Tevaarwerk, Amyé

The NCCN Guidelines for Survivorship include recommendations for screening, evaluation, and treatment of psychosocial and physical problems resulting from adult-onset cancer and its treatment. They also include recommendations to promote healthy behaviors and immunizations in survivors and provide a framework for care coordination. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel’s current recommendations regarding sexual health and fertility.

Abstract Purpose: Incorporating patient-reported outcomes (PROs) into survivorship care may improve the comprehensiveness of follow-up. The objective was to engage stakeholders to develop a PRO assessment of survivors’ symptoms and concerns for use during breast cancer follow-up. Methods: We convened patient and oncologist stakeholder advisory groups to define a low-risk survivor cohort; develop an initial PRO assessment including survivorship domains of importance, measurement instruments, and clinically significant thresholds; and revise the assessment based on feedback from community focus groups and two rounds of iterative pilot testing with survivors. Results: The most commonly cited “low-risk” criteria was cancer stage. Stakeholders identified key domains and measurement instruments, including recurrence symptoms, treatment side-effects, adherence, mental health, and sexual health. Ninety-four survivors completed the PRO assessment in the initial pilot test (median age 62 years, median 2 years from diagnosis). Most (89/93) reported questions were easy to understand. The level of missingness was low. The most common threshold-level symptoms/concerns were hot flashes (46%), fatigue (35%), back pain (31%), joint pain (31%), and anxiety (30%). The PRO assessment was revised to clarify symptom causality and desire to discuss with a provider. In a follow-up pilot study with twenty survivors, the most common symptoms were chest/breast discomfort (50%) and anxiety (25%). Conclusions: We leveraged stakeholder input to develop a comprehensive PRO assessment to use to assess breast cancer survivors’ well-being. Our PRO assessment is acceptable to survivors. Future research will focus on the integration of the PRO assessment into clinical care.

11128 Background: To improve documentation quality in Medical Onc outpatient clinics, a standardized template was created. In this template we embedded: 1. An Epic SmartForm to collect structured data (SD) about patient, disease, and response status at each encounter. Minimal Common Oncology Data Elements (mCODE) compatible SD elements were used to enhance interoperability. 2. Several clinically impactful quality metrics (QM) selected based on the Quality Onc Practice Initiative (QOPI) guidelines. In this analysis, we aim to assess how template use impacted documentation quality. Methods: 113,376 outpatient encounters occurred between 01/2018 – 12/2022 (41 providers: 35 physicians, 6 APPs). The template go live was 3/19/2019. 2,520 randomly selected encounters were manually reviewed. Distinct documentation of 8 items served as QMs (Table). Of note, using the template was voluntary and data entry in the embedded form is not mandated. Documentation of each QM was compared between notes authored with/without template. For each note, a completeness score was calculated based on total number of QMs present/note. Categorical comparisons were made using chi-squared or Fisher’s exact tests. Numerical/continuous values were summarized using means and standard deviations. A template “user” was defined as a provider using the template in >10% of encounters after go live. This QI project was exempted by IRB. Results: 154/2520 encounters were excluded after manual review (visits not for solid tumor malignancy). The template was used in 38.7% (917/2366) of the reviewed notes. Cancer diagnosis was documented in >99.8% of notes regardless of template use. Template use was associated with increased documentation of 7 QMs (Table). Documentation overall completeness improved from 62% to 90% with a very large effect size (Table). Template use positively correlated with female gender and fewer years since last training (p<0.001). In the subgroup of notes written by “users” (21 physicians, 4 APPs), individual QM and overall completeness scores improved with template use (p<0.001). Conclusions: Template use profoundly improved QM documentation (statistically significant and clinically meaningful) by Onc clinic providers. This strategy enhances mCODE compatible structured data collection and semantic interoperability between systems, strengthening the available real-world data (RWD) in EHR. [Table: see text]

