Changing Management of Intravestibular Schwannomas in the Era of Cochlear Implantation for Single-Sided Deafness.

OBJECTIVE: Intralabyrinthine schwannomas (ILSs) are a rare cause of deafness. Patients with ILS confined to the semicircular canals and the vestibule (intravestibular schwannomas) are potential candidates for cochlear implantation for hearing rehabilitation, a new option for patients with unilateral hearing loss since the 2019 FDA approval of cochlear implant (CI) for single-sided deafness. In this report, we describe an evolving management approach for ILSs causing hearing loss. PATIENTS: Adults (≥18 years) who underwent simultaneous ILS resection and CI between January 2019 and June 2023 (n = 3). INTERVENTION: Transmastoid labyrinthectomy with simultaneous cochlear implantation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Hearing performance with cochlear implantation measured as CNC Word Recognition scores and AzBio Sentence scores. RESULTS: Three patients with ILS confined to the semicircular canals and vestibule underwent simultaneous tumor resection via labyrinthectomy with CI placement. In all cases, complete tumor resection and full CI insertion were achieved. No patients experienced postoperative complications. Patients 1 and 2 underwent 6- and 9-month postactivation testing, respectively, with CNC scores 64% to 80% and AzBio 81% to 99% in the implanted ears. Patient 3 scored 0% on CNC and AzBio testing at 3 months and deferred her 6-month audiometry. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ILS confined to the vestibule and semicircular canals can be considered for simultaneous tumor resection and CI placement.

Understanding Treatment Decision-Making in Older Women With Breast Cancer: A Survey-Based Study.

INTRODUCTION: For women ≥70 y old with early-stage hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer, the national guidelines recommend the omission of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) and post-lumpectomy radiotherapy. However, national-level data suggest these treatments remain common. We utilized a survey-based approach to explore patient-level factors driving overutilization. METHODS: We recruited women ≥70 y old with early-stage hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer within 6 mo of surgery. An exploratory cross-sectional survey captured information on offered and pursued treatments, the importance of patient-centered outcomes, and the influence of each outcome on treatment decision-making. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis. RESULTS: 31/51 patients completed the survey with a response rate of 61%. Most patients (86%) received a lumpectomy. Twenty-eight percent of patients received SLNB, and 56% of lumpectomy patients underwent adjuvant radiotherapy. When considering treatment options, the patient-centered outcomes, most important for decision-making, were overall survival, breast-specific survival, and preventing local recurrence, while breast appearance, financial costs, and avoiding the need for pills (endocrine therapy) were the least important. CONCLUSIONS: Patients' treatment decisions align with their values. The correlation between patient-stated values and treatment decisions suggests a perceived mortality benefit of low-value SLNB and radiotherapy. These findings can inform targeted efforts to deimplement low-value care in breast cancer through patient-focused tools and education.

Patient Preferences and Satisfaction With Decisions in Stage-III Melanoma: A Mixed Methods Study.

INTRODUCTION: Rapid accumulation of data in surgical and medical oncology has changed the treatment landscape for patients with stage-III melanoma, introducing options for active surveillance and adjuvant systemic therapy; however, these options have increased the complexity of decision making. METHODS: We conducted an explanatory sequential mixed-methods study consisting of surveys and semistructured interviews among patients diagnosed with stage-III melanoma at a single institution from August 2019 to December 2021. The survey included the validated 30-point satisfaction with decision scale (SWD). The interview guide was developed using a shared decision-making framework. RESULTS: Twenty-six participants completed the survey (response rate 40%) and 17 were interviewed. In the survey, 69% of participants reported receiving a recommendation for active surveillance and 23% received a recommendation for adjuvant systemic therapy. Overall SWD for treatment of the lymph node basin and adjuvant systemic therapy was high at 27.94 and 26.21 out of 30, respectively. In the interviews, participants stressed the importance of the physician's recommendation as well as the desire to minimize intervention and avoid potential side effects in their decisions. However, they demonstrated persistent knowledge gaps in their understanding of the treatment options. CONCLUSIONS: Like other cancer types where the option for active surveillance exists, the physician's recommendation is influential in shaping decisions for patients with stage-III melanoma. Physicians can improve shared decision making in this complex treatment landscape through improved multidisciplinary collaboration and mechanisms for ensuring patients' understanding of the treatment options.

