Trends in biomarker testing among metastatic colorectal cancer patients: A temporal description of KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF testing in the EU5

e15136

Background: The European Medicines Agency (EMA) changed its indication language from wild-type KRAS to wild-type RAS ( KRAS and NRAS) for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients treated with panitumumab in July 2013. The objective of this study was to describe patterns of KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF testing among mCRC patients in the EU5 (United Kingdom (U.K.), Germany, France, Italy and Spain) and to evaluate if there were demographic or clinical differences in the patients who were/were not tested. Methods: This descriptive study utilized a serial physician survey from Oncology Analyzer data (IMS Health Oncology, Fairfield, CT, USA), which provides real-world epidemiologic and clinical data. Trends in biomarker testing were evaluated by calculating the proportion of patients who were /were not tested for combinations of KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF within each of the five countries. KRAS and BRAF data were available in all countries from quarter three (Q3) 2012 to quarter two (Q2) 2015. NRAS was available in all countries from quarter 1 (Q1) 2014 to Q2 2015. Frequencies and proportions were also calculated to summarize patient demographic and clinical characteristics between groups with different testing choices. Results: The study included 32,961 mCRC patients. Prior to July 2013, most patients were tested for only KRAS. The proportions of patients tested for both KRAS and NRAS increased substantially during the period of data availability for NRAS, including < 1% to 19.1% in the U.K., 8.8% to 31.9% in France, 13.1% to 43.2% in Germany, 5.9% to 24.6% in Italy, and 8.7% to 31.4% in Spain. The proportions of patients tested for all three biomarkers also increased during the period of data availability for all three biomarkers (Q1 2014 to Q2 2015), including 2.3% to 16.4% in the U.K., 4.8% to 26.6% in France, < 1% to 2.4% in Germany, 4.2% to 22.3% in Italy, and 1.5% to 9.3% in Spain. There were few differences in patient demographic or clinical characteristics between those with different testing choices. Conclusions: This analysis provides a description of the patterns of biomarker testing using read-world data and suggests a consistent increase in testing among mCRC patients in the EU5.

Preemptive versus reactive management of EGFR rash among mCRC patients treated with panitumumab: Results of a national survey of treating oncologists in the United States

e15169

Background: The Skin Toxicity Evaluation Protocol with Panitumumab (STEPP) and the Japan Skin Toxicity Evaluation Protocol with Panitumumab (J-STEPP) were open-label, randomized trials that were designed to evaluate differences in preemptive versus reactive management of dermatologic toxicities associated with panitumumab among patients with mCRC. The objective of this study was to evaluate if there were differences in the knowledge and application of STEPP and J-STEPP among oncologists who self-identified as primarily managing EGFR rash preemptively or reactively. Methods: A total of 250 practicing oncologists who had treated at least three new or continuing mCRC patients with panitumumab in the last year completed an online survey to report their opinions and perceptions regarding the management strategies for mCRC patients who are treated with panitumumab. Preemptive treatment was described in the survey as beginning treatment “prior to the appearance of rash” and reactive treatment was defined as beginning treatment “after signs of rash.” Results: Of the 250 oncologists who participated in this study, n = 58 (23%) reported treating 100% of their patients preemptively and n = 38 (15%) reported treating 100% of their patients reactively. A significantly higher proportion of preemptive treaters than reactive treaters reported following the skin management strategies from STEPP or J-STEPP when managing panitumumab-related skin toxicity (31% vs 13%, p = 0.02). When asked if skin moisturizer, sunscreen, over-the-counter topical steroids, prescription topical steroids, oral antibiotics, topical antibiotics, or UV protective garments were most critical in the preemptive management of panitumumab-related skin toxicity, preemptive treaters more likely to report using oral antibiotics and reactive treaters more like to report using sunscreen (p = 0.05). Conclusions: The results of this survey highlight the wide variability in the management of EGFR-related rash among mCRC patients who are treated with panitumumab and they highlight the need for heighted education among oncologists who treat mCRC patients with panitumumab.

Milk production and composition, nitrogen utilization, and grazing behavior of late-lactation dairy cows as affected by time of allocation of a fresh strip of pasture

Eighty late-lactation dairy cows were used to examine the effects of allocating a new pasture strip of a sward based on ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) in the morning (a.m.; ∼0730 h) or in the afternoon (p.m.; ∼1530 h) on milk production and composition, nitrogen (N) utilization, and grazing behavior. Cows grazed the same pasture strips for 24 h and were offered the same daily herbage allowance. Herbage composition differed among treatments; p.m. herbage had greater dry matter (DM; 22.7 vs. 19.9%), organic matter (OM; 89.5 vs. 88.9%), and water-soluble carbohydrate (10.9 vs. 7.6%) concentrations and lesser crude protein (20.5 vs. 22.2%) and neutral detergent fiber (48.8 vs. 50.4%) concentrations compared with a.m. herbage. Total fatty acids (FA), α-linolenic acid, and polyunsaturated FA (PUFA) were greater in a.m. herbage, whereas monounsaturated FA were greater in p.m. herbage. Estimates of herbage DM intake did not differ among treatments. Daily milk yields and milk fat and milk protein concentrations were similar among treatments, whereas milk fat (684 vs. 627 g/cow), milk protein (545 vs. 505 g/cow), and milk solids (milk fat + milk protein) yields (1,228 vs. 1,132 g/cow) tended to be greater for cows on p.m. herbage. Rumenic acid and total PUFA in milk were greater for cows on a.m. herbage, whereas oleic acid was greater for cows on p.m. herbage. Estimates of urinary N excretion (g/d) did not differ among treatments, but urinary N concentrations were greater for cows on a.m. herbage (5.85 vs. 5.36 g/L). Initial herbage mass (HM) available (kg of DM/ha) and instantaneous HM disappearance rates (kg of DM/ha and kg of DM/h) did not differ, but fractional disappearance rates (0.56 vs. 0.74 per hour for a.m. vs. p.m., respectively) differed. Under the current conditions, timing of pasture strip allocation altered the herbage nutrient supply to cows; allocating a fresh strip of pasture later in the day resulted in moderate increases in milk and milk solids yields in late-lactation dairy cows. Conversely, a greater concentration of precursor FA in a.m. herbage resulted in a greater concentration of beneficial FA in milk, compared with cows on p.m. herbage.

The treatment continuum of panitumumab, cetuximab, and bevacizumab in 1st through 3rd line by KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF mutation status among mCRC patients treated at community cancer centers in the United States

638

Background: Our objective was to use real world data to evaluate of the treatment continuum of bevacizumab (Bmab), cetuximab (Cmab), panitumumab (Pmab) or no biologics across 1st, 2nd, and 3rd lines among metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who were treated at community cancer centers in the United States. This objective was applied separately to patients with confirmed KRAS, NRAS, or BRAF wild-type (WT) or mutation (MUT) status, as well as patient who did not receive biomarker testing (UNK). Methods: This descriptive study utilized data from the Oncology Services Comprehensive Electronic Records (OSCER) database. It included 5,446 (2,064 WT, 1,807 MUT, and 1,575 UNK) patients diagnosed with mCRC between 1/1/2011 and 8/31/2015. Patients were stratified into the following mutually-exclusive categories in 1st, 2nd line, and 3rd line: Pmab only, Cmab only, Bmab only, or no biologic. Patients who survived and continued therapy were followed through the lines of therapy. Results: 23.8% of WT, 36.3% of MUT and 49.5% of UNK patients did not receive a biologic in 1st line. There were 1,003 WT patients who were treated with Bmab in 1st. Of those, n=587 (58.5%) survived and elected to continue treatment in 2nd line as follows: n=221 (37.6%) continued with Bmab, n=216 (36.8%) initiated Cmab, n=65 (11.1%) initiated Pmab, and n=85 (14.5%) received no biologic in 2nd line. Of the 221 WT patients who received Bmab in 1st and 2nd line, n=129 (58.4%) survived and initiated 3rd line treatment, of which n=20 (15.5%) received Bmab in 3rd line. There were 127/2,604 (4.9%) WT patients who were treated with Pmab in 1st line. Of those 127 patients, n=46 (36.2%) survived and elected to continue treatment in 2nd line as follows: n=11 (29.3%) continued treatment with Pmab in 2nd line, while n=14 (30.4%) initiated treatment with Bmab, n=4 (8.7%) initiated treatment with Cmab, and n=16 (36.4%) did not receive a biologic in 2nd line. Conclusions: A small proportion of patients continued treatment with the same biologic throughout subsequent lines of therapy. Many patients were not treated with a biologic in any line, even if they were confirmed WT.