11145 Background: T-DXd is increasingly used in mBC. A T-DXd toxicity of special interest is interstitial lung disease/pneumonitis (ILD), occurring in 10-15% of pts in the DESTINY-Breast trials, and with potential lower incidence/severity in earlier line settings [Krop et al, ASCO 2023]. However, in routine practice, T-DXd may be used in pts with more heavily pre-treated mBC and previously exposed to other antibody-drug conjugates (ADC) [Premji et al SABCS 2023]. We evaluated the incidence/severity of T-DXd related ILD in mBC at Mayo Clinic. Methods: We retrospectively identified pts with mBC who received ≥1 dose of T-DXd at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, between July 2022-December 2023. Demographic, mBC, and pulmonary clinical variables were abstracted from the clinical records. Data was summarized using descriptive statistics. Diagnosis of ILD was determined by treating clinicians, and severity to CTCAE V5 based on clinical documentation. Results: 77 pts with mBC received T-DXd during the study period. All were female, the majority (70, 91%) were Caucasian, and median age was 58. 53 (69%) had HER2-low mBC (37 HR+, 16 HR-) and 24 (31%) had HER2+ mBC (17 HR+, 7 HR-). 31 (40%) were active or former smokers. 11 (14%) had pulmonary comorbidities, including 6 (7.8%) with asthma, 2 (2.6%) with prior pneumonitis, and 3 (3.9%) with other pulmonary comorbidities. They had previously received a median of 1 line of endocrine therapy, and 4 lines of chemotherapy, with 20 (26%) having received another ADC. 17 (22%) developed any grade ILD [G1: 3 (4%), G2: 7 (9%), G3: 2 (3%), G4: 1 (1%), G5: 4 (5%)]. Among pts with ILD of any grade, 13 (76.5%) presented with at least 1 symptom (cough/SOB). The median number of T-DXd cycles prior to onset of any grade ILD was 6 (range 2-13), or 18 (range 6-39) weeks. 5 (29%) pts with any grade ILD received a prior ADC. Of pts with ≥G3 ILD (n=7), all were Caucasian, 2 (30%) were prior smokers, none had prior lung disease, and had received a median of 5 prior lines of chemo, with 4 (57%) having received a prior ADC. All grade ≥2 ILDs were treated with systemic steroids, and 1 also received IVIG. CT chest was used for diagnosis of all ILD. 7 pts (41%) required hospitalization, all of whom had bronchoscopy, with 5 (29%) requiring intubation. All pts with G1 ILD (3, 18%) restarted T-DXd without ILD recurrence. Conclusions: In this case series,22% of ps treated with T-DXd experienced ILD (5% G5), higher than the rate observed in the pivotal DESTINY-Breast trials, possibly due to real-world use of T-DXd in more heavily pre-treated pts and in pts with pulmonary comorbidities.

AbstractIntroductionStructured data capture requires defined languages such as minimal Common Oncology Data Elements (mCODE). This pilot assessed the feasibility of capturing 5 mCODE categories (stage, disease status, performance status (PS), intent of therapy and intent to change therapy).MethodsA tool (SmartPhrase) using existing and custom structured data elements was Built to capture 4 data categories (disease status, PS, intent of therapy and intent to change therapy) typically documented as free‐text within notes. Existing functionality for stage was supported by the Build. Participant survey data, presence of data (per encounter), and time in chart were collected prior to go‐live and repeat timepoints. The anticipated outcome was capture of >50% sustained over time without undue burden.ResultsPre‐intervention (5‐weeks before go‐live), participants had 1390 encounters (1207 patients). The median percent capture across all participants was 32% for stage; no structured data was available for other categories pre‐intervention. During a 6‐month pilot with 14 participants across three sites, 4995 encounters (3071 patients) occurred. The median percent capture across all participants and all post‐intervention months increased to 64% for stage and 81%–82% for the other data categories post‐intervention. No increase in participant time in chart was noted. Participants reported that data were meaningful to capture.ConclusionsStructured data can be captured (1) in real‐time, (2) sustained over time without (3) undue provider burden using note‐based tools. Our system is expanding the pilot, with integration of these data into clinical decision support, practice dashboards and potential for clinical trial matching.

AbstractBackgroundPatient‐reported outcomes (PROs) are a better tool for evaluating the experiences of patients who have symptomatic, treatment‐associated adverse events (AEs) compared with clinician‐rated AEs. The authors present PROs assessing health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) and treatment‐related neurotoxicity for adjuvant capecitabine versus platinum on the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group‐American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ECOG‐ACRIN) EA1131 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02445391).MethodsParticipants completed the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Breast Cancer Symptom Index (NFBSI‐16) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Gynecologic Oncology Group neurotoxicity subscale (platinum arm only) at baseline, cycle 3 day 1 (C3D1), 6 months, and 15 months. Because of early termination, power was insufficient to test the hypothesis that HRQoL, as assessed by the NFBSI‐16 treatment side‐effect (TSE) subscale, would be better at 6 and 15 months in the capecitabine arm; all analyses were exploratory. Means were compared by using t‐tests or the Wilcoxon rank‐sum test, and proportions were compared by using the χ2 test.ResultsTwo hundred ninety‐six of 330 eligible patients provided PROs. The mean NFBSI‐16 TSE subscale score was lower for the platinum arm at baseline (p = .02; absolute difference, 0.6 points) and for the capecitabine arm at C3D1 (p = .04; absolute difference, 0.5 points), but it did not differ at other times. The mean change in TSE subscale scores differed between the arms from baseline to C3D1 (platinum arm, 0.15; capecitabine arm, −0.72; p = .03), but not from baseline to later time points. The mean decline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Gynecologic Oncology Group neurotoxicity subscale scores exceeded the minimal meaningful change (1.38 points) from baseline to each subsequent time point (all p < .05).ConclusionsDespite the similar frequency of clinician‐rated AEs, PROs identified greater on‐treatment symptom burden with capecitabine and complemented clinician‐rated AEs by characterizing patients’ experiences during chemotherapy.

PURPOSE Multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTBs) support high-quality cancer care. Little is known about the impact of information technology (IT) tools on the operational and technical aspects of MTBs. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network EHR Oncology Advisory Group formed a workgroup to investigate the impact of IT tools such as EHRs and virtual conferencing on MTBs. METHODS The workgroup created a cross-sectional survey for oncology clinicians (eg, pathology, medical, surgical, radiation, etc) participating in MTBs at 31 National Comprehensive Cancer Network member institutions. A standard invitation e-mail was shared with each EHR Advisory Group Member with a hyperlink to the survey, and each member distributed the survey to MTB participants at their institution or identified the appropriate person at their institution to do so. The survey was open from February 26, 2022, to April 26, 2022. Descriptive statistics were applied in the analysis of responses, and a qualitative thematic analysis of open-ended responses was completed. RESULTS Individuals from 27 institutions participated. Almost all respondents (99%, n = 764 of 767) indicated that their MTBs had participants attending virtually. Most indicated increased attendance (69%, n = 514 of 741) after virtualization with the same or improved quality of discussion (75%, n = 557 of 741) compared with in-person MTBs. Several gaps between the current and ideal state emerged regarding EHR integration: 57% (n = 433 of 758) of respondents noted the importance of adding patients for MTB presentation via the EHR, but only 40% (n = 302 of 747) reported being able to do so most of the time. Similarly, 87% (n = 661 of 760) indicated the importance of documenting recommendations in the EHR, but only 53% (n = 394 of 746) reported this occurring routinely. CONCLUSION Major gaps include the lack of EHR integration for MTBs. Clinical workflows and EHR functionalities could be improved to further optimize EHRs for MTB management and documentation.

This editorial reviews the many opportunities and obstacles associated with ePRO integration in oncology

Abstract Breast cancer survivors may experience significant after effects from diagnoses of breast cancer and cancer directed therapies. This review synthesizes the evidence about optimal management of the sequelae of a diagnosis of breast cancer. It describes the side effects of chemotherapy and endocrine therapy and evidence based strategies for management of such effects, with particular attention to effects of therapies with curative intent. It includes strategies to promote health and wellness among breast cancer survivors, along with data to support the use of integrative oncology strategies. In addition, this review examines models of survivorship care and ways in which digital tools may facilitate communication between clinicians and patients. The strategies outlined in this review are paramount to supporting breast cancer survivors’ quality of life.

The NCCN Guidelines for Survivorship are intended to help healthcare professionals address the complex and varied needs of cancer survivors. The NCCN Guidelines provide screening, evaluation, and treatment recommendations for psychosocial and physical problems resulting from adult-onset cancer and its treatment; recommendations to help promote healthy behaviors and immunizations in survivors; and a framework for care coordination. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize recent guideline updates and panel discussions pertaining to sleep disorders, fatigue, and cognitive function in cancer survivors.