Incidence of Breast Cancer in Younger Women: A Canadian Trend Analysis.

Purpose: Breast cancer (BC) incidence is increasing globally. Age-specific BC incidence trend analyses are lacking for women under age 50 in Canada. In this study, we evaluate the incidence trends in breast cancer in women under age 50 in Canada and compare them with corresponding trends among women 50 to 54. Methods: BC case counts were obtained from the National Cancer Incidence Reporting System (1984-1991) and the Canadian Cancer Registry (1992-2019) both housed at Statistics Canada. Population data were also obtained from Statistics Canada. Annual female BC age-specific incidence rates from 1984 to 2019 were derived for the following age groups: 20 to 29, 30 to 39, 40 to 49, 40 to 44, 45 to 49, and 50 to 54. Changes in trends in age-specific BC incidence rates, if any, and annual percent changes (APCs) for each identified trend, were determined using JoinPoint. Results: Statistically significant increasing trends in BC incidence rates were noted for almost all age groups: since 2001 for 20 to 29 (APC = 3.06%, P < .001); since 2009 for 30 to 39 (APC = 1.25%, P = .007); since 1984 for both 40 to 49 (APC = 0.26%, P < .001) and 40 to 44 (APC = 0.19%, P = .011), increased since 2015 for 40 to 49 (APC = 0.77%, P = .047); and since 2005 for 50 to 54 (APC = 0.38%, P = .022). Among women 45 to 49 there was a non-significant increase since 2005 (APC = 0.24, P = .058). Statistically significant average annualized increases in BC incidence rates were observed for each age group studied. Conclusions: Examining age-specific incidence rates formed a more complete picture of BC time trends with significant increasing trends in the incidence of BC among women in their 20s, 30s, 40s, and early 50s. A greater awareness regarding the increasing number of cases of BC in women younger than 50 is critical to allow for earlier diagnosis with its resultant reduced mortality and morbidity.

Capturing the True Cost of Breast Cancer Treatment: Molecular Subtype and Stage-Specific per-Case Activity-Based Costing.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer (BC) treatment is rapidly evolving with new and costly therapeutics. Existing costing models have a limited ability to capture current treatment costs. We used an Activity-Based Costing (ABC) method to determine a per-case cost for BC treatment by stage and molecular subtype. METHODS: ABC was used to proportionally integrate multidisciplinary evidence-based patient and provider treatment options for BC, yielding a per-case cost for the total duration of treatment by stage and molecular subtype. Diagnostic imaging, pathology, surgery, radiation therapy, systemic therapy, inpatient, emergency, home care and palliative care costs were included. RESULTS: BC treatment costs were higher than noted in previous studies and varied widely by molecular subtype. Cost increased exponentially with the stage of disease. The per-case cost for treatment (2023C$) for DCIS was C$ 14,505, and the mean costs for all subtypes were C$ 39,263, C$ 76,446, C$ 97,668 and C$ 370,398 for stage I, II, III and IV BC, respectively. Stage IV costs were as high as C$ 516,415 per case. When weighted by the proportion of molecular subtype in the population, case costs were C$ 31,749, C$ 66,758, C$ 111,368 and C$ 289,598 for stage I, II, III and IV BC, respectively. The magnitude of cost differential was up to 10.9 times for stage IV compared to stage I, 4.4 times for stage III compared to stage I and 35.6 times for stage IV compared to DCIS. CONCLUSION: The cost of BC treatment is rapidly escalating with novel therapies and increasing survival, resulting in an exponential increase in treatment costs for later-stage disease. We provide real-time, case-based costing for BC treatment which will allow for the assessment of health system economic impacts and an accurate understanding of the cost-effectiveness of screening.

Impact of Breast Cancer Screening on 10-Year Net Survival in Canadian Women Age 40-49 Years.

PURPOSE: In Canada, some provincial/territorial mammography screening programs include women age 40-49 years, whereas others do not. This study examines the impact of this dichotomy on the 10-year breast cancer (BC) net survival (NS) among women age 40-49 years and 50-59 years at diagnosis. METHODS: Using the Canadian Cancer Registry data record linked to death information, we evaluated the cohort of Canadian women age 40-49 years and 50-59 years diagnosed with BC from 2002 to 2007. We compared 10-year NS estimates in the jurisdictions with organized screening programs that included women age 40-49 years, designated as screeners (Northwest Territories, British Columbia, Alberta, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island), with comparator programs that did not (Yukon, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, and Newfoundland and Labrador). RESULTS: BC was the primary cause of 10-year mortality in women age 40-49 years diagnosed with BC (90.7% of deaths). Among these women, the 10-year NS for screeners (84.8%; 95% CI, 83.8 to 85.8) was 1.9 percentage points (pp) higher than that for comparators (82.9%; 95% CI, 82.3 to 83.5; P = .001). The difference in favor of screeners was significant among women age 45-49 years (2.6 pp; P = .001) but not among women age 40-44 years (0.9 pp; P = .328). Similarly, the incidence-based BC mortality rate was significantly lower in screener jurisdictions among women age 40-49 years and 45-49 years, but not for 40-44 years. Provincial/territorial NS increased significantly with higher mammography screening participation (P = .003). The BC incidence rate was virtually identical in screener and comparator jurisdictions among women age 40-49 years (P = .976) but was significantly higher for comparators among women age 50-59 years (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Screening programs that included women in their 40s were associated with a significantly higher BC 10-year NS in women age 40-49 years, but not an increased rate of BC diagnosis. These results may inform screening guidelines for women age 40-49 years.

The Impact of Organised Screening Programs on Breast Cancer Stage at Diagnosis for Canadian Women Aged 40-49 and 50-59.

The relationship between Canadian mammography screening practices for women 40−49 and breast cancer (BC) stage at diagnosis in women 40−49 and 50−59 years was assessed using data from the Canadian Cancer Registry, provincial/territorial screening practices, and screening information from the Canadian Community Health Survey. For the 2010 to 2017 period, women aged 40−49 were diagnosed with lesser relative proportions of stage I BC (35.7 vs. 45.3%; p < 0.001), but greater proportions of stage II (42.6 vs. 36.7%, p < 0.001) and III (17.3 vs. 13.1%, p < 0.001) compared to women 50−59. Stage IV was lower among women 40−49 than 50−59 (4.4% vs. 4.8%, p = 0.005). Jurisdictions with organised screening programs for women 40−49 with annual recall (screeners) were compared with those without (comparators). Women aged 40−49 in comparator jurisdictions had higher proportions of stages II (43.7% vs. 40.7%, p < 0.001), III (18.3% vs. 15.6%, p < 0.001) and IV (4.6% vs. 3.9%, p = 0.001) compared to their peers in screener jurisdictions. Based on screening practices for women aged 40−49, women aged 50−59 had higher proportions of stages II (37.2% vs. 36.0%, p = 0.003) and III (13.6% vs. 12.3%, p < 0.001) in the comparator versus screener groups. The results of this study can be used to reassess the optimum lower age for BC screening in Canada.

Lung cancer screening primer: Key information for primary care providers.

OBJECTIVE: To review new evidence reported since the 2016 publication of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care recommendations and to summarize key facets of lung cancer screening to better equip primary care providers (PCPs) in anticipation of wider implementation of the recommendations. QUALITY OF EVIDENCE: A new, large randomized controlled trial has been published since 2016, as have updates from 4 other trials. PubMed was searched for studies published between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2020, using search words including lung cancer screening eligibility, lung cancer screening criteria, and lung cancer screening guidelines. All information from peer-reviewed articles, reference lists, books, and websites was considered. MAIN MESSAGE: Lung cancers diagnosed at stage 4 have a 5-year survival rate of only 5% and have a disproportionate impact on those with lower socioeconomic status, rural populations, and Indigenous populations. By downstaging, or diagnosing lung cancers at an earlier and more treatable stage, lung cancer screening reduces mortality with a number needed to screen of 250 to prevent 1 death. Practical aspects of lung cancer screening are reviewed, including criteria to screen, appropriate low-dose computed tomography screening, and management of findings. Harms of screening, such as overdiagnosis and incidental findings, are discussed to allow PCPs to appropriately counsel their patients in the face of ongoing implementation of new lung cancer screening programs. CONCLUSION: Lung cancer screening, with its embedded emphasis on smoking cessation, is an excellent addition to PCPs' preventive health care tools. The implementation of formal and pilot lung cancer screening programs across Canada means that PCPs will be increasingly required to counsel their patients around the uptake of lung cancer screening.