Search

Survivorship focuses on individual's health and well-being. Assessing for cancer recurrence is a follow-up priority for survivors and providers. However, providers also emphasize the importance of assessing for adherence to ongoing treatment. Providers should also assess for sequelae of local-regional and systemic treatment. Assessing for mental health is important, as many cancer survivors experience anxiety or depression. Finally, survivors should be encouraged to have ongoing visits with their primary care to ensure screening for other health conditions. This article reviews the recommendations for survivorship and the level of evidence supporting each aspect of high-quality survivorship care.

We sought to evaluate local/regional recurrence rates after breast-conserving surgery in a cohort of patients enrolled in legacy trials of the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology and to evaluate variation in recurrence rates by receptor subtype.Multiple randomized controlled trials have demonstrated equivalent survival between breast conservation and mastectomy, albeit with higher local/regional recurrence rates after breast conservation. However, absolute rates of local/regional recurrence have been declining with multi-modality treatment.Data from five Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology legacy trials that enrolled women diagnosed with breast cancer between 1997 and 2010 were included. Women who underwent breast-conserving surgery and standard systemic therapies (n=4,404) were included. Five-year rates of local/regional recurrence were estimated from Kaplan-Meier curves. Patients were censored at time of distant recurrence (if recorded as first recurrence), death, or last follow-up. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify factors associated with time to local/regional recurrence, including patient age, tumor size, lymph node status, and receptor subtype.Overall 5-year recurrence was 4.6% (95% CI=4.0-5.4%). Five-year recurrence rates were lowest in those with ER+ or PR+ tumors (Her2+ 3.4% [95% CI 2.0-5.7%], Her2- 4.0% [95% CI 3.2-4.9%]) and highest in the triple negative subtype (7.1% [95% CI 5.4-9.3%]). On multivariable analysis, increasing nodal involvement and triple-negative subtype were positively associated with recurrence (P0.0001).Rates of local/regional recurrence after breast conservation in women with breast cancer enrolled in legacy trials of the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology are significantly lower than historic estimates. This data can better inform patient discussions and surgical decision-making.

The objective is to determine perspectives of general surgeons, plastic surgeons, and cancer navigators on factors contributing to breast cancer patients' decision for post-mastectomy reconstruction, especially for women facing financial hardship.We mailed Wisconsin general and plastic surgeons who performed5 breast cancer procedures annually a survey, including a postcard inviting cancer navigators to participate. Descriptive statistics summarize item responses. McNemar's chi-squared tests evaluated surgeons' perspectives of factors influencing reconstruction for all women compared to women facing financial hardship.Respondents include 70 general surgeons, 18 plastic surgeons, and 9 navigators. Respondents perceived preference-related factors as important, including "does not want more surgery" (85% reported it important overall and 77% for financial hardship women) and "reconstructed breast is not important to her" (77% vs. 61%). Surgeons perceived logistical factors were more important for women facing financial hardship, including "capacity to be away from work or home responsibilities for recovery" (30% reported important overall and 60% for financial hardship women), "concerned about out-of-pocket costs" (26% vs. 57%), and "frequent visits to complete reconstruction too burdensome" (27% vs. 49%).Our findings demonstrate Wisconsin surgeons and cancer navigators perceive logistical concerns influence reconstruction decisions for women facing financial hardship.

Previous studies have identified racial-ethnic differences in the diagnostic patterns and recurrence outcomes of women with phyllodes tumors (PT). However, these studies are generally limited in size and generalizability. We therefore sought to explore racial-ethnic differences in age, tumor size, subtype, and recurrence in a large US cohort of women with PT.We performed an 11-institution retrospective review of women with PT from 2007 to 2017. Differences in age at diagnosis, tumor size and subtype, and recurrence-free survival according to race-ethnicity.Women of non-White race or Hispanic ethnicity were younger at the time of diagnosis with phyllodes tumor. Non-Hispanic Other women had a larger proportion of malignant PT. There were no differences in recurrence-free survival in our cohort.Differences in age, tumor size, and subtype were small. Therefore, the workup of young women with breast masses and the treatment of women with PT should not differ according to race-ethnicity. These conclusions are supported by our finding that there were no differences in recurrence-free survival.

Socioeconomic disparities in post-mastectomy breast reconstruction exist. Key informants have suggested that finding providers who accept Medicaid insurance and longer travel time to a plastic surgeon are important barriers. Our objective was to assess the relationship between these factors and reconstruction for socioeconomically disadvantaged women in Wisconsin.We identified women 75 years of age with stage 0-III breast cancer who underwent mastectomy using the Wisconsin Cancer Reporting System. Women in the most disadvantaged state-based tertile of the Area Deprivation Index were included (n = 1809). Geocoding determined turn-by-turn drive time from women's address to the nearest accredited Commission on Cancer or National Accreditation Program for Breast Centers. Multivariable logistic regression determined the relationship between reconstruction, Medicaid, and travel time, controlling for patient factors known to impact reconstruction. Average adjusted predicted probabilities of receiving reconstruction were calculated.Most patients had early-stage breast cancer (51% stage 0/I) and 15.2% had Medicaid. 37% of women underwent reconstruction. Socioeconomically disadvantaged women with Medicaid (OR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.46-0.84) and longer travel times (OR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.99-1.0) were less likely to receive reconstruction. Patients with the lowest predicted probability of reconstruction were those with Medicaid who lived furthest from a plastic surgeon.Among socioeconomically disadvantaged women, Medicaid and travel remained associated with lower rates of reconstruction. Further work will explore opportunities to improve access to reconstruction for women with Medicaid. This is particularly challenging as it may require socioeconomically disadvantaged women to travel further to receive care.

Background Guidelines for follow-up after locoregional breast cancer treatment recommend imaging for distant metastases only in the presence of patient signs and/or symptoms. However, guidelines have not been updated to reflect advances in imaging, systemic therapy, or the understanding of biological subtype. We assessed the association between mode of distant recurrence detection and survival. Methods In this observational study, a stage-stratified random sample of women with stage II-III breast cancer in 2006-2007 and followed through 2016 was selected, including up to 10 women from each of 1217 Commission on Cancer facilities (n = 10 076). The explanatory variable was mode of recurrence detection (asymptomatic imaging vs signs and/or symptoms). The outcome was time from initial cancer diagnosis to death. Registrars abstracted scan type, intent (cancer-related vs not, asymptomatic surveillance vs not), and recurrence. Data were merged with each patient’s National Cancer Database record. Results Surveillance imaging detected 23.3% (284 of 1220) of distant recurrences (76.7%, 936 of 1220 by signs and/or symptoms). Based on propensity-weighted multivariable Cox proportional hazards models, patients with asymptomatic imaging compared with sign and/or symptom detected recurrences had a lower risk of death if estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) negative, HER2 negative (triple negative; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.54 to 0.99), or HER2 positive (HR = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.33 to 0.80). No association was observed for ER- or PR-positive, HER2-negative (HR = 1.14, 95% CI = 0.91 to 1.44) cancers. Conclusions Recurrence detection by asymptomatic imaging compared with signs and/or symptoms was associated with lower risk of death for triple-negative and HER2-positive, but not ER- or PR-positive, HER2-negative cancers. A randomized trial is warranted to evaluate imaging surveillance for metastases results in these subgroups.

The applicability of modern prospective data on adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) fields in patients with micrometastases is limited because many trials occurred prior to routine measurement of nodal metastasis size and modern sentinel lymph node evaluation techniques. We aimed to determine prognostic factors for patients with micrometastases and evaluate the impact of adjuvant RT on disease outcomes.Patients diagnosed with pathologic T1-T3 N1mi breast cancers between 2004-2015 were identified. Cox proportional hazards methods were used to determine characteristics predictive of locoregional recurrence (LRR). Tumor and treatment-specific factors were further evaluated using log-rank statistics to compare rates of LRR-free survival.This analysis included 156 patients. On multivariable analysis, grade 3 histology (HR 10.84, 95% CI 2.72-43.21) and adjuvant RT (HR 0.22, 95% CI 0.06-0.81) were independent predictors of LRR. Among patients with grade 1-2 histology, 5-year LRR-free survival was 98.8% in patients who received adjuvant RT versus 100% in patients who did not receive adjuvant RT (P = .82). Among patients with grade 3 histology, 5-year LRR-free survival was 90.1% in patients who received adjuvant RT versus 53.0% in patients who did not receive adjuvant RT (P = .025), and 100% in patients receiving comprehensive nodal irradiation versus 76.7% in patients receiving whole breast irradiation or no RT (P = .045).Patients with grade 3 micrometastases are at substantial risk for LRR. Adjuvant RT, including comprehensive nodal irradiation, should be strongly considered in these women.

Minimally invasive inguinal lymphadenectomy (MILND) is safe and feasible, but limited data exist regarding oncologic outcomes.This study performed a multi-institutional retrospective cohort analysis of consecutive MILND performed for melanoma between January 2009 and June 2016. The open ILND (OILND) comparative cohort comprised patients enrolled in the second Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial (MSLT-II) between December 2004 and March 2014.The pre-defined primary end point was the same-basin regional nodal recurrence, calculated using properties of binomial distribution. Time to events was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The secondary end points were overall survival, progression-free survival, melanoma-specific survival (MSS), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS).For all the patients undergoing MILND, the same-basin regional recurrence rate was 4.4 % (10/228; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 2.1-7.9 %): 8.2 % (4/49) for clinical nodal disease and 3.4 % (6/179) for patients with a positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) as the indication. For the 288 patients enrolled in MSLT-II who underwent OILND for a positive SLN, 17 (5.9 %) had regional node recurrence as their first event. After controlling for ulceration, positive LN count and positive non-SLNs at the time of lymphadenectomy, no difference in OS, PFS, MSS or DMFS was observed for patients with a positive SLN who underwent MILND versus OILND.This large multi-institutional experience supports the oncologic safety of MILND for melanoma. The outcomes in this large multi-institutional experience of MILND compared favorably with those for an OILND population during similar periods, supporting the oncologic safety of MILND for melanoma.

Radiation-associated sarcoma (RAS) is a rare sequela of radiotherapy. Radiotherapy modalities for breast conservation and radiation treatment (BCT) have changed over time. We sought to determine if the incidence of RAS after BCT has changed over time.We identified breast cancer survivors (diagnosed 1988-2012) treated with BCT within the SEER database. We excluded patients with prior cancer,1-year follow-up/survival, and nonexternal beam radiation (n = 276 301). We identified patients with a subsequent chest sarcoma diagnosis. The primary predictor variable was a 5-year period of breast cancer diagnosis year (1988-1992, 1993-1997, etc.). The incidence of sarcoma was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method, censoring at sarcoma diagnosis, death, or last follow-up (available through December 2017). Given the known latency of RAS, we used Joinpoint analysis to identify the time point at which RAS incidence significantly increased (start of the analytic window). A log-rank test assessed differences in RAS incidence by diagnosis year.The incidence of RAS was 0.03% at 5 years (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.03-0.04) and 0.16% at 10 years (95% CI: 0.14-0.18). No statistical difference in RAS incidence by diagnosis year was observed (p = 0.2).RAS remains a rare but persistent sequela after BCT. As new radiation modalities become more common, ongoing surveillance is necessary to track these rare events.

