Longitudinal Trends in Patient-Reported Outcomes in the First Year After Lumpectomy Versus Mastectomy.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear how patient-reported outcomes (PROs) change longitudinally after breast cancer surgery. We sought to compare trends in PROs among patients who underwent lumpectomy versus mastectomy over the first year after surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Newly diagnosed stage 0-III female patients with breast cancer who underwent lumpectomy or mastectomy at an academic breast center between June 2019 and March 2023 were invited to participate in a longitudinal PRO study. Enrolled patients received the BREAST-Q™ module, a validated tool measuring domains, such as satisfaction with breasts, psychosocial well-being, physical well-being, and sexual well-being. Scores for each domain were compared between the lumpectomy and mastectomy groups over the first year after surgery. Linear mixed models were used to estimate the change in PRO scores over time. RESULTS: The cohort included 203 who underwent lumpectomy and 144 who underwent mastectomy. Patients who underwent lumpectomy were older, more likely to receive adjuvant radiation and endocrine therapy, and less likely to receive adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients who underwent lumpectomy demonstrated greater increases in scores over time for satisfaction with breasts, psychosocial well-being, and sexual well-being compared with patients who underwent mastectomy, after adjusting for the abovementioned covariates and receipt of reconstruction. The lumpectomy group had a larger decline in physical well-being over time compared with the mastectomy group. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent lumpectomy demonstrated greater satisfaction with their breasts, psychosocial well-being, and sexual well-being but worse physical well-being over the first year after surgery compared with patients who underwent mastectomy. These results may help inform early-stage breast cancer patients making decisions about their surgical care.

Internal Mammary Lymphadenopathy Does Not Impact Oncologic Outcomes in Patients Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Results from the I-SPY2 Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Internal mammary lymphadenopathy (IML) plays a role in breast cancer stage and prognosis. We aimed to evaluate method of IML detection, how IML impacts response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), and oncologic outcomes. METHODS: We evaluated patients enrolled in the I-SPY-2 clinical trial from 2010 to 2022. We captured the radiographic method of IML detection (magnetic resonance imaging [MRI], positron emission tomography/computed tomography [PET/CT], or both) and compared patients with IML with those without. Rates of locoregional recurrence (LRR), distant recurrence (DR) and event-free survival (EFS) were compared by bivariate analysis. RESULTS: Of 2095 patients, 198 (9.5%) had IML reported on pretreatment imaging. The method of IML detection was 154 (77.8%) MRI only, 11 (5.6%) PET/CT only, and 33 (16.7%) both. Factors associated with IML were younger age (p = 0.001), larger tumors (p < 0.001), and higher tumor grade (p = 0.027). Pathologic complete response (pCR) was slightly higher in the IML group (41.4% vs. 34.0%; p = 0.03). There was no difference in breast or axillary surgery (p = 0.41 and p = 0.16), however IML patients were more likely to undergo radiation (68.2% vs. 54.1%; p < 0.001). With a median follow up of 3.72 years (range 0.4-10.2), there was no difference between IM+ versus IM- in LRR (5.6% vs. 3.8%; p = 0.25), DR (9.1% vs. 7.9%; p = 0.58), or EFS (61.6% vs. 57.2%; p = 0.48). This was true for patients with and without pCR. CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of patients treated with NAC, outcomes were not negatively impacted by IML. We demonstrated that IML influences treatment selection but is not a poor prognostic indicator when treated with modern NAC and multidisciplinary disease management.

