Racz, Jennifer M.

PURPOSE The feasibility of Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score testing on diagnostic core needle biopsy (CNB) samples has been demonstrated through analysis of a large central laboratory experience. However, concordance with paired samples from the same primary breast tumor has not been comprehensively evaluated. The primary objective of this study was to determine the degree of concordance of Recurrence Score (RS) results between paired CNB and surgical excision (SE) specimens from the same untreated primary breast tumor of patients with early-stage, hormone receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative invasive breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients with a clinical RS result on either a CNB or SE specimen were included. Lin concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) with 95% CIs was estimated to assess agreement of continuous RS results between paired samples. Cohen Kappa with 95% CIs was used to evaluate categorical RS result concordance. RESULTS A total of 134 patients were identified with paired CNB and SE specimens. The median age was 62 years (range, 33-99; 23 patients [17%] were age ≤50 years v 111 [83%] age >50 years). The mean RS results were 15.6 (range, 0-56) for CNB and 16.6 (range, 0-59) for SE ( P = .003), with no statistically significant differences in RS categories. Agreement between continuous RS results from paired samples was strong, with a Lin CCC of 0.86 (95% CI, 0.80 to 0.90). The overall percent agreement in RS categories was 91.8% (95% CI, 87.1 to 96.4). Categorical agreement was further supported by a Cohen Kappa statistic of 0.64 (95% CI, 0.44 to 0.83), indicating substantial agreement between CNB and SE specimens. CONCLUSION The results of this study demonstrate high concordance of RS results between paired samples, which supports the use of CNB for Oncotype DX testing.

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.

46 Background: Tumor boards (TBs) are considered a key component for ensuring high quality cancer care. However, little is known about TB operational aspects that impact effectiveness. We aimed to understand how TBs leverage Electronic Health Record (EHR) functionalities and how pandemic-driven transitions from in-person TBs to virtual TBs impacted TB quality and effectiveness. Methods: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Oncology EHR Advisory Group formed a Workgroup to assess the current state of TBs, obtain providers’ views on ideal TB state, and develop recommendations for improving TB quality and effectiveness. The Workgroup surveyed providers in various specialties at 31 NCCN Member Institutions in March 2022. Results: 846 providers from 27 institutions responded to the survey (n = 76 respondents were excluded from analysis because they reported not participating in TBs). Almost all (n = 764/767, 99%) indicated that one or more participants always or frequently attended TB meetings virtually. When comparing (newly established) virtual to (pre-pandemic) in-person TBs, 69% indicated increased attendance at virtual TBs. 65% reported no change in case volume, and 56% reported unchanged discussion quality while 19% reported increased discussion quality when comparing virtual to in-person TB meetings. In regards to EHR integration, several gaps between current and ideal state were noted. For instance, 40% always or frequently added patients to the TB roster via the EHR, but 57% reported this functionality to be very important or important for TBs. Additionally, 53% always or frequently document TB recommendations within the EHR, while 87% indicated EHR documentation of recommendations as very important or important. Respondents reported that barriers to documentation include resource constraints, concerns with patient access to documentation, legal and liability concerns, and poor EHR functionality. Conclusions: Overall, the majority of responding providers reported virtual TBs to be at least similar in quality to in-person TB meetings. A major gap identified by this study is the lack of documentation of TB recommendations in the EHR. Workflows and EHR functionalities could be improved to fully optimize the EHR for TB management and documentation.[Table: see text]

Some melanomas develop a striking avidity for lymphatic spread. In spite of multiple recurrences, patients can remain years without visceral metastasis. There is clearly a biologic reason for this lymphotrophic pattern of growth and dissemination, which we have yet to uncover. In‐transit metastases have widely diverse clinical presentations and can be a stubborn disease to cure. As a result, a host of treatments exist that should be tailored to the individual patient.

BackgroundPatients with regionally advanced melanoma are at high risk of distant failure and unlikely to be cured by surgery alone. Neoadjuvant therapy may provide benefit in these patients.ObjectivesTo evaluate our experience with neoadjuvant systemic therapy in high‐risk stage III patients.MethodsRetrospective review of patients with advanced stage III disease who received neoadjuvant therapy between August 2009 and August 2016 at Mayo Clinic Rochester.ResultsTwenty‐three cases met our inclusion criteria, 16 with resectable disease and 7 with unresectable disease. No patients with resectable disease and one patient with borderline resectable disease progressed regionally, prohibiting surgical resection. Five of seven patients with unresectable disease were down‐staged to a resectable state. Six of twenty‐three (26%) had a CR and five are alive at last follow‐up. Fifteen of twenty three patients (65%) progressed with a median progression free survival of 11 months; however, the 5 year overall survival estimate was 84%.ConclusionsNeoadjuvant systemic therapy is a reasonable approach for patients with advanced but resectable/borderline resectable disease and the risk of losing regional control is low. Our data also suggest some patients with unresectable disease will be converted to resectable and a complete clinical response to treatment can be obtained in approximately one quater of patients.