Jimenez, Rachel

Importance Limited granular data exist on breast cancer in transgender, nonbinary, and/or gender-diverse (TGD) individuals. Objective To describe patient demographic and tumor clinicopathological variables, clinically relevant risk factors, method of breast cancer detection, treatment characteristics, and locoregional outcomes and to estimate a 5-year breast cancer–specific survival (BCSS). Design, Setting, and Participants This cohort study obtained data on patients treated from 1990 to 2023 from 22 US academic medical centers using institutional databases, electronic medical records, and tumor registries. Included participants were TGD individuals 18 years or older with stage 0 to IV breast cancer. A comparative breast cancer cohort was selected from the 2016 to 2021 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER) breast cancer dataset. Data were analyzed from January to October 2025. Exposure Breast cancer. Main Outcomes and Measures Estimated 5-year BCSS and locoregional recurrence rates. Wilcoxon rank sum and χ 2 tests were used to compare continuous and categorical variables. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate 5-year BCSS. Results A total of 112 TGD persons (median [IQR] age at diagnosis, 42.5 [36.5-51.0] years; 104 individuals [92.9%] were assigned female at birth) with breast cancer and 1 with bilateral disease were included in the analysis. Forty-three patients (38.4%) used gender-affirming hormone therapy before diagnosis. Among the entire cohort, 58 patients (51.8%) detected their own breast cancer, 68 (60.7%) had a familial breast cancer history, and 16 (14.3%) had a pathogenic germline variant. Tumors were predominantly hormone receptor positive (96 [85.7%]) and early stage (29 [25.7%] ductal carcinoma in situ [DCIS]; 51 [45.1%] stage I). The TGD cohort, compared with patients with breast cancer in the SEER dataset (N = 480 915), was younger (median [IQR] age, 42.5 [36.5-51.0] years vs 62.0 [52.0-72.0] years), had a higher proportion of persons assigned male at birth (8 [7.1%] vs 3522 [0.7%]), more often had progesterone receptor–positive disease (89 [79.5%] vs 335 491 [69.8%]), and presented with earlier-stage disease (eg, DCIS: 29 [25.9%] vs 79 604 [16.6%]). With a median (IQR) follow-up time for the TGD cohort of 38 (24-74) months, 5-year BCSS was favorable at 96.2% (95% CI, 85.3%-99.0%). Conclusions and Relevance This cohort study of TGD patients with breast cancer found that this population was young and often detected their own tumors via self-examination, suggesting opportunities to improve early detection through screening for individuals at elevated risk. Although short-term BCSS appeared favorable, prospective research is essential to define evidence-based guidelines and elucidate long-term outcomes.

98 Background: Prior authorization (PA) purports to control costs and ensure adherence to evidence-based guidelines but negatively impacts cancer care. Radiation oncology (RO) represents a minority of overall cancer spending yet bears a disproportionately high PA burden. Limited research exists on the effects of PA on patient outcomes and administrative workload within RO clinics. Methods: From 9/2024 to 10/2024, an online survey was open to U.S. members of the American Society for Radiation Oncology assessing experiences with PA including disposition (approval/denial/appeal including peer-to-peer [P2P] review) and perceived impact on patient care and administrative workload. Outcomes included treatment delays, changes from recommended treatment, and patient event including hospitalization, ED visits, permanent disability, or death. Descriptive statistics evaluated responses. Results: Of 736 responding radiation oncologists (16% response rate), 83% reported a rise in PA over the past three years, with 58% noting the burden has increased greatly. In the past year, 50% reported that more than half of their cases required PA, with a median approval rate of 75% and median overturn rate of 82% for denials. For more than half of their cases, nearly half of physicians (43%) noted that P2P was a futile effort to overturn PA denials due to insurance policies. Most (75%) reported that PA resulted in their practice needing to reallocate staff; 91% reported worsening burnout due to PA. P2P reviews were particularly burdensome, averaging 1.65 hours per week. A third (30%) reported that PA requirements had caused serious complications for their patients, including 7% who reported PA had contributed to patient death. Almost all (91%) reported PA-related treatment delays for some of their patients, with 58% indicating average delays of ≥5 days. Most (81%) reported that at times they had to use radiation techniques they considered less optimal due to PA, including 58% who were forced to deviate from national guidelines. The most common reasons for not appealing a PA denial were anticipated delays (73%), perceived futility based on prior PA experiences (62%), and administrative burden (45%). Conclusions: The administrative and clinical burdens associated with PA have significant implications for patient care, physician well-being, and healthcare resource allocation in RO. Treatment delays, compromised therapies, and adverse patient outcomes are commonly reported and underscore the need for PA reform to improve patient outcomes, reduce physician burnout, and improve efficiency.

Particle therapy has received increasing attention in the treatment of breast cancer due to its unique physical properties that may enhance patient quality of life and reduce the late effects of therapy. In this review, we will examine the rationale for the use of proton and carbon therapy in the treatment of breast cancer and highlight their potential for sparing normal tissue injury. We will discuss the early dosimetric and clinical studies that have been pursued to date in this domain before focusing on the remaining open questions limiting the widespread adoption of particle therapy.