Clipping the Positive Lymph Node in Patients with Clinically Node Positive Breast Cancer Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Impact on Axillary Surgery in the ISPY-2 Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: For patients with clinically node-positive (cN+) breast cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), retrieving previously clipped, biopsy-proven positive lymph nodes during sentinel lymph node biopsy [i.e., targeted axillary dissection (TAD)] may reduce false negative rates. However, the overall utilization and impact of clipping positive nodes remains uncertain. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed cN+ ISPY-2 patients (2011-2022) undergoing axillary surgery after NAC. We evaluated trends in node clipping and associations with type of axillary surgery [sentinel lymph node (SLN) only, SLN and axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), or ALND only] and event-free survival (EFS) in patients that were cN+ on a NAC trial. RESULTS: Among 801 cN+ patients, 161 (20.1%) had pre-NAC clip placement in the positive node. The proportion of patients that were cN+ undergoing clip placement increased from 2.4 to 36.2% between 2011 and 2021. Multivariable logistic regression showed nodal clipping was independently associated with higher odds of SLN-only surgery [odds ratio (OR) 4.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.8-6.8, p < 0.001]. This was also true among patients with residual pathologically node-positive (pN+) disease. Completion ALND rate did not differ based on clip retrieval success. No significant differences in EFS were observed in those with or without clip placement, both with or without successful clip retrieval [hazard ratio (HR) 0.85, 95% CI 0.4-1.7, p = 0.7; HR 1.8, 95% CI 0.5-6.0, p = 0.3, respectively]. CONCLUSION: Clip placement in the positive lymph node before NAC is increasingly common. The significant association between clip placement and omission of axillary dissection, even among patients with pN+ disease, suggests a paradigm shift toward TAD as a definitive surgical management strategy in patients with pN+ disease after NAC.

Exploration of Patient Retention in Seeking a Second Opinion: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: It is common for cancer patients to seek a second opinion for a variety of reasons. Understanding what drives patients to choose to receive treatment with their second opinion provider may uncover opportunities to improve the second opinion process. Therefore, we sought to identify the patient, disease, and treatment characteristics that were associated with second opinion retention rates in patients seeking a second surgical opinion for breast, colon, and pancreatic cancer. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study to evaluate patients who sought a second opinion within a large academic health-care system for breast, colon, and pancreatic cancer. Electronic medical records were reviewed for second opinions. Patient demographics and characteristics were collected and compared between the retained group and the nonretained groups. RESULTS: A total of 237 patients obtained second opinions for breast, colorectal, and pancreatic cancer. Patients that were offered a different treatment plan at their second opinion were more likely to be retained for systemic therapy (P = 0.009) for pancreatic cancer and any treatment for colon cancer (P = 0.003). Seeing a radiation oncologist (P = 0.007) or a plastic surgeon (P = 0.02) during the multidisciplinary consultation increased retention rates for breast cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons can better identify patients that are more likely to be retained after a second opinion by the individual patient characteristics and treatment factors. Understanding the factors that lead to retention for these three cancer types may help physicians provide the best possible resources for most patients presenting for second opinion evaluations.

Breast Conservation Surgery and Mastectomy Have Similar Locoregional Recurrence After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Results From 1462 Patients on the Prospective, Randomized I-SPY2 Trial.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) increases rates of successful breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in patients with breast cancer. However, some studies suggest that BCS after NAC may confer an increased risk of locoregional recurrence (LRR). We assessed LRR rates and locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS) in patients enrolled on I-SPY2 (NCT01042379), a prospective NAC trial for patients with clinical stage II to III, molecularly high-risk breast cancer. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate associations between surgical procedure (BCS vs mastectomy) and LRFS adjusted for age, tumor receptor subtype, clinical T category, clinical nodal status, and residual cancer burden (RCB). In 1462 patients, surgical procedure was not associated with LRR or LRFS on either univariate or multivariate analysis. The unadjusted incidence of LRR was 5.4% after BCS and 7.0% after mastectomy, at a median follow-up time of 3.5 years. The strongest predictor of LRR was RCB class, with each increasing RCB class having a significantly higher hazard ratio for LRR compared with RCB 0 on multivariate analysis. Triple-negative receptor subtype was also associated with an increased risk of LRR (hazard ratio: 2.91, 95% CI: 1.8-4.6, P < 0.0001), regardless of the type of operation. In this large multi-institutional prospective trial of patients completing NAC, we found no increased risk of LRR or differences in LRFS after BCS compared with mastectomy. Tumor receptor subtype and extent of residual disease after NAC were significantly associated with recurrence. These data demonstrate that BCS can be an excellent surgical option after NAC for appropriately selected patients.

Clinical implications of receptor conversions in breast cancer patients who have undergone neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: In this study, we aimed to determine the incidence of receptor conversions after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for breast cancer and assess the rate at which receptor conversion leads to changes in adjuvant therapy regimens. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of female breast cancer patients treated with NAC at an academic breast center between January 2017 and October 2021. Patients with residual disease on surgical pathology and complete receptor status information for both pre-NAC and post-NAC specimens were included. Incidence of receptor conversions, defined as a change in at least one hormone receptor (HR) or HER2 status compared to preoperative specimens, was tabulated, and adjuvant therapy modalities were reviewed. Factors associated with receptor conversion were analyzed using chi-square tests and a binary logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the 240 patients with residual disease after NAC, 126 (52.5%) had receptor testing repeated. After NAC, 37 specimens (29%) had a receptor conversion. Receptor conversion resulted in the addition or removal of an adjuvant therapy in 8 patients (6%), indicating a number needed to screen of 16. Prior history of cancer, receipt of initial biopsy at an outside site, HR-positive tumors, and a pathologic stage of II or lower were factors associated with receptor conversions. CONCLUSION: HR and HER2 expression profiles frequently change after NAC and drive adjustments in adjuvant therapy regimens. Repeat testing of HR and HER2 expression should be considered in patients who receive NAC, especially in patients with early stage, HR-positive tumors whose initial biopsies were performed externally.

Postoperative Outcomes After Staged Versus Coordinated Breast Surgery and Bilateral Salpingo-Oophorectomy.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to compare postoperative complication rates and healthcare charges between patients who underwent coordinated versus staged breast surgery and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The MarketScan administrative database was used to identify adult female patients with invasive breast cancer or BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations who underwent BSO and breast surgery (lumpectomy or mastectomy with or without reconstruction) between 2010 and 2015. Patients were assigned to the coordinated group if a breast operation and BSO were performed simultaneously or assigned to the staged group if BSO was performed separately. Primary outcomes were (1) incidence of 90-day postoperative complications and (2) 2-year aggregate perioperative healthcare charges. Fisher's exact tests, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, and multivariable regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: Of the 4228 patients who underwent breast surgery and BSO, 412 (9.7%) were in the coordinated group and 3816 (90.3%) were in the staged group. The coordinated group had a higher incidence of postoperative complications (24.0% vs. 17.7%, p < 0.01), higher risk-adjusted odds of postoperative complications [odds ratio (OR) 1.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.06-1.76, p = 0.02], and similar aggregate healthcare charges before (median charges: $106,500 vs. $101,555, p = 0.96) and after risk-adjustment [incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.00, 95% CI 0.93-1.07; p = 0.95]. In a subgroup analysis, incidence of postoperative complications (12.9% for coordinated operations vs. 11.7% for staged operation, p = 0.73) was similar in patients whose breast operation was a lumpectomy. CONCLUSIONS: While costs were similar, coordinating breast surgery with BSO was associated with more complications in patients who underwent mastectomy, but not in patients who underwent lumpectomy. These data should inform shared decision-making in high-risk patients.

Changes in Surgical Management of the Axilla Over 11 Years - Report on More Than 1500 Breast Cancer Patients Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy on the Prospective I-SPY2 Trial.

BACKGROUND: Axillary surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is becoming less extensive. We evaluated the evolution of axillary surgery after NAC on the multi-institutional I-SPY2 prospective trial. METHODS: We examined annual rates of sentinel lymph node (SLN) surgery with resection of clipped node, if present), axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), and SLN and ALND in patients enrolled in I-SPY2 from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2021 by clinical N status at diagnosis and pathologic N status at surgery. Cochran-Armitage trend tests were calculated to evaluate patterns over time. RESULTS: Of 1578 patients, 973 patients (61.7%) had SLN-only, 136 (8.6%) had SLN and ALND, and 469 (29.7%) had ALND-only. In the cN0 group, ALND-only decreased from 20% in 2011 to 6.25% in 2021 (p = 0.0078) and SLN-only increased from 70.0% to 87.5% (p = 0.0020). This was even more striking in patients with clinically node-positive (cN+) disease at diagnosis, where ALND-only decreased from 70.7% to 29.4% (p < 0.0001) and SLN-only significantly increased from 14.6% to 56.5% (p < 0.0001). This change was significant across subtypes (HR-/HER2-, HR+/HER2-, and HER2+). Among pathologically node-positive (pN+) patients after NAC (n = 525) ALND-only decreased from 69.0% to 39.2% (p < 0.0001) and SLN-only increased from 6.9% to 39.2% (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Use of ALND after NAC has significantly decreased over the past decade. This is most pronounced in cN+ disease at diagnosis with an increase in the use of SLN surgery after NAC. Additionally, in pN+ disease after NAC, there has been a decrease in use of completion ALND, a practice pattern change that precedes results from clinical trials.

