Adherence to breast cancer guidelines is associated with better survival outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies in EU countries

Abstract

Background Breast cancer (BC) clinical guidelines offer evidence-based recommendations to improve quality of healthcare for patients with or at risk of BC. Suboptimal adherence to recommendations has the potential to negatively affect population health. However, no study has systematically reviewed the impact of BC guideline adherence -as prognosis factor- on BC healthcare processes and health outcomes. The objectives are to analyse the impact of guideline adherence on health outcomes and on healthcare costs. Methods We searched systematic reviews and primary studies in MEDLINE and Embase, conducted in European Union (EU) countries (inception to May 2019). Eligibility assessment, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were conducted by one author and crosschecked by a second. We used random-effects meta-analyses to examine the impact of guideline adherence on overall survival and disease-free survival, and assessed certainty of evidence using GRADE. Results We included 21 primary studies. Most were published during the last decade (90%), followed a retrospective cohort design (86%), focused on treatment guideline adherence (95%), and were at low (80%) or moderate (20%) risk of bias. Nineteen studies (95%) examined the impact of guideline adherence on health outcomes, while two (10%) on healthcare cost. Adherence to guidelines was associated with increased overall survival (HR = 0.67, 95%CI 0.59–0.76) and disease-free survival (HR = 0.35, 95%CI 0.15–0.82), representing 138 more survivors (96 more to 178 more) and 336 patients free of recurrence (73 more to 491 more) for every 1000 women receiving adherent CG treatment compared to those receiving non-adherent treatment at 5 years follow-up (moderate certainty). Adherence to treatment guidelines was associated with higher costs, but adherence to follow-up guidelines was associated with lower costs (low certainty). Conclusions Our review of EU studies suggests that there is moderate certainty that adherence to BC guidelines is associated with an improved survival. BC guidelines should be rigorously implemented in the clinical setting. Trial registration PROSPERO (CRD42018092884).

Adherence to COVID-19 nutritional guidelines and their impact on the clinical outcomes of hospitalized COVID-19 patients

“…Our study results indicated that adherence to guidelines, particularly guideline knowledge, was associated with the length of hospital stay in critically ill patients and their mortality due to COVID-19. These results agreed with recent studies showing that adherence to guidelines by practitioners improved the health outcomes and survival rates of cancer patients [22,23]. Despite continuous efforts to improve doctors' guideline adherence, guideline nonadherence is still a major concern across all medical fields [24].…”

Breast cancer in previously thyroidectomized patients: which thyroid disorders are a risk factor?

“…Breast cancer (BC) is the most frequent malignancy of the female sex worldwide. More than 2 million cases were diagnosed in 2018, mostly in developed countries, and particularly in Europe, where an incidence of 400,000 new cases and 98,000 related deaths were detected in the same year [1,2]. Relationships between endocrine system, metabolic disorders and BC, excluding the sphere of sexual hormones, have long been hypothesized, and many epidemiological and clinical studies have found significant correlations with diabetes, obesity and other endocrine disorders [3][4][5][6].…”

Nonadherence to Multimodality Cancer Treatment Guidelines in the United States

“…Our findings are in keeping with the reported literature, showing a wide range of adherence with guidelineconcordant care based on disease and patient characteristics, both nationally [7][8][9]20,22 and abroad. [25][26][27][28] Treatment recommendations outlined by the NCCN for cancers included in this analysis are based on high level data showing improved outcomes for cancer patients with respect to both survival and quality of life. For anal cancer, radiation and chemotherapy have replaced radical surgery as definitive therapy based on data from a number of cooperative group trials showing equivalent survival without the morbidity associated with surgery.…”