Back to Authors

Moore, Halle C. F.

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7472-9350

Mayo Clinic

Cleveland Clinic

Citations 32

Operational Metrics for the ELAINE 2 Study Combining a Traditional Approach With a Just-in-TIME Model
Blau, Sibel , Peguero, Julio A. , Moore, Halle C. F. , Anderson, Ian Churchill, Cherian, Mathew , Elkhanany, Ahmed , O’Sullivan, Ciara C. , Moreno‐Aspitia, Alvaro , Plourde, Paul V., Gleich, Lyon L., Riesen, Kendra, Ezzati, Ross, Degele, Meghan, Shulman, Megan, Stempf, Stephanie Dobson, Sachse, Laura, Iyer, Amrita A. , Cooney, Matthew M. , Peguero, Julio Antonio , Cherian, Mathew Amprayil , Elkhanany, Ahmed , O'Sullivan, Ciara Catherine , Moreno-Aspitia, Alvaro , Iyer, Amrita A , Damodaran, Senthil , Moore, Halle C F , Barve, Minal

JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics | June 23, 2023 | Volume: No volume available | Issue: 7 | Pages: No page available

10.1200/cci.22.00164 Get It

PURPOSEThere are numerous barriers to enrollment in oncology biomarker-driven studies.METHODSThe ELAINE 2 study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04432454 ) is an open-label phase 2 study of lasofoxifene combined with abemaciclib in patients with advanced or metastatic estrogen receptor–positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative breast cancer with an ESR1 mutation. ELAINE 2 opened clinical sites by using a Traditional approach, which activated a site before patient identification, and the Tempus TIME Trial network, which opened a site only after identifying an eligible patient. This manuscript presents the operational metrics comparing the Traditional and TIME Trial site data.RESULTSThe study enrolled patients over 34 weeks and 16 sites (six Traditional and 10 TIME Trial) participated. Duration for full clinical trial agreement execution for Traditional sites and TIME Trial sites averaged 200.5 (range, 142-257) and 7.6 days (range, 2-14), respectively. Institutional review board approval time for Traditional sites and TIME Trial sites was 27.5 (range, 12-71) and 3.0 days (range, 1-12), respectively. Duration from study activation to first consent was 33.3 (range, 18-58) and 8.8 days (range, 1-35) for Traditional and TIME Trial sites, respectively. The first patient on study was at a TIME Trial site 115 days before a Traditional site and the first seven patients enrolled were at TIME Trial sites. Traditional sites consented 23 and enrolled 16 patients, while TIME Trial sites consented 16 and enrolled 13. The trial enrolled 29 patients in 8.5 months with the anticipated enrollment duration being 12-18 months.CONCLUSIONThe TIME Trial network opened earlier and enrolled the first study patients. These results demonstrate that the Just-in-TIME model, along with a Traditional model, can improve enrollment in biomarker-driven studies.
Lasofoxifene (LAS) plus abemaciclib (Abema) for treating ESR1-mutated ER+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer (mBC) after progression on prior therapies: ELAINE 2 study update.
Anderson, Ian Churchill, O’Sullivan, Ciara C. , Plourde, Paul V., Portman, David, Damodaran, Senthil , Moore, Halle C. F. , Cherian, Mathew , Goetz, Matthew P.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | June 4, 2023 | Volume: 41 | Issue: 16_suppl | Pages: 1057-1057

10.1200/jco.2023.41.16_suppl.1057 Get It

1057 Background: Endocrine therapy (ET), particularly aromatase inhibitors (AIs), for estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer can lead to acquired ESR1 mutations ( mESR1) driving endocrine resistance and tumor progression. Treatments for mBC with mESR1 are limited, especially after progression on ET/cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i) combinations. In ELAINE 2, LAS, a next-generation ET (breast ER antagonist) plus Abema had a median progression-free survival (PFS) of ~13 mos, objective response rate (ORR) of 33%, and 24-wk clinical benefit rate (CBR) of 62% with a favorable safety profile in patients with resistant mESR1 mBC (Damodaran S, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40:16 suppl 1022). Here, we report ELAINE 2 data with longer patient follow up (Jan 31, 2023). Methods: In this open-label, phase 2, single-arm study, 29 women with mESR1, ER+/HER2- mBC that progressed on prior ET took oral LAS 5 mg/day and Abema 150 mg BID until disease progression/toxicity. The primary endpoint was safety/tolerability; secondary included PFS, CBR, and ORR. Data were summarized descriptively with no formal hypothesis testing. Results: Patients (median age 60 yrs) had received a median of 2 prior therapy lines for mBC; all but one had prior CDK4/6i exposure and 14 (48%) had prior chemotherapy for mBC. LAS/Abema was well tolerated with primarily grade 1/2 treatment-emergent adverse events (most commonly diarrhea, nausea, fatigue, and vomiting). One treatment withdrawal occurred due to grade 2 diarrhea. No deaths occurred. LAS dose was not reduced; Abema dose was reduced to 100 mg BID in 6 (21%) patients. Median PFS was 56.0 wks (~13 mos) and CBR 65.5% (95% CI, 47.3‒80.1). Median overall survival was not estimable. In 18 patients with measurable lesions, ORR was 55.6% (95% CI, 33.7‒75.4), with median time to response of 5.7 mos and median duration of response of 6.4 mos. Seventy-six percent, 56%, and 39% of patients were progression free at 6, 12, and 18 mos, respectively. Three (10%) patients had scan-identified venous thromboembolic events, with one symptomatic pulmonary embolism and one symptomatic deep vein thrombosis. In 26 patients with evaluable baseline and wk 4 ctDNA, ESR1 mutant allele fraction decreased from baseline to wk 4 in 81% of patients and was not detected in 54%. Conclusions: With longer ELAINE 2 follow up, LAS/Abema continues to be well tolerated with clinically meaningful efficacy in women with mESR1, ER+/HER2- mBC that had progressed on ET and CDK4/6is. Decreases in mESR1 ctDNA suggest effective target engagement of LAS. The PFS (median ~13 mos) and ORR (56%) with LAS/Abema are promising and a confirmatory phase 3 study (ELAINE 3) will begin in 2023. If ELAINE 2 results are confirmed, the combination of LAS and Abema would address a critical unmet need, providing a practice changing option for treating mESR1 breast cancer. Clinical trial information: NCT04432454 .
Adherence to Cancer Prevention Lifestyle Recommendations Before, During, and 2 Years After Treatment for High-risk Breast Cancer
Cannioto, Rikki , Davis, Evan W. , Mendicino, Lucas A., Zirpoli, Gary , Tang, Li , Nair, Nisha M. , Hobday, Timothy J. , Albain, Kathy S. , Budd, G. Thomas , Zirpoli, Gary , Attwood, Kristopher M. , Mendicino, Lucas , Hutson, Alan D. , Barlow, William E. , Hershman, Dawn L. , Unger, Joseph M. , Moore, Halle C. F. , Isaacs, Claudine , Hortobágyi, Gabriel N. , Gralow, Julie R. , Ambrosone, Christine B.

JAMA Network Open | May 4, 2023 | Volume: 6 | Issue: 5 | Pages: e2311673

10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.11673 Get It

ImportanceThe American Institute for Cancer Research and American Cancer Society regularly publish modifiable lifestyle recommendations for cancer prevention. Whether these recommendations have an impact on high-risk breast cancer survival remains unknown.ObjectiveTo investigate whether adherence to cancer prevention recommendations before, during, and 1 and 2 years after breast cancer treatment was associated with disease recurrence or mortality.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThe Diet, Exercise, Lifestyles, and Cancer Prognosis Study (DELCaP) was a prospective, observational cohort study designed to assess lifestyles before diagnosis, during treatment, and at 1 and 2 years after treatment completion, implemented ancillary to the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) S0221 trial, a multicenter trial that compared chemotherapy regimens in breast cancer. Participants were chemotherapy-naive patients with pathologic stage I to III high-risk breast cancer, defined as node-positive disease with hormone receptor–negative tumors larger than 1 cm or any tumor larger than 2 cm. Patients with poor performance status and comorbidities were excluded from S0221. The study was conducted from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2010; mean (SD) follow-up time for those not experiencing an event was 7.7 (2.1) years through December 31, 2018. The analyses reported herein were performed from March 2022 to January 2023.ExposureAn aggregated lifestyle index score comprising data from 4 time points and 7 lifestyles, including (1) physical activity, (2) body mass index, (3) fruit and vegetable consumption, (4) red and processed meat intake, (5) sugar-sweetened beverage consumption, (6) alcohol consumption, and (7) smoking. Higher scores indicated healthier lifestyle.Main Outcomes and MeasuresDisease recurrence and all-cause mortality.ResultsA total of 1340 women (mean [SD] age, 51.3 [9.9] years) completed the baseline questionnaire. Most patients were diagnosed with hormone-receptor positive breast cancer (873 [65.3%]) and completed some education beyond high school (954 [71.2%]). In time-dependent multivariable analyses, patients with highest vs lowest lifestyle index scores experienced a 37.0% reduction in disease recurrence (hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.48-0.82) and a 58.0% reduction in mortality (hazard ratio, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.30-0.59).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this observational study of patients with high-risk breast cancer, strongest collective adherence to cancer prevention lifestyle recommendations was associated with significant reductions in disease recurrence and mortality. Education and implementation strategies to help patients adhere to cancer prevention recommendations throughout the cancer care continuum may be warranted in breast cancer.
Abstract P5-05-02: Estrogen receptor 1 (ESR1) mutations in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) from patients with ER+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer (mBC) treated with lasofoxifene plus abemaciclib in the ELAINE 2 study
O’Sullivan, Ciara C. , Plourde, Paul V., Riordan, Gary, Sloane, Hillary S. , Carroll, Dominic, Portman, David, Damodaran, Senthil , Moore, Halle C. F. , Tripathy, Debu

