Healthcare providers' adherence to breast cancer guidelines in Europe: a systematic literature review

Implementing supplementary breast cancer screening in women with dense breasts: Insights from European radiographers and radiologists

INTRODUCTION

In response to the critical need for enhancing breast cancer screening for women with dense breasts, this study explored the understanding of challenges and requirements for implementing supplementary breast cancer screening for such women among clinical radiographers and radiologists in Europe.

METHOD

Fourteen (14) semi-structured online interviews were conducted with European clinical radiologists (n = 5) and radiographers (n = 9) specializing in breast cancer screening from 8 different countries: Denmark, Finland, Greece, Italy, Malta, the Netherlands, Switzerland, United Kingdom. The interview schedule comprised questions regarding professional background and demographics and 13 key questions divided into six subgroups, namely Supplementary Imaging, Training, Resources and Guidelines, Challenges, Implementing supplementary screening and Women's Perspective. Data analysis followed the six phases of reflexive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Six significant themes emerged from the data analysis: Understanding and experiences of supplementary imaging for women with dense breasts; Challenges and requirements related to training among clinical radiographers and radiologists; Awareness among radiographers and radiologists of guidelines on imaging women with dense breasts; Challenges to implement supplementary screening; Predictors of Implementing Supplementary screening; Views of radiologists and radiographers on women's perception towards supplementary screening.

CONCLUSION

The interviews with radiographers and radiologists provided valuable insights into the challenges and potential strategies for implementing supplementary breast cancer screening. These challenges included patient and staff related challenges. Implementing multifaceted solutions such as Artificial Intelligence integration, specialized training and resource investment can address these challenges and promote the successful implementation of supplementary screening. Further research and collaboration are needed to refine and implement these strategies effectively.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This study highlights the urgent need for specialized training programs and dedicated resources to enhance supplementary breast cancer screening for women with dense breasts in Europe. These resources include advanced imaging technologies, such as MRI or ultrasound, and specialized software for image analysis. Moreover, further research is imperative to refine screening protocols and evaluate their efficacy and cost-effectiveness, based on the findings of this study.

Rates of adherence to cancer treatment guidelines in Australia and the factors associated with adherence: A systematic review

Adherence to cancer treatment clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) varies enormously across Australia, despite being associated with improved patient outcomes. This systematic review aims to characterize adherence rates to active-cancer treatment CPGs in Australia and related factors to inform future implementation strategies. Five databases were systematically searched, abstracts were screened for eligibility, a full-text review and critical appraisal of eligible studies performed, and data extracted. A narrative synthesis of factors associated with adherence was conducted, and the median adherence rates within cancer streams calculated. A total of 21,031 abstracts were identified. After duplicates were removed, abstracts screened, and full texts reviewed, 20 studies focused on adherence to active-cancer treatment CPGs were included. Overall adherence rates ranged from 29% to 100%. Receipt of guideline recommended treatments was higher for patients who were younger (diffuse large B-cell lymphoma [DLBCL], colorectal, lung, and breast cancer); female (breast and lung cancer), and male (DLBCL and colorectal cancer); never smokers (DLBCL and lung cancer); non-Indigenous Australians (cervical and lung cancer); with less advanced stage disease (colorectal, lung, and cervical cancer), without comorbidities (DLBCL, colorectal, and lung cancer); with good-excellent Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (lung cancer); living in moderately accessible places (colon cancer); and; treated in metropolitan facilities (DLBLC, breast and colon cancer). This review characterized active-cancer treatment CPG adherence rates and associated factors in Australia. Future targeted CPG implementation strategies should account for these factors, to redress unwarranted variation particularly in vulnerable populations, and improve patient outcomes (Prospero number: CRD42020222962).

Prescriptive appropriateness in early breast cancer staging exams: preliminary investigation about adherence to the guidelines in the clinical practice

.

Characteristics and impact of interventions to support healthcare providers' compliance with guideline recommendations for breast cancer: a systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) offer evidence-based recommendations to improve quality of healthcare for patients. Suboptimal compliance with breast cancer guideline recommendations remains frequent, and has been associated with a decreased survival. The aim of this systematic review was to characterize and determine the impact of available interventions to support healthcare providers' compliance with CPGs recommendations in breast cancer healthcare.

METHODS

We searched for systematic reviews and primary studies in PubMed and Embase (from inception to May 2021). We included experimental and observational studies reporting on the use of interventions to support compliance with breast cancer CPGs. Eligibility assessment, data extraction and critical appraisal was conducted by one reviewer, and cross-checked by a second reviewer. Using the same approach, we synthesized the characteristics and the effects of the interventions by type of intervention (according to the EPOC taxonomy), and applied the GRADE framework to assess the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

We identified 35 primary studies reporting on 24 different interventions. Most frequently described interventions consisted in computerized decision support systems (12 studies); educational interventions (seven), audit and feedback (two), and multifaceted interventions (nine). There is low quality evidence that educational interventions targeted to healthcare professionals may improve compliance with recommendations concerning breast cancer screening, diagnosis and treatment. There is moderate quality evidence that reminder systems for healthcare professionals improve compliance with recommendations concerning breast cancer screening. There is low quality evidence that multifaceted interventions may improve compliance with recommendations concerning breast cancer screening. The effectiveness of the remaining types of interventions identified have not been evaluated with appropriate study designs for such purpose. There is very limited data on the costs of implementing these interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Different types of interventions to support compliance with breast cancer CPGs recommendations are available, and most of them show positive effects. More robust trials are needed to strengthen the available evidence base concerning their efficacy. Gathering data on the costs of implementing the proposed interventions is needed to inform decisions about their widespread implementation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

CRD42018092884 (PROSPERO).

Guideline adherence and implementation of tumor board therapy recommendations for patients with gastrointestinal cancer

PURPOSE

Although participation in multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTBs) is an obligatory quality criterion for certification, there is scarce evidence, whether MTB recommendations are consistent with consensus guidelines and whether they are followed in clinical practice. Reasons of guideline and tumor board deviations are poorly understood so far.

METHODS

MTB's recommendations from the weekly MTB for gastrointestinal cancers at the University Cancer Center Leipzig/Germany (UCCL) in 2020 were analyzed for their adherence to therapy recommendations as stated in National German guidelines and implementation within an observation period of 3 months. To assess adherence, an objective classification system was developed assigning a degree of guideline and tumor board adherence to each MTB case. For cases with deviations, underlying causes and influencing factors were investigated and categorized.

RESULTS

76% of MTBs were fully adherent to guidelines, with 16% showing deviations, mainly due to study inclusions and patient comorbidities. Guideline adherence in 8% of case discussions could not be determined, especially because there was no underlying guideline recommendation for the specific topic. Full implementation of the MTBs treatment recommendation occurred in 64% of all cases, while 21% showed deviations with primarily reasons of comorbidities and differing patient wishes. Significantly lower guideline and tumor board adherences were demonstrated in patients with reduced performance status (ECOG-PS ≥ 2) and for palliative intended therapy (p = 0.002/0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

The assessment of guideline deviations and adherence to MTB decisions by a systematic and objective quality assessment tool could become a meaningful quality criterion for cancer centers in Germany.

The association between guideline adherence, age and overall survival among women with non-metastatic breast cancer: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Conformity with treatment guidelines should benefit patients. Studies have reported variation in adherence to breast cancer (BC) guidelines, particularly among older women. This study investigated (i) whether adherence to treatment guideline recommendations for women with non-metastatic BC improves overall survival (OS), (ii) whether that relationship varies by age.

METHODOLOGY

MEDLINE and EMBASE were systematically searched for studies on guideline adherence and OS in women with non-metastatic BC, published after January 2000, which examined recommendations on breast surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy or endocrine therapy. Study results were summarised using narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria. The recommendations for each treatment covered were similar, but studies differed in their definitions of adherence. 5-year OS rates among patients having compliant treatment ranged from 91.3% to 93.2%, while rates among patients having non-compliant treatment ranged from 75.9% to 83.4%. Six studies reported an adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) for non-compliant treatment compared with compliant treatment; all concluded OS was worse among patients whose overall treatment was non-compliant (aHR range: 1.52 [1.30-1.82] to 2.57 [1.96-3.37]), but adjustment for potential confounders was limited. Worse adherence among older women was reported in 12/16 studies, but they did not provide consistent evidence on whether OS was associated with treatment adherence and age.

CONCLUSIONS

Individual studies reported that better adherence to guidelines improved OS among women with non-metastatic BC, but the evidence base has weaknesses including inconsistent definitions of adherence. More precise and consistent research designs, including the evaluation of barriers to adherence across the spectrum of healthcare practice, are required to fully understand guideline compliance, as well as the relationship between compliance and OS following a BC diagnosis.

Real-World Breast Cancer Patient Follow-Up Practices by Medical Oncologists in India-A Survey Report

Amol PatelBackground  In India, breast cancer patients' post-treatment follow-up practices are not known. We did this survey to understand how the breast cancer patients are followed-up and tried to explore the challenges associated with it. Methods  We conducted a survey-based study among Indian oncologists. Seven questions were framed pertaining to follow-up practices. Answers were provided in the form of multiple options. Google forms platform was used. Survey was circulated through social media apps and through mail. We sought suggestions and opinions to address the challenges from participants. Results  A total of 158 medical oncologists responded to this survey. 10% were not aware that only history and clinical examination are the scientific recommendations for follow-up. Ninety percent of the medical oncologists felt clinical breast examination as an uncomfortable practice for patients and physicians and 39% ordered a chest X-ray and an ultrasound abdomen. Annual mammogram was ordered by 83%, and blood investigations were recommended by 14% routinely. The majority (49.6%) felt that the absence of a female attendant, physician and patient factors were responsible for nonadherence to clinical breast examination. The DEXA scan was recommended by 84 (53%) medical oncologists regularly for patients on aromatase inhibitors, while 23 (14%) did not recommend it. Conclusion  There is a disparity between scientific recommendations and real-world follow-up practices. A large number of medical oncologists relied on chest X-ray and ultrasound abdomen. There is an unmet need to address this issue.

QUALITY APPRAISAL OF CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES ON PROVISION OF DENTAL SERVICES DURING THE FIRST MONTHS OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC

Objectives

To evaluate the quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on dental services provision during the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Materials and methods

We systematically searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, Epistemonikos, Trip databases, websites of CPG developers, compilers of CPGs, scientific societies and ministries of health to identify documents with recommendations intended to minimize the risk of COVID-19 transmission during dental care. Reviewers independently and in duplicate assessed the included CPGs using the AGREE II instrument. We calculated the standardized scores for the 6 domains and made a final recommendation about each CPG. The inter-appraiser agreement was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

Results

Twenty-three CPGs published were included. Most of the CPGs were from America (n = 15) and Europe (n = 6). The overall agreement between reviewers was very good (ICC = 0.93; 95%CI 0.87-0.95). The median score for each domain was the following: Scope and purpose 67% (IQR 20%); Stakeholder involvement 33% (IQR 14%); Rigour of development 13% (IQR 13%); Clarity of presentation 64% (IQR 31%); Applicability 19% (IQR 17%) and Editorial independence 8% (IQR 8%). Twenty two guidelines were not recommended by the reviewers. Only one of the CPGs was recommended with modifications. The median overall rate was 3 (IQR 1). All CPGs were classified as low quality.

Conclusions

The overall quality of CPGs on dental services provision during the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic was low, which makes its implementation difficult for clinicians and policy makers. Therefore, it is critical that developers are transparent and forthcoming about the difficulties that have arisen during the CPG development process.

Provider Barriers and Facilitators of Breast Cancer Guideline-Concordant Therapy Delivery in Botswana: A Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research Analysis

Introduction

Systemic treatment for breast cancer in sub‐Saharan Africa (SSA) is cost effective. However, there are limited real‐world data on the translation of breast cancer treatment guidelines into clinical practice in SSA. The study aimed to identify provider factors associated with adherence to breast cancer guideline‐concordant care at Princess Marina Hospital (PMH) in Botswana.

Materials and Methods

The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was used to conduct one‐on‐one semistructured interviews with breast cancer providers at PMH. Purposive sampling was used, and sample size was determined by thematic saturation. Transcribed interviews were double‐coded and analyzed in NVivo using an integrated analysis approach.

Results

Forty‐one providers across eight departments were interviewed. There were variations in breast cancer guidelines used. Facilitators included a strong tension for change and a government‐funded comprehensive cancer care plan. Common provider and health system barriers were lack of available resources, staff shortages and poor skills retention, lack of relative priority compared with HIV/AIDS, suboptimal interdepartmental communication, and lack of a clearly defined national cancer control policy. Community‐level barriers included accessibility and associated transportation costs. Participants recommended the formal implementation of future guidelines that involved key stakeholders in all phases of planning and implementation, strategic government buy‐in, expansion of multidisciplinary tumor boards, leveraging nongovernmental and academic partnerships, and setting up monitoring, evaluation, and feedback processes.

Discussion

The study identified complex, multilevel factors affecting breast cancer treatment delivery in Botswana. These results and recommendations will inform strategies to overcome specific barriers in order to promote standardized breast cancer care delivery and improve survival outcomes.

Implications for Practice

To address the increasing cancer burden in low‐ and middle‐income countries, resource‐stratified guidelines have been developed by multiple international organizations to promote high‐quality guideline‐concordant care. However, these guidelines still require adaptation in order to be successfully translated into clinical practice in the countries where they are intended to be used. This study highlights a systematic approach of evaluating important contextual factors associated with the successful adaptation and implementation of resource‐stratified guidelines in sub‐Saharan Africa. In Botswana, there is a critical need for local stakeholder input to inform country‐level and facility‐level resources, cancer care accessibility, and community‐level barriers and facilitators.

To address an increasing mortality burden, resource‐stratified guidelines have been developed to ensure that breast cancer care is matched to specific resources in low‐ and middle‐income countries. This article identifies facilitators and barriers to the use of breast cancer guidelines by oncology providers at Princess Marina Hospital in Botswana using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

Staging Investigations in Asymptomatic Early Breast Cancer Patients at the Cancer Centre of Southeastern Ontario

Background: In 2012, the American Society for Clinical Oncology (ASCO) identified five key opportunities in oncology to improve patient care, recommending against imaging tests for the staging of patients with early breast cancer (EBC) at low risk for metastases. Similarly, the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) guideline does not support radiological staging in asymptomatic EBC (aEBC). The purpose of this study was to assess local practice and outcomes of staging investigations (SIs) in aEBC at the Cancer Centre of Southeastern Ontario (CCSEO). Methods: A retrospective electronic and paper chart review was undertaken to identify all aEBC patients treated at our institution between January 2012 and December 2014. Patients with pathological staging of T1-T2 and N0-1 with any receptor status were included. We collected patient demographics, treatment and pathologic tumor characteristics. The use and outcomes of initial and follow-up SIs were recorded. Data were analyzed to determine associations between the use of SIs and clinical characteristics (chi-square tests, independent samples t-tests and Mann–Whitney U tests). Results: From 2012 to 2014, 295 asymptomatic EBC patients were identified. The mean age was 64, 81% were postmenopausal and 76% had breast conserving surgery. Stage distribution was as follows: stage I 42%, stage IIA 37% and stage IIB 21%. Receptor status was as follows: ER+ 84%, HER2+ 13% and triple negative 12%. Adjuvant chemotherapy was received by 36%, Trastuzumab by 10% and endocrine therapy by 76% of patients. Baseline SIs were performed in 168 patients (57%) for a total of 332 tests. Overt metastatic disease was found in five patients (one bone scan and four CT scans). Seventy-one out of the 168 patients (42%) who received initial staging imaging underwent 138 follow-up imaging tests, none of which were diagnostic for metastases. Nine patients with suspicious CT findings underwent biopsies, of which four were malignant (one metastatic breast cancer and three new primaries). Factors significantly associated with SI were as follows: younger age (p = 0.001), premenopausal status (p = 0.01), T2 stage (p < 0.001), N1 stage (p < 0.001), HER2 positive (p < 0.001), triple negative status (p = 0.007) and use of adjuvant chemotherapy (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Over a 3-year period at our institution, more than 50% of aEBC patients underwent a total of 470 initial and follow-up staging tests, yielding a cancer diagnosis (metastatic breast cancer or second primary cancer) in four patients. We, therefore, conclude that routine-staging investigations in aEBC patients have low diagnostic value, supporting current guidelines that recommend against the routine use of SI in this population.

