Activity and safety of enobosarm, a novel, oral, selective androgen receptor modulator, in androgen receptor-positive, oestrogen receptor-positive, and HER2-negative advanced breast cancer (Study G200802): a randomised, open-label, multicentre, multinational, parallel design, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The androgen receptor is a tumour suppressor in oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. The activity and safety of enobosarm, an oral selective androgen receptor modulator, was evaluated in women with oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive, HER2-negative, and androgen receptor (AR)-positive disease. METHODS: Women who were postmenopausal (aged ≥18 years) with previously treated ER-positive, HER2-negative, locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were enrolled in a randomised, open-label, multicentre, multinational, parallel design, phase 2 trial done at 35 cancer treatment centres in nine countries. Participants were stratified on the setting of immediately preceding endocrine therapy and the presence of bone-only metastasis and randomly assigned (1:1) to 9 mg or 18 mg oral enobosarm daily using an interactive web response system. The primary endpoint was clinical benefit rate at 24 weeks in those with centrally confirmed AR-positive disease (ie, the evaluable population). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02463032). FINDINGS: Between Sept 10, 2015, and Nov 28, 2017, 136 (79%) of 172 patients deemed eligible were randomly assigned to 9 mg (n=72) or 18 mg (n=64) oral enobosarm daily. Of these 136 patients, 102 (75%) patients formed the evaluable population (9 mg, n=50; 18 mg, n=52). The median age was 60·5 years (IQR 52·3-69·3) in the 9 mg group and 62·5 years (54·0-69·3) in the 18 mg group. The median follow-up was 7·5 months (IQR 2·9-14·1). At 24 weeks, 16 (32%, 95% CI 20-47) of 50 in the 9 mg group and 15 (29%, 17-43) of 52 in the 18 mg group had clinical benefit. Six (8%) of 75 patients who received 9 mg and ten (16%) of 61 patients who received 18 mg had grade 3 or grade 4 drug-related adverse events, most frequently increased hepatic transaminases (three [4%] of 75 in the 9 mg group and two [3%] of 61 in the 18 mg group), hypercalcaemia (two [3%] and two [3%]), and fatigue (one [1%] and two [3%]). Four deaths (one in the 9 mg group and three in the 18 mg group) were deemed unrelated to the study drug. INTERPRETATION: Enobosarm has anti-tumour activity in patients with ER-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer, showing that AR activation can result in clinical benefit, supporting further clinical investigation of selective AR activation strategies for the treatment of AR-positive, ER-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. FUNDING: GTx.

Managing hyperglycemia and rash associated with alpelisib: expert consensus recommendations using the Delphi technique.

Hyperglycemia and rash are expected but challenging adverse events of phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase inhibition (such as with alpelisib). Two modified Delphi panels were conducted to provide consensus recommendations for managing hyperglycemia and rash in patients taking alpelisib. Experts rated the appropriateness of interventions on a 1-to-9 scale; median scores and dispersion were used to classify the levels of agreement. Per the hyperglycemia panel, it is appropriate to start alpelisib in patients with HbA1c 6.5% (diabetes) to <8%, or at highest risk for developing hyperglycemia, if they have a pre-treatment endocrinology consult. Recommend prophylactic metformin in patients with baseline HbA1c 5.7% to 6.4%. Metformin is the preferred first-line anti-hyperglycemic agent. Per the rash panel, initiate prophylactic nonsedating H1 antihistamines in patients starting alpelisib. Nonsedating H1 antihistamines and topical steroids are the preferred initial management for rash. In addition to clinical trial evidence, these recommendations will help address gaps encountered in clinical practice.

