Multidisciplinary breast clinic: Impact on patient satisfaction, timeliness, and guideline concordant care.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (30_suppl) ◽  
pp. 124-124 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caitlin Laurel Gomez ◽  
Nicole Ann Dawson ◽  
Robyn Lynn Dvorak ◽  
Nova Foster ◽  
Anne Hoyt ◽  
...  

124 Background: After recent implementation of a multidisciplinary breast clinic (MDC) for newly diagnosed women at our institution, we sought to examine the impact of MDC on patient satisfaction, timeliness and guideline concordant care. Methods: Women with newly diagnosed breast cancer at our institution are referred to MDC where they are seen by a team of breast specialists for initial consultation. The MDC model is further facilitated by a patient navigator/coordinator who serves as a single point of contact across disciplines and through the continuum of care. We deployed patient satisfaction surveys querying helpfulness of the care coordinator and satisfaction with seeing breast cancer specialty physicians together in one visit. We further retrospectively analyzed timeliness of care and guideline concordant care since MDC implementation. Results: Patient satisfaction survey response rate was 42% (n=133).On a scale of 1 (very poor) – 5 (excellent), 93% of respondents rated helpfulness of care coordinator as excellent and seeing specialty physicians together in one visit as excellent. 99% of respondents rated these factors as either excellent (5) or good (4). Regarding timeliness, among 202 women with newly diagnosed, non-metastatic breast cancer seen in MDC between June 2012 and April 2014, mean time from neoadjuvant chemotherapy to surgery was 43.1 days (range 26-78 days), from surgery to adjuvant radiation was 39.2 days (range 22-79 days), from surgery to adjuvant chemotherapy was 40.6 days (range 19-89 days), and from adjuvant chemotherapy to radiation was 34.9 days (range 13-67 days). All timeliness metrics well exceeded established national standards of 60-90 days. Regarding guideline concordant care, 94% and 90% respectively received indicated radiation therapy and chemotherapy in accordance with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Guidelines. Those not receiving guideline concordant care either declined, were of advanced age, or had prohibitive co-morbidities. Conclusions: The MDC model, which emphasizes care coordination via a team approach and patient navigation, is associated with excellent patient satisfaction and timely, guideline concordant breast cancer care.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (26_suppl) ◽  
pp. 45-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caitlin Laurel Gomez ◽  
Nicole Ann Dawson ◽  
Robyn Lynn Dvorak ◽  
Nova Foster ◽  
Anne Hoyt ◽  
...  

45 Background: Approximately 5% to 10% of women diagnosed with breast cancer have a genetic predisposition, which can affect management recommendations. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) has established guidelines for genetics referral and testing, however recent publications have indicated low rates of family history documentation and appropriate genetics referral. We sought to assess the impact of standardized family history documentation on rates of appropriate genetics referral in a multidisciplinary breast clinic (MDC) setting. Methods: In advance of MDC consultation, women with newly diagnosed breast cancer complete an intake questionnaire which includes documentation of Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry along with a thorough family history. We retrospectively analyzed family history documentation to inform eligibility for genetic testing and rates of appropriate genetics referral. Results: Between June 2012 and April 2014, 202 women with newly diagnosed, nonmetastatic breast cancer were seen in MDC. We noted 100% compliance with family history documentation. Per NCCN Guidelines, genetic testing was indicated in 52% (106 patients), of which 77% were appropriately referred to a genetic counselor for evaluation. All patients who met criteria based on personal history factors including age ≤ 45, triple-negative disease under age 60, or two or more breast primaries under age 50 were appropriately referred. Patients who were eligible but not referred ranged in age from 46 to 93 and were eligible for testing based on Ashkenzi Jewish ancestry (3 patients) or family history factors including a relative with ovarian cancer (3 patients), ≥2 relatives with breast cancer (5 patients), or a relative with breast cancer < age 50 (7 patients). Conclusions: Compared with recently published national averages, rates of appropriate family history documentation and genetic testing referrals are significantly higher in our MDC setting. However, this analysis has identified significant opportunity for improvement via identification of overlooked referral indications. Initiatives are underway to improve future compliance.


2014 ◽  
Vol 74 (S 01) ◽  
Author(s):  
M Wallwiener ◽  
AD Hartkopf ◽  
S Riethdorf ◽  
J Nees ◽  
FA Taran ◽  
...  

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (9) ◽  
pp. 1992
Author(s):  
Max Seidensticker ◽  
Matthias Philipp Fabritius ◽  
Jannik Beller ◽  
Ricarda Seidensticker ◽  
Andrei Todica ◽  
...  

Background: Radioembolization (RE) with yttrium-90 (90Y) resin microspheres yields heterogeneous response rates in with primary or secondary liver cancer. Radiation-induced liver disease (RILD) is a potentially life-threatening complication with higher prevalence in cirrhotics or patients exposed to previous chemotherapies. Advances in RILD prevention may help increasing tolerable radiation doses to improve patient outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of post-therapeutic RILD-prophylaxis in a cohort of intensely pretreated liver metastatic breast cancer patients; Methods: Ninety-three patients with liver metastases of breast cancer received RE between 2007 and 2016. All Patients received RILD prophylaxis for 8 weeks post-RE. From January 2014, RILD prophylaxis was changed from ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) and prednisolone (standard prophylaxis [SP]; n = 59) to pentoxifylline (PTX), UDCA and low-dose low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) (modified prophylaxis (MP); n = 34). The primary endpoint was toxicity including symptoms of RILD; Results: Dose exposure of normal liver parenchyma was higher in the modified vs. standard prophylaxis group (47.2 Gy (17.8–86.8) vs. 40.2 Gy (12.5–83.5), p = 0.017). All grade RILD events (mild: bilirubin ≥ 21 µmol/L (but <30 μmol/L); severe: (bilirubin ≥ 30 µmol/L and ascites)) were observed more frequently in the SP group than in the MP group, albeit without significance (7/59 vs. 1/34; p = 0.140). Severe RILD occurred in the SP group only (n = 2; p > 0.1). ALBI grade increased in 16.7% patients in the MP and in 27.1% patients in the SP group, respectively (group difference not significant); Conclusions: At established dose levels, mild or severe RILD events proved rare in our cohort. RILD prophylaxis with PTX, UDCA and LMWH appears to have an independent positive impact on OS in patients with metastatic breast cancer and may reduce the frequency and severity of RILD. Results of this study as well as pathophysiological considerations warrant further investigations of RILD prophylaxis presumably targeting combinations of anticoagulation (MP) and antiinflammation (SP) to increase dose prescriptions in radioembolization.


2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 2190-2198
Author(s):  
Dalia Kamel ◽  
Veronica Youssef ◽  
Wilma M. Hopman ◽  
Mihaela Mates

