Search

Aim The neuro-oncology community in Australia is well positioned to collaborate internationally, with a motivated trials group, strong regulatory bodies and an attractive fiscal environment. We sought to identify gaps in the Australian neuro-oncology clinical trials landscape and describe strategies to increase international trial access in Australia. Methods We searched clinical trial registries to identify active adult primary brain cancer trials. We compared the participation rate and phase of these trials between tumour types and countries. A survey was distributed to the Cooperative Trials Group for Neuro-Oncology membership to identify barriers and solutions to effective international collaboration. Results Globally, 307 trials for adult primary brain cancers were identified. These included 50% pharmaceutical agents, 18% cellular therapies and 9% radiation therapy. Twelve adult primary brain cancer trials were actively recruiting in Australia at the time the survey was sent out. There were more early phase brain cancer trials (34%) compared with colorectal and breast cancer (21% and 24%, respectively). In Australia, 92% of brain cancer trials were involving pharmaceutical agents. The most commonly cited barrier was lack of funding for international trials (86%) and insufficient research time (75%). High ranking solutions included increasing the availability of funding for international trials and creating opportunities to develop personal relationships with collaborators. Accreditation of clinical research key performance indicators into practice (88%) and hospital accreditation (73%) also ranked highly. Conclusions Participation in international research in Australia could be improved by embedding clinical research targets into institutional funding, provision of funding for early phase studies and streamlining mutual ethics schemes.

BackgroundTemozolomide offers minimal benefit in patients with glioblastoma with unmethylated O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter status, hence, the need for novel therapies. This study evaluated whether veliparib, a brain-penetrant poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, acts synergistically with radiation and temozolomide.MethodsVERTU was a multicenter 2:1 randomized phase II trial in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma and MGMT-unmethylated promotor status. The experimental arm consisted of veliparib and radiotherapy, followed by adjuvant veliparib and temozolomide. The standard arm consisted of concurrent temozolomide and radiotherapy, followed by adjuvant temozolomide. The primary objective was to extend the progression-free survival rate at six months (PFS-6m) in the experimental arm.ResultsA total of 125 participants were enrolled, with 84 in the experimental arm and 41 in the standard arm. The median age was 61 years, 70% were male, 59% had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0, and 87% underwent macroscopic resection. PFS-6m was 46% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 36%-57%) in the experimental arm and 31% (95% CI: 18%-46%) in the standard arm. Median overall survival was 12.7 months (95% CI: 11.4-14.5 months) in the experimental arm and 12.8 months (95% CI: 9.5-15.8 months) in the standard arm. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were thrombocytopenia and neutropenia, with no new safety signals.ConclusionThe veliparib-containing regimen was feasible and well tolerated. However, there was insufficient evidence of clinical benefit in this population. Further information from correlative translational work and other trials of PARP inhibitors in glioblastoma are still awaited.

Background The goal of a clinical quality registry is to deliver immediate gains in survival and quality of life by delivering timely feedback to practitioners, thereby ensuring every patient receives the best existing treatment. We are developing an Australian Brain Cancer Registry (ABCR) to identify, describe, and measure the impact of the variation and gaps in brain cancer care from the time of diagnosis to the end of life. Methods To determine a set of clinical quality indicators (CQIs) for the ABCR, a database and internet search were used to identify relevant guidelines, which were then assessed for quality using the AGREE II Global Rating Scale. Potential indicators were extracted from 21 clinical guidelines, ranked using a modified Delphi process completed in 2 rounds by a panel of experts and other stakeholders, and refined by a multidisciplinary Working Group. Results Nineteen key quality reporting domains were chosen, specified by 57 CQIs detailing the specific inclusion and outcome characteristics to be reported. Conclusion The selected CQIs will form the basis for the ABCR, provide a framework for achievable data collection, and specify best practices for patients and health care providers, with a view to improving care for brain cancer patients. To our knowledge, the systematic and comprehensive approach we have taken is a world first in selecting the reporting specifications for a brain cancer clinical registry.

ObjectivesSymptoms of raised intracranial pressure (ICP) in recurrent high-grade glioma (HGG) generally require corticosteroid treatment, often causing toxicity with variable effects on ICP symptoms. Acetazolamide reduces ICP when used in other clinical non-cancer settings. The aim of the study was to explore whether the addition of oral acetazolamide enables safe dexamethasone dose reduction in management of raised ICP in recurrent HGG.MethodsParticipants had recurrent HGG with any of dexamethasone recommencement, dose increase or dependency; prior/current bevacizumab was an exclusion. Eligible participants were randomised 1:1 to acetazolamide or placebo for 8 weeks. Standardised protocols were used for dexamethasone dosing, with planned dose decrease from day 5 once ICP symptoms were stable. The primary endpoint was a composite of dexamethasone dose reduction and stable Karnofsky Performance Status Secondary endpoints included toxicity and feasibility.ResultsThirty participants (15 per group) were enrolled (mean age 58 years) from seven Australian sites. The mean baseline dexamethasone dose was 6.2 mg. Mean duration on study treatment was 38 days (placebo group) and 31 days (acetazolamide group) with nine participants (30%) completing all study treatments (six placebo, three acetazolamide). Study withdrawal was due to adverse events (n=6; one placebo, five acetazolamide) and disease progression (n=6 (three per arm)). Four participants (13%) (two per arm) were stable responders. Ten participants experienced a total of 13 serious adverse events (acetazolamide arm: five participants (33%), six events, two related).ConclusionsThe study closed early due to poor accrual and increasing availability of bevacizumab. The addition of acetazolamide did not facilitate dexamethasone reduction.Trial registration numberACTRN12615001072505.

ObjectivesTo summarise the current evidence regarding interventions for accurate and timely cancer diagnosis among symptomatic individuals.DesignA scoping review following the Joanna Briggs Institute’s methodological framework for the conduct of scoping reviews and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist.Data sourcesMEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCOhost) and PsycINFO (Ovid) bibliographic databases, and websites of relevant organisations. Published and unpublished literature (grey literature) of any study type in the English language were searched for from January 2017 to January 2021.Eligibility and criteriaStudy participants were individuals of any age presenting at clinics with symptoms indicative of cancer. Interventions included practice guidelines, care pathways or other initiatives focused on achieving predefined benchmarks or targets for wait times, streamlined or rapid cancer diagnostic services, multidisciplinary teams and patient navigation strategies. Outcomes included accuracy and timeliness of cancer diagnosis.Data extraction and synthesisWe summarised findings graphically and descriptively.ResultsFrom 21 298 retrieved citations, 88 unique published articles and 16 unique unpublished documents (on 18 study reports), met the eligibility for inclusion. About half of the published literature and 83% of the unpublished literature were from the UK. Most of the studies were on interventions in patients with lung cancer. Rapid referral pathways and technology for supporting and streamlining the cancer diagnosis process were the most studied interventions. Interventions were mostly complex and organisation-specific. Common themes among the studies that concluded intervention was effective were multidisciplinary collaboration and the use of a nurse navigator.ConclusionsMultidisciplinary cooperation and involvement of a nurse navigator may be unique features to consider when designing, delivering and evaluating interventions focused on improving accurate and timely cancer diagnosis among symptomatic individuals. Future research should examine the effectiveness of the interventions identified through this review.

Background: The interval between suspected cancer and diagnosis for symptomatic patients is often fragmented, leading to diagnosis delays and increased patient stress. We conducted an exploratory qualitative study to explore barriers and facilitators to implementing and sustaining current initiatives across Canada that optimize early cancer diagnosis, with particular relevance for symptomatic patients. Methods: The national study included a document review and key informant interviews with purposefully recruited participants. Data were analyzed by two researchers using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. Results: Twenty-two participants from eight provinces participated in key informant interviews and reported on 17 early cancer diagnosis initiatives. Most initiatives (88%) were in early phases of implementation. Two patient-facing and eight provider/organization barriers to implementation (e.g., lack of stakeholder buy-in and limited resources) and five facilitators for implementation and sustainability were identified. Opportunities to improve early cancer diagnosis initiatives included building relationships with stakeholders, co-creating initiatives, developing initiatives for Indigenous and underserved populations, optimizing efficiency and sustainability, and standardizing metrics to evaluate impact. Conclusion: Early cancer diagnosis initiatives in Canada are in early implementation phases. Lack of stakeholder buy-in and limited resources pose a challenge to sustainability. We present opportunities for funders and policymakers to optimize the use and potential impact of early cancer diagnosis initiatives.

