Bridging the age gap in breast cancer: impact of omission of breast cancer surgery in older women with oestrogen receptor-positive early breast cancer on quality-of-life outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Primary endocrine therapy may be an alternative treatment for less fit women with oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer. This study compared quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes in older women treated with surgery or primary endocrine therapy. METHODS: This was a multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study of surgery or primary endocrine therapy in women aged over 70 years with operable breast cancer. QoL was assessed using European Organisation for Research and Treatment of cancer QoL questionnaires QLQ-C30, -BR23, and -ELD14, and the EuroQol Five Dimensions 5L score at baseline, 6 weeks, and 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Propensity score matching was used to adjust for baseline variation in health, fitness, and tumour stage. RESULTS: The study recruited 3416 women (median age 77 (range 69-102) years) from 56 breast units. Of these, 2979 (87.2 per cent) had ER-positive breast cancer; 2354 women had surgery and 500 received primary endocrine therapy (125 were excluded from analysis due to inadequate data or non-standard therapy). Median follow-up was 52 months. The primary endocrine therapy group was older and less fit. Baseline QoL differed between the groups; the mean(s.d.) QLQ-C30 global health status score was 66.2(21.1) in patients who received primary endocrine therapy versus 77.1(17.8) among those who had surgery plus endocrine therapy. In the unmatched analysis, changes in QoL between 6 weeks and baseline were noted in several domains, but by 24 months most scores had returned to baseline levels. In the matched analysis, major surgery (mastectomy or axillary clearance) had a more pronounced adverse impact than primary endocrine therapy in several domains. CONCLUSION: Adverse effects on QoL are seen in the first few months after surgery, but by 24 months these have largely resolved. Women considering surgery should be informed of these effects.

Bridging the age gap in breast cancer: cluster randomized trial of two decision support interventions for older women with operable breast cancer on quality of life, survival, decision quality, and treatment choices.

BACKGROUND: Rates of surgery and adjuvant therapy for breast cancer vary widely between breast units. This may contribute to differences in survival. This cluster RCT evaluated the impact of decision support interventions (DESIs) for older women with breast cancer, to ascertain whether DESIs influenced quality of life, survival, decision quality, and treatment choice. METHODS: A multicentre cluster RCT compared the use of two DESIs against usual care in treatment decision-making in older women (aged at least ≥70 years) with breast cancer. Each DESI comprised an online algorithm, booklet, and brief decision aid to inform choices between surgery plus adjuvant endocrine therapy versus primary endocrine therapy, and adjuvant chemotherapy versus no chemotherapy. The primary outcome was quality of life. Secondary outcomes included decision quality measures, survival, and treatment choice. RESULTS: A total of 46 breast units were randomized (21 intervention, 25 usual care), recruiting 1339 women (670 intervention, 669 usual care). There was no significant difference in global quality of life at 6 months after the baseline assessment on intention-to-treat analysis (difference -0.20, 95 per cent confidence interval (C.I.) -2.69 to 2.29; P = 0.900). In women offered a choice of primary endocrine therapy versus surgery plus endocrine therapy, knowledge about treatments was greater in the intervention arm (94 versus 74 per cent; P = 0.003). Treatment choice was altered, with a primary endocrine therapy rate among women with oestrogen receptor-positive disease of 21.0 per cent in the intervention versus 15.4 per cent in usual-care sites (difference 5.5 (95 per cent C.I. 1.1 to 10.0) per cent; P = 0.029). The chemotherapy rate was 10.3 per cent at intervention versus 14.8 per cent at usual-care sites (difference -4.5 (C.I. -8.0 to 0) per cent; P = 0.013). Survival was similar in both arms. CONCLUSION: The use of DESIs in older women increases knowledge of breast cancer treatment options, facilitates shared decision-making, and alters treatment selection. Trial registration numbers: EudraCT 2015-004220-61 (https://eudract.ema.europa.eu/), ISRCTN46099296 (http://www.controlled-trials.com).

Beyond Performance Status.

Oncologists should recognise the need to move beyond the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) score. ECOG PS is a longstanding and ubiquitous feature of oncology. It was evolved 40 years ago as an adaption of the 70-year-old Karnofsky performance score. It is short, easily understood and part of the global language of oncology. The wide prevalence of the ECOG PS attests to its proven utility and worth to help triage patient treatment. The ECOG PS is problematic. It is a unidimensional functional score. It is mostly physician assessed, subjective and therefore open to bias. It fails to account for multimorbidity, frailty or cognition. Too often the PS is recorded only once in wilful ignorance of a patient's changing physical state. As modern oncology offers an ever-widening array of therapies that are 'personalised' to tumour genotype, modern oncologists must strive to better define patient phenotype. Using a wider range of scoring and assessment tools, oncologists can identify deficits that may be reversed or steps taken to mitigate detrimental effects of treatment. These tools can function well to identify those patients who would benefit from comprehensive assessment. This overview identifies the strengths of ECOG PS but highlights the weaknesses and where these are supported by other measures. A strong recommendation is made here to move to routine use of the Clinical Frailty Score to start to triage patients and most appropriately design treatments and rehabilitation interventions.

