Dataset Information

A qualitative study to evaluate physician attitudes regarding omission of surgery among exceptional responders to neoadjuvant systemic therapy for breast cancer (NRG-CC006).

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Accrual to clinical trials that challenge well-established treatment paradigms represents a unique challenge. Physician opinions on investigation of a novel approach to breast cancer treatment, in which patients with complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy are offered omission of lumpectomy, are unknown. NRG-CC006 sought to describe physician attitudes toward a novel approach to breast cancer treatment.

Methods

We recruited 18 participants in the fields of surgery, medical oncology, and radiation oncology to participate in the semi-structured telephone interviews. Main outcomes are qualitative themes associated with omission of surgery.

Results

Of 18 interview participants, specialty and gender were evenly represented across surgery, medical oncology, and radiation oncology. Qualitative themes included general attitudes toward treatment de-escalation, stakeholder considerations, and trial/protocol considerations. The vast majority of participants expressed interest in investigation of omission of surgery, with all participants endorsing need for further investigation into treatment de-escalation. Stakeholder considerations in opening such a trial emphasized need for multidisciplinary involvement and, particularly, the unique role of surgeons as gatekeepers in breast cancer treatment. Finally, participants endorsed a need for further foundational studies to develop ways to predict complete pathologic response to chemotherapy without surgical intervention.

Conclusions

Physicians expressed interest in investigating a novel approach to breast cancer treatment that would omit surgery in complete responders to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Multidisciplinary input, and specifically surgeon engagement, will be key to the success of future investigations. Ongoing work to develop approaches to predict pathologic complete response accurately is needed to achieve the promise of this idea. ClinTrials #: BR005: NCT03188393 June 13, 2017.

SUBMITTER: Gharzai LA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8648089 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportancePatients should have an active role in decisions about pursuing or forgoing specific therapies in treatment de-escalation trials.ObjectiveTo evaluate longitudinal patient-reported outcomes (PROs) encompassing decisional comfort and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) among patients who elected to enroll in a clinical trial evaluating radiotherapy alone, without breast surgery, for invasive breast cancers with exceptional response to neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST).Design, setting, and participantsProspective, single-group, phase 2 clinical trial at 7 US medical centers. Women aged 40 years or older with invasive cT1-2 N0-1 M0 triple-negative or human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (ERBB2)-positive breast cancer with no pathologic evidence of residual disease following standard NST enrolled from March 6, 2017, to November 9, 2021. Validated PRO measures were administered at baseline and 6, 12, and 36 months post-radiotherapy. Data were analyzed from January to February 2023.InterventionsPRO measures included the Decision Regret Scale (DRS), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lymphedema (FACT-B+4), and Breast Cancer Treatment Outcomes Scale (BCTOS).Main outcomes and measuresChanges in PRO measure scores and subscores over time.ResultsAmong 31 patients, the median (IQR) age was 61 (56-66) years, 26 (84%) were White, and 26 (84%) were non-Hispanic. A total of 15 (48%) had triple-negative disease and 16 (52%) had ERBB2-positive disease. Decisional comfort was high at baseline (median [IQR] DRS score 10 [0-25] on a 0-100 scale, with higher scores indicating higher decisional regret) and significantly increased over time (median [IQR] DRS score at 36 months, 0 [0-20]; P < .001). HRQOL was relatively high at baseline (median [IQR] FACT-B composite score 121 [111-134] on a 0-148 scale, with higher scores indicating higher HRQOL) and significantly increased over time (median [IQR] FACT-B score at 36 months, 128 [116-137]; P = .04). Perceived differences between the affected breast and contralateral breast were minimal at baseline (median [IQR] BCTOS score 1.05 [1.00-1.23] on a 1-4 scale, with higher scores indicating greater differences) and increased significantly over time (median [IQR] BCTOS score at 36 months, 1.36 [1.18-1.64]; P < .001). At 36 months postradiotherapy, the cosmetic subscore was 0.45 points higher than baseline (95% CI, 0.16-0.74; P = .001), whereas function, pain, and edema subscores were not significantly different than baseline.Conclusions and relevanceIn this nonrandomized phase 2 clinical trial, analysis of PROs demonstrated an overall positive experience for trial participants, with longitudinal improvements in decisional comfort and overall HRQOL over time and minimal lasting adverse effects of therapy.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02945579.

