Opportunities for personalised follow-up in breast cancer: the gap between daily practice and recurrence risk

Madelon M. Voets,Noa S. Hassink,Jeroen Veltman,Cornelis H. Slump,Hendrik Koffijberg,Sabine Siesling

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-024-07246-5

2024-02-29

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

Abstract:Follow-up guidelines barely diverge from a one-size-fits-all approach, even though the risk of recurrence differs per patient. However, the personalization of breast cancer care improves outcomes for patients. This study explores the variation in follow-up pathways in the Netherlands using real-world data to determine guideline adherence and the gap between daily practice and risk-based surveillance, to demonstrate the benefits of personalized risk-based surveillance compared with usual care.

oncology

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The problem that this paper attempts to solve is the gap between clinical practice and risk - based personalized follow - up in the follow - up process of breast cancer patients. Specifically, although the recurrence risks of patients vary, the existing follow - up guidelines still adopt a "one - size - fits - all" approach and are not adjusted according to the recurrence risks of individual patients. This has led to a waste of resources, an additional burden on patients, and an increase in medical costs. Therefore, the study aims to explore the changes in the Dutch breast cancer follow - up pathway by using real - world data, evaluate guideline compliance, and reveal the gap between daily practice and risk - based monitoring, thereby demonstrating the advantages of personalized risk monitoring compared to routine care.

### Research Background
- **Status of Breast Cancer**: Breast cancer is the most common cancer diagnosis in women worldwide and is also the leading cause of cancer - related death in women. In recent years, with the progress of early detection and treatment technologies and the improvement of healthcare, the mortality rate of breast cancer is steadily decreasing.
- **Need for Personalized Treatment**: Although the treatment of breast cancer has gradually become personalized, follow - up still lacks personalized adjustment. The current Dutch guidelines recommend that most patients undergo mammography and physical examination once a year in the first 5 years after curative treatment, regardless of the specific situation of individual patients.
- **Existing Problems**: Many studies have shown that the intensity of follow - up in actual clinical practice is often higher than the standards recommended by the guidelines, and this excessive follow - up is not related to the patient's recurrence risk. In addition, nearly half of the recurrences are detected by the patients themselves during the regular follow - up intervals, and their severity is similar to that of the recurrences detected during regular follow - up.

### Research Objectives
- **Evaluate Guideline Compliance**: Evaluate the compliance with follow - up guidelines in clinical practice by analyzing real - world data.
- **Reveal the Gap**: Reveal the gap between daily clinical practice and risk - based follow - up.
- **Propose Solutions**: Explore how to use objective risk prediction tools (such as the INFLUENCE 2.0 nomogram) to support the formulation of personalized follow - up strategies and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of follow - up.

### Methods
- **Data Sources**: Select breast cancer patients who received treatment in a general hospital between 2005 and 2020 from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR), and extract detailed imaging activities and treatment information from the hospital's electronic health records (EHR).
- **Patient Selection**: The inclusion criteria are patients with stage I - III invasive breast cancer who have received surgical treatment and have no microscopic residual lesions.
- **Data Analysis**: Use process analysis techniques to draw patient and activity diagrams, analyze the actual resource utilization situation and improvement opportunities. Use the INFLUENCE 2.0 nomogram to predict the recurrence risk of patients.

### Results
- **Patient Characteristics**: A total of 3,478 patients were included, with an average follow - up time of 4.9 years. Patients visited the hospital an average of 1.3 times and received 1.7 imaging examinations in the first year after treatment.
- **Imaging Examinations**: Mammography is the most important imaging examination method, accounting for 70% of all imaging examinations. Patients with low recurrence risks visit the hospital more frequently instead.
- **Follow - up Pathways**: There are significant individual differences in follow - up pathways, and there is a large gap between actual clinical practice and risk - based monitoring.

### Conclusions
- **Poor Guideline Compliance**: In actual clinical practice, the deviation of the follow - up pathway does not match the patient's recurrence risk, indicating that it is difficult for doctors to accurately estimate the patient's recurrence risk.
- **Importance of Personalized Follow - up**: Using objective risk prediction tools (such as the INFLUENCE 2.0 nomogram) can bridge this gap, support doctors to more accurately formulate follow - up plans in daily decision - making, and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of follow - up.

Through these research results, the author emphasizes the importance of personalized follow - up in breast cancer management and proposes suggestions for optimizing the follow - up pathway by using modern risk prediction tools.