Elena Leinert1, Rolf Kreienberg2, Achim Wöckel3, Thorsten Kühn4, Felix Flock5, Ricardo Felberbaum6, Wolfgang Janni2, Kathy Taylor7, Susanne Singer7, Lukas Schwentner2. 1. Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University of Ulm, Prittwitzstr 43, 89075, Ulm, Germany. elena.leinert@uniklinik-ulm.de. 2. Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University of Ulm, Prittwitzstr 43, 89075, Ulm, Germany. 3. Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany. 4. Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Hospital Esslingen, Esslingen, Germany. 5. Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Hospital Memmingen, Memmingen, Germany. 6. Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Hospital Kempten, Kempten, Germany. 7. Institute of Medical Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, University Medical Centre, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aims to answer the questions where breast cancer patients in Germany receive follow-up care (with what types of doctors) and what are the long-term problems and treatment regrets of breast cancer patients. METHODS: In the prospective multicenter cohort study BRENDA II ("Breast Cancer under Evidence-Based Guidelines"), 456 patients with primary breast cancer were sampled consecutively over a period of 4 years (2009-2012) and contacted again 5 years after surgery. Long-term problems were elicited on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 0 ('not at all') to 3 ('very much'). RESULTS: 82% of the patients receive follow-up (FU) at the private practice gynecologist. In 22%, the initial treating hospital is involved in the FU, and in 20% the general practitioner does this (multiple answers possible). Long-term problems attributed to the treatment were most often related to endocrine therapy (mean 1.29) and to chemotherapy (mean 0.94). Most of the patients were happy to have had radiotherapy (95%). For chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, and antibody therapy, the satisfaction for the treatment decision was 87%, 87%, and 84% respectively. Among patients who reported they regretted having undergone a recommended treatment, it was most often for endocrine therapy (5%) and chemotherapy (4%). CONCLUSION: In Germany, different specialists are involved in the patients' FU care for BC. The detection of long-term problems due to BC treatment is an essential part of FU care.
PURPOSE: This study aims to answer the questions where breast cancerpatients in Germany receive follow-up care (with what types of doctors) and what are the long-term problems and treatment regrets of breast cancerpatients. METHODS: In the prospective multicenter cohort study BRENDA II ("Breast Cancer under Evidence-Based Guidelines"), 456 patients with primary breast cancer were sampled consecutively over a period of 4 years (2009-2012) and contacted again 5 years after surgery. Long-term problems were elicited on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 0 ('not at all') to 3 ('very much'). RESULTS: 82% of the patients receive follow-up (FU) at the private practice gynecologist. In 22%, the initial treating hospital is involved in the FU, and in 20% the general practitioner does this (multiple answers possible). Long-term problems attributed to the treatment were most often related to endocrine therapy (mean 1.29) and to chemotherapy (mean 0.94). Most of the patients were happy to have had radiotherapy (95%). For chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, and antibody therapy, the satisfaction for the treatment decision was 87%, 87%, and 84% respectively. Among patients who reported they regretted having undergone a recommended treatment, it was most often for endocrine therapy (5%) and chemotherapy (4%). CONCLUSION: In Germany, different specialists are involved in the patients' FU care for BC. The detection of long-term problems due to BC treatment is an essential part of FU care.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast cancer; Breast cancer survivors; Follow-up; Long-term problems; Treatment regrets
Authors: Elena Leinert; Susanne Singer; Wolfgang Janni; Nadia Harbeck; Tobias Weissenbacher; Brigitte Rack; Doris Augustin; Arthur Wischnik; Marion Kiechle; Johannes Ettl; Visnja Fink; Lukas Schwentner; Martin Eichler Journal: Clin Breast Cancer Date: 2016-10-19 Impact factor: 3.225
Authors: Anne Dahlhaus; Nicholas Vanneman; Corina Guethlin; Johanna Behrend; Andrea Siebenhofer Journal: Fam Pract Date: 2014-01-24 Impact factor: 2.267
Authors: Paula A van Luijt; Jacques Fracheboud; Eveline A M Heijnsdijk; Gerard J den Heeten; Harry J de Koning Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2013-07-17 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: K Hancke; M D Denkinger; J König; C Kurzeder; A Wöckel; D Herr; M Blettner; R Kreienberg Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2009-10-13 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: James L Khatcheressian; Patricia Hurley; Elissa Bantug; Laura J Esserman; Eva Grunfeld; Francine Halberg; Alexander Hantel; N Lynn Henry; Hyman B Muss; Thomas J Smith; Victor G Vogel; Antonio C Wolff; Mark R Somerfield; Nancy E Davidson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2012-11-05 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: L Schwentner; R Van Ewijk; C Kurzeder; I Hoffmann; J König; R Kreienberg; M Blettner; A Wöckel Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2012-09-06 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: N Riccetti; R Felberbaum; F Flock; T Kühn; E Leinert; L Schwentner; S Singer; K Taylor; A Wöckel; W Janni Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2022-05-04 Impact factor: 3.359
Authors: Leah T Tolby; Elisa N Hofmeister; Sophie Fisher; Sabrina Chao; Catherine Benedict; Allison W Kurian; Jonathan S Berek; Lidia Schapira; Oxana G Palesh Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2020-11-08 Impact factor: 4.062