Is de-escalation of treatment by omission of radiotherapy associated with fear of cancer recurrence in women with early breast cancer? An exploratory study

PURPOSE

Safe de-intensification of adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) for early breast cancer (BC) is currently under evaluation. Little is known about the patient experience of de-escalation or its association with fear of cancer recurrence (FCR), a key issue in survivorship. We conducted a cross-sectional study to explore this association.

METHODS

Psychometrically validated measures including the Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory-Short Form were completed by three groups of women with early BC: Women in the PROSPECT clinical trial who underwent pre-surgical MRI and omitted RT (A), women who underwent pre-surgical MRI and received RT (B); and women who received usual care (no MRI, received RT; C). Between group differences were analysed with non-parametric tests. A subset from each group participated in a semi-structured interview. These data (n = 44) were analysed with directed content analysis.

RESULTS

Questionnaires from 400 women were analysed. Significantly lower FCR was observed in Group A (n = 125) than in Group B (n = 102; p = .002) or Group C (n = 173; p = .001), and when participants were categorized by RT status (omitted RT vs received RT; p < .001). The proportion of women with normal FCR was significantly (p < .05) larger in Group A (62%) than in Group B (35%) or Group C (40%). Two qualitative themes emerged: 'What I had was best' and 'Coping with FCR'.

CONCLUSIONS

Omitting RT in the setting of the PROSPECT trial was not associated with higher FCR than receiving RT. Positive perceptions about tailored care, lower treatment burden, and trust in clinicians appear to be protective against FCR.

Telehealth in cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic

INTRODUCTION

The Victorian COVID-19 Cancer Network (VCCN) Telehealth Expert Working Group aimed to evaluate the telehealth (TH) experience for cancer patients, carers and clinicians with the rapid uptake of TH in early 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective multi-centre cross-sectional survey involving eight Victorian regional and metropolitan cancer services and three consumer advocacy groups. Patients or their carers and clinicians who had TH consultations between 1 July 2020 and 31 December 2020 were invited to participate in patient and clinician surveys, respectively. These surveys were opened from September to December 2020.

RESULTS

The acceptability of TH via both video (82.9%) and phone (70.4%) were high though acceptability appeared to decrease in older phone TH users. Video was associated with higher satisfaction compared to phone (87.1% vs 79.7%) even though phone was more commonly used. Various themes from the qualitative surveys highlighted barriers and enablers to rapid TH implementation.

DISCUSSION

The high TH acceptability supports this as a safe and effective strategy for continued care and should persist beyond the pandemic environment, where patient preferences are considered and clinically appropriate. Ongoing support to health services for infrastructure and resources, as well as expansion of reimbursement eligibility criteria for patients and health professionals, including allied health and nursing, are crucial for sustainability.

ASTEFANIA: adjuvant ado-trastuzumab emtansine and atezolizumab for high-risk, HER2-positive breast cancer

There is a strong rationale for combining HER2-targeted therapies with cancer immunotherapy to increase efficacy in breast cancer, particularly in the early-stage setting, where the immune system has not been weakened by heavy pretreatment. ASTEFANIA aims to evaluate the efficacy of adjuvant atezolizumab in combination with ado-trastuzumab emtansine in patients with high-risk, HER2-positive early breast cancer and residual disease following HER2-based neoadjuvant therapy. Eligible patients will be randomized to receive ado-trastuzumab emtansine in combination with either atezolizumab or placebo for 14 cycles within 12 weeks of primary surgery. The primary outcome is invasive disease-free survival and secondary outcomes include additional efficacy end points, safety and pharmacokinetics. The study plans to enroll 1700 patients across 32 counties. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04873362 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Adjuvant study of amcenestrant (SAR439859) versus tamoxifen for patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) early breast cancer (EBC), who have discontinued adjuvant aromatase inhibitor therapy due to treatment-related toxicity (AMEERA-6)

