Shared decision-making in metastatic breast cancer: discrepancy between the expected prolongation of life and treatment efficacy between patients and physicians, and influencing factors

Experiences of Indonesian women with breast cancer underwent treatment decision-making: A qualitative study

Background

Patients with breast cancer face a complex situation upon receiving their diagnosis and considering future treatment options. In Indonesian culture, relatives and others significantly influence decision-making processes. Understanding the perspectives of Indonesian women with breast cancer regarding treatment decision-making can enhance satisfaction with the care provided.

Objective

This study aimed to explore the experiences of Indonesian women with breast cancer regarding treatment decision-making.

Methods

A qualitative descriptive study design was utilized. Purposive sampling was employed to select the study participants. In-depth interviews were conducted with 15 women with breast cancer between March and June 2023. The data were analyzed using thematic analysis.

Results

Three main themes were developed: 1) Emotional impact and uncertainty in cancer care, 2) Clear communication and support for patients, and 3) Family-centered decision-making in treatment planning.

Conclusion

This study highlights the perspectives of Indonesian women with breast cancer on treatment decision-making. Nurses play a crucial role in providing clear information to patients and their families during the decision-making process. Understanding the experiences of women with breast cancer can help support and empower patients through effective communication while they undergo treatment.

Progression-free survival and quality of life in metastatic breast cancer: The patient perspective

Introduction

Objective

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

•

Overall survival benefit combined with good QoL are the most important endpoints for mBC patients.

•

Time without disease progression is meaningful to patients when coupled with no worsening in or improvements in QoL.

•

Quality of life is highly individual and evolves throughout the treatment journey.

•

Surrogate endpoints are confusing; more patient-centered language is needed.

•

Healthcare professionals should account for disease and psychological well-being.

Management of Advanced Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Positive Breast Cancer and Brain Metastases: ASCO Guideline Update

PURPOSE

To provide updated evidence- and consensus-based guideline recommendations to practicing oncologists and others on the management of brain metastases for patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive advanced breast cancer up to 2021.

METHODS

An Expert Panel conducted a targeted systematic literature review (for both systemic therapy for non-CNS metastases and for CNS metastases of HER2+ guideline updates) that identified 545 articles. Outcomes of interest included overall survival, progression-free survival, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Of the 545 publications identified and reviewed, six on systemic therapy were identified to form the evidentiary basis for the systemic therapy for CNS metastases guideline recommendations.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Patients with brain metastases should receive appropriate local therapy and systemic therapy, if indicated. Local therapies include surgery, whole-brain radiotherapy, and stereotactic radiosurgery. Memantine and hippocampal avoidance should be added to whole-brain radiotherapy when possible. Treatments depend on factors such as patient prognosis, presence of symptoms, resectability, number and size of metastases, prior therapy, and whether metastases are diffuse. Other options include systemic therapy, best supportive care, enrollment onto a clinical trial, and/or palliative care. There are insufficient data to recommend for or against performing routine magnetic resonance imaging to screen for brain metastases; clinicians should have a low threshold for magnetic resonance imaging of the brain because of the high incidence of brain metastases among patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines.

Endocrine Therapy for Hormone Receptor-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer: A Nation-Wide Multicenter Epidemiological Study in China

Background

Clinical guidelines generally recommend endocrine therapy (ET) as first-line treatment of hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer (HR+ ABC) whereas chemotherapy (CT) should be considered in the presence of life-threatening disease or limited clinical benefit after three sequential ET regimens. However, it is unclear if real-world clinical practice is in accordance with the current guidelines. This study was to present the real-world treatment patterns and ET regimens among HR+ ABC patients in China.

Methods

Using data from the Nation-wide Multicenter Retrospective Clinical Epidemiology Study of Female Advanced Breast Cancer in China (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03047889), we investigated the clinicopathological characteristics, clinical profiles, and treatment patterns of HR+ ABC patients from January 2012 to December 2014.

Results

A total of 2,342 patients with HR+ ABC were included in this study. Our findings revealed that, in comparisons with those receiving initial CT (n = 1445), patients initiated ET (n =402) were significantly older, later recurrent after adjuvant treatment, with a lower rate of visceral involvement and a decreasing quantity of metastatic sites. A total of 1,308 patients received palliative ET while only 18.9% patients (n = 247) reached three lines of ET. Among patients completing more than one line of ET, the median treatment duration was 8 months for the first line, 6 months for the second line, and 3 months for the third line for patients receiving ET. In the advanced setting, the choices of palliative ET regimens were diverse, yet aromatase inhibitor (AI) monotherapy was still the overall mainstay of ET; in contrast, patients were less accessible to everolimus plus AI regimen in this population.

Conclusions

Less than one quarter of patients initiated palliative ET for HR+ ABC in routine clinical practice. Patients who received multi-lines of ET experienced successive shorter durations following each line of therapy. This real-life data provides a solid overview of ET for HR+ ABC from China, indicating unmet need for treatment options that improve the effectiveness of endocrine therapy.

Changes in hospital variation in the probability of receiving treatment with curative intent for esophageal and gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Previous studies describe a large variation in the proportion of patients undergoing treatment with curative intent for esophageal (EC) and gastric cancer (GC). Since centralization of surgical care was initiated and more awareness regarding hospital practice variation was potentially present, we hypothesized that hospital practice variation for potentially curable EC and GC patients changed over time.

METHODS

Patients with potentially curable EC (n = 10,115) or GC (n = 3988) diagnosed between 2012-2017 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Multilevel multivariable logistic regression was used to analyze the differences in the probability of treatment with curative intent between hospitals of diagnosis over time, comparing 2012-2014 with 2015-2017. Relative survival (RS) between hospitals with different probabilities of treatment with curative intent were compared.

RESULTS

The range of proportions of patients undergoing treatment with curative intent per hospital of diagnosis for EC was 45-95 % in 2012-2014 and 54-89 % in 2015-2017, and for GC 52-100 % and 45-100 %. The adjusted variation declined for EC with Odds Ratios ranging from 0.50 to 1.72 between centers in the first period to 0.70-1.44 in the second period (p < 0.001) and did not change for GC (Odds Ratios ranging from 0.78 to 1.23 to 0.82-1.23, (p = 1.00)). A higher probability of treatment with curative intent was associated with a better survival for both malignancies.

CONCLUSION

Although substantial variation between hospitals of diagnosis in the probability in receiving treatment with curative intent still exists for both malignancies, it has decreased for EC. A low probability of receiving curative treatment remained associated with worse survival.

Current Status of Advance Care Planning and End-of-life Communication for Patients with Advanced and Metastatic Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

Advance care planning (ACP) is a process that supports adults in understanding and sharing their personal values, life goals, and preferences regarding future medical care. We examined the current status of ACP and end-of-life (EOL) communication between oncologists and patients with metastatic breast cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a survey among 41 institutions that specialize in oncology by using an online tool in October 2019. Participants (118 physicians) from 38 institutions completed a 39-item questionnaire that measured facility type and function; physicians' background and clinical approach, education about EOL communication, and understanding about ACP; and the current situation of ACP and EOL discussions.

RESULTS

Ninety-eight responses concerning physicians' engagement in ACP with patients were obtained. Seventy-one (72%) answered that they had engaged in ACP. Among these, 23 (33%) physicians used a structured format to facilitate the conversation in their institutions, and only 6 (8%) settled triggers or sentinel events for the initiation of ACP. In the multivariable analysis, only the opportunity to learn communication skills was associated with physicians' engagement with ACP (odds ratio: 2.8, 95% confidence interval: 1.1-7.0). The frequency and timing of communication about ACP and EOL care with patients substantially varied among the oncologists. Communication about patients' life expectancy was less frequent compared with other topics.

CONCLUSION

The opportunity to improve EOL communication skills promoted physicians' engagement with ACP among patients with metastatic/advanced breast cancer. However, there were still substantial variabilities in the method, frequency, and timing of ACP and EOL communication among the oncologists.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This study found that the opportunity to improve end-of-life (EOL) communication skills promoted physicians' engagement in advance care planning (ACP) among patients with metastatic/advanced breast cancer. All oncologists who treat said patients are encouraged to participate in effective education programs concerning EOL communication skills. In clinical practice, there are substantial variabilities in the method, frequency, and timing of ACP and EOL communication among oncologists. As recommended in several clinical guidelines, the authors suggest a system that identifies patients who require conversations about their care goals, a structured format to facilitate the conversations, and continuous measurement for improving EOL care and treatment.

Shared Decision-Making Competency: Provider-Specific Factors in Hematology-Oncology Clinical Practice

A computerized database search was performed using PubMed®, CINAHL®, and EBSCOhost to identify provider-specific factors associated with shared decision-making (SDM) competency among direct patient care providers in hematology-oncology practice. Personal factors included being female or older in age and having higher education. Years of clinical experience, nonclinical experiences, institutional support for SDM, administrative support for SDM training and education, and cultural competence were also reported as having a positive correlation with SDM competence among care providers. Future research is needed to identify core SDM competencies in the interprofessional hematology-oncology care setting.

Psychosocial aspects and life project disruption in young women diagnosed with metastatic hormone-sensitive HER2-negative breast cancer

Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) diagnosis in young women negatively impacts on quality of life (QoL) and daily activities, disrupting their life project and forcing them to face new psychosocial challenges. The recently published results on the improvement of the overall survival of pre- or perimenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative MBC treated with CDK4/6 inhibitors plus endocrine therapy, while preserving, and in some items improving their QoL, will change the landscape of the management of this patient population. Their extended survival and potential improvement in QoL will, therefore, modify their specific needs in terms of psychosocial support.

The complexity of the care of young women with MBC is described herein, based on an extensive literature review. Further research about the specific psychosocial requirements of these women and a new multidisciplinary holistic approach is paramount to properly address their concerns and preferences. The communication with and support of their partners, parents and children is an important factor affecting the QoL of these patients. Altogether, a multidisciplinary care, open communication and personalized support is required to address the psychosocial implications of the new prognostic expectations on these patients with the incorporation of new targeted therapies.

•

Life project disruption in young women with metastatic breast cancer.

•

Scarce research and lack of specific QoL questionnaires.

•

Multidisciplinary holistic approach key to address concerns of young MBC patients.

•

New therapies extend survival and improve quality of life of MBC patients.

•

Psychosocial support needs to be adapted to these new prognostic expectations.

Empowering patients in decision-making in radiation oncology - can we do better?

The decision as to whether or not a patient should receive radiation therapy as part of their cancer treatment is based on evidence‐based practice and on recommended international consensus treatment guidelines. However, the merit of involving the patients' individual preferences and values in the treatment decision is frequently overlooked. Here, we review the current literature pertaining to shared decision‐making (SDM) in the field of radiation oncology, including discussion of the patient's perception of radiation therapy as a treatment option and patient involvement in clinical trials. The merit of decision aids during the SDM process in radiation oncology is considered, as are patient preferences for active or passive involvement in decisions about their treatment. Clarity of terminology, a better understanding of effective strategies and increased resources will be needed to ensure SDM in radiation oncology becomes a reality.

Prospective Decision Analysis Study of Clinical Genomic Testing in Metastatic Breast Cancer: Impact on Outcomes and Patient Perceptions

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of targeted DNA sequencing on selection of cancer therapy for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this prospective, single-center, single-arm trial, patients with MBC were enrolled within 10 weeks of starting a new therapy. At enrollment, tumor samples underwent next-generation sequencing for any of 315 cancer-related genes to high depth (> 500×) using FoundationOne CDx. Sequencing results were released to providers at the time of disease progression, and physician treatment recommendations were assessed via questionnaire. We evaluated three prespecified questions to assess patients' perceptions of genomic testing.

RESULTS

In all, 100 patients underwent genomic testing, with a median of five mutations (range, 0 to 13 mutations) detected per patient. Genomic testing revealed one or more potential therapies in 98% of patients (98 of 100), and 60% of patients (60 of 100) had one or more recommended treatments with level I/II evidence for actionability. Among the 94 genomic text reports that were released, there was physician questionnaire data for 87 patients (response rate, 92.6%) and 31.0% of patients (27 of 87) had treatment change recommended by their physician. Of these, 37.0% (10 of 27) received the treatment supported by genomic testing. We did not detect a statistically significant difference in time-to-treatment failure (log-rank P = .87) or overall survival (P = .71) among patients who had treatment change supported by genomic testing versus those who had no treatment change. For patients who completed surveys before and after genomic testing, there was a significant decrease in confidence of treatment success, specifically among patients who did not have treatment change supported by genomic testing (McNemar's test of agreement P = .001).

CONCLUSION

In this prospective study, genomic profiling of tumors in patients with MBC frequently identified potential treatments and resulted in treatment change in a minority of patients. Patients whose therapy was not changed on the basis of genomic testing seemed to have a decrease in confidence of treatment success.

Goals and Adverse Effects: Rate of Concordance Between Patients and Providers

PURPOSE

Adequate understanding of the goals and adverse effects of cancer treatment has important implications for patients' decision making, expectations, and mood. This study sought to identify the degree to which patients and clinicians agreed upon the goals and adverse effects of treatment (ie, concordance).

METHODS

Patients completed a demographic questionnaire, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Distress Thermometer, the Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Survey, the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Treatment Satisfaction-General questionnaire, the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Spiritual Well-Being questionnaire, and a 13-item questionnaire about the goals and adverse effects of treatment. Providers completed a 12-item questionnaire.

RESULTS

One hundred patients (51 female) and 34 providers participated (questionnaire return rate mean difference, 5 days; SD, 16 days). Patient and provider dyads agreed 61% of the time regarding the intent of treatment. In cases of nonagreement, 36% of patients reported more optimistic therapy goals compared to providers. Patients and providers agreed 69% of the time regarding the patient's acknowledgement and understanding of adverse effects. Patients who reported an understanding of likely adverse effects endorsed significantly lower distress scores (mean, 2.5) than those who endorsed not understanding associated adverse effects (mean, 4.1; P = .008).

CONCLUSION

Timely data capturing of patient-provider dyadic ratings is feasible. A significant discrepancy exists between a substantial percentage of patients' and providers' views of the intent and adverse effects of treatment. Patients were almost always more optimistic about the intent of treatment. Higher rates of distress were noted in cases of discordance. Providers may benefit from conversational feedback from patients as well as other integrated feedback systems to inform them about patient understanding.

Using Probability for Pathological Complete Response (pCR) as a Decision Support Marker for Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in HER2 Negative Breast Cancer Patients - a Survey Among Physicians

BACKGROUND

In women with early breast cancer, a pathological complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is reported to be associated with an improvement of the survival. The aim of this survey among physicians was to investigate whether the probability of achieving pCR in patients with a hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative disease encourages physicians to recommend neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

METHODS

The study was conducted via an online survey that was sent to 493 physicians, who were either known as members of national guideline committees, heads of breast cancer centers, being high recruiters in clinical trials or leading a private practice. Participants were asked about a specific case that should resemble patients for whom it is unclear, whether they should be treated with chemotherapy.

RESULTS

113 (24.5%) physicians participated at the survey, out of which 96.5% had a work experience of more than 10 years and 94.7% were board certified in their specialty. A total of 84.1% would consider pCR for a decision concerning neoadjuvant chemotherapy. With regard to the pCR probability, 2.7 and 10.6% of the participants demanded at least a pCR rate of 5 and 10%, respectively, while 25.7% were satisfied with 20% probability, and another 25.7% with a pCR rate of 30%.

CONCLUSIONS

The vast majority of the long-term experienced physicians would embrace the implementation of a further method such as the prediction of pCR probability in clinical routine to support decision making regarding the necessity of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The cut-off of around 30% pCR probability seems to be a realizable rate to distinguish patient groups.

