Disparities in the survival of endometrial cancer patients in a public healthcare system: A population-based cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: Social determinants of health (SDH) have been shown to correlate with adverse cancer outcomes. It is unclear if their impact goes beyond behavioral risk or healthcare access. We aimed to evaluate the association of SDH with endometrial cancer outcomes in a public healthcare system. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of endometrial cancer patients diagnosed between 2009 and 2017 in Ontario, Canada. Clinical and sociodemographic variables were extracted from administrative databases. Validated multifactorial marginalization scores for domains of material deprivation, residential instability and ethnic concentration were used. Associations between marginalization and survival were evaluated using log-rank testing and Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: 20228 women with endometrial cancer were identified. Fewer patients in marginalized communities presented with early disease (70% vs. 76%, p < 0.001) and received surgery (89% vs. 93%, p < 0.001). Overall survival was shorter among marginalized patients (p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis adjusted for patient and disease factors, overall marginalization (HR = 1.22, 95% CI 1.03-1.08), material deprivation (HR = 1.22, 95% CI 1.10-1.35) and residential instability (HR = 1.32, 95% CI 1.19-1.46) were associated with increased risk of death (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Socioeconomic marginalization is associated with an increased risk of death in endometrial cancer patients. Targetable events in the cancer care pathway should be identified to improve health equity. FUNDING: This study was supported by a grant (#RD-196) from the Hamilton Health Sciences Juravinski Hospital and Cancer Center Foundation.

The impact of preoperative imaging on wait times, surgical approach and overall survival in endometrioid endometrial cancers.

OBJECTIVES: Routine preoperative axial imaging studies (CT/MRI) are not recommended for endometrioid endometrial cancer as they are unlikely to change management and may delay surgery. This study evaluated the association of receiving preoperative imaging on various outcomes. METHODS: A population-based cohort of Endometrioid Endometrial Cancer cases from 2006 to 2016 were identified from the Cancer Registry in Ontario, Canada. Wait time to surgery, type of surgery and overall survival were evaluated in patients with and without preoperative imaging. Predictive factors for wait time > 56 days and aggressive surgery (radical hysterectomy / lymphadenectomy) were determined using multivariable regression analysis. RESULTS: 13,050 cases were included. 22.6% of patients received preoperative imaging, mainly CT scans. Most patients (95.9%) received no neoadjuvant treatment. Patients with preoperative imaging were more likely to have neoadjuvant treatment (11.7% vs. 1.8%) and less likely to have surgery at 180 days post diagnosis (87.9% vs 94.6%). Patients with preoperative imaging had median wait time to surgery of 64 days (47-87), compared to 53 days (36-74) than those without imaging (p < 0.001). Multivariable modeling showed preoperative imaging was associated with decreased odds of having surgery within 56 days (OR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.62-0.75), and increased odds (OR = 1.73, 95% CI = 1.53-1.95) of having aggressive surgery. The 5-year overall survival for patients with imaging was 84.8% versus 91.1% for patients without preoperative imaging. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative imaging was associated with longer wait times to surgery, more aggressive surgery, surgery with a gynecologic oncologist and increased use of neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment. In early-stage disease there was no observed improvement in overall survival for patients with preoperative imaging. Further research on potential benefits of preoperative imaging in higher risk patients is required.

Treatment and outcomes in undifferentiated and dedifferentiated endometrial carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: Undifferentiated and dedifferentiated endometrial carcinoma is a rare type of uterine malignancy. This study assesses disease characteristics, treatment and survival outcomes in patients with undifferentiated and dedifferentiated endometrial carcinoma treated at BC Cancer. METHODS: All patients diagnosed with undifferentiated and dedifferentiated endometrial carcinoma between 2000 and 2019 at BC Cancer were reviewed centrally. Clinical, pathologic, treatment and outcomes were reviewed retrospectively. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to evaluate overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Multivariable analysis was performed using Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients were included, 33% had undifferentiated carcinoma and 67% dedifferentiated carcinoma. Sixty-nine percent of those who had mismatch repair (MMR) testing of their tumor had an abnormal profile. The 5-year DFS was 80% (95% confidence interval [CI]=71%-89%) for stage I/II, 29% (95% CI=28%-40%) for stage III and 10% (95% CI 1%-19%) for stage IV. The 5-year OS was 84% (95% CI=75%-92%) for stage I/II, 38% (95% CI=26%-50%) for stage III and 12% (95% CI=1%-24%) for stage IV. Multivariate analysis showed that receiving adjuvant chemotherapy, adjuvant radiotherapy, lower stage and better Eastern Cooperative Group performance status were associated with improved DFS (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Patients with stage I/II undifferentiated and dedifferentiated endometrial carcinoma had excellent survival outcomes, those with stage III/IV had worse outcomes, similar to previously reported. Adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy were associated with improved DFS. MMR testing should be performed for these patients due to the high incidence of abnormal profiles.