Cancer Research | March 2, 2023 | Volume: 83 | Issue: 5_Supplement | Pages: P5-05-02-P5-05-02

10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs22-p5-05-02 Get It

Abstract Introduction: Use of long-term endocrine therapy (ET) for ER+ breast cancer often leads to acquired ESR1 mutations (mutESR1), causing endocrine resistance, tumor progression, and poor prognosis. An unmet clinical need exists for treating ER+ mBC patients with mutESR1, particularly after progression on CDK4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i). ELAINE 2 is an open-label, phase 2, multicenter trial evaluating safety and efficacy of lasofoxifene (LAS [selective estrogen receptor modulator]) plus abemaciclib (Abema [CDK4/6i], provided by Eli Lilly) in patients with ER+/HER2- and mutESR1 mBC who progressed after prior ET. Preliminary data with LAS plus Abema showed median progression-free survival of 55.7 wks, objective response rate of 50%, and 24-wk clinical benefit (CB) rate of 69%, with an acceptable safety and tolerability profile. Here, we report ESR1 ctDNA mutant allele frequency (MAF) and correlations of ESR1 MAF changes with CB. Methods: ELAINE 2 patients with detectable ctDNA mutESR1 at baseline (BL) were analyzed. Oral LAS 5 mg/day and Abema 150 mg BID were taken until disease progression, death, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal from the study. ctDNA was assessed by the Sysmex-Inostics SafeSeq assay—which detects mutESR1 at low allele fractions—at BL, every 4 wks, and end of treatment. MAF changes from BL to wk 4 were characterized as decreased (decrease in ESR1 MAF or none detected [ND]), increased (increase in MAF), or equivocal (in polyclonal patients [>1 mutESR1] with some MAF increasing and decreasing trends). Correlations of MAF change at 4 wks with CB at 24 wks were explored. Results: 29 patients (median of 2 prior metastatic therapies: 97% CDK4/6i, 79% fulvestrant, 48% chemotherapy) had BL mutESR1 of Y537S (66%), D538G (45%), Y537N (28%), and other less frequently detected mutations; 14 (48.3%) patients were polyclonal. 26 of 29 patients had evaluable BL and wk-4 ctDNA results: 21 patients had decreased MAF (81% [54% with ND]), 3 (12%) had increased, and 2 (8%) had equivocal ESR1 MAF changes (Table). CB at 24 wks was seen in 17 patients with a decrease, 2 with an increase, and 1 with equivocal MAF change. A sensitivity of 89.5% and specificity of 20% were calculated for predicting CB based on direction of ESR1 MAF change. The positive predictive value (PPV) for CB with decreased MAF was 81% and the negative predictive value (NPV) for an increased MAF was 33%. Of the 14 (54%) patients with ND ESR1 MAF, 13 had CB resulting in 87% sensitivity, 50% specificity, 93% PPV, and 33% NPV. Conclusion: In ELAINE 2, 81% of patients had decrease/cleared (ND) mutESR1 after 4 wks of LAS plus Abema, which correlated with clinical benefit. All mutESR1 detected appear targeted with this therapy. High sensitivity and favorable PPV were observed in patients with decreased MAF, and even more so in those with ND MAF; however, increased MAF was less specific and not as predictive of treatment failure. Our results indicate that ESR1 liquid biopsy evaluation may be an adequate non-invasive surrogate marker for monitoring patients on treatment. Further study in a larger population of women with endocrine-resistant mBC and acquired mutESR1 is warranted to explore this potential for monitoring treatment response or resistance to this novel LAS-Abema combination. Table. Change from baseline to week 4 in ESR1 MAF and clinical benefit at 24 weeks. CI, confidence interval; MAF, mutant allele fraction; ND, none detected; NPV, negative predictive value; PPV, positive predictive value. *Sensitivity and specificity analyses do not include equivocal results. Citation Format: Senthil Damodaran, Halle Moore, Ciara C. O’Sullivan, Paul V. Plourde, Gary Riordan, Hillary S. Sloane, Debu Tripathy, Dominic Carroll, David J Portman. Estrogen receptor 1 (ESR1) mutations in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) from patients with ER+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer (mBC) treated with lasofoxifene plus abemaciclib in the ELAINE 2 study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-05-02.
Abstract GS4-09: Pregnancy Outcome and Safety of Interrupting Therapy for women with endocrine responsIVE breast cancer: Primary Results from the POSITIVE Trial (IBCSG 48-14/BIG 8-13)
Partridge, Ann, Pagani, Olivia , Niman, Samuel M. , Ruggeri, Monica , Azim, Hatem A. , Saura, Cristina , Shimizu, Chikako , Sætersdal, Anna Barbro, Mailliez, Audrey , Gombos, Andrea , Kataoka, Akemi, Borštnar, Simona, Takei, Junko , Borrego, Manuel Ruíz, Bjelic‐Radisic, Vesna , Vilarino, Teresa Ferreiro, Ribi, Karin, Ruddy, Kathryn, Piccart, Martine , Korde, Larissa A. , Goldhirsch, Aron, Gelber, Richard D. , Saura, Cristina , Peccatori, Fedro A , Colleoni, Marco , Kroep, Judith R. , Warner, Ellen , Borges, Virginia F. , Amant, Frédéric , Rousset‐Jablonski, Christine , Lee, Jeong Eon , Walshe, Janice M. , Moore, Halle C. F. , Saunders, Christobel , Susnjar, Snezana , Cardoso, Fátima , Smith, Karen L. , Vilarino, Teresa Ferreiro, Ruddy, Kathryn J. , El-Abed, Sarra

Cancer Research | March 2, 2023 | Volume: 83 | Issue: 5_Supplement | Pages: GS4-09-GS4-09

10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs22-gs4-09 Get It

Abstract Background: Pregnancy after breast cancer (BC) is of substantial importance for many young women at diagnosis and during follow-up. BC treatment including standard endocrine therapy (ET) (5-10 years) may reduce ovarian reserve and the chances of subsequent successful pregnancy, given conception is contraindicated during ET. A temporary interruption of ET to attempt and carry a pregnancy in this population has never been prospectively studied. Methods: POSITIVE is a single-arm, prospective, investigator-initiated, international trial evaluating the safety and pregnancy outcomes of interrupting ET for young women with early-stage hormone-receptor-positive (HR+) BC who desire pregnancy. The primary objective is to assess the risk of BC relapse associated with ET interruption for ~2 years to achieve pregnancy. Women ≤42 years with stage I-III HR+ BC who received adjuvant ET (SERM alone, GnRH analogue plus SERM or AI) for 18 to 30 months and wished to interrupt ET to attempt pregnancy were eligible. The primary endpoint is breast cancer free interval (BCFI) defined as the time from enrollment to the first BC event (local, regional, distant recurrence or a new invasive contralateral BC). Planned sample size was 500 patients. Three interim analyses of BCFI were reviewed by the Data Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC) to assure a 95% chance of stopping the trial early if the annual BCFI event rate exceeded 4%; with primary analysis triggered after 1600 patient years of follow-up (pyfu) and no more than 46 BCFI events defined as the safety threshold. The DSMC recommended continuing the study following each interim analysis. We now report the primary results. Results: From 12/2014 to 12/2019, 518 women were enrolled. At enrollment, the median age of participants was 37 years (27-43 years); 75.0% were nulliparous, 93.4% had stage I/II disease, 66.3% node-negative. Median time from BC diagnosis to enrollment was 29 months (IQR: 25-32). Tamoxifen alone was the most prescribed ET (41.7%), followed by tamoxifen+ovarian function suppression (35.7%). 62.0% of participants had received neo/adjuvant chemotherapy. At a median follow-up of 41 months (1638 pyfu), 44 participants had experienced a BCFI event, not exceeding the pre-specified safety threshold of 46 events. The 3-year BCFI failure percent was 8.9% (95% CI: 6.3 to 11.6%), similar to the 9.2% (95% CI: 7.6 to 10.8%) calculated in the comparative external control cohort from the SOFT/TEXT trials (Sun et al, Breast 2020). Of 497 women followed for pregnancy status, 368 (74.0%) had at least one pregnancy, 317 (63.8%) had at least one live birth, with a total of 365 babies born. Based on competing risk analysis, 76.3% of patients resumed ET (half within 26 months), 8.3% had BCFI event/death before ET resumption, and 15.4% had not resumed ET yet. Conclusions: The POSITIVE trial demonstrates that for young women with early HR+ BC desiring pregnancy, temporary interruption of ET to attempt pregnancy does not confer a greater short-term risk of recurrence than that observed in a modern historical control group that did not interrupt ET. Most participants have had a live birth. Further follow-up is planned to confirm long-term safety. These results should be considered in counselling BC patients desiring future pregnancy. Citation Format: Ann Partridge, Olivia Pagani, Samuel M. Niman, Monica Ruggeri, Fedro Alessandro A. Peccatori, Hatem A. Azim, Marco Colleoni, Cristina Saura, Chikako Shimizu, Anna Saetersdal, Judith Kroep, Audrey Mailliez, Ellen Warner, Virginia F. Borges, Frédéric Amant, Andrea Gombos, Akemi Kataoka, Christine Rousset-Jablonski, Simona Borstnar, Junko Takei, Jeong Eon Lee, Janice Walshe, Manuel Ruiz Borrego, Halle Moore, Christobel Saunders, Vesna Bjelic-Radisic, Snezana Susnjar, Fatima Cardoso, Karen L. Smith, Teresa Ferreiro Vilarino, Karin Ribi, Kathryn Ruddy, Sarra El-Abed, Martine Piccart, Larissa A. Korde, Aron Goldhirsch, Richard D. Gelber. Pregnancy Outcome and Safety of Interrupting Therapy for women with endocrine responsIVE breast cancer: Primary Results from the POSITIVE Trial (IBCSG 48-14/BIG 8-13) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr GS4-09.
NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Survivorship, Version 1.2022
Sanft, Tara , Peterson, Lindsay L. , Rodriguez, Maria Alma , Ansbaugh, Shannon, Demark‐Wahnefried, Wendy , Dickinson, Kristin , Fairman, Nathan, Goldman, Mindy, Henry, N. Lynn , Hill‐Kayser, Christine E. , Khakpour, Nazanin , Koura, Divya, McDonough, Allison L. , Melisko, Michelle , Mooney, Kathi , Moryl, Natalie , Neuman, Heather B. , Patel, Chirayu G. , Porpiglia, Andrea S., Ruddy, Kathryn J. , Schapira, Lidia , Shockney, Lillie D. , Syrjala, Karen L. , Yang, Eric H. , Zee, Phyllis C. , McMillian, Nicole R., Freedman-Cass, Deborah A., Broderick, Gregory, Henry, N Lynn , Yang, Eric , Demark-Wahnefried, Wendy , Day, Andrew T. , Armenian, Saro H. , Baker, Kevin Scott , Ballinger, Tarah Jean , Broderick, Gregory A. , Friedman, Debra L. , Hudson, Melissa M. , Moore, Halle C. F. , O’Connor, Tracey L. , Overholser, Linda , Paskett, Electra D. , Pirl, William F. , Smith, Sophia K. , Tevaarwerk, Amyé

Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network | October 14, 2022 | Volume: 20 | Issue: 10 | Pages: 1080-1090

