Breast cancer (BC) and severe COVID-19 (C-19) outcomes: a matched analysis.

PURPOSE: Patients with cancer receiving anticancer treatment have a higher risk of severe COVID-19 (C-19) outcomes. We examine the association between breast cancer (BC), recent treatment (systemic therapy, surgery, radiation), and C-19 outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective matched cohort study using the Optum® de-identified C-19 Electronic Health Record dataset (2007-2022). Patients with C-19 were categorized into: no cancer, BC with recent treatment, and BC without recent treatment and matched based on age, C-19 diagnosis date, and comorbidity score. We evaluated 30-day mortality, mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, and hospitalization. A composite outcome including all outcomes was analyzed. Multivariable logistic regression models were used. RESULTS: 2200 matched triplets (1:1:10) of patients with BC recently treated, BC not recently treated, and no cancer were included. Rates of adverse outcomes improved in 2021 compared to 2020. Compared to patients without cancer, those with BC recently treated had a similar risk of adverse outcomes, while patients with BC not recently treated had a lower risk of ICU stay and hospitalization. Using the composite variable, BC recently treated had similar outcomes (OR = 1.02; 95%CI 0.93-1.11) to patients without cancer, while BC patients not recently treated had better outcomes (OR = 0.66; 95%CI 0.59-0.74). Among patients with BC, chemotherapy within 3 months was associated with a higher risk of hospitalization (OR = 2.30; 95%CI 1.76-2.99) and composite outcome (OR = 2.11; 95%CI 1.64-2.72). CONCLUSION: Patients with BC have a similar risk of adverse C-19 outcomes compared to patients without cancer. Among patients with BC, recent chemotherapy was associated with a higher risk of hospitalization.

Utilization of Biologic Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Therapy in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis and Recently Diagnosed Breast Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) are immunosuppressants, and there have been concerns that they might impact tumor immunity in patients with cancer with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The purpose of this study was to describe the utilization trends of bDMARD in patients with RA after breast cancer (BC) diagnosis. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of adults with RA and BC (2008 onward) from Optum's de-identified Clinformatics® Data Mart Database (CDM); the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER) Medicare; and the Texas Cancer Registry (TCR) Medicare databases. We evaluated bDMARD utilization trends during the first three years after BC. We conducted multivariable logistic regression to evaluate the association of utilization with patient characteristics. RESULTS: A total 1,412 patients were identified in CDM and 1,439 patients in SEER/TCR-Medicare. During the three months before BC diagnosis, 28.2% (CDM) and 26.9% (SEER/TCR-Medicare) patients had received bDMARDs. Within the first three years after diagnosis, 24.1% (CDM) and 26.4% (SEER/TCR-Medicare) were receiving bDMARDs. About 70% of the patients in the two cohorts received glucocorticoids with no significant time trend increases. The largest predictor of bDMARD utilization was prior use before BC (CDM: odds ratio [OR] 27.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] 19.29-38.19; SEER/TCR: OR 18.98, 95% CI 13.72-26.26). Regional and distant BC compared to in situ or localized were also associated with lower bDMARDs utilization in SEER/TCR-Medicare (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.36-0.82; OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.13-0.77, respectively). CONCLUSION: The utilization of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors and other bDMARDs in patients with RA and recent BC has not increased since 2008. Glucocorticoids utilization remained high. The largest predictor of bDMARD utilization was prior use before BC.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Long-Term Adverse Radiation Therapy Effects Among Breast Cancer Survivors.

PURPOSE: Breast and skin changes are underrecognized side effects of radiation therapy for breast cancer, which may have long-term implications for quality of life (QOL). Racial and ethnic disparities in breast cancer outcomes, including long-term QOL differences after breast radiation therapy, are poorly understood. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey study of patients from the Texas Cancer Registry who received diagnoses of stage 0-II breast cancer from 2009 to 2014 and treated with lumpectomy and radiation therapy; 2770 patients were sampled and 631 responded (23%). The BREAST-Q Adverse Effects of Radiation overall score and subindices measured the effect of radiation therapy on breast tissue. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated associations of demographic and treatment characteristics with outcomes. RESULTS: The median age was 57 years (IQR, 48-65), median time from diagnosis to survey response 9 years (IQR, 7-10), and the cohort included 62 Asian American or Pacific Islander (9.8%), 11 American Indian or Alaskan Native (AIAN) (1.7%), 161 Black (25.5%), 144 Hispanic (22.8%), and 253 White (40.1%) patients. Mean BREAST-Q Adverse Effects of Radiation score was worse for AIAN patients (-22.2; 95% CI, -39.9 to -4.6; P = .01), Black patients (-10.8; 95% CI, -16.1 to -5.5; P < .001), and Hispanic patients (-7.8; 95% CI, -13.0 to -2.5; P = .004) compared with White patients, age <50 compared with ≥65 (effect size -8.6; 95% CI, -14.0 to -3.2; P = .002), less than a college education (-5.8; 95% CI, -10.0 to -1.6; P = .01), bra cup size of D/E versus A/B (-5.3; 95% CI, -9.9 to -0.65; P = .03), and current smokers (-11.3; 95% CI, -18.3 to -4.2; P = .002). AIAN, Black, and Hispanic patients reported worse changes in skin pigmentation, telangiectasias, dryness, soreness, and/or irritation compared with White patients. CONCLUSIONS: AIAN, Black, and Hispanic patients reported substantially worse long-term breast and skin QOL outcomes after radiation therapy. Additional work is needed to understand these differences and how to alleviate them.

Association of Medicaid Expansion with Reduction in Racial Disparities in the Timely Delivery of up-front Surgical Care for Patients with Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the association between Medicaid expansion and time to surgery among patients with early-stage breast cancer (BC). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Delays in surgery are associated to adverse outcomes. It is known that underrepresented minorities are more likely to experience treatment delays. Understanding the impact of Medicaid expansion on reducing racial and ethnic disparities in healthcare delivery is critical. METHODS: This was a population-based study including women ages 40-64 with stage I-II BC who underwent upfront surgery identified in the National Cancer Database (2010-2017) residing in states that expanded Medicaid on January 1, 2014. Difference-in-difference (DID) analysis compared rates of delayed surgery (>90 d from pathological diagnosis) according to time period (pre-expansion [2010-2013] and post-expansion [2014-2017]) and race/ethnicity (White vs. racial and ethnic minority), stratified by insurance type (private vs. Medicaid/uninsured). Secondary analyses included logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression. All analyses were conducted among a cohort of patients in the non-expansion states as a falsification analysis. Finally, a triple-differences approach compared pre-expansion with the post-expansion trend between expansion and non-expansion states. RESULTS: Among Medicaid expansion states, 104,569 patients were included (50,048 pre- and 54,521 post-expansion). In the Medicaid/uninsured subgroup, Medicaid expansion was associated with a -1.8% point (95% CI -3.5% to -0.1, P =0.04) reduction of racial disparity in delayed surgery. Cox regression models demonstrated similar findings (adjusted DID hazard ratio 1.12 [95% CI 1.05-1.21]). The falsification analysis showed significant racial disparity reduction among expansion states but not among non-expansion states, resulting in a triple-difference estimate of -2.5% points (95% CI -4.9% to -0.1%, P =0.04) in this subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: As continued efforts are being made to increase access to healthcare, our study demonstrates a positive association between Medicaid expansion and a reduction in the delivery of upfront surgical care, reducing racial disparities among patients with early-stage BC.

Benchmarking of the Cervical Cancer Care Cascade and Survival Outcomes After Radiation Treatment in a Low- and Middle-Income Country Setting.

PURPOSE: Timely radiation treatment (RT) is critical in cervical cancer treatment, but patients in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in sub-Saharan Africa often face barriers that delay care. Time to care was benchmarked in a multidisciplinary team (MDT) setting in Botswana. METHODS: Time intervals between steps in care were recorded for 230 patients reviewed at MDT between January 2016 and July 2018. Associations between RT delay and overall survival (OS) were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: For patients who received RT (n = 187; 81.3%), the median biopsy to pathology reporting interval was 25 (IQR, 19-36) days and was 57 (IQR, 28-68) days for patients who did not (P = .003). Intervals in care did not differ between patients who did and did not receive RT. Among treated patients, the uppermost quartile interval from pathology reporting to RT initiation was ≥111 days and that from RT simulation to initiation was ≥12 days. Among patients receiving a RT dose of ≥65 Gy (n = 100), the delay from RT simulation to initiation of >12 days was associated with worse median OS (2.0 v 4.6 years; P = .048); this association trended toward, although did not meet, statistical significance on multivariable analysis (hazard ratio, 2.35; 95% CI, 0.95 to 5.85; P = .07). CONCLUSION: The MDT-coordinated care model allows for systematic benchmarking of the patient treatment cascade. Barriers to timely treatment exist for this cohort in Botswana, and RT delay may be associated with OS of patients receiving curative treatment. Interventions to accelerate the timing of the radiation oncology care cascade may improve clinical outcomes in this LMIC setting.

Risk of Cancer After Diagnosis of Cardiovascular Disease.

Background: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer share several risk factors. Although preclinical models show that various types of CVD can accelerate cancer progression, clinical studies have not determined the impact of atherosclerosis on cancer risk. Objectives: The objective of this study was to determine whether CVD, especially atherosclerotic CVD, is independently associated with incident cancer. Methods: Using IBM MarketScan claims data from over 130 million individuals, 27 million cancer-free subjects with a minimum of 36 months of follow-up data were identified. Individuals were stratified by presence or absence of CVD, time-varying analysis with multivariable adjustment for cardiovascular risk factors was performed, and cumulative risk of cancer was calculated. Additional analyses were performed according to CVD type (atherosclerotic vs nonatherosclerotic) and cancer subtype. Results: Among 27,195,088 individuals, those with CVD were 13% more likely to develop cancer than those without CVD (HR: 1.13; 95% CI: 1.12-1.13). Results were more pronounced for individuals with atherosclerotic CVD (aCVD), who had a higher risk of cancer than those without CVD (HR: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.19-1.21). aCVD also conferred a higher risk of cancer compared with those with nonatherosclerotic CVD (HR: 1.11; 95% CI: 1.11-1.12). Cancer subtype analyses showed specific associations of aCVD with several malignancies, including lung, bladder, liver, colon, and other hematologic cancers. Conclusions: Individuals with CVD have an increased risk of developing cancer compared with those without CVD. This association may be driven in part by the relationship of atherosclerosis with specific cancer subtypes, which persists after controlling for conventional risk factors.

Sponsor Perspectives on the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Interventional Cancer Clinical Trial Protocols and Data Quality.

PURPOSE: The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic created major disruptions in the conduct of cancer clinical trials. In response, regulators and sponsors allowed modifications to traditional trial processes to enable clinical research and care to continue. We systematically evaluated how these mitigation strategies affected data quality and overall trial conduct. METHODS: This study used surveys and live interviews. Forty-one major industry and National Cancer Institute Network groups (sponsors) overseeing anticancer treatment trials open in the United States from January 2015 to May 2022 were invited to participate. Descriptive statistics were used for survey data summaries. Key themes from interviews were identified. RESULTS: Twenty sponsors (48.8%; 15 industry and five Network groups) completed the survey; 11/20 (55.0%) participated in interviews. Sponsors predominantly (n = 12; 60.0%) reported large (≥11 trials) portfolios of phase II and/or phase III trials. The proportion of sponsors reporting a moderate (9) or substantial (8) increase in protocol deviations in the initial pandemic wave versus the pre-pandemic period was 89.5% (17/19); the proportion reporting a substantial increased dropped from 42.1% (n = 8/19) in the initial wave to 15.8% (n = 3/19) thereafter. The most commonly adopted mitigation strategies were remote distribution of oral anticancer therapies (70.0%), remote adverse event monitoring (65.0%), and remote consenting (65.0%). Most respondents (15/18; 83.3%) reported that the pandemic had minimal (n = 14) or no impact (n = 1) on overall data integrity. CONCLUSION: Despite nearly all sponsors observing a temporary increase in protocol deviations, most reported the pandemic had minimal/no impact on overall data integrity. The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated an emerging trend toward greater flexibility in trial conduct, with potential benefits of reduced burden on trial participants and sites and improved patient access to research.

Long-term Patient-Reported Outcomes in a Population-Based Cohort Following Radiotherapy vs Surgery for Oropharyngeal Cancer.

Importance: Oncologic outcomes are similar for patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) treated with primary surgery or radiotherapy. However, comparative differences in long-term patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between modalities are less well established. Objective: To determine the association between primary surgery or radiotherapy and long-term PROs. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used the Texas Cancer Registry to identify survivors of OPSCC treated definitively with primary radiotherapy or surgery between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2016. Patients were surveyed in October 2020 and April 2021. Exposures: Primary radiotherapy and surgery for OPSCC. Main Outcomes and Measures: Patients completed a questionnaire that included demographic and treatment information, the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Head and Neck (MDASI-HN) module, the Neck Dissection Impairment Index (NDII), and the Effectiveness of Auditory Rehabilitation (EAR) scale. Multivariable linear regression models were performed to evaluate the association of treatment (surgery vs radiotherapy) with PROs while controlling for additional variables. Results: Questionnaires were mailed to 1600 survivors of OPSCC identified from the Texas Cancer Registry, with 400 responding (25% response rate), of whom 183 (46.2%) were 8 to 15 years from their initial diagnosis. The final analysis included 396 patients (aged ≤57 years, 190 [48.0%]; aged >57 years, 206 [52.0%]; female, 72 [18.2%]; male, 324 [81.8%]). After multivariable adjustment, no significant differences were found between surgery and radiotherapy outcomes as measured by the MDASI-HN (ß, -0.1; 95% CI, -0.7 to 0.6), NDII (ß, -1.7; 95% CI, -6.7 to 3.4), and EAR (ß, -0.9; 95% CI -7.7 to 5.8). In contrast, less education, lower household income, and feeding tube use were associated with significantly worse MDASI-HN, NDII, and EAR scores, while concurrent chemotherapy with radiotherapy was associated with worse MDASI-HN and EAR scores. Conclusions and Relevance: This population-based cohort study found no associations between long-term PROs and primary radiotherapy or surgery for OPSCC. Lower socioeconomic status, feeding tube use, and concurrent chemotherapy were associated with worse long-term PROs. Further efforts should focus on the mechanism, prevention, and rehabilitation of these long-term treatment toxicities. The long-term outcomes of concurrent chemotherapy should be validated and may inform treatment decision making.

Enhancing the utilization of healthy living interventions among cancer survivors in historically underserved populations and communities.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to describe the clinical characteristics and wellness programming preferences of cancer survivors from Acres Homes, a historically Black neighborhood in Houston, Texas, with areas of persistent poverty. The goal of this study was to identify opportunities to increase cancer survivor utilization of healthy eating and active living interventions aligned to cancer center community outreach and engagement efforts. METHODS: This multiple methods study included a retrospective review of electronic health record data (n = 413) and qualitative interviews with cancer survivors (n = 31) immediately preceding initiation of healthy eating, active living programming in Acres Homes. RESULTS: This study found Acres Homes survivors have high rates of co-occurrent cardiometabolic disease including obesity (45.0%), diabetes (30.8%), and other related risk factors as well as treatment-related symptoms. Four major concepts emerged from interviews: (1) Factors that influence survivors' ability to eat well and exercise, (2) Current usage of community resources, (3) Interest in relevant programming, and (4) Specific programming preferences. Opportunities for current and future health promotion programming for cancer survivors were explored. CONCLUSION: Strategically tailoring community resources for cancer survivors can provide a more robust network of support to promote healthy eating and active living in this population. This work informed community implementation of evidence-based health interventions in Acres Homes and may support future projects aiming to enhance community-led cancer prevention efforts in historically underserved communities.

Patient-reported Quality of Life After Breast-conserving Surgery With Radiotherapy Versus Mastectomy and Reconstruction.

OBJECTIVE: To compare long-term quality of life (QOL) outcomes in breast cancer survivors who received breast-conserving surgery with radiotherapy (BCS+RT) with those who received a mastectomy and reconstructive surgery (Mast+Recon) without radiotherapy and identify other important factors. BACKGROUND: The long-term differences in patient-reported QOL outcomes following BCS+RT and Mast+Recon are not well understood. METHODS: We identified patients from the Texas Cancer Registry with stage 0-II breast cancer diagnosed in 2009-2014 after BCS+RT or Mast+Recon without radiotherapy. Sampling was stratified by age and race and ethnicity. A paper survey was sent to 4800 patients which included validated BREAST-Q and PROMIS modules. Multivariable linear regression models were implemented for each outcome. Minimal clinically important difference for BREAST-Q and PROMIS modules, respectively, was 4 points and 2 points. RESULTS: Of 1215 respondents (25.3% response rate), 631 received BCS+RT and 584 received Mast+Recon. The median interval from diagnosis to survey completion was 9 years. In adjusted analysis, Mast+Recon was associated with worse BREAST-Q psychosocial well-being (effect size: -3.80, P =0.04) and sexual well-being (effect size: -5.41, P =0.02), but better PROMIS physical function (effect size: 0.54, P =0.03) and similar BREAST-Q satisfaction with breasts, physical well-being, and PROMIS upper extremity function ( P >0.05) compared with BCS+RT. Only the difference in sexual well-being reached clinical significance. Older (≥65) patients receiving BCS+RT and younger (<50) patients receiving autologous Mast+Recon typically reported higher QOL scores. Receipt of chemotherapy was associated with detriments to multiple QOL domains. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent Mast+Recon reported worse long-term sexual well-being compared with BCS+RT. Older patients derived a greater benefit from BCS+RT, while younger patients derived a greater benefit from Mast+Recon. These data inform preference-sensitive decision-making for women with early-stage breast cancer.

