Developing questions to assess and measure patients' perceived survival benefit from adjuvant endocrine therapy in breast cancer: a mixed methods pilot study.

This mixed method study developed multiple question types to understand and measure women's perceived benefit from adjuvant endocrine therapy. We hypothesis that patients do not understand this benefit and sought to develop the questions needed to test this hypothesis and obtain initial patient estimates. From 8/2022 to 3/2023, qualitative interviews focused on assessing and modifying 9 initial varied question types asking about the overall survival (OS) benefit from adjuvant endocrine therapy. Subsequent focus groups modified and selected the optimal questions. Patients' self-assessment of their OS benefit was compared to their individualized PREDICT model results. Fifty-three patients completed the survey; 42% Hispanic, 30% rural, and 47% with income < $39,999 per year. Patients reported adequate health care literacy (61.5%) and average confidence about treatment and medication decisions 49.4 (95% CI 24.4-59.5). From the original 9 questions, 3 modified questions were ultimately found to capture patients' perception of this OS benefit, focusing on graphical and prose styles. Patients estimated an OS benefit of 42% compared to 4.4% calculated from the PREDICT model (p < 0.001). In this group with considerable representation from ethnic minority, rural and low-income patients, qualitative data showed that more than one modality of question type was needed to clearly capture patients' understanding of treatment benefit. Women with breast cancer significantly overestimated their 10-year OS benefit from adjuvant endocrine therapy compared to the PREDICT model.

"Care needs to be integrated" Patient and provider perspectives on a cancer shared-care model.

PURPOSE: Current early-stage breast and gynecological cancer care models often begin with a referral from a primary care provider (PCP) or gynecologist (OB/Gyn) and end with a patient being transitioned back to the referring provider at the completion of treatment. There is frequently little communication between oncologists and the referring provider during treatment, and this pattern continues after the patient completes their treatment. METHODS: We convened a diverse Patient Advisory Board (PAB) to identify areas where breast or gynecological cancer patients felt they could benefit from additional support during and after their cancer care. PAB members attended five Zoom meetings and completed four online surveys. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with primary care or OB/Gyn physicians to collect information on current practices. RESULTS: Patients identified multiple areas in which they needed additional support from their PCP. Providers also identified topics on which they could use additional training. However, there was little overlap between patient and provider priority topics. Both patients and providers agreed that there was inadequate communication between the cancer center and PCPs before, during, and after cancer treatment. CONCLUSIONS: A shared-care model that emphasizes communication between primary care providers, the oncology care team, and patients is urgently needed. Patients indicated the need for additional support from their PCP on specific topics, and PCPs were interested in continuing their education to better serve their patients with cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: The importance of consistent communication among all parties during the entire cancer journey was emphasized as a key area for improvement.

A pilot randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study of omega-3 fatty acids to prevent paclitaxel-associated acute pain syndrome in breast cancer patients: Alliance A22_Pilot2.

PURPOSE: Paclitaxel is associated with an acute pain syndrome (P-APS- and chronic chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN). P-APS is associated with higher risk of CIPN. Omega-3 fatty acids have well-established anti-inflammatory and neuroprotective properties. The primary purpose of this pilot study was to assess whether omega-3 fatty acids could decrease P-APS and thus CIPN. METHODS: Patients scheduled to receive weekly paclitaxel for breast cancer were randomized to receive 4 g of omega-3 acid ethyl esters (Lovaza) or placebo, beginning 1 week prior and continued until paclitaxel was stopped. Patients completed acute pain questionnaires at baseline, daily after each treatment, and 1 month after completion of therapy. RESULTS: Sixty patients (49 evaluable) were randomized to treatment versus placebo. Seventeen (68.0%) patients receiving the omega-3 fatty acids intervention experienced P-APS, compared to 15 (62.5%) of those receiving placebo during the first week of treatment (p = 0.77). Over the full 12-week study, 21 (84.0%) patients receiving the omega-3 fatty acid intervention experienced P-APS, compared to 21 (87.5%) of those receiving placebo (p = 1.0). Secondary outcomes suggested that those in the intervention arm used more over-the-counter analgesics (OR: 1.65, 95% CI: 0.72-3.78, p = 0.23), used more opiates (OR: 2.06, 95% CI: 0.55-7.75, p = 0.28), and experienced higher levels of CIPN (12.8, 95% CI: 7.6-19.4 vs. 8.4, 95% CI: 4.6-13.2, p = 0.21). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this pilot study do not support further study of the use of omega-3 fatty acids for the prevention of the P-APS and CIPN. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Number: NCT01821833.

Developing Questions to Assess and Measure Patients' Perceived Survival Benefit from Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy in Breast Cancer: A Mixed Methods Pilot Study.

Purpose: This mixed methods study developed multiple question types to understand and measure women's perceived benefit from adjuvant endocrine therapy. We hypothesis that patients do not understand this benefit and sought to develop the questions needed to test this hypothesis and obtain initial patient estimates. Methods: From 8/2022 to 3/2023, qualitative interviews focused on assessing and modifying 9 initial varied question types asking about the overall survival (OS) benefit from adjuvant endocrine therapy. Subsequent focus groups modified and selected the optimal questions. Patients' self-assessment of their OS benefit was compared to their individualized PREDICT model results. Results: Fifty-three patients completed the survey; 42% Hispanic, 30% rural, and 47% with income <$39,999 per year. Patients reported adequate health care literacy (61.5%) and average confidence about treatment and medication decisions 49.4 (95% CI 24.4-59.5). From the original 9 questions, 3 modified questions were ultimately found to capture patients' perception of this OS benefit, focusing on graphical and prose styles. Patients estimated an OS benefit of 42% compared to 4.4% calculated from the PREDICT model (p < 0.001). Conclusion: In this group with considerable representation from ethnic minority, rural and low-income patients, qualitative data showed that more than one modality of question type was needed to clearly capture patients' understanding of treatment benefit. Women with breast cancer significantly overestimated their 10-year OS benefit from adjuvant endocrine therapy compared to the PREDICT model.

Patient-Reported Measures of a Breast Cancer Nurse Navigator Program in an Underserved, Rural, and Economically Disadvantaged Patient Population.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of the University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center's (UNMCCC's) breast cancer nurse navigator (BCNN) program in addressing gaps in cancer care for an underserved, rural, and economically disadvantaged population. SAMPLE & SETTING: 54 navigated patients under the care of the BCNN and 32 non-navigated patients whose care began prior to the start of the program. METHODS & VARIABLES: Surveys were administered anonymously to patients during regularly scheduled appointments at UNMCCC. RESULTS: Navigated patients more strongly agreed that they were prepared for the beginning of treatment and that calls were returned promptly, and showed a decreased desire for an after-treatment summary compared to non-navigated patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Navigated patients report better understanding of and engagement with the healthcare system when assisted by a BCNN during breast cancer treatment with curative intent, as well as desire fewer services than non-navigated peers, indicating greater satisfaction.

Biomarkers for Systemic Therapy in Metastatic Breast Cancer: ASCO Guideline Update.

PURPOSE: To update the ASCO Biomarkers to Guide Systemic Therapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer (MBC) guideline. METHODS: An Expert Panel conducted a systematic review to identify randomized clinical trials and prospective-retrospective studies from January 2015 to January 2022. RESULTS: The search identified 19 studies informing the evidence base. RECOMMENDATIONS: Candidates for a regimen with a phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase inhibitor and hormonal therapy should undergo testing for PIK3CA mutations using next-generation sequencing of tumor tissue or circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in plasma to determine eligibility for alpelisib plus fulvestrant. If no mutation is found in ctDNA, testing in tumor tissue, if available, should be used. Patients who are candidates for poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor therapy should undergo testing for germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic or likely pathogenic mutations to determine eligibility for a PARP inhibitor. There is insufficient evidence for or against testing for a germline PALB2 pathogenic variant to determine eligibility for PARP inhibitor therapy in the metastatic setting. Candidates for immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy should undergo testing for expression of programmed cell death ligand-1 in the tumor and immune cells to determine eligibility for treatment with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy. Candidates for an immune checkpoint inhibitor should also undergo testing for deficient mismatch repair/microsatellite instability-high to determine eligibility for dostarlimab-gxly or pembrolizumab, as well as testing for tumor mutational burden. Clinicians may test for NTRK fusions to determine eligibility for TRK inhibitors. There are insufficient data to recommend routine testing of tumors for ESR1 mutations, for homologous recombination deficiency, or for TROP2 expression to guide MBC therapy selection. There are insufficient data to recommend routine use of ctDNA or circulating tumor cells to monitor response to therapy among patients with MBC.Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines.

Improving Sexual and Gender Minority Cancer Care: Patient and Caregiver Perspectives From a Multi-Methods Pilot Study.

Purpose: Up to 1 million lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (i.e., sexual and gender minority, SGM) individuals in the United States have histories of cancer. This medically underserved population is diverse, with complex sexualities and gender identities, and distinct health concerns. SGM persons experience disproportionate risks for, and rates of, anal, breast, cervical, colorectal, endometrial, lung, and prostate cancers, in addition to cancers affecting transgender persons who have undergone sex-reassignment. SGM individuals are linked by shared experiences of stigmatization as a minority population for which little cancer research has been conducted. SGM cancer patients frequently report reluctance to seek healthcare, have poorer outcomes following diagnosis, engage in elevated risk behaviors (i.e. smoking and alcohol use) even after cancer diagnosis, have difficulty making emotional adjustment to illness, and experience higher rates of psychological distress. They report less satisfaction with cancer care, deficiencies in patient-centeredness and shared decision-making, gaps in care, and social isolation. Minority stress resulting from experiences of anti-SGM sentiment and discrimination affects cancer patients and their informal cancer caregivers. Our paper presents findings from a pilot study to identify gaps and opportunities to improve cancer care for SGM patients and caregivers at the University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center. Methods: Between June 2020 and July 2021, we used a multi-methods research design informed by ecological theory to collect qualitative and quantitative data regarding cancer patient and caregiver quality of life (QoL) and experiences of cancer and survivorship care. We used PROMIS measures distributed via REDCap to assess QoL (i.e., fatigue, pain interference, pain intensity, anxiety, depression, emotional support, social isolation, and companionship), and conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews. We recruited 10 SGM cancer patients and 8 heterosexual, cisgender (H/C) patient matches, and their self-identified informal cancer caregivers (n=36, dyad total n=18). Interviews ranged from 1 to 2 hours, were audio-recorded and transcribed for analysis. The study was approved by the University of New Mexico Human Research Protections Office Institutional Review Board. Results: Results of the PROMIS QoL assessments indicated that SGM patients reported greater anxiety [mean (SD) = 54.5 (8.8)] and depression [mean (SD) = 49.3 (4.8)] than H/C patients [mean (SD)=51.6 (7.5) and 45.4 (6.8) respectively], while heterosexual, cisgender (H/C) patients reported higher fatigue [mean (SD) =52.04 (8.18)] and stronger pain intensity than SGM patients [mean (SD)=48.3 (9.1) and 37.8 (9.1) respectively]. SGM patients reported higher levels of social isolation [mean (SD) = 48.3 (7.3) vs. 42.1 (7.4) for H/C patients, whereas H/C patients reported more emotional support (mean (SD) =57.5 (9.3) vs. 53.0 (6.9)] and companionship [mean (SD) = 55.2 (8.6) vs. 51.5 (11.0)]. SGM and H/C differences in caregiver QoL were most notable with regards to higher levels of fatigue [mean (SD) = 47.1 (6.0) for SGM, and 42.4 (11.5) for H/C] and companionship [mean (SD) = 55.3 (6.0) for SGM, and 50.9 (5.5) for H/C]. Qualitative interviews supported our quantitative results. SGM patients and caregivers articulated experiences of anti-SGM stigma and discrimination contributing to minority stress that influenced their initial cancer care encounters. SGM dyads had more trepidation and/or medical mistrust during initial cancer care encounters when compared to H/C patients and caregivers. SGM patients questioned care that was not culturally responsive to SGM preferences, while H/C patients were more apt to identify gaps in communication and perceived lack of clarity regarding cancer care delivery. Although SGM patients experienced high satisfaction with their cancer care once they developed trust with their providers, they discussed desires to have more direct conversations with their oncologists about their sexual orientation and gender identities and sexual health. All patients and providers in the study (SGM and H/C) appreciated their oncology care teams. All patients and caregivers relied on social networks comprised of friends and family, although SGM patients and caregivers had smaller social networks and relied less on biological family, and single SGM individuals experienced challenges accessing cancer care and struggled with social isolation. We discovered too, that all caregivers, regardless of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI), perceived a lack of support and information pertaining to their loved one's treatment, side effects and best way to provide care. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that prior stigmatizing experiences contribute to minority stress and medical mistrust for SGM cancer patients and their informal caregivers across the cancer care experience. Findings point to specific gaps in SGM cancer patient care, including lack of conversation about patient SOGI, inadequate staff and oncology provider SGM specific knowledge and cultural competence/cultural humility training, and insufficient patient supports for those who lack social support during cancer care treatment. Further, this study reveals inadequacies in SGM specific support, and overall support services for informal cancer caregivers. Additional research is required to develop targeted interventions to address minority stress and clinic environment concerns to improve cancer care for SGM patients. Importantly, while there were differences between SGM and H/C experiences of cancer treatment, significant similarities also emerged. Caregiver expressed consensus about the current lack of support and guidance for informal caregivers of cancer patients. Future work should focus on providing caregiver-specific resources in the clinic setting and facilitating support groups for caregivers to network with one another, as well as for tailoring SGM specific caregiver support services. Our findings highlight areas for improving cancer care for the SGM community, as well as a broader population of patients and caregivers.

