绝经前乳腺癌妇女卵巢功能抑制的临床管理:对 ASCO 成员的调查。

IF 4.7 3区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY
Catherine M Kelly, Kathleen E Bennett, Caitriona Cahir, Andrea Eisen, Lajos Pusztai
{"title":"绝经前乳腺癌妇女卵巢功能抑制的临床管理:对 ASCO 成员的调查。","authors":"Catherine M Kelly, Kathleen E Bennett, Caitriona Cahir, Andrea Eisen, Lajos Pusztai","doi":"10.1200/OP-24-00502","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Ovarian function suppression (OFS) with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists (GnRHas) is a standard of care for premenopausal patients with high-risk stage II/III hormone receptor-positive breast cancer (BC). Practical guidance on the optimal choice of GnRHa, timing, schedule, and monitoring is limited. Our aim was to determine how oncologists use OFS in routine care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We designed a questionnaire to determine the choice of GnRHa, schedule, duration, initiation, use of bone modifiers, and monitoring of estradiol (E2). The questionnaire was sent to oncologists treating BC, in practice for >1 year and participating in the ASCO Research Survey Pool (RSP). It was also forwarded by investigators to oncologists meeting these criteria. The survey was open between November 14, 2023, and January 5, 2024.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 996 oncologists participating in the ASCO RSP, 178 (18%) completed the survey. An additional 56 oncologists contacted by investigators responded. Respondents were from the United States (57%), Asia (15%), and Europe (14%). Goserelin (54%) and leuprolide (39%) were the most frequently used GnRHas and were administered once every month by 46%. Approaches to starting GnRHas were varied. Most continued them for the duration of aromatase inhibitor therapy (57%). Estradiol monitoring was performed regularly, sometimes, or never by 43%, 27%, and 27%, respectively. The E2 assays used were standard (65%), ultrasensitive (16%), and unknown (14%). Interpreting E2 assay results were considered difficult by 55%; however, 62% of oncologists changed treatment on the basis of them. A total of 92% of respondents would like ASCO guidance on the practical use of OFS.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Considerable practice variation exists for similar clinical scenarios in OFS administration. Respondents would welcome ASCO guidance on all aspects of OFS.</p>","PeriodicalId":14612,"journal":{"name":"JCO oncology practice","volume":" ","pages":"OP2400502"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical Management of Ovarian Function Suppression in Premenopausal Women With Breast Cancer: A Survey of Members of ASCO.\",\"authors\":\"Catherine M Kelly, Kathleen E Bennett, Caitriona Cahir, Andrea Eisen, Lajos Pusztai\",\"doi\":\"10.1200/OP-24-00502\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Ovarian function suppression (OFS) with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists (GnRHas) is a standard of care for premenopausal patients with high-risk stage II/III hormone receptor-positive breast cancer (BC). Practical guidance on the optimal choice of GnRHa, timing, schedule, and monitoring is limited. Our aim was to determine how oncologists use OFS in routine care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We designed a questionnaire to determine the choice of GnRHa, schedule, duration, initiation, use of bone modifiers, and monitoring of estradiol (E2). The questionnaire was sent to oncologists treating BC, in practice for >1 year and participating in the ASCO Research Survey Pool (RSP). It was also forwarded by investigators to oncologists meeting these criteria. The survey was open between November 14, 2023, and January 5, 2024.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 996 oncologists participating in the ASCO RSP, 178 (18%) completed the survey. An additional 56 oncologists contacted by investigators responded. Respondents were from the United States (57%), Asia (15%), and Europe (14%). Goserelin (54%) and leuprolide (39%) were the most frequently used GnRHas and were administered once every month by 46%. Approaches to starting GnRHas were varied. Most continued them for the duration of aromatase inhibitor therapy (57%). Estradiol monitoring was performed regularly, sometimes, or never by 43%, 27%, and 27%, respectively. The E2 assays used were standard (65%), ultrasensitive (16%), and unknown (14%). Interpreting E2 assay results were considered difficult by 55%; however, 62% of oncologists changed treatment on the basis of them. A total of 92% of respondents would like ASCO guidance on the practical use of OFS.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Considerable practice variation exists for similar clinical scenarios in OFS administration. Respondents would welcome ASCO guidance on all aspects of OFS.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14612,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JCO oncology practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"OP2400502\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JCO oncology practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1200/OP-24-00502\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JCO oncology practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/OP-24-00502","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:使用促性腺激素释放激素激动剂(GnRHas)进行卵巢功能抑制(OFS)是高风险 II/III 期激素受体阳性乳腺癌(BC)绝经前患者的标准治疗方法。关于 GnRHa 的最佳选择、时间、计划和监测的实用指导非常有限。我们的目的是确定肿瘤学家在常规治疗中如何使用 OFS:我们设计了一份调查问卷,以确定 GnRHa 的选择、时间安排、持续时间、启动、骨调节剂的使用以及雌二醇(E2)的监测。调查问卷发送给治疗BC、从业时间超过1年且参与ASCO研究调查库(RSP)的肿瘤学家。调查人员还将问卷转发给符合上述标准的肿瘤学家。调查时间为 2023 年 11 月 14 日至 2024 年 1 月 5 日:在参加 ASCO RSP 的 996 位肿瘤学家中,有 178 位(18%)完成了调查。调查人员联系的另外 56 名肿瘤学家也做出了回应。受访者分别来自美国(57%)、亚洲(15%)和欧洲(14%)。戈舍瑞林(54%)和亮丙瑞林(39%)是最常用的促肾上腺皮质激素,46%的受访者每月使用一次。开始使用促肾上腺皮质激素的方法多种多样。大多数人在芳香化酶抑制剂治疗期间继续使用(57%)。定期、有时或从不进行雌二醇监测的比例分别为 43%、27% 和 27%。使用的 E2 检测方法有标准(65%)、超灵敏(16%)和未知(14%)。55%的受访者认为解读 E2 检测结果很困难,但 62% 的肿瘤学家根据检测结果改变了治疗方法。共有 92% 的受访者希望 ASCO 就 OFS 的实际使用提供指导:结论:在类似的临床情况下,OFS 的使用存在相当大的实践差异。受访者希望 ASCO 就 OFS 的各个方面提供指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Clinical Management of Ovarian Function Suppression in Premenopausal Women With Breast Cancer: A Survey of Members of ASCO.

Purpose: Ovarian function suppression (OFS) with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists (GnRHas) is a standard of care for premenopausal patients with high-risk stage II/III hormone receptor-positive breast cancer (BC). Practical guidance on the optimal choice of GnRHa, timing, schedule, and monitoring is limited. Our aim was to determine how oncologists use OFS in routine care.

Methods: We designed a questionnaire to determine the choice of GnRHa, schedule, duration, initiation, use of bone modifiers, and monitoring of estradiol (E2). The questionnaire was sent to oncologists treating BC, in practice for >1 year and participating in the ASCO Research Survey Pool (RSP). It was also forwarded by investigators to oncologists meeting these criteria. The survey was open between November 14, 2023, and January 5, 2024.

Results: Of 996 oncologists participating in the ASCO RSP, 178 (18%) completed the survey. An additional 56 oncologists contacted by investigators responded. Respondents were from the United States (57%), Asia (15%), and Europe (14%). Goserelin (54%) and leuprolide (39%) were the most frequently used GnRHas and were administered once every month by 46%. Approaches to starting GnRHas were varied. Most continued them for the duration of aromatase inhibitor therapy (57%). Estradiol monitoring was performed regularly, sometimes, or never by 43%, 27%, and 27%, respectively. The E2 assays used were standard (65%), ultrasensitive (16%), and unknown (14%). Interpreting E2 assay results were considered difficult by 55%; however, 62% of oncologists changed treatment on the basis of them. A total of 92% of respondents would like ASCO guidance on the practical use of OFS.

Conclusion: Considerable practice variation exists for similar clinical scenarios in OFS administration. Respondents would welcome ASCO guidance on all aspects of OFS.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
7.50%
发文量
518
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信