Enhancing decision-making about adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer following EndoPredict testing

Decision impact studies, evidence of clinical utility for genomic assays in cancer: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Decision impact studies have become increasingly prevalent in cancer prognostic research in recent years. These studies aim to evaluate the impact of a genomic test on decision-making and appear to be a new form of evidence of clinical utility. The objectives of this review were to identify and characterize decision impact studies in genomic medicine in cancer care and categorize the types of clinical utility outcomes reported.

METHODS

We conducted a search of four databases, Medline, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science, from inception to June 2022. Empirical studies that reported a "decision impact" assessment of a genomic assay on treatment decisions or recommendations for cancer patients were included. We followed scoping review methodology and adapted the Fryback and Thornbury Model to collect and analyze data on clinical utility. The database searches identified 1803 unique articles for title/abstract screening; 269 articles moved to full-text review.

RESULTS

87 studies met inclusion criteria. All studies were published in the last 12 years with the majority for breast cancer (72%); followed by other cancers (28%) (lung, prostate, colon). Studies reported on the impact of 19 different proprietary (18) and generic (1) assays. Across all four levels of clinical utility, outcomes were reported for 22 discrete measures, including the impact on provider/team decision-making (100%), provider confidence (31%); change in treatment received (46%); patient psychological impacts (17%); and costing or savings impacts (21%). Based on the data synthesis, we created a comprehensive table of outcomes reported for clinical utility.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review is a first step in understanding the evolution and uses of decision impact studies and their influence on the integration of emerging genomic technologies in cancer care. The results imply that DIS are positioned to provide evidence of clinical utility and impact clinical practice and reimbursement decision-making in cancer care. Systematic review registration: Open Science Framework osf.io/hm3jr.

Talking about Risk, UncertaintieS of Testing IN Genetics (TRUSTING): development and evaluation of an educational programme for healthcare professionals about BRCA1 & BRCA2 testing

BACKGROUND

Mainstreaming of germline testing demands that all healthcare professionals have good communication skills, but few have genetic testing and counselling experience. We developed and evaluated educational workshops-Talking about Risk & UncertaintieS of Testing IN Genetics (TRUSTING). Contents included: presentations and exercises, an interview with a geneticist about BRCA testing, screening and prevention implications, filmed interactions between surgeons, a genetic counsellor and geneticists with a fictitious family (proband had a BRCA2 pathogenic variant with triple-negative breast cancer, her older sister-BRCA2 heterozygous, and cousin-negative for BRCA2 variant).

METHODS

Twenty-one surgeons, 5 oncologists, 18 nurses and 9 genetic counsellors participated. Knowledge (18 item MCQ), communication skills (responses to 6 questions from proband and relatives) and self-confidence (discussing 9 genetic testing issues) were assessed pre- and post workshop.

RESULTS

Knowledge scores improved significantly post workshop (mean change = 7.06; 95% confidence interval (CI) 6.37-7.74; P < 0.001), as did communication (mean change = 5.38; 95% CI 4.37-6.38; P < 0.001) and self-confidence (P < 0.001).

DISCUSSION

Healthcare professionals' knowledge and self-confidence when discussing the risks and uncertainties in genetics are often poor. TRUSTING workshops significantly enhanced attendees' navigation of communication difficulties encountered and will be rolled out more widely.

Role of Curculigo Orchioides in the Proliferation and Apoptosis of Breast Cancer Michigan Cancer Foundation-7 (MCF-7) Cells Under Network Pharmacology