Biosimilar Use Among 38 ASCO PracticeNET Practices, 2019-2021.

PURPOSE: Biosimilars offer increased patient choice and potential cost-savings, compared with originator biologics. We studied 3 years of prescribed biologics among US physician practices to determine the relationship of practice type and payment source to oncology biosimilar use. METHODS: We acquired biologic utilization data from 38 practices participating in PracticeNET. We focused on six biologics (bevacizumab, epoetin alfa, filgrastim, pegfilgrastim, rituximab, and trastuzumab) for the period from 2019 to 2021. We complemented our quantitative analysis with a survey of PracticeNET participants (prescribers and practice leaders) to reveal potential motivators and barriers to biosimilar use. We implemented logistic regression to evaluate the biosimilar use for each biologic, with covariates including time, practice type, and payment source, and accounted for clusters of practices. RESULTS: Use of biosimilars increased over the 3-year period, reaching between 51% and 80% of administered doses by the fourth quarter of 2021, depending on the biologic. Biosimilar use varied by practice, with independent physician practices having higher use of biosimilars for epoetin alfa, filgrastim, rituximab, and trastuzumab. Compared with commercial health plans, Medicaid plans had lower biosimilar use for four biologics; traditional Medicare had lower use for five biologics. The average cost per dose decreased between 24% and 41%, dependent on the biologic. CONCLUSION: Biosimilars have, through increased use, lowered the average cost per dose of the studied biologics. Biosimilar use differed by originator biologic, practice type, and payment source. There remains further opportunity for increases in biosimilar use among certain practices and payers.

Rate of COVID-19 vaccination among patients with cancer who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2: Analysis of the American Society of Clinical Oncology Registry.

BACKGROUND: The availability of safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines has enabled protections against serious COVID-19 outcomes, which are particularly important for patients with cancer. The American Society of Clinical Oncology Registry enabled the study of COVID-19 vaccine uptake in patients with cancer who were positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2. METHODS: Medical oncology practices entered data on patients who were in cancer treatment. The cohort included patients who had severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 infection in 2020 and had visits and vaccine data after December 31, 2020. The primary end point was the time to first vaccination from January 1, 2021. Cumulative incidence estimates and Cox regression with death as a competing risk were used to describe the time to vaccine uptake and factors associated with vaccine receipt. RESULTS: The cohort included 1155 patients from 56 practices. Among 690 patients who received the first vaccine dose, 92% received the second dose. The median time to vaccine was 99 days. After adjustment, older patients were associated with a higher likelihood of vaccination compared with patients younger than 50 years in January through March 2021, and age exhibited a linear effect, with older patients showing higher rates of vaccination. Metastatic solid tumors (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-0.98) or non-B-cell hematologic malignancies (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.54-0.93) compared with nonmetastatic solid tumors, and any comorbidity (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.73-0.95) compared with no comorbidity, were associated with lower vaccination rates. Area-level social determinants of health (lower education attainment and higher unemployment rates) were associated with lower vaccination rates. CONCLUSIONS: Patient age, cancer type, comorbidity, area-level education attainment, and unemployment rates were associated with differential vaccine uptake rates. These findings should inform strategies to communicate about vaccine safety and efficacy to patients with cancer.

