Comparing Breast Cancer and Cardiovascular Disease Risk and Use of Chemoprevention and Statins among Women with High-risk Breast Lesions.

Breast cancer chemoprevention with selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERM) or aromatase inhibitors (AI) remains underutilized among high-risk women. A potential barrier to chemoprevention is competing comorbidities such as atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), due to concern for additional medication side effects. We conducted a retrospective cohort study among women with atypical hyperplasia (AH) or lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS), an important target population for chemoprevention. We compared risks for breast cancer and ASCVD, as well as use of SERMs/AIs versus statins among high-risk women (defined as a 5-year invasive breast cancer risk ≥1.67% and 10-year ASCVD risk ≥7.5%, respectively). We used clinical data extracted from the electronic health record to calculate breast cancer risk according to the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium model and ASCVD risk according to the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association risk calculator. Among 298 evaluable women, mean age was 58.2 years (SD, 8.34), with 33% non-Hispanic White, 41% Hispanic, 9% non-Hispanic Black, 6% Asian, and 11% other/unknown race/ethnicity. About 98% of women met high-risk criteria for breast cancer, whereas 30% were high-risk for ASCVD. Mean 10-year risk of breast cancer was higher than mean 10-year risk of ASCVD (9.14% vs. 6.69%; P < 0.001). Among women who met high-risk criteria for both diseases, use of statins was higher compared with SERMs/AIs (58% vs. 21%; P < 0.001). Among women with AH or LCIS, statin use was higher compared with breast cancer chemoprevention among eligible women, despite having a higher mean risk of breast cancer than ASCVD. PREVENTION RELEVANCE: Among women with high-risk breast lesions, mean absolute risk of breast cancer was higher compared with cardiovascular disease; however, statin use was significantly higher than chemoprevention. To address underutilization of breast cancer chemoprevention, these drugs should be placed in the context of medications used to prevent other chronic diseases.

Sequential activation of E2F via Rb degradation and c-Myc drives resistance to CDK4/6 inhibitors in breast cancer.

Cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) are key therapeutic agents in the management of metastatic hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer. However, the emergence of drug resistance limits their long-term efficacy. Here, we show that breast cancer cells develop CDK4/6i resistance via a sequential two-step process of E2F activation. This process entails retinoblastoma (Rb)-protein degradation, followed by c-Myc-mediated amplification of E2F transcriptional activity. CDK4/6i treatment halts cell proliferation in an Rb-dependent manner but dramatically reduces Rb-protein levels. However, this reduction in Rb levels insufficiently induces E2F activity. To develop CDK4/6i resistance, upregulation or activating mutations in mitogenic or hormone signaling are required to stabilize c-Myc levels, thereby augmenting E2F activity. Our analysis of pre-treatment tumor samples reveals a strong correlation between c-Myc levels, rather than Rb levels, and poor therapeutic outcomes after CDK4/6i treatment. Moreover, we propose that proteasome inhibitors can potentially reverse CDK4/6i resistance by restoring Rb levels.

Cognitive and emotional factors related to COVID-19 among high-risk ethnically diverse adults at the onset of the New York City outbreak: A cross-sectional survey.

A cross-sectional survey was conducted among high-risk, racially/ethnically diverse adults at the point in time when New York City (NYC) became the COVID-19 pandemic's global epicenter. The study objective was to assess the threat and coping appraisals (cognitive factors known to correspond with people's willingness to adopt behaviorally focused interventions) and levels of distress, anxiety, and intolerance for uncertainty (emotional factors). Survey respondents were recruited in April 2020 using an online survey with unpaid recruitment on the GetHealthyHeights.org community-oriented website. We also recruited participants that engaged in previous research studies to gain survey responses from community members at higher risk for COVID-19 complications due to comorbidities compared to the general population. Analysis was performed to test for differences in survey responses by comorbidities, age, race, ethnicity, and employment status. Results show that the devastating effects of the pandemic appear to have uniquely impacted minority respondents, who reported significantly higher levels of anxiety and were significantly more likely to report having little control over whether they will get COVID-19 compared with White/non-Hispanic respondents. Minority respondents also had significantly higher mean scores on the behaviorally focused dimension of the intolerance of uncertainty (IU) scale, which measures avoidance and paralysis in the face of uncertainty. In multivariate analysis, IU predicted anxiety levels, and this association was not mediated by cognitive factors (threat and coping appraisals). By conducting this survey early in the pandemic, our study uniquely evaluated cognitive and emotional factors among a racially/ethnically diverse group of NYC residents during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. Our findings suggest the need to acknowledge the disparities that appear to exist in pandemic response and for culturally tailored messaging and interventions. Few studies have reported differences by race and ethnicity during pandemic exposure. Therefore, further research on factors that may influence pandemic response among minority populations is needed.

Breast cancer risk prediction combining a convolutional neural network-based mammographic evaluation with clinical factors.

PURPOSE: Deep learning techniques, including convolutional neural networks (CNN), have the potential to improve breast cancer risk prediction compared to traditional risk models. We assessed whether combining a CNN-based mammographic evaluation with clinical factors in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) model improved risk prediction. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study among 23,467 women, age 35-74, undergoing screening mammography (2014-2018). We extracted electronic health record (EHR) data on risk factors. We identified 121 women who subsequently developed invasive breast cancer at least 1 year after the baseline mammogram. Mammograms were analyzed with a pixel-wise mammographic evaluation using CNN architecture. We used logistic regression models with breast cancer incidence as the outcome and predictors including clinical factors only (BCSC model) or combined with CNN risk score (hybrid model). We compared model prediction performance via area under the receiver operating characteristics curves (AUCs). RESULTS: Mean age was 55.9 years (SD, 9.5) with 9.3% non-Hispanic Black and 36% Hispanic. Our hybrid model did not significantly improve risk prediction compared to the BCSC model (AUC of 0.654 vs 0.624, respectively, p = 0.063). In subgroup analyses, the hybrid model outperformed the BCSC model among non-Hispanic Blacks (AUC 0.845 vs. 0.589; p = 0.026) and Hispanics (AUC 0.650 vs 0.595; p = 0.049). CONCLUSION: We aimed to develop an efficient breast cancer risk assessment method using CNN risk score and clinical factors from the EHR. With future validation in a larger cohort, our CNN model combined with clinical factors may help predict breast cancer risk in a cohort of racially/ethnically diverse women undergoing screening.

Breast Cancer Risk and Screening Mammography Frequency Among Multiethnic Women.

INTRODUCTION: In 2009, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force updated recommended mammography screening frequency from annual to biennial for average-risk women aged 50-74 years. The association between estimated breast cancer risk and mammography screening frequency was evaluated. METHODS: A single-center retrospective cohort study was conducted among racially/ethnically diverse women, aged 50-74 years, who underwent screening mammography from 2014 to 2018. Data on age, race/ethnicity, first-degree family history of breast cancer, previous benign breast biopsies, and mammographic density were extracted from the electronic health record to calculate Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium 5-year risk of invasive breast cancer, with a 5-year risk ≥1.67% defined as high risk. Multivariable analyses were conducted to determine the association between breast cancer risk factors and mammography screening frequency (annual versus biennial). Data were analyzed from 2020 to 2022. RESULTS: Among 12,929 women with a mean age of 61±6.9 years, 82.7% underwent annual screening mammography, and 30.7% met high-risk criteria for breast cancer. Hispanic women were more likely to screen annually than non-Hispanic Whites (85.0% vs 79.8%, respectively), despite fewer meeting high-risk criteria. In multivariable analyses adjusting for breast cancer risk factors, high- versus low/average-risk women (OR=1.17; 95% CI=1.04, 1.32) and Hispanic versus non-Hispanic White women (OR=1.46; 95% CI=1.29, 1.65) were more likely to undergo annual mammography. CONCLUSIONS: A majority of women continue to undergo annual screening mammography despite only a minority meeting high-risk criteria, and Hispanic women were more likely to screen annually despite lower overall breast cancer risk. Future studies should focus on the implementation of risk-stratified breast cancer screening strategies.