Characterizing Low-Risk Breast and Gynecological Cancer Patients for Transition into an Oncology/Primary Care Coordinated Care Model: Findings from a Survey of Diverse Survivors in a Rural U.S. State.

We conducted a survey to characterize the key attributes of racial/ethnic and geographically diverse low-risk breast and gynecologic cancer patients. We collected data regarding patients' access to primary care (PC); compliance with screening recommendations; treatment for comorbidities; logistical barriers to clinic visits; and receipt of survivorship care documentation (SCD). Survey findings informed the development of an oncology/Primary Care Provider (PCP) care coordination intervention to improve care. We distributed a cross-sectional survey among a convenience sample of 150 cancer survivors. Responses were calculated using descriptive statistics and compared based on the distance participants traveled to their appointments at the cancer center (≤30 vs. >30 miles). Of the 150 respondents, 35% traveled >30 miles for follow-up care and 78% reported having one or more comorbid condition(s). PC utilization was high: 88% reported having a PCP, and 91% indicated ≤1 yearly follow-up visit. Participants traveling >30 miles reported higher rates of logistical challenges associated with cancer center visits compared to those traveling ≤30 miles. Nearly half of respondents (46%) had not received SCD. In conclusion, survey studies such as these allow for the systematic assessment of survivor behaviors and care utilization patterns to inform the development of care coordination interventions for diverse, low-risk cancer patients.

Southwest Harvest for Health: An Adapted Mentored Vegetable Gardening Intervention for Cancer Survivors.

