Search

PurposeAccrual to clinical trials that challenge well-established treatment paradigms represents a unique challenge. Physician opinions on investigation of a novel approach to breast cancer treatment, in which patients with complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy are offered omission of lumpectomy, are unknown. NRG-CC006 sought to describe physician attitudes toward a novel approach to breast cancer treatment.MethodsWe recruited 18 participants in the fields of surgery, medical oncology, and radiation oncology to participate in the semi-structured telephone interviews. Main outcomes are qualitative themes associated with omission of surgery.ResultsOf 18 interview participants, specialty and gender were evenly represented across surgery, medical oncology, and radiation oncology. Qualitative themes included general attitudes toward treatment de-escalation, stakeholder considerations, and trial/protocol considerations. The vast majority of participants expressed interest in investigation of omission of surgery, with all participants endorsing need for further investigation into treatment de-escalation. Stakeholder considerations in opening such a trial emphasized need for multidisciplinary involvement and, particularly, the unique role of surgeons as gatekeepers in breast cancer treatment. Finally, participants endorsed a need for further foundational studies to develop ways to predict complete pathologic response to chemotherapy without surgical intervention.ConclusionsPhysicians expressed interest in investigating a novel approach to breast cancer treatment that would omit surgery in complete responders to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Multidisciplinary input, and specifically surgeon engagement, will be key to the success of future investigations. Ongoing work to develop approaches to predict pathologic complete response accurately is needed to achieve the promise of this idea. ClinTrials #: BR005: NCT03188393 June 13, 2017.

Background: African-Americans have the highest overall cancer death rate and shortest survival time of any racial or ethnic group in the United States. The most common cancer studied in African-American radiation therapy (RT) access disparities research is breast cancer. The goal of this study is to evaluate the impact of patient navigation on RT access for African-American breast cancer patients. Material and methods: This study is a prospective survey-based evaluation of the impact of patient navigation on access to hypofractionated RT and financial toxicity in African-American breast cancer patients. The impact of patient navigation on RT access will be collated and analyzed from survey results pre-RT versus post-RT as well as for patients with versus without receipt of patient navigation. The validated COST-Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy score will be used to compare hypofractionation versus standard fractionated RT financial toxicity for patients with early-stage breast cancer who have received lumpectomy. Conclusion: This is the first study to investigate the impact of patient navigation on reducing RT access disparities facing African-American breast cancer patients. The natural progression of this work will be to expand this model to include additional breast cancer populations most vulnerable to suffering RT access disparities (Native American, Hispanic American, Appalachian) within the United States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite mandated insurance coverage for breast reconstruction following mastectomy, health care costs are increasingly passed on to women through cost‐sharing arrangements and high‐deductible health plans. In this population‐based study, the authors assessed perceived financial and employment declines related to breast reconstruction following mastectomy. Methods: Women with early‐stage breast cancer (stages 0‐II) diagnosed between July 2013 and May 2015 who underwent mastectomy were identified through the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries of Georgia and Los Angeles and were surveyed. Primary outcome measures included patients' appraisal of their financial and employment status after cancer treatment. Multivariable models evaluated the association between breast reconstruction and primary outcomes. Results: Among 883 patients with breast cancer who underwent mastectomy, 44.2% did not undergo breast reconstruction, and 55.8% underwent reconstruction. Overall, 21.9% of the cohort reported being worse off financially since their diagnosis (25.8% with reconstruction vs 16.6% without reconstruction; P =.002). Women who underwent reconstruction reported higher out‐of‐pocket medical expenses (32.1% vs 15.6% with expenses greater than $5000; P <.001). Reconstruction was independently associated with a perceived decline in financial status (odds ratio, 1.92; 95% confidence interval, 1.15‐3.22; P =.013). Among women who were employed at the time of their diagnosis, there was no association between reconstruction and a perceived decline in employment status (P =.927). Conclusions: In this diverse cohort of women who underwent mastectomy, those who elected to undergo reconstruction experienced higher out‐of‐pocket medical expenses and self‐reported financial decline. Patients, providers, and policymakers should be aware of the potential financial implications related to reconstruction despite mandatory insurance coverage. Among 883 patients with breast cancer who underwent mastectomy, women who underwent reconstruction reported higher out‐of‐pocket medical expenses and were independently more likely to report a perceived decline in their financial status. Patients, providers, and policymakers should be aware of the potential financial implications related to reconstruction despite mandatory insurance coverage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Simple intensity modulation of radiation therapy reduces acute toxicity compared with 2-dimensional techniques in adjuvant breast cancer treatment, but it remains unknown whether more complex or inverse-planned intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) offers an advantage over forward-planned, 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT).Methods and Materials: Using prospective data regarding patients receiving adjuvant whole breast radiation therapy without nodal irradiation at 23 institutions from 2011 to 2018, we compared the incidence of acute toxicity (moderate-severe pain or moist desquamation) in patients receiving 3DCRT versus IMRT (either inverse planned or, if forward-planned, using ≥5 segments per gantry angle). We evaluated associations between technique and toxicity using multivariable models with inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting, adjusting for treatment facility as a random effect.Results: Of 1185 patients treated with 3DCRT and conventional fractionation, 650 (54.9%) experienced acute toxicity; of 774 treated with highly segmented forward-planned IMRT, 458 (59.2%) did; and of 580 treated with inverse-planned IMRT, 245 (42.2%) did. Of 1296 patients treated with hypofractionation and 3DCRT, 432 (33.3%) experienced acute toxicity; of 709 treated with highly segmented forward-planned IMRT, 227 (32.0%) did; and of 623 treated with inverse-planned IMRT, 164 (26.3%) did. On multivariable analysis with inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting, the odds ratio for acute toxicity after inverse-planned IMRT versus 3DCRT was 0.64 (95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.91) with conventional fractionation and 0.41 (95% confidence interval, 0.26-0.65) with hypofractionation.Conclusions: This large, prospective, multicenter comparative effectiveness study found a significant benefit from inverse-planned IMRT compared with 3DCRT in reducing acute toxicity of breast radiation therapy. Future research should identify the dosimetric differences that mediate this association and evaluate cost-effectiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and radiotherapy reduce breast cancer recurrence but can cause functional deficits in breast