Surgery and Suicide Deaths Among Patients With Cancer.

This cohort study describes suicide incidence among patients with cancer compared with the general population and by surgical status and cancer treatment.

Development of a breast cancer risk prediction model integrating monogenic, polygenic, and epidemiologic risk.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer has been associated with monogenic, polygenic, and epidemiologic (clinical, reproductive and lifestyle) risk factors, but studies evaluating the combined effects of these factors have been limited. METHODS: We extended previous work in breast cancer risk modeling, incorporating pathogenic variants (PV) in six breast cancer predisposition genes and a 105-SNP polygenic risk score (PRS), to include an epidemiologic risk score (ERS) in a sample of non-Hispanic White women drawn from prospective cohorts and population-based case-control studies, with 23,518 cases and 22,832 controls, from the Cancer Risk Estimates Related to Susceptibility (CARRIERS) Consortium. RESULTS: The model predicts 4.4-fold higher risk of breast cancer for postmenopausal women with no predisposition PV and median PRS, but with the highest versus lowest ERS. Overall, women with CHEK2 PVs had >20% lifetime risk of breast cancer. However, 15.6% of women with CHEK2 PVs and a family history of breast cancer, and 45.1% of women with CHEK2 PVs but without a family history of breast cancer, had low (<20%) predicted lifetime risk and thus were below the threshold for MRI screening. CHEK2 PV carriers at the 10th percentile of the joint distribution of ERS and PRS, without a family history of breast cancer, had a predicted lifetime risk similar to the general population. CONCLUSIONS: These results illustrate that an ERS, alone and combined with the PRS, can contribute to clinically relevant risk stratification. IMPACT: Integrating monogenic, polygenic, and epidemiologic risk factors in breast cancer risk prediction models may inform personalized screening and prevention efforts.

Automated Extraction of Patient-Centered Outcomes After Breast Cancer Treatment: An Open-Source Large Language Model-Based Toolkit.

PURPOSE: Patient-centered outcomes (PCOs) are pivotal in cancer treatment, as they directly reflect patients' quality of life. Although multiple studies suggest that factors affecting breast cancer-related morbidity and survival are influenced by treatment side effects and adherence to long-term treatment, such data are generally only available on a smaller scale or from a single center. The primary challenge with collecting these data is that the outcomes are captured as free text in clinical narratives written by clinicians. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Given the complexity of PCO documentation in these narratives, computerized methods are necessary to unlock the wealth of information buried in unstructured text notes that often document PCOs. Inspired by the success of large language models (LLMs), we examined the adaptability of three LLMs, GPT-2, BioGPT, and PMC-LLaMA, on PCO tasks across three institutions, Mayo Clinic, Emory University Hospital, and Stanford University. We developed an open-source framework for fine-tuning LLM that can directly extract the five different categories of PCO from the clinic notes. RESULTS: We found that these LLMs without fine-tuning (zero-shot) struggle with challenging PCO extraction tasks, displaying almost random performance, even with some task-specific examples (few-shot learning). The performance of our fine-tuned, task-specific models is notably superior compared with their non-fine-tuned LLM models. Moreover, the fine-tuned GPT-2 model has demonstrated a significantly better performance than the other two larger LLMs. CONCLUSION: Our discovery indicates that although LLMs serve as effective general-purpose models for tasks across various domains, they require fine-tuning when applied to the clinician domain. Our proposed approach has the potential to lead more efficient, adaptable models for PCO information extraction, reducing reliance on extensive computational resources while still delivering superior performance for specific tasks.

The population-level effects of omitting chemotherapy guided by a 21-gene expression assay in node-positive breast cancer: a simulation modeling study.

