Breast cancer management pathways during the COVID-19 pandemic: outcomes from the UK ‘Alert Level 4’ phase of the B-MaP-C study

Background The B-MaP-C study aimed to determine alterations to breast cancer (BC) management during the peak transmission period of the UK COVID-19 pandemic and the potential impact of these treatment decisions.Methods This was a national cohort study of patients with early BC undergoing multidisciplinary team (MDT)-guided treatment recommendations during the pandemic, designated ‘standard’ or ‘COVID-altered’, in the preoperative, operative and post-operative setting.Findings Of 3776 patients (from 64 UK units) in the study, 2246 (59%) had ‘COVID-altered’ management. ‘Bridging’ endocrine therapy was used (n = 951) where theatre capacity was reduced. There was increasing access to COVID-19 low-risk theatres during the study period (59%). In line with national guidance, immediate breast reconstruction was avoided (n = 299). Where adjuvant chemotherapy was omitted (n = 81), the median benefit was only 3% (IQR 2–9%) using ‘NHS Predict’. There was the rapid adoption of new evidence-based hypofractionated radiotherapy (n = 781, from 46 units). Only 14 patients (1%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during their treatment journey.Conclusions The majority of ‘COVID-altered’ management decisions were largely in line with pre-COVID evidence-based guidelines, implying that breast cancer survival outcomes are unlikely to be negatively impacted by the pandemic. However, in this study, the potential impact of delays to BC presentation or diagnosis remains unknown.Subject terms: Breast cancer, Surgical oncology, Health care economics, Quality of life, Health policy     

Neoadjuvant Therapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: Recent Advances and Ongoing Challenges

Locally advanced rectal cancer has a rising global incidence. Over the last 4 decades, advances first in surgery and later in radiotherapy and chemoradiotherapy have improved outcomes, particularly with regard to local recurrence. Unfortunately, distant metastases remain a significant problem. In clinical trials of patients with stage II and III disease, distant relapse occurs in 25% to 30% of patients regardless of the treatment approach. Recent phase 3 trials have therefore focused on intensification of systemic therapy for localized disease, with an aim of reducing the distant relapse rate. Early results of trials of total neoadjuvant therapy with combination systemic therapy provided in the neoadjuvant setting are promising; for the first time, a significant improvement in the rate of distant relapse has been noted. Longer-term follow-up is eagerly awaited. On the other hand, trimodal therapy with chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery is toxic. Several trials are currently assessing the feasibility of a watch-and-wait approach, omitting surgery in those with complete response to neoadjuvant treatment, in an attempt to reduce the burden of treatment on patients. The future for rectal cancer patients is likely to be highly personalized, with more intense approaches for high-risk patients and omission of unnecessary therapy for those whose disease responds well to initial treatment. Biomarkers such as circulating tumor DNA will help to more accurately stratify patients into risk groups. Improvements in survival and quality of life are expected as the results of ongoing research become available throughout the next decade.     

A literature-based treatment algorithm for low-grade neuroendocrine liver metastases

BackgroundThe optimal timing of treatment of liver metastases from low-grade neuroendocrine tumors (LG-NELM) varies significantly due to numerous treatment modalities and the literature supporting various treatment(s). This study sought to create and validate a literature-based treatment algorithm for LG-NELM.MethodsA treatment algorithm to maximize overall survival (OS) was designed using peer-reviewed articles evaluating treatment of LG-NELM. This algorithm was retrospectively applied to patients treated for LG-NELM at our institution. Deviation was determined based on whether or not a patient received treatment consistent with that recommended by the algorithm. Patients who did and did not deviate from the algorithm were compared with respect to OS and number of treatments.ResultsApplying our algorithm to a 149-patient cohort, 57 (38%) deviated from recommended treatment. Deviation occurred in the form of alternative (28, 49%) versus additional procedures (29, 51%). Algorithm deviators underwent significantly more procedures than non-deviators (median 1 vs. 2, p < 0.001). Cox model indicated no difference in OS associated with algorithm deviation (HR 1.19, p = 0.58) when controlling for age and tumor characteristics.ConclusionThis literature-based algorithm helps standardize treatment protocols in patients with LG-NELM and can reduce cost and risk by minimizing unnecessary procedures. Prospective implementation and validation is required.     

A slime of the times: Two cases of acute irritant contact dermatitis from homemade slime

We describe two cases of acute‐onset erythema, peeling, and pruritus or tenderness isolated to the palmar surface of the hands. A detailed exposure history revealed significant periods of contact with homemade slime; given the clinical findings and timing of exposure, acute contact dermatitis of the hands was suspected. Symptoms and clinical findings resolved after avoidance of the suspected causative contactants. There are few if any reported cases of contact dermatitis to homemade slime in the literature; this serves to highlight the importance of a thorough exposure history in the evaluation of hand dermatitis.