The availability and effectiveness of tools supporting shared decision making in metastatic breast cancer care: a review

Background

Shared decision-making (SDM) in the management of metastatic breast cancer care is associated with positive patient outcomes. In daily clinical practice, however, SDM is not fully integrated yet. Initiatives to improve the implementation of SDM would be helpful. The aim of this review was to assess the availability and effectiveness of tools supporting SDM in metastatic breast cancer care.

Methods

Literature databases were systematically searched for articles published since 2006 focusing on the development or evaluation of tools to improve information-provision and to support decision-making in metastatic breast cancer care. Internet searches and experts identified additional tools. Data from included tools were extracted and the evaluation of tools was appraised using the GRADE grading system.

Results

The literature search yielded five instruments. In addition, two tools were identified via internet searches and consultation of experts. Four tools were specifically developed for supporting SDM in metastatic breast cancer, the other three tools focused on metastatic cancer in general. Tools were mainly applicable across the care process, and usable for decisions on supportive care with or without chemotherapy. All tools were designed for patients to be used before a consultation with the physician. Effects on patient outcomes were generally weakly positive although most tools were not studied in well-designed studies.

Conclusions

Despite its recognized importance, only two tools were positively evaluated on effectiveness and are available to support patients with metastatic breast cancer in SDM. These tools show promising results in pilot studies and focus on different aspects of care. However, their effectiveness should be confirmed in well-designed studies before implementation in clinical practice. Innovation and development of SDM tools targeting clinicians as well as patients during a clinical encounter is recommended.

Update Breast Cancer 2018 (Part 2) - Advanced Breast Cancer, Quality of Life and Prevention

The treatment of metastatic breast cancer has become more complicated due to increasing numbers of new therapies which need to be tested. Therapies are now being developed to treat special clinical or molecular subgroups. Even though intrinsic molecular subtypes play a major role, more and more new therapies for subgroups and histological subtypes are being developed, such as the use of PARP inhibitors to treat patients with BRCA mutations (breast and ovarian cancer). Supportive therapies are also evolving, allowing problems such as alopecia or nausea and vomiting to be treated more effectively. Treatment-related side effects have a direct impact on the prognosis of patients with metastatic breast cancer, and supportive therapy can improve compliance. Digital tools could be useful to establish better patient management systems. This overview provides an insight into recent trials and how the findings could affect routine treatment. Current aspects of breast cancer prevention are also presented.

Endocrine Therapy for Hormone Receptor-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Guideline

PURPOSE

To develop recommendations about endocrine therapy for women with hormone receptor (HR) -positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC).

METHODS

The American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an Expert Panel to conduct a systematic review of evidence from 2008 through 2015 to create recommendations informed by that evidence. Outcomes of interest included sequencing of hormonal agents, hormonal agents compared with chemotherapy, targeted biologic therapy, and treatment of premenopausal women. This guideline puts forth recommendations for endocrine therapy as treatment for women with HR-positive MBC.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Sequential hormone therapy is the preferential treatment for most women with HR-positive MBC. Except in cases of immediately life-threatening disease, hormone therapy, alone or in combination, should be used as initial treatment. Patients whose tumors express any level of hormone receptors should be offered hormone therapy. Treatment recommendations should be based on type of adjuvant treatment, disease-free interval, and organ function. Tumor markers should not be the sole criteria for determining tumor progression; use of additional biomarkers remains experimental. Assessment of menopausal status is critical; ovarian suppression or ablation should be included in premenopausal women. For postmenopausal women, aromatase inhibitors (AIs) are the preferred first-line endocrine therapy, with or without the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor palbociclib. As second-line therapy, fulvestrant should be administered at 500 mg with a loading schedule and may be administered with palbociclib. The mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor everolimus may be administered with exemestane to postmenopausal women with MBC whose disease progresses while receiving nonsteroidal AIs. Among patients with HR-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive MBC, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-targeted therapy plus an AI can be effective for those who are not chemotherapy candidates.

