Patient-Reported Outcome Measures May Add Value in Breast Cancer Surgery

Patient preferences for breast cancer screening: a systematic review update to inform recommendations by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care

BACKGROUND

Different guideline panels, and individuals, may make different decisions based in part on their preferences. Preferences for or against an intervention are viewed as a consequence of the relative importance people place on the expected or experienced health outcomes it incurs. These findings can then be considered as patient input when balancing effect estimates on benefits and harms reported by empirical evidence on the clinical effectiveness of screening programs. This systematic review update examined the relative importance placed by patients on the potential benefits and harms of mammography-based breast cancer screening to inform an update to the 2018 Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care's guideline on screening.

METHODS

We screened all articles from our previous review (search December 2017) and updated our searches to June 19, 2023 in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL. We also screened grey literature, submissions by stakeholders, and reference lists. The target population was cisgender women and other adults assigned female at birth (including transgender men and nonbinary persons) aged ≥ 35 years and at average or moderately increased risk for breast cancer. Studies of patients with breast cancer were eligible for health-state utility data for relevant outcomes. We sought three types of data, directly through (i) disutilities of screening and curative treatment health states (measuring the impact of the outcome on one's health-related quality of life; utilities measured on a scale of 0 [death] to 1 [perfect health]), and (ii) other preference-based data, such as outcome trade-offs, and indirectly through (iii) the relative importance of benefits versus harms inferred from attitudes, intentions, and behaviors towards screening among patients provided with estimates of the magnitudes of benefit(s) and harms(s). For screening, we used machine learning as one of the reviewers after at least 50% of studies had been reviewed in duplicate by humans; full-text selection used independent review by two humans. Data extraction and risk of bias assessments used a single reviewer with verification. Our main analysis for utilities used data from utility-based health-related quality of life tools (e.g., EQ-5D) in patients; a disutility value of about 0.04 can be considered a minimally important value for the Canadian public. When suitable, we pooled utilities and explored heterogeneity. Disutilities were calculated for screening health states and between different treatment states. Non-utility data were grouped into categories, based on outcomes compared (e.g. for trade-off data), participant age, and our judgements of the net benefit of screening portrayed by the studies. Thereafter, we compared and contrasted findings while considering sample sizes, risk of bias, subgroup findings and data on knowledge scores, and created summary statements for each data set. Certainty assessments followed GRADE guidance for patient preferences and used consensus among at least two reviewers.

FINDINGS

Eighty-two studies (38 on utilities) were included. The estimated disutilities were 0.07 for a positive screening result (moderate certainty), 0.03-0.04 for a false positive (FP; "additional testing" resolved as negative for cancer) (low certainty), and 0.08 for untreated screen-detected cancer (moderate certainty) or (low certainty) an interval cancer. At ≤12 months, disutilities of mastectomy (vs. breast-conserving therapy), chemotherapy (vs. none) (low certainty), and radiation therapy (vs. none) (moderate certainty) were 0.02-0.03, 0.02-0.04, and little-to-none, respectively, though in each case findings were somewhat limited in their applicability. Over the longer term, there was moderate certainty for little-to-no disutility from mastectomy versus breast-conserving surgery/lumpectomy with radiation and from radiation. There was moderate certainty that a majority (>50%) and possibly a large majority (>75%) of women probably accept up to six cases of overdiagnosis to prevent one breast-cancer death; there was some uncertainty because of an indication that overdiagnosis was not fully understood by participants in some cases. Low certainty evidence suggested that a large majority may accept that screening may reduce breast-cancer but not all-cause mortality, at least when presented with relatively high rates of breast-cancer mortality reductions (n = 2; 2 and 5 fewer per 1000 screened), and at least a majority accept that to prevent one breast-cancer death at least a few hundred patients will receive a FP result and 10-15 will have a FP resolved through biopsy. An upper limit for an acceptable number of FPs was not evaluated. When using data from studies assessing attitudes, intentions, and screening behaviors, across all age groups but most evident for women in their 40s, preferences reduced as the net benefit presented by study authors decreased in magnitude. In a relatively low net-benefit scenario, a majority of patients in their 40s may not weigh the benefits as greater than the harms from screening whereas for women in their 50s a large majority may prefer screening (low certainty evidence for both ages). There was moderate certainty that a large majority of women 50 years of age and 50 to 69 years of age, who have usually experienced screening, weigh the benefits as greater than the harms from screening in a high net-benefit scenario. A large majority of patients aged 70-71 years who have recently screened probably think the benefits outweigh the harms of continuing to screen. A majority of women in their mid-70s to early 80s may prefer to continue screening.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence across a range of data sources on how informed patients value the potential outcomes from breast-cancer screening will be useful during decision-making for recommendations. The evidence suggests that all of the outcomes examined have importance to women of any age, that there is at least some and possibly substantial (among those in their 40s) variability across and within age groups about the acceptable magnitude of effects across outcomes, and that provision of easily understandable information on the likelihood of the outcomes may be necessary to enable informed decision making. Although studies came from a wide range of countries, there were limited data from Canada and about whether findings applied well across an ethnographically and socioeconomically diverse population.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

Protocol available at Open Science Framework https://osf.io/xngsu/ .

Aesthetic results were more satisfactory after oncoplastic surgery than after total breast reconstruction according to patients and surgeons

INTRODUCTION

Patient satisfaction after breast cancer surgery has an impact on body image, sexual function, self-esteem, and quality of life and may differ from the perception of the attending physician. This study aimed to compare the aesthetic outcomes and satisfaction with conservative oncoplastic surgeries, mastectomies, and total breast reconstruction.

METHODS

We included 760 women diagnosed with invasive breast carcinoma or phyllodes tumors who returned at least 6 months after surgery or radiotherapy at two public hospitals and a private clinic between 2014 and 2022. Data was collected prospectively from patients and retrospectively from their medical records using a specific form after obtaining their informed consent. Aesthetic outcomes and quality of life were assessed using the BREAST-Q©, Harris Scale, and BCCT.core software. Data were evaluated using the SPSS statistical software. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. This study was approved by the hospital ethics committees.

RESULTS

A total of 405 (53.29%) partial and 355 (46.71%) total reconstructions were included. Patients who underwent partial reconstruction were older and had higher body mass index. Patients who underwent total reconstruction had larger tumors with advanced clinical and pathological stages. Clinical and surgical complications occurred more frequently in the total reconstruction group. A greater number of reparative surgeries and lipofilling procedures were required for total reconstruction. According to the BREAST-Q, the partial reconstruction group showed significantly higher levels of women's satisfaction with their breasts, the surgical outcomes, psychosocial and sexual well-being, provision of information, and the reconstructive surgeon. Only physical well-being was slightly higher in the total reconstruction group. In most cases, the results were rated good or excellent. Physicians considered partial reconstructions to have better results than total reconstructions, although this difference was not perceived by the BCCT.core software.

CONCLUSION

Women who underwent partial breast reconstruction had higher levels of satisfaction in several domains, lower frequency of complications, and required fewer surgeries to complete their reconstruction than women who underwent total reconstruction. Physicians were also more satisfied with the results of partial reconstructions.

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

PURPOSE

To establish the breast reconstruction rate in a large Dutch teaching hospital, and to gain insight into the motives of women to opt for or reject post-mastectomy breast reconstruction.