Qualitative analysis of shared decision-making for chemoprevention in the primary care setting: provider-related barriers.

BACKGROUND: Chemoprevention with anti-estrogens, such as tamoxifen, raloxifene or aromatase inhibitors, have been shown to reduce breast cancer risk in randomized controlled trials; however, uptake among women at high-risk for developing breast cancer remains low. The aim of this study is to identify provider-related barriers to shared decision-making (SDM) for chemoprevention in the primary care setting. METHODS: Primary care providers (PCPs) and high-risk women eligible for chemoprevention were enrolled in a pilot study and a randomized clinical trial of web-based decision support tools to increase chemoprevention uptake. PCPs included internists, family practitioners, and gynecologists, whereas patients were high-risk women, age 35-75 years, who had a 5-year invasive breast cancer risk ≥ 1.67%, according to the Gail model. Seven clinical encounters of high-risk women and their PCPs who were given access to these decision support tools were included in this study. Audio-recordings of the clinical encounters were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using grounded theory methodology. RESULTS: Six primary care providers, of which four were males (mean age 36 [SD 6.5]) and two were females (mean age 39, [SD 11.5]) and seven racially/ethnically diverse high-risk female patients participated in this study. Qualitative analysis revealed three themes: (1) Competing demands during clinical encounters; (2) lack of knowledge among providers about chemoprevention; and (3) limited risk communication during clinical encounters. CONCLUSIONS: Critical barriers to SDM about chemoprevention were identified among PCPs. Providers need education and resources through decision support tools to engage in risk communication and SDM with their high-risk patients, and to gain confidence in prescribing chemoprevention in the primary care setting.

Patient, primary care provider, and stakeholder perspectives on mammography screening frequency: lessons learned from a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: U.S. professional organizations have provided conflicting recommendations on annual vs. biennial mammography screening. Potential harms of more frequent screening include increased anxiety and costs of false positive results, including unnecessary breast biopsies and overdiagnosis. OBJECTIVE: To characterize current practices and beliefs surrounding mammography screening frequency and perspectives on using risk-based screening to inform screening intervals. DESIGN: Semi-structured interviews informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). PARTICIPANTS: Patients, primary care providers (PCPs), third-party stakeholders (breast radiologists, radiology administrators, patient advocates). MAIN MEASURES: Qualitative data, with a codebook developed based upon prespecified implementation science constructs. KEY RESULTS: We interviewed 25 patients, 11 PCPs, and eight key stakeholders, including three radiologists, two radiology administrators, and three patient advocates. Most patients reported having annual mammograms, however, half believed having mammograms every two years was acceptable. Some women were worried early breast cancer would be missed if undergoing biennial screening. PCPs were equally split between recommending annual and biennial mammograms. Although PCPs were interested in using breast cancer risk models to inform screening decisions, concerns raised include time burden and lack of familiarity with breast cancer risk assessment tools. All breast radiologists believed patients should receive annual mammograms, while patient advocates and radiology administrators were split between annual vs. biennial. Radiologists were worried about missing breast cancer diagnoses when mammograms are not performed yearly. Patient advocates and radiology administrators were more open to biennial mammograms and utilizing risk-based screening. CONCLUSIONS: Uncertainty remains across stakeholder groups regarding appropriate mammogram screening intervals. Radiologists recommend annual mammography, whereas patients and PCPs were evenly split between annual vs. biennial screening, although both favored annual screening among higher-risk women. Breast cancer risk assessment tools may help facilitate decisions about screening intervals, but face barriers to widespread implementation in the primary care setting. These results will inform future implementation strategies to adopt risk-stratified breast cancer screening.

