Risk factors of unmet needs among women with breast cancer in the post-treatment phase

OBJECTIVE: Unmet health care needs require additional care resources to achieve optimal patient well-being. In this nationwide study we examined associations between a number of risk factors and unmet needs after treatment among women with breast cancer, while taking into account their health care practices. We expected that more care use would be associated with lower levels of unmet needs. METHODS: A multicenter, prospective, observational design was employed. Women with primary breast cancer completed questionnaires 6 and 15 months post-diagnosis. Medical data were retrieved from medical records. Direct and indirect associations between sociodemographic and clinical risk factors, distress, care use, and unmet needs were investigated with structural equation modeling. RESULTS: Seven hundred forty-six participants completed both questionnaires (response rate 73.7%). The care services received were not negatively associated with the reported levels of unmet needs after treatment. Comorbidity was associated with higher physical and daily living needs. Higher age was associated with higher health system-related and informational needs. Having had chemotherapy and a mastectomy were associated with higher sexuality needs and breast cancer-specific issues, respectively. A higher level of distress was associated with higher levels of unmet need in all domains. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians may use these results to timely identify which women are at risk of developing specific unmet needs after treatment. Evidence-based, cost-effective (online) interventions that target distress, the most influential risk factor, should be further implemented and disseminated among patients and clinicians

A prediction model for underestimation of invasive breast cancer after a biopsy diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ: based on 2892 biopsies and 589 invasive cancers

Background: Patients with a biopsy diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) might be diagnosed with invasive breast cancer at excision, a phenomenon known as underestimation. Patients with DCIS are treated based on the risk of underestimation or progression to invasive cancer. The aim of our study was to expand the knowledge on underestimation and to develop a prediction model. Methods: Population-based data were retrieved from the Dutch Pathology Registry and the Netherlands Cancer Registry for DCIS between January 2011 and June 2012. Results: Of 2892 DCIS biopsies, 21% were underestimated invasive breast cancers. In multivariable analysis, risk factors were high-grade DCIS (odds ratio (OR) 1.43, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.05–1.95), a palpable tumour (OR 2.22, 95% CI: 1.76–2.81), a BI-RADS (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System) score 5 (OR 2.36, 95% CI: 1.80–3.09) and a suspected invasive component at biopsy (OR 3.84, 95% CI: 2.69–5.46). The predicted risk for underestimation ranged from 9.5 to 80.2%, with a median of 14.7%. Of the 596 invasive cancers, 39% had unfavourable features. Conclusions: The risk for an underestimated diagnosis of invasive breast cancer after a biopsy diagnosis of DCIS is considerable. With our prediction model, the individual risk of underestimation can be calculated based on routinely available preoperatively known risk factors (https://www.evidencio.com/models/show/1074)

Do screen-detected breast cancers have positive margins less often than clinically detected breast cancers?

<p>Positive tumour margins after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) have been selected as one of the major quality criteria for the surgical treatment of localized primary breast cancer. The national guideline states that the rate of positive margins should not exceed 30% in ductal carcinoma in situ and 20% in invasive cancers. We aimed to determine whether BCS in women with screen-detected breast cancer (SDBC) will have positive margins less often compared with women with clinically detected breast cancer (CDBC). Furthermore, the choice of subsequent therapy is studied when margins were positive after initial BCS. Women 50-75 years of age who underwent BCS for invasive breast cancer between July 2008 and December 2009 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Data were merged with the National Cancer Screening Program, regions North and East, to identify women with SDBC. The relation to screening history, clinical and pathological factors was evaluated for correlation with margin status using multilevel analysis. Of 1537 women with an invasive breast cancer, 873 (57%) were diagnosed through the screening programme. SDBCs were significantly smaller (87 vs. 69% T1 tumours, i.e. 2 cm), more often well differentiated (33 vs. 26%), preoperatively confirmed (98 vs. 96%), diagnosed in a nonteaching hospital (60 vs. 66%) and more often had negative lymph nodes (LNs) (80 vs. 68%). In 170 out of 1537 women, the resection margins were positive. Multivariable analysis showed that hospital, tumour size, multifocality, positive LNs and absent preoperative confirmation were predictors of positive margins. No difference was found between women with SDBC and CDBC. Of women with positive margins, 90% underwent additional surgery. Women diagnosed with SDBC do not have a lower risk of having positive margins after BCS than women with CDBC. Although positive margins may occur in 11% of women with invasive tumours, well below the percentage recommended by the national guideline, the presence of encouraging factors by SDBC such as a smaller tumour size, unifocality, negative LNs and the presence of preoperative confirmation should not lead to performing a more sparing excision than is considered usual for comparable CDBC. (C) 2013 Wolters Kluwer Health vertical bar Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.</p>

Non-primary breast malignancies: a single institution’s experience of a diagnostic challenge with important therapeutic consequences—a retrospective study

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is a common malignancy, but metastases to the breast of extramammary malignancies are very rare. Treatment and prognosis are different. The aim of the study is to report the incidence of lymphomas and metastases to the breast of extramammary malignancies in our 30-year archive. METHODS: The pathology database of a single institute was reviewed for all breast neoplasms which were coded in our system as a metastasis in the period 1985–2014. Metastatic tumors from primary breast carcinoma were excluded. RESULTS: A total of 47 patients were included (7 men/40 women, mean age 63 years). The majority originated from lymphoma (n = 18) and primary melanoma (n = 11). Other primary tumor sites included the ovary (n = 6), lung (n = 6), colon (n = 3), kidney (n = 1), stomach (n = 1), and chorion (n = 1). In 24/47 patients (51 %), metastasis was the first sign of the specific malignant disease. In seven patients (15 %) surgery was performed, the diagnosis of metastatic disease was adjusted in four patients (9 %) postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: It is important to distinguish lymphomas and metastases to the breast from common primary breast carcinoma for proper treatment and prognosis. Therefore, we emphasize the need for a histological or cytopathological diagnosis before any treatment is commenced. The pathologist plays a key role in considering the diagnosis of metastasis if the histological features are unusual for a primary breast carcinoma. The pathologist should therefore be properly informed by the clinical physician although lymphomas and metastases to the breast are the first presentation of malignant disease in half the cases

What affects women’s decision-making on breast reconstruction after mastectomy for breast cancer?

Purpose: To establish the breast reconstruction rate in a large Dutch teaching hospital, and to gain insight into the motives of women to opt for or reject post-mastectomy breast reconstruction. Methods: In a retrospective, cross-sectional study, all consecutive patients who underwent mastectomy for invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) were identified and categorized into two groups based on subsequent breast reconstruction or not. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed with the validated Breast-Q and a short survey about the decision-making process in breast reconstruction. These outcomes were compared between the two groups using univariable analyses, multivariable logistic regression, and multiple linear regression analyses. The Breast-Q scores were also compared to Dutch normative values. Results: A total of 319 patients were identified of whom 68% had no breast reconstruction. Of the 102 patients with breast reconstruction, the majority (93%) received immediate, instead of delayed breast reconstruction. The survey was completed by 155 (49%) patients. The non-reconstruction group, on average, reported significantly poorer psychosocial well-being, compared to the reconstruction group as well as compared to the normative data. However, the majority of the non-reconstruction group (83%) stated that they had no desire for breast reconstruction. In both groups, most patients stated that the provided information was sufficient. Conclusion: Patients have personal motives to opt for or reject breast reconstruction. It seemed that patients differ in their rating of values that affect their decision since the same arguments were used to opt for or reject reconstruction. Notably, patients were well-informed in their decision making

Multiparametric MRI with dynamic contrast enhancement, diffusion-weighted imaging, and 31-phosphorus spectroscopy at 7 T for characterization of breast cancer

Objectives: To describe and to correlate tumor characteristics onmultiparametric 7 tesla (T) breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with prognostic characteristics from postoperative histopathology in patients with breast cancer. Materials and Methods: Institutional review board approval and written informed consent of 15 women (46-70 years) with 17 malignant lesions were obtained. In this prospective study (March 2013 to March 2014), women were preoperatively scanned using dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI, diffusionweighted imaging, and 31-phosphorus spectroscopy (31P-MRS). The value of the protocol was assessed to quantify tumor differentiation and proliferation. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI was assessed according to the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting andData System-MRI lexicon.Apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCs) were calculated from diffusion-weighted imaging. On 31P-MRS, at the location of the tumor, the amount of phosphorus components was obtained in a localized spectrum. In this spectrum, the height of phosphodiester (PDE) and phosphomonoester (PME) peakswas assessed to serve as a measure for metabolic activity, stratifying tumors into a PDE > PME, PDE = PME, or PDE < PME group. Tumor grade andmitotic count fromresection specimenwere compared with the MRI characteristics using explorative analyses. Results: On dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI, the mean tumor size was 24 mm (range, 6-55 mm). An inverse trend was seen between ADC and tumor grade (P = 0.083), with mean ADC of 867 × 10-6 mm2/s for grade 1 (N = 4), 751 × 10-6 mm2/s for grade 2 (N = 6), and 659 × 10-6 mm2/s for grade 3 (N = 2) tumors. Between 31P-MR spectra andmitotic count, a relative increase of PME over PDE showed significant association with increasing mitotic counts (P = 0.02); a mean mitotic count of 6 was found in the PDE greater than PME group (N = 7), 8 in the PDE = PME group (N = 1), and 17 in the PDE < PME group (N = 3). Conclusions: Multiparametric 7 T breastMRI is feasible in clinical setting and shows association between ADC and tumor grade, and between 31P-MRS and mitotic count