Silent suffering: the impact of sexual health challenges on patient-clinician communication and adherence to adjuvant endocrine therapy among Black women with early-stage breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) increases sexual health challenges for women with early-stage breast cancer. Black women are more likely than women of other racial/ethnic groups to report adverse symptoms and least likely to initiate and maintain AET. Little is known about how sexual health challenges influence patient-clinician communication and treatment adherence. This study explores facilitators of and barriers to patient-clinician communication about sexual health and how those factors might affect AET adherence among Black women with early-stage breast cancer. METHODS: We conducted 32 semi-structured, in-depth interviews among Black women with early-stage breast cancer in the U.S. Mid-South region. Participants completed an online questionnaire prior to interviews. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Participants' median age was 59 (range 40-78 years, SD = 9.0). Adverse sexual symptoms hindered participants' AET adherence. Facilitators of patient-clinician communication about sexual health included female clinicians and peer support. Barriers included perceptions of male oncologists' disinterest in Black women's sexual health, perceptions of male oncologists' biased beliefs about sexual activity among older Black women, cultural norms of sexual silence among Southern Black women, and medical mistrust. CONCLUSIONS: Adverse sexual symptoms and poor patient-clinician communication about sexual health contribute to lower AET adherence among Black women with early-stage breast cancer. New interventions using peer support models and female clinicians trained to discuss sexual health could ameliorate communication barriers and improve treatment adherence. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Black women with early-stage breast cancer in the U.S. Mid-South may require additional resources to address sociocultural and psychosocial implications of cancer survivorship to enable candid discussions with oncologists.

2023 updated MASCC/ESMO Consensus recommendations: Prevention of nausea and vomiting following moderately emetic risk antineoplastic agents.

PURPOSE: Review the literature to update the MASCC guidelines from 2015 for controlling nausea and vomiting with systemic cancer treatment of moderate emetic potential. METHODS: A systematic literature review was completed using Medline, Embase, and Scopus databases. The literature search was done from June 2015 to January 2023 of the management of antiemetic prophylaxis for anticancer therapy of moderate emetic potential. RESULTS: Of 342 papers identified, 19 were relevant to update recommendations about managing antiemetic prophylaxis for systemic cancer treatment regimens of moderate emetic potential. Important practice changing updates include the use of emetic prophylaxis based on a triple combination of neurokinin (NK)1 receptor antagonist, 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, and steroids for patients undergoing carboplatin (AUC ≥ 5) and women < 50 years of age receiving oxaliplatin-based treatment. A double combination of 5-HT3 receptor antagonist and steroids remains the recommended prophylaxis for other MEC. Based on the data in the literature, it is recommended that the administration of steroids should be limited to day 1 in moderately emetogenic chemotherapy regimens, due to the demonstration of non-inferiority between the different regimens. More data is needed on the emetogenicity of new agents at moderate emetogenic risk. Of particular interest would be antiemetic studies with the agents sacituzumab-govitecan and trastuzumab-deruxtecan. Experience to date with these agents indicate an emetogenic potential comparable to carboplatin > AUC 5. Future studies should systematically include patient-related risk assessment in order to define the risk of emesis with MEC beyond the emetogenicity of the chemotherapy and improve the guidelines for new drugs. CONCLUSION: This antiemetic MASCC-ESMO guideline update includes new recommendations considering individual risk factors and the optimization of supportive anti-emetic treatments.

2023 updated MASCC/ESMO consensus recommendations: controlling nausea and vomiting with chemotherapy of low or minimal emetic potential.

PURPOSE: Review the literature to update the MASCC guidelines from 2016 for controlling nausea and vomiting with systemic cancer treatment of low and minimal emetic potential. METHODS: A working group performed a systematic literature review using Medline, Embase, and Scopus databases between June 2015 and January 2023 of the management of antiemetic prophylaxis for anticancer therapy of low or minimal emetic potential. A consensus committee reviewed recommendations and required a consensus of 67% or greater and a change in outcome of at least 10%. RESULTS: Of 293 papers identified, 15 had information about managing systemic cancer treatment regimens of low or minimal emetic potential and/or compliance with previous management recommendations. No new evidence was reported that would change the current MASCC recommendations. No antiemetic prophylaxis is recommended for minimal emetic potential therapy, and single agents recommended for low emetic potential chemotherapy for acute emesis, but no prophylaxis is recommended for delayed emesis. Commonly, rescue medication includes antiemetics prescribed for the next higher level of emesis. CONCLUSION: There is insufficient data to change the current guidelines. Future studies should seek to more accurately determine the risk of emesis with LEC beyond the emetogenicity of the chemotherapy to include patient-related risk assessment.

Work loss and activity impairment due to extended nausea and vomiting in patients with breast cancer receiving CINV prophylaxis.

PURPOSE: Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV)'s impact on work loss remains poorly described. We evaluated associations between the duration of CINV episodes, CINV-related work loss (CINV-WL), and CINV-related activity impairment (CINV-AI) in patients with breast cancer receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy. METHODS: We analyzed data from a prospective CINV prophylaxis trial of netupitant/palonestron and dexamethasone for patients receiving an anthracycline and cyclophosphamide (AC) for breast cancer (NCT0340371). Over the observed CINV duration (0-5 days), we analyzed patient-reported CINV-WL and CINV-AI for the first two chemotherapy cycles. We categorized patients as having either extended (≥ 3 days) or short (1-2 days) CINV duration and quantified its impact on work using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire (WPAI). RESULTS: Overall, we captured data for 792 cycles in 402 women, including 136 (33.8%) employed patients with 35.3% reporting CINV. Of those with CINV, patients reported CINV-WL in 26 cycles and CINV-AI in 142 cycles. Of those with CINV, 55.3% of extended CINV cycles experienced CINV-WL compared to 16.7% of short CINV cycles (p < 0.001). The relative risk of CINV-WL between extended and short CINV was 3.32 (p < 0.01) for employed patients. The mean difference in CINV-AI scores (higher = worse) between extended and short duration CINV was 5.0 vs. 3.0 (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Extended (≥ 3 days) CINV was associated with more than triple the risk of CINV-WL and higher CINV-AI compared with short CINV.

Improving biomarker testing in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer and metastatic colorectal cancer: experience from a large community oncology network in the USA.

Aim: Biomarker testing detects actionable driver mutations to inform first-line treatment in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) and metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This study evaluated biomarker testing in a nationwide database (NAT) versus the OneOncology (OneOnc) community network. Patients & methods: Patients with aNSCLC or mCRC with ≥1 biomarker test in a de-identified electronic health record-derived database were evaluated. OneOnc oncologists were surveyed. Results: Biomarker testing rates were high and comparable between OneOnc and NAT; next-generation sequencing (NGS) rates were higher at OneOnc. Patients with NGS versus other biomarker testing were more likely to receive targeted treatment. Operational challenges and insufficient tissue were barriers to NGS testing. Conclusion: Community cancer centers delivered personalized healthcare through biomarker testing.

What is this article about? Cancer therapies often work better in certain subgroups of patients. Tumors may have characteristics that can predict which therapies may be more likely to work. These cancer biomarkers may be identified by special testing, such as next-generation sequencing (NGS). If a biomarker is detected, the patient can potentially be treated with medicine that targets that biomarker. This study looked at biomarker testing of lung and colon cancers in two community cancer practices (OneOncology [OneOnc] and nationwide database [NAT]). What were the results? The biomarker testing rates were high (≥81%) and similar between OneOnc and NAT. NGS testing rates were higher at OneOnc than at NAT (58 vs 49% for non-small-cell lung cancer, 55 vs 42% for metastatic colorectal cancer [mCRC]), suggesting the success of OneOnc's networkwide educational, pathway and operational programs. NGS testing was lower in community practices due to operational challenges and insufficient tissue collection. Patients who had NGS versus other biomarker testing were more likely to receive treatment specifically for that biomarker. However, some patients started treatment before their biomarker results were reported, usually because of their disease and a long wait time for biomarker test results. What do the results of the study mean? Community cancer centers can treat patients with targeted medicine based on biomarker testing results. There are opportunities to increase the number of patients getting NGS testing, shorten turnaround times and reduce the number of patients who start treatment before getting their biomarker test results.

