Abstract
BackgroundIn the UK there is variation in the treatment of older women with breast cancer, with up to 40% receiving primary endocrine therapy (PET), which is associated with inferior survival. Case mix and patient choice may explain some variation in practice but clinician preference may also be important. MethodsA multicentre prospective cohort study of women aged >70 with operable breast cancer. Patient characteristics (health status, age, tumour characteristics, treatment allocation and decision-making preference) were analysed to identify whether treatment variation persisted following case-mix adjustment. Expected case-mix adjusted surgery rates were derived by logistic regression using the variables age, co-morbidity, tumour stage and grade. Concordance between patients’ preferred and actual decision-making style was assessed and associations between age, treatment and decision-making style calculated. ResultsWomen (median age 77, range 70–102) were recruited from 56 UK breast units between 2013 and 2018. Of 2854/3369 eligible women with oestrogen receptor positive breast cancer, 2354 were treated with surgery and 500 with PET. Unadjusted surgery rates varied between hospitals, with 23/56 units falling outside the 95% confidence intervals on funnel plots. Adjusting for case mix reduced, but did not eliminate, this variation between hospitals (10/56 units had practice outside the 95% confidence intervals). Patients treated with PET had more patient-centred decisions compared to surgical patients (42.2% vs 28.4%, p < 0.001). ConclusionsThis study demonstrates variation in treatment selection thresholds for older women with breast cancer. Health stratified guidelines on thresholds for PET would help reduce variation, although patient preference should still be respected.
Highlights
In the UK there is variation in the treatment of older women with breast cancer, with up to 40% receiving primary endocrine therapy (PET), which is associated with inferior survival
Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the probability of a woman undergoing surgical treatment based on patient level factors, including age, Charlson co-morbidity index, activities of daily living (ADL), instrumental activities of daily living (IADL), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, tumour size and grade
Units with a low rate of surgery following adjustment for case mix, had significantly higher rates of patient-centred actual decision-making style (35.2% vs 11.8%; p < 0.001). In this large prospective cohort study of the treatment of older women breast cancer across 56 units in England, 17.5% (500/2854) of ER þ patients were treated with PET, which is lower than figures published by similar recent audits; most recently, the National Audit of Breast Cancer in Older Patients found that 24% of women aged 70þ years with early ER þ breast cancer were treated with PET between 2014 and 2017 [12]
Summary
In the UK there is variation in the treatment of older women with breast cancer, with up to 40% receiving primary endocrine therapy (PET), which is associated with inferior survival. Patient characteristics (health status, age, tumour characteristics, treatment allocation and decision-making preference) were analysed to identify whether treatment variation persisted following case-mix adjustment. Expected case-mix adjusted surgery rates were derived by logistic regression using the variables age, co-morbidity, tumour stage and grade. Of 2854/3369 eligible women with oestrogen receptor positive breast cancer, 2354 were treated with surgery and 500 with PET. Adjusting for case mix reduced, but did not eliminate, this variation between hospitals (10/56 units had practice outside the 95% confidence intervals). Conclusions: This study demonstrates variation in treatment selection thresholds for older women with breast cancer. Health stratified guidelines on thresholds for PET would help reduce variation, patient preference should still be respected
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
