Julia Frebault1, Carmen Bergom2, Chandler S Cortina1, Monica E Shukla3, Yiwen Zhang4, Chiang-Ching Huang4, Amanda L Kong5. 1. Department of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI 53226. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI 53226; Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI 53226. 4. University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Zilber School of Public Health, Milwaukee, WI 53201. 5. Department of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI 53226. Electronic address: akong@mcw.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are no established treatment guidelines for women with breast cancer aged ≥80 despite increasing representation in the US population. Here we identify national treatment patterns and survival outcomes in women with stage I-III invasive breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women age ≥80 diagnosed with stage I-III invasive breast cancer (IBC) were identified from 2005-2014 in the National Cancer Database. χ2, Fisher's exact test, and logistic regression models were used to identify factors influencing receipt of breast surgery, and Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 62,575 women with IBC met inclusion criteria, of which the majority received surgery (94%). Receipt of surgery was associated with White race, age <90, lower stage, and fewer comorbidities. OS was higher for those who received surgery compared to those who did not (HR 3.3 [3.18-3.46] P < .001). Molecular subtype analysis demonstrated improved survival with receipt of surgery or radiation for all subtypes, as well as improved survival with chemotherapy for those with triple negative breast cancer. CONCLUSION: The vast majority of breast cancer patients aged ≥80 in the National Cancer Database with IBC received primary surgical management, which was associated with a significant OS benefit. Due to this finding, surgical resection should be considered for all patients ≥80 who are suitable operative candidates.
BACKGROUND: There are no established treatment guidelines for women with breast cancer aged ≥80 despite increasing representation in the US population. Here we identify national treatment patterns and survival outcomes in women with stage I-III invasive breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women age ≥80 diagnosed with stage I-III invasive breast cancer (IBC) were identified from 2005-2014 in the National Cancer Database. χ2, Fisher's exact test, and logistic regression models were used to identify factors influencing receipt of breast surgery, and Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 62,575 women with IBC met inclusion criteria, of which the majority received surgery (94%). Receipt of surgery was associated with White race, age <90, lower stage, and fewer comorbidities. OS was higher for those who received surgery compared to those who did not (HR 3.3 [3.18-3.46] P < .001). Molecular subtype analysis demonstrated improved survival with receipt of surgery or radiation for all subtypes, as well as improved survival with chemotherapy for those with triple negative breast cancer. CONCLUSION: The vast majority of breast cancer patients aged ≥80 in the National Cancer Database with IBC received primary surgical management, which was associated with a significant OS benefit. Due to this finding, surgical resection should be considered for all patients ≥80 who are suitable operative candidates.
Authors: M Lodi; L Scheer; N Reix; D Heitz; A-J Carin; N Thiébaut; K Neuberger; C Tomasetto; C Mathelin Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2017-08-12 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Supriya G Mohile; William Dale; Mark R Somerfield; Mara A Schonberg; Cynthia M Boyd; Peggy S Burhenn; Beverly Canin; Harvey Jay Cohen; Holly M Holmes; Judith O Hopkins; Michelle C Janelsins; Alok A Khorana; Heidi D Klepin; Stuart M Lichtman; Karen M Mustian; William P Tew; Arti Hurria Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-05-21 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Amir Qaseem; Jennifer S Lin; Reem A Mustafa; Carrie A Horwitch; Timothy J Wilt; Mary Ann Forciea; Nick Fitterman; Alfonso Iorio; Devan Kansagara; Michael Maroto; Robert M McLean; Janice E Tufte; Sandeep Vijan Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2019-04-09 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Chandler S Cortina; Surbhi Agarwal; Laurel L Mulder; Jennifer Poirier; Ruta Rao; David A Ansell; Andrea Madrigrano Journal: Clin Breast Cancer Date: 2018-07-06 Impact factor: 3.225
Authors: Kevin S Hughes; Lauren A Schnaper; Donald Berry; Constance Cirrincione; Beryl McCormick; Brenda Shank; Judith Wheeler; Lorraine A Champion; Thomas J Smith; Barbara L Smith; Charles Shapiro; Hyman B Muss; Eric Winer; Clifford Hudis; William Wood; David Sugarbaker; I Craig Henderson; Larry Norton Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-09-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Armando E Giuliano; Karla V Ballman; Linda McCall; Peter D Beitsch; Meghan B Brennan; Pond R Kelemen; David W Ollila; Nora M Hansen; Pat W Whitworth; Peter W Blumencranz; A Marilyn Leitch; Sukamal Saha; Kelly K Hunt; Monica Morrow Journal: JAMA Date: 2017-09-12 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Kevin S Hughes; Lauren A Schnaper; Jennifer R Bellon; Constance T Cirrincione; Donald A Berry; Beryl McCormick; Hyman B Muss; Barbara L Smith; Clifford A Hudis; Eric P Winer; William C Wood Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-05-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Joan M Neuner; Mary Ann Gilligan; Rodney Sparapani; Purushottam W Laud; David Haggstrom; Ann B Nattinger Journal: Cancer Date: 2004-09-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Lauren Brown; Samer A Naffouje; Christine Sam; Christine Laronga; M Catherine Lee Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2022-10-08 Impact factor: 4.624