To improve quality of care, centralisation of cancer services in high-volume centres has been stimulated. Studies linking specialisation and high (surgical) volumes to better outcomes already ...appeared in the 1990's. However, actual centralisation was a difficult process in many countries. In this study, factors influencing the centralisation of cancer services in the Netherlands were determined.
Centralisation patterns were studied for three types of cancer that are known to benefit from high surgical caseloads: oesophagus-, pancreas- and bladder cancer. The Netherlands Cancer Registry provided data on tumour and treatment characteristics from 2000-2013 for respectively 8037, 4747 and 6362 patients receiving surgery. By plotting timelines of centralisation of cancer surgery, relations with the appearance of (inter)national scientific evidence, actions of medical specialist societies, specific regulation and other important factors on the degree of centralisation were ascertained.
For oesophagus and pancreas cancer, a gradual increase in centralisation of surgery is seen from 2005 and 2006 onwards following (inter)national scientific evidence. Centralisation steps for bladder cancer surgery can be seen in 2010 and 2013 anticipating on the publication of norms by the professional society. The most influential stimulus seems to have been regulations on minimum volumes.
Scientific evidence on the relationship between volume and outcome lead to the start of centralisation of surgical cancer care in the Netherlands. Once a body of evidence has been established on organisational change that influences professional practice, in addition some form of regulation is needed to ensure widespread implementation.
We analysed incidence, treatment, survival, occurrence of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and invasive breast cancer (IBC) after lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) in the Netherlands.
All women ...diagnosed with classic LCIS between 1989 and 2017 were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. We calculated overall (OS), relative survival (RS) and cumulative incidence functions (CIF, accounting for competing risks) of mortality, DCIS and IBC. For IBC, standardised incidence ratios (SIR) of IBC were calculated. Analyses were stratified for surgical treatment.
We included 1890 patients. Median age was 51 years. Median follow-up was 8.5 years. In 1989–2017, LCIS incidence increased from 41 to 124, surgical treatment decreased from 100% to 41.1 % – mostly BCS. 10-year OS and 20-year RS exceeded 90 % in all subgroups. Overall, 48 (2.5 %) and 270 (14.3 %) patients were diagnosed with DCIS and IBC. IBCs were mostly early-stage. After mastectomy, 13 of 14 IBCs presented contralaterally. In the other groups, 64.8–70.9 % of IBCs presented ipsilaterally, 34.5–53.9 % of these were lobular. The SIR of ipsilateral IBC was highest after no surgery (6.9, 95%CI:4.9–9.4), lowest after mastectomy (0.2, 95%CI:0.4–0.8).
LCIS incidence increased, surgical treatment decreased. The low mortality risks support consideration of active surveillance. However, the increased IBC incidence suggests careful monitoring.
•The incidence of LCIS increased, while surgical treatment decreased over time.•10- and 20-year relative survival rates exceeded 90 %, irrespective of surgery.•The risk of breast cancer was highest after no surgery, lowest after mastectomy.•Subsequent breast cancers were generally of low stage.•Active surveillance for LCIS is advised, with the current follow-up five years.
Abstract Importance Online prognostication tools such as PREDICT and Adjuvant! are increasingly used in clinical practice by oncologists to inform patients and guide treatment decisions about ...adjuvant systemic therapy. However, their validity for young breast cancer patients is debated. Objective To assess first, the prognostic accuracy of PREDICT's and Adjuvant! 10-year all-cause mortality, and second, its breast cancer–specific mortality estimates, in a large cohort of breast cancer patients diagnosed <50 years. Design Hospital-based cohort. Setting General and cancer hospitals. Participants A consecutive series of 2710 patients without a prior history of cancer, diagnosed between 1990 and 2000 with unilateral stage I–III breast cancer aged <50 years. Main outcome measures Calibration and discriminatory accuracy, measured with C-statistics, of estimated 10-year all-cause and breast cancer–specific mortality. Results Overall, PREDICT's calibration for all-cause mortality was good (predicted versus observed) meandifference : −1.1% (95%CI: −3.2%–0.9%; P = 0.28). PREDICT tended to underestimate all-cause mortality in good prognosis subgroups (range meandifference : −2.9% to −4.8%), overestimated all-cause mortality in poor prognosis subgroups (range meandifference : 2.6%–9.4%) and underestimated survival in patients < 35 by −6.6%. Overall, PREDICT overestimated breast cancer–specific mortality by 3.2% (95%CI: 0.8%–5.6%; P = 0.007); and also overestimated it seemingly indiscriminately in numerous subgroups (range meandifference : 3.2%–14.1%). Calibration was poor in the cohort of patients with the lowest and those with the highest mortality probabilities. Discriminatory accuracy was moderate-to-good for all-cause mortality in PREDICT (0.71 95%CI: 0.68 to 0.73), and the results were similar for breast cancer–specific mortality. Adjuvant!'s calibration and discriminatory accuracy for both all-cause and breast cancer–specific mortality were in line with PREDICT's findings. Conclusions Although imprecise at the extremes, PREDICT's estimates of 10-year all-cause mortality seem reasonably sound for breast cancer patients <50 years; Adjuvant! findings were similar. Prognostication tools should be used with caution due to the intrinsic variability of their estimates, and because the threshold to discuss adjuvant systemic treatment is low. Thus, seemingly insignificant mortality overestimations or underestimations of a few percentages can significantly impact treatment decision-making.