cancer survivors. A cross-sectional study quantified the long-term pathophysiological impact of these treatments on biomechanical measures of shoulder stiffness and ultrasound shear wave elastography measures of the shear elastic modulus of the pectoralis major (PM). Nine node-positive patients treated with radiotherapy to the breast and regional nodes after BCS and axillary lymph node dissection (Group 1) were compared to nine node-negative patients treated with radiotherapy to the breast alone after BCS and sentinel node biopsy (Group 2) and nine healthy age-matched controls. The mean follow-up for Group 1 and Group 2 patients was 988 days and 754 days, respectively. Shoulder stiffness did not differ between the treatment groups and healthy controls (p = 0.23). The PM shear elastic modulus differed between groups (p = 0.002), with Group 1 patients exhibiting a stiffer PM than Group 2 patients (p < 0.001) and healthy controls (p = 0.027). The mean prescribed radiotherapy dose to the PM was significantly correlated with passive shear elastic modulus (p = 0.018). Breast cancer patients undergoing more extensive axillary surgery and nodal radiotherapy did not experience long-term functional deficits to shoulder integrity but did experience long-term mechanical changes of the PM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Treatment decisions for patients with early‐stage breast cancer often involve discussions with multiple oncology providers. However, the extent to which primary care providers (PCPs) are involved in initial treatment decisions remains unknown. Methods: A stratified random sample of PCPs identified by newly diagnosed patients with early‐stage breast cancer from the Georgia and Los Angeles Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries were surveyed (n = 517; a 61% response rate). PCPs were asked how frequently they discussed surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy options with patients; how comfortable they were with these discussions; whether they had the necessary knowledge to participate in decision making; and what their confidence was in their ability to help (on 5‐item Likert‐type scales). Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify PCP‐reported attitudes associated with more PCP participation in each treatment decision. Results: In this sample, 34% of PCPs reported that they discussed surgery, 23% discussed radiation, and 22% discussed chemotherapy options with their patients. Of those who reported more involvement in surgical decisions, 22% reported that they were not comfortable having a discussion, and 17% did not feel that they had the necessary knowledge to participate in treatment decision making. PCPs who positively appraised their ability to participate were more likely to participate in all 3 decisions (odds ratio [OR] for surgery, 6.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.16‐8.68; OR for radiation, 8.37; 95% CI, 5.16‐13.58; OR for chemotherapy, 6.56; 95% CI, 4.23‐10.17). Conclusions: A third of PCPs reported participating in breast cancer treatment decisions, yet gaps in their knowledge about decision making and in their confidence in their ability to help exist. Efforts to increase PCPs' knowledge about breast cancer treatment options may be warranted. The extent to which primary care providers are involved in their patients' multimodal breast cancer treatment decisions across surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy options is assessed in this study. Although a third of primary care providers report participating in these decisions, a notable proportion report gaps in their knowledge of treatment options and a lack of confidence in their ability to help with decision making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: We used two models to simulate a proposed noninferiority trial of radiotherapy (RT) omission in low-risk invasive breast cancer to illustrate how modeling could be used to predict the trial's outcomes, inform trial design, and contribute to practice debates.Methods: The proposed trial was a prospective randomized trial of no-RT vs RT in women age 40 to 74 years undergoing lumpectomy and endocrine therapy for hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, stage I breast cancer with an Oncotype DX score of 18 or lower. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free interval (RFI), including locoregional recurrence, distant recurrence, and breast cancer death. Noninferiority required the two-sided 90% confidence interval of the RFI hazard ratio (HR) for no-RT vs RT to be entirely below 1.7. Model inputs included published data. The trial was simulated 1000 times, and results were summarized as percent concluding noninferiority and mean (standard deviation) of hazard ratios for Model GE and Model M, respectively.Results: Noninferiority was demonstrated in 18.0% and 3.7% for the two models. The respective means (SD) of the RFI hazard ratios were 1.8 (0.7) and 2.4 (0.9); most were locoregional recurrences. The mean five-year RFI rates for no-RT vs RT (SD) were 92.7% (2.9%) vs 95.5% (2.2%) and 88.4% (2.0%) vs 94.5% (1.6%). Both models showed little or no difference in breast cancer-specific or overall survival. Alternative definitions of low risk based on combinations of age and grade produced similar results.Conclusions: The proposed trial was unlikely to show noninferiority of omitting radiotherapy even using alternative definitions of low-risk, as the endpoint included local recurrence. Future trials regarding radiotherapy should address absolute reduction in recurrence and impact of type of recurrence on the patient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Radiotherapy after breast conservation has become the standard of care. Prior meta-analyses on effects of radiotherapy predated availability of gene expression profiling (GEP) to assess recurrence risk and/or did not include all relevant outcomes. This analysis used GEP information with pooled individual-level data to evaluate the impact of omitting radiotherapy on recurrence and mortality.Methods: We considered trials that evaluated or administered radiotherapy after lumpectomy in women with low-risk breast cancer. Women included had undergone lumpectomy and were treated with hormonal therapy for stage I, ER+ and/or PR+, HER2- breast cancer with Oncotype scores no greater than 18. Recurrence-free interval (RFI), type of RFI (locoregional or distant), and breast cancer-specific and overall survival were compared between no radiotherapy and radiotherapy using adjusted Cox models. All statistical tests were two-sided.Results: The final sample included 1778 women from seven trials. Omission of radiotherapy was associated with an overall adjusted hazard ratio of 2.59 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.38 to 4.89, P = .003) for RFI. There was a statistically significant increase in any first locoregional recurrence (P = .001), but not distant recurrence events (P = .90), or breast cancer-specific (P = .85) or overall survival (P = .61). Five-year RFI rate was high (93.5% for no radiotherapy vs 97.9% for radiotherapy; absolute reduction = 4.4%, 95% CI = 0.7% to 8.1%, P = .03). The effects of radiotherapy varied across subgroups, with lower RFI rates for those with Oncotype scores of less than 11 (vs 11-18), older (vs younger), and ER+/PR+ status (vs other).Conclusions: Omission of radiotherapy in hormone-sensitive patients with low recurrence risk may lead to a modest increase in locoregional recurrence event rates, but does not appear to increase the rate of distant recurrence or death. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Little is known regarding whether growing awareness of the financial toxicity of a cancer diagnosis and its treatment has increased clinician engagement or changed the needs of current patients.Methods: The authors surveyed patients with early-stage breast cancer who were identified through population-based sampling from 2 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) regions and their physicians. The authors described responses from approximately 73% of surgeons (370 surgeons), 61% of medical oncologists (306 medical oncologists), 67% of radiation oncologists (169 radiation oncologists), and 68% of patients (2502 patients).Results: Approximately one-half (50.9%) of responding medical oncologists reported that someone in their practice often or always discusses financial burden with patients, as did 15.6% of surgeons and 43.2% of radiation oncologists. Patients indicated that financial toxicity remains common: 21.5% of white patients and 22.5% of Asian patients had to cut down spending on food, as did 45.2% of black and 35.8% of Latina patients. Many patients desired to talk to providers about the financial impact of cancer (15.2% of whites, 31.1% of blacks, 30.3% of Latinas, and 25.4% of Asians). Unmet patient needs for engagement with physicians about financial concerns were common. Of 945 women who worried about finances, 679 (72.8%) indicated that physicians and their staff did not help. Of 523 women who desired to talk to providers regarding the impact of breast cancer on employment or finances, 283 (55.4%) reported no relevant discussion.Conclusions: Many patients report inadequate clinician engagement in the management of financial toxicity, even though many providers believe that they make services available. Clinician assessment and communication regarding financial toxicity must improve; cure at the cost of financial ruin is unacceptable. Cancer 2018;000:000-000. © 2018 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The omission of radiotherapy (RT) after lumpectomy is a reasonable option for many older women with favorable-prognosis breast cancer. In the current study, we sought to evaluate patient perspectives regarding decision making about RT.Methods: Women aged 65 to 79 years with AJCC 7th edition stage I and II breast cancer who were reported to the Georgia and Los Angeles County Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries were surveyed (response rate, 70%) regarding RT decisions, the rationale for omitting RT, decision-making values, and understanding of disease recurrence risk. We also surveyed their corresponding surgeons (response rate, 77%). Patient characteristics associated with the omission of RT were evaluated using multilevel, multivariable logistic regression, accounting for patient clustering within surgeons.Results: Of 999 patients, 135 omitted RT (14%). Older age, lower tumor grade, and having estrogen receptor-positive disease each were found to be strongly associated with omission of RT in multivariable analyses, whereas the number of comorbidities was not. Non-English speakers were more likely to omit RT (adjusted odds ratio, 5.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-24.5). The most commonly reported reasons for RT omission were that a physician advised the patient that it was not needed (54% of patients who omitted RT) and patient choice (41%). Risk of local disease recurrence was overestimated by all patients: by approximately 2-fold among those who omitted RT and by approximately 8-fold among those who received RT. The risk of distant disease recurrence was overestimated by approximately 3-fold on average.Conclusions: To some extent, decisions regarding RT omission are appropriately influenced by patient age, tumor grade, and estrogen receptor status, but do not appear to be optimally tailored according to competing comorbidities. Many women who are candidates for RT omission overestimate their risk of disease recurrence. Cancer 2018;124:2714-2723. © 2018 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is growing concern about overtreatment of breast cancer as outcomes have improved over time. However, little is known about how chemotherapy use and oncologists' recommendations have changed in recent years.Methods: We surveyed 5080 women (70% response rate) diagnosed with breast cancer between 2013 and 2015 and accrued through two Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries (Georgia and Los Angeles) about chemotherapy receipt and their oncologists' chemotherapy recommendations. We surveyed 504 attending oncologists (60.3% response rate ) about chemotherapy recommendations in node-negative and node-positive case scenarios. We conducted descriptive statistics of chemotherapy use and patients' report of oncologists' recommendations and used a generalized linear mixed model of chemotherapy use according to time and clinical factors. All statistical tests were two-sided.Results: The analytic sample was 2926 patients with stage I-II, estrogen receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer. From 2013 to 2015, keeping other factors constant, chemotherapy use was estimated to decline from 34.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 30.8% to 38.3%) to 21.3% (95% CI = 19.0% to 23.7%, P < .001). Estimated decline in chemotherapy use was from 26.6% (95% CI = 23.0% to 30.7%) to 14.1% (95% CI = 12.0% to 16.3%) for node-negative/micrometastasis patients and from 81.1% (95% CI = 76.6% to 85.0%) to 64.2% (95% CI = 58.6% to 69.6%) for node-positive patients. Use of the 21-gene recurrence score (RS) did not change among node-negative/micrometastasis patients, and increasing RS use in node-positive patients accounted for one-third of the chemotherapy decline. Patients' report of oncologists' recommendations for chemotherapy declined from 44.9% (95% CI = 40.2% to 49.7%) to 31.6% (95% CI = 25.9% to 37.9%), controlling for other factors. Oncologists were much more likely to order RS if patient preferences were discordant with their recommendations (67.4%, 95% CI = 61.7% to 73.0%, vs 17.5%, 95% CI = 13.1% to 22.0%, concordant), and they adjusted recommendations based on patient preferences and RS results.Conclusions: For both node-negative/micrometastasis and node-positive patients, chemotherapy receipt and oncologists' recommendations for chemotherapy declined markedly over time, without substantial change in practice guidelines. Results of ongoing trials will be essential to confirm the quality of this approach to breast cancer care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients considering postmastectomy radiation and reconstruction require information regarding expected outcomes to make preference-concordant decisions.Methods: A prospective multicenter cohort study of women diagnosed with breast cancer at 11 centers between 2012 and 2015 compared complications and patient-reported outcomes of 622 irradiated and 1625 unirradiated patients who received reconstruction. Patient characteristics and outcomes between irradiated and unirradiated patients were analyzed using ttests for continuous variables and chi-square tests for categorical variables. Multivariable mixed-effects regression modelsassessed the impact of reconstruction type and radiotherapy on outcomes after adjusting for relevant covariates. All statistical tests were two-sided.Results: Autologous reconstruction was more commonly received by irradiated patients (37.9% vs 25.0%, P < .001). Immediate reconstruction was less common in irradiated patients (83.0% vs 95.7%, P < .001). At least one breast complication had occurred by two years in 38.9% of irradiated patients with implant reconstruction, 25.6% of irradiated patients with autologous reconstruction, 21.8% of unirradiated patients with implant reconstruction, and 28.3% of unirradiated patients with autologous reconstruction. Multivariable analysis showed bilateral treatment and higher body mass index to be predictive of developing a complication, with a statistically significant interaction between radiotherapy receipt and reconstruction type. Among irradiated patients, autologous reconstruction was associated with a lower risk of complications than implant-based reconstruction at two years (odds ratio [OR] = 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.27 to 0.82, P = .007); no between-procedure difference was found in unirradiated patients. The interaction was also statistically significant for satisfaction with breasts at two years (P = .002), with larger adjusted difference in satisfaction between autologous vs implant approaches (63.5, 95% CI = 55.9 to 71.1, vs 47.7, 95% CI = 40.2 to 55.2, respectively) in irradiated patients than between autologous vs implant approaches (67.6, 95% CI = 60.3 to 74.9, vs 60.5, 95% CI = 53.6 to 67.4) in unirradiated patients.Conclusions: Autologous reconstruction appears to yield superior patient-reported satisfaction and lower risk of complications than implant-based approaches among patients receiving postmastectomy radiotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Breast cancer patients’ misunderstanding of their systemic cancer recurrence risk has consequences on decision-making and quality of life. Little is known about how women derive their risk estimates. Methods. Using Los Angeles and Georgia’s SEER registries (2014–2015), a random sample of early-stage breast cancer patients was sent surveys about 2 to 3 months after surgery (N = 3930; RR, 68%). We conducted an inductive thematic analysis of open-ended responses about why women chose their risk estimates in a uniquely large sub-sample (N = 1,754). Clinician estimates of systemic recurrence risk were provided for patient sub-groups with DCIS and with low-, intermediate-, and high-risk invasive disease. Women’s perceived risk of systemic recurrence (0% to 100%) was categorized as overestimation, reasonably accurate estimation, or underestimation (0% for invasive disease) and was compared across identified factors and by clinical presentation. Results. Women identified 9 main factors related to their clinical experience (e.g., diagnosis and testing; treatment) and non-clinical beliefs (e.g., uncertainty; spirituality). Women who mentioned at least one clinical experience factor were significantly less likely to overestimate their risk (12% v. 43%, P < 0.001). Most women who were influenced by “communication with a clinician” had reasonably accurate recurrence estimates (68%). “Uncertainty” and “family and personal history” were associated with overestimation, particularly for women with DCIS (75%; 84%). “Spirituality, religion, and faith” was associated with an underestimation of risk (63% v. 20%, P < 0.001). Limitations. The quantification of our qualitative results is subject to any biases that may have occurred during the coding process despite rigorous methodology. Conclusions. Patient-clinician communication is important for breast cancer patients’ understanding of their numeric risk of systemic recurrence. Clinician discussions about recurrence risk should address uncertainty and relevance of family and personal history. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many patients with breast cancer work for pay at the time of their diagnosis, and the treatment plan may threaten their livelihood. Understanding work experiences in a contemporary population-based sample is necessary to inform initiatives to reduce the burden of cancer care.Methods: Women who were 20 to 79 years old and had been diagnosed with stage 0 to II breast cancer, as reported to the Georgia and Los Angeles Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries in 2014-2015, were surveyed. Of the 3672 eligible women, 2502 responded (68%); 1006 who reported working before their diagnosis were analyzed. Multivariate models evaluated correlates of missing work for >1 month and stopping work altogether versus missing work for ≤1 month.Results: In this diverse sample, most patients (62%) underwent lumpectomy; 16% underwent unilateral mastectomy (8% with reconstruction); and 23% underwent bilateral mastectomy (19% with reconstruction). One-third (33%) received chemotherapy. Most (84%) worked full-time before their diagnosis; however, only 50% had paid sick leave, 39% had disability benefits, and 38% had flexible work schedules. Surgical treatment was strongly correlated with missing >1 month of work (odds ratio [OR] for bilateral mastectomy with reconstruction vs lumpectomy, 7.8) and with stopping work altogether (OR for bilateral mastectomy with reconstruction vs lumpectomy, 3.1). Chemotherapy receipt (OR for missing >1 month, 1.3; OR for stopping work altogether, 3.9) and race (OR for missing >1 month for blacks vs whites, 2.0; OR for stopping work altogether for blacks vs whites, 1.7) also correlated. Those with paid sick leave were less likely to stop working (OR, 0.5), as were those with flexible schedules (OR, 0.3).Conclusions: Working patients who received more aggressive treatments were more likely to experience substantial employment disruptions. Cancer 2017;123:4791-9. © 2017 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND Little is known about how the individual decision styles and values of breast cancer patients at the time of treatment decision making are associated with the consideration of different treatment options and specifically with the consideration of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM). METHODS Newly diagnosed patients with early-stage breast cancer who were treated in 2013-2014 were identified through the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries of Los Angeles and Georgia and were surveyed approximately 7 months after surgery (n = 2578; response rate, 71%). The primary outcome was the consideration of CPM (strong vs less strong). The association between patients' values and decision styles and strong consideration was assessed with multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS Approximately one-quarter of women (25%) reported strong/very strong consideration of CPM, and another 29% considered it moderately/weakly. Decision styles, including a rational-intuitive approach to decision making, varied. The factors most valued by women at the time of treatment decision making were as follows: avoiding worry about recurrence (82%) and reducing the need for more surgery (73%). In a multivariate analysis, patients who preferred to make their own decisions, those who valued avoiding worry about recurrence, and those who valued avoiding radiation significantly more often strongly considered CPM ( P < .05), whereas those who reported being more logical and those who valued keeping their breast did so less often. CONCLUSIONS Many patients considered CPM, and the consideration was associated with both decision styles and values. The variability in decision styles and values observed in this study suggests that formally evaluating these characteristics at or before the initial treatment encounter could provide an opportunity for improving patient clinician discussions. Cancer 2017;123:4547-4555. © 2017 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient-reported toxicities help to appraise the breast cancer treatment experience. Yet extant data come from clinical trials and health care claims, which may be biased. Using patient surveys, the authors sought to quantify the frequency, severity, and burden of treatment-associated toxicities.Methods: Between 2013 and 2014, the iCanCare study surveyed a population-based sample of women residing in Los Angeles County and Georgia with early-stage, invasive breast cancer. The authors assessed the frequency and severity of toxicities; correlated toxicity severity with unscheduled health care use (clinic visits, emergency department visits/hospitalizations) and physical health; and examined patient, tumor, and treatment factors associated with reporting increased toxicity severity.Results: The overall survey response rate was 71%. From the analyzed cohort of 1945 women, 866 (45%) reported at least 1 toxicity that was severe/very severe, 9% reported unscheduled clinic visits for toxicity management, and 5% visited an emergency department or hospital. Factors associated with reporting higher toxicity severity included receipt of chemotherapy (odds ratio [OR], 2.2; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 2.0-2.5), receipt of both chemotherapy and radiotherapy (OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0-1.7), and Latina ethnicity (OR vs whites: 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1-1.5). A nonsignificant increase in at least 1 severe/very severe toxicity report was observed for bilateral mastectomy recipients (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.0-1.4).Conclusions: Women with early-stage invasive breast cancer report substantial treatment-associated toxicities and related burden. Clinicians should collect toxicity data routinely and offer early intervention. Toxicity differences observed by treatment modality may inform decision making. Cancer 2017;123:1925-1934. © 2017 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate complications after postmastectomy breast reconstruction, particularly in the setting of adjuvant radiotherapy. Background: Most studies of complications after breast reconstruction have been conducted at centers of excellence; relatively little is known about complication rates in irradiated patients treated in the broader community. This information is relevant for decision making in patients with breast cancer. Methods: Using the claims-based MarketScan database, we described complications in 14,894 women undergoing mastectomy for breast cancer from 1998 to 2007 and who underwent immediate autologous reconstruction (n = 2637), immediate implant-based reconstruction (n = 3007), or no reconstruction within the first 2 postoperative years (n = 9250). We used a generalized estimating equation to evaluate associations between complications and radiotherapy over time. Results: Wound complications were diagnosed within the first 2 postoperative years in 2.3% of patients without reconstruction, 4.4% patients with implants, and 9.5% patients with autologous reconstruction (P < 0.001). Infection was diagnosed within the first 2 postoperative years in 12.7% of patients without reconstruction, 20.5% with implants, and 20.7% with autologous reconstruction (P < 0.001). A total of 5219 (35%) women received radiation. Radiation was not associated with infection in any surgical group within the first 6 months but was associated with an increased risk of infection in months 7 to 24 in all 3 groups (each P < 0.001). In months 7 to 24, radiation was associated with higher odds of implant removal in patients with implant reconstruction (odds ratio = 1.48; P < 0.001) and fat necrosis in those with autologous reconstruction (odds ratio = 1.55; P = 0.01). Conclusions: Complication risks after immediate breast reconstruction differ by approach. Radiation therapy seems to modestly increase certain risks, including infection and implant removal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Health Care Climate Questionnaire measures patient perceptions of their clinician's autonomy supportive communication. We sought to evaluate the psychometric properties of a modified brief version of the Health Care Climate Questionnaire (mHCCQ) adapted for breast cancer patients. Methods: We surveyed 235 women aged 20-79 diagnosed with breast cancer within the previous 18 months at two cancer specialty centers using a print questionnaire. Patients completed the mHCCQ for their surgeon, medical oncologist, and radiation oncologist separately, as well as the overall treatment experience. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) using principal components was used to explore the factor structure. Results: One hundred sixty out of 235 (68.1 %) women completed the survey. Mean age was 57 years and time since diagnosis was 12.6 months. For surgeon, medical oncologist, and radiation oncologist ratings separately, as well as overall treatment, women rated 6 dimensions of perceived physician autonomy support. Exploratory factor analysis indicated a single factor solution for each clinician type and for the overall experience. Further, all six items were retained in each clinician subscore. Internal consistency was 0.93, 0.94, 0.97, and 0.92 for the overall, surgeon, medical oncologist, and radiation oncologist scales, respectively. Hierarchical factor analysis demonstrated that a summary score of the overall treatment experience accounts for only 52 % of the total variance observed in ratings of autonomy support for the three provider types. Conclusions: These results describe the first use of the mHCCQ in cancer patients. Ratings of the overall treatment experience account for only half of the variance in ratings of autonomy support, suggesting that patients perceive and report differences in communication across provider types. Future research is needed to evaluate the relationship between physician communication practices and the quality of decision making, as well as other outcomes among cancer patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Although worry about recurrence is a persistent concern among breast cancer survivors, little is known about physicians' confidence about presenting recurrence risk information, identifying women with considerable worry, and helping women manage worry. Methods Between January and June 2012, we surveyed 750 surgeons and 750 medical oncologists randomly sampled from the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile. We tested differences between surgeons and medical oncologists on confidence of presenting risk, identifying and managing worry using chi-square statistic and Student's t-tests and developed multiple variable logistic regression models to explain odds regarding confidence and use of different strategies for managing worry. Results The analytic sample included 403 surgeons and 363 medical oncologists ( n = 766; response rate = 60%). Compared with surgeons, medical oncologists were significantly more likely to report confidence in: presenting risk information (87.5% vs 73.2%), identifying women who are worried (74.1% vs 63.9%), and managing worry (66.9% vs 52.4%). Confidence in managing worry was associated with more regular inquiry about worry ( p = 0.009). Models of the likelihood of using different management strategies varied by provider type (e.g., surgeons more likely than medical oncologists to recommend support group or online resources, oncologists more likely to refer to psychologist or use medications, all p < 0.05). Conclusion Cancer providers, particularly surgeons, may benefit from educational training to raise confidence in identifying women with high levels of worry and managing women with considerable worry. Communication between specialties and primary care physicians on efforts to manage worry is necessary for coordinated, quality care for women with breast cancer. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND Many women with early-stage breast cancer are working at the time of diagnosis and survive without disease recurrence. The short-term impact of chemotherapy receipt on employment has been demonstrated, but the long-term impact merits further research. METHODS The authors conducted a longitudinal multicenter cohort study of women diagnosed with nonmetastatic breast cancer between 2005 and 2007, as reported to the population-based Los Angeles and Detroit Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program registries. Of 3133 individuals who were sent surveys, 2290 (73%) completed a baseline survey soon after diagnosis and of these, 1536 (67%) completed a 4-year follow-up questionnaire. RESULTS Of the 1026 patients aged < 65 years at the time of diagnosis whose breast cancer did not recur and who responded to both surveys, 746 (76%) worked for pay before diagnosis. Of these, 236 (30%) were no longer working at the time of the follow-up survey. Women who received chemotherapy as part of their initial treatment were less likely to be working at the time of the follow-up survey (38% vs 27%; P = .003). Chemotherapy receipt at the time of diagnosis (odds ratio, 1.4; P = .04) was found to be independently associated with unemployment during survivorship in a multivariable model. Many women who were not employed during the survivorship period wanted to work: 50% reported that it was important for them to work and 31% were actively seeking work. CONCLUSIONS Unemployment among survivors of breast cancer 4 years after diagnosis is often undesired and appears to be related to the receipt of chemotherapy during initial treatment. These findings should be considered when patients decide whether to receive adjuvant chemotherapy, particularly when the expected benefit is low. Cancer 2014;120:1854-1862. © 2014 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Radiation therapy is a critical component of the multidisciplinary management of invasive breast cancer. In appropriately selected patients, radiation not only improves local control, sparing patients the morbidity and distress of local recurrence, but it also improves survival by preventing seeding and reseeding of distant metastases from persistent reservoirs of locoregional disease. In recent years, considerable progress has been made toward improving our ability to select patients most likely to benefit from radiotherapy and to administer treatment in ways that maximize clinical benefit while minimizing toxicity and burden. This article reviews the role of radiation therapy in invasive breast cancer management, both after breast-conserving surgery and after mastectomy. It focuses particularly on emerging evidence that helps to define the clinical situations in which radiotherapy is indicated, the appropriate targets of treatment, and optimal approaches for minimizing both the toxicity and the burden of treatment, all in the context of the evolving surgical and systemic management of this common disease. It includes a discussion of new approaches in breast cancer radiotherapy, including hypofractionation and intensity modulation, as well as a discussion of promising avenues for future research. CA Cancer J Clin 2014;64:135-152. © 2013 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To assess whether radiation oncologists and surgeons differ in their attitudes regarding the local management of breast cancer, and to examine coordination of care between these specialists. Methods and Materials: We surveyed attending surgeons and radiation oncologists who treated a population-based sample of patients diagnosed with breast cancer in metropolitan Detroit and Los Angeles. We identified 419 surgeons, of whom 318 (76%) responded, and 160 radiation oncologists, of whom 117 (73%) responded. We assessed demographic, professional, and practice characteristics; challenges to coordinated care; and attitudes toward management in three scenarios. Results: 92.1% of surgeons and 94.8% of radiation oncologists indicated access to a multidisciplinary tumor board. Nevertheless, the most commonly identified challenge to radiation oncologists, cited by 27.9%, was failure of other providers to include them in the treatment decision process early enough. Nearly half the surgeons (49.7%) stated that few or almost none of the breast cancer patients they saw in the past 12 months had consulted with a radiation oncologist before undergoing definitive surgery. Surgeons and radiation oncologists differed in their recommendations in management scenarios. Radiation oncologists were more likely to favor radiation than were surgeons for a patient with 3/20 lymph nodes undergoing mastectomy (p = 0.03); surgeons were more likely to favor more widely clear margins after breast conservation than were radiation oncologists (p = 0.001). Conclusions: Despite the widespread availability of tumor boards, a substantial minority of radiation oncologists indicated other providers failed to include them in the breast cancer treatment decision-making process early enough. Earlier inclusion of radiation oncologists may influence patient decisions, and interventions to facilitate this should be considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registry data have been used to suggest underuse and disparities in receipt of radiotherapy. Prior studies have cautioned that SEER may underascertain radiotherapy but lacked adequate representation to assess whether underascertainment varies by geography or patient sociodemographic characteristics. The authors sought to determine rates and correlates of underascertainment of radiotherapy in recent SEER data. METHODS: The authors evaluated data from 2290 survey respondents with nonmetastatic breast cancer, aged 20 to 79 years, diagnosed from June of 2005 to February 2007 in Detroit and Los Angeles and reported to SEER registries (73% response rate). Survey responses regarding treatment and sociodemographic factors were merged with SEER data. The authors compared radiotherapy receipt as reported by patients versus SEER records. The authors then assessed correlates of radiotherapy underascertainment in SEER. RESULTS: Of 1292 patients who reported receiving radiotherapy, 273 were coded as not receiving radiotherapy in SEER (underascertained). Underascertainment was more common in Los Angeles than in Detroit (32.0% vs 11.25%, P < .001). On multivariate analysis, radiotherapy underascertainment was significantly associated in each registry (Los Angeles, Detroit) with stage ( P = .008, P = .026), income ( P < .001, P = .050), mastectomy receipt ( P < .001, P < .001), chemotherapy receipt ( P < .001, P = .045), and diagnosis at a hospital that was not accredited by the American College of Surgeons ( P < .001, P < .001). In Los Angeles, additional significant variables included younger age ( P < .001), nonprivate insurance ( P < .001), and delayed receipt of radiotherapy ( P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: SEER registry data as currently collected may not be an appropriate source for documentation of rates of radiotherapy receipt or investigation of geographic variation in the radiation treatment of breast cancer. Cancer 2011;. © 2011 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Although intensity modulation of the radiation beam has been shown to lower toxic effects for patients receiving whole-breast irradiation, relatively simple techniques may suffice. It is thus controversial whether such treatment justifies billing for intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Methods We used the claims data to determine billing for IMRT from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results–Medicare records from 2001 to 2005 for 26 163 women aged 66 years or older with nonmetastatic breast cancer treated with surgery and radiotherapy. The impact of individual covariates (demographic, health services, tumor, and treatment factors) on cost of treatment was assessed using the Wilcoxon two-sample test. Two-sided multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors for IMRT use. Cost of radiation was calculated in 2005 dollars. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results The number of patients with IMRT billing claims increased from 0.9% (49 of 5196) of patients diagnosed in 2001 to 11.2% (564 of 5020) in 2005. In multivariable analysis, IMRT billing was more likely for patients with left-sided tumors (odds ratio [OR] = 1.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.16 to 1.45), for those residing in a health service area with high radiation oncologist density (OR = 2.32, 95% CI = 1.47 to 3.68), for those treated at freestanding radiation centers (OR = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.20 to 1.53), or for those residing in regions where the Medicare intermediary allowed breast IMRT (OR = 10.87, 95% CI = 9.26 to 12.76, all P < .001). The mean cost of radiation was $7179 without IMRT and $15 230 with IMRT. IMRT adoption contributed to an increase in the mean cost of breast radiation from $6334 in 2001 to $8473 in 2005. Conclusions IMRT billing increased 10-fold from 2001 through 2005, contributing to a 33% increase in the cost of breast radiation. These findings suggest that reimbursement policy and practice setting strongly influenced adoption of IMRT billing for breast cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

BACKGROUND: Worry about recurrence (worry) is a persistent concern of breast cancer survivors. Little is known about whether race/ethnicity or healthcare experiences are associated with worry. METHODS: Women with nonmetastatic breast cancer diagnosed from June 2005 to February 2007 and reported to Detroit or Los Angeles Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries were surveyed (mean 9 months postdiagnosis); 2290 responded (73%). Latinas and African Americans were oversampled. A worry scale was constructed as the mean score of 3 items (on 5-point Likert, higher = more worry): worry about cancer returning to the same breast, occurring in the other breast, or spreading to other parts of the body. Race/ethnicity categories were white, African American, and Latina (categorized into low vs high acculturation). The worry scale was regressed on sociodemographics, clinical/treatment, and healthcare experience factors (eg, care coordination collapsed into low, medium, high). RESULTS: Low acculturated Latinas reported more worry and African Americans less worry than whites (P < .001). Other factors independently associated with more worry were younger age, being employed, more pain and fatigue, and radiation (Ps < .05). With all factors in the model, less worry was associated (all Ps < .05) with greater ease of understanding information (2.89, 2.99, 2.81 for low, medium, high), better symptom management (3.19, 2.89, 2.87 for low, medium, high), and more coordinated care (3.36, 2.94, 2.82 for low, medium, high). Race/ethnicity remained significant controlling for all factors (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Less acculturated Latina breast cancer patients are vulnerable to high levels of worry. Interventions that improve information exchange, symptom management, and coordinating care hold promise in reducing worry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To establish optimal intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) techniques for treating the left breast and regional nodes, using moderate deep-inspiration breath hold. Methods and Materials: We developed four IMRT plans of differing complexity for each of 10 patients following lumpectomy for left breast cancer. A dose of 60 Gy was prescribed to the boost planning target volume (PTV) and 52.2 Gy to the breast and supraclavicular, infraclavicular, and internal mammary nodes. Two plans used inverse-planned beamlet techniques: a 9-field technique, with nine equispaced axial beams, and a tangential beamlet technique, with three to five ipsilateral beams. The third plan (a segmental technique) used a forward-planned multisegment technique, and the fourth plan (a segmental blocked technique) was identical but included a block to limit heart dose. Dose--volume histograms were generated, and metrics chosen for comparison were analyzed using the paired t test. Results: Mean heart and left anterior descending coronary artery doses were similar with the tangential beamlet and segmental blocked techniques but higher with the segmental and 9-field techniques (mean paired difference of 15.1 Gy between segmental and tangential beamlet techniques, p < 0.001). Substantial volumes of contralateral tissue received dose with the 9-field technique (mean right breast V2, 58.9%; mean right lung V2, 75.3%). Minimum dose to ≥95% of breast PTV was, on average, 45.9 Gy with tangential beamlet, 45.0 Gy with segmental blocked, 51.4 Gy with segmental, and 50.2 Gy with 9-field techniques. Coverage of the internal mammary region was substantially better with the two beamlet techniques than with the segmental blocked technique. Conclusions: Compared to the 9-field beamlet and segmental techniques, a tangential beamlet IMRT technique reduced exposure to normal tissues and maintained reasonable target coverage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To report interim cosmetic results and toxicity from a prospective study evaluating accelerated partial-breast irradiation (APBI) administered using a highly conformal external beam approach. Methods and Materials: We enrolled breast cancer patients in an institutional review board–approved prospective study of APBI using beamlet intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) at deep-inspiration breath-hold. Patients received 38.5 Gy in 3.85 Gy fractions twice daily. Dosimetric parameters in patients who maintained acceptable cosmesis were compared with those in patients developing unacceptable cosmesis in follow-up, using t-tests. Results: Thirty-four patients were enrolled; 2 were excluded from analysis because of fair baseline cosmesis. With a median follow-up of 2.5 years, new unacceptable cosmesis developed in 7 patients, leading to early study closure. We compared patients with new unacceptable cosmesis with those with consistently acceptable cosmesis. Retrospective analysis demonstrated that all but one plan adhered to the dosimetric requirements of the national APBI trial. The mean proportion of a whole-breast reference volume receiving 19.25 Gy (V50) was lower in patients with acceptable cosmesis than in those with unacceptable cosmesis (34.6% vs. 46.1%; p = 0.02). The mean percentage of this reference volume receiving 38.5 Gy (V100) was also lower in patients with acceptable cosmesis (15.5% vs. 23.0%; p = 0.02). Conclusions: The hypofractionated schedule and parameters commonly used for external beam APBI and prescribed by the ongoing national trial may be suboptimal, at least when highly conformal techniques such as IMRT with management of breathing motion are used. The V50 and V100 of the breast reference volume seem correlated with cosmetic outcome, and stricter limits may be appropriate in this setting. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The article presents a population-based study that evaluates the pattern and correlates of postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) utilization. The authors of the study surveyed patients who were diagnosed with breast cancer in 2002 and were treated with mastectomy in Los Angeles, California and Detroit, Michigan. The results of the survey indicate that PMRT receipt is strongly correlated with clinical indication, and there was no observed sociodemographic disparities in utilization.

Purpose: To reduce cardiotoxicity from breast radiotherapy (RT), innovative techniques are under investigation. Information about cardiac motion with respiration and positional reproducibility under active breathing control (ABC) is necessary to evaluate these techniques.Methods and Materials: Patients requiring loco-regional RT for breast cancer were scanned by computed tomography using an ABC device at various breath-hold states, before and during treatment. Ten patients were studied. For each patient, 12 datasets were analyzed. Mutual information-based regional rigid alignment was used to determine the magnitude and reproducibility of cardiac motion as a function of breathing state. For each scan session, motion was quantified by evaluating the displacement of a point along the left anterior descending artery (LAD) with respect to its position at end expiration. Long-term positional reproducibility was also assessed.Results: Displacement of the LAD was greatest in the inferior direction, moderate in the anterior direction, and lowest in the left-right direction. At shallow breathing states, the average displacement of LAD position was up to 6 mm in the inferior direction. The maximum displacement in any patient was 2.8 cm in the inferior direction, between expiration and deep-inspiration breath hold. At end expiration, the long-term reproducibility (SD) of the LAD position was 3 mm in the A-P, 6 mm in the S-I, and 4 mm in the L-R directions. At deep-inspiration breath hold, long-term reproducibility was 3 mm in the A-P, 7 mm in the S-I, and 3 mm in the L-R directions.Conclusions: These data demonstrate the extent of LAD displacement that occurs with shallow breathing and with deep-inspiration breath hold. This information may guide optimization studies considering the effects of respiratory motion and reproducibility of cardiac position on cardiac dose, both with and without ABC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors comment on a 2016 systematic review of the use of patient preferences in designing noninferiority trials. Topics discussed include the reduction of adverse effects in an early-stage breast cancer trial that forgo axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), noninferiority margin including the balance of the decrement in disease control and improvements in adverse effects and the authors' suggestion for the use of decision models in estimating noninferiority margins.

Purpose: Postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) reduces locoregional recurrence (LRR) of breast cancer. Survival appears improved in patients at higher risk for LRR. This study addresses whether subsets of node-negative patients with sufficiently high risk of LRR might benefit from PMRT. Methods: Retrospective analysis of a cohort of 877 cases of node-negative breast cancer treated with mastectomy, without adjuvant radiation, from 1980 to 2000. Results: Median follow-up was 100 months. Ten-year cumulative incidence of LRR as first event was 6.0%. Size greater than 2 cm, margin less than 2 mm, premenopausal status, and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) were independently significant prognostic factors. Ten-year LRR was 1.2% for those with 0 risk factors, 10.0% for those with 1 risk factor, 17.9% for those with 2 risk factors, and 40.6% for those with 3 risk factors. The chest wall was the site of failure in 80% of patients. Conclusion: Postmastectomy radiation therapy has not been recommended for node-negative patients because the LRR rate is low in that population overall. This study suggests, however, that node-negative patients with multiple risk factors, including close margins, T2 or larger tumors, premenopausal status, and LVI, are at higher risk for LRR and might benefit from PMRT. Because the chest wall is the most common site of failure, treating the chest wall alone in these patients to minimize toxicity is reasonable. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Purpose: To document and explain the current radiotherapeutic management of invasive breast cancer in North America and Europe. We also identified a number of areas of agreement, as well as controversy, toward which additional clinical research should be directed. Methods and materials: An original survey questionnaire was developed to assess radiation oncologists'' self-reported management of breast cancer. The questionnaire was administered to physician members of the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology and the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology. We present the results of the comparative analysis of 702 responses from North America and 435 responses from Europe. Results: Several areas of national and international controversy were identified, including the selection of appropriate candidates for postmastectomy radiation therapy (RT) and the appropriate management of the regional lymph nodes after mastectomy, as well as after lumpectomy. Only 40.7% and 36.1% of respondents would use postmastectomy RT in patients with 1–3 positive lymph nodes in North America and Europe, respectively. Sentinel lymph node biopsy was offered more frequently by North American than European respondents (p <0.0001) and more frequently by academic than nonacademic respondents in North America (p < 0.05). The average radiation fraction size was larger in Europe than in North America (p < 0.01). European respondents offered RT to the internal mammary chain more often than did the North American respondents (p < 0.001). North American respondents were more likely to offer RT to the supraclavicular fossa (p < 0.001) and axilla (p < 0.01). Conclusion: Marked differences were found in physician opinions regarding the management of breast cancer, with statistically significant international differences in patterns of care. This survey highlighted areas of controversy, providing support for international randomized trials to optimize the RT management of invasive breast cancer. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Purpose: To examine the self-reported practice patterns of radiation oncologists in North America and Europe regarding radiotherapy to the internal mammary lymph node chain (IMC) in breast cancer patients.Methods and materials: A survey questionnaire was sent in 2001 to physician members of the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology and European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology regarding their management of breast cancer. Respondents were asked whether they would treat the IMC in several clinical scenarios.Results: A total of 435 responses were obtained from European and 702 responses from North American radiation oncologists. Respondents were increasingly likely to report IMC irradiation in scenarios with greater axillary involvement. Responses varied widely among different European regions, the United States, and Canada (p < 0.01). European respondents were more likely to treat the IMC (p < 0.01) than their North American counterparts. Academic physicians were more likely to treat the IMC than those in nonacademic positions (p < 0.01).Conclusion: The results of this study revealed significant international variation in attitudes regarding treatment of the IMC. The international patterns of variation mirror the divergent conclusions of studies conducted in the different regions, indicating that physicians may rely preferentially on evidence from local studies when making difficult treatment decisions. These variations in self-reported practice patterns indicate the need for greater data in this area, particularly from international cooperative trials. The cultural predispositions documented in this study are important to recognize, because they may continue to affect physician attitudes and practices, even as greater evidence accumulates. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The optimal adjuvant therapy (antiestrogen therapy [ET] + radiation therapy or ET alone, or in some reports radiation therapy alone) in older women with early-stage breast cancer has been highly debated. However, granular details on the role of insurance in the out-of-pocket cost for patients receiving ET with or without radiation therapy are lacking. This project disaggregates out-of-pocket costs by insurance plans to increase treatment cost transparency. Several radiation therapy schedules are accepted standards as per the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. For our financial estimate model, we used the 5-fraction and 15-fraction radiation therapy and ET prescribed over a 5-year duration. The total aggregate out-of-pocket costs were determined from the sum of treatment costs, deductibles, and copays/coinsurance based on Medicaid, Original Medicare, Medigap Plan G, and Medicare Part D Rx plans. The model assumes a Medicare- and/or Medicaid-eligible patient ≥70 years of age with node-negative, early-stage estrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer. Patient out-of-pocket costs were estimated from publicly available insurance data from plan-specific benefit coverage materials using a 5-year time horizon. Original Medicare beneficiaries face a total out-of-pocket treatment charge of $2738.52 for ET alone, $2221.26 for 5-fraction radiation therapy alone, $2573.92 for 15-fraction radiation therapy alone, $3361.26 for combined ET+ 5-fraction radiation therapy, and $3713.92 for combined ET + 15-fraction radiation therapy. Medigap Plan G beneficiaries have an out-of-pocket charge of $1130.00 with radiation therapy alone and face an out-of-pocket of $2270.00 for ET alone and combined ET+ radiation therapy. For Medicaid beneficiaries, all treatments approved by Medicaid are covered without limit, resulting in no out-of-pocket expense for either adjuvant treatment option. This model (based on actual cost estimates per insurance plan rather than claims data), by estimating expenses within Medicare and Medicaid plans, provides a level of transparency to patient cost. With knowledge of the costs borne by patients themselves, treatment decisions informed by patients' individual priorities and preferences may be further enhanced. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]