Search

Delays in starting potentially curative treatment for locally-advanced cervical cancer (LACC) decrease survival. Reasons for these delays are poorly understood. We conducted a retrospective chart review examining disparities in time from diagnosis of LACC to first clinic visit and to initiation of treatment based on insurance status within a single health system. We analyzed time to treatment using multivariate regression, adjusted for race, age, and insurance status. 25% of patients had Medicaid and 53% had private insurance. Having Medicaid was associated with delayed time from diagnosis to seeing a radiation oncologist (Mean 76.9 v. 31.3 days, p = 0.03). However, time from first radiation oncology visit to starting radiation was not delayed (Mean 22.6 v. 22.2 days, p = 0.67). Patients with locally-advanced cervical cancer and Medicaid had over double the time from pathologic diagnosis of cervical cancer to seeing radiation oncology; insurance disparities were not observed in treatment start after seeing radiation oncology. Improved referral and navigation processes for patients with Medicaid are needed to improve timely receipt of radiation and potentially improve survival.

Introduction: There is limited data comparing patient and physician expectations regarding ovarian cancer prognosis. Our primary objective was to compare physician and patient estimates of survival to 6 months, 1 year, and 5 years; secondary objectives included comparing provider and patient responses on the likelihood of requiring future treatments and categorizing patient and provider preferences regarding communication about prognosis. Methods: A prospective cross-sectional survey was delivered to 10 gynecologic oncology providers and 50 adult ovarian cancer patients from November 2015-April 2016 at one institution. Descriptive statistics were used to categorize survey answers and compare survey answers between patients and providers; multivariable logistic regression evaluated patient survey responses. Results: All providers (100%) believed treating providers should discuss prognosis and 90% reported having prognostic conversations with patients, compared to 63%, 37%, and 4% of patients who reported discussing prognosis, living wills/advance directives, and palliative care/hospice services, respectively, with their provider. Compared to their provider, patients gave significantly lower estimations of requiring any future therapy (mean score 84.6 vs 74, p

A potentially debilitating sequela of diagnosis or treatment for endometrial cancer islower limb lymphedema (LLL), which can have significant impacts on quality of life. Theobjective of this study was to determine the frequency of LLL symptoms in uterinecancer survivors over a 5-year study period. An IRB-approved prospective study of quality of life of endometrial cancer patients whounderwent surgical intervention was undertaken. The Gynecologic CancerLymphedema Questionnaire (GCLQ) was used to survey patients in 2011 and again in2016 to evaluate for symptoms of LLL.205 patients initially answered the survey, and 75 patients completed the follow upsurvey as well, with no differences in demographics between the cohorts. 90.7% ofpatients underwent lymph node dissection. Patients commonly reported symptoms ofnumbness (66.83%), aching (54.2%), and poor physical function (47.8%). On initialsurvey, 14.7% (n = 11) of patients met criteria for LLL by GCLQ criteria, with 8 patientsreporting improvement in symptoms and 3 reporting persistent diagnosis at follow up. At follow up survey, 12.0% (n = 9) patients meeting criteria five years later, with 6patients newly meeting criteria. The most persistent symptoms were poor physicalfunction (70.6%), numbness (72.5%), general swelling (55.6%), aching (64.1%), andlimb-related swelling (60%).While the rate of LLL was similar to previous reports, there were a number of newdiagnoses of LLL at interval follow up distant from surgery, up to 7 years later.Symptoms of LLL also persisted for many years after diagnosis.

Objectives: To examine overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) for different racial groups of women with surgically staged endometrial cancer by histologic subtype. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of women with stage I-III endometrioid, serous, clear cell, and carcinosarcoma who underwent hysterectomy as primary surgical staging in the 2000–2016 SEER-Medicare database. OS and CSS outcomes were stratified by race (defined as White, Black, Other), stage, and histology. Survival was assessed with descriptive analyses, log-rank tests and unadjusted and adjusted multivariable cox regression models. Results: Of the 24,142 women identified, 85.5% were White, 8.5% Black, and 6% other races. Receipt of adjuvant therapy differed only for stage III endometrioid: Black women were less likely to receive adjuvant treatment after hysterectomy (61.2% vs. 70.1% White, p = 0.03). For stage I, Black women had worse CSS for all histologies other than clear cell in unadjusted and adjusted analyses. For stage II, Black women had worse CSS for endometrioid histology in unadjusted analyses and similar OS. For stage III, Black women with endometrioid carcinoma had worse CSS and OS in unadjusted analyses, but no significant difference in CSS in adjusted analyses. “Other” race showed improved OS for Stage I endometrioid adenocarcinoma without significant differences in outcomes when compared to White women. Conclusion: Across histologies other than clear cell, Black women diagnosed with stage I endometrial cancer had consistently worse CSS, despite similar receipt of adjuvant therapy. Differences in CSS and OS at higher stages disappeared once accounting for treatment disparities.

Objective: The aim of the present study was to investigate the patterns of use and prognostic significance of adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) for patients with stage IC ovarian granulosa cell tumors (GCTs). Methods: We identified patients with stage IC GCTs diagnosed between 2004 and 2015 in the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB). Logistic regression was performed to identify variables independently associated with chemotherapy administration. Overall survival (OS) was evaluated for patients diagnosed between 2004 and 2014 following generation of Kaplan-Meier curves and compared with the log-rank test. A Cox model was constructed to control for known confounders. Results: A total of 492 patients with stage IC GCTs were identified, of which 166 (33.7%) received CT. Tumor size > = 10 cm (OR: 1.85, 95% CI: 1.21, 2.82) was independently associated with the administration of CT. There was no difference in OS between patients who did (n = 145) and did not (n = 282) receive CT, p = 0.52; 5-yr OS rates were 93.7% and 91.6% respectively. After controlling for patient age (

Abstact: Objective: To evaluate the prognostic significance of isolated distant lymph node metastases in comparison to other metastatic sites and stage IIIC disease. Methods: The National Cancer Data Base was accessed and patients diagnosed between 2004 and 2014 with stage IV or IIIC epithelial ovarian cancer who met criteria for pathological staging were identified. Overall survival (OS) was calculated with Kaplan-Meier curves and compared with the log-rank test. A Cox model was constructed to control for confounders. Results: A total of 33,561 patients met the inclusion criteria; 582 (1.7%) had stage IV only due to distant lymph node metastases (stage IV-LN), 8130 (24.2%) had stage IV with other sites of distant metastases (stage IV-other) and 24,849 (75.4%) had stage IIIC disease. The median OS for patients with stage IV-LN was 42.41 months (95% CI: 37.59, 47.23) compared to 30.23 months (95% CI: 29.30, 31.16) for those with stage IV-other (p

Purpose: Metastatic, persistent, or recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer (MPR-EOC) remains a significant threat to patient mortality despite advances in novel targeted agents. Radiation therapy (RT) is often used as a palliative option. We report outcomes of a large series of MPR-EOC patients treated with modern palliative RT (PRT) in an era of novel systemic therapies. Methods and Materials: A retrospective review was conducted of women treated with PRT for MPR-EOC between 2007 and 2019 at an academic institution. Clinical response rates were recorded at 3 months. Radiographic responses were categorized by RECIST 1.1 criteria. Overall response rate (ORR) was the sum of complete and partial response. Linear regression analyses of baseline characteristics were conducted for statistical testing. Results: Eighty-six patients with PMR-OC received 120 courses of palliative RT. Median follow-up was 8.6 months. Median age was 61 (range, 22-82). Thirty-six percent of women received central nervous system (CNS)-directed RT. In addition, 43% received targeted therapies before RT. Clinical ORR within 1 month and at last follow-up for non-CNS lesions was 79% and 61% (69% and 88% for CNS lesions, respectively). High-grade serous lesions were more likely to have clinical response (P = .04). Biologically effective doses (BED) >39 Gy were associated with improved clinical response in CNS lesions (P = .049). Bony sites were associated with worse clinical (P = .004) response in non-CNS lesions compared with soft tissue or nodal sites. Acute or late grade 3+ toxicities with bevacizumab were low (8.7%/4.3%). Conclusions: PRT offers excellent rates of response for symptomatic patients with MPR-EOC within 1 month of treatment, with durable responses beyond 3 months. High-grade serous lesions were associated with improved response in all patients. Higher BED and soft tissue or nodal sites were associated with improved response in CNS and non-CNS patients, respectively. Acute or late toxicities with bevacizumab and PRT were low. Prospective investigation is warranted to determine the optimal PRT regimen.

Aim: To understand the impact of the niraparib individualized starting dose (ISD), compared with fixed starting dose (FSD), on the cost of hematologic adverse event (AE) management from a US payer perspective. Methods: The frequencies of grade ≥3 hematologic AEs that occurred in >1% of patients treated with niraparib were obtained from the primary analysis results of the phase III PRIMA/ENGOTOV26/ GOG-3012 trial. US unit costs for each grade ≥3 AE in the base case were obtained from the 2017 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project database; unit costs were adjusted to 2020 US dollars. AE management costs per patient were calculated by multiplying AE unit cost by the frequency of each AE by niraparib starting dose. Because AEs were assumed to occur independently of one another, costs were added to derive the total cost. Results: For niraparib, the estimated AEmanagement cost per patient was lower for the ISD than the FSD for all hematologic AEs (FSD vs ISD: thrombocytopenia, $4701.87 vs $1921.89; anemia, $2784.00 vs $1760.59; platelet count decreased, $2103.47 vs $922.51; neutropenia, $2112.50 vs $1369.56; neutrophil count decreased, $1285.87 vs $770.38). The total mean calculated AE management cost per patient was $12,987.71 with the FSD and $6744.93 with the ISD. Conclusion: For niraparib, the cost of managing hematologic AEs in the US was reduced by almost halfwith the ISD comparedwith the FSD. The cost reduction and improvements in safety associated with the niraparib ISD support its use in clinical practice.