Design and Implementation of an Opt-Out, End-to-End, Preemptive DPYD Testing Program for Patients Planned for a Systemic Fluoropyrimidine.

PURPOSE: Several allelic variants of the gene DPYD encoding dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) are associated with impaired metabolism of the systemic fluoropyrimidine fluorouracil (5FU) and its oral prodrug, capecitabine, which elevates the risk for severe toxicity. Following a patient death related to capecitabine toxicity in which DPD deficiency was suspected, a multidisciplinary advisory panel was convened to develop an institution-wide approach to future patients planned for a systemic fluoropyrimidine. METHODS: The panel selected an opt-out testing strategy which focused on developing reliable processes to collect and report test results and targeted education. An electronic health record-based automated reminder was designed to activate when a 5FU- or capecitabine-containing chemotherapy regimen was ordered for a patient without prior exposure to either agent and without a prior DPYD sequencing test result. DPYD testing was standardized across all sites of care, and a closed loop reporting system for abnormal test results was created. Before implementation, targeted education was provided to providers, pharmacists, and nurses, and a failure mode and effects analysis was performed. Program rollout was staged over a 6-month period. RESULTS: At 10 months, the rate of preemptive testing increased from a baseline of 26% to a sustained rate of >90%. In the six network sites, the testing rate increased from 9% to 96%. A total of 1,043 patients have been tested preemptively; allelic variants have been identified in 43 (4.1%). Among 25 evaluable patients, dose reduction or change to a non-fluoropyrimidine-based regimen was accomplished in 96%. CONCLUSION: Preemptive DPYD testing is feasible, and high rates of testing can be achieved using an opt-out, reminder-based program. We provide the details of the implementation and encourage others to emulate it.

Neuroinvasive Bacillus cereus Infection in Immunocompromised Hosts: Epidemiologic Investigation of 5 Patients With Acute Myeloid Leukemia.

Background: Bacillus cereus is a ubiquitous gram-positive rod-shaped bacterium that can cause sepsis and neuroinvasive disease in patients with acute leukemia or neutropenia. Methods: A single-center retrospective review was conducted to evaluate patients with acute leukemia, positive blood or cerebrospinal fluid test results for B cereus, and abnormal neuroradiographic findings between January 2018 and October 2022. Infection control practices were observed, environmental samples obtained, a dietary case-control study completed, and whole genome sequencing performed on environmental and clinical Bacillus isolates. Results: Five patients with B cereus neuroinvasive disease were identified. All patients had acute myeloid leukemia (AML), were receiving induction chemotherapy, and were neutropenic. Neurologic involvement included subarachnoid or intraparenchymal hemorrhage or brain abscess. All patients were treated with ciprofloxacin and survived with limited or no neurologic sequelae. B cereus was identified in 7 of 61 environmental samples and 1 of 19 dietary protein samples-these were unrelated to clinical isolates via sequencing. No point source was identified. Ciprofloxacin was added to the empiric antimicrobial regimen for patients with AML and prolonged or recurrent neutropenic fevers; no new cases were identified in the ensuing year. Conclusions: B cereus is ubiquitous in the hospital environment, at times leading to clusters with unrelated isolates. Fastidious infection control practices addressing a range of possible exposures are warranted, but their efficacy is unknown and they may not be sufficient to prevent all infections. Thus, including B cereus coverage in empiric regimens for patients with AML and persistent neutropenic fever may limit the morbidity of this pathogen.

Identifying Patterns and Barriers in OncotypeDX Recurrence Score Testing in Older Patients With Early-Stage, Estrogen Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer: Implications for Guidance and Reimbursement.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical patterns of utilization of OncotypeDX Recurrence Score (RS) in early-stage, hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer (BC) at an academic center with previously established internal reflex testing guidelines. METHODS: RS testing in accordance with preexisting reflex criteria and predictors of utilization outside of reflex criteria were retrospectively analyzed for the years 2019-2021 in a quality improvement evaluation. Patients were grouped according to OncotypeDX testing within (cohort A) or outside (cohort B) of predefined criteria which included a cap at age older than 65 years. RESULTS: Of 1,687 patients whose tumors had RS testing, 1,087 were in cohort A and 600 in cohort B. In cohort B, nearly half of patients were older than 65 years (n = 279; IQR, 67-72 years). For patients older than 65 years, those with RS testing were younger (median age: 69 v 73 years), with higher grade cancers (G2-3: 84.9% v 54.7%) and were more likely to be treated with chemotherapy (15.4% v 4.1%). Issues for implementation of RS testing in older patients were identified, including potential structural barriers related to the current policy on the reimbursements of genomic tests. CONCLUSION: Internal guidelines may facilitate standardized utilization of the RS in early-BC. Our data suggest that clinicians preferred broader utilization of RS across the age spectrum, with therapeutically important consequences. Modifying the current policy for reimbursement of RS testing and in internal reflexive testing criteria for those older than 65 years is warranted.

Early Findings on the Use of Clinical Pathways for Management of Unwarranted Variation in Cancer Care.

Clinical pathways have the potential to improve complex clinical decision-making in cancer care. The authors implemented pathways with customized content to assist oncologists to select treatments, aiming for an on-pathway rate of 70%-85%. Treatment decisions were captured as on or off pathway, and metrics were shared monthly with users. Oncologists were categorized into quintiles based on on-pathway performance during the first 90 days of use. On-pathway rates were then calculated for days 91-360 (N = 121). Median on-pathway quintile rates varied from 50% to 100% in the initial 90-day period. During follow-up, median on-pathway rates shifted into the prespecified goal range for all groups. Clinical pathways resulted in greater uniformity in medical oncology practice. Monthly feedback about usage, familiarity with the electronic platform, and regular content updates are some factors that may influence on-pathway rates. Clinical pathways hold promise to manage unwarranted variation in cancer care.

Phase I study of JAK1/2 inhibitor ruxolitinib with weekly paclitaxel for the treatment of HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Preclinical studies support the JAK2-STAT3 signaling pathway as a key driver in CD44+ CD24- "stem-cell-like" breast cancer cells. Ruxolitinib is an orally bioavailable JAK1/2 inhibitor. We aimed to identify the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of ruxolitinib in combination with paclitaxel in patients with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC). METHODS: Eligible patients had HER2-negative MBC and had received ≤ 3 chemotherapy regimens for advanced disease. Patients received oral ruxolitinib (10-25 mg bid) in a 3 + 3 dose escalation design in combination with weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 in a 3-week cycle. The primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and the RP2D. RESULTS: Nineteen patients received protocol therapy (mean age 52 years). Eight (42%) had triple-negative breast cancer and 11 (58%) had hormone receptor-positive disease; 12 (63%) had visceral disease. Ten (53%) patients had not received prior treatment for advanced disease. Patients received a median number of 5 cycles of combination therapy (range 1-12) and five patients continued single-agent ruxolitinib. The MTD of ruxolitinib was 25 mg bid when combined with paclitaxel, and the RP2D for the combination was 15 mg bid. Thirteen (68%) patients required dose reductions or holds. Most frequent toxicities reported of any grade were neutropenia (50%) and anemia (33%). There were no grade 4/5 toxicities attributed to study drug. Four (21%) patients had PR, 12 (63%) had SD and three (16%) had PD as their best response. CONCLUSION: The combination of ruxolitinib and weekly paclitaxel was well tolerated with evidence of clinical activity. Further analysis of this combination is ongoing (NCT02041429). TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02041429. Date of registration: January 22, 2014.

