Survival from breast cancer

An analysis of Australian data by surgeon case load, treatment centre location, and health insurance status

David Roder, Primali De Silva, Helen M. Zorbas, James Kollias, Peter L. Malycha, Chris M. Pyke, Ian D. Campbell

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective. Early invasive breast cancer data from the Australian National Breast Cancer Audit were used to compare case fatality by surgeon case load, treatment centre location and health insurance status. Method. Deaths were traced to 31 December 2007, for cancers diagnosed in 19982005. Risk of breast cancer death was compared using Cox proportional hazards regression. Results. When adjustment was made for age and clinical risk factors: (i) the relative risk of breast cancer death (95% confidence limit) was lower when surgeons' annual case loads exceeded 20 cases, at 0.87 (0.76, 0.995) for 21100 cases and 0.83 (0.72, 0.97) for higher case loads. These relative risks were not statistically significant when also adjusting for treatment centre location (P<0.15); and (ii) compared with major city centres, inner regional centres had a relative risk of 1.32 (1.18, 1.48), but the risk was not elevated for more remote sites at 0.95 (0.74, 1.22). Risk of death was not related to private insurance status. Conclusion. Higher breast cancer mortality in patients treated in inner regional than major city centres and in those treated by surgeons with lower case loads requires further study. What is known about the topic? Studies in some countries show an association of poorer outcomes with lower case load and lack of private health insurance. What does this paper add? Lower survivals apply in contemporary Australian environments where annual case loads are 20 or fewer and for patients treated in inner regional compared with major city centres. Poorer survivals for patients without private health insurance status are not statistically significant after adjusting for tumour size and other risk factors. What are the implications for practitioners? Additional research is needed to determine why survivals are lower in Australian settings where case loads are low and when treatment is provided in inner regional centres. Meanwhile, it would be appropriate to target these settings in quality improvement programs.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)342-348
Number of pages7
JournalAustralian Health Review
Volume36
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 6 Aug 2012
Externally publishedYes

Cite this

Roder, David ; De Silva, Primali ; Zorbas, Helen M. ; Kollias, James ; Malycha, Peter L. ; Pyke, Chris M. ; Campbell, Ian D. / Survival from breast cancer : An analysis of Australian data by surgeon case load, treatment centre location, and health insurance status. In: Australian Health Review. 2012 ; Vol. 36, No. 3. pp. 342-348.
@article{cd36163364c54ece81d97672ad8846c1,
title = "Survival from breast cancer: An analysis of Australian data by surgeon case load, treatment centre location, and health insurance status",
abstract = "Objective. Early invasive breast cancer data from the Australian National Breast Cancer Audit were used to compare case fatality by surgeon case load, treatment centre location and health insurance status. Method. Deaths were traced to 31 December 2007, for cancers diagnosed in 19982005. Risk of breast cancer death was compared using Cox proportional hazards regression. Results. When adjustment was made for age and clinical risk factors: (i) the relative risk of breast cancer death (95{\%} confidence limit) was lower when surgeons' annual case loads exceeded 20 cases, at 0.87 (0.76, 0.995) for 21100 cases and 0.83 (0.72, 0.97) for higher case loads. These relative risks were not statistically significant when also adjusting for treatment centre location (P<0.15); and (ii) compared with major city centres, inner regional centres had a relative risk of 1.32 (1.18, 1.48), but the risk was not elevated for more remote sites at 0.95 (0.74, 1.22). Risk of death was not related to private insurance status. Conclusion. Higher breast cancer mortality in patients treated in inner regional than major city centres and in those treated by surgeons with lower case loads requires further study. What is known about the topic? Studies in some countries show an association of poorer outcomes with lower case load and lack of private health insurance. What does this paper add? Lower survivals apply in contemporary Australian environments where annual case loads are 20 or fewer and for patients treated in inner regional compared with major city centres. Poorer survivals for patients without private health insurance status are not statistically significant after adjusting for tumour size and other risk factors. What are the implications for practitioners? Additional research is needed to determine why survivals are lower in Australian settings where case loads are low and when treatment is provided in inner regional centres. Meanwhile, it would be appropriate to target these settings in quality improvement programs.",
author = "David Roder and {De Silva}, Primali and Zorbas, {Helen M.} and James Kollias and Malycha, {Peter L.} and Pyke, {Chris M.} and Campbell, {Ian D.}",
year = "2012",
month = "8",
day = "6",
doi = "10.1071/AH11060",
language = "English",
volume = "36",
pages = "342--348",
journal = "Australian Health Review",
issn = "0156-5788",
publisher = "CSIRO Publishing",
number = "3",

}

Survival from breast cancer : An analysis of Australian data by surgeon case load, treatment centre location, and health insurance status. / Roder, David; De Silva, Primali; Zorbas, Helen M.; Kollias, James; Malycha, Peter L.; Pyke, Chris M.; Campbell, Ian D.