Do drugs offering only PFS maintain quality of life sufficiently from a patient's perspective? Results from AVALPROFS (Assessing the 'VALue' to patients of PROgression Free Survival) study.

PURPOSE: Trials of novel drugs used in advanced disease often show only progression-free survival or modest overall survival benefits. Hypothetical studies suggest that stabilisation of metastatic disease and/or symptom burden are worth treatment-related side effects. We examined this premise contemporaneously using qualitative and quantitative methods. METHODS: Patients with metastatic cancers expected to live > 6 months and prescribed drugs aimed at cancer control were interviewed: at baseline, at 6 weeks, at progression, and if treatment was stopped for toxicity. They also completed Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT-G) plus Anti-Angiogenesis (AA) subscale questionnaires at baseline then monthly for 6 months. RESULTS: Ninety out of 120 (75%) eligible patients participated: 41 (45%) remained on study for 6 months, 36 progressed or died, 4 had treatment breaks, and 9 withdrew due to toxicity. By 6 weeks, 66/69 (96%) patients were experiencing side effects which impacted their activities. Low QoL scores at baseline did not predict a higher risk of death or dropout. At 6-week interviews, as the side effect severity increased, patients were significantly less inclined to view the benefit of cancer control as worthwhile (X2 = 50.7, P < 0.001). Emotional well-being initially improved from baseline by 10 weeks, then gradually returned to baseline levels. CONCLUSION: Maintaining QoL is vital to most patients with advanced cancer so minimising treatment-related side effects is essential. As side effect severity increased, drugs that controlled cancer for short periods were not viewed as worthwhile. Patients need to have the therapeutic aims of further anti-cancer treatment explained honestly and sensitively.

The cost of oropharyngeal cancer in England: A retrospective hospital data analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the total costs of treating head and neck cancers, specifically oropharyngeal, laryngeal and oral cavity cancer, in secondary care facilities in England during the period 2006/2007 to 2010/2011. DESIGN: Patient records were extracted from an English hospital database to estimate the number of patients treated for oropharyngeal, laryngeal and oral cavity cancer in England. Identified resource use was linked to published United Kingdom cost estimates to quantify the reimbursement of treatment through the Payment by Results system. SETTING: Retrospective hospital data analysis. PARTICIPANTS: From the hospital data, patient records of patients treated for oropharyngeal, laryngeal and oral cavity cancer were selected. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Annual total costs of treatment, stratified by inpatient and outpatient setting and by male and female patients. RESULTS: From 2006/2007 to 2010/2011, total costs of treatment across the three head and neck cancer sites were estimated to be approximately £309 million, with 90% attributable to inpatient care (bundled costs). Oropharyngeal cancer accounted for 37% of total costs. Costs and patient numbers increased over time, largely due to a rise in oropharyngeal cancer, where total costs increased from £17.21 million to £30.32 million, with over 1400 (52%) more inpatients treated in 2010/11 compared to 2006/07. CONCLUSIONS: In 4 years, the number of patients with oropharyngeal cancer receiving some form of inpatient care increased by more than half, and associated costs increased by three quarters. This reinforces the case for prevention and early detection strategies to help contain this epidemiological and economic burden.

Therapeutic aims of drugs offering only progression-free survival are misunderstood by patients, and oncologists may be overly optimistic about likely benefits.

PURPOSE: The use of novel and often expensive drugs offering limited survival benefit in advanced disease is controversial. Treatment recommendations are influenced by patient characteristics and trial data showing overall response rates (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). PFS is frequently the primary outcome in licencing studies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: As part of a longitudinal study Assessing the 'VALue' to patients of PROgression Free Survival (AVALPROFS), oncologists completed checklists at baseline following consultations with patients. Questions probed perceived clinical benefits of the drugs to populations in general. Patients completed study-specific interview schedules at baseline, 6 weeks into treatment, and at withdrawal due to toxicity or progression. Patients also completed tumour- and treatment-specific quality of life questionnaires monthly for their time in the study. Only baseline results are reported here. RESULTS: Thirty-two UK oncologists discussed management options with 90 patients with heterogeneous advanced cancers. Oncologists' estimates of medical benefit in general from treatment varied between 10 and 80 %. They expected 46/90 (51 %) of their patients to derive some clinical benefit from the prescribed treatment but were either unsure or expected none for 44/90 (49 %). Predictions of life expectancy were variable but 62 % (56/90) of patients were expected to survive longer with treatment. A majority of patients 51/90 (57 %) had 'no idea' or were 'unclear' what PFS meant and 45/90 (50 %) thought extension of life was the primary therapeutic aim of treatment. CONCLUSION: Discussions between doctors and patients with metastatic disease about future management plans and likely therapeutic gains are challenging. Factors influencing decisions about putative benefits of novel drugs are often applied inconsistently can be overly optimistic and may even contradict published data.

