| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Ring, A., et al.
(författare)
-
Bridging The Age Gap: observational cohort study of effects of chemotherapy and trastuzumab on recurrence, survival and quality of life in older women with early breast cancer
- 2021
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Cancer. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0007-0920 .- 1532-1827. ; 125, s. 209-219
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Chemotherapy improves outcomes for high risk early breast cancer (EBC) patients but is infrequently offered to older individuals. This study determined if there are fit older patients with high-risk disease who may benefit from chemotherapy. Methods: A multicentre, prospective, observational study was performed to determine chemotherapy (±trastuzumab) usage and survival and quality-of-life outcomes in EBC patients aged ≥70 years. Propensity score-matching adjusted for variation in baseline age, fitness and tumour stage. Results: Three thousands four hundred sixteen women were recruited from 56 UK centres between 2013 and 2018. Two thousands eight hundred eleven (82%) had surgery. 1520/2811 (54%) had high-risk EBC and 2059/2811 (73%) were fit. Chemotherapy was given to 306/1100 (27.8%) fit patients with high-risk EBC. Unmatched comparison of chemotherapy versus no chemotherapy demonstrated reduced metastatic recurrence risk in high-risk patients(hazard ratio [HR] 0.36 [95% CI 0.19–0.68]) and in 541 age, stage and fitness-matched patients(adjusted HR 0.43 [95% CI 0.20–0.92]) but no benefit to overall survival (OS) or breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) in either group. Chemotherapy improved survival in women with oestrogen receptor (ER)-negative cancer (OS: HR 0.20 [95% CI 0.08–0.49];BCSS: HR 0.12 [95% CI 0.03–0.44]).Transient negative quality-of-life impacts were observed. Conclusions: Chemotherapy was associated with reduced risk of metastatic recurrence, but survival benefits were only seen in patients with ER-negative cancer. Quality-of-life impacts were significant but transient. Trial Registration: ISRCTN 46099296. © 2021, The Author(s).
|
|
| 4. |
- Wyld, L., et al.
(författare)
-
Bridging the age gap in breast cancer. Impacts of omission of breast cancer surgery in older women with oestrogen receptor positive early breast cancer. A risk stratified analysis of survival outcomes and quality of life
- 2021
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Cancer. - : Elsevier BV. - 0959-8049. ; 142, s. 48-62
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Age-related breast cancer treatment variance is widespread with many older women having primary endocrine therapy (PET), which may contribute to inferior survival and local control. This propensity-matched study determined if a subgroup of older women may safely be offered PET. Methods: Multicentre, prospective, UK, observational cohort study with propensity-matched analysis to determine optimal allocation of surgery plus ET (S+ET) or PET in women aged ≥70 with breast cancer. Data on fitness, frailty, cancer stage, grade, biotype, treatment and quality of life were collected. Propensity-matching (based on age, health status and cancer stage) adjusted for allocation bias when comparing S+ET with PET. Findings: A total of 3416 women (median age 77, range 69–102) were recruited from 56 breast units—2854 (88%) had ER+ breast cancer: 2354 had S+ET and 500 PET. Median follow-up was 52 months. Patients treated with PET were older and frailer than patients treated with S+ET. Unmatched overall survival was inferior in the PET group (hazard ratio, (HR) 0.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.23–0.33, P < 0.001). Unmatched breast cancer–specific survival (BCSS) was also inferior in patients treated with PET (HR: 0.41, CI: 0.29–0.58, P < 0.001 for BCSS). In the matched analysis, PET was still associated with an inferior overall survival (HR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.53–0.98, P = 0.04) but not BCSS (HR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.40–1.37, P = 0.34) although at 4–5 years subtle divergence of the curves commenced in favor of surgery. Global health status diverged at certain time points between groups but over 24 months was similar when adjusted for baseline variance. Interpretation: For the majority of older women with early ER+ breast cancer, surgery is oncologically superior to PET. In less fit, older women, with characteristics similar to the matched cohort of this study (median age 81 with higher comorbidity and functional impairment burdens, the BCSS survival differential disappears at least out to 4–5 year follow-up, suggesting that for those with less than 5-year predicted life-expectancy (>90 years or >85 with comorbidities or frailty) individualised decision making regarding PET versus S+ET may be appropriate and safe to offer. The Age Gap online decision tool may support this decision-making process (https://agegap.shef.ac.uk/). Trial registration number: ISRCTN: 46099296. © 2020 The Authors
|
|
| 5. |
- Wyld, L., et al.
