Sabine Siesling
Please Note
9 records found
1
BackgroundPredictions of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) outcomes could support realistic recovery expectations after breast cancer (BC) surgery. We aimed to develop and validate prediction models for HRQoL outcomes after BC surgery.MethodsWe used three datasets of BC patients from Berlin, Germany; Ljubljana, Slovenia; and Rotterdam; Netherlands. We included non-metastasised patients who were surgically treated for an initial diagnosis of BC and completed pre- and postoperative validated questionnaires. We used linear mixed models to analyse 15 domains of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-BR23 over a two-year horizon. Baseline domain score (measured pre-operatively), age, BMI, smoking, TN stage, receptor status, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, axillary surgery and surgery type (breast-conserving, mastectomy, and immediate implant-based reconstruction) were included as predictors. Predictive performance at validation was assessed by the proportion of variance explained (marginal R2; mR2).ResultsWe included N = 795 patients from Germany for development and N = 623 from Slovenia and N = 417 from Netherlands for validation. The largest proportion of variance was explained by the prediction models for sexual functioning (SF, mR2 35%), physical functioning (PF, mR2 29%), body image (BI, mR2 26%), and cognitive functioning (CF, mR2 25%). The models captured meaningfully different trends over time for different outcomes and surgery types. The predictive performance of the models was largely driven by the baseline domain score. Performance was reasonable at external validation, with r2 values of 19–33% for PF, 10–17% for CF, 15–18% for BI, and 22–28% for SF, although some other outcomes (e.g. breast symptoms and role functioning) showed miscalibration, indicating a need for recalibration.ConclusionHRQoL after breast cancer surgery can be predicted using simple models with baseline domain scores and surgery type, demonstrating a new opportunity for Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in personalized care.
Background: In the Netherlands, the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a temporary halt of population screening for cancer and limited hospital capacity for non-COVID care. We aimed to investigate the impact of the pandemic on the in-hospital diagnostic pathway of breast cancer (BC) and colorectal cancer (CRC). Methods: 71,159 BC and 48,900 CRC patients were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients, diagnosed between January 2020 and July 2021, were divided into six periods and compared to the average of patients diagnosed in the same periods in 2017–2019. Diagnostic procedures performed were analysed using logistic regression. Lead time of the diagnostic pathway was analysed using Cox regression. Analyses were stratified for cancer type and corrected for age, sex (only CRC), stage and region. Results: For BC, less mammograms were performed during the first recovery period in 2020. More PET-CTs were performed during the first peak, first recovery and third peak period. For CRC, less ultrasounds and more CT scans and MRIs were performed during the first peak. Lead time decreased the most during the first peak by 2 days (BC) and 8 days (CRC). Significantly fewer patients, mainly in lower stages, were diagnosed with BC (−47%) and CRC (−36%) during the first peak. Conclusion: Significant impact of the COVID-19 pandemic was found on the diagnostic pathway, mainly during the first peak. In 2021, care returned to the same standards as before the pandemic. Long-term effects on patient outcomes are not known yet and will be the subject of future research.
Impact of Older Age and Comorbidity on Locoregional and Distant Breast Cancer Recurrence
A Large Population-Based Study
Hospital transfer after a breast cancer diagnosis
A population-based study in the Netherlands of the extent, predictive characteristics and its impact on time to treatment
Purpose. For individualized follow-up, accurate prediction of locoregional recurrence (LRR) and second primary (SP) breast cancer risk is required. Current prediction models employ regression, but with large data sets, machine-learning techniques such as Bayesian Networks (BNs) may be better alternatives. In this study, logistic regression was compared with different BNs, built with network classifiers and constraint- and score-based algorithms. Methods. Women diagnosed with early breast cancer between 2003 and 2006 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR) (N = 37,320). BN structures were developed using 1) Bayesian network classifiers, 2) correlation coefficients with different cutoffs, 3) constraint-based learning algorithms, and 4) score-based learning algorithms. The different models were compared with logistic regression using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, an external validation set obtained from the NCR from 2007 and 2008 (N = 12,308), and subgroup analyses for a high- and low-risk group. Results. The BNs with the most links showed the best performance in both LRR and SP prediction (c-statistic of 0.76 for LRR and 0.69 for SP). In the external validation, logistic regression generally outperformed the BNs in both SP and LRR (c-statistic of 0.71 for LRR and 0.64 for SP). The differences were nonetheless small. Although logistic regression performed best on most parts of the subgroup analysis, BNs outperformed regression with respect to average risk for SP prediction in low- and high-risk groups. Conclusions. Although estimates of regression coefficients depend on other independent variables, there is no assumed dependence relationship between coefficient estimators and the change in value of other variables as in the case of BNs. Nonetheless, this analysis suggests that regression is still more accurate or at least as accurate as BNs for risk estimation for both LRRs and SP tumors.