Background: In 2012, the American Society for Clinical Oncology (ASCO) identified five key opportunities in oncology to improve patient care, recommending against imaging tests for the staging of patients with early breast cancer (EBC) at low risk for metastases. Similarly, the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) guideline does not support radiological staging in asymptomatic EBC (aEBC). The purpose of this study was to assess local practice and outcomes of staging investigations (SIs) in aEBC at the Cancer Centre of Southeastern Ontario (CCSEO). Methods: A retrospective electronic and paper chart review was undertaken to identify all aEBC patients treated at our institution between January 2012 and December 2014. Patients with pathological staging of T1-T2 and N0-1 with any receptor status were included. We collected patient demographics, treatment and pathologic tumor characteristics. The use and outcomes of initial and follow-up SIs were recorded. Data were analyzed to determine associations between the use of SIs and clinical characteristics (chi-square tests, independent samples t-tests and Mann–Whitney U tests). Results: From 2012 to 2014, 295 asymptomatic EBC patients were identified. The mean age was 64, 81% were postmenopausal and 76% had breast conserving surgery. Stage distribution was as follows: stage I 42%, stage IIA 37% and stage IIB 21%. Receptor status was as follows: ER+ 84%, HER2+ 13% and triple negative 12%. Adjuvant chemotherapy was received by 36%, Trastuzumab by 10% and endocrine therapy by 76% of patients. Baseline SIs were performed in 168 patients (57%) for a total of 332 tests. Overt metastatic disease was found in five patients (one bone scan and four CT scans). Seventy-one out of the 168 patients (42%) who received initial staging imaging underwent 138 follow-up imaging tests, none of which were diagnostic for metastases. Nine patients with suspicious CT findings underwent biopsies, of which four were malignant (one metastatic breast cancer and three new primaries). Factors significantly associated with SI were as follows: younger age (p = 0.001), premenopausal status (p = 0.01), T2 stage (p < 0.001), N1 stage (p < 0.001), HER2 positive (p < 0.001), triple negative status (p = 0.007) and use of adjuvant chemotherapy (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Over a 3-year period at our institution, more than 50% of aEBC patients underwent a total of 470 initial and follow-up staging tests, yielding a cancer diagnosis (metastatic breast cancer or second primary cancer) in four patients. We, therefore, conclude that routine-staging investigations in aEBC patients have low diagnostic value, supporting current guidelines that recommend against the routine use of SI in this population.


2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (25) ◽  
pp. 2961-2968 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlotte Fribbens ◽  
Ben O’Leary ◽  
Lucy Kilburn ◽  
Sarah Hrebien ◽  
Isaac Garcia-Murillas ◽  
...  

Purpose ESR1 mutations are selected by prior aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy in advanced breast cancer. We assessed the impact of ESR1 mutations on sensitivity to standard therapies in two phase III randomized trials that represent the development of the current standard therapy for estrogen receptor–positive advanced breast cancer. Materials and Methods In a prospective-retrospective analysis, we assessed ESR1 mutations in available archived baseline plasma from the SoFEA (Study of Faslodex Versus Exemestane With or Without Arimidex) trial, which compared exemestane with fulvestrant-containing regimens in patients with prior sensitivity to nonsteroidal AI and in baseline plasma from the PALOMA3 (Palbociclib Combined With Fulvestrant in Hormone Receptor–Positive HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer After Endocrine Failure) trial, which compared fulvestrant plus placebo with fulvestrant plus palbociclib in patients with progression after receiving prior endocrine therapy. ESR1 mutations were analyzed by multiplex digital polymerase chain reaction. Results In SoFEA, ESR1 mutations were found in 39.1% of patients (63 of 161), of whom 49.1% (27 of 55) were polyclonal, with rates of mutation detection unaffected by delays in processing of archival plasma. Patients with ESR1 mutations had improved progression-free survival (PFS) after taking fulvestrant (n = 45) compared with exemestane (n = 18; hazard ratio [HR], 0.52; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.92; P = .02), whereas patients with wild-type ESR1 had similar PFS after receiving either treatment (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.67; P = .77). In PALOMA3, ESR1 mutations were found in the plasma of 25.3% of patients (91 of 360), of whom 28.6% (26 of 91) were polyclonal, with mutations associated with acquired resistance to prior AI. Fulvestrant plus palbociclib improved PFS compared with fulvestrant plus placebo in both ESR1 mutant (HR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.74; P = .002) and ESR1 wild-type patients (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.70; P < .001). Conclusion ESR1 mutation analysis in plasma after progression after prior AI therapy may help direct choice of further endocrine-based therapy. Additional confirmatory studies are required.


The Breast ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. S106-S107
Author(s):  
T. Iwase ◽  
T. Sangai ◽  
E. Ishigami ◽  
J. Sakakibara ◽  
K. Fujisaki ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document