Advertisement
ADVANCED SEARCH

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Chaudhry, R. Articles by Sawka, C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Chaudhry, R. Articles by Sawka, C. Related Collections Health services research Statistics & Research Methods Breast Cancer

Breast cancer survival by teaching status of the initial treating hospital

Ruhee Chaudhry^*, Vivek Goel and Carol Sawka

From the Departments of *Public Health Sciences, Health Administration and Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto; the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto; and the Division of Medical Oncology/Hematology, Toronto–Sunnybrook Regional Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ont.

Background: A number of studies have documented variation in treatment patterns by treatment setting or by region. In order to better understand how treatment setting might affect survival, we compared the survival outcomes of women with node-negative breast cancer who were initially treated at teaching hospitals with those of women initially treated at community hospitals.

Methods: We constructed a retrospective cohort consisting of a random sample of 938 cases, initially diagnosed in 1991, drawn from the Ontario Cancer Registry. Exposure was defined by the type of hospital in which the initial breast cancer surgery was performed. Outcomes were ascertained through follow-up of vital statistics.

Results: The crude 5-year survival rate was 88.7% for women who had their initial surgery in a community hospital and 92.5% for women who had their initial surgery in a teaching hospital. Women in higher income neighbourhoods experienced better survival at 5 years regardless of which type of hospital they were treated in. Multivariate proportional hazards regression modelling demonstrated a 53% relative reduction in risk of death among women with tumours less than or equal to 20 mm in diameter who were treated at a teaching hospital (relative risk [RR] = 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.23–0.96), whereas among those with larger tumours there was no demonstrated difference in survival (RR = 1.32, 95% CI 0.73–2.32). Other variables that were significant in the model were age at diagnosis, estrogen receptor status and the use of radiation therapy.

Interpretation: Women with node-negative breast cancer and tumours less than or equal to 20 mm in diameter who were initially seen at a teaching hospital had significantly better survival than women with similar tumours who were initially seen at a community hospital. Survival among women with larger tumours was not statistically significantly different for the 2 types of hospital.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				L. M. Woods, B. Rachet, and M. P. Coleman Origins of socio-economic inequalities in cancer survival: a review Ann. Onc., January 1, 2006; 17(1): 5 - 19. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C M Roberts, S Barnes, D Lowe, and M G Pearson Evidence for a link between mortality in acute COPD and hospital type and resources Thorax, November 1, 2003; 58(11): 947 - 949. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Minerva BMJ, October 6, 2003; 327(7418): E29 - 29. [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Simunovic, A. Gagliardi, D. McCready, A. Coates, M. Levine, and D. DePetrillo A snapshot of waiting times for cancer surgery provided by surgeons affiliated with regional cancer centres in Ontario Can. Med. Assoc. J., August 1, 2001; 165(4): 421 - 425. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. Willard Do women treated for breast cancer at teaching hospitals really fare better? Can. Med. Assoc. J., July 1, 2001; 165(2): 149 - 149. [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Cantin, H. Scarth, M. Levine, and M. Hugi Clinical practice guidelines for the care and treatment of breast cancer: 13. Sentinel lymph node biopsy Can. Med. Assoc. J., July 1, 2001; 165(2): 166 - 173. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. E. Myers Do women treated for breast cancer at teaching hospitals really fare better? Can. Med. Assoc. J., July 1, 2001; 165(2): 147 - 147. [Full Text] [PDF]

				T.J. Muckle Do women treated for breast cancer at teaching hospitals really fare better? Can. Med. Assoc. J., July 1, 2001; 165(2): 147 - 147. [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. Barron Do women treated for breast cancer at teaching hospitals really fare better? Can. Med. Assoc. J., July 1, 2001; 165(2): 147 - 149. [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. J. Fingerote Do women treated for breast cancer at teaching hospitals really fare better? Can. Med. Assoc. J., July 1, 2001; 165(2): 149 - 149. [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. P. Higgins Do women treated for breast cancer at teaching hospitals really fare better? Can. Med. Assoc. J., July 1, 2001; 165(2): 149 - 149. [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Chaudhry, V. Goel, and C. Sawka Do women treated for breast cancer at teaching hospitals really fare better? Can. Med. Assoc. J., July 1, 2001; 165(2): 149 - 151. [Full Text] [PDF]

				Correction Can. Med. Assoc. J., May 1, 2001; 164(9): 1280 - 1280. [Full Text]

				R. Grilli Specialization and cancer: words with too many meanings should be handled with care Can. Med. Assoc. J., January 1, 2001; 164(2): 210 - 211. [Full Text] [PDF]

HOME	CURRENT ISSUE	PAST ISSUES	COLLECTIONS	HELP	SEARCH
Copyright 1995-2001, Canadian Medical Association. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p) All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association.