Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Rural breast cancer treatment: evidence from the Reaching Communities for Cancer Care (REACH) project

  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background. Research shows that rural populations are more likely than their urban counterparts to be diagnosed with late‐stage cancer, but less is known about appropriateness of cancer treatment in rural locations after diagnosis. The objective of this analysis was to assess the degree to which rural breast cancer treatment was received in concordance with national recommendations.

Methods. Data came from 251 stage I and II breast cancer patients residing in rural North Carolina. State‐of‐the‐art care was defined using the National Cancer Institute's (NCI) physician data query (PDQ) database, and cases were categorized into appropriate primary and/or adjuvant treatment. Chi‐square and Fishers' exact tests were used to assess changes in appropriate treatment over time (1991–1996) and between stage. Multiple logistic regression was used to determine whether any patient or disease characteristics were associated with receipt of appropriate treatment.

Results. Most (81–90%) of the breast cancer cases received the appropriate primary therapy (mastectomy or lumpectomy followed by radiation therapy); of these, the majority received a mastectomy (66–72%). Fewer women received adjuvant therapy as recommended (27–61%), although significantly more stage II than stage I cases did so (p≤0.05). Regression showed that stage and estrogen‐receptor (ER) status were associated with appropriate therapy.

Conclusions. The findings suggest that there exist deviations from NCI established treatment recommendations among rural breast cancer patients. More research is needed to develop better methods for dissemination of state‐of‐the‐art cancer information to rural physicians and patients, and to understand how treatment decisions are made.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Liff JM, Chow W, Greenberg: Rural-urban differences in stage at diagnosis: possible relationship to cancer screening. Cancer 67: 1545–1559, 1991

    Google Scholar 

  2. Risser DR, Condon KW: Stage of cancer diagnosis in rural versus urban areas of Texas: implications for changing the disparity through health services. Texas J. Rural Health 14: 1–8, 1995

    Google Scholar 

  3. Howe H, Katterhagen JG, Yates J, Lehnherr M: Urban-rural differences in the management of breast cancer. Cancer Caus Control 3: 533–539, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  4. Nattinger A, Gottlieb M, Veum J: Geographic variation in the use of breast-conserving treatment for breast cancer. New Eng J Med 326(7): 1002–1107, 1992

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Farrow DC, Hunt W, Samet J: Geographic variation in the treatment of localized breast cancer. New Eng J Med 326(17): 1097–1101, 1992

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Albain KS, Green SR, Lichter AS, Hutchins LF, Wood WC, Henderson IC, Ingle JN, O'sullivan J, Osborne CK, Martino S: Influence of patient characteristics, socioeconomic factors, geography and systemic risk on the use of breast-sparing treatment in women enrolled in adjuvant breast cancer studies: an analysis of two intergroup trials. J Clin Onc 14(11): 30009–30017, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  7. Hillner BE, Penberthy L, Desch CE, McDonald MK, Smith TJ, Retchin SM: Variation in staging and treatment of local and regional breast cancer in the elderly. Breast Cancer Res Treat 40(1): 75–86, 1996

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Osteen RT, Cady B, Chmiel JS, Clive RE, Doggett RL, Friedman MA, Hussey DH, Kraybill WG, Urist MM, Winchester DP: 1991 national survey of carcinoma of the breast by the Commission on Cancer. J Amer College Surg 178(3): 213–219, 1994

    Google Scholar 

  9. Lazovich D, White E, Thomas DB, Moe RB: Underutilization of breast-conserving surgery and radiation therapy among women with stage I or II breast cancer. J Amer Med Assoc 266(24): 3433–3438, 1991

    Google Scholar 

  10. Grant CS: Changes in the treatment of early breast cancer at the Mayo Clinic: 1988-1992. Eur J Surg 162 (2): 93–96, 1996

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Office of Technology Assessment: Health Care in Rural America (OTA Publication NO. OTA-H-434). Washingon, DC, Government Printing Office, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  12. Howe H, Lehnherr M, Katterhagen JG: Effects of physician outreach programs on rural-urban differences in the management of breast cancer. J Rural Health 13(2): 109–117, 1997

    Google Scholar 

  13. Breast: In: American Joint Committee on Cancer: AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. Lippencott-Raven Publishers, 5th Edition. Phildelphia, 1997, pp. 171–180

    Google Scholar 

  14. PDQ Breast Cancer Treatment for Health Professionals. National Cancer Institute; 1991 and 1996

  15. Hubbard SM, Shields VT, Thurn AL, et al.: NCI's Cancer Information Resources - Reliable Sources of Current Information on the Management of Cancer Accessible On-line, by Fax and on the Internet. In: Dollinger M, Rosenbaum and Cable G. (eds): Everyone's Guide To Cancer Therapy, 3rd Edition. Somerville House, Toronto, 1997, pp. 302–310

    Google Scholar 

  16. Eley J, Hill H, Chen VW, Austin DF, Wesley MN, Muss HB, Greenberg RS, Coates RJ, Correa P, Redmond CK et al.: Racial differences in survival from breast cancer. Results of the National Cancer Institute Black/White Cancer Survival Study. J Amer Med Assoc 272(12): 947–954, 1994

    Google Scholar 

  17. Lyman GH, Kuderer NM, Lyman SL, Cox CE, Reintgen D, Baeley P: Importance of race on breast cancer survival. Ann Surg Oncol 4(1): 80–87, 1997

    Google Scholar 

  18. Newschaffer C, Penberthy L, Desch C, Retchin SM, Whittemore M: The effect of age and comorbidity in the treatment of elderly women with nonmetastatic breast cancer. Archives Int Med 156(1): 85–90, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  19. Fisher B, Anderson S: Conservative surgery for the management of invasive and noninvasive carcinoma of the breast: NSAB trials. World J Surg 18(1): 63–69, 1994

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lichter AS, Lippman M, Danforth D Jr., d'Angelo T, Steinberg SM, deMoss E, MacDonald HD, Reichert CM, Merino M, Swain SM, et al.: Mastectomy versus breast-conserving therapy in the treatment of stage I and II carcinoma of the breast randomized trial at the National Cancer Institute. J Clin Oncol 10(6): 976–983, 1992

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Horiguchi J, lino Y, Takei H, Sugamata N, Maemura M, Yokoe T, Morishita Y, Niibe H, Mitsuhashi N, Yamakawa M, Nakajima T, Oyama T, Shiozake H, Ishida T, Endo K, Takano A, Fujii T, Yokomori T: Comparison of breast-conserving therapy with mastectomy for early breast cancer. Anticancer Res 17(5B): 3849–3855, 1997

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Jacobson JA, Danforth DN, Cowan KH, d'Angelo T, Steinberg SM, Pierce L, Lippman ME, Lichter AS, Glatstein E, Okunieff P: Ten-year results of a comparison of conservation with mastectomy in the treatment of stage I and II breast cancer. New Eng J Med 332(14): 907–911, 1995

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Foster RS, Farwell ME, Costanza MC: Breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer: patterns of care in a geographic region and estimation of potential applicability. Ann Surg Oncol 2(3): 275–280, 1995

    Google Scholar 

  24. Tarbox BB, Rockwood JK, Abernathy CM: Are modified radical mastectomies done for T1 breast cancers because of surgeons' advice or patient's choice? Amer J Surg 164: 417–422, 1992

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Ayanian JA, Guadagnoli E: Variations in breast cancer treatment by patient and provider characteristics. Breast Cancer Res Treat 40(1): 65–74, 1996

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Patton ML, Moss BE, Kraut JD, Germain TJ, Haith LR Jr., Shotwell BA, Reilly KJ: Underutilization of breast conservation surgery with radiation therapy for women with stage Tis, I or II breast cancer. Int Surg 81(4): 423–427, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  27. Kotwall CA, Covington DL, Rutledge R, Churchill MP, Meyer AA: Patient, hospital and surgeon factors associated with breast conservation surgery. A statewide analysis in North Carolina. Ann Surg 224(4): 419–426, 1996

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Michaleski TA, Nattinger A: The influence of black race and socioeconomic status on the use of breast-conserving surgery for Medicare beneficiaries. Cancer 79(2): 314–319, 1997

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. McFall SL, Warnecke RB, Kaluzny AD, Aitken M, Ford L: Physician and practice characteristics associated with judgements about breast cancer treatment. Med Care 32(2): 106–117, 1993

    Google Scholar 

  30. Polednak AP: Predictors of breast-conserving surgery in Connecticut, 1990-1992. Ann Surg Oncol 4(3): 259–263, 1997

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Hayman JA, Fairclough DL, Harris JR, Weeks JC: Patient preferences concerning the trade-off between the risks and benefits of routine radiation therapy after conservative surgery for early stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 15(3): 1252–1260, 1997

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Wei JP, Sherry RM, Baisden BL, Peckel J, Lala G: Prospective hospital-based survey of attitudes of Southern women toward surgical treatment of breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2(4): 360–364, 1995

    Google Scholar 

  33. Tate PS, McGee EM, Hopkins SF, Rogers EL, Page GV: Breast conservation versus mastectomy: patient preferences in a community practice in Kentucky. J Surg Oncol 52(4): 213–216, 1993

    Google Scholar 

  34. Johnson JD, Roberts CS, Cox CE, Reintgen DS, Levine JS, Parsons M: Breast cancer patients' personality style, age and treatment decision making. J Surg Oncol 63(3): 183–186, 1996

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Silliman RA, Dukes KA, Sullivan LM, Kaplan SH: Breast cancer care in older women: sources of information, social support and emotional health outcomes. Cancer 83(4): 706–711, 1998

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Siminoff LA, Fetting JH: Factors affecting treatment decisions for a life-threatening illness: the case of medical treatment of breast cancer. Social Sci Med 32(7): 813–818, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Cooper MR, Ricketts TC, Paskett E, Tropman SE, Hatzell T: Final Report of the Reaching Communities for Cancer Care Project, 1998 (submitted to NCI)

  38. Schwartzberg JG, Guttman R: Effect of training on physician attitudes and practices in home and community care of the elderly. Archives Family Med 6(5): 439–444, 1997

    Google Scholar 

  39. Ockene JK, Ockene IS, Quirk ME, Hebert JR, Saperia GM, Luippold RS, Merriam PA, Ellis S: Physician training for patient-centered nutrition counseling in a lipid intervention trial. Preventive Medicine 24(6): 563–570, 1995

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Love RR: A course in cancer prevention for practicing physicians. Cancer Detection Preven 4(1-4): 273–280, 1981

    Google Scholar 

  41. Olivetto A, Coldman AJ, Hislop TG, Trevisan CH, Kula J, Goel V, Sawka C: Compliance with practice guidelines for node-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 15(1): 216–222, 1997

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Howe HL, Lehnherr M, Katterhagen JG: Education of rural physicians about breast cancer through an oncology outreach program. Public Health Reports 109(6): 804–808, 1994

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Feigl P, Glaefke G, Ford L, Diehr P, Chu J: Studying patterns of cancer care: How useful is the medical record? Amer J Public Health 78(5):526–533, 1988

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC

    Sarah E. Tropman, Thomas C. Ricketts & Theresa A. Hatzell

  2. Bowman‐Gray Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston‐Salem, NC

    Electra Paskett & M. Robert Cooper

  3. State Center for Health Statistics, North Carolina Central Cancer Registry, Raleigh, NC

    Timothy Aldrich

Authors
  1. Sarah E. Tropman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas C. Ricketts
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Electra Paskett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Theresa A. Hatzell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. M. Robert Cooper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Timothy Aldrich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tropman, S.E., Ricketts, T.C., Paskett, E. et al. Rural breast cancer treatment: evidence from the Reaching Communities for Cancer Care (REACH) project. Breast Cancer Res Treat 56, 59–66 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006279117650

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006279117650

Search

Navigation