METHODS

In a retrospective, cross-sectional study, all consecutive patients who underwent mastectomy for invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) were identified and categorized into two groups based on subsequent breast reconstruction or not. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed with the validated Breast-Q and a short survey about the decision-making process in breast reconstruction. These outcomes were compared between the two groups using univariable analyses, multivariable logistic regression, and multiple linear regression analyses. The Breast-Q scores were also compared to Dutch normative values.

RESULTS

A total of 319 patients were identified of whom 68% had no breast reconstruction. Of the 102 patients with breast reconstruction, the majority (93%) received immediate, instead of delayed breast reconstruction. The survey was completed by 155 (49%) patients. The non-reconstruction group, on average, reported significantly poorer psychosocial well-being, compared to the reconstruction group as well as compared to the normative data. However, the majority of the non-reconstruction group (83%) stated that they had no desire for breast reconstruction. In both groups, most patients stated that the provided information was sufficient.

CONCLUSION

Patients have personal motives to opt for or reject breast reconstruction. It seemed that patients differ in their rating of values that affect their decision since the same arguments were used to opt for or reject reconstruction. Notably, patients were well-informed in their decision making.

The Impact of Breast-Conserving Surgery Re-excision on Patient-Reported Outcomes Using the BREAST-Q

BACKGROUND

Approximately 14% of women undergoing breast-conserving surgery (BCS) require re-excision to achieve negative margins following the Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) and American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) margin guidelines, which may influence patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Few studies have assessed the impact of re-excision on PROs following BCS.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Women with stage 0-III breast cancer undergoing BCS who completed a BREAST-Q PRO measure from 2010 to 2016 were identified from a prospective database. Baseline characteristics were compared between women who underwent one BCS and those who underwent ≥ 1 re-excision surgery for positive margins (R-BCS). Linear mixed models were used to analyze associations between number of excisions and BREAST-Q scores over time.

RESULTS

Of 2543 eligible women, 1979 (78%) had one BCS and 564 (22%) had R-BCS. Younger age, lower BMI, surgery pre-SSO Invasive Guidelines issuance, ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), multifocal disease, radiation therapy receipt, and endocrine therapy omission were more common in the R-BCS group. Breast satisfaction and sexual well-being were lower in the R-BCS group 2 years postoperatively. There were no differences in psychosocial well-being between groups over 5 years. On multivariable analysis, re-excision was associated with lower breast satisfaction and sexual well-being (p= 0.007 and p= 0.049, respectively), but there was no difference in psychosocial well-being (p= 0.250).

CONCLUSIONS

Women with R-BCS had lower breast satisfaction and sexual well-being 2 years postoperatively, but this difference did not remain long term. Psychosocial well-being in women who underwent one BCS were largely comparable over time to the R-BCS group. These findings may help in counseling women who are concerned about satisfaction and quality-of-life outcomes with BCS if re-excision is necessary.

Pre-operative Radiotherapy And Deep Inferior Epigastric Artery Perforator (DIEP) flAp study (PRADA): Aesthetic outcome and patient satisfaction at one year

INTRODUCTION

The optimal combination of radiotherapy and breast reconstruction has not yet been defined. Post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) has deleterious effects on breast reconstruction, leading to caution amongst surgeons. Pre-operative radiotherapy (PRT) is a growing area of interest, is demonstrated to be safe, and spares autologous flaps from radiotherapy. This study evaluates the aesthetic outcome of PRT and deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap reconstruction within the Pre-operative Radiotherapy And Deep Inferior Epigastric artery Perforator (DIEP) flAp (PRADA) cohort.

METHODS

PRADA was an observational cohort study designed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of PRT for women undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy and DIEP reconstruction. Panel evaluation of 3D surface images (3D-SIs) and patient-reported outcome measures (BREAST-Q) for a subset of women in the study were compared with those of a DIEP-PMRT cohort who had undergone DIEP reconstruction and PMRT.

RESULTS

Seventeen out of 33 women from the PRADA study participated in this planned substudy. Twenty-eight women formed the DIEP-PMRT cohort (median follow-up 23 months). The median (inter-quartile range [IQR]) 'satisfaction with breasts' score at 12 months for the PRADA cohort was significantly better than the DIEP-PMRT cohort (77 [72-87] versus 64 [54-71], respectively), p=0.01). Median [IQR] panel evaluation (5-point scale) was also significantly better for the PRADA cohort than for the DIEP-PMRT cohort (4.3 [3.9-4.6] versus 3.6 [2.8-4] p=0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Aesthetic outcome for the PRADA cohort was reported to be 'good' or 'excellent' in 93% of cases using a bespoke panel assessment with robust methodology. Patient satisfaction at one year is encouraging and superior to DIEP-PMRT at 23 months. Switching surgery-radiotherapy sequencing leads to similar breast aesthetic outcomes and warrants further large-scale, multi-centre evaluation in a randomised trial.

Integration of Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Pediatric Hematology: A Qualitative Methods Study

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are self-reported questionnaires that allow patients and families to evaluate health-related experiences without influence or oversight from health care professionals. This study aimed to rate the relevance of existing PROMs for pediatric hematology patients, as identified by a recent systematic review, as well as to evaluate the receptivity of electronic PROM integration into clinical practice. Focus groups and interviews were conducted with children (10) and parents (19) impacted by nonmalignant hematological disorders, as well as with health care professionals (6). We observed strong support for the TranQol in thalassemia (100% for both parents [P] and children [C]); the Canadian Haemophilia Outcomes-Kids' Life Assessment Tool (CHO-KLAT) (100% P, 75% C) and Haemophilia Quality of Life questionnaire (Haemo-QoL) (100% P and C) in hemophilia; the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL) Sickle Cell Module (75% P, 100% C); and the Kids ITP Tool in immune thrombocytopenia (100% P, 66.7% C). Generic tools such as the PedsQL Generic were met with mixed support. Electronic PROM integration received universal support. We obtained strong support for the integration of a web-based platform into clinical practice and a preference for disease-specific PROMs over generic PROMs. Future projects may explore the development of a child-friendly Canadian web-based platform to standardize quality-of-life evaluation within the clinical encounter.

On the sensitivity of PROMs during breast radiotherapy

Purpose

To investigate the sensitivity of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to detect treatment-related side effects in patients with breast cancer undergoing external beam photon radiotherapy.

Methods

As part of daily clinical care, an in-house developed PROM tool was used to assess side effects in patients during a) whole-breast irradiation (WBI) to 40 Gy, b) WBI with a sequential boost of 10 Gy, and c) partial-breast irradiation (PBI) to 40 Gy.

Results

414 patients participated in this prospective study between October 2020 and January 2022, with 128 patients (31 %) receiving WBI, 241 (58 %) receiving WBI followed by a sequential boost, and 50 patients (12 %) receiving PBI. Significant differences in the reported toxicities (itching, radiation skin reaction, skin darkening, and tenderness and swelling) were reported between the WBI cohorts with and without boost (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p < 0.001, and p = 0.002, respectively). The comparison of PBI with WBI (no-boost) yielded significant differences for radiation skin reaction (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

The results highlight the high sensitivity of PROMs to detect treatment-related side effects in patients with breast cancer. Thus, PROMs may be a valuable tool for quality control and may support evidence-based learning from real-world data originating from daily routine care.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures of Breast Cancer Surgery: Evidence Review and Tool Adaptation

The objective of this scoping review was to review survey instruments for Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) and provide recommendations to construct a tool for PROMs specifically for breast cancer patients who have undergone surgery, to overcome the limitations of existing validated tools.

A total of 924 articles were screened. Nine articles were selected based on the eligibility criteria. We found that PROMs' data collection along with advancements in the treatment of breast cancer and the resultant improved clinical outcomes, there is a growing appreciation and focus on improving patients' quality of life (QoL). Previous studies have shown that the assessment of PROMs is linked to a positive effect on patients' symptoms of distress, quality of life, acceptance, and satisfaction. Several PROMs tools have been validated for use in cancer survivors. However, it is unclear whether existing tools are appropriate for use in breast cancer patients who have undergone surgical treatment. Hence, we conducted a scoping review.

Following a review of the current PROM related to breast cancer and the necessity to build specialized PROMs related to the outcomes of breast cancer surgery, we provide recommendations for the development of a comprehensive tool to overcome the limitations of existing PROMs tools.

Quality measurement for cardiovascular diseases and cancer in hospital value-based healthcare: a systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

This systematic literature review identifies hospital value-based healthcare quality measures, measurement practices, and tools, as well as potential strategies for improving cardiovascular diseases and cancer care.

METHODS

A systematic search was carried out in the PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and MEDLINE (OvidSP) databases. We included studies on quality measures in hospital value-based healthcare for cardiovascular diseases and cancer. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, conducted a full-text review of potentially relevant articles, assessed the quality of included studies, and extracted data thematically. This review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, and four validated tools were used for methodological quality assessment.

RESULTS

The search yielded 2860 publications. After screening the titles and abstracts, 60 articles were retrieved for full-text review. A total of 37 studies met our inclusion criteria. We found that standardized outcome sets with patient involvement were developed for some cardiovascular diseases and cancer. Despite the heterogeneity in outcome measures, there was consensus to include clinical outcomes on survival rate and disease control, disutility of care, and patient-reported outcome measures such as long-term quality of life.

CONCLUSION

Hospitals that developed value-based healthcare or are planning to do so can choose whether they prefer to implement the standardized outcomes step-by-step, collect additional measures, or develop their own set of measures. However, they need to ensure that their performance can be consistently compared to that of their peers and that they measure what prioritizes and maximizes value for their patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO ID: CRD42021229763 .

Breast cancer recurrence after immediate and delayed postmastectomy breast reconstruction-A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Oncological safety of different types and timings of PMBR after breast cancer remains controversial. Lack of stratified risk assessment in literature makes current clinical and shared decision‐making complex. This is the first systematic review and meta‐analysis to evaluate differences in oncological outcomes after immediate versus delayed postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) for autologous and implant‐based PMBR separately.

Methods

A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Embase. The Cochrane Collaboration Handbook and Meta‐analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklist were followed for data abstraction. Variability in point estimates attributable to heterogeneity was assessed using I²‐statistic. (Loco)regional breast cancer recurrence rates, distant metastasis rates, and overall breast cancer recurrence rates were pooled in generalized linear mixed models using random effects.

Results

Fifty‐five studies, evaluating 14,217 patients, were included. When comparing immediate versus delayed autologous PMBR, weighted average proportions were: 0.03 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.02–0.03) versus 0.02 (95% CI, 0.01–0.04), respectively, for local recurrences, 0.02 (95% CI, 0.01–0.03) versus 0.02 (95% CI, 0.01–0.03) for regional recurrences, and 0.04 (95% CI, 0.03–0.06) versus 0.01 (95% CI, 0.00–0.03) for locoregional recurrences. No statistically significant differences in weighted average proportions for local, regional and locoregional recurrence rates were observed between immediate and delayed autologous PMBR. Data did not allow comparing weighted average proportions of distant metastases and total breast cancer recurrences after autologous PMBR, and of all outcome measures after implant‐based PMBR.

Conclusions

Delayed autologous PMBR leads to similar (loco)regional breast cancer recurrence rates compared to immediate autologous PMBR. This study highlights the paucity of strong evidence on breast cancer recurrence after specific types and timings of PMBR.

Lay summery

Oncologic safety of different types and timings of postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) remains controversial.

Lack of stratified risk assessment in literature makes clinical and shared decision‐making complex.

This meta‐analysis showed that delayed autologous PMBR leads to similar (loco)regional recurrence rates as immediate autologous PMBR. Data did not allow comparing weighted average proportions of distant metastases and total breast cancer recurrence after autologous PMBR, and of all outcome measures after implant‐based PMBR.

Based on current evidence, oncological concerns do not seem a valid reason to withhold patients from certain reconstructive timings or techniques, and patients should equally be offered all reconstructive options they technically qualify for.

Oncologic safety of different types and timings of postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) remains controversial. This meta‐analysis showed that delayed autologous PMBR leads to similar (loco)regional breast cancer recurrence rates compared to immediate autologous PMBR.

Body image and quality of life in women with breast cancer: Appreciating the body and its functionality

Women with breast cancer often experience major physical changes, which can impact their body image and Quality of Life (QoL). Traditional assessments of body image implemented within breast cancer research focus solely on body dissatisfaction. This study explored the association between both positive and negative body image and QoL. Australian women (N = 123) within 5-years of a breast cancer diagnosis were invited to complete a web-based questionnaire including measures of body appreciation and functionality appreciation, cancer-specific measures of body dissatisfaction and QoL, and demographic, health and treatment/illness questions. All body image measures were significantly associated with QoL (p < .01). However, when body image variables were entered simultaneously as predictors of QoL (adjusting for comorbidity, treatment and employment), only body dissatisfaction was significantly associated with QoL (p < .001). Further analyses indicated this was due to shared variance in QoL between body and functionality appreciation, suggesting they assess highly related constructs within this population. Results indicate positive and negative components of body image are relevant to QoL within breast cancer populations; though, body dissatisfaction remained the strongest predictor of QoL indicating its pervasiveness. Future research should explore the development and use of breast cancer-specific measures of positive body image.

An absence of equipoise: Examining surgeons' decision talk during encounters with women considering breast cancer surgery

Shared decision-making is recommended for decisions with multiple reasonable options, yet clinicians often subtly or explicitly guide choices. Using purposive sampling, we performed a secondary analysis of 142 audio-recorded encounters between 13 surgeons and women eligible for breast-conserving surgery with radiation or mastectomy. We trained 9 surgeons in shared decision-making and provided them one of two conversation aids; 4 surgeons practiced as usual. Based on a published taxonomy of treatment recommendations (pronouncements, suggestions, proposals, offers, assertions), we examined how surgeons framed choices with patients. Many surgeons made assertions providing information and advice (usual care 71% vs. intervention 66%; p = 0.54). Some made strong pronouncements (usual care 51% vs. intervention 36%; p = .09). Few made proposals and offers, leaving the door open for deliberation (proposals usual care 21% vs. intervention 26%; p = 0.51; offers usual care 40% vs. intervention 40%; p = 0.98). Surgeons were significantly more likely to describe options as comparable when using a conversation aid, mentioning this in all intervention group encounters (usual care 64% vs. intervention 100%; p<0.001). Conversation aids can facilitate offers of comparable options, but other conversational actions can inhibit aspects of shared decision-making.

Predictors of delayed breast reconstruction in the Netherlands: a 5-year follow-up study in stage I-III breast cancer patients

PURPOSE

Delayed breast reconstruction (DBR) is a valid option for postmastectomy breast cancer patients who have a desire for breast reconstruction but are not considered suitable for immediate breast reconstruction (IBR). The objective of this study was to investigate the clinical practice and predictors of the use of DBR in the Netherlands.

METHODS

Stage I-III breast cancer patients diagnosed from January to March 2012 and treated with mastectomy were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Routinely collected patient, tumor, treatment and hospital characteristics were complemented with data about DBR up to 2018. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors independently associated with postmastectomy DBR. Factors associated with time to DBR were identified through Cox regression analyses.

RESULTS

Of all patients who underwent mastectomy (n = 1,415), 10.2% underwent DBR. DBR patients more often received autologous reconstruction compared to IBR patients (37.5% vs 6.2%, p < 0.001). Age below 50 years (age < 35 OR 15.55, age 35-49 OR 4.18) and neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy (OR 2.59 and OR 2.83, respectively) were significantly associated with DBR. Mean time to DBR was 2.4 years [range 1-6 years]. Time to DBR was significantly associated with age < 35 years (HR 2.22), and a high hospital volume (HR 1.87).

DISCUSSION

The use of DBR after mastectomy could not be fully explained by age below 50 years, chemotherapy, and hospital volume. Treatment with radiotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy increased time to DBR. More information about patient preferences is needed to understand the use and timing of reconstruction.

Challenging the current norm: Does health related quality of life data from reference populations accurately reflect baseline values in breast cancer patients? An observational cohort study comparing EORTC QLQ-C30 scores between the general Swedish population and baseline scores in breast cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Increased overall survival in breast cancer patients has led to a growing recognition of long-term effects of cancer treatment of patients' quality of life. Health related quality of life (HRQoL) data, as measured by patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), is increasingly incorporated into clinical practice and research. A commonly used method current available to interpret HRQoL PROMs data is by comparison to reference values, often obtained from sampling of the general population. The aim of this study was to assess whether HRQoL reference values derived from the general population are an accurate representation of the baseline values of an outpatient breast clinic population.

METHODS

A prospective observational cohort study was conducted by obtaining EORTC QLQ-C30 values for all patients offered an appointment in the outpatient breast clinic. These results were then compared to published baseline values in the general Swedish population, matched by gender and age.

RESULTS

568 questionnaires were returned with a response rate of 81,1 %. The outpatient breast clinic cohort reported a higher grade of symptoms, lower function and lower quality of life compared to the equivalent reference population.

CONCLUSION

This study challenges the assumption that the reference values accurately reflect those of the study population which clinicians and researchers need to account for in study design and clinical practice.

Patient-Reported Outcomes and Aesthetic Results after Immediate Breast Reconstruction Using Human Acellular Dermal Matrices: Results of a Multicenter, Prospective, Observational NOGGO-AWOGyn Study

BACKGROUND

With the increased use of acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) in implant-based breast reconstructions (IBBRs), the evaluation of patient-reported outcomes becomes more important.

METHODS

Patients who underwent an immediate human ADM-assisted, submuscular IBBR were included in this noninterventional, multicenter, prospective cohort study. Patients with primary reconstruction (cohort A) and patients with a revision surgery after capsular fibrosis (cohort B) were followed up for 12 months after surgery. Quality of life (EORTC BR-23) and patient and surgeon satisfaction scores (1 ["very satisfied"] to 6 ["not satisfied"]) with the outcome and the aesthetic result evaluated by 2 independent, external experts were assessed.

RESULTS

Eighty-four patients were enrolled in the study. The mean patient satisfaction score was 2.1 ± 0.8, with higher satisfaction in cohort B (p = 0.041). The score did not change significantly during the follow-up (p = 0.479). The mean satisfaction score of the surgeons was 2.0 ± 0.7; it was also higher in cohort B (p = 0.016) and showed no changes over time (p = 0.473). The mean aesthetic result was 2.2 ± 0.7. 92.9% of the patients completed at least 1 quality of life questionnaire. Body image and sexual functioning increased during follow-up. One year after surgery, the mean scores were 77.2 ± 22.5 and 44.7 ± 27.3, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The level of satisfaction among patients and surgeons and the score of the aesthetic result were constantly high among patients after ADM-assisted IBBR. Higher satisfaction scores could be observed after revision surgery caused by capsular fibrosis (cohort B) compared to primary reconstruction (cohort A). Quality of life increased during the first year after surgery.

MINImal vs. MAXimal Invasive Axillary Staging and Treatment After Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy in Node Positive Breast Cancer: Protocol of a Dutch Multicenter Registry Study (MINIMAX)

BACKGROUND

Node positive breast cancer (cN+) patients with an axillary pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) are not expected to benefit from axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). Therefore, less invasive axillary staging procedures have been introduced to establish response-guided treatment. However, evidence is lacking with regard to their oncologic safety and impact on quality of life (QoL). We hypothesize that if response-guided treatment is given, less invasive staging procedures are non-inferior to standard ALND in terms of oncologic safety, and superior to standard ALND in terms of QoL.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

MINIMAX is a Dutch multicenter registry study that includes patients with cN1-3M0 unilateral invasive breast cancer, who receive NST, followed by axillary staging and treatment according to local protocols. In a retrospective registry of ±4000 patients, the primary endpoint is oncologic safety at 5 and 10 years (disease-free, breast-cancer-specific and overall survival, and axillary recurrence rate). In a prospective multicenter registry, the primary endpoints are QoL at 1 and 5 years, and we aim to verify the 5-year oncologic safety. With an estimated 5-year disease-free survival of 72.5% and anticipated loss to follow-up of 10%, a sample size of 549 is needed to have 80% power to detect non-inferiority (with a 10% margin) of less invasive staging procedures.

CONCLUSION

In cN+ patients treated with NST, less invasive axillary staging procedures are already implemented globally. Evidence is needed to support the assumed oncologic safety and superior QoL of such procedures. This study will contribute to evidence-based guidelines.

Innovations for the future of breast surgery

BACKGROUND

Future innovations in science and technology with an impact on multimodal breast cancer management from a surgical perspective are discussed in this narrative review. The work was undertaken in response to the Commission on the Future of Surgery project initiated by the Royal College of Surgeons of England.

METHODS

Expert opinion was sought around themes of surgical de-escalation, reduction in treatment morbidities, and improving the accuracy of breast-conserving surgery in terms of margin status. There was emphasis on how the primacy of surgical excision in an era of oncoplastic and reconstructive surgery is increasingly being challenged, with more effective systemic therapies that target residual disease burden, and permit response-adapted approaches to both breast and axillary surgery.

RESULTS

Technologies for intraoperative margin assessment can potentially half re-excision rates after breast-conserving surgery, and sentinel lymph node biopsy will become a therapeutic procedure for many patients with node-positive disease treated either with surgery or chemotherapy as the primary modality. Genomic profiling of tumours can aid in the selection of patients for neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies as well as prevention strategies. Molecular subtypes are predictive of response to induction therapies and reductive approaches to surgery in the breast or axilla.

CONCLUSION

Treatments are increasingly being tailored and based on improved understanding of tumour biology and relevant biomarkers to determine absolute benefit and permit delivery of cost-effective healthcare. Patient involvement is crucial for breast cancer studies to ensure relevance and outcome measures that are objective, meaningful, and patient-centred.