A survey of medical oncologist’s opinions and perceptions regarding the management of dermatologic toxicities among mCRC patients treated with panitumumab in the United States

639

Background: Dermatologic toxicity can be a limiting factor for the use of anti-EGFR therapy such as panitumumab. There is a paucity of real world data regarding the management of dermatologic toxicity among metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients treated with panitumumab in the United States (U.S.). The objective of this study is to describe oncologist's opinions regarding timing of skin rash management in relation to the initiation of treatment and perceptions regarding rash management strategies. Methods: A total of 125 oncologists were recruited from a national database via a third independent party. Eligible oncologists (i.e.: licensed and practicing oncologist who had treated at least three new or continuing mCRC patients with panitumumab in the last year) completed an online survey to report their opinions regarding the grade and type of dermatologic toxicities seen and their perceptions about management strategies for mCRC patients who are treated with panitumumab. The timing of rash management initiation was defined as pre-emptive (prior to the appearance of the rash) or reactive (after any signs of skin rash). Results: Based upon their collective experience, oncologists expect that 44% of patients will develop acneiform rash while on treatment. More than half (58%) of the oncologists reported they did not follow any practice guidelines regarding the management of dermatologic toxicities. The oncologists reported that they pre-emptively initiated the management of dermatologic toxicities in 53% of their patients. Skin moisturizer and sunscreen were reported to be the most critical preemptive management approach, while skin moisturizer, over-the-counter topical steroids, and oral antibiotics were reported to be the most critical reactive management tools for Grades 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Conclusions: Despite evidence from randomized controlled trials, a majority of oncologists do not follow guidelines for dermatologic management of EGFR-I rash. There is a clear need for better physician education and awareness of mitigation strategies for skin toxicity management in mCRC patients treated with panitumumab.

Patterns of KRAS, NRAS and BRAF testing among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer in the EU5

637

Background: In mid-2013, the requirement for mCRC patients treated with panitumumab changed from wild-type KRAS to wild-type RAS ( KRAS and NRAS). The objective of this study was to describe patterns of KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF testing among mCRC patients in the EU5 (United Kingdom (U.K.), Germany, France, Italy and Spain). Methods: This descriptive study utilized Oncology Analyzer data (IMS Health Oncology, Fairfield, CT, USA), which provides real-world quarterly cross-sectional, epidemiologic and clinical data for mCRC patients. Trends in biomarker testing during the study period were evaluated by calculating the frequencies and proportions of patients who were /were not tested for combinations of KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF within each of the five countries. KRAS and BRAF data were available in all countries from quarter three (Q3) 2012 to quarter two (Q2) 2015. NRAS was available in all countries from quarter 1 (Q1) 2014 to Q2 2015. Frequencies and proportions were also calculated to summarize patient demographic and clinical characteristics between groups with different testing choices. Results: A total of 32,961 patients with mCRC were included in the analyses. Prior to 2013, the majority of patients in each country were tested for only KRAS. The proportion of patients tested for both KRAS and NRAS increased substantially during the period of data availability for NRAS (Q1 2014 to Q2 2015), including <1% to 19.1% in the U.K., 8.8% to 31.9% in France, 13.1% to 43.2% in Germany, 5.9% to 24.6% in Italy, and 8.7% to 31.4% in Spain. The proportion of patients who were tested for all three biomarkers also increased during the period of data availability for all three biomarkers (Q1 2014 to Q2 2015), including 2.3% to 16.4% in the U.K., 4.8% to 26.6% in France, <1% to 2.4% in Germany, 4.2% to 22.3% in Italy, and 1.5% to 9.3% in Spain. There were few differences in patient demographic or clinical characteristics between those with different testing groups. Conclusions: This analysis provides a description of biomarker testing using read-world data and suggests an overall increase in testing among mCRC patients in the EU5. Although there was a trend towards increased testing, many mCRC patients are still not tested for these important biomarkers.

