Coffee and tea consumption, patient-reported, and clinical outcomes in a longitudinal study of patients with breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Higher consumption of coffee and tea has been associated with improved health outcomes in the general population and improved breast cancer (BC) prognosis. This study investigated patterns of coffee and tea consumption and association with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and clinical outcomes among survivors of BC. METHODS: The authors included survivors of stage I-III BC enrolled in the CANTO cohort (NCT01993498) that provided post-treatment assessment of coffee and tea consumption from years 1 to 4 after diagnosis. Group-based trajectory modeling clustered patients according to daily consumption of coffee and tea. Multivariable mixed models and Cox models examined associations between consumption, PROs and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Among 3788 patients, the authors identified four stable patterns of consumption: "Low" (25.8%), "Moderate" (37.6%), "High" (25.3%), and "Very high" (11.3%), corresponding to <1, 2, 3, and ≥ 4 cups of coffee and/or tea per day. Patients in the "Very high" group (vs. "Low"), were more likely to be younger, smokers, with higher monthly income and education. PROs and survival outcomes were similar across the four groups. CONCLUSIONS: Over one in three survivors of BC reported high or very high consumption of coffee and/or tea. The authors found no association between higher consumption of coffee and/or tea, worse PROs and clinical outcomes.

Uptake of Recommendations for Posttreatment Cancer-Related Fatigue Among Breast Cancer Survivors.

BACKGROUND: Physical activity (PA) and psychosocial interventions are recommended management strategies for cancer-related fatigue (CRF). Randomized trials support the use of mind-body techniques, whereas no data show benefit for homeopathy or naturopathy. METHODS: We used data from CANTO (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01993498), a multicenter, prospective study of stage I-III breast cancer (BC). CRF, evaluated after primary treatment completion using the EORTC QLQ-C30 (global CRF) and QLQ-FA12 (physical, emotional, and cognitive dimensions), served as the independent variable (severe [score of ≥40/100] vs nonsevere). Outcomes of interest were adherence to PA recommendations (≥10 metabolic equivalent of task [MET] h/week [GPAQ-16]) and participation in consultations with a psychologist, psychiatrist, acupuncturist, or other complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) practitioner (homeopath and/or naturopath) after CRF assessment. Multivariable logistic regression examined associations between CRF and outcomes, adjusting for sociodemographic, psychologic, tumor, and treatment characteristics. RESULTS: Among 7,902 women diagnosed from 2012 through 2017, 36.4% reported severe global CRF, and 35.8%, 22.6%, and 14.1% reported severe physical, emotional, and cognitive CRF, respectively. Patients reporting severe global CRF were less likely to adhere to PA recommendations (60.4% vs 66.7%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71-0.94; P=.004), and slightly more likely to see a psychologist (13.8% vs 7.5%; aOR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.05-1.58; P=.014), psychiatrist (10.4% vs 5.0%; aOR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.10-1.76; P=.0064), acupuncturist (9.8% vs 6.5%; aOR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.17-1.82; P=.0008), or CAM practitioner (12.5% vs 8.2%; aOR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.23-1.82; P<.0001). There were differences in recommendation uptake by CRF dimension, including that severe physical CRF was associated with lower adherence to PA (aOR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.63-0.86; P=.0001) and severe emotional CRF was associated with higher likelihood of psychologic consultations (aOR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.06-1.79; P=.017). CONCLUSIONS: Uptake of recommendations to improve CRF, including adequate PA and use of psychosocial services, seemed suboptimal among patients with early-stage BC, whereas there was a nonnegligible interest in homeopathy and naturopathy. Findings of this large study indicate the need to implement recommendations for managing CRF in clinical practice.

Determinants of use of oral complementary-alternative medicine among women with early breast cancer: a focus on cancer-related fatigue.

