Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) advocacy-Past, present and future!

Patient advocates, referring to those individuals that have been diagnosed with the disease for which they advocate, are essential stake holders in healthcare. For those facing the stages of being diagnosed with Inflammatory Breast Cancer (IBC), the "call to advocate" is an immediate response to being diagnosed with a rare and aggressive disease that progresses rapidly, often in a matter of weeks or months. There is a great stigma and bias in the medical community that has inhibited the education and study of IBC. A lack of understanding of the disease, how it presents and how to treat it leaves many IBC patients facing misdiagnosis. Communication is a cornerstone of healthcare; this goes beyond the patient-provider dynamic. Education of IBC must be a grassroots initiative. There should be no barrier to care in the diagnosis, treatment, study and survivorship of inflammatory Breast Cancer. It is not just an oncologist's lesson to learn, but that of all providers in healthcare. In this chapter you will hear how 4 women who were diagnosed with IBC faced the difficult tasks of navigating through the healthcare system on their own and came out on the other side using their experience to help others. In conclusion, in defining the evolving roles of Patient Advocacy in IBC over the past 25 years, we examine what has been done, along with its challenges, and what work still remains from the perspectives of different patient advocates.

Standardized Definitions for Efficacy End Points in Neoadjuvant Breast Cancer Clinical Trials: NeoSTEEP.

PURPOSE: The Standardized Definitions for Efficacy End Points (STEEP) criteria, established in 2007 and updated in 2021 (STEEP 2.0), provide standardized definitions of adjuvant breast cancer (BC) end points. STEEP 2.0 identified a need to separately address end points for neoadjuvant clinical trials. The multidisciplinary NeoSTEEP working group of experts was convened to critically evaluate and align neoadjuvant BC trial end points. METHODS: The NeoSTEEP working group concentrated on neoadjuvant systemic therapy end points in clinical trials with efficacy outcomes-both pathologic and time-to-event survival end points-particularly for registrational intent. Special considerations for subtypes and therapeutic approaches, imaging, nodal staging at surgery, bilateral and multifocal diseases, correlative tissue collection, and US Food and Drug Administration regulatory considerations were contemplated. RESULTS: The working group recommends a preferred definition of pathologic complete response (pCR) as the absence of residual invasive cancer in the complete resected breast specimen and all sampled regional lymph nodes (ypT0/Tis ypN0 per AJCC staging). Residual cancer burden should be a secondary end point to facilitate future assessment of its utility. Alternative end points are needed for hormone receptor-positive disease. Time-to-event survival end point definitions should pay particular attention to the measurement starting point. Trials should include end points originating at random assignment (event-free survival and overall survival) to capture presurgery progression and deaths as events. Secondary end points adapted from STEEP 2.0, which are defined from starting at curative-intent surgery, may also be appropriate. Specification and standardization of biopsy protocols, imaging, and pathologic nodal evaluation are also crucial. CONCLUSION: End points in addition to pCR should be selected on the basis of clinical and biologic aspects of the tumor and the therapeutic agent investigated. Consistent prespecified definitions and interventions are paramount for clinically meaningful trial results and cross-trial comparison.

Baseline characteristics and first-line treatment patterns in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer in the SystHERs registry.

BACKGROUND: Systemic Therapies for HER2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer Study (SystHERs, NCT01615068) was a prospective, observational disease registry designed to identify treatment patterns and clinical outcomes in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) in real-world treatment settings. METHODS: SystHERs enrolled patients aged ≥ 18 years with recently diagnosed HER2-positive MBC. Treatment regimens and clinical management were determined by the treating physician. In this analysis, patients were compared descriptively by first-line treatment, age, or race. Multivariate logistic regression was used to examine the associations between baseline variables and treatment selections. Clinical outcomes were assessed in patients treated with trastuzumab (Herceptin [H]) + pertuzumab (Perjeta [P]). RESULTS: Patients were enrolled from June 2012 to June 2016. As of February 22, 2018, 948 patients from 135 US treatment sites had received first-line treatment, including HP (n = 711), H without P (n = 175), or no H (n = 62) (with or without chemotherapy and/or hormonal therapy). Overall, 68.7% received HP + taxane and 9.3% received H without P + taxane. Patients aged < 50 years received HP (versus H without P) more commonly than those ≥ 70 years (odds ratio 4.20; 95% CI, 1.62-10.89). Chemotherapy was less common in patients ≥ 70 years (68.2%) versus those < 50 years (88.0%) or 50-69 years (87.4%). Patients treated with HP had median overall survival of 53.8 months and median progression-free survival of 15.8 months. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis of real-world data shows that most patients with HER2-positive MBC received first-line treatment with HP + taxane. However, older patients were less likely to receive dual HER2-targeted therapy and chemotherapy.

De Novo Versus Recurrent HER2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer: Patient Characteristics, Treatment, and Survival from the SystHERs Registry.

BACKGROUND: Limited data exist describing real-world treatment of de novo and recurrent HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Systemic Therapies for HER2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer Study (SystHERs) was a fully enrolled (2012-2016), observational, prospective registry of patients with HER2-positive MBC. Patients aged ≥18 years and ≤6 months from HER2-positive MBC diagnosis were treated and assessed per their physician's standard practice. The primary endpoint was to characterize treatment patterns by de novo versus recurrent MBC status, compared descriptively. Secondary endpoints included patient characteristics, progression-free and overall survival (PFS and OS, by Kaplan-Meier method; hazard ratio [HR] and 95% confidence interval [CI] by Cox regression), and patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: Among 977 eligible patients, 49.8% (n = 487) had de novo and 50.2% (n = 490) had recurrent disease. A higher proportion of de novo patients had hormone receptor-negative disease (34.9% vs. 24.9%), bone metastasis (57.1% vs. 45.9%), and/or liver metastasis (41.9% vs. 33.1%), and a lower proportion had central nervous system metastasis (4.3% vs. 13.5%). De novo patients received first-line regimens containing chemotherapy (89.7%), trastuzumab (95.7%), and pertuzumab (77.8%) more commonly than recurrent patients (80.0%, 85.9%, and 68.6%, respectively). De novo patients had longer median PFS (17.7 vs. 11.9 months; HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.59-0.80; p < .0001) and OS (not estimable vs. 44.5 months; HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.44-0.69; p < .0001). CONCLUSION: Patients with de novo versus recurrent HER2-positive MBC exhibit different disease characteristics and survival durations, suggesting these groups have distinct outcomes. These differences may affect future clinical trial design. Clinical trial identification number. NCT01615068 (clinicaltrials.gov). IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: SystHERs was an observational registry of patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC), which is a large, modern, real-world data set for this population and, thereby, provides a unique opportunity to study patients with de novo and recurrent HER2-positive MBC. In SystHERs, patients with de novo disease had different baseline demographics and disease characteristics, had superior clinical outcomes, and more commonly received first-line chemotherapy and/or trastuzumab versus those with recurrent disease. Data from this and other studies suggest that de novo and recurrent MBC have distinct outcomes, which may have implications for disease management strategies and future clinical study design.

Baseline Characteristics, Treatment Patterns, and Outcomes in Patients with HER2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer by Hormone Receptor Status from SystHERs.

PURPOSE: We report treatments and outcomes in a contemporary patient population with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) by hormone receptor (HR) status from the Systemic Therapies for HER2-positive Metastatic Breast Cancer Study (SystHERs). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: SystHERs (NCT01615068) was an observational, prospective registry study of U.S.-based patients with newly diagnosed HER2-positive MBC. Endpoints included treatment patterns and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Of 977 eligible patients (enrolled from 2012 to 2016), 70.1% (n = 685) had HR-positive and 29.9% (n = 292) had HR-negative disease. Overall, 59.1% (405/685) of patients with HR-positive disease received any first-line endocrine therapy (with or without HER2-targeted therapy or chemotherapy); 34.9% (239/685) received HER2-targeted therapy + chemotherapy + sequential endocrine therapy. Patients with HR-positive versus HR-negative disease had longer median overall survival (OS; 53.0 vs 43.4 months; hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.56-0.87). Compared with patients with high HR-positive staining (10%-100%, n = 550), those with low HR-positive staining (1%-9%, n = 60) received endocrine therapy less commonly (64.2% vs 33.3%) and had shorter median OS (53.8 vs 40.1 months). Similar median OS (43.4 vs 40.1 months) was observed in patients with HR-negative versus low HR-positive tumors (1%-9%). CONCLUSIONS: Despite evidence that first-line HER2-targeted therapy, chemotherapy, and sequential endocrine therapy improves survival in patients with HR-positive, HER2-positive disease, only 34.9% of patients in this real-world setting received such treatment. Patients with low tumor HR positivity (1%-9%) had lower endocrine therapy use and worse survival than those with high tumor HR positivity (10%-100%).

