lesion, 3.4% had in situ cancer, and 2.4% had invasive cancer. An upgrade to an in situ cancer or invasive cancer was more common among women with a lesion greater than 1 cm, a palpable breast mass, age > 50 years, or if the lesion was > 5 cm from the nipple. No cancers were diagnosed in 61 women followed by imaging surveillance. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest, single-cohort study of benign papillary mass lesions diagnosed on IGCNB. On surgical excision, the overall rate of upgrade to in situ cancer and invasive cancer was low, and almost all cancers diagnosed had favorable features. Because no cancers were found in women who were followed by imaging, we conclude that outcomes for BPBL diagnosed on IGCNB are favorable whether surgical excision or surveillance is the treatment choice.

Breast Cancer Recurrence by Subtype in a Diverse, Contemporary Cohort of Young Women.

BACKGROUND: Young breast cancer (YBC) patients are a unique subpopulation that are often underrepresented in randomized clinical trials. Furthermore, large national cancer databases lack detailed information on recurrence, a meaningful oncologic outcome for young patients. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective review of YBC patients (age 40 years or younger) with stage I to III breast cancer diagnosed from 2008 to 2018 was performed. Information on clinicopathologic characteristics, demographics, and outcomes was obtained from the electronic health record and chart review. Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were used for comparisons of categorical variables and parametric and nonparametric tests for continuous variables. RESULTS: The cohort included 1,431 women with a median follow-up of 4.8 years (range 0.3 to 12.9 years). The median age was 37 years (interquartile range 34 to 39). The study population included 598 (41.8%) White, 112 (7.8%) Black, 420 (29.4%) Asian/Pacific Islander, 281 (19.6%) Hispanic, and 20 (1.4%) "other" race/ethnicity patients. Tumor subtype was as follows: [1] hormone receptor (HR) + /human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2 - ), grade (G) 1 to 2 = 541 (37.8%); [2] HR + /HER2 - , G3 = 268 (18.7%); [3] HR + /HER2 + = 262 (18.3%); [4] HR - /HER2 + = 101 (7.1%); [5] HR - /HER2 - = 259 (18.1%). The majority (64.2%) presented with stage II/III disease. There were 230 (16.1%) recurrences during follow-up; 74.8% were distant. Locoregional-only recurrence was seen in 17 of 463 (3.7%) patients who underwent breast conservation vs 41 of 968 (4.2%) patients undergoing mastectomy (p < 0.001). Recurrence varied by tumor subtype: [1] HR + /HER2 - , G1 to 2 (14.0%); [2] HR + /HER2 - , G3 (20.9%); [3] HR + /HER2 + (11.1%); [4] HR - /HER2 + (22.8%); [5] HR - /HER2 - (17.8%) (p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: In this large, diverse YBC cohort, recurrences were most frequent among HR + /HER2 - , G3, or HR - /HER2 + invasive tumors; most were distant. There were numerically similar locoregional-only recurrences after breast conservation vs mastectomy. Additional research is needed to identify predictors of recurrence.

Telemedicine implementation trends in surgical specialties before and after COVID-19 shelter in place: Adjusting to a changing landscape.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic caused a shift from in-person care to telemedicine, providing a unique opportunity to evaluate trends and efficiency of telemedicine usage within surgical subspecialties in a large, integrated health care system before and after shelter in place mandates. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included all of the Kaiser Permanente Northern California members referred to surgical services from January 1, 2019 to June 13, 2020 and receiving a surgical procedure. We compared the patient referrals (categorized as benign, urgent, or cancer) before and after shelter in place mandates, and we examined rates of telemedicine (video or telephone) usage for preoperative consultations, postoperative visits, time from referral to first surgical encounter, and to surgery or procedure. In multivariate analyses, we assessed the patient and provider characteristics associated with telemedicine usage. RESULTS: There was a total of 34,875 surgical referrals resulting in a procedure, with a significant decline in referral after shelter in place mandates. Preoperative encounter types shifted from 89.8% in-person before shelter in place mandates to 70.2% telemedicine after shelter in place mandates (P < .0001). The median time from referral to first encounter decreased after shelter in place mandates, as did median time to procedure. After shelter in place mandates, postoperative encounters were mainly telemedicine (65.8%) compared with before shelter in place mandates (41.7%) (P < .0001). Overall, there was a comparable uptake of telemedicine usage in almost all evaluated categories of patient characteristics after shelter in place mandates. CONCLUSION: Within a health care system with prior telemedicine capability, surgical specialties were able to shift to telemedicine rapidly, equitably, and efficiently in the preoperative and postoperative encounters of benign, urgent, and cancer diagnosis during mandated COVID-19 restrictions.

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.