Introduction: Prior studies have demonstrated that breast cancer survivors are less likely to receive primary care preventive services than non-cancer patients. However, even recent studies have largely assessed survivors diagnosed over a decade ago. Further, studies have not considered patient receipt of health promotion guidance, critical to maintaining a healthy lifestyle. We examined the receipt of preventive care and health promotion in a modern cohort of early stage breast cancer survivors seen within our breast program. Methods: A cross-sectional cohort of women with a history of stage I/II, hormone receptor +, HER2neu- breast cancer within 5 years from diagnosis who did not receive chemotherapy were consented (n=101). Survivors completed a survey evaluating aspects of survivorship, including provider discussions regarding health promotion. Electronic medical record (EMR) abstraction captured receipt of preventive care (see Table). We excluded survivors with a primary care provider outside our health care system to ensure complete capture of screening (n=36). Results: Our final cohort (n=62) was a median 2 years from diagnosis (range 0.5-5 years) and a median age of 61 years (range 30-84). Most were stage I (73%) and white (95%). The majority of survivors received preventive care (Table). Survivors were less likely to report health promotion guidance from their provider, including: discussing “things you could do to improve your health” (66%), getting “help you wanted to make changes in your habits” (52%), discussing “how much or what kinds of food you eat” (24%), and “how much or what kind of exercise” (42%). Conclusion: In a modern cohort of early stage breast cancer survivors from a single breast center homed within our health care system, documented receipt of preventive care was high (≥75%). These high rates may reflect the implementation of EMRs (which could facilitate care coordination and provide best practice alerts), participation of our health system in state-wide quality improvement programs, and/or heightened awareness of the importance of preventive care by oncology providers. However, survivors perceive limited discussions surrounding health promotion, presenting an opportunity to improve survivorship care. Table. Summary of Receipt of Preventive Care for Early Stage Breast Cancer SurvivorsRecommended Preventive Care ServicesDefinition of ReceiptProportion of Eligible PatientsInfluenza vaccineAny since diagnosis*76% (44/58)Pneumococcal vaccineIf >65 yo, any since diagnosis*93% (38/41)Lipid screeningAny within 5 years84% (52/62)Colorectal cancer screeningIf >50 yo, colonoscopy within 10 years, cologuard within 5 years, fecal occult test within 1 year77% (37/48)Cervical cancer screeningIf cervix present and Citation Format: Jessica R. Schumacher, James E Haine, Amye J Tevaarwerk, Kristine L Kwekkeboom, Trista J Stankowski-Drengler, Catherine R. Breuer, Jennifer L Tucholka, Courtney Maxcy, Maureen A Smith, Heather B. Neuman. Receipt of preventive care and health promotion in a cohort of early stage breast cancer survivors [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PS9-25.

Limited data exist to guide appropriate use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) screening in women with a personal history of breast cancer. We developed an algorithm to inform the use of MRI screening in patients with a personal history, implemented it, and evaluated initial implementation at our community and academic practice sites.A multidisciplinary committee of providers developed the initial algorithm on the basis of available literature and consensus. To evaluate projected MRI utilization based on the initial algorithm and inform algorithm revision, charts of patients 80 years of age diagnosed and treated in 2010 with stage 0-III breast cancer (n = 236) were reviewed. The revised algorithm was implemented into the electronic medical record (September 2013). Thirteen months after implementation (2014-2015), chart review of patients with a personal history of breast cancer who underwent screening MRI was performed to assess algorithm adherence.Before algorithm development, 9% (20/236) of patients received MRI screening (6 genetic mutation/family history, 4 occult primary, 8 young age/breast density, 2 unknown). Use of MRI screening was projected to increase to 25% with algorithm implementation. In postimplementation review, we identified 183 patients with a personal history of breast cancer who underwent screening MRI, with 94% algorithm adherence.We successfully developed and implemented an algorithm to guide MRI screening in patients with a personal breast cancer history. Clinicians can use this algorithm to guide patient discussions regarding the utility of MRI screening. Further prospective study, including cancer detection rates, biopsy rate, and mortality, are necessary to confirm the algorithm's usefulness.

Background Trials demonstrate equivalent survival for breast cancers treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) or adjuvant chemotherapy (AC). However, these were conducted before the recognition of the importance of receptor subtype for survival and chemotherapy response. Therefore, chemotherapy timing may impact survival for certain receptor subtypes. A scoping review of studies assessing outcomes by chemotherapy timing based on receptor subtype was conducted to evaluate gaps in the existing literature. Methods Three databases were searched in February 2019 with terms related to breast cancer, NAC/AC, and survival. Inclusion criteria were original peer-reviewed studies published in English after 1989 comparing breast cancer outcomes for females based on chemotherapy timing. Studies/sections of studies lacking outcomes by receptor subtype or including patients missing appropriate targeted therapy were excluded. Results Of 7354 articles, 262 abstracts and 60 full texts were reviewed. Three studies met criteria. All were single-institution retrospective studies analyzing outcomes for triple negative (TN) patients with one study also examining luminal A patients. Significant differences in clinical characteristics existed between patients selected for NAC versus AC. Two studies demonstrated no survival difference by chemotherapy timing for TN patients, with the third showing improved likelihood of survival after AC for TN patients. No difference was seen for patients with luminal A cancer. Conclusions Our scoping review reveals a significant gap in the existing literature regarding optimal timing of chemotherapy for modern-era patients receiving targeted therapy based on receptor subtype. Review of the identified studies identified methodological challenges to answering this question through observational study designs.

ImportanceAlthough longer times from breast cancer diagnosis to primary surgery have been associated with worse survival outcomes, the specific time point after which it is disadvantageous to have surgery is unknown. Identifying an acceptable time to surgery would help inform patients, clinicians, and the health care system.ObjectiveTo examine the association between time from breast cancer diagnosis to surgery (in weeks) and overall survival and to describe factors associated with surgical delay. The hypothesis that there is an association between time to surgery and overall survival was tested.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis was a case series study that used National Cancer Database (NCDB) data from female individuals diagnosed with breast cancer from 2010 to 2014 (with 5-year follow-up to 2019). The NCDB uses hospital registry data from greater than 1500 Commission on Cancer–accredited facilities, accounting for 70% of all cancers diagnosed in the US. Included participants were females 18 years or older with stage I to III ductal or lobular breast cancer who underwent surgery as the first course of treatment. Patients with prior breast cancer, missing receptor information, neoadjuvant or experimental therapy, or who were diagnosed with breast cancer on the date of their primary surgery were excluded. Multivariable Cox regression was used to evaluate factors associated with overall survival. Patients were censored at death or last follow-up. Covariates included age and tumor characteristics. Multinomial regression was performed to identify factors associated with longer time to surgery, using surgery 30 days or less from diagnosis as the reference group. Data were analyzed from March 15 to July 7, 2022.ExposuresTime to receipt of primary breast surgery.MeasuresThe primary outcome measure was overall survival.ResultsThe final cohort included 373 334 patients (median [IQR] age, 61 [51-70] years). On multivariable Cox regression analysis, time to surgery 9 weeks (57-63 days) or later after diagnosis was associated with worse overall survival (hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.08-1.23; P Conclusions and RelevanceFindings of this case series study suggest the use of 8 weeks or less as a quality metric for time to surgery. Time to surgery of greater than 8 weeks may partly be associated with disadvantageous social determinants of health.

INTRODUCTION. The opioid epidemic in the United States is a public health crisis. Breast surgeons are obligated to provide good pain control for their patients after surgery but also must minimize administration of narcotics to prevent a surgical episode of care from becoming a patient’s gateway into opioid dependence. METHODS. A survey to ascertain pain management practice patterns after breast surgery was performed. A review of currently available literature that was specific to breast surgery was performed to create recommendations regarding pain management strategies. RESULTS. A total of 609 surgeons completed the survey and demonstrated significant variations in pain management practices, specifically within regards to utilization of regional anesthesia (e.g., nerve blocks), and quantity of prescribed narcotics. There is excellent data to guide the use of local and regional anesthesia. There are, however, fewer studies to guide narcotic recommendations; thus, these recommendations were guided by prevailing practice patterns. CONCLUSIONS. Pain management practices after breast surgery have significant variation and represent an opportunity to improve patient safety and quality of care. Multimodality approaches in conjunction with standardized quantities of narcotics are recommended.

Patient participation in treatment decision-making is a health care priority. This study hypothesized that providing a decision aid before surgical consultation would better prepare patients for decision-making. The objective was to examine the impact of a decision aid versus high-quality websites on patients’ perceptions of information conveyed during surgical consultation and satisfaction with the decision process. Patients with stages 0 to 3 breast cancer were randomized. Surveys assessed perceptions of information conveyed, being asked surgical preference, and satisfaction with the decision process. Multivariable logistic regression assessed associations between outcomes and randomization arm, patient factors, and surgeon. Change in Pseudo-R2 assessed the comparative effect of these factors on perceptions of the information conveyed. The median patient age was 59 years. Most of the patients (98%) were white, and 62% were college educated (n = 201). The findings showed no association between randomization arm and perceptions of information conveyed, being asked surgical preference, or satisfaction with the decision process. Most of the patients reported discussing both breast-conserving therapy and mastectomy (69%) and being asked their surgical preference (65%). The surgeon seen was more important than the randomization arm or the patient factors in predicting patients’ perceptions of information conveyed (explained 64-69% of the variation), and 63% of the patients were satisfied with the decision process. Use of a decision aid compared with high-quality websites did not increase patients’ perceptions of information conveyed or satisfaction with the decision process. Although the surgeon seen influenced aspects of the patient experience, the surgeon was not associated with satisfaction. Understanding the factors driving low satisfaction is critical because this is increasingly used as a marker of health care quality.

Purpose Annual low-dose CT (LDCT) for lung screening in high-risk individuals decreases both lung cancer–specific mortality and all-cause mortality. Community oncology practice networks constituting the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) conduct clinical trials across the cancer spectrum. The authors report access to and characteristics of LDCT screening for lung cancer in these community oncology practices. Methods A landscape capacity assessment was conducted in 2017 across the NCORP network. The primary outcome was the proportion of adult oncology practice groups offering LDCT lung screening on site. The secondary outcomes were the proportion of those screening services (1) with radiologist participation in service management and (2) offered at ACR Designated Lung Cancer Screening Centers. Results Fifty-two percent of components and subcomponents responded to at least some portion of the assessment, representing 217 practice groups. Analyzing the 211 adult oncology practice groups responding to the primary question, 73% offered lung screening services on site. Radiologists participated in managing 69% of these services. Forty-seven percent were offered in ACR Designated Lung Cancer Screening Centers. Minority and underserved practice groups were less likely to offer lung screening; however, this association dissipated when analyses focused on practices within the United States. Safety net and Critical Access Hospital designation increased the likelihood of screening availability. Conclusions The majority of community oncology practice groups within the NCORP offered lung screening on site, although radiologist participation in service management and ACR Lung Cancer Screening Center designation, markers of service quality, were more variable.

Purpose/objective(s) For patients with localized soft tissue sarcoma (STS) who cannot or choose not to undergo surgery, radiation alone can be used for local tumor control. Conventionally fractionated radiation has been reported to achieve local control in Materials/methods We are conducting an IRB-approved, single institution, prospective phase II clinical trial enrolling patients with STS that was unresectable or who opted against surgery. Patients underwent HXRT in 8 or fewer fractions using either CT- (11, 61%) or MRI-guided radiation treatments (7, 39%). Data on patient characteristics, radiation, local tumor control, acute and late toxicity, and overall survival was collected. Local control was defined as stable disease, partial response, or complete response on standard-of-care follow up imaging. Toxicity was graded on the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAEv5.0) during treatment, at 1 month, and at standard-of-care follow-up visits. Results Eighteen patients were enrolled, 7 with an unresectable primary STS tumor only, 5 with oligometastatic STS, and 6 with widespread metastatic STS. Thirty-eight total lesions were treated - 2 in the neck, 25 in the chest, 1 in the abdomen, 3 in the retroperitoneum, 4 in the pelvis, and 3 in the extremities. Radiation dose ranged from 5-12 Gy per fraction in 3-8 fractions for a total of 18-60 Gy (median dose/fractionation was 50 Gy/5 fractions). Patients were followed for a median of 283 days (range 46 - 532 days). Local tumor control was achieved in all cases for which follow up imaging was obtained (15 patients): 8 patients (53%) had a stable response, 6 (40%) had a partial response, and 1 (7%) had a complete response. Three patients died prior to follow up imaging being obtained. Ten patients (56%) experienced any acute toxicity, with 1 having CTCAE grade 3 toxicity (pain) and 9 having grades 1-2 toxicity, most commonly grade 1-2 arthralgia or myositis (5 patients, 28%). Conclusion Interim analysis of this prospective clinical trial suggests that HXRT can be safely delivered to STS locations throughout the body and provides local tumor control. All evaluable patients exhibit local tumor control thus far, with only 1 acute toxicity of grade 3 or greater. Additional patient enrollment and follow up is needed to further evaluate these outcomes and to evaluate for potential late toxicities.