Assessment of treatment with panitumumab, cetuximab, and bevacizumab among mCRC patients with wild-type RAS or BRAF treated at community cancer centers in the United States

663

Background: There is limited observational data on the use of RAS test results and treatment patterns with chemotherapy and biologics among metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. Our objective was to use real world data to evaluate the treatment sequences of mCRC patients who have wild-type RAS (KRAS, NRAS), or BRAF and who are treated at community cancer clinics within the United States (U.S.). Methods: The sample included 536 patients in the Oncology Services Comprehensive Electronic Records (OSCER) database who were diagnosed with mCRC between 1/1/2011 and 8/31/2015. All patients had available treatment data and were confirmed to have wild-type RAS or BRAF. Patients were stratified into mutually-exclusive categories based on 1st line treatment with chemotherapy in combination with either bevacizumab (Bmab), cetuximab (Cmab), panitumumab (Pmab), a combination of Pmab, Cmab or Bmab, or no biologics. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data. Results: The demographics of the sample were as follows: mean age 67 years (standard deviation = 12), 55% male, 70% White, and 50% with ECOG value of zero. The use of Bmab, Cmab, or Pmab in combination with chemotherapy in 1st line treatment was follows: Bmab only (n = 270, 50%), Cmab only (n = 81, 15%), Pmab only (n = 28, 5%), and a combination of either Bmab, Cmab and/or Pmab (n = 6, 1%). No biologics were administered to 151 (28%) of the sample in 1st line. There were no statistically significant differences in age, gender, race, insurance type, region of the U.S. or ECOG status at mCRC diagnosis across the 1st line treatment categories. Of the 385 patients who received a biologic in 1st line, 94 (24%) of those who survived and selected to continue treatment received a biologic in 2nd line. Of these 94 patients, 25 (27%) of those who survived and selected to continue treatment also received a biologic in 3rd line. Conclusions: Bmab was the most commonly-used biologic among mCRC patients with wild-type RAS or BRAF in this descriptive study. Future research is needed to better understand what factors impact treatment decisions among mCRC patients.

RAS mutation prevalence among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis of real-world data

513

Background: Guidelines for prescribing anti-EGFR therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) require prior testing to confirm RAS (exons 2, 3, 4 of KRAS and NRAS) wild-type status in Europe and the USA. There is limited published evidence reporting the prevalence of RAS mutations in patients with mCRC in a real-world setting. The aim of this study was to use data from a range of real-world sources to obtain RAS mutation prevalence estimates for different geographic regions. Methods: Aggregated RAS mutation prevalence data were collected from 13 sources, including individual pathology centers (n = 7), mCRC registries (n = 3), and Amgen-sponsored studies (n = 3). Data sources included in this study originated in Europe (n = 10), the Middle East (n = 2), and South America (n = 1). A meta-analysis of all collected data was carried out to investigate the effect of heterogeneity amongst the data sources and obtain pooled RAS prevalence estimates for each, using a mixed regression model. Results: Aggregate data from 4322 patients with mCRC were included in the pooled meta-analysis. The overall RAS mutation prevalence across all data sources was estimated to be 43.5% (95% CI: 41.5–45.5%). RAS mutation prevalence varied between data sources, ranging from low estimates of 33.7% (95% CI: 28.4–39.3%) for a Middle Eastern pathology dataset, and 34.6% (95% CI: 27.7–42.1%) for a Middle Eastern mCRC registry, to the highest estimates of 53.6% (95% CI: 43.2–63.8%) and 54.1% (95% CI: 51.7–56.5%) in two European pathology centers, in the Czech Republic and Poland, respectively. Conclusions: This is one of the first studies to carry out a large pooled analysis of RAS mutation prevalence, based on real-world data. There was a high degree of heterogeneity between the sources included, possibly due to the types of data source, patient selection criteria, geographic location, or differences in laboratory testing methods. The estimated RAS mutation prevalence reported here is lower than that in a recent pooled analysis of past clinical trials, which reported an overall prevalence of 55.5% (95% CI: 53.9–57.9%) (Peeters M, et al. Eur J Cancer 2015;51:1704–13). Further investigations are required to explain the disparity in these findings.

The prevalence RAS and BRAF mutations among patients in the Middle East and Northern Africa with metastatic colorectal cancer

598

Background: Anti-EGFR therapies are recommended for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients with confirmed wild-type RAS (exons 2, 3, 4 of KRAS and NRAS) status. There is limited published information on the prevalence of RAS mutations using real world data. The objective of this study was estimate the prevalence of RAS and BRAF mutations among patients with mCRC in the Middle East and Northern Africa (MENA) in an effort to inform the rationale for biomarker testing and treatment choice. Methods: The study included 1,669 patients from August 2013 to July 2015 with mCRC from Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emeritus. Information on RAS mutation status was obtained from one pathology lab using High Resolution Melting Analysis. Extended RAS analysis was conducted in a subset of patients, including: overall RAS (exon 2, 3, 4 of KRAS and NRAS; n = 750), KRAS exon 2 (n = 750), KRAS exon 3 and 4 (n = 507), NRAS exon 2, 3, and 4 (n = 507), and BRAF exon 15 (n = 78). The proportion of patients with each mutation was summarized. Results: The overall RAS mutation in the full sample was 35.3% (n = 589/1669). The observed mutation for KRAS exon 2 in a subset of patients with extended RAS analysis (n = 750) was 32.4% (243/750). Out of the subjects with wild-type exon 2 (n = 507), the observed mutations rates were as follows: KRAS exon 4 (20/507 = 3.9%), KRAS exon 3 (13/507 = 2.6%), NRAS exon 2 (7/507 = 1.4%), NRAS exon 3 (6/507 = 1.2%), and NRAS exon 4 (0%). The prevalence of BRAF exon 15 was 3.8% (3/78). The most robust data on specific RAS mutations was obtained from Algeria, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia. The prevalence of KRAS exon 2 mutations in these countries was as follows: Algeria (n = 33/86 = 38.4%), Egypt (n = 83/303 = 27.4%), Saudi Arabia (n = 85/245 = 34.7%). Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate the prevalence of RAS and BRAF mutations in the Middle East using real world data. The results of this descriptive study illustrate that there is variation in the prevalence of RAS and BRAF mutations in MENA.

Characterization of KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF testing and timing among mCRC patients treated at community cancer centers in the United States

