Search

Aim: Patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) may be vulnerable to changes in healthcare management, safety standards and protocols that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic. Materials & methods: The REthink Access to Care & Treatment (REACT) survey assessed USA-based patient perspectives on COVID-19-related impacts to their MBC treatment experience between 27 April 2021 and 17 August 2021. Results: Participants (n = 341; 98.5% females, mean age 50.8 years) reported that overall oncology treatment quality was maintained during the pandemic. Delayed/canceled diagnostic imaging was reported by 44.9% of participants while telemedicine uptake was high among participants (80%). Conclusion: Overall, MBC care was minimally affected by the pandemic, possibly due to the expanded use of telemedicine, informing MBC management for future public health emergencies. Plain Language Summary The COVID-19 pandemic has forced healthcare providers to change the way that healthcare is delivered. These changes could particularly affect people with metastatic breast cancer (MBC), an advanced stage of cancer that has spread to other parts of the body. The authors of this study used a web-based survey to ask 341 volunteers with MBC how the pandemic has affected their cancer treatment. The authors found that people with MBC thought that the quality of their care stayed the same during the pandemic. Most people (80%) surveyed were able to use telemedicine, the remote delivery of care by phone or computer, to replace in-person visits to their doctor. However, almost half of people surveyed reported delays or cancellation of their diagnostic imaging appointments. Overall, this study shows that the COVID-19 pandemic did not affect peoples' opinions of their MBC care. Increased use of telemedicine may have contributed to the lack of disruption in care. These findings will help guide MBC care during future public health emergencies. Tweetable abstract A survey of patient perspectives on their care for metastatic breast cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic has shown consistent quality of care. Care delivery adaptations such as telemedicine may be key to maintaining cancer care quality during future public health emergencies. Substantial changes in healthcare management, safety standards and protocols occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) are particularly at risk of pandemic-related negative consequences due to the need for clinical visits, multimodal therapies, potential immunosuppression and compromised support services. This cross-sectional study used a two-part REthink Access to Care & Treatment (REACT) survey to assess the perspective of patients with MBC on the effects of COVID-19 with regards to their MBC treatment experience. Data from 341 validated participants (98.5% females; mean age 50.8 years) revealed that patient-reported overall quality of oncology treatment remained about the same during the pandemic. Telemedicine uptake was high among participants (80%); replacement of in-person visits with telemedicine was the most reported change to regular clinical checkups and mental health visits due to the pandemic. However, 44.9% of participants reported that diagnostic imaging appointments were either delayed or canceled. During the pandemic, 48.1% of participants reported disease progression. Overall, participants perceived that the management and treatment of their MBC were minimally disrupted by the pandemic, likely due in part to the utilization of telemedicine. While these findings can inform MBC management decisions during future public health crises, future studies should solicit perceptions of care from more diverse patient populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This article aims to discuss elacestrant, an oral selective estrogen receptor downregulator approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in January 2023 for the treatment of hormone receptor positive (HR+) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2−) advanced breast cancer. Data sources: PubMed, Embase, Medline, Clinicaltrials.gov, and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) were searched from inception to August 31, 2023. Study selection and data extraction: Clinical trials published in English were included and relevant information regarding methodology and results were extracted. Data synthesis: Phase 1 and 3 trials showed elacestrant was safe and improved progression-free survival in patients with endocrine receptor 1 (ESR1) mutations who failed cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor (CDK 4/6i) plus 1 prior endocrine therapy compared with standard of care (SOC) (fulvestrant, anastrozole, letrozole, or exemestane monotherapy). Relevance to patient care and clinical practice in comparison to existing drugs: Elacestrant maintains a comparable adverse event profile with other endocrine therapies and offers an alternative to typical sequential therapy which can delay the use of or be used after traditional chemotherapy. Elacestrant is currently being studied in CDK 4/6 inhibitor naïve patients and as a component of combination therapy for first-line use which could lead to future indications. Conclusions: Elacestrant gained FDA approval in January 2023 and can be considered in patients with HR+ HER2− advanced breast cancer and ESR1 mutations who have progressed despite therapy with either CDK 4/6i plus aromatase inhibitors (AI) or fulvestrant or chemotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Depression is a common co-morbidity in women with breast cancer. Previous systematic reviews investigating cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for depression in this population based their conclusions on findings from studies with varying and often limited specificity, quality and/or quantity of CBT within their interventions. Aim: To determine the effectiveness of a specific, well-evidenced CBT protocol for depression in women with breast cancer. Method: Online databases were systematically searched to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) testing CBT (aligned to Beck's protocol) as a treatment for depression in women with breast cancer. Screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were