Duration of Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting (CINV) as a Predictor of Recurrent CINV in Later Cycles.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between CINV duration and recurrence in subsequent cycles is largely unstudied. Our objective was to determine if patients experiencing CINV in their first cycle of chemotherapy (C1) would face increased risk of CINV in later cycles and whether the duration of the CINV would predict increased risk of recurrence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using data from a previously reported phase III trial, we assessed patients' recurrence of breakthrough CINV after antiemetic prophylaxis for anthracycline+cyclophosphamide (AC) for breast cancer, comparing C1 short CINV vs. extended CINV as a secondary analysis. Complete response (CR) and CINV duration were primary and secondary endpoints, respectively. CR was considered prophylaxis success; lack of CR was considered treatment failure (TF). RESULTS: Among 402 female patients, 99 (24.6%) had TF in C1 (TF1). The remaining 303 patients (CR1) had ≥93% CR rates in each subsequent cycle, while the 99 patients with TF1 had TF rates of 49.8% for cycles 2-4 (P < .001). The 51 patients with extended TF (≥3 days) in C1 had recurrent TF in 73/105 later cycles (69.5%, P < .001), while the 48 patients with short TF (1-2 days) in C1 had recurrent TF in 33/108 later cycles (30.6%). The relative risk of recurrence after C1 extended TF was 2.28 (CI 1.67-3.11; P < .001) compared to short TF. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylaxis success in C1 led to >90% repeat success across cycles of AC-based chemotherapy. For patients with breakthrough CINV, extended duration strongly predicted recurrent CINV. The duration of CINV should be closely monitored, and augmenting antiemetic prophylaxis considered for future cycles when extended CINV occurs.

Mobile application to support oncology patients during treatment on patient outcomes: Evidence from a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cancer treatment requires substantial demands on patients and their caregivers. Mobile apps can provide support for self-management during oncology treatment, but few have been rigorously evaluated. METHODS: A 3-month randomized controlled trial was conducted at a large cancer center to evaluate the efficacy of an app (LivingWith®) that provides self-management support during cancer treatment on quality of life and health care utilization. Patients in chemotherapy treatment were randomized into the intervention (n = 113) and control group (n = 111). Intervention group participants agreed to use the app weekly for 3 months, and all participants completed a survey at enrollment and after 3 months to evaluate changes in quality of life and health care utilization. RESULTS: Retention rate was 75.4% with 169 participants completing the follow-up survey. The intervention group reported 0.74 fewer medical office visits (p = 0.043) and 0.24 fewer visits with a mental health professional (p = 0.061) during the 3 and month intervention compared with controls. There were no significant changes by study group in quality of life, or emergency room and urgent care visits. Among intervention participants, 75.3% reported using the app and on average, used it 11.7 times during the 3-month intervention. Reasons for not using the app among intervention participants included lack of time, lack of interest in apps, and usability challenges. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Apps are inexpensive and scalable tools that can provide additional support for individuals coping with complex cancer treatments. This trial provides evidence that a well-designed oncology support app used during chemotherapy resulted in fewer clinic visits. Still, nearly a quarter of participants randomized to the intervention arm reported never using the app due to personal preference and usability challenges, which points to future opportunities for calibrating target user population and improving user-centered design. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT04331678.

Race Differences in Patient-Reported Symptoms during Chemotherapy among Women with Early-Stage Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Symptom burden differences may contribute to racial disparities in breast cancer survival. We compared symptom changes from before to during chemotherapy among women with breast cancer. METHODS: This observational study followed a cohort of Black and White women diagnosed with Stage I-III, hormone receptor-positive breast cancer from a large cancer center in 2007 to 2015, and reported symptoms before and during chemotherapy. We identified patients who experienced a one-standard deviation (SD) increase in symptom burden after starting chemotherapy using four validated composite scores (General Physical Symptoms, Treatment Side Effects, Acute Distress, and Despair). Kitagawa-Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition was used to quantify race differences in symptom changes explained by baseline characteristics (sociodemographic, baseline scores, cancer stage) and first-line chemotherapy regimens. RESULTS: Among 1,273 patients, Black women (n = 405, 31.8%) were more likely to report one-SD increase in General Physical Symptoms (55.6% vs. 48.2%, P = 0.015), Treatment Side Effects (74.0% vs. 63.4%, P < 0.001), and Acute Distress (27.4% vs. 20.0%, P = 0.010) than White women. Baseline characteristics and first-line chemotherapy regimens explained a large and significant proportion of the difference in Acute Distress changes (93.7%, P = 0.001), but not General Physical Symptoms (25.7%, P = 0.25) or Treatment Side Effects (16.4%, P = 0.28). CONCLUSIONS: Black women with early-stage breast cancer were more likely to experience significant increases in physical and psychological symptom burden during chemotherapy. Most of the difference in physical symptom changes remained unexplained by baseline characteristics, which suggests inadequate symptom management among Black women. IMPACT: Future studies should identify strategies to improve symptom management among Black women and reduce differences in symptom burden. See related commentary by Rosenzweig and Mazanec, p. 157.

Impact of early detection on cancer curability: A modified Delphi panel study.

Expert consensus on the potential benefits of early cancer detection does not exist for most cancer types. We convened 10 practicing oncologists using a RAND/UCLA modified Delphi panel to evaluate which of 20 solid tumors, representing >40 American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC)-identified cancer types and 80% of total cancer incidence, would receive potential clinical benefits from early detection. Pre-meeting, experts estimated how long cancers take to progress and rated the current curability and benefit (improvement in curability) of an annual hypothetical multi-cancer screening blood test. Post-meeting, experts rerated all questions. Cancers had varying estimates of the potential benefit of early cancer detection depending on estimates of their curability and progression by stage. Cancers rated as progressing quickly and being curable in earlier stages (stomach, esophagus, lung, urothelial tract, melanoma, ovary, sarcoma, bladder, cervix, breast, colon/rectum, kidney, uterus, anus, head and neck) were estimated to be most likely to benefit from a hypothetical screening blood test. Cancer types rated as progressing quickly but having comparatively lower cure rates in earlier stages (liver/intrahepatic bile duct, gallbladder, pancreas) were estimated to have medium likelihood of benefit from a hypothetical screening blood test. Cancer types rated as progressing more slowly and having higher curability regardless of stage (prostate, thyroid) were estimated to have limited likelihood of benefit from a hypothetical screening blood test. The panel concluded most solid tumors have a likelihood of benefit from early detection. Even among difficult-to-treat cancers (e.g., pancreas, liver/intrahepatic bile duct, gallbladder), early-stage detection was believed to be beneficial. Based on the panel consensus, broad coverage of cancers by screening blood tests would deliver the greatest potential benefits to patients.

An examination of health care utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic among women with early-stage hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Women undergoing treatment for breast cancer require frequent clinic visits for maintenance of therapy. With COVID-19 causing health care disruptions, it is important to learn about how this population's access to health care has changed. This study compares self-reported health care utilization and changes in factors related to health care access among women treated at a cancer center in the mid-South US before and during the pandemic. METHODS: Participants (N = 306) part of a longitudinal study to improve adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) adherence completed pre-intervention baseline surveys about their health care utilization prior to AET initiation. Questions about the impact of COVID-19 were added after the pandemic started assessing financial loss and factors related to care. Participants were categorized into three time periods based on the survey completion date: (1) pre-COVID (December 2018 to March 2020), (2) early COVID (April 2020 - December 2020), and later COVID (January 2021 to June 2021). Negative binomial regression analyses used to compare health care utilization at different phases of the pandemic controlling for patient characteristics. RESULTS: Adjusted analyses indicated office visits declined from pre-COVID, with an adjusted average of 17.7 visits, to 12.1 visits during the early COVID period (p = 0.01) and 9.9 visits during the later COVID period (p < 0.01). Hospitalizations declined from an adjusted average 0.45 admissions during early COVID to 0.21 during later COVID, after vaccines became available (p = 0.05). Among COVID period participants, the proportion reporting changes/gaps in health insurance coverage increased from 9.5% participants during early-COVID to 14.8% in the later-COVID period (p = 0.05). The proportion reporting financial loss due to the pandemic was similar during both COVID periods (34.3% early- and 37.7% later-COVID, p = 0.72). The proportion of participants reporting delaying care or refilling prescriptions decreased from 15.2% in early-COVID to 4.9% in the later-COVID period (p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: COVID-19 caused disruptions to routine health care for women with breast cancer. Patients reported having fewer office visits at the start of the pandemic that continued to decrease even after vaccines were available. Fewer patients reported delaying in-person care as the pandemic progressed.

Molecular characterization of ESR1 variants in breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Estrogen receptor 1 (ESR1) mutations and fusions typically arise in patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer after aromatase inhibitor therapy, whereby ESR1 is constitutively activated in a ligand-independent manner. These variants can impact treatment response. Herein, we characterize ESR1 variants among molecularly profiled advanced breast cancers. METHODS: DNA next-generation sequencing (592-gene panel) data from 9860 breast cancer samples were retrospectively reviewed. Gene fusions were detected using the ArcherDx fusion assay or whole transcriptome sequencing (n = 344 and n = 4305, respectively). Statistical analyses included Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. RESULTS: An ESR1 ligand-binding domain (LBD) mutation was detected in 8.6% of tumors evaluated and a pathogenic ESR1 fusion was detected in 1.6%. Most ESR1 LBD mutations/fusions were from estrogen receptor (ER)-positive samples (20.1% and 4.9%, respectively). The most common ESR1 LBD mutations included D538G (3.3%), Y537S (2.3%), and E380Q (1.1%) mutations. Among biopsy sites, ESR1 LBD mutations were most observed in liver metastases. Pathogenic ESR1 fusions were identified in 76 samples (1.6%) with 40 unique fusion partners. Evaluating co-alterations, ESR1 variant (mutation/fusion) samples more frequently expressed androgen receptor (78.0% vs 58.6, P < 0.0001) and less frequently immune checkpoint proteins than ESR1 wild-type (PD-1 20.0% vs 53.4, P < 0.05; immune cell PD-L1 10.0% vs 30.2, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: We have described one of the largest series of ESR1 fusions reported. ESR1 LBD mutations were commonly identified in ER-positive disease. Limited data exists regarding the clinical impact of ESR1 fusions, which could be an area for future therapeutic exploration.

Complementary Roles for Tissue- and Blood-Based Comprehensive Genomic Profiling for Detection of Actionable Driver Alterations in Advanced NSCLC.

Introduction: Whereas tumor biopsy is the reference standard for genomic profiling of advanced NSCLC, there are now multiple assays approved by the Food and Drug Administration for liquid biopsy testing of circulating tumor DNA. Here, we study the incremental value that liquid biopsy comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) adds to tissue molecular testing. Methods: Patients with metastatic NSCLC were enrolled in a prospective diagnostic study to receive circulating tumor DNA CGP; tissue CGP was optional in addition to their standard tissue testing. Focusing on nine genes listed per the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines, liquid CGP was compared with available tissue testing results across three subcohorts: tissue CGP, standard-of-care testing of up to five biomarkers, or no tissue testing. Results: A total of 515 patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC received liquid CGP. Among 131 with tissue CGP results, NCCN biomarkers were detected in 86 (66%) with tissue CGP and 56 (43%) with liquid CGP (p < 0.001). Adding liquid CGP to tissue CGP detected no additional patients with NCCN biomarkers, whereas tissue CGP detected NCCN biomarkers in 30 patients (23%) missed by liquid CGP. Studying 264 patients receiving tissue testing of up to five genes, 102 (39%) had NCCN biomarkers detected in tissue, with an additional 48 (18%) detected using liquid CGP, including 18 with RET, MET, or ERBB2 drivers not studied in tissue. Conclusions: For the detection of patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC harboring 9 NCCN biomarkers, liquid CGP increases detection in patients with limited tissue results, but does not increase detection in patients with tissue CGP results available. In contrast, tissue CGP can add meaningfully to liquid CGP for detection of NCCN biomarkers and should be considered as a follow-up when an oncogenic driver is not identified by liquid biopsy.

Racial Differences in Patient-Reported Symptoms and Adherence to Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy Among Women With Early-Stage, Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer.

Importance: Adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) reduces breast cancer recurrence, but symptom burden is a key barrier to adherence. Black women have lower AET adherence and worse health outcomes than White women. Objective: To investigate the association between symptom burden and AET adherence differences by race. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study using electronic health records with patient-reported data from a large cancer center in the US. Patients included Black and White women initiating AET therapy for early-stage breast cancer from August 2007 to December 2015 who were followed for 1 year from AET initiation. Sixty symptoms classified into 7 physical and 2 psychological symptom clusters were evaluated. For each cluster, the number of symptoms with moderate severity at baseline, and symptoms with 3-point or greater increases during AET were counted. Adherence was measured as the proportion of days covered by AET during the first-year follow-up. Multivariable regressions for patients' adherence adjusting for race, symptom measures, sociodemographic characteristics, and clinical characteristics were conducted. Kitagawa-Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition was used to quantify racial differences in adherence explained by symptoms and patient characteristics. Analyses were conducted from July 2021 to January 2022. Exposures: Physical and psychological symptoms at baseline and changes during AET. Results: Among 559 patients (168 [30.1%] Black and 391 [69.9%] White; mean [SD] age 65.5 [12.1] years), Black women received diagnoses younger (mean [SD] age at diagnosis, 58.7 [13.7] vs 68.5 [10.0] years old) than White women, with more advanced stages (30 Black participants [17.9%] vs 31 White participants [7.9%] had stage III disease at diagnosis), and lived in areas with fewer adults attaining high school education (mean [SD], 78.8% [7.8%] vs 84.0% [9.3%]). AET adherence in the first year was 78.8% for Black and 82.3% for White women. Black women reported higher severity in most symptom clusters than White women. Neuropsychological, vasomotor, musculoskeletal, cardiorespiratory, distress, and despair symptoms at baseline and increases during the follow-up were associated with 1.2 to 2.6 percentage points decreases in adherence, which corresponds to 4 to 9 missed days receiving AET in the first year. After adjusting for psychological symptoms, being Black was associated with 6.5 percentage points higher adherence than being White. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, severe symptoms were associated with lower AET adherence. Black women had lower adherence rates that were explained by their higher symptom burden and baseline characteristics. These findings suggest that better symptom management with a focus on psychological symptoms could improve AET adherence and reduce racial disparities in cancer outcomes.

Ovarian Function Suppression: A Deeper Consideration of the Role in Early Breast Cancer and its Potential Impact on Patient Outcomes: A Consensus Statement from an International Expert Panel.

It has been suggested that the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) in premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-) early breast cancer may be related, at least in part, to CT-induced ovarian function suppression (OFS) in this subgroup of patients. Although this hypothesis has not been directly tested in large randomized clinical trials, the observations from prospective studies have been remarkably consistent in showing a late benefit of CT among the subgroup of patients who benefit (ie, women who were close to menopause). The hypothesis has important clinical implications, as it may be possible to spare the associated adverse effects of adjuvant CT in a select group of women with early breast cancer, in favor of optimizing OFS and endocrine therapy (ET), without compromising clinical outcomes. Such an approach has the added benefit of preserving the key quality of life outcomes in premenopausal women, particularly by preventing the irreversible loss of ovarian function that may result from CT use. For this reason, we convened an international panel of clinical experts in breast cancer treatment to discuss the key aspects of the available data in this area, as well as the potential clinical implications for patients. This article summarizes the results of these discussions and presents the consensus opinion of the panel regarding optimizing the use of OFS for premenopausal women with HR+, HER2- early breast cancer.

Social Disparities of Pain and Pain Intensity Among Women Diagnosed With Early Stage Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is one of the most commonly diagnosed cancers among women in the United States and pain is the most common side effect of breast cancer and its treatment. Yet, the relationships between social determinants of pain and pain experience/intensity remain under-investigated. We examined the associations between social determinants of pain both at the individual level and the neighborhood level to understand how social conditions are associated with pain perception among early stage breast cancer patients. METHODS: We conducted integrated statistical analysis of 1,191 women with early stage breast cancer treated at a large cancer center in Memphis, Tennessee. Combining electronic health records, patient-reported data and census data regarding residential address at the time of first diagnosis, we evaluated the relationships between social determinants and pain perception. Pain responses were self-reported by a patient as a numerical rating scale score at the patient's initial diagnosis and follow-up clinical visits. We implemented two sets of statistical analyses of the zero-inflated Poisson model and estimated the associations between neighborhood poverty prevalence and breast cancer pain intensity. After adjustment for demographic characteristics, cancer stage, and chemotherapy, pain perception was significantly associated with poverty and blight level of the neighborhood. RESULTS: Among women living in the highest-poverty areas, the odds of reporting pain were 2.48 times higher than those in the lowest-poverty area. Women living in the highest-blight area had 5.43 times higher odds of reporting pain than those in the lowest-blight area. Neighborhood-level social determinants were significantly associated with pain intensity among women diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Distressed neighborhood conditions are significantly associated with higher pain perception. Breast cancer patients living in socio-economically disadvantaged neighborhoods and in poor environmental conditions reported higher pain severity compared to patients from less distressed neighborhoods. Therefore, post-diagnosis pain treatment design needs to be tailored to the social determinants of the breast cancer patients.

Efficacy and safety of palbociclib in patients with estrogen receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer with preexisting conditions: A post hoc analysis of PALOMA-2.

OBJECTIVE: In the PALOMA-2 trial, palbociclib in combination with letrozole prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) and exhibited an acceptable safety profile in patients with estrogen receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer (ABC). This post hoc analysis of PALOMA-2 evaluated the efficacy and safety of palbociclib plus letrozole in patients with preexisting conditions grouped by Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) System Organ Class (SOC). METHODS: Postmenopausal patients without prior treatment for ABC were randomized 2:1 to receive palbociclib (125 mg/d on a 3 weeks on/1 week off schedule) plus letrozole (2.5 mg/d, continuous) or placebo plus letrozole. Patients were grouped by the following MedDRA SOC preexisting conditions: gastrointestinal, musculoskeletal, metabolic, and vascular/cardiac. Median PFS was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method, and treatment emergent adverse events (AEs) were compared between treatment arms within each preexisting condition subgroup. RESULTS: At baseline, 276 (41.4 %) patients had preexisting gastrointestinal disorders, 390 (58.6 %) had musculoskeletal disorders, 259 (38.9 %) had metabolic disorders, and 382 (57.4 %) had vascular/cardiac disorders. Baseline characteristics were similar between subgroups and between each arm within subgroups. Regardless of baseline preexisting condition, palbociclib plus letrozole prolonged PFS compared with placebo plus letrozole. Treatment-emergent AEs associated with palbociclib plus letrozole and dose modifications due to AEs were similar across preexisting condition subgroups. CONCLUSION: This post hoc analysis of PALOMA-2 demonstrated a favorable effect of palbociclib on PFS and a safety profile consistent with previous observations, regardless of underlying preexisting condition. Pfizer Inc (NCT01740427).

Healthcare resource utilization and cost among patients treated for early-stage triple-negative breast cancer.

Background: This retrospective, observational study examined real-world healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs in 308 patients diagnosed with early-stage (II-IIIB) triple-negative breast cancer between 1 March 2008 and 31 March 2016. Methods: HCRU and costs were evaluated for two time periods: from neoadjuvant treatment start date to surgery (Time 1) and after surgery to recurrence or death (Time 2). Results: The sample included 236 patients who received neoadjuvant treatment without subsequent adjuvant treatment (Neo) and 72 patients who received neoadjuvant treatment followed by adjuvant treatment (Neo + adj). Mean monthly HCRU events and mean monthly costs per patient were higher in Time 1 compared with Time 2 for both groups. Conclusion: These results demonstrate the economic burden of early-stage triple-negative breast cancer especially during neoadjuvant treatment phase.

Lay abstract This study included 308 patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer treated in the USA at community oncology practices. Patients were female, 18 years or older and diagnosed with stage II, IIIA or IIIB breast cancer between March 2008 and March 2016, and the breast cancer was determined to be triple negative (i.e., negative for estrogen receptors, progesterone receptors and excess HER2 protein). There were 236 patients who received neoadjuvant treatment without subsequent adjuvant treatment (the Neo group) and 72 patients who received neoadjuvant treatment followed by adjuvant treatment (the Neo + adj group). The study looked at healthcare resource use and costs of care during two time periods: from neoadjuvant treatment start date to surgery (Time 1) and after surgery to recurrence or death (Time 2). Average monthly healthcare resource use and average monthly costs of care per patient were higher in Time 1 compared with Time 2 for both groups. These results demonstrate the economic and resource burden of early-stage triple-negative breast cancer especially in the time from neoadjuvant treatment initiation until surgery.