Background: Treatment decisions concerning older patients can be very challenging and individualised treatment plans are often required in this very heterogeneous group. In 2015 we have implemented... Show moreBackground: Treatment decisions concerning older patients can be very challenging and individualised treatment plans are often required in this very heterogeneous group. In 2015 we have implemented a routine clinical care pathway for older patients in need of intensive treatment, including a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) that was used to support clinical decision making. An ongoing prospective cohort study, the Triaging Elderly Needing Treatment (TENT) study, has also been initiated in 2016 for participants in this clinical care pathway, to study associations between geriatric characteristics and outcomes of treatment that are relevant to older patients. The aim of this paper is to describe the implementation and rationale of the routine clinical care pathway and design of the TENT study.Methods: A routine clinical care pathway has been designed and implemented in multiple hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients aged >= 70 years who are candidates for intensive treatments, such as chemotherapy, (chemo-)radiation therapy or major surgery, undergo frailty screening based on the Geriatric 8 (G-8) questionnaire and the Six-Item Cognitive Impairment Test (6CIT). If screening reveals potential frailty, a CGA is performed. All patients are invited to participate in the TENT study. Clinical data and blood samples for biomarker studies are collected at baseline. During follow-up, information about treatment complications, hospitalisations, functional decline, quality of life and mortality is collected. The primary outcome is the composite endpoint of functional decline or mortality at 1 year.Discussion: Implementation of a routine clinical care pathway for older patients in need of intensive treatment provides the opportunity to study associations between determinants of frailty and outcomes of treatment. Results of the TENT study will support individualised treatment for future patients.Trial registration: The study is retrospectively registered at the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR), trial number NL81 07. Date of registration: 22-10-2019. Show less
Purpose: Individualized selection of patients with early-stage hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancer for extended endocrine therapy (EET) is required to balance modest gains in outcome with... Show morePurpose: Individualized selection of patients with early-stage hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancer for extended endocrine therapy (EET) is required to balance modest gains in outcome with toxicities of prolonged use. This study examined the Breast Cancer Index [BCI; HOXB13/IL17BR ratio (H/I)] as a predictive biomarker of EET benefit in patients from the Investigation on the Duration of Extended Adjuvant Letrozole trial.Experimental Design: BCI was tested in primary tumor specimens from 908 patients randomized to receive 2.5 versus 5 years of extended letrozole. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free interval. Cox models and likelihood ratios tested the interaction between HET and BCI (H/I).Results: BCI (H/I)-high significantly predicted benefit from extended letrozole in the overall cohort [HR 0.42; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.21-0.84; P = 0.011] and any aromatase inhibitor subset [HR 0.34; 95% CI, 0.16-0.73; P - 0.004), whereas BCI (H/I)-low patients did not derive significant benefit (HR 0.95; 95% CI, 0.58-1.56; P - 0.84 and HR 0.90; 95% CI, 053-1.55; P - 0.71, respectively) treatment to hiomarker interaction was significant (P = 0.045, P = 0.025, respectively). BCI identified approximately 50% of patients with clinically high-risk disease that did not benefit, and with clinically low-risk disease that derived significant benefit, from an additional 2.5 years of EEL.Conclusions: BCI (H/I) predicted preferential benefit from 5 versus 2.5 years of EET and identified patients with improved outcomes from completing 10 years of adjuvant endocrine therapy. Findings expand the clinical utility of BCI (H/I) to a broader range of patients and beyond prognostic risk factors as a predictive endocrine response biomarker for early-stage HR+ breast cancer. Show less
Purpose: Individualized selection of patients with early stage hormone receptor positive (HR+) breast cancer for extended endocrine therapy (EET) are required to balance modest gains in outcome... Show morePurpose: Individualized selection of patients with early stage hormone receptor positive (HR+) breast cancer for extended endocrine therapy (EET) are required to balance modest gains in outcome with toxicities of prolonged use. This study examined the Breast Cancer Index (BCI) [HOXB13/IL17BR ratio (H/I)] as a predictive biomarker of EET benefit in patients from the Investigation on the Duration of Extended Adjuvant Letrozole (IDEAL) trial.Experimental design: BCI was tested in primary tumor specimens from 908 patients randomized to receive 2.5 vs 5 years of extended letrozole. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free interval (RFI). Cox models and likelihood ratios tested the interaction between EET and BCI (H/I).Results: BCI (H/I)-High significantly predicted benefit from extended letrozole in the Overall cohort (HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.21-0.84; P=0.011) and Any AI subset (HR 0.34, 0.16-0.73; P=0.004), whereas BCI (H/I)-Low patients did not derive significant benefit (HR 0.95, 0.58-1.56; P=0.84, HR 0.90, 0.53-1.55; P=0.71, respectively); treatment to biomarker interaction was significant (P=0.045, P=0.025, respectively). BCI identified ~50% of patients with clinically high-risk disease that did not benefit, and with clinically low-risk disease that derived significant benefit, from an additional 2.5 years of EET.Conclusions: BCI (H/I) predicted preferential benefit from 5 vs 2.5 years of EET and identified patients with improved outcomes from completing 10 years of adjuvant endocrine therapy. Findings expand the clinical utility of BCI (H/I) to a broader range of patients and beyond prognostic risk factors as a predictive endocrine response biomarker for early stage HR+ breast cancer. Show less
PURPOSEMost distant recurrences (DRs) in women with hormone receptor–positive breast cancer occur after 5 years from diagnosis. The Clinical Treatment Score post-5 years (CTS5) estimates DRs after... Show morePURPOSEMost distant recurrences (DRs) in women with hormone receptor–positive breast cancer occur after 5 years from diagnosis. The Clinical Treatment Score post-5 years (CTS5) estimates DRs after 5 years of adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET). The aim of this study was to externally validate the CTS5 as a prognostic/predictive tool.METHODSThe CTS5 categorizes patients who have been disease free for 5 years into low, intermediate, and high risk and calculates an absolute risk for developing DRs between 5 and 10 years. Discrimination and calibration were assessed using data from the TEAM and IDEAL trials. The predictive value of the CTS5 was tested with data from the IDEAL trial.RESULTSA total of 5,895 patients from the TEAM trial and 1,591 patients from the IDEAL trial were included. When assessing the CTS5 discrimination, significantly more DRs were found at 10 years after diagnosis in the CTS5 high- and intermediate-risk groups than in the low-risk group (hazard ratio, 5.7 [95% CI, 3.6 to 8.8] and 2.8 [95% CI, 1.7 to 4.4], respectively). In low- and intermediate-risk patients, the CTS5-predicted DR rates were higher, although not statistically significantly so, than observed rates. However, in high-risk patients, the CTS5-predicted DR rates were significantly higher than observed rates (29% v 19%, respectively; P < .001). The CTS5 was not predictive for extended AET duration.CONCLUSIONThe CTS5 score as applied to patients treated in the TEAM and IDEAL cohorts discriminates between risk categories but overestimates the risk of late DRs in high-risk patients. Therefore, the numerical risk assessment from the CTS5 calculator in its current form should be interpreted with caution when used in daily clinical practice, particularly in high-risk patients. Show less
Introduction: Approximately 20% of older patients with breast cancer either present with metastatic disease or develop distant metastases after early breast cancer. The aims of this study were to... Show moreIntroduction: Approximately 20% of older patients with breast cancer either present with metastatic disease or develop distant metastases after early breast cancer. The aims of this study were to assess the prevalence of psychosocial problems in older patients with metastatic breast cancer, and to assess longitudinal changes in functional status, psychosocial functioning, and quality of life.Methods: For this prospective cohort study, patients with metastatic breast cancer aged 70 years and older were recruited in four Dutch hospitals. A baseline geriatric assessment was performed evaluating somatic, functional and psychosocial domains. Self-administered questionnaires were performed at baseline, three and six months: the Groningen Activity Restriction Scale, Geriatric Depression Scale. Loneliness scale, Apathy scale, Distress Thermometer and EORTC-QLQ-C30. Longitudinal changes on these scales were assessed by performing crude and adjusted linear mixed models.Results: Of the 100 patients that were included and underwent a geriatric assessment, 85 patients completed the baseline self-administered questionnaires. Almost half of the patients (46%) had depressive symptoms, and up to 64% experienced distress. Apathy was present in 53%, and 36% experienced loneliness. Three- and six-month questionnaires were completed by 77 and 72 patients, respectively. Although a significant increase in loneliness between baseline and six months was seen, this size of this change was not clinically relevant. No other longitudinal changes were found.Conclusion: The prevalence of distress, depressive symptoms, apathy and loneliness in older patients with metastatic breast cancer is high. Timely detection, for which a geriatric assessment is effective, could potentially improve quality of life. (C) 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Show less
