Analysis of Utility Assessment Scores to Objectify the Health Burden Caused by Breast Conservation Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Lumpectomy followed by radiation, known as breast conservation therapy (BCT), is a viable surgical treatment option for early-stage breast cancer. However, the current literature suggests that patients prefer mastectomy over BCT, likely due to the wide variety of postmastectomy reconstructive options. Our aim is to investigate the objective health burden of living with BCT to help surgeons gain a better understanding of patient treatment preferences. METHODS: Three validated health state utility tools were used to objectify the burden of living with post-BCT results: visual analogue scale (VAS), time trade-off (TTO), and standard gamble (SG). A prospective sample of the general population and medical students were recruited, and their responses analyzed to attain these scores. RESULTS: Utility scores for living with BCT are VAS 0.81 ± 0.19, TTO 0.93 ± 0.10, and SG 0.92 ± 0.14. The TTO and SG suggest a willingness to trade 2.5 years of life years and an 8% chance of death undergoing reconstructive procedures to correct a BCT defect, respectively. Age, gender, race, education, and income were not statistically significant independent predictors for higher or lower utility scores. CONCLUSION: The impact of the health burden of BCT was ascertained using validated objective numeric utility scores. These indices demonstrate a willingness to trade less life years to undergo correction of a BCT defect than reconstruction following unilateral mastectomy. They can provide surgeons with the best objective understanding of patient preferences for shared decision-making in the management of breast cancer.

HISTORIQUE: La lumpectomie suivie d'une radiothérapie, ou conservation mammaire (CM), est un traitement chirurgical viable du cancer du sein précoce. Selon les publications, les patients préfèrent toutefois la mastectomie à la CM, probablement en raison du large éventail de possibilités de reconstructions après la mastectomie. Les chercheurs visent à explorer le fardeau objectif d'une vie avec une CM pour la santé, afin d'aider les chirurgiens à mieux comprendre les préférences des patientes en matière de traitement. MÉTHODOLOGIE: Les chercheurs ont utilisé trois outils utilitaires validés sur l'état de santé pour objectiver le fardeau de la vie après une CM : l'échelle visuelle analogique (ÉVA), l'arbitrage temporel (AT) et le pari standard (PS). Ils ont recruté un échantillon prospectif de la population générale et d'étudiants en médecine et ont analysé leurs réponses pour obtenir les scores. RÉSULTATS: Les scores d'utilité d'une vie avec une CM s'établissent comme suit : ÉVA 0,81 ± 0,19, AT 0,93 ± 0,10 et PS 0,92 ± 0,14. L'AT et le PS indiquent respectivement la volonté de perdre 2,5 années de vie et d'accroître le risque de décès de 8 % pendant les interventions de reconstruction pour corriger une anomalie de CM. L'âge, le genre, la race, l'instruction et le revenu n'étaient pas des prédicteurs indépendants statistiquement significatifs des scores d'utilité plus élevés ou plus faibles. CONCLUSION: Les chercheurs ont évalué les répercussions du fardeau de la CM sur la santé au moyen de scores d'utilité numériques validés. Ces indices démontrent la volonté de réduire le nombre d'années de vie pour corriger une anomalie de la CM plutôt qu'une reconstruction après une mastectomie unilatérale. Ils peuvent aider les chirurgiens à mieux comprendre les préférences des patientes pour parvenir à une décision commune en matière de prise en charge du cancer du sein.

Acellular Dermal Matrix-sparing Direct-to-implant Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction: A Comparative Study Including Cost Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Refined mastectomy techniques, the advent of new technologies and materials such as acellular dermal matrix (ADM), cohesive gel silicone implants, and intraoperative tissue perfusion analysis, have fueled a resurgence in prepectoral breast reconstruction. This article aims to compare an immediate direct-to-implant prepectoral ADM-sparing approach with the traditional subpectoral 2-stage immediate reconstruction. A cost analysis within a Canadian-run single-payer system is also presented. METHODS: A retrospective 2-group comparative chart review study was performed (June 2015-January 2017) to identify all patients who underwent prepectoral direct-to-implant breast reconstruction using an ADM-sparing technique. The comparison group consisted of patients having undergone traditional 2-stage subpectoral reconstruction with ADM. All countable variables were included in the cost analysis, which was performed in Canadian dollars. RESULTS: A total of 77 patients (116 reconstructed breasts) were included. Both the prepectoral and subpectoral groups were comparable in size, demographics including age, diabetic and smoking status, and receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy and postmastectomy radiotherapy. Patients having undergone direct-to-implant prepectoral reconstruction benefited from fewer follow-up visits (3.8 vs 5.4, respectively) and from less complications (24.7% vs 35.6%, respectively) including animation deformity. In addition, direct-to-implant prepectoral reconstruction costs 25% less than the 2-stage subpectoral reconstruction when all associated costs were considered. CONCLUSION: Prepectoral implant placement avoids many of the disadvantages of the traditional 2 stage subpectoral reconstruction, including pectoralis muscle dissection, animation deformity, and multiple surgeries. As the first comparative cost analysis study on the subject, our ADM-sparing direct-to-implant prepectoral reconstruction method costs 25% less than the traditional 2-stage subpectoral reconstruction with a comparable complication profile.

Nipple-areolar Complex Reconstruction following Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction: A Comparative Utility Assessment Study.

BACKGROUND: Nipple-areola complex (NAC) reconstruction occurs toward the final stage of breast reconstruction; however, not all women follow through with these procedures. The goal of this study was to determine the impact of the health state burden of living with a reconstructed breast before NAC reconstruction. METHODS: A sample of the population and medical students at McGill University were recruited to establish the utility scores [visual analog scale (VAS), time trade-off (TTO), and standard gamble (SG)] of living with an NAC deformity. Utility scores for monocular and binocular blindness were determined for validation and comparison. Linear regression and Student's t test were used for statistical analysis, and significance was set at P < 0.05. RESULTS: There were 103 prospective volunteers included. Utility scores (VAS, TTO, and SG) for NAC deformity were 0.84 ± 0.18, 0.92 ± 0.11, and 0.92 ± 0.11, respectively. Age, gender, and ethnicity were not statistically significant independent predictors of utility scores. Income thresholds of <$10,000 and >$10,000 revealed a statistically significant difference for VAS (P = 0.049) and SG (P = 0.015). Linear regression analysis showed that medical education was directly proportional to the SG and TTO scores (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The absence of NAC in a reconstructed breast can be objectively assessed using utility scores (VAS, 0.84 ± 0.18; TTO, 0.92 ± 0.11; SG, 0.92 ± 0.11). In comparison to prior reported conditions, the quality of life in patients choosing to undergo NAC reconstruction is similar to that of persons living with a nasal deformity or an aging neck requiring rejuvenation.

Population preferences of undergoing brachioplasty for arm laxity.

BACKGROUND: The number of patients requesting surgical procedures performed for brachioplasty and massive weight loss is increasing. The authors set out to quantify the health state utility outcome assessment of living with arm deformity requiring brachioplasty. METHODS: Utility assessments using the visual analog scale (VAS), time trade-off (TTO), and standard gamble (SG) were used to obtain utilities scores for arm deformity, monocular blindness, and binocular blindness from a sample of the general population and medical students. Linear regression and Student t test were used for statistical analysis. A P value less than 0.05 was deemed statistically significant. RESULTS: All the measures for arm deformity of the 107 volunteers (VAS, 0.80 ± 0.14; TTO, 0.91 ± 0.12; SG, 0.94 ± 0.10) were significantly different (P < 0.001) from the corresponding measures for monocular blindness and binocular blindness. When compared to the sample of the general population, having a medical education demonstrated a statistical significance of being less likely to trade years of life and less likely to gamble risk of death for a procedure such as a brachioplasty. Race and sex were not statistically significant independent predictors of risk acceptance. CONCLUSIONS: We have objectified the health state of living with upper arm deformity requiring brachioplasty. Utility outcome scores (VAS, 0.80 ± 0.14; TTO, 0.91 ± 0.12; SG, 0.94 ± 0.10) were comparable to living with health states such as aging neck needing rejuvenation, excess skin in the thighs necessitating thigh lift, and massive weight loss requiring panniculectomy based on previously reported studies.

Living with a unilateral mastectomy defect: a utility assessment and outcomes study.

BACKGROUND: The gold standard for the treatment of breast cancer includes mastectomy surgery. Our goal was to quantify the health state utility assessment of living with unilateral mastectomy. METHODS: The visual analogue scale (VAS), time trade-off (TTO), and standard gamble (SG) were used to obtain utilities for unilateral mastectomy, monocular blindness and binocular blindness from a prospective sample of the general population and medical students. RESULTS: All measures (VAS, TTO, SG) for unilateral mastectomy (0.75 SD 0.17, 0.87 SD 0.14, and 0.86 SD 0.18, respectively) of the 140 volunteers were significantly different from the corresponding scores for monocular (0.61 SD 0.18, 0.84 SD 0.17, and 0.84 SD 0.18, respectively) and binocular blindness (0.38 SD 0.17, 0.67 SD 0.24, and 0.69 SD 0.23, respectively). Age, gender, race, education, and income were not statistically significant independent predictors of utility scores. CONCLUSION: In a sample of the general population and medical students, utility assessments for living with unilateral mastectomy were comparable with those of living with bilateral mastectomy and severe breast hypertrophy. Our sample population, if faced living with unilateral mastectomy was willing to gamble a theoretical 14% chance of death and willing to trade 4.2 years of existing life-years.

An objective assessment of the perceived quality of life of living with bilateral mastectomy defect.

BACKGROUND: Mastectomy is a common treatment for breast cancer. We set out to quantify the health state utility assessment of living with bilateral mastectomy using previously described validated methods. METHODS: Utility assessments using visual analogue scale (VAS), time trade-off (TTO), and standard gamble (SG) were used to obtain utilities for mastectomy, monocular blindness and binocular blindness from a prospective sample of the general population and medical students. RESULTS: All measures (VAS, TTO, SG) for mastectomy (0.70 ± 0.18, 0.85 ± 0.16, and 0.86 ± 0.17, respectively) of the 120 volunteers were significantly different (p < 0.0001) from the corresponding scores for binocular blindness (0.38 ± 0.17, 0.67 ± 0.24, and 0.69 ± 0.23, respectively). Utility scores for mastectomy were not statistically different (p > 0.05) when compared to those for monocular blindness (0.67 ± 0.13, 0.86 ± 0.15, and 0.86 ± 0.15, respectively). Age, gender, race, and income were not statistically significant independent predictors of utility scores. Medical education was associated with statistically significant higher SG compared to general population (0.90 ± 0.11 versus 0.84 ± 0.19; p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In a sample of the general population and medical students, utility assessments for living with bilateral mastectomy were comparable with those of living with the loss of sight from one eye. Our sample population, if faced with living with bilateral mastectomy, would consent to undergo a procedure such as breast reconstruction with a theoretical 14 percent chance of mortality and be willing to trade 5.4 years of existing life-years for such a procedure.