Clinical Impact of Second Opinion Radiology Consultation for Patients With Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: To assess the incidence and clinical significance of discrepancy in subspecialty interpretation of outside breast imaging examinations for newly diagnosed breast cancer patients presenting to a tertiary cancer center. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This Institutional Review Board-approved retrospective study included patients presenting from July 2016 to March 2017 to a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center for second opinion after breast cancer diagnosis. Outside and second opinion radiology reports of 252 randomly selected patients were compared by two subspecialty breast radiologists to consensus. A peer review score was assigned, modeled after ACR's RADPEERTM peer review metric: 1-agree; 2-minor discrepancy (unlikely clinically significant); 3-moderate discrepancy (may be clinically significant); 4-major discrepancy (likely clinically significant). Among cases with clinically significant discrepancies, rates of clinical management change (management alterations including change in follow-up, neoadjuvant therapy use, and surgical management as a direct result of image review), and detection of additional malignancy were assessed through electronic medical record review. RESULTS: A significant difference in interpretation (scores = 3 or 4) was seen in 41 of 252 cases (16%, 95% confidence interval [CI], 11.7%-20.8%). The difference led to additional workup in 38 of 252 cases (15%, 95% CI 10.6%-19.5%) and change in clinical management in 18 of 252 cases (7.1%, 95% CI 4.0%-10.2%), including 15 of 252 with change in surgical management (6.0%, 95% CI, 3.0%-8.9%). An additional malignancy or larger area of disease was identified in 11 of 252 cases (4.4%, 95% CI, 1.8%-6.9%). CONCLUSION: Discrepancy between outside and second-opinion breast imaging subspecialists frequently results in additional workup for breast cancer patients, changes in treatment plan, and identification of new malignancies.

Impact of Genomic Assay Testing and Clinical Factors on Chemotherapy Use After Implementation of Standardized Testing Criteria.

BACKGROUND: For clinically appropriate early-stage breast cancer patients, reflex criteria for Oncotype DX ordering ("the intervention") were implemented at our comprehensive cancer center, which reduced time-to-adjuvant chemotherapy initiation. Our objective was to evaluate Oncotype DX ordering practices and chemotherapy use before and after implementation of the intervention. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined medical records for 498 patients who had definitive breast cancer surgery at our center. The post-intervention cohort consisted of 232 consecutive patients who had Oncotype DX testing after reflex criteria implementation. This group was compared to a retrospective cohort of 266 patients who were diagnosed and treated prior to reflex criteria implementation, including patients who did and did not have Oncotype DX ordered. Factors associated with Oncotype DX ordering pre- and post-intervention were examined. We used multivariate logistic regression to evaluate factors associated with chemotherapy receipt among patients with Oncotype DX testing. RESULTS: The distribution of Oncotype DX scores, the proportion of those having Oncotype DX testing (28.9% vs. 34.1%) and those receiving chemotherapy (14.3% vs. 19.4%), did not significantly change between pre- and post-intervention groups. Age ≤65 years, stage II, grade 2, 1-3+ nodes, and tumor size >2 cm were associated with higher odds of Oncotype DX testing. Among patients having Oncotype DX testing, node status and Oncotype DX scores were significantly associated with chemotherapy receipt. CONCLUSION: Our criteria for reflex Oncotype DX ordering appropriately targeted patients for whom Oncotype DX would typically be ordered by providers. No significant change in the rate of Oncotype DX ordering or chemotherapy use was observed after reflex testing implementation. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study demonstrates that implementing multidisciplinary consensus reflex criteria for Oncotype DX ordering maintains a stable Oncotype DX ordering rate and chemotherapy rate, mirroring what was observed in a specific clinical practice, while decreasing treatment delays due to additional testing. These reflex criteria appropriately capture patients who would likely have had Oncotype DX ordered by their providers and for whom the test results are predicted to influence management. This intervention serves as a potential model for other large integrated, multidisciplinary oncology centers to institute processes targeting patient populations most likely to benefit from genomic assay testing, while mitigating treatment delays.

Age and the Risk of Paclitaxel-Induced Neuropathy in Women with Early-Stage Breast Cancer (Alliance A151411): Results from 1,881 Patients from Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 40101.

PURPOSE: A few previous studies report a direct relationship between older age and chemotherapy-induced neuropathy. This study further evaluated this adverse event's age-based risk. METHODS: CALGB 40101 investigated adjuvant paclitaxel (80 mg/m2 once per week or 175 mg/m2 every 2 weeks) in patients with breast cancer and served as a platform for the current study that investigated age-based differences in neuropathy. Grade 2 or worse neuropathy, as per Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4, was the primary endpoint; patients were assessed at baseline, every 6 months for 2 years, and then annually for 15 years. RESULTS: Among these 1,881 patients, 230 were 65 years of age or older, 556 were 55-64 years, and 1,095 were younger than 55; 1,226 neuropathy events (commonly grade 1 or 2) were reported in 65% of the cohort. The number of grade 2 or worse events was 63 (27%), 155 (28%), and 266 (24%) within respective age groups (p = .14). In univariate analysis, only motor neuropathy had a higher age-based incidence: 19 (8%), 43 (8%), and 60 (5%), respectively (p = .04); in multivariate analyses, this association was no longer statistically significant. Other endpoints, such as time to onset of neuropathy (time from trial enrollment to neuropathy development) and time to improvement (time from maximal grade sensory neuropathy to a one-category improvement), showed no statistically significant age-based differences. In contrast, obesity was associated with neuropathy, and every 2-week paclitaxel was associated with trends toward neuropathy. CONCLUSION: Although paclitaxel-induced neuropathy is common, older age is not an independent risk factor. Clinical trial identification number. NCT00041119 (CALGB 40101). IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Age alone is not an independent risk factor for paclitaxel-induced neuropathy.

Developing a Novel Model to Improve Research and care for Cancer Survivors: a Feasibility Study.

Despite a growing number of clinical trials and supportive care programs for cancer survivors, recruitment of patients for these opportunities during the survivorship phase of care is challenging. We piloted a novel process to systematically educate patients about available research studies and supportive care programs as part of a survivorship care visit. Between 3/2015 and 8/2015, patients seen in the Adult Survivorship Program who had not previously received a treatment summary and survivorship care plan (TS/SCP) were provided with one accompanied by a list of survivorship research studies and care programs tailored to their diagnosis. Survivorship providers discussed the opportunities and recorded whether the patient was interested in relevant studies and placed referrals to study staff. Following the visit, we tracked study enrollment and surveyed patients about their experience. Fifty of 56 (89%) pilot participants completed the survey. Almost all (98%) reported that the TS/SCP visit and document helped with knowledge of research opportunities and supportive care interventions. Following receipt of the TS/SCP, 44% were interested in at least one study and in further follow-up with research staff. Of the 30 survivors eligible for at least one study, 6 (20%) have enrolled in at least one study to date. This pilot program demonstrates that the systematic sharing of available clinical studies and supportive care programming as part of a survivorship care plan visit is feasible and well received by cancer survivors and may facilitate and enhance accrual to clinical trials in the survivorship phase of care.