BACKGROUND: A recent trial showed that postmenopausal women diagnosed with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2)-negative, lymph node-positive (1-3 nodes) breast cancer with a 21-gene recurrence score of ≤ 25 could safely omit chemotherapy. However, there are limited data on population-level long-term outcomes associated with omitting chemotherapy among diverse women seen in real-world practice. METHODS: We adapted an established, validated simulation model to generate the joint distributions of population-level characteristics of women diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer in the U.S. Input parameters were derived from cancer registry, meta-analyses, and clinical trial data. The effects of omitting chemotherapy on 10-year distant recurrence-free survival, life-years, and quality adjusted life-years (QALYs) were modeled for premenopausal and postmenopausal women. QALYs were discounted at 3%. Results were evaluated for subgroups stratified by race and ethnicity. Sensitivity analyses included testing results across a range of inputs. The model was validated using the published RxPONDER trial data. RESULTS: In premenopausal women, the 10-year distant recurrence-free survival rates were 85.3% with chemo-endocrine and 80.1% with endocrine therapy. The estimated life-years and QALYs gained with chemotherapy in premenopausal women were 2.1 and 0.6, respectively. There was no chemotherapy benefit in postmenopausal women. There was no variation in the absolute benefit of chemotherapy across racial or ethnic subgroups. However, there were differences in distant recurrence-free survival rates, life-years, and QALYs across groups. Sensitivity analysis showed similar results. The model closely replicated the RxPONDER trial. CONCLUSIONS: Modeled population-level outcomes show a small chemotherapy benefit in premenopausal women, but no benefit among postmenopausal women. Simulation modeling provides a useful tool to extend trial data and evaluate population-level outcomes.

Pregnancy-Related Factors and Breast Cancer Risk for Women Across a Range of Familial Risk.

Importance: Few studies have investigated whether the associations between pregnancy-related factors and breast cancer (BC) risk differ by underlying BC susceptibility. Evidence regarding variation in BC risk is critical to understanding BC causes and for developing effective risk-based screening guidelines. Objective: To examine the association between pregnancy-related factors and BC risk, including modification by a of BC where scores are based on age and BC family history. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included participants from the prospective Family Study Cohort (ProF-SC), which includes the 6 sites of the Breast Cancer Family Registry (US, Canada, and Australia) and the Kathleen Cuningham Foundation Consortium (Australia). Analyses were performed in a cohort of women enrolled from 1992 to 2011 without any personal history of BC who were followed up through 2017 with a median (range) follow-up of 10 (1-23) years. Data were analyzed from March 1992 to March 2017. Exposures: Parity, number of full-term pregnancies (FTP), age at first FTP, years since last FTP, and breastfeeding. Main Outcomes and Measures: BC diagnoses were obtained through self-report or report by a first-degree relative and confirmed through pathology and data linkages. Cox proportional hazards regression models estimated hazard ratios (HR) and 95% CIs for each exposure, examining modification by PARS of BC. Differences were assessed by estrogen receptor (ER) subtype. Results: The study included 17 274 women (mean [SD] age, 46.7 [15.1] years; 791 African American or Black participants [4.6%], 1399 Hispanic or Latinx participants [8.2%], and 13 790 White participants [80.7%]) with 943 prospectively ascertained BC cases. Compared with nulliparous women, BC risk was higher after a recent pregnancy for those women with higher PARS (last FTP 0-5 years HR for interaction, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.13-2.07; P for interaction < .001). Associations between other exposures were limited to ER-negative disease. ER-negative BC was positively associated with increasing PARS and increasing years since last FTP (P for interaction < .001) with higher risk for recent pregnancy vs nulliparous women (last FTP 0-5 years HR for interaction, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.03-2.31). ER-negative BC was positively associated with increasing PARS and being aged 20 years or older vs less than 20 years at first FTP (P for interaction = .002) and inversely associated with multiparity vs nulliparity (P for interaction = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of women with no prior BC diagnoses, associations between pregnancy-related factors and BC risk were modified by PARS, with greater associations observed for ER-negative BC.

Genetic Counseling, Testing, and Family Communication Into Survivorship After Diagnosis of Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: To examine receipt of genetic testing and communication with relatives about results into survivorship after diagnosis of breast cancer. METHODS: Women age 20-79 years diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer in 2014-2015 and reported to the Georgia and Los Angeles County SEER registries were surveyed approximately 7 months and 6 years after diagnosis (n = 1,412). We asked about genetic counseling, testing, and communication with relatives about results. We categorized women into indications for testing on the basis of clinical guidelines at the time of diagnosis and at the time of the follow-up survey (FUPs). RESULTS: A total of 47.4% had indications for genetic testing at any time: 28.0% at baseline and an additional 19.4% at the time of the FUPs (only); 71.9% (95% CI, 67.4 to 76.4) of those with a baseline indication reported genetic testing versus 53.3% (95% CI, 47.3 to 59.2) with an indication at FUPs only and 35.0% (95% CI, 31.6 to 38.4) with no indication (P < .001). There were no significant racial or ethnic differences in receipt of testing, controlling for age and clinical indications (P = .239); results for genetic counseling were similar. Only 3.4% of survivors had direct-to-consumer genetic testing (DTCt) for cancer. Testers who reported a pathogenic variant (n = 62) were much more likely to have talked to most or all their first-degree adult relatives about genetic testing than those with a variant of unknown significance (n = 49) or a negative finding (n = 419): 62.7% versus 38.8% and 38.0%, respectively (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Many women with indications for genetic counseling and testing into survivorship do not receive it. But those tested reach out to family members on the basis of the clinical relevance of their results. Very few patients obtained DTCt, which suggests that these tests do not substitute for clinical testing in breast cancer survivors.

Validation of a clinical breast cancer risk assessment tool combining a polygenic score for all ancestries with traditional risk factors.

PURPOSE: We previously described a combined risk score (CRS) that integrates a multiple-ancestry polygenic risk score (MA-PRS) with the Tyrer-Cuzick (TC) model to assess breast cancer (BC) risk. Here, we present a longitudinal validation of CRS in a real-world cohort. METHODS: This study included 130,058 patients referred for hereditary cancer genetic testing and negative for germline pathogenic variants in BC-associated genes. Data were obtained by linking genetic test results to medical claims (median follow-up 12.1 months). CRS calibration was evaluated by the ratio of observed to expected BCs. RESULTS: Three hundred forty BCs were observed over 148,349 patient-years. CRS was well-calibrated and demonstrated superior calibration compared with TC in high-risk deciles. MA-PRS alone had greater discriminatory accuracy than TC, and CRS had approximately 2-fold greater discriminatory accuracy than MA-PRS or TC. Among those classified as high risk by TC, 32.6% were low risk by CRS, and of those classified as low risk by TC, 4.3% were high risk by CRS. In cases where CRS and TC classifications disagreed, CRS was more accurate in predicting incident BC. CONCLUSION: CRS was well-calibrated and significantly improved BC risk stratification. Short-term follow-up suggests that clinical implementation of CRS should improve outcomes for patients of all ancestries through personalized risk-based screening and prevention.

Reproductive characteristics, menopausal status, race and ethnicity, and risk of breast cancer subtypes defined by ER, PR and HER2 status: the Breast Cancer Etiology in Minorities study.

BACKGROUND: Associations between reproductive factors and risk of breast cancer differ by subtype defined by joint estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and HER2 expression status. Racial and ethnic differences in the incidence of breast cancer subtypes suggest etiologic heterogeneity, yet data are limited because most studies have included non-Hispanic White women only. METHODS: We analyzed harmonized data for 2,794 breast cancer cases and 4,579 controls, of whom 90% self-identified as African American, Asian American or Hispanic. Questionnaire data were pooled from three population-based studies conducted in California and data on tumor characteristics were obtained from the California Cancer Registry. The study sample included 1,530 luminal A (ER-positive and/or PR-positive, HER2-negative), 442 luminal B (ER-positive and/or PR-positive, HER2-positive), 578 triple-negative (TN; ER-negative, PR-negative, HER2-negative), and 244 HER2-enriched (ER-negative, PR-negative, HER2-positive) cases. We used multivariable unconditional logistic regression models to estimate subtype-specific ORs and 95% confidence intervals associated with parity, breast-feeding, and other reproductive characteristics by menopausal status and race and ethnicity. RESULTS: Subtype-specific associations with reproductive factors revealed some notable differences by menopausal status and race and ethnicity. Specifically, higher parity without breast-feeding was associated with higher risk of luminal A and TN subtypes among premenopausal African American women. In contrast, among Asian American and Hispanic women, regardless of menopausal status, higher parity with a breast-feeding history was associated with lower risk of luminal A subtype. Among premenopausal women only, luminal A subtype was associated with older age at first full-term pregnancy (FTP), longer interval between menarche and first FTP, and shorter interval since last FTP, with similar OR estimates across the three racial and ethnic groups. CONCLUSIONS: Subtype-specific associations with reproductive factors overall and by menopausal status, and race and ethnicity, showed some differences, underscoring that understanding etiologic heterogeneity in racially and ethnically diverse study samples is essential. Breast-feeding is likely the only reproductive factor that is potentially modifiable. Targeted efforts to promote and facilitate breast-feeding could help mitigate the adverse effects of higher parity among premenopausal African American women.

Family communication of cancer genetic test results in an ethnically diverse population: a qualitative exploration of more than 200 patients.

Previous research on family communication of cancer genetic test results has primarily focused on non-Hispanic White patients with high-risk pathogenic variants (PV). There are limited data on patient communication of moderate-risk PVs, variants of uncertain significance (VUS), and negative results. This qualitative study examined communication of positive, negative, and VUS hereditary cancer multi-gene panel (MGP) results in an ethnically and socioeconomically diverse population. As part of a multicenter, prospective cohort study of 2000 patients who underwent MGP testing at three hospitals in California, USA, free-text written survey responses to the question: "Feel free to share any thoughts or experiences with discussing genetic test results with others" were collected from participant questionnaires administered at 3 and 12-months post results disclosure. Content and thematic analyses were performed using a theory-driven analysis, Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), on 256 responses from 214 respondents. Respondents with high perceived utility of sharing genetic test results often reported positive attitudes towards sharing test results and direct encouragement for genetic testing of others. Respondents with high self-efficacy in the sharing process were likely to report high perceived utility of sharing, whereas patients with low self-efficacy more often had VUS results and were more likely to report uncertainty about sharing. Consistent with TPB, our findings suggest that clinician reinforcement of the utility of genetic testing may increase intent for patients to communicate genetic information. Our findings suggest that clinicians should focus on strategies to improve patient understanding of VUS results.

Emergency department involvement in the diagnosis of cancer among older adults: a SEER-Medicare study.

BACKGROUND: Internationally, 20% to 50% of cancer is diagnosed through emergency presentation, which is associated with lower survival, poor patient experience, and socioeconomic disparities, but population-based evidence about emergency diagnosis in the United States is limited. We estimated emergency department (ED) involvement in the diagnosis of cancer in a nationally representative population of older US adults, and its association with sociodemographic, clinical, and tumor characteristics. METHODS: We analyzed Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program-Medicare data for Medicare beneficiaries (≥66 years old) with a diagnosis of female breast, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancers (2008-2017), defining their earliest cancer-related claim as their index date, and patients who visited the ED 0 to 30 days before their index date to have "ED involvement" in their diagnosis, with stratification as 0 to 7 or 8 to 30 days. We estimated covariate-adjusted associations of patient age, sex, race and ethnicity, marital status, comorbidity score, tumor stage, year of diagnosis, rurality, and census-tract poverty with ED involvement using modified Poisson regression. RESULTS: Among 614 748 patients, 23% had ED involvement, with 18% visiting the ED in the 0 to 7 days before their index date. This rate varied greatly by tumor site, with breast cancer at 8%, colorectal cancer at 39%, lung cancer at 40%, and prostate cancer at 7%. In adjusted models, older age, female sex, non-Hispanic Black and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander race, being unmarried, recent year of diagnosis, later-stage disease, comorbidities, and poverty were associated with ED involvement. CONCLUSIONS: The ED may be involved in the initial identification of cancer for 1 in 5 patients. Earlier, system-level identification of cancer in non-ED settings should be prioritized, especially among underserved populations.

Racial disparities in breast cancer risk factors and risk management.

Racial disparities in breast cancer outcomes are well described across the spectrum of screening, diagnosis, treatment, and survivorship. Breast cancer mortality is markedly elevated for Non-Hispanic Black women compared with other racial and ethnic groups, with multifactorial causes. Here, we aim to reduce this burden by identifying disparities in breast cancer risk factors, risk assessment, and risk management before breast cancer is diagnosed. We describe a reproductive profile and modifiable risk factors specific to the development of triple-negative breast cancer. We also propose that screening strategies should be both risk- and race-based, given the prevalence of early-onset triple-negative breast cancer in young Black women. We emphasize the importance of early risk assessment and identification of patients at hereditary and familial risk and discuss indications for a high-risk referral. We discuss the subtleties following genetic testing and highlight "uncertain" genetic testing results and risk estimation challenges in women who test negative. We trace aspects of the obesity epidemic in the Black community to infant feeding patterns and emphasize healthy eating and activity. Finally, we discuss building an environment of trust to foster adherence to recommendations, follow-up care, and participation in clinical trials. Addressing relevant social determinants of health; educating patients and clinicians on factors impacting disparities in outcomes; and encouraging participation in targeted, culturally sensitive research are essential to best serve all communities.

