Philippa Youl1, Shoni Philpot2, Julie Moore1, Michelle Morris3, David E Theile1,4. 1. Cancer Alliance Queensland, Metro South Hospital and Health Service, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Burke Street, Woolloongabba, QLD, 4102, Australia. 2. Cancer Alliance Queensland, Metro South Hospital and Health Service, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Burke Street, Woolloongabba, QLD, 4102, Australia. Shoni.Philpot@health.qld.gov.au. 3. Sunshine Coast Hospital and Health Service, Sunshine Coast University Hospital, 6 Doherty Street, Birtinya, QLD, 4575, Australia. 4. Translational Research Institute, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Our aim was to describe variations in the treatment of early-stage breast cancer and to examine factors associated with disease-specific survival (DSS). METHODS: The study used linked data for 24,190 women with a T1 (≤ 20 mm) breast cancer who underwent surgery from 2005 to 2019. Multivariate logistic regression was used to model predictors of receiving breast-conserving surgery (BCS) compared to mastectomy and a multinomial model was used to examine factors associated with type(s) of treatment received. RESULTS: Overall, 70.3% had BCS, with a reduced likelihood of BCS observed for younger women (p < 0.001), rural residence, (p < 0.001), socioeconomic disadvantage (p = 0.004), higher tumour grade (p < 0.001) and surgery in a public versus private hospital (p < 0.001). Compared to women who received BCS and radiation therapy (RT), those having mastectomy alone or mastectomy plus RT were more likely to be younger (p < 0.001), live in a rural area (p < 0.001), have higher-grade tumours (p < 0.001) and positive lymph nodes (p < 0.001). Overall 5-year survival was 95.3% and breast cancer-specific survival was 98.3%. Highest survival was observed for women having BCS and RT and lowest for those having mastectomy and RT (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our results indicate some variation in the management of early-stage breast cancer. Lower rates of BCS were observed for rural and disadvantaged women and for those treated in a public or low-volume hospital. Whilst survival was high for this cohort, differences in tumour biology likely explain the differences in survival according to treatment type.
PURPOSE: Our aim was to describe variations in the treatment of early-stage breast cancer and to examine factors associated with disease-specific survival (DSS). METHODS: The study used linked data for 24,190 women with a T1 (≤ 20 mm) breast cancer who underwent surgery from 2005 to 2019. Multivariate logistic regression was used to model predictors of receiving breast-conserving surgery (BCS) compared to mastectomy and a multinomial model was used to examine factors associated with type(s) of treatment received. RESULTS: Overall, 70.3% had BCS, with a reduced likelihood of BCS observed for younger women (p < 0.001), rural residence, (p < 0.001), socioeconomic disadvantage (p = 0.004), higher tumour grade (p < 0.001) and surgery in a public versus private hospital (p < 0.001). Compared to women who received BCS and radiation therapy (RT), those having mastectomy alone or mastectomy plus RT were more likely to be younger (p < 0.001), live in a rural area (p < 0.001), have higher-grade tumours (p < 0.001) and positive lymph nodes (p < 0.001). Overall 5-year survival was 95.3% and breast cancer-specific survival was 98.3%. Highest survival was observed for women having BCS and RT and lowest for those having mastectomy and RT (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our results indicate some variation in the management of early-stage breast cancer. Lower rates of BCS were observed for rural and disadvantaged women and for those treated in a public or low-volume hospital. Whilst survival was high for this cohort, differences in tumour biology likely explain the differences in survival according to treatment type.
Authors: M Clarke; R Collins; S Darby; C Davies; P Elphinstone; V Evans; J Godwin; R Gray; C Hicks; S James; E MacKinnon; P McGale; T McHugh; R Peto; C Taylor; Y Wang Journal: Lancet Date: 2005-12-17 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: F Cardoso; S Kyriakides; S Ohno; F Penault-Llorca; P Poortmans; I T Rubio; S Zackrisson; E Senkus Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2019-10-01 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: A S Lichter; M E Lippman; D N Danforth; T d'Angelo; S M Steinberg; E deMoss; H D MacDonald; C M Reichert; M Merino; S M Swain Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1992-06 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: J A van Dongen; A C Voogd; I S Fentiman; C Legrand; R J Sylvester; D Tong; E van der Schueren; P A Helle; K van Zijl; H Bartelink Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2000-07-19 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: K J Mitchell; L Fritschi; A Reid; S P McEvoy; D M Ingram; K Jamrozik; C Clayforth; M J Byrne Journal: Breast Date: 2006-06-09 Impact factor: 4.380