Patrick Arveux
University of Burgundy
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Patrick Arveux.
Annals of Oncology | 2009
Tienhan Sandrine Dabakuyo; J. Fraisse; S. Causeret; S. Gouy; M.-M. Padeano; C. Loustalot; J. Cuisenier; J.-M. Sauzedde; M. Smail; J.-P. Combier; P. Chevillote; C. Rosburger; S. Boulet; Patrick Arveux; F. Bonnetain
BACKGROUNDnThis prospective multicenter study assessed and compared the impact of different surgical procedures on quality of life (QoL) in breast cancer patients.nnnPATIENTS AND METHODSnThe EORTC QLQ-C30 and the EORTC QLQ-BR-23 questionnaires were used to assess global health status (GHS), arm (BRAS) and breast (BRBS) symptom scales, before surgery, just after surgery and 6 and 12 months later. The Kruskal-Wallis test with the Bonferroni correction was used to compare scores. A mixed model analysis of variance for repeated measurements was then applied to assess the longitudinal effect of surgical modalities on QoL.nnnRESULTSnBefore surgery, GHS (P = 0.7807) and BRAS (P = 0.7688) QoL scores were similar whatever the surgical procedure: sentinel node biopsy (SLNB), axillary node dissection (ALND) or SLNB + ALND. As compared with other surgical groups, GHS 75.91 [standard deviation (SD) = 17.44, P = 0.041] and BRAS 11.39 (SD = 15.36, P < 0.0001) were better in the SLNB group 12 months after surgery. Whatever the type of surgery, GHS decreased after surgery (P < 0.0001), but increased 6 months later (P = 0.0016). BRAS symptoms increased just after surgery (P = 0.0329) and until 6 months (P < 0.0001) before decreasing (P < 0.0001).nnnCONCLUSIONSnSLNB improved GHS and BRAS QoL in breast cancer patients. However, surgeons must be cautious, SLNB with ALND results in a poorer QoL.
BMC Cancer | 2012
Julie Gentil; Tienhan Sandrine Dabakuyo; Samiratou Ouédraogo; Marie-Laure Poillot; Olivier Dejardin; Patrick Arveux
BackgroundIt has been shown in several studies that survival in cancer patients who were operated on by a high-volume surgeon was better. Why then do all patients not benefit from treatment by these experienced surgeons? The aim of our work was to study the hypothesis that in breast cancer, geographical isolation and the socio-economic level have an impact on the likelihood of being treated by a specialized breast-cancer surgeon.MethodsAll cases of primary invasive breast cancer diagnosed in the Côte d’Or from 1998 to 2008 were included. Individual clinical data and distance to the nearest reference care centre were collected. The Townsend Index of each residence area was calculated. A Log Rank test and a Cox model were used for survival analysis, and a multilevel logistic regression model was used to determine predictive factors of being treated or not by a specialized breast cancer surgeon.ResultsAmong our 3928 patients, the ten-year survival of the 2931 (74.6u2009%) patients operated on by a high-volume breast cancer surgeon was significantly better (LogRank pu2009<u20090.001), independently of age at diagnosis, the presence of at least one comorbidity, circumstances of diagnosis (screening or not) and TNM status (Cox HRu2009=u20090.81 [0.67-0.98]; pu2009=u20090.027). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, patients who lived 20 to 35 minutes, and more than 35 minutes away from the nearest reference care centre were less likely to be operated on by a specialized surgeon than were patients living less than 10 minutes away (ORu2009=u20090.56 [0.43; 0.73] and 0.38 [0.29; 0.50], respectively). This was also the case for patients living in rural areas compared with those living in urban areas (ORu2009=u20090.68 [0.53; 0.87]), and for patients living in the two most deprived areas (ORu2009=u20090.69 [0.48; 0.97] and 0.61 [0.44; 0.85] respectively) compared with those who lived in the most affluent area.ConclusionsA disadvantageous socio-economic environment, a rural lifestyle and living far from large specialized treatment centres were significant independent predictors of not gaining access to surgeons specialized in breast cancer. Not being treated by a specialist surgeon implies a less favourable outcome in terms of survival.
Oncologist | 2011
Zeinab Hamidou; Tienhan Sandrine Dabakuyo; Mariette Mercier; Jean Fraisse; Sylvain Causeret; Hervé Tixier; Marie-Martine Padeano; Catherine Loustalot; Jean Cuisenier; Jean-Marc Sauzedde; Marc Smail; Jean-Philibert Combier; Patrick Chevillote; Christian Rosburger; Patrick Arveux; F. Bonnetain
PURPOSEnThis prospective multicenter study explored different definitions of time to deterioration (TTD) in quality of life (QoL) scores, according to different cutoffs of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) as a modality for longitudinal QoL assessment in breast cancer patients.nnnMETHODSnQoL was assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 and BR-23 before surgery, after surgery, and 6 and 12 months later. The global health score, arm symptoms score (BRAS), and breast symptoms score were analyzed. For a given baseline score, QoL was considered to have deteriorated if this score decreased by ≥5 points at any time point after baseline. Analyses were repeated using an MCID of 10 points and taking the score after surgery as the reference score (to explore the occurrence of response shift). TTD was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression was used to identify independent factors associated with TTD.nnnRESULTSnTwo hundred thirty-five patients underwent axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), 222 underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB), and 61 underwent SLNB plus ALND. Patients who underwent SLNB had a significantly longer TTD for the BRAS dimension than those who underwent ALND. Cox multivariate analyses showed that treatment using SLNB and age >59 years were independently associated with longer TTD for the BRAS, whereas surgery elsewhere than at the Centre Georges François Leclerc was associated with a shorter TTD.nnnCONCLUSIONnExploration of different definitions of TTD in QoL provides meaningful longitudinal QoL results for clinicians.
Preventive Medicine | 2014
Samiratou Ouédraogo; Tienhan Sandrine Dabakuyo-Yonli; Adrien Roussot; Carole Pornet; Nathalie Sarlin; Philippe Lunaud; Pascal Desmidt; Catherine Quantin; Franck Chauvin; Vincent Dancourt; Patrick Arveux
BACKGROUNDnWe investigated factors explaining low breast cancer screening programme (BCSP) attendance taking into account a European transnational ecological Deprivation Index.nnnPATIENTS AND METHODSnData of 13,565 women aged 51-74years old invited to attend an organised mammography screening session between 2010 and 2011 in thirteen French departments were randomly selected. Information on the womens participation in BCSP, their individual characteristics and the characteristics of their area of residence were recorded and analysed in a multilevel model.nnnRESULTSnBetween 2010 and 2012, 7121 (52.5%) women of the studied population had their mammography examination after they received the invitation. Women living in the most deprived neighbourhood were less likely than those living in the most affluent neighbourhood to participate in BCSP (OR 95%CI=0.84[0.78-0.92]) as were those living in rural areas compared with those living in urban areas (OR 95%CI=0.87[0.80-0.95]). Being self-employed (p<0.0001) or living more than 15min away from an accredited screening centre (p=0.02) was also a barrier to participation in BCSP.nnnCONCLUSIONnDespite the classless delivery of BCSP, inequalities in uptake remain. To take advantage of prevention and to avoid exacerbating disparities in cancer mortality, BCSP should be adapted to womens personal and contextual characteristics.
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care | 2010
Catherine Lejeune; Vincent Dancourt; Patrick Arveux; Claire Bonithon-Kopp; Jean Faivre
OBJECTIVESnThe aim of this study was to compare the cost and the effectiveness of two biennial fecal occult blood screening tests for colorectal cancer: a guaiac nonrehydrated test (G-FOBT) and an immunochemical test (I-FOBT) with the absence of screening.nnnMETHODSnA Markov model was developed to compare these strategies in a general population of subjects aged 50 to 74 over a 20-year period.nnnRESULTSnCompared with the absence of screening, G-FOBT and I-FOBT were associated with a decrease in colorectal cancer mortality of 17.4 percent and 25.2 percent, respectively. With regard to cost-effectiveness, expressed as cost per life-year gained, I-FOBT was the most effective and most costly alternative. Compared with no screening, G-FOBT and I-FOBT presented similar discounted incremental cost-effectiveness ratios: 2,739 euros and 2,819 euros respectively per life-year gained. When compared with G-FOBT, I-FOBT presented an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 2,988 euros per life-year gained. Sensitivity analyses showed the strong influence of the I-FOBT lead time, of the participation rate to screening for I-FOBT, and of the purchase price of the I-FOBT on the discounted incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.nnnCONCLUSIONSnCompared with the absence of screening and with G-FOBT, the biennial two-stool immunochemical test can be considered a promising method for mass screening for colorectal cancer.
BMC Cancer | 2012
Pegdwende Olivia Dialla; Tienhan Sandrine Dabakuyo; Sophie Marilier; Julie Gentil; Patrick Roignot; Ariane Darut-Jouve; Marie-Laure Poillot; Valérie Quipourt; Patrick Arveux
BackgroundA large proportion of women with breast cancer (BC) are elderly. However, there is a lack of information regarding BC prognostic factors and care in this population. The aims of this study were to assess the prognostic factors of relative survival (RS) among women with BC aged ≥ 75 years old and to identify the predictive factors of treatments administered to this population.MethodsA population-based study was performed using data from the Cote d’Or breast and gynaecological cancer registry. Women aged 75 years and older with primary invasive BC and resident in Cote d’Or at the time of diagnosis made between January 1998 and December 2008 were retrospectively selected. Prognostic factors of RS were estimated in a generalized linear model with a Poisson error structure. RS rate for the whole population was given at 5 years. Logistic regression models were used to identify the predictors of the treatments administered.ResultsSix hundred and eighty-one women were included. Median age at diagnosis was 80. Comorbidities (p=0.02), pT stage (p=0.04), metastases (p=<0.001), having a family doctor (p=0.03) and hormone-receptor status (p=0.006) were independent prognostic factors of RS. The RS rate at 5 years for the whole population was 78.2%, 95%CI = [72.2-83.0]. Age, pT stage, metastases, histoprognostic SBR grade, hormone receptor status and comorbidities were frequently found to be predictors of treatment with surgery alone, hormone therapy alone, breast conserving surgery plus adjuvant therapy and mastectomy plus adjuvant therapy.ConclusionsComorbid conditions adversely affect survival in older women with breast cancer. Moreover the results of this study showed that there are numerous predictors of the type of treatment administered, and that the most important were age and comorbidities.
BMC Cancer | 2010
Zeinab Hamidou; Sylvain Causeret; Tienhan Sandrine Dabakuyo; Julie Gentil; Laurent Arnould; Patrick Roignot; Thierry Altwegg; Marie-Laure Poillot; F. Bonnetain; Patrick Arveux
BackgroundThe aim of this population-based study was to assess independent prognostic factors in ovarian cancer using relative survival (RS) and to investigate changes in RS rates from 1982 to 2005.MethodsData on 748 patients with ovarian cancer were provided by the Côte dOr gynaecologic cancer registry. The RS was estimated using a generalized linear model with a Poisson error structure. Relative survival and its 95% confidence interval (CI) were described at the following specific time points 1, 3 and 5 years. The effect of prognostic factors on survival was assessed with multivariate analyses of RS.ResultsThe median follow-up was 12 years. The RS rates at 1, 3 and 5 years were 81%, 55% and 44%, respectively. As compared with the period 1982-1989, an improvement in survival was found for the period 1998-2005: HR = 0.52[0.40-0.67]. Women who lived in urban areas had better RS: HR = 0.82[0.67-0.99]. Patients with epithelial types of ovarian cancer other than mucinous or endometrioid cancer had worse RS than those with serous histology. Age ≥ 70 years was associated with lower survival.ConclusionsPeriod of diagnosis, stage at diagnosis, histology, place of residence and age were independent prognostic factors for survival in ovarian cancer. An improvement in the survival rate was observed after 1998 but a significant improvement was limited to advanced stage cancers.