Collaborative Modeling to Compare Different Breast Cancer Screening Strategies: A Decision Analysis for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Importance: The effects of breast cancer incidence changes and advances in screening and treatment on outcomes of different screening strategies are not well known. Objective: To estimate outcomes of various mammography screening strategies. Design, Setting, and Population: Comparison of outcomes using 6 Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) models and national data on breast cancer incidence, mammography performance, treatment effects, and other-cause mortality in US women without previous cancer diagnoses. Exposures: Thirty-six screening strategies with varying start ages (40, 45, 50 years) and stop ages (74, 79 years) with digital mammography or digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) annually, biennially, or a combination of intervals. Strategies were evaluated for all women and for Black women, assuming 100% screening adherence and "real-world" treatment. Main Outcomes and Measures: Estimated lifetime benefits (breast cancer deaths averted, percent reduction in breast cancer mortality, life-years gained), harms (false-positive recalls, benign biopsies, overdiagnosis), and number of mammograms per 1000 women. Results: Biennial screening with DBT starting at age 40, 45, or 50 years until age 74 years averted a median of 8.2, 7.5, or 6.7 breast cancer deaths per 1000 women screened, respectively, vs no screening. Biennial DBT screening at age 40 to 74 years (vs no screening) was associated with a 30.0% breast cancer mortality reduction, 1376 false-positive recalls, and 14 overdiagnosed cases per 1000 women screened. Digital mammography screening benefits were similar to those for DBT but had more false-positive recalls. Annual screening increased benefits but resulted in more false-positive recalls and overdiagnosed cases. Benefit-to-harm ratios of continuing screening until age 79 years were similar or superior to stopping at age 74. In all strategies, women with higher-than-average breast cancer risk, higher breast density, and lower comorbidity level experienced greater screening benefits than other groups. Annual screening of Black women from age 40 to 49 years with biennial screening thereafter reduced breast cancer mortality disparities while maintaining similar benefit-to-harm trade-offs as for all women. Conclusions: This modeling analysis suggests that biennial mammography screening starting at age 40 years reduces breast cancer mortality and increases life-years gained per mammogram. More intensive screening for women with greater risk of breast cancer diagnosis or death can maintain similar benefit-to-harm trade-offs and reduce mortality disparities.

A scoping review of web-based, interactive, personalized decision-making tools available to support breast cancer treatment and survivorship care.

PURPOSE: We reviewed existing personalized, web-based, interactive decision-making tools available to guide breast cancer treatment and survivorship care decisions in clinical settings. METHODS: The study was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). We searched PubMed and related databases for interactive web-based decision-making tools developed to support breast cancer treatment and survivorship care from 2013 to 2023. Information on each tool's purpose, target population, data sources, individual and contextual characteristics, outcomes, validation, and usability testing were extracted. We completed a quality assessment for each tool using the International Patient Decision Aid Standard (IPDAS) instrument. RESULTS: We found 54 tools providing personalized breast cancer outcomes (e.g., recurrence) and treatment recommendations (e.g., chemotherapy) based on individual clinical (e.g., stage), genomic (e.g., 21-gene-recurrence score), behavioral (e.g., smoking), and contextual (e.g., insurance) characteristics. Forty-five tools were validated, and nine had undergone usability testing. However, validation and usability testing included mostly White, educated, and/or insured individuals. The average quality assessment score of the tools was 16 (range: 6-46; potential maximum: 63). CONCLUSIONS: There was wide variation in the characteristics, quality, validity, and usability of the tools. Future studies should consider diverse populations for tool development and testing. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: There are tools available to support personalized breast cancer treatment and survivorship care decisions in clinical settings. It is important for both cancer survivors and physicians to carefully consider the quality, validity, and usability of these tools before using them to guide care decisions.

Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and breast cancer mortality in racially and ethnically diverse participants of the Northern California Breast Cancer Family Registry.

Stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (sTIL) enrichment in pretreatment breast tumors has been associated with superior response to neoadjuvant treatment and survival. In a population-based cohort, we studied sTIL-survival associations by race and ethnicity. We assessed associations of continuous sTIL scores and sTIL-enriched breast cancers (defined as percent lymphocytic infiltration of tumor stroma or cell nests at cutoffs of 30%, 50%, and 70%) with clinical and epidemiologic characteristics and conducted multivariable survival analyses. Although we identified no difference in sTIL score by race and ethnicity, higher continuous sTIL score was associated with lower breast cancer-specific mortality only among non-Hispanic White and Asian American but not African American and Hispanic women. This finding suggests that complex factors influence treatment response and survival, given that sTIL enrichment was not associated with a survival advantage among women from minoritized groups, who more often experience health disparities. Further study of patient selection for sTIL-guided treatment strategies is warranted.

Incidence of Nonkeratinocyte Skin Cancer After Breast Cancer Radiation Therapy.

Importance: Previous studies have suggested that radiation therapy may contribute to an increased risk of subsequent nonkeratinocyte (ie, not squamous and basal cell) skin cancers. Objective: To test the hypothesis that radiation therapy for breast cancer increases the risk of subsequent nonkeratinocyte skin cancers, particularly when these cancers are localized to the skin of the breast or trunk. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study used longitudinal data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program for January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2019. The SEER database includes population-based cohort data from 17 registries. Patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer were identified and were evaluated for subsequent nonkeratinocyte skin cancer development. Data analysis was performed from January to August 2023. Exposures: Radiation therapy, chemotherapy, or surgery for breast cancer. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) for subsequent nonkeratinocyte skin cancer development from 2000 to 2019 based on treatment type (radiation therapy, chemotherapy, or surgery), skin cancer site on the body, and skin cancer subtype. Results: Among the 875 880 patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer included in this study, 99.3% were women, 51.6% were aged older than 60 years, and 50.3% received radiation therapy. A total of 11.2% patients identified as Hispanic, 10.1% identified as non-Hispanic Black, and 69.5% identified as non-Hispanic White. From 2000 to 2019, there were 3839 patients with nonkeratinocyte skin cancer, including melanoma (3419 [89.1%]), Merkel cell carcinoma (121 [3.2%]), hemangiosarcoma (104 [2.7%]), and 32 other nonkeratinocyte skin cancers (195 [5.1%]), documented to occur after breast cancer treatment. The risk of nonkeratinocyte skin cancer diagnosis after breast cancer treatment with radiation was 57% higher (SIR, 1.57 [95% CI, 1.45-1.7]) than that of the general population when considering the most relevant site: the skin of the breast or trunk. When risk at this site was stratified by skin cancer subtype, the SIRs for melanoma and hemangiosarcoma were both statistically significant at 1.37 (95% CI, 1.25-1.49) and 27.11 (95% CI, 21.6-33.61), respectively. Receipt of radiation therapy was associated with a greater risk of nonkeratinocyte skin cancer compared with chemotherapy and surgical interventions. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study of patients with breast cancer, an increased risk of melanoma and hemangiosarcoma after breast cancer treatment with radiation therapy was observed. Although occurrences of nonkeratinocyte skin cancers are rare, physicians should be aware of this elevated risk to help inform follow-up care.

Germline Testing in Patients With Breast Cancer: ASCO-Society of Surgical Oncology Guideline.

PURPOSE: To develop recommendations for germline mutation testing for patients with breast cancer. METHODS: An ASCO-Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) panel convened to develop recommendations based on a systematic review and formal consensus process. RESULTS: Forty-seven articles met eligibility criteria for the germline mutation testing recommendations; 18 for the genetic counseling recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS: BRCA1/2 mutation testing should be offered to all newly diagnosed patients with breast cancer ≤65 years and select patients >65 years based on personal history, family history, ancestry, or eligibility for poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor therapy. All patients with recurrent breast cancer who are candidates for PARP inhibitor therapy should be offered BRCA1/2 testing, regardless of family history. BRCA1/2 testing should be offered to women who develop a second primary cancer in the ipsilateral or contralateral breast. For patients with prior history of breast cancer and without active disease, testing should be offered to patients diagnosed ≤65 years and selectively in patients diagnosed after 65 years, if it will inform personal and family risk. Testing for high-penetrance cancer susceptibility genes beyond BRCA1/2 should be offered to those with supportive family histories; testing for moderate-penetrance genes may be offered if necessary to inform personal and family cancer risk. Patients should be provided enough pretest information for informed consent; those with pathogenic variants should receive individualized post-test counseling. Variants of uncertain significance should not impact management, and patients with such variants should be followed for reclassification. Referral to providers experienced in clinical cancer genetics may help facilitate patient selection and interpretation of expanded testing, and provide counseling of individuals without pathogenic germline variants but with significant family history.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines.