Financial Toxicity of Breast Cancer Care: The Patient Perspective Through Surveys and Interviews.

INTRODUCTION: Although the economic burden of cancer care is an emerging concern in the United States, the potential financial toxicity of breast cancer care at the patient level remains poorly understood. This study aims to characterize the scope of the contributors to financial distress on breast cancer patients and the resources utilized to address them. METHODS: Adult female patients diagnosed with invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ between 2014 and 2019 at a single institution were retrospectively evaluated. Those who enrolled in copay assistance or indicated financial concerns on an intake distress screen were provided a web-based survey assessing financial changes, resources used, and financial engagement with providers. Semi-structured interviews further explored sources of financial distress and were analyzed by two researchers using grounded theory methodology. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients completed the online survey, 15 of the 68 also participated in semi-structured phone interviews. On the online survey 74% of participants endorsed a financial distress score ≥5 on a scale of 0-10. Seventy-four percent changed their budget, 72% used their savings, and 60% cut down on spending. However, only 40% used resources such as financial counseling or financial assistance. Interviews revealed three major contributors to financial distress: (1) unexpected medical and nonmedical expenses, (2) lost revenue from missed work, and (3) altered budgeting. CONCLUSIONS: Many breast cancer patients experience significant financial distress without access to the resources they need. This study highlights the need for financial transparency, supportive financial services counseling at the time of diagnosis, throughout treatment and beyond.

De-implementation of Axillary Dissection in Women With Breast Cancer is Largely Driven By Site-level Contextual Effects.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the contribution of unknown institutional factors (contextual effects) in the de-implementation of cALND in women with breast cancer. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Women included in the National Cancer Database with invasive breast carcinoma from 2012 to 2016 that underwent upfront lumpectomy and were found to have a positive sentinel node. METHODS: A multivariable mixed effects logistic regression model with a random intercept for site was used to determine the effect of patient, tumor, and institutional variables on the risk of cALND. Reference effect measureswere used to describe and compare the contribution of contextual effects to the variation in cALND use to that of measured variables. RESULTS: By 2016, cALND was still performed in at least 50% of the patients in a quarter of the institutions. Black race, younger women and those with larger or hormone negative tumors were more likely to undergo cALND. However, the width of the 90% reference effect measures range for the contextual effects exceeded that of the measured site, tumor, time, and patient demographics, suggesting institutional contextual effects were the major drivers of cALND de-implementation. For instance, a woman at an institution with low-risk of performing cALND would have 74% reduced odds of havinga cALND than if she was treated at a median-risk institution, while a patient at a high-risk institution had 3.91 times the odds. CONCLUSION: Compared to known patient, tumor, and institutional factors, contextual effects had a higher contribution to the variation in cALND use.

