ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The optimal structure for survivorship care plan (SCP) programs and methodology for generating treatment summaries (TSs) has not yet been defined, but the Commission on Cancer and the National Accreditation Program for Breast Centers both mandate that participating oncology programs implement SCP-TS processes for patients that have completed treatment. METHODS: We used the Institute for Healthcare Improvement's Plan-Do-Study-Act model for conducting a quality improvement project evaluating two different SCP-TS programs implemented at the Henry Ford Health System/Henry Ford Cancer Institute's Breast Oncology Program in Detroit, Michigan. System I involved TSs drafted by nonspecialist breast clinic staff; System II involved TSs vetted through a multidisciplinary breast specialist conference approach. Accuracy of basic documentation entries related to dates and components of treatment were compared for the two approaches. RESULTS: Seventy-one System I and 93 System II documents were reviewed. Documentation was accurate in at least 90% of documents for both systems regarding delivery of chemotherapy and/or endocrine therapy and for documenting the identity of the various members of the cancer treatment team. Both systems had notable inaccuracies in documenting type of surgery performed, but System II had fewer inaccuracies than System I (33.78% v 51.67%, respectively; P = .05). System II, compared with System I, had fewer inaccuracies in documenting date of diagnosis (9.68% v 25.35%, respectively; P = .01) and had less missing information for dose of radiation delivered (9.33% v 33.9%, respectively; P < .01). CONCLUSION: A multidisciplinary team approach to drafting and reviewing SCP-TS documents improved content accuracy for our program, but ongoing education regarding documentation of various surgical procedures is warranted.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Delivery of Health Care , Patient Care Planning , Patient Care Team , Survivorship , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/etiology , Breast Neoplasms/therapy , Disease Management , Female , Humans , Medical Oncology/methods , Medical Oncology/standardsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The molecular classification system categorizes invasive breast carcinomas according to their key driving biomarkers. In the current study, the authors evaluated whether response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy was correlated with the molecular classification groups. METHODS: Using immunohistochemistry, the molecular classification group (luminal-A, luminal-B, HER-2-variant, HER-2-classic, and basal phenotype) was retrospectively determined in 68 breast cancer patients who received neoadjuvant treatment. RESULTS: A total of 28 carcinoma patients (41.2%) achieved a compete pathologic response (CPR), including 2 of 15 patients classified as having luminal-A (13.3%), 4 of 16 patients classified as having luminal-B (25.0%), 10 of 12 patients classified as having HER-2-classic (83.3%), none of the 4 patients classified as having HER-2-variant, and 12 of 21 patients classified as having basal phenotype (57.1%) neoplasms. The CPR rate among patients with the HER-2-classic and basal neoplasms was 67% (22 of 33 neoplasms), compared with 17.1% (6 of 35 neoplasms) in the non-HER-2-classic/basal combined group (P < .001). Eleven carcinomas were initially diagnosed as invasive lobular carcinomas (pleomorphic and classic), 4 of which were luminal-A, 4 of which were luminal-B, 2 of which were HER-2-classic, and 1 of which was basal. On review, only 3 of these 11 cases remained classified as classic lobular carcinoma, all of which were classified as luminal-A, and none of these patients achieved a CPR. Four of the other 8 patients achieved a CPR. CONCLUSIONS: The molecular classification system is useful for identifying carcinoma patients who are most likely and those who are least likely to achieve a CPR. In the current study, all the morphologically classic lobular carcinomas were classified as luminal-A neoplasms, which may explain the low rate of CPR reported.
