Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25304931›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2014

Provision of breast cancer care and survival in Germany - results from a population-based high resolution study from Saarland.

Bernd Holleczek, Hermann Brenner

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The requirements of a specialist breast centre.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2020
    Guideline
  2. Article
  3. [Are the assessments of individual out-of-pocket health services of the IGeL-Monitor in line with clinical guidelines?]Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)) · 2023
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Bernd HolleczekDivision of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center, Im Neuenheimer Feld 581, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany. b.holleczek@dkfz-heidelberg.de.
Hermann Brenner
Heidelberg University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStudies on the implementation of Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) and particularly its effect on breast cancer (BRC) survival on a population-level are scant. This population-based high resolution study from Germany aims at providing data on the usage of BRC treatment, the extent of adherence to CPG and, as a novelty, survival of BRC patients according to major recommended treatment options.

methodsData from the Saarland Cancer Registry including women diagnosed with invasive BRC without distant metastasis and followed up between 2000 and 2009 were used. Provision of cancer care according to major treatment options is presented by age, clinical subtypes of BRC, and over time. Conventional and modeled period analysis was used to derive estimates of most up-to-date 5-year relative survival (RS) and the effect of non-adherence to CPG on relative excess risk of death (RER).

resultsThe study revealed increasing guideline adherence, with high levels already seen for local treatment (e.g. 67% of the BRC patients in 2008/09 received breast conserving surgery), and substantial progress since the millennium change with regard to sentinel node dissection (SND) and adjuvant systemic treatments (e.g. SND and chemotherapy provided to 62% of all patients and 79% of the patients with nodal positive or hormone receptor negative BRC in 2008/09, respectively). It further demonstrated increased cancer related mortality among patients without guideline compliant cancer treatment (e.g. patients with nodal positive and hormone receptor negative BRC who were not treated with chemotherapy had a 5-year RS of 29% (RER: 2.89, 95% CI: 1.46-5.71) compared to 54% for patients obtaining chemotherapy).

conclusionsThis study provides data on the implementation of CPG in a highly developed European country and extends available population-based survival data of BRC patients and may provide evidence of increased cancer related excess mortality, if BRC patients do not receive guideline compatible treatment.

Indexed as

Patient CarePublic Health SurveillanceAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBreast NeoplasmsFemaleGermanyHumansMiddle AgedNeoplasm MetastasisNeoplasm StagingRegistriesSurvival AnalysisYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID25304931
PMCPMC4213502
OpenAlexW2103070748

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.