http://repub.eur.nl/res/aut/50834/ List of Publications en http://repub.eur.nl/static-eur/img/logo.png http://repub.eur.nl http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/35037/ 2012-01-01T00:00:00Z Surgical margin status after first breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is used as a quality indicator of breast cancer care in the Netherlands. The aim is to describe the variation in surgical margin status between hospitals. 7,345 patients with DCIS or invasive cancer (T1-2,N0-1,M0) diagnosed between July 1, 2008, and June 30, 2009, who underwent BCS as first surgery, were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients were treated in 96 hospitals. Maximum target values were 30% 'focally positive' or 'more than focally positive' for DCIS and 10% 'more than focally positive' for invasive carcinoma. Results per hospital are presented in funnel plots. For invasive carcinoma, multivariate logistic regression was used to adjust for case mix. Overall 28.5% (95% CI: 25.5-31.4%) of DCIS and 9.1% (95% CI: 8.4-9.8%) of invasive carcinoma had positive margins. Variation between hospitals was substantial. 6 and 10 hospitals, respectively, for DCIS and invasive cancer showed percentages above the upper limit of agreement. Case mix correction led to significant different conclusions for 5 hospitals. After case mix correction, 10 hospitals showed significant higher rates, while 7 hospitals showed significant lower rates. High rates were not related to breast cancer patient volume or type of hospital (teaching vs. non-teaching). Higher rates were related to hospitals where the policy is to aim for BCS instead of mastectomy. The overall percentage of positive margins in the Netherlands is within the predefined targets. The variation between hospitals is substantial but can be largely explained by coincidence. Case mix correction leads to relevant shifts. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/33573/ 2011-01-01T00:00:00Z The authors investigated the role of known risk factors in educational differences in breast cancer incidence. Analyses were based on the European Prospective Investigation Into Cancer and Nutrition and included 242,095 women, 433 cases of in situ breast cancer, and 4,469 cases of invasive breast cancer. Reproductive history (age at first full-term pregnancy and parity), exposure to endogenous and exogenous hormones, height, and health behaviors were accounted for in the analyses. Relative indices of inequality (RII) for education were estimated using Cox regression models. A higher risk of invasive breast cancer was found among women with higher levels of education (RII = 1.22, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.09, 1.37). This association was not observed among nulliparous women (RII = 1.13, 95% CI: 0.84, 1.52). Inequalities in breast cancer incidence decreased substantially after adjusting for reproductive history (RII = 1.11, 95% CI: 0.98, 1.25), with most of the association being explained by age at first full-term pregnancy. Each other risk factor explained a small additional part of the inequalities in breast cancer incidence. Height accounted for most of the remaining differences in incidence. After adjusting for all known risk factors, the authors found no association between education level and risk of invasive breast cancer. Inequalities in incidence were more pronounced for in situ breast cancer, and those inequalities remained after adjustment for all known risk factors (RII = 1.61, 95% CI: 1.07, 2.41), especially among nulliparous women.