Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Factors influencing the use of extended adjuvant endocrine therapy

  • Clinical trial
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Extending adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) beyond 5 years has been shown to improve outcomes in breast cancer; however, limited data are available about if and why women pursue extended ET. The primary objective was to estimate the proportion of women who were willing to receive extended ET if recommended by their physician and secondarily, to determine what factors were associated with this decision.

Methods

This descriptive cross-sectional study surveyed 131 women with AJCC 7th Edition stages I–III breast cancer who had been taking adjuvant ET for 3–5 years. The survey inquired about the willingness to continue ET, quality of life (FACT-ES), and beliefs about medications (BMQ). Logistic regression was used to test for associations between clinical and disease factors, FACT-ES, BMQ, and the primary outcome.

Results

One hundred and twelve (85%) patients reported “moderate” (n = 30, 23%), “quite a bit” (n = 41, 31%), or “extreme” (n = 41, 31%) willingness to pursue extended ET; 19 (14%) patients were “not at all” or were “unlikely” to be willing to take extended ET. On univariate analysis, lower total and social well-being FACT-ES scores, and lower perceived necessity and higher concerns on BMQ were associated with lower willingness to pursue extended ET. On multivariable analysis, greater patient perception of necessity of ET was the only factor associated with willingness to pursue extended ET (OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.15–1.57, p = 0.0005).

Conclusions

Most women who have taken ET for multiple years report being willing to pursue extended ET if recommended. When discussing extended ET, the data from this study support exploring patients’ belief of medication necessity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. DeSantis CE, Ma J, Goding Sauer A et al (2017) Breast cancer statistics, 2017, racial disparity in mortality by state. CA Cancer J Clin 67:439–448. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21412

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Burstein HJ, Temin S, Anderson H et al (2014) Adjuvant endocrine therapy for women with hormone receptor–positive breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Focused Update. J Clin Oncol 32:2255–2269. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2013.54.2258

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Burstein HJ, Lacchetti C, Anderson H et al (2016) Adjuvant endocrine therapy for women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update on Ovarian Suppression. J Clin Oncol 34:1689–1701. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2015.65.9573

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Gradishar WJ, Anderson BO, Balassanian R et al (2016) Invasive breast cancer Version 1.2016, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw 14:324–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Pan H, Gray R, Braybrooke J et al (2017) 20-Year risks of breast-cancer recurrence after stopping endocrine therapy at 5 years. N Engl J Med 377:1836–1846. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1701830

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Gray R, Rea D, Handley K et al (2013) aTTom: long-term effects of continuing adjuvant tamoxifen to 10 years versus stopping at 5 years in 6953 women with early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 31(18 Suppl):5. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2013.31.18_suppl.5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Davies C, Pan H, Godwin J et al (2013) Long-term effects of continuing adjuvant tamoxifen to 10 years versus stopping at 5 years after diagnosis of oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer: ATLAS, a randomised trial. Lancet 381:805–816. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61963-1

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Mamounas EP, Jeong J-H, Wickerham DL et al (2008) Benefit from exemestane as extended adjuvant therapy after 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen: intention-to-treat analysis of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-33 Trial. J Clin Oncol 26:1965–1971. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2007.14.0228

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Jin H, Tu D, Zhao N et al (2012) Longer-term outcomes of letrozole versus placebo after 5 years of tamoxifen in the NCIC CTG MA.17 trial: analyses adjusting for treatment crossover. J Clin Oncol 30:718–721. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2010.34.4010

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Henry NL, Azzouz F, Desta Z et al (2012) Predictors of aromatase inhibitor discontinuation as a result of treatment-emergent symptoms in early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 30:936–942. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2011.38.0261

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Aiello Bowles EJ, Boudreau DM, Chubak J et al (2012) Patient-reported discontinuation of endocrine therapy and related adverse effects among women with early-stage breast cancer. J Oncol Pract 8:e149–e157. https://doi.org/10.1200/JOP.2012.000543

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Crew KD, Greenlee H, Capodice J et al (2007) Prevalence of joint symptoms in postmenopausal women taking aromatase inhibitors for early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 25:3877–3883. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2007.10.7573