There is a large variation between Dutch hospitals in the use of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy (SLNB) in patients with a biopsy diagnosis of Ductal Carcinoma in Situ. The aim of our study was to ...investigate whether this variation might be explained by preferences of surgeons, organisational factors or the influence of patients preferences.
A cross-sectional web survey was conducted among 260 Dutch oncological/breast surgeons. Preferences of surgeons and the influence of the patients' preferences were determined by means of best-worst scaling (BWS) of profile case scenarios and by ranking risk factors. The survey also explored organisational questions, the reported use of diagnostic techniques and influences on the decision.
The BWS scenarios were completed by 57 surgeons. The most important reasons for performing SLNB were a suspected invasive component and DCIS grade 3. In the ranking, these were also the first and second most important factor, followed by the size of the lesion and a mass on mammogram. In 58% to 70% of the scenarios, the surgeons would not change their decisions on the use of SLNB if the patient's chose differed. No organisational factor was significantly associated with the reported use of SLNB.
The inter-hospital variation in the use of SLNB could not be attributed to organisational factors or surgeons' preferences for risk factors. The risk factors that most surgeons reported as reasons for performing SLNB are consistent with the factors described in the Dutch treatment guideline for the use of SLNB.
Purpose
The addition of trastuzumab to adjuvant chemotherapy has improved the outcome of human epidermal growth-factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer. Uncertainty remains about the optimal ...timing of trastuzumab treatment. Therefore, we compared long-term outcome after concurrent versus sequential treatment, in a population-based setting, using data from the nationwide Netherlands Cancer Registry.
Methods
We identified 1843 women diagnosed in The Netherlands from January 1st 2005 until January 1st 2008 with primary, HER2-positive, T
1-4
N
any
M
0
breast cancer who received adjuvant chemotherapy and trastuzumab. Kaplan–Meier survival estimates and Cox regression were used to compare recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) between women who received trastuzumab concurrently with versus sequentially after chemotherapy. Hazard ratios (HR) were adjusted for age, year of diagnosis, grade, pathological T-stage, number of positive lymph nodes, ER-status, PR-status, socio-economic status, radiotherapy, hormonal therapy, ovarian ablation, and type of chemotherapy.
Results
After a median follow-up of 8.2 years, RFS events had occurred in 224 out of 1235 (18.1%) concurrently treated women and 129 out of 608 (21.2%) sequentially treated women (adjusted-HR 0.91; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67–1.24;
P
= 0.580). Deaths occurred in 182/1235 (14.7%) concurrently treated women and 104/608 (17.1%) sequentially treated women (adjusted-HR 0.92; 95% CI 0.65–1.29;
P
= 0.635).
Conclusions
The results of this population-based study are consistent with earlier randomized trials, demonstrating a non-significant difference in outcome for concurrently treated women compared to those who were treated sequentially, suggesting both options are justified.
The association between the disease-free interval (DFI) and survival after a locoregional recurrence (LRR) or second primary (SP) breast cancer remains uncertain. The objective of this study is to ...clarify this association to obtain more information on expected prognosis. Women first diagnosed with early breast cancer between 2003-2006 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. LRRs and SP tumours within five years of first diagnosis were examined. The five-year period was subsequently divided into three equal intervals. Prognostic significance of the DFI on survival after a LRR or SP tumour was determined using Kaplan-Meier estimates and multivariable Cox regression analysis. Follow-up was complete until January 1, 2014. A total of 37,278 women was included in the analysis. LRRs or SP tumours were diagnosed in 890 (2,4%) and 897 (2,4%) respectively. Longer DFI was strongly and independently related to an improved survival after a LRR (long versus short: HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.48-0.88; medium versus short HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.65-1.01). Other factors related to improved survival after LRR were younger age (<70 years) and surgical removal of the recurrence. No significant association was found between DFI and survival after SP tumours. This is the first study to explore the association between the DFI and survival after recurrence in a nationwide population-based cancer registry. The DFI before a LRR is an independent prognostic factor for survival, with a longer DFI predicting better prognosis.
