Despite spending more per patient than any other country, the quality of US health care remains suboptimal.¹ This paradox has led to growing emphasis on the need for value-based health care, which is characterized by the “Triple Aim” of improved patient experience of care, better health of the population, and reduced per capita cost of health care.² In cancer care delivery, costs are expected by 2020 to rise to $173 billion per year,³ in part because of the aging population and high expense associated with caring for geriatric patients.⁴ Innovative solutions are needed to transform the health care system.

Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer worldwide and is one of the leading causes of cancer death. The incidence, pathological features, and clinical outcomes in breast cancer differ by geographical distribution and across racial and ethnic populations. Importantly, racial and ethnic diversity in breast cancer clinical trials is lacking, with both Blacks and Hispanics underrepresented. In this forum article, breast cancer researchers from across the globe discuss the factors contributing to racial and ethnic breast cancer disparities and highlight specific implications of precision oncology approaches for equitable provision of breast cancer care to improve outcomes and address disparities.

The Patient Care Connect Program (PCCP) is a lay patient navigation program, implemented by the University of Alabama at Birmingham Health System Cancer Community Network. The PCCP’s goal is to provide better health and health care, as well as to lower overall expenditures. The program focuses on enhancing the health of patients, with emphasis on patient empowerment and promoting proactive participation in health care. Navigator training emphasizes palliative care principles and includes development of skills to facilitate advance care planning conversations. Lay navigators are integrated into the health care team, with the support of a nurse supervisor, physician medical director, and administrative champion. The intervention focuses on patients with high needs to reach those with the greatest potential for benefit from supportive services. Navigator activities are guided by frequent distress assessments, which help to identify patient concerns across multiple domains, triage patients to appropriate resources, and ultimately overcome barriers to health care. In this article, we describe the PCCP’s development, infrastructure, selection and training of lay navigators, and program operations.

Background: Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is an ideal environment for shared decision-making because of the large number of guideline-based treatment options with similar efficacy but different toxicity profiles. This qualitative analysis describes patient and provider factors that influence decision-making in treatment of MBC. Materials and Methods: Patients and community oncologists completed in-person interviews. Academic medical oncologists participated in focus groups. Interviews and focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using NVivo. Using an a priori model based on the Ottawa Framework, two independent coders analyzed transcripts using a constant comparative method. Major themes and exemplary quotes were extracted. Results: Participants included 20 patients with MBC, 6 community oncologists, and 5 academic oncologists. Analysis of patient interviews revealed a decision-making process characterized by the following themes: decision-making style, contextual factors, and preferences. Patient preference subthemes include treatment efficacy, physical side effects of treatment, emotional side effects of treatment, cognitive side effects of treatment, cost and financial toxicity, salience of cutting-edge treatment options (clinical trial or newly approved medication), treatment logistics and convenience, personal and family responsibilities, treatment impact on daily activities, participation in self-defining endeavors, attending important events, and pursuing important goals. Physician decisions emphasized drug-specific characteristics (treatment efficacy, side effects, cost) rather than patient preferences, which might impact treatment choice. Conclusion: Although both patients with MBC and oncologists considered treatment characteristics when making decisions, patients’ considerations were broader than oncologists’, incorporating contextual factors such as the innovative value of the treatment and life responsibilities. Differences in perspectives between patients and oncologists suggests the value of tools to facilitate systematic communication of preferences in the setting of MBC. Implications for Practice: Both patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and oncologists emphasized importance of efficacy and physical side effects when making treatment decisions. However, other patient considerations for making treatment decisions were broader, incorporating contextual factors such as the logistics of treatments, personal and family responsibilities, and ability to attend important events. Furthermore, individual patients varied substantially in priorities that they want considered in treatment decisions. Differences in perspectives between patients and oncologists suggest the value of tools to facilitate systematic elicitation of preferences and communication of those preferences to oncologists for integration into decision-making in MBC.