Case-mix analysis and variation in rates of non-surgical treatment of older women with operable breast cancer

Survival Outcomes in Older Women with Oestrogen-Receptor-Positive Early-Stage Breast Cancer: Primary Endocrine Therapy vs. Surgery by Comorbidity and Frailty Levels

Primary endocrine therapy (PET) offers non-surgical treatment for older women with early-stage breast cancer who are unsuitable for surgery due to frailty or comorbidity. This research assessed all-cause and breast cancer-specific mortality of PET vs. surgery in older women (≥70 years) with oestrogen-receptor-positive early-stage breast cancer by frailty and comorbidity levels. This study used UK secondary data to analyse older female patients from 2000 to 2016. Patients were censored until 31 May 2019 and grouped by the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) and hospital frailty risk score (HFRS). Cox regression models compared all-cause and breast cancer-specific mortality between PET and surgery within each group, adjusting for patient preferences and covariates. Sensitivity analyses accounted for competing risks. There were 23,109 patients included. The hazard ratio (HR) comparing PET to surgery for overall survival decreased significantly from 2.1 (95%CI: 2.0, 2.2) to 1.2 (95%CI: 1.1, 1.5) with increasing HFRS and from 2.1 (95%CI: 2.0, 2.2) to 1.4 (95%CI 1.2, 1.7) with rising CCI. However, there was no difference in BCSM for frail older women (HR: 1.2; 0.9, 1.9). There were no differences in competing risk profiles between other causes of death and breast cancer-specific mortality with PET versus surgery, with a subdistribution hazard ratio of 1.1 (0.9, 1.4) for high-level HFRS (p = 0.261) and CCI (p = 0.093). Given limited survival gains from surgery for older patients, PET shows potential as an effective option for frail older women with early-stage breast cancer. Despite surgery outperforming PET, surgery loses its edge as frailty increases, with negligible differences in the very frail.

Factors influencing older women's decision-making related to treatment of operable breast cancer: A qualitative systematic review

OBJECTIVE

There is variation in practice in the treatment of older women with breast cancer. International guidelines highlight the importance of patient autonomy in treatment decision-making. The aim of this study is to identify factors which influence decision-making in older women with operable breast cancer, which will enable us to further understand how to support these patients.

METHODS

Systematic review in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines was performed to identify factors which influence treatment decision-making in older women with operable breast cancer. Medline, Web of Science and SCOPUS were searched.

RESULTS

The search yielded 5840 results; 13 articles met the inclusion criteria and reported on a total of 1118 women. Thematic analysis identified three key themes in which decision-making factors could be categorised. These were healthcare-related factors, patient-related factors and impact of treatment. Healthcare-related factors included communication with clinicians and provision of information. Patient-related factors were age, pre-existing knowledge, preconceptions of breast cancer and treatment, decision-making style and co-morbidities. The impact of treatment considerations included body image and effect on quality of life. Decision-making style was frequently reported; older women did not demonstrate one preferred style.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings have highlighted the complex interplay of factors which influence how older women make breast cancer treatment-decisions. Clinicians should have an awareness of the factors highlighted to maximise their ability to provide support and personalised care to older women with breast cancer whilst treatment decisions are made.

Improving outcomes for women aged 70 years or above with early breast cancer: research programme including a cluster RCT

Background

In breast cancer management, age-related practice variation is widespread, with older women having lower rates of surgery and chemotherapy than younger women, based on the premise of reduced treatment tolerance and benefit. This may contribute to inferior outcomes. There are currently no age- and fitness-stratified guidelines on which to base treatment recommendations.

Aim

We aimed to optimise treatment choice and outcomes for older women (aged ≥ 70 years) with operable breast cancer.

Objectives

Our objectives were to (1) determine the age, comorbidity, frailty, disease stage and biology thresholds for endocrine therapy alone versus surgery plus adjuvant endocrine therapy, or adjuvant chemotherapy versus no chemotherapy, for older women with breast cancer; (2) optimise survival outcomes for older women by improving the quality of treatment decision-making; (3) develop and evaluate a decision support intervention to enhance shared decision-making; and (4) determine the degree and causes of treatment variation between UK breast units.

Design

A prospective cohort study was used to determine age and fitness thresholds for treatment allocation. Mixed-methods research was used to determine the information needs of older women to develop a decision support intervention. A cluster-randomised trial was used to evaluate the impact of this decision support intervention on treatment choices and outcomes. Health economic analysis was used to evaluate the cost–benefit ratio of different treatment strategies according to age and fitness criteria. A mixed-methods study was used to determine the degree and causes of variation in treatment allocation.

Main outcome measures

The main outcome measures were enhanced age- and fitness-specific decision support leading to improved quality-of-life outcomes in older women (aged ≥ 70 years) with early breast cancer.

Results

(1) Cohort study: the study recruited 3416 UK women aged ≥ 70 years (median age 77 years). Follow-up was 52 months. (a) The surgery plus adjuvant endocrine therapy versus endocrine therapy alone comparison: 2854 out of 3416 (88%) women had oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer, 2354 of whom received surgery plus adjuvant endocrine therapy and 500 received endocrine therapy alone. Patients treated with endocrine therapy alone were older and frailer than patients treated with surgery plus adjuvant endocrine therapy. Unmatched overall survival and breast-cancer-specific survival were higher in the surgery plus adjuvant endocrine therapy group (overall survival: hazard ratio 0.27, 95% confidence interval 0.23 to 0.33; p < 0.001; breast-cancer-specific survival: hazard ratio 0.41, 95% confidence interval 0.29 to 0.58; p < 0.001) than in the endocrine therapy alone group. In matched analysis, surgery plus adjuvant endocrine therapy was still associated with better overall survival (hazard ratio 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.53 to 0.98; p = 0.04) than endocrine therapy alone, but not with better breast-cancer-specific survival (hazard ratio 0.74, 95% confidence interval 0.40 to 1.37; p = 0.34) or progression-free-survival (hazard ratio 1.11, 95% confidence interval 0.55 to 2.26; p = 0.78). (b) The adjuvant chemotherapy versus no chemotherapy comparison: 2811 out of 3416 (82%) women received surgery plus adjuvant endocrine therapy, of whom 1520 (54%) had high-recurrence-risk breast cancer [grade 3, node positive, oestrogen receptor negative or human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 positive, or a high Oncotype DX® (Genomic Health, Inc., Redwood City, CA, USA) score of > 25]. In this high-risk population, there were no differences according to adjuvant chemotherapy use in overall survival or breast-cancer-specific survival after propensity matching. Adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with a lower risk of metastatic recurrence than no chemotherapy in the unmatched (adjusted hazard ratio 0.36, 95% confidence interval 0.19 to 0.68; p = 0.002) and propensity-matched patients (adjusted hazard ratio 0.43, 95% confidence interval 0.20 to 0.92; p = 0.03). Adjuvant chemotherapy improved the overall survival and breast-cancer-specific survival of patients with oestrogen-receptor-negative disease. (2) Mixed-methods research to develop a decision support intervention: an iterative process was used to develop two decision support interventions (each comprising a brief decision aid, a booklet and an online tool) specifically for older women facing treatment choices (endocrine therapy alone or surgery plus adjuvant endocrine therapy, and adjuvant chemotherapy or no chemotherapy) using several evidence sources (expert opinion, literature and patient interviews). The online tool was based on models developed using registry data from 23,842 patients and validated on an external data set of 14,526 patients. Mortality rates at 2 and 5 years differed by < 1% between predicted and observed values. (3) Cluster-randomised clinical trial of decision support tools: 46 UK breast units were randomised (intervention, n = 21; usual care, n = 25), recruiting 1339 women (intervention, n = 670; usual care, n = 669). There was no significant difference in global quality of life at 6 months post baseline (difference –0.20, 95% confidence interval –2.7 to 2.3; p = 0.90). In women offered a choice of endocrine therapy alone or surgery plus adjuvant endocrine therapy, knowledge about treatments was greater in the intervention arm than the usual care arm (94% vs. 74%; p = 0.003). Treatment choice was altered, with higher rates of endocrine therapy alone than of surgery in the intervention arm. Similarly, chemotherapy rates were lower in the intervention arm (endocrine therapy alone rate: intervention sites 21% vs. usual-care sites 15%, difference 5.5%, 95% confidence interval 1.1% to 10.0%; p = 0.02; adjuvant chemotherapy rate: intervention sites 10% vs. usual-care site 15%, difference 4.5%, 95% confidence interval 0.0% to 8.0%; p = 0.013). Survival was similar in both arms. (4) Health economic analysis: a probabilistic economic model was developed using registry and cohort study data. For most health and fitness strata, surgery plus adjuvant endocrine therapy had lower costs and returned more quality-adjusted life-years than endocrine therapy alone. However, for some women aged > 90 years, surgery plus adjuvant endocrine therapy was no longer cost-effective and generated fewer quality-adjusted life-years than endocrine therapy alone. The incremental benefit of surgery plus adjuvant endocrine therapy reduced with age and comorbidities. (5) Variation in practice: analysis of rates of surgery plus adjuvant endocrine therapy or endocrine therapy alone between the 56 breast units in the cohort study demonstrated significant variation in rates of endocrine therapy alone that persisted after adjustment for age, fitness and stage. Clinician preference was an important determinant of treatment choice.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates that, for older women with oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer, there is a cohort of women with a life expectancy of < 4 years for whom surgery plus adjuvant endocrine therapy may offer little benefit and simply have a negative impact on quality of life. The Age Gap decision tool may help make this shared decision. Similarly, although adjuvant chemotherapy offers little benefit and has a negative impact on quality of life for the majority of older women with oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer, for women with oestrogen-receptor-negative breast cancer, adjuvant chemotherapy is beneficial. The negative impacts of adjuvant chemotherapy on quality of life, although significant, are transient. This implies that, for the majority of fitter women aged ≥ 70 years, standard care should be offered.

Limitations

As with any observational study, despite detailed propensity score matching, residual bias cannot be excluded. Follow-up was at median 52 months for the cohort analysis. Longer-term follow-up will be required to validate these findings owing to the slow time course of oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer.

Future work

The online algorithm is now available (URL: https://agegap.shef.ac.uk/; accessed May 2022). There are plans to validate the tool and incorprate quality-of-life and 10-year survival outcomes.

