Selection of treatment among Latina and non-Latina white women with ductal carcinoma in situ.
ABSTRACT The growing rates of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and evidence that Latinas may underuse breast-conserving surgery (BCS) compared with white women highlight the need to better understand how treatment decisions are made in this understudied group. To help address this gap, this study compared surgery and radiation treatment decision making among white and Spanish-speaking and English-speaking Latina women with DCIS recruited from eight population-based cancer registries from 35 California counties.
Women aged ≥18 who self-identified as Latina or non-Latina white diagnosed with DCIS between 2002 and 2005 were selected from eight California Cancer Registry (CCR) regions and surveyed about their DCIS treatment decision making by telephone approximately 24 months after diagnosis. Survey data were merged with CCR hospital-based records to obtain tumor and treatment data.
Mean age was 57 years. Multivariate analysis indicated no differences by ethnicity or language in the receipt of mastectomy vs. BCS after controlling demographic, health, and personal preferences. English-speaking Latinas were more likely to receive radiation than their Spanish-speaking or white counterparts, controlling for demographic and other factors. Among women receiving BCS, physician recommendation was the strongest predictor of receipt of radiation.
Ethnic disparities in surgical treatment choices after breast cancer diagnosis were not seen in this cohort of women diagnosed with DCIS. Physicians play an essential role in patients' treatment choices for DCIS, particularly for adjuvant radiation.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Treatment decisions associated with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), including the decision to undergo breast reconstruction, may be more problematic for Latinas due to access and language issues. To help understand the factors that influence patients' receipt of reconstruction following mastectomy for DCIS, we conducted a population-based study of English- and Spanish-speaking Latina and non-Latina white women from 35 California counties. The objectives of this study were to identify the role of ethnicity and language in the receipt of reconstruction, the relationship between system-level factors and the receipt of reconstruction, and women's reasons for not undergoing reconstruction. Women aged 18 and older, who self-identified as Latina or non-Latino white and were diagnosed with DCIS between 2002 and 2005 were selected from eight California Cancer Registry (CCR) regions encompassing 35 counties. Approximately 24 months after diagnosis, they were surveyed about their DCIS treatment decisions. Survey data were merged with CCR records to obtain tumor and treatment data. The survey was successfully completed by 745 women, 239 of whom had a mastectomy and represent the sample included in this study. Whites had a higher completion rate than Latinas (67 and 55%, respectively). Analysis included descriptive statistics and logistic regression modeling. Mean age was 54 years. A greater proportion of whites had reconstruction (72%) compared to English-speaking Latinas (69%) and Spanish-speaking Latinas (40%). Multivariate analysis showed that women who were aged 65 and older, unemployed, and had a lower ratio of plastic surgeons in their county were less likely to have reconstructive surgery after mastectomy. The most frequent reasons mentioned not to receive reconstruction included lack of importance and desire to avoid additional surgery. Although ethnic/language differences in treatment selection were observed, multivariable analysis suggests that these differences could be explained by differential employment levels and geographic availability of plastic surgeons.Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 04/2011; 129(3):909-17. DOI:10.1007/s10549-011-1524-0 · 4.20 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The role of postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) in the management of low-grade glioma remains controversial. An analysis using data from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 22844/22845 studies concluded that several factors portend a poor prognosis: age ≥40 years, astrocytoma histology, tumor size ≥6 cm, tumor crossing midline, and preoperative neurologic deficits. PORT may benefit patients with high-risk features. The aim of this study was to assess temporal trends and determinants of the use of PORT. By using data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program, the authors identified 1127 adult patients diagnosed with low-grade glioma (World Health Organization grade I and II) who underwent surgical resection between January 1, 1998 and December 31, 2006. The primary outcome was receipt of PORT. The authors performed multivariate logistic regression to examine the association between clinical, patient, and demographic characteristics and receipt of PORT. Receipt of PORT declined during the study period, from 64% of patients in 1998 to 36% of patients in 2006. On multivariate analysis, significant predictors of receipt of PORT were age ≥40 years, tumor crossing midline, and partial surgical resection. The use of PORT for patients with low-grade glioma has declined in the period from 1998 to 2006 for both low-risk and high-risk patients.Cancer 12/2011; 118(15):3735-42. DOI:10.1002/cncr.26693 · 4.90 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: In September 2010, the American Cancer Society and National Cancer Institute convened a conference to review current issues in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) risk communication and decision-making and to identify directions for future research. Specific topics included patient and health care provider knowledge and attitudes about DCIS and its treatment, how to explain DCIS to patients given the heterogeneity of the disease, consideration of nomenclature changes, and the usefulness of decision tools/aids. This report describes the proceedings of the workshop in the context of the current literature and discusses future directions. Evidence suggests that there is a lack of clarity about the implications and risks of a diagnosis of DCIS among patients, providers, and researchers. Research is needed to understand better the biology and mechanisms of the progression of DCIS to invasive breast cancer and the factors that predict those subtypes of DCIS that do not progress, as well as efforts to improve the communication and informed decision-making surrounding DCIS.CA A Cancer Journal for Clinicians 04/2012; 62(3):203-10. DOI:10.3322/caac.21140 · 162.50 Impact Factor