Risk-adjusted benchmarking of long-term overall survival in patients with HER2-positive early-stage Breast cancer: A Swedish retrospective cohort study

AIM

The main objective of the current study was to explore the value of risk-adjustment when comparing (i.e. benchmarking) long-term overall survival (OS) in breast cancer (BC) between Swedish regions. We performed risk-adjusted benchmarking of 5- and 10-year OS after HER2-positive early BC diagnosis between Sweden's two largest healthcare regions, constituting approximately a third of the total population in Sweden.

METHODS

All patients diagnosed with HER2-positive early-stage BC between 01-01-2009 and 31-12-2016 in healthcare regions Stockholm-Gotland and Skane were included in the study. Cox proportional hazards model was used for risk-adjustment. Unadjusted (i.e. crude) and adjusted 5- and 10-year OS was benchmarked between the two regions.

RESULTS

The crude 5-year OS was 90.3% in the Stockholm-Gotland region and 87.8% in the Skane region. The crude 10-year OS was 81.7% in the Stockholm-Gotland region and 77.3% in the Skane region. However, when adjusted for age, menopausal status and tumour biology, there was no significant OS disparity between the regions, neither at the 5-year nor 10-year follow-up.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that risk-adjustment is relevant when benchmarking OS in BC, even when comparing regions from the same country that share the same national treatment guidelines. This is, to our knowledge, the first published risk-adjusted benchmarking of OS in HER2-positive BC.

Measuring Quality of Life Using Patient-Reported Outcomes in Real-World Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients: The Need for a Standardized Approach

Simple Summary

Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) remains incurable despite treatment improvements. The health-related quality of life is a multidimensional entity which covers physical, psychological and social dimensions. It is an important outcome particularly in patients with metastatic disease, as the primary goal of therapy is no longer curation, but to provide the best possible quality of life weighted against treatment risks and adverse symptoms. Patient-reported outcomes reflecting the quality of life are usually measured with validated questionnaires to evaluate treatment strategies based on symptom burden and to improve care delivery. This review shares insights into the role of patient-reported outcome measurements in MBC patients and describes the heterogeneity of current questionnaires. We conclude that an up-to-date and standardized outcome set is needed, containing relevant domains referring to individual needs to improve the quality of life assessment among MBC patients. This is a prerequisite to learn about how they could impact the clinical care pathway.

Abstract

Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients are almost always treated to minimize the symptom burden, and to prolong life without a curative intent. Although the prognosis of MBC patients has improved in recent years, the median survival after diagnosis is still only 3 years. Therefore, the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) should play a leading role in making treatment decisions. Heterogeneity in questionnaires used to evaluate the HRQoL in MBC patients complicates the interpretability and comparability of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) globally. In this review, we aimed to provide an overview of PRO instruments used in real-world MBC patients and to discuss important issues in measuring HRQoL. Routinely collecting symptom information using PROs could enhance treatment evaluation and shared decision-making. Standardizing these measures might help to improve the implementation of PROs, and facilitates collecting and sharing data to establish valid comparisons in research. This is a prerequisite to learn about how they could impact the clinical care pathway. In addition, the prognostic value of intensified PRO collection throughout therapy on survival and disease progression is promising. Future perspectives in the field of PROs and MBC are described.