Socioeconomic Barriers to Randomized Clinical Trial Retention in Patients Treated With Adjuvant Radiation for Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Socioeconomic barriers contribute to breast cancer clinical trial enrollment disparities. We sought to identify whether socioeconomic disadvantage also is associated with decreased trial retention. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We performed a secondary analysis of 253 (of 287) patients enrolled in a randomized phase 3 trial of conventionally fractionated versus hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation. The outcome of trial retention versus dropout was defined primarily based on whether the patient completed breast cosmesis outcomes assessment at 3-year follow-up, and secondarily, at 5-year follow-up. Associations of retention with severity of socioeconomic disadvantage, quantified by patients' home neighborhood area deprivation index (ADI) rank (1 [least] to 100 [most deprivation]), were tested using the Kruskal-Wallis test and multivariate logistic regression. Associations of retention with patients' use of social resource assistance were analyzed using the χ2 test. RESULTS: In total, 21.7% (n = 55) of patients dropped out by 3 years and 36.7% (n = 92) by 5 years. Median ADI was 36.5 (interquartile range, 22-57) for retained and 46.0 (interquartile range, 29-60) for dropout patients. Dropout was associated with more severe socioeconomic deprivation (ADI ≥45 vs <45) at 3 years (odds ratio, 3.63; 95% confidence interval, 1.62-8.15; P = .002) and 5 years (odds ratio, 2.55; 95% confidence interval, 1.37-4.76; P = .003). While on study, patients who ultimately dropped out were more likely to require resource assistance for practical (transportation, housing, financial) than psychological needs (distress, grief) or advance care planning (P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, ADI was associated with disparities in clinical trial retention of patients with breast cancer receiving adjuvant radiation treatment. Results suggest that developing multidimensional interventions that extend beyond routine social determinants needs screening are needed, not only to enhance initial clinical trial access and enrollment but also to enable robust long-term retention of socioeconomically disadvantaged patients and improve the validity and generalizability of reported long-term trial clinical and patient-reported outcomes.

Medicaid expansion, chemotherapy delays, and racial disparities among women with early-stage breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act extends eligibility for participating states and has been associated with improved outcomes by facilitating access to care. Delayed initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy is associated with worse outcomes among patients with early-stage breast cancer (BC). The impact of Medicaid expansion in narrowing delays by race and ethnicity has not been studied, to our knowledge. METHODS: This was a population-based study using the National Cancer Database. Patients diagnosed with primary early-stage BC between 2007 and 2017 residing in states that underwent Medicaid expansion in January 2014 were included. Time to chemotherapy initiation and proportion of patients experiencing chemotherapy delays (>60 days) were evaluated using difference-in-difference and Cox proportional hazards models in preexpansion and postexpansion periods according to race and ethnicity. RESULTS: A total 100 643 patients were included (63 313 preexpansion and 37 330 postexpansion). After Medicaid expansion, the proportion of patients experiencing chemotherapy initiation delay decreased from 23.4% to 19.4%. The absolute decrease was 3.2, 5.3, 6.4, and 4.8 percentage points (ppt) for Black, Hispanic, White, and Other patients. Compared with White patients, statistically significant adjusted difference-in-differences were observed for Black (-2.1 ppt, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -3.7% to -0.5%) and Hispanic patients (-3.2 ppt, 95% CI = -5.6% to -0.9%). Statistically significant reductions in time to chemotherapy between expansion periods were observed among White patients (adjusted hazard ratio = .11, 95% CI = 1.09 to 1.12) and those belonging to racialized groups (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.11 to 1.17). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with early-stage BC, Medicaid expansion was associated with a reduction in racial disparities by decreasing the gap in the proportion of Black and Hispanic patients experiencing delays in adjuvant chemotherapy initiation.

Risks of mortality and severe coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) outcomes in patients with or without systemic lupus erythematosus.

OBJECTIVES: We compared the outcomes of patients with or without systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) who were diagnosed with coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) and evaluated factors within patients with SLE associated with severe outcomes. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used the deidentified Optum COVID-19 electronic health record dataset to identify patients with COVID-19 from 1/1/2020 to 31/12/2020. Cases with SLE were matched with general controls at a ratio of 1:10 by age, sex, race and ethnicity and COVID-19 diagnosis date. Outcomes included 30-day mortality, mechanical ventilation, hospitalisation and intensive care unit admission. We evaluated the relationship between COVID-19-related outcomes and SLE using multivariable logistic regression. In addition, within SLE cases, we examined factors associated with COVID-19 related outcomes, including disease activity and SLE therapy. RESULTS: We included 687 patients matched with 6870 controls. Unadjusted rates of outcomes for patients with SLE were significantly worse than for matched controls including mortality (3.6% vs 1.8%), mechanical ventilation (6% vs 2.5%) and hospitalisation (31% vs 17.7%) (all p<0.001). After multivariable adjustment, patients with SLE had increased risks of mechanical ventilation (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.82) and hospitalisation (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.65). Among patients with SLE, severe disease activity was associated with increased risks of mechanical ventilation (OR 5.83, 95% CI 2.60 to 13.07) and hospitalisation (OR 3.97, 95% CI 2.37 to 6.65). Use of glucocorticoids, mycophenolate and tacrolimus before COVID-19 was associated with worse outcomes. CONCLUSION: Patients with SLE had increased risk of severe COVID-19-related outcomes compared with matched controls. Patients with severe SLE disease activity or prior use of corticosteroids experienced worse outcomes.

