e14144 Background: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use is relatively common among cancer patients. Data regarding CAM use in Brazil is scarce. We sought to define CAM use by cancer patients and investigate factors that might influence it. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of adults diagnosed with any cancer type who came to appointments at our outpatient clinic in January 2020. Chi-square tests were used to investigate the association between CAM use and age and gender Results: We interviewed 156 patients who consented to the face-to-face interview and all of them completed the questionnaires. Most patients were between 51 and 70 years-old; 56% were female and 55% had their cancer diagnosed in the last 12 months. Most cancer types were breast (17.4%), colorectal (16.7%), and lung (16.1%). More than 90% of the participants were on any active treatment. The prevalence of current CAM use was 29.6%. 58.7% of the patients did not believe CAM has anti-cancer properties, including 32.6% of patients who reported CAM use. Two-thirds of the participants have never discussed about CAM with their oncologists. Only 5.1% of the respondents would abandon conventional cancer treatment in order to use just CAM. Among CAM users, 55% referred multiple therapies use. Of those therapies, spiritual surgery was the most prevalent one. There was a significant higher proportion of females reporting CAM use (p = 0,029) as well as a higher proportion of CAM use among younger patients (p = 0,008). Conclusions: CAM use was common among our study population, especially spiritual surgery. Women and younger patients were more prone to use CAM. Although most patients would not abandon conventional treatment, many of them have never discussed about CAM with their oncologists.

Microsatellite instability (MSI) and POLD1 mutations are usually described in colorectal tumours in patients with polyposis syndrome but rarely found in breast tumours. This case describes a metastatic luminal B breast tumour in a young patient with an important family history of cancer. Mutational studies found a Variant of Uncertain Significance (VUS)-type alteration in POLD1 that motivated the study for MSI, which was found positive. Recent data point towards the use of pembrolizumab as a treatment option for tumour presenting with MSI instead of chemotherapy.

12060 Background: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use is relatively common among cancer patients. Data regarding CAM use in Brazil is scarce. We sought to define CAM use among cancer patients and investigate factors that might influence it. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of adults diagnosed with any cancer type who came to appointments at two cancer centers in Brazil from January 2020 to January 2021. Unadjusted and adjusted analyses were conducted by using Logistic Regression models to determine the association of covariates with binary outcome. Statistical analyses were performed with SAS 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NC). All tests were 2-sided, and P < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: In total, 319 patients who consented to the face-to-face interview were included and all of them completed the questionnaires. Most patients (52.4%) were between 51 and 70 years-old, 59,6% were female, 85,2% were from the private service and 67% had college graduate/baccalaureate. Most cancer types were from gastrointestinal tract (31,4%), breast (20.4%), lung (12.3%) and genitourinary type. More than 85% of the participants were on any active cancer treatment. The prevalence of current CAM use was 34.2% and 50.2% of the patients did not believe CAM has anti-cancer properties. Two-thirds of the participants have never discussed about CAM with their oncologists. Only 4.1% of the respondents would abandon conventional cancer treatment in order to use just CAM. Among CAM users, 55% referred multiple therapies use. Of those therapies, spiritual surgery was the most prevalent one. There was a significant higher proportion of females reporting CAM use (p = 0,008) as well as a higher proportion of CAM use among private patients (p = 0,008). Conclusions: CAM use was common among our study population, especially spiritual surgery. Women and private patients were more prone to use CAM. Although most patients would not abandon conventional treatment, many of them have never discussed about CAM with their oncologists.