Trial registration

This trial is registered as ISRCTN46099296.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 10, No. 6. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Surgical under-treatment of older adult patients with cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Older patients with cancer often have lower surgery rates and survival than younger patients, but this may reflect surgical contraindications of advanced disease, comorbidities, and frailty - and not necessarily under-treatment.

OBJECTIVES

This review aims to describe variations in surgery rates and observed or net survival among younger (<75) and older (≥75) patients with breast, lung and colorectal cancer, while taking account of pre-existing health factors, in order to understand how under-treatment is defined and estimated in the literature.

METHOD

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and PubMed databases were searched for studies reporting surgery rates and observed or net survival among younger and older patients with breast, lung, and colorectal cancer. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale, and random effects meta-analyses were used to combine study results. The I-squared statistic and subgroup analyses were used to assess heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Thirty relatively high-quality studies of patients with breast (230,200; 71.9%), lung (77,573; 24.2%), and colorectal (12,407; 3.9%) cancers were identified. Compared to younger patients, older patients were less likely to receive surgical treatment for 1) breast cancer after adjusting for comorbidity, performance status (PS), functional status and patient choice, 2) lung cancer after accounting for stage, comorbidity, PS, and 3) colorectal cancer after adjusting for stage, comorbidity, and gender. The pooled unadjusted analyses showed lower surgery receipt in older patients with breast (odds ratio [OR] 0.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.13-0.78), lung (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.39-0.75), and colorectal (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.51-0.68) cancer. In separate analyses, older patients with breast, lung and colorectal cancer had lower observed and net survival, compared to younger patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Lower surgery rates in older patients may contribute to their poorer survival compared to younger patients. Future research quantifying under-treatment should include necessary clinical factors, patient choice, patient's quality of life and a statistically-robust approach, which will demonstrate how much of the survival deficit in older patients is due to their receiving lower surgery rates.

Care Disparities Across the Health Care Continuum for Older Adults: Lessons From Multidisciplinary Perspectives

Older adults comprise a considerable proportion of patients with cancer in the world. Across multiple cancer types, cancer treatment outcomes among older age groups are often inferior to those among younger adults. Cancer care for older individuals is complicated by the need to adapt treatment to baseline health, fitness, and frailty, all of which vary widely within this age group. Rates of social deprivation and socioeconomic disparities are also higher in older adults, with many living on reduced incomes, further compounding health inequality. It is important to recognize and avoid undertreatment and overtreatment of cancer in this age group; however, simply addressing this problem by mandating standard treatment of all would lead to harms resulting from treatment toxicity and futility. However, there is little high-quality evidence on which to base these decisions, because older adults are poorly represented in clinical trials. Clinicians must recognize that simple extrapolation of outcomes from younger age cohorts may not be appropriate because of variance in disease stage and biology, variation in fitness and treatment tolerance, and reduced life expectancy. Older patients may also have different life goals and priorities, with a greater focus on quality of life and less on length of life at any cost. Health care professionals struggle with treatment of older adults with cancer, with high rates of variability in practice between and within countries. This suggests that better national and international recommendations that more fully address the needs of this special patient population are required and that primary research focused on the older age group is urgently required to inform these guidelines.

Bridging the age gap in breast cancer: cluster randomized trial of two decision support interventions for older women with operable breast cancer on quality of life, survival, decision quality, and treatment choices

BACKGROUND

Rates of surgery and adjuvant therapy for breast cancer vary widely between breast units. This may contribute to differences in survival. This cluster RCT evaluated the impact of decision support interventions (DESIs) for older women with breast cancer, to ascertain whether DESIs influenced quality of life, survival, decision quality, and treatment choice.

METHODS

A multicentre cluster RCT compared the use of two DESIs against usual care in treatment decision-making in older women (aged at least ≥70 years) with breast cancer. Each DESI comprised an online algorithm, booklet, and brief decision aid to inform choices between surgery plus adjuvant endocrine therapy versus primary endocrine therapy, and adjuvant chemotherapy versus no chemotherapy. The primary outcome was quality of life. Secondary outcomes included decision quality measures, survival, and treatment choice.

RESULTS

A total of 46 breast units were randomized (21 intervention, 25 usual care), recruiting 1339 women (670 intervention, 669 usual care). There was no significant difference in global quality of life at 6 months after the baseline assessment on intention-to-treat analysis (difference -0.20, 95 per cent confidence interval (C.I.) -2.69 to 2.29; P = 0.900). In women offered a choice of primary endocrine therapy versus surgery plus endocrine therapy, knowledge about treatments was greater in the intervention arm (94 versus 74 per cent; P = 0.003). Treatment choice was altered, with a primary endocrine therapy rate among women with oestrogen receptor-positive disease of 21.0 per cent in the intervention versus 15.4 per cent in usual-care sites (difference 5.5 (95 per cent C.I. 1.1 to 10.0) per cent; P = 0.029). The chemotherapy rate was 10.3 per cent at intervention versus 14.8 per cent at usual-care sites (difference -4.5 (C.I. -8.0 to 0) per cent; P = 0.013). Survival was similar in both arms.

CONCLUSION

The use of DESIs in older women increases knowledge of breast cancer treatment options, facilitates shared decision-making, and alters treatment selection. Trial registration numbers: EudraCT 2015-004220-61 (https://eudract.ema.europa.eu/), ISRCTN46099296 (http://www.controlled-trials.com).