Patients' perspectives on information from physicians during palliative chemotherapy: A qualitative study

Objective:

During the course of their disease, patients with cancer receiving palliative chemotherapy receive extensive amounts of information from physicians. The objective of our study was to describe patients' perspectives on the information they received from physicians during palliative chemotherapy with regard to their cancer diagnosis, treatments, prognosis, and future planning.

Method:

A total of 15 semistructured face-to-face interviews with patients who had incurable cancer were conducted, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed with qualitative content analysis.

Results:

Three categories were defined during the analytical process: “having a chronic disease,” “depending on chemotherapy,” and “living with an unpredictable future.”

Significance of results:

Our study demonstrated that patients undergoing palliative chemotherapy perceived that their disease was incurable and chronic, that they were dependent on chemotherapy, and that their future was uncertain. Compared with other studies, the patients in our study seemed to be more aware of their prognosis and the goals of care.

Physicians' Considerations for Repeat Biopsy in Patients With Recurrent Metastatic Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

A strong recommendation has been made to perform repeat biopsy for recurrent metastatic breast cancer (RMBC), to reconfirm the histologic features, and to assess for possible changes in hormone receptors (HRs) or human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status. The present study was undertaken to assess the documented and nondocumented factors affecting physicians' decisions to perform a repeat biopsy in patients with RMBC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We reviewed the medical records of 410 patients with RMBC for whom recurrence had developed between January 2000 and August 2014. The demographic data and characteristics regarding early and metastatic disease were recorded. The written follow-up records were examined, seeking considerations for or against repeat biopsy. Multivariate analysis was performed using logistic regression to determine the nondocumented reasons for repeat biopsy.

RESULTS

A new biopsy was performed in 295 of 410 patients (72%). However, only 88 of the 295 patients (30%) had a documented reason for rebiopsy. The reason for not performing repeat biopsy was documented for only 1 of the 115 patients. The main documented consideration for rebiopsy was to obtain a new receptor status (recorded in 47 of 88 patients; 53%). The other recorded reasons were suspicion of a second primary, differential diagnosis of metastasis from a second primary, the time from early diagnosis, and patient desire. Significant, but undocumented, considerations for repeat biopsy were low stage at early diagnosis, year of recurrence, interval to recurrence, and site of recurrence. Only for 165 of 295 patients (56%) was the full HR and HER2 status from the new biopsy specimen obtained.

CONCLUSION

Nondocumented factors influence physicians' decisions for referring patients for rebiopsy. This might reflect a low rate of patient involvement in their disease management and decision making.

Terminal Versus Advanced Cancer: Do the General Population and Health Care Professionals Share a Common Language?

Purpose

Many end-of-life care studies are based on the assumption that there is a shared definition of language concerning the stage of cancer. However, studies suggest that patients and their families often misperceive patients’ cancer stages and prognoses. Discrimination between advanced cancer and terminal cancer is important because the treatment goals are different. In this study, we evaluated the understanding of the definition of advanced versus terminal cancer of the general population and determined associated socio-demographic factors.

Materials and Methods

A total of 2,000 persons from the general population were systematically recruited. We used a clinical vignette of a hypothetical advanced breast cancer patient, but whose cancer was not considered terminal. After presenting the brief history of the case, we asked respondents to choose the correct cancer stage from a choice of early, advanced, terminal stage, and don’t know. Multinomial logistic regression analysis was performed to determine sociodemographic factors associated with the correct response, as defined in terms of medical context.

Results

Only 411 respondents (20.6%) chose “advanced,” while most respondents (74.5%) chose “terminal stage” as the stage of the hypothetical patient, and a small proportion of respondents chose “early stage” (0.7%) or “don’t know” (4.4%). Multinomial logistic regression analysis found no consistent or strong predictor.

Conclusion

A large proportion of the general population could not differentiate advanced cancer from terminal cancer. Continuous effort is required in order to establish common and shared definitions of the different cancer stages and to increase understanding of cancer staging for the general population.

