Recommendations for prioritization, treatment, and triage of breast cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. the COVID-19 pandemic breast cancer consortium. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2020;181:487-497. [PMID: 32333293 PMCID: PMC7181102 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-020-05644-z]

Validation study of risk-reduction activities after personalized breast cancer education tool in the WISDOM study

Breast cancer risk reduction strategies have been well-validated, but barriers remain for high-risk individuals to adopt them. We performed a study among participants with high risk of breast cancer to validate whether a virtual breast health decision tool impacted a participant's willingness to start risk-reducing activities, identify barriers to adopting these strategies, and understand if it affects breast cancer anxiety. The study sample was 318 participants in the personalized (investigational) arm of the Women Informed to Screen Depending on Measures of risk (WISDOM) clinical trial. After reviewing the tool, these participants completed a feedback survey. We demonstrated that 15 (4.7%) women were taking endocrine risk reduction, 123 (38.7%) were reducing alcohol intake, and 199 (62.6%) were exercising. In the three-month follow-up survey of 109 respondents, only 8 of 61 (13.1%) women who considered endocrine risk reduction pursued it. In contrast, 11 of 16 (68%) participants who considered alcohol reduction pursued the activity, and 14 of 24 (58%) women who considered exercise followed through. Participants listed fear of side effects as the most common barrier to endocrine risk reduction. We also present further steps to be taken to improve the effectiveness of the Breast Health Decisions tool.

Morphological and molecular changes of oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer following bridging endocrine therapy: a United Kingdom multicentre study

AIMS

Standard neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NAET) is used for 6-9 months to downstage hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer. Bridging ET was introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic to delay surgical intervention. There are no data in the literature on the effect of short course therapy on tumour response. We aimed to analyse the effect of bridging ET and validate the previously proposed neoadjuvant ET pathological reporting criteria.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This was a multicentre cohort of 256 patients who received bridging ET between March and October 2020. Assessment of paired pre- and post-NAET hormone receptors and HER2 and posttherapy Ki67 expression was done. The median duration of NAET was 45 days. In all, 86% of cases achieved partial pathological response and 9% showed minimal residual disease. Histological response to ET was observed from as early as day 6 posttherapy. Central scarring was noted in 32.8% of cases and lymphocytic infiltrate was seen in 43.4% of cases. Significant changes associated with the duration of ET were observed in tumour grade (21%), with downgrading identified in 12% of tumours (P < 0.001), progesterone receptor (PR) expression with switch to PR-negative status in 26% of cases (P < 0.001), and HER2 status with a switch from HER2-low to HER2-negative status in 32% of cases (P < 0.001). The median patient survival was 475 days, with an overall survival rate of 99.6%.

CONCLUSIONS

Changes characteristic of tumour regression and significant changes in PR and HER2 occurred following a short course of NAET. The findings support biomarker testing on pretreatment core biopsies and retesting following therapy.

A Randomized Trial Comparing Concurrent versus Sequential Radiation and Endocrine Therapy in Early-Stage, Hormone-Responsive Breast Cancer

Concerns exist regarding increased toxicities, including endocrine therapy toxicity, with concurrent radiation and endocrine therapy in early breast cancer (EBC). We present a pragmatic, randomized trial comparing concurrent versus sequential endocrine and radiotherapy in hormone-responsive EBC. In this multicenter trial, patients were randomized to receive adjuvant endocrine therapy concurrent with, or sequential to, radiotherapy. The primary outcome was change in endocrine therapy toxicity from baseline to 3 months post radiotherapy using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Endocrine Symptom (FACT-ES) score. From September 2019 to January 2021, 133 patients were randomized to concurrent endocrine and radiotherapy, and 127 to sequential treatment. Most patients were post-menopausal (72.7%, 189/260) with stage 1 disease (65.8%, 171/260). Tamoxifen was the endocrine therapy of choice for 69.6% (181/260) of patients, and an aromatase inhibitor for the remainder. The median total radiation dose and fractions were 40.1 Gray (range 26-50) and 15 fractions (range 5-25), respectively. For the primary outcome of change in endocrine therapy toxicity per FACT-ES scores from baseline to 3 months post radiotherapy, no significant difference was found between the groups (median [range] = -4.9 (-82, 38.8) for concurrent and -5.1 (-42, 40) for sequential, p = 0.87). This is the first trial to investigate the impact of concurrent versus sequential adjuvant endocrine and radiotherapy on endocrine therapy-related toxicities. The findings provide further support to allow the optimal timing of radiation and endocrine therapy to be tailored for the individual patient.

Impact of Covid-19 on Breast Cancer Screening

OBJECTIVE

To assess the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on breast cancer screening.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional and retrospective study, which used data extracted from "TABNET" between 2014 to 2020.  Statistical analysis was carried out using the ANOVA model.

RESULT

In 2019, a total of 3,068,776 mammograms were conducted, which significantly decreased to 1,808,765 in 2020.  Since the onset of the pandemic in Brazil in March 2020, there has been a reduction in the number of mammograms performed.  Mammography coverage increased from 0.11 to 0.18 between 2014 and 2019 but sharply declined from 0.18 to 0.10 between 2019 and 2020.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a detrimental impact on breast cancer screening efforts, especially in detecting the disease in early stages.  Health services shifted their focus towards caring for COVID-19 patients, therefore neglecting routine screening programs and interventions. Additionally, the population's fear of contagion contributed to a decrease in demand for screening tests.

Advancing perspectives on the off-label use of anticancer drugs: an updated classification and exploration of categories

To date, the definition that the off-label usage of drugs refers to the unapproved use of approved drugs, which covers unapproved indications, patient populations, doses, and/or routes of administration, has been in existence for many years. Currently, there is a limited frequency and prevalence of research on the off-label use of antineoplastic drugs, mainly due to incomplete definition and classification issues. It is time to embrace new categories for the off-label usage of anticancer drugs. This review provided an insight into an updated overview of the concept and categories of the off-label use of anticancer drugs, along with illustrating specific examples to establish the next studies about the extent of the off-label usage of anticancer drugs in the oncology setting. The scope of the off-label use of current anticancer drugs beyond the previous definitions not only includes off-label uses in terms of indications, patient populations, doses, and/or routes of administration but also off-label use in terms of medication course, combination, sequence of medication, clinical purpose, contraindications scenarios, etc. In addition, the definition of the off-label usage of anticancer drugs should be added to the condition at a given time, and it varies from approval authorities. We presented a new and relatively comprehensive classification, providing extensive analysis and illustrative examples of the off-label usage of antineoplastic drugs for the first time. Such a classification has the potential to promote practical adoption and enhance management strategies for the off-label use of antitumor drugs.

Association Between COVID-19 and Planned and Postponed Cancer Screenings Among American Indian Adults Residing in California and Oklahoma, March-December 2020

OBJECTIVE

Little is known about how the COVID-19 pandemic affected cancer screenings among American Indian people residing in California and Oklahoma, 2 states with the largest American Indian populations. We assessed rates and factors associated with cancer screenings among American Indian adults during the pandemic.

METHODS

From October 2020 through January 2021, we surveyed 767 American Indian adults residing in California and Oklahoma. We asked participants whether they had planned to obtain screenings for breast cancer, cervical cancer, and colorectal cancer (CRC) from March through December 2020 and whether screening was postponed because of COVID-19. We calculated adjusted odds ratios (AORs) for factors associated with reasons for planned and postponed cancer screening.

RESULTS

Among 395 participants eligible for breast cancer screening, 234 (59.2%) planned to obtain the screening, 127 (54.3%) of whom postponed it. Among 517 participants eligible for cervical cancer screening, 357 (69.1%) planned to obtain the screening, 115 (32.2%) of whom postponed it. Among 454 participants eligible for CRC screening, 282 (62.1%) planned to obtain CRC screening, 80 of whom (28.4%) postponed it. In multivariate analyses, women who lived with a child (vs did not) had lower odds of planning to obtain a breast cancer screening (AOR = 0.6; 95% CI, 0.3-1.0). Adherence to social distancing recommendations was associated with planning to have and postponement of cervical cancer screening (AOR = 7.3; 95% CI, 0.9-58.9). Participants who received (vs did not receive) social or financial support had higher odds of planning to have CRC screening (AOR = 2.0; 95% CI, 1.1-3.9).

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic impeded completion of cancer screenings among American Indian adults. Interventions are needed to increase the intent to receive evidence-based cancer screenings among eligible American Indian adults.

Favorable outcome of neoadjuvant endocrine treatment than surgery-first in female HR-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer patients-A NCDB analysis (2010-2016)

PURPOSE

To assess the efficacy of neoadjuvant endocrine therapy in female HR-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer patients.

DATA AND METHODS

We identified female patients aged ≥18 years with cT1-4N0-XM0, HR(+), and HER2(-) breast cancer from the National Cancer Database. The patients who underwent surgery first were categorized as "surgery-first," while those who received NET before surgery were classified as "NET." Propensity score-matching, Cox proportional-hazard model, variance inflation factors, and interaction analysis were employed to estimate the correlation between NET and survival outcomes.

RESULTS

Among 432,387 cases, 2914 NET patients and 2914 surgery-first patients were matched. Compared with the surgery-first group, the NET group received less adjuvant chemotherapy (p < 0.001). Furthermore, the NET group exhibited higher survival probabilities compared with the surgery-first group (3 years: 91.4% vs. 82.1%; 5 years: 82.1% vs. 66.8%). Multivariate Cox analysis indicated that NET was associated with improved OS (surgery-first vs. NET: HR 2.17, 95% CI: 1.93-2.44). Age over 55 years old, having public insurance, higher CDCC score, higher NSBR grade, ER(+)PR(-), and advanced clinical stage were related to worse OS (all p < 0.05). There was an interaction between age, race, income, and home and treatment regimen (all p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

NET may be a more effective treatment procedure than surgery-first in female HR-positive/HER2-negative, non-metastatic breast cancer patients. Future clinical studies with more detailed data will provide higher-level evidence-based data.

Did the COVID-19 pandemic delay treatment for localized breast cancer patients? A multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Longer times between diagnosis and treatments of cancer patients have been estimated as effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, relatively few studies attempted to estimate actual delay to treatment at the patient level.

OBJECTIVE

To assess changes in delays to first treatment and surgery among newly diagnosed patients with localized breast cancer (BC) during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

We used data from the PAPESCO-19 multicenter cohort study, which included patients from 4 French comprehensive cancer centers. We measured the delay to first treatment as the number of days between diagnosis and the first treatment regardless of whether this was neoadjuvant chemotherapy or surgery. COVID-19 pandemic exposure was estimated with a composite index that considered both the severity of the pandemic and the level of lockdown restrictions. We ran generalized linear models with a log link function and a gamma distribution to model the association between delay and the pandemic.

RESULTS

Of the 187 patients included in the analysis, the median delay to first treatment was 42 (IQR:32-54) days for patients diagnosed before and after the start of the 1st lockdown (N = 99 and 88, respectively). After adjusting for age and centers of inclusion, a higher composite pandemic index (> = 50 V.S. <50) had only a small, non-significant effect on times to treatment. Longer delays were associated with factors other than the COVID-19 pandemic.

CONCLUSION

We found evidence of no direct impact of the pandemic on the actual delay to treatment among patients with localized BC.

Breast cancer incidence, stage distribution, and treatment shifts during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic: a nationwide population-level study

BACKGROUND

The first COVID-19 wave in 2020 necessitated temporary suspension of non-essential medical services including organized cancer screening programs in Belgium. This study assessed the impact of the pandemic on breast cancer (BC) incidence, stage at diagnosis, and management in Belgium in 2020.

METHODS

All Belgian residents diagnosed with in situ or invasive BC in 2015-2020 in the nationwide, population-based cancer registry database were included. Incidence trends for 2015-2019 were extrapolated to predict incidence and stage distribution for 2020 and compared with the observed values. National healthcare reimbursement data were used to examine treatment strategies. Exact tumor diameter and nodal involvement, extracted from pathology reports, were analyzed for 2019 and 2020.

RESULTS

74,975 tumors were selected for analysis of incidence and clinical stage. Invasive BC incidence declined by -5.0% in 2020, with a drop during the first COVID-19 wave (Mar-Jun; -23%) followed by a rebound (Jul-Dec; +7%). Predicted and observed incidence (in situ + invasive) was not different in patients < 50 years. In the 50-69 and 70 + age groups, significant declines of -4.1% and - 8.4% respectively were found. Excess declines were seen in clinical stage 0 and I in Mar-Jun, without excess increases in clinical stage II-IV tumors in Jul-Dec. There was no increase in average tumor diameter or nodal involvement in 2020. Patients diagnosed in Mar-Jun received significantly more neoadjuvant therapy, particularly neoadjuvant hormonal therapy for patients with clinical stage I-II BC.

CONCLUSIONS

BC incidence decline in 2020 in Belgium was largely restricted to very early-stage BC and patients aged 50 and over. Delayed diagnosis did not result in an overall progression to higher stage at diagnosis in 2020. Observed treatment adaptations in Belgium were successful in prioritizing patients for surgery while preventing tumor progression in those with surgical delay. Continuation of monitoring BC incidence and stage in the future is crucial.

Impact of COVID-19 on patients with metastatic breast cancer: REthink Access to Care and Treatment survey results

Aim: Patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) may be vulnerable to changes in healthcare management, safety standards and protocols that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic.Materials & methods: The REthink Access to Care & Treatment (REACT) survey assessed USA-based patient perspectives on COVID-19-related impacts to their MBC treatment experience between 27 April 2021 and 17 August 2021.Results: Participants (n = 341; 98.5% females, mean age 50.8 years) reported that overall oncology treatment quality was maintained during the pandemic. Delayed/canceled diagnostic imaging was reported by 44.9% of participants while telemedicine uptake was high among participants (80%).Conclusion: Overall, MBC care was minimally affected by the pandemic, possibly due to the expanded use of telemedicine, informing MBC management for future public health emergencies.

A randomised controlled trial of Pre-Operative Oncotype DX testing in early-stage breast cancer (PRE-DX study) - Study protocol

BACKGROUND

The Oncotype DX® Breast Recurrence Score assay can guide recommendations made to patients with oestrogen receptor positive (ER+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-) breast cancer regarding post-surgery adjuvant therapy. Standard practice is to order the test in the post-operative setting on a specimen from the excised invasive carcinoma. However, it has been shown to be technically possible to perform the test on the diagnostic core biopsy. By testing the diagnostic core biopsy in the pre-operative setting, the wait for excised invasive carcinoma Recurrence Score results could be reduced allowing patients to be more accurately counselled regarding their treatment pathway sooner with any adjuvant treatment recommendations expedited. This would allow for more efficient streaming of follow up appointments. The aim of this study is to compare the impact on the patient treatment pathway of performing the Oncotype DX® test on the diagnostic core biopsy pre-operatively (intervention) as opposed to the excised invasive carcinoma (control).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This parallel group randomised controlled trial aims to recruit 330 newly diagnosed patients with grade 2 or grade 3, ER+, HER2-, invasive intermediate risk early-stage breast cancer. Participants will be randomised 2:1 to the preoperative testing of the diagnostic core biopsy compared to the post-operative testing of the excision specimen. The primary endpoint is number of clinical touchpoints between treating team and patient from initial approach until offer and prescription of the first adjuvant treatment. Secondary endpoints include time from diagnosis to offer and prescription of the first adjuvant treatment, patient-reported anxiety scores and health cost impact analysis collected at baseline, following the post-operative clinic and following the offer of adjuvant treatment, and number of alterations in treatment sequence from original planned surgical treatment to neoadjuvant therapy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered on ISRCTN (ISRCTN14337451) on the 16th August 2022.

TBCRC 057: Survey about willingness to participate in cancer clinical trials during the pandemic

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer patients experienced heightened anxiety during the pandemic. Also, modifications to clinical trial activities allowing for virtual platforms, local assessments, and greater flexibility were introduced to facilitate participation. We sought to evaluate the association between pandemic-related anxiety and willingness to participate in trials and how pandemic-era modifications to trial activities affect the decision to participate.

METHODS

We conducted an online survey from August to September, 2021 of patients with breast cancer assessing pandemic-related anxiety; clinical trials knowledge and attitudes; willingness to participate during and before the pandemic; and how each modification affects the decision to participate. Fisher's exact tests evaluated differences in proportions and two-sample t-tests evaluated differences in means. The association of pandemic-related anxiety with a decline in willingness to participate during compared to prior to the pandemic was modeled using logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among 385 respondents who completed the survey, 81% reported moderate-severe pandemic-related anxiety. Mean willingness to participate in a trial was lower during the pandemic than prior [2.97 (SD 1.17) vs. 3.10 (SD 1.09), (p < 0.001)]. Severe anxiety was associated with higher odds of diminished willingness to participate during the pandemic compared to prior (OR 5.07). Each of the modifications, with the exception of opting out of research-only blood tests, were endorsed by >50% of respondents as strategies that would increase their likelihood of deciding to participate.

CONCLUSIONS

While pandemic-related anxiety was associated with diminished willingness to participate in trials, the leading reasons for reluctance to consider trial participation were unrelated to the pandemic but included worries about not getting the best treatment, side effects, and delaying care. Patients view trial modifications favorably, supporting continuation of these modifications, as endorsed by the National Cancer Institute and others.

The Effect of Coronavirus Disease 2019 on the Quality of Associated Care in Patients with Gastric Cancer

Coronavirus is a new virus that has affected human life on a large scale; it has infected millions of people and killed hundreds of thousands of people. In contrast, among cancers, stomach neoplasia is the most common cancer of the upper gastrointestinal (UGI) tract. COVID-19 disease has disrupted the optimal management of patients with cancer. Metastasis, deterioration of the patient's nutritional status, UGI bleeding, and increased surgical complications are all consequences of delayed treatment of patients with gastric cancer. However, there is still insufficient evidence on the immunogenicity of the vaccine and the protection provided by coronavirus vaccines in patients with cancer, especially those with immunodeficiency or those who are treated for certain types of cancers. Also, as part of the prevention and control of COVID-19 disease, nutritional support for patients with gastrointestinal cancer is particularly important, and the psychological and physiological limitations caused by the disease duration are hurting the well-being of patients. Therefore, the assessment of the impact of the coronavirus on cancer should be treated as an important issue, and healthcare professionals should be prepared to deal with the long-term effects of the coronavirus disease.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on breast cancer pathological stage at diagnosis in Tunisian patients

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer (BC) patients' diagnosis and management was affected by a global reorganization after the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Our study aimed to assess the impact of the pandemic on the pathological stage of newly diagnosed patients with BC compared to pre-pandemic and to identify predictive factors of tumor advanced stage.

METHODS

Pathological records of all consecutive newly operated BC patients between March 2020 and December 2021 were reviewed retrospectively. Clinical and pathological prognostic factors of BC were collected and compared between pre-pandemic and pandemic periods. Then, predictive factors of tumor advanced stage were identified.

RESULTS

Of the 225 cases included in the analysis, 98.7% were females and 1.3% were males. The median time from first histological diagnosis to first surgical treatment was enlarged by 42 days with a significant difference between the two periods (p = 0.002). Newly diagnosed BC patients during the COVID-19 pandemic were operated at a more advanced stage (54.1% vs 36.2%, p = 0.007), had a greater lymphovascular invasion (p = 0.002), lymph node metastasis (p = 0.015) and are more commonly of IBC NST histological type (p = 0.005). Moreover, multivariate analyses showed that the pandemic period (AOR = 2.28; p = 0.016) and the lympho-vascular invasion (p < 0.001) were independently associated with advanced stage of tumors.

CONCLUSION

Our findings proved an increase in alarming rates of advanced stage BC associated with the COVID-19 crisis. These findings support recommendations for a quick restoration of BC screening at full capacity, with adequate prioritization strategies to mitigate harm.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Treatment Practices for Patients With Early Breast Cancer: A Cross-Sectional Study From a Large Cancer Center in Italy

INTRODUCTION

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has disrupted health services worldwide. The evidence on the impact of the pandemic on cancer care provision, however, is conflicting. We aimed to audit the management of patients diagnosed with early breast cancer (EBC) during the pandemic in a large, tertiary-level cancer center in Italy.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study to track the route to first treatment for patients diagnosed with EBC during 2019, 2020, and 2021. We abstracted data for all consecutive patients referred to the Veneto Institute of Oncology (Padua, Italy). We defined as point of contact (POC) the date of the first consultation with a breast cancer specialist of the breast unit. First treatment was defined as either upfront surgery or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT).

RESULTS

We reviewed medical records for 878 patients for whom an MDT report during 2019-2021 (April through June) was available. Of these, 431 (49%) were eligible. The proportion of screen-detected tumors was larger in 2019 and 2021 than in 2020 (59%). Conversely, the proportion of screen-detected tumors was offset by the proportion of palpable tumors in 2020 (P = .004). Distribution of tumor and nodal stage was unchanged over time, but in situ tumors were slightly fewer in 2020 than in 2019 or 2021. The adjusted odds ratio for treatment delay (45 days or more) was 0.87 for 2020 versus 2019 (95% CI, 0.5-1.53) and 0.9 for 2021 versus 2019 (95% CI, 0.52-1.55).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no evidence for major changes in the management of patients with EBC during 2019-2021 and no treatment delays were observed. Our findings suggest that more women presented with palpable nodules at diagnosis, but the stage distribution did not change over time. Validation on a larger cohort of patients is warranted to robustly assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on treatment practices for patients with EBC.

De-Implementation of Low-Value Care for Women 70 Years of Age or Older with Low-Risk Breast Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

Older women with early-stage estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) invasive breast cancer (IBC) are at risk for overtreatment. Guidelines allow for sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) and radiotherapy omission after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for women 70 years of age or older with T1, clinical node negativity (cN0), and ER+ IBC. The study objective was to evaluate radiotherapy and SLNB de-implementation in older women with low-risk IBC after the resource limitations of the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

An institutional database was analyzed to identify women 70 years of age or older who received BCS for IBC from 2012 to 2022. The patients were divided into two cohorts: (1) patients with low-risk IBC (pT1, cN0, and ER+/HER2-) who were eligible for radiotherapy and SLNB omission and (2) patients with high-risk IBC (pT2-T4, cN+, ER-, or HER2+) who were ineligible for therapy omission. Clinicopathologic variables in both cohorts were analyzed.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 881 patients. For the patients with low-risk IBC, the annual rates of radiotherapy were stable from 2012 to 2019. However, radiotherapy utilization decreased significantly from 2020 to 2022 (58% in 2012 vs 36% in 2022; p = 0.04). In contrast, radiotherapy usage among the patients with high-risk IBC was stable from 2012 to 2022 (79% in 2012 vs 79% in 2022; p = 0.95). Among the patients with low-risk IBC, SLNB rates decreased from 86% in 2012 to 56% in 2022, but this trend predated those in 2020. The factors significantly associated with SLNB and receipt of radiotherapy among the patients with low-risk IBC were younger age, larger tumors, grade 3 disease, and involved nodal status (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated appropriate and sustained de-escalation of radiotherapy in older women with low-risk IBC after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Shallow kinetics induced by a metronome (SKIM): A novel contactless respiratory motion management

OBJECTIVES

As an alternative to conventional compression amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, we developed a contactless motion management strategy. By increasing the patient's breathing rate to induce shallow breathing with the aid of a metronome, our hypothesis is that the motion magnitude of the target may be minimized without physical contact or compression.

METHODS

Fourteen lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) patients treated under fast shallow-breathing (FSB) were selected for inclusion in this retrospective study. Our proposed method is called shallow kinetics induced by a metronome (SKIM). We induce FSB by setting the beats-per-minute (BPM) high (typically in the range of 50-60). This corresponded to a patient breathing rate of 25-30 (breathing) cycles per minute. The magnitude of target motion in 3D under SKIM was evaluated using 4DCT datasets. Comparison with free breathing (FB) 4DCT was also made for a subset for which FB data available.

RESULTS

The overall effectiveness of SKIM was evaluated with 18 targets (14 patients). Direct comparison with FB was performed with 12 targets (10 patients). The vector norm mean ± SD value of motion magnitude under SKIM for 18 targets was 8.2 ± 4.1 mm. The mean ± SD metronome BPM was 54.9 ± 4.0 in this group. The vector norm means ± SD values of target motion for FB and SKIM in the 12 target sub-group were 14.6 ± 8.5 mm and 9.3 ± 3.7 mm, respectively. The mean ± SD metronome BPM for this sub-group was 56.3 ± 2.5.

CONCLUSION

Compared with FB, SKIM can significantly reduce respiratory motion magnitude of thoracic targets. The difference in maximum motion reduction in the overall vector norm, S-I, and A-P directions was significant (p = 0.033, 0.042, 0.011). Our proposed method can be an excellent practical alternative to conventional compression due to its flexibility and ease of implementation.

Safety analysis of immediate breast reconstruction with a deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap in the post-COVID-19 era: a comparison between pre- and post-pandemic cohorts

Background

The demand for immediate breast reconstruction with a deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap is recovering as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) transitions from a pandemic to an endemic. This study sought to evaluate the safety of resuming DIEP flap reconstruction in the post-COVID-19 era.

Methods

Consecutive breast cancer patients who underwent immediate breast reconstruction with a DIEP flap at the Comprehensive Breast Health Center, Ruijin Hospital were retrospectively included in the study. The patients were divided into a post-pandemic group (Group A) and a pre-pandemic group (Group B). The clinicopathological factors, surgical procedures, and rates of post-operative complications were compared between the two groups using the Mann-Whitney U test and Chi-squared test.

