ReviewPatient-reported outcomes in ductal carcinoma in situ: A systematic review
Introduction
Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a heterogeneous disease, variously described as pre-cancerous, pre-invasive or non-invasive intra-ductal breast cancer [1]. It accounts for 12–25% of screen-detected breast cancers [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]. Breast cancer-specific mortality of patients treated with currently available therapies is low [8], [9]. Treatment for DCIS reduces the risk of recurrence [10], [11] but can have adverse consequences [12], [13], [14]. There is growing concern about overtreatment of low-risk patients [15], [16], [17], with clinical trials underway to test the safety of observation alone [13], [18], [19]. Since prognosis is excellent [8], patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and impact of treatment on quality of life are particularly relevant to the cost-benefit analysis of DCIS treatment [9]. Understanding the psychological impact of diagnosis is also relevant, for example in relation to effective communication about the risks of invasive disease- and breast cancer-specific mortality.
Treatment options for DCIS are comparable to early stage invasive breast cancer except that axillary dissection and adjuvant chemotherapy are not indicated. Surgical options include breast conserving surgery (BCS) or mastectomy ± breast reconstruction and sometimes sentinel node biopsy. Many women have radiotherapy (RT) following BCS. Some women also receive endocrine therapy.
Abundant high quality evidence about PROs in invasive breast cancer suggests that adverse consequences of DCIS treatment may include pain, fatigue and reduced physical function during recovery, and in the longer term, arm and shoulder dysfunction, and body image and sexuality issues [20]. However, several factors limit the direct application of this evidence to women with DCIS. Treatment for invasive breast cancer more often includes axillary surgery with attendant morbidity, and chemotherapy causing fatigue and loss of physical, role, social and cognitive functioning [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26]. While these problems tend to resolve, some deficits may persist for years [27]. In contrast to patients with DCIS, breast reconstruction for invasive disease is more often postponed until after by post-mastectomy radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy are completed [28], [29]. In addition, women with invasive breast cancer have a higher risk of mortality, with attendant psychological impacts, including anxiety about cancer recurrence [30], [31]. These, in turn, may influence perception of other psychosocial outcomes such as emotional, social and cognitive function, fatigue, body image and sexual functioning [32].
As the survival benefit of treatment for DCIS is much smaller than for invasive breast cancer, quality of life consequences are a pertinent consideration in treatment decision-making. Treatment decisions in DCIS are often guided by tumour pathology [11], [33], [34], [35], but with considerable scope for patient preferences. Thus, it is important to understand the impact of different treatments for DCIS on PROs including quality of life, to inform patient decision-making and provide appropriate care, support and information [9].
We conducted a systematic review of PROs in DCIS. Specific objectives were to:
- 1.
Identify and synthesise qualitative evidence about the experience of women diagnosed with DCIS;
- 2.
Identify and synthesise quantitative evidence about the impacts of diagnosis of DCIS and consequent treatments on PROs from diagnosis to survivorship; and
- 3.
Compare and contrast these outcomes for women receiving different treatments for DCIS.
Section snippets
Methods
We searched five electronic databases: MEDLINE; PsycInfo; CINAHL; EMBASE; and Scopus from database inception to 12th November 2015. Our search strategy comprised a comprehensive set of terms for ‘DCIS’ and ‘PROs’ (Online Appendix A). No language restrictions were applied. To supplement this, we: 1) searched the reference lists of all studies included in this review and of other relevant systematic reviews; 2) conducted an electronic search by author of key researchers identified; and 3)
Results
Twenty-three papers were eligible (Fig. 1); four informed objective 1 (Table 1), and 19 informed objectives 2 and 3 (Table 2). Table 1, Table 2 summarise the study design and methods of the qualitative and quantitative studies, respectively.
Discussion
We found 23 papers reporting 17 studies of PROs after treatment for DCIS. Evidence pooled across treatments indicated that core aspects of quality of life (physical, role, social, emotional function, pain, fatigue) and psychological distress (anxiety, depression) were impacted initially, but most returned to population norm levels by 6–12 months, and all by 2 years. However, fear of breast cancer recurrence and dying of breast cancer were exaggerated, occurred early and persisted for many
Conclusions and future directions
Clearly interpretable evidence about the comparative impact of treatment options for DCIS on PROs has not been published. Well-powered PRO studies are required to track acute to intermediate recovery trajectories and long-term impacts of the range of contemporary and emerging treatment options. Several randomised trials that are active or awaiting activation [13], [18], [19], [66] will provide valuable PRO data, as well as important new data on other outcomes relevant to DCIS treatment
Funding
This work was conducted without grant funding. Professor King is supported by the Australian Government through Cancer Australia.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.
References (66)
- et al.
Low grade ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS): how best to describe it?
Breast
(2014) - et al.
A review of the management of ductal carcinoma in situ following breast conserving surgery
Breast
(2013) - et al.
Addressing overtreatment of screen detected DCIS; the LORIS trial
Eur J Cancer
(2015) - et al.
