O’Neill, Anne

Abstract Background: Breast cancer (BC) treatment, including surgery, can impact not only short-term health outcomes but may also affect longer term health-related and psychosocial quality of life (QOL). We sought to describe the impact of BC surgery on QOL among breast cancer survivors followed in a large randomized trial. Methods: The ECOG-ACRIN protocol E5103 was a phase III trial that randomized BC patients (pts) who had undergone definitive BC surgery to receive adjuvant doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and paclitaxel with either bevacizumab (bev) or placebo. Telephone based surveys were administered to all pts enrolled between 01/Jan/10 and 08/Jun/10 as part of a Decision-Making/QOL component until 18 mos post enrollment. Functional/psychosocial QOL domains were assessed by the EQ-5D-3L and the FACT B+G. Fisher's exact test compared categorical and Wilcoxon rank sum test compared continuous variables between subgroups. Multivariable regression was used to evaluate factors in addition to primary surgery at enrollment (age, race, ER/PgR status, tumor size, nodal status) associated with overall FACT score at 18 mos. Results: Patient reported outcomes at 18 mos were available from 89.6% (465/519) pts. At enrollment, 57% (266/465) had a mastectomy; 43% (199/465) breast conserving surgery (BCS). Median age at enrollment was 52 (range: 25-76) years. There were no differences in QOL between bev vs placebo treatment arms (EQ-5D-3L Index Score p=0.65; FACT B+G Score p=0.23) at 18 mos so groups were combined. Using EQ-5D-3L, over half of the pts (58%) reported at least some pain/discomfort; 38% symptoms of anxiety/depression. A higher proportion of mastectomy pts reported problems with usual activities compared to BCS pts (Table). Compared to BCS pts, mastectomy pts had lower average EQ5D-3L scores 0.80 vs. 0.84, p=0.04 and FACT B+G scores 109 vs. 114, p=0.01, indicating worse QOL. In univariate analyses, non-white race (p=0.03), ER/PgR+ status (p=0.04) and mastectomy as primary surgery (p=0.01) were significantly associated with worse QOL (lower FACT B+G scores). In multivariable analyses, non-white race (p=0.02) and ER/PgR+ status (p=0.05) remained associated with worse QOL; mastectomy was borderline significant (p=0.06). Conclusions: Among women participating in a contemporary adjuvant BC chemotherapy trial, a substantial proportion of survivors experience symptoms that may be amenable to intervention, including referral to physical rehabilitation, especially among pts undergoing more extensive surgery. Attention to psychosocial health is also essential both during and after completion of active treatment to optimize QOL outcomes. N(%) reporting problems* 5 DimensionsBCSMastectomyOverallp**Mobility44(23)59(23)103(23)1.00Self-care11(6)23(9)34(7)0.21Usual activities49(25)90(34)139(30)0.04Pain/discomfort104(53)161(61)265(58)0.08Anxiety/depression70(36)105(40)175(38)0.44*3L: 3 possible answers: 1) no problems 2) some/moderate problems 3) problems; responses then collapsed into no problems vs. any problems' (=some/moderate problems and problems). ** Fisher's exact test p-value. Citation Format: Rosenberg SM, O'Neill A, Sepucha K, Miller KD, Dang CT, Northfelt DW, Sledge GW, Schneider BP, Partridge AH. The impact of breast cancer surgery on quality of life: Long term results from E5103 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS6-05.

PurposeBevacizumab improves progression-free survival but not overall survival in patients with metastatic breast cancer. E5103 tested the effect of bevacizumab in the adjuvant setting in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative disease.Patients and MethodsPatients were assigned 1:2:2 to receive placebo with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) followed by weekly paclitaxel (arm A), bevacizumab only during AC and paclitaxel (arm B), or bevacizumab during AC and paclitaxel followed by bevacizumab monotherapy for 10 cycles (arm C). Random assignment was stratified and bevacizumab dose adjusted for choice of AC schedule. Radiation and hormonal therapy were administered concurrently with bevacizumab in arm C. The primary end point was invasive disease–free survival (IDFS).ResultsFour thousand nine hundred ninety-four patients were enrolled. Median age was 52 years; 64% of patients were estrogen receptor positive, 27% were lymph node negative, and 78% received dose-dense AC. Chemotherapy-associated adverse events including myelosuppression and neuropathy were similar across all arms. Grade ≥ 3 hypertension was more common in bevacizumab-treated patients, but thrombosis, proteinuria, and hemorrhage were not. The cumulative incidence of clinical congestive heart failure at 15 months was 1.0%, 1.9%, and 3.0% in arms A, B, and C, respectively. Bevacizumab exposure was less than anticipated, with approximately 24% of patients in arm B and approximately 55% of patients in arm C discontinuing bevacizumab before completing planned therapy. Five-year IDFS was 77% (95% CI, 71% to 81%) in arm A, 76% (95% CI, 72% to 80%) in arm B, and 80% (95% CI, 77% to 83%) in arm C.ConclusionIncorporation of bevacizumab into sequential anthracycline- and taxane-containing adjuvant therapy does not improve IDFS or overall survival in patients with high-risk human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative breast cancer. Longer duration bevacizumab therapy is unlikely to be feasible given the high rate of early discontinuation.

Abstract Background: Late recurrence 5 or more years after diagnosis accounts for least one-half of all breast cancer recurrences, especially in hormone receptor (HR)+ disease. Biomarkers prognostic for late recurrence offer potential to more accurately identify subjects who might benefit from extended adjuvant endocrine therapy, or novel strategies to reduce late recurrence risk. Methods: CTCs were assessed at a single time point using the CELL SEARCH® assay in patients without clinical evidence of recurrence between 4.5-7.5 years after an initial diagnosis of HER2- stage II-III breast cancer and enrolled in trial E5103; all patients received surgery plus adjuvant chemotherapy and endocrine therapy for at least 5 years if HR+ disease. Patients were followed for evidence of clinical recurrence in accordance with standard care, and the association between CTCs and clinical recurrence was evaluated. Results: 546 patients without clinical evidence of recurrence enrolled between 2/25/13-7/29/16 and provided a blood sample that yielded a CTC result; 16 (2.9%) subsequently had a recurrence, of whom 15 had HR-positive disease. The median time between enrollment on E5103 and CTC assay was 5.2 years, and median/mean followup after the CTC assay was 1.6 years (range 0-3.9 years). The CTC assay was positive in 27 (4.9%) (median CTC count 1/7.5 ml blood, range 1-15). There were no significant differences in patient characteristics in the CTC+ vs. CTC- cases, including age < 50 years at initial diagnosis (52% vs. 44%), tumor size > 2 cm (63% vs. 59%), >/= 1 positive axillary node (81% vs. 72%), ER and/or PR+ (70% vs. 64%) or poor histologic grade (44% vs 55%). The recurrence rate per person-year in the CTC+ vs. CTC- groups was 19.6% vs. 1.1%, respectively (P<0.01). The median/mean time to recurrence after a positive CTC assay was 2.8 years. In multivariate analysis adjusted for clinical covariates (see table), a positive CTC assay was associated with an 18.3-fold increased risk of recurrence. Univariate and Multivariate Analysis - Association Between CTC Status and RecurrenceCovariateHazard Ratio for Recurrence - Univariate Analysis (95% CI)Hazard Ratio for Recurrence - Multivariate Analysis (95% CI)Age < 50 years3.4 (0.95-11.8)3.0 (0.8-10.9)Tumor size > 2 cm4.2 (0.98-19.2)2.9 (0.6-13.2)>/= 1+ node2.6 (0.59-11.5)0.7 (0.1-3.8)ER and/or PR+8.3 (1.1-63.5)7.7 (0.7-79.9)Poor grade0.43 (0.14-1.2)1.2 (0.4-3.8)CTC -pos vs CTC-neg20.9 (7.5-58.3)18.3 (5.7-58.2) Conclusions: A single positive CTC assay in patients without clinical evidence of recurrence 5 years after diagnosis of stage II-III HR+, HER2- breast cancer provides independent prognostic information for late recurrence, providing proof of concept for using liquid-based biomarkers for late relapse risk assessment. These findings provide a foundation for further evaluation of this new risk assessment paradigm using CTC and other blood-based assays in this setting, and designing clinical trials to tailor therapeutic risk interventions. Supported by Breast Cancer Research Foundation (J. Sparano; R. Comis) and Susan G. Komen Foundation (J. Sparano), and by the National Cancer Institute (CA180820, CA180794, CA180790, CA180791, CA180795, CA180802, CA180816, CA180821, CA189859). Citation Format: Sparano JA, O'Neill A, Alpaugh K, Wolff AC, Northfelt DW, Dang C, Sledge, Jr. GW, Miller KD. Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) five years after diagnosis are prognostic for late recurrence in operable stage II-III breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS6-03.

