Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Health states of women after conservative surgery and radiation for breast cancer

  • Brief Report
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of the study is to use the EQ-5D instrument to evaluate the long-term health states of women with early stage breast cancer treated by breast-conserving surgery and radiation. A total of 1,050 women treated with conservative surgery and radiation with or without systemic therapy completed 2,480 questionnaires during follow-up visits. The EQ-5D is a standardized and validated instrument for measuring quality of life outcomes. The descriptive system uses 5 dimensions of health with three possible levels of response that combine into 243 (35) possible unique health states that are each assigned a values-based index score from 0 to 1. The visual analog scale (VAS) rates health on a simple vertical line from 0 to 100. Higher scores correspond to better health status. The mean index scores were 0.89 (95% CI: 0.87–0.91) at 5 years, 0.9 (95% CI: 0.86–0.94) at 10 years, and 0.9 (95% CI: 0.83–1.0) at 15 years. There were no significant differences in health states between patients by age when compared with U.S. controls. There was a statistically significant positive correlation between the results of the VAS and descriptive system. Significant trends in health dimensions over 15 years were increased problems with self-care and decreased problems with anxiety/depression, pain/discomfort, and performing usual activities. This study of EQ-5D is unique and demonstrates very high quality of life in patients long-term after breast-conserving surgery and radiation. These health states are comparable to the adult female U.S. population. These data will provide valuable patient utility information for informing decision analyses investigating new treatments in women with breast cancer.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  1. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (2008) NCCN practice guidelines for breast cancer. http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/PDF/breast.pdf

  2. NIH Consensus Conference (1991) Treatment of early-stage breast cancer. JAMA 265:391–395

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L, Greco M, Saccozzi R, Luini A, Aguilar M, Marubini E (2002) Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 347:1227–1232

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, Margolese RG, Deutsch M, Fisher ER, Jeong J, Wolmark N (2002) Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 347:1233–1241

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Fisher B, Dignam J, Wolmark N, Mamounas E, Costantino J, Poller W, Fisher ER, Wickerham DL, Deutsch M, Margolese R et al (1998) Lumpectomy and radiation therapy for the treatment of intraductal breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-17. J Clin Oncol 16:441–452

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Fisher ER, Dignam J, Tan-Chiu E, Costantino J, Fisher B, Paik S, Wolmark N (1999) Pathologic findings from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast Project (NSABP) eight-year update of Protocol B-17. Intraductal carcinoma. Cancer 86:429–438

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (2005) Effects of radiotherapy and of differences in the extent of surgery for early breast cancer on local recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet 366(9503):2087–2106

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ganz PA, Kwan L, Stanton AL, Krupnick JL, Rowland JH, Meyerowitz BE, Bower JE, Belin TR (2004) Quality of life at the end of primary treatment of breast cancer: first results from the moving beyond cancer randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 96:376–387

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Prescott RJ, Kunkler IH, Williams LJ, King CC, Jack W, van der Pol M, Goh TT, Lindley R, Cairns J (2007) A randomised controlled trial of postoperative radiotherapy following breast-conserving surgery in a minimum-risk older population. The PRIME trial. Health Technol Assess 11(31):1–149 iii–iv

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Rayan G, Dawson LA, Bezjak A, Lau A, Fyles AW, Yi Q, Merante P, Vallis KA (2003) Prospective comparison of breast pain in patients participating in a randomized trial of breast-conserving surgery and tamoxifen with or without radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 55:154–161

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Wengstrom Y, Haggmark C, Strander H, Forsberg C (2000) Perceived symptoms and quality of life in women with breast cancer receiving radiation therapy. Eur J Oncol Nurs 4(2):78–88 discussion 89–90

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Back M, Ahern V, Delaney G, Graham P, Steigler A, Wratten C (2005) Absence of adverse early quality of life outcomes of radiation therapy in breast conservation therapy for early breast cancer. Australas Radiol 49(1):39–43

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Whelan TJ, Levine M, Julian J, Kirkbride P, Skingley P (2000) The effects of radiation therapy on quality of life of women with breast carcinoma: results of a randomized trial. Ontario Clinical Oncology Group. Cancer 88(10):2260–2266

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lee TS, Kilbreath SL, Refshauge KM, Pendlebury SC, Beith JM, Lee MJ (2008) Quality of life of women treated with radiotherapy for breast cancer. Support Care Cancer 16:399–405

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Waljee JF, Hu ES, Ubel PA, Smith DM, Newman LA, Alderman AK (2008) Effect of esthetic outcome after breast-conserving surgery on psychosocial functioning and quality of life. J Clin Oncol 26:3331–3337

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. EuroQol Group (1990) EuroQol—a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 16:199–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. American Joint Committee on Cancer (1997) AJCC cancer staging manual, 5th edn. Lippincott–Raven, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  18. Fowble B, Freedman G (2000) Cancer of the breast. In: Wang CC (ed) Clinical Radiation oncology: indications, techniques and results, 2nd edn. Wiley-Liss, Inc, New York, NY

  19. Luo N, Johnson JA, Shaw JW, Feeny D, Coons SJ (2005) Self-reported health status of the general adult U.S. population as assessed by the EQ-5D and Health Utilities Index. Med Care 43(11):1078–1086

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Geinitz H, Zimmermann FB, Stoll P, Thamm R, Kaffenberger W, Ansorg K, Keller M, Busch R, van Beuningen D, Molls M (2001) Fatigue, serum cytokine levels, and blood cell counts during radiotherapy of patients with breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 51(3):691–698

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bower JE, Ganz PA, Desmond KA, Bernaards C, Rowland JH, Meyerowitz BE, Belin TR (2006) Fatigue in long-term breast carcinoma survivors: a longitudinal investigation. Cancer 106(4):751–758

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Wratten C, Kilmurray J, Nash S, Seldon M, Hamilton CS, O’Brien PC, Denham JW (2004) Fatigue during breast radiotherapy and its relationship to biological factors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 59(1):160–167

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Irvine D, Vincent L, Graydon J, Bubela N (1998) Fatigue in women with breast cancer receiving radiation therapy. Cancer Nurs 21:127–135

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Konski A (2008) Economic analysis of health care interventions. Semin Radiat Oncol 18(3):168–174

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Konski A (1997) Use of health plan data to estimate cost and outcomes of a breast cancer population. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 39:230

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hayman JA, Hillner BE, Harris JR, Pierce LJ, Weeks JC (2000) Cost-effectiveness of adding an electron-beam boost to tangential radiation therapy in patients with negative margins after conservative surgery for early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 18:287–295

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Karnon J, Delea T, Barghout V (2008) Cost utility analysis of early adjuvant letrozole or anastrozole versus tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with early invasive breast cancer: the UK perspective. Eur J Health Econ 9(2):171–183

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Wallner PE, Konski A (2008) A changing paradigm in the study and adoption of emerging health care technologies: coverage with evidence development. J Am Coll Radiol 5(11):1125–1129

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

The authors thank Cindy Rosser for her collection and management of the data for the study population.

Conflict of Interest Statement

No conflicts reported.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gary M. Freedman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Freedman, G.M., Li, T., Anderson, P.R. et al. Health states of women after conservative surgery and radiation for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 121, 519–526 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-009-0552-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-009-0552-5

Keywords

Navigation