Treatments for breast cancer in men: late effects and impact on quality of life.

PURPOSE: Male breast cancer accounts for approximately 1% of all breast cancer diagnoses. Unfortunately, a lack of information exists regarding late effects of breast cancer treatment in men. METHODS: An online survey directed towards male breast cancer patients was distributed via social medial and emails from June to July 2022. Participants were asked about their disease characteristics, treatments and side effects from the disease or treatment. Patients and treatment variables were reported via descriptive statistics. Univariate logistic regression was performed to evaluate associations between different treatment variables and outcomes expressed by odds ratio. RESULTS: A total of 127 responses were analyzed. Median age of the participants was 64 years (range 56-71 years). A total of 91 participants (71.7%) revealed they experienced late effects secondary to their cancer or cancer treatment. The most concerning physical and psychological symptoms reported were fatigue and fear of recurrence respectively. Axillary lymph node dissection was associated with swollen arm and with difficulty in arm or shoulder movement. Systemic chemotherapy was related to bothersome hair loss and changes on interest in sex; and endocrine therapy was associated with feeling less masculine. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that men suffer several late effects from treatments for breast cancer. Lymphedema, difficulty with arm and shoulder movement, sexual dysfunction and hair loss should be discussed with males as it can be distressing for some patients and decrease their quality of life.

Patient preferences and comfort for cancer survivorship models of care: results of an online survey.

PURPOSE: Workforce shortages will impact oncologists' ability to provide both active and survivorship care. While primary care provider (PCP) or survivorship clinic transition has been emphasized, there is little evidence regarding patient comfort. METHODS: We developed an online survey in partnership with patient advocates to assess survivors' comfort with PCP or survivorship clinic care and distributed the survey to online, cancer-specific patient communities from June to August 2020. Descriptive and logistic regression analyses were conducted. RESULTS: A total of 975 surveys were complete. Most respondents were women (91%) and had private insurance (65%). Thirty-six cancer types were reported. Ninety-three percent had a PCP. Twenty-four percent were comfortable seeing a PCP for survivorship care. Higher odds of comfort were seen among respondents who were Black or had stage 0 cancer; female sex was associated with lower odds. Fifty-five percent were comfortable with a survivorship clinic. Higher odds of comfort were seen with lymphoma or ovarian cancer, > 15 years from diagnosis, and non-US government insurance. Lower odds were seen with melanoma, advanced stage, Medicaid insurance, and one late effect. Preference for PCP care was 87% for general health, 32% for recurrence monitoring, and 37% for late effect management. CONCLUSIONS: One quarter of cancer survivors were comfortable with PCP-led survivorship care and about half with a survivorship clinic. Most preferred oncologist care for recurrence monitoring and late-effect management. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Patient preference and comfort should be considered when developing survivorship care models. Future efforts should focus on facilitating patient-centered transitions to non-oncologist care.

Male Breast Cancer Patient and Surgeon Experience: The Male WhySurg Study.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the experience of the male breast cancer patient. Mastectomy is often offered despite evidence that breast-conserving surgery (BCS) provides similar outcomes. METHODS: Two concurrent online surveys were distributed from August to October 2020 via social media to male breast cancer (MBC) patients and by email to American Society of Breast Surgeon members. The MBC patients were asked their opinions about their surgery, and the surgeons were asked to provide surgical recommendations for MBC patients. RESULTS: The survey involved 63 MBC patients with a mean age of 62 years (range, 31-79 years). Five MBC patients (7.9 %) stated that their surgeon recommended BCS, but 54 (85.7 %) of the patients underwent unilateral, and 8 (12.7 %) underwent bilateral mastectomy. Most of the patients (n = 60, 96.8 %) had no reconstruction. One third of the patients (n = 21, 33.3 %) felt somewhat or very uncomfortable with their appearance after surgery. The response rate was 16.5 % for the surgeons. Of the 438 surgeons who answered the survey, 298 (73.3 %) were female, 215 (51.7 %) were fellowship-trained, and 244 (58.9 %) had been practicing for 16 years or longer. More than half of surgeons (n = 259, 59.1 %) routinely offered BCS to eligible men, and 180 (41.3 %) stated they had performed BCS on a man with breast cancer. Whereas 89 (20.8 %) of the surgeons stated that they routinely offer reconstruction to MBC patients, 87 (20.3 %) said they do not offer reconstruction, 96 (22.4 %) said they offer it only if the patient requests it, and 157 (36.6 %) said they never consider it as an option. CONCLUSIONS: The study found discordance between MBC patients' satisfaction with their surgery and surgeon recommendations and experience. These data present an opportunity to optimize the MBC patient experience.

Webinar as an Informational Resource on Trastuzumab Biosimilars: Planning, Promotion, Execution, and Evaluation.

Despite the incorporation of trastuzumab biosimilars (to treat HER2-positive breast cancer) in clinical practice guidelines, gaps remain such as patient and clinician education. We hosted a webinar comprised of a panel of biosimilars experts, oncologists, pharmacist, infusion nurse, and a patient advocate. The outcomes of the webinar include audience responses to pre- and post-webinar questionnaires, educational benefits, real-time opportunities to ask questions, and a recording. Education needs to be tailored to the needs of both, patients and clinicians.

Characterizing experiences of non-medical switching to trastuzumab biosimilars using data from internet-based surveys with US-based oncologists and breast cancer patients.

PURPOSE: To characterize current experiences with communication and decision-making practices when non-medical switching to a biosimilar trastuzumab is proposed or required by cancer center or insurer. METHODS: We developed and launched 60- and 51-item internet surveys to elicit US breast cancer patient and medical oncologist lived experiences with trastuzumab biosimilars and patient information needs and seeking practices. We recruited participants using social media and administered via REDCap in 2020-2021. RESULTS: 143 breast cancer patients and 33 medical oncologists completed the surveys. 63.9% patients reported having switched to a trastuzumab biosimilar and 40.8% reported receiving no prior notification about switching. 44% of patients reported learning about biosimilars primarily through self-directed learning and 41% wanting more time to discuss with oncologist. None of the oncologists reported that the decision to switch a patient to a biosimilar was initiated by them, but rather more frequently by the insurer (45.2%). About 54.8% reported not receiving any pharmaceutical manufacturer material related to the selected biosimilar. Patients and oncologists diverged in their responses to items regarding patient opportunities to ask questions, adequacy of resources, effectiveness of treatment, patient worry, and magnitude of change. CONCLUSION: There is a need for tailored and effective patient and oncologist information and education on trastuzumab biosimilars, along with improved healthcare communication regarding switching. The discrepancy between patient-reported experiences and oncologist perceptions of the patient experience, suggests a lack of adequate information that may be a challenge not only to the uptake of trastuzumab biosimilars, but to the patient-oncologist relationship.

Higher risk tumor features are not associated with higher nodal stage in patients with estrogen receptor-positive, node-positive breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Studies support omission of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) for patients with sentinel node-positive disease, with ALND recommended for patients who present with clinically positive nodes. Here, we evaluate patient and tumor characteristics and pathologic nodal stage of patients with estrogen receptor-positive (ER +) breast cancer who undergo ALND to determine if differences exist based on nodal presentation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective chart review from 2010 to 2019 defined three groups of patients with ER + breast cancer who underwent ALND for positive nodes: SLN + (positive node identified at SLN biopsy), cNUS (abnormal preoperative US and biopsy), and cNpalp (palpable adenopathy). Patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy or presented with axillary recurrence were excluded. RESULTS: Of 191 patients, 94 were SLN + , 40 were cNUS, and 57 were cNpalp. Patients with SLN + compared with cNpalp were younger (56 vs 64 years, p < 0.01), more often pre-menopausal (41% vs 14%, p < 0.01), and White (65% vs 39%, p = 0.01) with more tumors that were low-grade (36% vs 8%, p < 0.01). Rates of PR + (p = 0.16), levels of Ki67 expression (p = 0.07) and LVI (p = 0.06) did not differ significantly among groups. Of patients with SLN + disease, 64% had pN1 disease compared to 38% of cNUS (p = 0.1) and 40% of cNpalp (p = 0.01). On univariable analysis, tumor size (p = 0.01) and histology (p = 0.04) were significantly associated with pN1 disease, with size remaining an independent predictor on multivariable analysis (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Historically, higher risk features have been attributed to patients with clinically positive nodes precluding omission of ALND, but when restricting evaluation to patients with ER + breast cancer, only tumor size is associated with higher nodal stage.

Social Media and Professional Development for Oncology Professionals.

The use of social media continues to increase in health care and academia. Health care practice, particularly the oncologic field, is constantly changing because of new knowledge, evidence-based research, clinical trials, and government policies. Therefore, oncology trainees and professionals continue to strive to stay up-to-date with practice guidelines, research, and skills. Although social media as an educational and professional development tool is no longer completely new to medicine and has been embraced, it is still under-researched in terms of various outcomes. Social media plays several key roles in professional development and academic advancement. We reviewed the literature to evaluate how social media can be used for professional development and academic promotion of oncology professionals.

Identifying and describing cancer survivors: Implications for cancer survivorship research and clinical care.

BACKGROUND: Gathering information directly from cancer survivors has advanced our understanding of the cancer survivorship experience. However, it is unknown whether surveys can distinguish important subgroups of cancer survivors. This study aimed to describe the current landscape of survey questions used to identify and describe cancer survivors in national cross-sectional studies. METHODS: Using publicly available databases, the authors identified national cross-sectional surveys used in the United States within the past 15 years that included a question on self-reported history of cancer. After abstracting questions and response items used to identify cancer survivors, they conducted a descriptive analysis. RESULTS: The authors identified 14 national cross-sectional surveys, with half administered to the general population and the other half administered to cancer survivors. The most common question used to identify cancer survivors was "Have you ever been told by a doctor or other health professional that you had cancer?" Most surveys had questions asking participants to identify a single cancer type (n = 11), multiple prior cancer diagnoses or types (n = 11), and the time from diagnosis (n = 12). Treatment questions varied from active treatment status to specific treatments received. Questions addressing cancer stage (n = 2), subtypes (n = 1), metastatic status (n = 3), and recurrence (n = 4) were less frequently included. CONCLUSIONS: There is no standard method for assessing self-reported cancer history, and this limits the ability to distinguish among potentially important subgroups of survivors. Future cross-sectional surveys that capture nuanced data elements, such as cancer types, stages/subtypes, metastatic/recurrent status, and treatments received, can help to fill important gaps in cancer survivorship research and clinical care.

National trends and predictors of mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate national trends in utilization, resource use, and predictors of immediate breast reconstruction (IR) after mastectomy. METHODS: The 2005-2014 National Inpatient Sample database was used to identify adult women undergoing mastectomy. IR was defined as any reconstruction during the same inpatient stay. Multivariable regression models were utilized to identify factors associated with IR. RESULTS: Of 729,340 patients undergoing mastectomy, 41.3% received IR. Rates of IR increased from 28.2% in 2005 to 58.2% in 2014 (NP-trend<0.001). Compared to mastectomy alone, IR was associated with increased length of stay (2.5 vs. 2.1 days, P < 0.001) and hospitalization costs ($17,628 vs. $8,643, P < 0.001), which increased over time (P < 0.001). Predictors of IR included younger age, fewer comorbidities, White race, private insurance, top income quartile, teaching hospital designation, high mastectomy volume, and performance of bilateral mastectomy. CONCLUSION: Mastectomy with IR is increasingly performed with resource utilization rising at a steady pace. Our study points to persistent sociodemographic and hospital level disparities associated with the under-utilization of IR. Efforts are needed to alleviate disparities in IR.

"Going Flat" After Mastectomy: Patient-Reported Outcomes by Online Survey.

BACKGROUND: The Going Flat movement aims to increase awareness and acceptance of mastectomy alone as a viable option for patients. Little is known about motivations and satisfaction with surgical outcomes in this population. METHODS: An online survey was administered to 931 women who had a history of uni- or bilateral mastectomy for treatment of breast cancer or elevated breast cancer risk without current breast mound reconstruction. Satisfaction with outcome and surgeon support for the patient experience were characterized using 5-level scaled scores. RESULTS: Mastectomy alone was the first choice for 73.7% of the respondents. The top two reasons for going flat were desire for a faster recovery and avoidance of a foreign body placement. Overall, the mean scaled satisfaction score was 3.72 ± 1.17 out of 5. In the multivariable analysis, low level of surgeon support for the decision to go flat was the strongest predictor of a satisfaction score lower than 3 (odds ratio [OR], 3.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.59-5.72; p < 0.001). Dissatisfaction also was more likely among respondents reporting a body mass index (BMI) of 30 kg/m2 or higher (OR, 2.74; 95% CI, 1.76-4.27; p < 0.001) and those undergoing a unilateral procedure (OR, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.29-3.09; p = 0.002). Greater satisfaction was associated with receiving adequate information about surgical options (OR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.32-0.69; p < 0.0001) and having a surgeon with a specialized breast surgery practice (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.38-0.81; p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients undergoing mastectomy alone are satisfied with their surgical outcome. Surgeons may optimize patient experience by recognizing and supporting a patient's decision to go flat.

How patients experience endocrine therapy for breast cancer: an online survey of side effects, adherence, and medical team support.

PURPOSE: Many patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancer do not adhere to endocrine therapy (ET), and treatment-related side effects are often discussed by participants in online breast cancer forums. Our aim was to survey this unique group of patients about their ET-related experiences. METHODS: We partnered with patients active in breast cancer social media communities to develop a survey assessing ET-related side effects and medical team communication. Patients with a history of HR+ breast cancer who had received a recommendation to take ET were eligible to participate in the anonymous, online survey. RESULTS: Respondents included 2353 women and 54 men. Aromatase inhibitors were the most commonly used medication. Side effects were reported by 91.2%, were more often experienced by women than men (p < 0.001), and were primarily related to medication type. Approximately one-third of respondents discontinued therapy early. While most felt supported by their medical team, 31.5% reported that their side effects were dismissed or minimized. Survey respondents most frequently reported that a healthy diet and exercise, yoga/acupuncture, and vitamins/supplements were helpful in managing ET-related side effects. CONCLUSIONS: ET-related side effects are very common, and one-third discontinued treatment early. Lifestyle changes and complementary therapies can be important tools for side effect management. One-third of patients did not feel that their side effects were taken seriously. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: This is the largest survey of ET use by participants in online breast cancer communities. Further research is needed to identify strategies to improve treatment adherence and to better manage ET-related side effects.

Self-Reported Changes and Perceived Barriers to Healthy Eating and Physical Activity among Global Breast Cancer Survivors: Results from an Exploratory Online Novel Survey.

BACKGROUND: Despite being motivated to improve nutrition and physical activity behaviors, cancer survivors are still burdened by suboptimal dietary intake and low levels of physical activity. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess changes in nutrition and physical activity behaviors after cancer diagnosis or treatment, barriers to eating a healthy diet and staying physically active, and sources for seeking nutrition advice reported by breast cancer survivors. DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: The study included 315 survivors of breast cancer who were recruited through social media and provided completed responses to an online exploratory survey. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-reported changes in nutrition and physical activity behaviors after cancer diagnosis or treatment, perceived barriers to healthy eating and physical activity, and sources of nutrition advice were measured. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Frequency distribution of nutrition and physical activity behaviors and changes, barriers to healthy eating and physical activity, and sources of nutrition advice were estimated. RESULTS: About 84.4% of the breast cancer survivors reported at least 1 positive behavior for improving nutrition and physical activity after cancer diagnosis or treatment. Fatigue was the top barrier to both making healthy food choices (72.1%) and staying physically active (65.7%), followed by stress (69.5%) and treatment-related changes in eating habits (eg, change in tastes, loss of appetite, and craving unhealthy food) (31.4% to 48.6%) as barriers to healthy eating, and pain or discomfort (53.7%) as barriers to being physically active. Internet search (74.9%) was the primary source for seeking nutrition advice. Fewer than half reported seeking nutrition advice from health care providers. CONCLUSIONS: Despite making positive changes in nutrition and physical activity behaviors after cancer diagnosis or treatment, breast cancer survivors experience treatment-related barriers to eating a healthy diet and staying physically active. Our results reinforce the need for developing tailored intervention programs and integrating nutrition into oncology care.