Patient and Clinician Decision Support to Increase Genetic Counseling for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Syndrome in Primary Care: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: To promote the identification of women carrying BRCA1/2 variants, the US Preventive Services Task Force recommends that primary care clinicians screen asymptomatic women for an increased risk of carrying a BRCA1/2 variant risk. Objective: To examine the effects of patient and clinician decision support about BRCA1/2 genetic testing compared with standard education alone. Design, Setting, and Participants: This clustered randomized clinical trial was conducted at an academic medical center including 67 clinicians (unit of randomization) and 187 patients. Patient eligibility criteria included women aged 21 to 75 years with no history of breast or ovarian cancer, no prior genetic counseling or testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC), and meeting family history criteria for BRCA1/2 genetic testing. Interventions: RealRisks decision aid for patients and the Breast Cancer Risk Navigation Tool decision support for clinicians. Patients scheduled a visit with their clinician within 6 months of enrollment. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was genetic counseling uptake at 6 months. Secondary outcomes were genetic testing uptake at 6 and 24 months, decision-making measures (perceived breast cancer risk, breast cancer worry, genetic testing knowledge, decision conflict) based upon patient surveys administered at baseline, 1 month, postclinic visit, and 6 months. Results: From December 2018 to February 2020, 187 evaluable patients (101 in the intervention group, 86 in the control group) were enrolled (mean [SD] age: 40.7 [13.2] years; 88 Hispanic patients [46.6%]; 15 non-Hispanic Black patients [8.1%]; 72 non-Hispanic White patients [38.9%]; 35 patients [18.9%] with high school education or less) and 164 (87.8%) completed the trial. There was no significant difference in genetic counseling uptake at 6 months between the intervention group (20 patients [19.8%]) and control group (10 patients [11.6%]; difference, 8.2 percentage points; OR, 1.88 [95% CI, 0.82-4.30]; P = .14). Genetic testing uptake within 6 months was also statistically nonsignificant (13 patients [12.9%] in the intervention group vs 7 patients [8.1%] in the control group; P = .31). At 24 months, genetic testing uptake was 31 patients (30.7%) in intervention vs 18 patients (20.9%) in control (P = .14). Comparing decision-making measures between groups at baseline to 6 months, there were significant decreases in perceived breast cancer risk and in breast cancer worry (standard mean differences = -0.48 and -0.40, respectively). Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial did not find a significant increase in genetic counseling uptake among patients who received patient and clinician decision support vs those who received standard education, although more than one-third of the ethnically diverse women enrolled in the intervention underwent genetic counseling. These findings suggest that the main advantage for these high-risk women is the ability to opt for screening and preventive services to decrease their cancer risk. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03470402.

Patient and Provider Web-Based Decision Support for Breast Cancer Chemoprevention: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Significant underutilization of breast cancer chemoprevention remains, despite guidelines stating that physicians should recommend chemoprevention with antiestrogen therapy to high-risk women. We randomized women, ages 35 to 75 years, who met high-risk criteria for breast cancer, without a personal history of breast cancer or prior chemoprevention use, to standard educational materials alone or combined with a web-based decision aid. All healthcare providers, including primary care providers and breast specialists, were given access to a web-based decision support tool. The primary endpoint was chemoprevention uptake at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included decision antecedents (perceived breast cancer risk/worry, chemoprevention knowledge, self-efficacy) and decision quality (decision conflict, chemoprevention informed choice) based upon patient surveys administered at baseline, 1 and 6 months after randomization. Among 282 evaluable high-risk women enrolled from November 2016 to March 2020, mean age was 57 years (SD, 9.9) and mean 5-year invasive breast cancer risk was 2.98% (SD, 1.42). There was no significant difference in chemoprevention uptake at 6 months between the intervention and control groups (2.1% vs. 3.5%). Comparing the intervention and control arms at 1 month, there were significant differences among high-risk women in accurate breast cancer risk perceptions (56% vs. 39%, P = 0.017), adequate chemoprevention knowledge (49% vs. 27%, P < 0.001), mean decision conflict (34.0 vs. 47.0, P < 0.001), and informed choice (41% vs. 23%, P = 0.003). These differences were no longer significant at 6 months. Although our decision support tools did not result in a significant increase in chemoprevention uptake, we did observe improvements in decision antecedents and decision quality measures. PREVENTION RELEVANCE: In this randomized controlled trial of decision support for 300 high-risk women and 50 healthcare providers, we did not observe a significant increase in chemoprevention uptake, which remained low at under 5%. However, these decision support tools may increase knowledge and informed choice about breast cancer chemoprevention.

Use of a convolutional neural network-based mammographic evaluation to predict breast cancer recurrence among women with hormone receptor-positive operable breast cancer.

PURPOSE: We evaluated whether a novel, fully automated convolutional neural network (CNN)-based mammographic evaluation can predict breast cancer relapse among women with operable hormone receptor (HR)-positive breast cancer. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study among women with stage I-III, HR-positive unilateral breast cancer diagnosed at Columbia University Medical Center from 2007 to 2017, who received adjuvant endocrine therapy and had at least two mammograms (baseline, annual follow-up) of the contralateral unaffected breast for CNN analysis. We extracted demographics, clinicopathologic characteristics, breast cancer treatments, and relapse status from the electronic health record. Our primary endpoint was change in CNN risk score (range, 0-1). We used two-sample t-tests to assess for difference in mean CNN scores between patients who relapsed vs. remained in remission, and conducted Cox regression analyses to assess for association between change in CNN score and breast cancer-free interval (BCFI), adjusting for known prognostic factors. RESULTS: Among 848 women followed for a median of 59 months, there were 67 (7.9%) breast cancer relapses (36 distant, 25 local, 6 new primaries). There was a significant difference in mean absolute change in CNN risk score from baseline to 1-year follow-up between those who relapsed vs. remained in remission (0.001 vs. - 0.022, p = 0.030). After adjustment for prognostic factors, a 0.01 absolute increase in CNN score at 1-year was significantly associated with BCFI, hazard ratio = 1.05 (95% Confidence Interval 1.01-1.09, p = 0.011). CONCLUSION: Short-term change in the CNN-based breast cancer risk model on adjuvant endocrine therapy predicts breast cancer relapse, and warrants further evaluation in prospective studies.

Strategies to Identify and Recruit Women at High Risk for Breast Cancer to a Randomized Controlled Trial of Web-based Decision Support Tools.

We evaluated strategies to identify and recruit a racially/ethnically diverse cohort of women at high-risk for breast cancer to a randomized controlled trial (RCT). We enrolled 300 high-risk women and 50 healthcare providers to a RCT of standard educational materials alone or in combination with web-based decision support tools. We implemented five strategies to identify high-risk women: (i) recruitment among patients previously enrolled in a study evaluating breast cancer risk; (ii) automated breast cancer risk calculation using information extracted from the electronic health record (EHR); (iii) identification of women with atypical hyperplasia or lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) using International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9/10 diagnostic codes; (iv) clinical encounters with enrolled healthcare providers; (v) recruitment flyers/online resources. Breast cancer risk was calculated using either the Gail or Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) models. We identified 6,229 high-risk women and contacted 3,459 (56%), of whom 17.2% were identified from prior study cohort, 37.5% through EHR risk information, 14.8% with atypical hyperplasia/LCIS, 29.0% by clinical encounters, and 1.5% through recruitment flyers. Women from the different recruitment sources varied by age and 5-year invasive breast cancer risk. Of 300 enrolled high-risk women, 44.7% came from clinical encounters and 27.3% from prior study cohort. Comparing enrolled with not-enrolled participants, there were significant differences in mean age (57.2 vs. 59.1 years), proportion of non-Whites (41.5% vs. 54.8%), and mean 5-year breast cancer risk (3.0% vs. 2.3%). We identified and successfully recruited diverse high-risk women from multiple sources. These strategies may be implemented in future breast cancer chemoprevention trials. PREVENTION RELEVANCE: We describe five strategies to identify and successfully recruit a large cohort of racially/ethnically diverse high-risk women from multiple sources to a randomized controlled trial evaluating interventions to increase chemoprevention uptake. Findings could inform recruitment efforts for future breast cancer prevention trials to increase recruitment yield of high-risk women.

Diagnosis of Leptomeningeal Metastasis in Women With Breast Cancer Through Identification of Tumor Cells in Cerebrospinal Fluid Using the CNSide™ Assay.

INTRODUCTION: Diagnosis of LM is limited by low sensitivity of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) cytopathology. Detecting tumor cells in CSF (CSF-TCs) might be more sensitive. We evaluated if CNSide (CNSide), a novel assay for tumor cell detection in CSF, can detect CSF-TCs better than conventional CSF cytology. METHODS: We enrolled adults with metastatic breast cancer and clinical suspicion for LM to undergo lumbar puncture (LP) for CSF cytopathology and CNSide. CNSide captured CSF-TCs using a primary 10-antibody mixture, streptavidin-coated microfluidic channel, and biotinylated secondary antibodies. CSF-TCs were assessed for estrogen receptor (ER) expression by fluorescent antibody and HER2 amplification by fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH). CSF cell-free DNA (cfDNA) was extracted for next-generation sequencing (NGS). Leptomeningeal disease was defined as positive CSF cytology and/or unequivocal MRI findings. We calculated sensitivity and specificity of CSF cytology and CNSide for the diagnosis of LM. RESULTS: Ten patients, median age 51 years (range, 37-64), underwent diagnostic LP with CSF evaluation by cytology and CNSide. CNSide had sensitivity of 100% (95% Confidence Interval [CI], 40%-100%) and specificity of 83% (95% CI, 36%-100%) for LM. Among these patients, concordance of ER and HER2 status between CSF-TCs and metastatic biopsy were 60% and 75%, respectively. NGS of CSF cfDNA identified somatic mutations in three patients, including one with PIK3CA p.H1047L in blood and CSF. CONCLUSIONS: CNSide may be a viable platform to detect CSF-TCs, with potential use as a diagnostic tool for LM in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Additional, larger studies are warranted.

Association Between Genetic Testing for Hereditary Breast Cancer and Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy Among Multiethnic Women Diagnosed With Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Increasing usage of multigene panel testing has identified more patients with pathogenic or likely pathogenic (P or LP) variants in low-moderate penetrance genes or variants of uncertain significance (VUS). Our study evaluates the association between genetic test results and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) among patients with breast cancer. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study among women diagnosed with unilateral stage 0-III breast cancer between 2013 and 2020 who underwent genetic testing. We examined whether genetic test results were associated with CPM using multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: Among 707 racially or ethnically diverse women, most had benign or likely benign (B or LB) variants, whereas 12.5% had P or LP and 17.9% had VUS. Racial or ethnic minorities were twice as likely to receive VUS. Patients with P or LP variants had higher CPM rates than VUS or B or LB (64.8% v 25.8% v 25.9%), and highest among women with P or LP variants in high-penetrance genes (74.6%). On multivariable analysis, P or LP compared with B or LB variants were significantly associated with CPM (odds ratio = 4.24; 95% CI, 2.48 to 7.26). CONCLUSION: Women with P or LP variants on genetic testing were over four times more likely to undergo CPM than B or LB. Those with VUS had similar CPM rates as B or LB. Our findings suggest appropriate genetic counseling and communication of cancer risk to multiethnic breast cancer survivors.

Clinical trial data and emerging immunotherapeutic strategies: hormone receptor-positive, HER2- negative breast cancer.

While checkpoint inhibitors have been approved in patients with newly metastatic PDL1-positive triple negative breast cancer, similar clinical benefit with immunotherapy alone or in combination with chemotherapy has not been observed in patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2- negative breast cancer in the metastatic setting. However, in the ISPY2 trial, an increase in pathologic response has been observed with the addition of immunotherapy (± PARP inhibition) to chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy alone in patients with high-risk hormone receptor-positive, HER2- breast cancer. We review strategies to enhance the immunotherapeutic activity in this subtype of breast cancer, including combinations of checkpoint inhibition with chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, PARP inhibitors, HDAC inhibitors, CDK4/6 inhibitors, and radiotherapy. Combinations with agents targeting novel immunotherapeutic targets are also discussed. Though there remains an unmet need for immunotherapy approaches in patients with hormone-receptor positive breast cancer, there are a number of approaches that may lead to increased anti-tumor activity with immunotherapy in this tumor subtype.

Diffuse optical tomography breast imaging measurements are modifiable with pre-surgical targeted and endocrine therapies among women with early stage breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Diffuse optical tomography breast imaging system (DOTBIS) non-invasively measures tissue concentration of hemoglobin, which is a potential biomarker of short-term response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. We evaluated whether DOTBIS-derived measurements are modifiable with targeted therapies, including AKT inhibition and endocrine therapy. METHODS: We conducted a proof of principle study in seven postmenopausal women with stage I-III breast cancer who were enrolled in pre-surgical studies of the AKT inhibitor MK-2206 (n = 4) or the aromatase inhibitors exemestane (n = 2) and letrozole (n = 1). We performed DOTBIS at baseline (before initiation of therapy) and post-therapy in the affected breast (tumor volume) and contralateral, unaffected breast, and measured tissue concentrations (in µM) of total hemoglobin (ctTHb), oxyhemoglobin (ctO2Hb), and deoxyhemoglobin (ctHHb), as well as water fraction (%). RESULTS: We found consistent decreases in DOTBIS-measured hemoglobin concentrations in tumor volume, with median percent changes for ctTHb, ctHHb, ctO2Hb, and water fraction for the entire cohort of - 27.1% (interquartile range [IQR] 37.5%), - 49.8% (IQR 29.3%), - 33.5% (IQR 47.4%), and - 3.6% (IQR 10.6%), respectively. In the contralateral breast, median percent changes for ctTHb, ctHHb, ctO2Hb, and water fraction were + 1.8% (IQR 26.7%), - 8.6% (IQR 29.3%), + 6.2% (IQR 29.5%), and + 1.9% (IQR 30.7%), respectively. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated that DOTBIS-derived measurements are modifiable with pre-surgical AKT inhibition and endocrine therapy, supporting further investigation of DOTBIS as a potential imaging assessment of response to neoadjuvant targeted therapies in early stage breast cancer.

Extraction of Electronic Health Record Data using Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources for Automated Breast Cancer Risk Assessment.

Women at high risk for breast cancer may benefit from enhanced screening and risk-reduction strategies. However, limited time during clinical encounters is one barrier to routine breast cancer risk assessment. We evaluated if electronic health record (EHR) data downloaded using Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) is sufficient for breast cancer risk calculation in our decision support tools, RealRisks and BNAV. We accessed EHR data using FHIR for six patient advocates, and downloaded and parsed XML documents. We searched for relevant clinical variables, and evaluated if data was sufficient to calculate risk using validated models (Gail, Breast Cancer Screening Consortium [BCSC], BRCAPRO). While only one advocate had sufficient EHR data to calculate risk using the BCSC model only, we identified variables including age, race/ethnicity, mammographic density, and prior breast biopsy in most advocates. EHR data from FHIR could be incorporated into automated breast cancer risk calculation in clinical decision support tools.

Trust and credibility of information sources related to COVID-19 among high-risk ethnically diverse adults at the onset of the New York City outbreak: A cross-sectional survey conducted via a community health portal.

In March 2020, days after New York shut down to mitigate the spread of COVID-19, we developed a cross-sectional, participant-administered electronic survey to explore how New Yorkers were impacted by and were responding to the ongoing crisis. A critical component of the survey was to assess how credible and trustworthy respondents found various information sources. To advertise and distribute the survey, we embedded an invitation to participate using a popup on the GetHealthyHeights.org website. GetHealthyHeights was designed using community-based participatory research for the medically-underserved, urban, and largely Latinx community of Washington Heights-Inwood, New York City. We received 321 responses from April through July 2020. Participant ages ranged from 25 to 87, and 25% were Latinx. Results showed that the choice of and trust in different COVID-19 information sources were observed to be significantly different across demographic variables, including gender, age, race, and chronic health conditions. In the domains of trust and information source credibility, designers should account for perspectives of diverse subgroups.