The impact of mastectomy on body image and sexuality in women with breast cancer: a systematic review

Objective: The study aims to evaluate the impact of mastectomy on body image and sexuality of women with breast cancer, as well as to provide a general understanding of their quality of life. Method: This review followed the PRISMA guidelines. The expression “Mastectomy AND (sexuality OR “body image”)” was searched in Lilacs, Scielo, Pubmed and Scopus databases. Articles published in English, Portuguese and Spanish between 2010 and 2020 were selected. The text analysis was carried out by peers. Results: 69.3% (43) of the studies presented mastectomy as a technique that worsens body image, sexual functioning and quality of life of women. Less radical procedures, such as breast-conserving surgery, showed lower impact on these indicators. Breast reconstruction is an alternative to mitigate breast surgery impacts. Conclusion: Mastectomy caused the major impacts on body image, sexual functioning and quality of life. These implications need to be considered during therapeutic choice.

Enhancing Self-Esteem and Body Image of Breast Cancer Women through Interventions: A Systematic Review

Breast Cancer (BC) is the most common neoplasm in women worldwide, considered a global public health problem. Among BC women, some of the most common psychological symptoms in the adaptation to the disease are reduction in self-esteem and distorted body image (BI). Although there are numerous studies with the goal of promoting different psychological variables, BI and self-esteem are often separately observed despite their relationship and their importance in the process of the illness. Moreover, there have been no reviews that have synthesized the findings related to interventions aimed at enhancing both self-esteem and BI in BC women. Therefore, the objective of this review was to identify and examine the implemented interventions aimed at boosting both variables in this population. For this purpose, a systematic review was implemented following the PRISMA statement. A thorough search was performed on the following databases: Web of Science, PubMed, PsychInfo, PsychArticles, and Scopus. Among 287 records, only eight articles met the eligibility criteria. Interventions were grouped into three types according to their characteristics: Group therapies, Physical activity therapies, and Cosmetic and beauty treatments. The levels of effectiveness of the different interventions varied between them, and within each, in their impact on self-esteem and BI. More interventions focused on developing BI and self-esteem in this population are needed due to their ability to predict psychological functioning and quality of life of women with breast cancer.

Breast conservation and axillary management after primary systemic therapy in patients with early-stage breast cancer: the Lucerne toolbox

Primary systemic therapy is increasingly used in the treatment of patients with early-stage breast cancer, but few guidelines specifically address optimal locoregional therapies. Therefore, we established an international consortium to discuss clinical evidence and to provide expert advice on technical management of patients with early-stage breast cancer. The steering committee prepared six working packages to address all major clinical questions from diagnosis to surgery. During a consensus meeting that included members from European scientific oncology societies, clinical trial groups, and patient advocates, statements were discussed and voted on. A consensus was reached in 42% of statements, a majority in 38%, and no decision in 21%. Based on these findings, the panel developed clinical guidance recommendations and a toolbox to overcome many clinical and technical requirements associated with the diagnosis, response assessment, surgical planning, and surgery of patients with early-stage breast cancer. This guidance could convince clinicians and patients of the major clinical advancements purported by primary systemic therapy, the use of less extensive and more targeted surgery to improve the lives of patients with breast cancer.

Satisfaction Outcomes in Women Who "Choose to Go Flat" After Mastectomy: An Integrative Review

A considerable number of women undergoing mastectomies are "choosing to go flat," forgoing reconstruction. This integrative review sought to identify satisfaction outcomes and relevant factors among these women. Using variations of the key word "going flat," a systematic search of 7 databases was conducted. Fifteen articles met the inclusion criteria and were reviewed. Decisional and breast/chest appearance satisfaction in women who did not have reconstruction was mixed when compared with other surgical options. Body image, body mass index, radiation therapy, and access to information/resources affected satisfaction. Nurses are in a pivotal role to address the communication and informational needs of these women to support optimal surgical decision-making processes and improve patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes.

Oncoplastic partial breast reconstruction: concepts and techniques

Immediate oncoplastic breast reconstruction performed at the time of breast conserving surgery for the treatment of breast cancer merges the therapeutic goals of complete oncologic extirpation with preservation of breast form and function. A constellation of surgical techniques that employs breast volume displacement and/or replacement methods of varying complexity levels have emerged, thus broadening the potential applications for breast conservation therapy to include cases with increased tumor-to-native breast-volume ratios, multicentric or multifocal disease, and/or previous margin-positive resections. This review describes the various reconstructive methods, including the use of local tissue rearrangement, oncoplastic reduction-mastopexy, and locoregional flaps. Classification of the surgical options into levels I and II volume-displacement and volume-replacing techniques is made. Additionally, we explore the oncologic safety and effectiveness of this treatment paradigm by summarizing existing supportive evidence regarding associated risk of surgical complications, rate of margin-positive resection, implications for radiographic surveillance, local recurrence rates, and patient-reported outcomes. In conclusion, surgeons may use a wide variety of oncoplastic techniques for partial breast reconstruction at the time of segmental mastectomy to deliver effective breast conserving treatment for women with breast cancer. A growing body of literature affirms the oncologic safety of this approach. Future directions for research include long-term follow-up data with emphasis on outcomes from patient perspectives.

Psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L: a systematic review of the literature

PURPOSE

Although the EQ-5D has a long history of use in a wide range of populations, the newer five-level version (EQ-5D-5L) has not yet had such extensive experience. This systematic review summarizes the available published scientific evidence on the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L.

METHODS

Pre-determined key words and exclusion criteria were used to systematically search publications from 2011 to 2019. Information on study characteristics and psychometric properties were extracted: specifically, EQ-5D-5L distribution (including ceiling and floor), missing values, reliability (test-retest), validity (convergent, known-groups, discriminate) and responsiveness (distribution, anchor-based). EQ-5D-5L index value means, ceiling and correlation coefficients (convergent validity) were pooled across the studies using random-effects models.

RESULTS

Of the 889 identified publications, 99 were included for review, representing 32 countries. Musculoskeletal/orthopedic problems and cancer (n = 8 each) were most often studied. Most papers found missing values (17 of 17 papers) and floor effects (43 of 48 papers) to be unproblematic. While the index was found to be reliable (9 of 9 papers), individual dimensions exhibited instability over time. Index values and dimensions demonstrated moderate to strong correlations with global health measures, other multi-attribute utility instruments, physical/functional health, pain, activities of daily living, and clinical/biological measures. The instrument was not correlated with life satisfaction and cognition/communication measures. Responsiveness was addressed by 15 studies, finding moderate effect sizes when confined to studied subgroups with improvements in health.

CONCLUSIONS

The EQ-5D-5L exhibits excellent psychometric properties across a broad range of populations, conditions and settings. Rigorous exploration of its responsiveness is needed.

Patient-reported outcomes of ductoscopy procedures for pathologic nipple discharge

Background

Pathologic nipple discharge (PND) is a common complaint often associated with breast cancer. However, when ultrasound and mammography are negative, the chances of malignancy are lower than 5%. Currently, major duct excision and microdochectomy are often recommended to alleviate symptoms and definitely rule out malignancy, but can cause infections and breastfeeding problems. Ductoscopy is a minimally invasive endoscopy technique that allows visualization of the mammary ducts and may not only obviate surgery but also detect malignancy. The aim of this study was to determine quality of life (QOL) after ductoscopy in patients with PND.

Materials and methods

All PND patients referred for ductoscopy between 2014 and 2015 to our hospital were included. Ductoscopy procedures were performed under local anaesthesia in the outpatient clinic. Patients were asked to fill out questionnaires (Breast-Q, EQ-5D-5L and SF-36) on the day of ductoscopy, and after 2 weeks, 3 and 6 months. Additionally, we performed reliability analysis to determine if these questionnaires were suitable for PND patients.

Results

Fifty consecutive patients underwent ductoscopy of whom 47 patients participated in this study. One domain of SF-36 (vitality) varied significantly over time. Breast-Q, SF-36 and EQ-5D-5L showed that QOL after ductoscopy for PND was unaffected by ductoscopy. Success of the ductoscopy procedure was a significant predictor for satisfaction with the result domain.

Conclusion

Ductoscopy is a minimally invasive technique that does not seem to impact QoL of PND patients over time. Breast-Q, SF-36 and EQ-5D-5L seem to be suitable existing QOL tests for PND patients undergoing ductoscopy, whereas SF-36 would require modifications.

A randomised online experimental study to compare responses to brief and extended surveys of health-related quality of life and psychosocial outcomes among women with breast cancer

PURPOSE

Collecting patient-reported outcomes is important in informing the well-being of women with breast cancer. Consumer perceptions are important for successful implementation of monitoring systems, but are rarely formally assessed. We compared reactions to two different surveys (assessing psychosocial outcomes and/or Health-related Quality of Life (HrQoL) outcomes) among Australian women with breast cancer.

METHODS

Women (18 + years) within 5 years diagnosis of breast cancer were randomly allocated to complete one of two online surveys: (i) minimum HrQoL measures or (ii) minimum HrQoL measures plus psychosocial outcomes (body image, depression, anxiety stress, fear of cancer recurrence, decisional difficulties and unmet need). Participants completed questions regarding their perceptions of the survey, including qualitative feedback.

RESULTS

Data were available for 171 participants (n_(i) = 89; n_(ii) = 82), with 92% (n = 158) providing 95-100% complete data. Perceptions were comparable between survey groups, and high (80-100%) regarding time burden, ease of completion, comprehensible, appropriateness and willingness to participate again and moderately high (67-74%) regarding willingness to answer more questions and relevance. Qualitative feedback indicated gaps across both surveys, including financial/work-related issues, satisfaction with information and care, need for nuanced questions, and impact of side effects/treatment, and from the minimum set only, emotional well-being and support. Impairment in some HrQoL and psychosocial outcomes were observed among participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Assessment of HrQoL and psychosocial outcomes was well received by consumers. Results alleviate concern regarding possible patient burden imposed by longer more in-depth surveys. The importance placed on assessment brevity should not outweigh the need to assess outcomes that consumers consider important.

The added value of immediate breast reconstruction to health-related quality of life of breast cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Postmastectomy immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) may improve the quality of life (QoL) of breast cancer patients. Guidelines recommend to discuss the option IBR with all patients undergoing mastectomy. However, substantial hospital variation in IBR-rates was previously observed in the Netherlands, influenced by patient, tumour and hospital factors and clinicians' believes. Information provision about IBR may have a positive effect on receiving IBR and therefore QoL. This study investigated patient-reported QoL of patients treated with mastectomy with and without IBR.

METHODS

An online survey, encompassing the validated BREAST-Q questionnaire, was distributed to a representative sample of 1218 breast cancer patients treated with mastectomy. BREAST-Q scores were compared between patients who had undergone mastectomy either with or without IBR.

RESULTS

A total of 445 patients were included for analyses: 281 patients with and 164 without IBR. Patients who had received IBR showed significantly higher BREAST-Q scores on "psychosocial well-being" (75 versus 67, p < 0.001), "sexual well-being" (62 versus 52, p < 0.001) and "physical well-being" (77 versus 74, p = 0.021) compared to patients without IBR. No statistically significant difference was found for "satisfaction with breasts" (64 versus 62, p = 0.21). Similar results were found after multivariate regression analyses, revealing IBR to be an independent factor for a better patient-reported QoL.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients diagnosed with breast cancer with IBR following mastectomy report a better QoL on important psychosocial, sexual and physical well-being domains. This further supports the recommendation to discuss the option of IBR with all patients with an indication for mastectomy and to enable shared decision-making.

The Impact of Radiotherapy on Patient-reported Outcomes of Immediate Implant-based Breast Reconstruction With and Without Mesh

OBJECTIVE

To explore the impact of PMRT on PROs of IBBR performed with and without mesh.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

PMRT is increasingly given to improve breast cancer outcomes but can adversely impact complications after IBBR. Little; however, is known about the impact of PMRT on the PROs of IBBR, especially when mesh is used.

METHODS

The implant Breast Reconstruction evAluation prospective cohort study recruited consecutive women undergoing immediate IBBR from 81 UK breast and plastic surgical units. Demographic, operative, oncological, and 3-month complication data were collected, and patients consented to receive validated PRO questionnaires at 18-months. The association between IBBR, PMRT, and PROs were investigated using mixed-effects regression models adjusted for clinically-relevant confounders and including a random-effect to account for potential clustering by center RESULTS:: A total of 1163 women consented to receive 18-month questionnaires of whom 730 (63%) completed it. Patients undergoing PMRT (214 patients) reported worse PROs in 3 BREAST-Q domains: satisfaction with breasts [-6.27 points, P = 0.008, 95% confidence interval (CI) (-10.91, -1.63)], satisfaction with outcome [-7.53 points, P = 0.002, CI (-12.20, -2.85)] and physical well-being [-6.55 points, P < 0.001, CI (-9.43, -3.67)]. Overall satisfaction was worse in the PMRT group [OR 0.497, P = 0.002, CI (0.32, 0.77)]. These effects were not ameliorated by mesh use.

CONCLUSIONS

PMRT may adversely affect PROs after IBBR irrespective of whether mesh is used. These findings should be discussed with all patients considering IBBR and when indications for PMRT are borderline to enable informed decision-making regarding oncological and reconstructive treatment options.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN37664281.

Lowering Re-excision Rates After Breast-Conserving Surgery: Unraveling the Intersection Between Surgeon Case Volumes and Techniques

BACKGROUND

The re-excision rates after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) are significantly varied, with surgeon case volume as one influential factor. Surgeons with higher case volumes have been shown to have lower reoperation rates. This study attempted to determine whether this may be attributable to excessive breast tissue removal during initial BCS.

METHODS

A retrospective study analyzed referrals to the authors' cancer center during 3 years. Patients undergoing initial BCS for ductal carcinoma in situ or T1-T3 breast cancers were included. Patient age, tumor factors, surgeon case volume, and the calculated resection ratio (CRR) were analyzed. The total resection volume was divided by the optimal resection volume to produce the CRR, which reflected the magnitude of excess tissue resected during initial BCS. Comparison of the mean CRR between surgeon case-volume categories was performed with a repeated measures analysis of variance. A multivariate regression model assessed the effects of the CRR and surgeon case volume on re-excision rates.

