Eva Grunfeld

Randomized Trial of Long-Term Follow-Up for Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Comparison of Family Physician Versus Specialist Care

PURPOSE Most women with breast cancer are diagnosed at an early stage and more than 80% will be long-term survivors. Routine follow-up marks the transition from intensive treatment to survivorship. It is usual practice for routine follow-up to take place in specialist clinics. This study tested the hypothesis that follow-up by the patients family physician is a safe and acceptable alternative to specialist follow-up. PATIENTS AND METHODS A multicenter, randomized, controlled trial was conducted involving 968 patients with early-stage breast cancer who had completed adjuvant treatment, were disease free, and were between 9 and 15 months after diagnosis. Patients may have continued receiving adjuvant hormonal therapy. Patients were randomly allocated to follow-up in the cancer center according to usual practice (CC group) or follow-up from their own family physician (FP group). The primary outcome was the rate of recurrence-related serious clinical events (SCEs). The secondary outcome was health-related quality of life (HRQL). RESULTS In the FP group, there were 54 recurrences (11.2%) and 29 deaths (6.0%). In the CC group, there were 64 recurrences (13.2%) and 30 deaths (6.2%). In the FP group, 17 patients (3.5%) compared with 18 patients (3.7%) in the CC group experienced an SCE (0.19% difference; 95% CI, -2.26% to 2.65%). No statistically significant differences (P < .05) were detected between groups on any of the HRQL questionnaires. CONCLUSION Breast cancer patients can be offered follow-up by their family physician without concern that important recurrence-related SCEs will occur more frequently or that HRQL will be negatively affected.

Breast Cancer Follow-Up and Management After Primary Treatment: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update

PURPOSE To provide recommendations on the follow-up and management of patients with breast cancer who have completed primary therapy with curative intent. METHODS To update the 2006 guideline of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), a systematic review of the literature published from March 2006 through March 2012 was completed using MEDLINE and the Cochrane Collaboration Library. An Update Committee reviewed the evidence to determine whether the recommendations were in need of updating. RESULTS There were 14 new publications that met inclusion criteria: nine systematic reviews (three included meta-analyses) and five randomized controlled trials. After its review and analysis of the evidence, the Update Committee concluded that no revisions to the existing ASCO recommendations were warranted. RECOMMENDATIONS Regular history, physical examination, and mammography are recommended for breast cancer follow-up. Physical examinations should be performed every 3 to 6 months for the first 3 years, every 6 to 12 months for years 4 and 5, and annually thereafter. For women who have undergone breast-conserving surgery, a post-treatment mammogram should be obtained 1 year after the initial mammogram and at least 6 months after completion of radiation therapy. Thereafter, unless otherwise indicated, a yearly mammographic evaluation should be performed. The use of complete blood counts, chemistry panels, bone scans, chest radiographs, liver ultrasounds, pelvic ultrasounds, computed tomography scans, [(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography scans, magnetic resonance imaging, and/or tumor markers (carcinoembryonic antigen, CA 15-3, and CA 27.29) is not recommended for routine follow-up in an otherwise asymptomatic patient with no specific findings on clinical examination.

Evaluating Survivorship Care Plans: Results of a Randomized, Clinical Trial of Patients With Breast Cancer

PURPOSE An Institute of Medicine report recommends that patients with cancer receive a survivorship care plan (SCP). The trial objective was to determine if an SCP for breast cancer survivors improves patient-reported outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS Women with early-stage breast cancer who completed primary treatment at least 3 months previously were eligible. Consenting patients were allocated within two strata: less than 24 months and ≥ 24 months since diagnosis. All patients were transferred to their own primary care physician (PCP) for follow-up. In addition to a discharge visit, the intervention group received an SCP, which was reviewed during a 30-minute educational session with a nurse, and their PCP received the SCP and guideline on follow-up. The primary outcome was cancer-related distress at 12 months, assessed by the Impact of Event Scale (IES). Secondary outcomes included quality of life, patient satisfaction, continuity/coordination of care, and health service measures. RESULTS Overall, 408 survivors were enrolled through nine tertiary cancer centers. There were no differences between groups on cancer-related distress or on any of the patient-reported secondary outcomes, and there were no differences when the two strata were analyzed separately. More patients in the intervention than control group correctly identify their PCP as primarily responsible for follow-up (98.7% v 89.1%; difference, 9.6%; 95% CI, 3.9 to 15.9; P = .005). CONCLUSION The results do not support the hypothesis that SCPs are beneficial for improving patient-reported outcomes. Transferring follow-up to PCPs is considered an important strategy to meet the demand for scarce oncology resources. SCPs were no better than a standard discharge visit with the oncologist to facilitate transfer.

Primary Care Physicians' Views of Routine Follow-Up Care of Cancer Survivors

PURPOSE Routine follow-up of adult cancer survivors is an important clinical and health service issue. Because of a lack of evidence supporting advantages of long-term follow-up care in oncology clinics, there is increasing interest for the locus of this care to be provided by primary care physicians (PCPs). However, current Canadian PCP views on this issue have been largely unknown. METHODS A mail survey of a random sample of PCPs across Canada, stratified by region and proximity to urban centers, was conducted. Views on routine follow-up of adult cancer survivors and modalities to facilitate PCPs in providing this care were determined. RESULTS A total of 330 PCPs responded (adjusted response rate, 51.7%). After completion of active treatment, PCPs were willing to assume exclusive responsibility for routine follow-up care after 2.4 +/- 2.3 years had elapsed for prostate cancer, 2.6 +/- 2.6 years for colorectal cancer, 2.8 +/- 2.5 years for breast cancer, and 3.2 +/- 2.7 years for lymphoma. PCPs already providing this care were willing to provide exclusive care sooner. The most useful modalities PCPs felt would assist them in assuming exclusive responsibility for follow-up cancer care were (1) a patient-specific letter from the specialist, (2) printed guidelines, (3) expedited routes of rereferral, and (4) expedited access to investigations for suspected recurrence. CONCLUSION With appropriate information and support in place, PCPs reported being willing to assume exclusive responsibility for the follow-up care of adult cancer survivors. Insights gained from this survey may ultimately help guide strategies in providing optimal care to these patients.

Clinical practice guidelines for the care and treatment of breast cancer: follow-up after treatment for breast cancer (summary of the 2005 update)

This article provides a summary of the changes along with the updated recommendations ([Table 1][1]) made by Health Canadas Steering Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Care and Treatment of Breast Cancer to the article “Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Care and Treatment of

Towards using administrative databases to measure population-based indicators of quality of end-of-life care : testing the methodology

This study is concerned with methods to measure population-based indicators of quality end-of-life care. Using a retrospective cohort approach, we assessed the feasibility, validity and reliability of using administrative databases to measure quality indicators of end-of-life care in two Canadian provinces. The study sample consisted of all females who died of breast cancer between 1 January 1998 and 31 December 2002, in Nova Scotia or Ontario, Canada. From an initial list of 19 quality indicators selected from the literature, seven were determined to be fully measurable in both provinces. An additional seven indicators in one province and three in the other province were partially measurable. Tests comparing administrative and chart data show a high level of agreement with inter-rater reliability, confirming consistency in the chart abstraction process. Using administrative data is an efficient, population-based method to monitor quality of care which can compliment other methods, such as qualitative and purposefully collected clinical data.

The expanding role of primary care in cancer control

The nature of cancer control is changing, with an increasing emphasis, fuelled by public and political demand, on prevention, early diagnosis, and patient experience during and after treatment. At the same time, primary care is increasingly promoted, by governments and health funders worldwide, as the preferred setting for most health care for reasons of increasing need, to stabilise health-care costs, and to accommodate patient preference for care close to home. It is timely, then, to consider how this expanding role for primary care can work for cancer control, which has long been dominated by highly technical interventions centred on treatment, and in which the contribution of primary care has been largely perceived as marginal. In this Commission, expert opinion from primary care and public health professionals with academic and clinical cancer expertise—from epidemiologists, psychologists, policy makers, and cancer specialists—has contributed to a detailed consideration of the evidence for cancer control provided in primary care and community care settings. Ranging from primary prevention to end-of-life care, the scope for new models of care is explored, and the actions needed to effect change are outlined. The strengths of primary care—its continuous, coordinated, and comprehensive care for individuals and families—are particularly evident in prevention and diagnosis, in shared follow-up and survivorship care, and in end-of-life care. A strong theme of integration of care runs throughout, and its elements (clinical, vertical, and functional) and the tools needed for integrated working are described in detail. All of this change, as it evolves, will need to be underpinned by new research and by continuing and shared multiprofessional development.

Barriers and facilitators to enrollment in cancer clinical trials: Qualitative study of the perspectives of clinical research associates

The literature continues to report low rates of accrual to cancer clinical trials. Previous studies have examined principally physician‐related or patient‐related barriers. Clinical research associates (CRAs) have a unique perspective on enrollment that has been explored very little. This study sought the views of CRAs on barriers and facilitators to accrual.

Population-Based Longitudinal Study of Follow-Up Care for Breast Cancer Survivors

PURPOSE To describe the patterns of follow-up care provided to a population-based cohort of breast cancer survivors, and to assess factors associated with adherence to guidelines on follow-up care. PATIENTS AND METHODS We conducted a retrospective longitudinal study of all women with surgically treated breast cancer who were without evidence of recurrence, advanced breast cancer, or new primary cancer and were diagnosed in Ontario, Canada, within a 2-year period (n = 11,219). They were followed for 5 years. The cohort was identified through the Ontario Cancer Registry, and individuals were linked across population-based administrative health databases. Frequency of and adherence to guideline recommendations for oncologist and primary care physician (PCP) visits; surveillance imaging for metastatic disease; and surveillance mammograms by year from diagnosis, age group, and income quintile were analyzed. Factors associated with adherence to guideline recommendations were analyzed. RESULTS Most women saw both oncologists and PCPs in each follow-up year. Approximately two thirds had surveillance mammograms in each follow-up year. Overall, two thirds had either fewer or greater than recommended oncology visits, one quarter had fewer than recommended surveillance mammograms, and half had greater than recommended surveillance imaging for metastatic disease. CONCLUSION This population-based study shows substantial variation in adherence to guideline recommendations, with both overuse and underuse of surveillance visits and tests. Most importantly, a substantial proportion are receiving more than recommended imaging for metastatic disease but fewer than recommended mammograms for detection of local recurrence or new primary cancer, for which effective intervention is possible.

Toward Population-based Indicators of Quality End-of-Life Care: Testing Stakeholder Agreement

Quality indicators (QIs) are tools designed to measure and improve quality of care. The objective of this study was to assess stakeholder acceptability of QIs of end‐of‐life (EOL) care that potentially were measurable from population‐based administrative health databases.