Patient Perceptions of Changes in Breast Cancer Care and Well-Being During COVID-19: A Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Widespread healthcare restructuring due to the COVID-19 pandemic led to modifications in the timing and delivery of care for breast cancer patients. Our study explores patient concerns relating to COVID-19, breast cancer, and changes to breast cancer care. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Breast cancer patients who presented for surgical consultation at an academic, multidisciplinary clinic completed the electronically distributed validated COVID-19 Impact and Healthcare Related Quality of Life questionnaire between August 2020 and February 2021. This questionnaire uses Likert score responses to assess COVID-specific concerns within domains, including distress and financial hardship. Scale scores were determined by averaging items within each domain, and scores > 2 indicated greater disruption. Semistructured interviews were conducted with patients who indicated interest in participating in the questionnaire. RESULTS: Of 381 patients recruited, 133 patients completed the questionnaire and 20 patients completed interviews. Sixty-three percent of survey participants reported attending a telemedicine appointment for their cancer care, and the majority (67%) were satisfied with their experience. Half of the participants (50%) reported fear about how the COVID-19 pandemic will impact their cancer care or recovery, and 66% reported anxiety about contracting COVID-19. Twenty-two percent of participants reported decreased income due to COVID-19. Patient interviews revealed tangible changes to care and provided in-depth information on the advantages and disadvantages of telehealth. CONCLUSIONS: Breast cancer patients report anxiety about COVID-19 infection and potential care modifications. Our study identifies impacts on patients' care and quality of life. Further investigation will inform interventions to improve psychosocial outcomes for patients and the telehealth experience.

No One-Size-Fits-All: Sexual Health Education Preferences in Patients with Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Using explanatory mixed methods, we characterize the education that patients with breast cancer received about potential sexual health effects of treatment and explore preferences in format, content, and timing of education. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult patients with stage 0-IV breast cancer seen at an academic breast center during December 2020 were emailed questionnaires assessing sexual health symptoms experienced during treatment. Patients interested in further study involvement were invited to participate in semistructured interviews. These interviews explored sexual health education provided by the oncology team and patient preferences in content, format, and timing of education delivery. RESULTS: Eighty-seven (32%) patients completed the questionnaire. Most patients reported decreased sexual desire (69%), vaginal dryness (63%), and less energy for sexual activity (62%) during/after treatment. Sixteen patients participated in interviews. Few women reported receiving information about potential sexual effects of breast cancer treatment; patients who did reported a focus on menopausal symptoms or fertility rather than sexual function. Regarding preferences in format, patients were in favor of multiple options being offered rather than a one-size-fits-all approach, with particular emphasis on in-person options and support groups. Patients desired education early and often throughout breast cancer treatment, not only about sexual side effects but also on mitigation strategies, sexual function, dating and partner intimacy, and body image changes. CONCLUSION: Few patients received information about the sexual health effects of breast cancer treatment, though many experienced symptoms. Potential adverse effects should be discussed early and addressed often throughout treatment, with attention to strategies to prevent and alleviate symptoms and improve overall sexual health.

Choosing Between Mastectomy and Breast-Conserving Therapy: Is Patient Distress an Influencing Factor?

BACKGROUND: Breast-conserving therapy (BCT) offers oncologic outcomes similar to those of mastectomy, yet many patients, when provided the option, choose mastectomy. This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between patient-reported distress and surgical decisions and to determine factors predictive of choosing BCT versus mastectomy. METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer deemed candidates for BCT who completed a distress screen at their initial visit to an academic institution between 2016 and 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. This screening tool captures distress in emotional, social, health, and practical domains on a scale of 0 to 10. The distress scores were compared against surgical decisions using nonparametric Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Patient factors associated with surgical choice were analyzed using chi-square, Fisher's exact, and Student's t tests. A two-sided p value lower than 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Of 506 patients deemed eligible for BCT, 430 (85%) chose BCT and 76 (15%) pursued mastectomy. The distress levels did not differ significantly between the surgical options. The patients who underwent mastectomy were on the average younger (50.7 vs 60.4 years; p < 0.0001), presented with palpable masses (p < 0.0001), had stage 0, 2, or 3 versus stage 1 disease (p < 0.0001), sought consultation for second opinions (19.7% vs 8.6%; p = 0.0032), received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (31.6% vs 16.3%; p = 0.0016), or had deleterious gene mutations (21.1% vs 5.1%; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Distress was not associated with the pursuit of surgical treatment. Rather, younger age, search for a second opinion, and a palpable mass present at presentation were associated with more aggressive surgical decisions. Understanding factors that influence surgical decision-making is critical in guiding informed decisions that reflect patient values.

