Impact of personalized diabetes care on distress and treatment satisfaction in people with breast cancer.

AIMS: In patients with breast cancer (BCa) and diabetes (DM), diabetes distress (DD) and treatment satisfaction (DTS) can influence BCa management and outcomes. We assessed the impact of implementing a personalized diabetes care model in patients with BCa. METHODS: Patients in active treatment or surveillance for BCa with an HbA1c > 53 mmol/mol (7%) or random blood glucose >11.1 mmol/L were included. Participants were offered continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), virtual care and a dedicated diabetes provider for 6 months. Primary outcomes included DD measured by the Diabetes Distress Survey (DDS) and DTS measured by the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ). Questionnaires were conducted at 0, 3 and 6 months. RESULTS: Thirty-one women were enrolled (median age 61, IQR 49.0-69.0). Compared to baseline, the mean DDS score was lower at both 3 months (2.2 vs. 1.8 [n = 27], p = 0.004, SD = 0.70) and 6 months (2.3 vs. 1.8 [n = 23], p = 0.002, SD = 0.70). The mean DTSQ score was higher at 3 months (baseline: 20.5 vs. 3 months: 28.7 [n = 28], p < 0.001, SD = 9.2) and 6 months (baseline: 20.4 vs. 6 months: 30.0 [n = 26], p < 0.001, SD = 9.7). CONCLUSIONS: Personalized diabetes care models that emphasize remote management and optimize access for those with BCa may lower DD and improve DTS.

The Effects of Diabetes and Glycemic Control on Cancer Outcomes in Individuals With Metastatic Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether diabetes and glycemic control affects the outcomes of breast cancer, especially among those with metastatic disease. This study aims to determine the impact of diabetes and hyperglycemia on cancer progression and mortality in individuals with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). METHODS: Patients with a diagnosis of MBC between 2010 and 2021 were identified using the MBC database at 2 academic institutions. We evaluated the effects of diabetes and glycemic control on overall survival (OS) and time to next treatment (TTNT). RESULTS: We compared 244 patients with diabetes (median age 57.6 years) to 244 patients without diabetes (matched for age, sex, ethnicity, and receptor subtype). OS at 5 years [diabetes: 54% (95% CI 47-62%) vs controls: 56% (95% CI 49-63%), P = 0.65] and TTNT at 1 year [diabetes: 43% (95% CI 36-50%) vs controls: 44% (95% CI 36-51%), P = 0.33] were similar between groups. A subgroup analysis comparing those with good glycemic control and those with poor glycemic control among patients with specific receptor subtype profiles showed no differences in OS at 5 years or TTNT at 1 year. In an 8-year landmark subgroup analysis, there was worse OS among individuals with diabetes compared to controls, and OS was found to be better among those with good glycemic control compared to those with poor control. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes was not associated with increased mortality in individuals with MBC at 5 years. However, diabetes and hyperglycemia were associated with worse OS among a cohort of longer-term survivors. These findings suggest that individualized diabetes and glycemic goals should be considered in patients with MBC.