Results

A total of 167 patients were included in the study, of whom 119 (71.3%) were in Group A and 48 (28.7%) were in Group B. The two groups had similar clinicopathological features, including age (P=0.988), body mass index (P=0.504), and tumor, node, metastasis (TNM) stage (P=0.932). The Group A patients were more likely to receive single perforator DIEP flap transplantation than the Group B patients (n=28, 22.8% vs. n=3, 5.8%, P=0.007). There was a numerical decrease in the mean operating time of Group A patients compared to Group B patients (9.82 vs. 10.12 hours, P=0.172). The mean length of stay after the surgery was significantly shorter after the pandemic than before the pandemic (11.2 vs. 14.3 days, P<0.001). The complication rates between the two groups were similar.

Conclusions

This study provides evidence that resuming DIEP reconstruction is safe in the post-COVID-19 era.

Feasibility of Symptom Monitoring During the First Year of Endocrine Therapy for Early Breast Cancer Using Patient-Reported Outcomes Collected via Smartphone App

PURPOSE

Treatment-associated symptoms drive early discontinuation of adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) for breast cancer. We hypothesized that symptom monitoring with electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) during adjuvant ET will enhance symptom detection, symptom management, and persistence.

METHODS

Eligible patients were initiating ET for stage 0-III breast cancer. Participants completed ePRO surveys via smartphone at baseline and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. Measures included Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Anxiety, Depression, Fatigue, and Vaginal Discomfort; plus Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events items assessing joint pain, hot flashes, vaginal dryness, concentration problems, and memory problems. Scores surpassing prespecified thresholds triggered alerts, and recommended symptom management pathways were provided to clinicians. The primary objective was to evaluate feasibility, assessed by survey completion rates, with targets of >65% for the baseline survey and ≥1 follow-up survey during the first 6 months. Secondary objectives included 12-month ET discontinuation rate (target: ≤15%), describing symptoms and evaluating pathway implementation.

RESULTS

Among 250 participants, 73.2% completed the baseline survey and 69.6% completed ≥1 follow-up survey during the first 6 months. Thirty-one percent of participants had ≥1 symptom alert at baseline and 74% had ≥1 symptom alert during follow-up. The proportions of participants for whom pathway-concordant symptom management was documented at each time point ranged from 12.8% to 36.6%. Twenty-eight participants (11.2%) discontinued ET by 12 months.

CONCLUSION

Symptom monitoring with ePROs during adjuvant ET is feasible. Despite infrequent documentation of pathway-concordant symptom management after symptom alerts, ePROs were associated with favorable short-term ET persistence.

COVID-19 related change in breast cancer diagnosis, stage, treatment, and case volume: 2019-2021

PURPOSE

Evaluate the COVID-19 pandemic impact on breast cancer detection method, stage and treatment before, during and after health care restrictions.

METHODS

In a retrospective tertiary cancer care center cohort, first primary breast cancer (BC) patients, years 2019-2021, were reviewed (n = 1787). Chi-square statistical comparisons of detection method (patient (PtD)/mammography (MamD), Stage (0-IV) and treatment by pre-pandemic time 1: 2019 + Q1 2020; peak-pandemic time 2: Q2-Q4 2020; pandemic time 3: Q1-Q4 2021 (Q = quarter) periods and logistic regression for odds ratios were used.

RESULTS

BC case volume decreased 22% in 2020 (N = 533) (p = .001). MamD declined from 64% pre-pandemic to 58% peak-pandemic, and increased to 71% in 2021 (p < .001). PtD increased from 30 to 36% peak-pandemic and declined to 25% in 2021 (p < .001). Diagnosis of Stage 0/I BC declined peak-pandemic when screening mammography was curtailed due to lock-down mandates but rebounded above pre-pandemic levels in 2021. In adjusted regression, peak-pandemic stage 0/I BC diagnosis decreased 24% (OR = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.60, 0.96, p = .021) and increased 34% in 2021 (OR = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.06, 1.70, p = .014). Peak-pandemic neoadjuvant therapy increased from 33 to 38% (p < .001), primarily for surgical delay cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic restricted health-care access, reduced mammography screening and created surgical delays. During the peak-pandemic time, due to restricted or no access to mammography screening, we observed a decrease in stage 0/I BC by number and proportion. Continued low case numbers represent a need to re-establish screening behavior and staffing.

Cancer management during the COVID-19 world pandemic

Since 2019, the world has been experiencing an outbreak of a novel beta-coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV)-2. The worldwide spread of this virus has been a severe challenge for public health, and the World Health Organization declared the outbreak a public health emergency of international concern. As of June 8, 2023, the virus' rapid spread had caused over 767 million infections and more than 6.94 million deaths worldwide. Unlike previous SARS-CoV-1 and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus outbreaks, the COVID-19 outbreak has led to a high death rate in infected patients; this has been caused by multiorgan failure, which might be due to the widespread presence of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptors-functional receptors of SARS-CoV-2-in multiple organs. Patients with cancer may be particularly susceptible to COVID-19 because cancer treatments (e.g., chemotherapy, immunotherapy) suppress the immune system. Thus, patients with cancer and COVID-19 may have a poor prognosis. Knowing how to manage the treatment of patients with cancer who may be infected with SARS-CoV-2 is essential. Treatment decisions must be made on a case-by-case basis, and patient stratification is necessary during COVID-19 outbreaks. Here, we review the management of COVID-19 in patients with cancer and focus on the measures that should be adopted for these patients on the basis of the organs or tissues affected by cancer and by the tumor stage.

African American Women Breast Cancer Survivors: Coping with the COVID-19 Pandemic

African American women breast cancer survivors are among those with the greater burden of cancer. Breast cancer is the second leading cause of death among black women, and this death rate is 40% higher than that of white women. The COVID-19 pandemic increased the burden of morbidity and mortality among this population of cancer survivors. In this report, we explore the ways in which the COVID-19 pandemic was a source of stress for African American women breast cancer survivors and their subsequent responses to these stressors. This is a qualitative descriptive study with content analysis of data from the narratives of 18 African American breast cancer survivors. Participants were interviewed via phone and video conferencing platform and asked questions related to their experiences with the COVID-19 pandemic. The findings suggest stressors associated with (1) potential COVID-19 spreaders in their immediate environments; (2) closures and restricted access to social- and faith-based activities; (3) televised news broadcasts of COVID-19; and (4) disruptions to planned cancer prevention and control healthcare. Three categories emerged that captured the ways in which these women responded to stressors during the early phase of this pandemic: (1) seeking control in their social environments; (2) following the rules; and (3) seeking support from God, family, and friends. These findings can be used to better support breast cancer patients during the early phases of a pandemic.

Lasting Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Breast Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment in the United States

The COVID-19 pandemic was an unprecedented time that placed unique challenges on the screening and treatment of breast cancer in the United States. Collaboration among medical disciplines and societies provided guidelines and strategies to mitigate the exposure of patients and medical providers to the virus and provide optimal care. We discuss the changes that the pandemic had on the multidisciplinary management of breast cancer.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Delays to Breast Cancer Surgery: Ripples or Waves?

BACKGROUND

Adherence to current recommendations for optimal time from diagnosis to treatment for patients with breast cancer may have been disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the pandemic on time to surgery or systemic treatment with chemotherapy or immunotherapy for patients diagnosed with breast cancer.

METHODS

Using the National Cancer Database, patients diagnosed with breast cancer in 2020 were compared to those diagnosed from 2018-2019 (Pre-COVID). Sub-analyses were performed for patients who were tested for COVID-19 and those who had a positive result in 2020. Multivariate logistic regression was used assess odds ratios for delayed time to surgery (DTS, defined as > 90 days) or systemic therapy (defined as > 120 days).

RESULTS

In total, 230,997 patients were diagnosed with breast cancer in 2018 and 2019 compared to 102,065 in 2020. Of the 2020 cohort, 47,659 (46.7%) received COVID-19 testing; of which, 3,158 (6.6%) resulted positive. A larger proportion of COVID-tested or COVID-positive patients had higher stage at diagnosis. DTS was more likely for patients who were diagnosed in 2020, uninsured or underinsured, non-white, Hispanic, less educated, or age < 70 years. Similar factors were predictive of delay to systemic therapy (less age < 70 years); however, diagnosis in 2020 was not.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with significant DTS for breast cancer but spared time to systemic therapy. Delays disproportionately impacted vulnerable and underserved patient populations. The true clinical effects of these delays may yet be realized for breast cancer patients.

