METHODS: In October 2018, the BHGI convened the Sixth Global Summit on Improving Breast Healthcare Through Resource-Stratified Phased Implementation. The purpose of the summit was to define a stepwise methodology (phased implementation) for guiding the translation of resource-appropriate breast cancer control guidelines into real-world practice. Three expert consensus panels developed stepwise, resource-appropriate recommendations for implementing these guidelines in low-income and middle-income countries as well as underserved communities in high-income countries. Each panel focused on 1 of 3 specific aspects of breast cancer care: 1) early detection, 2) treatment, and 3) health system strengthening.

RESULTS: Key findings from the summit and subsequent article preparation included the identification of phased-implementation prerequisites that were explored during consensus debates. These core issues and concepts are key components for implementing breast health care that consider real-world resource constraints. Communication and engagement across all levels of care is vital to any effectively operating health care system, including effective communication with ministries of health and of finance, to demonstrate needs, outcomes, and cost benefits.

METHODS: We established PN in a dedicated breast clinic of a Malaysian state-run hospital. We compared diagnostic and treatment timeliness between navigated patients (n = 135) and patients diagnosed in the prior year (n = 148), and described factors associated with timeliness.

RESULTS: Women with PN received timely mammography compared with patients in the prior year (96.4% v 74.4%; P < .001), biopsy (92.5% v 76.1%; P = .003), and communication of news (80.0% v 58.5%; P < .001). PN reduced treatment default rates (4.4% v 11.5%; P = .048). Among navigated patients, late stage at presentation was independently associated with having emotional and language barriers ( P = .01). Finally, the main reason reported for delay, default, or refusal of treatment was the preference for alternative therapy.

METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted using breast cancer data from the Kelantan Cancer Registry between 2007 and 2011, and Kelantan general population mortality data. The breast cancer cases were followed up for 5 years until 2016. Out of 598 cases, 549 cases met the study criteria and were included in the analysis. Modelling of excess mortality was conducted using Poisson regression.

METHODS: Two prospective groups of 423 and 965 newly diagnosed breast cancer patients in University of Malaya Medical Centre, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia diagnosed in two time periods ie. 1993 to 1997 and in 1998 to 2002 were studied. Vital status was obtained from the National Registry of Births and Deaths. The overall survival was calculated from the date of diagnosis to the date of death from any cause. The survival differences between the two groups were analysed using the log-rank or Peto-Wilcoxon method. Survival estimates and independent prognostic factors were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method and multivariate analysis using Cox proportional hazard models. P values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Analyses were performed using SPlus 2000 Professional Release 2.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Median follow-up for the two groups were 55 months (SD 29.2 months) in the first group and 52 months (SD 24.43) in the second group. There was improvement in 5-year observed survival from 58.4% (CI 0.54-0.63) to 75.7% (CI 0.73-0.79). The improvement in survival was significantly seen in all co-variates (p< 0.05) except for those aged 40 years and below (p= 0.27), tumour size 2 to 5 cm (p=0.11), grade 3 (p=0.32) and patients with Stage IV disease (p= 0.80). Stage of disease, lymph node (LN) involvement, size and grade were identified as independent prognostic factors in cohort one. For the second cohort; stage and LN involvement remained independent factors with the addition of ER status and ethnicity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study examined breast cancer patients between 1st January 1994 and 31st December 2004 in UMMC. Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method and comparisons between groups using the log-rank test. Univariate and multivariate analysis on prognostic factors were carried out using the Cox's proportionate hazard model for patient demographics, and tumour and treatment factors.

RESULTS: One hundred and thirty six patients were identified, with a median age at diagnosis of 75 years. Most had at least one co-morbidity (61.8%). Only 75.0% had a good performance status (ECOG 0-1). Mean tumour size was 4.4 cm. Primary tumour stages (T stages) 3 and 4 were present in 8.1% and 30.1% of patients respectively, and 30.9% had stage III and 8.8% had stage IV disease based on overall AJCC staging. ER positivity was 58.1%. PR status was positive in 30.1%. Surgery was performed in 69.1% of the patients and mastectomy and axillary clearance were the commonest surgical procedures (50.7%). Some 79.4% of patients received hormonal therapy, 30.1% radiotherapy and only 3.6% chemotherapy. Non-standard treatment was given to 39.0% of patients due to a variety of reasons. The cumulative 5 years overall, relapse free and cause specific survivals were 51.9%, 79.7% and 73.3% respectively. Performance status, T3-4 tumour, presence of metastasis, tumour grade and ER status were independent prognostic factors for overall survival. For cause specific survival they were T4 tumour, presence of metastasis and ER status.