MATERIALS AND METHODS: An extensive systematic electronic review (PUBMED, CINAHL, PsyINFO and Ovid) and handsearch were carried out to retrieve published articles up to November 2012, using Depression OR Dysthymia AND (Cancer OR Tumor OR Neoplasms as the keywords. Information about the design of the studies, measuring scale, characteristics of the participants, prevalence of depression and its associated factors from the included studies were extracted and summarized.
RESULTS: We identified 32 eligible studies that recruited 10,826 breast cancer survivors. Most were cross-sectional or prospective designed. The most frequent instrument used to screen depression was the Center for Epidemiological Studies for Depression (CES-D, n=11 studies) followed by the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI, n=6 studies) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS, n=6 studies). CES-D returned about similar prevalence of depression (median=22%, range=13-56%) with BDI (median=22%, range=17-48%) but higher than HADS (median=10%, range=1-22%). Depression was associated with several socio-demographic variables, cancer-related factors, treatment-related factors, subject psychological factors, lifestyle factors, social support and quality of life.
CONCLUSIONS: Breast cancer survivors are at risk for depression so that detection of associated factors is important in clinical practice.
METHODS: Two prospective groups of 423 and 965 newly diagnosed breast cancer patients in University of Malaya Medical Centre, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia diagnosed in two time periods ie. 1993 to 1997 and in 1998 to 2002 were studied. Vital status was obtained from the National Registry of Births and Deaths. The overall survival was calculated from the date of diagnosis to the date of death from any cause. The survival differences between the two groups were analysed using the log-rank or Peto-Wilcoxon method. Survival estimates and independent prognostic factors were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method and multivariate analysis using Cox proportional hazard models. P values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Analyses were performed using SPlus 2000 Professional Release 2.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Median follow-up for the two groups were 55 months (SD 29.2 months) in the first group and 52 months (SD 24.43) in the second group. There was improvement in 5-year observed survival from 58.4% (CI 0.54-0.63) to 75.7% (CI 0.73-0.79). The improvement in survival was significantly seen in all co-variates (p< 0.05) except for those aged 40 years and below (p= 0.27), tumour size 2 to 5 cm (p=0.11), grade 3 (p=0.32) and patients with Stage IV disease (p= 0.80). Stage of disease, lymph node (LN) involvement, size and grade were identified as independent prognostic factors in cohort one. For the second cohort; stage and LN involvement remained independent factors with the addition of ER status and ethnicity.
CONCLUSIONS: There was improvement in 5-year observed survival. Besides known prognostic factors, Malay ethnicity was an independent prognostic factor.
METHODS: Data from 585 eligible patients who received palliative radiotherapy between January 2012 and December 2014 were analysed. Median overall survival was calculated from the commencement of first fraction of the last course of radiotherapy to date of death or when censored. 30-DM was calculated as the proportion of patients who died within 30 days from treatment start date. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to estimate survival. Chi-square test and logistic regression was used to assess the impact of potential prognostic factors on median survival and 30-DM.
RESULTS: The most common diagnoses were lung and breast cancers and most common irradiated sites were bone and brain. Median survival and 30-DM were 97 days and 22.7% respectively. Primary cancer, age, treatment course, performance status, systemic treatment post radiotherapy and intended radiotherapy treatment completed had an impact on median survival whereas mainly the latter three factors had an impact on 30-DM.
CONCLUSION: Median survival and factors affecting both survival and 30-DM in our study are comparable to others. However, a 30-DM rate of 22.7% is significantly higher compared to the literature. We need to better select patients who will benefit from palliative radiotherapy in our centre.
METHODS: This historical cohort study included women who underwent mastectomy after diagnosis with stage 0 to stage IIIa breast cancer from 2011 to 2015 in a tertiary hospital. Multivariable regression analyses were used to assess factors associated with immediate breast reconstruction and to measure clinical outcomes.
RESULT: Out of 790 patients with early breast cancer who had undergone mastectomy, only 68 (8.6%) received immediate breast reconstruction. Immediate breast reconstruction was independently associated with younger age at diagnosis, recent calendar years, Chinese ethnicity, higher education level, and invasive ductal carcinomas. Although immediate breast reconstruction was associated with a higher risk of short-term local surgical complications (adjusted odds ratio: 3.58 [95% confidence interval 1.75-7.30]), there were no significant differences in terms of delay in initiation of chemotherapy, 5-year disease-free survival, and 5-year overall survival between both groups in the multivariable analyses.
CONCLUSION: Although associated with short-term surgical complications, immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy does not appear to be associated with delays in initiation of chemotherapy, recurrence, or mortality after breast cancer. These findings are valuable in facilitating shared surgical decision-making, improving access to immediate breast reconstruction, and setting priorities for surgical trainings in middle-income settings.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study examined breast cancer patients between 1st January 1994 and 31st December 2004 in UMMC. Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method and comparisons between groups using the log-rank test. Univariate and multivariate analysis on prognostic factors were carried out using the Cox's proportionate hazard model for patient demographics, and tumour and treatment factors.
RESULTS: One hundred and thirty six patients were identified, with a median age at diagnosis of 75 years. Most had at least one co-morbidity (61.8%). Only 75.0% had a good performance status (ECOG 0-1). Mean tumour size was 4.4 cm. Primary tumour stages (T stages) 3 and 4 were present in 8.1% and 30.1% of patients respectively, and 30.9% had stage III and 8.8% had stage IV disease based on overall AJCC staging. ER positivity was 58.1%. PR status was positive in 30.1%. Surgery was performed in 69.1% of the patients and mastectomy and axillary clearance were the commonest surgical procedures (50.7%). Some 79.4% of patients received hormonal therapy, 30.1% radiotherapy and only 3.6% chemotherapy. Non-standard treatment was given to 39.0% of patients due to a variety of reasons. The cumulative 5 years overall, relapse free and cause specific survivals were 51.9%, 79.7% and 73.3% respectively. Performance status, T3-4 tumour, presence of metastasis, tumour grade and ER status were independent prognostic factors for overall survival. For cause specific survival they were T4 tumour, presence of metastasis and ER status.
CONCLUSION: The 5 years overall survival rate was 51.9% and 41.8% of deaths were non-breast cancer related deaths. Low survival rate was related to low life expectancy in this population. Locally advanced disease, metastatic disease and high ER negative rates play a major role in the survival of elderly breast cancer patients in Malaysia.