Larger recipient vein caliber during lymphatic microsurgical preventive healing approach (LYMPHA) is associated with lower lymphedema rates

BACKGROUND

The lymphatic microsurgical preventive healing approach reduces the risk of lymphedema after axillary lymph node dissection. We identified surgical factors of Lymphatic Microsurgical Preventive Healing Approach (LYMPHA) that influence lymphedema rates focusing on the vein caliber used.

METHODS

A single-institution retrospective cohort study included breast cancer patients undergoing axillary lymph node dissection and LYMPHA (April 2021-November 2022) with a follow-up of at least 1 year. Lymphedema was defined as an increase of ≥10 units in the lymphedema index (measured using bioimpedance spectroscopy) from baseline. The primary outcome was the correlation between the lymphedema index of patients with a vein caliber of ≤2 mm vs > 2 mm.

RESULTS

Forty-eight patients with documented vein caliber were analyzed. The median baseline lymphedema index in patients with a vein caliber ≤2 mm was 2 (SD 3.04) and 2.2 (SD 2.03) for vein caliber >2 mm. (P = .57). After 1-year follow-up, the L-dex was 6.20 (SD 7.48) for vein caliber ≤2 mm and 1.60 (SD 5.85) for vein caliber >2 mm (P = .02). The L-dex difference from baseline was higher for vein caliber ≤2 mm compared to >2 mm (2.9 vs 0.10, P = .02). Larger vein caliber was associated with a lower L-dex at 3 months (P = .04) and a lesser difference from the baseline after 1 year (P = .03). This was maintained on univariate analysis and multivariate analysis controlling for radiation, chemotherapy, and number of lymph nodes excised.

CONCLUSION

Vein caliber >2 mm during LYMPHA axillary lymph node dissection is associated with a lower postoperative lymphedema index. These results can be enhanced by a multi-institutional study to improve standardization of this technique.

Association of relative resection volume with patient-reported outcomes applying different levels of oncoplastic breast conserving surgery - A retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

The American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) recently classified oncoplastic breast conserving surgery (OBCS) into two levels. The association of resection ratio during OBCS with patient-reported outcomes (PRO) is unclear.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with stage 0-III breast cancer undergoing OBCS between 01/2011-04/2023 at a Swiss university hospital, who completed at least one postoperative BREAST-Q PRO questionnaire were identified from a prospectively maintained institutional database. Outcomes included differences in PROs between patients after ASBrS level I (<20 % of breast tissue removed) versus level II surgery (20-50 %).

RESULTS

Of 202 eligible patients, 129 (63.9 %) underwent level I OBCS, and 73 (36.1 %) level II. Six patients (3.0 %) who underwent completion mastectomy were excluded. The median time to final PROs was 25.4 months. Patients undergoing ASBrS level II surgery were more frequently affected by delayed wound healing (p < 0.001). ASBrS level was not found to independently predict any BreastQ domain. However, delayed wound healing was shown to reduce short-term physical well-being (estimated difference -26.27, 95 % confidence interval [CI] -39.33 to -13.22, p < 0.001). Higher age was associated with improved PROs.

CONCLUSION

ASBrS level II surgery allows the removal of larger tumors without impairing PROs. Preventive measures for delayed wound healing and close postoperative follow-up to promptly treat wound healing disorders may avoid short-term reductions in physical well-being.

A Clinical Analysis of Prognosis and Patient-Reported Outcomes of Oncoplastic Breast-Conserving Surgery for Early Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study

PURPOSE

Approximately 25-30% of patients suffer from breast deformity and/or asymmetry after conventional breast-conserving surgery (CBCS). Generally, it is thought that oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OBCS) results in an improved cosmetic result; however, studies comparing the prognosis and aesthetic outcomes of CBCS and OBCS in early breast cancer (EBC) are inadequate.

METHODS

A total of 143 patients were included in this retrospective cohort study; 53 underwent OBCS and 90 underwent CBCS. The resected weight, complications, esthetic results, patient satisfaction, and recurrence rate were compared between the groups. Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) were assessed by the BREAST-Q questionnaire.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients in OBCS group was 43.8 years. This was younger than that in CBCS group (49.1 years, p < 0.001). Postoperative complications (11.3% vs. 8.9%, p = 0.64) and re-excision (5.7% vs. 6.7%, p > 0.99) rates were similar. The OBCS group had higher breast satisfaction and psychosocial well-being than the CBCS group (75 vs. 63, p < 0.001 and 84 vs. 77, p = 0.05); however, sexual well-being (56 vs. 66, p = 0.05) and physical well-being (65 vs. 76, p < 0.001) were worse in OBCS. After 42.3 (range: 12.6-69.2)-month median follow-up, no difference in event-free survival (EFS) was demonstrated between the groups (p = 0.13).

CONCLUSION

Although OBCS has the better aesthetic outcomes and identical oncological safety in comparison with CBCS, the sexual and physical well-being in OBCS are not improved for Asian patients. Hence, choosing an appropriate procedure may be more important for the typically small to moderate-sized breasts characteristic of Asian females unlike Westerners.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

The development of an archive of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in oncology: The Italian PRO4All project

BACKGROUND

Choosing the most adequate measure of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for a specific medical condition is not straightforward. This study aimed to develop a comprehensive archive of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), observer-reported outcome measures (ObsROMs) and caregiver-reported outcome measures (CROMs) in oncology and identify their main characteristics and target outcome domains.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

As part of the Italian PRO4All Project, we retrieved questionnaires through an extensive search of online databases. We developed a data extraction form to collect information on cancer type, questionnaire variant(s), recall period, and scoring system. We performed a content analysis of the questionnaires to assign each item a specific outcome domain according to a predefined 38-item taxonomy.

RESULTS

A total of 386 PROMs (n = 356), ObsROMs (n = 13) and CROMs (n = 17) were identified and described; of these, 358 were also analyzed in their content. 47.3 % of the instruments were cancer type-specific, 45.1 % were generic for cancer and 7.9 % were developed for the general population but also recommended in oncology. The great majority (92.2 %) were patient-reported. In 50.3 % the recall period was "last week". The mean number of items per questionnaire was 22.0 (range: 1-130). 7794 items were assigned an outcome domain, the most frequent being emotional functioning/wellbeing (22 %), physical functioning (15.7 %), general outcomes (10.1 %) and delivery of care (8.9 %).

CONCLUSIONS

There are a variety of patient and caregiver-reported measures in oncology. This archive can guide researchers and practitioners in selecting the most suitable measures and fostering a patient-centered approach in clinical trials, clinical practice, and regulatory activities.

Disentangling the value equation: a step forward in value-based healthcare

BACKGROUND

The value equation of value-based healthcare (VBHC) as a single figure remains ambiguous, closer to a theoretical framework than a useful tool for decision making. The challenge lies in the way patient-centred outcomes (PCOs) might be combined to produce a single value of the numerator. This paper aims to estimate the weights of PCOs to provide a single figure in the numerator, which ultimately will allow a VBHC figure to be reached.

METHODS

A cohort of patients diagnosed with breast cancer (n = 690) with a 6-month follow-up recruited in 2019-20 across six European hospitals was used. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), clinical-related outcomes (CROs), and clinical and socio-demographic variables were collected. The numerator was defined as a composite indicator of the PCOs (CI-PCO), and regression analysis was applied to estimate their weights and consequently arrive at a single figure.

RESULTS

Pain showed as the highest weight followed by physical functioning, emotional functioning, and ability to work, and then by a symptom, either arm or breast. PCOs weights were robust to sensitivity analysis. The CI-PCO value was found to be more informative than the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) value.

CONCLUSIONS

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first research to combine the PCOs proposed by ICHOM to provide a single figure in the numerator of the value equation. This figure shows a step forward in VBHC to reach a holistic benchmarking across healthcare centres and a value-based payment. This research might also be applied in other medical conditions as a methodological pathway.

Barriers and facilitators to measuring patient reported outcomes in an academic breast cancer clinic: An application of the RE-AIM framework

BACKGROUND

Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are important for patient-centered, value-based care; however, implementation into surgical practice remains limited. We aimed to demonstrate feasibility of measuring PROMs in an academic breast cancer clinic.

METHODS

We conducted a pilot study implementing the patient-reported outcome measure BREAST-Q among patients with Stage 0-III breast cancer at a single institution from 06/2019-03/2023 using the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. Barriers and facilitators were characterized. Survey completion was assessed pre-operatively and up to 12 months post-operatively.

RESULTS

Barriers included limited time and lack of incorporation into the electronic medical record. Facilitators included utilizing trained team members and an automated workflow. Among eligible patients, 74% completed BREAST-Q at 2-weeks post-operatively and 55% at 12 months post-operatively.

CONCLUSIONS

We describe the implementation of a PROM using the RE-AIM framework, highlighting facilitators and barriers that may assist others in collecting patient-reported outcome data.

Patient-reported Quality of Life After Breast-conserving Surgery With Radiotherapy Versus Mastectomy and Reconstruction

OBJECTIVE

To compare long-term quality of life (QOL) outcomes in breast cancer survivors who received breast-conserving surgery with radiotherapy (BCS+RT) with those who received a mastectomy and reconstructive surgery (Mast+Recon) without radiotherapy and identify other important factors.

BACKGROUND

The long-term differences in patient-reported QOL outcomes following BCS+RT and Mast+Recon are not well understood.

METHODS

We identified patients from the Texas Cancer Registry with stage 0-II breast cancer diagnosed in 2009-2014 after BCS+RT or Mast+Recon without radiotherapy. Sampling was stratified by age and race and ethnicity. A paper survey was sent to 4800 patients which included validated BREAST-Q and PROMIS modules. Multivariable linear regression models were implemented for each outcome. Minimal clinically important difference for BREAST-Q and PROMIS modules, respectively, was 4 points and 2 points.

RESULTS

Of 1215 respondents (25.3% response rate), 631 received BCS+RT and 584 received Mast+Recon. The median interval from diagnosis to survey completion was 9 years. In adjusted analysis, Mast+Recon was associated with worse BREAST-Q psychosocial well-being (effect size: -3.80, P =0.04) and sexual well-being (effect size: -5.41, P =0.02), but better PROMIS physical function (effect size: 0.54, P =0.03) and similar BREAST-Q satisfaction with breasts, physical well-being, and PROMIS upper extremity function ( P >0.05) compared with BCS+RT. Only the difference in sexual well-being reached clinical significance. Older (≥65) patients receiving BCS+RT and younger (<50) patients receiving autologous Mast+Recon typically reported higher QOL scores. Receipt of chemotherapy was associated with detriments to multiple QOL domains.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who underwent Mast+Recon reported worse long-term sexual well-being compared with BCS+RT. Older patients derived a greater benefit from BCS+RT, while younger patients derived a greater benefit from Mast+Recon. These data inform preference-sensitive decision-making for women with early-stage breast cancer.

Assessing trends in breast care surveillance metrics after implementing surgeon-specific tracking and performance reporting in a large, integrated cancer network

BACKGROUND

There are few quality metrics and benchmarks specific to surgical oncology. Development of a surgeon-level performance metrics system based on peer comparisons is hypothesized to positively influence surgical decision-making. This study established a tracking and reporting system comprised of evidence and consensus-based metrics to assess breast care delivered by individual surgeons.

METHODS

Surgeons' performance is assessed by a surveillance tracking system of metrics pertaining to referrals and surgical elements. This retrospective analysis of prospectively collected breast care data reports on recurring 6-month and cumulative data from nine care locations from 2015 to 2021.

RESULTS

Breast care was provided to 6659 patients by 41 surgeons. A total of 27 breast care metrics were evaluated over 7 years. Metrics with consistent, proficient results were retired after 18 months, including the rate of core biopsy, specimen orientation, and referrals to medical oncology, genetics, and fertility, among others. In clinically node-negative, hormone receptor-positive patients 70 years of age or older, the cumulative rate of sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy significantly decreased by 40% over 5.5 years (p < .001). The overall breast conservation rate for T0-T2 cancer increased 10% over 7 years. At the surgeon level, improvements were made in the median number of SLNs removed and in operative note documentation.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of a surgeon-specific, peer comparison-based metric and tracking system has yielded substantive changes in breast care management. This process and governance structure can serve as a model for quantification of breast care at other institutions and for other disease sites.

Explaining risks and benefits of loco-regional treatments to patients

Treatment for early-stage breast cancer is complex, requiring multidisciplinary care with a multitude of treatment options available for each patient. Coupled with the rising importance of shared decision-making, patient-physician conversations are progressively more complicated. These conversations require frank disclosure of risks and benefits of the different treatment modalities in a way that is individualized for each patient and simple to understand. In most patients, breast conserving therapy with radiation should be presented as the gold-standard local treatment given similar long-term and improved quality of life outcomes. De-escalation is currently at the forefront of research in loco-regional treatments, and further investigations are required to best determine the optimal patient populations for reduced sentinel lymph node sampling, omission of sentinel lymph node biopsy altogether and omission of radiation treatment. For future trials, better endpoints need to be established considering patient-centered outcomes as well as recurrence.

Timing of Chemotherapy and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Breast-Conserving Surgery and Mastectomy with Immediate Reconstruction

INTRODUCTION

Receipt of chemotherapy is associated with decreased satisfaction after breast surgery, but whether timing as adjuvant versus neoadjuvant (NAC) affects patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is unclear. We examined associations between chemotherapy timing and PROs after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and mastectomy with immediate reconstruction (M-IR).

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study of patients with stage I-III breast cancer undergoing chemotherapy between January 2017 and December 2019, we compared satisfaction with breasts (SABTR) and chest physical well-being (PWB-CHEST) between chemotherapy groups in BCS and M-IR cohorts. Median SABTR and PWB-CHEST scores (scale 0-100) were compared between chemotherapy groups at baseline and for 3 years postoperatively. Factors associated with SABTR and PWB-CHEST at 1 and 2 years were assessed with multivariable linear regression.

RESULTS

Overall, 640 patients had BCS and 602 had M-IR; 210 (33%) BCS patients and 294 (49%) M-IR patients had NAC. Following BCS, SABTR was higher than baseline at all postoperative timepoints, whereas 3-year SABTR remained similar to baseline following M-IR, independent of chemotherapy timing. In both surgical cohorts, PWB-CHEST was lowest after NAC at 6 months compared with baseline but was similar to adjuvant counterparts by 3 years. NAC was not a statistically significant predictor of SABTR or PWB-CHEST in either surgical cohort on multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with breast cancer who require chemotherapy, neoadjuvant versus adjuvant timing does not impact long-term PROs in this study. These findings may inform shared decision making regarding the sequence of treatment in patients with operable disease.

A comparison of acute patient-reported outcomes in breast cancer patients with and without regional nodal irradiation using the ESAS and PRFS tool

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Regional nodal irradiation (RNI) is commonly administered in patients with breast cancer with node-positive disease to prevent cancer recurrence. The purpose of this study is to identify whether RNI is associated with greater acute symptom burden from baseline to 1 to 3 months post completion of radiotherapy (RT) when compared to localized RT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patient and treatment characteristics were collected prospectively for breast cancer patients with and without RNI from February 2018 to September 2020. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) and Patient-Reported Functional Status (PRFS) tool were completed by patients at baseline, weekly during RT, and at a 1- to 3-month follow-up visit. The Wilcoxon rank-sum or Fisher exact tests were used to compare variables between patients with or without RNI.

RESULTS

A total of 781 patients were included in the analysis. Baseline symptom reporting was similar between cohorts, with the exception of PRFS scores (p = 0.0023), which were worse in patients receiving RNI. Across all time points, differences in outcomes between cohorts were minimal, except for lack of appetite (p = 0.03) and PRFS scores (p = 0.049), which were significantly aggravated in patients treated with RNI.

CONCLUSION

There is insufficient evidence to suggest that RNI is associated with greater symptom burden as assessed with the ESAS. Further research should be conducted over a longer time period to determine the impact of late effects of RNI on patient-reported symptoms.

Access to Results of Patient Reported Outcome Surveys Does Not Improve Survey Response Rates

INTRODUCTION

In this embedded substudy of a longitudinal, randomized controlled trial, we sought to evaluate the effects of patient engagement and results feedback on longitudinal patient-reported outcome (PRO) survey completion rates.

METHODS

Newly diagnosed stage 0-III breast cancer patients seen at an academic breast center between June 2019 and December 2021 were invited to participate in a longitudinal PRO study. Participants were emailed the BREAST-Q survey, a validated PRO scale, preoperatively and at regular intervals during their postoperative course. Patients were randomized into the intervention group, who received survey results upon completion, or the control group, who received no feedback. The primary endpoint was postoperative survey completion rate. An intention to treat analysis was performed and a quasi-Poisson regression was used to compare rates of longitudinal survey completion between the two groups.

RESULTS

Of the 253 patients offered the preoperative survey, 115 were in the intervention group and 138 were in the control group. Postoperative survey completion rate was 54% for the intervention group and 47% for the control group. There was no significant difference in longitudinal postoperative survey completion rate between the two groups (rate ratio 1.10; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.93-1.31).

CONCLUSIONS

In this prospective randomized controlled study, patients did not complete surveys at a higher rate when their survey results were shared with them, suggesting that viewing these results without appropriate clinical context does not generate significant enhancement in patient engagement. Effective interventions to improve survey response rate must be identified to better evaluate PROs.

Who Are We Missing: Does Engagement in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Breast Cancer Vary by Age, Race, or Disease Stage?

INTRODUCTION

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) are used to assess value-based care. Little is known as to whether PROM response in breast cancer reflects the diverse patient population. The BREAST-Q, a validated measure of satisfaction and quality of life, and Recovery Tracker, a postoperative assessment tool, are PROM routinely delivered to all patients undergoing breast surgery at our institution. Here we determine whether response to PROM differs by age, race, language, or disease stage.

METHODS

All patients who had a breast operation between January 2020 and July 2021 were requested to complete the BREAST-Q and Recovery Tracker. Non-responders did not complete the PROM at any timepoint; responders completed 1 or more. Primary outcomes included rates of non-response versus response overall.

RESULTS

Of 6374 patients identified, 5653 (88.7%) responded to either PROM [4366/4751 (91.9%) BREAST-Q; 2746/3384 (81.1%) Recovery Tracker]. On univariate analysis, non-responders were older (60 years versus 55 years, p < 0.001) and more often non-English speaking (p < 0.001), Hispanic ethnicity (p = 0.031), and Black race (p < 0.001), versus responders. On multivariate analysis, non-responders were significantly more often Black race and non-English speaking (p < 0.001). Non-English speakers were significantly less responsive among all ethnicities and races except Black race. Although breast cancer stage did not reach significance for response, patients with malignant disease and those receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy responded more often.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings demonstrate high patient engagement using 2 different PROM following breast surgery, but suggest that PROM results may not reflect the experience of the entire breast cancer population. Care process changes based solely on PROM should consider these findings to ensure that the views of the entire spectrum of patients with breast cancer are represented.

BREAST-Q Breast-Conserving Therapy Module: Normative Data from a Dutch Sample of 9059 Women

BACKGROUND

BREAST-Q, a patient-reported outcome measure for cosmetic and reconstructive breast surgery, is widely used in both clinical research and practice. The aim of this study was to acquire normative data of BREAST-Q's Breast-Conserving Therapy Module from a Dutch population sample and to compare it with existing normative BREAST-Q values.

METHODS

Flyers with QR codes, WhatsApp, and one academic center's Facebook and LinkedIn platforms were used to direct participants to self-complete an online version of four domains of the preoperative BREAST-Q Breast-Conserving Therapy Module. BREAST-Q domain scores were log transformed to normalize the distribution. Univariable regression analyses were used to assess (nonlinear) associations between age and BREAST-Q domain scores.

RESULTS

Overall, 9059 questionnaire responses were analyzed. Median (±SD) BREAST-Q domain scores were 64.0 ± 18.0 (satisfaction with breasts), 69.0 ± 21.0 (psychosocial well-being), 92.0 ± 20 (physical well-being), and 59.0 ± 15.0 (sexual well-being). Age as a linear term was associated with log-transformed satisfaction with breasts, psychosocial well-being, and physical well-being; sexual well-being was a quadratic function of age. Previous breast surgery unrelated to breast cancer was a significant predictor for higher log-transformed satisfaction with breasts (β = 0.04, p < 0.001) and higher sexual well-being score (β = -0.05, p < 0.001). Compared with previously published normative data, small differences were found in mean BREAST-Q domain scores (mean differences ranging between 2.45 and 6.24).

CONCLUSIONS

Normative Dutch BREAST-Q scores follow similar patterns across domains in comparison with previously published normative data. Normative Dutch BREAST-Q data enable future comparisons in breast-related satisfaction and quality of life issues of Dutch patients with breast cancer compared with their age-matched peers.

Diversity of interpretations of the concept "patient-centered care for breast cancer patients"; a scoping review of current literature

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Patient-centered care is considered a vital component of good quality care for breast cancer patients. Nevertheless, the implementation of this valuable concept in clinical practice appears to be difficult. The goal of this study is to bridge the gap between theoretical elaboration of "patient-centered care" and clinical practice. To that purpose, a scoping analysis was performed of the application of the term "patient-centered care in breast cancer treatment" in present-day literature.

METHOD

For data-extraction, a literature search was performed extracting references that were published in 2018 and included the terms "patient-centered care" and "breast cancer". The articles were systematically traced for answers to the following three questions: "What is patient-centered care?", "Why perform patient-centered care?", and "How to realize patient-centered care?". For the content analysis, these answers were coded and assembled into meaningful clusters until separate themes arose which concur with various interpretations of the term "patient-centered care".

RESULTS

A total of 60 publications were retained for analysis. Traced answers to the three questions "what", "why", and "how" varied considerably in recent literature concerning breast cancer treatment. Despite the inconsistent use of the term "patient-centered care," we did not find any critical consideration about the nature of the concept, regardless of the applied interpretation. Interventions that are supposed to contribute to the heterogeneous concept of patient-centered care as such, seem to be judged desirable, virtually without empirical justification.

CONCLUSIONS

We propose, contrary to previous efforts to define "patient-centered care" more accurately, to embrace the heterogeneity of the concept and apply "patient-centered care" as an umbrella-term for all healthcare that intends to contribute to the acknowledgement of the person in the patient. For the justification of measures to realize patient-centered care for breast cancer patients, instead of a mere contribution to the abstract concept, we insist on the demonstration of desirable real-world effects.

Surgeon Perceptions of the Integration of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures into Clinical Practice

INTRODUCTION

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs/PROM) are standardized, validated instruments used to measure the patient's perception of their own health status including their symptoms, functional wellbeing, and mental health. Although PROMs were initially developed as research tools, their use in clinical practice for shared decision-making and to assess the impact of disease and treatment on quality of life of individual patients has been increasing. There is a paucity of research exploring providers' perspectives on the clinical integration of PROMs. We sought to use a qualitative methodology to understand surgeons' perceptions of integrating PROMs into their clinical practices.

METHODS

Semistructured interviews were performed from November 2019 until August 2020. All interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic saturation was achieved after interviewing nine surgeons representing eight surgical specialties. Qualitative interview data were thematically analyzed using an inductive approach facilitated by Atlas.ti qualitative software.

RESULTS

Forty seven unique codes were identified that fit into 21 themes that revealed five novel insights. Key insights included: (1) PROM data can modify surgical practice on an individual and institutional level, (2) Surgeon's view PROM clinical integration as a potential method of advancing patient-centered care, (3) There are various institutional processes that must be in place, including strong leadership and an integrative platform, to enable successful clinical PROM integration, (4) Surgeons appreciate challenges of integrating PROMs into surgical practice including risks of incorrect use or interpretation, and (5) A PROM platform must be adaptable to the diversity within surgery and to unique physician workflows.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgeons perceived value from integrating PROMs into routine care to better inform patients during preoperative discussions and to help identify at-risk patients in the postoperative period. However, they also identified numerous barriers to the implementation of an integrated system for the routine use of PROMs in clinical practice and expressed concern about using PROMs to compare operative outcomes between surgeons. Based on this work, institutions that want to incorporate PROMs into surgical practice need a leadership team capable of supporting the change management necessary for effective integration and use a PROM platform that gives individual surgeons and surgical teams the ability to customize platforms for their unique practices.

The association between patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and patient participation in chronic care: A scoping review

OBJECTIVES

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly applied in chronic care due to their many functionalities and synergies with current healthcare policies. The participatory potential of PROs is especially emphasised in the Danish context. This review scrutinises the association between PRO and patient participation in chronic care.

METHODS

This scoping review adheres to PRISMA-ScR guidelines, and the synthesis is based on narrative and thematic analyses.

RESULTS

Eighty-four articles were deemed eligible. The association between PRO and patient participation regards seven themes: PRO development, response rates and patient burden, patient empowerment and self-management, display and quality of data, patient-clinician communication, shared decision-making, and organisational and attitudinal aspects. Lack of knowledge, actor attitudes, organisational setup, and technological infrastructure act as the main barriers.

CONCLUSION

The connection between PROs and patient participation is dialectic and unfolds in three phases-before, during, and after patient-clinician consultation. Knowledge regarding the last phase is particularly scarce. Henceforth, studies should address how to include a broader segment of patients, PROs participatory effects over time and PROs impact on patients' everyday lives.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The review provides knowledge concerning the association between PROs and patient participation to enhance future chronic care, research, and discussions in the area.

Patient reported outcomes in oncology: changing perspectives-a systematic review

In public health context, oncology is associated with severe negative impact on patients and on their relatives’ quality of life. Over the last decades, survival has remained at 50% worldwide for some tumor locations. Patient reported outcomes (PROs) assessment and, the corresponding use in clinical practice, help establishing patient individualized profiling involving caregivers. The purpose of this systematic review was to examine critical success factors for PROs assessment in daily clinical oncology practice. Additionally, we investigated how PROs collection can change oncology perspectives for patients and caregivers. According to PRISMA guidelines, 83 studies were included in this systematic review, whether related with implementation in daily clinical practice or associated with its use in oncology. PROs assessment gathers multi-professional teams, biomedical and clinical expertise, patients, families and caregivers. Institutional involvement, first line for caregiver’s adherence, team continuous formation, encompassing training and support, design of clear workflows, continuous monitoring, and data analysis are crucial for implementation. PROs measures are decisive in oncology. Several items were improved, including caregiver–patient–physician communication, patient risk groups identification, unmet problems and needs detection, disease course and treatment tracking, prognostic markers, cost-effectiveness measurement and comfort/support provision for both patients and caregivers. Routine assessment and implementation of PROs in clinical practice are a major challenge and a paradigm transformation for future.

High recurrence of lymphedema and influencing factors in discharged breast cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: A multicenter, cross-sectional survey

Background

There has been a delay in the detection and treatment of lymphedema in breast cancer patients during the lockdown owing to quarantine and limited social activity. Moreover, this scenario has caused psychosocial issues in these patients. Given that there is scarce information on the prevalence and influence of lymphedema during the coronavirus disease (COVID‐19) pandemic, we aimed to estimate the prevalence of lymphedema recurrence and its influencing factors among discharged breast cancer patients during the COVID‐19 pandemic.

Methods

This was a multicenter, cross‐sectional, hospital‐based survey of discharged breast cancer patients was conducted during the COVID‐19 pandemic in eight first‐class hospitals in Wuhan, China. The Norman Questionnaire was used to assess lymphedema. Univariable and multivariable binary logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors influencing moderate or severe lymphedema. Differences in living characteristics, anxiety, and depression were compared between the no/mild lymphedema group and the moderate/severe lymphedema groups. Preferences for lymphedema management during the pandemic were determined.

Results

Overall, 202 patients were included in this study, and 191 of them reported recurrent lymphedema (prevalence: 94.6%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 90.5% to 97.3%). Among them, 134 and 57 had mild and moderate/severe lymphedema, respectively. In 191 patients, the main symptoms were swelling (140; 69.3%) and pain (56, 27.7%). Multivariable regression showed that older age (odds ratio [OR], 1.06; 95% CI: 1.02–1.10), radical surgery (OR = 4.35, 95% CI: 1.54–12.50), and fully complete radiotherapy (OR = 2.62, 95% CI: 1.17–5.87, p = 0.019) were associated with an elevated risk of moderate/severe lymphedema. The moderate/severe lymphedema group experienced a higher rate of anxiety and depression than the no/mild lymphedema group did. Patients equally preferred treatment in the hospital and self‐care at home.

Conclusion

During the COVID‐19 pandemic, high prevalence of lymphedema was observed in patients Age, radical surgery and fully completed radiotherapy were associated with increased risk of severer lymphedema. Meanwhile, the patients with severe lymphedema experienced psychological distress. While the Covid‐19 pandemic was still raging, continuous efforts should be made to identify patient at risk of lymphedema and distribute feasible guidance and education for self‐management in lymphedema.

Identifying breast cancer recurrence histories via patient-reported outcomes

PURPOSE

To test accuracy of patient self-report of breast cancer recurrence for enhancing standard population-based cancer registries that do not routinely collect cancer recurrence data despite the importance of this outcome.

METHODS

Potential research subjects were identified in the Breast Cancer Research Database (BCRD) of the Swedish Cancer Institute (SCI). The BCRD has collected data within 45 days of each medical encounter on new primary breast cancer patients receiving all or part of their initial care at SCI. Females diagnosed with a new primary breast cancer 2004-2016, Stages I-III, and alive at the time of study initiation (2018) were identified. Recurrent breast cancer patients were matched 1:1 to surviving non-recurrent patients by patient age, date of diagnosis, and single or multiple primary tumors. Consented research subjects were surveyed about their initial and subsequent diagnostic, therapeutic, and recurrent events. PRO survey responses were compared with BCRD information for each individual participant. Discrepancies were reviewed in medical records.

RESULTS

A matched sample of 88 recurrent and 88 non-recurrent patients were used in analyses. Respondents correctly identified the date of diagnosis of first primary breast cancer within 1 year 94% (165/176). Recurrence was reported by 97% (85/88) of recurrent patients. No recurrence was reported by 100% (88/88) of non-recurrent patients. Recurrence date within 1 year was correctly identified in 79% (67/85). Recurrence site was correctly identified in 82% (70/85). Medical record review of survey-registry discrepancies led to BCRD corrections in 4.5% (8/176) of cases.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Breast cancer patients can accurately report their disease characteristics, treatments, and recurrence history. Patient-reported information would enhance cancer registry data.

Innovative Standards in Oncoplastic Breast Conserving Surgery: From Radical Mastectomy to Extreme Oncoplasty

BACKGROUND

Oncoplastic breast conserving surgery (OBCS), which is the current procedure of choice for eligible BC patients, describes a philosophy that prioritizes oncologic and cosmetic outcomes. However, knowledge gaps regarding training, acceptance, and practice preclude standardization and make it difficult to design algorithmic guidelines to optimize individualized management in the era of precision medicine.

SUMMARY

The harmony between patient expectations and oncologic goals creates the state of the art of OBCS. Nevertheless, to achieve these goals, multidisciplinary approach is a must. Surgical decisions require a comprehensive evaluation including patient factors, tumor biology, genetics, technical considerations, and adjunct therapies. Moreover, the quality-of-life (QOL) issues should be considered as the highest level of priority with a shared decision making instituted on realistic discussions with the patient.

KEY MESSAGES

The standardization in OBCS should be initiated via defining a breast surgeon who should gain theorical and practical competence on techniques via national or international educational programs. The algorithmic patient assessment with appropriate documentation before and after surgery should be established. A simple and safe global lexicon should be designed regarding techniques to be proposed and quality metrics to be considered. Additionally, international multicenter prospective trials should be instituted to overcome knowledge gaps. It is evident that OBCS is the perfect union of science with art. Nevertheless, at the very end, the question is not the nature of the surgeon/artist who would be the extremist, the innovator, or the conservative, but the patient's satisfaction, prognosis, and QOL that conclude the cascade of state of the art of OBCS.

Cross-sectional survey of patients, caregivers, and physicians on diagnosis and treatment of brain metastases

BACKGROUND

The development of brain metastases (BM) is one of the most feared complications of cancer due to the substantial neurocognitive morbidity and a grim prognosis. In the past decade, targeted therapies and checkpoint inhibitors have demonstrated promising intracranial response rates for tumors of multiple histologies. As overall survival for these patients improves, there is a growing need to identify issues surrounding patient survivorship and to standardize physician practice patterns for these patients. To date, there has not been an adequate study to specifically explore these questions of survivorship and practice standardization for patients with advanced cancer and BM.

METHODS

Here, we present results from a cross-sectional survey in which we analyze responses from 237 patients, 209 caregivers, and 239 physicians to identify areas of improvement in the clinical care of BM.

RESULTS

In comparing physician and patient/caregiver responses, we found a disparity in the perceived discussion of topics pertaining to important aspects of BM clinical care. We identified variability in practice patterns for this patient population between private practice and academic physicians. Many physicians continue to have patients with BM excluded from clinical trials. Finally, we obtained patient/physician recommendations on high-yield areas for federal funding to improve patient quality of life.

CONCLUSION

By identifying potential areas of unmet need, we anticipate this wealth of actionable information will translate into tangible benefits for both patients and caregivers. Future studies are needed to validate our findings.

Patients Require Less Time to Complete Preoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Than Legacy Patient-Reported Outcome Measures

Purpose

To analyze time to completion of preoperative legacy patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and more recent computer adaptive Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) questionnaires in patients with symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement syndrome undergoing primary hip arthroscopy.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients undergoing hip arthroscopy by a single fellowship-trained hip arthroscopist. Inclusion criteria were patients undergoing primary arthroscopic hip surgery and completion of at least 1 legacy PRO or PROMIS questionnaire at the preoperative time point. Exclusion criteria were history of contralateral or ipsilateral hip surgery, non-English-speaking patients, patients who completed PROs by phone or by paper form, and patients who did not complete preoperative PROs. Legacy PROs included modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score (HOS), International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12), and Hip Pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS-Pain). PROMIS PROs included Physical Function (PROMIS-PF), Pain Interference (PROMIS-PI), and Depression (PROMIS-D). Only preoperative PROs were included in the analysis. Completion time was calculated using the questionnaire start and stop time reported by the survey collecting software. The median and interquartile range of each PRO were reported for analysis of central tendency and statistical dispersion, respectively.

Results

A total of 1,901 patients and 269 patients were included in the legacy and PROMIS groups, respectively. The median time required for completion of each PRO in (minutes: seconds) format was as follows: mHHS (1:29), HOS (3:58), iHOT (2:11), VAS-Pain (0:32), PROMIS-PF (0:46), PROMIS-PI (0:37), and PROMIS-D (0:43). The interquartile range of the middle 50% of respondents was as follows; mHHS (0:58), HOS (2:46), iHOT (1:22), VAS-Pain (0:28), PROMIS-PI (0:19), PROMIS-D (0:29), and PROMIS-PF (0:20).

Conclusions

This study supports that preoperative PROMIS forms require less time to complete than preoperative legacy PROs and are not significantly influenced by age, race, or workers compensation status.

Level of Evidence

Level IV, case series.

Comparative Effectiveness of Implantable Defibrillators for Asymptomatic Brugada Syndrome: A Decision-Analytic Model

Background Optimal management of asymptomatic Brugada syndrome (BrS) with spontaneous type I electrocardiographic pattern is uncertain. Methods and Results We developed an individual-level simulation comprising 2 000 000 average-risk individuals with asymptomatic BrS and spontaneous type I electrocardiographic pattern. We compared (1) observation, (2) electrophysiologic study (EPS)-guided implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), and (3) upfront ICD, each using either subcutaneous or transvenous ICD, resulting in 6 strategies tested. The primary outcome was quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), with cardiac deaths (arrest or procedural-related) as a secondary outcome. We varied BrS diagnosis age and underlying arrest rate. We assessed cost-effectiveness at $100 000/QALY. Compared with observation, EPS-guided subcutaneous ICD resulted in 0.35 QALY gain/individual and 4130 cardiac deaths avoided/100 000 individuals, and EPS-guided transvenous ICD resulted in 0.26 QALY gain and 3390 cardiac deaths avoided. Compared with observation, upfront ICD reduced cardiac deaths by a greater margin (subcutaneous ICD, 8950; transvenous ICD, 6050), but only subcutaneous ICD improved QALYs (subcutaneous ICD, 0.25 QALY gain; transvenous ICD, 0.01 QALY loss), and complications were higher. ICD-based strategies were more effective at younger ages and higher arrest rates (eg, using subcutaneous devices, upfront ICD was the most effective strategy at ages 20-39.4 years and arrest rates >1.37%/year; EPS-guided ICD was the most effective strategy at ages 39.5-51.3 years and arrest rates 0.47%-1.37%/year, and observation was the most effective strategy at ages >51.3 years and arrest rates <0.47%/year). EPS-guided subcutaneous ICD was cost-effective ($80 508/QALY). Conclusions Device-based approaches (with or without EPS risk stratification) can be more effective than observation among selected patients with asymptomatic BrS. BrS management should be tailored to patient characteristics.

Patient reported physical and mental health changes associated with a comprehensive cardiovascular risk reduction program for women with breast cancer receiving potentially cardiotoxic chemotherapy

OBJECTIVE

Women with breast cancer (BCA) and cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors are at increased risk of developing cardiovascular complications when exposed to potentially cardiotoxic cancer therapy. The benefit of aggressive CVD risk factor modification to reduce adverse treatment-related psychologic and biologic effects is not well established.

METHODS

Using a single group pre-test, post-test design, 33 women with BCA receiving anthracycline and/or trastuzumab therapy participated in a 6-month comprehensive CVD risk reduction program involving formal cardio-oncology evaluation along with regular motivational counseling for improved nutrition and physical activity. Study parameters were assessed at baseline and 6 months with paired t-tests used to evaluate changes after the intervention.

RESULTS

The mental component summary score assessed by SF-36V2 improved significantly after program completion (45.0 to 48.8, effect size 0.37, p = 0.017), however the physical component summary score declined (46.2 to 40.9, effect size - 0.53, p = 0.004). Despite this decline in perceived physical health, markers of health-related fitness and nutritional status were maintained or improved. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure also improved after the intervention (136.7 to 124.1 mmHg, p = 0.001 and 84.0 to 78.7 mmHg, p = 0.031, respectively). No significant change in resting heart rate, body mass index, lipids, hemoglobin A1C, or left ventricular ejection fraction was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient-reported mental health improved significantly in women with BCA enrolled in a comprehensive CVD risk reduction program despite exposure to potentially cardiotoxic therapies. This study provides preliminary data for future randomized controlled trials evaluating the effects CVD risk reduction program in high-risk breast cancer cohorts.

Health-related quality of life in breast cancer patients: review of reviews from 2008 to 2018

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer still is a topic. This overview of the literature aimed to update the current knowledge on quality of life in breast cancer patients.

METHODS

A review of literature in MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Google Scholar were carried out to identify review papers on health-related quality of life in breast cancer during the 2008 to 2018. All publications were screened using the PRISMA guideline. The methodological quality of reviews was assessed using the AMSTAR. The findings were summarized and tabulated accordingly.

RESULTS

Within over a decade, a total of 974 review papers were identified which according to the study selection criteria finally we have evaluated 82 reviews. Of these about 85% had a reasonable methodological quality. The findings were mainly summarized on several headings including instruments used to measure quality of life, treatment, supportive care, psychological distress, and symptoms. Questionnaires had a good performance to quantify quality of life in breast cancer patients. Most reviews were focused on the impact of treatment including endocrine therapy as well as integrating complementary and alternative medicine into the current practice. According to the reviews, yoga was the most recommended exercise to improve quality of life in breast cancer patients.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the findings from this overview indicated that quality of life in breast cancer patients enhanced during the last decade. Several simple but effective interventions such as physical activity and psychosocial interventions proved to be effective in improving quality of life in this population. However, management of symptoms such as pain, and lymphedema, issues related to worry, sexual function especially for young patients, and the future outlooks all are among topics that deserve further consideration. Also, this overview indicated that methodological issues in measuring quality of life in breast cancer patients improved greatly, but still there is a long way to go to understand what really matter to patients.

A randomized study comparing different doses of superparamagnetic iron oxide tracer for sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer: The SUNRISE study

INTRODUCTION

The non-radioactive method that uses the magnetic tracer (SPIO/Sienna) has shown to be a feasible technique for the SLN detection in breast cancer patients. The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of different doses of a new magnetic tracer Sienna XP (Magtrace) compared to Tc-99 m and to evaluate its non-inferiority.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer cT1-3 N0, from October 2016 to August 2018 were eligible and consecutively randomized to three different doses of new SPIO used: group 1 (1 mL), group 2 (1.5 mL) and group 3 (2 mL).

RESULTS

A total of 135 patients were included in the study, 45 in each group. Detection of SLNs with the three doses of Sienna XP (1 mL, 1.5 mL and 2 mL) showed non-inferior rates compared to the conventional technique with radiotracer (p = 0.654). Concordance by patients with SLN positive was 100% for all groups. 83 (70.3%) patients reported skin staining at one month postoperatively, significantly lower in group 1 (p = 0.042). At 6 months follow up, group 1 remains with significantly lower skin discoloration (p = 0,01). In multivariate analysis, dose of 2 mL showed statistically significant for the skin staining. The majority of patients (70%) felt that skin discoloration does not represent a problem.

CONCLUSION

The use of the Sienna XP magnetic tracer at 1 mL is not inferior to higher doses of magnetic tracer neither is inferior to radiotracer. 1 mL of magnetic tracer resulted in significantly less skin discoloration compared to higher doses.

Immediate and delayed autologous abdominal microvascular flap breast reconstruction in patients receiving adjuvant, neoadjuvant or no radiotherapy: a meta-analysis of clinical and quality-of-life outcomes

BACKGROUND

Effects of postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) on autologous breast reconstruction (BRR) are controversial regarding surgical complications, cosmetic appearance and quality of life (QOL). This systematic review evaluated these outcomes after abdominal free flap reconstruction in patients undergoing postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy (PMRT), preoperative radiotherapy (neoadjuvant radiotherapy) and no radiotherapy, aiming to establish evidence-based optimal timings for radiotherapy and BRR to guide contemporary management.

METHODS

The study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42017077945). Embase, MEDLINE, Google Scholar, CENTRAL, Science Citation Index and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched (January 2000 to August 2018). Study quality and risk of bias were assessed using GRADE and Cochrane's ROBINS-I respectively.

RESULTS

Some 12 studies were identified, involving 1756 patients (350 PMRT, 683 no radiotherapy and 723 neoadjuvant radiotherapy), with a mean follow-up of 27·1 (range 12·0-54·0) months for those having PMRT, 16·8 (1·0-50·3) months for neoadjuvant radiotherapy, and 18·3 (1·0-48·7) months for no radiotherapy. Three prospective and nine retrospective cohorts were included. There were no randomized studies. Five comparative radiotherapy studies evaluated PMRT and four assessed neoadjuvant radiotherapy. Studies were of low quality, with moderate to serious risk of bias. Severe complications were similar between the groups: PMRT versus no radiotherapy (92 versus 141 patients respectively; odds ratio (OR) 2·35, 95 per cent c.i. 0·63 to 8·81, P = 0·200); neoadjuvant radiotherapy versus no radiotherapy (180 versus 392 patients; OR 1·24, 0·76 to 2·04, P = 0·390); and combined PMRT plus neoadjuvant radiotherapy versus no radiotherapy (272 versus 453 patients; OR 1·38, 0·83 to 2·32, P = 0·220). QOL and cosmetic studies used inconsistent methodologies.

CONCLUSION

Evidence is conflicting and study quality was poor, limiting recommendations for the timing of autologous BRR and radiotherapy. The impact of PMRT and neoadjuvant radiotherapy appeared to be similar.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in Surgical Oncology: An Overview of Instruments and Scores

Traditional measures of quality and effectiveness in surgical oncology have focused on morbidity, mortality, and when available, recurrence rates. Measuring patient-reported outcomes (PROs) has become more widely accepted during the last decade. This article reviews instruments commonly used in the surgical treatment of cancer patients to evaluate PROs. In addition, it discusses the linkage of PROs and health-related quality of life measures with traditional surgical complications and highlights future directions related to the expanding use of PROs in the surgical care of cancer patients.

Incorporating Patient-Reported Outcome Measures into Breast Surgical Oncology: Advancing Toward Value-Based Care

Value in health care is defined as the health outcome achieved per unit of cost. For health care systems, improving value means achieving better outcomes at lower costs. Improving outcomes, including patient-reported outcomes (PROs), as well as more established metrics such as mortality and complication rates, ensures high-quality care. This is particularly true in breast cancer surgery, where survival and recurrence rates are comparable across different surgical approaches. Outcomes reflecting survivorship quality may therefore better inform decision making regarding surgical approaches. PROs can be assessed using validated instruments known as patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). They are obtained directly from patients reflecting their health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Ongoing initiatives strive to define PROMs that accurately reflect HRQOL and demonstrate value, with the goal of establishing benchmarks for quality of care. Clinicians caring for patients with breast cancer are well positioned to be involved in defining meaningful measures of value-based breast cancer care. This article reviews value-based breast cancer care in the context of locoregional therapy, with attention paid to the work done by the International Consortium of Health Outcome Measures in which a "standard set" of value-based patient-centered outcomes for breast cancer for international use is defined. In addition, an overview is provided of relevant PROMs and previously reported scores. Recommendations and future challenges for implementation of routine collection of PROs are also discussed. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Opportunity exists to act as early adopters of the routine collection of longitudinal patient-reported outcome data for breast cancer, allowing transition of current care to value-based cancer care.

Chinese multicentre prospective registry of breast cancer patient-reported outcome-reconstruction and oncoplastic cohort (PRO-ROC): a study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Available patient-reported outcome (PRO) studies are mainly from single institution or of small sample size, and the variations across hospitals and regions were not fully analysed. A multicentre, prospective, patient-reported outcome-reconstruction and oncoplastic cohort (PRO-ROC) will be planned to assess the PROs of Chinese patients with breast cancer who will undergo breast reconstruction (BR) or oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OBCS).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The inclusion criteria are female patients with breast cancer aged >18 years old who will undergo BR or OBCS. This cohort will include at least 10 000 consecutive patients (about 5000 patients who will undergo BR and 5000 patients who will undergo OBCS). The exposures were surgery types: BR and OBCS regardless of the techniques and materials used. The primary endpoint will be PROs, which include BREAST-Q and quality of life (European Organisation for Research and Treatment (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and EORTC QoL Breast Cancer-specific version (QLQ-BR23)). All patients will be followed up to 24 months after operations. All data will be prospectively collected using an app software. Data will be analysed using SPSS and Stata software.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study follows the Helsinki Declaration. All patients will be asked to sign an informed consent before enrolment. The results of this study will be presented at national and international meetings and published in a scientific peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04030845; Pre-results.

The impact of health symptoms on health-related quality of life in early-stage breast cancer survivors

PURPOSE

In breast cancer patients, treatment-related health symptoms can occur that may affect their health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This study aimed to determine the impact of health symptoms on HRQoL in breast cancer patients up to 5 years after diagnosis.

METHODS

Females surgically treated for early-stage breast cancer diagnosed between 2012 and 2016 (n = 876) were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and invited for a survey about current health symptoms ('Symptoms and Perceptions questionnaire', SaP) and HRQoL ('EORTC-QLQ-C30'). From the latter, functioning and global health were included. Mean scores were compared to norm population scores (T test). Multivariable linear regression analyses were performed to determine the association between health symptoms and global health and functioning.

RESULTS

404 patients (46%) responded. The median age was 62.2 ± 10.9 years. Respondents had significantly lower mean scores for role, cognitive, emotional, and social functioning than the general population. The most frequently reported health symptoms were musculoskeletal (including pain/complaints in lower/upper extremities/back/neck; 71%) and central nervous system symptoms (including concentration impairment, dizziness, neuralgia; 66%), and fatigue (63%). While most symptoms affected functioning, irrespective of time since diagnosis, especially fatigue, musculoskeletal, central nervous system, and gastrointestinal symptoms were significantly associated (p < 0.05) with lower functioning.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of health symptoms that occur after breast cancer treatment were associated with lower functioning of patients in daily life. This paper urges healthcare providers to support breast cancer patients in alleviating or coping with health symptoms, even years after end of treatment, to improve their functioning.