Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Breast Cancer Stage at Diagnosis, Presentation, and Patient Management.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic caused delays in breast cancer management forcing clinicians to potentially alter treatment recommendations. This study compared breast cancer stage at diagnosis and rates of neoadjuvant therapy among women presenting to our institution before and during COVID-19. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of patients with a new breast cancer diagnosis from March 2020-August 2020 (during-COVID-19) were compared with March 2019-August 2019 (pre-COVID-19). We compared stage at diagnosis, clinical/demographic features, and neoadjuvant therapy use between the time periods. RESULTS: A total of 573 patients included: 376 pre-COVID-19, 197 during-COVID-19. Method of cancer detection was by imaging in 66% versus 63% and by physical findings/symptoms in 34% versus 37% of patients comparing pre-COVID-19 to during-COVID-19, p = 0.47. Overall clinical prognostic stage did not differ significantly (p = 0.39) between the time periods, nor did cM1 disease (2% in each period); 23% pre-COVID-19 and 27% during-COVID-19 presented with cN+ disease (p = 0.38). Neoadjuvant therapy use was significantly higher during-COVID-19 (39%) versus pre-COVID-19 (29%, p = 0.02) driven by increased neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) use (7% to 16%, p = 0.002), whereas neoadjuvant chemotherapy use did not change (22% vs. 23%, p = 0.72). In HR+/HER2- disease, NET use increased from 10% pre-COVID-19 to 23% during-COVID-19 (p = 0.001) with a significant increase in stage I patients (7 to 22%, p < 0.001) and nonsignificant increases in stage II (18 to 23%, p = 0.63) and stage III (9 to 29%, p = 0.29). CONCLUSIONS: Breast cancer stage at diagnosis did not differ significantly during-COVID-19 compared with pre-COVID-19. More patients during-COVID-19 were treated with NET, which was significantly increased in stage I HR+/HER2- disease.

Analysis of the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Multidisciplinary Management of Breast Cancer: Review from the American Society of Breast Surgeons COVID-19 and Mastery Registries.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in rapid and regionally different approaches to breast cancer care. METHODS: In order to evaluate these changes, a COVID-19-specific registry was developed within the American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) Mastery that tracked whether decisions were usual or modified for COVID-19. Data on patient care entered into the COVID-19-specific registry and the ASBrS Mastery registry from 1 March 2020 to 15 March 2021 were reviewed. RESULTS: Overall, 177 surgeons entered demographic and treatment data on 2791 patients. Mean patient age was 62.7 years and 9.0% (252) were of African American race. Initial consultation occurred via telehealth in 6.2% (173) of patients and 1.4% (40) developed COVID-19. Mean invasive tumor size was 2.1 cm and 17.8% (411) were node-positive. In estrogen receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (ER+/HER2-) disease, neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) was used as the usual approach in 6.9% (119) of patients and due to COVID-19 in an additional 31% (542) of patients. Patients were more likely to receive NET due to COVID-19 with increasing age and if they lived in the Northeast or Southeast (odds ratio [OR] 1.1, 2.3, and 1.7, respectively; p < 0.05). Genomic testing was performed on 51.5% (781) of estrogen-positive patients, of whom 20.7% (162) had testing on the core due to COVID-19. Patients were less likely to have core biopsy genomic testing due to COVID-19 if they were older (OR 0.89; p = 0.01) and more likely if they were node-positive (OR 4.0; p < 0.05). A change in surgical approach due to COVID-19 was reported for 5.4% (151) of patients. CONCLUSION: The ASBrS COVID-19 registry provided a platform for monitoring treatment changes due to the pandemic, highlighting the increased use of NET.

Surgical Management of Axilla Following Neoadjuvant Endocrine Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Randomized clinical trials support deescalation of axillary surgery in breast cancer patients with low-volume axillary disease treated with a surgery-first approach. However, few data exist to guide axillary surgery following neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET). Therefore, we evaluated the extent and outcomes of axillary surgery in a contemporary cohort of NET patients, a treatment approach that has become particularly relevant during the coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified invasive breast cancer patients treated with NET between October 2008 and November 2019. Patients presenting with stage IV disease or recurrent disease were excluded. Statistical analyses were performed using chi-square, Fisher's exact, and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. RESULTS: 194 invasive breast cancers in 186 patients (median age 66 years) were evaluated; 81 patients had breast-conserving surgery (BCS), while 113 underwent mastectomy. Eighty-four patients (43.3%) were biopsy-proven cN+ with 4/84 (4.8%) ypN0 following NET. Among cN+ patients, 14 (16.7%) had sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) only, 27 (32.1%) had SLNB + axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), and 43 (51.2%) had ALND. Among 110 cN0 patients, 99 had axillary surgery with 28/99 (28.3%) ypN+: SLNB in 83 (75.5%), SLNB+ALND in 14 (12.7%), and ALND in 2 (1.8%). Among all ypN+ patients, 23/108 (21.3%) had SLNB alone: 18/43 (41.9%) of BCS and 5/65 (7.7%) mastectomy patients (p < 0.001). After median follow-up of 35 months, no regional recurrences were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Among biopsy-proven cN+ NET patients, we observed deescalation of axillary surgery in selected patients, despite a low nodal pathologic complete response (pCR) rate, without nodal recurrences. These data suggest that patients with low-volume axillary disease treated with NET may be managed similarly to patients treated with a surgery-first approach.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Cancer Clinical Trials.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had widespread impact on healthcare, resulting in modifications to how we perform cancer research, including clinical trials for cancer. The impact of some healthcare workers and study coordinators working remotely and patients minimizing visits to medical facilities impacted clinical trial participation. Clinical trial accrual dropped at the onset of the pandemic, with improvement over time. Adjustments were made to some trial protocols, allowing telephone or video-enabled consent. Certain study activities were permitted to be performed by local healthcare providers or at local laboratories to maximize patients' ability to continue on study during these challenging times. We discuss the impact of COVID-19 on cancer clinical trials and changes at the local, cooperative group, and national level.