Treatment guideline concordance, initiation, and abandonment in patients with non-metastatic breast cancer from the African Breast Cancer-Disparities in Outcomes (ABC-DO) cohort in sub-Saharan Africa: a prospective cohort study

Geospatial disparities in survival of patients with breast cancer in sub-Saharan Africa from the African Breast Cancer-Disparities in Outcomes cohort (ABC-DO): a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

There is an urgent need to improve breast cancer survival in sub-Saharan Africa. Geospatial barriers delay diagnosis and treatment, but their effect on survival in these settings is not well understood. We examined geospatial disparities in 4-year survival in the African Breast Cancer-Disparities in Outcomes cohort.

METHODS

In this prospective cohort study, women (aged ≥18 years) newly diagnosed with breast cancer were recruited from eight hospitals in Namibia, Nigeria, South Africa, Uganda, and Zambia. They reported sociodemographic information in interviewer-administered questionnaires, and their clinical and treatment data were collected from medical records. Vital status was ascertained by contacting participants or their next of kin every 3 months. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality in relation to rural versus urban residence, straight-line distance, and modelled travel time to hospital, analysed using restricted mean survival time, Cox proportional hazards, and flexible parametric survival models.

FINDINGS

2228 women with breast cancer were recruited between Sept 8, 2014, and Dec 31, 2017. 127 were excluded from analysis (58 had potentially recurrent cancer, had previously received treatment, or had no follow-up; 14 from minority ethnic groups with small sample sizes; and 55 with missing geocoded home addresses). Among the 2101 women included in analysis, 928 (44%) lived in a rural area. 1042 patients had died within 4 years of diagnosis; 4-year survival was 39% (95% CI 36-42) in women in rural areas versus 49% (46-52) in urban areas (unadjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1·24 [95% CI 1·09-1·40]). Among the 734 women living more than 1 h from the hospital, the crude 4-year survival was 37% (95% CI 32-42) in women in rural areas versus 54% (46-62) in women in urban areas (HR 1·35 [95% CI 1·07-1·71] after adjustment for age, stage, and treatment status). Among women in rural areas, mortality rates increased with distance (adjusted HR per 50 km 1·04, 1·01-1·07) and travel time (adjusted HR per h 1·06, 1·02-1·10). Among women with early-stage breast cancer receiving treatment, women in rural areas had a strong survival disadvantage (overall HR 1·54, 1·14-2·07 adjusted for age and stage; >1 h distance adjusted HR 2·14, 1·21-3·78).

INTERPRETATION

Geospatial barriers reduce survival of patients with breast cancer in sub-Saharan Africa. Specific attention is needed to support patients with early-stage breast cancer living in rural areas far from cancer treatment facilities.

FUNDING

US National Institutes of Health (National Cancer Institute), Susan G Komen for the Cure, and the International Agency for Research on Cancer.

Real-world treatment of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer in the USA, Europe and Asia

Aim: To characterize real-world patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) and treating physicians and evaluate treatment trends and baseline concordance versus guidelines internationally. Materials & methods: Retrospective, cross-sectional data from the Ipsos Global Oncology Monitor database 2018-2020 were used for descriptive analysis of mHSPC patients, treating physicians and treatment utilization. Results: Among the 6198 mHSPC patients from five countries, the most common treatment was either androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) monotherapy or first-generation androgen receptor inhibitor + ADT. Second-generation androgen receptor inhibitor use was only initiating but increasing over the study period. Conclusion: Despite contemporaneous guidelines recommending treatment intensification of ADT in combination with novel antihormonals or docetaxel, 76.1% of reported mHSPC patients received non-guideline-concordant care.

From Incidence to Intervention: A Comprehensive Look at Breast Cancer in South Africa

The formidable impact of breast cancer extends globally, with South Africa facing pronounced challenges, including significant disparities in breast cancer screening, treatment and survival along ethnic and socioeconomic lines. Over the last two decades, breast cancer incidence has increased and now accounts for a substantial portion of cancers in women. Ethnic disparities in terms of screening, incidence and survival exacerbate the issue, leading to delayed diagnosis among Black patients and highlighting healthcare inequities. These concerning trends underscore the urgency of enhancing breast cancer screening while mitigating treatment delays, although obstacles within the healthcare system impede progress. The intersection of breast cancer and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) further complicates matters and particularly affects the Black population. Tackling the aforementioned disparities in breast cancer in South Africa mandates a multifaceted strategy. Robust screening efforts, particularly those targeting marginalised communities, are crucial for early detection. Concurrently, expedited treatment initiation is imperative. Addressing HIV-related complexities requires tailored interventions to ensure effective care. These multifaceted disparities require pan African research and cooperation as well as tailored interventions to enhance breast cancer care within the African region.

