Citations

e24108 Background: Clonal hematopoiesis of Indeterminate Potential (CHIP) is associated with adverse clinical outcomes including increased risk of hematologic malignancies and heart disease. Limited data suggest an increased prevalence of CHIP in patients treated for solid tumors, particularly after exposure to radiation and chemotherapy. CHIP testing may inform risk-reduction strategies for cancer survivors. Little is known about patient knowledge, attitudes, and preferences regarding CHIP testing. Methods: We surveyed survivors without history of recurrence participating in an ongoing prospective cohort study of young women with breast cancer (BC). The survey was sent by email and included an introduction to CHIP including risk factors and clinical associations. Respondents then reviewed a vignette and were asked about CHIP testing preferences (definitely/probably test vs. definitely/probably not test) considering sequentially: 1) population-based 10-year risk of BC recurrence, hematological malignancy and heart disease; 2) estimated increase in these risks with CHIP; 3) current CHIP management; 4) a dedicated CHIP clinic; and 5) a theoretical CHIP treatment. Changes in preferences from the prior scenario were evaluated with the McNemar's test using a type I error rate of 5%. Results: 528/642 (82.2%) eligible women responded to the survey, at a median age of 46 (range: 31-54) years (median time from diagnosis: 108 months (range: 60-168)), and 88% were white. Most had stage 1/2 BC (78.8%) and had received chemotherapy (73.1%) and/or radiation (61.9%). 93.6% had never heard of CHIP prior to survey. After initial patient vignette presentation, most women (87.1%,) recommended CHIP testing if offered. Preferences for testing decreased (p<0.05) when considering population-based risks, with 11.1% shifting their preference from CHIP testing to not testing. After considering increased risks associated with CHIP, interest in testing increased (p<0.05), with 10.1% shifting their preference to testing. Interest significantly (p<0.05) increased with the possibility of managing CHIP through a clinic or a hypothetical CHIP treatment, with 7.2% and 14.1% switching their preferences towards testing, respectively. Finally, 75.8% responded that they themselves, after learning about CHIP and reviewing the vignette, would want to have CHIP testing; 28.2% reported that learning about CHIP and the associated risks caused them at least moderate anxiety. Conclusion: Few young BC survivors were aware of CHIP yet most indicated an interest in testing after learning about it. Testing preferences were influenced by risks presented and potential management strategies. Findings highlight the importance of effective risk communication and the need for adequate psychosocial support when considering testing for CHIP and other potential clinical biomarkers predictive of cancer and other medical risks in cancer survivors.

e18739 Background: Hair loss is a well-known side effect of chemotherapy. The Paxman Hair Loss Prevention System, a scalp cooling device, has been shown to be effective in reducing chemotherapy induced alopecia in patients receiving chemotherapy (Nangia, JAMA, 2017). The National Comprehensive Cancer Network and the European Society for Medical Oncology guidelines have recommended scalp cooling as category 2A and 2B options, respectively. Methods: The real world use of scalp cooling using the Paxman device, as documented by orders through the Paxman Hub during the years of 2017-2020 was summarized. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize demographics and utilization. Results: Data from 6649 patients who used scalp cooling were reviewed. Patients with breast cancer were the most common users of scalp cooling (78%, n=5197) followed by gynecology (12%, n=775), gastrointestinal (3%, n=201), lung (1%, n=81) and genitourinary (1%, n=52). The majority of patients were between the ages of 45-65 (55%), followed by 65-74 (18%), older than 75 (5%), and 25-44 (2%). Average number (#) of cycles of cooling completed was 6.53 (range of average # of cycles 4.50-12). Scalp cooling with this device was commonly used in 39 out of 50 states. Conclusions: This is the largest report of scalp cooling usage in the real world setting in the USA, including scalp cooling usage in older adults. Uptake of scalp cooling across various cancers has not been uniform and this deserves further study.

e18561 Background: Young women with breast cancer (BC) have unique issues, including fertility, genetic, and emotional health concerns; these may sometimes be inadequately addressed by providers. Given documented disparities in BC care and outcomes, we sought to explore whether provider attention to these issues differs by race, as well as to examine racial differences in satisfaction with care among young patients with BC. Methods: The Young & Strong Study was a cluster randomized trial of an educational and supportive care intervention at 14 academic + 40 community oncology practices across the US enrolling women with newly diagnosed BC at age ≤45 and their providers. Patients completed surveys at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months after enrollment. Race was self-reported at baseline. Provider attention to fertility, genetics, and emotional health was evaluated by medical record review. The proportions of patients with attention to these concerns by 3 months was compared by race (white, Black, Asian, multi-racial/other/unknown) using Fisher’s exact tests. Satisfaction with care was assessed with the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire-18 (PSQ-18) at 3 months. Median scores for each of 7 PSQ-18 subscales (1-5 scale, higher scores=more satisfaction) were compared by race with the Kruskal-Wallis test. Results: 465/467 (99.6%) of enrolled patients had evaluable data. 77% were white, 12% Black, 4% Asian, and 7% multiracial/other/unk. Median age at diagnosis was 40 (range: 22-45) years. Provider attention to genetics (≥85%) and emotional health (≥90%) was high across groups, and there were no differences by race in attention to fertility, genetics, or emotional health (Table). Among 359/465 women (77%) who completed the PSQ-18, median subscale scores ranged from 3.5-4.5, indicating high levels of satisfaction with care. For the PSQ-18 technical quality domain, median scores were lower (p=.03), indicating less satisfaction, in Black and Asian women (4.0) and higher in white women (4.5). Median scores for other PSQ-18 domains (general satisfaction, interpersonal manner, communication, financial, time spent with doctor, accessibility) did not differ by race. Conclusions: Satisfaction with care was high and issues related to fertility, genetics and emotional health were addressed by providers in the majority of young women in our study, with minimal differences by race. These patients were all enrolled in a clinical trial and had access to high-quality care, limiting the generalizability of our findings. Larger, population-based studies in more diverse settings are warranted. Clinical trial information: NCT01647607. Attention to psychosocial concerns by race. [Table: see text]

5554 Background: A better understanding regarding the burden of treatment side effects in patients with gynecological malignancies could help guide symptom interventions and oncologic therapy decision-making. We aim to inform understanding of symptom burden in epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) by analyzing patient-reported symptom data from patients treated for this condition over a 16-month period. Methods: Patients receiving medical oncology care at Mayo Clinic Rochester and at Midwest Mayo Clinic Health System community sites have received symptom-focused surveys prior to each medical oncology visit since March 28, 2019 through the Enhanced Electronic Health Record Facilitated Cancer Symptom Control Study (E2C2). These surveys, administered either through the electronic medical record portal or on a clinic tablet prior to each oncology office visit, no more frequently than every 2 weeks, include six linear analogue scales measuring sleep disturbance, pain, anxiety, emotional distress, and fatigue (SPADE), as well as physical dysfunction on a scale of 0 (none) to 10 (as bad as you can imagine). Scores of 0-3 were considered mild symptoms, 4-6 moderate symptoms, and 7-10 severe symptoms. We collected survey results from March 28, 2019 to July 20, 2020 for patients with EOC and reviewed the number of surveys per patient in addition to the average symptom scores. Results: From March 2019 to July 2020, for patients with EOC, there were 2974 encounter-based surveys from 762 patients. The number of surveys completed by each patient ranged from 1-20. The following number of patients returned the correlating number of surveys: 1 survey:240 patients; 2 surveys:145; 3 surveys:79; 4 surveys:56; 5 surveys:58; 6 surveys:45; 7 surveys:38; 8 surveys:27; 9 surveys:22; ≥10 surveys:52. The average score from all surveys for each symptom was: 2.41 for sleep disturbance, 2.03 for pain, 2.32 for anxiety, 1.97 for emotional distress, 3.26 for fatigue, and 2.50 for physical dysfunction. Please see the table for the proportion of surveys that reported symptoms as mild, moderate, or severe. Conclusions: Fatigue and physical dysfunction were reported most frequently in patients with EOC, while emotional distress and pain were reported least frequently. 20% of surveys reported moderate to severe emotional distress, while 40% reported moderate to severe fatigue. A targeted approach to symptom management is needed for patients undergoing EOC evaluation and treatment. Our next steps in this analysis include an assessment of potential predictors of greater symptom burden (e.g., specific treatments, age, and other clinical and sociodemographic characteristics). Clinical trial information: NCT03892967. [Table: see text]

Abstract Background: Use of menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) is associated with increased risk for breast cancer. However, the relevant mechanisms and its interaction with genetic variants are not fully understood. Methods: We conducted a genome-wide interaction analysis between MHT use and genetic variants for breast cancer risk in 27,585 cases and 34,785 controls from 26 observational studies. All women were post-menopausal and of European ancestry. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to test for multiplicative interactions between genetic variants and current MHT use. We considered interaction p-values<5x10-8 as genome-wide significant, and p-values<1x10-5 as suggestive. Linkage disequilibrium (LD)-based clumping was performed to identify independent candidate variants.Results: None of the 9.7 million genetic variants tested for interactions with MHT use reached genome-wide significance. Only 213 variants, representing 18 independent loci, had p-values<1x105. The strongest evidence was found for rs4674019 (p-value=2.27x10-7), which showed genome-wide significant interaction (p-value=3.8x10-8) with current MHT use when analysis was restricted to population-based studies only. Limiting the analyses to combined estrogen-progesterone MHT use only or to estrogen receptor (ER) positive cases did not identify any genome-wide significant evidence of interactions. Conclusions: In this large genome-wide SNP-MHT interaction study of breast cancer, we found no strong support for common genetic variants modifying the effect of MHT on breast cancer risk. These results suggest that common genetic variation has limited impact on the observed MHT–breast cancer risk association.

BackgroundThis study was aimed at examining the risks of subsequent primary cancers (SPCs) among breast cancer survivors by hormone receptor (HR) status and age at diagnosis.MethodsData from 12 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries were used to identify 431,222 breast cancer survivors (at least 1 year) diagnosed between the ages of 20 and 84 years from 1992 to 2015. Risks of SPCs were measured as the standardized incidence ratio (SIR) and the excess absolute risk (EAR) per 10,000 person‐years. Poisson regression was used to test the difference in SIRs by HR status.ResultsIn comparison with the general population, the risk of new cancer diagnoses among survivors was 20% higher for those with HR‐positive cancers (SIR, 1.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19‐1.21; EAR, 23.3/10,000 person‐years) and 44% higher for those with HR‐negative cancers (SIR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.41‐1.47; EAR, 45.2/10,000 person‐years), with the risk difference between HR statuses statistically significant. The higher risk after HR‐negative cancer was driven by acute nonlymphocytic leukemia and breast, ovarian, peritoneal, and lung cancers. By age at diagnosis, the total EAR per 10,000 person‐years ranged from 15.8 (95% CI, 14.1‐17.5; SIR, 1.11) among late‐onset (age, 50‐84 years) HR‐positive survivors to 69.4 (95% CI, 65.1‐73.7; SIR, 2.24) among early‐onset (age, 20‐49 years) HR‐negative survivors, with subsequent breast cancer representing 73% to 80% of the total EAR. After breast cancer, the greatest EARs were for ovarian cancer among early‐onset HR‐negative survivors, lung cancer among early‐ and late‐onset HR‐negative survivors, and uterine corpus cancer among late‐onset HR‐positive survivors.ConclusionsRisks of SPCs after breast cancer differ substantially by subtype and age. This suggests that more targeted approaches for cancer prevention and early‐detection strategies are needed in survivorship care planning.

