Search

Background: Despite evidence of substantial breast cancer risk reduction, few high-risk women adopt chemopreventive medications such as selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) or aromatase inhibitors (AIs). Women with benign breast disease, such as atypical hyperplasia (AH) or lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS), have an increased risk of developing breast cancer and derive a greater benefit from antiestrogens compared to other high-risk women. Reasons for low uptake of chemoprevention include insufficient patient and clinician knowledge about antiestrogens, time constraints during the clinical encounter, and concerns about side effects. To address these barriers, we have developed patient and provider web-based decision support tools to improve informed choice about breast cancer chemoprevention among women with AH or LCIS. Study design: We are conducting a cluster-randomized controlled trial of clinical decision support to improve chemoprevention informed choice among women with AH or LCIS and their treating providers. Twenty-six U.S. sites through the SWOG Cancer Research Network were randomly assigned 1:1 to standard educational materials alone or in combination with the patient-centered decision aid (RealRisks) and provider decision support tool (BNAV). A total of 415 patients and 200 healthcare providers will be recruited from these sites. RealRisks consists of interactive modules to calculate personalized breast cancer risk and elicit preferences on chemoprevention. The modules are available in English and Spanish. BNAV is comprised of self-directed case-based learning modules on breast cancer risk assessment and chemoprevention. Patients complete questionnaires at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Providers complete surveys at baseline and after their enrolled patient’s 6-month clinical encounter. The primary endpoint is chemoprevention informed choice at 6 months, using a measure combining knowledge, attitude, and intention scales. Secondary endpoints include perceived breast cancer risk/worry, chemoprevention knowledge/intention, decision conflict/regret, shared decision-making, and chemoprevention uptake. For patients who begin chemoprevention, adherence and reasons for discontinuation are assessed annually for up to 5 years. Barriers and facilitators to implementing RealRisks and BNAV into clinic workflow will be assessed by conducting patient and provider interviews at baseline and mid-implementation. Eligibility criteria: Eligible patients include women, age 35-74 years, with AH or LCIS, no history of breast cancer, no prior use of SERMs or AIs, no bilateral mastectomies, English or Spanish-speaking, and access to the internet. Eligible providers include breast surgeons, medical oncologists, primary care providers, and physician extenders who see patients with AH or LCIS. Statistical methods: We have 90% power to detect a 15% increase in the frequency of chemoprevention informed choice with a 1-sided 0.025 level test, assuming an intraclass correlation (ICC) of 0.02 to account for clustering, roughly equal accrual at each site, 10% loss to follow-up, and ≤10% event rate in the control arm. Current/target accrual: The trial was activated on 9/1/2020. As of 7/7/2022, all 26 sites have been randomized, 157/200 providers and 184/415 patients have been enrolled. Discussion: Our hybrid effectiveness/implementation study seeks to evaluate the effectiveness of a multi-level intervention in promoting informed decision-making about breast cancer chemoprevention. Study results will provide valuable insights on how the decision support tools are integrated in diverse clinical settings. Citation Format: Katherine D. Crew, Garnet Anderson, Kathryn Arnold, Andrew Stieb, Jacquelyn N. Amenta, Cynthia Law, Ana Sandoval-Leon, Sarah Colonna, Tari King, Debra Mangino, Sandhya Pruthi, Maria Grosse Perdekamp, Christa Braun-Inglis, Stacy Krisher, Lisa Yee, Danielle Bertoni, Samantha Seaward, Kari B. Wisinski, Justin Floyd, Corrine Zarwan, Tarah J. Ballinger, Lindi VanderWalde, Masey M. Ross, Preston Steen, Shelly Lo, Alison Conlin, Kathleen Yost, John Ellerton, Erin Lin, Holly J. Pederson, Sagar Sardesai, Cheryl Jernigan, Dawn Hershman, Marian L. Neuhouser, Banu K. Arun, Rita Kukafka. SWOG 1904: Cluster-randomized controlled trial of patient and provider decision support to increase chemoprevention informed choice among women with atypical hyperplasia or lobular carcinoma in situ (MiCHOICE) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr OT1-15-01.

