Abstract GS6-05: The impact of breast cancer surgery on quality of life: Long term results from E5103

Background: Breast cancer (BC) treatment, including surgery, can impact not only short-term health outcomes but may also affect longer term health-related and psychosocial quality of life (QOL). We sought to describe the impact of BC surgery on QOL among breast cancer survivors followed in a large randomized trial.

Methods: The ECOG-ACRIN protocol E5103 was a phase III trial that randomized BC patients (pts) who had undergone definitive BC surgery to receive adjuvant doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and paclitaxel with either bevacizumab (bev) or placebo. Telephone based surveys were administered to all pts enrolled between 01/Jan/10 and 08/Jun/10 as part of a Decision-Making/QOL component until 18 mos post enrollment. Functional/psychosocial QOL domains were assessed by the EQ-5D-3L and the FACT B+G. Fisher's exact test compared categorical and Wilcoxon rank sum test compared continuous variables between subgroups. Multivariable regression was used to evaluate factors in addition to primary surgery at enrollment (age, race, ER/PgR status, tumor size, nodal status) associated with overall FACT score at 18 mos.

Results: Patient reported outcomes at 18 mos were available from 89.6% (465/519) pts. At enrollment, 57% (266/465) had a mastectomy; 43% (199/465) breast conserving surgery (BCS). Median age at enrollment was 52 (range: 25-76) years. There were no differences in QOL between bev vs placebo treatment arms (EQ-5D-3L Index Score p=0.65; FACT B+G Score p=0.23) at 18 mos so groups were combined. Using EQ-5D-3L, over half of the pts (58%) reported at least some pain/discomfort; 38% symptoms of anxiety/depression. A higher proportion of mastectomy pts reported problems with usual activities compared to BCS pts (Table). Compared to BCS pts, mastectomy pts had lower average EQ5D-3L scores 0.80 vs. 0.84, p=0.04 and FACT B+G scores 109 vs. 114, p=0.01, indicating worse QOL. In univariate analyses, non-white race (p=0.03), ER/PgR+ status (p=0.04) and mastectomy as primary surgery (p=0.01) were significantly associated with worse QOL (lower FACT B+G scores). In multivariable analyses, non-white race (p=0.02) and ER/PgR+ status (p=0.05) remained associated with worse QOL; mastectomy was borderline significant (p=0.06).

Conclusions: Among women participating in a contemporary adjuvant BC chemotherapy trial, a substantial proportion of survivors experience symptoms that may be amenable to intervention, including referral to physical rehabilitation, especially among pts undergoing more extensive surgery. Attention to psychosocial health is also essential both during and after completion of active treatment to optimize QOL outcomes.

 N(%) reporting problems*  5 DimensionsBCSMastectomyOverallp**Mobility44(23)59(23)103(23)1.00Self-care11(6)23(9)34(7)0.21Usual activities49(25)90(34)139(30)0.04Pain/discomfort104(53)161(61)265(58)0.08Anxiety/depression70(36)105(40)175(38)0.44*3L: 3 possible answers: 1) no problems 2) some/moderate problems 3) problems; responses then collapsed into no problems vs. any problems' (=some/moderate problems and problems). ** Fisher's exact test p-value.

Citation Format: Rosenberg SM, O'Neill A, Sepucha K, Miller KD, Dang CT, Northfelt DW, Sledge GW, Schneider BP, Partridge AH. The impact of breast cancer surgery on quality of life: Long term results from E5103 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS6-05.

Abstract PD2-14: Participation in a personalized breast cancer screening trial does not increase anxiety at baseline

Introduction: The purpose of this study is to examine whether participation in a personalized screening trial is associated with anxiety or breast cancer worry. The Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute recently funded WISDOM (Women Informed to Screen Depending On Measures of risk), which is a randomized trial that tests the safety and efficacy of basing starting age, stopping age, frequency and modality of breast cancer screening on individual risk (Clinical Trials Identifier NCT02620852).

Methods: In WISDOM, participants can be randomized to annual screening or personalized screening arm, or self-select an arm an observational cohort. This interim analysis examined the first 1817 participants to determine if the personalized risk arm is acceptable and to explore whether baseline anxiety was associated with study arm. For acceptability our target was to have >60% of participants agree to randomization. Participants completed questions about their Risk Perception, the PROMIS Anxiety short form 8a (total scores 8-40 with higher scores indicating more anxiety), and Breast Cancer Risk Worry (BCRW) survey (total scores 5-20) with higher scores indicating more worry) at baseline and before they were given information on their personal risk or study assignment. For the purposes of these analyses, we defined high anxiety to be the percentage of participants scoring =>22 on the PROMIS and >8 on the BCRW.

Results: The participants were recruited from three sites (UCSD, UCSF, Sanford Health). Of the 1817 initial participants, 1643 completed the baseline questionnaire. Participants has a mean age of 57 years (SD 9). 15.8% felt their chances of developing breast cancer was high, 19.5% felt their chance of developing breast cancer was greater than the average women, and 56.6% felt their lifetime risk of developing breast cancer was >25. Risk perception was not significantly different between women who opted to be randomized versus the observational arm.

The majority of participants were willing to be randomly assigned to an arm (1071/1643, 65.1%). Of those who joined the observational cohort, the majority selected personalized risk arm (474/572, 82.9%). Overall, PROMIS anxiety scores were low at baseline (14.0 MEAN (SD 4.6)) as were the Breast Cancer Risk Worry scores (5.7 MEAN (SD 1.05)). Less than 8% of participants had PROMIS scores >22 and that did not vary across the randomized or observational groups (P=0.2)). About 2% of participants had a BCRW scores >8. Women who worried with breast cancer were more likely to select to be in the observational (3.5%) than randomized (1.7%) arm of the study (P=0.02).

Conclusions: For the women approached to participate in Wisdom, personalized screening was acceptable alternative to annual mammography. Participants in general overestimated their lifetime risk of breast cancer, had very low anxiety and low breast cancer worry. Those who were worried about breast cancer opted more often for the observational arm of the study to allow them to choose between the personalized versus annual arm. Future analyses will follow participants prospectively to determine adherence to assigned or selected arm, and whether anxiety changes after receipt of their personalized risk information.

Citation Format: Naeim A, Sepucha K, Wenger N, Eklund M, Annette S, Madlensky L, van't Veer L, Parker B, Yau C, Cink T, Anton-Culver H, Borowsky A, Petruse A, Sarrafan S, Stover-Fiscalini A, LaCroix A, Adduci K, Wisdom Advocate Partners, Laura E. Participation in a personalized breast cancer screening trial does not increase anxiety at baseline [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD2-14.

Abstract P5-11-02: Survival benefit needed to undergo chemotherapy: Patients and physicians preferences

Background: Data regarding patients (pts) and physicians' preferences for modern adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) are limited. Prior studies suggested that most pts with early stage breast cancer were willing to receive 6 months of adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) for modest survival benefits (e.g. most women would have accepted 3-6 months extension of life).

Methods: E5103 was a phase III trial which randomized node positive or high risk node negative breast cancer pts to receive adjuvant CT (doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide and paclitaxel) with either placebo or bevacizumab. Telephone based surveys were administered to all pts enrolled on E5103 between 01/Jan/10 and 08/Jun/10, as part of a Decision-Making/Quality of Life component. Results presented here are part of the 18 months post-enrollment follow-up. Pts were asked to rate the survival benefit needed to justify 6 months of CT. A complementary survey was sent to all physicians who registered at least one pt on E5103.

Results: 465 out of 519 eligible pts (90%) responded to this survey at 18 months. Main reasons for non response were: inability to reach the patient (6%) or patient refusal (2%). Median pts age was 51 (25-76); 42% of pts had at least a college degree. The majority had at least Stage II cancer.

179 (16%) physicians participated, among whom median age was 50 (35-70). The median years in practice was 17 (3-38); 78% of physicians worked on large size practices, 72% saw at least 5 new breast cancer pts/month, and 77% enroll between 1-4 pts on trials/month.

We found considerable variation in pts preferences particularly for modest survival benefits: a substantial minority of pts (24%) would consider 6 months of CT definitely worthwhile for 1 month survival benefit, 18% would possibly consider it and 56% would not. The percentage considering CT definitely worthwhile increased with greater benefit, but did not reach 100%, even with 24 months survival benefit. About half of pts considered 6 months of CT definitely worthwhile for 9 months benefit, 70% for 12 months and 84% for 24 months.

Physicians were less likely to accept CT for a small chance of benefit (34% of pts vs. 5% of physicians would definitely consider CT worthwhile for 2 months of benefit). For longer benefit, pts and physicians choices were similar (84% of pts vs. 92% of physicians would definitely consider CT worthwhile for 24 months benefit).

Table Yes, definitely worthwhileYes, maybeNo, not worthwhileNo answerConsider 6 months of CT to live:PtsPhysiciansPtsPhysiciansPtsPhysiciansPts/Physicians*1 month longer24%3%18%15%56%80%2%2 months longer34%5%23%32%41%60%2%6 months longer44%32%35%54%19%12%2%9 months longer53%51%34%42%11%5%2%12 months longer70%75%23%22%5%1%2%24 months longer84%92%12%5%2%1%2%n Pts= 465; n Physicians= 179; * equal results in both groups

Conclusions: This subgroup of pts who had undergone modern adjuvant CT in a large multicenter randomized controlled trial and these physicians who registered pts on the same trial had different cutoffs for acceptable levels of benefits and risks when considering adjuvant chemotherapy. It is important to engage pts in determining whether CT is or is not a "reasonable" option for treatment.

Citation Format: Vaz Luis I, O'Neill A, Sepucha K, Miller KD, Baker E, Dang CT, Northfelt DW, Winer EP, Sledge GW, Schneider BP, Partridge A. Survival benefit needed to undergo chemotherapy: Patients and physicians preferences. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2015 Dec 8-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-11-02.

Abstract P2-18-02: Factors associated with contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in young women with breast cancer

Background: While younger age at diagnosis has consistently been identified as a predictor of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM), little is known about how clinical, decisional, and psychosocial factors are related to the decision to undergo CPM in young women with breast cancer.

Methods: As part of an ongoing, multi-center cohort study of young women diagnosed with breast cancer at age 40 or younger, we identified 428 women with unilateral Stage I-III disease. Participants were asked to complete surveys by mail that included questions about decision-making and treatments. Tumor characteristics were ascertained via medical record review. Multinomial logistic regression was used to identify predictors of: 1) CPM vs. unilateral mastectomy (UM); 2) CPM vs. breast conserving surgery (BCS). Independent variables with a p-value ≤ 0.15 in bi-variate analyses were included in the final multivariable model.

Results: 41% of women had CPM, 29% had UM and 31% had BCS. Median age at diagnosis was 37 (range: 17-40). Most women had stage I or II disease (87%), and estrogen receptor (ER) positive tumors (69%); approximately 14% were carriers of a BRCA 1 or 2 mutation. In the multivariable analysis (Table 1), having a cancer-predisposing mutation, having at least one child, anxiety as measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and patient-driven decision making were all associated with a greater likelihood of undergoing CPM, while women who reported their physician made the final decision about surgery were less likely to undergo CPM, compared to both UM and BCS. Additional factors significantly associated with undergoing CPM vs. BCS included nodal involvement, Her2 positivity, and lower BMI. Race/ethnicity, marital status, tumor size, tumor grade, depression (as measured by the HADS), fear of recurrence, and having a first-degree relative with breast or ovarian cancer were not associated with undergoing CPM.

Conclusion: Many young women with early stage breast cancer are choosing to undergo CPM. Our findings point to the need for improved communication with patients regarding surgical choices as well as better management of anxiety surrounding diagnosis. Interventions aimed at enhancing risk communication and encouraging shared patient-physician decision-making might be beneficial in this setting.

Table 1. Factors associated with: 1) CPM vs. UM; 2) CPM vs. BCS CPM vs. UMCPM vs. BCS OR (95% CI)OR (95% CI)Age at diagnosis0.92 (0.86-1.00)0.97 (0.90-1.04)Mutation positive3.83 (1.60-9.15)14.51 (5.02-41.92)Any nodal involvement0.79 (0.45-1.38)1.93 (1.05-3.55)Her2 positivity0.71 (0.40-1.26)2.24 (1.18-4.25)Having ≥ 1 child2.08 (1.04-4.14)3.25 (1.63-6.48)BMI0.98 (0.92-1.03)0.92 (0.87-0.97)Anxiety1.93 (1.05-3.56)2.31 (1.22-4.35)Decisional involvement (ref = shared)  Mainly patient's decision3.47 (1.99-6.06)3.71 (2.09-6.58)Mainly doctor's decision0.14 (0.03-0.63)0.16 (0.03-0.77)

Citation Information: Cancer Res 2013;73(24 Suppl): Abstract nr P2-18-02.

The Quality of Decisions about Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Early Stage Breast Cancer