Therapy delay due to COVID-19 pandemic among European women with breast cancer: prevalence and associated factors

PURPOSE

This study investigates the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on breast cancer (BC) care, analyzing treatment delays and factors associated with them.

METHODS

This retrospective cross-sectional study analyzed data from the Oncology Dynamics (OD) database. Surveys of 26,933 women with BC performed between January 2021 and December 2022 in Germany, France, Italy, the United Kingdom, and Spain were examined. The study focused on determining the prevalence of treatment delays due to the COVID-19 pandemic, considering factors such as country, age group, treating facility, hormone receptor status, tumor stage, site of metastases, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) status. Baseline and clinical characteristics were compared for patients with and without therapy delay using chi-squared tests, and a multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted to explore the association between demographic and clinical variables and therapy delay.

RESULTS

The present study found that most therapy delays lasted less than 3 months (2.4%). Factors associated with higher risk of delay included being bedridden (OR 3.62; 95% CI 2.51-5.21), receiving neoadjuvant therapy (OR 1.79; 95% CI 1.43-2.24) compared to adjuvant therapy, being treated in Italy (OR 1.58; 95% CI 1.17-2.15) compared to Germany or treatment in general hospitals and non-academic cancer facilities (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.13-2.44 and OR 1.54; 95% CI 1.14-2.09, respectively) compared to treatment by office-based physicians.

CONCLUSION

Addressing factors associated with therapy delays, such as patient performance status, treatment settings, and geographic location, can help guide strategies for improved BC care delivery in the future.

Implications of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Immediate Breast Reconstruction Access

AIMS

As a result of COVID-19, there have been restrictions on surgical interventions across Canada. Immediate breast reconstruction (IBR), while an essential component of cancer care, is classified as elective surgery and therefore has been restricted in access over the course of the pandemic. The purpose of this study was to compare wait times for breast cancer patients undergoing surgical intervention for IBR before and since the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cross-sectional study of consecutive patients who underwent IBR between July 2018 and October 2021 by 5 plastic surgeons at a single Canadian health center. Wait times to consultation and surgical intervention between pre- and post-COVID cohorts were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 161 patients met inclusion criteria. For ablative surgery, there was no difference in wait times to surgical oncology consultation (14.0 ± 12.3 vs 14.0 ± 11.0 days, P = 0.991) and surgical intervention with IBR (41.0 ± 49.8 vs 35.0 ± 58.0 days, P = 0.621) between the pre- and post-COVID cohorts. For breast reconstruction, while time to consultation with plastic surgery (12.5 ± 14.8 vs 11.0 ± 12.8 days, P = 0.775) remained unchanged, usage of autologous techniques was reduced [n = 13 (16%) vs n = 2 (2%), P = 0.006], and time to second-stage alloplastic reconstruction increased (230 ± 102 vs 325 ± 224 days, P = 0.044) post-COVID.

CONCLUSIONS

Swift adoption of evidence driven protocols has resulted in comparable wait times for breast cancer ablative procedures. However, utilization of autologous techniques and wait times to second-stage reconstructions have increased.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Endocrine Therapy for Older Patients with Estrogen Receptor Positive Breast Cancer: Comparison of Approaches

BACKGROUND

Benefits of a pathologic complete response (pCR) following neoadjuvant therapy are well established, yet outcomes for older women are understudied. We sought to examine the pCR and overall survival (OS) rates of women with estrogen receptor (ER) positive breast cancer across age groups.

METHODS

Women diagnosed with cT1-4, N0-3, M0, ER+/HER2- breast cancer (2010-2018) who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) or neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) followed by surgery were selected from the National Cancer Database and categorized by age. Differences were tested, and Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the association of response with OS after adjustment for covariates.

RESULTS

In the 43,009-patient cohort, 84.8% received NACT and 15.2% received NET. Of those aged ≥ 70 (N = 5623), 51.0% received NACT, and 49.0% received NET. Compared with younger women receiving NACT, older women were less likely to have a breast or nodal pCR [no pCR by age: 85.1% (≥ 70 years) vs 82.2% (50-69 years) vs 77.7% (< 50 years), p < 0.001]. Rates of pCR were similarly low for all women receiving NET [no pCR by age: 95.6% (≥ 70 years) vs 95% (50-69 years) vs 96% (< 50 years), p = 0.06]. After adjustment, pCR after NACT was not associated with OS for older patients, but better survival outcomes were noted for older patients achieving pCR after NET.

CONCLUSION

For women with ER+/HER2- breast cancer, pCR rates after NACT are lower in older women compared with younger women, and are equally low after NET for all women. However, pCR after NET is associated with improved OS among older women, unlike pCR after NACT.

Impact of COVID-19 on older adults with cancer and their caregivers' cancer treatment experiences study: The ICE-OLD study

The COVID-19 pandemic and health services impacts related to physical distancing posed many challenges for older adults with cancer. The goal of this study was to examine the impact of the pandemic on cancer treatment plans and cancer treatment experiences of older adults (ie, aged 65 years and older) and their caregiver' experiences of caring for older adults during the pandemic to highlight gaps in care experienced. In this multi-centre qualitative study guided by an interpretive descriptive research approach we interviewed older adults diagnosed with cancer and caregivers caring for them. Participants were recruited via cancer treatment centres in the provinces of British Columbia and Ontario (Vancouver and Toronto), Canada, and through an online ad sent out through patient advocacy organization newsletters. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim and data were analyzed using an interpretive thematic analysis approach. A total of 27 individuals (17 older adults, 52.9% female; 10 caregivers, 90% female) participated in interviews lasting on average 45 minutes. Older adults with cancer described many impacts and pressures created by the pandemic on their cancer experiences, though they generally felt that the pandemic did not impact treatment decisions made and access to care. We grouped our findings into two main themes with their accompanying sub-themes, related to: (1) alterations in the individual and dyadic cancer experience; and (2) navigating health and cancer systems during the pandemic. The additional stressors the pandemic placed on older adults during their treatment and decision-making process and their caregivers expose the need to create or avail additional supports for future disruptions in care.

Bio-ethical issues in oncology during the first wave of the COVID-19 epidemic: A qualitative study in a French hospital

BACKGROUND

Using a specific bioethical theory (=global bioethics) and method (=a posteriori), we try here to identify and evaluate the bio-ethical issues raised by the COVID-19 pandemic, and possible solutions, to improve the management of cancer patients at the hospital in future pandemics, before the emergence of vaccines or scientifically validated treatments.

MATERIALS & METHODS

Our work is based primarily on the clinical experience of three oncologists from the oncology department of Foch Hospital in France, who were on the frontline during the first wave of the epidemic. We compared their perceptions with published findings, to complete or nuance their views.

RESULTS

Three bio-ethical issues were identified, and possible solutions to these problems were evaluated: (1) scientific evidence versus lack of time → the creation of emergency multidisciplinary team meetings (MTM); (2) healthcare equality versus lack of resources → the development of telemedicine; (3) individual liberties versus risk of contamination → role of cancer patients' associations, psychologists and bioethicists.

CONCLUSION

We consider the creation of an emergency MTM, in particular, in addition to a true ethics committee with real competence in bioethics, to be a first solution that would be easy to implement in hospitals in many countries.

Ensuring access to post-cancer breast reconstructions: COVID-19 lessons from the Dutch Breast Implant Registry

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 has impacted breast implant surgery for oncological and non-oncological patients worldwide. This population-based study aimed to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on access to reconstructive and cosmetic breast implant surgery in the Netherlands using real-world data to describe trends, and to identify lessons to prevent future capacity problems within (inter)national healthcare.

METHODS

This longitudinal study included patients undergoing breast implant surgery from the mandatory nationwide Dutch Breast Implant Registry. For 2020, the first COVID-19 wave, intermediate period, and second wave were defined. We compared data from during the pandemic to a pre-pandemic (2019) reference year, assessing differences in the number of registered breast implants, and patient and surgery-related characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 34133 breast implants (17459 patients) were included. Compared to 2019, fewer implants were registered for post-cancer (n=484; -14.7%), cosmetic (n=480; -3.6%), and gender-affirming indications (n=104; -38.0%) during 2020. Fewer implants were registered in academic (n=196; -22.0%) and regional hospitals (n=1591; -16.5%), but more in private clinics (n=725; +10.1%). After the first wave, up to twice as many implants were registered in private clinics compared to 2019. No differences were found in characteristics of patients undergoing surgery in 2020 versus 2019.

CONCLUSION

Hospital-based reconstructive and gender-affirming surgery were heavily impacted during the pandemic, while private-clinic-based cosmetic surgery quickly recovered. These outcomes are useful to fuel discussions about how healthcare could be reorganized in times of capacity problems. We suggest exploring options to deploy private clinics for ambulatory surgery aiming to keep hospital capacity available for acutely ill patients.

