Table 2.
Adherence levels by treatment modality
| Study1 | Guideline | Overall care* or overall treatment | ST | Pre-treatment/diagnosis | Surgical procedures | CT | ET | RT | Anti HER2 | Supportive measures | Follow -up |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Andreano 2017 [57] | ESMO 2015 | 69%* | 76% | 81% | 97% | – | – | RT after BCS 84% | – | – | 84% |
| Balasubramanian 2003 [71] | North Trent breast cancer group guidelines for treatment and referral (1998) | 82% | – | – | 90% | – | 74% | – | – | – | |
| Barni 2011 [58] | Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) | 64%*–71% | 93% | BCS 74%; ALND 68%; SLNB 57% | 100% | 90% | 92% | – | 0% | ||
| Boskovic 2017 [74] | Bone health guidelines | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 32–75% | – | |
|
BRENDA I Ebner 2015 [67] |
German National Step 3 (S3) (younger vs older) | 67% vs 47% | – | 86.3% vs 88.3% | 88% vs 68% | 91% vs 87% | 95% vs 83% | – | – | – | |
|
BRENDA I Ebner 2015a [20] |
German National Step 3 | 61% | – | – | 91% | 74% | 75% | 83% | – | – | – |
|
BRENDA I Hancke 2010 [21] |
German National Step 3 | – | – | BCS: 87%; MT: 52% | Recommended: 56%; not recommended: 95% | Recommended: 88%; not recommended: 92% | Recommended: 86%; not recommended: 88% | – | – | – | |
|
BRENDA I Schwentner 2012a [12] |
German National Step 3 | 33% vs 57% overall: 54% | – | – | BCS: 86% | 74% | – | 84% | – | – | – |
|
BRENDA I Schwentner 2012b [22] |
German National Step 3 | BBC 15% | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
|
BRENDA I Schwentner 2013 [68] |
German National Step 3 | – | TNBC: 44%; non-TNBC: 70% | – | TNBC 86%; non-TNBC 87% | TNBC 53%; non-TNBC 87% | – | TNBC: 90%; non-TNBC 92% | – | – | – |
|
BRENDA I Van Ewijk 2015 [23] |
German National Step 3 | – | 59% | – | 87.6% | 78% | 91% | 91% | – | – | – |
|
BRENDA I Varga 2010 [24] |
German National Step 3 | – | 54% | – | 87% | 80% | 81% | 87% | – | – | – |
|
BRENDA I Wöckel 2010 [25] |
German National Step 3 2004 | 52% | – | – | BCS: 85% MT: 85% | 71% | 85% | 84% | – | – | – |
|
BRENDA I Wöckel 2014 [26] |
German National Step 3 | – | – | – | – | – | – | 87% | – | – | – |
|
BRENDA I Wökel 2010a [13] |
German National Step 3 | 48% | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
|
BRENDA I Wollschlager 2017 [27] |
German National Step 3 | – |
Charlson 0: 68% Charlson 1–2: 66% Charlson ≥ 3: 58% |
– | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
|
BRENDA I Wolters 2015 [28] |
German National Step 3 | 53% | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
| BRENDA II Stuber 2017 [31] | German National Step 3 | – | – | – | – | – | 92% | – | – | – | – |
| BRENDA II Leinert 2019 [29] | German National Step 3 | – | – | – | – |
High risk: 90%; low risk: 100% |
– | – | – | – | – |
| BRENDA II Schwentner 2016 [30] | German National Step 3 | – | – | – | – | 85% | – | – | – | – | |
| Bucchi 2009 [66] | 1995, 1998, 2001 Gallen International Conferences guidelines | 53% | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
| de Munck 2011 [40] | NABON (National Breast Cancer Organization of The Netherlands) | – | – | – | – | – | – | 94% | – | – | |
| de Roos 2005 [41] | CCN guidelines | 69% | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| DURTO 2003 [38] | St Gallen International Consensus Panel | – | – | – | – | – | 96% | – | |||
| Heins 2017 [43] | Dutch National Cancer Treatment guidelines for breast cancer | – | – | – | – | 90–99% | 90–95% | – | – | – | – |
| Holm-Rasmussen 2017 [72] | Danish Breast Cancer Group guideline | – | – | – | SLNB 76% | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Jacke 2015 [59] | S1-guidelines (1996–1997) vs S3-guidelines (2003–2004) | 15% vs 34% | – | – | ALND 81% vs 81% | 75% vs 93% | 70% vs 84% | BCS + RT: 29% vs 53% | – | – | – |
| Jensen 2018 [73] | Danish Breast Cancer Group guidelines | – | – | 99% | 95% | 97% | 96% | 80–97% | – | – | – |
| Kuijer 2017 [44] | Dutch AST guidelines: 2005–2008, 2008–2012 and 2012–2014 | – | – | – | – | 78% | 88% | – | – | – | – |
| Lebeau 2011 [63] | French National CPGs | 12–29% | – | – | 65% | 73% | 88% | 48% | – | – | – |
| Liebrich 2011 [64] | 2006 AGO-S3 German Cancer Society | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 77% | – | – |
| Mille 2000 [69] | Centre Regional Leon Bernard (CRLB) guideline (1993 vs 1995) | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | First–year 16% vs 74% |
| Mylvaganam 2018 [54] | British best practice guidelines for implant-based breast reconstruction 2015 | – | – | – | 17–50% | – | – | – | – | 19–100% | – |
| Natoli 2014 [55] | National and International Oncology societies | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 10% |
|
OncoDoc2 |
Cancer Est CPGs | 91% | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Ottevanger 2004 [60] | CCCE National guideline (1988 vs 1996) | – | – | – | BCS 39% vs 35%; MT: 56% vs 54% | 91% vs 88% | – | 75% vs 93% | – | – | – |
| Poncet 2009 [51] | French National guidelines and regional CGs | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | National 31%–Regional 83% | – | – |
| Ray-Coquard 1997 [35] | Guideline in 1993 (1993 vs 1995) | 19% vs 54%* | – | 75% vs 86% | 96% vs 92% | 71% vs 85% | 72% vs 94% | 83% vs 93% | – | – | 31% vs 80% |
| Ray-Coquard 2012 [70] | French and international guidelines to manage CT-induced anaemia | – | – | – | – | 95% | – | – | – | – | – |
| Roila 2003 [39] | St Gallen International Consensus Panel | – | – | – | – | 60% | 81% | – | – | – | – |
| Sacerdote 2013 [61] | Piedmont guidelines (2002 vs 2004) | – | – | – | BCS 86% vs 93% | 66% vs 64% | 94% vs 94% | 88% vs. 88% | – | – | – |
| Schaapveld 2004 [46] | Regional treatment CCCN Guidelines | – | – | – | – | 89% | – | – | – | – | – |
| Schaapveld 2005 [45] | CCCN Guidelines | – | – | – | BCS: 95%; MRM: 90.6% | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Schrodi 2015 [62] | German National Step 3 (1999 vs 2010) | – | – | – | BCS 72%; SLNB: 0.2% vs 51% | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| van de Water 2012 [48] | Dutch AST guidelines: 2005–2008, 2008–2012 and 2012–2014 | < 65 years: 62% ≥ 75 years: 56% | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Van Ryckeghem 2019 [37] | European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer guidelines (EORTC 2010) | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 75% | – |
| Vercauteren 2010 [65] | Dutch national CGs for breast cancer screening and diagnosis, American College of Radiology CGs | – | – | Adding US: 94%; not additional: 83% | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Visser 2016 [49] | HERA (Herceptin adjuvant study) | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 63% | – |
| Weggelaar 2011 [50] | CCN guidelines | – | 77% | – | – | 90% | 76% | 91% | – | – | – |
| Wimmer 2019 [36] | German National Step 3 (2017) | – | – | – | – | – | – | 97% | – | – |
1Sorted in alphabetical order
*Including follow-up
BBC bilateral breast cancer, BCS breast-conserving surgery, CT chemotherapy, ET endocrine therapy, HER2 human epidermal growth receptor, MRM modified radical mastectomy, MT mastectomy, SLNB sentinel lymph node biopsy, TNBC triple-negative breast cancer, US ultrasonography. Preventive measures procedures described in the text