METHOD: All newly diagnosed breast cancer patients with node-negative and hormone receptor negative tumors measuring≤2cm at the University Malaya Medical Centre (Malaysia) from 1993 to 2013 were included. Mortality of patients with and without adjuvant chemotherapy were compared and adjusted for possible confounders using propensity score.
RESULTS: Of 6732 breast cancer patients, 341 (5.1%) had small (≤2cm), node-negative and hormone receptor negative tumors at diagnosis. Among them, only 214 (62.8%) received adjuvant chemotherapy. Five-year overall survival was 88.1% (95% confidence interval (CI): 82.0%-94.2%) for patients receiving chemotherapy and 89.6% (95% CI: 85.1%-94.1%) for patients without chemotherapy. Chemotherapy was not associated with survival following adjustment for age, ethnicity, tumor size, tumor grade, HER2 status, lympho-vascular invasion, type of surgery and radiotherapy administration. However, chemotherapy was associated with a significant survival advantage (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.35, 95%CI: 0.14-0.91) in a subgroup of women with high-grade tumors.
CONCLUSION: Adjuvant chemotherapy does not appear to be associated with a survival benefit in women with T1N0M0, hormone receptor negative breast cancer except in those with high-grade tumors.
METHODS: Country-specific data from a multinational prospective cohort study, Association of Southeast Asian Nations Costs in Oncology Study, comprising 1,249 cancer survivors were included. Household costs of complementary medicine (healthcare practices or products that are not considered as part of conventional medicine) throughout the first year after cancer diagnosis were measured using cost diaries. Study outcomes comprised (1) shares of household expenditures on complementary medicine from total out-of-pocket costs and health costs that were respectively incurred in relation to cancer, (2) incidence of financial catastrophe (out-of-pocket costs related to cancer ≥ 30% of annual household income), and (3) economic hardship (inability to pay for essential household items or services).
RESULTS: One third of patients reported out-of-pocket household expenditures on complementary medicine in the immediate year after cancer diagnosis, accounting to 20% of the total out-of-pocket costs and 35% of the health costs. Risk of financial catastrophe was higher in households reporting out-of-pocket expenditures on complementary medicine (adjusted odds ratio: 1.39 [95% CI, 1.05 to 1.86]). Corresponding odds ratio within patients from low-income households showed that they were substantially more vulnerable: 2.28 (95% CI, 1.41 to 3.68). Expenditures on complementary medicine were, however, not associated with economic hardship in the immediate year after cancer diagnosis.
CONCLUSION: In settings with universal health coverage, integration of subsidized evidence-based complementary medicine into mainstream cancer care may alleviate catastrophic expenditures. However, this must go hand in hand with interventions to reduce the use of nonevidence-based complementary therapies following cancer.
METHODS: Focus group discussions were conducted with cancer patients who were diagnosed at least 1 year prior to recruitment, and either had paid work, were self-employed, currently unemployed, or currently retired (N = 66).
RESULTS: Three main themes were identified: (1) loss of income: While some participants were entitled for a 1-year cancer-specific sick leave, many other participants recounted having insufficient paid sick leave, forcing them to take prolonged unpaid leave to complete treatment; (2) dealing with side effects of cancer and its treatment: The need for workplace accommodations was highlighted including flexible working hours, lighter workloads, and dedicated rest areas to enable patients to cope better; (3) Discrimination and stigma at workplace: Some participants mentioned being passed over on a promotion, getting demoted, or being forced to resign once their cancer diagnosis was disclosed, highlighting an urgent need to destigmatize cancer in the workplace.
CONCLUSION: In settings with limited employment protection policies, a cancer diagnosis severely impacts the working experiences of patients, leading to financial loss. Urgent interventions and legislative reforms are needed in these settings to address the unmet employment needs of cancer survivors.
IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: This study may facilitate planning of local solutions to fulfill the unmet employment needs following cancer, such as return-to-work navigation services.
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.
METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study involved interviewing newly diagnosed breast cancer patients in the University Malaya Medical Centre (UMMC) using a structured questionnaire. Eligible respondents were interviewedduring a routine clinical visit.
RESULTS: A total of 400 patients were interviewed, of whom 139 (34.8%) were CAM users. Dietary supplementation (n = 107, 77.0%) was the most frequently used type of CAM, followed by spiritual healing (n = 40, 28.8%) and traditional Chinese medicine (n = 32, 23.0%). Malay ethnic group (n = 61, 43.9%) was the largest group of CAM users, followed by Chinese (n = 57, 41.0%) and Indian (n = 20, 14.4%). Majority of these CAM users (n = 87, 73.1%) did not disclose the use of CAM to their doctors. Most of them used remedies based on the recommendation of family and friends. Malay ethnicity and patients with 3 or more comorbidities were more likely to use CAM.
CONCLUSION: There is substantial use of CAM among breast cancer patients in UMMC prior to seeking hospital treatment, and the most popular CAM modality is dietary supplements. Since, the majority of CAM users do not disclose the use of CAM to their physicians, therefore health care providers should ensure that those patients who are likely to use CAM are appropriately counseled and advised.
METHODS: This hospital-based prospective cohort study will comprise patients with breast cancer (18 years and above), managed in the University Malaya Medical Centre (UMMC). We aim to recruit 1000 cancer survivors over a 6-year period. Data collection will occur at baseline (within 3 months of diagnosis), 6 months, and 1, 3 and 5 years following diagnosis. The primary outcomes are disease-free survival and overall survival, and secondary outcome is QoL. Factors measured are demographic and socioeconomic factors, lifestyle factors (eg, dietary intake, physical activity), anthropometry measurements (eg, height, weight, waist, hip circumference, body fat analysis), psychosocial aspects, and complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) usage.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol was approved by the UMMC Ethical Committee in January 2012. All participants are required to provide written informed consent. The findings from our cohort study will be disseminated via scientific publication as well as presentation to stakeholders including the patients, clinicians, the public and policymakers, via appropriate avenues.