independently undertaken by two study authors. Both narrative synthesis and meta-analysis were used to analyse the data. The meta-analysis used a random effects model to compare CBT with non-active/active controls of depression using validated, self-report measures. Results: Six RCTs were included in the narrative synthesis, and five in the meta-analysis (n = 531 participants). Overall, CBT demonstrated an improvement in depression scores in the CBT condition versus active and non-active controls at post-intervention (SMD = –0.93 [95% CI –1.47, –0.40]). Narratively, five out of six RCTs reported statistically significant improvements in depression symptoms for CBT over control conditions for women with breast cancer. Conclusion: CBT aligned to Beck's protocol for depression appears effective for treating depression in women with breast cancer. However, further research is needed for women with stage IV breast cancer. The clinical recommendation is that therapists utilise Beck's CBT protocol for depression, whilst considering the complex presentation and adapt their practice accordingly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Molecular profiling of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) through the widespread use of next-generation sequencing (NGS) has highlighted actionable mutations and driven trials of targeted therapy matched to tumour molecular profiles, with improved outcomes reported using such an approach. Here, we review NGS results and treatment outcomes for a cohort of Asian MBC patients in the phase I unit of a tertiary centre. Methods: Patients with MBC referred to a phase I unit underwent NGS via Ion AmpliSeq Cancer Hotspot v2 (ACH v2, 2014-2017) prior to institutional change to FoundationOne CDx (FM1; 2017-2022). Patients were counselled on findings and enrolled on matched therapeutic trials, where available. Outcomes for all subsequent treatment events were recorded to data cut-off on January 31, 2022. Results: A total of 215 patients were enrolled with successful NGS in 158 patients. The PI3K/AKT/PTEN pathway was the most altered with one or more of the pathway member genes PIK3/AKT/PTEN affected in 62% (98/158) patients and 43% of tumours harbouring a PIK3CA alteration. Tumour mutational burden (TMB) was reported in 96/109 FM1 sequenced patients, with a mean TMB of 5.04 mt/Mb and 13% (12/96) with TMB ≥ 10 mt/Mb. Treatment outcomes were evaluable in 105/158 patients, with a pooled total of 216 treatment events recorded. Matched treatment was administered in 47/216 (22%) events and associated with prolonged median progression-free survival (PFS) of 21.0 weeks [95% confidence interval (CI) 11.7, 26.0 weeks] versus 12.1 weeks (95% CI 10.0, 15.4 weeks) in unmatched, with hazard ratio (HR) for progression or death of 0.63 (95% CI 0.41, 0.97; p = 0.034). In the subgroup of PIK3/AKT/PTENaltered MBC, the HR for progression or death was 0.57 (95% CI 0.35, 0.92; p = 0.02), favouring matched treatment. Per-patient overall survival (OS) analysis (n = 105) showed improved survival for patients receiving matched treatment versus unmatched, with median OS (mOS) of 30.1 versus 11.8 months, HR = 0.45 (95% CI 0.24, 0.84; p = 0.013). Objective response rate (ORR) in the overall population was similar in matched and unmatched treatment events (23.7% versus 17.2%, odds ratio of response 1.14 95% CI 0.50, 2.62; p = 0.75). Conclusions: Broad-panel NGS in MBC is feasible, allowing therapeutic matching, which was associated with improvements in PFS and OS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Many studies on cancer patients investigate the impact of treatment on health-related quality of life (QoL). Typically, QoL is measured longitudinally, at baseline and at predefined timepoints thereafter. The question is whether, at a given timepoint, patients who return their questionnaire (available cases, AC) have a different QoL than those who do not return their questionnaire (non-AC). Methods: We employed augmented inverse probability weighting (AIPW) to estimate the average QoL of non-AC in two studies on advanced-stage cancer patients. The AIPW estimator assumed data to be missing at random (MAR) and used machine learning (ML)-based methods to estimate answering probabilities of individuals at given timepoints as well as their reported QoL, as a function of auxiliary variables. These auxiliary variables were selected by medical oncologists based on domain expertise. We aggregated results both by timepoint and by time until death and compared AIPW estimates to the AC averages. Additionally, we used a pattern mixture model (PMM) to check sensitivity of our AIPW estimates against violation of the MAR assumption. Results: Our study included 1927 patients with advanced pancreatic and 797 patients with advanced breast cancer. The AIPW estimate for average QoL of non-AC was below the average QoL of AC when aggregated by timepoint. The difference vanished when aggregated by time until death. PMM estimates were below AIPW estimates. Conclusions: Our results indicate that non-AC have a lower average QoL than AC. However, estimates for QoL of non-AC are subject to unverifiable assumptions about the missingness mechanism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key Points: We conducted semi‐structured interviews with providers at four New York‐Presbyterian (NYP) hospitals: Weill Cornell Medicine (WCM), NYP‐Queens, NYP‐Brooklyn Methodist Hospital, and Columbia University Medical Center.Emergent themes identified factors that influenced healthcare delivery at the institutional, provider, and patient levels.Most frequently reported barriers included a lack of formal protocols for communicating and offering psychosocial resources to patients (institutional), lack of vital staff such as, social workers and patient navigators (institutional), time constraints (provider), and stigma regarding mental health care (patient).Most frequently cited facilitators to delivering psychosocial care included having a trained social worker on staff (institutional), awareness of psychosocial needs (provider), and engagement (patient).Our findings highlight opportunities to improve the provision of psychosocial care for adults with metastatic breast cancer (mBC) at multiple levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Precision oncology programs using next-generation sequencing to detect predictive biomarkers are extending therapeutic options for patients with metastatic breast cancer (mBC). Regularly, based on the recommendations of the interdisciplinary molecular tumor board (iMTB), an inclusion in a clinical trial is not possible. In this case, the German health insurance system allows for the application of reimbursement for an off-label drug use. Here, we describe the current challenges and our experience with reimbursement of molecular therapies in mBC. Methods: A total of 100 applications for reimbursement of off-label therapies recommended by an iMTB were filed for patients with mBC, of which 89 were evaluable for this analysis. The approval rate was correlated with the molecular level of evidence of the respective therapy according to the National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT) and European Society for Medical Oncology Scale for Clinical Actionability of molecular Targets (ESCAT) classification as well as with pretreatment therapy lines. Findings: Overall, 53.9% (48/89) of reimbursement applications were approved. Applications for therapies based on level of evidence m1 (NCT classification), tier I and II (ESCAT classification) had a significantly and clinically relevant increased chance of reimbursement, while a greater number of previous treatment lines had no significantly increased chance of approval, though a trend of approval toward higher treatment lines was detectable. Interpretation: Currently, the German jurisdiction seems to aggravate the clinical implementation of clinically urgently needed molecular therapies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Novel therapies in metastatic cancers have contributed to improvements in survival outcomes, yet real-world data suggest that improvements may be mainly driven by those patient groups who already had the highest survival outcomes. This study aimed to develop and apply a framework for quantifying the impact of novel metastatic cancer therapies on health inequalities in survival outcomes based on published aggregate data. Methods: Nine (N = 9) novel therapies for metastatic breast cancer (mBC), metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), and metastatic non–small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) were identified, 3 for each cancer type. Individual patient data (IPD) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were replicated from published Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves. For each cancer type, data were pooled for the novel therapies and comparators separately and weighted based on sample size to ensure equal contribution of each therapy in the analyses. Parametric (mixture) distributions were fitted to the weighted data to model and extrapolate survival. The inequality in survival was defined by the absolute difference between groups with the highest and lowest survival for 2 stratifications: one for which survival was stratified into 2 groups and one using 5 groups. Additionally, a linear regression model was fitted to survival estimates for the 5 groups, with the regression coefficient or slope considered as the inequality gradient (IG). The impact of the pooled novel therapies was subsequently defined as the change in survival inequality relative to the pooled comparator therapies. A probabilistic analysis was performed to quantify parameter uncertainty. Results: The analyses found that novel therapies were associated with significant increases in inequalities in survival outcomes relative to their comparators, except in terms of OS for mNSCLC. For mBC, the inequalities in OS increased by 13.9 (95% CI: 1.4; 26.6) months, or 25.0%, if OS was stratified in 5 groups. The IG for mBC increased by 3.2 (0.3; 6.1) months, or 24.7%. For mCRC, inequalities increased by 6.7 (3.0; 10.5) months, or 40.4%, for stratification based on 5 groups; the IG increased by 1.6 (0.7; 2.4) months, or 40.2%. For mNSCLC, inequalities decreased by 14.9 (−84.5; 19.0) months, or 12.2%, for the 5-group stratification; the IG decreased by 2.0 (−16.1; 5.1) months, or 5.5%. Results for the stratification based on 2 groups demonstrated significant increases in OS inequality for all cancer types. In terms of PFS, the increases in survival inequalities were larger in a relative sense compared with OS. For mBC, PFS inequalities increased by 8.7 (5.9; 11.6) months, or 71.7%, for stratification based on 5 groups; the IG increased by 2.0 (1.3; 2.6) months, or 67.6%. For mCRC, PFS inequalities increased by 5.4 (4.2; 6.6) months, or 147.6%, for the same stratification. The IG increased by 1.3 (1.1; 1.6) months, or 172.7%. For mNSCLC, inequalities increased by 18.2 (12.5; 24.4) months, or 93.8%, for the 5-group stratification; the IG increased by 4.0 (2.8; 5.4) months, or 88.1%. Results from the stratification based on 2 groups were similar. Conclusion: Novel therapies for mBC, mCRC, and mNSCLC are generally associated with significant increases in survival inequalities relative to their comparators in randomized controlled trials, though inequalities in OS for mNSCLC decreased nonsignificantly when stratified based on 5 groups. Although further research using real-world IPD is warranted to assess how, for example, social determinants of health affect the impact of therapies on health inequalities among patient groups, the proposed framework can provide important insights in the absence of such data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Oncology guidelines for distress management recommend use of the single‐item distress thermometer (DT) and accompanying Problem List (PL) to identify patients with high distress levels and their potential sources of distress. However, oncology practices have yet to establish standardized protocols to screen and triage caregivers with high distress levels. With an eye toward integrating caregiver‐centered support services into cancer care, this mixed‐methods study sought to assess caregiver distress and challenges that may contribute to their distress. Methods: Nineteen caregivers of metastatic breast cancer patients (60% female, 47% ethnic/racial minority) completed an interview and a survey comprised of