BACKGROUNDPublished studies have suggested that most patients with early stage breast cancer are willing, for modest survival benefits, to receive 6 months of adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5‐fluorouracil, an older regimen that is used infrequently today. We examined preferences regarding the survival benefit needed to justify 6 months of a contemporary chemotherapy regimen.METHODSThe Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Protocol 5103 was a phase 3 trial that randomized breast cancer patients to receive standard adjuvant doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and paclitaxel with either bevacizumab or placebo. Serial surveys to assess quality of life were administered to patients enrolled between January 1, 2010, and June 8, 2010. Survival benefit needed to justify 6 months of chemotherapy by patients was collected at the 18‐month assessment. A parallel survey was sent to physicians who had enrolled patients in the study.RESULTSOf 519 patients who had not withdrawn at a time point earlier than 18 months, 87.8% responded to this survey. A total of 175 physicians participated. We found considerable variation in patient preferences, particularly for modest survival benefits: for 2 months of benefit, 57% would consider 6 months of chemotherapy, whereas 96% of patients would consider 6 months of chemotherapy for 24 months. Race and education were associated with the choices. Physicians who responded were less likely to accept chemotherapy for modest benefit.CONCLUSIONSAmong patients who received contemporary adjuvant chemotherapy in a randomized controlled trial, we found substantial variation in preferences regarding benefits that justified undergoing chemotherapy. Differences between patients' and physicians' choices were also apparent. Eliciting preferences regarding risks and benefits of adjuvant chemotherapy is critical. Cancer 2017;123:2821–28. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Abstract Background: Data regarding patients (pts) and physicians' preferences for modern adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) are limited. Prior studies suggested that most pts with early stage breast cancer were willing to receive 6 months of adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) for modest survival benefits (e.g. most women would have accepted 3-6 months extension of life). Methods: E5103 was a phase III trial which randomized node positive or high risk node negative breast cancer pts to receive adjuvant CT (doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide and paclitaxel) with either placebo or bevacizumab. Telephone based surveys were administered to all pts enrolled on E5103 between 01/Jan/10 and 08/Jun/10, as part of a Decision-Making/Quality of Life component. Results presented here are part of the 18 months post-enrollment follow-up. Pts were asked to rate the survival benefit needed to justify 6 months of CT. A complementary survey was sent to all physicians who registered at least one pt on E5103. Results: 465 out of 519 eligible pts (90%) responded to this survey at 18 months. Main reasons for non response were: inability to reach the patient (6%) or patient refusal (2%). Median pts age was 51 (25-76); 42% of pts had at least a college degree. The majority had at least Stage II cancer. 179 (16%) physicians participated, among whom median age was 50 (35-70). The median years in practice was 17 (3-38); 78% of physicians worked on large size practices, 72% saw at least 5 new breast cancer pts/month, and 77% enroll between 1-4 pts on trials/month. We found considerable variation in pts preferences particularly for modest survival benefits: a substantial minority of pts (24%) would consider 6 months of CT definitely worthwhile for 1 month survival benefit, 18% would possibly consider it and 56% would not. The percentage considering CT definitely worthwhile increased with greater benefit, but did not reach 100%, even with 24 months survival benefit. About half of pts considered 6 months of CT definitely worthwhile for 9 months benefit, 70% for 12 months and 84% for 24 months. Physicians were less likely to accept CT for a small chance of benefit (34% of pts vs. 5% of physicians would definitely consider CT worthwhile for 2 months of benefit). For longer benefit, pts and physicians choices were similar (84% of pts vs. 92% of physicians would definitely consider CT worthwhile for 24 months benefit). Table Yes, definitely worthwhileYes, maybeNo, not worthwhileNo answerConsider 6 months of CT to live:PtsPhysiciansPtsPhysiciansPtsPhysiciansPts/Physicians*1 month longer24%3%18%15%56%80%2%2 months longer34%5%23%32%41%60%2%6 months longer44%32%35%54%19%12%2%9 months longer53%51%34%42%11%5%2%12 months longer70%75%23%22%5%1%2%24 months longer84%92%12%5%2%1%2%n Pts= 465; n Physicians= 179; * equal results in both groups Conclusions: This subgroup of pts who had undergone modern adjuvant CT in a large multicenter randomized controlled trial and these physicians who registered pts on the same trial had different cutoffs for acceptable levels of benefits and risks when considering adjuvant chemotherapy. It is important to engage pts in determining whether CT is or is not a "reasonable" option for treatment. Citation Format: Vaz Luis I, O'Neill A, Sepucha K, Miller KD, Baker E, Dang CT, Northfelt DW, Winer EP, Sledge GW, Schneider BP, Partridge A. Survival benefit needed to undergo chemotherapy: Patients and physicians preferences. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2015 Dec 8-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-11-02.