Biomarker Testing Disparities in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

Importance: Among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), data are limited on disparate biomarker testing and its association with clinical outcomes on a national scale. Objective: To evaluate the socioeconomic and demographic inequities in microsatellite instability (MSI) and KRAS biomarker testing among patients with mCRC and to explore the association of testing with overall survival (OS). Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study, conducted between November 2022 and March 2024, included patients who were diagnosed with mCRC between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2017. The study obtained data from the National Cancer Database, a hospital-based cancer registry in the US. Patients with mCRC and available information on biomarker testing were included. Patients were classified based on whether they completed or did not complete MSI or KRAS tests. Exposure: Demographic and socioeconomic factors, such as age, race, ethnicity, educational level in area of residence, median household income, insurance type, area of residence, facility type, and facility location were evaluated. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were MSI and KRAS testing between the date of diagnosis and the date of first-course therapy. Univariable and multivariable logistic regressions were used to identify the relevant factors in MSI and KRAS testing. The OS outcomes were also evaluated. Results: Among the 41 061 patients included (22 362 males [54.5%]; mean [SD] age, 62.3 [10.1] years; 17.3% identified as Black individuals, 78.0% as White individuals, 4.7% as individuals of other race, with 6.5% Hispanic or 93.5% non-Hispanic ethnicity), 28.8% underwent KRAS testing and 43.7% received MSI testing. A significant proportion of patients had Medicare insurance (43.6%), received treatment at a comprehensive community cancer program (40.5%), and lived in an area with lower educational level (51.3%). Factors associated with a lower likelihood of MSI testing included age of 70 to 79 years (relative risk [RR], 0.70; 95% CI, 0.66-0.74; P < .001), treatment at a community cancer program (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.70-0.79; P < .001), rural residency (RR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.69-0.92; P < .001), lower educational level in area of residence (RR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.79-0.89; P < .001), and treatment at East South Central facilities (RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.61-0.73; P < .001). Similar patterns were observed for KRAS testing. Survival analysis showed modest OS improvement in patients with MSI testing (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.91-0.96; P < .001). The median (IQR) follow-up time for the survival analysis was 13.96 (3.71-29.34) months. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study of patients with mCRC found that older age, community-setting treatment, lower educational level in area of residence, and treatment at East South Central facilities were associated with a reduced likelihood of MSI and KRAS testing. Highlighting the sociodemographic-based disparities in biomarker testing can inform the development of strategies that promote equity in cancer care and improve outcomes for underserved populations.

Clinico-pathologic factors and survival of patients with breast cancer diagnosed with de novo brain metastasis: a national cancer database analysis.

PURPOSE: Patients with Breast Cancer (BC) with Brain Metastasis (BCBM) have poor survival outcomes. We aimed to explore the clinico-pathologic and therapeutic factors predicting the survival in patients with de novo BCBM using the National Cancer Database (NCDB). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The NCDB was queried for patients with BC between 2010 and 2020. Survival analysis with Kaplan-Meier curves and log rank tests were used to find median overall survival (OS) in months (95% CI) across the different variables. A multivariate cox regression model was computed to identify significant predictors of survival. RESULTS: Out of n = 2,610,598 patients, n = 9005 (0.34%) had de novo BCBM. A trend of decreasing OS was observed with increasing age, Charlson-Deyo score (CDS), and number of extracranial metastatic sites. The highest median OS was observed in the Triple Positive and the lowest OS in the Triple Negative subgroup. Based on treatment regimen, combination of systemic therapy and local therapy achieved the highest OS. A positive trend in OS was observed in the BC subgroup analysis with targeted therapy demonstrating a survival benefit when added to systemic therapy. The multivariate cox regression model showed that age, race, ethnicity, insurance, median income, facility type, CDS, BC subtype, metastatic location sites, and treatment combinations received were significantly associated with risk of death. Receiving only local treatment for BM without systemic therapy more than doubled the risk of death compared to combining it with systemic therapy. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests that treatment of systemic disease is the major factor influencing survival in patients with BCBM. Moreover, targeted therapy with anti-HER2 increased survival when added to systemic therapy explaining the highest median OS noted in the Triple Positive subgroup.

"You matter": patients perceptions and disparities about cancer care and telehealth during and after COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: Disparities in cancer care have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study is to establish how telehealth mitigated the effect of COVID-19 on the healthcare sector and to identify potential disparities in perception and experience with telehealth in cancer care during and after the pandemic. METHODS: We identified individuals with an established cancer diagnosis who received treatment at a comprehensive academic cancer center with a diverse patient population between 2019 and 2021, during the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants were asked to complete a self-administrated survey intended to collect patient-reported outcomes on socioeconomic and mental health challenges incurred during the pandemic as well as participants' experience with telehealth. The assessment was adapted from a 21-question-based survey applied for mental health. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize participant characteristics and the response to the survey items. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess and analyze the contributing factors to the survey responses. RESULTS: A total of N = 136 participants were included in this analysis. The majority of participants (60.6%) reported increased anxiety, stress, or experience of distress as a direct result of COVID-19. However, among 54.1% of survey responders participated in a telehealth appointment and 84.4% agreed it was an easy and effective experience. CONCLUSION: Elderly, male, and black participants reported the worst impact related to the pandemic. The majority of patients had a positive experience with telehealth. The results of the study suggest that telehealth services can serve as a tool for patients with cancer during and beyond active treatment to access supportive services.

Preferences for the sequencing of first-line systemic treatments in metastatic hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer.

Introduction: Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is a diverse disease. Therapeutic options include hormonal therapy, chemotherapy, and targeted therapies. The optimal treatment sequence for patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR-positive), HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer remains unknown. Methods: This was a retrospective and prospective study. The data was collected from the medical records of patients in a tertiary healthcare center in Lebanon between the years 2016 and 2019, and patients were followed up for a 3-year duration. The main aim was to identify oncologists' preferences in the choice and sequence of treatment for newly diagnosed and/or recurrent cases of HR-positive, HER2-negative MBC. Results: A total of 51 patients were included. 24 patients received chemotherapy, while 27 received endocrine therapy as first-line treatment after a diagnosis of MBC, with a median overall survival (OS) of 13 months and a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 12 months after first-line treatment with chemotherapy, compared to 27 months and 18 months with endocrine therapy. A higher percentage of patients have received chemotherapy in the first-line setting compared to the data reported in the literature, with the choice being multifactorial. Conclusion: Factors to consider in MBC management include the choice of first-line treatment, the optimal sequence of treatment, and the combination of available treatment options.

Factors Associated with the Decision to Decline Chemotherapy in Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

(1) Background: Disparities in cancer treatment and outcomes have long been well-documented in the medical literature. With the eruption of advances in new treatment modalities, the long-existing disparities are now being further uncovered and brought to the attention of the medical community. While social health determinants have previously been linked to treatment disparities in lung cancer, we analyzed data from the National Cancer Database to explore sociodemographic and geographic factors related to accepting or declining physician-recommended chemotherapy. Patients diagnosed with metastatic lung cancer between 2004 and 2016 who declined chemotherapy recommended by their physicians were included in this study. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed. Cox Regression and Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed to look for survival characteristics. (2) Results: 316,826 patients with Stage IV lung cancer were identified. Factors related to a higher rate of refusal by patients included older age > 70, female sex, low income, lack of insurance coverage, residency in the New England region, and higher comorbidity. Patients living in areas with lower education were less likely to decline chemotherapy. (3) Conclusion: Further understanding of the factors impacting treatment decisions would be essential to improve the efficacy of care delivery in patients with cancer and reduce reversible causes of disparity.

Thymoma and Myasthenia Gravis: An Examination of a Paraneoplastic Manifestation.

Thymoma is a rare type of malignancy but is considered one of the most common neoplasms that occur in the anterior mediastinum. A large proportion of thymomas are associated with paraneoplastic syndromes, such as myasthenia gravis. Whenever feasible, the standard of care for the treatment of thymoma should focus on the control of paraneoplastic syndromes, surgical resection, and adjuvant therapy if appropriate. A 36-year-old female patient with a significant past medical history of obesity and iron deficiency anemia who underwenten bloc resection of thymoma three months prior now presented to the benign hematology clinic to establish care for the management of anemia. Upon review of systems, the patient incidentally reported fatigue, weakness with repetitive motion, occasional blurred vision, headaches, and exertional dyspnea. Physical examination was positive for horizontal nystagmus. Given the patient's history and clinical findings, suspicion of myasthenia gravis was high. Further work-up demonstrated anti-acetylcholine receptor titers of 5.70 nmol/L (normal < 0.21 nmol/L), supporting a diagnosis of myasthenia gravis in this patient. She was subsequently started on pyridostigmine. Often, patients with thymoma experience paraneoplastic syndrome-related symptoms prior to thymectomy, and in many cases thymectomy is curative. However, in the case presented, we examine a patient that was asymptomatic prior to surgery and subsequently reported the onset of symptoms following what we suspect was an exacerbation due to general anesthesia and pain control medications. We argue that all patients with thymoma should undergo systematic evaluation and treatment of paraneoplastic syndromes, regardless of clinical symptoms and prior to surgery, in order to improve patient quality of life and hospital outcomes.

Impact of COVID-19 on Cancer-Related Care in the United States: An Overview.

COVID-19 impacted several health services, including cancer-related care. Its implications were significant due to the lapse in hospital resources, compounded by the delays stemming from the economic effects on patients' jobs and medical coverage. Furthermore, reports suggesting an increased risk for morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 in patients with cancer and those on active cancer treatment caused additional fear and potential delays in seeking medical services. This review provides an overview of the pandemic's impact on cancer care in the United States and suggests measures for tackling similar situations in the future.