Trends and variations in postmastectomy radiation therapy for breast cancer in patients with 1 to 3 positive lymph nodes: A National Cancer Data Base analysis.

BACKGROUND: High-level evidence is lacking to guide treatment decisions about postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) in patients who have breast cancer with 1 to 3 positive lymph nodes who receive contemporary systemic therapies, leading to potential variations in PMRT delivery. The objective of this study was to examine nationwide trends in PMRT use in this group. METHODS: The National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) was used to identify 93,372 women who had T1-T2N1 breast cancer diagnosed between 2003 and 2012. Patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy or radiation therapy (RT) and those who had bilateral breast cancers were excluded. Time trends were evaluated using the Cochrane-Armitage test and correlated the receipt of PMRT with various patient demographic, facility, clinicopathologic, and treatment variables using multivariable logistic regression. A second analysis was performed for patients who were diagnosed during 2010 and included radiation oncologist density as an additional covariate. P values < .0001 were considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Overall, 22.5% of the study population received PMRT, representing an increase from 19.1% in 2003 to 30.3% in 2012. Factors associated with greater PMRT use included younger age, lower Charlson-Deyo comorbidity scores, shorter distance to the treating facility, treatment at a comprehensive cancer program, facility location in the New England Census division, and higher density of radiation oncologists. Increased PMRT use was associated with later year of diagnosis, receipt of chemotherapy, receipt of hormone therapy, higher grade disease, larger tumor size, greater numbers of positive lymph nodes, positive margins, and absence of immediate breast reconstruction (all P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: The receipt of PMRT by patients with breast cancer who have 1 to 3 positive lymph nodes has increased over time, with wide variability in practice patterns in the United States. Cancer 2018;124:482-90. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

A Descriptive Report of Early Mobilization for Critically Ill Ventilated Patients with Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Early mobilization protocols have been successfully implemented to improve function in critically ill patients; however, no study has focused on the oncology population. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the feasibility of early mobilization and describe the rehabilitation interventions and discharge outcomes in a cohort of critically ill patients with cancer. DESIGN: Retrospective review. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients with cancer who participated in occupational and physical therapy while on mechanical ventilation utilizing an institutional early mobilization protocol from June 2010 - July 2011, was completed. Demographic and clinical variables were abstracted, as well as occupational and physical therapy interventions. RESULTS: A cohort of 42 cancer patients on mechanical ventilation in the mixed medical/surgical intensive care unit of a comprehensive cancer center received early mobilization during the study period. The majority of participants demonstrated improved cognitive and functional status from the intensive care unit to hospital discharge. There were no reported adverse events during the occupational and physical therapy sessions. Among the 30 hospital survivors, 53% required continued rehabilitation services in their home environment and 40% were transferred to a rehabilitation facility. LIMITATIONS: Due to the small sample size, these findings are not generalizable to all critically ill cancer patients. There was no post-acute care follow-up of cognitive and physical functional performance. CONCLUSION: Early mobilization appears feasible in addressing the cognitive and functional needs of oncology patients in the intensive care unit.

Efficacy of concurrent cetuximab vs. 5-fluorouracil/carboplatin or high-dose cisplatin with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for locally-advanced head and neck cancer (LAHNSCC).

OBJECTIVES: We previously reported inferior outcomes for locally-advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (LAHNSCC) patients treated with concurrent cetuximab vs. high-dose cisplatin with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Prior to FDA approval of cetuximab for LAHNSCC, non-cisplatin eligible patients at our institution received 5-fluorouracil (5FU)/carboplatin. We sought to compare concurrent cetuximab vs. 5FU/carboplatin vs. high-dose cisplatin with IMRT for LAHNSCC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective review was performed for LAHNSCC patients treated at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center from 11/02 to 04/08 with concurrent cetuximab (n=49), 5FU/carboplatin (n=52), or cisplatin (n=259) and IMRT. Overall survival (OS), locoregional failure (LRF), distant metastasis-free survival, and late toxicity were analyzed using univariate and multivariate analyses. OS analysis was confirmed by propensity score adjustment. RESULTS: Treatment groups were similar with regard to primary tumor site, overall stage, and alcohol and tobacco history. Cetuximab and 5FU/carboplatin patients were older, with lower performance status, more comorbidities, higher T classification, and worse renal function. On multivariate analysis, compared with cisplatin and 5FU/carboplatin, cetuximab was associated with inferior 4-year OS (86.9% vs. 70.2% vs. 40.9%; P<.0001) and 4-year LRF (6.3% vs. 9.7% vs. 40.2%; P<.0001). Late toxicity was highest with 5FU/carboplatin (25.0%) vs. cisplatin (8.0%) vs. cetuximab (7.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Although 5FU/carboplatin patients were sicker and experienced greater toxicity than cisplatin patients, no significant difference was found in all endpoints. In contrast, despite similar pretreatment characteristics, outcomes for cetuximab vs. 5FU/carboplatin were significantly worse. We feel that caution should be used with routine use of cetuximab in the management of LAHNSCC.

Improved biochemical outcomes with statin use in patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: To investigate the association between 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors (statins) and biochemical and survival outcomes after high-dose radiotherapy (RT) for prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 1711 men with clinical stage T1-T3 prostate cancer were treated with conformal RT to a median dose of 81 Gy during 1995-2007. Preradiotherapy medication data were available for 1681 patients. Three hundred eighty-two patients (23%) were taking a statin medication at diagnosis and throughout RT. Nine hundred forty-seven patients received a short-course of neoadjuvant and concurrent androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) with RT. The median follow-up was 5.9 years. RESULTS: The 5- and 8-year PSA relapse-free survival (PRFS) rates for statin patients were 89% and 80%, compared with 83% and 74% for those not taking statins (p=0.002). In a multivariate analysis, statin use (hazard ratio [HR] 0.69, p=0.03), National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) low-risk group, and ADT use were associated with improved PRFS. Only high-risk patients in the statin group demonstrated improvement in PRFS (HR 0.52, p=0.02). Across all groups, statin use was not associated with improved distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) (p=0.51). On multivariate analysis, lower NCCN risk group (p=0.01) and ADT use (p=0.005) predicted improved DMFS. CONCLUSIONS: Statin use during high-dose RT for clinically localized prostate cancer was associated with a significant improvement in PRFS in high-risk patients. These data suggest that statins have anticancer activity and possibly provide radiosensitization when used in conjunction with RT in the treatment of prostate cancer.