Search

PURPOSETo provide guidance regarding best practices in the prevention and management of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) in patients with cancer.METHODSMultinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO) and ASCO convened a multidisciplinary Expert Panel to evaluate the evidence and formulate recommendations. Guideline development involved a systematic review of the literature and a formal consensus process. PubMed and EMBASE were searched for studies of the prevention and management of MRONJ related to bone-modifying agents (BMAs) for oncologic indications published between January 2009 and December 2017. Results from an earlier systematic review (2003 to 2008) were also included.RESULTSThe systematic review identified 132 publications, only 10 of which were randomized controlled trials. Recommendations underwent two rounds of consensus voting.RECOMMENDATIONSCurrently, MRONJ is defined by (1) current or previous treatment with a BMA or angiogenic inhibitor, (2) exposed bone or bone that can be probed through an intraoral or extraoral fistula in the maxillofacial region and that has persisted for longer than 8 weeks, and (3) no history of radiation therapy to the jaws or metastatic disease to the jaws. In patients who initiate a BMA, preventive care includes comprehensive dental assessments, discussion of modifiable risk factors, and avoidance of elective dentoalveolar surgery (ie, surgery that involves the teeth or contiguous alveolar bone) during BMA treatment. It remains uncertain whether BMAs should be discontinued before dentoalveolar surgery. Staging of MRONJ should be performed by a clinician with experience in the management of MRONJ. Conservative measures comprise the initial approach to MRONJ treatment. Ongoing collaboration among the dentist, dental specialist, and oncologist is essential to optimal patient care.

Purpose To update the ASCO adjuvant endocrine therapy guideline based on emerging data concerning the benefits and risks of ovarian suppression in addition to standard adjuvant therapy in premenopausal women with estrogen receptor–positive breast cancer. Methods ASCO convened an Update Panel and conducted a systematic review of randomized clinical trials investigating ovarian suppression. Results Two trials investigating the addition of ovarian suppression to tamoxifen did not show an overall clinical benefit for ovarian suppression. Nonetheless, the addition of ovarian suppression to standard adjuvant therapy with tamoxifen or with an aromatase inhibitor improved disease-free survival and improved freedom from breast cancer and distant recurrence compared with tamoxifen alone among the subset of patients who were at sufficient risk for recurrence such that adjuvant chemotherapy was warranted. Compared with tamoxifen alone, ovarian suppression was associated with a substantial increase in menopausal symptoms, sexual dysfunction, and diminished quality of life. Recommendations The Panel recommends that higher-risk patients should receive ovarian suppression in addition to adjuvant endocrine therapy, whereas lower-risk patients should not. Women with stage II or III breast cancers who would ordinarily be advised to receive adjuvant chemotherapy should receive ovarian suppression with endocrine therapy. The panel recommends that some women with stage I or II breast cancers at higher risk of recurrence who might consider chemotherapy may also be offered ovarian suppression with endocrine therapy. Women with stage I breast cancers not warranting chemotherapy should not receive ovarian suppression, nor should women with node-negative cancers 1 cm or less. Ovarian suppression may be administered with either tamoxifen or an aromatase inhibitor. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/guidelines/endocrinebreast and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki .

Purpose To update the ASCO clinical practice guideline on adjuvant endocrine therapy based on emerging data about the optimal duration of aromatase inhibitor (AI) treatment. Methods ASCO conducted a systematic review of randomized clinical trials from 2012 to 2018. Guideline recommendations were based on the Panel’s review of the evidence from six trials. Results The six included studies of AI treatment beyond 5 years of therapy demonstrated that extension of AI treatment was not associated with an overall survival advantage but was significantly associated with lower risks of breast cancer recurrence and contralateral breast cancer compared with placebo. Bone-related toxic effects were more common with extended AI treatment. Recommendations The Panel recommends that women with node-positive breast cancer receive extended therapy, including an AI, for up to a total of 10 years of adjuvant endocrine treatment. Many women with node-negative breast cancer should consider extended therapy for up to a total of 10 years of adjuvant endocrine treatment based on considerations of recurrence risk using established prognostic factors. The Panel noted that the benefits in absolute risk of reduction were modest and that, for lower-risk node-negative or limited node-positive cancers, an individualized approach to treatment duration that is based on considerations of risk reduction and tolerability was appropriate. A substantial portion of the benefit for extended adjuvant AI therapy was derived from prevention of second breast cancers. Shared decision making between clinicians and patients is appropriate for decisions about extended adjuvant endocrine treatment, including discussions about the absolute benefits in the reduction of breast cancer recurrence, the prevention of second breast cancers, and the impact of adverse effects of treatment. Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines .

Purpose To provide recommendations for appropriate cytotoxic chemotherapy dosing for obese adult patients with cancer. Methods The American Society of Clinical Oncology convened a Panel of experts in medical and gynecologic oncology, clinical pharmacology, pharmacokinetics and pharmacogenetics, and biostatistics and a patient representative. MEDLINE searches identified studies published in English between 1996 and 2010, and a systematic review of the literature was conducted. A majority of studies involved breast, ovarian, colon, and lung cancers. This guideline does not address dosing for novel targeted agents. Results Practice pattern studies demonstrate that up to 40% of obese patients receive limited chemotherapy doses that are not based on actual body weight. Concerns about toxicity or overdosing in obese patients with cancer, based on the use of actual body weight, are unfounded. Recommendations The Panel recommends that full weight–based cytotoxic chemotherapy doses be used to treat obese patients with cancer, particularly when the goal of treatment is cure. There is no evidence that short- or long-term toxicity is increased among obese patients receiving full weight–based doses. Most data indicate that myelosuppression is the same or less pronounced among the obese than the non-obese who are administered full weight–based doses. Clinicians should respond to all treatment-related toxicities in obese patients in the same ways they do for non-obese patients. The use of fixed-dose chemotherapy is rarely justified, but the Panel does recommend fixed dosing for a few select agents. The Panel recommends further research into the role of pharmacokinetics and pharmacogenetics to guide appropriate dosing of obese patients with cancer.

Purpose The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) has policies and procedures for endorsing practice guidelines that have been developed by other professional organizations. Methods The Cancer Care Ontario (CCO) Guideline on Adjuvant Ovarian Ablation (OA) in the Treatment of Premenopausal Women With Early-Stage Invasive Breast Cancer was reviewed for developmental rigor by methodologists. An ad hoc review panel of experts reviewed the content. Results The ASCO ad hoc OA guideline review panel concurred that the recommendations are clear, thorough, based on the most relevant scientific evidence in this content area, and present options that will be acceptable to patients. According to the CCO guideline: one, OA should not be routinely added to systemic therapy with chemotherapy, tamoxifen, or the combination of tamoxifen and chemotherapy; two, OA alone is not recommended as an alternative to any other form of systemic therapy, except in the specific case of patients who are candidates for other forms of systemic therapy but who, for some reason, will not receive any other systemic therapy (eg, patients who cannot tolerate other forms of systemic therapy or patients who choose no other form of systemic therapy); and three, when chemical suppression using luteinizing hormone–releasing hormone agonists is the chosen method of OA, in the opinion of the Breast Cancer Disease Site Group, monthly injection is the recommended mode of administration. The mode of administration in nearly all of the available trials has been monthly administration. Conclusion The ASCO review panel agrees with the recommendations as stated in the CCO guideline, with the qualification that ongoing research studies may alter the recommendations of the panel.

Purpose To develop evidence-based guidelines, based on a systematic review, for endocrine therapy for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor–positive breast cancer. Methods A literature search identified relevant randomized trials. Databases searched included MEDLINE, PREMEDLINE, the Cochrane Collaboration Library, and those for the Annual Meetings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium (SABCS). The primary outcomes of interest were disease-free survival, overall survival, and time to contralateral breast cancer. Secondary outcomes included adverse events and quality of life. An expert panel reviewed the literature, especially 12 major trials, and developed updated recommendations. Results An adjuvant treatment strategy incorporating an aromatase inhibitor (AI) as primary (initial endocrine therapy), sequential (using both tamoxifen and an AI in either order), or extended (AI after 5 years of tamoxifen) therapy reduces the risk of breast cancer recurrence compared with 5 years of tamoxifen alone. Data suggest that including an AI as primary monotherapy or as sequential treatment after 2 to 3 years of tamoxifen yields similar outcomes. Tamoxifen and AIs differ in their adverse effect profiles, and these differences may inform treatment preferences. Conclusion The Update Committee recommends that postmenopausal women with hormone receptor–positive breast cancer consider incorporating AI therapy at some point during adjuvant treatment, either as up-front therapy or as sequential treatment after tamoxifen. The optimal timing and duration of endocrine treatment remain unresolved. The Update Committee supports careful consideration of adverse effect profiles and patient preferences in deciding whether and when to incorporate AI therapy.