695

Background: The requirement to establish RAS status prior to administration of an EGFR inhibitor has increased the need to understand which patients are tested for RAS and the length of time it takes for the treating oncologist to receive the RAS test result. Our objective was to evaluate factors that may influence RAS testing among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and the turn-around time for RAS testing among patients who are treated at community cancer centers in the United States (U.S.). Methods: The sample includes 1550 patients in the Oncology Services Comprehensive Electronic Records (OSCER) database who were diagnosed with mCRC between 1/1/2011 and 8/31/2015. Patient demographics and clinical characteristics were evaluated at the time of mCRC diagnosis. The median number of days and interquartile range (IQR) between the following dates was summarized: diagnosis for mCRC, tissue collection for biomarker testing, tissue was received by the lab for biomarker testing, and biomarker results returned to the oncologist. Results: The frequency of RAS testing was as follows: KRAS (n = 964; 62%), NRAS (n = 116; 7%), BRAF (n = 231; 15%), all three simultaneously (n = 94, 6%). There were significant differences in KRAS testing by age and type of insurance, with young (p < 0.001) and commercially-insured (p = 0.01) patients more likely to receive testing. The median number of days and IQR between specimen collection and diagnosis of mCRC was as follows: KRAS (0; 0 to 443), NRAS (0; -18.5 to 362), and BRAF (-3; -474 to 0). The median number of calendar days between the date the specimen was collected and the date it was received by the lab was as follows: KRAS (19; 1 to 303), NRAS (34.5, 8 to 518), and BRAF (29; 2 to 428). The median number of days between the date the specimen was received by the lab and the date the result was returned to the oncologist was as follows: KRAS (7; 5 to 13), NRAS (10; 7 to 15), and BRAF (8; 6 to 14). Conclusions: Many patients had a specimen collected for biomarker testing at the time of mCRC diagnosis and the results were generally returned to the treating oncologist within one week of it arriving at the lab.

International burden of chronic kidney disease and secondary hyperparathyroidism: a systematic review of the literature and available data

The international burden of secondary hyperparathyroidism (SHPT) is unknown, but it may be estimable through the available chronic kidney disease and SHPT literature. Structured reviews of biomedical literature and online data systems were performed for selected countries to ascertain recent estimates of the incidence, prevalence, and survival of individuals with CKD and SHPT. International societies of nephrology were contacted to seek additional information regarding available data. Estimates were abstracted from 35 sources reporting estimates of CKD in 25 countries. Population prevalence estimates of CKD stages 3-5 in adults ranged from approximately 1 to 9% (China, Mexico, resp.). Estimates of the population prevalence of maintenance dialysis therapy ranged from 79 per million population (pmp; China) to 2385 pmp (Japan); incidence rates ranged from 91 pmp (United Kingdom) to 349 pmp (United States). Prevalence of SHPT among stage 5D populations was highly variable and dependent upon the disease definition used. Among the few nations reporting, approximately 30-50% of stage 5D patients had serum parathyroid hormone levels >300 pg/mL. Reported incidence and prevalence estimates across the individual nations were variable, likely reflecting differing population demographics, risk factors, etiologies, and availability of treatment through all stages of CKD.

A multicenter phase I study of cabazitaxel (Cbz), mitoxantrone (Mito), and prednisone (Pred) (CAMP) for chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC)

243

Background: Cbz/pred extends survival in mCRPC patients (pts) following docetaxel and first-line studies comparing Cbz to docetaxel are ongoing. Mito/pred also has anti-tumor activity in mCRPC and a non-overlapping mechanism of action and toxicity profile with Cbz. A multicenter phase I trial was initiated through the DOD PCCTC to establish the maximally tolerated dose (MTD) of the combination of Cbz, Mito, and Pred. Methods: Chemotherapy (chemo)-naive pts with mCRPC were enrolled in an accelerated titration design. The primary objective was to determine the MTD of CAMP; secondary objectives included assessing PSA and objective response rates and duration of response. Starting dose of Cbz was 25 mg/m2 (the currently approved single-agent dose) and Mito 4 mg/m2, administered on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. Mito was escalated by 2 mg/m2 per dose level. Pred 5 mg BID and pegfilgrastim were administered with each cycle. Results: 9 pts were enrolled (dose level I, N = 1; dose level II, N = 1; dose level III, N = 3; dose level IV N = 4). The median age was 67 (range 55-81) and the median baseline PSA was 82.3 (range 20.4-791.2). There were 2 DLTs observed at dose level IV (Cbz 25 mg/m2 + mito 10 mg/m2), both grade 4 sepsis. The most common grade 3 adverse events were hematologic (neutropenia, n = 5; febrile neutropenia, n = 2, thrombocytopenia, n = 2). 6 of 9 pts remain on study (range 2.2 - 10.5+ months). Maximal PSA declines from baseline > 50% have been observed in 4/7 (57%) evaluable pts to date. 2 of 4 pts with measurable disease have experienced partial responses and a third has had a minor response after 4 cycles of chemo. The median progression-free survival and duration of response have not been reached. Conclusions: The approved single-agent dosage of Mito (12 mg/m2) could not be safely reached in combination with Cbz 25 mg/m2. Pre-planned evaluation of an alternate dosing strategy combining Mito with Cbz 20 mg/m2, which has demonstrated activity in mCRPC and potentially less hematologic toxicity, is underway. Preliminary efficacy data are encouraging but additional follow-up and further study of the treatment combination is required. Clinical trial information: NCT01594918.