Antibody-drug conjugates in metastatic triple negative breast cancer: a spotlight on sacituzumab govitecan, ladiratuzumab vedotin, and trastuzumab deruxtecan.

INTRODUCTION: Metastatic triple-negative breast cancers (mTNBC) are characterized by aggressive behavior and worse clinical outcomes than other breast cancer subtypes, as well as poor response to cytotoxic chemotherapies. The use of antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) has been investigated as a potential treatment strategy, particularly in heavily pretreated disease. AREAS COVERED: This article reviews the preclinical and clinical data supporting the use of the ADCs sacituzumab govitecan (SG), ladiratuzumab vedotin (LV), and trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) in mTNBC, and highlights ongoing clinical trials and future clinical applications. EXPERT OPINION: SG, LV, and T-DXd have demonstrated their potential to meaningfully improve clinical outcomes in patients with pretreated mTNBC, as demonstrated by notable response rates in phase I/II and, for SG, phase III clinical trials. Investigation of their use in combination with other agents, including PARP inhibitors and checkpoint inhibitors, is ongoing in the metastatic setting, and their application in early-stage TNBCs are under investigation. ADCs are therefore expected to redefine treatment paradigms in TNBC.

Uptake of genetic testing for germline BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants in a predominantly Hispanic population.

Genetic counseling is under-utilized in women who meet family history criteria for BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) testing, particularly among racial/ethnic minorities. We evaluated the uptake of BRCA1/2 genetic testing among women presenting for screening mammography in a predominantly Hispanic, low-income population of Washington Heights in New York City. We administered the Six-Point Scale (SPS) to women presenting for screening mammography at Columbia University Irving Medical Center (CUIMC) in the Washington Heights neighborhood of New York, NY. The SPS is a family history screener to determine eligibility for BRCA1/2 genetic testing based upon U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines that has been validated in low-income, multiethnic populations. Among women who underwent screening mammography at CUIMC between November 2014 and June 2016, 3,055 completed the SPS family history screener. Participants were predominantly Hispanic (76.7%), and 12% met family history criteria for BRCA1/2 testing, of whom <5% had previously undergone testing. In a multiethnic population, a significant proportion met family history criteria for BRCA1/2 testing, but uptake of genetic testing was low. Such underutilization of BRCA1/2 genetic testing among minorities further underscores the need to develop programs to engage high-risk women from underrepresented populations in genetic testing services.

Identifying Women at High Risk for Breast Cancer Using Data From the Electronic Health Record Compared With Self-Report.

PURPOSE: A barrier to chemoprevention uptake among high-risk women is the lack of routine breast cancer risk assessment in the primary care setting. We calculated breast cancer risk using the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) model, accounting for age, race/ethnicity, first-degree family history of breast cancer, benign breast disease, and mammographic density, using data collected from the electronic health records (EHRs) and self-reports. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Among women undergoing screening mammography, we enrolled those age 35 to 74 years without a prior history of breast cancer. Data on demographics, first-degree family history, breast radiology, and pathology reports were extracted from the EHR. We assessed agreement between the EHR and self-report on information about breast cancer risk. RESULTS: Among 9,514 women with known race/ethnicity, 1,443 women (15.2%) met high-risk criteria based upon a 5-year invasive breast cancer risk of 1.67% or greater according to the BCSC model. Among 1,495 women with both self-report and EHR data, more women with a first-degree family history of breast cancer (14.6% v 4.4%) and previous breast biopsies (21.3% v 11.3%) were identified by self-report versus EHR, respectively. However, more women with atypia and lobular carcinoma in situ were identified from the EHR. There was moderate agreement in identification of high-risk women between EHR and self-report data (κ, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.42-0.54). CONCLUSION: By using EHR data, we determined that 15% of women undergoing screening mammography had a high risk for breast cancer according to the BCSC model. There was moderate agreement between information on breast cancer risk derived from the EHR and self-report. Examining EHR data may serve as an initial screen for identifying women eligible for breast cancer chemoprevention.