Top

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

Published in:

Open Access 01-08-2017 | Clinical trial

Aesthetic result after breast-conserving therapy is associated with quality of life several years after treatment. Swedish women evaluated with BCCT.core and BREAST-Q™

Authors: Cecilia Dahlbäck, Jenny Heiman Ullmark, Martin Rehn, Anita Ringberg, Jonas Manjer

Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Issue 3/2017

Abstract

Purpose

A gold standard for evaluation of aesthetic outcome after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) is still lacking. The BCCT.core software has been developed to assess aesthetic result in a standardised way. We aimed to study how the result of BCCT.core after BCT is associated with quality of life, measured with the BREAST-Q™, a validated questionnaire.

Methods

Women eligible for BCT were consecutively recruited between February 1st 2008 and January 31st 2012 (n = 653). Photographs of 310 women, taken one year after BCT, were evaluated using the BCCT.core software. The postoperative BCT module of the BREAST-Q™ questionnaire was administered by mail and 348 questionnaires were returned (median 5.5 years after BCT). In all, 216 women had both BCCT.core results and completed BREAST-Q™ questionnaires available.

Results

The results from the BCCT.core evaluation were: excellent n = 49 (15.8%); good n = 178 (57.4%); fair n = 73 (23.5%); poor n = 10 (3.2%). The median BREAST-Q™ score for satisfaction with breasts was 66 [interquartile range (IQR) 57–80] and for psychosocial well-being 82 (IQR 61–100). Poor/fair results on BCCT.core were associated with Q-scores below median for both satisfaction with breasts [odds ratio (OR) 3.4 (confidence interval (CI) 1.7–6.8)] as well as for psychosocial well-being [OR 2.2 (CI 1.1–4.2)].

Conclusions

A statistically significant association between BCCT.core results one year after BCT and quality of life ratings using BREAST-Q™ several years later is shown in this study. This implies that the BCCT.core may be valuable in BCT follow-up and used as a standardised instrument in the evaluation of aesthetic results.

Copyright notice: “Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center and the University of British Columbia™ 2006, All rights reserved”. Contact information and permission to use: MAPI Research Trust, Lyon, France. E-mail: PROinformation@mapi-trust.org; Internet: www.proqolid.org.

Socialstyrelsen Statistical Database of Cancer (2017). http://www.socialstyrelsen.se/statistik/statistikdatabas/cancer. Accessed 14 March 2017

Annual Report from the National Breast Cancer Registry (2015). https://www.cancercentrum.se/globalassets/cancerdiagnoser/brost/kvalitetsregister/nationell_brostcancer_rapport_2015-2pdf.pdf. Accessed 14 March 2017

Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L, Greco M, Saccozzi R, Luini A, Aguilar M, Marubini E (2002) Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 347(16):1227–1232CrossRefPubMed

Pusic AL, Chen CM, Cano S, Klassen A, McCarthy C, Collins ED, Cordeiro PG (2007) Measuring quality of life in cosmetic and reconstructive breast surgery: a systematic review of patient-reported outcomes instruments. Plast Reconstr Surg 120(4):823–837. doi:10.1097/01.prs.0000278162.82906.81 (Discussion 838–829) CrossRefPubMed

Pusic AL, Klassen AF, Snell L, Cano SJ, McCarthy C, Scott A, Cemal Y, Rubin LR, Cordeiro PG (2012) Measuring and managing patient expectations for breast reconstruction: impact on quality of life and patient satisfaction. Expert Rev Pharm Outcomes Res 12(2):149–158. doi:10.1586/erp.11.105

Pusic AL, Reavey PL, Klassen AF, Scott A, McCarthy C, Cano SJ (2009) Measuring patient outcomes in breast augmentation: introducing the BREAST-Q augmentation module. Clin Plast Surg 36(1):23–32. doi:10.1016/j.cps.2008.07.005 CrossRefPubMed

Klassen AF, Pusic AL, Scott A, Klok J, Cano SJ (2009) Satisfaction and quality of life in women who undergo breast surgery: a qualitative study. BMC Women’s Health 9:11. doi:10.1186/1472-6874-9-11 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Pusic AL, Klassen AF, Scott AM, Klok JA, Cordeiro PG, Cano SJ (2009) Development of a new patient-reported outcome measure for breast surgery: the BREAST-Q. Plast Reconstr Surg 124(2):345–353. doi:10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181aee807 CrossRefPubMed

Chen CM, Cano SJ, Klassen AF, King T, McCarthy C, Cordeiro PG, Morrow M, Pusic AL (2010) Measuring quality of life in oncologic breast surgery: a systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures. Breast J 16(6):587–597. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4741.2010.00983.x CrossRefPubMed

10.

Cano SJ, Klassen AF, Scott AM, Cordeiro PG, Pusic AL (2012) The BREAST-Q: further validation in independent clinical samples. Plast Reconstr Surg 129(2):293–302. doi:10.1097/PRS.0b013e31823aec6b CrossRefPubMed

11.

Taylor ME, Perez CA, Halverson KJ, Kuske RR, Philpott GW, Garcia DM, Mortimer JE, Myerson RJ, Radford D, Rush C (1995) Factors influencing cosmetic results after conservation therapy for breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 31(4):753–764CrossRefPubMed

12.

Vrieling C, Collette L, Fourquet A, Hoogenraad WJ, Horiot JH, Jager JJ, Pierart M, Poortmans PM, Struikmans H, Maat B, Van Limbergen E, Bartelink H (2000) The influence of patient, tumor and treatment factors on the cosmetic results after breast-conserving therapy in the EORTC ‘boost vs. no boost’ trial. EORTC Radiotherapy and Breast Cancer Cooperative Groups. Radiother Oncol 55(3):219–232CrossRefPubMed

13.

Al-Ghazal SK, Blamey RW (1999) Cosmetic assessment of breast-conserving surgery for primary breast cancer. Breast 8(4):162–168CrossRefPubMed

14.

Arenas M, Sabater S, Hernandez V, Henriquez I, Ameijide A, Anglada L, Mur E, Artigues M, Lafuerza A, Borras J (2006) Cosmetic outcome of breast conservative treatment for early stage breast cancer. Clin Transl Oncol 8(5):334–338CrossRefPubMed

15.

Cardoso JS, Cardoso MJ (2007) Towards an intelligent medical system for the aesthetic evaluation of breast cancer conservative treatment. Artif Intell Med 40(2):115–126. doi:10.1016/j.artmed.2007.02.007 CrossRefPubMed

16.

Cardoso MJ, Cardoso J, Amaral N, Azevedo I, Barreau L, Bernardo M, Christie D, Costa S, Fitzal F, Fougo JL, Johansen J, Macmillan D, Mano MP, Regolo L, Rosa J, Teixeira L, Vrieling C (2007) Turning subjective into objective: the BCCT.core software for evaluation of cosmetic results in breast cancer conservative treatment. Breast 16(5):456–461. doi:10.1016/j.breast.2007.05.002 CrossRefPubMed

17.

Dahlback C, Manjer J, Rehn M, Ringberg A (2016) Determinants for patient satisfaction regarding aesthetic outcome and skin sensitivity after breast-conserving surgery. World J Surg Oncol 14(1):303. doi:10.1186/s12957-016-1053-8 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Hansson E, Manjer J, Ringberg A (2014) Reliability of plastic cups to measure breast volume. J Plast Surg Hand Surg 48(4):254–258. doi:10.3109/2000656X.2013.870908 CrossRefPubMed

19.

Strombeck JO, Malm M (1986) Priority grouping in a waiting list of patients for reduction mammaplasty. Ann Plast Surg 17(6):498–502CrossRefPubMed

20.

Socialstyrelsen (2007) Nationella riktlinjer för bröstcancersjukvård. doi:978-91-85482-94-8

21.

O’Connell RL, DiMicco R, Khabra K, O’Flynn EA, deSouza N, Roche N, Barry PA, Kirby AM, Rusby JE (2016) Initial experience of the BREAST-Q breast-conserving therapy module. Breast Cancer Res Treat 160(1):79–89. doi:10.1007/s10549-016-3966-x CrossRefPubMed

22.

Hennigs A, Hartmann B, Rauch G, Golatta M, Tabatabai P, Domschke C, Schott S, Schutz F, Sohn C, Heil J (2015) Long-term objective esthetic outcome after breast-conserving therapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat 153(2):345–351. doi:10.1007/s10549-015-3540-y CrossRefPubMed

23.

