Effect of receiving a customizable brochure on breast cancer patients' knowledge about their diagnosis and treatment: A randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients' lack of knowledge about their own disease may function as a barrier to shared decision-making and well-being. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of written educational materials on breast cancer patients. METHODS: This multicenter, parallel, unblinded, randomized trial included Latin American women aged ≥18 years with a recent breast cancer diagnosis yet to start systemic therapy. Participants underwent randomization in a 1:1 ratio to receive a customizable or standard educational brochure. The primary objective was accurate identification of molecular subtype. Secondary objectives included identification of clinical stage, treatment options, participation in decision-making, perceived quality of information received, and illness uncertainty. Follow-up occurred at 7-21 and 30-51 days post-randomization. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT05798312. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-five breast cancer patients with a median age of 53 years and 61 days from diagnosis were included (customizable: 82; standard: 83). At first available assessment, 52%, 48%, and 30% identified their molecular subtype, disease stage, and guideline-endorsed systemic treatment strategy, respectively. Accurate molecular subtype and stage identification were similar between groups. Per multivariate analysis, customizable brochure recipients were more likely to identify their guideline-recommended treatment modalities (OR: 4.20,p = 0.001). There were no differences between groups in the perceived quality of information received or illness uncertainty. Customizable brochure recipients reported increased participation in decision-making (p = 0.042). CONCLUSIONS: Over one third of recently diagnosed breast cancer patients are incognizant of their disease characteristics and treatment options. This study demonstrates a need to improve patient education and shows that customizable educational materials increase patients' understanding of recommended systemic therapies according to individual breast cancer characteristics.

MONARCH 3: Abemaciclib As Initial Therapy for Advanced Breast Cancer.

Purpose Abemaciclib, a cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitor, demonstrated efficacy as monotherapy and in combination with fulvestrant in women with hormone receptor (HR)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative advanced breast cancer previously treated with endocrine therapy. Methods MONARCH 3 is a double-blind, randomized phase III study of abemaciclib or placebo plus a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor in 493 postmenopausal women with HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer who had no prior systemic therapy in the advanced setting. Patients received abemaciclib or placebo (150 mg twice daily continuous schedule) plus either 1 mg anastrozole or 2.5 mg letrozole, daily. The primary objective was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Secondary objectives included response evaluation and safety. A planned interim analysis occurred after 189 events. Results Median progression-free survival was significantly prolonged in the abemaciclib arm (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.72; P = .000021; median: not reached in the abemaciclib arm, 14.7 months in the placebo arm). In patients with measurable disease, the objective response rate was 59% in the abemaciclib arm and 44% in the placebo arm ( P = .004). In the abemaciclib arm, diarrhea was the most frequent adverse effect (81.3%) but was mainly grade 1 (44.6%). Comparing abemaciclib and placebo, the most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (21.1% v 1.2%), diarrhea (9.5% v 1.2%), and leukopenia (7.6% v 0.6%). Conclusion Abemaciclib plus a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor was effective as initial therapy, significantly improving progression-free survival and objective response rate and demonstrating a tolerable safety profile in women with HR-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer.