Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30790047›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2019

PROMs following breast-conserving therapy for breast cancer: results from a prospective longitudinal monocentric study.

I Kindts, A Laenen, M van den Akker, C Weltens

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

4 authors.

I KindtsDepartment of Oncology, Experimental Radiation Oncology, KU Leuven-University of Leuven, B-3000, Leuven, Belgium. Isabelle.kindts@uzleuven.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6570-141X
A LaenenLeuven Biostatistics and Statistical Bioinformatics Centre (L-Biostat), KU Leuven University, Kapucijnenvoer 35, B-3000, Leuven, Belgium.
M van den AkkerDepartment of Family Medicine, School CAPRI, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
C WeltensDepartment of Oncology, Experimental Radiation Oncology, KU Leuven-University of Leuven, B-3000, Leuven, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTreatment of breast cancer includes many options and shared decision making is becoming standard practice. Within the context of treatment individualization, the omission of radiotherapy (RT) can be considered. It is thereby of great importance to correctly foresee the side effects attributed to RT. Data from longitudinal studies with contemporary techniques however are sparse. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and long-term aesthetic outcome (AO) related to RT in the breast-conserving therapy (BCT) setting for breast cancer over time.

methodsPatients treated with BCT between April 2015 and April 2016 were prospectively included in the cohort. Evaluations were made at six time points: at baseline (before RT), during and at the end of RT, between 3 and 6 months, 1 year and 2 years after RT. AO was scored by the patient and by the BCCT.core software. Further PROMs were measured with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire QLQ-C30/-BR23 and the Body Image after Breast Cancer Questionnaire BIBCQ. Patients were evaluated over 2 years. First, we assessed the evolution in time. Second, we tested the differences in mean scale scores of the PROMs between patients with a favourable and an unfavourable AO.

resultsOne hundred seventy-five patients were included in the analysis. At baseline, unsatisfactory levels were already present for several scales. Most unsatisfactory PROMs improved up to 1 year after RT. Complaints of fatigue increased at the start but decreased up to a lower level than that at baseline up to 1 year after RT (mean difference (MD) 7.6, - 12.3, respectively). Cognitive functioning showed a small decrease at the start with no further significant decrease (MD - 4.73, - 0.21, respectively). Breast symptoms significantly increased during RT but decreased afterwards up to 2 years after RT to lower values than those at baseline and were then considered satisfactory (MD 15.6, - 19.7, - 4.1, respectively). AO scored as PROM associated with BCCT.core and with the body image measures.

conclusionsThe study suggests that quality of life and body image are temporarily impaired due to RT. Around one third of patients score their long-term AO as unfavourable. These results should be discussed with the patient and could help in the decision making of the treatment plan and in the clarification of the patient's expectations.

Indexed as

AgedBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMiddle AgedProspective StudiesQuality of LifeAesthetic outcomeBreast cancerBreast-conserving therapyPROMs

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.