INTRODUCTION:Cosmetic results and quality of life (QoL) are increasingly important in the treatment of breast cancer. This study was designed to determine the relationship between QoL and both subjectively and objectively measured cosmetic outcomes of breast-conserving therapy (BCT), and its course over time. METHODS: A total of 128 breast cancer patients who underwentBCT as part of a prospective randomized controlled trial were included. QoL was measured using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR23 at baseline, 3, 6, 12, and 36 months. Cosmetic outcome was determined by patient self-evaluation, panel evaluation, and BCCT.core software. RESULTS: By 36 months, all QoL factors except arm symptoms had returned to baseline or improved. After adjustment for patient and tumor characteristics, a significantly better QoL in terms of body image, pain, and arm and breast symptoms was found for good/excellent cosmetic outcomes compared to fair/poor outcomes, as measured by both patient self-evaluation and panel evaluation. The BCCT.core showed no correlation with any QoL factors. CONCLUSION: There is a high correlation between poor cosmetic outcome and low scores on quality of life indicators, underlining the importance of achieving a good cosmetic outcome after BCT.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION: Cosmetic results and quality of life (QoL) are increasingly important in the treatment of breast cancer. This study was designed to determine the relationship between QoL and both subjectively and objectively measured cosmetic outcomes of breast-conserving therapy (BCT), and its course over time. METHODS: A total of 128 breast cancerpatients who underwent BCT as part of a prospective randomized controlled trial were included. QoL was measured using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR23 at baseline, 3, 6, 12, and 36 months. Cosmetic outcome was determined by patient self-evaluation, panel evaluation, and BCCT.core software. RESULTS: By 36 months, all QoL factors except arm symptoms had returned to baseline or improved. After adjustment for patient and tumor characteristics, a significantly better QoL in terms of body image, pain, and arm and breast symptoms was found for good/excellent cosmetic outcomes compared to fair/poor outcomes, as measured by both patient self-evaluation and panel evaluation. The BCCT.core showed no correlation with any QoL factors. CONCLUSION: There is a high correlation between poor cosmetic outcome and low scores on quality of life indicators, underlining the importance of achieving a good cosmetic outcome after BCT.
Authors: Lisanne L de Boer; Torre M Bydlon; Frederieke van Duijnhoven; Marie-Jeanne T F D Vranken Peeters; Claudette E Loo; Gonneke A O Winter-Warnars; Joyce Sanders; Henricus J C M Sterenborg; Benno H W Hendriks; Theo J M Ruers Journal: J Transl Med Date: 2018-12-19 Impact factor: 5.531
Authors: Cary S Kaufman; Michael J Cross; Julie L Barone; Nayana S Dekhne; Kiran Devisetty; Joshua T Dilworth; David A Edmonson; Firas G Eladoumikdachi; Jennifer S Gass; William H Hall; Robert L Hong; Robert R Kuske; Brandon J Patton; Carol Perelson; Rogsbert F Phillips; Arnold B Smith; Linda A Smith; Lorraine Tafra; Gail S Lebovic Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2020-11-21 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Lisanne L de Boer; Esther Kho; Koen K Van de Vijver; Marie-Jeanne T F D Vranken Peeters; Frederieke van Duijnhoven; Benno H W Hendriks; Henricus J C M Sterenborg; Theo J M Ruers Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2021-05-22 Impact factor: 6.466
Authors: Amy R Godden; Rachel L O'Connell; Peter A Barry; Katherine C D Krupa; Lisa M Wolf; Kabir Mohammed; Anna M Kirby; Jennifer E Rusby Journal: Breast Cancer Date: 2020-06-19 Impact factor: 4.239