Agreement Between Self-Reported Breast Cancer Treatment and Medical Records in a Population-Based Breast Cancer Family Registry

2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (21) ◽  
pp. 4679-4686 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly-Anne Phillips ◽  
Roger L. Milne ◽  
Saundra Buys ◽  
Michael L. Friedlander ◽  
John H. Ward ◽  
...  

Purpose Although self-report data on treatment for breast cancer are collected in some large epidemiologic studies, their accuracy is unknown. Methods As part of a population-based Breast Cancer Family Registry, questionnaires on initial breast cancer treatment and subsequent recurrence were mailed to Australian women diagnosed between 1991 and 1998. These self-report data were validated against medical records for 895 women. Results The median recall period was 3.2 years, mean age at diagnosis was 44 years, and 81% of women had early-stage breast cancer. Agreement between the two data sources was very high for general questions about type of treatment (100%, 99%, 99%, and 94% for surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, respectively). For more specific questions about details of each treatment received, agreement was: for radiation therapy, 96% and 99% for radiation to the breast and chest wall, respectively; for surgery, 83%, 97%, and 88% for lumpectomy, mastectomy, and lymph node dissection, respectively; for hormonal therapy, 94% for tamoxifen; and for chemotherapy, range between 76% and 93%. There was 97% agreement about whether there had been a recurrence, and agreement about the location of recurrence was at least 90% for all sites. Agreement regarding stage at diagnosis was 62%, with discrepancies mostly due to women with locoregional disease incorrectly reporting distant spread. Conclusion This self-report questionnaire can be used to collect accurate data on broad categories of initial breast cancer treatment and recurrence, and even for more detailed information on specifics of treatment and site of recurrence.

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (34) ◽  
pp. 4505-4509 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allison W. Kurian ◽  
Gail D. Gong ◽  
Esther M. John ◽  
David A. Johnston ◽  
Anna Felberg ◽  
...  

Purpose Women with germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations have five- to 20-fold increased risks of developing breast and ovarian cancer. A recent study claimed that women testing negative for their family-specific BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation (noncarriers) have a five-fold increased risk of breast cancer. We estimated breast cancer risks for noncarriers by using a population-based sample of patients with breast cancer and their female first-degree relatives (FDRs). Patients and Methods Patients were women with breast cancer and their FDRs enrolled in the population-based component of the Breast Cancer Family Registry; patients with breast cancer were tested for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations, as were FDRs of identified mutation carriers. We used segregation analysis to fit a model that accommodates familial correlation in breast cancer risk due to unobserved shared risk factors. Results We studied 3,047 families; 160 had BRCA1 and 132 had BRCA2 mutations. There was no evidence of increased breast cancer risk for noncarriers of identified mutations compared with FDRs from families without BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations: relative risk was 0.39 (95% CI, 0.04 to 3.81). Residual breast cancer correlation within families was strong, suggesting substantial risk heterogeneity in women without BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations, with some 3.4% of them accounting for roughly one third of breast cancer cases. Conclusion These results support the practice of advising noncarriers that they do not have any increase in breast cancer risk attributable to the family-specific BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation.


2019 ◽  
Vol 121 (8) ◽  
pp. 719-721 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadom Safi ◽  
Antoinette Anazodo ◽  
Jan E. Dickinson ◽  
Kei Lui ◽  
Alex Y. Wang ◽  
...  

The Breast ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 26 ◽  
pp. 80-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kaisu Ojala ◽  
Tuomo J. Meretoja ◽  
Johanna Mattson ◽  
Päivi Salminen-Peltola ◽  
Suvi Leutola ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (15) ◽  
pp. 1513-1520 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne S. Reiner ◽  
Julia Sisti ◽  
Esther M. John ◽  
Charles F. Lynch ◽  
Jennifer D. Brooks ◽  
...  

Purpose The Women’s Environmental Cancer and Radiation Epidemiology (WECARE) study demonstrated the importance of breast cancer family history on contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk, even for noncarriers of deleterious BRCA1/2 mutations. With the completion of WECARE II, updated risk estimates are reported. Additional analyses that exclude women negative for deleterious mutations in ATM, CHEK2*1100delC, and PALB2 were performed. Patients and Methods The WECARE Study is a population-based case-control study that compared 1,521 CBC cases with 2,212 individually matched unilateral breast cancer (UBC) controls. Participants were younger than age 55 years when diagnosed with a first invasive breast cancer between 1985 and 2008. Women were interviewed about breast cancer risk factors, including family history. A subset of women was screened for deleterious mutations in BRCA1/2, ATM, CHEK2*1100delC, and PALB2. Rate ratios (RRs) were estimated using multivariable conditional logistic regression. Cumulative absolute risks (ARs) were estimated by combining RRs from the WECARE Study and population-based SEER*Stat cancer incidence data. Results Women with any first-degree relative with breast cancer had a 10-year AR of 8.1% for CBC (95% CI, 6.7% to 9.8%). Risks also were increased if the relative was diagnosed at an age younger than 40 years (10-year AR, 13.5%; 95% CI, 8.8% to 20.8%) or with CBC (10-year AR, 14.1%; 95% CI, 9.5% to 20.7%). These risks are comparable with those seen in BRCA1/2 deleterious mutation carriers (10-year AR, 18.4%; 95% CI, 16.0% to 21.3%). In the subset of women who tested negative for deleterious mutations in BRCA1/2, ATM, CHEK2*1100delC, and PALB2, estimates were unchanged. Adjustment for known breast cancer single-nucleotide polymorphisms did not affect estimates. Conclusion Breast cancer family history confers a high CBC risk, even after excluding women with deleterious mutations. Clinicians are urged to use detailed family histories to guide treatment and future screening decisions for young women with breast cancer.


2013 ◽  
Vol 37 (6) ◽  
pp. 968-972 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda de Munck ◽  
Annemiek Kwast ◽  
Dick Reiding ◽  
Geertruida H. de Bock ◽  
Renée Otter ◽  
...  

JAMA Oncology ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 267 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anouk J. M. Rombouts ◽  
Jonathan Huising ◽  
Niek Hugen ◽  
Sabine Siesling ◽  
Philip Martin Poortmans ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document