KEY TAKEAWAYS
- The study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of personalized breast cancer follow-up approaches through a systematic review.
- The study concluded that diverse interventions hindered definitive conclusions on personalized follow-up effectiveness. Uniform standards are imperative.
Breast cancer follow-up, including surveillance and aftercare, ranges from standardized to personalized methodologies. This variability prompts exploration into the efficacy of tailored approaches through systematic review.
Marissa C van Maaren and the team aimed to assess the effectiveness of personalized breast cancer follow-up via systematic review.
The study conducted searches in PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases from January 1, 2010, to October 10, 2022. The review was registered in PROSPERO under the registration number CRD42022375770.
The inclusion criteria involved patients with nonmetastatic breast cancer aged 18 or older post-completion of curative treatment. Intervention-control studies examining personalized surveillance and/or aftercare strategies throughout the follow-up period were included. The 2 reviewers conducted all review processes, including the risk of bias assessment. The characteristics of the included studies were duly documented.
The results revealed that out of 3708 publications identified, 64 full-text articles were screened, leading to the inclusion of 16 for data extraction. One study focused on personalized surveillance, while various personalized aftercare interventions and outcomes were examined across others. Common elements in personalized aftercare plans included treatment summaries (75%), follow-up guidelines (56%), lists of supportive care resources (38%), and patient-reported outcomes (25%). Control conditions primarily consisted of usual care.
Of the evaluated studies, 57% reported improvements in quality of life with personalization, while 38% found no significant effect across multiple outcomes (e.g., distress, satisfaction). Risk of bias assessment indicated one study (6.3%) as low risk, four (25%) as high risk, and 11 (68.8%) with concerns.
The study concluded that, due to variations in interventions, measurement tools, and outcomes among included studies, concluding on the effectiveness of personalized follow-up was not feasible. Establishing clear definitions for personalized surveillance and aftercare, followed by uniform outcome measurement standards, is imperative.
This review is a component of a project funded by ZonMw. The funding organization played no role in the study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or manuscript preparation.
Source: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38695938/
van Maaren MC, van Hoeve JC, Korevaar JC, et al. (2024). “The effectiveness of personalised surveillance and aftercare in breast cancer follow-up: a systematic review.” Support Care Cancer. 2024 May 2;32(5):323. doi: 10.1007/s00520-024-08530-2. PMID: 38695938.