Patient-Reported Financial Toxicity in a Population-Based Cohort of Oropharynx Cancer Survivors.

PURPOSE: Patients with oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) are at high risk for financial toxicity (FT), but the nature, extent, and predictors of FT experienced after primary radiation therapy (RT) or surgery are poorly understood. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We used a population-based sample of patients from the Texas Cancer Registry with stage I to III OPSCC diagnosed from 2006 to 2016 and treated with primary RT or surgery. Of 1,668 eligible patients, 1,600 were sampled, 400 responded, and 396 confirmed OPSCC. Measures included the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory Head and Neck, Neck Dissection Impairment Index, and a financial toxicity instrument adapted from the Individualized Cancer Care (iCanCare) study. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated associations of exposures with outcomes. RESULTS: Of 396 analyzable respondents, 269 (68%) received primary RT and 127 (32%) surgery. The median time from diagnosis to survey was 7 years. Due to OPSCC, 54% of patients experienced material sacrifice (including 28% who reduced food spending and 6% who lost their housing), 45% worried about financial problems, and 29% experienced long-term FT. Independent factors associated with more long-term FT included female sex (odds ratio [OR], 1.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.23-2.40), Black non-Hispanic race (OR, 2.98; 95% CI, 1.26-7.09), unmarried status (OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.11-2.03), feeding tube use (OR, 3.98; 95% CI, 2.29-6.90), and worst versus best quartile on the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory Head and Neck (OR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.23-2.90) and Neck Dissection Impairment Index (OR, 5.62; 95% CI, 3.79-8.34). Factors associated with less long-term FT included age >57 years (OR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.41-0.71; P < .001) and household income ≥$80,000 (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.44-0.82; P = .001). Primary RT versus surgery was not associated with long-term FT (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.68-1.24). CONCLUSIONS: Oropharynx cancer survivors experience high rates of material sacrifice and long-term FT, and we identified important risk factors. Chronic symptom burden was associated with significantly worse long-term financial status, supporting the hypothesis that toxicity mitigation strategies may reduce long-term FT.

Optimizing Preventive Adjuvant Linac-Based (OPAL) Radiation: A Phase 2 Trial of Daily Partial Breast Irradiation.

PURPOSE: Evidence supports use of partial-breast irradiation (PBI) in the management of early breast cancer, but the optimal dose-fractionation remains unsettled. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We conducted a phase 2 clinical trial (OPAL trial) to evaluate a novel PBI dosing schedule of 35 Gy in 10 daily fractions. Patients with close (<2 mm) margins also received a boost of 9 Gy in 3 fractions. Eligible patients underwent margin-negative lumpectomy for ductal carcinoma in situ or estrogen receptor-positive invasive breast cancer, up to 3 cm, pTis-T2 N0. The primary outcome was any grade ≥2 toxic effect occurring from the start of radiation through 6 months of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included patient-reported cosmesis, breast pain, and functional status, measured using the Breast Cancer Treatment Outcomes Scale, and physician-reported cosmesis, measured using the Radiation Therapy and Oncology Group scale. The Cochran-Armitage trend test and multivariable mixed-effects longitudinal growth curve models compared outcomes for the OPAL study population with those for a control group of similar patients treated with whole-breast irradiation (WBI) plus boost. RESULTS: All 149 patients enrolled on the OPAL trial received the prescribed dose, and 17.4% received boost. The median age was 64 years; 83.2% were White, and 73.8% were overweight or obese. With median follow-up of 2.0 years, 1 patient (0.7%) experienced in-breast recurrence. Prevalence of the primary toxicity outcome was 17.4% (26 of 149 patients) in the OPAL trial compared with 72.7% (128 of 176 patients) in the control WBI-plus-boost cohort (P < .001). In longitudinal multivariable analysis, treatment on the OPAL trial was associated with improved patient-reported cosmesis (P < .001), functional status (P = .004), breast pain (P = .004), and physician-reported cosmesis (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with daily PBI was associated with substantial reduction in early toxicity and improved patient- and physician-reported outcomes compared with WBI plus boost. Daily external-beam partial-breast irradiation with 13 or fewer fractions merits further prospective evaluation.

Systemic Lupus Erythematosus and Mortality in Elderly Patients With Early Breast Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with cancer and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) may have worse outcomes than those without SLE, given their comorbidities. We examined survival in elderly women with breast cancer (BC) and SLE and hypothesized that survival would be decreased compared with women with BC but without SLE. METHODS: We identified patients with BC and SLE and patients with BC without SLE in the Texas Cancer Registry and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results, linked to Medicare claims. Overall survival (OS) was estimated after matching (age and cancer stage) and in multivariable Cox proportional hazards models adjusting for other cancer characteristics, treatment, and comorbidities. Two additional cohorts of women without cancer with and without SLE were also studied. RESULTS: We identified 494 BC SLE cases and 145,517 BC non-SLE cases, of whom we matched 9,708. Women with SLE were less likely to receive radiation, breast conserving surgery, or endocrine therapy. The 8-year OS estimate for women with early BC (stages 0-II) with and without SLE was 52% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 45%-59%) and 74% (95% CI 73%-75%), respectively. In the Cox multivariable model, BC and SLE had increased risk of death (hazard ratio [HR] 1.65, 95% CI 1.38-1.98). Women with BC and SLE also had increased risk of death compared with women with SLE but without cancer (HR 1.42, 95% CI 1.05-1.92) after adjusting for SLE severity. Women with SLE and BC received less glucocorticoids, antimalarials, and immunosuppressants after cancer diagnosis than those without cancer. CONCLUSION: Systemic lupus is a risk factor for increased mortality in women with early BC.

Breast Cancer (BC) and Severe COVID-19 (C-19) Outcomes: A Matched Analysis.

Purpose: Patients with cancer receiving anticancer treatment have a higher risk of severe COVID-19 (C-19) outcomes. We examine the association between breast cancer (BC), recent treatment (systemic therapy, surgery, radiation), and C-19 outcomes. Methods: Retrospective matched cohort study using the Optum® de-identified COVID-19 Electronic Health Record dataset (2007-2022). Patients with C-19 were categorized into: No cancer, BC with recent treatment, and BC without recent treatment and matched based on age, C-19 diagnosis date, and comorbidity score. We evaluated 30-day mortality, mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, and hospitalization. A composite outcome including all outcomes was analyzed. Multivariable logistic regression models were used. Results: 2200 matched triplets (1:1:10) of patients with BC recently treated, BC not recently treated, and no cancer were included. Rates of adverse outcomes improved in 2021 compared to 2020. Compared to patients without cancer, those with BC recently treated had a similar risk of adverse outcomes, while patients with BC not recently treated had a lower risk of ICU stay and hospitalization. Using the composite variable, BC recently treated had similar outcomes (OR = 1.02; 95%CI 0.93-1.11) to patients without cancer, while BC patients not recently treated had better outcomes (OR = 0.66; 95%CI 0.59-0.74). Among patients with BC, chemotherapy within 3-months was associated with a higher risk of hospitalization (OR = 2.30; 95%CI 1.76-2.99) and composite outcome (OR = 2.11; 95%CI 1.64-2.72). Conclusion: Patients with BC have a similar risk of adverse C-19 outcomes compared to patients without cancer. Among patients with BC, recent chemotherapy was associated with a higher risk of hospitalization.

Oncologists' Perspectives on Individualizing Dose Selection for Patients With Metastatic Cancer.

PURPOSE: Treatment goals for patients with metastatic cancer include prolongation and maintenance of quality of life. Patients and oncologists have questioned the current paradigm of initial dose selection for systemic therapy; however, data on oncologists' dose selection strategies and beliefs are lacking. METHODS: We conducted an electronic international survey of medical oncologists who treat patients with breast and/or gastrointestinal cancers. Survey questions addressed experiences with, and attitudes toward, dose reduction at initiation (DRI) of a new systemic therapy for patients with metastatic cancer. RESULTS: Among 3,099 eligible oncologists, 367 responded (response rate 12%). Most (52%) reported using DRI at least 10% of the time to minimize toxicities. Gastrointestinal specialists were more likely to report DRI ≥ 10% of the time (72% v 50% of generalists and 51% of breast specialists, P < .005). Of those who dose reduced ≥ 10% of the time, 89% reported discussing potential tradeoffs between efficacy and toxicity with patients. Overall, 65% agreed it is acceptable to lower starting doses to reduce side effects even if it compromises efficacy; younger clinicians were more likely to agree (P < .005). There was strong support (89%) for future trials to determine optimal effective, rather than maximum tolerated, dose. CONCLUSION: Oncology practice varies with regard to discussion and individualized selection of starting doses in the metastatic setting. This study demonstrates a need for consideration of shared decision making regarding initial dose selection and strong support among oncologists for clinical studies to define optimal dosing and best practices for individualizing care.