21 research outputs found

    Health care use and remaining needs for support among women with breast cancer in the first 15 months after diagnosis:the role of the GP

    Get PDF
    Background: The number of women with breast cancer in general practice is rising. To address their needs and wishes for a referral, GPs might benefit from more insight into women's health care practices and need for additional support. Objective: To examine the prevalence of health care use and remaining needs among women with breast cancer in the first 15 months after diagnosis. Methods: In this multicentre, prospective, observational study women with breast cancer completed a questionnaire at 6 and 15 months post-diagnosis. Medical data were retrieved through chart reviews. The prevalence of types of health care used and remaining needs related to medical, psychosocial, paramedical and supplementary service care (such as home care), was examined with descriptive analyses. Results: Seven hundred forty-six women completed both questionnaires. At both assessments patients reported that they had most frequent contact with medical and paramedical providers, independent of types of treatment received. Three to fifteen percent of the patients expressed a need for more support. Prominent needs included a wish for more frequent contact with a physiotherapist, a clinical geneticist and a psychologist. Patients also wanted more help for chores around the house, particularly in the early post-treatment phase. Conclusion: A small but relevant percentage of women with breast cancer report having unmet needs. GPs may need to be particularly watchful of their need for more support from specific providers. Future research into the necessity of structural needs assessment among cancer patients in general practice is warranted

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

    Get PDF
    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

    Get PDF
    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?

    Get PDF
    <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>

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

    No full text
    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

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

    Get PDF
    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

    Patients' preferences for breast reconstruction: A discrete choice experiment

    No full text
    Background: Patients' preferences are important determinants in the decision for a specific type of breast reconstruction (BR). Understanding their considerations in the decision for a specific type of BR can contribute to further improvement in patient counselling. We explored patients' preferences for three BR modalities in a discrete choice experiment (DCE). Methods: We approached 386 patients who had previously undergone a therapeutic (n = 309) or prophylactic (n = 79) mastectomy, of whom 247 had also undergone a BR. These women were asked to choose between hypothetical BR profiles that were characterised by six treatment attributes: (1) material used for reconstruction, (2) number and duration of operations, (3) short-term complication rate, (4) long-term complication rate, (5) aesthetic result and (6) waiting time. The relative importance of attributes and trade-offs that the patients were willing to make among them were analysed using a multinomial logit regression model. Results: The overall response rate was 71%. All treatment characteristics proved important for patients to make their choices. Respondents generally expressed a preference for autologous material and an excellent aesthetic result, which had the biggest positive effect on preferences. Complication rates of 20-30% had a similar negative effect. In this DCE, autologous free flap BR fitted in best with patients' preferences. Conclusions: Our study provides insight into the relative weight patients place on various aspects of BR and trade-offs they make among BR characteristics. In addition to understanding patients' considerations, professional assessment of the technical feasibility, acceptable risks and obtainable aesthetic result of different techniques will always remain crucial in deciding which technique is best suited for an individual patient. (C) 2010 British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserve

    A patient- and assessor-blinded randomized controlled trial of axillary reverse mapping (ARM) in patients with early breast cancer

    Get PDF
    Background: Axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in breast cancer patients is infamous for its accompanying morbidity. Selective preservation of upper extremity lymphatic drainage and accompanying lymph nodes crossing the axillary basin - currently resected during a standard ALND - has been proposed as a valuable surgical refinement.Methods: Peroperative Axillary Reversed Mapping (ARM) was used for selective preservation of upper extremity lymphatic drainage. A multicentre patient- and assessor-blinded randomized study was performed in clinical node negative, sentinel node positive early breast cancer patients. Patients were randomized to undergo either standard-ALND or ARM-ALND. Primary outcome was the presence of surgery-related lymphedema at six, 12 and 24 months post-operatively. Secondary outcomes included patient reported and objective signs and symptoms of lymphedema, pain, paraesthesia, numbness, loss of shoulder mobility, quality of life and axillary recurrence risk.Results: No significant differences were found between both groups using the water displacement method with respect to measured lymphedema. ARM-ALND resulted in less reported complaints of lymphedema at six, 12 and 24 months postoperatively (pConclusions: In contrast to results of volumetric measurement, patient reported outcomes support selective sparing of the upper extremity lymphatic drainage using ARM as valuable surgical refinement in case of ALND in clinically node negative, sentinel node positive early breast cancer. If completion ALND in clinically node negative, sentinel node positive early breast cancer is considered, selective sparing of upper extremity axillary lymphatics by implementing ARM should be carried out in order to reduce morbidity. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd, BASO - The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.</p

    Satisfaction with prophylactic mastectomy and breast reconstruction in genetically predisposed women

    No full text
    Prophylactic mastectomy with breast reconstruction is a risk-reducing strategy for women at increased risk of breast cancer. It remains a very radical intervention, and long-term data on satisfaction are insufficiently available. In the present follow-up study, the authors assess satisfaction with prophylactic mastectomy and breast reconstruction and its impact on sexual relationships. The authors conducted a retrospective study using a short self-report questionnaire administered to 114 genetically predisposed women who underwent prophylactic mastectomy and breast reconstruction mainly by subpectorally implanted silicone prostheses performed at one institution. The median follow-up time between prophylactic mastectomy/breast reconstruction and completion of the questionnaire was 3 years. Sixty percent of all participants were satisfied with the result of prophylactic mastectomy/breast reconstruction. Satisfaction was significantly and negatively correlated with perceived lack of information, experienced complications, ongoing complaints, whether or not the reconstructed breasts feel "like your own," and not choosing this type of breast reconstruction again. Adverse effects in the patient's sexual relationship were strongly correlated with perceived lack of information, discrepant expectations, ongoing complaints and limitations, whether or not the reconstructed breasts feel "like your own," altered feelings of femininity, partner's negative perception on femininity and sexuality, and not choosing this type of breast reconstruction again. A majority of women would choose the procedure again, but adverse effects and untoward changes in the perception of the sexual relationship need to be addressed in the counselling of women at high risk, to optimize an informed choice and enable adequate adjustment postoperativel
    corecore