Assessing the Burden of Nodal Disease for Breast Cancer Patients with Clinically Positive Nodes: Hope for More Limited Axillary Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Omission of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) is accepted for patients with one or two positive sentinel nodes, and studies are focusing on clinically node-positive patients who have been downstaged with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). Evidence is lacking for patients with positive nodes who undergo surgery upfront. These patients are assumed to have a higher burden of nodal disease such that ALND remains the standard of care. METHODS: Patients who underwent ALND for breast cancer between 2010 and 2019 at the authors' institution were retrospectively identified. Those with clinical N1 disease were included in the study. Patients who received NAC and those who had surgery for sentinel node positive disease or axillary recurrence were excluded. Clinical and pathologic factors associated with nodal stage were evaluated. RESULTS: Of 111 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 61.3% had a palpable node on exam, and 41.4% ultimately had pN1 disease. Most of the tumors were estrogen receptor (ER)-positive (91.5%), and 21.7% of the tumors were invasive lobular cancers. Lobular histology, tumor size, and metastasis size were associated with higher nodal stage. In the multivariable analysis, the patients with nodal metastasis larger than 10 mm had significantly lower odds of having pN1 disease (odds ratio 0.12; 95% confidence interval 0.02-0.69; p = 0.02). In a subset analysis of patients with palpable nodes, tumor size and histology remained significantly associated with nodal stage. CONCLUSION: More than 40% of breast cancer patients with clinically positive nodes had minimal nodal disease (pN1) at surgery. Additionally, palpable nodes on exam did not predict higher nodal stage. A subset of patients with clinically positive nodes may be identified who can potentially be spared the morbidity of ALND.

A History of #BCSM and Insights for Patient-Centered Online Interaction and Engagement.

PURPOSE: Participation in cancer support groups can provide a sense of community and may better prepare patients for interactions with their health care team. Online interactions may overcome some barriers to in-person support group participation. #BCSM (breast cancer social media), the first cancer support community established on Twitter, was founded in 2011 by two breast cancer survivors. The aims of this study are to describe the growth and changes in this community and to discuss future directions and lessons that may apply to other online support communities. METHODS: Symplur Signals was used to obtain all #BCSM Twitter data from January 1, 2011, to January 1, 2020 (00:00:00 Coordinated Universal Time for both). Hashtag use by selected stakeholder groups, user locations, weekly tweet chat activity, and topics were determined. RESULTS: From year 1 (2011) to year 9 (2019), tweets using the #BCSM hashtag increased by 424%. Tweets by patient advocates increased by 226%, with a peak in 2016. Impressions, a measure of potential tweet views, by patient advocates increased by 517%. Tweets by doctors and nonphysician health care professionals increased by 693%. Weekly #BCSM tweet chat activity peaked in 2013, increasing by 58.1% from 2011. Chat topics have included survivorship, metastatic breast cancer, death and dying, advocacy, and highlights from national breast cancer meetings. CONCLUSIONS: #BCSM has experienced tremendous growth since 2011, although there are challenges to community sustainability. The weekly chats, as well as discussions utilizing the hashtag but occurring outside of scheduled chat times, serve as an important resource for patients and offer physicians an opportunity to both support and learn from patients.