Search

For women diagnosed with cancer, side effects affecting their sexuality are extremely common and can be distressing and life-changing; however, most women are left in the dark without any guidance from their oncology teams regarding possible side effects and treatment options. American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical guidelines provide guidance on the recommended assessments related to the domains of sexual function and their respective interventions. Despite the existence of these guidelines, the reality is that only a few women with cancer are asked about sexual concerns that result from cancer treatments. Common barriers to sexuality discussion reported by oncology providers include a lack of qualification and knowledge, not having a place to refer patients, and not knowing how to start the conversation. Social media remains a widely untapped resource regarding sexuality and cancer interventions, as people are increasingly turning to social media for health information and advice. This may be especially relevant for sexuality, as oncologists may not feel comfortable or well-trained to discuss the topic, and patients may be reluctant to bring up sexual concerns during their visits. Social media can play a critical role in studying sexual health and in sexuality interventions, particularly in adolescent and young adult patients with cancer. Here, we discuss the lack of inclusion regarding sexuality in oncology, the rates of sexual dysfunction in patients with cancer, treatment options for common sexual concerns, how to utilize the reach of various social media channels, and provide patient and provider resources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose of Review: Male breast cancer is a relatively uncommon and rare disease that is often managed based on evidence adopted from trials pertaining to female breast cancer due to low accrual rates or exclusion of males. This is despite the known differences in the biology and epidemiology of this condition. This review provides an update regarding the management and surveillance of male breast cancer. Recent Findings: Men with breast cancer tend to undergo more extensive surgery in the breast and axilla. The outcomes of male breast cancer compared to a similar subtype of female breast cancer appear worse when matched for stage. Systemic therapies remain predominantly based on recommendations for female breast cancer, although tamoxifen is the more optimal endocrine therapy for men than women. Surveillance with mammograms is recommended for patients harboring a breast cancer susceptibility gene but is otherwise not advised for men who have undergone a mastectomy. Notably, the role of other imaging modalities, including ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging, is minimal. Although the focus on survivorship care among men is low, it is abundantly clear that this is a stigmatizing diagnosis for men, and they suffer from long-term physical and psychological sequelae following a diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer. Summary: In summary, providing more gender-inclusive care and advocating for increased representation of men in prospective breast cancer studies and clinical trials may help improve outcomes and provide enhanced support for this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors offer observation on impact of the landmark Dobbs v Jackson Supreme Court ruling in the U.S. on female patients of childbearing age with cancer. Topics discussed include malignancies that are associated with pregnancy, public health challenge of cancer health disparities in the U.S., and significance of the Dobbs decision for oncology patients in states with a complete abortion ban.

The article presents the discussion on physicians or other health care professionals having a high risk of containing misinformation. Topics include instantaneous access to medical information being beneficial and empowering patients to advocate and others in the cancer communities; and having dietary recommendations in cancer treatment and survivorship.

It is without question that the Internet has democratized access to medical information, with estimates that 70% of the American population use it as a resource, particularly for cancer-related information. Such unfettered access to information has led to an increase in health misinformation. Fortunately, the data indicate that health care professionals remain among the most trusted information resources. Therefore, understanding how the Internet has changed engagement with health information and facilitated the spread of misinformation is an important task and challenge for cancer clinicians. In this review, we perform a meta-synthesis of qualitative data and point toward empirical evidence that characterizes misinformation in medicine, specifically in oncology. We present this as a call to action for all clinicians to become more active in ongoing efforts to combat misinformation in oncology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social media growth has revolutionized health care, facilitating user-friendly, rapid and global sharing of content. Within oncology, this allows for new frontiers in communication for cancer patients, caregivers and healthcare providers. As more physicians engage in online spaces, it is imperative that there are resources to assist in establishing a professional presence on social media. This article describes how to create a social media identity, best practices for engaging both in patient and caregiver spaces and professional communities, and how to address antagonistic and inappropriate behavior on social media with the goal of helping physicians develop an engaging, productive and enjoyable experience online. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Targeted therapies in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer significantly improve outcomes but efficacy is limited by therapeutic resistance. HER2 is an acutely sensitive Heat Shock Protein 90 (HSP90) client and HSP90 inhibition can overcome trastuzumab resistance. Preclinical data suggest that HSP90 inhibition is synergistic with taxanes with the potential for significant clinical activity. We therefore tested ganetespib, a HSP90 inhibitor, in combination with paclitaxel and trastuzumab in patients with trastuzumab-refractory HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer.Methods: In this phase I dose-escalation study, patients with trastuzumab-resistant HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer received weekly trastuzumab (2 mg/kg) and paclitaxel (80 mg/m2) on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of a 28-day cycle with escalating doses of ganetespib (100 mg/m2, 150 mg/m2, and a third cohort of 125 mg/m2 if needed) on days 1, 8, and 15. Therapy was continued until disease progression or toxicity. The primary objective was to establish the safety and maximum tolerated dose and/or recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of this therapy. The secondary objectives included evaluation of the effects of ganetespib on the pharmacokinetics of paclitaxel, and to make a preliminary assessment of the efficacy of the combination therapy.Results: Dose escalation was completed for the two main cohorts without any observed dose-limiting toxicities. Nine patients received treatment. The median prior lines of anti-HER2 therapy numbered three (range 2-4), including prior pertuzumab in 9/9 patients and ado-trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) in 8/9 patients. The most common grade 1/2 adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea, fatigue, anemia, and rash. There were no grade 4 AEs related to ganetespib. The overall response rate was 22% (2/9 patients had partial response) and stable disease was seen in 56% (5/9 patients). The clinical benefit rate was 44% (4/9 patients). The median progression-free survival was 20 weeks (range 8-55).Conclusion: The RP2D of ganetespib is 150 mg/m2 in combination with weekly paclitaxel plus trastuzumab. The combination was safe and well tolerated. Despite prior taxanes, pertuzumab, and T-DM1, clinical activity of this triplet regimen in this heavily pretreated cohort is promising and warrants further study in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02060253 . Registered 30 January 2014. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer are at an increased risk of developing brain metastases. The incidence and prevalence of central nervous system (CNS) disease are increasing due to improved survival, which can be attributed to better systemic therapies for extracranial disease. The current standard of care for brain metastases includes a combination of surgery and/or radiation. Systemic therapies are typically reserved for patients with intracranial progression following radiation, due to their limited ability to cross the blood-brain barrier. None of the available anti-HER2 agents (trastuzumab, lapatinib, pertuzumab, and ado-trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1)) are currently approved for the treatment of brain metastases. Research is underway evaluating novel anti-HER2 agents, which have demonstrated CNS activity. This article discusses the current data on using anti-HER2 therapies to treat CNS disease as well as the newer anti-HER2 agents, which may overcome the current challenges faced in treating brain metastases in the HER2-positive patient population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hepatitis B reactivation can occur with cytotoxic chemotherapy in patients with hepatitis B and cancer. Reactivation can occur in a patient with chronic hepatitis, an inactive carrier, or one with resolved hepatitis. Clinical presentation may range from subclinical elevation of liver enzymes to fatal fulminant hepatic failure. Mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors, which include everolimus, are a new generation of targeted agents that are currently approved for many cancers (since March 2009) including advanced hormone receptor positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer, in conjunction with exemestane (as of July 2012). We are therefore still learning the various adverse events that occur with this new class of agents. Here, we present an unfortunate case of fatal hepatitis B reactivation in a woman with metastatic breast cancer treated with everolimus and exemestane. We have detailed the controversies around hepatitis B screening prior to immunosuppressive therapy. Clinicians and patients should be aware of this rare but fatal complication prior to everolimus use, and a detailed history, screening for hepatitis B and prophylactic antiviral treatment should be considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]