Adults with intellectual disabilities and challenging behaviour: the costs and outcomes of in- and out-of-area placements

BACKGROUND

People with severe challenging behaviour are vulnerable to exclusion from local services and removal to out-of-area placements if locally available supported accommodation is insufficient to meet their needs. There are concerns about the high costs and potentially poorer outcomes of out-of-area placements but relatively little is known about how costs and outcomes compare with provision for a similar population placed locally.

METHODS

Costs, quality of care and a wide range of quality of life outcomes for 38 people with intellectual disabilities and challenging behaviour living in-area and 38 similar people living out-of-area were compared. The two groups were matched as far as possible on risk factors for out-of-area placement. The out-of-area group represented two-thirds of the total number of people who originated from the territory served by the largest specialist health service in Wales and were placed in residential settings at least 10 miles beyond its boundaries.

RESULTS

There was a mixed pattern of quality of care and quality of outcome advantages between the two types of setting, although in-area placements had a greater number of advantages than out-of-area placements. Unexpectedly, out-of-area placements had lower total costs, accommodation costs and daytime activity costs.

CONCLUSIONS

No overall conclusion could be reached about cost-effectiveness. A number of potential reasons for the differences in cost were identified. Although additional resources may be needed to provide in-area services for those currently placed out-of-area, government policy to provide comprehensively for those who want to live locally, irrespective of their needs, appears to be attainable.

A multisource approach to improving epidemiologic estimates: application to global B-cell malignancies

The compilation of comprehensive, worldwide epidemiologic data can inform hypotheses on cancer etiology and guide future drug development. These statistics are reported by a multitude of sources using varying methods; thus, compiling a complete database of these statistics is a challenge. To this end, this paper examined the usefulness of a novel, multisource approach—extracting data from the peer-reviewed literature, online reports, and query systems from cancer registries and health agencies and directly contacting cancer registry personnel—for building a comprehensive, multinational epidemiologic cancer database. The major B-cell malignancies were chosen as the cancer subtype to test this approach largely because their epidemiology has not been well characterized in the peer-reviewed literature. We found that a multisource approach yields a more comprehensive epidemiologic database than what would have been possible with the use of literature searches alone. In addition, our paper revealed that cancer registries vary considerably in their methodology, comprehensiveness, and ability to gather information on specific B-cell malignancy subtypes. Collectively, this paper demonstrates the feasibility and value of a multisource approach to gathering epidemiologic data.

Examination of ancestral informative markers and self-reported race with tumor characteristics of breast cancer among Black and White women