In: Australian Health Review, Vol. 36, No. 3, 06.08.2012, p. 342-348.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Survival from breast cancer

T2 - An analysis of Australian data by surgeon case load, treatment centre location, and health insurance status

AU - Roder, David

AU - De Silva, Primali

AU - Zorbas, Helen M.

AU - Kollias, James

AU - Malycha, Peter L.

AU - Pyke, Chris M.

AU - Campbell, Ian D.

PY - 2012/8/6

Y1 - 2012/8/6

N2 - Objective. Early invasive breast cancer data from the Australian National Breast Cancer Audit were used to compare case fatality by surgeon case load, treatment centre location and health insurance status. Method. Deaths were traced to 31 December 2007, for cancers diagnosed in 19982005. Risk of breast cancer death was compared using Cox proportional hazards regression. Results. When adjustment was made for age and clinical risk factors: (i) the relative risk of breast cancer death (95% confidence limit) was lower when surgeons' annual case loads exceeded 20 cases, at 0.87 (0.76, 0.995) for 21100 cases and 0.83 (0.72, 0.97) for higher case loads. These relative risks were not statistically significant when also adjusting for treatment centre location (P<0.15); and (ii) compared with major city centres, inner regional centres had a relative risk of 1.32 (1.18, 1.48), but the risk was not elevated for more remote sites at 0.95 (0.74, 1.22). Risk of death was not related to private insurance status. Conclusion. Higher breast cancer mortality in patients treated in inner regional than major city centres and in those treated by surgeons with lower case loads requires further study. What is known about the topic? Studies in some countries show an association of poorer outcomes with lower case load and lack of private health insurance. What does this paper add? Lower survivals apply in contemporary Australian environments where annual case loads are 20 or fewer and for patients treated in inner regional compared with major city centres. Poorer survivals for patients without private health insurance status are not statistically significant after adjusting for tumour size and other risk factors. What are the implications for practitioners? Additional research is needed to determine why survivals are lower in Australian settings where case loads are low and when treatment is provided in inner regional centres. Meanwhile, it would be appropriate to target these settings in quality improvement programs.

AB - Objective. Early invasive breast cancer data from the Australian National Breast Cancer Audit were used to compare case fatality by surgeon case load, treatment centre location and health insurance status. Method. Deaths were traced to 31 December 2007, for cancers diagnosed in 19982005. Risk of breast cancer death was compared using Cox proportional hazards regression. Results. When adjustment was made for age and clinical risk factors: (i) the relative risk of breast cancer death (95% confidence limit) was lower when surgeons' annual case loads exceeded 20 cases, at 0.87 (0.76, 0.995) for 21100 cases and 0.83 (0.72, 0.97) for higher case loads. These relative risks were not statistically significant when also adjusting for treatment centre location (P<0.15); and (ii) compared with major city centres, inner regional centres had a relative risk of 1.32 (1.18, 1.48), but the risk was not elevated for more remote sites at 0.95 (0.74, 1.22). Risk of death was not related to private insurance status. Conclusion. Higher breast cancer mortality in patients treated in inner regional than major city centres and in those treated by surgeons with lower case loads requires further study. What is known about the topic? Studies in some countries show an association of poorer outcomes with lower case load and lack of private health insurance. What does this paper add? Lower survivals apply in contemporary Australian environments where annual case loads are 20 or fewer and for patients treated in inner regional compared with major city centres. Poorer survivals for patients without private health insurance status are not statistically significant after adjusting for tumour size and other risk factors. What are the implications for practitioners? Additional research is needed to determine why survivals are lower in Australian settings where case loads are low and when treatment is provided in inner regional centres. Meanwhile, it would be appropriate to target these settings in quality improvement programs.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84865456963&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1071/AH11060

DO - 10.1071/AH11060

M3 - Article

VL - 36

SP - 342

EP - 348

JO - Australian Health Review

JF - Australian Health Review

SN - 0156-5788

IS - 3

ER -