Discrepancies of current recommendations in breast cancer follow-up: a systematic review
- 84 Downloads
Management and optimal follow-up of early breast cancer survivors remain up to this day a challenge due to the lack of well-established guidelines. Multiple medical societies, organizations and working groups have provided recommendations for follow-up but there is no uniform, globally approved algorithm to guide clinical practice.
A systematic review was performed to identify and evaluate discrepancies between available guidelines for the follow-up of breast cancer survivors.
Differences in the follow-up schedule, laboratory and imaging investigations were noted. In the clinical practice setting, the situation is complicated further by clinicians who often request unnecessary tests not currently incorporated in any of the existing guidelines.
Follow-up of patients with early breast cancer needs to become standardized and prospective clinical trials focusing on optimal follow-up are more than mandatory.
KeywordsFollow-up Breast cancer Guidelines Clinical practice Discrepancies
We appreciate Dr. Andreas Giannopoulos contribution on English language editing.
Compliance with ethical standards
The authors declare that this systematic review was conducted according to the laws of Greece.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 4.Grunfeld E, Dhesy-Thind S, Levine M, Steering Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Care and Treatment of Breast Cancer. Clinical practice guidelines for the care and treatment of breast cancer: follow-up after treatment for breast cancer (summary of the 2005 update). CMAJ. 2005;172:1319–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Dewis R, Gribbin J. Breast cancer: diagnosis and treatment: an assessment of need. Cardiff: National Collaborating Centre for Cancer; 2009.Google Scholar
- 7.Barnadas A, Algara M, Cordoba O, Casas A, Gonzalez M, Marzo M, et al. Recommendations for the follow-up care of female breast cancer survivors: a guideline of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM), Spanish Society of General Medicine (SEMERGEN), Spanish Society for Family and Community Medicine (SEMFYC), Spanish Society for General and Family Physicians (SEMG), Spanish Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology (SEGO), Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology (SEOR), Spanish Society of Senology and Breast Pathology (SESPM), and Spanish Society of Cardiology (SEC). Clin Transl Oncol. 2018;20:687–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Australian Government NHaMRC. Clinical practice guideline for the management of early breast cancer, 2nd ed. Canberra: Australian Government NHaMRC; 2001.Google Scholar
- 15.Grossmann M, Ramchand S, Milat F, Vincent A, Lim E, Kotowicz MA, et al. Assessment and management of bone health in women with oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer receiving endocrine therapy: position statement of the Endocrine Society of Australia, the Australian and New Zealand Bone & Mineral Society, the Australasian Menopause Society and the Clinical Oncology Society of Australia. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2018;89(3):280–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Nippert I, Julian-Reynier C, Harris H, Evans G, van Asperen CJ, Tibben A, et al. Cancer risk communication, predictive testing and management in France, Germany, the Netherlands and the UK: general practitioners’ and breast surgeons’ current practice and preferred practice responsibilities. J Community Genet. 2014;5:69–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar