Evidence to support a change in follow-up policy for patients with breast cancer: time to first relapse and hazard rate analysis.
The ideal follow-up for patients with cancer should be sensitive to the likelihood of relapse, for prompt investigation and treatment if indicated, together with the support of patient confidence. The current British Association of Surgical Oncologists guidelines for patients with breast cancer suggest intensive follow-up, including 3-monthly clinic visits during the first 2 years. These recommendations place increasing demands on clinical resources. The combined outcome of screening, early detection, dedicated clinical services that emphasize rapid diagnosis and concomitant improved survival, have resulted in increasing absolute numbers of diagnosed breast cancer patients in follow-up clinics. This article examines the follow-up of breast cancer patients to determine if the convention should be adjusted to obtain more from current resources while maintaining equivalent patient care. The data on all patients with breast cancer attending one general oncology clinic were examined in order to determine the pattern of relapse. Analyses identified: (1) the time to relapse at any site and at specific sites; and (2) the prognostic significance of three factors for subsequent relapse, namely nodal status, menopausal status and T stage at diagnosis. In 416 consecutive patients, the annual rate of relapse of breast cancer was found to increase progressively over the first 4 years. Nodal disease was the most important single variable as a predictor of relapse. The annual hazard rate for relapse for node positive patients in the first year was 5%; this increased to 10% and 14% in years three and four respectively. In contrast, in those patients who were node negative at diagnosis (302/416; 73%), the hazard rate for relapse was 1% in year one, increasing to 5% in years three and four. Intensive early follow-up of breast cancer patients provides no clear clinical gain for the great majority of patients, since early relapse is rare in the first year. The use of clinical funds and staff resources might be optimized to focus clinical follow-up on those patients at risk of recurrence. We suggest that all patients should continue to be monitored and receive psychological care through access to their general practitioner, skilled breast care nurses and specialized counsellors. Any patient at risk, or developing symptoms of relapse, would have immediate clinical access to the oncologist for diagnostic investigations. This strategy would optimize psychological patient care and use the full backup of clinical resources during the prolonged period over which relapse becomes more probable.
Wheeler
T
T
Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK.
Stenning
S
S
Negus
S
S
Picken
S
S
Metcalfe
S
S
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D001943:Breast Neoplasms / Q000473:pathology*; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D018450:Disease Progression; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006291:Health Policy; D006801:Humans; D008137:Longitudinal Studies; D008207:Lymphatic Metastasis; D008875:Middle Aged; D009364:Neoplasm Recurrence, Local / Q000175:diagnosis*; D011379:Prognosis; D016016:Proportional Hazards Models; D018570:Risk Assessment