Background: Observational data investigating the relationship between body habitus and outcomes in breast cancer have been variable and inconsistent, largely centered in the curative setting and focused on weight-based metrics. This study evaluated the impact of muscle measures on outcomes in patients with metastatic breast cancer receiving endocrine-based therapy. Methods: Baseline CT scans were collected from ECOG-ACRIN E2112, a randomized phase III placebo-controlled study of exemestane with or without entinostat. A CT cross-sectional image at the L3 level was extracted to obtain skeletal muscle mass and attenuation. Low muscle mass (LMM) was defined as skeletal muscle index <41 cm2/m2 and low muscle attenuation (LMA) as muscle density <25 HU or <33 HU if overweight/obese by body mass index (BMI). Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models determined the association between LMM or LMA and progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Correlations between LMM, LMA, and patient-reported outcomes were determined using 2-sample t tests. Results: Analyzable CT scans and follow-up data were available for 540 of 608 patients. LMM was present in 39% (n=212) of patients and LMA in 56% (n=301). Those with LMA were more likely to have obesity and worse performance status. LMM was not associated with survival (PFS hazard ratio [HR]: 1.13, P=.23; OS HR: 1.05, P=.68), nor was LMA (PFS HR: 1.01, P=.93; OS HR: 1.00, P=.99). BMI was not associated with survival. LMA, but not LMM, was associated with increased frequency of patient-reported muscle aches. Conclusions: Both low muscle mass and density are prevalent in patients with hormone receptor–positive metastatic breast cancer. Muscle measures correlated with obesity and performance status; however, neither muscle mass nor attenuation were associated with prognosis. Further work is needed to refine body composition measurements and select optimal cutoffs with meaningful endpoints in specific breast cancer populations, particularly those living with metastatic disease.
Impact of Muscle Measures on Outcome in Patients Receiving Endocrine Therapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer: Analysis of ECOG-ACRIN E2112
Tarah J. Ballinger, Helga S. Marques, Gloria Xue, Richard Hoffman, Constantine Gatsonis, Fengmin Zhao, Kathy D. Miller, Joseph Sparano, and Roisin M. Connolly
NCCN Biosimilars White Paper: Regulatory, Scientific, and Patient Safety Perspectives
Andrew D. Zelenetz, Islah Ahmed, Edward Louis Braud, James D. Cross, Nancy Davenport-Ennis, Barry D. Dickinson, Steven E. Goldberg, Scott Gottlieb, Philip E. Johnson, Gary H. Lyman, Richard Markus, Ursula A. Matulonis, Denise Reinke, Edward C. Li, Jessica DeMartino, Jonathan K. Larsen, and James M. Hoffman
Biologics are essential to oncology care. As patents for older biologics begin to expire, the United States is developing an abbreviated regulatory process for the approval of similar biologics (biosimilars), which raises important considerations for the safe and appropriate incorporation of biosimilars into clinical practice for patients with cancer. The potential for biosimilars to reduce the cost of biologics, which are often high-cost components of oncology care, was the impetus behind the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, a part of the 2010 Affordable Care Act. In March 2011, NCCN assembled a work group consisting of thought leaders from NCCN Member Institutions and other organizations, to provide guidance regarding the challenges health care providers and other key stakeholders face in incorporating biosimilars in health care practice. The work group identified challenges surrounding biosimilars, including health care provider knowledge, substitution practices, pharmacovigilance, naming and product tracking, coverage and reimbursement, use in off-label settings, and data requirements for approval.
Bladder Cancer, Version 3.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology
Thomas W. Flaig, Philippe E. Spiess, Neeraj Agarwal, Rick Bangs, Stephen A. Boorjian, Mark K. Buyyounouski, Sam Chang, Tracy M. Downs, Jason A. Efstathiou, Terence Friedlander, Richard E. Greenberg, Khurshid A. Guru, Thomas Guzzo, Harry W. Herr, Jean Hoffman-Censits, Christopher Hoimes, Brant A. Inman, Masahito Jimbo, A. Karim Kader, Subodh M. Lele, Jeff Michalski, Jeffrey S. Montgomery, Lakshminarayanan Nandagopal, Lance C. Pagliaro, Sumanta K. Pal, Anthony Patterson, Elizabeth R. Plimack, Kamal S. Pohar, Mark A. Preston, Wade J. Sexton, Arlene O. Siefker-Radtke, Jonathan Tward, Jonathan L. Wright, Lisa A. Gurski, and Alyse Johnson-Chilla
This selection from the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Bladder Cancer focuses on the clinical presentation and workup of suspected bladder cancer, treatment of non–muscle-invasive urothelial bladder cancer, and treatment of metastatic urothelial bladder cancer because important updates have recently been made to these sections. Some important updates include recommendations for optimal treatment of non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer in the event of a bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) shortage and details about biomarker testing for advanced or metastatic disease. The systemic therapy recommendations for second-line or subsequent therapies have also been revised. Treatment and management of muscle-invasive, nonmetastatic disease is covered in the complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Bladder Cancer available at NCCN.org. Additional topics covered in the complete version include treatment of nonurothelial histologies and recommendations for nonbladder urinary tract cancers such as upper tract urothelial carcinoma, urothelial carcinoma of the prostate, and primary carcinoma of the urethra.
Dermatofibrosarcoma Protuberans, Version 1.2014
Christopher K. Bichakjian, Thomas Olencki, Murad Alam, James S. Andersen, Daniel Berg, Glen M. Bowen, Richard T. Cheney, Gregory A. Daniels, L. Frank Glass, Roy C. Grekin, Kenneth Grossman, Alan L. Ho, Karl D. Lewis, Daniel D. Lydiatt, William H. Morrison, Kishwer S. Nehal, Kelly C. Nelson, Paul Nghiem, Clifford S. Perlis, Ashok R. Shaha, Wade L. Thorstad, Malika Tuli, Marshall M. Urist, Timothy S. Wang, Andrew E. Werchniak, Sandra L. Wong, John A. Zic, Nicole McMillian, Karin Hoffman, and Maria Ho
Dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans (DFSP) is an uncommon soft tissue tumor characterized by a relatively high risk of local recurrence and low risk of metastasis. The NCCN Guidelines for DFSP provide multidisciplinary recommendations on the management of patients with this rare disease. These NCCN Guidelines Insights highlight the addition of the Principles of Pathology section, which provides recommendations on the pathologic assessment of DFSP. Because DFSP can mimic other lesions, immunohistochemical studies are often required to establish diagnosis. Cytogenetic testing for the characteristic translocation t(17;22)(q22;q13) can also be valuable in the differential diagnosis of DFSP with other histologically similar tumors.
NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Bladder Cancer, Version 2.2022
Featured Updates to the NCCN Guidelines
Thomas W. Flaig, Philippe E. Spiess, Michael Abern, Neeraj Agarwal, Rick Bangs, Stephen A. Boorjian, Mark K. Buyyounouski, Kevin Chan, Sam Chang, Terence Friedlander, Richard E. Greenberg, Khurshid A. Guru, Harry W. Herr, Jean Hoffman-Censits, Amar Kishan, Shilajit Kundu, Subodh M. Lele, Ronac Mamtani, Vitaly Margulis, Omar Y. Mian, Jeff Michalski, Jeffrey S. Montgomery, Lakshminarayanan Nandagopal, Lance C. Pagliaro, Mamta Parikh, Anthony Patterson, Elizabeth R. Plimack, Kamal S. Pohar, Mark A. Preston, Kyle Richards, Wade J. Sexton, Arlene O. Siefker-Radtke, Matthew Tollefson, Jonathan Tward, Jonathan L. Wright, Mary A. Dwyer, Carly J. Cassara, and Lisa A. Gurski
The NCCN Guidelines for Bladder Cancer provide recommendations for the diagnosis, evaluation, treatment, and follow-up of patients with bladder cancer and other urinary tract cancers (upper tract tumors, urothelial carcinoma of the prostate, primary carcinoma of the urethra). These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel discussion behind recent important updates to the guidelines regarding the treatment of non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer, including how to treat in the event of a bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) shortage; new roles for immune checkpoint inhibitors in non–muscle invasive, muscle-invasive, and metastatic bladder cancer; and the addition of antibody–drug conjugates for metastatic bladder cancer.