Effective stakeholder engagement: design and implementation of a clinical trial (SWOG S1415CD) to improve cancer care.

BACKGROUND: The Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center has engaged an External Stakeholder Advisory Group (ESAG) in the planning and implementation of the TrACER Study (S1415CD), a five-year pragmatic clinical trial assessing the effectiveness of a guideline-based colony stimulating factor standing order intervention. The trial is being conducted by SWOG through the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program in 45 clinics. The ESAG includes ten patient partners, two payers, two pharmacists, two guideline experts, four providers and one medical ethicist. This manuscript describes the ESAG's role and impact on the trial. METHODS: During early trial development, the research team assembled the ESAG to inform plans for each phase of the trial. ESAG members provide feedback and engage in problem solving to improve trial implementation. Each year, members participate in one in-person meeting, web conferences and targeted email discussion. Additionally, they complete a survey that assesses their satisfaction with communication and collaboration. The research team collected and reviewed stakeholder input from 2014 to 2018 for impact on the trial. RESULTS: The ESAG has informed trial design, implementation and dissemination planning. The group advised the trial's endpoints, regimen list and development of cohort and usual care arms. Based on ESAG input, the research team enhanced patient surveys and added pharmacy-related questions to the component application to assess order entry systems. ESAG patient partners collaborated with the research team to develop a patient brochure and study summary for clinic staff. In addition to identifying recruitment strategies and patient-oriented platforms for publicly sharing results, ESAG members participated as co-authors on this manuscript and a conference poster presentation highlighting stakeholder influence on the trial. The annual satisfaction survey results suggest that ESAG members were satisfied with the methods, frequency and target areas of their engagement in the trial during project years 1-3. CONCLUSIONS: Diverse stakeholder engagement has been essential in optimizing the design, implementation and planned dissemination of the TrACER Study. The lessons described in the manuscript may assist others to effectively partner with stakeholders on clinical research.

Central Nervous System Metastasis in Patients with HER2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer: Patient Characteristics, Treatment, and Survival from SystHERs.

PURPOSE: Patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) with central nervous system (CNS) metastasis have a poor prognosis. We report treatments and outcomes in patients with HER2-positive MBC and CNS metastasis from the Systemic Therapies for HER2-positive Metastatic Breast Cancer Study (SystHERs). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: SystHERs (NCT01615068) was a prospective, U.S.-based, observational registry of patients with newly diagnosed HER2-positive MBC. Study endpoints included treatment patterns, clinical outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes (PRO). RESULTS: Among 977 eligible patients enrolled (2012-2016), CNS metastasis was observed in 87 (8.9%) at initial MBC diagnosis and 212 (21.7%) after diagnosis, and was not observed in 678 (69.4%) patients. White and younger patients, and those with recurrent MBC and hormone receptor-negative disease, had higher risk of CNS metastasis. Patients with CNS metastasis at diagnosis received first-line lapatinib more commonly (23.0% vs. 2.5%), and trastuzumab less commonly (70.1% vs. 92.8%), than patients without CNS metastasis at diagnosis. Risk of death was higher with CNS metastasis observed at or after diagnosis [median overall survival (OS) 30.2 and 38.3 months from MBC diagnosis, respectively] versus no CNS metastasis [median OS not estimable: HR 2.86; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.05-4.00 and HR 1.94; 95% CI, 1.52-2.49]. Patients with versus without CNS metastasis at diagnosis had lower quality of life at enrollment. CONCLUSIONS: Despite advances in HER2-targeted treatments, patients with CNS metastasis continue to have a poor prognosis and impaired quality of life. Observation of CNS metastasis appears to influence HER2-targeted treatment choice.