Follow-up and Survivorship in Head and Neck Cancer.

Treatments for head and neck cancer are improving, yet they remain toxic and challenging. The incidence of some forms of head and neck cancer (e.g. oropharyngeal) is rising. This creates an enlarging cohort of survivors with complex needs. These needs may be overlooked and undertreated. This overview presents evidence for the unmet survivorship needs of head and neck cancer patients and identifies strategies for the recognition and remedy of these needs in the clinic. There is sufficient evidence to challenge services to redesign follow-up strategies around unmet need using the full multidisciplinary team and to widen focus away from a sole aim of recognition and treatment of recurrent disease. Problems presented include depression, comorbid disease, second malignancy, alcohol and nicotine dependence, eating and drinking difficulties (including dysphagia, dental problems, trismus and sense disturbance) and hypothyroidism.

Pulmonary lymphangitic carcinomatosis from head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.

Pulmonary lymphangitic carcinomatosis (PLC) secondary to mucosal head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is extremely rare, difficult to diagnose in the pre-symptomatic phase, and is rapidly fatal. We describe two cases of fatal PLC secondary to squamous cell carcinoma in whom a review of pre-treatment imaging (computed tomography of the chest) changes reported as unspecific were retrospectively felt to be consistent with pre-symptomatic PLC. Case 1, a 73-year-old male with T2N2bMx poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinoma of the right tonsil, died 6 weeks after chemoradiotherapy with curative intent. Case 2, a 65-year-old female with T4aN2bMx of the right body of the mandible, died within 6 weeks of radical surgery including free tissue transfer. A review of the literature showed that PLC secondary to HNSCC occurs in an older cohort of patients: mean age 69 years vs. other tumour groups 50 years. PLC secondary to HNSCC can behave in distinctly different ways, demonstrating similarity to either gastric adenocarcinoma or bronchogenic squamous cell carcinomas.

ARIX: a randomised trial of acupuncture v oral care sessions in patients with chronic xerostomia following treatment of head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: Radiation treatment of head and neck cancer can cause chronic xerostomia which impairs patients' quality of life. The study reported here examined the efficacy of acupuncture in alleviating xerostomia symptoms especially dry mouth. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 145 patients with chronic radiation-induced xerostomia >18 months after treatments were recruited from seven UK cancer centres. The study employed a randomised crossover design with participants receiving two group sessions of oral care education and eight of acupuncture using standardised methods. Patient-reported outcome (PROs) measures were completed at baseline and weeks 5, 9, 13, 17, and 21. The primary outcome was improvement in dry mouth. OBJECTIVE: saliva measurements were also carried out. RESULTS: Acupuncture compared with oral care, produced significant reductions in patient reports of severe dry mouth (OR = 2.01, P = 0.031) sticky saliva (OR = 1.67, P = 0.048), needing to sip fluids to swallow food (OR = 2.08, P = 0.011) and in waking up at night to drink (OR = 1.71, P = 0.013). There were no significant changes in either stimulated or unstimulated saliva measurements over time. CONCLUSION: Eight sessions of weekly group acupuncture compared with group oral care education provide significantly better relief of symptoms in patients suffering from chronic radiation-induced xerostomia.

Clinically significant human papilloma virus in squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck in UK practice.

AIMS: The association between squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (HNSCC) and infection with human papilloma viruses (HPV) has created considerable interest. Rates of primary oropharyngeal cancers have shown increasing incidence and declining age at presentation over the last decade, believed to relate to infection with oncogenic or high-risk subtypes of HPV (HR-HPV). HR-HPV-associated tumours have reportedly improved outcomes when compared with HPV-negative cancers. Within the UK, rates of HR-HPV in HNSCC have not yet been reported. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analysed consecutive retrospective cases of oropharyngeal cancer presenting between 2004 and 2007. RESULTS: Thirty-seven per cent of 83 oropharyngeal tumours stained positively for p16(INK4A), a marker of HPV infection (73% tonsillar cancers being p16 (INK4A) positive, 30% tongue and 43% floor of mouth tumours). HPV16 DNA was demonstrated in 75% p16 (INK4A) cases. Despite being more advanced with higher T-stage and nodal burden at presentation, HR-HPV-associated HNSCC showed significantly improved rates of disease-free and overall survival, in particular with improved rates of response to radical radiotherapy. CONCLUSION: HPV16 infection seems to be a clinically significant cause of oropharyngeal HNSCC in the UK and the collection of national data should be supported.

Acute oncology service: assessing the need and its implications.

Cancer patients often have complex and difficult inpatient diagnostic and treatment pathways that involve many different specialities within secondary care. With current severe resource constraints, improvements in outcomes and patient experience need to be both cost-efficient and effective. We review the reports that will shape national cancer care in coming years and use data gathered from our own hospital to highlight important issues in the development of in-patient cancer services and the emergence of a new specialty; acute oncology.