IMPORTANCE COVID-19 is a life-threatening illness for many patients. Prior studies have established hematologic cancers as a risk factor associated with particularly poor outcomes from COVID-19. To our knowledge, no studies have established a beneficial role for anti-COVID-19 interventions in this at-risk population. Convalescent plasma therapy may benefit immunocompromised individuals with COVID-19, including those with hematologic cancers.OBJECTIVE To evaluate the association of convalescent plasma treatment with 30-day mortality in hospitalized adults with hematologic cancers and COVID-19 from a multi-institutional cohort. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis retrospective cohort study using data from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium registry with propensity score matching evaluated patients with hematologic cancers who were hospitalized for COVID-19. Data were collected between

No abstract

Cancer incidence increases with age, and as life expectancy increases, the number of elderly patients with cancer is increasing. Cancer treatments, including chemotherapy and radiotherapy, have significant short- and long-term effects on cardiovascular function. These cardiotoxic effects can be acute, such as changes in electrocardiogram (ECG), arrhythmias, ischemia, and pericarditis and/or myocarditis-like syndromes, or they can be chronic, such as ventricular dysfunction. Anticancer therapies can also have indirect effects, such as alterations in blood pressure, or can cause metabolic abnormalities that subsequently increase risk for cardiac events. In this review, we explore both observational and clinical trial evidence of cardiac risk in the elderly. In both observational and clinical trial data, risk of cardiotoxicity with anthracycline-based chemotherapy increases with age. However, it is less clear whether the association between age and cardiotoxicity exists for newer treatments. The association may not be well demonstrated as a result of under-representation of elderly patients in clinical trials and avoidance of these therapies in this population. In addition, we discuss strategies for surveillance and prevention of cardiotoxicity in the elderly. In the elderly, it is important to be aware of the potential for cardiotoxicity during long-term follow-up and to consider both prevention and surveillance of these late effects.

PURPOSE: COVID-19 has altered healthcare delivery. Previous work has focused on patients with cancer and COVID-19, but little has been reported on healthcare system changes among patients without COVID-19. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of patients with breast cancer (BC) in New York City between February 1, 2020, and April 30, 2020. New patients were included as were patients scheduled to receive intravenous or injectable therapy. Patients with COVID-19 were excluded. Demographic and treatment information were obtained by chart review. Delays and/or changes in systemic therapy, surgery, radiation, and radiology related to the pandemic were tracked, along with the reasons for delay and/or change. Univariate and multivariable analysis were used to identify factors associated with delay and/or change. RESULTS: We identified 350 eligible patients, of whom 149 (42.6%) experienced a delay and/or change, and practice reduction (51.0%) was the most common reason. The patients who identified as Black or African American, Asian, or Other races were more likely to experience a delay and/or change compared with White patients (Black, 44.4%; Asian, 47.1%; Other, 55.6%; White, 31.4%; P = .001). In multivariable analysis, Medicaid compared with commercial insurance (odds ratio [OR], 3.04; 95% CI, 1.32 to 7.27) was associated with increased odds of a delay and/or change, whereas stage II or III BC compared with stage I (OR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.95; and OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.092, respectively) was associated with decreased odds of a delay and/or change. CONCLUSION: Almost half of the patients with BC without COVID-19 had a delay and/or change. We found racial and socioeconomic disparities in the likelihood of a delay and/or change. Further studies are needed to determine the impact these care alterations have on BC outcomes.

PURPOSE To update recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)-Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario [CCO]) adjuvant bone-modifying agents in breast cancer guideline. METHODS An Expert Panel conducted a systematic review to identify new, potentially practice-changing data. RESULTS Four articles met eligibility criteria and form the evidentiary basis for revision of the previous recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS Adjuvant bisphosphonate therapy should be discussed with all postmenopausal patients (natural or therapy-induced) with primary breast cancer, irrespective of hormone receptor status and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status, who are candidates to receive adjuvant systemic therapy. Adjuvant bisphosphonates, if used, are not substitutes for standard anticancer modalities. The benefit of adjuvant bisphosphonate therapy will vary depending on the underlying risk of recurrence and is associated with a modest improvement in overall survival. The NHS PREDICT tool provides estimates of the benefit of adjuvant bisphosphonate therapy and may aid in decision making. Factors influencing the decision to recommend adjuvant bisphosphonate use should include patients' risk of recurrence, risk of side effects, financial toxicity, drug availability, patient preferences, comorbidities, and life expectancy. When an adjuvant bisphosphonate is used to prevent breast cancer recurrence, the therapeutic options recommended by the Panel include oral clodronate, oral ibandronate, and intravenous zoledronic acid. The Panel supports starting bisphosphonate therapy early, consistent with the points outlined in the parent CCO-ASCO guideline; this is a consensus recommendation. The Panel does not recommend adjuvant denosumab to prevent breast cancer recurrence, because studies did not show a consistent reduction of breast cancer recurrence in any subset of those with early-stage breast cancer. Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guideline .

We found that nonadherence to medications for chronic conditions prior to HT was associated with greater nonadherence to oral HT in patients with breast cancer. Medication nonadherence history may play an important role in determining patients at risk for nonadherence to a subsequent medication for a different illness, such as HT, and a potential target for future interventions.

Purpose For women with stage IV breast cancer (BC), the association between survival time (ST) and use of aggressive end-of-life (EOL) care is unknown. Methods We used the SEER-Medicare database to identify women with stage IV BC diagnosed 2002–2011 who died by 12/31/2012. Aggressive EOL care was defined as receipt in the last month of life: >1 ED visit, >1 hospitalization, ICU admission, life-extending procedures, hospice admission within 3 days of death, IV chemotherapy within 14 days of death, and/or ≥10 unique physician encounters in the last 6 months of life. Receipt of aggressive EOL care and hospice in the last month of life were determined using claims, and multivariable analysis was used to identify factors associated with receipt. Costs of care were also evaluated. Results We identified 4521 eligible patients. Of these, 2748 (60.8%) received aggressive EOL care. Factors associated with aggressive EOL care were race (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.19–1.81 for blacks compared to whites) and more frequent oncology office visits (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.28–1.90). Patients who lived >12 months after diagnosis were less likely to receive aggressive EOL care (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.38–0.52), and more likely to utilize hospice (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.21–1.69) compared to patients who lived ≤6 months. Patients with a shorter ST had significantly higher costs of care per-month-alive compared to patients with longer ST. Conclusion Patients with a shorter ST were more likely to receive aggressive EOL care and had higher costs of care compared to patients who lived longer.

Purpose The optimal frequency of monitoring patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is unknown; however, data suggest that intensive monitoring does not improve outcomes. We performed a population-based analysis to evaluate patterns and predictors of extreme use of disease-monitoring tests (serum tumor markers [STMs] and radiographic imaging) among women with MBC. Methods The SEER-Medicare database was used to identify women with MBC diagnosed from 2002 to 2011 who underwent disease monitoring. Billing dates of STMs (carcinoembryonic antigen and/or cancer antigen 15-3/cancer antigen 27.29) and imaging tests (computed tomography and/or positron emission tomography) were recorded; if more than one STM or imaging test were completed on the same day, they were counted once. We defined extreme use as > 12 STM and/or more than four radiographic imaging tests in a 12-month period. Multivariable analysis was used to identify factors associated with extreme use. In extreme users, total health care costs and end-of-life health care utilization were compared with the rest of the study population. Results We identified 2,460 eligible patients. Of these, 924 (37.6%) were extreme users of disease-monitoring tests. Factors significantly associated with extreme use were hormone receptor–negative MBC (odds ratio [OR], 1.63; 95% CI, 1.27 to 2.08), history of a positron emission tomography scan (OR, 2.92; 95% CI, 2.40 to 3.55), and more frequent oncology office visits (OR, 3.14; 95% CI, 2.49 to 3.96). Medical costs per year were 59.2% higher in extreme users. Extreme users were more likely to use emergency department and hospice services at the end of life. Conclusion Despite an unknown clinical benefit, approximately one third of elderly women with MBC were extreme users of disease-monitoring tests. Higher use of disease-monitoring tests was associated with higher total health care costs. Efforts to understand the optimal frequency of monitoring are needed to inform clinical practice.