Outpatient Mastectomy: Factors Influencing Patient Selection and Predictors of Return to Care.

BACKGROUND: After implementation of the Surgical Home Recovery (SHR) initiative for mastectomy within a large, integrated health delivery system, most patients are discharged on the day of the procedure. We sought to identify predictors of SHR and unplanned return to care (RTC). STUDY DESIGN: Mastectomy cases with and without reconstruction from October 2017 to August 2019 were analyzed. Patient characteristics, operative variables, and multimodal pain management were compared between admitted patients and SHR patients using logistic regression. We identified predictors of RTC in SHR patients, defined as 7-day readmission, reoperation, or emergency department visit. RESULTS: Of 2,648 mastectomies, 1,689 (64%) were outpatient procedures and the mean age of patients was 58.5 years. Predictors of SHR included perioperative IV acetaminophen (odds ratio [OR] 1.59; 95% CI, 1.28 to 1.97), perioperative opiates (OR 1.47; 95% CI, 1.06 to 2.02), and operation performed by a high-volume breast surgeon (OR 2.12; 95% CI, 1.42 to 3.18). Bilateral mastectomies (OR 0.70; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.91), immediate reconstruction (OR 0.52; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.70), and American Society of Anesthesiologists class 3 to 4 (OR 0.69; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.87) decreased the odds of SHR. Of SHR patients, 111 of 1,689 patients (7%) experienced RTC. Patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists class 3 to 4 (OR 2.01; 95% CI, 1.29 to 3.14) and African American race (OR 2.30; 95% CI, 1.38 to 4.91) were more likely to RTC; receiving IV acetaminophen (OR 0.56; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.88) and filling an opiate prescription (OR 0.51; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.77) decreased the odds of RTC. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeon volume and multimodal pain medication increased the odds of SHR. Within the SHR group, American Society of Anesthesiologists Class 3 to 4 and African American patients increased the likelihood of RTC. This study helps optimize patient selection and perioperative practice for successful SHR.

Attitudes and Perceptions of Multidisciplinary Cancer Care Clinicians Toward Telehealth and Secure Messages.

Importance: Telehealth use including secure messages has rapidly expanded since the COVID-19 pandemic, including for multidisciplinary aspects of cancer care. Recent reports described rapid uptake and various benefits for patients and clinicians, suggesting that telehealth may be in standard use after the pandemic. Objective: To examine attitudes and perceptions of multidisciplinary cancer care clinicians toward telehealth and secure messages. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cross-sectional specialty-specific survey (ie, some questions appear only for relevant specialties) among multidisciplinary cancer care clinicians, collected from April 29, 2020, to June 5, 2020. Participants were all 285 clinicians in the fields of medical oncology, radiation oncology, surgical oncology, survivorship, and oncology navigation from all 21 community cancer centers of Kaiser Permanente Northern California. Main Outcomes and Measures: Clinician satisfaction, perceived benefits and challenges of telehealth, perceived quality of telehealth and secure messaging, preferred visit and communication types for different clinical activities, and preferences regarding postpandemic telehealth use. Results: A total of 202 clinicians (71%) responded (104 of 128 medical oncologists, 34 of 37 radiation oncologists, 16 of 62 breast surgeons, 18 of 28 navigators, and 30 of 30 survivorship experts; 57% (116 of 202) were women; 73% [147 of 202] between ages 36-55 years). Seventy-six percent (n = 154) were satisfied with telehealth without statistically significant variations based on clinician characteristics. In-person visits were thought to promote a strong patient-clinician connection by 99% (n = 137) of respondents compared with 77% (n = 106) for video visits, 43% (n = 59) for telephone, and 14% (n = 19) for secure messages. The most commonly cited benefits of telehealth to clinicians included reduced commute (79%; n = 160), working from home (74%; n = 149), and staying on time (65%; n = 132); the most commonly cited negative factors included internet connection (84%; n = 170) or equipment problems (72%; n = 146), or physical examination needed (64%; n = 131). Most respondents (59%; n = 120) thought that video is adequate to manage the greater part of patient care in general; and most deemed various telehealth modalities suitable for any of the queried types of patient-clinician activities. For some specific activities, less than half of respondents thought that only an in-person visit is acceptable (eg, 49%; n = 66 for end-of-life discussion, 35%; n = 58 for new diagnosis). Most clinicians (82%; n = 166) preferred to maintain or increase use of telehealth after the pandemic. Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey of multidisciplinary cancer care clinicians in the COVID-19 era, telehealth was well received and often preferred by most cancer care clinicians, who deemed it appropriate to manage most aspects of cancer care. As telehealth use becomes routine in some cancer care settings, video and telephone visits and use of asynchronous secure messaging with patients in cancer care has clear potential to extend beyond the pandemic period.