No abstract

No abstract

Increased breast cancer incidence and better survival have raised the number of patients requiring follow-up care. Despite guidelines, there is controversy about appropriate breast cancer follow-up. Therefore, semi-structured interviews were conducted in two hospitals with 23 patients and 18 health professionals (HPs) in order to explore opinions and preferences about the purpose, the duration and frequency of breast cancer follow-up and which examinations should be done, by whom. The transcripts were inductively analysed and coded into pre-identified themes. Patients were followed more intensively than guidelines recommend. HPs mentioned three major reasons; patient preferences, each discipline wanting to observe the patient, and financial incentives. For patients and HPs the most important purpose of follow-up was early detection of new malignancies. A highly valued aspect of follow-up mentioned by HPs was the psychosocial support, which was rarely mentioned by patients. Patient's expectations about the benefits of follow-up and additional examinations were sometimes unrealistic. Patients and HPs were positive about nurse practitioner-led follow-up, but less positive about general practitioner-led follow-up. Important barriers to current guideline adherence were revealed and should be taken into account by implementing new individualised guidelines. Furthermore, patients should be better informed about the benefits of follow-up to prevent unrealistic expectations.

EUROCHIP (European Cancer Health Indicators Project) focuses on understanding inequalities in the cancer burden, care and survival by the indicators “stage at diagnosis,” “cancer treatment delay” and “compliance with cancer guidelines” as the most important indicators. Our study aims at providing insight in whether cancer registries collect well‐defined variables to determine these indicators in a comparative way. Eighty‐six general European population‐based cancer registries (PBCR) from 32 countries responded to the questionnaire, which was developed by EUROCHIP in collaboration with ENCR (European Network of Cancer Registries) and EUROCOURSE. Only 15% of all the PBCR in EU had all three indicators available. The indicator “stage at diagnosis” was gathered for at least one cancer site by 81% (using TNM in 39%). Variables for the indicator “cancer treatment delay” were collected by 37%. Availability of type of treatment (30%), surgery date (36%), starting date of radiotherapy (26%) and starting date of chemotherapy (23%) resulted in 15% of the PBCRs to be able to gather the indicator “compliance to guidelines”. Lack of data source access and qualified staff were the major reasons for not collecting all the variables. In conclusion, based on self‐reporting, a few of the participating PBCRs had data available which could be used for clinical audits, evaluation of cancer care projects, survival and for monitoring national cancer control strategies. Extra efforts should be made to improve this very efficient tool to compare cancer burden and the effects of the national cancer plans over Europe and to learn from each other.

The association between the disease-free interval (DFI) and survival after a locoregional recurrence (LRR) or second primary (SP) breast cancer remains uncertain. The objective of this study is to clarify this association to obtain more information on expected prognosis. Women first diagnosed with early breast cancer between 2003–2006 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. LRRs and SP tumours within five years of first diagnosis were examined. The five-year period was subsequently divided into three equal intervals. Prognostic significance of the DFI on survival after a LRR or SP tumour was determined using Kaplan-Meier estimates and multivariable Cox regression analysis. Follow-up was complete until January 1, 2014. A total of 37,278 women was included in the analysis. LRRs or SP tumours were diagnosed in 890 (2,4%) and 897 (2,4%) respectively. Longer DFI was strongly and independently related to an improved survival after a LRR (long versus short: HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.48–0.88; medium versus short HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.65–1.01). Other factors related to improved survival after LRR were younger age (<70 years) and surgical removal of the recurrence. No significant association was found between DFI and survival after SP tumours. This is the first study to explore the association between the DFI and survival after recurrence in a nationwide population-based cancer registry. The DFI before a LRR is an independent prognostic factor for survival, with a longer DFI predicting better prognosis.

No abstract

Background:This study examined the risk of third cancer of non-breast origin (TNBC) among women with bilateral breast cancer (BBC; either synchronous or metachronous), focussing on the relation with breast cancer treatment.Methods:Risk was assessed, among 8752 Dutch women diagnosed with BBC between 1989 and 2008, using standardised incidence ratios (SIR) and Cox regression analyses to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) of TNBC for different treatment modalities.Results:Significant increased SIRs were observed for all TNBCs combined, haematological malignancies, stomach, colorectal, non-melanoma skin, lung, head and neck, endometrial, and ovarian cancer. A 10-fold increased risk was found for ovarian cancer among women younger than 50 years (SIR=10.0, 95% confidence interval (CI)=5.3–17.4). Radiotherapy was associated with increased risks of all TNBCs combined (HR=1.3; 95%CI=1.1–1.6, respectively). Endocrine therapy was associated with increased risks of all TNBCs combined (HR=1.2; 95%CI=1.0–1.5), haematological malignancies (HR=2.0; 95%CI=1.1–3.9), and head and neck cancer (HR=3.3; 95%CI=1.1–10.4). After chemotherapy decreased risks were found for all TNBCs combined (HR=0.63; 95%CI=0.5–0.87).Conclusion:Increased risk of TNBC could be influenced by genetic factors (ovarian cancer) or an effect of treatment (radiotherapy and endocrine therapy). More insight in the TNBC risk should further optimise and individualise treatment and surveillance protocols in (young) women with BBC.

Hormone receptor (HR) status is an important prognostic factor for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and is also correlated with other prognostic factors, such as initial lymph node status, HER2-Neu status and age. The prognostic value of these other factors, however, is unknown when stratified by HR positive versus HR negative patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate prognostic factors for MBC survival in relation to HR status. Dutch women diagnosed with breast cancer in 2003-2006 treated with curative intent who developed MBC within 5 years of follow-up were selected from the Netherlands cancer registry (N = 2,001). Independent prognostic factors for survival after metastatic occurrence were determined by multivariable Cox survival analyses stratified by HR status. Interactions between HR status and prognostic factors were determined. Median survival for MBC patients with HR negative (HR-) tumours was 8 months, compared to 19 months for HR positive (HR+) patients. The prognostic value of lymph node status, HER2-Neu status, adjuvant endocrine treatment and first-line palliative chemotherapy was dependent on HR status. Initial lymph node status was independently associated with survival in HR- patients, but not in HR+ patients. HER2-Neu positive status was associated with better survival in both HR+ and HR- patients, although the association was stronger in HR- patients. Similarly, patients treated with first-line palliative chemotherapy fared better, especially HR- patients. HR+ patients had worse survival if they had received adjuvant endocrine treatment. This study shows that the prognostic value of various factors depends on HR status in MBC. This information may help physicians to determine individual prognostic profiles and therapeutic strategies for MBC patients.