the DT, the original 39‐item PL, and five additional caregiver‐specific PL items. Results: Caregivers reported moderate distress levels and more than half exceeded the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) cut‐off, denoting significant distress. There was no association between caregiver distress and the number of items endorsed on the original PL. Qualitative analysis identified nine problem domains as areas of caregiver unmet need needs (i.e., practical challenges, caregiving responsibilities, social/relationship issues, caregiver and patient emotional well‐being, caregiver and patient physical well‐being, spiritual well‐being, and communication). Two of the problem domains (caregiving responsibilities and communication) were not captured in any way by the original PL. Conclusion: With further research and development, the identified domains could serve as the basis for a caregiver‐specific PL to facilitate triage and referral when incorporated as part of routine distress screening. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Phosphatidylinositol-4,5-bisphosphate 3-kinase catalytic subunit alpha (PIK3CA) is a well-known oncogene with a high prevalence of mutation in breast cancer patients. The effect of the mutation is a deregulation in phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase-related pathways, and, consequently, in unrestricted cell growth and differentiation. With the advent of precision oncology, PIK3CA has emerged as a pivotal treatment target, culminating in the recent approval of alpelisib. Despite years of research on this genetic alteration, certain aspects of its influence on the prognosis of breast cancer remain ambiguous. The purpose of this analysis is to characterize the clinical picture of breast cancer patients with PIK3CA mutation in comparison to the PIK3CA-wild-type group. We examined 103 tumor samples from 100 breast cancer patients using a next-generation sequencing panel. Presence of the mutation was linked to an older age at diagnosis, a lower expression of Ki67 protein, a greater percentage of tumors expressing progesterone receptors, and a notably higher incidence of metastatic disease at presentation. No significant differences were identified in overall and progression-free survival between the two groups. Our findings enhance the understanding of how PIK3CA mutations shape the clinical and prognostic landscape for breast cancer patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Watson for Oncology (WFO) decision system has been rolled out in many cancers. However, the consistency of treatment for breast cancer is still unclear in relatively economically disadvantaged areas. Patients with postoperative adjuvant stage (January 2017 to December 2017) and advanced-stage breast cancer (January 2014 to December 2018) in northwest of China were included in this study. Patient information was imported to make treatment decisions using Watson version 19.20 analysis and subsequently compared with clinician decisions and analyzed for influencing factors. A total of 263 patients with postoperative adjuvant breast cancer and 200 with advanced breast cancer were included in this study. The overall treatment modality for WFO was in 80.2% and 50.5% agreement with clinicians in the adjuvant and advanced-stage population, respectively. In adjuvant treatment after breast cancer surgery, menopausal status (odds ratio (OR) = 2.89, P = 0.012, 95% CI, 1.260–6.630), histological grade (OR = 0.22, P = 0.019, 95% CI, 0.061–0.781) and tumor stage (OR = 0.22, P = 0.042, 95% CI, 0.050–0.943) were independent factors affecting the concordance between the two stages. In the first-line treatment of advanced breast cancer, hormone receptor status was a factor influencing the consistency of treatment (χ2 = 14.728, P < 0.001). There was good agreement between the WFOs and clinicians' treatment decisions in postoperative adjuvant breast cancer, but poor agreement was observed in patients with advanced breast cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The prognosis for individuals with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) has improved in recent decades. This expanding cohort has unique psychological and psychosocial needs, yet targeted supportive care interventions are underdeveloped. This systematic review seeks to summarise the available evidence on the effectiveness of supportive care interventions in improving quality of life and symptom experience of individuals living with MBC so that services can be developed to address the unmet needs of this cohort in future. Methods: Academic Search Complete, CINAHL, ERIC, Medline and SocINDEX were searched for publications investigating the effect of supportive care interventions specifically targeted at addressing the quality of life or symptom experience of individuals living with MBC. Three reviewers independently screened and selected studies. Quality appraisal and assessed risk of bias were carried out. Results: The search yielded 1972 citations. Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Interventions included psychological (n = 3), end of life discussion and preparation (n = 2), physical activity (n = 4), lifestyle (n = 2), and medication self‐management support (n = 2). Three studies reported significant improvement in quality of life, two of which reported improved symptom experience in at least one symptom. Three further physical activity interventions showed improvement in at least one of the symptoms investigated. Conclusion: Studies reporting a statistically significant effect on quality of life and improved symptom experience were extremely heterogenous. We can tentatively suggest that multimodal and frequently administered interventions are effective, with physical activity interventions positively impacting on symptom experience, however further research is required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To develop a physical function test based on lie-to-sit transition and to study its feasibility in patients suffering from metastatic breast cancer (MBC). This cross-sectional study recruited 90 women diagnosed with MBC. Patients were asked to transfer from lying to sitting position as fast as possible during 30 s, performing the 30-second lie-to-sit test (30-LTS). Heart rate (HR), rate of perceived exertion (RPE) and number of repetitions were measured. An assessment included the 30-second sit-to-stand test (30-STS), handgrip strength, Upper Limb Functional Index (ULFI) and Lower Limb Functional Index (LLFI). Pearson correlation was calculated between 30-LTS and independent outcomes. A linear regression model explaining the 30-LTS results was further constructed with variables that had a significant correlation. About 72 patients were measured, of which 65 were able to perform 30-LTS. Subjects performed 8.13 repetitions on average, with a mean RPE of 4.78 (0–10), reaching 63.08% of maximal HR. 30-LTS was significantly correlated with 30-STS (r = 0.567), handgrip (p = 0.26) and LLFI (r = 0.348). The regression model was significant (F = 4.742; p = 0.00), and these variables explained 32% of the variance of the 30-LTS. The 30-LTS showed to be a feasible functional and submaximal test in a sample of MBC. The 30-second lie-to-sit (30-LTS) developed does not require the patient to acquire a standing position and therefore it is an alternative to other more biomechanically demanding tests such as a 30 second sit-to-stand test or Timed up-and-go. 30-LTS involves both a functional and energy system assessment tool that can be implemented by allied health professionals in oncology rehabilitation to individualize exercise prescription, as well as for functional screening purposes. The present study adds value to current research focused on individualizing exercise prescription in the oncology field and provides reference values of function in metastatic breast cancer patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Oncology electronic health record (EHR) databases have increased in quality and availability over the past decade, yet it remains unclear whether these clinical practice data can be used to conduct reliable comparative effectiveness studies. We sought to emulate a clinical trial with EHR data in the advanced breast cancer population and compare our results against the trial. Methods: This cohort study used EHR data from US oncology practices. All elements of the study were defined to mimic the PALOMA‐2 trial as closely as possible. Patients with hormone‐positive, HER‐2 negative metastatic breast cancer with no prior treatment for metastatic disease were included. Patients initiating palbociclib and letrozole on the same day following the earliest record of metastasis were compared to those initiating letrozole only. The primary associational measure was the conditional hazard ratio for time‐to‐next treatment (TTNT). TTNT is well‐measured in our data source and amenable for calibration against the randomized study results of the PALOMA‐2 trial. We used multiple imputation for several patient characteristics with missing values. Results: There were 3836 study‐eligible women with advanced breast cancer. The hazard ratio for TTNT in the observational study (HR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.56–0.68) was closely aligned with that of the randomized trial (HR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.52–0.78). Conclusions: Under our assumptions on missing data and comparability of the two study populations, results from our non‐randomized study closely matched that of the randomized trial. Further studies are needed to determine whether EHR data can yield reliable conclusions on treatment effects in oncology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is a challenging disease, and despite new therapies, prognosis is still poor for a majority of patients. There is a clinical need for improved prognostication where immuno-oncology markers can provide important information. The aim of this study was to evaluate serum immuno-oncology markers in MBC patients and their respective relevance for prediction of survival. Patients and methods: We investigated a broad panel of 92 immuno-oncology proteins in serum from 136 MBC patients included in a prospective observational study (NCT01322893) with long-term follow-up. Serum samples were collected before start of systemic therapy and analyzed using multiplex proximity extension assay (Olink Target 96 Immuno-Oncology panel). Multiple machine learning techniques were used to identify serum markers with highest importance for prediction of overall and progression-free survival (OS and PFS), and associations to survival were further evaluated using Cox regression analyses. False discovery rate was then used to adjust for multiple comparisons. Results: Using random forest and random survival forest analyses, we identified the top nine and ten variables of highest predictive importance for OS and PFS, respectively. Cox regression analyses revealed significant associations (P < 0.005) of higher serum levels of IL-8, IL-10 and CAIX with worse OS in multivariable analyses, adjusted for established clinical prognostic factors including circulating tumor cells (CTCs). Similarly, high serum levels of IL-8, IL-10, ADA and CASP8 significantly associated with worse PFS. Interestingly, high serum levels of FasL significantly associated with improved OS and PFS. In addition, CSF-1, IL-6, MUC16, TFNSFR4 and CD244 showed suggestive evidence (P < 0.05) for an association to survival in multivariable analyses. After correction for multiple comparisons, IL-8 still showed strong evidence for correlation to survival. Conclusion: To conclude, we found six serum immuno-oncology markers that were significantly associated with OS and/or PFS in MBC patients, independently of other established prognostic factors including CTCs. Furthermore, an additional five serum immuno-oncology markers provided suggestive evidence for an independent association to survival. These findings highlight the relevance of immuno-oncology serum markers in MBC patients and support their usefulness for improved prognostication. Trial registration Clinical Trials (NCT01322893), registered March 25, 2011. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures are critical for assessing treatment benefit of anticancer treatments. Although PRO measures have been developed with the intention of capturing patient-centric concepts, a gap exists in understanding the patient experience with these tools. We characterized the experience of patients with metastatic breast cancer (mBC) with PRO measures in an oncology clinical trial setting to determine the importance, relevance, barriers, and facilitators for PRO completion. Methods The multicenter, qualitative design included semistructured interviews with 18 women with mBC who completed PRO measures in a clinical trial setting within 1 year of screening. Interviews began with concept elicitation to understand symptom characterization, decision to participate in a clinical trial, pre-trial expectations, and thoughts on study-related questionnaires. Cognitive debriefing was conducted to determine if items in a commonly used PRO instrument were relevant to the patient experience. Qualitative data were analyzed using a constant comparative approach. Results Participants described the need for detailed explanation of PRO measures at study start, including information about how the PRO data will likely be used to support drug development. Respondents who felt connected to clinical trial research were more likely to feel as if the measures adequately captured their experiences. Items that were deemed irrelevant or out of date to the patient experience may cause a respondent to feel marginalized and adds to the overall burden of PRO measure completion. Mode of PRO measure administration (electronic/paper) was important to some, but placement of the instrument completion within a study visit appeared to influence respondent willingness to fully engage with the measures. A lack of any type of feedback loop to allow respondents to learn from the captured PRO data was noted as important but missing from the patient experience. Conclusions PRO measures need to include content that is relevant to the patient experience over the course of the clinical trial period to be considered meaningful to respondents, and administration techniques also impact engagement. Robust communication strategies that socialize the intent, use, and results of PRO data may enrich the patient experience and support greater adherence to PRO completion in future studies.

Despite progress in breast cancer treatment, the survival rate for patients with metastatic breast cancer remains low due to chemotherapeutic agent resistance and the lack of specificity of the current generation of cancer drugs. Our previous findings indicated that the antimicrobial peptide SKACP003 exhibited anticancer properties, particularly against the MCF-7, MDA-MB-231, and MDA-MB-453 breast cancer cell lines. However, the mechanism of SKACP003-induced cancer cell death is unknown. Here, we investigated the molecular mechanism by which SKACP003 inhibits the cell cycle, cell proliferation, and angiogenesis in breast cancer cell lines. The results revealed that all the breast cancer cell lines treated at their IC50 values significantly inhibited the replicative phase of the cell cycle. The SKACP003-induced growth inhibition induced apoptosis, as evidenced by a decrease in BCL-2 and an increase in BAX and caspase gene (Cas-3, Cas-8, and Cas-9) expression. Reduced expression of the β-Catenin signaling pathway was associated with the SKACP003-induced apoptosis. SKACP003-treated breast cancer cells showed decreased expression of Wnt/β-Catenin targeting genes such as C-Myc, P68, and COX-2 and significant downregulation of CDK-4 and CDK-6 genes. Furthermore, cytoplasmic β-catenin protein levels in SKACP003-treated cell lines were significantly lower than in control cell lines. The results of the current study suggest that the newly identified antimicrobial peptide SKACP003 has great potential as a candidate for specifically targeting the β-catenin and thus significantly reducing the progression and prognosis of breast cancer cell lines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: CDK4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) combined with endocrine therapy are considered standard-of-care for first-line therapy of patients with hormone receptor positive, HER2 negative, advanced breast cancer (HR+/HER2- ABC). Superiority of combination therapy over endocrine monotherapy has been demonstrated in a multitude of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in phase III and IV. However, RCTs reflect clinical reality only to a limited extent, as narrow inclusion criteria lead to a selected patient collective. Here, we present real-world data (RWD) on CDK4/6i treatment in patients with HR+/HER2- ABC at four certified German university breast cancer centers. Methods: Patients diagnosed with HR+/HER2- ABC who were treated in clinical routine with CDK4/6i between November 2016 and December 2020 at four certified German university breast cancer centers (Saarland University Medical Center, University Medical Center Charité Berlin, University Medical Center Bonn, and University Medical Center Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel) were identified and enrolled in this retrospective study. Clinicopathological characteristics and clinical outcomes were recorded with particular emphasis on CDK4/6i therapy course [progression-free survival (PFS) following treatment initiation, toxicity, dose reduction, therapy discontinuation, prior and subsequent therapy line]. Results: Data from n = 448 patients were evaluated. The mean patient age was 63 (±12) years. Of these patients, n = 165 (36.8%) were primarily metastasized, and n = 283 (63.2%) had secondary metastatic disease. N = 319 patients (71.3%) received palbociclib, n = 114 patients (25.4%) received ribociclib, and n = 15 patients (3.3%) received abemaciclib, respectively. Dose reduction was performed in n = 132 cases (29.5%). N = 57 patients (12.7%) discontinued the treatment with CDK4/6i due to side effects. N = 196 patients (43.8%) experienced disease progression under CDK4/6i treatment. The median PFS was 17 months. Presence of hepatic metastases and prior therapy lines were associated with shorter PFS, whereas estrogen positivity and dose reduction due to toxicity were positively associated with PFS. Presence of bone and lung metastases, progesterone positivity, Ki67 index, grading, BRCA1/2 and PIK3CA mutation status, adjuvant endocrine resistance, and age did not significantly impact on PFS. Conclusion: Our RWD analysis on CDK4/6i treatment in Germany supports data from RCTs regarding both treatment efficacy and safety of CDK4/6i for treatment of patients with HR+/HER2- ABC. In comparison to data from the pivotal RCTs, median PFS was lower but within the expected range for RWD, which could result from inclusion of patients with more advanced diseases (i.e., higher therapy lines) to our dataset. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Regardless of the advances in our ability to detect early and treat breast cancer, it is still one of the common types of malignancy worldwide, with the majority of patients decease upon metastatic disease. Nevertheless, due to these advances, we have extensively characterized the drivers and molecular profiling of breast cancer and further dividing it into subtypes. These subgroups are based on immunohistological markers (Estrogen Receptor-ER; Progesterone Receptor-PR and Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-HER-2) and transcriptomic signatures with distinct therapeutic approaches and regiments. These therapeutic approaches include targeted therapy (HER-2+), endocrine therapy (HR+) or chemotherapy (TNBC) with optional combination radiotherapy, depending on clinical stage. Technological and scientific advances in the identification of molecular pathways that contribute to therapy-resistance and establishment of metastatic disease, have provided the rationale for revolutionary targeted approaches against Cyclin-Dependent Kinases 4/6 (CDK4/6), PI3 Kinase (PI3K), Poly ADP Ribose Polymerase (PARP) and Programmed Death-Ligand 1 (PD-L1), among others. In this review, we focus on the comprehensive overview of epidemiology and current standard of care treatment of metastatic breast cancer, along with ongoing clinical trials. Towards this goal, we utilized available literature from PubMed and ongoing clinical trial information from clinicaltrials.gov to reflect the up to date and future treatment options for metastatic breast cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Few studies have investigated the needs of patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC), and none have been conducted in Italy. Three categories of needs have been identified from the literature: information, support, and practical resources. The present study aims to achieve an in-depth understanding of the patients' needs related to the MBC care pathway. In-depth interviews were conducted and analyzed by thematic analysis. The participants were 9 women with MBC (age range 36–74) who were enrolled at the Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionalde dei tumori, in Milan. The analysis enabled us to identify four themes (which reflect the needs of the participants), each divided into numerous sub-themes: (1) the need for clinical recognition, (2) the need for more attention from healthcare professionals, (3) the need for more and better services to be available at the hospital, (4) the need for specific public health policies. Since the metastatic phase of breast cancer seems to elicit additional, specific needs and multi-level management, changes in attitudes and multidisciplinary practices should be tested in order to ascertain how these needs can be met. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The treatment of HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer with cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 inhibitors combined with endocrine therapy has recently emerged as the most relevant therapeutic strategy. However, in routine clinical practice, the best therapeutic approach in patients with comorbidities at early relapsing or ab initio metastatic disease, PI3KCA mutation, is still debated among oncologists. Given these areas of uncertainty, we conducted a Delphi survey to describe and confront the level of agreement or disagreement between clinicians working in referral vs local spoke oncological hospitals and summarize a consensus on these debated topics. total, 56 items were drafted using the Nominal Group Technique and used for the Delphi Survey. A total of 46 clinicians participated in the survey. Overall, the consensus threshold among all participants was reached in 46/56 items (82%), and Delphi Survey results showed a high level of consensus. For the 10 items (18%) that did not reach the consensus threshold, possible explanations considering differences in clinical practice and recent findings from literature are provided in the Discussion. Outcomes from the present survey may help guide treatment in multiple comorbidities, early recurring and ab initio metastatic disease, and PI3KCA mutation, where evidence from randomized trials and level 1 evidence is currently missing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/significance: Over 168,000 women are living with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) in the USA. More efficacious treatments have lengthened overall survival, but these treatments often result in a myriad of symptoms and financial burden that may negatively impact perceptions of cancer treatment and medication-taking behavior. Purpose: To explore cancer treatment–specific medication beliefs among women undergoing cancer treatment for MBC. Methods: A qualitative study was conducted using semi-structured interviews that were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. A thematic analysis was conducted using ATLAS.ti 8.0 software. Inter-rater reliability was set at a threshold of 0.80. Participants were recruited from a National Cancer Institute–designated comprehensive care center. Eligibility included ≥18 years old, English speaking, confirmed MBC diagnosis, and able/willing to complete interviews via telephone or Zoom. Results: Participants (n = 16) were largely Caucasian (86.7%) and non-Hispanic (93.3%). Mean age was 55.62 years. Three major themes were revealed, with corresponding subthemes: (1) positive cancer treatment–specific medication beliefs highlighting the benefit of treatment (relief of cancer-related symptoms and medication efficacy: delayed disease progression/extended survival); (2) negative cancer treatment–specific medication beliefs that caused concern for cancer treatment (medication symptoms, side effects and drug-drug interactions, financial toxicity, lack of guarantee medication would work); and (3) dialectical cancer treatment–specific medication beliefs indicating the benefits of cancer treatment outweigh the risks. Conclusion: Overall, participants noted that the benefits of cancer treatment outweighed the risks in the context of metastatic disease. Participants understood their prognosis and that they depended on their cancer treatment for survival. Oncology providers should continue to assess and address medication beliefs over the treatment trajectory and assist MBC patients with the decisional balance between the risk and benefit of continued cancer treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bevacizumab plus chemotherapy is a well-established first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We investigated whether polymorphisms of genes involved in immune regulation signaling are related to the clinical outcome of mCRC patients treated with bevacizumab-based chemotherapy. In this study, we genotyped 14 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) in IFN-γ/IFNGRs/JAKs/STATs/PD-L1 pathway by using DNA from blood samples of 141 mCRC patients treated with first-line bevacizumab-based chemotherapy. In the univariate and multivariate analysis, patients with AA genotype of CD274 :rs2297136 had a significantly better PFS and OS than patients with AG or GG genotype (10.8 versus 9.8, log-rank P =0.0031; 31.4 versus 20.9, log-rank P =0.0233). Patients with AG/GG genotype of IFNGR1 :rs2234711, CT/TT genotype of IFNGR1 :rs9376267 also showed longer OS than patients with AA or CC genotype, however, the statistic did not reach significant after adjusted by clinical factors in the multivariate analysis. A nomogram based on the genetic variants and clinic characteristics was developed with a good accuracy to predict patients' survival. Our result indicates that CD274 :rs2297136 is one of the most important predictors for the prognosis of mCRC patients treated with bevacizumab-based chemotherapy, if further validated in larger population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The link between glutathione S-transferase P1 (GSTP1) c.313A > G polymorphism and chemotherapy-related adverse events remains controversial. The goal of this study was to assess how this variant affected the toxicity of anthracycline-/paclitaxel-based chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer. Methods: This study retrospectively investigated pharmacogenetic associations of GSTP1 c.313A > G with chemotherapy-related adverse events in 142 breast cancer patients who received anthracycline and/or paclitaxel chemotherapy. Results: There were 61 (43.0%), 81 (57.0%), 43 (30.3%), and 99 (69.7%) patients in the T0-T2, T3-T4, N0-N1, and N2-N3 stages, respectively. There were 108 (76.1%) patients in clinical stages I–III and 34 (23.9%) patients in clinical stage IV. The numbers of patients with luminal A, luminal B, HER2 + , and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) were 10 (7.0%), 77 (54.2%), 33 (23.2%), and 22 (15.5%), respectively. The numbers of patients who carried GSTP1 c.313A > G A/A, A/G, and G/G genotypes were 94 (66.2%), 45 (31.7%), and 3 (2.1%), respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in the proportion of certain toxicities in patients with A/G, G/G, and A/G + G/G genotypes, except for neutropenia, in which the proportion of patients with A/G + G/G (χ2 = 6.586, P = 0.035) genotypes was significantly higher than that with the AA genotype. The logistic regression analysis indicated that GSTP1 c.313A > G mutation (A/G + G/G vs. A/A genotype) (adjusted OR 4.273, 95% CI 1.141–16.000, P = 0.031) was an independent variable associated with neutropenia. Conclusions: The findings of this study indicate that the GSTP1 c.313A > G mutation is an independent risk factor for neutropenia hematotoxicity in breast cancer patients induced by anthracycline-/paclitaxel-based chemotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures are critical for assessing treatment benefit of anticancer treatments. Although PRO measures have been developed with the intention of capturing patient-centric concepts, a gap exists in understanding the patient experience with these tools. We characterized the experience of patients with metastatic breast cancer (mBC) with PRO measures in an oncology clinical trial setting to determine the importance, relevance, barriers, and facilitators for PRO completion. Methods: The multicenter, qualitative design included semistructured interviews with 18 women with mBC who completed PRO measures in a clinical trial setting within 1 year of screening. Interviews began with concept elicitation to understand symptom characterization, decision to participate in a clinical trial, pre-trial expectations, and thoughts on study-related questionnaires. Cognitive debriefing was conducted to determine if items in a commonly used PRO instrument were relevant to the patient experience. Qualitative data were analyzed using a constant comparative approach. Results: Participants described the need for detailed explanation of PRO measures at study start, including information about how the PRO data will likely be used to support drug development. Respondents who felt connected to clinical trial research were more likely to feel as if the measures adequately captured their experiences. Items that were deemed irrelevant or out of date to the patient experience may cause a respondent to feel marginalized and adds to the overall burden of PRO measure completion. Mode of PRO measure administration (electronic/paper) was important to some, but placement of the instrument completion within a study visit appeared to influence respondent willingness to fully engage with the measures. A lack of any type of feedback loop to allow respondents to learn from the captured PRO data was noted as important but missing from the patient experience. Conclusions: PRO measures need to include content that is relevant to the patient experience over the course of the clinical trial period to be considered meaningful to respondents, and administration techniques also impact engagement. Robust communication strategies that socialize the intent, use, and results of PRO data may enrich the patient experience and support greater adherence to PRO completion in future studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]