PURPOSE: COVID-19 has altered healthcare delivery. Previous work has focused on patients with cancer and COVID-19, but little has been reported on healthcare system changes among patients without COVID-19. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of patients with breast cancer (BC) in New York City between February 1, 2020, and April 30, 2020. New patients were included as were patients scheduled to receive intravenous or injectable therapy. Patients with COVID-19 were excluded. Demographic and treatment information were obtained by chart review. Delays and/or changes in systemic therapy, surgery, radiation, and radiology related to the pandemic were tracked, along with the reasons for delay and/or change. Univariate and multivariable analysis were used to identify factors associated with delay and/or change. RESULTS: We identified 350 eligible patients, of whom 149 (42.6%) experienced a delay and/or change, and practice reduction (51.0%) was the most common reason. The patients who identified as Black or African American, Asian, or Other races were more likely to experience a delay and/or change compared with White patients (Black, 44.4%; Asian, 47.1%; Other, 55.6%; White, 31.4%; P = .001). In multivariable analysis, Medicaid compared with commercial insurance (odds ratio [OR], 3.04; 95% CI, 1.32 to 7.27) was associated with increased odds of a delay and/or change, whereas stage II or III BC compared with stage I (OR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.95; and OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.092, respectively) was associated with decreased odds of a delay and/or change. CONCLUSION: Almost half of the patients with BC without COVID-19 had a delay and/or change. We found racial and socioeconomic disparities in the likelihood of a delay and/or change. Further studies are needed to determine the impact these care alterations have on BC outcomes.
Background/Aims Essential to bringing innovative cancer treatments to patients is voluntary participation in clinical trials but approximately 8% of American cancer patients are enrolled onto a trial. We used a domain-oriented framework to assess barriers to cancer clinical trial enrollment. Methods Physicians (MD, DO, fellows, residents) and research staff (physician assistants, nurse practitioners, staff and research nurses, clinical assistants, and program coordinators) involved in clinical research at a comprehensive cancer center completed an online survey in 2017; adult cancer patients not currently enrolled in a trial were interviewed in 2018. To inform the construct of our physician/staff and patient surveys and to assess barriers to clinical trial enrollment, we first conducted in-depth interviews among 14 key informants representing medical, hematologic, gynecologic, neurologic, radiation oncology, as well as members of the clinical research team (one clinical research coordinator, one research nurse practitioner). Perceived structural, provider- and patient-level barriers to clinical trial enrollment were assessed. Differences in perceptions, attitudes, and beliefs toward clinical trial enrollment between (1) physicians and staff, (2) patients by ethnicity, and (3) physicians/staff and patients were examined. Results In total, 120 physicians/staff involved in clinical research (39.2% physicians, 60.8% staff; 48.0% overall response rate) and 150 cancer patients completed surveys. Nearly three-quarters of physician/staff respondents reported difficulty in keeping track of the eligibility criteria for open studies but was more often cited by physicians than staff (84.4% vs 64.3%, p = 0.02). Physicians more often reported lack of time to present clinical trial information than did staff( p < 0.001); 44.0% of staff versus 18.2% of physicians reported patient family interaction as a clinical trial enrollment barrier ( p = 0.007). Hispanic patients more often stated they would join a trial, even if standard therapy was an option compared to non-Hispanic patients (47.7% vs 20.8%, p = 0.002). Comparing the beliefs and perceptions of physicians/staff to those of patients, patients more often reported negative beliefs about clinical trial enrollment (e.g. being in a trial does not help patients personally, 32.9% vs 1.8%, p < 0.001) but less often felt they had no other options when agreeing to join (38.1% vs 85.6%, p < 0.001), and less often refused clinical trial enrollment due to lack of understanding (9.1% vs 63.3%, p = 0.001) than reported by physicians/staff. Conclusion Our findings indicate a wide gap between physician/staff and patient attitudes and beliefs about clinical trial enrollment and highlight the importance of focusing future initiatives to raise awareness of this incongruency. Reconciling these differences will require tailored education to reduce implicit biases and dispel misperceptions. Strategies to improve the quality of patient–provider communication and address infrastructure and resource issues are also needed to improve patient enrollment onto cancer clinical trials.
PURPOSE: Adjuvant therapy is associated with improved survival for women with breast cancer, but not all women who could benefit initiate treatment. Women's belief systems are related to treatment initiation. It has been hypothesized that complementary and alternative (CAM) use is associated with decreased initiation of standard oncology treatments because patients may be exploring alternative treatment approaches. However, there are limited data on the association between CAM use and cancer treatment initiation. We examined the association between CAM use and initiation of adjuvant breast cancer chemotherapy in a prospective cohort of early stage breast cancer patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Subjects participated in a multi-center prospective cohort study of women with early stage invasive breast cancer (n=1,156). National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines were used to define groups based on whether chemotherapy was indicated. Three subgroups were created: chemotherapy indicated for subjects <70 years, chemotherapy discretionary for subjects <70 years, and chemotherapy discretionary for subjects ≥70 years. CAM use was assessed based upon self-reported use of 5 CAM modalities, including vitamin/mineral supplements, herbal supplements, other over-the-counter natural products, mind-body based approaches, and body/energy-based treatments. Psychosocial factors potentially related to chemotherapy initiation were assessed. Multivariable logistic regression models evaluated the associations between CAM use and chemotherapy initiation, adjusted for demographic, clinical and psychosocial factors. RESULTS: Current CAM use was reported by 87% of women and 38% reporting current use of ≥3 modalities. The most commonly used CAM modalities were mind body therapies (63%) and other natural products (41%). In bivariate analyses, among women <70 years where chemotherapy was indicated, women who reported current use of vitamins/minerals or current use of all 5 CAM modalities were less likely to initiate chemotherapy compared to non-users (P<.0001), but this was not observed among women for whom chemotherapy was discretionary. Psychosocial factors were also associated with high levels of current CAM use in this group, including higher expectations of adverse effects from chemotherapy, more concerns about the physical effects of chemotherapy, lower beliefs in the benefits of chemotherapy, and lower positive decision balance while making chemotherapy decisions (all P<.05). Among women age <70 years for whom chemotherapy was indicated, 89% initiated treatment, and current use of all 5 CAM modalities was inversely associated with initiation in multivariable analyses adjusted for demographic and clinical factors (OR=0.08, CI: 0.02-0.32). The association remained after separately adjusting for psychosocial factors (all P<.05), except for positive decision balance, which was no longer statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: High use of CAM was associated with decreased chemotherapy initiation among women with breast cancer for whom chemotherapy was indicated. It is important for oncologists to discuss CAM use with their patients, especially since high CAM use is associated with negative expectations and beliefs about chemotherapy. Citation Format: Greenlee H, Neugut AI, Falci L, Hillyer GC, Buono D, Roh JM, Ergas IJ, Kwan ML, Lee M, Tsai WY, Shi Z, Lamerato L, Mandelblatt JS, Kushi LH, Hershman DL. Complementary and alternative medicine use and breast cancer chemotherapy initiation: The BQUAL study. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2015 Dec 8-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD4-05.
Background: Non-adherence to adjuvant hormonal therapy among women with breast cancer is common, but little is known about how financial factors influence it. We investigated the relationship between prescription co-payment amount and compliance with adjuvant aromatase inhibitors (AI) therapy. Patients and Methods: Using de-identified, integrated pharmacy and medical claim database at Medco Health Solutions, Inc. women >50 years old on AIs for early breast cancer with at least 2 mail order prescription refills between 1/1/07 and 12/31/08 were identified. All data were pooled prior to the analysis. Variables that were evaluated included medical and demographic information, household income, number of other prescriptions, diagnostic codes, prescription refill dates, provider type and co-payment amounts. Age was classified as <63 or ≥63 to distinguish patients ever covered by Medicare. Copayment amount was categorized as <$30, between $30 and $89.99, and ≥$90. Non-persistence was defined as prescription supply gap of 45 days with no subsequent refill. Non-adherence was defined as a medication possession ratio ≥80% of eligible days. Logistic regressions and Cox proportional hazards modeling were used. Results: Of 8110 women age 50-62 years (mean=59.1), 1721(21.2%) were non-persistent and of those who continued, 863(10.3%) were non-adherent over the 2 year period. Among 14,050 women ≥63 years (mean=74.9), 3476(24.7%) were non-persistent and of those who continued, 1248(8.9%) were non-adherent. Ninety day co-payments ranged from $0 to $893.49. In a multivariate analysis, non-persistence (ever/never) in both age groups was associated with older age, having a primary care physician write the prescription, and higher number of co-prescriptions. Similar results were seen with non-adherence. Compared to a copayment of <$30, a 90 day copayment of $30-$89.99 was associated with time to non-persistence in women ≥63 (HR 1.34, 95%CI 1.24-1.46) but not among women <63, while a copayment ≥$90 was associated with time to non-persistence both in women <63 (HR 1.26, 95%CI 1.09–1.38) and women ≥63 (HR 1.33, 95%CI 1.22–1.46). Conclusions: We found that a higher prescription co-payment was associated with both early discontinuation and non-adherence to AIs. This relationship was stronger for older women. Because hormone therapy non-compliance is associated with worse survival outcomes, future public policy efforts should be directed towards reducing financial constraints as a means of increasing the use of these life-saving medications. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2010;70(24 Suppl):Abstract nr S6-4.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.