Smith, Mary Lou

12094 Background: The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy patient-reported outcomes (PRO) item GP5 (“I am bothered by side effects of treatment”) estimates treatment tolerability. We aimed to extend our previous finding that GP5 predicts early aromatase inhibitor (AI) discontinuation (E1Z03, 96% White) in the racially diverse E1Z11 trial cohort. Methods: E1Z11 was coordinated by the ECOG-ACRIN NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) Research Base. Postmenopausal women initiating anastrozole per clinical care for ER+ stage I-III breast cancer with a pain score 0-3/10 and no rheumatologic comorbidities were eligible. Accrual of a racially diverse cohort of 1,000 women, including Black and Asian women, was planned. GP5 was administered prior to initiating anastrozole (trial baseline) and at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. GP5 was scored on a 5-point Likert scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (very much) and dichotomized as no/little treatment bother (0/1) or moderate/high treatment bother (2-4), consistent with previous analyses. A univariate Cox proportional hazards model estimated baseline GP5’s association with treatment duration via hazard ratio (HR). Early treatment discontinuation status was defined as treatment duration < 12 months with discontinuation not attributed to disease progression or death (n = 4), consistent with previous analyses. Results: 1,046 women enrolled from 6/2013-10/2018 (640 White, 201 Black, 205 Asian), including 590 (56%) from NCORP Community or Minority/Underserved Sites. Approximately 10% (100/987 with GP5 data) reported moderate/high treatment bother prior to initiating anastrozole. Anastrozole discontinuation rate at 1-year was 26.2% overall; it was lower among women with no/little treatment bother (25.7%, GP5 = 0-1) compared to moderate/high treatment bother prior to initiating anastrozole (34.7%, GP5 = 2-4; HR = 1.50, 95% confidence interval [CI]:1.04-2.15, p = 0.027). Subgroup analyses by racial cohort showed a similar predictive effect of GP5 in the White (n = 606, HR = 1.76, 95% CI: 1.12-2.77, p = 0.014) and Black (n = 184, HR = 1.85, 95% CI: 0.92-3.71, p = 0.079) cohorts, but not in the Asian cohort (n = 197, HR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.10-1.62, p = 0.20). Conclusions: Moderate/high treatment bother prior to starting anastrozole was observed in 10% of patients and associated with a higher risk of early discontinuation, except in Asian patients. Our findings support the presence of a treatment tolerability threshold which can be compromised by pre-treatment burden. Treatment tolerability may also be influenced by cultural and genetic factors, which will be explored in further analysis of genetic and PRO data. Clinical trial information: NCT01824836.

The NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer include up-to-date guidelines for clinical management of patients with carcinoma in situ, invasive breast cancer, Paget disease, phyllodes tumor, inflammatory breast cancer, male breast cancer, and breast cancer during pregnancy. These guidelines are developed by a multidisciplinary panel of representatives from NCCN Member Institutions with breast cancer–focused expertise in the fields of medical oncology, surgical oncology, radiation oncology, pathology, reconstructive surgery, and patient advocacy. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on the most recent updates to recommendations for adjuvant systemic therapy in patients with nonmetastatic, early-stage, hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative breast cancer.

Background: The Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events is an item library designed for eliciting patient-reported adverse events in oncology. For each adverse event, up to three individual items are scored for frequency, severity, and interference with daily activities. To align the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events with other standardized tools for adverse event assessment including the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, an algorithm for mapping individual items for any given adverse event to a single composite numerical grade was developed and tested. Methods: A five-step process was used: (1) All 179 possible Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events score combinations were presented to 20 clinical investigators to subjectively map combinations to single numerical grades ranging from 0 to 3. (2) Combinations with <75% agreement were presented to investigator committees at a National Clinical Trials Network cooperative group meeting to gain majority consensus via anonymous voting. (3) The resulting algorithm was refined via graphical and tabular approaches to assure directional consistency. (4) Validity, reliability, and sensitivity were assessed in a national study dataset. (5) Accuracy for delineating adverse events between study arms was measured in two Phase III clinical trials (NCT02066181 and NCT01522443). Results: In Step 1, 12/179 score combinations had <75% initial agreement. In Step 2, majority consensus was reached for all combinations. In Step 3, five grades were adjusted to assure directional consistency. In Steps 4 and 5, composite grades performed well and comparably to individual item scores on validity, reliability, sensitivity, and between-arm delineation. Conclusion: A composite grading algorithm has been developed and yields single numerical grades for adverse events assessed via the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, and can be useful in analyses and reporting.

PURPOSE To update the ASCO guideline on the recommended prevention and treatment approaches in the management of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) in adult cancer survivors. METHODS An Expert Panel conducted targeted systematic literature reviews to identify new studies. RESULTS The search strategy identified 257 new references, which led to a full-text review of 87 manuscripts. A total of 3 systematic reviews, 2 with meta-analyses, and 28 primary trials for prevention of CIPN in addition to 14 primary trials related to treatment of established CIPN, are included in this update. RECOMMENDATIONS The identified data reconfirmed that no agents are recommended for the prevention of CIPN. The use of acetyl-l-carnitine for the prevention of CIPN in patients with cancer should be discouraged. Furthermore, clinicians should assess the appropriateness of dose delaying, dose reduction, substitutions, or stopping chemotherapy in patients who develop intolerable neuropathy and/or functional impairment. Duloxetine is the only agent that has appropriate evidence to support its use for patients with established painful CIPN. Nonetheless, the amount of benefit from duloxetine is limited. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/survivorship-guidelines .

7018 Background: Standard reporting of symptomatic adverse events (AEs) in oncology relies on clinicians to rate patient (pt) experience using CTCAE; each symptom is represented by a single graded item. To capture direct pt experience, NCI developed PRO-CTCAE to supplement CTCAE. In PRO-CTCAE, the pt answers up to 3 questions per AE about a symptom’s frequency, severity and interference with daily activities. To align PRO-CTCAE with CTCAE, we developed an algorithm for mapping sets of questions for an AE to a single composite numerical grade. Methods: We used a 5-step process. (1) All 187 possible PRO-CTCAE score permutations were presented to clinical investigators to subjectively map permutations to single numerical grades (range 0-3). (2) Permutations with < 75% agreement were presented to investigator committees at a National Clinical Trials Network meeting to gain majority consensus via anonymous voting. (3) The resulting algorithm was refined via graphical and tabular approaches to assure directional consistency. (4) Validity, reliability and sensitivity were assessed in a national study dataset. (5) Accuracy for delineating AEs between study arms was measured in 2 phase III clinical trials (Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology A091105 and Exelixis COMET-2). Results: (1) 12/187 score permutations had < 75% initial agreement. (2) Majority consensus was reached for all permutations. (3) 5 mappings were adjusted to assure directional consistency. (4) Composite grades for 46/59 (78%) AEs were higher in pts with ECOG performance status 2-4 vs 0-1 (median effect size 0.23 [range -0.49-0.73]; 32/59 effect size ≥0.2; 25/59 p< 0.05), similar to when conducting analysis on individual unmapped items. The test-retest reliability for 24 selected composite grades ranged from 0.57-0.96 (median intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] 0.77) with 18/24 (75%) grades having ICC ≥0.7. Median (range) standardized response means in pts reporting worsening, no change, and improvement were 0.20 (0.03-0.34), -0.06 (-0.20-0.03) and -0.12 (-0.32-0.06). (5) Pattern, directionality and statistical significance of between-arm differences in both trials were preserved with composite grades as compared to individual unmapped items. Conclusions: A composite grading algorithm for PRO-CTCAE was rigorously developed and validated. PRO-CTCAE composite grades may be useful in analyses to provide a single metric for each pt-reported AE for trial and real-world reporting. Support: UG1CA189823; U01CA233046; HHSN261200800043C; Bayer (A091105); https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org .

Several new systemic therapy options have become available for patients with metastatic breast cancer, which have led to improvements in survival. In addition to patient and clinical factors, the treatment selection primarily depends on the tumor biology (hormone-receptor status and HER2-status). The NCCN Guidelines specific to the workup and treatment of patients with recurrent/stage IV breast cancer are discussed in this article.