Surgeon Variability and Factors Predicting for Reoperation Following Breast-Conserving Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Reoperation after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is common and has been partially associated with the lack of consensus on margin definition. We sought to investigate factors associated with reoperations and variation in reoperation rates across breast surgeons at our cancer center. METHODS: Retrospective analyses of patients with clinical stage I-II breast cancer who underwent BCS between January and December 2014 were conducted prior to the recommendation of 'no ink on tumor' margin. Patient demographics and tumor and surgical data were extracted from medical records. A multivariate regression model was used to identify factors associated with reoperation. RESULTS: Overall, 490 patients with stage I (n  = 408) and stage II (n  = 89) breast cancer underwent BCS; seven patients had bilateral breast cancer and underwent bilateral BCS procedures. Median invasive tumor size was 1.1 cm, reoperation rate was 22.9% (n  = 114) and varied among surgeons (range 15-40%), and, in 100 (88%) patients, the second procedure was re-excision, followed by unilateral mastectomy (n  = 7, 6%) and bilateral mastectomy (n  = 7, 6%). Intraoperative margin techniques (global cavity or targeted shaves) were utilized in 50.1% of cases, while no specific margin technique was utilized in 49.9% of cases. Median total specimen size was 65.8 cm3 (range 24.5-156.0). In the adjusted model, patients with multifocal disease were more likely to undergo reoperation [odds ratio (OR) 5.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.17-15.42]. In addition, two surgeons were found to have significantly higher reoperation rates (OR 6.41, 95% CI 1.94-21.22; OR 3.41, 95% CI 1.07-10.85). CONCLUSIONS: Examination of BCS demonstrated variability in reoperation rates and margin practices among our breast surgeons. Future trials should look at surgeon-specific factors that may predict for reoperations.

Implementation of Surgeon-Initiated Gene Expression Profile Testing (Onco type DX) Among Patients With Early-Stage Breast Cancer to Reduce Delays in Chemotherapy Initiation.

PURPOSE: Delays to adjuvant chemotherapy initiation in breast cancer may adversely affect clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction. We previously identified an association between genomic testing (Onco type DX) and delayed chemotherapy initiation. We sought to reduce the interval between surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy initiation by developing standardized criteria and workflows for Onco type DX testing. METHODS: Criteria for surgeon-initiated reflex Onco type DX testing, workflows for communication between surgeons and medical oncologists, and a streamlined process for receiving and processing Onco type DX requests in pathology were established by multidisciplinary consensus. Criteria for surgeon-initiated testing included patients ≤ 65 years old with T1cN0 (grade 2 or 3), T2N0 (grade 1 or 2), or T1/T2N1 (grade 1 or 2) breast cancer on final surgical pathology. Medical oncologists could elect to initiate Onco type testing for cases falling outside the criteria. We then examined 720 consecutive patients with breast cancer who underwent Onco type DX testing postoperatively between January 1, 2014 and November 28, 2016 and measured intervals between date of surgery, Onco type DX order date, result received date, and chemotherapy initiation date (if applicable) before and after intervention implementation. RESULTS: The introduction of standardized criteria and workflows reduced time between surgery and Onco type DX ordering, and time from surgery to receipt of result, by 7.3 days ( P < .001) and 6.3 days ( P < .001), respectively. The mean number of days between surgery and initiation of chemotherapy was also reduced by 6.4 days ( P = .004). CONCLUSION: Developing consensus on Onco type DX testing criteria and implementing streamlined workflows has led to clinically significant reductions in wait times to chemotherapy decision making and initiation.

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.

Variation in the use of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor for dose dense paclitaxel: A single institution retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: The necessity of using granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) during dose-dense (DD) paclitaxel (T) after doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) is unclear. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study including patients with stage I-III breast cancer treated at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute with adjuvant DD-ACT between January 2011 and December 2013. Descriptive analyses evaluating patterns of G-CSF utilization during T were performed. RESULTS: Overall, 156 patients were treated with DD-ACT by 26 providers. The majority of patients (135, 87%) received at least one dose of G-CSF during T (group 1), 17% of these patients received it in only one cycle and 48% received it in all four cycles. Reasons for omitting G-CSF included high baseline absolute neutrophil count and pain. Twenty-one (13%) patients did not receive any G-CSF during T (group 2). Respectively, 94% and 90% of patients completed the treatment in groups 1 and 2. There were no cases of treatment cessation due to neutropenia. Six percent of patients in group 1 had at least one treatment delay. There were no treatment delays reported in group 2. Variation in the use of G-CSF by provider and by patient was found, with 11 providers choosing not to use G-CSF in at least one patient. CONCLUSIONS: We identified substantial variation in the use of G-CSF within the practice. However, omission of G-CSF was not associated with treatment delays or adverse events. Prospective studies are warranted to formally test whether routine G-CSF is necessary during dose-dense T therapy.

Teamwork and Electronic Health Record Implementation: A Case Study of Preserving Effective Communication and Mutual Trust in a Changing Environment.

This article describes how trust among team members and in the technology supporting them was eroded during implementation of an electronic health record (EHR) in an adult outpatient oncology practice at a comprehensive cancer center. Delays in care of a 38-year-old woman with high-risk breast cancer occurred because of ineffective team communication and are illustrated in a case study. The case explores how the patient's trust and mutual trust between team members were disrupted because of inaccurate assumptions about the functionality of the EHR's communication tool, resultant miscommunications between team members and the patient, and the eventual recognition that care was not being effectively coordinated, as it had been previously. Despite a well-established, team-based culture and significant preparation for the EHR implementation, the challenges that occurred point to underlying human and system failures from which other organizations going through a similar process may learn. Through an analysis and evaluation of events that transpired before and during the EHR rollout, suggested interventions for preventing this experience are offered, which include: a thorough crosswalk between old and new communication mechanisms before implementation; understanding and mitigation of gaps in the communication tool's functionality; more robust training for staff, clinicians, and patients; greater consideration given to the pace of change expected of individuals; and development of models of collaboration between EHR users and vendors in developing products that support high-quality, team-based care in the oncology setting. These interventions are transferable to any organizational or system change that threatens mutual trust and effective communication.

Implementation of a Breast/Reconstruction Surgery Coordinator to Reduce Preoperative Delays for Patients Undergoing Mastectomy With Immediate Reconstruction.

PURPOSE: Mastectomy with immediate reconstruction (MIR) requires coordination between breast and reconstructive surgical teams, leading to increased preoperative delays that may adversely impact patient outcomes and satisfaction. Our cancer center established a target of 28 days from initial consultation with the breast surgeon to MIR. We sought to determine if a centralized breast/reconstructive surgical coordinator (BRC) could reduce care delays. METHODS: A 60-day pilot to evaluate the impact of a BRC on timeliness of care was initiated at our cancer center. All reconstructive surgery candidates were referred to the BRC, who had access to surgical clinic and operating room schedules. The BRC worked with both surgical services to identify the earliest surgery dates and facilitated operative bookings. The median time to MIR and the proportion of MIR cases that met the time-to-treatment goal was determined. These results were compared with a baseline cohort of patients undergoing MIR during the same time period (January to March) in 2013 and 2014. RESULTS: A total of 99 patients were referred to the BRC (62% cancer, 21% neoadjuvant, 17% prophylactic) during the pilot period. Focusing exclusively on patients with a cancer diagnosis, an 18.5% increase in the percentage of cases meeting the target (P = .04) and a 7-day reduction to MIR (P = .02) were observed. CONCLUSION: A significant reduction in time to MIR was achieved through the implementation of the BRC. Further research is warranted to validate these findings and assess the impact the BRC has on operational efficiency and workflows.

Variation in Additional Breast Imaging Orders and Impact on Surgical Wait Times at a Comprehensive Cancer Center.

