Summary Attention to survivors of adult cancers formally began more than 30 years ago with the founding of the National Coalition for Cancer Survivorship by representatives from 20 organisations who ...envisioned an organisation that would address survivorship issues and include friends, family, and caregivers. Since then, progress has been made in cancer care delivery, which has created challenges for and barriers to provision of optimal follow-up care to patients and survivors living with cancer as a chronic illness. Focus on post-treatment cancer care, including monitoring for long-term and late effects, and concerns regarding the effect of a cancer diagnosis and treatment on quality of life have gained momentum in the past 10 years. This impetus is largely a result of the 2005 Institute of Medicine Report From Cancer Patient to Cancer Survivor: Lost in Transition . Although the issues raised in the report were hardly novel, they gave a new and powerful voice to the cancer survivorship movement that demanded a call to action. In this Series paper, we provide an overview of the issues surrounding provision of cancer survivorship and follow-up care in the USA and discuss potential solutions to these challenges.
Recent studies suggest that tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) are associated with disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in operable triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). We seek to ...validate the prognostic impact of TILs in primary TNBCs in two adjuvant phase III trials conducted by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG).
Full-face hematoxylin and eosin–stained sections of 506 tumors from ECOG trials E2197 and E1199 were evaluated for density of TILs in intraepithelial (iTILs) and stromal compartments (sTILs). Patient cases of TNBC from E2197 and E1199 were randomly selected based on availability of sections. For the primary end point of DFS, association with TIL scores was determined by fitting proportional hazards models stratified on study. Secondary end points were OS and distant recurrence–free interval (DRFI). Reporting recommendations for tumor marker prognostic studies criteria were followed, and all analyses were prespecified.
The majority of 481 evaluable cancers had TILs (sTILs, 80%; iTILs, 15%). With a median follow-up of 10.6 years, higher sTIL scores were associated with better prognosis; for every 10% increase in sTILs, a 14% reduction of risk of recurrence or death (P = .02), 18% reduction of risk of distant recurrence (P = .04), and 19% reduction of risk of death (P = .01) were observed. Multivariable analysis confirmed sTILs to be an independent prognostic marker of DFS, DRFI, and OS.
In two national randomized clinical trials using contemporary adjuvant chemotherapy, we confirm that stromal lymphocytic infiltration constitutes a robust prognostic factor in TNBCs. Studies assessing outcomes and therapeutic efficacies should consider stratification for this parameter.
The COVID-19 pandemic presents clinicians a unique set of challenges in managing breast cancer (BC) patients. As hospital resources and staff become more limited during the COVID-19 pandemic, it ...becomes critically important to define which BC patients require more urgent care and which patients can wait for treatment until the pandemic is over. In this Special Communication, we use expert opinion of representatives from multiple cancer care organizations to categorize BC patients into priority levels (A, B, C) for urgency of care across all specialties. Additionally, we provide treatment recommendations for each of these patient scenarios. Priority A patients have conditions that are immediately life threatening or symptomatic requiring urgent treatment. Priority B patients have conditions that do not require immediate treatment but should start treatment before the pandemic is over. Priority C patients have conditions that can be safely deferred until the pandemic is over. The implementation of these recommendations for patient triage, which are based on the highest level available evidence, must be adapted to current availability of hospital resources and severity of the COVID-19 pandemic in each region of the country. Additionally, the risk of disease progression and worse outcomes for patients need to be weighed against the risk of patient and staff exposure to SARS CoV-2 (virus associated with the COVID-19 pandemic). Physicians should use these recommendations to prioritize care for their BC patients and adapt treatment recommendations to the local context at their hospital.
Abstract
There are now close to 17 million cancer survivors in the United States, and this number is expected to continue to grow. One decade ago the Institute of Medicine report, From Cancer Patient ...to Cancer Survivor: Lost in Transition, outlined 10 recommendations aiming to provide coordinated, comprehensive care for cancer survivors. Although there has been noteworthy progress made since the release of the report, gaps remain in research, clinical practice, and policy. Specifically, the recommendation calling for the development of quality measures in cancer survivorship care has yet to be fulfilled. In this commentary, we describe the development of a comprehensive, evidence-based cancer survivorship care quality framework and propose the next steps to systematically apply it in clinical settings, research, and policy.
The objective of this review is to describe existing data on breast cancer incidence and mortality in low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMICs), in particular in sub‐Saharan Africa; identify the ...limitations of these data; and review what is known about breast cancer control strategies in sub‐Saharan African countries and other LMICs. Available estimates demonstrate that breast cancer incidence and mortality are rising in LMICs, including in Africa, although high‐quality data from LMICs (and particularly from sub‐Saharan Africa) are largely lacking. Case fatality rates from breast cancer appear to be substantially higher in LMICs than in high‐income countries. Significant challenges exist to developing breast cancer control programs in LMICs, perhaps particularly in sub‐Saharan Africa, and the most effective strategies for treatment and early detection in the context of limited resources are uncertain. High‐quality research on breast cancer incidence and mortality and implementation research to guide effective breast cancer control strategies in LMICs are urgently needed. Enhanced investment in breast cancer research and treatment in LMICs should be a global public health priority.
Implications for Practice:
The numbers of new cases of breast cancer, and breast cancer deaths per year, in low‐ and middle‐income countries are rising. Engagement by the international breast cancer community is critical to reduce global disparities in breast cancer outcomes. Cancer specialists and institutions in high‐income countries can serve as key partners in training initiatives, clinical care, protocol and program development, and research. This article provides an overview of what is known about breast cancer incidence, mortality, and effective strategies for breast cancer control in sub‐Saharan Africa and identifies key gaps in the literature. This information can help guide priorities for engagement by the global cancer community.
This review provides an overview about what is known about breast cancer incidence and mortality in LMICs, with a focus on sub‐Saharan Africa. It discusses the implications of these trends for breast cancer early detection and treatment strategies and identifies what is currently known about delivery of such care in LMICs. It focuses on the limitations of the existing data and areas in which high‐quality research is most needed.
While health systems have implemented multifaceted interventions to improve physician and patient communication in serious illnesses such as cancer, clinicians vary in their response to these ...initiatives. In this secondary analysis of a randomized trial, we identified phenotypes of oncology clinicians based on practice pattern and demographic data, then evaluated associations between such phenotypes and response to a machine learning (ML)-based intervention to prompt earlier advance care planning (ACP) for patients with cancer.
Between June and November 2019, we conducted a pragmatic randomized controlled trial testing the impact of text message prompts to 78 oncology clinicians at 9 oncology practices to perform ACP conversations among patients with cancer at high risk of 180-day mortality, identified using a ML prognostic algorithm. All practices began in the pre-intervention group, which received weekly emails about ACP performance only; practices were sequentially randomized to receive the intervention at 4-week intervals in a stepped-wedge design. We used latent profile analysis (LPA) to identify oncologist phenotypes based on 11 baseline demographic and practice pattern variables identified using EHR and internal administrative sources. Difference-in-differences analyses assessed associations between oncologist phenotype and the outcome of change in ACP conversation rate, before and during the intervention period. Primary analyses were adjusted for patients' sex, age, race, insurance status, marital status, and Charlson comorbidity index. The sample consisted of 2695 patients with a mean age of 64.9 years, of whom 72% were White, 20% were Black, and 52% were male. 78 oncology clinicians (42 oncologists, 36 advanced practice providers) were included. Three oncologist phenotypes were identified: Class 1 (n = 9) composed primarily of high-volume generalist oncologists, Class 2 (n = 5) comprised primarily of low-volume specialist oncologists; and 3) Class 3 (n = 28), composed primarily of high-volume specialist oncologists. Compared with class 1 and class 3, class 2 had lower mean clinic days per week (1.6 vs 2.5 class 3 vs 4.4 class 1) a higher percentage of new patients per week (35% vs 21% vs 18%), higher baseline ACP rates (3.9% vs 1.6% vs 0.8%), and lower baseline rates of chemotherapy within 14 days of death (1.4% vs 6.5% vs 7.1%). Overall, ACP rates were 3.6% in the pre-intervention wedges and 15.2% in intervention wedges (11.6 percentage-point difference). Compared to class 3, oncologists in class 1 (adjusted percentage-point difference-in-differences 3.6, 95% CI 1.0 to 6.1, p = 0.006) and class 2 (adjusted percentage-point difference-in-differences 12.3, 95% confidence interval CI 4.3 to 20.3, p = 0.003) had greater response to the intervention.
Patient volume and time availability may be associated with oncologists' response to interventions to increase ACP. Future interventions to prompt ACP should prioritize making time available for such conversations between oncologists and their patients.
PDF