6531 Background: This survey of Targeted Agent and Profiling Utilization Registry (TAPUR) Study physicians examined use, attitudes, and perception of tumor genomic testing (TGT), defined as any DNA test performed on tumor specimen/plasma. TAPUR is a multibasket study of marketed agents targeting tumor genomics. Methods: 333 physicians at 54 TAPUR sites were surveyed (2016-2017). Survey domains included use of TGT, barriers to ordering TGT, and genomic confidence. Surveys included 3 scenarios for TGT ordering 1) pretreated advanced cancer patients (pts) without options, 2) newly diagnosed, untreated, metastatic pts and 3) early stage/potentially curable pts with standard options. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics. Results: 112 physicians responded (33%). The table displays demographics and genomic confidence. Respondents reported a median of 25% of their pts had TGT in past 12 months for trials/routine care (range 0-85%). Barriers to testing included access to tumor specimen (86%), insurance coverage (67%), concerns that results will not be actionable (55%), and test issues (wait time, unsure which test/lab to use, test accuracy) (54%). TGT was ordered most often for scenario 1 (96%) and 2 pts (70%). Few respondents (32%) would order testing in scenario 3. Of those who reported testing for scenarios 1 & 2, most told pts that results could inform treatment/prognosis/trials (97%) or may be uninformative (84%). In all scenarios, pt expectations of TGT results were discussed prior to testing. A minority reported frequently telling pts in advance that results could inform heritable cancer susceptibility (37%). Conclusions: Confidence in using TGT was high. TGT was performed most for pts with advanced cancer and few options. Availability of specimens was largest barrier reported, indicating the importance of blood-based tests. Few respondents discussed implications of germline findings in advance, despite growing evidence of germline findings in somatic testing. [Table: see text]

These NCCN Guidelines Insights highlight the updated recommendations for use of multigene assays to guide decisions on adjuvant systemic chemotherapy therapy for women with hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative early-stage invasive breast cancer. This report summarizes these updates and discusses the rationale behind them.

SummaryAttention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common and challenging comorbidity affecting many children with epilepsy. A working group under the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) Pediatric Commission identified key questions on the identification and management of ADHD in children with epilepsy. Systematic reviews of the evidence to support approaches to these questions were collated and graded using criteria from the American Academy of Neurology Practice Parameter. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) requirements were followed, with PROSPERO registration (CRD42018094617). No increased risk of ADHD in boys with epilepsy compared to girls with epilepsy was found (Level A). Valproate use in pregnancy is associated with inattentiveness and hyperactivity in offspring (1 class I study), and children with intellectual and developmental disabilities are at increased risk of ADHD (Level A). Impact of early seizure onset on development of ADHD was unclear (Level U), but more evident with poor seizure control (Level B). ADHD screening should be performed from 6 years of age, or at diagnosis, and repeated annually (Level U) and reevaluated after change of antiepileptic drug (AED) (Level U). Diagnosis should involve health practitioners with expert training in ADHD (Level U). Use of the Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire screening tool is supported (Level B). Formal cognitive testing is strongly recommended in children with epilepsy who are struggling at school (Level U). Behavioral problems are more likely with polytherapy than monotherapy (Level C). Valproate can exacerbate attentional issues in children with childhood absence epilepsy (Level A). Methylphenidate is tolerated and effective in children with epilepsy (Level B). Limited evidence supports that atomoxetine is tolerated (Level C). Multidisciplinary involvement in transition and adult ADHD clinics is essential (Level U). In conclusion, although recommendations could be proposed for some of the study questions, this systematic review highlighted the need for more comprehensive and targeted large‐population prospective studies.

Abstract [Background] Patient advocates bring a unique, valuable perspective and presence to SPOREs. However, although patient advocates are recommended members of SPORE grants, guidelines are not given on the role of advocates or on measurement of the performance of advocates. [Methods] The Mayo Clinic Breast Cancer SPORE Patient Advocate Advisory Committee has developed a participation measurement tool. This tool will underpin and augment evaluations of the individual advocate contributions by the program PI and the SPORE project leaders. The Advocate Advisory Committee Chair will review the evaluations with the individual advocates. Annually, the advocate committee will review the performance of the group by the standard of the metrics. [Results] Advocates kept a log of their SPORE activities for four months then worked with a statistician to discern patterns of measurable, evaluable behaviors. The determined evaluable areas are training, scientific activity, meeting attendance, communication. Currently, those metrics are being tracked. Advocates developed the metrics together and report activities at the monthly advocate meetings. Currently, activities are simply tracked and categorized. No minimum standards are set. This will be the third step in the development of the metrics. [Conclusions] This approach is the first step in the development of meaningful evaluation of advocate SPORE activities. It quantifies the participation of advocates in the SPORE and provides the basis for developing a qualitative performance evaluation. The SPORE PI and the Committee Chair will use the evaluations to interpret the involvement of advocates in SPORE research and activities and to plan interventions to strengthen the advocate contributions to the SPORE. Citation Format: Cynthia Chauhan, Wayland Eppard, Lori Denison, Debra Gearhart, Lawanna Holmes, Ruth Kraft, Linda Miller, Mary A Sitta, Mary L Smith, James Ingle, Matthew Goetz. Measurements of advocate participation in and contributions to the Mayo Clinic breast cancer SPORE [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Seventh Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2014 Dec 9-13; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(9 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-09-04.