Ki67 and breast cancer mortality in women with invasive breast cancer

BACKGROUND

The percentage of cells staining positive for Ki67 is sometimes used for decision-making in patients with early invasive breast cancer (IBC). However, there is uncertainty regarding the most appropriate Ki67 cut points and the influence of interlaboratory measurement variability. We examined the relationship between breast cancer mortality and Ki67 both before and after accounting for interlaboratory variability and 8 patient and tumor characteristics.

METHODS

A multicenter cohort study of women with early IBC diagnosed during 2009-2016 in more than 20 NHS hospitals in England and followed until December 31, 2020.

RESULTS

Ki67 was strongly prognostic of breast cancer mortality in 8212 women with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative early IBC (Ptrend < .001). This relationship remained strong after adjustment for patient and tumor characteristics (Ptrend < .001). Standardization for interlaboratory variability did little to alter these results. For women with Ki67 scores of 0%-5%, 6%-10%, 11%-19%, and 20%-29% the corresponding 8-year adjusted cumulative breast cancer mortality risks were 3.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.8% to 4.0%), 3.7% (95% CI = 3.0% to 4.4%), 3.4% (95% CI = 2.8% to 4.1%), and 3.4% (95% CI = 2.8% to 4.1%), whereas for women with Ki67 scores of 30%-39% and 40%-100%, these risks were higher, at 5.1% (95% CI = 4.3% to 6.2%) and 7.7% (95% CI = 6.6% to 9.1) (Ptrend < .001). Similar results were obtained when the adjusted analysis was repeated with omission of pathological information about tumor size and nodal involvement, which would not be available preoperatively for patients being considered for neoadjuvant therapy.

CONCLUSION

Our findings confirm the prognostic value of Ki67 scores of 30% or more in women with ER-positive, HER2-negative early IBC, irrespective of interlaboratory variability. These results also suggest that Ki67 may be useful to aid decision-making in the neoadjuvant setting.

Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Patients Are Skilled at Adapting to "Out of the Ordinary" Situations: A Qualitative Study

OBJECTIVE

Blood cancers can potentially be cured by hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT), but HCT recipients can remain immunocompromised for extended periods of time and require caregiver support. Though the COVID-19 pandemic has globally affected the livelihood and well-being of all individuals, it has affected certain populations in unique ways, HCT recipients being one of them. This study intends to understand the lived experience of HCT recipients and HCT-eligible patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

DATA SOURCES

This qualitative study enrolled participants (N=25) from a parent study that recruited transplant patients (HCT eligible or HCT recipients) between May and October 2020. Participants were invited to participate on a one-on-one interview via an electronic platform. A phenomenologic qualitative approach was used to identify emerging themes and subthemes.

CONCLUSION

Three themes were developed: a) the pandemic experience was influenced by the transplant journey; b) participants found ways to thrive despite the odds and access support in unique ways; and c) participants described challenges during the pandemic regarding non-transplant care, vaccine considerations, and distrust in media.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Results from this study highlighted that HCT recipients were uniquely prepared for "out of the ordinary" situations during the pandemic and underscored challenges faced by them during this time, identifying areas for improvement in the health care system. Nurses in their unique role can initiate and lead process changes to address barriers such as lack of access to reliable information, poor communication, and inadequate resources for accessing non-transplant care especially during uncertain times.

Breast Cancer Management Timelines in a Tertiary Care Center During the COVID-19 Pandemic, Makkah City, Saudi Arabia: A Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer (BC) is a prevalent form of cancer and a leading cause of death among women worldwide. In Saudi Arabia, it accounted for 31.8% among females of all new cancer cases reported in 2018. Following the declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic, there was a complete redistribution of healthcare resources to face this crisis, which caused a significant delay in the management of various diseases, including BC. There is currently a lack of research in our region on the facility time interval in BC management. Therefore, this study aimed to fill this gap by determining the timelines of diagnosis, management, and factors influencing the delay.

METHODS

This observational retrospective study included all female patients diagnosed with BC at or referred to King Abdullah Medical City (KAMC) in Makkah, Saudi Arabia, between January 2020 and August 2021. The data for this study were obtained from a centralized electronic chart review of all included patients at the KAMC center.

RESULTS

A total of 76 patients were included in the study, with a mean age of 50 ± 11 years. In terms of the disease management duration, 20 patients (26.3%) completed their management within 30 days, 28 patients (36.8%) had a management duration between 31 and 60 days, and the management duration of 28 patients (36.8%) exceeded 60 days. Patient deposition showed a significant association with delay (p = 0.033). A higher incidence of delays at the initiation of treatment was observed in patients who failed to attend appointments (p < 0.001). Among patients who skipped two or more appointments, 12 individuals (80%) experienced a delay of more than 60 days. Moreover, appointment cancellation was associated with delayed treatment initiation (p = 0.03). Patients' age and comorbidity showed no significant association (p = 0.49, p = 0.24, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our findings highlight the significant impact of patient deposition and canceled or skipped appointments on delayed initiation of therapy for BC patients. Further research should be conducted to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on other malignancies.

Time interval between breast cancer diagnosis and surgery is associated with disease outcome

Time interval between breast cancer (BC) diagnosis and surgery is of concern to patients and clinicians, but its impact on survival remains unclear. We identified 5130 BC patients receiving surgery between 2009 and 2017 from the Shanghai Jiaotong University Breast Cancer Database (SJTU-BCDB), and divided as Ruijin cohort and SJTU cohort. All participants were divided into three groups according to the interval between diagnosis and surgery: ≤ 1 week, 1-2 weeks, and > 2 weeks. Among 3144 patients of Ruijin cohort, the estimated 5-year breast cancer-free interval (BCFI) rates for the ≤ 1 week, 1-2 weeks and > 2 weeks groups were 91.8%, 87.5%, and 84.0% (P = 0.088), and the estimated 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were 95.6%, 89.6%, and 91.5% (P = 0.002). Multivariate analysis showed that patients with a TTS > 2 weeks had significantly lower BCFI (HR = 1.80, 95%CI 1.05-3.11, P = 0.034) and OS (HR = 2.07, 95% CI 1.04-4.13, P = 0.038) rates than patients with a TTS ≤ 1 week. Among 5130 patients when combining Ruijin cohort with SJTU cohort, the estimated 5-year BCFI rates for the ≤ 1 week, 1-2 weeks, and > 2 weeks groups were 91.0%, 87.9%, and 78.9%, and the estimated 5-year OS rates for the ≤ 1 week, 1-2 weeks, and > 2 weeks groups were 95.8%, 90.6%, and 91.5%, both with a significantly p value < 0.001. Our findings demonstrated the prolonged time to surgery (more than 2 weeks) after BC diagnosis was associated with poor disease outcomes, suggesting that efforts to early initiate treatment after diagnosis need to be pursued where possible to improve survival.

Patient Experience and Clinical Outcomes after Same-day Outpatient Mastectomy and Immediate Breast Reconstruction Protocol during the Global Pandemic

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic provoked rapid changes in clinical practice to accommodate mandated restrictions within healthcare delivery. This study reviewed patient-reported experiences and clinical outcomes after implementation of a same-day discharge protocol after mastectomy with immediate alloplastic breast reconstruction compared with our historical overnight stay protocol.

Methods

This is a retrospective single-institution study of consecutive patients who underwent mastectomy and immediate alloplastic reconstruction between July 2019 and November 2020. A postoperative survey was completed by patients to evaluate satisfaction with perioperative communications, recovery, and their overall experience.

Results

A total of 302 patients (100% women) underwent mastectomy and immediate alloplastic reconstruction (174 pre-COVID-19, 128 during COVID-19). During COVID-19, 71% of patients were scheduled for a same-day discharge, among which 89% were successfully discharged the same day. Compared with pre-COVID-19, there were no differences in type of surgery, operative times, pain scores, 30-day readmission, or unplanned visits (all P > 0.05) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Compared with pre-COVID-19, patients during the pandemic reported comparable satisfaction with their care experience and postoperative recovery (56% survey response rate). Patient satisfaction was also similar between those discharged the same day (n = 81) versus the next day (n = 47) during COVID-19.

Conclusions

Same-day discharge is feasible, safe, and can provide similar patient-reported satisfaction and outcomes compared with traditional overnight stay. These data highlight the ability to deliver adaptable, high-quality breast cancer care, within the constraints of a global pandemic.

