Who Gets Genomic Testing for Breast Cancer Recurrence Risk?

Our study examined whether patient characteristics, beliefs, and decision-making styles were associated with uptake of genomic testing for breast cancer recurrence risk

Longitudinal trajectories of a claims-based frailty measure during adjuvant chemotherapy in women with stage I-III breast cancer

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a dynamic syndrome characterized by reduced physiological reserve to maintain homeostasis. Prospective studies have reported frailty worsening in women with breast cancer during chemotherapy, with improvements following treatment. We evaluated whether the Faurot frailty index, a validated claims-based frailty measure, could identify changes in frailty during chemotherapy treatment and identified predictors of trajectory patterns. METHODS: We included women (65+ years) with stage I-III breast cancer undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy in the SEER-Medicare database (2003-2019). We estimated the Faurot frailty index (range: 0-1; higher scores indicate greater frailty) at chemotherapy initiation, 4 months postinitiation, and 10 months postinitiation. Changes in frailty were compared to a matched noncancer comparator cohort. We identified patterns of frailty trajectories during the year following chemotherapy initiation using K-means clustering. RESULTS: Twenty-one thousand five hundred and ninety-nine women initiated adjuvant chemotherapy. Mean claims-based frailty increased from 0.037 at initiation to 0.055 4 months postchemotherapy initiation and fell to 0.049 10 months postinitiation. Noncancer comparators experienced a small increase in claims-based frailty over time (0.055-0.062). We identified 6 trajectory patterns: a robust group (78%), 2 resilient groups (16%), and 3 nonresilient groups (6%). Black women and women with claims for home hospital beds, wheelchairs, and Parkinson's disease were more likely to experience nonresilient trajectories. CONCLUSIONS: We observed changes in a claims-based frailty index during chemotherapy that are consistent with prior studies using clinical measures of frailty and identified predictors of nonresilient frailty trajectories. Our study demonstrates the feasibility of using claims-based frailty indices to assess changes in frailty during cancer treatment

Disparities in Breast Cancer Treatment and Outcomes: Biological, Social, and Health System Determinants and Opportunities for Research

Racial disparities in breast cancer mortality have been widely documented for several decades and persist despite advances in receipt of mammography across racial groups. This persistence leads to questions about the roles of biological, social, and health system determinants of poor outcomes. Cancer outcomes are a function not only of innate biological factors but also of modifiable characteristics of individual behavior and decision making as well as characteristics of patient-health system interaction and the health system itself. Attempts to explain persistent racial disparities have mostly been limited to discussion of differences in insurance coverage, socioeconomic status, tumor stage at diagnosis, comorbidity, and molecular subtype of the tumor. This article summarizes existing literature exploring reasons for racial disparities in breast cancer mortality, with an emphasis on treatment disparities and opportunities for future research. Because breast cancer care requires a high degree of multidisciplinary team collaboration, ensuring that guideline recommended treatment (such as endocrine therapy for hormone receptor positive patients) is received by all racial/ethnic groups is critical and requires coordination across multiple providers and health care settings. Recognition that variation in cancer care quality may be correlated with race (and socioeconomic and health system factors) may assist policy makers in identifying strategies to more equally distribute clinical expertise and health infrastructure across multiple user populations

Health Disparities Across the Breast Cancer Continuum

To provide a brief overview of disparities across the spectrum of breast cancer incidence, treatment, and long-term care during the survivorship period

Examining racial variation in antiemetic use and post-chemotherapy health care utilization for nausea and vomiting among breast cancer patients

Racial minority cancer patients may experience underuse of antiemetic medications to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). In addition to its adverse implications for quality of life, antiemetic underuse may contribute to observed disparities in acute illness during chemotherapy. To understand the potential contribution of CINV prophylaxis to breast cancer disparities, we assessed racial variation in potent antiemetic use and post-chemotherapy utilization related to CINV, and the relationship between the two

Parenting while living with advanced cancer: A qualitative study

Patients with advanced cancer who have dependent children are an important population with a life-limiting illness and high levels of psychological distress. Few studies have addressed the experience of being a parent with advanced cancer and their potential palliative needs

Race, response to chemotherapy, and outcome within clinical breast cancer subtypes