Surgeon-scientists provide critical perspectives to academic medicine, both as lead scientists and as collaborators. Successfully applying for and obtaining funding is critical to sustain a research program; however, significant challenges exist. It is imperative to be aware of and consider all funding sources available to surgeons during the evolution of one's career. Additionally, a deep understanding of intramural and extramural nonfinancial resources, such as mentorship relationships, grant writing, and career development courses, and research infrastructure are required. In this article, we present a set of recommendations and guidelines for surgeon-scientists to leverage funding resources with active planning longitudinally during their careers to sustain their research programs and provide their unique perspectives on surgical disease to the scientific community.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Some surgeons remain hesitant to perform immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) in patients with higher risk cancers due to concerns about cancer recurrence and/or detection. Our objective was to determine the rate of ipsilateral local-regional recurrence for stage II/III patients who underwent IBR. METHODS: The National Cancer Database special study mechanism was used to create a stratified sample of women diagnosed with stage II/III breast cancer from 1,217 facilities. Demographic, tumor, and recurrence data for women who underwent mastectomy with or without IBR were abstracted, including location of recurrence and method of detection. Estimates of 5-year local-regional recurrence rates were calculated and factors associated with recurrence were identified with multivariable Cox regression. RESULTS: 13% (692/5,318) of stage II/III patients underwent IBR after mastectomy. Patients undergoing IBR were younger (p

PURPOSE Phyllodes tumors (PTs) are rare breast neoplasms, which have little granular data on margins. Current guidelines recommend ≥ 1 cm margins; however, recent data suggest narrower margins are sufficient, and for benign PT, a negative margin may not be necessary. METHODS We performed an 11-institution contemporary (2007-2017) review of PT practices. Demographics, surgical, and histopathologic data were captured. Logistic regression was used to estimate the association of select covariates with local recurrence (LR). RESULTS Of 550 PT patients, the majority underwent excisional biopsy (55.3%, n = 302/546) or lumpectomy (wide excision) (38.5%, n = 210/546). Median tumor size was 30 mm, 68.9% (n = 379) were benign, 19.6% (n = 108) borderline, and 10.5% (n = 58) malignant. Surgical margins were positive in 42% (n = 231) and negative in 57.3% (n = 311). A second operation was performed in 38.0% (n = 209) of the total cohort, including 51 patients with an initial negative margin (82.4% with < 2 mm), and 157 with an initial positive margin, with residual disease only found in six (2.9%). Notably, 32.0% (n = 74) of those with an initial positive margin did not undergo a second operation, among whom only 2.7% (n = 2) recurred. Recurrence occurred in 3.3% (n = 18) of the total cohort (n = 15 LR, n = 3 distant), at median follow-up of 36.7 months. LR (all PT grades) was not reduced with wider negative margin width (≥ 2 mm v < 2 mm: odds ratio [OR] = 0.39; 95% CI, 0.07 to 2.10; P = .27) or final margin status (positive v negative: OR = 0.96; 95% CI, 0.26 to 3.52; P = .96). CONCLUSION In current practice, many patients are managed outside of current guidelines. For the entire cohort, a wider margin width was not associated with a reduced risk of LR. We do not recommend re-excision of a negative margin for benign PT, regardless of margin width, as a progressively wider surgical margin is unlikely to reduce LR.

Background: Cancer-related financial hardship is associated with poor care outcomes and reduced quality of life for patients and families. Scalable intervention development to address financial hardship requires knowledge of current screening practices and services within community cancer care. Methods: The NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) 2017 Landscape Assessment survey assessed financial screening and financial navigation practices within U.S. community oncology practices. Logistic models evaluated associations between financial hardship screening and availability of a cancer-specific financial navigator and practice group characteristics (e.g., safety-net designation, critical access hospital, proportion of racial and ethnic minority patients served). Results: Of 221 participating NCORP practice groups, 72% reported a financial screening process and 50% had a cancer-specific financial navigator. Practice groups with more than 10% of new patients with cancer enrolled in Medicaid (adjOR = 2.81, P = 0.02) and with less than 30% racial/ethnic minority cancer patient composition (adjOR = 3.91, P < 0.01) were more likely to screen for financial concerns. Practice groups with less than 30% racial/ethnic minority cancer patient composition (adjOR = 2.37, P < 0.01) were more likely to have a dedicated financial navigator or counselor for patients with cancer. Conclusions: Most NCORP practice groups screen for financial concerns and half have a cancer-specific financial navigator. Practices serving more racial or ethnic minority patients are less likely to screen and have a designated financial navigator. Impact: The effectiveness of financial screening and navigation for mitigating financial hardship could be tested within NCORP, along with specific interventions to address cancer care inequities. See related commentary by Yabroff et al., p. 593

BackgroundA paucity of data exists regarding inherited mutations associated with phyllodes tumors (PT); however, some are reported (TP53, BRCA1, and RB1). A PT diagnosis does not meet NCCN criteria for testing, including within Li-Fraumeni Syndrome (TP53). We sought to determine the prevalence of mutations associated with PT.MethodsWe performed an 11-institution review of contemporary (2007-2017) PT practice. We recorded multigenerational family history and personal history of genetic testing. We identified patients meeting NCCN criteria for genetic evaluation. Logistic regression estimated the association of select covariates with likelihood of undergoing genetic testing.ResultsOf 550 PT patients, 59.8% (n = 329) had a close family history of cancer, and 34.0% (n = 112) had ≥ 3 family members affected. Only 6.2% (n = 34) underwent genetic testing, 38.2% (n = 13) of whom had only BRCA1/BRCA2 tested. Of 34 patients tested, 8.8% had a deleterious mutation (1 BRCA1, 2 TP53), and 5.9% had a BRCA2 VUS. Of women who had TP53 testing (N = 21), 9.5% had a mutation. Selection for testing was not associated with age (odds ratio [OR] 1.01, p = 0.55) or PT size (p = 0.12) but was associated with grade (malignant vs. benign: OR 9.17, 95% CI 3.97-21.18) and meeting NCCN criteria (OR 3.43, 95% confidence interval 1.70-6.94). Notably, an additional 86 (15.6%) patients met NCCN criteria but had no genetic testing.ConclusionsVery few women with PT undergo germline testing; however, in those selected for testing, a deleterious mutation was identified in ~ 10%. Multigene testing of a PT cohort would present an opportunity to discover the true incidence of germline mutations in PT patients.

Background American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines recommend that patients ≥65 years of age starting chemotherapy undergo a geriatric assessment (GA) to inform and guide management; however, little is known about resources available in community oncology practices to implement these guidelines and to facilitate geriatric oncology research. Materials and Methods Oncology practices within the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) were electronically surveyed in 2017 regarding the availability of specialty providers, supportive services, and practice characteristics, as part of a larger survey of cancer care delivery research capacity. Results Of the 943 NCORP practices, 504 (54%) responded to the survey, representing 210 practice groups. The median new cancer cases per year ≥65 years of age was 457 (interquartile range 227–939). Of respondents, only 2.0% of practices had a fellowship-trained geriatric oncologist on staff. Geriatricians were available for consultation or comanagement at 37% of sites, and of those, only 13% had availability within the oncology clinic (5% of overall). Practice size of ≥1,000 new adult cancer cases (ages ≥18) per year was associated with higher odds (1.81, confidence interval 1.02–3.23) of geriatrician availability. Other multidisciplinary care professionals that could support GA were variably available onsite: social worker (84%), nurse navigator (81%), pharmacist (77%), dietician (71%), rehabilitative medicine (57%), psychologist (42%), and psychiatrist (37%). Conclusion Only a third of community oncology practices have access to a geriatrician within their group and only 5% of community sites have access within the oncology clinic. Use of primarily self-administered GA tools that direct referrals to available services may be an effective implementation strategy for guideline-based care. Implications for Practice Only a minority of community oncology practices in the U.S. have access to geriatric specialty care. Developing models of care that use patient-reported measures and/or other geriatric screening tools to assess and guide interventions in older adults, rather than geriatric consultations, are likely the most practical methods to improve the care of this vulnerable population.

INTRODUCTION: National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend that sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) be discussed with patients with thin melanoma at higher risk for lymph node metastasis (T1b or T1a with positive deep margins, lymphovascular invasion, or high mitotic index). We examined the association between SLNB and resource utilization in this cohort. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients that underwent wide local excision for higher risk thin melanomas from 2009 to 2018 at a tertiary care center. Patients who underwent SLNB were compared to those who did not undergo SLNB with regard to resource utilization, including total hospital cost. RESULTS: A total of 70 patients were included in the analysis and 50 patients (71.4%) underwent SLNB. SLNB was associated with increased hospital costs ($6700 vs. $3767; p < .01) and increased operative time (68.5 vs. 36.0 min; p < .01). This cost difference persisted in multivariable regression (p < .01). Of patients who underwent successful SLN mapping, 3 out of 49 patients had a positive SLN (6.1%). The cost to identify a single positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) was $47,906. CONCLUSION: In patients with a higher risk of thin melanoma, SLNB is associated with increased cost despite a low likelihood of SLN positivity. These data better inform patient-provider discussions as the role of SLNB in thin melanoma evolves.

As the use of neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NAST) increases, the optimal management of the axilla has become increasingly complex. Consensus among professional organizations is that those patients with clinically negative axillary nodes who are being considered for NAST should undergo a sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy following NAST. If a positive SLN is subsequently identified, an axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) is the current standard of care. For patients with clinically node-positive disease, SLN biopsy is a reasonable option for those with a good response to NAST. Patients should undergo SLN mapping with a dual dye technique. Additionally, at least 2 lymph nodes should be removed, including the previously biopsied and marked lymph node with cancer. In this setting, the identification and false negative rates are acceptable. Patients found to have a negative SLN at this time may be spared the morbidity associated with ALND. Patients found to have persistently positive lymph nodes following NAST, either clinically or pathologically, should undergo a complete ALND.

Background Supportive care interventions have demonstrated benefits for both informal and/or family cancer caregivers and their patients, but uptake generally is poor. To the authors' knowledge, little is known regarding the availability of supportive care services in community oncology practices, as well as engagement practices to connect caregivers with these services. Methods Questions from the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP)'s 2017 Landscape Survey examined caregiver engagement practices (ie, caregiver identification, needs assessment, and supportive care service availability). Logistic regression was used to assess the relationship between the caregiver engagement outcomes and practice group characteristics. Results A total of 204 practice groups responded to each of the primary outcome questions. Only 40.2% of practice groups endorsed having a process with which to systematically identify and document caregivers, although approximately 76% were routinely using assessment tools to identify caregiver needs and approximately 63.7% had supportive care services available to caregivers. Caregiver identification was more common in sites affiliated with a critical access hospital (odds ratio [OR], 2.44; P = .013), and assessments were less common in safety-net practices (OR, 0.41; P = .013). Supportive care services were more commonly available in the Western region of the United States, in practices with inpatient services (OR, 2.96; P = .012), and in practices affiliated with a critical access hospital (OR, 3.31; P = .010). Conclusions Although many practice groups provide supportive care services, fewer than one-half systematically identify and document informal cancer caregivers. Expanding fundamental engagement practices such as caregiver identification, assessment, and service provision will be critical to support recent calls to improve caregivers' well-being and skills to perform caregiving tasks.

PURPOSE: Randomized controlled trials demonstrate that omission of radiation therapy (RT) in older women with early-stage cancer undergoing breast conserving surgery (BCS) is an “acceptable choice.” Despite this, high RT rates have been reported. The objective was to evaluate the impact of patient- and system-level factors on RT rates in a contemporary cohort. METHODS: Through the National Cancer Data Base, we identified women with clinical stage I estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer who underwent BCS (n = 84,214). Multivariable logistic regression identified patient, tumor, and system-level factors associated with RT. Joinpoint regression analysis calculated trends in RT use over time stratified by age and facility-type, reporting annual percent change (APC). RESULTS: RT rates decreased from 2004 (77.2%) to 2015 (64.3%). The decline occurred earliest and was most pronounced in older women treated at academic facilities. At academic facilities, the APC was − 5.6 (95% CI − 8.6, − 2.4) after 2009 for women aged > 85 years, − 6.4 (95% CI − 9.0, − 3.8) after 2010 for women aged 80 − < 85 years, − 3.7 (95% CI − 5.6, − 1.9) after 2009 for women aged 75 − < 80, and − 2.4 (95% CI, − 3.1, − 1.6) after 2009 for women aged 70 − < 75. In contrast, at community facilities rates of RT declined later (2011, 2012, and 2013 for age groups 70–74, 75–79, and 80–84 years). CONCLUSIONS: RT rates for older women with early-stage breast cancer are declining with patient-level variation based on factors related to life expectancy and locoregional recurrence. Facility-level variation suggests opportunities to improve care delivery by focusing on barriers to de-implementation of routine use of RT.

Background: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network and American Society of Clinical Oncology recommend consideration of the use of echocardiography 6 to 12 months after completion of anthracycline-based chemotherapy in at-risk populations. Assessment of BNP (B-type natriuretic peptide) has also been suggested by the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Heart Failure Society of America for the identification of Stage A (at risk) heart failure patients. The real-world frequency of the use of these tests in patients after receipt of anthracycline therapy, however, has not been studied previously. Methods and Results: In this retrospective study, using administrative claims data from the OptumLabs Data Warehouse, we identified 31 447 breast cancer and lymphoma patients (age ≥18 years) who were treated with an anthracycline in the United States between January 1, 2008 and January 31, 2018. Continuous medical and pharmacy coverage was required for at least 6 months before the initial anthracycline dose and 12 months after the final dose. Only 36.1% of patients had any type of cardiac surveillance (echocardiography, BNP, or cardiac imaging) in the year following completion of anthracycline therapy (29.7% echocardiography). Surveillance rate increased from 37.5% in 2008 to 42.7% in 2018 (25.6% in 2008 to 40.5% echocardiography in 2018). Lymphoma patients had a lower likelihood of any surveillance compared with patients with breast cancer (odds ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.74–0.85]; P P 50% rate of surveillance. Conclusions: The majority of survivors of breast cancer and lymphoma who have received anthracycline-based chemotherapy do not undergo cardiac surveillance after treatment, including those with a history of cardiovascular comorbidities, such as heart failure.

The goal of cancer care delivery research (CCDR) is to inform sustainable practice changes that will provide better clinical outcomes and patient experience guided by patient values. CCDR encompasses salient concepts from other well-established research approaches and spans the continuum of research from hypothesis generation to effectiveness studies to policy development. CCDR incorporates pertinent attributes, such as saliency to stakeholders, inclusion of diverse participants, and implementation into real-world settings. This article provides examples of CCDR studies, focusing specifically on how CCDR can improve the quality of oncologic surgical care.

BackgroundTreatment-related toxicity can vary substantially between chemotherapy regimens. In this study we evaluated the frequency of outpatient office visits among a cohort of early stage breast cancer survivors after completion of 4 different adjuvant chemotherapy regimens to better understand how differences in toxicities between regimens might affect health care use.Materials and methodsWe analyzed administrative claims data from a US commercial insurance database (OptumLabs) to identify women who received adjuvant doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (AC), AC followed or preceded by docetaxel or paclitaxel (AC-T), AC concurrent with docetaxel or paclitaxel (TAC), or docetaxel/cyclophosphamide (TC) between 2008 and 2014. We compared mean numbers of visits per patient (adjusted for age, race/ethnicity, region, year, surgery type, radiation, chronic conditions, and previous hospitalizations) across the different regimens (TC= reference) for 12 months, starting 4 months after the end of chemotherapy.ResultsIn 6247 eligible patients, the mean adjusted number of outpatient visits per patient was significantly higher in patients who received AC-T (8.1) or TAC (7.3) than TC (6.5) or AC (6.0; P< .001 for comparisons of AC-T and TAC with TC), primarily because of differences in Medical Oncology visits. Approximately 40% did not see a primary care provider at all during this time frame.ConclusionsAC-T and TAC are associated with more subsequent outpatient visits than TC. Visits to primary care providers are infrequent during the year after completion of chemotherapy.

Current guidelines recommend counseling on risk-reduction strategies, including lifestyle modification, endocrine therapy, and bilateral mastectomy, for patients with classic-type lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) detected on core biopsy or surgical excision. Importantly, current diagnosis and treatment guidelines for classic-type LCIS do not include unilateral mastectomy for primary treatment or risk reduction. Prior studies reporting national practice patterns suggest increasing use of mastectomy for management of LCIS, with considerable variation by geographic region. However, these studies did not distinguish between uni- and bilateral mastectomies. This study aimed to investigate national practice patterns and factors associated with unilateral mastectomy. The study used the National Cancer Database to identify women with a diagnosis of LCIS from 2004 to 2013. Descriptive statistics were used to describe surgical treatment, and multinomial logistic regression was used to identify temporal, patient, and facility-level factors associated with receipt of uni- and bilateral mastectomy. The study identified 30,105 women with LCIS. Of these woman, 5.4% received no surgery, 84.8% had surgical excision, 4% underwent unilateral mastectomy, and 5.1% underwent bilateral mastectomy. Adjusted analysis showed that young age, white race, insurance coverage, greater comorbidity, and geographic region (p