Preoperative indication for systemic therapy extended to patients with early-stage breast cancer using multiparametric 7-tesla breast MRI

PURPOSE: To establish a preoperative decision model for accurate indication of systemic therapy in early-stage breast cancer using multiparametric MRI at 7-tesla field strength. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients eligible for breast-conserving therapy were consecutively included. Patients underwent conventional diagnostic workup and one preoperative multiparametric 7-tesla breast MRI. The postoperative (gold standard) indication for systemic therapy was established from resected tumor and lymph-node tissue, based on 10-year risk-estimates of breast cancer mortality and relapse using Adjuvant! Online. Preoperative indication was estimated using similar guidelines, but from conventional diagnostic workup. Agreement was established between preoperative and postoperative indication, and MRI-characteristics used to improve agreement. MRI-characteristics included phospomonoester/phosphodiester (PME/PDE) ratio on 31-phosphorus spectroscopy (31P-MRS), apparent diffusion coefficients on diffusion-weighted imaging, and tumor size on dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE)-MRI. A decision model was built to estimate the postoperative indication from preoperatively available data. RESULTS: We included 46 women (age: 43-74yrs) with 48 invasive carcinomas. Postoperatively, 20 patients (43%) had positive, and 26 patients (57%) negative indication for systemic therapy. Using conventional workup, positive preoperative indication agreed excellently with positive postoperative indication (N = 8/8; 100%). Negative preoperative indication was correct in only 26/38 (68%) patients. However, 31P-MRS score (p = 0.030) and tumor size (p = 0.002) were associated with the postoperative indication. The decision model shows that negative indication is correct in 21/22 (96%) patients when exempting tumors larger than 2.0cm on DCE-MRI or with PME>PDE ratios at 31P-MRS. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperatively, positive indication for systemic therapy is highly accurate. Negative indication is highly accurate (96%) for tumors sized ≤2,0cm on DCE-MRI and with PME≤PDE ratios on 31P-MRS

Preoperative indication for systemic therapy extended to patients with early-stage breast cancer using multiparametric 7-tesla breast MRI

PURPOSE: To establish a preoperative decision model for accurate indication of systemic therapy in early-stage breast cancer using multiparametric MRI at 7-tesla field strength. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients eligible for breast-conserving therapy were consecutively included. Patients underwent conventional diagnostic workup and one preoperative multiparametric 7-tesla breast MRI. The postoperative (gold standard) indication for systemic therapy was established from resected tumor and lymph-node tissue, based on 10-year risk-estimates of breast cancer mortality and relapse using Adjuvant! Online. Preoperative indication was estimated using similar guidelines, but from conventional diagnostic workup. Agreement was established between preoperative and postoperative indication, and MRI-characteristics used to improve agreement. MRI-characteristics included phospomonoester/phosphodiester (PME/PDE) ratio on 31-phosphorus spectroscopy (31P-MRS), apparent diffusion coefficients on diffusion-weighted imaging, and tumor size on dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE)-MRI. A decision model was built to estimate the postoperative indication from preoperatively available data. RESULTS: We included 46 women (age: 43-74yrs) with 48 invasive carcinomas. Postoperatively, 20 patients (43%) had positive, and 26 patients (57%) negative indication for systemic therapy. Using conventional workup, positive preoperative indication agreed excellently with positive postoperative indication (N = 8/8; 100%). Negative preoperative indication was correct in only 26/38 (68%) patients. However, 31P-MRS score (p = 0.030) and tumor size (p = 0.002) were associated with the postoperative indication. The decision model shows that negative indication is correct in 21/22 (96%) patients when exempting tumors larger than 2.0cm on DCE-MRI or with PME>PDE ratios at 31P-MRS. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperatively, positive indication for systemic therapy is highly accurate. Negative indication is highly accurate (96%) for tumors sized ≤2,0cm on DCE-MRI and with PME≤PDE ratios on 31P-MRS

Partial mastectomy and m. latissimus dorsi reconstruction for radiation-induced fibrosis after breast-conserving cancer therapy

Background: Patients with severe complaints of radiation-induced fibrosis after breast-conserving therapy and not responding to conservative therapy, were treated by partial mastectomy and m. latissimus dorsi reconstruction. Method: To determine the feasibility and outcome of this approach, a retrospective study of nine patients was carried out. Results: After a mean follow-up of 46 months, eight of the nine patients experienced improvement of their complaints and shape of the breast. In only one case did the procedure fail, as evidenced by continuation of all complaints. Conclusions: Partial mastectomy and m. latissimus dorsi reconstruction is the ultimate option in the treatment of radiation fibrosis. The procedure is safe with satisfying results