A phase II randomized clinical trial to assess toxicity and quality of life of breast cancer patients with hypofractionated versus conventional fractionation radiotherapy with regional nodal irradiation in the context of COVID-19 crisis

Purpose

This study, conducted during the COVID-19 crisis, primarily aimed to compare the acute toxicity between conventional fractionated radiation therapy (CF-RT) with hypofractionated radiation therapy (HF-RT) among patients who underwent breast-conserving surgery or mastectomy in whom breast or chest wall and regional nodal irradiation (RNI) were indicated. The secondary endpoints were both acute and subacute toxicity, cosmesis, quality of life, and lymphedema features.

Methods

In this open and non-inferiority randomized trial, patients (n = 86) were randomly allocated 2:1 in the CF-RT arm (n = 33; 50 Gy/25 fractions ± sequential boost [10 Gy/5 fractions]) versus the HF-RT arm (n = 53; 40 Gy/15 fractions ± concomitant boost [8 Gy/15 fractions]). Toxic effects and cosmesis evaluation used the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.03 (CTCAE) and the Harvard/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP)/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) scale. For the patient-reported quality of life (QoL), the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the breast cancer-specific supplementary questionnaire (QLQ-BR23) were used. Lymphedema was assessed by comparing volume differences between the affected and contralateral arms using the Casley-Smith formula.

Results

Grade 2 and grade 3 dermatitis were lower with HF-RT than with CF-RT (28% vs. 52%, and 0% vs. 6%, respectively; p = 0.022). HF-RT had a lower rate of grade 2 hyperpigmentation (23% vs. 55%; p = 0.005), compared to CF-RT. No other differences in overall rates of physician-assessed grade 2 or higher and grade 3 or higher acute toxicity between HF-RT and CF-RT were registered. There was no statistical difference between groups regarding cosmesis, lymphedema rate (13% vs. 12% HF-RT vs. CF-RT; p = 1.000), and functional and symptom scales, during both the irradiation period and after 6 months of the end of treatment. The results revealed that the subset of patients up to 65 years or older did not show a statistical difference between both arm fractionation schedules (p > 0.05) regarding skin rash, fibrosis, and lymphedema.

Conclusion

HF-RT was non-inferior to CF-RT, and moderate hypofractionation showed lower rates of acute toxicity, with no changes in quality-of-life outcomes.

Clinical trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT40155531.

COVID-19 and Breast Cancer: Analysis of Surgical Management of a Large Referral Center during the 2020-2021 Pandemic Period

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) has spread worldwide since December 2019 and was officially declared a pandemic in March 2020. Due to the rapid transmission and the high fatality rate, drastic emergency restrictions were issued, with a negative impact on routine clinical activities. In particular, in Italy, many authors have reported a reduction in the number of breast cancer diagnoses and critical problems in the management of patients who accessed the breast units during the dramatic first months of the pandemic. Our study aims to analyze the global impact of COVID-19 in the two years of the pandemic (2020-2021) on the surgical management of breast cancer by comparing them with the previous two years.

METHODS

In our retrospective study, we analyzed all cases of breast cancer diagnosed and surgically treated at the breast unit of "Città della Salute e della Scienza" in Turin, Italy, making a comparison between the 2018-2019 pre-pandemic period and the 2020-2021 pandemic period.

RESULTS

We included in our analysis 1331 breast cancer cases surgically treated from January 2018 to December 2021. A total of 726 patients were treated in the pre-pandemic years and 605 in the pandemic period (-121 cases, 9%). No significant differences were observed regarding diagnosis (screening vs. no screening) and timing between radiological diagnosis and surgery for both in situ and invasive tumors. There were no variations in the breast surgical approach (mastectomy vs. conservative surgery), while a reduction in axillary dissection compared to the sentinel lymph node in the pandemic period was observed (p-value < 0.001). Regarding the biological characteristics of breast cancers, we observed a greater number of grades 2-3 (p-value = 0.007), pT stage 3-4 breast cancer surgically treated without previous neoadjuvant chemotherapy (p-value = 0.03), and a reduction in luminal B tumors (p-value = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, we report a limited reduction in surgical activity for breast cancer treatment considering the entire pandemic period (2020-2021). These results suggest a prompt resumption of surgical activity similar to the pre-pandemic period.

Key points of anti-tumor treatment in breast cancer patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection

Internationally, the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become the most serious public health emergency. With the adjustment of the prevention and control policies, China downgraded the management of COVID-19 from Class A to Class B, causing new challenges in the clinical management of patients with breast cancer. It is necessary to formulate clinical strategies for timely and reasonable anti-tumor treatment after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. By combing the relevant evidence and summarizing the anti-tumor treatment experience for breast cancer patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection in various regions, the expert panel of the Breast Cancer Professional Committee of the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO-BC) discussed and voted on hot and difficult issues of this situation timely. Based on the vote results, combined with domestic and foreign guidelines and consensus, the key points of treatment and management of breast cancer patients who were infected with COVID-19 have been established to provide suggestions and recommendations for clinical practice, such as restart time of anti-tumor treatment, application of anti-tumor drugs and other considerations. In the formulation of this key point, we mainly focus on mild to moderate and asymptomatic infection patients who account for the largest proportion of COVID-19 patients, and propose diagnosis and treatment recommendations for breast cancer patients with different infections and after SARS-CoV-2 infection, aiming to provide a reference for clinical diagnosis and treatment.

Bridging pre-surgical endocrine therapy for breast cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic: outcomes from the B-MaP-C study

PURPOSE

The B-MaP-C study investigated changes to breast cancer care that were necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we present a follow-up analysis of those patients commenced on bridging endocrine therapy (BrET), whilst they were awaiting surgery due to reprioritisation of resources.

METHODS

This multicentre, multinational cohort study recruited 6045 patients from the UK, Spain and Portugal during the peak pandemic period (Feb-July 2020). Patients on BrET were followed up to investigate the duration of, and response to, BrET. This included changes in tumour size to reflect downstaging potential, and changes in cellular proliferation (Ki67), as a marker of prognosis.

RESULTS

1094 patients were prescribed BrET, over a median period of 53 days (IQR 32-81 days). The majority of patients (95.6%) had strong ER expression (Allred score 7-8/8). Very few patients required expedited surgery, due to lack of response (1.2%) or due to lack of tolerance/compliance (0.8%). There were small reductions in median tumour size after 3 months' treatment duration; median of 4 mm [IQR - 20, 4]. In a small subset of patients (n = 47), a drop in cellular proliferation (Ki67) occurred in 26 patients (55%), from high (Ki67 ≥ 10%) to low (< 10%), with at least one month's duration of BrET.

DISCUSSION

This study describes real-world usage of pre-operative endocrine therapy as necessitated by the pandemic. BrET was found to be tolerable and safe. The data support short-term (≤ 3 months) usage of pre-operative endocrine therapy. Longer-term use should be investigated in future trials.

Outcomes of the same-day discharge following mastectomy before, during and after COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The majority of patients undergoing mastectomy before the COVID-19 pandemic were admitted for 23-h observation to the hospital. Indications for observation included drain care education, pain control and observation for possible early surgical complications. This study compared the rates of outpatient mastectomy before, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic and indirectly evaluated the safety of same-day discharge.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed patients undergoing mastectomy using Current Procedural Terminology code 19303.

RESULTS

A total of 357 patients were included: 113 were treated pre-COVID-19, 82 patients during COVID-19 and 162 post-COVID-19. The rate of outpatient mastectomies tripled during the pandemic from 17% to 51% (p < 0.001); after the pandemic remain high at 48%. The rate of bilateral mastectomies decreased during the pandemic to 30% from 48% prepandemic (p = 0.015). Pectoralis muscle block utilization increased during the COVID-19 period from 36% to 59% (p = 0.002). No difference in complication rates, including surgical site infections, hematomas, and readmissions, pre and during COVID.

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of outpatient mastectomy increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. During this timeframe, perioperative complications did not increase, suggesting the safety of this practice. After the pandemic, the rate of outpatient mastectomy continued to be significantly higher than pre-COVID.

Impact of coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on breast cancer surgery using the National Database of Japan

Various countries have reported a decrease in breast cancer surgeries during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic; however, inconsistent results have been reported in Japan. This study revealed changes in the number of surgeries during the pandemic using the National Database of Health Insurance Claims and Specific Health Checkups of Japan (NDB) from January 2015 to January 2021, where insurance claims data from Japan as a whole are comprehensively accumulated. The number of breast-conserving surgeries (BCS) without axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) significantly decreased in July (- 846; 95% confidence interval (CI) - 1190 to - 502) and October 2020 (- 540; 95% CI - 861 to - 218). No decrease was observed for other types of surgery, BCS with ALND, and mastectomy with or without ALND. In the age-specific subgroup analysis, significant and transient reduction in BCS without ALND was observed in all age groups (0-49, 50-69, and ≥ 70 years). The number of BCS without ALND significantly decreased for a relatively short period in the early pandemic stages, suggesting reduced surgery for patients with a relatively low stage of cancer. Some patients with breast cancer might have been left untreated during the pandemic, and an unfavorable prognosis would be a concern.

Racial Disparities in Breast Cancer Presentation and Diagnosis in COVID-Era Central Texas

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted the diagnosis of breast cancer (BC). With a large Hispanic/Latinx population, early revocation of mask mandates, and lower vaccination rate than many other states, this study explores the relationship between COVID-19 and the presentation and diagnosis of BC patients in the unique socio-politico-economic context of Central Texas.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective review of the Seton Medical Center Austin tumor registry for BC patients from March 1, 2019 to March 2, 2021. We compared demographics, insurance status, clinical and pathologic stage, and time from diagnosis to intervention between "pre-COVID" (March 1, 2019- March 1, 2020) and "post-COVID" (March 2, 2020-March 2, 2021). We utilized descriptive, univariate, and multivariable logistic regression statistics.

RESULTS

There were 781 patients diagnosed with BC, with 113 fewer post-COVID compared to pre-COVID. The proportion of Black patients diagnosed with BC decreased post-COVID compared with pre-COVID (10.1%-4.5%, P = 0.002). When adjusting for other factors, uninsured and underinsured patients had increased odds of presenting with late-stage BC (odds ratio:5.40, P < 0.001). There was also an association between presenting with stage 2 or greater BC and delayed time-to-intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Although fewer women overall were diagnosed with BC post-COVID, the return to baseline diagnoses has yet to be seen. We identified a pandemic-related decrease in BC diagnoses in Black women and increased odds of late-stage cancer among uninsured patients, suggesting a disparate relationship between COVID-19 and health care access and affordability. Outreach and screening efforts should address strategies to engage Black and uninsured patients.

Palliative Care in Breast Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has harmed the provision of palliative care (PC) services for women with breast cancer due to all the restrictions that came along with the virus.

OBJECTIVE

To map the available evidence on the situation of PC in breast cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A scoping review was carried out based on the methodology proposed by the Joanna Briggs Institute. The search was conducted in nine databases, one electronic repository, and one library, using controlled vocabularies.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine articles and seven documents were included. The majority (11.4% each) were published in the United Kingdom, Italy, and the United States, 38.9% addressed palliative radiotherapy (RT), and 47.2% consisted of recommendations. From the content analysis, five categories were obtained focused on the recommendations on changes in palliative treatment guidelines and the response of PC teams to the evolving crisis.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence pointed to the management of general PC, palliative RT, palliative chemotherapy, management of metastatic breast cancer, and use of technologies in palliative care. No recommendations were found to manage frequent symptoms in PC, indicating the need to develop primary studies that investigate these aspects in detail in this vulnerable group.

IMPLICATIONS

The results contained in this document can provide professionals working in this field of care with a global view of how other teams have dealt with the pandemic, thereby identifying the best guidelines to apply in their reality, taking into account the clinical and social situation of each patient.

The Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Mastectomy Outcomes for Breast Cancer

Background

Single center studies have shown that during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, many patients had surgical procedures postponed or modified. We studied how the pandemic affected the clinical outcomes of breast cancer patients who underwent mastectomies in 2020.

Methods

Using the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database, we compared clinical variables of 31,123 and 28,680 breast cancer patients who underwent a mastectomy in 2019 and 2020, respectively. Data from 2019 served as the control, and data from 2020 represented the COVID-19 cohort.

Results

Fewer surgeries of all kinds were performed in the COVID-19 year than in the control (902,968 vs. 1,076,411). The proportion of mastectomies performed in the COVID-19 cohort was greater than in the control year (3.18% vs. 2.89%, <0.001). More patients presented with ASA level 3 in the COVID-19 year vs. the control (P < .002). Additionally, the proportion of patients with disseminated cancer was lower during the COVID-19 year (P < .001). Average hospital length of stay (P < .001) and time from operation to discharge were shorter in the COVID vs. control cohort (P < .001). Fewer unplanned readmissions were seen in the COVID year (P < .004).

Conclusion

The ongoing surgical services and mastectomies for breast cancer during the pandemic produced similar clinical outcomes to those seen in 2019. Prioritization of resources for sicker patients and the use of alternative interventions produced similar results for breast cancer patients who underwent a mastectomy in 2020.

Regulatory Approval, Reimbursement, and Clinical Use of Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 4/6 Inhibitors in Metastatic Breast Cancer in the Netherlands

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study found that CDK4/6 inhibitors rapidly reached many eligible patients with metastatic breast cancer and were adopted gradually over time in the Netherlands. Adoption of innovative medicines may be further optimized, and better transparency of the availability of new medicines during different phases of the postapproval access pathway is needed.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cohort study reviewed approval and reimbursement decisions of the CDK4/6 inhibitors palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib and estimated the number of patients with metastatic breast cancer who were eligible for these medicines compared with the actual use in clinical practice. The study used nationwide claims data that were obtained from the Dutch Hospital Data. Claims and early access data for patients with hormone receptor-positive and ERBB2 (formerly HER2)-negative metastatic breast cancer who were treated with CDK4/6 inhibitors from November 1, 2016, to December 31, 2021, were included.

IMPORTANCE

The number of new cancer medicines that are being approved by regulatory agents is increasing exponentially. Yet little is known about the pace at which these medicines reach eligible patients in daily clinical practice during different phases of the postapproval access pathway.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Description of the postapproval access pathway, monthly number of patients who were treated with CDK4/6 inhibitors in clinical practice, and estimated number of patients who were eligible for treatment. Aggregated claims data were used, and patient characteristics and outcomes data were not collected.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the entire postapproval access pathway of cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors in the Netherlands, from regulatory approval to reimbursement and to investigate the adoption of these medicines in clinical practice among patients with metastatic breast cancer.

RESULTS

Three CDK4/6 inhibitors have received European Union-wide regulatory approval for the treatment of HR-positive and ERBB2-negative metastatic breast cancer since November 2016. In the Netherlands, the number of patients who have been treated with these medicines increased to approximately 1847 (based on 1 624 665 claims over the entire study period) from approval to the end of 2021. Reimbursement for these medicines was granted between 9 and 11 months after approval. While awaiting reimbursement decisions, 492 patients received palbociclib, the first approved medicine of this class, via an expanded access program. By the end of the study period, 1616 patients (87%) were treated with palbociclib, whereas 157 patients (7%) received ribociclib, and 74 patients (4%) received abemaciclib. The CKD4/6 inhibitor was combined with an aromatase inhibitor in 708 patients (38%) and with fulvestrant in 1139 patients (62%). The pattern of use over time appeared to be somewhat lower compared with the estimated number of eligible patients (1847 vs 1915 in December 2021), especially in the first 2.5 years after approval.

Breast Cancer Management in the Era of Covid-19; Key Issues, Contemporary Strategies, and Future Implications

During the COVID-19 pandemic, several priority diseases were not getting sufficient attention. Whilst breast cancer is a fatal disease affecting millions worldwide, identification and management of these patients did not initially attract critical attention to minimize the impact of lockdown, post-lockdown, and other measures. Breast cancer patients' conditions may not remain stable without proper care, worsening their prognosis. Proper care includes the timely instigation of surgery, systemic therapy, and psychological support. This includes low-and middle-income countries where there are already concerns with available personnel and medicines to adequately identify and treat these patients. Consequently, there was a need to summarize the current scenario regarding managing breast cancer care during COVID-19 across all countries, including any guidelines developed. We systematically searched three scientific databases and found 76 eligible articles covering the medical strategies of high-income countries versus LMICs. Typically, diagnostic facilities in hospitals were affected at the beginning of the pandemic following the lockdown and other measures. This resulted in more advanced-stage cancers being detected at initial presentation across countries, negatively impacting patient outcomes. Other than increased telemedicine, instigating neo-adjuvant endocrine therapy more often, reducing non-essential visits, and increasing the application of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy to meet the challenges, encouragingly, there was no other significant difference among patients in high-income versus LMICs. Numerous guidelines regarding patient management evolved during the pandemic to address the challenges posed by lockdowns and other measures, which were subsequently adopted by various high-income countries and LMICs to improve patient care. The psychological impact of COVID-19 and associated lockdown measures, especially during the peak of COVID-19 waves, and the subsequent effect on the patient's mental health must also be considered in this high-priority group. We will continue to monitor the situation to provide direction in future pandemics.