Chemotherapy and targeted therapy for women with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (or unknown) advanced breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline

PURPOSE

To identify optimal chemo- and targeted therapy for women with human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2)- negative (or unknown) advanced breast cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review of randomized evidence (including systematic reviews and meta-analyses) from 1993 through to current was completed. Outcomes of interest included survival, progression-free survival, response, quality of life, and adverse effects. Guideline recommendations were evidence based and were agreed on by the Expert Panel via consensus.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising 20 systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses, 30 trials on first-line treatment, and 29 trials on second-line and subsequent treatment. These trials form the evidence base for the guideline recommendations.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Endocrine therapy is preferable to chemotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with estrogen receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer unless improvement is medically necessary (eg, immediately life-threatening disease). Single agent is preferable to combination chemotherapy, and longer planned duration improves outcome but must be balanced against toxicity. There is no single optimal first-line or subsequent line chemotherapy, and choice of treatment will be determined by multiple factors including prior therapy, toxicity, performance status, comorbid conditions, and patient preference. The role of bevacizumab remains controversial. Other targeted therapies have not so far been shown to enhance chemotherapy outcome in HER2-negative breast cancer.

Recommendations on disease management for patients with advanced human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer and brain metastases: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline

PURPOSE

To provide formal expert consensus-based recommendations to practicing oncologists and others on the management of brain metastases for patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -positive advanced breast cancer.

METHODS

The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) convened a panel of medical oncology, radiation oncology, guideline implementation, and advocacy experts and conducted a systematic review of the literature. When that failed to yield sufficiently strong quality evidence, the Expert Panel undertook a formal expert consensus-based process to produce these recommendations. ASCO used a modified Delphi process. The panel members drafted recommendations, and a group of other experts joined them for two rounds of formal ratings of the recommendations.

RESULTS

No studies or existing guidelines met the systematic review criteria; therefore, ASCO conducted a formal expert consensus-based process.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Patients with brain metastases should receive appropriate local therapy and systemic therapy, if indicated. Local therapies include surgery, whole-brain radiotherapy, and stereotactic radiosurgery. Treatments depend on factors such as patient prognosis, presence of symptoms, resectability, number and size of metastases, prior therapy, and whether metastases are diffuse. Other options include systemic therapy, best supportive care, enrollment onto a clinical trial, and/or palliative care. Clinicians should not perform routine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to screen for brain metastases, but rather should have a low threshold for MRI of the brain because of the high incidence of brain metastases among patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer.

Systemic therapy for patients with advanced human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline

PURPOSE

To provide evidence-based recommendations to practicing oncologists and others on systemic therapy for patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) -positive advanced breast cancer.

METHODS

The American Society of Clinical Oncology convened a panel of medical oncology, radiation oncology, guideline implementation, and advocacy experts and conducted a systematic literature review from January 2009 to October 2012. Outcomes of interest included overall survival, progression-free survival (PFS), and adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 16 trials met the systematic review criteria. The CLEOPATRA trial found survival and PFS benefits for docetaxel, trastuzumab, and pertuzumab in first-line treatment, and the EMILIA trial found survival and PFS benefits for trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) in second-line treatment. T-DM1 also showed a third-line PFS benefit. One trial reported on duration of HER2-targeted therapy, and three others reported on endocrine therapy for patients with HER-positive advanced breast cancer.

RECOMMENDATIONS

HER2-targeted therapy is recommended for patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer, except for those with clinical congestive heart failure or significantly compromised left ventricular ejection fraction, who should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Trastuzumab, pertuzumab, and taxane for first-line treatment and T-DM1 for second-line treatment are recommended. In the third-line setting, clinicians should offer other HER2-targeted therapy combinations or T-DM1 (if not previously administered) and may offer pertuzumab, if the patient has not previously received it. Optimal duration of chemotherapy is at least 4 to 6 months or until maximum response, depending on toxicity and in the absence of progression. HER2-targeted therapy can continue until time of progression or unacceptable toxicities. For patients with HER2-positive and estrogen receptor-positive/progesterone receptor-positive breast cancer, clinicians may recommend either standard first-line therapy or, for selected patients, endocrine therapy plus HER2-targeted therapy or endocrine therapy alone.