Abstract:Treatment with the selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) tamoxifen for 5 years has produced dramatic breast cancer-related benefits in (a) the adjuvant setting, with 30% to 50% reductions in recurrence, contralateral disease, and mortality and (b) the prevention setting of healthy high-risk women, where tamoxifen reduces the risk of invasive and noninvasive breast cancer by 50%. Despite these striking data, adherence to tamoxifen is low, and low adherence is associated with poor survival. Although toxic… Show more
“…As reviewed (59,75), only modest information about factors associated with continued hormone therapy use is known and, importantly, few of the factors identified are easily modifiable. In addition, current medical claims databases, commonly used in adherence analyses, contain limited information on healthcare practice patterns or patient characteristics needed to identify new potentially modifiable factors.…”
Section: Clinical Trials To Improve Endocrine Therapy Adherencementioning
Adherence to oral endocrine therapy in adjuvant breast cancer settings is a substantial clinical problem. To provide current perspective on adherence to oral endocrine therapies, a comprehensive literature review was conducted. In adjuvant trials, endocrine therapy adherence is relatively high with greater adherence for aromatase inhibitors compared with tamoxifen. In contrast, adherence to adjuvant therapy in clinical practice is relatively poor, with only about 50% of women successfully completing 5-year therapy. Importantly, good adherence (>80% use) has been associated with lower recurrence risk. Endocrine therapy adherence in primary breast cancer prevention trials parallels that seen in adjuvant trials. Factors associated with nonadherence include low recurrence risk perception, side effects, age extremes, medication cost, suboptimal patient-physician communication, and lack of social support. Few prospective studies have evaluated interventions designed to improve adherence. Interventions currently proposed reflect inferences from clinical trial procedures in which clinical contacts are commonly greater than in usual practice settings. In conclusion, for optimal breast cancer outcome, adherence to endocrine therapy must improve. Although general recommendations likely to improve adherence can be made based on clinical trial results and preliminary prospective trial findings, research specifically targeting this issue is needed to establish effective intervention strategies. Cancer Prev Res; 7(4); 378-87. Ó2014 AACR.
“…As reviewed (59,75), only modest information about factors associated with continued hormone therapy use is known and, importantly, few of the factors identified are easily modifiable. In addition, current medical claims databases, commonly used in adherence analyses, contain limited information on healthcare practice patterns or patient characteristics needed to identify new potentially modifiable factors.…”
Section: Clinical Trials To Improve Endocrine Therapy Adherencementioning
Adherence to oral endocrine therapy in adjuvant breast cancer settings is a substantial clinical problem. To provide current perspective on adherence to oral endocrine therapies, a comprehensive literature review was conducted. In adjuvant trials, endocrine therapy adherence is relatively high with greater adherence for aromatase inhibitors compared with tamoxifen. In contrast, adherence to adjuvant therapy in clinical practice is relatively poor, with only about 50% of women successfully completing 5-year therapy. Importantly, good adherence (>80% use) has been associated with lower recurrence risk. Endocrine therapy adherence in primary breast cancer prevention trials parallels that seen in adjuvant trials. Factors associated with nonadherence include low recurrence risk perception, side effects, age extremes, medication cost, suboptimal patient-physician communication, and lack of social support. Few prospective studies have evaluated interventions designed to improve adherence. Interventions currently proposed reflect inferences from clinical trial procedures in which clinical contacts are commonly greater than in usual practice settings. In conclusion, for optimal breast cancer outcome, adherence to endocrine therapy must improve. Although general recommendations likely to improve adherence can be made based on clinical trial results and preliminary prospective trial findings, research specifically targeting this issue is needed to establish effective intervention strategies. Cancer Prev Res; 7(4); 378-87. Ó2014 AACR.
“…Clinically accessible markers that individually or in combination reliably predict that nonadherence may allow for interventions that decrease nonadherence and improve survival in women treated with adjuvant endocrine breast cancer therapy (30). The aim of this study was to investigate whether constitutional factors such as body mass index (BMI) and waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), lifestyle factors such as smoking, alcohol intake, and natural remedy use, tumor characteristics, detection mode, and type of surgery predict nonadherence to adjuvant endocrine breast cancer therapy, alone or in combination.…”
Nonadherence to adjuvant endocrine breast cancer treatment adversely affects disease-free and overall survival. Clinical predictors of nonadherence may allow for specific interventions to reduce nonadherence and improve survival. The aim was to investigate whether clinical characteristics predict nonadherence. Clinical characteristics and information on adherence were obtained from 417 patients with breast cancer in a population-based prospective cohort from southern Sweden using patient charts, pathology reports, and questionnaires filled out at the 1-and 2-year follow-up visits. At the 1-and 2-year follow-up visits, 36 (8.6%) and 33 (9.7%) patients were nonadherent, respectively. Thirteen of the nonadherent patients declined treatment and were never prescribed endocrine treatment. A body mass index (BMI) < 25 kg/m 2 , preoperative current smoking, and drinking alcohol less often than twice a month predicted nonadherence at the 1-year [relative risk (RR), 5.24; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.75-9.97] and the 2-year visits (RR, 4.07; 95% CI, 2.11-7.84) in patients with at least two of these clinical characteristics. When low histologic grade (I) was added to the model, having at least two of these four clinical characteristics predicted nonadherence at the 1-year (RR, 4.94; 95% CI, 2.46-10.00) and the 2-year visits (RR, 4.74; 95% CI, 2.28-9.87), the two profiles had a sensitivity ranging from 60.6% to 72.7%, whereas the specificity ranged from 68.0% to 78.4%. Nonadherence at the 1-year visit was associated with an increased risk for early breast cancer events (HR, 2.97; 95% CI, 1.08-8.15), adjusted for age and tumor characteristics. In conclusion, two clinical profiles predicted early nonadherence and may allow for targeted interventions to increase adherence if validated in an independent cohort. Cancer Prev Res; 5(5); 735-45. Ó2012 AACR.
“…Patients in low-SES communities often have limited financial resources and lack of support, preventing them from completing their recommended treatment course or follow-up care (16). This was demonstrated recently in patients with breast cancer, where rates of adherence to adjuvant tamoxifen were found to be significantly lower in patients of low SES (22).…”
This study demonstrates that low SES is associated with more advanced PTC at presentation and a lower rate of adjuvant RAI after total thyroidectomy, particularly among patients <45 years of age from areas with a low median household income. Future studies are needed to address these disparities, as well as to determine appropriate indications for the use of adjuvant RAI for PTC.
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.