National Patterns of Hospital Admission Versus Home Recovery Following Mastectomy for Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: We examined national patterns of care and perioperative outcomes for women after mastectomy, comparing home recovery (HR) with hospital admission. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using Martketscan data (2017-2019), women ≥ 18 years old who underwent mastectomy ± reconstruction were identified and classified as either home recovery (same calendar day discharge) or hospital admission (stays > 1 calendar day). Comorbidities and receipt of chemo/immunotherapy 6 months prior to surgery and post-surgical 30-day complications were measured. Logistic regression calculated the odds of any complication by encounter type, adjusting for age, accompanying lymph node (LN) procedure, reconstruction, neoadjuvant chemo- and/or immunotherapy, and select comorbidities. RESULTS: Of 11,789 mastectomy encounters (N = 11,659 women), 4751 (40%) cases utilized HR while 7038 (60%) had hospital admission. HR patients were older (53.6 years old vs. 51.8 years old) with lower rates of reconstruction (60.2 vs. 74.5%, p < 0.001). Rates of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (19.6 vs. 20.9%, p = 0.099) and immunotherapy (3.6 vs. 3.9%, p = 0.445) were similar between groups. Complication rates were lower among HR patients with fewer postoperative hematomas (0.6 vs. 1.3%, p < 0.001) and decreased wound complications (8.5 vs. 9.8%, p = 0.019). In a multivariable analysis, the odds of any complication were approximately 20% lower for HR patients compared with admission patients (aOR 0.81, 95% CI 0.72-0.91, p < 0.001). Unplanned emergency room visits were similar between groups (6.7 vs. 7.2%, p = 0.374); yet fewer hospital re-admissions (2.5 vs. 3.5%, p = 0.003) occurred in women recovering at home. CONCLUSION: HR is a safe option compared with in-hospital admission for clinically appropriate women after mastectomy as they are less likely to experience postoperative complications, emergency department (ED) visits, or hospitalization.

Incidence of Pathologic Nodal Disease in Clinically Node-Negative, Microinvasive or T1a Breast Cancers.

BACKGROUND: Axillary staging in early-stage breast cancer can impact adjuvant treatment options but also has associated morbidity. The incidence of pathologic nodal positivity (pN+) in patients with microinvasive or T1a disease is poorly characterized and the value of sentinel node biopsy remains controversial. METHODS: Women with cN0 and pathologic microinvasive or T1a cancer who underwent upfront surgery were identified from the National Cancer Database. Pathologic nodal stage at the time of surgery was the primary outcome. Multivariable logistic modeling was used to assess predictors of pN+. RESULTS: Overall, 141,840 women were included; 139,206 had pathologic node-negative (pN0) disease and 2634 had pN+ disease. Rates of pN+ disease differed by receptor status, with the highest rates in hormone receptor-negative/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HR-/HER2+) disease compared with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), HR-positive/HER2-negative (HR+/HER2-), and triple positive breast cancer. Rates of pN+ were also higher with lobular histology compared with ductal histology. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that compared with White women, Black women had higher odds of pN+ disease, and compared with women <50 years of age, women >70 years of age had higher odds of pN+ disease. Compared with women with HR+/HER2- disease, women with TNBC, triple-positive breast cancer, and HR-/HER2+ all had lower odds, and women with invasive lobular disease had higher odds compared with women with invasive ductal disease. Women with significant comorbidities also had higher odds of node positivity. CONCLUSION: Over 90% of patients with clinically node-negative, microinvasive and T1a breast cancer remain pathologically node-negative following axillary staging. However, higher rates of nodal disease were found among Black patients, older patients, and patients with lobular cancer and significant comorbidities.

The impact of converting to telehealth for cancer genetic counseling and testing during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 outbreak in March 2020 resulted in a shift to telemedicine for cancer genetic counseling (GC). The objective of this study was to determine the effect of telehealth (TH) services on patient acceptance of recommended genetic testing, time to test completion, and follow-up test-disclosure GC appointment, as well as compliance with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) recommendations for medical screenings when testing positive for a genetic variant. Data for this retrospective cohort study were collected at a tertiary-care academic health center using the electronic medical record and laboratory portal. Patients with traditional in-person visits (the 2019 control group) and date-matched TH visits (2020) were compared. In total, 206 new GC appointments occurred in the in-person group and 184 new appointments occurred in the TH group. The in-person group was more likely to consent to testing than the TH cohort (92.6% vs. 82.1%, p = 0.003) and had increased rates of sample submission (99.5% vs. 93.75%, p < 0.01), as well as a shorter turn-around time between their initial appointment and laboratory result reporting (34.24 vs. 20.32 days, p < 0.01). There was no increase in time from initial to follow-up GC appointments (67.87 days for control, 62.39 days for THs, p = 0.37). With >2.5 years of follow-up for all study participants, there were no statistically significant differences in pathogenic variant (PV) carrier compliance with screening recommendations. During the COVID-19 pandemic, use of TH allowed patients to access GC with no significant differences in time between initial consultation and follow-up. However, in-person visits were associated with increased patient willingness to consent to and complete genetic testing. This work offers a nuanced look at the success of TH GC during the pandemic and follow-up with screening recommendations, while offering future opportunities to address the acceptance of testing as GC is practiced in a virtual or hybrid model.

Updates in the pathology of Pregnancy Associated Breast Cancer (PABC).

Pregnancy associated breast cancer (PABC) is defined as a breast cancer diagnosed during gestation, lactation or within 5 years postpartum. While the development of malignancy during pregnancy is rare, the incidence is increasing. Breast cancer is one of the most common cancers diagnosed during pregnancy, affecting up to 1 in 3000 deliveries. New understanding of the pathophysiology of PABC recently resulted in updated definitions distinguishing breast cancer diagnosed during pregnancy (PrBC) from cancer diagnosed during the postpartum period (PPBC) due to distinct biology and prognosis. Pregnancy has a dual effect on breast cancer development- both protective against cancer and promoting tumor growth. While several hypotheses have been proposed over the years to explain these effects, the most likely hypothesis for the development of PABC is the involution hypothesis, proposing that remodeling programs activated in the immediate postpartum period are similar to wound healing and inflammation that may be associated with tumor development and progression. Although PABCs reflect all subtypes of breast carcinomas, they are most commonly invasive ductal carcinomas of high tumor grade and large tumor size, with more advanced stage at presentation and higher rates of lymph node involvement. Most PABCs are hormone negative tumors (triple negative or HER2 amplified tumors) with high Ki-67 proliferation rates. Several studies have shown that PABCs have different genomic signatures than non-PABC tumors, showing increased expression of immune response mediators. Better understanding of the molecular pathways of tumor initiation and progression, along with prompt diagnosis and novel treatment protocols in the care of PrBC and PPBC are needed to improve outcomes for these young, high-risk breast cancer patients.

Financial toxicity in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers.

OBJECTIVE: Financial toxicity (FT), the cumulative financial burden experienced due to medical care, is a well-established adverse effect of healthcare. Patients with BRCA mutations have significantly increased cancer risks compared to non-affected individuals, requiring more frequent screenings and, at times, prophylactic surgery, increasing their risk for FT. Our primary aim in this study was to describe rates of FT among BRCA carriers. METHODS: We performed a novel, cross-sectional study of FT in BRCA1/2 carriers. Participants were recruited via phone and/or email to complete consents and surveys on REDCap. The FACIT-COST tool, a validated tool for measuring FT, was used to assess FT; scores were divided into tertiles, with high FT defined as COST score < 24. RESULTS: 265 BRCA positive female participants met enrollment criteria; 76 (28.7%) consented to participate and completed the survey. Participants were primarily non-Hispanic White (97.4%), privately insured (82.9%), and employed full time (67.1%). A significant proportion (22.7%) of participants reported delaying or avoiding care secondary to finances. No statistically significant association was seen between financial toxicity groups and analyzed demographics. Participants with high FT were more likely to engage in all surveyed cost-saving measures, with 41.7% of participants reporting delays/avoidance of care due to cost (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: This study of FT in BRCA carriers shows that financial toxicity exists as an issue in this high-risk patient population. This work serves as the first description of FT in BRCA mutation carriers and highlights the importance of incorporating routine counseling on cost when discussing recommendations for screening and clinical care with this patient population.