(författare)
-
Improving outcomes for women aged 70 years or above with early breast cancer: Research programme including a cluster RCT
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Programme Grants for Applied Research. - 2050-4322. ; 10:6
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)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). Adjuva t 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://ag gap.shef.ac.uk/; accessed May 2022). There are plans to validate the tool and incorprate quality-of-life and 10-year survival outcomes.
|
|
| 6. |
- Arbyn, M, et al.
(författare)
-
Methods for screening and diagnosis
- 2007
-
Ingår i: 2nd edition of the EU Guidelines for cervical cancer screening. - 9789279076985 ; , s. 69-141
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Klabunde, C, et al.
(författare)
-
Participation rates for organized colorectal cancer screening programmes: an international comparison
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Journal of medical screening. - : SAGE Publications. - 1475-5793 .- 0969-1413. ; 22:3, s. 119-126
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Participation, an indicator of screening programme acceptance and effectiveness, varies widely in clinical trials and population-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes. We aimed to assess whether CRC screening participation rates can be compared across organized guaiac fecal occult blood test (G-FOBT)/fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based programmes, and what factors influence these rates. Methods Programme representatives from countries participating in the International Cancer Screening Network were surveyed to describe their G-FOBT/FIT-based CRC screening programmes, how screening participation is defined and measured, and to provide participation data for their most recent completed screening round. Results Information was obtained from 15 programmes in 12 countries. Programmes varied in size, reach, maturity, target age groups, exclusions, type of test kit, method of providing test kits and use, and frequency of reminders. Coverage by invitation ranged from 30–100%, coverage by the screening programme from 7–67.7%, overall uptake/participation rate from 7–67.7%, and first invitation participation from 7–64.3%. Participation rates generally increased with age and were higher among women than men and for subsequent compared with first invitation participation. Conclusion Comparisons among CRC screening programmes should be made cautiously, given differences in organization, target populations, and interpretation of indicators. More meaningful comparisons are possible if rates are calculated across a uniform age range, by gender, and separately for people invited for the first time vs. previously.
|
|
| 10. |
- Lancucki, L, et al.
(författare)
-
A fall-off in cervical screening coverage of younger women in developed countries
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Journal of medical screening. - : SAGE Publications. - 1475-5793 .- 0969-1413. ; 17:2, s. 91-96
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- To analyse cervical screening coverage data by age over time in a number of developed countries throughout the world, with specific emphasis on trends for younger women and on age differentials between younger and older women. Methods Routinely collected cervical screening statistics and survey data were collected on the proportion of women who have undergone cervical screening with cytology in seven countries in the period 1995 to 2005. Results Data for the 25-29 age group were examined. Coverage fell in most countries, in three by more than 5 percentage points. In two countries while overall coverage rose in the period, the rise was not as steep in the youngest group of women. Data for each available 5-year age group for the different countries shows a similar gradient in most, regardless of the absolute level of coverage. Although the trend is not uniform in every country, it appears that generally the gap between coverage of younger women and coverage of older women increased, sometimes dramatically, between the mid-1990s and the mid-2000s. Conclusions There is a general trend in developed countries towards lower coverage in young women (25-29 years old). No common underlying cause has been clearly identified and there is a need for further studies to investigate the possible reasons for this phenomenon.
|
|