DUCHESS: an evaluation of the ductal carcinoma in situ score for decisions on radiotherapy in patients with low/intermediate-risk DCIS.

BACKGROUND: Identification of women with DCIS who have a very low risk of local recurrence risk (LRR) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is needed to de-escalate therapy. We evaluated the impact of 10-year LRR estimates after BCS, calculated by the integration of a 12-gene molecular expression assay (Oncotype Breast DCIS Score®) and clinicopathological features (CPFs), on its ability to change radiation oncologists' recommendations for RT after BCS for DCIS. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of women with DCIS treated with BCS. Eligibility criteria were as follows: age > 45 years, tumor ≤ 2.5 cm, and margins ≥ 1 mm. Radiation oncologists provided 10-year LRR estimates without RT and recommendation for RT pre- and post-assay. Primary outcome was change in RT recommendation. RESULTS: 217 patients were evaluable, with mean age = 63 years, mean tumor size = 1.1 cm, and mean DCIS Score = 32; 140 (64%) were in the low-risk (<39), 32 (15%) were in the intermediate-risk (39-54), and 45 (21%) were in the high-risk groups (≥55). The assay led to a change in treatment recommendation in 76 (35.2%) (95%CI 29.1-41.8%) patients. RT recommendations decreased from 79% pre-assay to 50% post-assay (difference = 29%; 95%CI 22-35%) due to a significant increase in the proportion of patients with a predicted low LRR (< 10%) post-assay and recommendations to omit RT for those with a low predicted risk. The assay was associated with improved patient satisfaction and reduced decisional conflict. CONCLUSION: The DCIS Score assay combined with CPFs identified more women with an estimated low (<10%) 10-yr LR risk after BCS, leading to a significant decrease in recommendations for RT compared to estimates based on CPFs alone.

The use of imaging in endometrial cancer prior to potential surgery: Are guidelines being followed?

OBJECTIVES: Clinical practice guidelines recommend against routine preoperative axial imaging studies (CT/MRI) for endometrial cancer, except for cases of locally advanced disease or aggressive histologies. This study utilized population-based data to evaluate the use of preoperative imaging and factors associated with its use. METHODS: A population-based cohort of women diagnosed with endometrial cancer from 2006 to 2016 were identified from the Ontario Cancer Registry in Ontario, Canada. Patients were excluded if they had: hysterectomy prior to the date of diagnosis, non-epithelial histology or a prior cancer diagnosis within 5 years. Preoperative imaging (CT or MRI) rates were calculated over time. Predictive factors for preoperative imaging use were determined using multi-variable regression analysis. RESULTS: 17,718 cases were eligible for analysis. From 2006 to 2016, the proportion of patients receiving preoperative imaging increased from 22.2% to 39.3%. In a subgroup of patients with low-risk disease (stage 1, endometrioid adenocarcinoma), imaging increased from 16.3% to 29.5%. Multivariate analysis showed an association between preoperative imaging and advanced stage, advanced grade, non-endometrioid morphology, surgery with a gynecologic oncologist, surgery at a teaching hospital and a later year of diagnosis. From 2006 to 2016, the yearly incidence of endometrial cancer increased from 22.3/100,000 to 36.1/100,000, representing a mean annual increase of 3.6% per year. CONCLUSIONS: Endometrial cancer incidence and the use of preoperative imaging are increasing. Factors most associated with preoperative imaging are high-risk features. However, preoperative imaging is still being performed in low-risk patients, indicating non-adherence to guidelines, which has implications for constrained healthcare resources.

Incorporating patient centered benefits as endpoints in randomized trials of maintenance therapies in advanced ovarian cancer: A position paper from the GCIG symptom benefit committee.