Haloua MH, Krekel NM, Jacobs GJ, Zonderhuis B, Bouman MB, Buncamper ME, Niessen FB, Winters HA, Terwee C, Meijer S, van den Tol MP (2014) Cosmetic outcome assessment following breast-conserving therapy: a comparison between BCCT.core software and panel evaluation. Int J Breast Cancer 2014:716860. doi:10.1155/2014/716860 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Kim KD, Kim Z, Kuk JC, Jeong J, Choi KS, Hur SM, Jeong GA, Chung JC, Cho GS, Shin EJ, Kim HC, Kang SG, Lee MH, Lim CW (2016) Long-term results of oncoplastic breast surgery with latissimus dorsi flap reconstruction: a pilot study of the objective cosmetic results and patient reported outcome. Ann Surg Treat Res 90(3):117–123. doi:10.4174/astr.2016.90.3.117 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Immink JM, Putter H, Bartelink H, Cardoso JS, Cardoso MJ, van der Hulst-Vijgen MH, Noordijk EM, Poortmans PM, Rodenhuis CC, Struikmans H (2012) Long-term cosmetic changes after breast-conserving treatment of patients with stage I-II breast cancer and included in the EORTC ‘boost versus no boost’ trial. Ann Oncol 23(10):2591–2598. doi:10.1093/annonc/mds066 CrossRefPubMed

26.

Johansen J, Overgaard J, Rose C, Engelholm SA, Gadeberg CC, Kjaer M, Kamby C, Juul-Christensen J, Blichert-Toft M, Overgaard M (2002) Cosmetic outcome and breast morbidity in breast-conserving treatment—results from the Danish DBCG-82TM national randomized trial in breast cancer. Acta Oncol 41(4):369–380CrossRefPubMed

27.

Soror T, Kovacs G, Seibold N, Melchert C, Baumann K, Wenzel E, Stojanovic-Rundic S (2017) Cosmetic changes following surgery and accelerated partial breast irradiation using HDR interstitial brachytherapy: evaluation by a multidisciplinary/multigender committee. Strahlenther Onkol. doi:10.1007/s00066-016-1093-6 PubMed

28.

Heil J, Czink E, Golatta M, Schott S, Hof H, Jenetzky E, Blumenstein M, Maleika A, Rauch G, Sohn C (2011) Change of aesthetic and functional outcome over time and their relationship to quality of life after breast conserving therapy. Eur J Surg Oncol 37(2):116–121. doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2010.11.007 CrossRefPubMed

29.

Hennigs A, Biehl H, Rauch G, Golatta M, Tabatabai P, Domschke C, Schott S, Wallwiener M, Schutz F, Sohn C, Heil J (2016) Change of patient-reported aesthetic outcome over time and identification of factors characterizing poor aesthetic outcome after breast-conserving therapy: long-term results of a prospective cohort study. Ann Surg Oncol 23(5):1744–1751. doi:10.1245/s10434-015-4943-z CrossRefPubMed

30.

Hansson E, Manjer J, Ringberg A (2014) Inter-observer reliability of clinical measurement of suprasternal notch-nipple distance and breast ptosis. Indian J Plast Surg 47(1):61–64. doi:10.4103/0970-0358.129625 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Title: Aesthetic result after breast-conserving therapy is associated with quality of life several years after treatment. Swedish women evaluated with BCCT.core and BREAST-Q™
Authors: Cecilia Dahlbäck
Jenny Heiman Ullmark
Martin Rehn
Anita Ringberg
Jonas Manjer
Publication date: 01-08-2017
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment / Issue 3/2017
Print ISSN: 0167-6806
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7217
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-017-4306-5

Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras

Prof. Fabrice Barlesi

Developed by: Springer Medicine

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2017

Risk of death from cardiovascular disease following breast cancer: a systematic review

Effect of age on breast cancer screening using tomosynthesis in combination with digital mammography

Childhood and teenage physical activity and breast cancer risk

Impact of treatment regimen on acute care use during and after adjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer

Limited influence of germline genetic variation on all-cause mortality in women with early onset breast cancer: evidence from gene-based tests, single-marker regression, and whole-genome prediction

Erratum to: Breast cancer risk models: a comprehensive overview of existing models, validation, and clinical applications

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer