1
|
Kalvala J, Parks RM, Abdi J, Green AR, Cheung KL. Assessment of the Androgen Receptor in Older Women with Primary Breast Cancer: Association with a Panel of Biomarkers and Breast Cancer Specific Survival. Adv Ther 2023; 40:2820-2835. [PMID: 37118159 DOI: 10.1007/s12325-023-02504-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/21/2022] [Accepted: 03/22/2023] [Indexed: 04/30/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Breast cancer in older women tends to have more favourable biology, compared to younger women. Androgen receptor (AR) is significant for breast tumour carcinogenesis; however, the role of AR in older women has not been fully explored. METHODS Surgical specimens were obtained from an existing series of 1758 older women (≥ 70 years) with primary breast cancer, treated in a single institution with long-term (≥ 37 years) follow-up. As part of previous work, it was possible to construct good quality tissue microarrays (TMAs) in 575 surgical specimens and a panel of 24 biomarkers was measured by immunohistochemistry (IHC) in these TMAs. AR positivity was assessed by IHC and defined as H-score ≥ 40. The relationship between AR in this cohort was compared to an equivalent group of younger women (< 70 years, n = 1708); the panel of 24 biomarkers and breast cancer specific survival (BCSS) in the older cohort. RESULTS AR was assessed in 509 samples. Overall, 59% of the older women cohort had positive expression of AR, compared to 63% in the younger cohort. AR positivity (regardless of age) was associated with smaller size of tumour, lower grade of tumour, lower tubule formation, lower nuclear polymorphism and lower mitotic frequency. AR positivity was associated with positive expression of oestrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), breast cancer gene 1 (BRCA1), cytokeratin (CK) 7/8, CK18, CK19, B cell lymphoma (Bcl)2 and Mucin 1 (Muc1) expression. Conversely, AR-positive expression was associated with negative expression of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), Ki-67, CK5, CK17, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), and CD44 expression. Older women with AR-positive tumours had better BCSS compared to AR-negative tumours (p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS There was no difference in AR expression between older and younger women with breast cancer. AR has prognostic potential in terms of BCSS. Further work is needed to investigate AR as a therapeutic target.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jahnavi Kalvala
- Nottingham Breast Cancer Research Centre, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Ruth M Parks
- Nottingham Breast Cancer Research Centre, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Jamal Abdi
- Nottingham Breast Cancer Research Centre, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Andrew R Green
- Nottingham Breast Cancer Research Centre, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Kwok-Leung Cheung
- Nottingham Breast Cancer Research Centre, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
- Academic Unit for Translational Medical Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Royal Derby Hospital Centre, Uttoxeter Road, Derby, DE22 3DT, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Abdel-Razeq H, Abu Rous F, Abuhijla F, Abdel-Razeq N, Edaily S. Breast Cancer in Geriatric Patients: Current Landscape and Future Prospects. Clin Interv Aging 2022; 17:1445-1460. [PMID: 36199974 PMCID: PMC9527811 DOI: 10.2147/cia.s365497] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/28/2022] [Accepted: 09/14/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Breast cancer is the most common cancer diagnosed among women worldwide and more than half are diagnosed above the age of 60 years. Life expectancy is increasing and the number of breast cancer cases diagnosed among older women are expected to increase. Undertreatment, mostly due to unjustifiable fears of advanced-age and associated comorbidities, is commonly practiced in this group of patients who are under-represented in clinical trials and their management is not properly addressed in clinical practice guidelines. With modern surgery and anesthesia, breast surgeries are considered safe and is usually associated with very low complication rates, regardless of extent of surgery. However, oncoplastic surgery and management of the axilla can be tailored based on patients’- and disease-related factors. Most of chemotherapeutic agents, along with targeted therapy and anti-Human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2) drugs can be safely given for older patients, however, dose adjustment and close monitoring of potential adverse events might be needed. The recently introduced cyclin-D kinase (CDK) 4/6-inhibitors in combination with aromatase inhibitors (AI) or fulvestrant, which changed the landscape of breast cancer therapy, are both safe and effective in older patients and had substituted more aggressive and potentially toxic interventions. Despite its proven efficacy, adjusting or even omitting adjuvant radiation therapy, at least in low-risk older patients, is safe and frequently practiced. In this paper, we review existing data related to breast cancer management among older patients across the continuum; from resection of the primary tumor through adjuvant chemotherapy, radiation and endocrine therapy up to the management of recurrent and advanced-stage disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hikmat Abdel-Razeq
- Department of Internal Medicine, King Hussein Cancer Center, Amman, Jordan
- School of Medicine, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan
- Correspondence: Hikmat Abdel-Razeq, Department of Internal Medicine, King Hussein Cancer Center, 202 Queen Rania Al Abdullah Street, Amman, 11941, Jordan, Tel +962-6 5300460, Ext: 1000, Email
| | | | - Fawzi Abuhijla
- Department of Radiation Oncology, King Hussein Cancer Center, Amman, Jordan
| | | | - Sarah Edaily
- Department of Internal Medicine, King Hussein Cancer Center, Amman, Jordan
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Wyld L, Reed MWR, Collins K, Ward S, Holmes G, Morgan J, Bradburn M, Walters S, Burton M, Lifford K, Edwards A, Brain K, Ring A, Herbert E, Robinson TG, Martin C, Chater T, Pemberton K, Shrestha A, Nettleship A, Richards P, Brennan A, Cheung KL, Todd A, Harder H, Audisio R, Battisti NML, Wright J, Simcock R, Murray C, Thompson AM, Gosney M, Hatton M, Armitage F, Patnick J, Green T, Revill D, Gath J, Horgan K, Holcombe C, Winter M, Naik J, Parmeshwar R. Improving outcomes for women aged 70 years or above with early breast cancer: research programme including a cluster RCT. Programme Grants Appl Res 2022. [DOI: 10.3310/xzoe2552] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lynda Wyld
- Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield Medical School, Sheffield, UK
- Jasmine Breast Centre, Doncaster and Bassetlaw Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Doncaster, UK
| | | | - Karen Collins
- Faculty of Health and Wellbeing, Department of Allied Health Professions, Collegiate Cresent Campus, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK
| | - Sue Ward
- Department of Health and Social Care Economics and Decision Science, School for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Geoff Holmes
- Department of Health and Social Care Economics and Decision Science, School for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Jenna Morgan
- Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield Medical School, Sheffield, UK
- Jasmine Breast Centre, Doncaster and Bassetlaw Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Doncaster, UK
| | - Mike Bradburn
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, School for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Stephen Walters
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, School for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Maria Burton
- Faculty of Health and Wellbeing, Department of Allied Health Professions, Collegiate Cresent Campus, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK
| | - Kate Lifford
- Division of Population Medicine, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | - Adrian Edwards
- Division of Population Medicine, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | - Kate Brain
- Division of Population Medicine, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | | | - Esther Herbert
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, School for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Thompson G Robinson
- Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester, Cardiovascular Research Centre, Glenfield General Hospital, Leicester, UK
| | - Charlene Martin
- Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield Medical School, Sheffield, UK
- Jasmine Breast Centre, Doncaster and Bassetlaw Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Doncaster, UK
| | - Tim Chater
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, School for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Kirsty Pemberton
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, School for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Anne Shrestha
- Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield Medical School, Sheffield, UK
- Jasmine Breast Centre, Doncaster and Bassetlaw Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Doncaster, UK
| | | | - Paul Richards
- Department of Health and Social Care Economics and Decision Science, School for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Alan Brennan
- Department of Health and Social Care Economics and Decision Science, School for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | | | - Annaliza Todd
- Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield Medical School, Sheffield, UK
- Jasmine Breast Centre, Doncaster and Bassetlaw Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Doncaster, UK
| | | | - Riccardo Audisio
- Sahlgrenska Universitetssjukhuset, University of Gothenburg, Göteborg, Sweden
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Margot Gosney
- School of Psychology and Clinical Language Sciences, University of Reading, Reading, UK
| | | | | | - Julietta Patnick
- Cancer Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Tracy Green
- Yorkshire and Humber Research Network Consumer Research Panel, Sheffield, UK
| | - Deirdre Revill
- Yorkshire and Humber Research Network Consumer Research Panel, Sheffield, UK
| | - Jacqui Gath
- Yorkshire and Humber Research Network Consumer Research Panel, Sheffield, UK
| | | | - Chris Holcombe
- Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK
| | - Matt Winter
- Breast Unit, Weston Park Hospital, Sheffield, UK
| | - Jay Naik
- Breast Unit, Pinderfields Hospital, Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust, Wakefield, UK
| | - Rishi Parmeshwar
- Breast Unit, Royal Lancaster Infirmary, University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS Foundation Trust, Lancaster, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Marinopoulos S, Dimitrakakis C, Kalampalikis A, Zagouri F, Andrikopoulou A, Rodolakis A. Adjuvant Treatment of Elderly Breast Cancer Patients: Offer the Best Chances of Cure. Breast Care (Basel) 2022; 17:71-80. [PMID: 35355693 PMCID: PMC8914240 DOI: 10.1159/000513708] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/09/2020] [Accepted: 12/11/2020] [Indexed: 02/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Breast cancer remains the most common cancer in women and a leading cause of death. Elderly people have a higher incidence of breast cancer since it increases with age. Furthermore, the extended life expectancy and advances in imaging techniques have led to an increased number of cases. Guidelines concerning the management of this specific age group are rare, mainly due to underrepresentation of seniors in clinical trials. Moreover, increased frailty, comorbidities, and a poor performance status make it complex to determine the best therapeutic approach. Summary In this review, we attempt to summarize the current literature and aim to provide specific approaches and recommendations for prompt diagnosis, treatment, and management of breast cancer in the elderly. Key Messages The establishment of applicable protocols is imperative and efforts are being made in this direction. A careful geriatric assessment and adequate consultation should be the standard of care and patient's preferences should always be considered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Spyridon Marinopoulos
- Breast Unit, 1st Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Alexandra Hospital, Athens, Greece,*Spyridon Marinopoulos, 1st Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Alexandra Hospital, 80 V. Sofias Ave., GR–11528 Athens (Greece),
| | - Constantine Dimitrakakis
- Breast Unit, 1st Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Alexandra Hospital, Athens, Greece
| | - Andreas Kalampalikis
- Breast Unit, 1st Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Alexandra Hospital, Athens, Greece
| | - Flora Zagouri
- Department of Clinical Therapeutics, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Alexandra Hospital, Athens, Greece
| | - Angeliki Andrikopoulou
- Department of Clinical Therapeutics, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Alexandra Hospital, Athens, Greece
| | - Alexandros Rodolakis
- Breast Unit, 1st Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Alexandra Hospital, Athens, Greece
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Rassu PC. Breast surgical oncology in elderly and unfit patients: a systematic review. Minerva Surg 2021; 76:538-549. [PMID: 34935322 DOI: 10.23736/s2724-5691.21.08995-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Breast cancer treatment in elderly women remains a complex issue due to pre-existing comorbidities, therapy-related toxicities, and the lack of evidence-based data in this population, leading to both overtreatment and undertreatment. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION The aim was to investigate the literature on breast surgical oncology in the older woman as a major therapeutic challenge: the 86 more consistent articles amongst 1440 potential citations according to PRISMA guidelines were retained. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS Studies demonstrated that despite low-grade tumor types, lower incidence of axillary lymph node involvement, ER+ disease, and less aggressive tumor biology, elderly breast cancer patients often receive less than the standard-of-care when compared to their younger counterparts. The surgery omission in elderlies and the preference for the primary endocrine treatment is associated with worse survival, especially in patients aged 80 years or over - a cohort with no specific recommendations concerning breast and axillary surgical procedures. On the other hand, a higher mastectomy rate is still considered the standard treatment in older women with higher T2:T1 tumor ratio and greater difficulties to attend radiotherapy due to severe comorbidities. Surgical de-escalation procedures even in an-ambulatory setting are recognized as a feasible option in these patients to prevent or palliate breast or chest wall symptoms. CONCLUSIONS Benefits and disadvantages from surgery only or coupled with adjuvant therapies for elderly women were analyzed in literature, outlining a growing need for a proper geriatric assessment and short-stay surgical programs which are feasible today owing to the availability of less invasive approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pier C Rassu
- Department of General Surgery, S. Giacomo Hospital, Novi Ligure, Alessandria, Italy -
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
MacRae R, Papadopoulou C. Managing a Dual Diagnosis of Cancer and Dementia in an Acute Setting: Considerations, Implications, and Future Recommendations. Semin Oncol Nurs 2021; 37:151233. [PMID: 34753641 DOI: 10.1016/j.soncn.2021.151233] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To present an overview of the issues related to the well-being of people affected by cancer and dementia. To highlight the evidence from dementia care that can help improve the care experiences of people with dementia and cancer. DATA SOURCES Electronic databases such as PubMed and CINAHL were used to retrieve relevant literature published between 2010 and 2020. CONCLUSION Having a dual diagnosis of dementia and cancer poses several challenges across the cancer care pathway. Communication, treatment decision-making, environment ,and time-related issues were all identified. The literature suggests the need for evidence-based guidelines taking into consideration the person and the environment to support this population. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE To address these challenges and offer an optimal care experience for this group and their families, solutions need to focus both on the workforce and the environment. Offering dementia education for professionals working in acute cancer care, as well as adapting local environments that facilitate people navigate the space can be a starting point to offer person-centered, rights-based dementia sensitive care.
Collapse
|
7
|
Daniels SL, Burton M, Lee MJ, Moug SJ, Kerr K, Wilson TR, Brown SR, Wyld L. Healthcare professional preferences in the health and fitness assessment and optimization of older patients facing colorectal cancer surgery. Colorectal Dis 2021; 23:2331-2340. [PMID: 34046988 DOI: 10.1111/codi.15758] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/18/2021] [Revised: 04/26/2021] [Accepted: 05/18/2021] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
AIM There are few age- and fitness-specific, evidence-based guidelines for colorectal cancer surgery. The uptake of different assessment and optimization strategies is variable. The aim of this study was to explore healthcare professional opinion about these issues using a mixed methods design. METHODS Semi-structured qualitative interviews were undertaken with healthcare professionals from a single UK region involved in the treatment, assessment and optimization of colorectal surgery patients. Interviews were analysed using the framework approach. An online questionnaire survey was subsequently designed and disseminated to UK surgeons to quantitatively assess the importance of interview themes. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse questionnaire data. RESULTS Thirty-seven healthcare professionals out of 42 approached (response rate 88%) were interviewed across five hospitals in the south Yorkshire region. Three broad themes were developed: attitudes towards treatment of the older patient, methods of assessment of suitability and optimization strategies. The questionnaire was completed by 103 out of an estimated 256 surgeons (estimated response rate 40.2%). There was a difference in opinion regarding the role of major surgery in older patients, particularly when there is coexisting dementia. Assessment was not standardized. Access to optimization strategies was limited, particularly in the emergency setting. CONCLUSION There is wide variation in the process of assessment and provision of optimization strategies in UK practice. Lack of evidence-based guidelines, cost and time constraints restrict the development of services and pathways. Differences in opinion between surgeons towards patients with frailty or dementia may account for some of the variation in colorectal cancer outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah L Daniels
- Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.,Department of General Surgery, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK
| | | | - Matthew J Lee
- Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.,Department of General Surgery, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK
| | - Susan J Moug
- Royal Alexandra Hospital, Paisley, UK.,University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
| | - Karen Kerr
- Department of Anaesthesia, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK
| | - Tim R Wilson
- Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.,Doncaster and Bassetlaw NHS Foundation Trust, Doncaster, UK
| | - Steven R Brown
- Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.,Department of General Surgery, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK
| | - Lynda Wyld
- Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.,Doncaster and Bassetlaw NHS Foundation Trust, Doncaster, UK
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Angarita FA, Hoppe EJ, Ko G, Lee J, Vesprini D, Hong NJL. Why do Older Women Avoid Breast Cancer Surgery? A Qualitative Analysis of Decision-making Factors. J Surg Res 2021; 268:623-633. [PMID: 34474211 DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2021.06.088] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/21/2021] [Revised: 06/14/2021] [Accepted: 06/28/2021] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Few studies have explored why older women (≥70 years old) avoid breast cancer surgery. This study aimed to identify physician- and patient-perceived attitudes that influence the decision to avoid surgery among older women with invasive breast cancer. METHODS Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with multidisciplinary breast cancer specialists and older women (≥70 years old) with breast cancer who declined surgery. Transcripts were iteratively coded using a theoretical framework to guide identification of common themes. Thematic comparison was performed between patients and physicians. RESULTS Ten breast cancer specialists and eleven patients participated. Physicians believed older women declined surgery because they did not perceive breast cancer as a life-threatening ailment compared to other medical comorbidities. Physicians did not discuss breast reconstruction, as it was perceived to be unimportant. Treatment side effects, length of treatment, impact on quality of life, and minimal survival benefit strongly influenced patients' decision to decline surgery. Patients valued independence and quality of life over quantity of life. Patients felt empowered to participate in the decision-making process but appreciated having support. Both phyisicians and patients had congruent beliefs with respect to age impacting treatment decision, cosmesis playing a minor factor in treatment decisions, and importance of quality of life; however, they were discordant in their perceptions about the amount of support that patients have from their families. CONCLUSIONS The decision to avoid surgery in older women stems from a variety of individual beliefs. Acknowledging patient values early in treatment planning may facilitate a patient-centered approach to the decision-making process.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Ethan J Hoppe
- Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Gary Ko
- Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Justin Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Division of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Danny Vesprini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Division of Radiation Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Nicole J Look Hong
- Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Caba Y, Dharmarajan K, Gillezeau C, Ornstein KA, Mazumdar M, Alpert N, Schwartz RM, Taioli E, Liu B. The Impact of Dementia on Cancer Treatment Decision-Making, Cancer Treatment, and Mortality: A Mixed Studies Review. JNCI Cancer Spectr 2021; 5:pkab002. [PMID: 34056540 PMCID: PMC8152697 DOI: 10.1093/jncics/pkab002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/30/2020] [Revised: 09/21/2020] [Accepted: 11/16/2020] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Dementia and cancer occur commonly in older adults. Yet, little is known about the effect of dementia on cancer treatment and outcomes in patients diagnosed with cancer, and no guidelines exist. We performed a mixed studies review to assess the current knowledge and gaps on the impact of dementia on cancer treatment decision-making, cancer treatment, and mortality. A search in PubMed, Medline, and PsycINFO identified 55 studies on older adults with a dementia diagnosis before a cancer diagnosis and/or comorbid cancer and dementia published in English from January 2004 to February 2020. We described variability using range in quantitative estimates, ie, odds ratios (ORs), hazard ratios (HRs), and risk ratios (RR) when appropriate and performed narrative review of qualitative data. Patients with dementia were more likely to receive no curative treatment (including hospice or palliative care) (OR, HR, and RR range = 0.40-4.4, n = 8), while less likely to receive chemotherapy (OR and HR range = 0.11-0.68, n = 8), radiation (OR range = 0.24-0.56, n = 2), and surgery (OR range = 0.30-1.3, n = 4). Older adults with cancer and dementia had higher mortality than those with cancer alone (HR and OR range = 0.92-5.8, n = 33). Summarized findings from qualitative studies consistently revealed that clinicians, caregivers, and patients tended to prefer less aggressive care and gave higher priority to quality of life over life expectancy for those with dementia. Current practices in treatment-decision making for patients with both cancer and dementia are inconsistent. There is an urgent need for treatment guidelines for this growing patient population that considers patient and caregiver perspectives.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yaelin Caba
- Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA
| | - Kavita Dharmarajan
- Brookdale Department of Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
- Tisch Cancer Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
| | - Christina Gillezeau
- Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA
| | - Katherine A Ornstein
- Brookdale Department of Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
| | - Madhu Mazumdar
- Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA
- Tisch Cancer Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
- Institute for Healthcare Delivery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
| | - Naomi Alpert
- Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA
| | - Rebecca M Schwartz
- Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA
- Tisch Cancer Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Occupational Medicine, Epidemiology and Prevention, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Manhasset, NY, USA
| | - Emanuela Taioli
- Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA
- Tisch Cancer Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
| | - Bian Liu
- Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA
- Tisch Cancer Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Dharmarajan KV, Presley CJ, Wyld L. Care Disparities Across the Health Care Continuum for Older Adults: Lessons From Multidisciplinary Perspectives. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book 2021; 41:1-10. [PMID: 33956492 DOI: 10.1200/edbk_319841] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kavita V Dharmarajan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Brookdale Department of Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY
| | - Carolyn J Presley
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, James Cancer Hospital & Solove Research Institute, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Lynda Wyld
- Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield Medical School, Sheffield, United Kingdom.,Doncaster and Bassetlaw Teaching Hospitals, National Health Service Foundation Trust, Doncaster, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Wyld L, Reed MWR, Collins K, Burton M, Lifford K, Edwards A, Ward S, Holmes G, Morgan J, Bradburn M, Walters SJ, Ring A, Robinson TG, Martin C, Chater T, Pemberton K, Shrestha A, Nettleship A, Murray C, Brown M, Richards P, Cheung KL, Todd A, Harder H, Brain K, Audisio RA, Wright J, Simcock R, Armitage F, Bursnall M, Green T, Revell D, Gath J, Horgan K, Holcombe C, Winter M, Naik J, Parmeshwar R, Gosney M, Hatton M, Thompson AM. 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. Br J Surg 2021; 108:499-510. [PMID: 33760077 PMCID: PMC10364907 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znab005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/08/2020] [Revised: 10/04/2020] [Accepted: 12/28/2020] [Indexed: 11/14/2022]
Abstract
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).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L Wyld
- Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield Medical School, Sheffield, UK
| | - M W R Reed
- Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Falmer, Brighton, UK
| | - K Collins
- College of Health, Wellbeing and Life Sciences, Department of Allied Health Professions, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK
| | - M Burton
- College of Health, Wellbeing and Life Sciences, Department of Allied Health Professions, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK
| | - K Lifford
- Division of Population Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | - A Edwards
- Division of Population Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | - S Ward
- Department of Health Economics and Decision Science, School for Health and Related Research, ScHARR, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - G Holmes
- Department of Health Economics and Decision Science, School for Health and Related Research, ScHARR, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - J Morgan
- Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield Medical School, Sheffield, UK
| | - M Bradburn
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, School for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - S J Walters
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, School for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - A Ring
- Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - T G Robinson
- Department of Cardiovascular Sciences and NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, University of Leicester, Cardiovascular Research Centre, Glenfield General Hospital, Leicester, UK
| | - C Martin
- Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield Medical School, Sheffield, UK
| | - T Chater
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, School for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - K Pemberton
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, School for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - A Shrestha
- Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield Medical School, Sheffield, UK
| | - A Nettleship
- EpiGenesys, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - C Murray
- EpiGenesys, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - M Brown
- EpiGenesys, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - P Richards
- Department of Health Economics and Decision Science, School for Health and Related Research, ScHARR, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - K L Cheung
- University of Nottingham, Royal Derby Hospital, Derby, UK
| | - A Todd
- Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield Medical School, Sheffield, UK
| | - H Harder
- Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Falmer, Brighton, UK
| | - K Brain
- Division of Population Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | - R A Audisio
- University of Gothenberg, Sahlgrenska Universitetssjukhuset, Gothenberg, Sweden
| | - J Wright
- Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Falmer, Brighton, UK
| | - R Simcock
- Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Falmer, Brighton, UK
| | | | - M Bursnall
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, School for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - T Green
- Yorkshire and Humber Consumer Research Panel (yhcrp.org.uk), Leeds, UK
| | - D Revell
- Yorkshire and Humber Consumer Research Panel (yhcrp.org.uk), Leeds, UK
| | - J Gath
- Yorkshire and Humber Consumer Research Panel (yhcrp.org.uk), Leeds, UK
| | - K Horgan
- Department of Breast Surgery, Bexley Cancer Centre, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK
| | - C Holcombe
- Liverpool University Hospitals Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK
| | - M Winter
- Weston Park Hospital, Sheffield, UK
| | - J Naik
- Pinderfields Hospital, Mid Yorkshire NHS Foundation Trust, Wakefield, UK
| | - R Parmeshwar
- University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay, Lancaster, UK
| | - M Gosney
- Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust, Reading, UK
| | - M Hatton
- Weston Park Hospital, Sheffield, UK
| | - A M Thompson
- Department of Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Jauhari Y, Gannon MR, Dodwell D, Horgan K, Clements K, Medina J, Cromwell DA. Surgical decisions in older women with early breast cancer: patient and disease factors. Br J Surg 2021; 108:160-167. [PMID: 33711149 PMCID: PMC7954278 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znaa042] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/20/2020] [Revised: 06/27/2020] [Accepted: 09/19/2020] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Y Jauhari
- Clinical Effectiveness Unit, The Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, UK
| | - M R Gannon
- Clinical Effectiveness Unit, The Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, UK
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - D Dodwell
- Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - K Horgan
- Department of Breast Surgery, St James’s University Hospital, Leeds, UK
| | - K Clements
- National Disease Registration Service, Public Health England, Birmingham, UK
| | - J Medina
- Clinical Effectiveness Unit, The Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, UK
| | - D A Cromwell
- Clinical Effectiveness Unit, The Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, UK
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Morgan JL, Holmes G, Ward S, Martin C, Burton M, Walters SJ, Cheung KL, Audisio RA, Reed MW, Wyld L. 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. Eur J Surg Oncol 2021; 47:261-268. [PMID: 33046279 PMCID: PMC7526638 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2020.09.029] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/13/2020] [Revised: 08/18/2020] [Accepted: 09/09/2020] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jenna L Morgan
- Academic Unit of Surgical Oncology, University of Sheffield Medical School, Beech Hill Road, Sheffield, UK.
| | - Geoff Holmes
- Department of Health Economics and Decision Science, School for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Sue Ward
- Department of Health Economics and Decision Science, School for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Charlene Martin
- Academic Unit of Surgical Oncology, University of Sheffield Medical School, Beech Hill Road, Sheffield, UK
| | - Maria Burton
- Centre for Health and Social Care Research, Sheffield Hallam University, Collegiate Crescent, Sheffield, UK
| | - Stephen J Walters
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, School for Health and Related Research, ScHARR, University of Sheffield, UK
| | - Kwok Leung Cheung
- University of Nottingham, Royal Derby Hospital, Uttoxeter Road, Derby, DE22 3DT, UK
| | - Riccardo A Audisio
- University of Gothenberg, Sahlgrenska Universitetssjukhuset, 41345, Göteborg, Sweden
| | | | - Lynda Wyld
- Academic Unit of Surgical Oncology, University of Sheffield Medical School, Beech Hill Road, Sheffield, UK
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Martin C, Shrestha A, Morgan J, Bradburn M, Herbert E, Burton M, Todd A, Walters S, Ward S, Holmes G, Reed M, Collins K, Robinson TG, Ring A, Cheung KL, Audisio R, Gath J, Revell D, Green T, Lifford K, Edwards A, Chater T, Pemberton K, Wyld L. Treatment choices for older women with primary operable breast cancer and cognitive impairment: Results from a prospective, multicentre cohort study. J Geriatr Oncol 2021; 12:705-713. [PMID: 33353856 DOI: 10.1016/j.jgo.2020.12.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/03/2020] [Revised: 11/16/2020] [Accepted: 12/09/2020] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The presence of dementia co-existing with a diagnosis of breast cancer may render management more challenging and have a substantial impact on oncological outcomes. The aim of this study was to examine the treatment and outcomes of older women with co-existing cognitive impairment and primary breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS A prospective, multicentre UK cohort study of women aged 70 years or over with primary operable breast cancer. Patients with and without cognitive impairment were compared to assess differences in treatment and survival outcomes. RESULTS In total, 3416 women were recruited between 2013 and 2018. Of these, 478 (14%) had a diagnosis of dementia or cognitive impairment, subcategorised as mild, moderate and severely impaired. Up to 85% of women with normal cognition underwent surgery compared to 74%, 61% and 40% with mild, moderate, and severe impairment (p = 0.001). Among women at higher risk of recurrence, the uptake of chemotherapy was 25% for cognitively normal women compared to 20%, 22% and 12% for mild, moderate and severe impairment groups (p = 0.222). Radiotherapy use was similar in the subgroups. Although patients with cognitive impairment had shorter overall survival (HR: 2.10, 95% CI: 1.77-2.50, p < 0.001), there were no statistically significant differences in breast cancer specific or progression-free survival. CONCLUSION Cognitive impairment appears to play a significant part in deciding how to treat older women with breast cancer. Standard treatment may be over-treatment for some women with severe dementia and careful consideration must be given to a more tailored approach in these women.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charlene Martin
- Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield, The Medical School, Beech Hill Road, Sheffield S10 2RX, UK
| | - Anne Shrestha
- Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield, The Medical School, Beech Hill Road, Sheffield S10 2RX, UK
| | - Jenna Morgan
- Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield, The Medical School, Beech Hill Road, Sheffield S10 2RX, UK
| | - Michael Bradburn
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, School for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Esther Herbert
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, School for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Maria Burton
- Centre for Health and Social Care Research, Sheffield Hallam University, Collegiate Crescent, Sheffield, UK
| | - Annaliza Todd
- Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield, The Medical School, Beech Hill Road, Sheffield S10 2RX, UK
| | - Stephen Walters
- Centre for Health and Social Care Research, Sheffield Hallam University, Collegiate Crescent, Sheffield, UK
| | - Sue Ward
- Department of Health Economics and Decision Science, School for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Geoffrey Holmes
- Department of Health Economics and Decision Science, School for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Malcolm Reed
- Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Falmer, Brighton, UK
| | - Karen Collins
- Centre for Health and Social Care Research, Sheffield Hallam University, Collegiate Crescent, Sheffield, UK
| | - Thompson G Robinson
- Department of Cardiovascular Sciences and NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre, University of Leicester, The Glenfield Hospital, Leicester LE3 9QP, UK
| | - Alistair Ring
- Breast Unit, Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Kwok-Leung Cheung
- School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Royal Derby Hospital Centre, Uttoxeter Road, Derby DE22 3DT, UK
| | - Riccardo Audisio
- Department of Surgery, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Blå Stråket 5, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, 413 45 Göteborg, Sweden
| | - Jacqui Gath
- Yorkshire and Humber Consumer Research Panel, UK
| | | | - Tracy Green
- Yorkshire and Humber Consumer Research Panel, UK
| | - Kate Lifford
- Division of Population Medicine, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff CF14 4YS, UK
| | - Adrian Edwards
- Division of Population Medicine, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff CF14 4YS, UK
| | - Tim Chater
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, School for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Kirsty Pemberton
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, School for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Lynda Wyld
- Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield, The Medical School, Beech Hill Road, Sheffield S10 2RX, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Affiliation(s)
- David Dodwell
- Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Yasmin Jauhari
- Clinical Effectiveness Unit, Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, UK
| | - Toral Gathani
- Cancer Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford
- Department of Surgery, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK
| | - David Cromwell
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, UK
| | - Melissa Gannon
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, UK
| | | | - Kieran Horgan
- Department of Breast Surgery, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
McWilliams L. An Overview of Treating People with Comorbid Dementia: Implications for Cancer Care. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2020; 32:562-568. [PMID: 32718761 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2020.06.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/01/2020] [Revised: 06/02/2020] [Accepted: 06/18/2020] [Indexed: 01/26/2023]
Abstract
With increasing prevalence of both cancer and dementia in the UK, due to an ageing population, oncology healthcare professionals will experience higher numbers of people with both conditions. As dementia is highly heterogeneous and symptoms vary from individual to individual, it presents specific challenges for healthcare professionals, people with dementia and caregivers alike. This overview will describe current theories that explain the association between cancer and dementia, report prevalence rates and highlight the evidence on the impact of having a diagnosis of dementia on outcomes along the cancer pathway from cancer symptom detection to cancer treatment outcomes. It suggests that although prevalence rates of cancer and dementia are typically lower than other comorbidities, people with cancer and dementia have poorer cancer-related outcomes. This includes later stage cancer diagnoses, fewer cancer treatment options and an increased risk of death compared with people who have cancer alone or other comorbid conditions. Considerations for cancer treatment decision making and management are proposed to improve patient experience for this group.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L McWilliams
- Division of Psychology & Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine & Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Abstract
Mammographic screening guidelines in women aged 75 and older are inconsistent due to a lack of data from prospective randomized controlled trials, such as those that exist for women between 40-74 years of age. In addition, older women are perceived as less likely to benefit from early detection due to increased comorbidities and a greater proportion of biologically favorable cancers. With increasing life expectancy and quality of life in the elderly, the question of when to stop mammographic screening merits renewed discussion. Observational data support a survival benefit from regular screening in older women with no severe comorbidities. In addition, screening mammography in this age group has been shown to perform better than in younger age groups, tipping the balance toward greater benefits than harms. Early studies of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) in older women suggest that performance metrics are further improved with DBT screening. While a biennial schedule in older women preserves some of the benefit of screening, annual mammography achieves the greatest reductions in breast cancer mortality and morbidity. As the medical community strives to offer personalized care for all age groups, health care providers are well positioned to offer shared decision-making based on existing data and tailored to each woman's individual risk profile, comorbid conditions, and personal values.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Reni Butler
- Yale University School of Medicine, Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, New Haven, CT
| | - Liane Philpotts
- Yale University School of Medicine, Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, New Haven, CT
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Morrow ES, Dolan RD, Doughty J, Stallard S, Lannigan A, Romics L. Variation in the management of elderly patients in two neighboring breast units is due to preferences and attitudes of health professionals. Breast Cancer (Dove Med Press) 2019; 11:179-188. [PMID: 31190976 PMCID: PMC6520595 DOI: 10.2147/bctt.s194124] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2018] [Accepted: 02/19/2019] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Ross D Dolan
- Academic Unit of Surgery, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
| | - Julie Doughty
- Department of Surgery, Gartnavel General Hospital, Glasgow, UK
| | - Sheila Stallard
- Department of Surgery, Gartnavel General Hospital, Glasgow, UK
| | - Alison Lannigan
- Department of Surgery, Wishaw General Hospital, Lanarkshire, UK
| | - Laszlo Romics
- Academic Unit of Surgery, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.,Department of Surgery, New Victoria Hospital, Glasgow, UK
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Cavers D, Habets L, Cunningham-Burley S, Watson E, Banks E, Campbell C. Living with and beyond cancer with comorbid illness: a qualitative systematic review and evidence synthesis. J Cancer Surviv 2019; 13:148-159. [PMID: 30685822 PMCID: PMC6394454 DOI: 10.1007/s11764-019-0734-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/24/2018] [Accepted: 01/11/2019] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
Purpose To identify the qualitative evidence on the experience of cancer and comorbid illness from the perspective of patients, carers and health care professionals to identify psycho-social support needs, experience of health care, and to highlight areas where more research is needed. Methods A qualitative systematic review following PRISMA guidance. Relevant research databases were searched using an exhaustive list of search terms. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts and discussed variations. Included articles were subject to quality appraisal before data extraction of article characteristics and findings. Thomas and Harden’s thematic synthesis of extracted findings was undertaken. Results Thirty-one articles were included in the review, covering a range of cancer types and comorbid conditions; with varying time since cancer diagnosis and apparent severity of disease for both cancer and other conditions. The majority of studies were published after 2010 and in high income countries. Few studies focused exclusively on the experience of living with comorbid conditions alongside cancer; such that evidence was limited. Key themes identified included the interaction between cancer and comorbid conditions, symptom experience, illness identities and ageing, self-management and the role of primary and secondary care. Conclusions In addition to a better understanding of the complex experience of cancer and comorbidity, the review will combine with research prioritisation work with consumers to inform an interview study with the defined patient group. Implications for Cancer Survivors Expanding this evidence base will help to illuminate developing models of cancer patient-centred follow-up care for the large proportion of patients with comorbid conditions. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s11764-019-0734-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Debbie Cavers
- Usher Institute, Medical School, University of Edinburgh, Teviot Place, Edinburgh, EH8 9AG, UK.
| | - Liset Habets
- Leiden University Medical Center, University of Leiden, Albinusdreef 2, 2333, Leiden, ZA, Netherlands
| | - Sarah Cunningham-Burley
- Medical and Family Sociology, Usher Institute, Medical School, University of Edinburgh, Teviot Place, Edinburgh, EH8 9AG, UK
| | - Eila Watson
- Supportive Cancer Care, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Jack Straws Lane, Marston, Oxford, OX3 0FL, UK
| | - Elspeth Banks
- , 1 Carnwath Lane, Carluke, South Lanarkshire, ML8 4QU, UK
| | - Christine Campbell
- Usher Institute, Medical School, University of Edinburgh, Teviot Place, Edinburgh, EH8 9AG, UK
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Ojala K, Meretoja TJ, Mattson J, Leidenius MHK. Surgical treatment and prognosis of breast cancer in elderly - A population-based study. Eur J Surg Oncol 2019; 45:956-962. [PMID: 30691722 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2019.01.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/21/2018] [Revised: 01/08/2019] [Accepted: 01/16/2019] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to investigate outcome of treatment in patients over 80 years of age with early breast cancer at the time of the diagnosis with special interest in surgical treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS Breast cancer patients older than 80 years of age, treated at the Breast Surgery Unit of Helsinki University Hospital in 2005-2010 were identified from electronic patient records. Patients were followed-up until the end of 2014. Patient and tumour characteristics, recurrences, co-morbidities and reasons for omission of surgery were collected from electronic patient records. Survival data was obtained from Finnish Cancer Registry. RESULTS 446 patients were eligible for the study: 401 (90%) received surgery. The median follow-up time was 52 months. In the entire study population, local and regional recurrences/disease progression were diagnosed in 16 (3.6%) and 6 (1.3%) patients, respectively. The five-year overall survival was 50.6% in the surgical treatment and only 15.2% in non-surgical treatment group, p < 0.001. Also, the five-year breast cancer specific survival was significantly better in the patients with surgery, 82.0%, but 56.0% in the patients without surgery, p < 0.001. There was no mortality related to the surgery, but 122 (30%) patients died within three years from surgery. CONCLUSION Surgical treatment rate was high. OS and BCSS were better in surgically treated elderly patients. Local and regional disease control was excellent, probably due to high rate of surgical treatment. Surgical treatment also seemed safe in this elderly patient population. However, surgical overtreatment was obvious in some patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kaisu Ojala
- Breast Surgery Unit, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Helsinki University Hospital and Helsinki University, Finland.
| | - Tuomo J Meretoja
- Breast Surgery Unit, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Helsinki University Hospital and Helsinki University, Finland
| | - Johanna Mattson
- Department of Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Helsinki University Hospital and Helsinki University, Finland
| | - Marjut H K Leidenius
- Breast Surgery Unit, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Helsinki University Hospital and Helsinki University, Finland
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Okonji DO, Sinha R, Phillips I, Fatz D, Ring A. Comprehensive geriatric assessment in 326 older women with early breast cancer. Br J Cancer 2017; 117:925-931. [PMID: 28797032 PMCID: PMC5625670 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2017.257] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/15/2017] [Revised: 05/26/2017] [Accepted: 07/13/2017] [Indexed: 01/30/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D O Okonji
- Breast Unit, Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton SM2 5PT, UK
| | - R Sinha
- Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton BN2 5BE, UK
| | - I Phillips
- Breast Unit, Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton SM2 5PT, UK
| | - D Fatz
- Research and Development, Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust, Brighton BN2 5BE, UK
| | - A Ring
- Breast Unit, Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton SM2 5PT, UK.,Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton BN2 5BE, UK
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Morgan JL, Walters SJ, Collins K, Robinson TG, Cheung KL, Audisio R, Reed MW, Wyld L. What influences healthcare professionals' treatment preferences for older women with operable breast cancer? An application of the discrete choice experiment. Eur J Surg Oncol 2017; 43:1282-1287. [PMID: 28237423 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2017.01.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/20/2016] [Revised: 12/14/2016] [Accepted: 01/08/2017] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J L Morgan
- Academic Unit of Surgical Oncology, University of Sheffield Medical School, Beech Hill Road, Sheffield, S10 2RX, UK.
| | - S J Walters
- School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA, UK
| | - K Collins
- Centre for Health and Social Care Research, Sheffield Hallam University, Collegiate Crescent, Sheffield, S10 2BA, UK
| | - T G Robinson
- Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester, Robert Kilpatrick Clinical Sciences Building, P.O. Box 65, Leicester, LE2 7LX, UK
| | - K-L Cheung
- School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Royal Derby Hospital Centre, Uttoxeter Road, Derby, DE22 3DT, UK
| | - R Audisio
- Department of Surgery, University of Liverpool, St Helens Teaching Hospital, Marshalls Cross Road, St Helens, WA9 3DA, UK
| | - M W Reed
- Brighton and Sussex Medical School, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, BN1 9PX, UK
| | - L Wyld
- Academic Unit of Surgical Oncology, University of Sheffield Medical School, Beech Hill Road, Sheffield, S10 2RX, UK
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Hopkinson JB, Milton R, King A, Edwards D. People with dementia: what is known about their experience of cancer treatment and cancer treatment outcomes? A systematic review. Psychooncology 2016; 25:1137-1146. [PMID: 27246507 DOI: 10.1002/pon.4185] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/31/2015] [Revised: 05/27/2016] [Accepted: 05/27/2016] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The objective of the study is to report a systematic review of what is currently known about the experience of cancer treatment and cancer treatment in adults with dementia. METHODS The analytic plan and inclusion/exclusion criteria were specified in advance of the search process in a protocol. Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library for publications about people with cancer and a pre-existing dementia. Limits were English language; 2000 to 12/2015; adults; >18 years old. The search identified 5214 titles and abstracts that were assessed against eligibility criteria and 101 were selected for full-text examination by two researchers who agreed inclusion of nine papers, extracted data independently then conducted a content analysis and narrative synthesis. RESULTS Nine studies conducted in four resource rich countries were included in the review. These studies evidence that when compared with other cancer patients, those with dementia are diagnosed at a later stage, receive less treatment, are more likely to experience complications from treatment and have poorer survival. The experience of supportive care and preferences of people with dementia receiving cancer services and cancer treatment have not been investigated. Research into how the cancer team manage the particular needs of people with dementia and their family members has been limited to one study that reported how a cancer team managed the particular needs of seven people with dementia. CONCLUSION Further work is needed to establish practice guidelines for the management of cancer in people with dementia. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J B Hopkinson
- School of Healthcare Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
| | - R Milton
- School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | - A King
- School of Healthcare Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| | - D Edwards
- School of Healthcare Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
| |
Collapse
|