Surgical decisions in older women with early breast cancer: patient and disease factors

BACKGROUND

Studies reporting lower rates of surgery for older women with early invasive breast cancer have focused on women with oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive tumours. This study examined the factors that influence receipt of breast surgery in older women with ER-positive and ER-negative early invasive breast cancer .

METHODS

Women aged 50 years or above with unilateral stage 1-3A early invasive breast cancer diagnosed in 2014-2017 were identified from linked English and Welsh cancer registration and routine hospital data sets. Logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the influence of tumour and patient factors on receipt of surgery.

RESULTS

Among 83 188 women, 86.8 per cent had ER-positive and 13.2 per cent had ER-negative early invasive breast cancer. These proportions were unaffected by age at diagnosis. Compared with women with ER-negative breast cancer, a higher proportion of women with ER-positive breast cancer presented with low risk tumour characteristics: G1 (20.0 versus 1.5 per cent), T1 (60.8 versus 44.2 per cent) and N0 (73.9 versus 68.8 per cent). The proportions of women with any recorded co-morbidity (13.7 versus 14.3 per cent) or degree of frailty (25 versus 25.8 per cent) were similar among women with ER-positive and ER-negative disease respectively. In women with ER-positive early invasive breast cancer aged 70-74, 75-79 and 80 years or above, the rate of no surgery was 5.6, 11.0 and 41.9 per cent respectively. Among women with ER-negative early invasive breast cancer, the corresponding rates were 3.8, 3.7 and 12.3 per cent. The relatively lower rate of surgery for ER-positive breast cancer persisted in women with good fitness.

CONCLUSION

The reasons for the observer differences should be further explored to ensure consistency in treatment decisions.

Observational cohort study to determine the degree and causes of variation in the rate of surgery or primary endocrine therapy in older women with operable breast cancer

BACKGROUND

In the UK there is variation in the treatment of older women with breast cancer, with up to 40% receiving primary endocrine therapy (PET), which is associated with inferior survival. Case mix and patient choice may explain some variation in practice but clinician preference may also be important.

METHODS

A multicentre prospective cohort study of women aged >70 with operable breast cancer. Patient characteristics (health status, age, tumour characteristics, treatment allocation and decision-making preference) were analysed to identify whether treatment variation persisted following case-mix adjustment. Expected case-mix adjusted surgery rates were derived by logistic regression using the variables age, co-morbidity, tumour stage and grade. Concordance between patients' preferred and actual decision-making style was assessed and associations between age, treatment and decision-making style calculated.

RESULTS

Women (median age 77, range 70-102) were recruited from 56 UK breast units between 2013 and 2018. Of 2854/3369 eligible women with oestrogen receptor positive breast cancer, 2354 were treated with surgery and 500 with PET. Unadjusted surgery rates varied between hospitals, with 23/56 units falling outside the 95% confidence intervals on funnel plots. Adjusting for case mix reduced, but did not eliminate, this variation between hospitals (10/56 units had practice outside the 95% confidence intervals). Patients treated with PET had more patient-centred decisions compared to surgical patients (42.2% vs 28.4%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates variation in treatment selection thresholds for older women with breast cancer. Health stratified guidelines on thresholds for PET would help reduce variation, although patient preference should still be respected.

The influence of age, comorbidity and frailty on treatment with surgery and systemic therapy in older women with operable triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) in England: A population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Surgery and chemotherapy use were studied among older women with early stage triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) in a population-based cohort.

METHODS

Women aged ≥50 years with unilateral early (stage 1-3a) TNBC diagnosed in 2014-2017 were identified from English cancer registration data. Information on surgery and chemotherapy was from linked Hospital Episode Statistics and Systemic Anti-Cancer Therapy datasets, respectively. Logistic regression was used to investigate the influences of patient age, comorbidity and frailty on uptake of surgery and chemotherapy.

RESULTS

There were 7094 women with early stage TNBC. Overall rate of surgery was 94%, which only decreased among women aged ≥85 years (74%) and among the most frail. Among the 6681 women receiving surgery, 16% had neoadjuvant and 42% had adjuvant chemotherapy; the use of both decreased with age. More comorbidities and greater frailty were associated with lower rates of chemotherapy. There were differences in the uptake of chemotherapy across geographical regions and in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy regimens between age groups.

CONCLUSION

Majority of older women with early TNBC had surgery, although some physically fit older women did not. Chemotherapy use varied by age and fitness.

Bridging the age gap in breast cancer. Impacts of omission of breast cancer surgery in older women with oestrogen receptor positive early breast cancer. A risk stratified analysis of survival outcomes and quality of life

Background

Age-related breast cancer treatment variance is widespread with many older women having primary endocrine therapy (PET), which may contribute to inferior survival and local control. This propensity-matched study determined if a subgroup of older women may safely be offered PET.

Methods

Multicentre, prospective, UK, observational cohort study with propensity-matched analysis to determine optimal allocation of surgery plus ET (S+ET) or PET in women aged ≥70 with breast cancer. Data on fitness, frailty, cancer stage, grade, biotype, treatment and quality of life were collected. Propensity-matching (based on age, health status and cancer stage) adjusted for allocation bias when comparing S+ET with PET.

Findings

A total of 3416 women (median age 77, range 69–102) were recruited from 56 breast units—2854 (88%) had ER+ breast cancer: 2354 had S+ET and 500 PET. Median follow-up was 52 months. Patients treated with PET were older and frailer than patients treated with S+ET. Unmatched overall survival was inferior in the PET group (hazard ratio, (HR) 0.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.23–0.33, P < 0.001). Unmatched breast cancer–specific survival (BCSS) was also inferior in patients treated with PET (HR: 0.41, CI: 0.29–0.58, P < 0.001 for BCSS). In the matched analysis, PET was still associated with an inferior overall survival (HR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.53–0.98, P = 0.04) but not BCSS (HR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.40–1.37, P = 0.34) although at 4–5 years subtle divergence of the curves commenced in favor of surgery. Global health status diverged at certain time points between groups but over 24 months was similar when adjusted for baseline variance.

Interpretation

For the majority of older women with early ER+ breast cancer, surgery is oncologically superior to PET. In less fit, older women, with characteristics similar to the matched cohort of this study (median age 81 with higher comorbidity and functional impairment burdens, the BCSS survival differential disappears at least out to 4–5 year follow-up, suggesting that for those with less than 5-year predicted life-expectancy (>90 years or >85 with comorbidities or frailty) individualised decision making regarding PET versus S+ET may be appropriate and safe to offer. The Age Gap online decision tool may support this decision-making process (https://agegap.shef.ac.uk/).

Trial registration number

ISRCTN: 46099296.

•

Propensity matched study of women >70 with breast cancer comparing surgery or PET

•

Unmatched analysis found surgery improves overall & disease-specific survival.

•

Matched analysis (stage, age, health, frailty) found similar disease-specific survival

•

Surgery led to adverse events in 19% & negative impacts on QoL and physical function

•

Less fit women >85 may be offered PET to reduce morbidity, without survival detriment

Cryoablation: A promising non-operative therapy for low-risk breast cancer

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of cryoablation for early-stage low-risk breast cancer without tumor resection.

METHODS

Women diagnosed with ER+, PR+, and HER2-infiltrating ductal carcinomas ≤1.5 cm were treated with cryoablation. The non-surgical procedure used a Visica® 2 Treatment System with ultrasound guidance for ablation of the tumor with a 1 cm margin. Patients were monitored at 6-month intervals by MRI, mammogram, and ultrasound.

RESULTS

Twelve patients with unifocal breast cancer were treated with cryoablation for local control without follow-up tumor resection. All patients received adjuvant endocrine therapy, and none had radiation. The median follow-up was 28.5 (range = 4-41) months with 11 patients having at least one six-month follow-up. All imaging modalities showed complete ablation of target zone 11/11 (100%). Four patients (33.3%) have been followed up for ≥ 2 years with no local failure or residual disease.

CONCLUSION

Cryoablation of early-stage low-risk (ER+, PR+, and HER2-) breast cancer is a safe alternative to surgery.

Tumor characteristics and treatment outcomes of older patients with breast cancer in Jordan

Background

Less than 10% of newly diagnosed breast cancer cases in Jordan are diagnosed in women 70 years or older. Treatment plans of such patients is less clear and could result in poor outcomes. In this paper, we describe clinical presentation, tumor characteristics and treatment outcomes in this population of breast cancer patients.

Methods

Consecutive patients aged 65 years or older with pathologically-confirmed diagnosis of breast cancer were included. Medical records and hospital databases were searched for patients’ characteristics and treatment outcomes.

Results

A total of 553 patients, mean age ± SD (71 ± 5.1) years, were included. On presentation, 114 (20.6%) patients had metastatic disease and was mostly visceral (81; 71.1%). Patients with non-metastatic disease had poor pathological features including node-positive in 244 (55.6%), high grade (grade III) in 170 (38.7%) and lymphovascular invasion in 173 (39.4%). Patients were treated less aggressively; 144 (32.8%) patients with early-stage disease and 98 (86.0%) with metastatic disease never had chemotherapy.

After a median follow up of 45 months, 5-year overall survival for the whole group was 67.6%. Survival was better for patients with non-metastatic disease (78.8% vs. 25.4%, P < 0.001) and for those with node-negative compared to node-positive disease (85.4% vs. 74.1%, P = 0.002). On Cox regression, only positive lymph nodes were associated with poor outcome in patients with non-metastatic disease (Hazard Ratio [HR], 1.75; 95% CI: 1.006–3.034, P = 0.048).

Conclusions

Older Jordanian patients with breast cancer present with more aggressive features and advanced-stage disease that reflect poorly on treatment outcomes. Older patients were treated less aggressively with less than a third received any chemotherapy.

Construction of the secondary care administrative records frailty (SCARF) index and validation on older women with operable invasive breast cancer in England and Wales: a cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Studies that use national datasets to evaluate the management of older women with breast cancer are often constrained by a lack of information on patient fitness. This study constructed a frailty index for use with secondary care administrative records and evaluated its ability to improve models of treatment patterns and overall survival in women with breast cancer.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS

Women aged ≥50 years with oestrogen receptor (ER) positive early invasive breast cancer diagnosed between 2014 and 2017 in England.

METHODS

The secondary care administrative records frailty (SCARF) index was based on the cumulative deficit model of frailty, using International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Injuries and Causes of Death, 10th revision codes to define a set of deficits. The index was applied to administrative records that were linked to national cancer registry datasets. The ability of the SCARF index to improve the performance of regression models to explain observed variation in the rate of surgery and overall survival was evaluated using Harrell's c-statistic and decision curve analysis. External validation was performed on a dataset of similar women diagnosed in Wales.

RESULTS

The SCARF index captured 32 deficits that cover functional impairment, geriatric syndromes, problems with nutrition, cognition and mood, and medical comorbidities. In the English dataset (n=67 925), the prevalence of frailty in women aged 50-69, 70-79 and ≥80 years was 15%, 28% and 47%, respectively. Adding a frailty measure to regression models containing age, tumour characteristics and comorbidity improved their ability to: (1) discriminate between whether a woman was likely to have surgery and (2) predict overall survival. Similar results were obtained when the models were applied to the Welsh cohort (n=4 230).

CONCLUSION

The SCARF index provides a simple and consistent method to identify frailty in population level data and could help describe differences in breast cancer treatments and outcomes.

Effect of omission of surgery on survival in patients aged 80 years and older with early-stage hormone receptor-positive breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Surgery is increasingly being omitted in older patients with operable breast cancer in the Netherlands. Although omission of surgery can be considered in frail older patients, it may lead to inferior outcomes in non-frail patients. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of omission of surgery on relative and overall survival in older patients with operable breast cancer.

METHODS

Patients aged 80 years or older diagnosed with stage I-II hormone receptor-positive breast cancer between 2003 and 2009 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. An instrumental variable approach was applied to minimize confounding, using hospital variation in rate of primary surgery. Relative and overall survival was compared between patients treated in hospitals with different rates of surgery.

RESULTS

Overall, 6464 patients were included. Relative survival was lower for patients treated in hospitals with lower compared with higher surgical rates (90·2 versus 92·4 per cent respectively after 5 years; 71·6 versus 88·2 per cent after 10 years). The relative excess risk for patients treated in hospitals with lower surgical rates was 2·00 (95 per cent c.i. 1·17 to 3·40). Overall survival rates were also lower among patients treated in hospitals with lower compared with higher surgical rates (48·3 versus 51·3 per cent after 5 years; 15·0 versus 19·7 per cent after 10 years respectively; adjusted hazard ratio 1·07, 95 per cent c.i. 1·00 to 1·14).

CONCLUSION

Omission of surgery is associated with worse relative and overall survival in patients aged 80 years or more with stage I-II hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. Future research should focus on the effect on quality of life and physical functioning.

Variation in the management of elderly patients in two neighboring breast units is due to preferences and attitudes of health professionals

Introduction: Elderly breast cancer patients have been shown to be managed less aggressively than younger patients. There is evidence that their management varies between institutions. We audited the management of elderly patients in two neighboring units in Glasgow and aimed to identify reasons for any differences in practice found.

Methods: Patients aged ≥70 years, who were managed for a new diagnosis of breast cancer in the two units between 2009 and 2013, were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Tumor pathology, treatment details, postcode and consultant in charge of care were obtained from the same database. Comorbidities were obtained from each patient’s electronic clinical record. Questionnaires were distributed to members of each multidisciplinary teams.

Results: 487 elderly patients in Unit 1 and 467 in Unit 2 were identified. 76.2% patients in Unit 1 were managed surgically compared to 63.7% in Unit 2 (p<0.0001). There was no difference between the two units in patient age, tumor pathology, deprivation or comorbidity. 16.2% patients managed surgically in Unit 1 had a comorbidity score of 6 and above compared to 11% of surgically managed patients in Unit 2 (p=0.036). Responses to questionnaires suggested that staff at Unit 1 were more confident of the safety of general anesthetic in elderly patients and were more willing to consider local anesthetic procedures.

Conclusion: A higher proportion of patients aged >70 years with breast cancer were managed surgically in Unit 1 compared to Unit 2. Reasons for variation in practice seem to be related to attitudes of medical professionals toward surgery in the elderly, rather than patient or pathological factors.

Efficient development and usability testing of decision support interventions for older women with breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Around one-third of breast cancers diagnosed every year in the UK are in women aged ≥70 years. However, there are currently no decision support interventions (DESIs) for older women who have a choice between primary endocrine therapy and surgery followed by adjuvant endocrine therapy (surgery+endocrine therapy), or who can choose whether or not to have chemotherapy following surgery. There is also little evidence-based guidance specifically on the management of these older patients. A large UK cohort study is currently underway to address this lack of evidence and to develop two DESIs to facilitate shared decision-making with older women about breast cancer treatments. Here, we present the development and initial testing of these two DESIs.

METHODS

An initial prototype DESI was developed for the choice of primary endocrine therapy or surgery+endocrine therapy. Semi-structured interviews with healthy volunteers and patients explored DESI acceptability, usability, and utility. A framework approach was used for analysis. A second DESI for the choice of having chemotherapy or not was subsequently developed based on more focused development and testing.

RESULTS

Participants (n=22, aged 75-94 years, 64% healthy volunteers, 36% patients) found the primary endocrine therapy /surgery+endocrine therapy DESI acceptable, and contributed to improved wording and illustrations to address misunderstandings. The chemotherapy DESI (tested with 14 participants, aged 70-87 years, 57% healthy volunteers, 43% patients) was mostly understandable, however, suggestions for rewording sections were made. Most participants considered the DESIs helpful, but highlighted the importance of complementary discussions with clinicians.

CONCLUSION

It was possible to use a template DESI to efficiently create a second prototype for a different treatment option (chemotherapy). Both DESIs were acceptable and considered helpful to support/augment consultations. Development of acceptable additional DESIs for similar target populations using simplified methods may be an efficient way to develop future DESIs. Further research is needed to test the effectiveness of the DESIs.

Omission of surgery in older women with early breast cancer has an adverse impact on breast cancer-specific survival

Background

Primary endocrine therapy is used as an alternative to surgery in up to 40 per cent of women with early breast cancer aged over 70 years in the UK. This study investigated the impact of surgery versus primary endocrine therapy on breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) in older women.

Methods

Cancer registration data for 2002–2010 were obtained from two English regions. A retrospective analysis was performed for women with oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive disease, using statistical modelling to show the effect of treatment (surgery or primary endocrine therapy) and age and health status on BCSS. Missing data were handled using multiple imputation.

Results

Cancer registration data on 23 961 women were retrieved. After data preprocessing, 18 730 of 23 849 women (78·5 per cent) were identified as having ER-positive disease; of these, 10 087 (53·9 per cent) had surgery and 8643 (46·1 per cent) had primary endocrine therapy. BCSS was worse in the primary endocrine therapy group than in the surgical group (5-year BCSS rate 69·4 and 89·9 per cent respectively). This was true for all strata considered, although the difference was less in the cohort with the greatest degree of co-morbidity. For older, frailer patients the hazard of breast cancer death had less relative impact on overall survival.

Conclusion

BCSS in older women with ER-positive disease is worse if surgery is omitted. This treatment choice may contribute to inferior cancer outcomes. Selection for surgery on the basis of predicted life expectancy may permit choice of women for whom surgery confers little benefit.

Primary Endocrine Therapy in Older Women with Breast Cancer

Purpose of Review

Breast cancer incidence increases with age. In recent years, primary endocrine therapy has been increasingly used as a treatment option for frail elderly women with breast cancer, although surgery is still the guideline-recommended treatment. In this review, we discuss the evidence for primary endocrine therapy versus surgical treatment in older women with early breast cancer.

Recent Findings

Both randomised controlled trials and recent observational studies showed a favourable progression-free survival but not overall survival for surgery plus adjuvant endocrine therapy versus primary endocrine therapy. Information about quality of life with either treatment strategy is so far lacking. Deciding who is fit for surgery and has sufficiently long life expectation to be at risk of disease progression can be supported by performing an individual geriatric assessment.

Summary

This review suggests that primary endocrine therapy is a reasonable alternative to primary surgery in frail older women with breast cancer. Future studies should focus on the long-term effects on quality of life and physical functioning.

Age-related Disparity: Breast Cancer in the Elderly

Aging poses an unique opportunity to study cancer biology and treatment in older adults. Breast cancer is often studied in young women; however, much investigation remains to be done on breast cancer in our expanding elderly population. Diagnostic and management strategies applicable to younger patients cannot be empirically used to manage older breast cancer patients. Lack of evidence-based data continues to be the major impediment toward delivery of personalized cancer care to elderly breast cancer patients. This article reviews the relevant literature on management of curable breast cancer in the elderly, the role of geriatric assessment, complex treatment decision making within the context of patient's expected life expectancy, comorbidities, physical function, socioeconomic status, barriers to health care delivery, goals of treatment, and therapy-related side effects. Continuing efforts for enrolling elderly breast cancer patients in contemporary clinical trials, and thus improving age-appropriate care, are emphasized.

Comprehensive geriatric assessment in 326 older women with early breast cancer

Background:

One-third of new early breast cancer diagnoses occur in women over 70 years old. However, older women are less likely to receive radical curative treatments. This study prospectively evaluated a cohort of older women using a Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) to determine whether fitness explained the apparent under-treatment in this patient group.

Methods:

In this multi-centre prospective study, patients aged ⩾70 years with Stages I–III breast cancer underwent a pretreatment baseline CGA consisting of eight assessment tools. Patients were defined as ‘fit’ if they had normal score in seven out of eight of the assessment tools. ‘High risk’ patients were defined as those with grade 3, ER negative, HER2 positive, or node positive breast cancer.

Results:

Data on 326 patients were available for full analysis. The median age was 77 years. In all, 182 (56%) of the total population were defined as high risk, with 49%, 61% and 53% of those in the 70–74, 75–84 and ⩾85 years age groups respectively having high risk tumours. A total of 301 patients had sufficient CGA records of whom 131 (44%) were reported as fit, with 34%, 54% and 12% of them in the 70–74, 75–84 and ⩾85 years age groups respectively. More fit than unfit patients underwent primary breast surgery (100% vs 91%, P=0.0002), axillary surgery (92% vs 84%, P=0.0340), and adjuvant chemotherapy for high-risk disease (51% vs 20%, P=0.0001). Rates of adjuvant radiotherapy after wide local excision were not significantly different (88% vs 90% respectively, P=0.8195).

Conclusions:

In this study, all women ⩾70 years deemed fit by CGA underwent primary surgery. Nearly 50% of fit women with high-risk disease did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy suggesting under treatment in this group.