Background: Decisions about adjuvant chemotherapy are highly challenging for many women with early stage breast cancer. We sought to assess the quality of breast cancer patients' decisions about chemotherapy by measuring their knowledge and the degree to which their treatment decisions reflect their goals and preferences.Methods: We mailed a survey to early stage (I, II) breast cancer survivors who were treated at one of four sites, as part of a larger study to validate decision quality instruments. A subset of women completed the chemotherapy module, which included questions about the patient-provider interaction, about facts, about treatment goals, and about the patient's preferred treatment. Characteristics associated with knowledge were identified with linear regression. Characteristics associated with chemotherapy were identified with logistic regression.The percentage of patients who received their preferred treatment was calculated.Results: 358 patients completed the survey (response rate 59%). 64% of patients had Stage I disease, and 57% had chemotherapy. Average age was 56.9 years, 82.6% were white, and 63.7% had a college degree.Decision making: 70% of patients reported that their provider mentioned chemotherapy as an option. 43% reported that their provider asked for their preference about chemotherapy. 23% said the doctor mainly made the decision, 29% said they mainly made the decision, and 46% said both made the decision.Most women (92%) felt their level of involvement was about right.Knowledge: The mean knowledge score was 39.6% (SD 20.3). 29.9% knew that less than half of women with early stage breast cancer eventually die from breast cancer without chemotherapy or hormone therapy.21.8% knew that more than half are free from recurrence in 10 years without chemotherapy or hormone therapy. Chemotherapy treatment and the doctor having discussed chemotherapy were significantly associated (p<0.05) with higher knowledge. Younger age at diagnosis, white race, higher income, and a college degree were also significantly associated with higher knowledge (p<0.05).Treatment: Factors associated with having chemotherapy were younger age (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.01, 2.91) and not having hormone therapy (OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.92, 5.42). Factors associated with not having chemotherapy were lower stage (OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.10, 0.30), mastectomy (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.26, 0.86), and the goal “live as long as possible” (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.10, 1.80).Concordance with preferences: 81.6% of patients who preferred chemotherapy received it, and 92.6% of patients who preferred no chemotherapy received no chemotherapy.Conclusion: Breast cancer patients had substantial knowledge deficits about chemotherapy, which were even more prevalent among older, non-white, less educated, and lower-income women. In addition, more than half of women reported they were not asked about their preferences, and some reported getting chemotherapy treatment that was not concordant with their preferences.Oncologists should address knowledge deficits and explicitly ask patients their preferences.

Citation Information: Cancer Res 2009;69(24 Suppl):Abstract nr 2083.

Decisions about Breast Reconstruction after Mastectomy: Patient Involvement, Knowledge, and Preferences

Background:Most breast cancer patients who have a mastectomy do not have breast reconstruction, and rates of reconstruction vary by race, education, and geographic location, suggesting problems with decision making. We sought to assess the quality of decisions about breast reconstruction by measuring patient involvement in decision making, patient knowledge, and the degree to which decisions reflected patients' goals.Methods: Breast cancer survivors from four sites who were treated with mastectomy in the past 3 years completed a mailed survey, as part of a larger study to validate decision quality instruments. The survey contained questions about the decision making process, factual questions, and questions about personal goals and concerns. Characteristics associated with knowledge were identified with linear regression. Goals/concerns associated with reconstruction were identified using logistic regression. The percent match between treatment preference and treatment received was calculated.Results: The larger study recruited 456 patients (overall response rate 59%). 91 patients completed the reconstruction module. Average age was 56.9 years, 82.6% were white, 63.7% had a college degree, and 64% had Stage I disease. 45.8% had reconstruction.Decision making: 78% of patients reported that their doctor mentioned reconstruction. Most reported a discussion of the pros of reconstruction (63.8%), whereas the minority reported a discussion of the cons (20.9%). 76% reported being asked for their preference about reconstruction. 3% said the doctor mainly made the decision, 74% said they made the decision, and 15% said both made the decision. Most (81%) felt their level of involvement was about right.Knowledge:The mean knowledge score was 32.9% (SD=19). 41% knew that reconstruction has little effect on cancer surveillance. 54% knew that recovery after implant surgery is easier than after flap surgery. 3.3% knew that about 1/3 of patients have a major complication. On bivariate analysis, reconstruction (43.3 vs. 32.6, p=0.053), higher income (43.4 vs. 26.3, p=0.008), a college degree (43.4 vs. 26.2, p<0.01), and being married (40.9 vs. 29, p=0.04) were associated with higher knowledge. On multivariate analysis, higher income was associated with higher knowledge (p=0.0013).Preferences:The following goals were associated with reconstruction: “use your own tissue to make a breast” (OR 1.309, CI 1.028, 1.605), “avoid using a prosthesis” (OR 1.254, CI 1.039, 1.512), and “wake up after mastectomy with reconstruction underway” (OR 1.254, CI 1.057, 1.487). Patients who felt it was important to “avoid putting foreign material in your body” were less likely to have reconstruction (OR 0.682, CI 0.518, 0.899).The majority of patients (81%) had treatment that was concordant with preference.Conclusions: Despite reporting high involvement in decisions about reconstruction, breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy had major knowledge deficits, and many reported having treatment they did not prefer. In addition to involving patients in decisions about reconstruction, surgeons should discuss both the pros and the cons and should explicitly ask patients for their preference about reconstruction.

Citation Information: Cancer Res 2009;69(24 Suppl):Abstract nr 3103.