Evolution of breast cancer incidence in young women in a French registry from 1990 to 2018: Towards a change in screening strategy?

BACKGROUND: The worldwide incidence of invasive breast cancer in women is increasing according to several studies. This increase in incidence seems to be higher in young women (< 40 years). However, the reasons for this trend are poorly understood. This article aims to provide the most recent estimates of this trend and assess whether there is indeed an increase in the incidence of breast cancer among young women to strengthen prevention campaigns. METHODS: We collected data from the Isere cancer registry in France of all invasive breast cancers from January 1990 to December 2018. The standardized incidence rate was calculated for four age groups (< 40 years, 40-49 years, 50-74 years, ≥ 75 years) for this period. The 10-year relative survival was evaluated for each age group age for two periods (1990-1999 and 2000-2008). From 2011 to 2013, we analyzed the incidence and 5-year relative survival by tumor subtype (triple negative, luminal, HER2 amplified) for each age group. RESULTS: A total of 23,703 cases were selected, including 1343 young women (< 40 years). The incidence of invasive breast cancer increased annually by 0,8% (95% CI 0,7; 1) in all age groups combined from 1990 to 2018. The highest incidence increase is found among young women, by 2,1% annually (95% CI 1,3; 2,8). Regarding tumor subtypes from 2011 to 2018, the incidence of triple negatives increases higher in young women (+ 1,4% by year, 95% CI - 8,2; 11) and those over 75 years (+ 4% by year, 95% CI - 5,1; 13,2), but the results are not statistically significant. 10-year relative survival in young women increased from 74,6% (95% CI 69,6; 78,9) to 78,3%(95% CI 73,7; 82,1) between 1990-1999 and 2000-2008, respectively. Five-year relative survival is better in young women among triple negative and HER2 amplified. CONCLUSION: Our study confirms the current trend of increasing the incidence of breast cancer in young women, associated with improved survival very likely attributable to earlier diagnosis due to increased awareness, and improvements in treatment. A better individualized risk-based screening strategy is needed for these patients. Additional studies will be needed to more accurately assess the risk of developing breast cancer and improve diagnostic performance.

Survival, cost and added therapeutic benefit of drugs granted early access through the French temporary authorization for use program in solid tumors from 2009 to 2019.

Decisions on market authorization (MA) and reimbursement have different durations across countries because of health technology assessment (HTA) procedures and negotiations between manufacturers and national authorities. To overcome this delay, France has implemented a Temporary Authorization for Use (ATU) program that allows early access to drugs before MA, in order to treat patients with unmet medical needs. The objectives of our study were to establish the added therapeutic benefit (ATB) of ATUs for solid tumors and to investigate the correlations between three tools evaluating ATB and survival outcomes and drug costs. Data on ATUs granted from January 2009 to December 2019 to treat solid tumors were analyzed. An assessment of their ATB was conducted using the American Society of Clinical Oncology-Value Framework (ASCO-VF), the European Society for Medical Oncology-Magnitude Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) and the French HTA criterion, clinical added value (CAV). The latter score determines reimbursement and national market access. Thirty-five drugs in 39 indications were granted ATUs. All of them obtained MA and derived a clinical benefit to be reimbursed by the Social Security. Twenty-eight (71.8%) had CAV compared to preexisting therapies. 24/38 (63.2%) had a 4-5 ESMO-MCBS score and 19/33 (57.6%) had an ASCO-VF score over 45. No correlations were found between cost, PFS, OS, CAV and ASCO-VF score, while high ESMO-MCBS scores were correlated to OS. In conclusion, many patients were treated with innovations before MA thanks to ATU, although there are discrepancies between ATB scales, hence the importance of international collaboration in the evaluation of innovative therapies.