Project description:BackgroundThe vast majority of metastatic cancers cannot be cured. Palliative treatment may relieve disease symptoms by stopping or slowing cancer growth and may prolong patients' lives, but almost all patients will inevitably develop disease progression after initial response. However, for reasons that are not fully understood, a very few patients will have extraordinary durable responses to standard anticancer treatments.Materials and methodsWe analyzed exceptional responders treated at Fox Chase Cancer Center between September 2009 and November 2017. An exceptional response was defined as a complete response lasting more than 1 year or a partial response or stable disease for more than 2 years. Tumor samples were analyzed using an Ambry Genetics test kit with a 142-gene panel. Messenger RNA expression was evaluated using NanoString's nCounter PanCancer Pathways Panel and Immune Profiling Panel and compared with matched controls for gender, age, and cancer type.ResultsTwenty-six exceptional responders with metastatic bladder, kidney, breast, lung, ovarian, uterine, and colon cancers were enrolled. Mutations were identified in 45 genes. The most common mutation was an EPHA5 nonsynonymous mutation detected in 87.5% of patients. Mutations in DNA damage repair pathway genes were also frequent, suggesting increased genome instability. We also found varying expression of 73 genes in the Pathways panel and 85 genes in the Immune Profiling panel, many of them responsible for improvement in tumor recognition and antitumor immune response.ConclusionsThe genomic instability detected in our exceptional responders, plus treatment with DNA damage compounds combined with favorable anticancer immunity, may have contributed to exceptional responses to standard anticancer therapies in the patients studied.Implications for practiceWith recent advances in the treatment of cancer, there is increased emphasis on the importance of identifying molecular markers to predict treatment outcomes, thereby allowing precision oncology. In this study, it was hypothesized that there is a "specific biologic signature" in the biology of the cancer in long-term survivors that allows sensitivity to systemic therapy and durability of response. Results showed that DNA damage repair pathway alterations, combined with favorable anticancer immunity, may have contributed to exceptional responses. It is very likely that an in-depth examination of outlier responses will become a standard component of drug development in the future.

Project description:PurposeAdvances in chemotherapeutic and targeted agents have increased pathologic complete response (pCR) rates after neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST). Vacuum-assisted biopsy (VAB) has been suggested to accurately evaluate pCR. This study aims to confirm the non-inferiority of the 5-year disease-free survival of patients who omitted breast surgery when predicted to have a pCR based on breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and VAB after NST, compared with patients with a pCR who had undergone breast surgery in previous studies.MethodsThe Omission of breast surgery for PredicTed pCR patients wIth MRI and vacuum-assisted bIopsy in breaST cancer after neoadjuvant systemic therapy (OPTIMIST) trial is a prospective, multicenter, single-arm, non-inferiority study enrolling in 17 tertiary care hospitals in the Republic of Korea. Eligible patients must have a clip marker placed in the tumor and meet the MRI criteria suggesting complete clinical response (post-NST MRI size ≤ 1 cm and lesion-to-background signal enhancement ratio ≤ 1.6) after NST. Patients will undergo VAB, and breast surgery will be omitted for those with no residual tumor. Axillary surgery can also be omitted if the patient was clinically node-negative before and after NST and met the stringent criteria of MRI size ≤ 0.5 cm. Survival and efficacy outcomes are evaluated over five years.DiscussionThis study seeks to establish evidence for the safe omission of breast surgery in exceptional responders to NST while minimizing patient burden. The trial will address concerns about potential undertreatment due to false-negative results and recurrence as well as improved patient-reported quality of life issues from the omission of surgery. Successful completion of this trial may reshape clinical practice for certain breast cancer subtypes and lead to a safe and less invasive approach for selected patients.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05505357. Registered on August 17, 2022. Clinical Research Information Service Identifier: KCT0007638. Registered on July 25, 2022.

Project description:ObjectiveTo explore US provider perspectives about self-sourced medication abortion and how their attitudes and clinic practices changed in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.Study designWe conducted a multi-method study of survey and interview data. We performed 40 baseline interviews and surveys in spring 2019 and 36 follow-up surveys and ten interviews one year later. We compared pre- and post-Likert scale responses of provider views on the importance of different aspects of standard medication abortion assessment and evaluation (e.g., related to ultrasounds and blood-typing). We performed content analysis of the follow-up interviews using deductive-inductive analysis.ResultsSurvey results revealed that clinics substantially changed their medication abortion protocols in response to COVID-19, with more than half increasing their gestational age limits and introducing telemedicine for follow-up of a medication abortion. Interview analysis suggested that physicians were more supportive of self-sourced medication abortion in response to changing clinic protocols that decreased in-clinic assessment and evaluation for medication abortion, and as a result of physicians' altered assessments of risk in the context of COVID-19. Having evidence already in place that supported these practice changes made the implementation of new protocols more efficient, while working in a state with restrictive abortion policies thwarted the flexibility of clinics to adapt to changes in standards of care.ConclusionThis exploratory study reveals that the COVID-19 pandemic has altered clinical assessment of risk and has shifted practice towards a less medicalized model. Further work to facilitate person-centered abortion information and care can build on initial modifications in response to the pandemic.ImplicationsCOVID-19 has shifted clinician perception of risk and has catalyzed a change in clinical protocols for medication abortion. However, state laws and policies that regulate medication abortion limit physician ability to respond to changes in risk assessment.