Review of Cancer-Specific Quality Measures Promoting the Avoidance of Low-Value Care.

BACKGROUND: With rising healthcare costs and campaigns aimed at avoiding low-value care, reducing cancer overtreatment has emerged as an important measure of cancer care quality. The extent to which avoidance of low-value care has been incorporated in cancer-specific quality measures is unknown. We aimed to identify and characterize cancer quality measures that promote the avoidance of low-value care, and identify gaps that may guide future measure development. METHODS: We systematically identified cancer-specific quality measures from leading quality measure organizations [e.g., National Quality Forum (NQF), National Quality Measures Clearinghouse (NQMC)]. We reviewed measures promoting the avoidance of low-value cancer care and subclassified them into disease site- or non-disease site-specific categories and the phase of care they targeted. RESULTS: We reviewed 313 quality measures from six organizations. Of these, 18% (n = 55) focused on avoidance of low-value care. Quality measures focused on end-of-life care were most likely to focus on low-value care [n = 13 (50%)], followed by breast [n = 12 (18%)], lung [n = 9 (31%)], colon [n = 8 (20%)], prostate [n = 5 (38%)], general cancer care [n = 4 (3%)], symptoms and toxicities [n = 2 (40%)], and palliative cancer care [n = 2 (11%)] measures. The phases of care quality measures targeted included low-value screening [n = 5 (9%)], diagnostic testing and staging [n = 7 (13%)], treatment [n = 19 (34%)], surveillance [n = 6 (11%)], and clinical outcomes [n = 18 (33%)]. All categories had a treatment-specific quality measure, but no category had a representative measure for every phase of care. DISCUSSION: A minority of cancer quality measures are aimed at avoiding low-value care, and multiple evidence-based recommendations targeting low-value care have not been incorporated.

Clinician Attitudes and Beliefs About Deintensifying Head and Neck Cancer Surveillance.

Importance: Surveillance imaging and visits are costly and have not been shown to improve oncologic outcomes for patients with head and neck cancer (HNC). However, the benefit of surveillance visits may extend beyond recurrence detection. To better understand surveillance and potentially develop protocols to tailor current surveillance paradigms, it is important to elicit the perspectives of the clinicians who care for patients with HNC. Objective: To characterize current surveillance practices and explore clinician attitudes and beliefs on deintensifying surveillance for patients with HNC. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study was performed from January to March 2021. Guided by an interpretive description approach, interviews were analyzed to produce a thematic description. Data analysis was performed from March to April 2021. Otolaryngologists and radiation oncologists were recruited using purposive and snowball sampling strategies. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were current practice, attitudes, and beliefs about deintensifying surveillance and survivorship as well as patients' values and perspectives collected from interviews of participating physicians. Results: Twenty-one physicians (17 [81%] men) were interviewed, including 13 otolaryngologists and 8 radiation oncologists with a median of 8 years (IQR, 5-20 years) in practice. Twelve participants (57%) stated their practice comprised more than 75% of patients with HNC. Participants expressed that there was substantial variation in the interpretation of the surveillance guidelines. Participants were open to the potential for deintensification of surveillance or incorporating symptom-based surveillance protocols but had concerns that deintensification may increase patient anxiety and shift some of the burden of recurrence monitoring to patients. Patient and physician peace of mind, the importance of maintaining the patient-physician relationship, and the need for adequate survivorship and management of treatment-associated toxic effects were reported to be important barriers to deintensifying surveillance. Conclusions and Relevance: In this qualitative study, clinicians revealed a willingness to consider altering cancer surveillance but expressed a need to maintain patient and clinician peace of mind, maintain the patient-clinician relationship, and ensure adequate monitoring of treatment-associated toxic effects and other survivorship concerns. These findings may be useful in future research on the management of posttreatment surveillance.