Harvest for Health is a home-based vegetable gardening intervention that pairs cancer survivors with Master Gardeners from the Cooperative Extension System. Initially developed and tested in Alabama, the program was adapted for the different climate, growing conditions, and population in New Mexico. This paper chronicles the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of "Southwest Harvest for Health". During the nine-month single-arm trial, 30 cancer survivor-Master Gardener dyads worked together to establish and maintain three seasonal gardens. Primary outcomes were accrual, retention, and satisfaction. Secondary outcomes were vegetable and fruit (V and F) intake, physical activity, and quality of life. Recruitment was diverse and robust, with 30 survivors of various cancers, aged 50-83, roughly one-third minority, and two-thirds females enrolled in just 60 days. Despite challenges due to the COVID-19 pandemic, retention to the nine-month study was 100%, 93% reported "good-to-excellent" satisfaction, and 87% "would do it again." A median increase of 1.2 servings of V and F/day was documented. The adapted home-based vegetable gardening program was feasible, well-received, and resulted in increased V and F consumption among adult cancer survivors. Future studies are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of this program and to inform strategies to increase the successful implementation and further dissemination of this intervention.

Improving Outpatient Infusion Clinic Wait Times at a Comprehensive Cancer Center.

PURPOSE: Many factors contribute to long wait times for patients on the day of their chemotherapy infusion appointments. Longer wait time leads to nonoptimal care, increased costs, and decreased patient satisfaction. We conducted a quality improvement project to reduce the infusion wait times at a Comprehensive Cancer Center. METHODS: A multidisciplinary working group of physicians, infusion center nurses, pharmacists, information technology analysts, the Chief Medical Officer, and patient advocates formed a working group. Wait times were analyzed, and the contributing factors to long wait time were identified. Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles were implemented and included labeling patients ready to treat earlier, loading premedications into the medication dispensing system, increasing the number of pharmacy staff, and improving communication using a secure messaging system. The outcome measure was time from patient appointment to initiation of first drug at the infusion center. The secondary outcome measure was patient wait time satisfaction on the basis of Press Ganey score. RESULTS: Postintervention, the mean time from appointment to initiation of first drug decreased 17.6 minutes (P < .001; 95% CI, 16.3 to 18.9), from 58.1 minutes to 40.5 minutes (43.5% decrease). Patient wait time satisfaction score increased 8.9 points (P < .001; 95% CI, 6.0 to 11.82), from 76.2 to 85.1 (11.7% increase). CONCLUSION: Exploring real-time data and using a classic quality improvement methodology allowed a Comprehensive Cancer Center to identify deficiencies and prevent delays in chemotherapy initiation. This significantly improved patient wait time and patient satisfaction.

Southwest Harvest for Health: Adapting a mentored vegetable gardening intervention for cancer survivors in the southwest.

Few diet and physical activity evidence-based interventions have been routinely used in community settings to achieve population health outcomes. Adapting interventions to fit the implementation context is important to achieve the desired results. Harvest for Health is a home-based vegetable gardening intervention that pairs cancer survivors with certified Master Gardeners from the Cooperative Extension Service with the ultimate goal of increasing vegetable consumption and physical activity, and improving physical functioning and health-related quality-of-life. Harvest for Health has potential for widespread dissemination since Master Gardener Programs exist throughout the United States. However, state- and population-specific adaptations may be needed to improve intervention adoption by other Master Gardener Programs. Our primary objective was to adapt this evidence-informed intervention that was initially incepted in Alabama, for the drastically different climate and growing conditions of New Mexico using a recommended adaptation framework. Our secondary objective was to develop a study protocol to support a pilot test of the adapted intervention, Southwest Harvest for Health. The adaptation phase is a critical first step towards widespread dissemination, implementation, and scale-out of an evidence-based intervention. This paper describes the adaptation process and outcomes, and the resulting protocol for the ongoing pilot study that is currently following 30 cancer survivors and their paired Extension Master Gardener mentors.