Early Trajectories of Patient Reported Outcomes in Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing Lumpectomy Versus Mastectomy.

PURPOSE: This study was designed to: (1) characterize longitudinal patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between breast cancer patients undergoing lumpectomy and mastectomy and (2) compare return to baseline scores at 3 months and 6 months postoperatively. METHODS: Newly diagnosed breast cancer patients seen at an academic breast center between June 2019 and February 2021 were invited to participate in longitudinal PRO surveys at their initial clinic visit. If willing to participate, patients were emailed the validated BREAST-Q™ questionnaire at the initial clinic visit (baseline), 2 weeks after surgery, and then every 3 months for the first year. We used linear mixed models to estimate the differences in slopes over time between lumpectomy and mastectomy for each PRO measure. Pearson's Chi-square tests with Yates' continuity correction were used to compare proportions of patients who return to baseline PRO scores. P < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Of 164 patients invited to participate, 100 (61%) completed a baseline survey and were included in analyses. Mastectomy patients had significantly greater decreases in breast satisfaction (P = 0.002), psychosocial well-being (P < 0.0001), and sexual well-being (P < 0.0001) over time compared with lumpectomy patients. Both surgical groups reported a decrease in physical well-being, although the decline was more significant in lumpectomy patients (P = 0.005). At 3 months and 6 months after surgery, significantly larger proportions of lumpectomy patients returned to their baseline breast satisfaction, psychosocial well-being, and physical well-being compared with mastectomy patients. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding how outcomes important to patients change over the care continuum can provide opportunities for early intervention and may prevent debilitating long-term morbidities of treatment.

Longitudinal Risk Management for Patients with Increased Risk for Breast Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to characterize longitudinal care management and evaluate the relationship between various patient factors and the likelihood of choosing risk-reducing behaviors in women with increased risk of developing breast cancer. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted to evaluate all adult female patients who had at least one clinic visit with a surgical provider for discussion of breast cancer risk assessment between January, 2017 to July, 2020 at an academic center. Patients with prior history of breast cancer were excluded. Patient details and strategies pursued at clinic visits were recorded. A time-to-event analysis was performed, and hazard ratios were determined to characterize associations between patient characteristics and time to pursuing risk-reducing care management. RESULTS: There were 283 participants with at least one follow-up visit and 48 (17.0%) ultimately changed their initial strategy to either chemoprevention or prophylactic mastectomy. Patients with gene mutations were 6 times more likely to engage in risk-reducing management compared to those without (hazard ratio (HR) 5.99, P < 0.001). Those with histories of high-risk proliferative changes (HR 7.62, P < 0.001) and hysterectomy (HR 2.99, P = 0.019) were also more likely to engage in risk-reducing management. Age, race, and increased predicted risk of developing breast cancer (estimated by various calculators) were not associated with increased likelihood of engaging in risk-reducing strategies. CONCLUSION: Known gene mutations, history of high-risk proliferative changes, and prior hysterectomy were factors associated with women who were more likely to engage in risk-reducing strategies. These findings, when paired with patient reported outcome measures, may help guide shared decision-making.

The Waiting Game: How Long Are Breast Cancer Patients Waiting for Definitive Diagnosis?

BACKGROUND: Receiving a new breast cancer (BC) diagnosis can cause significant patient anxiety, which is amplified by delays in diagnosis. There is a lack of defined time periods for delays in the workup of BC. This study aims to evaluate national variations in timing from first abnormal mammogram to first biopsy and to determine independent predictors of delay in diagnosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were derived from SEER-Medicare linked claims database from 2007 to 2013. Time intervals from abnormal mammogram, either screening or diagnostic, to biopsy were assessed. The fourth quartile for timing from first mammogram to first biopsy was utilized to define delay in diagnosis. Multivariate analyses were used to evaluate the association between clinicopathologic variables and delays in diagnosis. RESULTS: We analyzed 53,758 patients with stage 0-II BC who underwent upfront surgery. Significant variations in timing of care were identified, with mean times from mammogram to biopsy, surgeon visit, and breast surgery of 23.3, 31.6, and 52.6 days, respectively. Over the study period, there was a decrease in delays from mammogram to biopsy. Non-White race, Northeast location, and earlier stage disease were found to be independent predictors of delays in the diagnosis of BC (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrates significant variations in time to diagnostic biopsy. More efficient processes of care to address these delays should be implemented, and further studies are needed to determine whether improved efficiency decreases patient anxiety. The large variations in time to diagnosis speak to the need for consensus guidelines to establish a standard of care.

