Advanced

Aesthetic result after breast-conserving therapy is associated with quality of life several years after treatment. Swedish women evaluated with BCCT.core and BREAST-Q™

Dahlbäck, Cecilia LU ; Ullmark, Jenny Heiman; Rehn, Martin LU ; Ringberg, Anita LU and Manjer, Jonas LU (2017) In Breast Cancer Research and Treatment p.1-9
Abstract

Purpose: A gold standard for evaluation of aesthetic outcome after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) is still lacking. The BCCT.core software has been developed to assess aesthetic result in a standardised way. We aimed to study how the result of BCCT.core after BCT is associated with quality of life, measured with the BREAST-Q™, a validated questionnaire. Methods: Women eligible for BCT were consecutively recruited between February 1st 2008 and January 31st 2012 (n = 653). Photographs of 310 women, taken one year after BCT, were evaluated using the BCCT.core software. The postoperative BCT module of the BREAST-Q™ questionnaire was administered by mail and 348 questionnaires were returned (median 5.5 years after BCT). In all, 216 women... (More)

Purpose: A gold standard for evaluation of aesthetic outcome after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) is still lacking. The BCCT.core software has been developed to assess aesthetic result in a standardised way. We aimed to study how the result of BCCT.core after BCT is associated with quality of life, measured with the BREAST-Q™, a validated questionnaire. Methods: Women eligible for BCT were consecutively recruited between February 1st 2008 and January 31st 2012 (n = 653). Photographs of 310 women, taken one year after BCT, were evaluated using the BCCT.core software. The postoperative BCT module of the BREAST-Q™ questionnaire was administered by mail and 348 questionnaires were returned (median 5.5 years after BCT). In all, 216 women had both BCCT.core results and completed BREAST-Q™ questionnaires available. Results: The results from the BCCT.core evaluation were: excellent n = 49 (15.8%); good n = 178 (57.4%); fair n = 73 (23.5%); poor n = 10 (3.2%). The median BREAST-Q™ score for satisfaction with breasts was 66 [interquartile range (IQR) 57–80] and for psychosocial well-being 82 (IQR 61–100). Poor/fair results on BCCT.core were associated with Q-scores below median for both satisfaction with breasts [odds ratio (OR) 3.4 (confidence interval (CI) 1.7–6.8)] as well as for psychosocial well-being [OR 2.2 (CI 1.1–4.2)]. Conclusions: A statistically significant association between BCCT.core results one year after BCT and quality of life ratings using BREAST-Q™ several years later is shown in this study. This implies that the BCCT.core may be valuable in BCT follow-up and used as a standardised instrument in the evaluation of aesthetic results.

(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
in press
subject
keywords
Aesthetic result, BCCT.core, Breast-conserving therapy, BREAST-Q, Health-related quality of life
in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
pages
9 pages
publisher
Springer
external identifiers
  • scopus:85019883876
  • wos:000404777500017
ISSN
0167-6806
DOI
10.1007/s10549-017-4306-5
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
bfd96c74-e228-4ad1-8091-e41783742a15
date added to LUP
2017-06-30 14:17:33
date last changed
2017-09-18 11:37:09
@article{bfd96c74-e228-4ad1-8091-e41783742a15,
  abstract     = {<p>Purpose: A gold standard for evaluation of aesthetic outcome after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) is still lacking. The BCCT.core software has been developed to assess aesthetic result in a standardised way. We aimed to study how the result of BCCT.core after BCT is associated with quality of life, measured with the BREAST-Q™, a validated questionnaire. Methods: Women eligible for BCT were consecutively recruited between February 1st 2008 and January 31st 2012 (n = 653). Photographs of 310 women, taken one year after BCT, were evaluated using the BCCT.core software. The postoperative BCT module of the BREAST-Q™ questionnaire was administered by mail and 348 questionnaires were returned (median 5.5 years after BCT). In all, 216 women had both BCCT.core results and completed BREAST-Q™ questionnaires available. Results: The results from the BCCT.core evaluation were: excellent n = 49 (15.8%); good n = 178 (57.4%); fair n = 73 (23.5%); poor n = 10 (3.2%). The median BREAST-Q™ score for satisfaction with breasts was 66 [interquartile range (IQR) 57–80] and for psychosocial well-being 82 (IQR 61–100). Poor/fair results on BCCT.core were associated with Q-scores below median for both satisfaction with breasts [odds ratio (OR) 3.4 (confidence interval (CI) 1.7–6.8)] as well as for psychosocial well-being [OR 2.2 (CI 1.1–4.2)]. Conclusions: A statistically significant association between BCCT.core results one year after BCT and quality of life ratings using BREAST-Q™ several years later is shown in this study. This implies that the BCCT.core may be valuable in BCT follow-up and used as a standardised instrument in the evaluation of aesthetic results.</p>},
  author       = {Dahlbäck, Cecilia and Ullmark, Jenny Heiman and Rehn, Martin and Ringberg, Anita and Manjer, Jonas},
  issn         = {0167-6806},
  keyword      = {Aesthetic result,BCCT.core,Breast-conserving therapy,BREAST-Q,Health-related quality of life},
  language     = {eng},
  month        = {05},
  pages        = {1--9},
  publisher    = {Springer},
  series       = {Breast Cancer Research and Treatment},
  title        = {Aesthetic result after breast-conserving therapy is associated with quality of life several years after treatment. Swedish women evaluated with BCCT.core and BREAST-Q™},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-017-4306-5},
  year         = {2017},
}