secondary breast cancer
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

77
(FIVE YEARS 22)

H-INDEX

8
(FIVE YEARS 1)

BMC Cancer ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda Rainey ◽  
Daniëlle van der Waal ◽  
Louise S. Donnelly ◽  
Jake Southworth ◽  
David P. French ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The Predicting Risk of Cancer at Screening (PROCAS) study provided women who were eligible for breast cancer screening in Greater Manchester (United Kingdom) with their 10-year risk of breast cancer, i.e., low (≤1.5%), average (1.5–4.99%), moderate (5.-7.99%) or high (≥8%). The aim of this study is to explore which factors were associated with women’s uptake of screening and prevention recommendations. Additionally, we evaluated women’s organisational preferences regarding tailored screening. Methods A total of 325 women with a self-reported low (n = 60), average (n = 125), moderate (n = 80), or high (n = 60) risk completed a two-part web-based survey. The first part contained questions about personal characteristics. For the second part women were asked about uptake of early detection and preventive behaviours after breast cancer risk communication. Additional questions were posed to explore preferences regarding the organisation of risk-stratified screening and prevention. We performed exploratory univariable and multivariable regression analyses to assess which factors were associated with uptake of primary and secondary breast cancer preventive behaviours, stratified by breast cancer risk. Organisational preferences are presented using descriptive statistics. Results Self-reported breast cancer risk predicted uptake of (a) supplemental screening and breast self-examination, (b) risk-reducing medication and (c) preventive lifestyle behaviours. Further predictors were (a) having a first degree relative with breast cancer, (b) higher age, and (c) higher body mass index (BMI). Women’s organisational preferences for tailored screening emphasised a desire for more intensive screening for women at increased risk by further shortening the screening interval and moving the starting age forward. Conclusions Breast cancer risk communication predicts the uptake of key tailored primary and secondary preventive behaviours. Effective communication of breast cancer risk information is essential to optimise the population-wide impact of tailored screening.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sally Anne Pearson ◽  
Sally Taylor ◽  
Antonia Marsden ◽  
Janelle Yorke

Abstract Background It is well recognised that access and receipt of appropriate guideline recommended treatment with systemic anti-cancer therapies for secondary breast cancer is a key determinant in overall survival. Where there is disparity in access this may result in unwarranted variation and disparity in outcomes. Individual, clinical and wider contextual factors have been associated with these disparities, however this remains poorly understood for women with secondary breast cancer. The purpose of the review is to examine individual, clinical and contextual factors which influence access to evidence-based systemic anti-cancer therapies for women with secondary breast cancer. This will include barriers and facilitators for access and receipt of treatment and an exploration of women and clinicians experience and perspectives on access. Methods A mixed methods approach with a segregated design will be used to examine and explore factors which influence access to systemic anti-cancer therapies for women with secondary breast cancer. Electronic databases to be searched from January 2000 onwards will be EBSCO CINAHL Plus, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, PsychINFO and the Cochrane Library and JBI database. This will include NHS Evidence which will be searched for unpublished studies and gray literature. Title and abstract citations and full-text articles will be screened by the author and second reviewer. Data will be extracted by the author and validated by the second reviewer. An overarching synthesis will be produced which brings together quantitative and qualitative findings. Methodological quality and risk of bias will be assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Discussion Understanding individual, clinical and wider contextual factors associated with access and receipt of systemic anti-cancer therapies for secondary breast cancer is a complex phenomenon. These will be examined to determine any association with access. Review findings will be used to guide future research in this area and the development of an evidence-based service level intervention designed to address unwarranted variation in access based upon the Medical Research Council (MRC) approach to the development, implementation and evaluation of complex interventions. Systematic review registration The review protocol has been registered in PROSPERO CRD42020196490.


Author(s):  
Candice A. M. Sauder ◽  
Qian Li ◽  
Richard J. Bold ◽  
Kathryn J. Ruddy ◽  
Theresa H. M. Keegan

Author(s):  
Candice A. M. Sauder ◽  
Qian Li ◽  
Richard J. Bold ◽  
Kathryn J. Ruddy ◽  
Theresa H. M. Keegan

Abstract Background Secondary cancers account for 16% of all new cancer diagnoses, with breast cancer (BC) the most common secondary cancer. We have shown that secondary BC has unique characteristics and decreased survival compared with primary BC in adolescent and young adults (AYA; 15–39 years old). However, older BC populations are less well studied. Methods Females (age ≥ 15 years) diagnosed with primary BC during 1991–2015 (n = 377,167) and enrolled in the California Cancer Registry were compared with those with secondary BC (n = 37,625) by age (15–39, 40–64, ≥ 65 years). We examined BC-specific survival (BCSS) accounting for other causes of death as a competing risk using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression. Results Most secondary BC patients were of older age (15–39, n = 777; 40–64, n = 15,848; ≥ 65, n = 21,000). Compared with primary BC treatment, secondary BCs were more often treated with mastectomy and less often with chemotherapy and/or radiation. BCSS was shorter in secondary BC patients than primary BC patients, but the survival difference between secondary and primary BC diminished with age [15–39 hazard ratio (HR): 2.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.83–2.39; 40–64 HR: 1.51; 95% CI 1.44–1.58; ≥ 65 HR: 1.14; 95% CI 1.10–1.19]. Survival differences were most pronounced in women with hormone receptor positive disease and Hispanic and Asian/Pacific Islanders 40–64 years of age. Conclusions When BC is diagnosed following a prior cancer of any organ site, BCSS is worse than when compared with patients for whom BC is the primary diagnosis, suggesting that we may need to tailor our treatments for women with secondary BC.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document