Avoiding lead-time bias by estimating stage-specific proportions of cancer and non-cancer deaths.

PURPOSE: Understanding how stage at cancer diagnosis influences cause of death, an endpoint that is not susceptible to lead-time bias, can inform population-level outcomes of cancer screening. METHODS: Using data from 17 US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries for 1,154,515 persons aged 50-84 years at cancer diagnosis in 2006-2010, we evaluated proportional causes of death by cancer type and uniformly classified stage, following or extrapolating all patients until death through 2020. RESULTS: Most cancer patients diagnosed at stages I-II did not go on to die from their index cancer, whereas most patients diagnosed at stage IV did. For patients diagnosed with any cancer at stages I-II, an estimated 26% of deaths were due to the index cancer, 63% due to non-cancer causes, and 12% due to a subsequent primary (non-index) cancer. In contrast, for patients diagnosed with any stage IV cancer, 85% of deaths were attributed to the index cancer, with 13% non-cancer and 2% non-index-cancer deaths. Index cancer mortality from stages I-II cancer was proportionally lowest for thyroid, melanoma, uterus, prostate, and breast, and highest for pancreas, liver, esophagus, lung, and stomach. CONCLUSION: Across all cancer types, the percentage of patients who went on to die from their cancer was over three times greater when the cancer was diagnosed at stage IV than stages I-II. As mortality patterns are not influenced by lead-time bias, these data suggest that earlier detection is likely to improve outcomes across cancer types, including those currently unscreened.

Analysis of Breast Cancer Mortality in the US-1975 to 2019.

Importance: Breast cancer mortality in the US declined between 1975 and 2019. The association of changes in metastatic breast cancer treatment with improved breast cancer mortality is unclear. Objective: To simulate the relative associations of breast cancer screening, treatment of stage I to III breast cancer, and treatment of metastatic breast cancer with improved breast cancer mortality. Design, Setting, and Participants: Using aggregated observational and clinical trial data on the dissemination and effects of screening and treatment, 4 Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) models simulated US breast cancer mortality rates. Death due to breast cancer, overall and by estrogen receptor and ERBB2 (formerly HER2) status, among women aged 30 to 79 years in the US from 1975 to 2019 was simulated. Exposures: Screening mammography, treatment of stage I to III breast cancer, and treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Main Outcomes and Measures: Model-estimated age-adjusted breast cancer mortality rate associated with screening, stage I to III treatment, and metastatic treatment relative to the absence of these exposures was assessed, as was model-estimated median survival after breast cancer metastatic recurrence. Results: The breast cancer mortality rate in the US (age adjusted) was 48/100 000 women in 1975 and 27/100 000 women in 2019. In 2019, the combination of screening, stage I to III treatment, and metastatic treatment was associated with a 58% reduction (model range, 55%-61%) in breast cancer mortality. Of this reduction, 29% (model range, 19%-33%) was associated with treatment of metastatic breast cancer, 47% (model range, 35%-60%) with treatment of stage I to III breast cancer, and 25% (model range, 21%-33%) with mammography screening. Based on simulations, the greatest change in survival after metastatic recurrence occurred between 2000 and 2019, from 1.9 years (model range, 1.0-2.7 years) to 3.2 years (model range, 2.0-4.9 years). Median survival for estrogen receptor (ER)-positive/ERBB2-positive breast cancer improved by 2.5 years (model range, 2.0-3.4 years), whereas median survival for ER-/ERBB2- breast cancer improved by 0.5 years (model range, 0.3-0.8 years). Conclusions and Relevance: According to 4 simulation models, breast cancer screening and treatment in 2019 were associated with a 58% reduction in US breast cancer mortality compared with interventions in 1975. Simulations suggested that treatment for stage I to III breast cancer was associated with approximately 47% of the mortality reduction, whereas treatment for metastatic breast cancer was associated with 29% of the reduction and screening with 25% of the reduction.