The SystHERs registry: an observational cohort study of treatment patterns and outcomes in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Amplification of the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) gene occurs in approximately 20% of invasive breast cancer cases and is associated with a more aggressive disease course than HER2-negative breast cancer. HER2-targeted therapies have altered the natural history of HER2-positive breast cancer, a trend that will likely further improve with the recent approval of new agents. A prospective, observational cohort study was designed and initiated to provide real-world insights into current treatment patterns, long-term survival, and patients' experiences with initial and subsequent treatments for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). METHODS/DESIGN: The Systematic Therapies for HER2-positive Metastatic Breast Cancer Study (SystHERs) is a US-based prospective observational cohort study enrolling patients ≥18 years of age with recently diagnosed HER2-positive MBC not previously treated with systemic therapy in the metastatic setting. The primary objective of the study is to identify treatment patterns and clinical outcomes in recently diagnosed patients in a variety of practice settings. Secondary objectives include comparative efficacy, safety, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Healthcare resource utilization is an exploratory end point. Tumor tissue and blood sample collection is optional.The SystHERs registry will enroll approximately 1000 patients over a 3-year period, after which the study will continue for ≥5 years, allowing for a maximum follow-up of 8 years. The treating physician will determine all care and the frequency of visits. PRO measures will be completed at study enrollment and every 90 days. Clinical data will be abstracted quarterly from patient records. The first patient was enrolled in June 2012, and preliminary descriptive data based on 25% to 30% of the final study population are expected at the end of 2013, and as of April 25, 2014, 386 patients are enrolled. DISCUSSION: SystHERs is expected to provide in-depth data on demographic, clinicopathological, and treatment patterns and their associations with clinical outcomes, PROs, and healthcare resource utilization. Tumor tissue and DNA repositories will also be established for use in future translational research. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01615068 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Margins for breast-conserving surgery with whole-breast irradiation in stage I and II invasive breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology endorsement of the Society of Surgical Oncology/American Society for Radiation Oncology consensus guideline.

PURPOSE: The Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO)/American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) guideline on surgical margins for breast-conserving surgery with whole-breast irradiation in stage I and II invasive breast cancer was considered for endorsement. METHODS: The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) has a policy and set of procedures for endorsing practice guidelines developed by other organizations. ASCO staff reviewed the SSO/ASTRO guideline for developmental rigor; an ASCO ad hoc review panel of experts reviewed the guideline content. RESULTS: The ASCO ad hoc guideline review panel concurred that the recommendations are clear, thorough, and based on the most relevant scientific evidence in this content area and that they present options acceptable to patients. According to the SSO/ASTRO guideline, the use of no ink on tumor (ie, no cancer cells adjacent to any inked edge/surface of specimen) as the standard for an adequate margin in invasive cancer in the era of multidisciplinary therapy is associated with low rates of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence and has the potential to decrease re-excision rates, improve cosmetic outcomes, and decrease health care costs. CONCLUSION: The ASCO review panel endorses the SSO/ASTRO recommendations with qualifications, as follows. The panel reinforces and amplifies the guideline authors' call for the monitoring of outcomes of the guideline at the institutional level, as institutions transition to adopting the SSO/ASTRO recommendations; would place greater emphasis on the importance of postlumpectomy mammography for cases involving microcalcifications; and calls for flexibility in the application of the guideline in light of the generally weak evidence supporting the recommendations.

Inflammatory breast cancer: patient advocate view.

Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is the most aggressive form of breast cancer, often presenting with distant metastasis. While controversy exists regarding the actual incidence of the disease, there is agreement that IBC causes a disproportionate number of breast cancer deaths. Those with typical IBC symptoms face a healthcare system that is often dismissive of their concerns. This is especially true for pregnant, lactating, and younger women. IBC remains poorly understood and diagnosis is frequently delayed due to a lack of knowledge in both the lay and medical communities. The IBC Research Foundation is committed to facilitating research that will improve diagnosis and treatment of IBC, as well as working to raise awareness of the disease in the medical community and general population.

Management of a patient with inflammatory breast cancer.

IBC is an aggressive breast cancer, sometimes mistaken for contact dermatitis, in which many patients do not have a palpable mass. Management of this deadly disease is evolving.

The patient advocate view.

Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is considered a rare disease by researchers and clinicians, and is classified as such by the Office of Rare Diseases by having a prevalence of fewer than 200,000 affected persons in the United States [5]. To affected persons, their family and friends, however, IBC is not rare; it is real, it is here, it is pain, its treatment is often filled with its own pain. As with many other diseases, IBC demands that patients be their own best advocate; no one is pre-trained for this role, it is all on-the-job-training. The "IBC Community" is comprised of those who have been diagnosed with IBC, their family, their friends, and interested other persons. It is a passionate, committed community, knit together principally by the Internet, e-mail, and telephone. The Inflammatory Breast Cancer Research Foundation was founded in 1999 by advocates, and focuses on education and awareness of IBC symptoms, diagnosis, and treatment, as well as assisting researchers and clinicians investigate IBC, the results of which will be of diagnostic and treatment value.