Historically, surgeons have provided subspecialty breast care. The development of a robust medical breast program in a large academic center staffed by trained primary care providers initially showed a shift in care of benign breast disease away from surgeons. In this review, we aim to revisit the practice after 20 years. Medical patients are defined as patients with symptomatic issues (eg, pain or lump), those at increased risk (due to family history, genetic mutations, or benign atypical lesions), or survivors in need of long-term care.Data for this review were collected retrospectively from an internal outpatient appointment dataset. The sample included data for 3 staff breast surgeons (2.6 clinical full-time employees [FTEs]), 3 staff medical breast physicians (2.4 clinical FTEs), and 2 medical breast advanced practice providers (2.0 clinical FTEs). Provider visit types were grouped into 1 of 4 categories (new medical, established medical, new surgical, and established surgical) in order to review the percentages of outpatient visits by provider group.Before the institution of the Medical Breast Service, 75% of breast surgeons' outpatient visits were for either new or established medical issues. Our most recent analyses show that between 2013 and 2017 breast surgeons averaged 19% of surgical outpatient visits for medical issues. Higher surgical outpatient visits have resulted in higher surgical volume, increased surgical productivity and time spent in the operating room, and decreased time to treatment at our institution. Both surgical and medical breast providers can be added and become rapidly productive with focus on their respective areas of expertise.The Medical Breast Service has met its expectations in providing access for symptomatic patients, personalized care for those at risk, and attentive care to long-term survivors. The program has allowed for surgeons to focus on surgical outpatient visits, driving surgical volume and productivity, and streamlining care.

Women at high inherited risk of ovarian cancer are offered risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) from age 35 to 45 years. Although potentially life-saving, RRSO may induce symptoms that negatively affect quality of life and impair long-term health. Clinical care following RRSO is often suboptimal. This scoping review describes how RRSO affects short- and long-term health and provides evidence-based international consensus recommendations for care from preoperative counselling to long-term disease prevention. This includes the efficacy and safety of hormonal and non-hormonal treatments for vasomotor symptoms, sleep disturbance and sexual dysfunction and effective approaches to prevent bone and cardiovascular disease.

Breast cancer remains the most common female malignancy in the United States. Reducing this cancer burden involves identification of high-risk individuals and personalized risk management. Because coronary artery disease remains the primary cause of death for women, any intervention to reduce breast cancer risk must be weighed against comorbidities and interventions affecting cardiovascular risk reduction. For select women at increased risk for breast cancer, preventive medication can greatly decrease risk and is vastly underutilized. Women's health clinicians are poised to evaluate risk, promote breast cancer risk reduction, and manage overall health.

Background: Personalized breast cancer (BC) risk assessment depends on known traditional risk factors, specific germline mutations, and genome-wide polygenic risk scores (PRS). PRS explains a substantial proportion of genetic BC susceptibility. Accuracy of BC risk prediction may be improved by combining a PRS with traditional risk factors. We recently developed and validated a 149-SNP PRS for women of diverse ancestries using ancestry-informative genetic markers and combined this with version 7 of the Tyrer-Cuzick (TC) model to generate a Combined Risk Score (CRS). Here, we describe a pre-specified prospective longitudinal clinical validation of CRS as a predictor of BC risk. Methods: Women in the U.S. who were referred for clinical genetic testing between January 2017 and February 2019 were matched to medical and hospital claims in an anonymized dataset. Women with a pathogenic mutation in a BC-related gene were excluded from analysis. Follow-up began 4 months after testing and extended to the earliest date of BC diagnosis, censoring at the time of BC preventive treatment, or November 1, 2019. Incident BC events were determined by an ICD10 code of C50.* and confirmed by relevant treatment codes. CRS calibration was evaluated by the ratio of observed (O) to expected (E) incident BCs for the full cohort, and for women split into event-based 5-year CRS risk deciles. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate discriminatory accuracy in terms of hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and p-values from likelihood ratio chi-squared statistics. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to examine risk for women split into high- or low-risk groups according to a 3% 5-year CRS risk threshold. Results: 130,058 women with 148,349 total patient years met study eligibility criteria and were matched to claims data. Over a median (range) follow-up of 12.1 (4.0-29.5) months, 340 incident BC events were observed. The CRS was well calibrated in the overall cohort with an O/E ratio of 1.11 (95% CI=0.99-1.23) and within deciles of predicted risk (Table). Importantly, in the highest risk decile, the O/E was 0.91 (95% CI=0.63-1.27) with CRS, but 0.67 (95% CI=0.46-0.94) with TC alone, illustrating the superior calibration of CRS. In a Cox model adjusted for age at testing, PRS had an HR per standard deviation (SD) of 1.48 (95% CI=1.33-1.64, p=2.55×10-13); the HR/SD was 1.43 (95% CI=1.29-1.59, p=1.61×10-11) after adjusting for family history. In a bivariate analysis using both CRS and TC to predict time to BC, CRS added significantly to the model after accounting for TC (HR/SD=2.89, 95% CI=2.12-3.94, p=1.20×10-11), whereas TC did not add significant information after accounting for CRS. 15,986 (12.3%) women were above the CRS high-risk threshold, including 123 with events. A total of 10,248 (7.9%) women were reclassified by the CRS model compared to the TC model. Among women who were classified as high-risk by TC, 32.6% were reclassified as low-risk by CRS; among those classified as low-risk by TC, 4.3% were reclassified as high-risk by CRS. The CRS high-risk group experienced events at over three times the rate of the low-risk group (HR=3.75, 95% CI=3.00-4.68, p=6.39×10-27). Conclusion: The CRS was well-calibrated in predicting BC and significantly improved upon a traditional risk factor model. Clinical use of the CRS may lead to improved BC prevention and screening strategies. Table: Absolute risk calibration by 5-year risk decile Incidence is reported per 1,000 women-years. 34 breast cancers were observed per decile. Citation Format: Brent Mabey, Elisha Hughes, Braden Probst, Holly J. Pederson, Timothy Simmons, Brian Morris, Brooke Hullinger, Susan Domchek, Charis Eng, Monique Gary, Jennifer Klemp, Semanti Mukherjee, Vijai Joseph, Kenneth Offit, Olufunmilayo I. Olopade, Sandhya Pruthi, Allison W. Kurian, Mark E. Robson, Pat Whitworth, Susanne Wagner, Jerry Lanchbury, Thomas Slavin, Alexander Gutin. PD14-05 Prospective longitudinal validation of a breast cancer risk prediction model in a cohort of 130,058 women [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr PD14-05.

ImportanceIdentifying hereditary cancer predisposition facilitates high-risk organ-specific cancer surveillance and prevention. In PTEN hamartoma tumor syndrome (PHTS), longitudinal studies remain lacking, and there are insufficient data on cancers in children and young adults, as well as individuals with neurodevelopmental disorders (NDD).ObjectiveTo evaluate lifetime cancer risks, including second malignant neoplasms (SMN), among patients with PHTS.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsProspective longitudinal cohort study (September 1, 2005, through January 6, 2022). General population risks from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Patients with PHTS, molecularly defined as carrying germline PTEN variants, were accrued from community and academic medical centers throughout North America, South America, Europe, Australia, and Asia. Data were analyzed from July 2022 to February 2023.ExposuresReview of physical and electronic medical records, and follow-up through clinical visits or telephone interviews.Main Outcomes and MeasuresLifetime cancer risks in PHTS relative to the general population.ResultsA total of 7302 patients were prospectively accrued, 701 of whom had germline PTEN variants (median [IQR] age at consent, 38 [12-52] years; 413 female patients [59%]). Longitudinal follow-up data could be obtained for 260 patients (37%), with a median (IQR) follow-up of 4 (2-8) years. Of the 701 patients, 341 (49%) received at least 1 cancer diagnosis, with 144 (42%) of those having SMN. The study found significantly elevated lifetime risks for breast (91%), endometrial (48%), thyroid (33%), kidney (30%), and colorectal cancers (17%), as well as melanoma (5%). Cancer diagnoses were also observed in children and young adults with PHTS (15%) and in patients with PHTS with neurodevelopmental disorders (11%). Elevated risks (P P Conclusions and RelevanceThis cohort study found consistently elevated lifetime cancer risks in PHTS. Organ-specific surveillance should continue in patients with PHTS. Additional study is required to ascertain elevated cancer risks in patients with PHTS with NDD.