Bridging the age gap in breast cancer: evaluation of decision support interventions for older women with operable breast cancer: protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

While breast cancer outcomes are improving steadily in younger women due to advances in screening and improved therapies, there has been little change in outcomes among the older age group. It is inevitable that comorbidities/frailty rates are higher, which may increase the risks of some breast cancer treatments such as surgery and chemotherapy, many older women are healthy and may benefit from their use. Adjusting treatment regimens appropriately for age/comorbidity/frailty is variable and largely non-evidence based, specifically with regard to rates of surgery for operable oestrogen receptor-positive disease and rates of chemotherapy for high-risk disease.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This multicentre, parallel group, pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) (2015-18) reported here is nested within a larger ongoing 'Age Gap Cohort Study' (2012-18RP-PG-1209-10071), aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a complex intervention of decision support interventions to assist in the treatment decision making for early breast cancer in older women. The interventions include two patient decision aids (primary endocrine therapy vs surgery/antioestrogen therapy and chemotherapy vs no chemotherapy) and a clinical treatment outcomes algorithm for clinicians.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

National and local ethics committee approval was obtained for all UK participating sites. Results from the trial will be submitted for publication in international peer-reviewed scientific journals.

IRAS REFERENCE

115550.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials (EudraCT) number 2015-004220-61;Pre-results. Sponsor's Protocol Code Number Sheffield Teaching Hospitals STH17086. ISRCTN 32447*.

Setting Quality Improvement Priorities for Women Receiving Systemic Therapy for Early-Stage Breast Cancer by Using Population-Level Administrative Data

Purpose Routine evaluation of quality measures (QMs) can drive improvement in cancer systems by highlighting gaps in care. Targeting quality improvement at QMs that demonstrate substantial variation has the potential to make the largest impact at the population level. We developed an approach that uses both variation in performance and number of patients affected by the QM to set priorities for improving the quality of systemic therapy for women with early-stage breast cancer (EBC). Patients and Methods Patients with EBC diagnosed from 2006 to 2010 in Ontario, Canada, were identified in the Ontario Cancer Registry and linked deterministically to multiple health care databases. Individual QMs within a panel of 15 QMs previously developed to assess the quality of systemic therapy across four domains (access, treatment delivery, toxicity, and safety) were ranked on interinstitutional variation in performance (using interquartile range) and the number of patients who were affected; then the two rankings were averaged for a summative priority ranking. Results We identified 28,427 patients with EBC who were treated at 84 institutions. The use of computerized physician electronic order entry for chemotherapy, emergency room visits or hospitalizations during chemotherapy, and timely receipt of chemotherapy were identified as the QMs that had the largest potential to improve quality of care at a system level within this cohort. Conclusion A simple ranking system based on interinstitutional variation in performance and patient volume can be used to identify high-priority areas for quality improvement from a population perspective. This approach is generalizable to other health care systems that use QMs to drive improvement.

What influences healthcare professionals' treatment preferences for older women with operable breast cancer? An application of the discrete choice experiment

INTRODUCTION

Primary endocrine therapy (PET) is used variably in the UK as an alternative to surgery for older women with operable breast cancer. Guidelines state that only patients with "significant comorbidity" or "reduced life expectancy" should be treated this way and age should not be a factor.

METHODS

A Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) was used to determine the impact of key variables (patient age, comorbidity, cognition, functional status, cancer stage, cancer biology) on healthcare professionals' (HCP) treatment preferences for operable breast cancer among older women. Multinomial logistic regression was used to identify associations.

RESULTS

40% (258/641) of questionnaires were returned. Five variables (age, co-morbidity, cognition, functional status and cancer size) independently demonstrated a significant association with treatment preference (p < 0.05). Functional status was omitted from the multivariable model due to collinearity, with all other variables correlating with a preference for operative treatment over no preference (p < 0.05). Only co-morbidity, cognition and cancer size correlated with a preference for PET over no preference (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The majority of respondents selected treatment in accordance with current guidelines, however in some scenarios, opinion was divided, and age did appear to be an independent factor that HCPs considered when making a treatment decision in this population.

The decision-making process for senior cancer patients: treatment allocation of older women with operable breast cancer in the UK

Objective

Up to 40% of women over 70 years with primary operable breast cancer in the UK are treated with primary endocrine therapy (PET) as an alternative to surgery. A variety of factors are important in determining treatment for older breast cancer patients. This study aimed to identify the patient and tumor factors associated with treatment allocation in this population.

Methods

Prospectively collected data on treatment received (surgery vs. PET) were analysed with multivariable logistic regression using the variables age, modified Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), activities of daily living (ADL) score, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score, HER2 status, tumour size, grade and nodal status.

Results

Data were available for 1,122 cancers in 1,098 patients recruited between February 2013 and June 2015 from 51 UK hospitals. About 78% of the population were treated surgically, with the remainder being treated with PET. Increasing patient age at diagnosis, increasing CCI score, large tumor size (5 cm or more) and dependence in one or more ADL categories were all strongly associated with non-surgical treatment (P<0.05).

Conclusion

Increasing comorbidity, large tumor size and reduced functional ability are associated with reduced likelihood of surgical treatment of breast cancer in older patients. However, age itself remains a significant factor for non-surgical treatment; reinforcing the need for evidence-based guidelines.