Breugom, A.J.; Bastiaannet, E.; Guren, M.G.; Korner, H.; Boelens, P.G.; Dekker, F.W.; ... ; Velde, C.J.H. van de 2020
Background: The potential benefit of surgery of the primary tumour in patients with asymptomatic metastatic colorectal cancer is debated. This EURECCA international comparison analyses treatment... Show moreBackground: The potential benefit of surgery of the primary tumour in patients with asymptomatic metastatic colorectal cancer is debated. This EURECCA international comparison analyses treatment strategies and overall survival in the Netherlands and Norway in patients with incurable metastatic colorectal cancer.Methods: National cohorts (2007-2013) from the Netherlands and Norway including all patients with synchronous metastatic colorectal cancer were compared on treatment strategy and overall survival. Using country as an instrumental variable, we assessed the effect of different treatment strategies on mortality in the first year.Results: Of 21,196 patients (16,144 Dutch and 5052 Norwegian), 38.6% Dutch and 51.5% (p < 0.001) Norwegian patients underwent resection of the primary tumour. In the Netherlands, 58.2% received chemotherapy compared with 21.4% in Norway. Radiotherapy was given in 9.5% of Dutch patients and 7.2% of Norwegian patients. Using the Netherlands as reference, the adjusted HR for overall survival was 0.96 (95% CI 0.93-0.99; p = 0.024). Instrumental variable analysis showed an adjusted OR of 1.00 (95% CI 0.99-1.02; p = 0.741).Conclusions: Treatment strategies varied significantly between the Netherlands and Norway, with more surgery and less radiotherapy in Norway. Adjusted overall survival was better in Norway for all patients and patients <75 years, but not for patients >= 75 years. Instrumental variable analysis showed no benefit in one-year mortality for a treatment strategy with a higher proportion of surgery and a lower proportion of radiotherapy. Our findings emphasise the need for further research to select patients with incurable metastatic colorectal cancer for different treatment options. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd, BASO similar to The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved. Show less
Objective This study aimed to assess psychological functioning, quality of life, and regret about screening after a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and subsequent colonoscopy, and to... Show moreObjective This study aimed to assess psychological functioning, quality of life, and regret about screening after a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and subsequent colonoscopy, and to evaluate changes over time.Methods This is a prospective cohort study. Individuals aged 55 to 75 with a positive FIT that were referred for colonoscopy between July 2017 and November 2018, were invited to complete questionnaires related to psychological distress and health-related quality of life at three predefined time points: before colonoscopy, after histopathology result notification, and after 6 months. Four questionnaires were used: the Psychological Consequences Questionnaire (PCQ), the six-item Cancer Worry Scale (CWS), the Decision Regret Scale (DRS), and the 36-item Short-Form (SF-36).Results A total of 1066 participants out of 2151 eligible individuals were included. Patients with cancer showed a significant increase in psychological dysfunction (P = .01) and cancer worry (P = .008) after colonoscopy result notification, and a decline to pre-colonoscopy measurements after 6 months. In the no-cancer groups, psychological dysfunction and cancer worry significantly decreased over time (P < .05) but there was no ongoing decline. After 6 months, 17% of participants with no cancer experienced high level of cancer worry (CWS >= 10). Yet, only 5% reported high level of regret about screening participation (DRS > 25). A good global quality of life was reported in participants with no cancer.Conclusion Some psychological distress remains up to 6 months after colonoscopy in participants who tested false-positive in the Dutch bowel cancer screening program. Show less
Boer, A.Z. de; Glas, N.A. de; Marang-van De Mheen, P.J.; Dekkers, O.M.; Siesling, S.; Munck, L. de; ... ; Bastiaannet, E. 2020
Background Surgery is increasingly being omitted in older patients with operable breast cancer in the Netherlands. Although omission of surgery can be considered in frail older patients, it may... Show moreBackground Surgery is increasingly being omitted in older patients with operable breast cancer in the Netherlands. Although omission of surgery can be considered in frail older patients, it may lead to inferior outcomes in non-frail patients. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of omission of surgery on relative and overall survival in older patients with operable breast cancer.Methods Patients aged 80 years or older diagnosed with stage I-II hormone receptor-positive breast cancer between 2003 and 2009 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. An instrumental variable approach was applied to minimize confounding, using hospital variation in rate of primary surgery. Relative and overall survival was compared between patients treated in hospitals with different rates of surgery.Results Overall, 6464 patients were included. Relative survival was lower for patients treated in hospitals with lower compared with higher surgical rates (90 center dot 2 versus 92 center dot 4 per cent respectively after 5 years; 71 center dot 6 versus 88 center dot 2 per cent after 10 years). The relative excess risk for patients treated in hospitals with lower surgical rates was 2 center dot 00 (95 per cent c.i. 1 center dot 17 to 3 center dot 40). Overall survival rates were also lower among patients treated in hospitals with lower compared with higher surgical rates (48 center dot 3 versus 51 center dot 3 per cent after 5 years; 15 center dot 0 versus 19 center dot 7 per cent after 10 years respectively; adjusted hazard ratio 1 center dot 07, 95 per cent c.i. 1 center dot 00 to 1 center dot 14).Conclusion Omission of surgery is associated with worse relative and overall survival in patients aged 80 years or more with stage I-II hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. Future research should focus on the effect on quality of life and physical functioning. Show less
Kooij, M.K. van der; Verdegaal, E.M.E.; Visser, M.; Bruin, L. de; Minne, C.E. van der; Meij, P.M.; ... ; Kapiteijn, E. 2020
IntroductionTreatment with anti-PD-1 immunotherapy does not lead to long-lasting clinical responses in approximately 60% of patients with metastatic melanoma. These refractory patients, however,... Show moreIntroductionTreatment with anti-PD-1 immunotherapy does not lead to long-lasting clinical responses in approximately 60% of patients with metastatic melanoma. These refractory patients, however, can still respond to treatment with tumour infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) and interferon-alpha (IFNa). A combination of TIL, pegylated-interferon-alpha (PEG-IFNa) and anti-PD-1 is expected to provide a safe, feasible and effective therapy for patients with metastatic melanoma, who are refractory to standard of care treatment options.Methods and analysisPatients are treated in two phases. In phase I, the safety of the combination TIL and anti-PD-1 is assessed (cohort 1) according to CTCAE 4.03 criteria. Subsequently, the safety of cotreatment with PEG-IFNa is tested in cohort 2. The efficacy will be evaluated in the second phase of the trial. Efficacy is evaluated according to RECIST 1.1 and immune-related response criteria. Clinical and immunological parameters will be evaluated for their relation with clinical responsiveness.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval of the trial was obtained from the Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects in the Netherlands. The trial results will be shared with the scientific community at (inter)national conferences and by publication in a peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration numberNCT03638375; Pre-results. Show less
Verdegaal, E.; Kooij, M.K. van der; Visser, M.; Minne, C. van der; Bruin, L. de; Meij, P.; ... ; Burg, S.H. van der 2020
Background Adoptive cell therapy (ACT) with tumor-reactive T cells has shown consistent clinical efficacy. We evaluated the response to ACT in combination with interferon alpha (IFNa)... Show moreBackground Adoptive cell therapy (ACT) with tumor-reactive T cells has shown consistent clinical efficacy. We evaluated the response to ACT in combination with interferon alpha (IFNa) preconditioning in patients with stage IV metastatic melanoma, most of which were progressive on cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 and/or programmed cell death protein 1 checkpoint blockade therapy. Methods Thirty-four patients were treated with ex vivo expanded tumor reactive T cells, derived from mixed lymphocyte autologous tumor cultures, or with autologous tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and evaluated for clinical response. Clinical and immunological parameters associated with response were also evaluated. Results Best overall response defined as clinical benefit, comprising either complete response, partial response or stable disease >6 months, was observed in 29% of the patients. Forty-three per cent of the 14 immunotherapy-naive patients and 20% of the 20 patients progressive on prior immunotherapy benefited from ACT. The overall survival (OS) was 90% versus 28.6% at 1 year and 46.7% versus 0% at 3 years follow-up, of responder and non-responder patients, respectively. Median OS was 36 versus 7 months, respectively. IFNa pretreatment resulted in leukopenia, neutropenia and lymphopenia, which was sustained during the treatment in clinical responders and associated with response. Differences in antigen specificity, but not in phenotype, cytokine profile or CD8+ T cell number of the ACT products correlated with clinical response. Cross-reactivity of the ACT products to one or more allogeneic human leukocyte antigen-matched melanoma cell lines was associated with short OS after treatment while the ACT products of very long-term survivors showed no cross-reactivity but recognized patient-specific neoantigens. Conclusion This study demonstrates that ACT in combination with a mild IFNa preconditioning regimen can induce clinical benefit even in immunotherapy pretreated patients, although with lower success than in immunotherapy-naive patients. ACT products comprising neoantigen reactivity may be more effective. Show less
Heil, J.; Kuerer, H.M.; Pfob, A.; Rauch, G.; Sinn, H.P.; Golatta, M.; ... ; Peeters, M.J.V. 2020
In patients with operable early breast cancer, neoadjuvant systemic treatment (NST) is a standard approach. Indications have expanded from downstaging of locally advanced breast cancer to... Show moreIn patients with operable early breast cancer, neoadjuvant systemic treatment (NST) is a standard approach. Indications have expanded from downstaging of locally advanced breast cancer to facilitate breast conservation, to in vivo drug-sensitivity testing. The pattern of response to NST is used to tailor systemic and locoregional treatment, that is, to escalate treatment in nonresponders and de-escalate treatment in responders. Here we discuss four questions that guide our current thinking about 'response-adjusted' surgery of the breast after NST. (i) What critical diagnostic outcome measures should be used when analyzing diagnostic tools to identify patients with pathologic complete response (pCR) after NST? (ii) How can we assess response with the least morbidity and best accuracy possible? (iii) What oncological consequences may ensue if we rely on a nonsurgical-generated diagnosis of, for example, minimally invasive biopsy proven pCR, knowing that we may miss minimal residual disease in some cases? (iv) How should we design clinical trials on de-escalation of surgical treatment after NST? Show less
Purpose In the Netherlands, radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is omitted in up to 30% of patients aged >= 75 years. Although omission of radiotherapy is considered an option for... Show morePurpose In the Netherlands, radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is omitted in up to 30% of patients aged >= 75 years. Although omission of radiotherapy is considered an option for older women treated with endocrine treatment, the majority of these patients do not receive systemic treatment following Dutch treatment guidelines. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of omission of radiotherapy on locoregional recurrence risk in this patient population.Methods Patients aged >= 75 years undergone BCS for T1-2N0 breast cancer diagnosed between 2003 and 2009 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. To minimize confounding by indication, hospital variation was used to assess the impact of radiotherapy-use on locoregional recurrence risk using cox proportional hazards regression. Hazards ratios with 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated.Results Overall, 2390 patients were included. Of the patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer, 39.3% received endocrine treatment. Five-year incidences of locoregional recurrence were 1.9%, 2.8%, and 3.0% in patients treated at hospitals with higher (average radiotherapy-use 96.0%), moderate (88.0%), and lower radiotherapy-use (72.2%) respectively, and nine-year incidences were 2.2%, 3.1%, and 3.2% respectively. Adjusted hazard ratios were 1.46 (95% CI 0.77-2.78) and 1.50 (95% CI 0.79-2.85) for patients treated at hospitals with moderate and lower radiotherapy-use, compared to patient treated at hospitals with higher radiotherapy-use.Conclusions Despite endocrine treatment in only 39.3%, locoregional recurrence risk was low, even in patients treated at hospitals with lower radiotherapy-use. This provides reasonable grounds to consider omission of radiotherapy in patients aged >= 75 years with T1-2N0 breast cancer. Show less
Objective Many treatment decisions are preference-sensitive and call for shared decision-making, notably when benefits are limited or uncertain, and harms impact quality of life. We explored if... Show moreObjective Many treatment decisions are preference-sensitive and call for shared decision-making, notably when benefits are limited or uncertain, and harms impact quality of life. We explored if clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) acknowledge preference-sensitive decisions in how they motivate and phrase their recommendations.Design We performed a qualitative analysis of the content of CPGs and verified the results in semistructured interviews with CPG panel members.Setting Dutch oncology CPGs issued in 2010 or later, concerning primary treatment with curative intent.Participants 14 CPG panel members.Main outcomes For treatment recommendations from six CPG modules, two researchers extracted the following: strength of recommendation in terms of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation and its consistency with the CPG text; completeness of presentation of benefits and harms; incorporation of patient preferences; statements on the panel's benefits-harm trade-off underlying recommendation; and advice on patient involvement in decision-making.Results We identified 32 recommendations, 18 were acknowledged preference-sensitive decisions. Three of 14 strong recommendations should have been weak based on the module text. The reporting of benefits and harms, and their probabilities, was sufficiently complete and clear to inform the strength of the recommendation in one of the six modules only. Numerical probabilities were seldom presented. None of the modules presented information on patient preferences. CPG panel's preferences were not made explicit, but appeared to have impacted 15 of 32 recommendations. Advice to involve patients and their preferences in decision-making was given for 20 recommendations (14 weak). Interviewees confirmed these findings. Explanations for lack of information were, for example, that clinicians know the information and that CPGs must be short. Explanations for trade-offs made were cultural-historical preferences, compliance with daily care, presumed role of CPGs and lack of time.Conclusions The motivation and phrasing of CPG recommendations do not stimulate choice awareness and a neutral presentation of options, thus hindering shared decision-making. Show less
Background. Breast cancer screening has been presented to women as mostly positive for decades, despite voices raising issues related to harms since its introduction. Public communications about... Show moreBackground. Breast cancer screening has been presented to women as mostly positive for decades, despite voices raising issues related to harms since its introduction. Public communications about breast cancer screening tended to use persuasive techniques aimed at maximizing uptake. Concern about the harm of overdetection is more recent, and awareness of overdetection among the public is limited. We aimed to assess the impact of extensive information on treatment following overdetection in breast screening on women's acceptance of screening, and to assess correlates of acceptance. Methods. We performed an online survey among women aged 45-75 from the general public in the Netherlands and Australia, asking women their maximum acceptable ratio of overdetection, per breast cancer death avoided, for four treatment scenarios (randomized order): mastectomy; lumpectomy; lumpectomy plus radiotherapy; lumpectomy plus radiotherapy and hormone therapy. The effect of treatment was assessed using General Linear Models, controlling for socio-demographics, experience, and psychological characteristics. Results. Four-hundred Australian and 403 Dutch women responded. Around half of the women would always screen, even at a 6:1 overdetection-to-death-avoided ratio. Acceptance was highest for the lumpectomy scenario, decreasing with more invasive treatment. In multivariate analyses the effect of treatment remained (p<0.001). Higher acceptance was seen for women with children (p=0.04), screening experience (p<0.001), and less understanding of overdetection (p<0.001). A learning effect was seen: acceptance was highest for the first scenario shown. Conclusions. Acceptance of overdetection was high, but decreased after the first scenario and with invasiveness of treatment. This provides a first indication that with more knowledge and understanding, women may move from uncritical acceptance of screening towards a more informed decision that involves a trade-off of the benefits and harms. Show less
Glas, N. de; Bastiaannet, E.; Boer, A. de; Siesling, S.; Liefers, G.J.; Portielje, J. 2019
PurposeThe number of older patients with breast cancer is rapidly increasing. A previous study showed that between 1990 and 2005, the survival of older patients with breast cancer did not improve... Show morePurposeThe number of older patients with breast cancer is rapidly increasing. A previous study showed that between 1990 and 2005, the survival of older patients with breast cancer did not improve in contrast to younger patients. In recent years, scientific evidence in the older age group has increased and specific guidelines for older women with breast cancer have been developed. The aim of this study was to assess changes in survival outcomes of older patients with breast cancer.Patients and methodsAll patients with breast cancer between 2000 and 2017 were included from the Netherlands cancer registry. We assessed changes in treatments using logistic regression. We calculated changes in relative survival as proxy for breast cancer mortality, stratified by age and stage.ResultsWe included 239,992 patients. Relative survival improved for patients<65 for all stages. In patients aged 65-75 years, relative survival did not improve in stage I-II but did improve in stage III breast cancer (RER 0.98, 95% CI 0.96-1.00, p=0.046). Concurrently, prescription of systemic treatments increased. In patients>75, relative survival did not improve in patients with stage I/II or stage III disease, nor did treatment strategies change.ConclusionsThis study shows that relative survival of patients aged 65-75 years with advanced breast cancer has improved, and concurrently, prescription of systemic treatment increased. To improve survival of patients >75 as well, future studies should focus on individualizing treatments based on concomitant comorbidity, geriatric parameters and the risk of competing mortality and toxicity of treatments. Show less
Groot, S. de; Pijl, H.; Charehbili, A.; Ven, S. van de; Smit, V.T.H.B.M.; Meershoek-Klein Kranenbarg, E.; ... ; Dutch Breast Canc Res Grp 2019
