University Library
  • Login
A gateway to Melbourne's research publications
Minerva Access is the University's Institutional Repository. It aims to collect, preserve, and showcase the intellectual output of staff and students of the University of Melbourne for a global audience.
View Item 
  • Minerva Access
  • Medicine, Dentistry & Health Sciences
  • Melbourne School of Population and Global Health
  • Melbourne School of Population and Global Health - Research Publications
  • View Item
  • Minerva Access
  • Medicine, Dentistry & Health Sciences
  • Melbourne School of Population and Global Health
  • Melbourne School of Population and Global Health - Research Publications
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Evaluating the Age-Based Recommendations for Long-Term Follow-Up in Breast Cancer

    Thumbnail
    Download
    published version (1.057Mb)

    Citations
    Altmetric
    Author
    Witteveen, A; de Munck, L; Groothuis-Oudshoorn, CGM; Sonke, GS; Poortmans, PM; Boersma, LJ; Smidt, ML; Vliegen, IMH; IJzerman, MJ; Siesling, S
    Date
    2020-06-29
    Source Title
    The Oncologist
    Publisher
    WILEY
    University of Melbourne Author/s
    IJzerman, Maarten
    Affiliation
    Melbourne School of Population and Global Health
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Document Type
    Journal Article
    Citations
    Witteveen, A., de Munck, L., Groothuis-Oudshoorn, C. G. M., Sonke, G. S., Poortmans, P. M., Boersma, L. J., Smidt, M. L., Vliegen, I. M. H., IJzerman, M. J. & Siesling, S. (2020). Evaluating the Age-Based Recommendations for Long-Term Follow-Up in Breast Cancer. ONCOLOGIST, 25 (9), pp.E1330-E1338. https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2019-0973.
    Access Status
    Open Access
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/11343/251506
    DOI
    10.1634/theoncologist.2019-0973
    Abstract
    BACKGROUND: After 5 years of annual follow-up following breast cancer, Dutch guidelines are age based: annual follow-up for women <60 years, 60-75 years biennial, and none for >75 years. We determined how the risk of recurrence corresponds to these consensus-based recommendations and to the risk of primary breast cancer in the general screening population. SUBJECTS, MATERIALS, AND METHODS: Women with early-stage breast cancer in 2003/2005 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (n = 18,568). Cumulative incidence functions were estimated for follow-up years 5-10 for locoregional recurrences (LRRs) and second primary tumors (SPs). Risks were compared with the screening population without history of breast cancer. Alternative cutoffs for age were determined by log-rank tests. RESULTS: The cumulative risk for LRR/SP was lower in women <60 years (5.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.3-6.6) who are under annual follow-up than for women 60-75 (6.3%, 95% CI 5.6-7.1) receiving biennial visits. All risks were higher than the 5-year risk of a primary tumor in the screening population (ranging from 1.4% to 1.9%). Age cutoffs <50, 50-69, and > 69 revealed better risk differentiation and would provide more risk-based schedules. Still, other factors, including systemic treatments, had an even greater impact on recurrence risks. CONCLUSION: The current consensus-based recommendations use suboptimal age cutoffs. The proposed alternative cutoffs will lead to a more balanced risk-based follow-up and thereby more efficient allocation of resources. However, more factors should be taken into account for truly individualizing follow-up based on risk for recurrence. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The current age-based recommendations for breast cancer follow-up after 5 years are suboptimal and do not reflect the actual risk of recurrent disease. This results in situations in which women with higher risks actually receive less follow-up than those with a lower risk of recurrence. Alternative cutoffs could be a start toward risk-based follow-up and thereby more efficient allocation of resources. However, age, or any single risk factor, is not able to capture the risk differences and therefore is not sufficient for determining follow-up. More risk factors should be taken into account for truly individualizing follow-up based on the risk for recurrence.

    Export Reference in RIS Format     

    Endnote

    • Click on "Export Reference in RIS Format" and choose "open with... Endnote".

    Refworks

    • Click on "Export Reference in RIS Format". Login to Refworks, go to References => Import References


    Collections
    • Minerva Elements Records [52443]
    • Melbourne School of Population and Global Health - Research Publications [5315]
    Minerva AccessDepositing Your Work (for University of Melbourne Staff and Students)NewsFAQs

    BrowseCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects
    My AccountLoginRegister
    StatisticsMost Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors