ABC3 Consensus: Assessment by a German Group of Experts

The Advanced Breast Cancer Third International Consensus Conference on the diagnosis and treatment of advanced breast cancer took place in Lisbon, Portugal, on November 5-7, 2015. This year's conference (ABC3) was focused on the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (stage IV), as it was 4 years ago at the first consensus meeting (ABC1). A matter of particular interest was the patients' perspective. Thus, patient-relevant issues were addressed by the consensus discussions, such as those on treatment goals, quality of life, care of long-term survivors ('survivorship issues'), and coping with disease-related symptoms and the side effects of treatment. Further important issues on the agenda were the use of standardized instruments for the assessment of individual treatment success ('patient-reported outcome measures') and the evaluation of the benefit of novel drugs (e.g. the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale). Diagnosis and treatment of inoperable locally advanced breast cancer had already been discussed 2 years earlier at the ABC2 Consensus and were not dealt with in the framework of this year's ABC3 Consensus. With regard to country-specific peculiarities, which unavoidably found their way into the ABC Consensus, a working group of German breast cancer experts commented on the voting results of the ABC panelists. As for the past consensus, the group specially considered the German guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer (AGO (Gyneco-Oncology Working Group), S3, DGHO (German Society of Hematology and Medical Oncology)) in order to adapt the ABC3 consensus for everyday therapy in Germany. (C) 2016 S. Karger GmbH, Freibur

Changes in breast cancer management during the Corona Virus Disease 19 pandemic: an international survey of the European Breast Cancer Research Association of Surgical Trialists (EUBREAST)

Background: Corona Virus Disease 19 (COVID-19) had a worldwide negative impact on healthcare systems, which were not used to coping with such pandemic. Adaptation strategies prioritizing COVID-19 patients included triage of patients and reduction or re-allocation of other services. The aim of our survey was to provide a real time international snapshot of modifications of breast cancer management during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A survey was developed by a multidisciplinary group on behalf of European Breast Cancer Research Association of Surgical Trialists and distributed via breast cancer societies. One reply per breast unit was requested. Results: In ten days, 377 breast centres from 41 countries completed the questionnaire. RT-PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 prior to treatment was reported by 44.8% of the institutions. The estimated time interval between diagnosis and treatment initiation increased for about 20% of institutions. Indications for primary systemic therapy were modified in 56% (211/377), with upfront surgery increasing from 39.8% to 50.7% (p < 0.002) and from 33.7% to 42.2% (p < 0.016) in T1cN0 triple-negative and ER-negative/HER2- positive cases, respectively. Sixty-seven percent considered that chemotherapy increases risks for developing COVID-19 complications. Fifty-one percent of the responders reported modifications in chemotherapy protocols. Gene-expression profile used to evaluate the need for adjuvant chemotherapy increased in 18.8%. In luminal-A tumours, a large majority (68%) recommended endocrine treatment to postpone surgery. Postoperative radiation therapy was postponed in 20% of the cases. Conclusions: Breast cancer management was considerably modified during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our data provide a base to investigate whether these changes impact oncologic outcomes

Neoadjuvant and adjuvant end-points in health technology assessment in oncology

Health technology assessment (HTA) of clinical and economic value of a new intervention is an integral step in providing the access of patients to innovative cancer care and treatment. Overall survival (OS) is the preferred criterion for demonstrating the therapeutic efficacy in HTA given its direct clinical and patient relevance. However, with often long life expectancy of patients with early cancer, analysis of OS becomes less practical. Partially due to this reason, pathological complete response (pCR) and time-to-event end-points like disease-free survival are frequently incorporated into the pivotal clinical trials in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings. However, there exists a discrepancy between different national HTA bodies regarding the acknowledgement of patient relevance of these end-points. In this article, we analysed the perspectives of patients on different aspects of end-points used in clinical trials in early cancer. Gathered evidence strongly suggests that complete tumour eradication and reduced risk of recurrence provide important psychological benefits thus signifying that pCR and time-to-event end-points are directly relevant to patients. Additionally, we reviewed opinions on patient relevance of neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy end-points adopted by HTA bodies during the recent evaluations. We found that improvements in end-points used in the adjuvant setting were commonly considered as valuable to patients. In contrast, opinions on patient relevance of neoadjuvant therapy end-points varied between the national HTA bodies. Universal acknowledgement of patient relevance of therapeutic end-points for early cancer by HTA bodies is necessary to balance the inequality in uptake of innovative therapies into national healthcare systems. (C) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

Onco-Cardiology: Consensus Paper of the German Cardiac Society, the German Society for Pediatric Cardiology and Congenital Heart Defects and the German Society for Hematology and Medical Oncology

The acute and long-lasting side effects of modern multimodal tumour therapy significantly impair quality of life and survival of patients afflicted with malignancies. The key components of this therapy include radiotherapy, conventional chemotherapy, immunotherapy and targeted therapies. In addition to established tumour therapy strategies, up to 30 new therapies are approved each year with only incompletely characterised side effects. This consensus paper discusses the risk factors that contribute to the development of a potentially adverse reaction to tumour therapy and, in addition, defines specific side effect profiles for different treatment groups. The focus is on novel therapeutics and recommendations for the surveillance and treatment of specific patient groups

Onco-Cardiology Consensus Paper of the German Cardiac Society, the German Society for Pediatric Cardiology and Congenital Heart Defects and the German Society for Hematology and Medical Oncology

Acute and chronic side effects of modern, multimodal treatment of advanced cancers significantly impact the quality of life and survival in patients with malignant diseases. The essential components of these treatment modalities include radiotherapy, classical (conventional) chemotherapy, immunotherapy and the so-called molecular targeted therapies. In addition to the established treatment strategies up to 30 newly approved drugs enter the market each year, with only incompletely characterized side effect profiles. This consensus paper addresses the risk factors for potential adverse reactions under tumor treatment and furthermore lists specific side effect profiles for the various treatment groups. Novel cancer therapies are discussed and recommendations for the treatment of specific patient groups are presented