The effect of race on breast cancer outcome is confounded by tumor and treatment heterogeneity. We examined a cohort of women with stage II–III breast cancer treated uniformly with neoadjuvant chemotherapy to identify factors associated with racial differences in chemotherapeutic response and long-term survival. Using a prospective database, we identified women with stage II-III breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy from 1998 to 2011. Race was categorized as African-American (AA) or non-AA. Preplanned subtype analyses were stratified by hormone receptor (HR) and HER2. Pathologic response to chemotherapy (pCR), time to recurrence (TTR), and overall survival (OS) were assessed using logistic regression, Kaplan–Meier method, and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses. Of 349 women identified, 102 (29 %) were AA, who were younger (p = 0.03), more obese (p < 0.001), and less likely to have HR+/HER2–tumors (p = 0.01). No significant differences in pCR rate by race were found. At median follow-up of 6.5 years, AA had worse TTR (hazard ratio 1.51, 95 % CI 1.02–2.24), which was attenuated in multivariable modeling, and there was no significant difference in OS. When stratified by HR, worse outcomes were limited to HR+AA (TTR hazard ratio 1.85, 95 % CI 1.09–3.14; OS hazard ratio 2.42 95 % CI 1.37–4.28), which remained significant in multivariable analysis including pCR rate and BMI. With long-term follow-up, racial disparity in outcome was limited to HR+ breast cancer, with no apparent contribution of chemotherapy sensitivity. This suggests that disparity root causes may be driven by HR+ factors such as unmeasured molecular differences, endocrine therapy sensitivity, or adherence

Concerns underlying treatment preferences of advanced cancer patients with children

BACKGROUND: Decision-making about advanced cancer treatment is complex and may be influenced by patients' family context, including the presence of children. We explored how parental values and concerns motivate patients' preferences about aggressiveness of advanced cancer treatment as well as preferences for palliative care and hospice services. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 42 patients with advanced cancer who had at least one child under 18 years. We created and applied thematic codes. Descriptive analyses were used to report the number of participants who mentioned each code. RESULTS: The majority of participants (29/42) reported that having children influenced their preferences for advanced cancer care. For most parents, extending life to maximize the time they had left to parent their children was important in guiding treatment preferences. Others prioritized preserving their physical condition and parental functioning and remaining physically close to their children. Many parents discussed life extension and parental functioning preservation as competing priorities. Most of the sample expressed interest in palliative care services and hospice, but responses by several participants reflected concerns about dying at home and lack of clarity about the role of early palliative care. CONCLUSIONS: Parents in our sample expressed that maximizing time with their children and preserving parental functioning were important concerns underlying their preferences for advanced cancer care. Future research should assess the palliative and end-of-life care needs and preferences of parents with advanced cancer, which may differ from those of non-parents. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd

Comparative toxicity and effectiveness of trastuzumab-based chemotherapy regimens in older women with early-stage breast cancer

Purpose The combination of chemotherapy and trastuzumab is the standard of care for adjuvant treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer. Two regimens have been widely adopted in the United States: doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, paclitaxel, and trastuzumab (ACTH) and docetaxel, carboplatin, and trastuzumab (TCH). No head-to-head comparison of these regimens has been conducted in a clinical trial, and existing trial data have limited generalizability to older patients. Methods We used SEER-Medicare data from 2005 to 2013 to compare outcomes of ACTH versus TCH among patients age older than 65 years. Propensity score matching was used to balance cohort characteristics between treatment arms. Outcomes included toxicity-related hospitalization, survival, and trastuzumab completion. Data from 1,077 patients receiving ACTH or TCH were analyzed, and the propensity-matched subsample included 416 women. Results There was a significant shift toward TCH over time, with 88% of patients receiving ACTH in 2005 compared with 15% by 2011. Among propensity score-matched patients, we found no difference between regimens in health care use overall or for chemotherapy-related adverse events (ACTH, 34% v TCH, 36.5%; P = .46). Patients receiving TCH were significantly more likely to complete trastuzumab (89% v 77%; P = .001). There was no difference in 5-year breast cancer-specific survival (ACTH, 92% v TCH, 96%; hazard ratio, 2.08; 95% CI, 0.90 to 4.82) or overall survival. Conclusion Among a matched sample of older patients, ACTH compared with TCH was not associated with a higher rate of serious adverse events or hospitalizations, but it was associated with less completion of adjuvant trastuzumab.Wedid not detect a difference in 5-year survival outcomes for ACTH compared with TCH. In the context of limited evidence in older patients, selection between these two regimens on the basis of concerns about differential toxicity or efficacy may not be appropriate

The project data sphere initiative: accelerating cancer research by sharing data

Background. In this paper, we provide background and context regarding the potential for a new data-sharing platform, the Project Data Sphere (PDS) initiative, funded by financial and in-kind contributions from the CEO Roundtable on Cancer, to transform cancer research and improve patient outcomes. Given the relatively modest decline in cancer death rates over the past several years, a new research paradigm is needed to accelerate therapeutic approaches for oncologic diseases. Phase III clinical trials generate large volumes of potentially usable information, often on hundreds of patients, including patients treated with standard of care therapies (i.e., controls). Both nationally and internationally, a variety of stakeholders have pursued data-sharing efforts to make individual patient-level clinical trial data available to the scientific research community. Potential Benefits and Risks of Data Sharing. For researchers, shared data have the potential to foster a more collaborative environment, to answer research questions in a shorter time frame than traditional randomized control trials, to reduce duplication of effort, and to improve efficiency. For industry participants, use of trial data to answer additional clinical questions could increase research and development efficiency and guide future projects through validation of surrogate end points, development of prognostic or predictive models, selection of patients for phase II trials, stratification in phase III studies, and identification of patient subgroups for development of novel therapies. Data transparency also helps promote a public image of collaboration and altruism among industry participants. For patient participants, data sharing maximizes their contribution to public health and increases access to information that may be used to develop better treatments. Concerns about data-sharing efforts include protection of patient privacy and confidentiality. To alleviate these concerns, data sets are deidentified to maintain anonymity. To address industry concerns about protection of intellectual property and competitiveness, we illustrate several models for data sharing with varying levels of access to the data and varying relationships between trial sponsors and data access sponsors. The Project Data Sphere Initiative. PDS is an independent initiative of the CEO Roundtable on Cancer Life Sciences Consortium, built to voluntarily share, integrate, and analyze comparator arms of historical cancer clinical trial data sets to advance future cancer research. The aim is to provide a neutral, broad-access platform for industry and academia to share raw, deidentified data from late-phase oncology clinical trials using comparator-arm data sets. These data are likely to be hypothesis generating or hypothesis confirming but, notably, do not take the place of performing a well-designed trial to address a specific hypothesis. Prospective providers of data to PDS complete and sign a data sharing agreement that includes a description of the data they propose to upload, and then they follow easy instructions on the website for uploading their deidentified data. The SAS Institute has also collaborated with the initiative to provide intrinsic analytic tools accessible within the website itself. As of October 2014, the PDS website has available data from 14 cancer clinical trials covering 9,000 subjects, with hopes to further expand the database to include more than 25,000 subject accruals within the next year. PDS differentiates itself from other data-sharing initiatives by its degree of openness, requiring submission of only a brief application with background information of the individual requesting access and agreement to terms of use. Data from several different sponsors may be pooled to develop a comprehensive cohort for analysis. In order to protect patient privacy, data providers in the U.S. are responsible for deidentifying data according to standards set forth by the Privacy Rule of the U.S. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996. Using Data Sharing to Improve Outcomes in Cancer: The “Prostate Cancer Challenge.” Control-arm data of several studies among patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) are currently available through PDS. These data sets have multiple potential uses. The “Prostate Cancer Challenge” will ask the cancer research community to use clinical trial data deposited in the PDS website to address key research questions regarding mCRPC. General themes that could be explored by the cancer community are described in this article: prognostic models evaluating the influence of pretreatment factors on survival and patient-reported outcomes; comparative effectiveness research evaluating the efficacy of standard of care therapies, as illustrated in our companion article comparing mitoxantrone plus prednisone with prednisone alone; effects of practice variation in dose, frequency, and duration of therapy; level of patient adherence to elements of trial protocols to inform the design of future clinical trials; and age of subjects, regional differences in health care, and other confounding factors that might affect outcomes. Potential Limitations and Methodological Challenges. The number of data sets available and the lack of experimental arm data limit the potential scope of research using the current PDS. The number of trials is expected to grow exponentially over the next year and may include multiple cancer settings, such as breast, colorectal, lung, hematologic malignancy, and bone marrow transplantation. Other potential limitations include the retrospective nature of the data analyses performed using PDS and its generalizability, given that clinical trials are often conducted among younger, healthier, and less racially diverse patient populations. Methodological challenges exist when combining individual patient data from multiple clinical trials; however, advancements in statistical methods for secondary database analysis offer many tools for reanalyzing data arising from disparate trials, such as propensity score matching. Despite these concerns, few if any comparable data sets include this level of detail across multiple clinical trials and populations. Conclusion. Access to large, late-phase, cancer-trial data sets has the potential to transform cancer research by optimizing research efficiency and accelerating progress toward meaningful improvements in cancer care. This type of platform provides opportunities for unique research projects that can examine relatively neglected areas and that can construct models necessitating large amounts of detailed data.The full potential of PDS will be realized only when multiple tumor types and larger numbers of data sets are available through the website