Stafford, Lesley;
Sinclair, Michelle;
Butow, Phyllis;
Hughes, Janemary;
Park, Allan;
Gilham, Leslie;
Rose, Allison;
Mann, G. Bruce
Is de-escalation of treatment by omission of radiotherapy associated with fear of cancer recurrence in women with early breast cancer? An exploratory study
You can manage bookmarks using lists, please log in to your user account for this.
Media type:
E-Article
Title:
Is de-escalation of treatment by omission of radiotherapy associated with fear of cancer recurrence in women with early breast cancer? An exploratory study
Contributor:
Stafford, Lesley;
Sinclair, Michelle;
Butow, Phyllis;
Hughes, Janemary;
Park, Allan;
Gilham, Leslie;
Rose, Allison;
Mann, G. Bruce
Published:
Springer Science and Business Media LLC, 2023
Published in:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 201 (2023) 3, Seite 367-376
Language:
English
DOI:
10.1007/s10549-023-07039-2
ISSN:
0167-6806;
1573-7217
Origination:
Footnote:
Description:
Abstract Purpose Safe de-intensification of adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) for early breast cancer (BC) is currently under evaluation. Little is known about the patient experience of de-escalation or its association with fear of cancer recurrence (FCR), a key issue in survivorship. We conducted a cross-sectional study to explore this association. Methods Psychometrically validated measures including the Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory-Short Form were completed by three groups of women with early BC: Women in the PROSPECT clinical trial who underwent pre-surgical MRI and omitted RT (A), women who underwent pre-surgical MRI and received RT (B); and women who received usual care (no MRI, received RT; C). Between group differences were analysed with non-parametric tests. A subset from each group participated in a semi-structured interview. These data (n = 44) were analysed with directed content analysis. Results Questionnaires from 400 women were analysed. Significantly lower FCR was observed in Group A (n = 125) than in Group B (n = 102; p = .002) or Group C (n = 173; p = .001), and when participants were categorized by RT status (omitted RT vs received RT; p < .001). The proportion of women with normal FCR was significantly (p < .05) larger in Group A (62%) than in Group B (35%) or Group C (40%). Two qualitative themes emerged: ‘What I had was best’ and ‘Coping with FCR’. Conclusions Omitting RT in the setting of the PROSPECT trial was not associated with higher FCR than receiving RT. Positive perceptions about tailored care, lower treatment burden, and trust in clinicians appear to be protective against FCR.