Developing a survivorship care plan (SCP) delivery process for patients and primary care providers serving poor, rural, and minority patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Survivorship care plans (SCPs) summarize patients' treatment and act as an education and communication tool between oncologists and primary care providers (PCPs). But creation and delivery of SCPs are challenging, labor intensive, and costly. The University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center (UNM CCC) treats a poor, rural, and minority patient population, and our purpose was to implement and evaluate a process to create and deliver SCPs to patients and PCPs. METHODS: Providers placed an electronic SCP order, basic information was imported, and staff compiled treatment details. Flagged SCPs were then ready for delivery, providers approved of and delivered the SCP at the next encounter, and the SCP was sent to the PCP. RESULTS: By April 2020, 283 SCPs were ordered, 241 (85.2%) were created by the designated staff, and 97 (34.2%) were given to patients after definitive therapy for breast cancer (59.1%), gynecological cancers (10.8%), prostate cancer (7.4%), colorectal cancer (5.1%), and lymphomas (4.8%). Of 97 SCPs eligible to be sent to PCPs, 75 (77.3%) were mailed or sent via EMR. Of the 41 (48.9%) SCPs sent via mail or fax, only 8 (8.3%) were received and 5 (5.2%) integrated. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that SCPs can be delivered to patients in a poor, rural, and minority patient population but that PCP receipt and integration of SCPs are poor. Future efforts need to ensure that an oncologist to PCP education and communication tool is able reach and be integrated by PCPs.

Selection of Optimal Adjuvant Chemotherapy and Targeted Therapy for Early Breast Cancer: ASCO Guideline Update.

PURPOSE: The aim of this work is to update key recommendations of the ASCO guideline adaptation of the Cancer Care Ontario guideline on the selection of optimal adjuvant chemotherapy regimens for early breast cancer and adjuvant targeted therapy for breast cancer. METHODS: An Expert Panel conducted a targeted systematic literature review guided by a signals approach to identify new, potentially practice-changing data that might translate into revised guideline recommendations. RESULTS: The Expert Panel reviewed abstracts from the literature review and identified one article for inclusion that reported results of the phase III, open-label KATHERINE trial. In the KATHERINE trial, patients with stage I to III human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer with residual invasive disease in the breast or axilla after completing neoadjuvant chemotherapy and HER2-targeted therapy were allocated to adjuvant trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1; n = 743) or to trastuzumab (n = 743). Invasive disease-free survival was significantly higher in the T-DM1 group than in the trastuzumab arm (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.64; P < .001), and risk of distant recurrence was lower in patients who received T-DM1 than in patients who received trastuzumab (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.79). Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 190 patients (25.7%) who received T-DM1 and in 111 patients (15.4%) who received trastuzumab. RECOMMENDATIONS: Patients with HER2-positive breast cancer with pathologic invasive residual disease at surgery after standard preoperative chemotherapy and HER2-targeted therapy should be offered 14 cycles of adjuvant T-DM1, unless there is disease recurrence or unmanageable toxicity. Clinicians may offer any of the available and approved formulations of trastuzumab, including trastuzumab, trastuzumab and hyaluronidase-oysk, and available biosimilars.Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines.

Randomized Trial of Text Messaging to Reduce Early Discontinuation of Adjuvant Aromatase Inhibitor Therapy in Women With Early-Stage Breast Cancer: SWOG S1105.

PURPOSE: Nonadherence to aromatase inhibitors (AIs) for breast cancer is common and increases the risk of recurrence. Text messaging increases adherence to medications for chronic conditions. METHODS: We conducted a randomized clinical trial of text messaging (TM) versus no text messaging (No-TM) at 40 sites in the United States. Eligible patients were postmenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer taking an AI for > 30 days with a planned duration of ≥ 36 months. Test messages were sent twice a week over 36 months. Content themes focused on overcoming barriers to medication adherence and included cues to action, statements related to medication efficacy, and reinforcements of the recommendation to take AIs. Both groups were assessed every 3 months. The primary outcome was time to adherence failure (AF), where AF was defined as urine AI metabolite assay results satisfying one of the following: < 10 ng/mL, undetectable, or no submitted specimen. A stratified log-rank test was conducted. Multiple sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: In total, 724 patients were registered between May 2012 and September 2013, among whom,702 patients (348 in the text-messaging arm and 354 in the no-text-messaging arm) were eligible at baseline. Observed adherence at 36 months was 55.5% for TM and 55.4% for No-TM. The primary analysis showed no difference in time to AF by arm (3-year AF: 81.9% TM v 85.6% No-TM; HR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.76 to 1.05]; P = .18). Multiple time to AF sensitivity analyses showed similar nonsignificant results. Three-year self-reported time to AF (10.4% v 10.3%; HR, 1.16 [95% CI, 0.69 to 1.98]; P = .57) and site-reported time to AF (21.9% v 18.9%; HR, 1.31 [95% CI, 0.86 to 2.01]; P = .21) also did not differ by arm. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this was the first large, long-term, randomized trial of an intervention directed at improving AI adherence. We found high rates of AI AF. Twice-weekly text reminders did not improve adherence to AIs. Improving long-term adherence will likely require personalized and sustained behavioral interventions.

Pharmacist-Driven Oral Oncolytic Medication Education and Consent.

PURPOSE: The numbers and types of oral oncolytics in oncology are expanding rapidly. Oral oncolytics have serious adverse effects, and pharmacist-driven patient education has the potential to reduce adverse events. The University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center (UNM CCC) initiated a patient education and consent process for oral oncolytics in our minority, rural, and economically disadvantaged population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The UNM CCC initiated a pharmacist-driven education and consent process from August 2016 to October 2018. The process metric measured via statistical process control charts was the percentage of patients receiving oral oncolytic therapy who were educated and consented. The balancing metric was time for benefit investigation. The intervention was pharmacy team members providing standardized education for and obtaining consent from each patient, supported by electronic medical record orders, physician education, pharmacy notifications, and hospital discharge planning. RESULTS: The initial monthly education and consent rate was 17.9%, followed by 45.5% the subsequent month. This quickly grew to an average of 87.0% (95% CI, 81.5% to 92.4%) for the subsequent 15 months in which control was achieved. Additional changes increased the education rate to 95.7% (95% CI, 93.4% to 98.1%). These 2 periods were statistically different (P = .0025). There was no change in time for benefit investigation (5.60 v 5.52 days; P = .75). CONCLUSION: A pharmacist-driven program for education and consent upon initiation of oral oncolytics is possible and can successfully educate a majority of patients. Future directions will include ensuring patient adherence and educating patients who fill oral oncolytic prescriptions outside UNM CCC.

Preferences for multigene panel testing for hereditary breast cancer risk among ethnically diverse BRCA-uninformative families.

Until recently, genetic testing for hereditary breast cancer has primarily focused on pathogenic variants in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA) genes. However, advances in DNA sequencing technologies have made simultaneous testing for multiple genes possible. We examined correlates of interest in multigene panel testing and risk communication preferences in an ethnically diverse sample of women who tested negative for BRCA mutations previously but remain at high risk based on their family history (referred to as "BRCA-uninformative") and their at-risk female family members. Two-hundred and thirteen women with a previous breast cancer diagnosis and a BRCA-uninformative test result and their first-degree relatives completed a survey on interest in multigene panel testing, communication preferences, and sociodemographic, psychological, and clinical factors. Stepwise logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with testing interest. Chi-square analyses were used to test differences in risk communication preferences. Interest in multigene panel testing was high (84%) and did not considerably differ by cancer status or ethnicity. In multivariable analysis, factors significantly associated with interest in genetic testing were having had a mammogram in the past 2 years (odds ratio (OR) = 4.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.80-9.02) and high cancer worry (OR = 3.77, 95% CI 1.34-10.60). Overall, the most commonly preferred genetic communication modes were genetic counselors, oncologists, and print materials. However, non-Hispanic women were more likely than Hispanic women to prefer web-based risk communication (p < 0.001). Hispanic and non-Hispanic women from BRCA-uninformative families have a high level of interest in gene panel testing. Cancer-related emotions and communication preferences should be considered in developing targeted genetic risk communication strategies.

Ki67 Proliferation Index as a Tool for Chemotherapy Decisions During and After Neoadjuvant Aromatase Inhibitor Treatment of Breast Cancer: Results From the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z1031 Trial (Alliance).

Purpose To determine the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate in estrogen receptor (ER) -positive primary breast cancer triaged to chemotherapy when the protein encoded by the MKI67 gene (Ki67) level was > 10% after 2 to 4 weeks of neoadjuvant aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy. A second objective was to examine risk of relapse using the Ki67-based Preoperative Endocrine Prognostic Index (PEPI). Methods The American College of Surgeons Oncology Group (ACOSOG) Z1031A trial enrolled postmenopausal women with stage II or III ER-positive (Allred score, 6 to 8) breast cancer whose treatment was randomly assigned to neoadjuvant AI therapy with anastrozole, exemestane, or letrozole. For the trial ACOSOG Z1031B, the protocol was amended to include a tumor Ki67 determination after 2 to 4 weeks of AI. If the Ki67 was > 10%, patients were switched to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. A pCR rate of > 20% was the predefined efficacy threshold. In patients who completed neoadjuvant AI, stratified Cox modeling was used to assess whether time to recurrence differed by PEPI = 0 score (T1 or T2, N0, Ki67 < 2.7%, ER Allred > 2) versus PEPI > 0 disease. Results Only two of the 35 patients in ACOSOG Z1031B who were switched to neoadjuvant chemotherapy experienced a pCR (5.7%; 95% CI, 0.7% to 19.1%). After 5.5 years of median follow-up, four (3.7%) of the 109 patients with a PEPI = 0 score relapsed versus 49 (14.4%) of 341 of patients with PEPI > 0 (recurrence hazard ratio [PEPI = 0 v PEPI > 0], 0.27; P = .014; 95% CI, 0.092 to 0.764). Conclusion Chemotherapy efficacy was lower than expected in ER-positive tumors exhibiting AI-resistant proliferation. The optimal therapy for these patients should be further investigated. For patients with PEPI = 0 disease, the relapse risk over 5 years was only 3.6% without chemotherapy, supporting the study of adjuvant endocrine monotherapy in this group. These Ki67 and PEPI triage approaches are being definitively studied in the ALTERNATE trial (Alternate Approaches for Clinical Stage II or III Estrogen Receptor Positive Breast Cancer Neoadjuvant Treatment in Postmenopausal Women: A Phase III Study; clinical trial information: NCT01953588).

Factors Associated with Interest in Gene-Panel Testing and Risk Communication Preferences in Women from BRCA1/2 Negative Families.

Scientific advances have allowed the development of multiplex gene-panels to assess many genes simultaneously in women who have tested negative for BRCA1/2. We examined correlates of interest in testing for genes that confer modest and moderate breast cancer risk and risk communication preferences for women from BRCA negative families. Female first-degree relatives of breast cancer patients who tested negative for BRCA1/2 mutations (N = 149) completed a survey assessing multiplex genetic testing interest and risk communication preferences. Interest in testing was high (70 %) and even higher if results could guide risk-reducing behavior changes such as taking medications (79 %). Participants preferred to receive genomic risk communications from a variety of sources including: primary care physicians (83 %), genetic counselors (78 %), printed materials (71 %) and the web (60 %). Factors that were independently associated with testing interest were: perceived lifetime risk of developing cancer (odds ratio (OR) = 1.67: 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.06-2.65) and high cancer worry (OR = 3.12: CI 1.28-7.60). Findings suggest that women from BRCA1/2 negative families are a unique population and may be primed for behavior change. Findings also provide guidance for clinicians who can help develop genomic risk communications, promote informed decision making and customize behavioral interventions.