BACKGROUND: Despite the questionable effectiveness of oral complementary and alternative medicine (OCAM) in relieving cancer-related symptoms, including fatigue (CRF), many patients use it aiming to improve their quality of life. We assessed factors associated with OCAM use, focusing on CRF. METHODS: Women with stage I-III breast cancer (BC) were included from CANTO (NCT01993498). OCAM use was defined as taking homeopathy, vitamins/minerals, or herbal/dietary supplements. Multivariable multinomial logistic regressions evaluated associations of CRF (EORTC QLQ-C30), patient, and treatment characteristics with OCAM use. RESULTS: Among 5237 women, 23.0% reported OCAM use overall (49.3% at diagnosis, 50.7% starting post-diagnosis), mostly homeopathy (65.4%). Mean (SD) CRF score was 27.6 (24.0) at diagnosis and 35.1 (25.3) at post-diagnosis. More intense CRF was consistently associated with OCAM use at diagnosis and post-diagnosis [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for 10-point increase 1.05 (95% Confidence interval 1.01-1.09) and 1.04 (1.01-1.09) vs. never use, respectively]. Odds of using OCAM at diagnosis were higher among older [for 5-year increase, 1.09 (1.04-1.14)] and more educated patients [college vs. primary 1.80 (1.27-2.55)]. Women with income > 3000 [vs. < 1500 euros/month, 1.44 (1.02-2.03)], anxiety [vs. not, 1.25 (1.01-1.54)], and those receiving chemotherapy [vs. not, 1.32 (1.04-1.68)] had higher odds of using OCAM post-diagnosis. CONCLUSION: One-in-four patients reported use of OCAM. More severe CRF was consistently associated with its use. Moreover, older, better educated, wealthier, more anxious women, and those receiving chemotherapy seemed more prone to use OCAM. Characterizing profiles of BC patients more frequently resorting to OCAM may help deliver targeted information about its benefits and potential risks.

[An updated synthesis of the international recommendations about the use of non-pharmacological interventions in the treatment of fatigue]. / Synthèse actualisée des recommandations internationales sur le traitement de la fatigue par des interventions non pharmacologiques.

INTRODUCTION: Fatigue is a frequent and disturbing symptom in oncology but remains undertreated. Given the absence of effective drug treatment, non-pharmacological interventions have a prominent place in the treatment of fatigue. However, they are relatively unknown by professionals who lack of clear points of reference to refer patients with confidence. This article aims to improve the knowledge about this therapeutic field through an updated synthesis of the levels of recommendations and available evidence. METHODS: A three-step approach was conducted, including (1) a synthesis of international guidelines on non-pharmacological interventions in the treatment of fatigue among adults in oncology, (2) a systematic review of recent data in the literature, (3) a comparison between the synthesis of guidelines and the systematic review with the aim of updating the levels of evidence. RESULTS: Five guidelines were synthesized; 111 systematic reviews were analyzed. Their comparison mainly showed: (1) a convergence in favor of the use of physical activity, educational interventions and cognitive-behavioral therapies, with levels of evidence ranging from moderate to high; (2) a consolidation of short-term efficacy evidence to support the use of mindfulness-based approaches and yoga; 3) the persistence of a lack of sufficiently reliable data to establish the efficacy of other types of intervention. DISCUSSION: Supported by international guidelines and recent data, the use of non-pharmacological interventions in the treatment of fatigue is critical and has to become better known.

Evidence-based approaches for the management of side-effects of adjuvant endocrine therapy in patients with breast cancer.

The growing availability of more effective therapies has contributed to an increased survival of patients with breast cancer. In hormone receptor-positive early disease, increased survival is strongly correlated with the use of adjuvant endocrine therapy, but this therapy can cause side-effects that have major consequences in terms of treatment adherence and patients' quality of life. In premenopausal breast cancer survivors, these side-effects might be even more prominent due to the abrupt suppression of oestrogen associated with the most intense endocrine therapies. An important ambition of cancer care in the 21st century is to recover pre-cancer quality of life and emotional and social functions, which is only possible through the mitigation of the side-effects of anticancer treatments. This Review presents a comprehensive summary of the efficacy and safety data of the available interventions (hormonal and non-hormonal pharmacological strategies, non-pharmacological approaches, and complementary and alternative medicine) to control selected side-effects associated with adjuvant endocrine therapy (hot flashes, sexual dysfunction, weight gain, musculoskeletal symptoms, and fatigue), providing updated, evidence-based approaches for their management.

A qualitative evaluation of the use of interventions to treat fatigue among cancer survivors: A healthcare provider's view.

OBJECTIVE: Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is among the most common and distressing side effects of cancer treatment. Different types of interventions, including physical activity (PA), psychosocial and mind-body interventions, have been shown to reduce CRF. We aimed to explore HCPs' practices and barriers to refer patients towards interventions to reduce CRF. METHODS: We performed a qualitative study using key informant interviews among a sample of 20 HCPs including medical, surgical and radiation oncologists, pain specialists, nurses, psychologists, psychiatrists and physiotherapists recruited from breast, prostate and colorectal cancer disease groups from a comprehensive cancer centre. RESULTS: Most interviewees reported not to address CRF spontaneously during consultations. When the topic of CRF was brought up by patients, all interviewees acknowledged to recommend PA, whereas few would recommend psychosocial or mind-body interventions. Barriers to recommend interventions to manage CRF included: lack of knowledge about CRF and its treatment, lack of time and complexity of the referral due to their accessibility and cost. CONCLUSION: In a diverse sample of HCPs, most acknowledged not to address CRF proactively with their patients, but identified several actionable barriers. Specific training on screening and management of CRF and improving the referral network dedicated to interventions need to be implemented.

Factors Associated With Delays in Chemotherapy Initiation Among Patients With Breast Cancer at a Comprehensive Cancer Center.

BACKGROUND: National guidelines endorse time-dependent quality metrics for breast cancer care. We examined factors associated with delays in chemotherapy initiation at an NCI-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified 523 patients who received postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy between January 2011 and December 2013 at our center. We defined 28 days from last definitive surgery (LDS) to chemotherapy as the target time frame, and an unacceptable delay in chemotherapy initiation (UCD) as greater than 42 days from LDS. Multivariate regression models were used to identify factors associated with UCD and the impact of Oncotype DX testing in patients with hormone receptor (HR)-positive breast cancer. RESULTS: Median days between LDS and chemotherapy initiation was 34 (interquartile range, 15), with 30% of patients starting within 28 days of LDS and 26.9% having UCD. Tumor characteristics such as subtype and stage affected UCD; patients with HR-positive or HER2-positive tumors were more likely to be delayed compared with those with triple-negative breast cancer. Patients with stage I disease, those undergoing mastectomy with or without immediate reconstruction, and those whose pathology sign-out was greater than 10 days postoperatively were more likely to be delayed. A higher proportion of UCD was found in HR-positive patients (31%) for whom Oncotype DX testing was ordered compared with those in whom it was not ordered (20%). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides insight into subpopulations that may be at risk to experience delays in chemotherapy initiation, directing interventions to improve the timeliness of care.

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.

Variation in type of adjuvant chemotherapy received among patients with stage I breast cancer: A multi-institutional study.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with stage I breast cancer, there is significant uncertainty concerning the optimal threshold at which to consider chemotherapy, and when considered, there is controversy regarding whether to consider non-intensive versus intensive regimens. The authors examined the types and costs of adjuvant chemotherapy received among patients with stage I breast cancer. METHODS: The current study was a prospective cohort study including patients with stage I breast cancer who were treated at a National Comprehensive Cancer Network center from 2000 through 2009. Stage was defined according to the version of the American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging Manual applicable at the time of diagnosis. Stratifying by human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), the authors examined the percentage of patients receiving intensive versus non-intensive chemotherapy regimens and the factors associated with type of chemotherapy administered using multivariable logistic regression. Costs of the most common regimens were estimated. RESULTS: Of 8907 patients, 33% received adjuvant chemotherapy. Among those individuals, there was an increase in the use of intensive chemotherapy within the last decade, from 31% in 2000 through 2005 to 63% in 2008 through 2009 (including an increase in the use of the combination of docetaxel, carboplatin, and trastuzumab) among patients with HER2-positive disease and from 15% in 2000 through 2005 to 41% in 2008 through 2009 among patients with HER2-negative disease (32% of patients with hormone receptor-positive and 59% of patients with triple-negative disease). Among patients treated with non-intensive regimens, there was an increase in the use of the combination of docetaxel and cyclophosphamide noted, with a decrease in the use of the doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide combination. The choice of regimen varied significantly by institution. The major drivers of cost variation were the incorporation of biologics (eg, trastuzumab) and growth factors, with significant variation even within non-intensive and intensive regimens. CONCLUSIONS: Over time, there was an increase in use of intensive regimens among Stage I breast cancer, with striking institutional and cost variations.