TPS607

Background: There are currently limited treatment options for patients with HR+ EBC who have discontinued adjuvant treatment with aromatase inhibitors (AIs) due to treatment-related toxicity. Amcenestrant is an optimized oral selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD) with potent dual activity which antagonizes and degrades the ER resulting in inhibition of the ER signalling pathway. Preliminary clinical evidence from the phase 1/2 AMEERA-1 trial has demonstrated meaningful antitumour activity and a favourable safety profile of amcenestrant in the treatment of HR+ advanced breast cancer (Linden HM, Campone M, Bardia A, et al: Abstract PD8-08: A phase 1/2 study of SAR439859, an oral selective estrogen receptor (ER) degrader (SERD), as monotherapy and in combination with other anti-cancer therapies in postmenopausal women with ER-positive (ER+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC): AMEERA-1. SABCS 2020 PD8-08). Methods: AMEERA-6 is a prospective, randomized, international, double-blind, double-dummy, phase 3 study. 3738 patients will be randomized 1:1 to receive either amcenestrant 200 mg daily or tamoxifen 20 mg daily. Eligible patients are pre-or postmenopausal women or men with HR+ EBC (stage IIB-III) who have received at least 6 months of adjuvant AIs (at least 3 months in the adjuvant setting if they have received prior neoadjuvant AI therapy) and discontinued them within 30 months of initiation due to treatment-related toxicity. Participants will be centrally assessed to have ER+ and/or PgR+ (≥10% positive stained cells) status by immunohistochemistry assay. Prior use of adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibitors are allowed. Patients are eligible irrespective of HER2 status; for patients with HER2-positive disease adjuvant anti-HER2 treatment and chemotherapy must be completed prior to randomization. Stratification factors include: duration of AI therapy, HER2 status, prior chemotherapy, prior CDK4/6 inhibitors, geographic region, and menopausal status. Planned treatment duration is 5 years. Patients will be followed-up for 10 years from randomization. The primary endpoint is invasive breast cancer-free survival (IBCFS). Invasive disease-free survival is a key secondary endpoint, while other secondary endpoints include distant relapse-free survival (RFS), locoregional RFS, overall survival, breast-cancer specific survival, safety, patient reported outcomes and pharmacokinetics. Adherence to treatment is an exploratory endpoint. AMEERA-6 opened for recruitment in January 2022. Clinical trial information: NCT05128773.

Diversity, inclusion, and patient (pt)-centricity in the randomized, double-blind, phase III ASTEFANIA study of ado-trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) ± atezolizumab in pts with HER2-positive early breast cancer (EBC) with residual invasive disease after preoperative chemotherapy and anti-HER2 therapy

e12504

Background: Representative pt populations in clinical trials are essential to address healthcare disparities between different racial/ethnic groups, including treatment access and pt outcomes. Many clinical trials mainly include White pts, which may limit the generalizability of the results to the global population. A framework that was recently developed by Genentech for improving inclusion of underrepresented pt groups, as well as the CHIMES (NCT04377555) and EMPACTA (NCT04372186) studies, have all shown the feasibility of inclusive studies. ASTEFANIA (NCT04873362) is a pt-centric study, which includes pt/investigator collaboration to keep a pt focus and tactics to recruit a diverse population and enable participation of underserved communities. We report early recruitment data. Methods: Global/local initiatives and inclusive eligibility criteria remove barriers to enrollment of underserved pts and support treatment journeys. Eligible pts (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0/1; no prior immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment) are randomized 1:1 to T-DM1 (3.6 mg/kg) + atezolizumab (1200 mg)/placebo every 3 weeks for 14 cycles (stratification factors: clinical stage, hormone receptor status, preoperative anti-HER2 therapy, PD-L1 status). Primary endpoints: IDFS in intention-to-treat and PD-L1-positive populations. Secondary endpoints include overall survival, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and safety. To remove pt access barriers and ease pt burden, consent and PRO forms are available in multiple languages, mobile nursing/telemedicine is planned for pts in rural areas, a wellness app and culturally sensitive support videos are being created, and financial support is provided for study-related expenses and loss of earnings. Results: Recruitment began in May 2021. By Feb 9, 2022, 236 pts were randomized: 147 White (62%), 72 Asian (31%; Indian [n = 4], Korean [46], Chinese [16], other [6]), 10 Hispanic (4%; 5 of whom also identify as American Indian), 2 Black (1%), and 5 pts (2%) whose race/ethnicity was unreported/unknown. Of these, 27 (11%) have received financial support. Enrollment in Africa begins later this year. Mobile nursing/telemedicine is planned for 14 countries. Conclusions: As the first study of its kind in HER2-positive EBC, ASTEFANIA actively aims to be accessible and include pts from a range of races/ethnicities and socially underserved backgrounds. There is a growing need for more compassionate and inclusive research. To do this, forward planning of pt-centric studies is essential to reduce the burden on study resources. We hope that the tactics outlined here will allow us to achieve our goals of inclusive research. Clinical trial information: NCT04873362.

Telehealth in cancer care: during and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID‐19 pandemic has precipitated the rapid uptake of telehealth in cancer care and in other fields. Many of the changes made in routine clinical practice could be embedded beyond the duration of the pandemic. This is intended as a practical guide to cancer clinicians and others in establishing and improving the quality of consultations performed by telehealth.

Maternal breast cancer and communicating with children: A qualitative exploration of what resources mothers want and what health professionals provide

OBJECTIVE

To explore the communication and resource needs of mothers diagnosed with breast cancer treated with curative intent in communicating with their young children and to identify gaps in the resources and support provided to these women.

METHODS

Data were collected via semi-structured telephone interviews from 13 mothers who were diagnosed with breast cancer while parenting a young child (age 3-12 years), and 10 health professionals in Victoria, Australia. Data were analysed qualitatively using the Framework Method.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Mothers and health professionals prioritised communication with children about the cancer diagnosis; however, health professionals and mothers differed in their views of parents' communication needs both in terms of the nature of the support/information needed and the delivery of this support/information. Mothers wanted easily accessible resources that were both instructive and practical. Mothers also emphasised quality over quantity of support. Health professionals were mostly aware of mothers' needs, however, emphasised less instructive support and information. This study highlights the need for improved coordination and tailoring of psychosocial resources and supports for these parents and families communicating about a cancer diagnosis with their young children.

Study protocol for Enhancing Parenting In Cancer (EPIC): development and evaluation of a brief psycho-educational intervention to support parents with cancer who have young children

Background

Parents with cancer have high rates of psychological morbidity, and their children are at risk of poor psychosocial outcomes, particularly in the context of parental distress and poor family communication. Parents express concerns about the impact of cancer on their children and report a lack of professional guidance in meeting their children’s needs. Few parenting interventions exist and current interventions have extensive infrastructure demands making them unsuitable for routine use in most health settings. The aims of this study are to develop and establish the feasibility and acceptability of a novel and accessible psycho-educational intervention to improve parenting efficacy and decrease parental stress among adults with cancer who have children aged 3–12 years. The intervention will be suitable for parents with cancer who are receiving treatment with a view to longer term survival, irrespective of cancer diagnosis, and their respective co-parents.

Methods/design

This study comprises two phases using the UK Medical Research Council framework for developing complex interventions. In the development phase, intervention content will be iteratively developed and evaluated in consultation with consumers, and in the piloting phase, feasibility will be tested in a clinical sample of 20 parents with cancer and their co-parents using a single arm, pre-test post-test design. The intervention will comprise an audiovisual resource (DVD), a question prompt list, and a telephone call with a clinical psychologist. Questionnaires administered pre- and 1 month post-intervention will assess parental stress, psychological morbidity, quality of life, self-efficacy and perceptions of child adjustment, and family functioning. Intervention feasibility will be determined by mixed-method participant evaluation of perceived usefulness, benefits, and acceptability.

Discussion

This new initiative will translate existing descriptive evidence into an accessible intervention that supports parenting during cancer treatment and meets the information needs of parents with cancer and their families. This is an important advance: despite increasing recognition of the impact of parental cancer on the family, intervention research lags behind the descriptive literature. This low-intensity, accessible, and targeted intervention places minimal burden on infrastructure and promotes patient autonomy and self-management. If feasible, this style of intervention may be a template for future interventions with similar populations.