Effect of Unblinding on Participants' Perceptions of Risk and Confidence in a Large Double-Blind Clinical Trial of Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer

Patient perspectives on testing for clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential

Clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP), an emerging biomarker for personalized risk-directed interventions, is increased in cancer survivors. However, little is known about patient preferences for CHIP testing. We surveyed participants in a prospective cohort study of young women with breast cancer (BC). The emailed survey included an introduction to CHIP and a vignette eliciting participants' preferences for CHIP testing, considering sequentially: population-based 10-year risk of BC recurrence, hematologic malignancy, and heart disease; increased CHIP-associated risks; current CHIP management; dedicated CHIP clinic; and hypothetical CHIP treatment. Preference changes were evaluated using the McNemar test. The survey response rate was 82.2% (528/642). Median age at time of survey was 46 years and median time from diagnosis was 108 months. Only 5.9% had prior knowledge of CHIP. After vignette presentation, most survivors (87.1%) recommended CHIP testing for the vignette patient. Presented next with CHIP-independent, population-based risks, 11.1% shifted their preference from testing to not testing. After receiving information about CHIP-associated risks, an additional 10.1% shifted their preference to testing. Preference for testing increased if vignette patient was offered a CHIP clinic or hypothetical CHIP treatment, with 7.2% and 14.1% switching preferences toward testing, respectively. Finally, 75.8% of participants desired CHIP testing for themselves. Among participants, 28.2% reported that learning about CHIP caused at least moderate anxiety. Most young survivors favored CHIP testing, with preferences influenced by risk presentation and potential management strategies. Our findings highlight the importance of risk communication and psychosocial support when considering biomarkers for future risk in cancer survivors. This trial has been registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01468246.

Double-Blind Phase III Trial of Adjuvant Chemotherapy With and Without Bevacizumab in Patients With Lymph Node-Positive and High-Risk Lymph Node-Negative Breast Cancer (E5103)

Purpose Bevacizumab improves progression-free survival but not overall survival in patients with metastatic breast cancer. E5103 tested the effect of bevacizumab in the adjuvant setting in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative disease. Patients and Methods Patients were assigned 1:2:2 to receive placebo with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) followed by weekly paclitaxel (arm A), bevacizumab only during AC and paclitaxel (arm B), or bevacizumab during AC and paclitaxel followed by bevacizumab monotherapy for 10 cycles (arm C). Random assignment was stratified and bevacizumab dose adjusted for choice of AC schedule. Radiation and hormonal therapy were administered concurrently with bevacizumab in arm C. The primary end point was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS). Results Four thousand nine hundred ninety-four patients were enrolled. Median age was 52 years; 64% of patients were estrogen receptor positive, 27% were lymph node negative, and 78% received dose-dense AC. Chemotherapy-associated adverse events including myelosuppression and neuropathy were similar across all arms. Grade ≥ 3 hypertension was more common in bevacizumab-treated patients, but thrombosis, proteinuria, and hemorrhage were not. The cumulative incidence of clinical congestive heart failure at 15 months was 1.0%, 1.9%, and 3.0% in arms A, B, and C, respectively. Bevacizumab exposure was less than anticipated, with approximately 24% of patients in arm B and approximately 55% of patients in arm C discontinuing bevacizumab before completing planned therapy. Five-year IDFS was 77% (95% CI, 71% to 81%) in arm A, 76% (95% CI, 72% to 80%) in arm B, and 80% (95% CI, 77% to 83%) in arm C. Conclusion Incorporation of bevacizumab into sequential anthracycline- and taxane-containing adjuvant therapy does not improve IDFS or overall survival in patients with high-risk human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer. Longer duration bevacizumab therapy is unlikely to be feasible given the high rate of early discontinuation.

Patient Perceptions of Breast Cancer Risk in Imaging-Detected Low-Risk Scenarios and Thresholds for Desired Intervention: A Multi-Institution Survey

PURPOSE

To determine women's perceptions of breast cancer risk and thresholds for desiring biopsy when considering BI-RADS 3 and 4A scenarios and recommendations, respectively.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Women presenting for screening mammography from five geographically diverse medical centers were surveyed. Demographic information and baseline anxiety were queried. Participants were presented with scenarios of short-term imaging follow-up recommendations (ie, BI-RADS 3) and biopsy recommendations (ie, BI-RADS 4A) for low-risk mammographic abnormalities and asked to estimate their breast cancer risk for each scenario. Participants reported the threshold (ie, likelihood of cancer) where they would feel comfortable undergoing short-term imaging follow-up and biopsy and their anticipated regret for choosing short-term follow-up versus biopsy.

RESULTS

Analysis of 2,747 surveys showed that participants estimated breast cancer risk of 32.8% for a BI-RADS 3 and 41.1% for a BI-RADS 4A scenarios are significantly greater rates than clinically established rates (<2% [P < .001] and 2%-10% [P < .001], respectively). Over one-half (55.4%) of participants reported they would never want imaging follow-up if there was any chance of cancer; two-thirds (66.2%) reported they would desire biopsy if there was any chance of cancer. Participants reported greater anticipated regret (P < .001) and less relief and confidence (P < .001) with the decision to undergo follow-up imaging versus biopsy.

CONCLUSION

Women overestimate breast cancer risk associated with both BI-RADS 3 and 4A scenarios and desire very low biopsy thresholds. Greater anticipated regret and less relief and confidence was reported with the choice to undergo short-term imaging follow-up compared with biopsy.