10.6004/jnccn.2022.0052 Get It

The NCCN Guidelines for Survivorship are intended to help healthcare professionals who work with survivors to ensure that the survivors’ complex and varied needs are addressed. The NCCN Guidelines provide screening, evaluation, and treatment recommendations for the consequences of adult-onset cancer and its treatment; recommendations to help promote physical activity, weight management, and immunizations in survivors; and a framework for care coordination. This article summarizes updates to the NCCN Guidelines pertaining to preventive health for cancer survivors, including recommendations about alcohol consumption and vaccinations.
Operational metrics for the ELAINE II study combining a traditional approach with a just-in-time model.
Blau, Sibel , Peguero, Julio A. , Anderson, Ian Churchill, O’Sullivan, Ciara C. , Moreno‐Aspitia, Alvaro , Plourde, Paul V., Gleich, Lyon L., Riesen, Kendra, Ezzati, Ross, Degele, Meghan, Shulman, Megan, Stempf, Stephanie Dobson, Cooney, Matthew M. , Moore, Halle C. F. , Barve, Minal , Cherian, Mathew , Elkhanany, Ahmed , Damodaran, Senthil

Journal of Clinical Oncology | June 6, 2022 | Volume: 40 | Issue: 16_suppl | Pages: 1504-1504

10.1200/jco.2022.40.16_suppl.1504 Get It

1504 Background: Trial recruitment that requires specific actionable mutations based on next-generation sequencing (NGS) is challenging. Barriers can include competing studies, physician study awareness, site proximity, mutation incidence, among other concerns. Methods: This study (NCT04432454) opened clinical sites using two methods during the COVID-19 pandemic. The “Traditional” approach included site selection, IRB and contract approval, and trial activation prior to a patient being identified for enrollment. The second approach used the Tempus “TIME” Trials network that would only open a site after identifying a patient with a mutation of interest and eligible for the trial. Results: The first patient enrolled was on 10/12/20 and the last patient was on 6/24/21. A total of 16 sites (6 Traditional and 10 TIME) participated. All Traditional sites, and none of the TIME sites, were affiliated with major academic institutions. Duration for full CTA execution for Traditional sites averaged 200.5 days (range 142 to 257) and for TIME sites averaged 7.6 days (range 2 to 14). IRB approval time average for Traditional sites was 27.5 days (range 12 to 71) and TIME sites was 3.0 days (range 1 to 12 days). Days from site selection to activation letter for Traditional sites was on average 250.0 days (range 187 to 281) and for TIME sites was 131.6 days (range 22 to 248). Time from study activation to first consent was 33.3 days (range 18 to 58) for Traditional sites and 8.8 days (range 1 to 35) for TIME sites. The first patient on-study was at a TIME site 115 days prior to a Traditional site and the first 7 patients enrolled were at TIME sites. Traditional sites consented 23 and enrolled 16 patients while the TIME sites consented 16 and enrolled 13. The trial enrolled all 29 patients in 8 months with the anticipated enrollment duration being 12 to 18 months. Conclusions: Although the Traditional and TIME programs had different operational models, they both contributed a significant number of patients and reduced the projected enrollment timeline. TIME sites enrolled the initial patients. These results demonstrate that the “Just-in-Time model,” in conjunction with a Traditional model, can reduce projected overall time to enrollment in biomarker-driven studies. [Table: see text]
Survivorship, Version 1.2021
Denlinger, Crystal S. , Sanft, Tara , Ansbaugh, Shannon M., Demark‐Wahnefried, Wendy , Dickinson, Kristin , Ganz, Patricia A. , Goldman, Mindy, Henry, N. Lynn , Hill‐Kayser, Christine E. , Khakpour, Nazanin , Koura, Divya, McDonough, Allison L. , Melisko, Michelle , Mooney, Kathi , Moryl, Natalie , Moslehi, Javid J. , O’Connor, Tracey L. , Overholser, Linda , Patel, Chirayu G. , Peterson, Lindsay L. , Rodriguez, Maria Alma , Ruddy, Kathryn J. , Schapira, Lidia , Shockney, Lillie D. , Syrjala, Karen L. , Zee, Phyllis C. , McMillian, Nicole R., Freedman-Cass, Deborah A., Broderick, Gregory, Henry, N Lynn , Demark-Wahnefried, Wendy , Tevaarwerk, Amyé , Armenian, Saro H. , Baker, Kevin Scott , Broderick, Gregory A. , Day, Andrew T. , Friedman, Debra L. , Hudson, Melissa M. , Moore, Halle C. F. , Paskett, Electra D. , Pirl, William F. , Smith, Sophia K.

Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network | November 24, 2021 | Volume: 19 | Issue: 6 | Pages: 676-685

10.6004/jnccn.2021.0028 Get It

The NCCN Guidelines for Survivorship are intended to help healthcare professionals working with cancer survivors to ensure that each survivor’s complex and varied needs are addressed. The Guidelines provide screening, evaluation, and treatment recommendations for consequences of adult-onset cancer and its treatment; recommendations to help promote healthful lifestyle behaviors, weight management, and immunizations in survivors; and a framework for care coordination. This article summarizes the recommendations regarding employment and return to work for cancer survivors that were added in the 2021 version of the NCCN Guidelines.
NCCN Guidelines Insights: Survivorship, Version 2.2020
Denlinger, Crystal S. , Sanft, Tara , Moslehi, Javid J. , Overholser, Linda , Demark‐Wahnefried, Wendy , Goldman, Mindy, Henry, N. Lynn , Hill‐Kayser, Christine E. , Khakpour, Nazanin , Koura, Divya, McDonough, Allison L. , Melisko, Michelle , Mooney, Kathi , Moryl, Natalie , O’Connor, Tracey L. , Patel, Chirayu G. , Peterson, Lindsay L. , Rodriguez, Maria Alma , Ruddy, Kathryn J. , Shockney, Lillie D. , Smith, Sophia K. , Syrjala, Karen L. , Zee, Phyllis C. , McMillian, Nicole R., Freedman-Cass, Deborah A., Broderick, Gregory, Henry, N Lynn , Demark-Wahnefried, Wendy , Armenian, Saro H. , Baker, Kevin Scott , Broderick, Gregory A. , Friedman, Debra L. , Hudson, Melissa M. , Moore, Halle C. F. , Paskett, Electra D. , Pirl, William F. , Tevaarwerk, Amyé

Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network | August 5, 2020 | Volume: 18 | Issue: 8 | Pages: 1016-1023

10.6004/jnccn.2020.0037 Get It

The NCCN Guidelines for Survivorship provide screening, evaluation, and treatment recommendations for consequences of adult-onset cancer and its treatment, with the goal of helping healthcare professionals who work with survivors, including those in primary care. The guidelines also provide recommendations to help clinicians promote physical activity, weight management, and proper immunizations in survivors and facilitate care coordination to ensure that all of the survivors’ needs are addressed. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize additions and changes made to the guidelines in 2020 regarding cardiovascular disease risk assessment and screening for subsequent primary malignancies.
Reducing time to treatment and patient costs with breast cancer: The impact of patient visits.
Sittenfeld, Sarah M. C. , Al‐Hilli, Zahraa , Abraham, Jame , Grobmyer, Stephen R. , Monteleone, Emily Elizabeth, Tullio, Katherine, Shah, Chirag , Greenberg, Zachary, Moore, Halle C. F.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | May 25, 2020 | Volume: 38 | Issue: 15_suppl | Pages: e19407-e19407

10.1200/jco.2020.38.15_suppl.e19407 Get It

e19407 Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of a continuous improvement process aimed at reducing time to treatment on minimizing the number of days spent to complete pre-treatment visits and the associated costs for patients with non-metastatic breast cancer. Methods: System-wide initiatives were implemented in 2015 to minimize time to treatment initiation (TTI), by incorporating lean process strategies and enhanced coordination. Patient and treatment information was obtained through an IRB-approved registry for the years 2015 and 2018. Average number of days spent to complete visits, TTI, and associated patient costs including driving expenses, parking, food, childcare, and lost wages were calculated and compared between the years 2015 and 2018. Results: In 2015, the median TTI was 43.5 days and the average number of separate days spent to attend multidisciplinary visits prior to first treatment was 1.86. These were reduced to 29 days and 1.52 visits, respectively, in 2018 (p < 0.0001 for both). When evaluating treatment visits by surgical procedure, the average number of visits was reduced regardless of surgical procedure. The average number of visits was highest for patients undergoing mastectomy with reconstruction (2.34 in 2015, reduced to 1.65 in 2018, p < 0.0001). A single visit to complete treatment planning was associated with patient costs of $249 as compared with multiple trips costing $491 for 2 visits and up to $1,226 for 5 visits. Conclusions: In breast cancer patients, implementing a continuous improvement process to reduce time to treatment was associated with fewer visits required prior to treatment initiation, resulting in lower patient costs.