Search

Background: The first COVID-19 wave in 2020 necessitated temporary suspension of non-essential medical services including organized cancer screening programs in Belgium. This study assessed the impact of the pandemic on breast cancer (BC) incidence, stage at diagnosis, and management in Belgium in 2020., Methods: All Belgian residents diagnosed with in situ or invasive BC in 2015-2020 in the nationwide, population-based cancer registry database were included. Incidence trends for 2015-2019 were extrapolated to predict incidence and stage distribution for 2020 and compared with the observed values. National healthcare reimbursement data were used to examine treatment strategies. Exact tumor diameter and nodal involvement, extracted from pathology reports, were analyzed for 2019 and 2020., Results: 74,975 tumors were selected for analysis of incidence and clinical stage. Invasive BC incidence declined by -5.0% in 2020, with a drop during the first COVID-19 wave (Mar-Jun; -23%) followed by a rebound (Jul-Dec; +7%). Predicted and observed incidence (in situ + invasive) was not different in patients < 50 years. In the 50-69 and 70 + age groups, significant declines of -4.1% and - 8.4% respectively were found. Excess declines were seen in clinical stage 0 and I in Mar-Jun, without excess increases in clinical stage II-IV tumors in Jul-Dec. There was no increase in average tumor diameter or nodal involvement in 2020. Patients diagnosed in Mar-Jun received significantly more neoadjuvant therapy, particularly neoadjuvant hormonal therapy for patients with clinical stage I-II BC., Conclusions: BC incidence decline in 2020 in Belgium was largely restricted to very early-stage BC and patients aged 50 and over. Delayed diagnosis did not result in an overall progression to higher stage at diagnosis in 2020. Observed treatment adaptations in Belgium were successful in prioritizing patients for surgery while preventing tumor progression in those with surgical delay. Continuation of monitoring BC incidence and stage in the future is crucial., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objective: Assessing the association between hospital surgical volume (SV) and outcomes after rectal cancer surgery (RCS), using national population-based data., Summary Background Data: For RCS, the association of higher SV with improved short- and/or long-term outcomes remains controversial., Methods: National cancer registry data and administrative data were used to select patients diagnosed with stage I-III rectal cancer in 2009-2018 and who underwent RCS. The average annual SV of RCS was categorised as low (<15; LV), medium (15-29; MV) or high (≥30; HV). The association between SV and 90-day and 1-year excess postoperative mortality (90DPM and 1YEPM) and 5-year observed survival (5YOS) was evaluated., Results: From the 11,519 patients , RCS was performed in LV (4,088; 36%), MV (2,795; 24%) or HV (4,636; 40%) hospitals. Observed 90DPM was significantly better in HV (2.3% 95%CI[1.9,2.8]) than in LV (3.7% 95%CI[3.2,4.4]) and MV (3.5% 95%CI[2.9,4.3]) with adjusted OR 1.4, P<0.0001. Continuous regression analysis showed significantly higher 90DPM in annual SV <35 compared to ≥35 (OR 1.6 95%CI[1.21,2.11]; P=0.0009). Observed 1YEPM was significantly better in HV (2.9% 95%CI[2.2,3.6]) compared to LV (4.7% 95%CI [3.9,5.6]) with adjusted excess HR 1.31 95%CI[1.00,1.73] and P=0.05, and to MV (5.0% 95%CI[4.0,6.1]) with adjusted excess HR 1.45 95%CI[1.09,1.94] and P=0.01. The 5YOS was significantly better in HV (75.9% 95%CI[74.6,77.2]) than in LV (70.3% 95%CI[68.8,71.8]) and MV (71.5% 95%CI[69.7,73.2]) with adjusted HR 1.4 in both LV and MV versus HV, P≤0.003., Conclusions: This population-based study identified robustly superior outcomes at 90-days, 1-year and 5-years after RCS in hospitals with higher volumes., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest: All authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: We aimed to assess the impact of surgery of primary tumor in overall survival (OS) of women with de novo metastatic breast cancer., Methods: Nationwide, population-based retrospective cohort study of women diagnosed with de novo metastatic breast cancer in Belgium, between Jan/2010-Dec/2014. Data was obtained from the Belgian Cancer Registry and administrative databases. "Surgery" group was defined by surgery of primary tumor up to nine months after diagnosis. We excluded women who did not receive systemic treatment or did not complete nine months follow-up after diagnosis. All the subsequent analyses reporting on overall survival and the stratified outcome analyses were performed based on this nine-month landmark cohort. OS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method and compared using adjusted Cox proportional hazards models controlling for confounders with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We performed a stratified analysis according to surgery timing and a propensity score matching analysis., Results: 1985 patients, 534 (26.9%) in the "Surgery" and 1451 (73.1%) in the "No Surgery" group. Patients undergoing surgery were younger (p < 0.001), had better performance status (PS) (p < 0.001), and higher proportion of HER2-positive and triple-negative breast cancer (p = 0.012). Median follow-up was 86.0 months (82.6-88.5). Median OS was 60.1 months (57.1-68.2) in the "Surgery" vs. 41.9 months (39.8-44.2) in the "No Surgery" group (adjusted HR 0.56; 0.49-0.64). OS was similar when surgery was performed upfront or after systemic treatment. Propensity score matching analysis confirmed the same findings., Conclusion: Among patients receiving systemic treatment for de novo metastatic breast cancer and surviving nine months or more, those who received surgery of the primary tumor within nine months of diagnosis have longer subsequent survival than those who did not., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)