Based on network pharmacology (NP), the effects of curculigo orchioides (CO) granules alone or CO granules along with tamoxifen on the proliferation and apoptosis (P&A) of human breast cancer (BC) cells were explored. A search database was constructed to obtain the active components (ACs) of CO and related target genes to perform disease mapping, and a BC target map was constructed to perform related pathway enrichment analysis (PEA). The blank control group (CG), estrogen group (EG), and tamoxifen group (TG) were set as controls to observe the effects of CO granules alone and CO granules along with tamoxifen. The PEA showed that the effect of CO on BC may be related to the cooperation of its ACs. The target of action may be related to cell cycle and proliferation, growth factors, metabolic pathways, etc. Different concentrations of CO had different effects, CO granules of various concentrations had no obvious growth-promoting effect (P < 0.05), and so did CO combined with tamoxifen (P > 0.05); high-dose (H-D) CO combined with tamoxifen can induce cell apoptosis (P < 0.05). Through NP, the ACs of CO and related targets of BC were predicted and analyzed. At the same time, it was proved that CO granules are safe in clinical use, and the combined effect of tamoxifen is better in the treatment of estrogen-positive patients, providing reference for the follow-up use of CO in the treatment of BC.

The implementation of a commercially available multi-gene profile test for breast cancer characterization in a department of pathology: what have we learned from the first 100 cases?

Analysis of breast cancer prognostic and predictive factors is still nowadays poorly accurate and standardized. The advent of multi-gene expression profiles (MGEPs) has improved the prediction of breast cancer outcome, particularly regarding early luminal breast cancers (LBCs). The availability in our Institute of EndoPredict® (EP), a last-generation prognostic gene signature assay, has prompted us to study a series of LBCs, firstly verifying its reproducibility on six routine representative cases, either presenting non-optimal preanalytical conditions or different tumor samples from the same patient; secondly, correlating EP results on 8 retrospectively recruited samples with patients' follow-up; thirdly, applying prospectively EP on 100 routinely diagnosed cases, assessing the oncologists' and pathologists' attitude toward it. The complete reproducibility of EP on all the samples investigated in the first phase allowed to state that EP overcomes the detrimental effects of an inaccurate pre-analytic phase, determining the most appropriate prognostic and predictive parameters of breast cancer. The second phase confirmed EP as a fundamental tool in guiding therapeutic decision, improving the classical bio-pathological characterization and recovering 38% patients' inadequately managed. Finally, the study disclosed how oncologists sometimes inadequately requested EP, but also how it allows a better stratification of breast cancer otherwise considered poorly aggressive and not requiring an EP test, such as G1 neoplasms or tubular histotype. In conclusion, the introduction of EP test in an Anatomic Pathology Department emerges as a useful tool in routine breast cancer diagnosis, both for the characterization of individual cases and, as a result, for more appropriate therapeutic choices.

Patients' perceptions of 70-gene signature testing: commonly changing the initial inclination to undergo or forego chemotherapy and reducing decisional conflict

PURPOSE

Little is known about the impact of 70-gene signature (70-GS) use on patients' chemotherapy decision-making. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of 70-GS use on patients' decisions to undergo chemotherapy. The perceived decision conflict during decision-making was a secondary objective of the study.

METHODS

Patients operated for estrogen receptor positive early breast cancer were asked to fill out a questionnaire probing their inclination to undergo chemotherapy before deployment of the 70-GS test. After disclosure of the 70-GS result patients were asked about their decision regarding chemotherapy. Patients' decisional conflict was measured using the 16-item decisional conflict scale (DCS); scores < 25 are associated with a persuaded decision while a score > 37.5 implies that one feels unsure about a choice.

RESULTS

Between January 1th 2017 and December 31th 2018, 106 patients completed both questionnaires. Before deployment of the 70-GS, 58% of patients (n = 62) formulated a clear treatment preference, of whom 21 patients (34%) changed their opinion on treatment with chemotherapy following the 70-GS. The final decision regarding chemotherapy was in line with the 70-GS result in 90% of patients. The percentage of patients who felt unsure about their preference to be treated with chemotherapy decreased from 42 to 5% after disclosure of the 70-GS. The mean total DCS significantly decreased from pre-test to post-test from 35 to 23, irrespective of the risk estimate (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Deployment of the 70-GS changed patients' inclination to undergo adjuvant chemotherapy in one third of patients and decreased patients' decisional conflict.

Change in therapeutic management after the EndoPredict assay in a prospective decision impact study of Mexican premenopausal breast cancer patients

Objective

To evaluate the change in adjuvant therapeutic decision in a cohort of young women with breast cancer discussed by a multidisciplinary team, before and after EndoPredict testing.

Patients and methods

99 premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, T1-T2, and N0-N1 breast cancer were included. Clinicopathological characteristics were recorded and cases were presented in a multidisciplinary tumor board. Consensual therapeutic decisions before and after EndoPredict results were registered. Medical records were reviewed at six-month follow-up to determine physicians’ adherence to therapeutic recommendations. Pearson chi-square and McNemar’s tests were used to analyze differences between groups and changes in treatment recommendations, respectively.

Results

Median age at diagnosis was 43 years. The most frequent tumor size was pT2 (53.5%) and 27% of patients had 1–3 positive lymph nodes. 46% of patients had a low-risk EPclin result. Nodal status and tumor grade were significantly associated with EPclin result (p < .00001 and p = .0110, respectively), while Ki67 levels and age ≤40 years were not. A change in chemotherapy decision was registered in 19.2% of patients (p = .066), with the greatest impact in de-escalation (9% net reduction). A change in chemotherapy or endocrine therapy regimen was suggested in 19% and 20% of cases, respectively, after EPclin results were available. A significant difference was found in the median EPclin score between patients with a low- vs. high-intensity chemotherapy and endocrine therapy regimen recommendation (p = 0.049 and p = 0.0001, respectively). Tumor board treatment recommendation adherence with the EndoPredict result was 95% and final treatment adherence to EPclin result was 93%.

Conclusions

The EndoPredict test successfully assisted the clinical decision-making process in premenopausal patients, with a clinically significant change in overall decision-making, with the greatest impact seen in chemotherapy reduction, and a high rate of therapeutic adherence.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Patients with Breast Cancer Based on Clinical and Evolving Oncotype DX Criteria

Introduction

Oncotype DX assay recurrence score (ODX-RS) cut-off values have recently changed after the publication of the TAILOR-X trial results. We aim to explore decisions for adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) based on physicians' clinical assessment and the evolving ODX-RS.

Methodology

Patients who underwent ODX testing after curative surgical resection of estrogen receptor positive (ER+), Her2 non-overexpressed (Her2-) and lymph node-negative (LN-) breast cancer (BC) were eligible. Management of these patients was guided by the results of the old ODX-RS-1 (<18, 18-30, and ≥31) risk grouping. For the purpose of this study, treatment decisions were also assumed according to TAILOR-X results (ODX-RS-2). Decisions of 3 medical oncologists on ACT were solicited by blinding them to the RS to investigate concordance with ODXA RS-1 and 2 recommendations.

Results

Sixty-six consecutive patients were included. Median age was 50.5 (range: 21-73) years. There was 1 male patient, and 37/65 females (56.9%) were premenopausal. Among the 3 oncologists, recommendations for ACT based on clinical assessment were discrepant in 29 (43.9%) patients. Based on majority consensus (≥2 oncologists), ACT would have been recommended to 22/41 (53.7%) and 22/46 (47.82%) patients with low-risk tumors according to ODX-RS-1 and ODX-RS-2, respectively. Compared to ODX-RS-1, ODX-RS-2 identifies 12% (46 vs. 41) more low-risk patients and 66% (20 vs. 12 patients) more high-risk patients.

Conclusion

Overtreatment and discrepancies in the management of patients with ER+/Her2-/LN- early BC can be minimized by the implementation of ODX genomic assay. Some differences in ACT recommendations exist between ODX-RS-1 and ODX-RS-2.

Decision of adjuvant chemotherapy in intermediate risk luminal breast cancer patients: A prospective multicenter trial assessing the clinical and psychological impact of EndoPredict® (EpClin) use (UCBG 2-14)

PURPOSE

Genomic tests can identify ER-positive HER2-negative localized breast cancer patients who may not benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. Such tests seem especially interesting in "intermediate" clinico-pathological risk categories. The psychological impact of the decision uncertainty in these women remains largely unexplored. We assessed the clinical and psychological impact of EndoPredict® (EpClin), a clinico-genomic test, in these patients.

METHODS

This multicenter, single arm prospective study (NCT02773004) enrolled patients for which adjuvant chemotherapy was uncertain, based on predefined criteria. The primary endpoint was the proportion of change between initial adjuvant decision and final administration of chemotherapy. Secondary endpoints included post-test (Day 17) and 1-year patient reported outcomes.

RESULTS

One third of 200 evaluable patients had a high EpClin score (≥3.32867; 10 years cumulative risk of distance failure ≥10%). The overall change rate of chemotherapy decision was 72/200 (35.8%, 95% CI 29.2-42.4). Chemotherapy was withdrawn in 57 cases (28.4% [22.2-34.8]) and added in 15 (7.5% [3.8-11.2]. 6 changes (8%) were based on patients' decisions. Anxiety and distress levels increased at Day 17 when adding chemotherapy after the test result (p < 10-7 and 0.00022 respectively), while stable in other situations. At 1-year, all patients had returned to the baseline anxiety and distress levels (mean anxiety 51.5, +/- SD = 2.5 [max. 80], mean distress 3±1 [max. 10]).

CONCLUSIONS

EndoPredict ® (EpClin) is clinically useful in deciding whether or not to administer adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with intermediate risk. A single-step decision is preferable since adding chemotherapy at a later stage increases anxiety and distress.

Risk stratification in early breast cancer in premenopausal and postmenopausal women: integrating genomic assays with clinicopathological features

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There is growing consensus that genomic assays provide useful complementary information to clinicopathological features in oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancers. Here, ongoing research with multigene tests used for postmenopausal breast cancer and new emerging prognostic and predictive markers for pre and postmenopausal women are summarised.

RECENT FINDINGS

Results of the TAILORx trial have shown that women with an intermediate risk score do not benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. Prosgina has been further investigated in a contemporary patient population in postmenopausal women and its use has been extended for premenopausal women. The EndoPredict was extensively used in decision-impact studies showing that its use can potentially reduce the need for adjuvant chemotherapy. Several new genomic assays have been developed, with some of them showing promising use for women with early oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer.

SUMMARY

New areas of research for prediction of recurrence and risk stratification involve the development of immune gene signatures that carry modest but significant prognostic value. The recent expansion of high-throughput technology platforms including circulating tumour DNA/RNA and microRNA offer new opportunities to improve prediction models, particularly in women with oestrogen receptor-negative disease and premenopausal women. Genomic assays have clearly improved prognostication of early oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer but it is clear that standard clinicopathological parameters are still very important when identifying patient for adjuvant chemotherapy.

Online accounts of gene expression profiling in early-stage breast cancer: Interpreting genomic testing for chemotherapy decision making

Background

Genomic techniques are being developed within oncology and beginning to be experienced within routine cancer care. Little is known about how these tools feature in patients’ experiences of treatment decision making.

Objective

This research explores the ways in which women interpret and discuss gene expression profiling for breast cancer treatment decision making, as articulated within online accounts.

Design

This study used a qualitative approach to analyse written exchanges focusing on gene expression profiling in the UK (Oncotype DX test). Accounts are taken from online forums hosted by two UK cancer charity websites, comprising 132 discussion threads from a total of seven forums. Authors qualitatively analysed the data and developed key themes drawing on existing literature from medical sociology.

Findings

Women used online spaces to share and discuss results of gene expression profiling. Women interpreted results in the context of indirect experience of cancer treatment, and sociocultural depictions of cancer and chemotherapy. Users largely represented the test positively, emphasizing its ability to “personalize” treatment pathways, though many also pointed to inherent uncertainties with regards the possibility of cancer recurrence.

Discussion and Conclusions

We highlight the complex contexts in which genomic techniques are experienced, with these shaped by personal biographies, online environments and pervasive cultural narratives of cancer and its treatment. We highlight tensions between the claims of genomic testing to aid treatment decision making and patient reflections on the capability of these techniques to resolve uncertainties surrounding treatment decisions.