Reassessing Opioid Use in Breast Surgery.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to assess multimodal pain management and opioid prescribing practices in patients undergoing breast surgery. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients undergoing breast surgery at an academic medical center between April 1, 2018 and September 30, 2019, was performed. Patients with a history of recent opioid use or conditions precluding use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or acetaminophen (APAP) were excluded. Opioid-sparing pain regimens were assessed. Opioids prescribed on discharge were recorded as oral morphine equivalents (OMEs) and concordance with the Opioid Prescribing Engagement Network (OPEN) determined. RESULTS: The total study population consisted of 518 patients. 358 patients underwent minor outpatient procedures (sentinel lymph node biopsy, lumpectomy, and excisional biopsy), 10-40% of whom were appropriately prescribed as per the OPEN. Perioperatively, 53.9% of patients received APAP, 24.6% NSAIDs, 20.4% gabapentin, and 0.3% blocks; intraoperatively, 95.8% received local anesthetic and 25.7% ketorolac. For mastectomy without reconstruction, 63-88% of prescriptions were concordant with the OPEN. For mastectomy with reconstruction, discharge opioids ranged from 25 to 400 OMEs with a mean of 134.4 OMEs; 25% of patients received a refill. Of all patients undergoing mastectomy ± reconstruction, 62.5% received APAP, 18.8% NSAIDs, 38.8% pregabalin, and 20.6% locoregional block perioperatively; 37.5% received local anesthetic and 15.6% ketorolac intraoperatively. Of 143 inpatient stays, 89% received APAP, 38% NSAID, and 29% benzodiazepines; 29 patients received no opioids inpatient but were still prescribed 25-200 OMEs on discharge. CONCLUSIONS: There is need for a multidisciplinary approach to pain management with the use of enhanced recovery after surgery protocols as potential means to standardize perioperative regimens and mitigate opioid overprescription.

Increasing omission of radiation therapy and sentinel node biopsy in elderly patients with early stage, hormone-positive breast cancer.

Prospective evidence demonstrates that there is limited benefit of axillary staging with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) or radiation therapy (RT) in patients over age 70 with clinical stage I, hormone-positive breast cancer. The clinical impact of this literature is unknown. Our hypothesis is that omission of SLNB and RT has increased over time in these patients, and patient and tumor characteristics can predict when omission strategies are used. A single-center tumor registry was queried for all patients over age 70 with ER+, Her2/neu-negative, clinical T1N0 invasive breast cancer from 2009 to 2017, who underwent breast conservation (n = 141). Date of treatment, age, tumor characteristics, use of SLNB, and use of RT were evaluated. The trend of treatment strategy over time was evaluated. Multivariable analysis was performed on the subgroup of patients after publication of the long-term follow-up CALGB 9343 data1 . Patients undergoing treatment with omission of RT and SLNB increased over the study period (P = .0006). Patients who did not receive RT were older (78.76 years ± 5.48 vs 73.37 ± 3.63, P < .01). There was no difference between tumor grade and size between uses of RT. Of patients who received SLNB (n = 84), only 3 (3.5%) had a positive LN. On multivariable analysis of patients who were treated after publication of the CALGB 9343 data (2014-2017), only age was predictive of being treated with RT (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.67-0.88). Omission of both RT and SLNB are increasing in clinical practice in appropriately selected patients. The likelihood that patients are offered omission of these interventions increases with age. Low nodal positivity rates suggest that this strategy may be underutilized. Tumor grade and size were not predictive of omission of RT in this group of low-risk patients. Long-term data are needed as these approaches are increasingly adopted.