Background: This study explores the incidence of patient-reported major toxicity—symptoms rated “moderate,” “severe,” or “very severe”—for chemotherapy regimens commonly used in early breast cancer. Patients and Methods: Female patients aged 21 years or older completed a validated Patient-Reported Symptom Monitoring instrument and rated 17 symptoms throughout adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Fisher's exact tests compared differences in percentages in symptom ratings, and general linear regression was used to model the incidence of patient-reported major toxicity. Results: In 152 patients, the mean age was 54 years (range, 24–77), and 112 (74%) were white; 51% received an anthracycline-based regimen. The proportion of patients rating fatigue, constipation, myalgia, diarrhea, nausea, peripheral neuropathy, and swelling of arms or legs as a major toxicity at any time during chemotherapy varied significantly among four chemotherapy regimens (p < .05). The mean (SD) number of symptoms rated major toxicities was 6.3 (3.6) for anthracycline-based and 4.4 (3.5) for non-anthracycline-based regimens (p = .001; possible range, 0–17 symptoms). Baseline higher body mass index (p = .03), patient-reported Karnofsky performance status ≤80 (p = .0003), and anthracycline-based regimens (p = .0003) were associated with greater total number of symptoms rated major toxicities (alternative model: chemotherapy duration, p < .0001). Twenty-six percent of dose reductions (26 of 40), 75% of hospitalizations (15 of 20), and 94% of treatment discontinuations (15 of 16) were in anthracycline-based regimens. Conclusion: Capturing multiple toxicity outcomes throughout chemotherapy enables oncologists and patients to understand the range of side effects as they discuss treatment efficacies. Continuous symptom monitoring may aid in the timely development of interventions that minimize toxicity and improve outcomes.

Background: In postmenopausal women diagnosed with breast cancer (BC), most BC tumors are hormone receptor positive and guidelines recommend adjuvant endocrine therapy that includes an aromatase inhibitor (AI). This study investigates the impact of a 6-week, home-based, self-directed walking program on the commonly reported side effect of AI-associated arthralgia (AIAA). Materials and Methods: In this phase II trial, consented BC patients were randomized to walking Intervention (n = 31) or Wait List Control (WLC; n = 31). Eligibility criteria included: stage 0–III BC, on AI for at least 4 weeks, ≥3 on a 5-point scale inquiring about joint symptom intensity “at its worst,” and exercising ≤150 minutes per week. Outcomes were self-reported joint symptoms and psychosocial measures. Analyses comparing Intervention and WLC groups were conducted on an intention-to-treat basis to assess intervention impact at 6 weeks (postintervention) and at 6-months follow-up. Adjusted means were calculated to assess differences in two groups. Results: In our final sample (n = 62), mean age was 64 years, 74% were white, and 63% had a body mass index of 30 or higher. At postintervention, Intervention group participants reported significantly increased walking minutes per week, reduced stiffness, less difficulty with activities of daily living (ADL), and less perceived helplessness in managing joint symptoms. At 6-months follow-up (postwalking period in both Intervention and WLC), walking minutes per week had decreased significantly; however, improvements in stiffness and difficulty with ADLs were maintained. Conclusion: This study adds to the growing evidence base suggesting exercise as a safe alternative or adjunct to medications for the management of AIAA.

BACKGROUND: National guidelines recommend that patients with a cancer diagnosis engage in regular physical activity to reduce cancer‐related fatigue, maintain quality of life and physical function, and improve overall prognosis and survival. This study investigates oncology provider communications about physical activity during routine clinic visits with patients with early‐stage breast, colon, or prostate cancer.METHODS: This study used a retrospective chart review for documentation of inquiries or recommendations pertaining to physical activity in clinician notes and after‐visit patient summaries.RESULTS: In a 1‐month period, 55 oncology providers had 361 encounters (clinic visits) with early‐stage cancer patients. Thirty‐five percent of these encounters included a provider communication about “physical activity,” “exercise,” or “activity.” Encounters with a medical oncologist resulted in a physical activity communication 55% of the time, whereas encounters with other clinician specialties did so 20% of the time (P < .0001). The likelihood of a physical activity communication increased with patient age (P < .001). When the encounter was with a patient who was being seen for surveillance, chemotherapy, or endocrine treatment, the rate of physical activity communications was significantly higher (46%, 37%, and 58%, respectively) than the rate when the visit was during radiation treatment or surgery (6% and 19%, respectively; P < .0001).CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that it is feasible for oncology providers to have physical activity communications during routine clinic visits; however, the frequency of physical activity communications varies among providers. Interventions are needed to remind and encourage all oncology providers to encourage their patients with early‐stage cancer to be physically active. Cancer 2016;122:470–476. © 2015 American Cancer Society.