BACKGROUND: Quality of life and patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are important secondary endpoints and incorporated in most contemporary clinical trials. There have been deficiencies in their assessment and reporting in ovarian cancer clinical trials, particularly in trials of maintenance treatment where they are of particular importance. The Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG) symptom benefit committee (SBC) recently convened a brainstorming meeting with representation from all collaborative groups to address questions of how to best incorporate PROMs into trials of maintenance therapies to support the primary endpoint which is usually progression free survival (PFS). These recommendations should harmonize the collection, analysis and reporting of PROM's across future GCIG trials. METHODS: Through literature review, trials analysis and input from international experts, the SBC identified four relevant topics to address with respect to promoting the role of PROMs to support the PFS endpoint in clinical trials of maintenance treatment for OC. RESULTS: The GCIG SBC unanimously accepted the importance of integrating PROM's in future maintenance trials and developed four guiding principles to be considered early in trial design. These include 1) adherence to SPIRIT-PRO guidelines, 2) harmonization of selection, collection and reporting of PROM's; 3) combining Health Related Quality of Life (HRQL) measures with clinical endpoints and 4) common approaches to dealing with incomplete HRQL data. CONCLUSIONS: Close attention to incorporating HRQL and PROM's is critical to interpret the results of ovarian cancer clinical trials of maintenance therapies. There should be a consistent approach to assessing and reporting patient centered benefits across all GCIG trials to enable cross trial comparisons which can be used to inform practice.

Outcomes of Adjuvant Therapy for Stage IA Serous Endometrial Cancer.

PURPOSE: Serous adenocarcinoma is a rare, aggressive histologic subtype of endometrial cancer with a high rate of recurrence and a poor prognosis. The optimal adjuvant treatment for early-stage patients is unclear. Our objective was to evaluate the outcomes of stage IA serous endometrial cancers only treated at a single institution and determine whether our current approach of chemotherapy plus vaginal brachytherapy (VBT) is sufficient. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of our institution's pathology database, including all cases of stage IA serous endometrial carcinoma from 2000-2014 was completed. Kaplan-Meier estimates were calculated for Overall and Recurrence-Free Survival (OS and RFS); hazard ratios were calculated using Cox proportional hazards modeling for independent prognostic factors. RESULTS: There were 63 patients with stage IA serous endometrial cancer of whom 79.4% were surgically staged. Percent RFS was 76.5% at five years while OS was 84.7% for the whole cohort. One of the 23 patients receiving VBT and chemotherapy recurred at the vagina versus four of 32 patients who were observed. Two patients in the observation group recurred in the pelvis while there were no first pelvic recurrences in the VBT and chemotherapy group (non- significant). Overall survival was 95% in the brachytherapy and chemotherapy group versus 79.6% in the observation group (non-significant). Post-operative management included observation (n=33), combination VBT and chemotherapy (n=21), or chemotherapy with or without external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) (n=9). DISCUSSION: We report one of the largest cohorts of serous endometrial cancer stage IA patients. Our results emphasize the inferior RFS and OS of stage IA serous versus endometrioid endometrial cancer patients. While some centers continue to use EBRT for these patients, our results demonstrate low pelvic recurrence rates with radiotherapy limited to VBT, as well as the high systemic risk regardless of treatment. We advocate for combination chemotherapy and brachytherapy given the poor outcomes in these patients.

Moving toward uniform and evidence-based practice of radiotherapy for management of cervical cancer in Ontario, Canada.

PURPOSE: To recognize the practice of radiotherapy for management of cervical cancer in Ontario, Canada, and to use the results of the survey to harmonize and standardize practice across the province. METHODS AND MATERIALS: An electronic survey (SurveyMonkey) was sent to all 14 provincial cancer centers by Cancer Care Ontario Gynecology Community of Practice (CoP) in 2013. The survey included 72 questions in four different categories: general/demographic, pretreatment assessment, external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), and brachytherapy (BT). RESULTS: Ten of 14 centers treated cervical cancer patients and had a dedicated BT suite. All 10 centers had a peer review process for quality assurance. EBRT technique was a 4-field box in eight of 10 centers. The dose/fractionation for pelvic EBRT was 45-50 Gy in 1.8-2 Gy/fraction in all but one center. Nine of 10 centers used high-dose-rate BT. Only one center offered interstitial BT. For treatment planning, two centers used CT and MRI, five centers used CT, and three centers used orthogonal x-rays. Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie and the European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology guidelines were used in four of seven of the centers for target volume delineation and in five of seven centers for organs at risk dose constraints. All but one center prescribed and reported dose to Point A. CONCLUSIONS: The survey identified areas where practice varied across the province. Gynecology CoP used this information to identify priorities for practice change and implemented several strategies to harmonize the care of women with cervical cancer. This highlights the value of interdisciplinary, grass-roots initiatives such as CoPs to standardize practice in a practical manner that directly benefits patients.

The role of adjuvant therapy in stage IA serous and clear cell uterine cancer: A multi-institutional pooled analysis.

OBJECTIVE: As the optimal adjuvant management of stage IA serous or clear cell endometrial cancer is controversial, a multi-institutional review was conducted with the objective of evaluating the appropriateness of various strategies including observation. METHODS: Retrospective chart reviews for 414 consecutive patients who underwent hysterectomy for FIGO stage IA endometrial cancer with serous, clear cell or mixed histology between 2004 and 2015 were conducted in 6 North American centers. Time-to-event outcomes were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier estimates, log-rank test, univariable and multivariable cox proportional hazard regression models. RESULTS: Post-operative management included observation (50%), chemotherapy and radiotherapy (RT) (27%), RT only (16%) and chemotherapy only (7%). The 178 RT patients received external beam (EBRT, 16%), vaginal vault brachytherapy (VVB, 56%) or both (28%). Among patients without any adjuvant treatment, 5-year local control (LC), disease free survival (DFS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were 82% (95% confidence interval: 74-88), 70% (62-78) and 90% (82-94), respectively. CSS in patients without adjuvant treatment was improved with adequate surgical staging (100% vs. 87% (77-92), log-rank p=0.022). Adjuvant VVB was associated with improved LC (5-year 96% (91-99) vs. 84% (76-89), log-rank p=0.007) and DFS (5-year 79% (66-88) vs. 71% (63-77), log-rank p=0.033). Adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with better LC (5-year 96% (90-98) vs. 84% (77-89), log-rank p=0.014) and DFS (5-year 84% (74-91) vs. 69% (61-76), log-rank p=0.009). On multivariable analysis, adjuvant chemotherapy and VVB were associated with improved LC while adjuvant chemotherapy and age were significant for DFS. CONCLUSIONS: In stage IA serous or clear cell uterine cancer, adjuvant RT and chemotherapy were associated with better LC and DFS. Observation may be appropriate in patients who have had adequate surgical staging.

Prospective comparison of rectal dose reduction during intracavitary brachytherapy for cervical cancer using three rectal retraction techniques.

PURPOSE: To compare three rectal retraction methods on dose to organs at risk, focusing on rectal dose, in cervix cancer patients treated with high-dose-rate intracavitary brachytherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A prospective study was conducted on patients with cervical carcinoma treated with chemoradiotherapy, including external beam radiation and four fractions of high-dose-rate intracavitary brachytherapy prescribed to Point A using a ring and tandem applicator under conscious sedation. Rectal retraction methods included: a rectal retractor blade (RR), vaginal gauze packing (VP), and a tandem Foley balloon (FB). All three methods were used in all patients. The RR was used first, and the following applications were randomly assigned to VP or FB. CT planning was used to calculate D2cc for rectum, sigmoid, small bowel, and bladder. The Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to determine if the median dose differences between methods were statistically significant. RESULTS: In these 11 patients, median dose (min, max) in cGy to the rectum using RR, FB, and VP was 131 (102, 165), 199 (124, 243), and 218 (149, 299), respectively. The RR demonstrated lower median intrapatient doses to rectum compared with FB and VP (-55 cGy; p = 0.014 and -76 cGy; p = 0.004, respectively). The RR also resulted in lower sigmoid doses. No differences in dose were observed between the VP and FB methods. CONCLUSION: The rectal retractor significantly reduced the dose to rectum and sigmoid compared with FP and VP. In patients treated under conscious sedation, the RR method provides the best rectal sparing. There were no significant differences in dose observed between the FB and VP techniques.

Close or positive resection margins are not associated with an increased risk of chest wall recurrence in women with DCIS treated by mastectomy: a population-based analysis.