BACKGROUND: In the multidisciplinary care model, breast imagers frequently provide second-opinion reviews of imaging studies performed at outside institutions. However, the need for additional imaging and timeliness of obtaining these studies has yet to be established. We sought to evaluate the frequency of additional imaging orders by breast surgeons and to evaluate the impact of this supplementary imaging on timeliness of surgery. METHODS: We identified 2489 consecutive women with breast cancer who underwent first definitive surgery (FDS) at our comprehensive cancer center between 2011 and 2013. The number of breast-specific imaging studies performed for each patient between initial consultation and FDS was obtained. χ (2) tests were used to quantify the proportion of patients undergoing additional imaging by surgeon. Interval time between initial consultation and additional imaging and/or biopsy was calculated. The delay of additional imaging on time to FDS was assessed by t test. RESULTS: Of 2489 patients, 615 (24.7 %) had at least one additional breast-specific imaging study performed between initial consultation and FDS, with 222 patients undergoing additional biopsies (8.9 %). The proportion of patients receiving imaging tests by breast surgeon ranged from 15 to 39 % (p < 0.0001). Patients receiving additional imaging had statistically longer wait times to FDS for BCT (21.4-28.5 days, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Substantial variability exists in the utilization of additional breast-specific imaging and in the timeliness of obtaining these tests among breast surgeons. Further research is warranted to assess the sources and impact of this variation on patient care, cost, and outcomes.

The Influence of Radiology Image Consultation in the Surgical Management of Breast Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND: Patients referred to comprehensive cancer centers arrive with clinical data requiring review. Radiology consultation for second opinions often generates additional imaging requests; however, the impact of this service on breast cancer management remains unclear. We sought to identify the incidence of additional imaging requests and the effect additional imaging has on patients' ultimate surgical management. METHODS: Between November 2013 and March 2014, 153 consecutive patients with breast cancer received second opinion imaging reviews and definitive surgery at our cancer center. We identified the number of additional imaging requests, the number of fulfilled requests, the modality of additional imaging completed, the number of biopsies performed, and the number of patients whose management was altered due to additional imaging results. RESULTS: Of 153 patients, the mean age was 55 years; 98.9% were female; 23.5% (36) had in situ carcinoma (35 DCIS/1 LCIS), and 76.5% (117) had invasive carcinoma. Additional imaging was suggested for 47.7% (73/153) of patients. After multidisciplinary consultation, 65.8% (48/73) of patients underwent additional imaging. Imaging review resulted in biopsy in 43.7% (21/48) of patients and ultimately altered preliminary treatment plans in 37.5% (18/48) of patients (Fig. 1). Changes in management included: conversion to mastectomy or breast conservation, neoadjuvant therapy, additional wire placement, and need for contralateral breast surgery. Fig. 1 Impact of second-opinion imaging reviews on the management of breast cancer patients CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis of second opinion imaging consultation demonstrates the significant value that this service has on breast cancer management. Overall, 11.7% (18/153) of patients who underwent breast surgery had management changes as a consequence of radiologic imaging review.

Understanding process-of-care delays in surgical treatment of breast cancer at a comprehensive cancer center.

Few studies have examined care processes within providers' and institutions' control that expedite or delay care. The authors investigated the timeliness of breast cancer care at a comprehensive cancer center, focusing on factors influencing the time from initial consultation to first definitive surgery (FDS). The care of 1,461 women with breast cancer who underwent surgery at Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center from 2011 to 2013 was studied. The interval between consultation and FDS was calculated to identify variation in timeliness of care based on procedure, provider, and patients' sociodemographic characteristics. Targets of 14 days for lumpectomy and mastectomy and 28 days from mastectomy with immediate reconstruction were set and used to define delay. Mean days between consultation and FDS was 21.6 (range 1-175, sd 15.8) for lumpectomy, 36.7 (5-230, 29.1) for mastectomy, and 37.5 (7-111, 16) for mastectomy with reconstruction. Patients under 40 were less likely to be delayed (OR = 0.56, 95 % CI = 0.33-0.94, p = 0.03). Patients undergoing mastectomy alone (OR = 2.64, 95 % CI = 1.80-3.89, p < 0.0001) and mastectomy with immediate reconstruction (OR = 1.34 95 % CI = 1.00-1.79, p = 0.05) were more likely to be delayed when compared to lumpectomy. Substantial variation in surgical timeliness was identified. This study provides insight into targets for improvement including better coordination with plastic surgery and streamlining pre-operative testing. Cancer centers may consider investing in efforts to measure and improve the timeliness of cancer care.