Feasibility of monitoring Global Breast Cancer Initiative Framework key performance indicators in 21 Asian National Cancer Centers Alliance member countries

Background

The Global Breast Cancer Initiative (GBCI) Framework, launched by the World Health Organisation (WHO) in 2023, emphasises assessing, strengthening, and scaling up services for the early detection and management of breast cancer. This study aims to determine the feasibility of monitoring the status of breast cancer control in the 21 Asian National Cancer Centers Alliance (ANCCA) countries based on the three GBCI Framework key performance indicators (KPIs): stage at diagnosis, time to diagnosis, and treatment completion.

Methods

We reviewed published literature on breast cancer control among 21 ANCCA countries from May to July 2023 to establish data availability and compiled the latest descriptive statistics and sources of the indicators using a standardised data collection form. We performed bivariate Pearson's correlation analysis to measure the strength of correlation between stage at diagnosis, mortality and survival rates, and universal health coverage.

Findings

Only 12 (57%) ANCCA member countries published national cancer registry reports on breast cancer age-standardised incidence rate (ASIR) and age-standardised mortality rate (ASMR). Indonesia, Myanmar, and Nepal had provincial data and others relied on WHO's Global Cancer Observatory (GLOBOCAN) estimates. GLOBOCAN data differed from the reported national statistics by 5-10% in Bhutan, Indonesia, Iran, the Republic of Korea, Singapore, and Thailand and >10% in China, India, Malaysia, Mongolia, and Sri Lanka. The proportion of patients diagnosed in stages I and II strongly correlated with the five-year survival rate and with the universal health coverage (UHC) index. Three countries (14%) reported national data with >60% of invasive breast cancer patients diagnosed at stages I and II, and a five-year survival rate of >80%. Over 60% of the ANCCA countries had no published national data on breast cancer staging, the time interval from presentation to diagnosis, and diagnosis to treatment. Five (24%) countries reported data on treatment completion. The definition of delayed diagnosis and treatment completion varied across countries.

Interpretation

GBCI's Pillar 1 KPI correlates strongly with five-year survival rate and with the UHC index. Most ANCCA countries lacked national data on cancer staging, timely diagnosis, and treatment completion KPIs. While institutional-level data were available in some countries, they may not represent the nationwide status. Strengthening cancer surveillance is crucial for effective breast cancer control. The GBCI Framework indicators warrant more detailed definitions for standardised data collection. Surrogate indicators which are measurable and manageable in country-specific settings, could be considered for monitoring GBCI indicators. Ensuring UHC and addressing health inequalities are essential to early diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer.

Funding

Funding for this research article's processing fee (APC) will be provided by the affiliated institution to support the open-access publication of this work. The funding body is not involved in the study design; collection, management, analysis and interpretation of data; or the decision to submit for publication. The funding body will be informed of any planned publications, and documentation provided.

Stigma and Social Determinants of Health Associated With Fidelity to Guideline-Concordant Therapy in Patients With Breast Cancer Living With and Without HIV in Botswana

BACKGROUND

Patients with breast cancer in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) experience a disproportionate burden of mortality. Fidelity to treatment guidelines, defined as receiving optimal dose and frequency of prescribed treatments, improves survival. We sought to identify patient factors associated with treatment fidelity and how this may differ for people with HIV (PWH) and breast cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative study of women who initiated outpatient treatment for stages I-III breast cancer in Botswana, with deviance sampling of high- and low-fidelity patients. One-on-one interviews were conducted using semi-structured guides informed by the Theory of Planned Behavior. The sample size was determined by thematic saturation. Transcribed interviews were double coded with an integrated analytic approach.

RESULTS

We enrolled 15 high- and 15 low-fidelity participants from August 25, 2020 to December 15, 2020, including 10 PWH (4 high, 6 low fidelity). Ninety-three percent had stage III disease. Barriers to treatment fidelity included stigma, social determinants of health (SDOH), and health system barriers. Acceptance and de-stigmatization, peer and other social support, increased knowledge and self-efficacy were identified as facilitators. The COVID-19 pandemic amplified existing socioeconomic stressors. Unique barriers and facilitators identified by PWH included intersectional stigma, and HIV and cancer care integration, respectively.

CONCLUSION

We identified multilevel modifiable patient and health system factors associated with fidelity. The facilitators provide opportunities for leveraging existing strengths within the Botswana context to design implementation strategies to increase treatment fidelity to guideline-concordant breast cancer therapy. However, PWH experienced unique barriers, suggesting that interventions to address fidelity may need to be tailored to specific comorbidities.

One versus three weeks hypofractionated whole breast radiotherapy for early breast cancer treatment: the FAST-Forward phase III RCT

Background

FAST-Forward aimed to identify a 5-fraction schedule of adjuvant radiotherapy delivered in 1 week that was non-inferior in terms of local cancer control and as safe as the standard 15-fraction regimen after primary surgery for early breast cancer. Published acute toxicity and 5-year results are presented here with other aspects of the trial.

Design

Multicentre phase III non-inferiority trial. Patients with invasive carcinoma of the breast (pT1-3pN0-1M0) after breast conservation surgery or mastectomy randomised (1 : 1 : 1) to 40 Gy in 15 fractions (3 weeks), 27 Gy or 26 Gy in 5 fractions (1 week) whole breast/chest wall (Main Trial). Primary endpoint was ipsilateral breast tumour relapse; assuming 2% 5-year incidence for 40 Gy, non-inferiority pre-defined as < 1.6% excess for 5-fraction schedules (critical hazard ratio = 1.81). Normal tissue effects were assessed independently by clinicians, patients and photographs.

Sub-studies

Two acute skin toxicity sub-studies were undertaken to confirm safety of the test schedules. Primary endpoint was proportion of patients with grade ≥ 3 acute breast skin toxicity at any time from the start of radiotherapy to 4 weeks after completion. Nodal Sub-Study patients had breast/chest wall plus axillary radiotherapy testing the same three schedules, reduced to the 40 and 26 Gy groups on amendment, with the primary endpoint of 5-year patient-reported arm/hand swelling.

Limitations

A sequential hypofractionated or simultaneous integrated boost has not been studied.

Participants

Ninety-seven UK centres recruited 4096 patients (1361:40 Gy, 1367:27 Gy, 1368:26 Gy) into the Main Trial from November 2011 to June 2014. The Nodal Sub-Study recruited an additional 469 patients from 50 UK centres. One hundred and ninety and 162 Main Trial patients were included in the acute toxicity sub-studies.

Results

Acute toxicity sub-studies evaluable patients: (1) acute grade 3 Radiation Therapy Oncology Group toxicity reported in 40 Gy/15 fractions 6/44 (13.6%); 27 Gy/5 fractions 5/51 (9.8%); 26 Gy/5 fractions 3/52 (5.8%). (2) Grade 3 common toxicity criteria for adverse effects toxicity reported for one patient. At 71-month median follow-up in the Main Trial, 79 ipsilateral breast tumour relapse events (40 Gy: 31, 27 Gy: 27, 26 Gy: 21); hazard ratios (95% confidence interval) versus 40 Gy were 27 Gy: 0.86 (0.51 to 1.44), 26 Gy: 0.67 (0.38 to 1.16). With 2.1% (1.4 to 3.1) 5-year incidence ipsilateral breast tumour relapse after 40 Gy, estimated absolute differences versus 40 Gy (non-inferiority test) were -0.3% (-1.0-0.9) for 27 Gy (p = 0.0022) and -0.7% (-1.3-0.3) for 26 Gy (p = 0.00019). Five-year prevalence of any clinician-assessed moderate/marked breast normal tissue effects was 40 Gy: 98/986 (9.9%), 27 Gy: 155/1005 (15.4%), 26 Gy: 121/1020 (11.9%). Across all clinician assessments from 1 to 5 years, odds ratios versus 40 Gy were 1.55 (1.32 to 1.83; p < 0.0001) for 27 Gy and 1.12 (0.94-1.34; p = 0.20) for 26 Gy. Patient and photographic assessments showed higher normal tissue effects risk for 27 Gy versus 40 Gy but not for 26 Gy. Nodal Sub-Study reported no arm/hand swelling in 80% and 77% in 40 Gy and 26 Gy at baseline, and 73% and 76% at 24 months. The prevalence of moderate/marked arm/hand swelling at 24 months was 10% versus 7% for 40 Gy compared with 26 Gy.

Interpretation

Five-year local tumour incidence and normal tissue effects prevalence show 26 Gy in 5 fractions in 1 week is a safe and effective alternative to 40 Gy in 15 fractions for patients prescribed adjuvant local radiotherapy after primary surgery for early-stage breast cancer.

Future work

Ten-year Main Trial follow-up is essential. Inclusion in hypofractionation meta-analysis ongoing. A future hypofractionated boost trial is strongly supported.

Trial registration

FAST-Forward was sponsored by The Institute of Cancer Research and was registered as ISRCTN19906132.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 09/01/47) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 25. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Analysis of the Breast Cancer Journey in Namibia

Importance

Breast cancer (BC) is the leading cancer among women in Namibia. Examining the BC journey in this multiracial country where inequalities remain large is needed to inform effective interventions to reduce BC mortality.

Objective

To describe the entire BC journey of Namibian women by race, utilizing the World Health Organization Global Breast Cancer Initiative (GBCI) framework.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study used the Namibian subset of the African Breast Cancer-Disparities in Outcomes prospective cohort. Participants were all Namibian residents with confirmed incident BC who presented at the main national public oncology center of the Windhoek Central Hospital (WCH). Follow-up started from recruitment (September 8, 2014, to October 5, 2016) and ended up to 3 years after diagnosis (December 13, 2014, to September 27, 2019). Data analysis was conducted from June 2022 to August 2023.

Exposures

Participants' self-reported ethnicities were aggregated into 3 population groups: Black, mixed ancestry, and White.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Three-year overall survival (OS) was examined using Cox models, and summary statistics were used to describe women's BC journey, including GBCI pillar key performance indicators: (1) early stage (TNM I or II) diagnosis (population benchmark ≥60%), (2) prompt diagnosis, ie, 60 days or less to first health care practitioner visit (population benchmark 100%), and (3) completion of recommended multimodal treatment (MT, ie, surgery plus chemotherapy) (population benchmark ≥80%).

Results

Of 405 women, there were 300 (74%) Black (mean [SD] age, 53 [15] years), 49 (12%) mixed ancestry (mean [SD] age, 53 [7] years), and 56 (14%) White (mean [SD] age, 59 [12] years) patients. Three-year OS was lowest in Black women (60% [95% CI, 54%-66%]; mixed ancestry: 80% [95% CI, 65%-89%]; White: 89% [95% CI, 77%-95%]), who had lower prevalence of early stage diagnosis (Black: 37% [95% CI, 31%-42%]; mixed ancestry and White: 75% [95% CI, 66%-83%]) and timely diagnosis (Black: 60% [95% CI, 54%-66%]; mixed ancestry and White: 77% [95% CI, 69%-85%]), while MT completion (Black: 53% [95% CI, 46%-59%]; mixed ancestry and White: 63% [95% CI, 50%-73%]) was low in all women.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of 405 Namibian residents with BC, marked racial disparities in survival were paralleled by inequities all along the BC journey. To improve BC survival, interventions are needed to promote earlier diagnosis in Black Namibian women and to increase MT initiation and completion in all women.

Global Cancer Drug Development-A Report From the 2022 Accelerating Anticancer Agent Development and Validation Meeting

Rapidly expanding systemic treatment options, combined with improved screening, diagnostic, surgical, and radiotherapy techniques, have led to improved survival outcomes for many cancers over time. However, these overall survival gains have disproportionately benefited patients in high-income countries, whereas patients in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) continue to experience challenges in accessing timely and guideline concordant care. In September 2022, the Accelerating Anticancer Agent Development and Validation workshop was held, focusing on global cancer drug development. Panelists discussed key barriers such as the lack of diagnostic services and human resources, drug accessibility and affordability, lack of research infrastructure, and regulatory and authorization challenges, with a particular focus on Africa and Latin America. Potential opportunities to improve access and affordability were reviewed, such as the importance of prioritizing investments in diagnostics, investing health infrastructure and work force planning, coordinated drug procurement efforts and streamlined regulatory processing, incentivized pricing through regulatory change, and the importance of developing and promoting clinical trials that can answer relevant clinical questions for patients in LMICs. As a cancer community, we must continue to advocate for and work toward equitable access to high-quality interventions for patients, regardless of their geographical location.

Outcomes in breast cancer-does ethnicity matter?

Ethnic or racial differences in breast cancer (BC) survival outcomes have been reported, but current data are largely restricted to comparisons between African Americans and non-Hispanic whites. Most analyses have traditionally been based on self-reported race which may not always be accurate, or are oversimplified in their classification. With increasing globalization, quantification of the genetic ancestry from genomic data may offer a solution to infer the complex makeup from admixture of races. Focusing on the larger and the latest studies, we will discuss recent findings on the differing host and tumor biology that may be driving these disparities, in addition to the extrinsic environmental or lifestyle factors. Socioeconomic disparities with lower cancer literacy may lead to late presentation, poorer adherence to treatment, and other lifestyle factors such as unhealthy diet, obesity, and inadequate physical activity. These hardships may also result in greater allostatic load, which is in turn associated with aggressive BC features in disadvantaged populations. Epigenetic reprogramming may mediate the effects of the environment or lifestyle factors on gene expression, with ensuing differences in BC characteristics and outcome. There is increasing evidence that germline genetics can influence somatic gene alterations or expression, as well as modulate the tumor or immune microenvironment. Although the precise mechanisms remain elusive, this may account for the varying distribution of different BC subtypes across ethnicities. These gaps in our knowledge highlight the need to interrogate the multiomics landscape of BC in diverse populations, ideally in large-scale collaborative settings with standardized methodology for the comparisons to be statistically robust. Together with improving BC awareness and access to good quality health care, a holistic approach with insights of the biological underpinnings is much needed to eradicate ethnic disparities in BC outcomes.