Abstract PS10-32: Patient reported outcomes (PROs) with poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) versus chemotherapy (CTX) in patients (pts) with germlineBRCA1/2mutated (gBRCA1/2mut) HER2- advanced breast cancer (ABC): Results from a multi-country real-world (RW) study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reshma Mahtani ◽  
Alexander Niyazov ◽  
Katie Lewis ◽  
James Pike ◽  
Alex Rider ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Advanced Breast Cancer ◽  
Real World ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Advanced Breast ◽  
Polymerase Inhibitors ◽  
Patient Reported

scholarly journals Real-world patient-reported outcomes of women receiving initial endocrine-based therapy for HR+/HER2− advanced breast cancer in five European countries

BMC Cancer ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alison Davie ◽  
Gebra Cuyun Carter ◽  
Alex Rider ◽  
James Pike ◽  
Katie Lewis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Advanced Breast Cancer ◽  
Real World ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Advanced Disease ◽  
Advanced Breast ◽  
Activity Impairment ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Eortc Qlq C30 ◽  
Eortc Qlq

Abstract Background Endocrine therapy (ET)-based regimens are the mainstay of treatment for patients with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2−) advanced breast cancer. With the introduction of new treatment classes, it is important to examine patient symptoms and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at the start of this changing therapeutic landscape. This real-world study describes the patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of women with HR+/HER2− advanced breast cancer receiving ET-based regimens who were naïve to systemic treatment in the advanced setting across five European countries (EU5). Methods Data were collected between March and July 2017 from surveyed oncologists and their patients at a single time point using the multinational Adelphi Advanced Breast Cancer Disease Specific Programme™. Patients completed PRO questionnaires on HRQoL (EORTC QLQ-C30), pain severity and interference, and work and activity impairment. A multiple linear regression model explored factors associated with HRQoL. Results Across EU5, 226 physicians provided data on 781 women with HR+/HER2− advanced breast cancer taking their first ET-based regimen for advanced disease, of whom 252 provided PRO data. This subset had a mean age of 67.1 years, 94% were postmenopausal, 89% were diagnosed with advanced breast cancer at initial presentation, 79% had stage IV disease (66% of these patients had bone metastases and 38% had visceral metastases, including 18% with liver metastases) and 77% were on endocrine-only therapy as their initial treatment for advanced disease. The mean EORTC QLQ-C30 global health score (50.9) was worse than the reference value for patients with advanced breast cancer (60.2). Fatigue, pain, and insomnia were the most severe symptoms, and mean functioning scores were also worse than reference values. “Worst pain” and “pain interference” were moderate/severe for 42 and 80% of patients. Mean activity impairment was 44%, and greater activity impairment was associated with poorer HRQoL. Conclusions Despite receiving first-line ET-based regimens for advanced disease, these women had a poor HRQoL and high levels of symptoms, pain, pain interference and activity impairment. New treatments that maintain a stable disease state and reduce activity impairment may have a positive effect on the HRQoL of those living with advanced breast cancer.

scholarly journals Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in advanced breast cancer (ABC) treated with ribociclib + fulvestrant: Results from MONALEESA-3

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 ◽  
pp. viii90 ◽  
Author(s):  
P.A. Fasching ◽  
F.J. Esteva ◽  
X. Pivot ◽  
A. Nusch ◽  
J.T. Beck ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Advanced Breast Cancer ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Advanced Breast ◽  
Patient Reported

Next steps: Incorporating patient-reported outcomes into palliative care referral for people with advanced breast cancer.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (34_suppl) ◽  
pp. 133-133
Author(s):  
Yun Rose Li ◽  
Celine Denise Marquez ◽  
Hope S. Rugo ◽  
Michael W. Rabow ◽  
Laura Esserman
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Palliative Care ◽  
Advanced Breast Cancer ◽  
Severity Score ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Metastatic Cancer ◽  
Advanced Breast ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Patient Reported

133 Background: Specialty palliative care (SPC) has been shown to improve quality of life, reduce unnecessary health care utilization, reduce overall costs, and decrease mortality in some settings for patients with advanced or metastatic cancer, however only a small proportion are being promptly referred. As interventions that respond to patient reported outcomes (PROs) have been shown to improve symptoms and decrease mortality, we hypothesized that the rates of SPC referral would be increased by documenting, tracking, and presenting PROs for oncology visits to referring oncologists. Methods: Over a period of 2 months, 74 English-speaking established patients seen in an advanced breast cancer clinic with an embedded SPC service were approached and completed the study. All patients filled out the electronic, validated PROMIS and PRO-CTCAE PRO questionnaires in the waiting room using a touch screen tablet. Results were presented to the oncologist during the encounter if the CTCAE severity score exceeded 3 in at least 1 domain. Patient demographics, clinical features and PC referrals or appointments were assessed via chart review. Results: At baseline, 9 (12.2%) patients scored a minimum of “severe” (4/5 or 5/5) in at least 1 of the 3 anxiety domains; 17 (23.0%) had moderate-severe pain; and 27 (32.1%) reported fatigue. At study entry, 25 patients (33.8%) had been referred previously to the SPC service; 19 had actually been seen (76% of referred). Of the 63 (85.1%) patients with sufficient follow-up, 13 (20.6%) reported at least “severe” in >1 CTCAE domains, 6 (46.2%) of whom were previously referred to SPC. For the remaining 7 patients, median PROMIS T-score and PRO-CTCAE maximum severity score were 58.3 and 3.2, respectively; none were referred to SPC during the follow up period. Conclusions: The choice to refer (or not to refer) a patient to SPC is complex and tied to patient specific factors such as coordinating additional visits and fear of end of life conversations. To enable greater access to SPC, alternative referral mechanisms, such as group-based or personalized patient education, or automatic referrals triggered by evidence of need, may be required. #YRL/CDM contributed equally.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document