Variations in treatment and survival in breast cancer

BRCA Testing for Patients Treated in Italy: A National Survey of Breast Centers Associated with Senonetwork

BACKGROUND

Breast units (BUs) provide breast cancer (BC) care, including prevention, treatment, and genetic assessment. Genetic research has highlighted BRCA1/2 mutations as key hereditary BC risk factors. BRCA testing is crucial for personalized treatment and prevention strategies. However, the integration of BRCA testing in Italian BUs faces multiple challenges. This study, by Senonetwork Italia, aimed to evaluate genetic testing practices and identify obstacles within Italian BUs.

METHODS

Senonetwork Italia conducted a 16-question web-based survey involving 153 BUs. The survey assessed aspects of BRCA testing, including timing, urgency, counseling, patient selection, and multi-gene panels.

RESULTS

Of the 153 BUs, 109 (71.2%) responded. Testing before surgery was performed by 70.6% of centers, with urgent cases acknowledged by 87.2%. Most centers (56.0%) arranged urgent pre-test counseling within a week. BRCA mutation status influenced treatment decisions in 99.1% of cases. Multi-gene panels were used by 33.0% of centers for all genetic counseling cases, while 56.0% followed standard referral criteria. The main challenges included cost, reimbursement, and reporting timelines.

CONCLUSIONS

This survey highlights significant variations in BRCA testing practices across Italian BUs and identifies key logistical and financial challenges. There is a need for standardized practices of genetic testing to ensure personalized and effective BC management in Italy.

A Pilot Study to Show Longitudinal Trends in Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) in a Cohort of Breast Cancer Patients Under Treatment at a Tertiary Healthcare Facility in Bhubaneswar, India

Introduction

Breast cancer incidence has overtaken that of cervical cancer among women in India according to the Globacon 2020 reports. Cancer management is also being streamlined at the Center and district levels, such that comprehensive integrated management is offered to cases to optimize the best results. In breast cancer, there are two modes of surgery namely Breast Conservation Surgery(BCS) and Modified Radical Mastectomy (MRM) now over 2 decades, with recommended Chemo radiation depending on the extent of the disease. HRQOL (Health-related Quality of Life) studies have been done in these groups of patients, due to their added relevance in terms of the loss of a vital organ like the breast. EORTC 30 and BR23 are standardized and detailed tools that have been seen to estimate QOL, keeping in mind a whole array of domains that are affected by the disease.

Objective

To evaluate the "Body Image" and "Quality of life" (QOL) in operated breast cancer patients using BR -23 and EORTC - QLQ- questionnaire at 1month (after surgery) and then 3 to 4 months after surgery.

Methods

This article attempts to draw a comparison among of EORTC30 and BR 23 scores calculated for 46 breast cancer patients operated during the pandemic time in one center and consenting to repeat the measures at pre-decided three time periods during the course of management.

Results

No significant differences are noted in the mean scores for EORTC 30 and BR23 for the two types of surgeries. Visit 1 scores for both modes of surgery are over 75 and by Visit 3 become less than 55 for EORTC. BR 23 (which measures the symptoms core to Breast cancer) at all 3 visits are between 45 to 55. Friedman's test shows that the scores are not significant for age groups, the number of living children, or lifestyle factors like alcohol or tobacco chewing, though quadratic graphs depict the distinct variations in the scores at the 3 times reinforcing the need for follow-up of mental health in these subjects at intervals. The study largely brings out a strong need for repeated follow-up and counseling at regular and short intervals, post-surgery in breast cancer patients. EORTC 30 and BR 23 tools are excellent to use to essay information on the mental health of patients with breast cancer.

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.

Breast cancer risk is increased in the years following false-positive breast cancer screening

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

A small number of studies have investigated breast cancer (BC) risk among women with a history of false-positive recall (FPR) in BC screening, but none of them has used time-to-event analysis while at the same time quantifying the effect of false-negative diagnostic assessment (FNDA). FNDA occurs when screening detects BC, but this BC is missed on diagnostic assessment (DA). As a result of FNDA, screenings that detected cancer are incorrectly classified as FPR. Our study linked data recorded in the Flemish BC screening program (women aged 50–69 years) to data from the national cancer registry. We used Cox proportional hazards models on a retrospective cohort of 298 738 women to assess the association between FPR and subsequent BC, while adjusting for potential confounders. The mean follow-up was 6.9 years. Compared with women without recall, women with a history of FPR were at an increased risk of developing BC [hazard ratio=2.10 (95% confidence interval: 1.92–2.31)]. However, 22% of BC after FPR was due to FNDA. The hazard ratio dropped to 1.69 (95% confidence interval: 1.52–1.87) when FNDA was excluded. Women with FPR have a subsequently increased BC risk compared with women without recall. The risk is higher for women who have a FPR BI-RADS 4 or 5 compared with FPR BI-RADS 3. There is room for improvement of diagnostic assessment: 41% of the excess risk is explained by FNDA after baseline screening.

The influence of socio-economic and locational disadvantage on survival after a diagnosis of lung or breast cancer in Western Australia

Objectives

The effects of demographic, locational and socio-economic disadvantage, and the influence of private health care on five-year mortality rates in patients with lung cancer or after breast cancer surgery in Western Australia were examined.

Methods

The Western Australian Record Linkage Project was used to extract all hospital morbidity, cancer and death records of all people with lung or breast cancer in Western Australia from 1982 to 1996. Mortality rate ratios after a diagnosis of lung cancer or breast cancer surgery were estimated using Cox regression. Two sets of analyses were carried out: demographically adjusted from 1982 to 1996; and demographically and disadvantage adjusted from 1992 to 1996.

Results

Overall, 87.7% of lung cancer and 17.8% of breast cancer patients were deceased by five years. Lung and breast cancer patients treated in rural hospitals had higher mortality rates (1992-1996: relative risk (RR) 1.24, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07-1.44, and RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.92-1.56, respectively; 1982-1996: RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.11- 1.30, and RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.06-1.33, respectively), whereas location of residence had little effect. Lung and breast cancer patients treated in private hospitals had lower mortality (1992-1996: RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.76-0.95, and RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.77-1.05, respectively; 1982-1996: RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.84-0.97, and RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.85-0.99, respectively), although insurance status was not a factor. Women with breast cancer had significantly worse survival in the more socio-economically disadvantaged groups (1992-1996: RR 1.41 to 1.26; 1982-1996: RR 1.45 to 1.29).

Conclusions

Survival was poorer in patients treated in the public hospital system, but the possession of private health insurance was not predictive of better outcomes. People treated in rural hospitals had worse survival, whereas location of residence was not an independent factor. Women in more socio-economically advantaged groups who underwent breast cancer surgery had improved survival.

Life after the cancer strategy: analysis of surgical workload in the general hospital setting

BACKGROUND

The National Cancer Strategy heralded a major reorganisation of the delivery of cancer services in Ireland. As a result of this policy, cancer care was centralised to eight centres. The impact of this strategy on hospitals no longer providing cancer services has not been analysed to date.

AIM

The aim of this study was to examine the impact of centralisation of cancer services on surgical workload at Mayo General Hospital.

METHODS

Data pertaining to all surgical procedures performed in 2007 (prior to the introduction of the National Cancer Strategy) and 2011 were obtained using the Hospital Inpatient Enquiry system. Histopathology reports and theatre registers were also analysed to ensure accuracy of the data.

RESULTS

The numbers of elective and emergency surgical admissions during 2007 and 2011 were broadly similar (2,581 vs. 2,662). One hundred and thirty-five oncological procedures (colorectal and breast) were carried out in 2007 compared with 50 (colorectal) in 2011. This represents a 63% reduction in cancer surgery workload following the implementation of the National Cancer Strategy. There was a concomitant increase in surgery performed for benign conditions (laparoscopic cholecystectomy and hernia repair), which coincided with the innovative introduction of 43 ring-fenced surgical in-patient beds in June 2010.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates the impact of the centralisation of cancer services on surgical workload in a non-cancer centre. Our results show that there continues to be a role for general hospitals in the provision of elective surgical services. Hospital network arrangements have the potential to facilitate such developments.

Clinical outcome data for symptomatic breast cancer: the Breast Cancer Clinical Outcome Measures (BCCOM) Project

Background:

Data collection for screen-detected breast cancer in the United Kingdom is fully funded, which has led to improvements in clinical practice. However, data on symptomatic cancer are deficient, and the aim of this project was to monitor the current practice.

Methods:

A data set was designed together with surrogate outcome measures to reflect best practice. Data from cancer registries initially required the consent of clinicians, but in the third year anonymised data were available.

Results:

The quality of data improved, but this varied by region and only a third of the cases were validated by clinicians. Regional variations in mastectomy rates were identified, and one-third of patients who underwent conservative surgery for the treatment invasive breast cancer were not recorded as receiving radiotherapy.

Conclusion:

National data are essential to ensure that all patients receive appropriate treatment for breast cancer, but variations still exist in the United Kingdom and further improvement in data capture is required.

Season of diagnosis and prognosis in breast and prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients with breast or prostate cancer diagnosed during the summer season have been observed to have better survival. The extent to which this is due to biological and/or health care system related factors is unclear.

METHODS

Using the Swedish Cancer Register and clinical databases, we analyzed overall survival by month of diagnosis among the incident cases of breast (n = 89,630) cancer and prostate (n = 72,375) cancer diagnosed from 1960 to 2004. We retrieved data on tumor stage from 1976 for breast cancer and 1997 for prostate cancer. Cox proportional hazards models were used to calculate relative risk of survival by the season of diagnosis.

RESULTS

There was a higher hazard ratio of death in men and women diagnosed with cancer in the summer with a relative hazard of 1.20 (95% confidence interval 1.15-1.25) for July for prostate cancer and 1.14 (95% confidence interval 1.09-1.19) for August for breast cancer when compared to being diagnosed in January. This difference coincided with a lower mean number of cases diagnosed per day, and a higher proportion of advanced cases diagnosed in the summer. This pattern of presentation was stronger in the later years.

CONCLUSION

The difference in stage distribution explains the seasonal variation in prognosis seen in this study. The variation may be because of structure of the health care system and a strong tradition of vacationing from mid June to mid August. Thus, the health care infrastructure and the late presentation of symptomatic disease may influence cancer survival studied by season of diagnosis substantially.

Delayed diagnosis of breast cancer in women recalled for suspicious screening mammography

PURPOSE

To determine the frequency, pathology and causes of a delay in cancer diagnosis in women recalled for suspicious screening mammography.

METHODS

We included all 290,943 screening mammograms of women aged 50-75 years, who underwent biennial screening mammography between 1st January 1995 and 1st January 2006. During a follow-up period of at least 2 years, clinical data, breast imaging reports, biopsy results and breast surgery reports were collected of all 3513 women with a positive screening result. Tumour stages of breast cancers with a diagnostic delay (defined as breast cancer confirmation more than 3 months following a positive mammography screen) were compared with those of cancers diagnosed within 3 months following referral and with interval cancers.

RESULTS

A diagnostic delay occurred in 97 (6.5%) of 1503 screen-detected cancers. These 97 false-negative assessments comprised significantly more ductal cancers in situ (26.8%) than did cancers with an adequate assessment after recall (15.5%, p=0.004) or interval cancers (3.7%, p<0.001). Compared with interval cancers, cancers with a false-negative assessment had a more favourable tumour size (T1a-c, 87.3% versus T1a-c, 46.4%; p<0.001) and showed significantly fewer cases with axillary lymph node metastases (22.5% versus 48.2%; p<0.001). Between hospitals having performed the workup of at least 500 referred women each, the percentage of women with a false-negative assessment varied from 5.0% to 9.1% (p=0.03). In these hospitals, improper classification of lesions at diagnostic mammography comprised 64.4% of false-negative assessments.

CONCLUSION

We found that 6.5% of recalled women experienced a delay in breast cancer diagnosis, with significant performance variations between hospitals.

Improvement of best practice in early breast cancer: actionable surgeon and hospital factors

To identify actionable elements for improving best practice, this study examined the relative effects of patient, surgeon and hospital factors on surgical treatment variation of 2,929 early breast cancer patients, diagnosed from January 1998 to January 2002 in the region of the Comprehensive Cancer Centre North-Netherlands. Multilevel logistic regression was used to analyze the hierarchically structured data. Apart from the patient level, 43.3% of the treatment variation was due to the hospital and 56.7% to the surgeon, after adjustment for patient characteristics. Although hospital factors like volume, teaching status, and management and policy contributed to this variation, multidisciplinary care seemed the most important actionable hospital factor. Although the surgeon was shown to be an important starting point for quality improvement, actionable elements seemed difficult to identify as factors like surgeon experience and volume were not conclusive and significant variance on this level remained (sigma2 = 0.149, SE 0.053). We conclude that multidisciplinary care can improve best practice and that further research into actionable surgeon factors is needed.

Reducing the Global Breast Cancer Burden: The Importance of Patterns of Care Research

Breast cancer treatment guidelines are not uniformly followed in clinical practice, with evidence for substantial variations in treatment patterns, quality of care, and patient outcomes among and within countries. The factors that drive treatment decisions are unclear. Furthermore, the impact of different treatment strategies on survival is poorly understood outside the clinical trial setting. Sources of patterns of care information often have limitations in completeness, quality, timeliness of reporting, and relevance to the larger population. Patterns of care studies frequently lack details on cancer stage at diagnosis, tumor biology, and treatment received. It is difficult to compare data between studies and/or track changes over time because of variations in data sources and collection techniques. Thus, the design and implementation of a global registry is sorely needed in order to prospectively evaluate worldwide patterns of care and outcomes in patients with breast cancer. Components of this registry should include random selection of centers of variable practice settings in multiple countries and accurate and rapid data reporting at prestudy and follow-up timepoints. Data collected would include tumor and demographic factors, staging information, treatment rendered, and survival. Variables that influenced the treatment selected would be assessed. This unique international effort would allow the development of strategies to improve diagnostic and treatment-related standards of care and survival outcomes, thus reducing the breast cancer burden worldwide.

Subsequent surgery after initial breast conserving surgery: a population based study

BACKGROUND

In line with current Australian early breast cancer management guidelines, more women are having breast conserving surgery to treat breast cancer when appropriate. Some women will undergo further surgery because of involved margins, early local relapse, or other factors including patient choice. The aim of this study was to investigate whether socio-economic, demographic or hospital factors were associated with the risk of re-excision or subsequent mastectomy.

METHODS

A record linkage population-based study on 12 711 women diagnosed with breast cancer in Western Australia from 1982 to 2000 who underwent breast surgery within 12 months of diagnosis was performed. Logistic regression was used to identify social, demographic and hospital factors associated with the risk of undergoing further surgery following initial breast conserving surgery.

RESULTS

The proportion of women undergoing initial breast conserving surgery doubled from 33% in 1982-1985 to 72% in 1998-2000. The proportion of women who underwent further surgery following initial breast conserving surgery decreased from 50 to 30% over the same period. The risk of re-excision or subsequent mastectomy was between 2.4 (95% CI 1.7-3.4) and 5.0 (95% CI 3.4-7.4) times greater if initial surgery was performed in a non-metropolitan hospital compared to Perth hospitals. Younger women were between 1.7 (95% CI 1.4-2.0) and 2.1 (95% CI 1.5-3.0) times more likely to undergo re-excisions compared to women aged 50-64 years of age.

CONCLUSIONS

Young women and women initially treated in non-metropolitan hospitals were at an increased risk of re-excision or a subsequent mastectomy following initial breast conserving surgery to treat breast cancer. Efforts need to be directed towards improving specialist health services outside of Perth if women continue to be treated for breast cancer in non-metropolitan hospitals.

Mammography screening in the Netherlands: delay in the diagnosis of breast cancer after breast cancer screening

In a prospective study we determined the frequency and causes of delay in the diagnosis of breast cancer after suspicious screening mammography. We included all women aged 50–75 years who underwent biennial screening mammography in the southern breast cancer screening region of the Netherlands between 1 January 1996 and 1 January 2002. Clinical data, breast imaging reports, biopsy results and breast surgery reports were collected of all women with a positive screening result with a minimum of 2-year follow-up. Of 153 969 mammographic screening examinations, 1615 (1.05%) were positive screens. Breast cancer was diagnosed in 770 (47.9%) of 1607 women for whom follow-up information was available, yielding a cancer detection rate of 5.0 per 1000 women screened. Breast cancer was diagnosed within 3 months following a positive screen in 722 cases (93.8%). The diagnostic delay was 4–6, 7–12 and 13–24 months, respectively, in 11 (1.4%), 24 (3.1%) and nine (1.2%) patients. In four other patients (0.5%), breast cancer was diagnosed after a repeat positive screen, resulting in a diagnostic delay of 25–27 months. Reasons for a diagnostic delay >3 months were erroneous mammographic interpretation of suspicious lesions as benign or probably benign lesions (33 cases), benign biopsies from a malignant lesion (10), and omission to biopsy or remove a lesion that was suspicious at breast imaging (4) or core biopsy (1). We conclude that there is room for improvement in the workup of patients with a positive screening mammography, as seen from data in this screening region. To improve the workup, we suggest that other breast cancer screening programmes also identify delay in breast cancer diagnosis after a positive screen.