Search

Study Question: Do female adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer have a higher risk of subsequent infertility diagnosis than AYAs without cancer?Summary Answer: Female AYAs with breast, hematological, thyroid and melanoma cancer have a higher risk of subsequent infertility diagnosis.What Is Known Already: Cancer therapies have improved substantially, leading to dramatic increases in survival. As survival improves, there is an increasing emphasis on optimizing the quality of life among cancer survivors. Many cancer therapies increase the risk of infertility, but we lack population-based studies that quantify the risk of subsequent infertility diagnosis in female AYAs with non-gynecological cancers. The literature is limited to population-based studies comparing pregnancy or birth rates after cancer against unexposed women, or smaller studies using markers of the ovarian reserve as a proxy of infertility among female survivors of cancer.Study Design, Size, Duration: We conducted a population-based cohort study using universal health care databases in the province of Ontario, Canada. Using data from the Ontario Cancer Registry, we identified all women 15-39 years of age diagnosed with the most common cancers in AYAs (brain, breast, colorectal, leukemia, Hodgkin lymphoma, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, thyroid and melanoma) from 1992 to 2011 who lived at least 5 years recurrence-free (Exposed, n = 14,316). Women with a tubal ligation, bilateral oophorectomy or hysterectomy previous to their cancer diagnosis were excluded. We matched each exposed woman by age, census subdivision, and parity to five randomly selected unexposed women (n = 60,975) and followed subjects until 31 December 2016.Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: Infertility diagnosis after 1 year of cancer was identified using information on physician billing codes through the Ontario Health Insurance Plan database (ICD-9 628). Modified Poisson regression models were used to assess the risk of infertility diagnosis (relative risk, RR) adjusted for income quintile and further stratified by parity at the time of cancer diagnosis (nulliparous and parous).Main Results and the Role Of Chance: Mean age at cancer diagnosis was 31.4 years. Overall, the proportion of infertility diagnosis was higher in cancer survivors compared to unexposed women. Mean age of infertility diagnosis was similar among cancer survivors and unexposed women (34.8 years and 34.9 years, respectively). The overall risk of infertility diagnosis was higher in cancer survivors (RR 1.30; 95% CI 1.23-1.37). Differences in infertility risk varied by type of cancer. Survivors of breast cancer (RR 1.46; 95% CI 1.30-1.65), leukemia (RR 1.56; 95% CI 1.09-2.22), Hodgkin lymphoma (RR 1.49; 95% CI 1.28-1.74), non-Hodgkin lymphoma (RR 1.42; 95% CI 1.14, 1.76), thyroid cancer (RR 1.20; 95% CI 1.10-1.30) and melanoma (RR 1.17; 95% CI 1.01, 1.35) had a higher risk of infertility diagnosis compared to women without cancer. After stratification by parity, the association remained in nulliparous women survivors of breast cancer, leukemia, lymphoma and melanoma, whereas it was attenuated in parous women. In survivors of thyroid cancer, the association remained statistically significant in both nulliparous and parous women. In survivors of brain or colorectal cancer, the association was not significant, overall or after stratification by parity.Limitations, Reasons For Caution: Non-biological factors that may influence the likelihood of seeking a fertility assessment may not be captured in administrative databases. The effects of additional risk factors, including cancer treatment, which may modify the associations, need to be assessed in future studies.Wider Implications Of the Findings: Reproductive health surveillance in female AYAs with cancer is a priority, especially those with breast cancer, leukemia and lymphoma. Our finding of a potential effects of thyroid cancer (subject to over-diagnosis) and, to a lesser extent, melanoma need to be further studied, and, if an effect is confirmed, possible mechanisms need to be elucidated.Study Funding/competing Interest(s): Funding was provided by the Faculty of Health Sciences and Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Queen's University. There are no competing interests to declare.Trial Registration Number: N/A. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction The understanding of the biology and epidemiology of, and the optimal therapeutic strategies for, breast cancer (bca) in younger women is limited. We present the rationale, design, and initial recruitment of Reducing the Burden of Breast Cancer in Young Women (ruby), a unique national prospective cohort study designed to examine the diagnosis, treatment, quality of life, and outcomes from the time of diagnosis for young women with bca. Methods Over a 4-year period at 33 sites across Canada, the ruby study will use a local and virtual recruitment model to enrol 1200 women with bca who are 40 years of age or younger at the time of diagnosis, before initiation of any treatment. At a minimum, comprehensive patient, tumour, and treatment data will be collected to evaluate recurrence and survival. Patients may opt to complete patient-reported questionnaires, to provide blood and tumour samples, and to be contacted for future research, forming the core dataset from which 4 subprojects evaluating genetics, lifestyle factors, fertility, and local management or delivery of care will be performed. Summary The ruby study will be the most comprehensive repository of data, biospecimens, and patient-reported outcomes ever collected with respect to young women with bca from the time of diagnosis, enabling research unique to that population now and into the future. This research model could be used for other oncology settings in Canada. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Clinical practice guidelines recommend a multidisciplinary approach to cancer care that brings together all relevant disciplines to discuss optimal disease management. However, the literature is characterized by heterogeneous definitions and few reviews about the processes and outcomes of multidisciplinary care. The objective of this scoping review was to identify and classify the definitions and characteristics of multidisciplinary care, as well as outcomes and interventions for patients with breast cancer. Methods A systematic search for quantitative and qualitative studies about multidisciplinary care for patients with breast cancer was conducted for January 2001 to December 2017 in the following electronic databases: MEDLINE, embase, PsycInfo, and CINAHL. Two reviewers independently applied our eligibility criteria at level 1 (title/abstract) and level 2 (full-text) screening. Data were extracted and synthesized descriptively. Results The search yielded 9537 unique results, of which 191 were included in the final analysis. Two main types of multidisciplinary care were identified: conferences and clinics. Most studies focused on outcomes of multidisciplinary care that could be variously grouped at the patient, provider, and system levels. Research into processes tended to focus on processes that facilitate implementation: teamworking, meeting logistics, infrastructure, quality audit, and barriers and facilitators. Summary Approaches to multidisciplinary care using conferences and clinics are well described. However, studies vary by design, clinical context, patient population, and study outcome. The heterogeneity of the literature, including the patient populations studied, warrants further specification of multidisciplinary care practice and systematic reviews of the processes or contexts that make the implementation and operation of multidisciplinary care effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objectives Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (cpm) has been increasingly common among women with unilateral invasive breast cancer (ibca) even though the data that support it are limited. Using a population-based cohort, the objectives of the present study were to describe factors predictive of cpm in young women (=35 years) with ibca and to evaluate the impact of the procedure on mortality. Methods All women diagnosed during 1994-2003 and treated with cpm were identified from the Ontario Cancer Registry. Logistic regression was used to identify patient and tumour factors associated with the use of cpm. Multivariate analyses were used to assess the effect of cpm on recurrence and mortality. Results Of 614 women identified, 81 underwent cpm (13.2%). On multivariable analysis, factors associated with cpm included negative lymph node status, negative estrogen receptor status, and initial breast-conserving surgery with re-excision. At follow-up, breast cancer-specific mortality was similar for women who did and did not undergo cpm. Conclusions Use of cpm in young women with ibca (compared with non-use) was not associated improved breast cancer-specific mortality. Factors found to be predictive of cpm were negative lymph node status, negative estrogen receptor status, and initial breast-conserving surgery followed by re-excision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Data on the social determinants of health can help primary care practices target improvement efforts, yet relevant data are rarely available. Our family practice located in Toronto, Ontario routinely collects patient-level sociodemographic data via a pilot-tested survey developed by a multi-organizational steering committee. We sought to use these data to assess the relationship between the social determinants and colorectal, cervical and breast cancer screening, and to describe the opportunities and challenges of using data on social determinants from a self-administered patient survey. Methods: Patients of the family practice eligible for at least one of the three cancer screening types, based on age and screening guidelines as of June 30, 2015 and who had answered at least one question on a socio-demographic survey were included in the study. We linked self-reported data from the sociodemographic survey conducted in the waiting room with patients' electronic medical record data and cancer screening records. We created an individual-level income variable (low-income cut-off) that defined a poverty threshold and took household size into account. The sociodemographic characteristics of patients who were overdue for screening were compared to those who were up-to-date for screening for each cancer type using chi-squared tests. Results: We analysed data for 5766 patients for whom we had survey data. Survey participants had significantly higher screening rates (72.9, 78.7, 74.4% for colorectal, cervical and breast cancer screening respectively) than the 13, 036 patients for whom we did not have survey data (59.2, 65.3, 58.9% respectively). Foreign-born patients were significantly more likely to be up-to-date on colorectal screening than their Canadian-born peers but showed no significant differences in breast or cervical cancer screening. We found a significant association between the low-income cut-off variable and cancer screening; neighbourhood income quintile was not significantly associated with cancer screening. Housing status was also significantly associated with colorectal, cervical and breast cancer screening. There was a large amount of missing data for the low-income cut-off variable, approximately 25% across the three cohorts. Conclusion: While we were able to show that neighbourhood income might under-estimate income-related disparities in screening, individual-level income was also the most challenging variable to collect. Future work in this area should target the income disparity in cancer screening and simultaneously explore how best to collect measures of poverty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Presents the results of a study on trends in the treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast in the U.S., as of June 2004. Mastectomy; Axillary dissection; Radiation use as a component of breast conservation therapy.