Although not guideline recommended, studies suggest 50% of locoregional breast cancer patients undergo systemic imaging during follow-up, prompting its inclusion as a Choosing Wisely measure of potential overuse. Most studies rely on administrative data that cannot delineate scan intent (prompted by signs/symptoms vs. asymptomatic surveillance). This is a critical gap as intent is the only way to distinguish overuse from appropriate care. Our aim was to assess surveillance systemic imaging post-breast cancer treatment in a national sample accounting for scan intent. A stage-stratified random sample of 10 women with stage II–III breast cancer in 2006–2007 was selected from each of 1217 Commission on Cancer-accredited facilities, for a total of 10,838 patients. Registrars abstracted scan type (computed tomography [CT], non-breast magnetic resonance imaging, bone scan, positron emission tomography/CT) and intent (cancer-related vs. not, asymptomatic surveillance vs. not) from medical records for 5 years post-diagnosis. Data were merged with each patient’s corresponding National Cancer Database record, containing sociodemographic and tumor/treatment information. Of 10,838 women, 30% had one or more, and 12% had two or more, systemic surveillance scans during a 4-year follow-up period. Patients were more likely to receive surveillance imaging in the first follow-up year (lower proportions during subsequent years) and if they had estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor-negative tumors. Locoregional breast cancer patients undergo asymptomatic systemic imaging during follow-up despite guidelines recommending against it, but at lower rates than previously reported. Providers appear to use factors that confer increased recurrence risk to tailor decisions about systemic surveillance imaging, perhaps reflecting limitations of data on which current guidelines are based. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02171078.

Annual mammography is recommended after breast cancer treatment. However, studies suggest its under-utilization for Medicare patients. Utilization in the broader population is unknown, as is the role of breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Understanding factors associated with imaging use is critical to improvement of adherence to recommendations. A random sample of 9835 eligible patients receiving surgery for stages 2 and 3 breast cancer from 2006 to 2007 was selected from the National Cancer Database for primary data collection. Imaging and recurrence data were abstracted from patients 90 days after surgery to 5 years after diagnosis. Factors associated with lack of imaging were assessed using multivariable repeated measures logistic regression with generalized estimating equations. Patients were censored for death, bilateral mastectomy, new cancer, and recurrence. Of 9835 patients, 9622, 8702, 8021, and 7457 patients were eligible for imaging at surveillance years 1 through 4 respectively. Annual receipt of breast imaging declined from year 1 (69.5%) to year 4 (61.0%), and breast MRI rates decreased from 12.5 to 5.8%. Lack of imaging was associated with age 80 years or older and age younger than 50 years, black race, public or no insurance versus private insurance, greater comorbidity, larger node-positive hormone receptor-negative tumor, excision alone or mastectomy, and no chemotherapy (p

Previous research suggests that providing information to women newly diagnosed with breast cancer, during the gap between cancer diagnosis and their first surgeon consultation, may support decision making. Our objective was to compare patients' knowledge after the pre-consultation delivery of standard websites vs a web-based decision aid (DA).We randomized women with stage 0 to III breast cancer, within an academic and community breast clinic, to be emailed a link to selected standard websites (National Cancer Institute, American Cancer Society, Breastcancer.org,) vs the Health Dialog DA (Clinicaltrials.govNCT03116035). Patients seeking second opinions, diagnosed by excisional biopsy, or without an email address, were ineligible. Pre-consultation knowledge was assessed using the Breast Cancer Surgery Decision Quality Instrument. We compared differences in knowledge using t-test.Median patient age was 59 years, 99% were white, and 65% had a college degree or higher, with no differences in demographics between study arms. Knowledge was higher in patients who received the DA (median 80% vs 66% correct, p = 0.01). Decision-aid patients were more likely to know that waiting a few weeks to make a treatment decision would not affect survival (72% vs 54%, p0.01). Patients in both arms found the information helpful (median score 8 of 10).Although patients found receipt of any pre-consultation information helpful, the DA resulted in improved knowledge over standard websites and effectively conveyed that there is time to make a breast cancer surgery decision. Decreasing the urgency patients feel may improve the quality of patient-surgeon interactions and lead to more informed decision-making.

Significant variation in the number and types of oncologists that provide breast cancer follow-up exists. However, there is limited understanding regarding breast cancer survivors’ preferences for who provides their follow-up. Our objective was to explore breast cancer survivors’ perspectives on the goals of breast cancer follow-up, the preferred role for primary care providers, and the perceived roles of different types of oncologists during follow-up. A convenience sample of stage 0–III breast cancer survivors was identified and in-depth one-on-one interviews conducted. Data were analyzed using inductive content analysis. Survivors cited a strong preference for oncology-based follow-up within the first 5 years after diagnosis, driven by their need for reassurance that cancer had not recurred. Survivors also thought that their primary care provider needed to be involved. Survivors assumed that oncology follow-up was directed by a standard protocol that included streamlining the follow-up team. Survivors recognized that patients with more complex cancers or challenging treatment courses may require more intensive follow-up and deviate from the standard protocol. Most survivors were comfortable deferring decisions regarding who participated in follow-up to the oncology team. Most patients think a streamlined approach to oncology-based breast cancer follow-up already occurs, driven by a standard protocol. The use of a standard protocol to provide guidance for which types of oncology providers should participate in breast cancer follow-up will streamline care and represents a significant opportunity to reduce unnecessary variation. This approach is especially critical given patients’ strong preferences for oncology-based follow-up.

Background Completion lymph node dissection (CLND) is recommended for melanoma patients with positive sentinel lymph node biopsies (SLNB); however, 50% do not undergo CLND. We sought to determine CLND trends over time, and factors contributing to variability. Methods The NCDB was queried for patients undergoing wide local excision (WLE), with or without SLNB and CLND. Cohorts were created based on demographic/socioeconomic variables and era of treatment (Era 1: 2003-07, Era 2: 2008-12). Univariate and multivariate analyses identified factors associated with performance of or trends in CLND. Results 122 849 underwent WLE with SLNB. Of 24 267 (19.8%) with +SLNB, 13 594 (56.0%) continued to CLND. In multivariate analyses, Medicaid (OR 0.78; P = 0.04) or Medicare (OR 0.79; P