Increasing Appropriate BRCA1/2 Mutation Testing: The Role of Family History Documentation and Genetic Counseling in a Multidisciplinary Clinic.

BACKGROUND: Findings show that 5-10 % of women with a diagnosis of breast cancer (BCa) have actionable genetic mutations. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for testing to detect BRCA1/2 mutations include personal history (PH) variables such as age of 45 years or younger and a family history (FH) variables. Rates of FH documentation and overall rates of appropriate referral for genetic testing are low, ranging from about 30 to 60 %. The authors hypothesized that an upfront FH documentation and inclusion of a genetics counselor in a multidisciplinary clinic (MDC) setting would increase rates of appropriate referral for genetic testing. METHODS: The study enrolled 609 consecutive women with non-metastatic BCa seen in consultation between June 2012 and December 2015 at a multidisciplinary clinic. Rates of FH documentation and referral for genetic testing to detect BRCA1/2 mutations were assessed before and after inclusion of a genetic counselor in the MDC. RESULTS: The rates of FH documentation and appropriate referral were 100 and 89 %, respectively. Half (50 %) of the patients had only FH-based indications for testing. All the patients with PH-based indications were referred. The inclusion of a genetic counselor significantly increased appropriate referral rates among those with only FH-based indications (62 vs. 92 %) and overall (80 vs. 96 %) (p < 0.0001 for both). Among the 12 % of the patients with actionable mutations, 60 % were 45 years of age or younger, whereas 30 % had only FH-based testing indications. CONCLUSIONS: This report shows substantially higher FH documentation and appropriate genetic testing rates than prior reports. Many patients with indications for genetic testing may have only FH-based indications for testing, and this subset may account for the sizable proportion of patients with newly diagnosed BCa who have actionable mutations.

Pretreatment weight status and weight loss among head and neck cancer patients receiving definitive concurrent chemoradiation therapy: implications for nutrition integrated treatment pathways.

PURPOSE: The purpose was to examine the effect of pretreatment weight status on loco-regional progression for patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) after receiving definitive concurrent chemoradiation therapy (CCRT). METHODS: In an expanded cohort of 140 patients, we retrospectively reviewed weight status and loco-regional progression of SCCHN patients treated with CCRT between 2004 and 2010. RESULTS: Pretreatment ideal body weight percentage (IBW%) was statistically significantly different for patients with disease progression than for those without progression (p = 0.02) but was not an independent predictor of progression. Median pretreatment IBW% was 118 (72-193) for the progression-free group and was 101.5 (73-163) for the group with progression. Both groups suffered clinically severe weight loss of approximately 9 % from baseline to end treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Pretreatment weight status, a very crude indicator of nutrition status, may have prognostic value in patients with SCCHN undergoing definitive CCRT. Inadequate nutritional status in these patients has been associated with poor clinical outcomes and decreased quality of life. Based on this report and others, the best next steps include routine validated malnutrition screening and the testing of evidence-based nutrition care protocols with the goals of minimizing weight loss and improvement of quality of life.

Delivering affordable cancer care in high-income countries.

The burden of cancer is growing, and the disease is becoming a major economic expenditure for all developed countries. In 2008, the worldwide cost of cancer due to premature death and disability (not including direct medical costs) was estimated to be US$895 billion. This is not simply due to an increase in absolute numbers, but also the rate of increase of expenditure on cancer. What are the drivers and solutions to the so-called cancer-cost curve in developed countries? How are we going to afford to deliver high quality and equitable care? Here, expert opinion from health-care professionals, policy makers, and cancer survivors has been gathered to address the barriers and solutions to delivering affordable cancer care. Although many of the drivers and themes are specific to a particular field-eg, the huge development costs for cancer medicines-there is strong concordance running through each contribution. Several drivers of cost, such as over-use, rapid expansion, and shortening life cycles of cancer technologies (such as medicines and imaging modalities), and the lack of suitable clinical research and integrated health economic studies, have converged with more defensive medical practice, a less informed regulatory system, a lack of evidence-based sociopolitical debate, and a declining degree of fairness for all patients with cancer. Urgent solutions range from re-engineering of the macroeconomic basis of cancer costs (eg, value-based approaches to bend the cost curve and allow cost-saving technologies), greater education of policy makers, and an informed and transparent regulatory system. A radical shift in cancer policy is also required. Political toleration of unfairness in access to affordable cancer treatment is unacceptable. The cancer profession and industry should take responsibility and not accept a substandard evidence base and an ethos of very small benefit at whatever cost; rather, we need delivery of fair prices and real value from new technologies.

Benefits and challenges of radiation therapy in gastric cancer: techniques for improving outcomes.

Gastric cancer is a highly virulent neoplasm with high morbidity and mortality. Although the benefit of radiation therapy (RT) combined with chemotherapy in gastric cancer has been established, challenges remain in providing accurate and safe radiation delivery. Improved understanding of patterns of gastric cancer relapse and tumor spread, and of organ motion in the abdomen, has allowed for implementation of more conformal radiation techniques. At a minimum, successful implementation of conformal RT requires a detailed understanding of gastric anatomy and radiobiologic principles, an individualized assessment of organ motion, precise patient immobilization techniques, and adequate physics and dosimetry expertise. To aid the practicing clinician, the Gastric Surgical Adjuvant Radiotherapy Consensus Report and National Comprehensive Cancer Network have recently formulated detailed recommendations on simulation, treatment planning, target volumes, and dose limits for select critical normal structures. The practicing clinician is urged to draw upon the multitude of resources now available to ensure that optimal RT for gastric cancer is delivered safely and accurately.