European Journal of Cancer Care | 2012
Tienhan Sandrine Dabakuyo; O. Dialla; Julie Gentil; Marie-Laure Poillot; P. Roignot; J. Cuisenier; Patrick Arveux
Breast cancer in men is rare, and clinical trials are thus not feasible. This study aimed to describe the epidemiological characteristics, treatment and prognostic factors of breast cancer in men. A population-based study was performed using data from the Cote dOr breast and gynaecological cancer registry. Data on male breast cancer diagnosed from 1982 to 2008 were provided. Relative survival rates were estimated at 5 years according to the characteristics of the patient and tumour, and treatment. Prognostic factors of survival in men with breast cancer were identified using a generalised linear model. Seventy-five men with invasive breast cancer were registered. Mean age at diagnosis was 66 years. The use of adjuvant chemotherapy (P= 0.013) and hormone therapy (P < 0.0001) increased over time. Relative survival rate at 5 years was 69% for the whole population. Analysis of relative survival according to the treatment showed that survival was longer for patients treated with surgery + radiotherapy + hormone therapy: 89% at 5 years. Scarff, Bloom and Richardson grade was independent prognostic factor of survival. Male breast cancer is a rare disease with a poor prognosis, and diagnosis is often made at an advanced stage. Early diagnosis and better knowledge of the disease would certainly lead to improvements in the prognosis.
Quality of Life Research | 2016
Wai-on Chu; Pegdwende Olivia Dialla; Patrick Roignot; Marie-Christine Bone-Lepinoy; Marie-Laure Poillot; Charles Coutant; Patrick Arveux; Tienhan Sandrine Dabakuyo-Yonli
PurposeTo identify the impact of clinical and socio-economic determinants on quality of life (QoL) among breast cancer (BC) survivors 5xa0years after diagnosis.MethodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted in women diagnosed in 2007 for primary invasive non-metastatic BC and identified through the Côte d’Or BC registry. QoL was assessed with the Medical Outcomes Study 12-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12), the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life (EORTC-QLQ-C30) and the breast cancer (EORTC-QLQ-BR23) questionnaires. Social support was assessed with Sarason’s social support questionnaire, and deprivation was assessed by the EPICES questionnaire. Clinical variables were collected through the registry database. Determinants of QoL were identified using multivariable mixed model analysis for each SF-12 dimension. A sensitivity analysis was conducted with multiple imputations on missing data.ResultsOverall, 188 patients on 319 patients (59xa0%) invited to participate to the survey completed the questionnaires. Five years after breast cancer diagnosis, the disease stages at diagnosis, as well as the treatment received, were not determinants of QoL. Only the age at diagnosis and comorbidities were found to be determinants of QoL.ConclusionsFive years after BC diagnosis, disease severity and the treatment received did not affect QoL.
Maturitas | 2015
Pegdwende Olivia Dialla; Wai-on Chu; Patrick Roignot; Marie-Christine Bone-Lepinoy; Marie-Laure Poillot; Charles Coutant; Patrick Arveux; Tienhan Sandrine Dabakuyo-Yonli
OBJECTIVESnThe main purpose of this study was to identify age-related socioeconomic and clinical determinants of quality of life among breast cancer survivors five years after the diagnosis. The secondary objective was to describe quality of life in the studied population according to age.nnnSTUDY DESIGNnA cross-sectional survey in five-year breast cancer survivors was conducted in women diagnosed with breast cancer in 2007 and 2008 in Côte dOr.nnnMAIN OUTCOME MEASURESnQuality of life was assessed with the SF-12, the EORTC-QLQ-C30 and the EORTC-QLQ-BR23 questionnaires. Socio-economic deprivation was assessed by the EPICES questionnaire. Social support was assessed by the Sarason questionnaire and clinical features were collected through the Côte dOr breast cancer registry. Age-related determinants of quality of life were identified using multivariate mixed model analysis for each SF-12 dimension.nnnRESULTSnOverall 396 women completed the questionnaires. Women aged <65 years had a better quality of life and a greater availability of social support than did women aged ≥65 years. Body mass index, relapse and EPICES were found to be determinants of quality of life in younger women (p<0.006). For older women, comorbidities and EPICES deprivation scores were predictors of low quality of life scores (p<0.006).nnnCONCLUSIONSnFive years after breast cancer diagnosis, disease severity did not affect quality of life. The major determinants of quality of life in younger women were disease relapse and EPICES deprivation scores while those in older women were comorbidities and EPICES deprivation scores.