BACKGROUND VERTU was a randomized phase II trial evaluating veliparib, a brain-penetrant PARP inhibitor, combined with radiotherapy and temozolomide, for patients with newly diagnosed MGMT-unmethylated glioblastoma. As part of planned correlative work after study completion, we assessed genome-wide DNA methylation patterns to predict methylation class, glioblastoma subtype and MGMT status. METHODS Patients were randomized 2:1 to experimental (60Gy/30 fractions with veliparib 200mg bid, then temozolomide 150-200mg/m2 D1-5 + veliparib 40mg bid D1-7 Q28D for 6 cycles) versus standard arm (60Gy/30 fractions with temozolomide 75mg/m2 daily, then temozolomide 150-200mg/m2 D1-5 Q28D for 6 cycles). The primary objective to improve 6-month progression-free survival (PFS-6m) was not met (doi: 10.1093/neuonc/noab111). Methylation data were generated using the Illumina Infinium Methylation EPIC bead chip array. Tumor tissues were categorized using the Heidelberg methylation-based classifier. RESULTS Methylation data were successfully generated for 98/125 patients (poor quality DNA [n = 12], no consent [n = 11], insufficient tissue [n = 4]). Those with classifier scores below 0.5 (n = 25), tumor microenvironment only (n = 6) and rediagnosis as pleomorphic xanthoastrocytoma (n = 1) were excluded, leaving n = 66. Methylation classes were GBM RTK II (n = 23, PFS-6m 43% [95%CI 23-62]), RTK I (n = 20, PFS-6m 50% [95%CI 27-69]), MES (n = 20, PFS-6m 40% [95%CI 19-60]), MID (n = 2) and G34 (n = 1). Glioblastoma subtypes were mesenchymal (n = 28, PFS-6m 50% [95%CI 30-66]), proneural (n = 24, PFS-6m 50% [95%CI 29-68]) and classical (n = 14, PFS-6m 36% [95%CI 13-59]). MGMT status were unmethylated (n = 58, PFS-6m 48% [95%CI 35-60]) and methylated (n = 8, PFS-6m 38% [95%CI 9-67]). There was no evidence of interaction between treatment arm and methylation class (excluding GBM MID and G34, P = 0.45), glioblastoma subtype (P = 0.68) or MGMT status (P = 0.52). CONCLUSIONS Genome-wide DNA methylation patterns in VERTU identified a spectrum of methylation-defined subgroups, reflecting tumoral heterogeneity. This may have utility for future clinical trials and practice. The effect of veliparib in VERTU appeared to be consistent across subgroups. ACTRN12615000407594.

Purpose High-grade disease accounts for ~ 70% of all glioma, and has a high mortality rate. Few modifiable exposures are known to be related to glioma risk or mortality. Methods We examined associations between lifetime physical activity and physical activity at different ages (15–18 years, 19–29 years, 30–39 years, last 10 years) with the risk of glioma diagnosis, using data from a hospital-based family case–control study (495 cases; 371 controls). We followed up cases over a median of 25 months to examine whether physical activity was associated with all-cause mortality. Physical activity and potential confounders were assessed by self-administered questionnaire. We examined associations between physical activity (metabolic equivalent [MET]-h/wk) and glioma risk using unconditional logistic regression and with all-cause mortality in cases using Cox regression. Results We noted a reduced risk of glioma for the highest (≥ 47 MET-h/wk) versus lowest ( Conclusion Our findings are consistent with previous research that suggested physical activity during adolescence might be protective against glioma. Engaging in physical activity during adolescence has many health benefits; this health behavior may also offer protection against glioma.

INTRODUCTION Symptoms of raised intracranial pressure (ICP) in recurrent or progressive high-grade glioma (HGG) generally require corticosteroid treatment, often causing toxicity with variable effects on reversing ICP symptoms. Acetazolamide reduces ICP in other clinical settings including case series in glioma. AIM To explore whether addition of oral acetazolamide enables safe dexamethasone dose reduction in management of raised ICP in recurrent and/or progressive HGG. METHODS Participants had recurrent, progressive and/or persistent residual HGG requiring recommencement of dexamethasone, dose increase or dexamethasone dependency; prior/current bevacizumab was an exclusion. Eligible participants were randomised 1:1 to acetazolamide 250mg twice daily or placebo for 8 weeks. Standardised protocols were used for dexamethasone dose changes in both arms, with planned dose decrease from day 5 once ICP symptoms were stable. The primary endpoint was a composite of dexamethasone dose reduction and stability of performance status. Secondary endpoints included toxicity and feasibility (accrual and compliance). RESULTS Thirty participants of a planned sample of 84 were enrolled (mean age 58 y (32-89)) from 7 Australian sites. The mean baseline dexamethasone dose was 6.2mg (4-16mg). Mean duration on treatment was 38 days (4-57) in placebo group and 31 days (3-60) in acetazolamide group, with 9 participants (30%) completing all study treatment (6 placebo, 3 acetazolamide). Study withdrawal was due to adverse events (n=6 (1 placebo, 5 acetazolamide)) and disease progression (n=6 (3 per arm)). Four participants (13%) (2 per arm) were stable responders meeting the primary endpoint criteria (≥50% corticosteroid dose reduction from baseline by 28 days maintained for 7 days, and no deterioration in performance status). Ten participants experienced a total of 13 serious adverse events (acetazolamide arm: 5 participants (33%), 6 events, 2 related). DISCUSSION The addition of acetazolamide did not facilitate dexamethasone reduction. The study closed early due to poor accrual and increasing availability of bevacizumab.

Background A key component of cancer research is the availability of clinical samples with appropriately annotated clinical data. Biobanks facilitate research by collecting/storing various types of clinical samples for research. Brain Cancer Biobanking Australia (BCBA) was established to facilitate the networking of brain cancer biobanking operations Australia-wide. Maximizing biospecimen utility in a networked biobanking environment requires the standardization of procedures and data across different sites. The aim of this research was to scope and develop a recommended clinical annotation dataset both for pediatric and adult brain cancer biobanks. Methods A multidisciplinary working group consisting of members from the BCBA Consortium was established to develop clinical dataset recommendations for brain cancer biobanks. A literature search was undertaken to identify any published clinical dataset recommendations for brain cancer biobanks. An audit of data items collected and stored by BCBA member biobanks was also conducted to survey current clinical data collection practices across the BCBA network. Results BCBA has developed a clinical annotation dataset recommendation for pediatric and adult brain cancer biobanks. The clinical dataset recommendation has 5 clinical data categories: demographic, clinical and radiological diagnosis and surgery, neuropathological diagnosis, patient treatment, and patient follow-up. The data fields have been categorized into 1 of 3 tiers; essential, preferred, and comprehensive. This enables biobanks and researchers to prioritize appropriately where resources are limited. Conclusion This dataset can be used to guide the integration of data from multiple existing biobanks for research studies and for planning prospective brain cancer biobanking activities.

BACKGROUND TMZ offers minimal benefit in pts with de novo uMGMT GBM. V is synergistic with RT and TMZ in uMGMT preclinical GBM models, safe when combined with either RT or TMZ clinically, but the triplet (V+RT+TMZ) is poorly tolerated. VERTU tested V in pts with uMGMT GBM. METHODS VERTU is a randomized Phase 2 trial comparing Standard Arm (Arm A), RT (60Gy/30 fractions) + TMZ (75mg/m2 daily) followed by TMZ (150–200mg/m2D 1–5) every 28 days for 6 cycles vs Experimental Arm (Arm B), RT (60Gy/30 fractions) + V (200mg PO BID) followed by TMZ (150–200mg/m2D 1–5) + V (40mg bid, D 1–7) every 28 days for 6 cycles in pts with de novo uMGMT GBM according to centralised testing. RESULTS 125 pts were randomized 1:2 (41:84). The 2 groups were matched for age, sex, performance status and extent of resection. Median follow-up was 25.8 months and 91 pts had died. The 6-month Progression-Free Survival (6mPFS) for Arms A and B were 34% (95% CI 20–48) and 46% (95% CI 36–57) respectively. The median PFS for Arms A and B were 4.2m (95% CI 2.5–6.0) and 5.7m (95% CI 4.1–6.6) respectively (HR = 0.80, 95%CI 0.55–1.18). 55% of pts in both arms experienced Grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) with no significant differences in frequency or severity between the arms. Most common Grade 3/4 AEs were thrombocytopenia, seizures, hyperglycaemia and diarrhoea. CONCLUSION VERTU demonstrated that a novel treatment strategy for patients with de novo uMGMT GBM was feasible and tolerable. The observed 6mPFS and PFS were similar in both arms. Overall survival and other endpoints will be presented. Central MRI review, biomarker analyses, including DNA repair and methylation signature analyses are ongoing. (ANZCTR#ACTRN12615000407594).

2042 Background: The VERTU trial (ANZCTR #ACTRN12615000407594) compared Arm A (standard of care) = RT (60Gy/30 fractions) + TMZ (75mg/m2 daily) followed by TMZ (150–200mg/m2 D1–5) every 28 days for 6 cycles vs Arm B (experimental arm) = RT (60Gy/30 fractions) + V (200mg PO BID) followed by TMZ (150–200mg/m2 D1–5) + V (40mg PO BID, D1–7) every 28 days for 6 cycles in pts with newly diagnosed centrally determined uMGMT GBM. To ensure that veliparib was not associated with clinical detriment, serial HRQL assessments were performed for comparison as a secondary objective. Methods: Pts completed the EORTC quality of life core questionnaire (QLQ-C30) and brain cancer module (BN20) every 4 weeks (w) (baseline: w0; concurrent: w4,8; adjuvant: w10,14,18,22,26,30). Based on relevance to GBM patients, 5 HRQL scales (global health [GH], physical functioning [PF], social functioning [SF], motor dysfunction [MD] and communication deficit [CD]) were pre-selected for primary analysis. Maximum change from baseline score (clinically relevant deterioration/improvement defined as ≥10-point change) during the progression-free period, and deterioration-free survival (time to deterioration/progression/death) were evaluated. Results: Patient characteristics were well-matched (Arm A: N = 41, median age = 62, male = 68%, ECOG 0 = 66%, macroscopic resection = 88%; Arm B: N = 84, median age = 60, male = 70%, ECOG 0 = 65%, macroscopic resection = 86%). Almost all completed at least one HRQL assessment (98%). HRQL assessments during the progression-free period were completed in 87% (Arm A) and 90% (Arm B) of cases. For Arm A vs B, the proportion of patients who experienced a deterioration in GH (59% vs 64%, p = 0.69), PF (53% vs 53%, p > 0.99), SF (46% vs 53%, p = 0.56), MD (63% vs 58%, p = 0.70) and CD (45% vs 46%, p > 0.99) were similar. Deterioration-free survival was not statistically different for any HRQL item. Conclusions: The addition of veliparib to standard of care for newly diagnosed uMGMT GBM does not appear to compromise HRQL. This would support the primary efficacy analysis of the VERTU trial. Clinical trial information: ACTRN12615000407594.

2011 Background: TMZ offers minimal benefit in uMGMT GBM pts. V is synergistic with both RT and TMZ in preclinical models, safe when combined with either RT or TMZ clinically, but the triplet (V+RT+TMZ) is poorly tolerated. This study examined a novel approach to patients with uMGMT GBM. Methods: VERTU is a randomized Phase 2 trial comparing Arm A (Standard of care) = RT (60Gy/30 fractions) + TMZ (75mg/m2 daily) followed by TMZ (150–200mg/m2D 1–5) every 28 days for 6 cycles vs Arm B (experimental arm) = RT (60Gy/30 fractions) + V (200mg PO BID) followed by TMZ (150–200mg/m2D 1–5) + V (40mg bid, D 1–7) every 28 days for 6 cycles in pts with newly diagnosed centrally determined uMGMT GBM. The study aims to randomize 120 pts (2:1 to the experimental arm). The primary endpoint was 6 months progression free survival (6mPFS) with multiple secondary and tertiary endpoints. Evaluation of feasibility and safety was planned after completion of RT in the first 60 pts (Stage 1). (ANZCTR #ACTRN12615000407594). Tumor tissue and serial bloods were collected for translational research. Results: 125 pts were randomized (41 Arm A, 84 Arm B). Mean (range) age 58 (22–78) years, 70% male, 61% ECOG 0, 86% macroscopic resection, 14% biopsy. At the time of analysis (cut-off date: 04/Feb/2019), median follow up was 16.5 months, 76 pts had died. 6mPFS (95% CI, Kaplan-Meier estimate) was 37% (22–52) in Arm A and 53% (41–63) in Arm B, and median PFS was 4.4m (95% CI 4.0–6.0) for Arm A and 6.2m (95% CI 4.9–7.1) for Arm B (HR = 0.81, 95%CI 0.54–1.21). 50% of pts in Arm A and 53% in Arm B experienced ≥ G3 adverse events (AEs). The most common G 3/4 AEs were decreased platelets, seizures, hyperglycemia and diarrhea (each 5%) in Arm A and decreased platelets (13%) and seizures (11%) in Arm B. Conclusions: In this multicenter, randomized study, the experimental therapy was feasible and well tolerated. The observed 6mPFS appeared longer in Arm B, but at the time of submitting the abstract, this result did not meet the prespecified primary endpoint. More mature results will be presented at the annual meeting. QoL in VERTU is reported separately. Central MR review, biomarker analyses, including DNA repair and methylation signature analyses are ongoing. Clinical trial information: ACTRN12615000407594.

2045Background: TMZ offers minimal benefit in uMGMT GBM pts. V is synergistic with both RT and TMZ in preclinical models, safe when combined with either RT or TMZ clinically but the triplet (V+RT+T...

Background: Use of the neoadjuvant approach to treat breast cancer patients has increased since the early 2000s, but the overall pathway of care for such patients can be highly variable. The aim of our project was to establish a multidisciplinary consensus among clinicians with expertise in neoadjuvant therapy (nat) for breast cancer and to determine if that consensus reflects published methods used in randomized controlled trials (rcts) in this area. Methods: A modified Delphi protocol, which used iterative surveys administered to 85 experts across Canada, was established to obtain expert consensus concerning all aspects of the care pathway for patients undergoing nat for breast cancer. All rcts published between January 1, 1967, and December 1, 2012, were systematically reviewed. Data extracted from the rcts were analyzed to determine if the methods used matched the expert consensus for specific areas of nat management. A scoring system determined the strength of the agreement between the literature and the expert consensus. Results: Consensus was achieved for all areas of the pathway of care for patients undergoing nat for breast cancer, with the exception of the role of magnetic resonance imaging in the pre-treatment or preoperative setting. The levels of agreement between the consensus statements and the published rcts varied, primarily because specific aspects of the pathway of care were not well described in the reviewed literature. Conclusions: A true consensus of expert opinion concerning the pathway of care appropriate for patients receiving nat for breast cancer has been achieved. A review of the literature illuminated gaps in the evidence about some elements of nat management. Where evidence is available, agreement with expert opinion is strong overall. Our study is unique in its approach to establishing consensus among medical experts in this field and has established a pathway of care that can be applied in practice for patients receiving nat.

e17539 Background: Guidelines suggest that neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) should be an option for any breast cancer patient to whom adjuvant therapy would be offered. Studies show that those with aggres...

140 Background: Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) is widely considered to be the standard of care for patients diagnosed with locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) or inflammatory breast cancer (IBC). NAT is also considered in patients with more aggressive subtypes (Her2+ or triple negative cancers). However, it remains unclear which patients are being considered for NAT, which patients are indeed receiving NAT, and how long the current wait times for chemotherapy and hormone therapy are in this patient population. This study was designed to characterize the breast cancer patients being referred to the BC Cancer Agency (BCCA) Vancouver’s NAT clinic, and to determine the average wait times for chemotherapy and hormone therapy in these patients. Methods: Between May 13th, 2013 and June 3rd, 2014, a total of 160 potential NAT candidates were seen at the BCCA Vancouver NAT clinic. Breast cancer characteristics and wait times for these patients were assessed prospectively using a secure database. Results: Of these 160 patients, 119 (74%) actually received NAT; 76.7% of these were deemed LABC patients (clinical stage IIB or III), and 6% were “window of opportunity” (WOP) patients (those considered for NAT due to long surgical wait times). NAT patient receptor status differed significantly from the receptor statuses of patients who did not receive NAT (p=0.006), with Her2+ and triple negative breast cancer patients being most likely to receive NAT. Seventy-eight percent of ER+Her2+, 86% of ER-Her2+, 67% of ER+Her2-, and 80% of triple negative patients received NAT. A total of 4 patients (2.5%) presented in clinic with metastatic disease and thus were not considered for NAT. The average wait time between when a patient was referred to the BCCA and when they commenced chemotherapy was 18.1 days (median: 16), while the average wait time to receive hormone therapy alone was 12.3 days (median: 10). Conclusions: These findings suggest a need to expedite screening and care for these high-risk breast cancer patients in order to characterize and treat the disease neoadjuvantly before it has metastasized. Strategies to reduce wait times in this breast cancer population are being further assessed.

e17519 Background: Cancer care requires coordinated and efficient communication from many healthcare providers. Web-based social media has the potential to improve cancer care by facilitating physi...

47 Background: Guidelines are usually developed using systematic literature reviews. Expert opinion plays a key role but can be difficult to incorporate. The objective of this study was to develop a national consensus of expert opinion on the management of Locally Advanced Breast Cancer (LABC) and subsequently identify gaps in knowledge translation in current practice. Methods: 361 Canadian oncologists were subdivided into LABC experts (n = 83) and non-experts (n = 278). Experts were surveyed with a modified Delphi protocol to establish consensus. A systematic literature review was performed and compared to expert opinion. Non-experts were then surveyed with a 29-item questionnaire to determine current practice patterns. Z test was used to assess discordance. Results: Response rate for the expert survey was 61% (51/83). Consensus was achieved in all key aspects of care and was concordant to published literature in areas of: clinical assessment with caliper at each cycle, option of lumpectomy if good clinical response, radiotherapy to loco-regional lymph nodes, and no further adjuvant chemotherapy outside of clinical trial if residual disease found at time of surgery. Response rate for the non-expert survey was 50% (140/278). Areas of discordance are highlighted below. Conclusions: A national practice consensus guideline reflective of current evidence and expert opinion has been developed on the management of LABC. Differences in expert opinion and current practice have been identified as targets for knowledge translation interventions (KTIs) that may improve quality of care and resource utilization. Further exploration of KTIs to address identified gaps is warranted. [Table: see text]

e17526 Background: For locally advanced breast cancer patients (LABC), there are currently limited, if any, up-to-date protocol guidelines. The objective of this paper was to develop a consensus of opinion amongst Canadian oncologists, and to determine if Canadian oncologists agreed with the relevant literature. Methods: A modified Delphi survey protocol was used to determine consensus of opinion amongst 83 Canadian experts identified by peers as leaders in LABC. Consensus was defined as > 85% agreement. Concurrently, a systematic review of the literature was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in this field (limits imposed were “humans”, “English language” and “RCT”). The protocols utilized in the RCTs were compared to the results of the consensus survey to determine if expert opinion in Canada is evidence-based or experiential. Results: Consensus of opinion amongst experts was obtained across all areas of patient management except for use of MRI in the workup of patients with LABC. 81% stated MRI would be required prior to initiation of therapy and 68% stated repeat MRI would be required prior to surgical planning in cases where lumpectomy is considered an option. Expert consensus reflected the published literature well in the areas of: clinical assessment with caliper at each cycle, option of lumpectomy if good clinical response, radiotherapy to loco-regional lymph nodes, and no further adjuvant chemotherapy outside of a clinical trial if residual disease is found at the time of surgery. On most other aspects of patient management the Canadian consensus was more conservative than the published literature, except for the use of salvage radiotherapy in the setting of progression on therapy, where the literature was more conservative than the Canadian opinion. Conclusions: A national practice consensus has been developed for the management of LABC which reflects the published literature or is more conservative than the published literature. The only area of clinical equipoise nationally is on the utility of MRI both pre and post neoadjuvant therapy. A further study assessing the appropriate role of MRI clinically in the treatment of LABC patients is warranted.

6585 Background: Locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) accounts for only 10% of all breast cancers. While several guidelines and consensus statements exist, whether the current practice reflects these guidelines is unclear. We sought to survey the oncologists in Canada to assess current practice patterns and identify areas of targeted knowledge translation interventions (KTIs) in the treatment of LABC. Methods: 426 Canadian oncologists were surveyed with a 29 item survey-tool. They were subdivided into LABC experts (n=83) and non-experts (n=343). Physicians were removed from the survey if they identified that they were not involved in the treatment of breast cancer. The survey included demographic information as well as questions as to the current practice patterns utilized in the pathway of care for LABC patients. Level of discordance was calculated between the expert and non-expert responses using a z test. Results: 139 responses were obtained (48% response rate) from the non-experts and 51 responses were obtained from the experts (61% response rate). Areas of discordance in expert and non-expert survey included: frequency of clinical assessment during neoadjuvant therapy, methods for clinical assessment, radiographic re-evaluation post therapy, and assessment of receptor status (see Table). Conclusions: Several areas have been identified as targets for KTIs that may help to improve the quality and consistency of care of patients with LABC in Canada and may also have implications for improvements in resource utilization. [Table: see text]