Outcomes by tumor subtype and treatment pattern in women with small, node-negative breast cancer: a multi-institutional study.

PURPOSE: Treatment decisions for patients with T1a,bN0M0 breast cancer are challenging. We studied the time trends in use of adjuvant chemotherapy and survival outcomes among these patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study within the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Database that included 4,113 women with T1a,bN0M0 breast cancer treated between 2000 and 2009. Tumors were grouped by size (T1a, T1b), biologic subtype defined by hormone receptor (HR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status, and receipt of chemotherapy with or without trastuzumab. RESULTS: Median follow-up time was 5.5 years. Eight percent of patients with HR-positive/HER2-negative tumors were treated with chemotherapy. Fifty-two percent of those with HER2-positive or HR-negative/HER2-negative breast cancers received chemotherapy, with an increase over the last decade. Survival outcomes diverged by subtype and size, but the 5-year distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) did not exceed 10% in any subgroup. The 5-year DRFS for patients with T1a tumors untreated with chemotherapy ranged from 93% to 98% (n = 49 to 972), and for patients with T1b tumors, it ranged from 90% to 96% (n = 17 to 2,005). Patients with HR-positive/HER2-negative disease had the best DRFS estimates, and patients with HR-negative/HER2-negative tumors had the lowest. In this observational, nonrandomized cohort study, the 5-year DRFS for treated patients with T1a tumors was 100% for all subgroups (n = 12 to 33), and for patients with T1b tumors, it ranged from 94% to 96% (n = 88 to 241). CONCLUSION: Women with T1a,b tumors have an excellent prognosis without chemotherapy. Size and tumor subtype may identify patients in whom the rate of recurrence justifies consideration of chemotherapy. These patients represent an optimal group for evaluating less toxic adjuvant regimens to maintain efficacy while minimizing short- and long-term risks.

Impact of hormone receptor status on patterns of recurrence and clinical outcomes among patients with human epidermal growth factor-2-positive breast cancer in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network: a prospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: In gene expression experiments, hormone receptor (HR)-positive/human epidermal growth factor-2 (HER2)-positive tumors generally cluster within the luminal B subset; whereas HR-negative/HER2-positive tumors reside in the HER2-enriched subset. We investigated whether the clinical behavior of HER2-positive tumors differs by HR status. METHODS: We evaluated 3,394 patients who presented to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) centers with stage I to III HER2-positive breast cancer between 2000 and 2007. Tumors were grouped as HR-positive/HER2-positive (HR+/HER2+) or HR-negative/HER2-positive (HR-/HER2+). Chi-square, logistic regression and Cox hazard proportional regression were used to compare groups. RESULTS: Median follow-up was four years. Patients with HR-/HER2+ tumors (n = 1,379, 41% of total) were more likely than those with HR+/HER-2+ disease (n = 2,015, 59% of total) to present with high histologic grade and higher stages (P <0.001). Recurrences were recorded for 458 patients. HR-/HER2+ patients were less likely to experience first recurrence in bone (univariate Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.53, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.34 to 0.82, P = 0.005) and more likely to recur in brain (univariate OR = 1.75, 95% CI: 1.05 to 2.93, P = 0.033). A lower risk of recurrence in bone persisted after adjusting for age, stage and adjuvant trastuzumab therapy (OR = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.34 to 0.83, P = 0.005) and when first and subsequent sites of recurrence were both considered (multivariable OR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.37 to 0.80, P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Presenting features, patterns of recurrence and survival of HER2-positive breast cancer differed by HR status. These differences should be further explored and integrated in the design of clinical trials.