RESULTS

Larger tumor size, lobular histology, and lower CRR were associated with increased re-excision rates. The CRR was similar for each surgeon case-volume group. Surgeon case volume was not independently associated with re-excision rates, but surgeons with very high case volumes had lower odds of re-excision than surgeons with intermediate case volumes (odds ratio 0.44; 95% confidence interval 0.21-0.91).

CONCLUSIONS

When control was used for the CRR, apparent differences in re-excision rates between surgeon case-volume groups were observed, suggesting that surgeons with higher case volumes may be more accurate when performing BCS.

Does receipt of preference sensitive care impact patient reported outcomes following breast cancer surgery?

BACKGROUND

Patients with early breast cancer have multiple surgical options, with their choice being based on personal values, and ultimately being preference sensitive. Most patients will choose breast conserving surgery (BCS) as their preferred management, with some ultimately requiring mastectomy. These patients may have lower satisfaction with this approach than others choosing mastectomy as their preferred option.

METHODS

The BREAST-Q patient reported outcomes (PRO) measurement tool was retrospectively administered to patients undergoing mastectomy.

RESULTS

Patients choosing an index mastectomy had higher satisfaction with breasts score than those originally having BCS (58.0 vs 44.0; p = 0.012). Quality of life domains were also higher in those originally choosing a mastectomy, including: psychosocial (72.5 vs 63.0; p = 0.019), sexual (48.0 vs 36.0; p = 0.042), and physical well being of the chest domains (80.0 vs 72.0; p = 0.031).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing mastectomy after initial breast conserving surgery report lower PRO's than those initially choosing mastectomy. This suggests that patient preferences need to be considered when interpreting PRO's following breast cancer surgery.

Machine learning with PROs in breast cancer surgery; caution: Collecting PROs at baseline is crucial

As high breast cancer survival rates are achieved nowadays, irrespective of type of surgery performed, prediction of long‐term physical, sexual, and psychosocial outcomes is very important in treatment decision‐making. Patient‐reported outcomes (PROs) can help facilitate this shared decision‐making. Given the significance of more personalized medicine and the growing trend on the application of machine learning techniques, we are striving to develop an algorithm using machine learning techniques to predict PROs in breast cancer patients treated with breast surgery. This short communication describes the bottlenecks in our attempt to predict PROs.

Patient-reported outcome after oncoplastic breast surgery compared with conventional breast-conserving surgery in breast cancer

INTRODUCTION

Oncoplastic breast surgery (OBS) has developed as an extension of breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in an effort to improve esthetic and functional outcome following surgery for breast cancer. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the possible benefits of OBS, as compared with BCS, with regard to health-related quality of life (HRQoL), using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients treated with OBS (n = 200) and BCS (n = 1304) in the period 1 January 2008 to 31 December 2013 were identified in a research database and in the Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group (DBCG) registry. Data on patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics were retrieved from the DBCG registry. Patients were sent a survey including the Breast-Q™ BCT postoperative module and a study-specific questionnaire (SSQ) in 2016. A good outcome in the Breast-Q module was defined as above the median. OBS was compared to BCS using a logistic regression analysis, and then adjusted for potential confounders, yielding odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

There was a statistically significant better outcome considering the HRQoL domain "Psychosocial Well-being " for patients treated with OBS as compared with BCS (OR 2.15: 1.25-3.69). No statistically significant differences were found for the domains "Physical Well-being" (0.83: 0.50-1.39), "Satisfaction with Breast" (0.95: 0.57-1.59), or "Sexual Well-being" (1.42: 0.78-2.58).

CONCLUSION

The present study indicates better outcomes of HRQoL for breast cancer patients treated with OBS as compared to patients treated with BCS. There was no increase in physical discomfort among OBS patients despite more extensive surgery.

Incorporating Patient-Reported Outcome Measures into Breast Surgical Oncology: Advancing Toward Value-Based Care

Value in health care is defined as the health outcome achieved per unit of cost. For health care systems, improving value means achieving better outcomes at lower costs. Improving outcomes, including patient-reported outcomes (PROs), as well as more established metrics such as mortality and complication rates, ensures high-quality care. This is particularly true in breast cancer surgery, where survival and recurrence rates are comparable across different surgical approaches. Outcomes reflecting survivorship quality may therefore better inform decision making regarding surgical approaches. PROs can be assessed using validated instruments known as patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). They are obtained directly from patients reflecting their health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Ongoing initiatives strive to define PROMs that accurately reflect HRQOL and demonstrate value, with the goal of establishing benchmarks for quality of care. Clinicians caring for patients with breast cancer are well positioned to be involved in defining meaningful measures of value-based breast cancer care. This article reviews value-based breast cancer care in the context of locoregional therapy, with attention paid to the work done by the International Consortium of Health Outcome Measures in which a "standard set" of value-based patient-centered outcomes for breast cancer for international use is defined. In addition, an overview is provided of relevant PROMs and previously reported scores. Recommendations and future challenges for implementation of routine collection of PROs are also discussed. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Opportunity exists to act as early adopters of the routine collection of longitudinal patient-reported outcome data for breast cancer, allowing transition of current care to value-based cancer care.

Chinese multicentre prospective registry of breast cancer patient-reported outcome-reconstruction and oncoplastic cohort (PRO-ROC): a study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Available patient-reported outcome (PRO) studies are mainly from single institution or of small sample size, and the variations across hospitals and regions were not fully analysed. A multicentre, prospective, patient-reported outcome-reconstruction and oncoplastic cohort (PRO-ROC) will be planned to assess the PROs of Chinese patients with breast cancer who will undergo breast reconstruction (BR) or oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OBCS).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The inclusion criteria are female patients with breast cancer aged >18 years old who will undergo BR or OBCS. This cohort will include at least 10 000 consecutive patients (about 5000 patients who will undergo BR and 5000 patients who will undergo OBCS). The exposures were surgery types: BR and OBCS regardless of the techniques and materials used. The primary endpoint will be PROs, which include BREAST-Q and quality of life (European Organisation for Research and Treatment (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and EORTC QoL Breast Cancer-specific version (QLQ-BR23)). All patients will be followed up to 24 months after operations. All data will be prospectively collected using an app software. Data will be analysed using SPSS and Stata software.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study follows the Helsinki Declaration. All patients will be asked to sign an informed consent before enrolment. The results of this study will be presented at national and international meetings and published in a scientific peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04030845; Pre-results.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures may optimize shared decision-making for cancer risk management in BRCA mutation carriers

Purpose

The aim of this study was to compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, either after bilateral prophylactic mastectomy (BPM) or during breast surveillance, to improve shared decision-making in their cancer risk management.

Methods

Unaffected BRCA1/2 mutation carriers at least one year after BPM followed by immediate breast reconstruction (BPM-IBR) or one year under surveillance were eligible. After informed consent, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and BREAST-Q were administered and compared between the different strategies. PROs were also compared to available normative data.

Results

Ninety-six participants were analyzed in this study and showed significant differences between strategies in age, age at genetic testing, and time since BPM or starting breast surveillance. All HADS scores were below 8 suggesting no signs of anxiety or depression in both groups. Higher mean ‘Q-physical well-being’ scores were reported by the surveillance group (81.78 [CI 76.99–86.57]) than the BPM group (76.96 [CI 73.16 – 80.75]; p = 0.011). Overall, for both questionnaires better scores were seen when compared to age-matched normative data.

Conclusions

No signs of anxiety or depression were seen in the surveillance or BPM-IBR group. Slightly better mean BREAST-Q scores were seen for the surveillance group in comparison to BPM-IBR, except for ‘Q-psychological well-being’. The difference in ‘Q-physical well-being’ was significantly worse for BPM-IBR. Approaches to obtain longitudinal PROs and reference values should be explored in the future, which could add value to shared decision-making in regards to breast cancer risk management in this specific patient population.

Evaluation of the preoperative perception of quality of life and satisfaction of women with breast cancer using the BREAST-Q™ questionnaire

INTRODUCTION

Almost 40% of women who undergo breast surgery are dissatisfied with the decision-making process as well as cosmetic results. Our objective was to demonstrate the usefulness of the BREAST-Q™ preoperative questionnaire to evaluate the satisfaction and health-related quality of life in women with diagnosis of breast cancer prior to surgery, as well as identifying satisfaction profiles.

METHODS

Prospective cohort observational study in women with breast cancer, evaluating preoperative quality of life using the BREAST-Q™ questionnaire. Percentile measures for each domain and baseline physical characteristics were assessed for posterior analysis.

RESULTS

The average score in the breast satisfaction domain was 58.9±16.9. The average score in the preoperative psychosocial well-being domain was 70.5±16.1. Patients who were offered conservative surgery had a mean physical well-being score of 80.7±18.5, and those who were offered mastectomy had an average score of 79.9±17.7. The sexual well-being average score was 63.2±20.7. No statistically significant differences were found between low-score and high-score groups regarding epidemiological and clinical characteristics CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative evaluation in breast cancer patients provides correct assessment of the effect of surgical treatment on patient satisfaction and quality of life. This information is useful for communicating with patients about their expectations and postoperative results.

Comparing Quality of Life in Breast Cancer Patients Who Underwent Mastectomy Versus Breast-Conserving Surgery: A Meta-Analysis

: The purpose of our study was to carry out a meta-analysis of current literature to determine whether total mastectomy and breast-conserving surgery induce different outcomes in quality of life, based on the breast-cancer-specific module of the European Organizaation for Research and Treatment of Cancer core questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-BR23) used postoperatively. A systematic literature search of PubMed and EMBASE was conducted. Observational clinical studies that compared the quality of life in different surgery groups and presented empirical findings were selected. Six studies met the inclusion criteria. Breast-conserving surgery has statistically significant better outcomes than mastectomy in three of the eight outcomes measured in the EORTC QLQ-BR23, namely body image (standard mean difference, SMD = 1.742, 95% CI 0.579-2.905, p = 0.003), future perspective (SMD = 0.606, 95% CI 0.075-1.138, p = 0.025) and systemic therapy side effects (SMD = -0.641, 95% CI 0.101-1.181, p = 0.020). Our study highlighted that breast-conserving surgery was preferred over mastectomy because breast-conserving surgery leads to better outcomes in body image, future perspectives and less systemic side effects.

Satisfaction with the Aesthetic Effect and Quality of Life for Women after Breast Conserving Therapy (BCT)-Preliminary Research

All methods of breast cancer treatment may potentially lead to breast deformities, which are often associated with the reduced mental well-being of patients. Breast conserving therapy (BCT) is commonly used, and its core element is breast conserving surgery (BCS).The aim of this study was to determine the level of satisfaction with the aesthetic outcome of surgery and quality of life (QoL) of breast cancer patients undergoing BCT in a longitudinal study performed three months, six months and 12 months after surgery. This longitudinal observational study was carried out on a group of 91 women. The Breast-Q^TM BCT 1.0 questionnaire was used in this study. Before surgery, patients assessed their satisfaction with the appearance of their breasts (SwB) at an average level of M = 56.0. Satisfaction with the aesthetic outcome (SwO) of BCS was highest among all patients three months after surgery (M = 63.0). The mean score in the sub-scale of psychosocial well-being (Psycho-soc W-B) before surgery was M = 62.0, while in the subsequent periods of the study, it was higher. The mean score for physical well-being (Physical W-B) before surgery was M = 69.92; and in the subsequent study periods, it was lower. The level of patient satisfaction with the outcome of the surgery and the QoL related to health do not differ significantly in post-operative observation. QoL in terms of psychosocial functioning in patients undergoing BCT is significantly higher 12 months after surgery compared to the pre-operative period. Patient satisfaction with the BCS aesthetic outcome is positively related to the evaluation of QoL in terms of psychosocial functioning.

The use of Patient Reported Outcome Measures in assessing patient outcomes when comparing autologous to alloplastic breast reconstruction: a systematic review

Breast reconstruction surgery after mastectomy has demonstrated positive psychological benefits, and is reflected in the number of patients undergoing the procedure, rising from 26.94% of patients after mastectomy in 2005, to 43.30% in 2014. Most of this is attributable to implant and expander-based reconstruction, with the rate of free flaps only increasing from 1.25% to 3.96% in this time period. Increasingly, breast cancer patients have higher survival rates. There is now an emphasis on Value Based Health Care (VBHC), which focusses on outcomes, and that can be measured by Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs). To date, there has been no systematic review to analyse PROMs between those undergoing autologous or alloplastic reconstruction, using validated measurement tools, to determine if there is a preferred technique from the patient's perspective. We performed a systematic search on EMBASE, and together with bibliographic linkage, identified 146 articles. After screening and assessment of articles through abstract, and full article appraisal, 13 were identified suitable for inclusion in this systematic review. Using BREAST-Q, satisfaction of breast and psychosocial well-being were rated highly by the autologous group when compared to implant-based reconstruction. Physical well-being was less significant, with the least significant difference noted for sexual well-being. EORTC-QLQ-BR23/C30 PROMs noted similar trends. SF-36 however, noted virtually no difference between the two methods of reconstruction regarding similar PROM quality of life (QoL) domains. From the patient perspective, autologous reconstruction is either equal to or superior to implant-based reconstruction, and should be offered to all patients.

Implementation of Value Based Breast Cancer Care

PURPOSE

Adding value of care to patients is crucial for all stakeholders. The use of both provider and patient reported outcome data was implemented in a single academic breast cancer center. We describe the development of the outcomes set, data integration within electronical health records (EHR) and clinical use.

METHODS

An Integrated Practice Unit (IPU) was constructed providing the full care cycle for breast cancer patients. Provider reported outcomes and patient reported outcomes (PROs) were defined, reflecting the entire cycle of care and long-term sustainability of quality of life. Multidisciplinary provider and patient perspectives were obtained via focus groups and surveys. Patient pathways were redesigned in order to identify suitable opportunities for data collection during the entire care cycle.

RESULTS

A Standard Set for Breast Cancer Outcomes together with case-mix variables and timelines was agreed upon within the IPU. A secure electronic platform, directly linked to the EHR, was designed to measure PROs during the outpatient phase. First year evaluation showed a decrease of response rates over time, from 83.3% at baseline to 45.2% at 12 months after surgery. Patients reacted positively to the use of PROMs in daily clinical cancer care.

CONCLUSION

Assessment of patient reported as well as provider reported outcomes was implemented within our standard of breast cancer care. For this, dedicated resources, change of culture and practice, and improved knowledge and awareness about Value-based healthcare (VBHC) were essential. Our proposed framework aims to serve as a blueprint for implementation of VBHC in daily care.