Feasibility of a prospective, randomised, open-label, international multicentre, phase III, non-inferiority trial to assess the safety of active surveillance for low risk ductal carcinoma in situ—the LORD study
Eur J Cancer
(2015) - et al.
Mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy. A new option for patients with operable invasive breast cancer. Results of a 20 years single institution study
Eur J Surg Oncol
(2011) - et al.
The role of boost and hypofractionation as adjuvant radiotherapy in patients with DCIS: a meta-analysis of observational studies
Radiother Oncol
(2015) - et al.
The challenge of being diagnosed and treated for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS)
Eur J Oncol Nurs
(2008) - et al.
Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Long-term follow-up of health-related quality of life, emotional reactions and body image
Eur J Surg Oncol
(2010) - et al.
A comparison of quality of life, disease impact and risk perception in women with invasive breast cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ
Eur J Cancer
(2007) - et al.
The psychosocial impact of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS): a longitudinal prospective study
Breast
(2010)
Psychosexual functioning and body image following a diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ
J Sex Med
Detection of ductal carcinoma in situ in women undergoing screening mammography
J Natl Cancer Inst
Cancer statistics, 2007
CA Cancer J Clin
Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast
N Engl J Med
NHS breast screening programme annual review 2008
Report to the nation – breast cancer 2012
Setting a research agenda for ductal carcinoma in situ that meets the current need for change
Ann Intern Med
Breast cancer mortality after a diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ
JAMA Oncol
National Institutes of Health State-of-the-Science Conference statement: diagnosis and management of ductal carcinoma in situ September 22–24, 2009
J Natl Cancer Inst
Overview of the randomized trials of radiotherapy in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr
Interim cosmetic and toxicity results from RAPID: a randomized trial of accelerated partial breast irradiation using three-dimensional conformal external beam radiation therapy
J Clin Oncol
Anastrozole versus tamoxifen for the prevention of locoregional and contralateral breast cancer in postmenopausal women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ (IBIS-II DCIS): a double-blind, randomised controlled trial
Lancet
The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review
Lancet
Toward minimizing overtreatment and under treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ in the United States
J Clin Oncol
Comparison of operative versus medical endocrine therapy for low risk DCIS: the COMET trial
Quality-of-life measurement in randomized clinical trials in breast cancer: an updated systematic review (2001–2009)
J Natl Cancer Inst
Variability of patterns of fatigue and quality of life over time based on different breast cancer adjuvant chemotherapy regimens
Oncol Nurs Forum
Adjuvant chemotherapy followed by goserelin compared with either modality alone: the impact on amenorrhea, hot flashes, and quality of life in premenopausal patients—the International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial VIII
J Clin Oncol
Chemotherapy versus ovarian ablation as adjuvant therapy for breast cancer: impact on health-related quality of life in a randomized trial
Breast Cancer Res Treat
Quality of life in women with breast cancer during the first year after random assignment to adjuvant treatment with marrow-supported high-dose chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, thiotepa, and carboplatin or tailored therapy with Fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide: Scandinavian Breast Group Study 9401
J Clin Oncol
Significant negative impact of adjuvant chemotherapy on health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) in women with breast cancer treated by conserving surgery and postoperative 3-D radiotherapy
Strahlenther Onkol
Health-related quality of life in axillary node-negative, estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer patients undergoing AC versus CMF chemotherapy: findings from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-23
Breast Cancer Res Treat
Cited by (33)
Effect of propofol and sevoflurane on postoperative fatigue after laparoscopic hysterectomy
2024, Journal of Psychosomatic ResearchIdentification of patients with ductal carcinoma in situ at high risk of postoperative upstaging: A comprehensive review and an external (un)validation of predictive models developed
2022, European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive BiologyViews of healthcare professionals about the role of active monitoring in the management of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS): Qualitative interview study
2020, BreastCitation Excerpt :Not surprisingly, women are often confused about the meaning of a DCIS diagnosis [19] and have exaggerated risk perceptions and anxiety [20]. Furthermore, DCIS patients have high unmet needs for information and treatment decision support, which has important implications for women’s capacity to participate in shared decision making about management [6,21,22]. Given the current challenges faced by HCPs in relation to DCIS, as well as the potential for overdiagnosis of DCIS [23] this study aimed to understand HCPs’ views on the management options for DCIS as well as their benefits and harms, and explore key influences on treatment decision making.
Quality of life after breast-conserving therapy and adjuvant radiotherapy for non-low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ (BIG 3-07/TROG 07.01): 2-year results of a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial
2020, The Lancet OncologyCitation Excerpt :Our study adds to knowledge about recovery trajectories in women diagnosed with and treated for ductal carcinoma in situ. The results were consistent with published studies that showed that core aspects of HRQOL were initially affected, but most returned to baseline within 24 months.2 The degree of worsening across the core aspects of HRQOL was generally small except for fatigue scores, which showed a substantial deterioration at the end of treatment.