BackgroundThe diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer can have profound effects on a young woman's family planning and fertility, particularly among women with hormone receptor–positive breast cancer.MethodsThe Young Women's Breast Cancer Study was a multicenter cohort of women aged 40 years or younger and newly diagnosed with breast cancer from 2006 to 2016. Surveys included assessments of fertility concerns, endocrine therapy (ET) preferences, and use. Characteristics were compared between women who reported that fertility concerns affected ET decisions and those who did not. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with having an ET decision affected by fertility concerns.ResultsOf 643 eligible women with hormone receptor–positive, stage I to III breast cancer, one‐third (213 of 643) indicated that fertility concerns affected ET decisions. In a multivariable analysis, only parity at diagnosis was significantly associated with fertility concerns affecting ET decisions (odds ratio for nulliparous vs ≥2 children, 6.96; 95% confidence interval, 4.09‐11.83; odds ratio for 1 vs ≥2 children, 5.30; 95% confidence interval, 3.03‐9.87). Noninitiation/nonpersistence was higher among women with fertility concerns versus those without fertility concerns (40% vs 20%; P < .0001). Among women with fertility‐related ET concerns, 7% (15 of 213) did not initiate ET, and 33% (70 of 213) were nonpersistent over 5 years of follow‐up. Of these women, 66% (56 of 85) reported 1 or more pregnancies or pregnancy attempts; 27% (15 of 56) had resumed ET at the last available follow‐up through 5 years.ConclusionsConcern about fertility is a contributor to adjuvant ET decisions among a substantial proportion of young breast cancer survivors. Ensuring family planning is addressed in the setting of ET recommendations should be a priority throughout the cancer care continuum.

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a common and potentially permanent adverse effect of chemotherapeutic agents including taxanes such as paclitaxel and platinum-based compounds such as oxaliplatin and carboplatin. Previous studies have suggested that genetics may impact the risk of CIPN. We conducted genome-wide association studies (GWASs) for CIPN in two independent populations who had completed European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ)-CIPN20 assessments (a CIPN-specific 20-item questionnaire which includes three scales that evaluate sensory, autonomic, and motor symptoms). The study population N08Cx included 692 participants from three clinical trials (North Central Cancer Treatment Group (NCCTG) N08C1, N08CA, and N08CB) who had been treated with paclitaxel, paclitaxel plus carboplatin, or oxaliplatin. The primary endpoint for the GWAS was the change from pre-chemotherapy CIPN20 sensory score to the worse score over the following 18 weeks. Study population The Mayo Clinic Breast Disease Registry (MCBDR) consisted of 381 Mayo Clinic Breast Disease Registry enrollees who had been treated with taxane or platinum-based chemotherapy. The primary endpoint for the GWAS assessed was the earliest CIPN20 sensory score available after the completion of chemotherapy. In multivariate model analyses, chemotherapy regimen (p = 3.0 × 10−8) and genetic ancestry (p = 0.007) were significantly associated with CIPN in the N08Cx population. Only age (p = 0.0004) was significantly associated with CIPN in the MCBDR population. The SNP most associated with CIPN was rs56360211 near PDE6C (p =7.92 × 10−8) in N08Cx and rs113807868 near TMEM150C in the MCBDR (p = 1.27 × 10−8). Due to a lack of replication, we cannot conclude that we identified any genetic predictors of CIPN.

Abstract Many young women have not completed their desired childbearing when they are diagnosed with breast cancer. This is increasingly true as the average age of first birth rises such that more premenopausal breast cancers are diagnosed in nulliparous women. Even women who already have one or more children at the time of their cancer diagnosis may be hoping to become pregnant again. Because chemotherapy is gonadotoxic and endocrine therapy is contraindicated during pregnancy(allowing natural ovarian aging over the 5-10 years of adjuvant therapy recommended for those with endocrine-sensitive stage 1-3 tumors), breast cancer treatments can impair fertility. Fertility preservation strategies including oocyte cryopreservation and embryo cryopreservation should be considered prior to initiation of systemic therapy for young women with fertility concerns, often using modified ovarian stimulation protocols to minimize delays in cancer treatment. The administration of a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist before and during chemotherapy to help maintain ovarian function is more controversial, but can also be considered. It is critical that we offer reproductive counseling and access to fertility preservation techniques at the time of diagnosis, and that we also continue to discuss contraception and fertility planning during and after cancer treatment. Results from the POSITIVE trial, which is assessing pregnancy and cancer outcomes of young women who wished to take a break from adjuvant endocrine therapy to attempt conception, are eagerly awaited to inform these discussions. This talk will address current knowns and unknowns related to the optimal management of reproductive concerns in premenopausal women with breast cancer. Citation Format: K Ruddy. Oncofertility [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr SP133.

