COVID-19, Social Justice, and Clinical Cancer Research

The COVID-19 pandemic and related socioeconomic events have markedly changed the environment in which cancer clinical trials are conducted. These events have resulted in a substantial, immediate-term decrease in accrual to both diagnostic and therapeutic cancer investigations as well as substantive alterations in patterns of oncologic care. The sponsors of clinical trials, including the United States National Cancer Institute, as well as the cancer centers and community oncology practices that conduct such studies, have all markedly adapted their models of care, usage of health care personnel, and regulatory requirements in the attempt to continue clinical cancer investigations while maintaining high levels of patient safety. In doing so, major changes in clinical trials practice have been embraced nationwide. There is a growing consensus that the regulatory and clinical research process alterations that have been adopted in response to the pandemic (such as the use of telemedicine visits to reduce patient travel requirements and the application of remote informed consent procedures) should be implemented long term. The COVID-19 outbreak has also refocused the oncologic clinical trials community on the need to bring clinical trials closer to patients by dramatically enhancing clinical trial access, especially for minority and underserved communities that have been disproportionately affected by the pandemic. In this Commentary, changes to the program of clinical trials supported by the National Cancer Institute that could improve clinical trial availability, effectiveness, and diversity are proposed.This work was supported in whole or in part with federal funds from the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, ZIA BC 011078; Phase 0/1 Clinical Trials

An Improved Breast Epithelial Sampling Method for Molecular Profiling and Biomarker Analysis in Women at Risk for Breast Cancer

Background There is a strong need to define the molecular changes in normal at-risk breast epithelium to identify biomarkers and new targets for breast cancer prevention and to develop a molecular signature for risk assessment. Improved methods of breast epithelial sampling are needed to promote whole-genome molecular profiling, increase ductal epithelial cell yield, and reduce sample cell heterogeneity. Methods We developed an improved method of breast ductal sampling with ductal lavage through a 22-gauge catheter and collection of ductal samples with a microaspirator. Women at normal risk or increased risk for breast cancer were studied. Ductal epithelial samples were analyzed for cytopathologic changes, cellular yield, epithelial cell purity, quality and quantity of DNA and RNA, and use in multiple downstream molecular applications. Results We studied 50 subjects, including 40 subjects at normal risk for breast cancer and 37 subjects with non-nipple aspirate fluid-yielding ducts. This method provided multiple 1.0 mL samples of high ductal epithelial cell content (median ≥8 samples per subject of ≥5,000 cells per sample) with 80%–100% epithelial cell purity. Extraction of a single intact ductal sample (fluid and cells) or the separate frozen cellular component provided DNA and RNA for multiple downstream studies, including quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for microRNA, quantitative PCR for the human telomerase reverse transcriptase gene, whole-genome DNA amplification, and array comparative genomic hybridization analysis. Conclusion An improved breast epithelial sampling method has been developed, which should significantly expand the acquisition and biomarker analysis of breast ductal epithelium in women at risk for breast cancer