Background
Despite the potential for residual lymph node metastases after a negative or positive sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB), breast cancer patients rarely experience regional recurrences ...(RRs). This study aimed to quantify the effects of nonsurgical treatments on RR incidence among SLNB-negative (SLNB N0) breast cancer patients.
Methods
All primary SLNB N0-staged breast cancer patients with a diagnosis between 2005 and 2008 and 5-year follow-up data on recurrences were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. The cumulative incidence function (CIF) for RR was calculated as the first event at 5 years, taking into account any other first-event (local or distant recurrence, contralateral breast cancer, or death) as competing risk. Cox regression analysis was used to model the cause-specific hazard of RR developing as the first event to quantify the effect of adjuvant systemic therapy and whole-breast radiotherapy (RT) on RR incidence at 5 years.
Results
The study included 13,512 patients. Of these patients, 162 experienced an RR. The CIF of RR at 5 years was 1.3% (95% confidence interval CI, 1.1–1.5%), whereas the CIFs for death and other events were 4.4% and 9.5%, respectively. Cox regression analysis showed hazard ratios (HRs) of 0.46 (95% CI 0.33–0.64), 0.31 (95% CI 0.18–0.55), and 0.40 (95% CI 0.24–0.67) respectively for patients treated by RT as a routine part of breast-conserving therapy (BCT), chemotherapy, and hormonal therapy.
Conclusion
RT as routine part of BCT, chemotherapy, and hormonal therapy independently exerted a mitigating effect on the risk for the development of RR. The three methods at least halved the risk.
Purpose
The COVID-19 pandemic had a major impact on the health services worldwide. We aimed to investigate the impact of the pandemic on colorectal cancer (CRC) care in the Netherlands in 2020.
...Methods
CRC patients, diagnosed in 2018–2020 in the Netherlands, were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). The year 2020 was divided in four periods reflecting COVID-19 developments in the Netherlands (pre-COVID, 1st peak, recovery period, 2nd peak) and compared with the same periods in 2018/2019. Patient characteristics and treatment were compared using the Chi-squared test. Median time between diagnosis and treatment, and between (neo)adjuvant therapy and surgery were analyzed by the Mann–Whitney
U
test.
Results
In total, 38,021 CRC patients were diagnosed in 2018/2019 (
n
= 26,816) and 2020 (
n
= 11,205). Median time between diagnosis and initial treatment decreased on average 4 days and median time between neoadjuvant radiotherapy and surgery in clinical stage II or III rectal cancer patients increased on average 34 days during the three COVID-19 periods compared to the same periods of 2018/2019. The proportion of colon cancer patients that underwent elective surgery significantly decreased with 3.0% during the 1st peak. No differences were found in the proportion of patients who received (neo)adjuvant therapy, systemic therapy, or no anti-cancer treatment.
Conclusion
Only minor changes in the care for CRC patients occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, mostly during the 1
st
peak. In conclusion, the impact on CRC care in the Netherlands was found to be limited. However, long-term effects cannot be precluded.
Background:
The COVID-19 pandemic impacted cancer diagnosis and treatment. However, little is known about end-of-life cancer care during the pandemic.
Aim:
To investigate potentially inappropriate ...end-of-life hospital care for cancer patients before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Design:
Retrospective population-based cohort study using data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and the Dutch National Hospital Care Registration. Potentially inappropriate care in the last month of life (chemotherapy administration, >1 emergency room contact, >1 hospitalization, hospitalization >14 days, intensive care unit admission or hospital death) was compared between four COVID-19 periods and corresponding periods in 2018/2019.
Participants:
A total of 112,919 cancer patients (⩾18 years) who died between January 2018 and May 2021 were included.
Results:
Fewer patients received potentially inappropriate end-of-life care during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to previous years, especially during the first COVID-19 peak (22.4% vs 26.0%). Regression analysis showed lower odds of potentially inappropriate end-of-life care during all COVID-19 periods (between OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.74–0.88 and OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.87–0.97) after adjustment for age, sex and cancer type. For the individual indicators, fewer patients experienced multiple or long hospitalizations, intensive care unit admission or hospital death during the pandemic.
Conclusions:
Cancer patients received less potentially inappropriate end-of-life care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Because several factors may have contributed, it is unclear whether this reflects better quality care. However, these findings raise important questions about what pandemic-induced changes in care practices can help provide appropriate end-of-life care for future patients in the context of increasing patient numbers and limited resources.
PDF