Abstract BackgroundCancer diagnosis and early treatment may have wide-ranging consequences for a woman’spartner (ie. spouse or significant other). In general, younger caregivers have been found to havegreater unmet needs and higher levels of distress compared to those who are older. To date,there is little known about the unmet needs and experiences of partners who care for youngwomen with breast cancer during active treatment.Trial Design: Cross-sectional survey of partners of young women with breast cancer.Eligibility Criteria: The current analysis focuses on a subset of respondent partners of womenwith breast cancer participating in the Young Womens Breast Cancer Study (NCT01468246)who met the following criteria: diagnosed at age &lt; 40 years; time since diagnosis &lt;12 months;and/or Stage IV disease (at diagnosis or in metastatic setting); and/or local recurrent disease&lt; 12 months.Specific Aims: To explore the experience of partners of women in active treatment or havingvery recently completed treatment for breast cancer.Statistical Methods: We employed descriptive statistics to present sample characteristics,including means or medians for continuous variables and proportions for categorical variables.We assessed partners’ responses re: sociodemographics, perceived social support (MOS-Social Support Survey, Cancer Perceived Agents of Social Support), quality of life (QOL)(Caregiver QOL Index-Cancer), coping (Brief COPE), perceived financial security, perceivedparenting concerns (Parenting Concerns Questionnaire), anxiety and depression symptoms(Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), sexual satisfaction (Global Measure of SexualSatisfaction), posttraumatic growth (Posttraumatic Growth Inventory-Short Form), and an open-ended question to explore their experiences and needs.Accrual: 25 participants were included.Results: All partners were male (25/25; 100%), and most were white (n=23/25; 92%), workingfull-time (n=21/25; 91%); and college educated (n=19/25; 86%). Eighteen partners (n=18/25;72%) were parenting children &lt;18 years old and 40% (n=10/25) were partnered with womenwith Stage 4 breast cancer. At the time of the survey, the median age of partners was 44 years(range, 28-69) and of patients was 38 years (range, 25-40). Many partners (57%) reportedsymptoms of anxiety (&gt;8 on the HADS anxiety subscale), fewer (22%) were categorized ashaving symptoms of depression (&gt;8 on the HADS depression subscale). Additionally, 39%reported not being sexually active; 41% reported maladaptive coping; 30% reported financialstrain;30% reported relationship strain. Reported caregiver QOL ranged from 22-116, with amean score of 52.5 (SD, 23.9), similar to population norms, with higher scores indicating lowerquality of life. Parenting concerns scores were generally low indicating less concern, with arange of 12-35, and mean of 20.5 (SD, 7.6). Post-traumatic growth ranged from 4-33, with amean score of 20.7 (SD, 7.4), with higher scores indicating greater personal growthexperienced. 44% (11/25) responded to the open-ended experiences and needs question.Common responses included feeling a lack of support, need for tailored and titrated information,and desire to connect with other men who faced similar experiences. Partners also reportedtheir struggles with uncertainty about the future. Discussion: A subset of partners of young women in active treatment for breast cancerexpressed concerns related to relationship strain, sexuality, need for support, and finances.Future work designed to meet the needs of partners of breast cancer patients includinginformational and psychosocial supports may benefit them and the patients as they manage theprocess of ongoing treatment and challenges about the future. Citation Format: Tamryn F Gray, Nancy Borstelmann, Shoshana Rosenberg, Shari Gelber, Meghan E Meyer, Kathryn J. Ruddy, Lidia Schapira, Steven Come, Virginia Borges, Tamara Cadet, Peter Maramaldi, Ann H. Partridge. The psychosocial impact of caregiving on partners of young women with breast cancer in treatment [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PS9-08.