Outcome analysis of primary breast cancer patients who declined adjuvant chemotherapy—results from the prospective multi-center BRENDA II study

Author:

Leinert ElenaORCID,Schwentner Lukas,Janni Wolfgang,Wöckel Achim,Herbert Saskia-L.,Herr Daniel,Kühn Thorsten,Flock Felix,Felberbaum Ricardo,Kreienberg Rolf,Fink Visnja,Dayan Davut,Ernst Kristina,Singer Susanne,

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundThis study examined 5-year overall, recurrence and distant metastasis-free survival (OS, RFS, MFS) of high- and intermediate-risk breast cancer (BC) patients who declined guideline-recommended adjuvant chemotherapy (CHT).MethodsIn the prospective multicenter cohort study BRENDA II, patients with primary BC were sampled over a period of four years (2009–2012). A multi-professional team (tumorboard) discussed recommendation for adjuvant CHT according to the German guideline. Potential differences in 5 year survival were analyzed using Kaplan–Meier curves and Cox regression. The hazard ratios (HR) were adjusted for age, Charlson Comorbidity Score, American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) physical status classification, and endocrine therapy.ResultsA total of 759 patients were enrolled of which 688 could receive CHT according to the guidelines (n = 219 had a clear indication, inn = 304 it was possible). For 360 patients, the tumorboard advised to perform CHT, for 304 it advised against and in 24 cases, no decision was documented. Of those with a positive suggestion, 83% received CHT. Until 5 years after diagnosis, 57 patients were deceased, 41 had at least one distant metastasis and 29 a recurrence. There was no evidence for differences in OS and MFS in patients who declined CHT despite tumorboard recommendation (HR 3.5, 95% CI 0.8–15.1 for OS, HR 1.9, 95% 0.6–6.6 for MFS). Patients who received CHT had significantly better 5-year RFS compared to those who declined (HR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1–0.9,p = 0.03). There was no evidence for different survival in those who had no CHT because of comorbidity and those who declined actively, neither for OS, MFS nor RFS.ConclusionThe prospective BRENDA II study demonstrates benefit in RFS by guideline adherence in adjuvant breast cancer treatment, indicating prospectively the value of internationally validated guidelines in breast cancer care.

Funder

Universitätsklinikum Ulm

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Pharmacology (medical),Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and imaging,Oncology,General Medicine

Reference30 articles.

1. Gloeckler Ries LA, Reichman ME, Lewis DR, Hankey BF, Edwards BK. Cancer survival and incidence from the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER) program. Oncologist. 2003;8(6):541–52. https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.8-6-541.

2. Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Gelber RD, Coates AS, Thürlimann B, Senn HJ; 10th St. Gallen conference. Progress and promise: highlights of the international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer. Ann Oncol. 2007;18(7):1133–44. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdm271.

3. Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie (Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft, Deutsche Krebshilfe, AWMF): S3-Leitlinie Früherkennung, Diagnose, Therapie und Nachsorge des Mammakarzinoms, Version 4.1,2018 AWMF Registernummer: 032-045OL, http://www.leitlinienprogramm-onkologie.de/leitlinien/mammakarzinom/

4. Schwentner L, Van Ewijk R, Kurzeder C, Hoffmann I, König J, Kreienberg R, et al. Participation in adjuvant clinical breast cancer trials: does study participation improve survival compared to guideline adherent adjuvant treatment? A retrospective multi-centre cohort study of 9,433 patients. Eur J Cancer. 2013;49(3):553–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2012.08.011.

5. Wollschlager D, Meng X, Wockel A, Janni W, Kreienberg R, Blettner M, et al. Comorbidity-dependent adherence to guidelines and survival in breast cancer-Is there a role for guideline adherence in comorbid breast cancer patients? A retrospective cohort study with 2137 patients. Breast J. 2018;24(2):120–7.

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3