Benefits and harms of breast cancer mammography screening for women at average risk of breast cancer: A systematic review for the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer

OBJECTIVES

Mammography screening is generally accepted in women aged 50-69, but the balance between benefits and harms remains controversial in other age groups. This study systematically reviews these effects to inform the European Breast Cancer Guidelines.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library for randomised clinical trials (RCTs) or systematic reviews of observational studies in the absence of RCTs comparing invitation to mammography screening to no invitation in women at average breast cancer (BC) risk. We extracted data for mortality, BC stage, mastectomy rate, chemotherapy provision, overdiagnosis and false-positive-related adverse effects. We performed a pooled analysis of relative risks, applying an inverse-variance random-effects model for three age groups (<50, 50-69 and 70-74). GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) was used to assess the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

We identified 10 RCTs including 616,641 women aged 38-75. Mammography reduced BC mortality in women aged 50-69 (relative risk (RR) 0.77, 95%CI (confidence interval) 0.66-0.90, high certainty) and 70-74 (RR 0.77, 95%CI 0.54-1.09, high certainty), with smaller reductions in under 50s (RR 0.88, 95%CI 0.76-1.02, moderate certainty). Mammography reduced stage IIA+ in women 50-69 (RR 0.80, 95%CI 0.64-1.00, very low certainty) but resulted in an overdiagnosis probability of 23% (95%CI 18-27%) and 17% (95%CI 15-20%) in under 50s and 50-69, respectively (moderate certainty). Mammography was associated with 2.9% increased risk of invasive procedures with benign outcomes (low certainty).

CONCLUSIONS

For women 50-69, high certainty evidence that mammography screening reduces BC mortality risk would support policymakers formulating strong recommendations. In other age groups, where the net balance of effects is less clear, conditional recommendations will be more likely, together with shared decision-making.

Breast cancer tumor heterogeneity has only little impact on the estimation of the Oncotype DX® recurrence score using Magee Equations and Magee Decision Algorithm™

Oncotype DX® assay is used to guide therapeutic decisions in early-stage invasive breast carcinoma but remains expensive. Magee Equations (MEs) and Magee Decision Algorithm (MDA) predict the Oncotype DX® recurrence score (RS) on the basis of histopathological parameters. The influence of intratumor heterogeneity on MEs and MDA remains uncertain. We compared Ki-67, estrogen and progesterone receptors, and human erb-b2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2 (HER2) status on tissue microarray cores with the corresponding findings on the whole slides to calculate MEs scores and to decide if Oncotype DX® testing was required as per MDA in two sets of 175 and 59 tumors, without and with Oncotype DX® results, respectively. Agreements in the interpretation of Ki-67, estrogen and progesterone receptors, and HER2 status were very good between limited areas and whole-slide analyses. This resulted also in very good agreements about the results of MEs and MDA. For 7 of 175 (4%) and 3 of 59 (5.1%) cases, MEs and MDA results in different tumor areas would have changed the indication to perform or not perform Oncotype DX® assays. Oncotype DX® RSs were significantly correlated with MEs and MDA results, but among cases initially predicted to have an RS ≤25 using MDA, 3 of 34 cases (8.8%) had in fact an RS >25. Tumor heterogeneity appears to have little impact on the estimation of the Oncotype DX® RS using MEs and MDA and would have permitted to avoid half of Oncotype DX® assays in our series. Caution is nevertheless required in discarding Oncotype DX® assay in cases with ME scores >18 associated with low mitotic activity.