Mastectomy is effective treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) but some women will develop chest wall recurrence. Most chest wall recurrences that develop after mastectomy are invasive cancer and are associated with poorer prognosis. Past studies have been unable to identify factors predictive of chest wall recurrence. Therefore, it remains unclear if a subset exists of women with DCIS treated by mastectomy experience a high rate of recurrence in whom more aggressive treatment may be of benefit. We report outcomes of all women in Ontario (N = 1,546) diagnosed with pure DCIS from 1994 to 2003 treated with mastectomy without radiotherapy and evaluate factors associated with the development of chest wall recurrence. Treatments and outcomes were validated by chart review. Proportional differences were compared using Chi square analyses. Survival analyses were used to study the development of chest wall recurrence in relation to patient and tumor characteristics. Median follow-up was 10.1 years. Median age was 57.1 years. 36 patients (2.3%) developed chest wall recurrence. The 10-year actuarial chest wall recurrence-free survival rates and invasive chest wall recurrence-free survival rates were 97.6 and 98.6%, respectively. There was no difference in cumulative 10 year rates of chest wall recurrence by age at diagnosis (<40 years = 5.2%, 40-44 years = 1.3%, 45-50 years = 2.9%, >50 years = 2.1%; p = 0.19), nuclear grade (high = 3.0%, intermediate = 1.4%, low = 1.0%, unreported = 2.5%; p = 0.41), or among women with close or positive resection margins (positive = 3.0%, 2 mm or less = 1.4%, >2 mm = 1.5%, unreported = 2.8%; p = 0.51). On univariate and multivariable analysis, none of the factors were significantly associated with the development of chest wall recurrence. In this population cohort, individuals treated by mastectomy experienced low rates of chest wall recurrence. We did not identify a subset of patients with a high rate of chest wall recurrence, including those with positive margins.

Predictors of adverse cosmetic outcome in the RAPID trial: an exploratory analysis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate factors associated with adverse cosmesis outcome in breast cancer patients randomized to accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) using 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy or whole-breast irradiation in the RAPID (Randomized Trial of Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation) trial. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Subjects were trial participants with nurse-assessed global cosmetic scores at baseline and at 3 years. Adverse cosmesis was defined as a score of fair or poor. Cosmetic deterioration was defined as any adverse change in score from baseline to 3 years. The analysis is based on data from the previously reported interim analysis. Logistic regression models were used to assess the association of risk factors for these outcomes among all patients and those treated with APBI only. RESULTS: Clinicopathologic characteristics were similar between subjects randomized to APBI (n=569) or whole-breast irradiation (n=539). For all subjects, factors associated with adverse cosmesis at 3 years were older age, central/inner tumor location, breast infection, smoking, seroma volume, breast volume, and use of APBI; factors associated with cosmetic deterioration were smoking, seroma volume, and use of APBI (P<.05). For APBI subjects, tumor location, smoking, age, and seroma volume were associated with adverse cosmesis (P<.05), and smoking was associated with cosmetic deterioration (P=.02). An independent association between the V95/whole-breast volume ratio and adverse cosmesis (P=.28) or cosmetic deterioration (P=.07) was not detected. On further exploration a V95/whole-breast volume ratio <0.15 was associated with a lower risk of cosmetic deterioration (p=.04), but this accounted for only 11% of patients. CONCLUSION: In the RAPID trial, a number of patient tumor and treatment-related factors, including the use of APBI, were associated with adverse cosmesis and cosmetic deterioration. For patients treated with APBI alone, the high-dose treatment volume was not independently associated with an adverse cosmetic outcome, and a useful clinical threshold could not be identified.

A cosmesis outcome substudy in a prospective, randomized trial comparing radioguided seed localization with standard wire localization for nonpalpable, invasive, and in situ breast carcinomas.

BACKGROUND: The primary study objective was to compare the cosmetic result of radioguided seed localization (RSL) with wire localization (WL). METHODS: A subgroup of patients enrolled in a multicentered, randomized trial comparing WL with RSL participated. Frontal photographs were taken 1 and 3 years postsurgery. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Cosmetic Rating System was used to evaluate cosmesis outcomes by the patient and a panel of 5 raters. RESULTS: The study enrolled 73 patients (WL, n = 38; RSL, n = 35). Most patients rated their overall cosmesis as "excellent" or "good" (76% WL, 80% RSL). Patient and panel ratings on all cosmetic outcomes were similar between groups. Multivariable regression for overall cosmesis found larger specimen volume and reoperation to be predictors of worse ratings. CONCLUSIONS: All cosmetic outcomes assessed were similar after WL and RSL. The comparable outcomes may reflect similar reoperation rates and volumes of excision between groups.

Interim cosmetic and toxicity results from RAPID: a randomized trial of accelerated partial breast irradiation using three-dimensional conformal external beam radiation therapy.

PURPOSE: To report interim cosmetic and toxicity results of a multicenter randomized trial comparing accelerated partial-breast irradiation (APBI) using three-dimensional conformal external beam radiation therapy (3D-CRT) with whole-breast irradiation (WBI). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women age > 40 years with invasive or in situ breast cancer ≤ 3 cm were randomly assigned after breast-conserving surgery to 3D-CRT APBI (38.5 Gy in 10 fractions twice daily) or WBI (42.5 Gy in 16 or 50 Gy in 25 daily fractions ± boost irradiation). The primary outcome was ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR). Secondary outcomes were cosmesis and toxicity. Adverse cosmesis was defined as a fair or poor global cosmetic score. After a planned interim cosmetic analysis, the data, safety, and monitoring committee recommended release of results. There have been too few IBTR events to trigger an efficacy analysis. RESULTS: Between 2006 and 2011, 2,135 women were randomly assigned to 3D-CRT APBI or WBI. Median follow-up was 36 months. Adverse cosmesis at 3 years was increased among those treated with APBI compared with WBI as assessed by trained nurses (29% v 17%; P < .001), by patients (26% v 18%; P = .0022), and by physicians reviewing digital photographs (35% v 17%; P < .001). Grade 3 toxicities were rare in both treatment arms (1.4% v 0%), but grade 1 and 2 toxicities were increased among those who received APBI compared with WBI (P < .001). CONCLUSION: 3D-CRT APBI increased rates of adverse cosmesis and late radiation toxicity compared with standard WBI. Clinicians and patients are cautioned against the use of 3D-CRT APBI outside the context of a controlled trial.

Can we select individuals with low risk ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS)? A population-based outcomes analysis.

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), a non-invasive breast cancer, is usually treated by breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Randomized trials prove that the addition of radiotherapy (XRT) leads to lower rates of recurrence. Despite the evidence, half of women do not receive XRT after BCS. It is unknown how well clinicians identify women with low risk DCIS for treatment by BCS alone or to what extent women with DCIS develop recurrent cancer due to the omission of radiotherapy. We report the outcomes of a population of women with DCIS treated with BCS, alone or with radiotherapy, and evaluate the effectiveness of each therapeutic approach. All women diagnosed with DCIS and treated with BCS, alone or with radiotherapy in Ontario from 1994 to 2003 were identified. Treatments and outcomes were validated by chart review. Survival analyses were used to study the development of local recurrence (LR) in relation to patient and tumor characteristics and the use of radiotherapy. The cohort included 3,762 women treated with breast-conserving therapy; 1,895 of whom (50 %) also received radiation. At 10 years median follow-up, LR developed in 233 (12 %) women who received radiotherapy and in 363 (19 %) of women who did not (p < 0.0001). The 10-year actuarial LR rate for women who did and did not receive radiotherapy was 12.7 and 20.0 % (p < 0.0001). Differences were significant for both for invasive LR (7.0 vs. 10.0 %, p < 0.0001) and for DCIS recurrence (6.1 vs. 10.8 %, p < 0.0001). We estimate that 22 % of recurrences diagnosed in Ontario women treated for DCIS between 1994 and 2003 would have been prevented if all patients had received radiotherapy. The omission of radiotherapy after BCS for DCIS resulted in substantive recurrences that might have been avoided with treatment. Additional markers are needed to identify a low risk group in whom radiation can be safely omitted.

Toward clinical care guidelines for supporting rehabilitative vaginal dilator use with women recovering from cervical cancer.

PURPOSE: Building upon the findings of a recent qualitative investigation of women's experiences with rehabilitative vaginal dilator use, the primary goal of this article is to outline a set of preliminary clinical care recommendations that health care professionals may draw upon in addressing women's unique experiences with vaginal dilator use including their multifaceted struggles with the procedure, possibly enhancing adherence to this practice. METHODS: Ten women participated in in-depth interviews regarding their experiences with using the dilator as prescribed by their health care providers. Following the analysis of these interviews, members of the interdisciplinary research team met to review and discuss the development of clinical care recommendations stemming from these findings. RESULTS: Eight care recommendations aimed at addressing the concerns expressed by the women interviewed and at improving women's overall experiences with rehabilitative dilator use emerged: (1) introduce the dilator in a light and straightforward manner; (2) enhance dilator accessibility; (3) introduce the vaginal dilator early on in treatment; (4) emphasize health maintenance over intercourse as a benefit of dilator use; (5) explore and acknowledge women's values and views of sexuality; (6) increase awareness and sensitivity to emotional reactions; (7) enhance psychoeducational resources for supporting vaginal dilator use; and (8) ensure consistent institutional practice when introducing the dilator. CONCLUSION: The clinical care recommendations proposed here reflect the various challenges women may encounter when using the vaginal dilator--which vary from practical to, for some, profoundly emotional--and are designed to better position health care providers to help women navigate these challenges.