African American (AA) women have a higher mortality from breast cancer (BC) compared to European American (EA) women. This may be due to the higher proportion of AA women with tumors that are diagnosed at more advanced stages and are characterized as being estrogen receptor negative (ER-)/progesterone receptor negative (PR-). Our study sought to determine whether self-reported race and percent African ancestry were associated with BC tumor characteristics. In a multi-center, population-based case-control study of BC, we determined percent African ancestry using ancestry informative markers (AIM) among women self-reporting race as AA or Black. BC tumor characteristics were associated with self-reported race (including a 30 % reduction in ER+/PR+ tumors [95 % confidence interval [CI]: 0.6-0.9] and a 1.5-fold increased risk of high grade [95 % CI: 1.2-1.9] for AA women compared to EA women). AIMs among AA women were not associated with BC tumor characteristics (AA women with ≥95 % versus <80 % African ancestry, odds ratio [OR] = 1.0 for ER+/PR+ [95 % CI: 0.6-1.8] and OR = 0.9 for high-grade tumors [95 % CI: 0.6-1.4]). Similar findings were observed for BC stage. While BC subtypes were associated with self-reported race, BC subtypes were not associated with percent African ancestry. These study results suggest that subtle differences in percent African ancestry are less important than the overall presence of African ancestry in relation to BC tumor characteristics.

Estrogen-related genes and their contribution to racial differences in breast cancer risk

Racial differences in breast cancer risk, including the risks of hormone receptor subtypes of breast cancer, have been previously reported. We evaluated whether variation in genes related to estrogen metabolism (COMT, CYP1A1, CYP1B1, CYP17A1, CYP19A1, ESR1, GSTM1, GSTP1, GSTT1, HSD17B1, SULT1A1, and UGT1A1) contributes to breast cancer risk and/or racial differences in risk within the CARE study, a multi-centered, population-based case-control study of breast cancer. Genetic variation was assessed as single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), haplotypes, and SNP-hormone therapy (HT) interactions within a subset of 1,644 cases and 1,451 controls, including 949 Black women (493 cases and 456 controls), sampled from the CARE study population. No appreciable associations with breast cancer risk were detected for single SNPs or haplotypes in women overall. We detected SNP-HT interactions in women overall within CYP1B1 (rs1800440; p (het) = 0.003) and within CYP17A1 (rs743572; p (het) = 0.009) in which never users of HT were at a decreased risk of breast cancer, while ever users were at a non-significant increased risk. When investigated among racial groups, we detected evidence of an SNP-HT interaction with CYP1B1 in White women (p value = 0.02) and with CYP17A1 in Black women (p value = 0.04). This analysis suggests that HT use may modify the effect of variation in estrogen-related genes on breast cancer risk, which may affect Black and White women to a different extent.

Abstract A89: Examination of ancestral informative markers and self-reported race with tumor characteristics of breast cancer among black and white women

African American (AA) women have higher mortality from breast cancer (BC) compared to European American (EA) women. This may be due to the higher proportion of AA women with tumors that are diagnosed at advanced stage and are estrogen receptor negative (ER-) /progesterone receptor negative (PR-). Our study sought to determine whether self-reported race and percent African ancestry were associated with BC tumor characteristics. In a multi-center, population-based case-control study of BC, we determined percent African ancestry using ancestry informative markers (AIM) among women self-reporting as Black. While self-reported race was associated with several BC tumor characteristics, AIMs markers among AA women were not. Specifically, women self-reporting as Black were at a 30% reduction in ER+/PR+ tumors (95% CI: 0.6–0.9), a non-significant risk of ER-/PR-tumors (OR = 1.3 [95% CI: 0.9–1.7]), a 1.4-fold increased risk of regional/distant stage (95% CI: 1.1–1.7) and a 1.5-fold increased risk of high grade tumors (95% CI: 1.2–1.9) compared to EA women. Percent African ancestry was not associated with any BC tumor characteristics (OR=1.0 for ER+/PR+ [95% CI: 0.6–1.8], OR = 0.9 for ER-/PR-[95% CI: 0.5–1.6], OR = 1.3 for regional/distant stage [95% CI: 0.8–2.1], and OR=0.9 for high-grade tumors [95% CI: 0.6–1.4] comparing those with ≥95% African ancestry to those with &lt;80% African ancestry). This analysis suggests that factors unrelated to AA women's genetic ancestry contribute to racial differences in BC tumor characteristics.

Citation Information: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2011;20(10 Suppl):A89.