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG), Dowsett M, Forbes JF et al (2015) Aromatase inhibitors versus tamoxifen in early breast cancer: patient-level meta-analysis of the randomised trials. Lancet 386:1341–1352. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)61074-1

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG), Davies C, Godwin J et al (2011) Relevance of breast cancer hormone receptors and other factors to the efficacy of adjuvant tamoxifen: patient-level meta-analysis of randomised trials. Lancet 378:771–784. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60993-8

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Dillman DA (1978) Mail and telephone surveys. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  16. Rookey BD, Le L, Littlejohn M, Dillman DA (2012) Understanding the resilience of mail-back survey methods: An analysis of 20 years of change in response rates to national park surveys. Soc Sci Res 41:1404–1414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2012.06.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Sparano JA, Gray RJ, Makower DF et al (2015) Prospective validation of a 21-gene expression assay in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 373:2005–2014. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1510764

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Horne R, Weinman J, Hankins M (1999) The beliefs about medicines questionnaire: The development and evaluation of a new method for assessing the cognitive representation of medication. Psychol Health 14:1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870449908407311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Corter AL, Findlay M, Broom R et al (2013) Beliefs about medicine and illness are associated with fear of cancer recurrence in women taking adjuvant endocrine therapy for breast cancer. Br J Health Psychol 18:168–181. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjhp.12003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Emilsson M, Berndtsson I, Lötvall J et al (2011) The influence of personality traits and beliefs about medicines on adherence to asthma treatment. Prim Care Respir J 20:141–147. https://doi.org/10.4104/pcrj.2011.00005

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Horne R, Weinman J (1999) Patients’ beliefs about prescribed medicines and their role in adherence to treatment in chronic physical illness. J Psychosom Res 47:555–567

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. McQueen A, Swank PR, Bastian LA, Vernon SW (2008) Predictors of perceived susceptibility of breast cancer and changes over time: a mixed modeling approach. Heal Psychol 27:68–77. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.27.1.68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Rakovitch E, Franssen E, Kim J et al (2003) A comparison of risk perception and psychological morbidity in women with ductal carcinoma in situ and early invasive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 77:285–293

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Gotay CC, Pagano IS (2007) Assessment of Survivor Concerns (ASC): a newly proposed brief questionnaire. Health Qual Life Outcomes 5:15. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-5-15

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Stafford L, Judd F, Gibson P et al (2014) Comparison of the hospital anxiety and depression scale and the center for epidemiological Studies Depression Scale for detecting depression in women with breast or gynecologic cancer. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 36:74–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2013.08.010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Fallowfield LJ, Leaity SK, Howell A et al (1999) Assessment of quality of life in women undergoing hormonal therapy for breast cancer: validation of an endocrine symptom subscale for the FACT-B. Breast Cancer Res Treat 55:189–199

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Collins ED, Moore CP, Clay KF et al (2009) Can women with early-stage breast cancer make an informed decision for mastectomy? J Clin Oncol 27:519–525. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2008.16.6215

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Zdenkowski N, Butow P, Tesson S, Boyle F (2016) A systematic review of decision aids for patients making a decision about treatment for early breast cancer. Breast 26:31–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2015.12.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was funded by NLH who was a Damon Runyon-Lilly Clinical Investigator supported (in part) by the Damon Runyon Cancer Research Foundation (Grant Number CI-53-10) and by an American Cancer Society Research Scholar Grant (124654-RSG-13-240-01-PCSM).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Solid Tumor Oncology, Levine Cancer Institute, Atrium Health, Charlotte, USA

    Kunal C. Kadakia

  2. Department of Biostatistics, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, USA

    Kelley M. Kidwell

  3. School of Nursing, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA

    Debra L. Barton

  4. Breast Oncology Program, University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, USA

    Anne F. Schott, Daniel F. Hayes & Jennifer J. Griggs

  5. Division of Oncology, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, 2000 Circle of Hope Dr., #5513, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA

    N. Lynn Henry

Authors
  1. Kunal C. Kadakia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kelley M. Kidwell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Debra L. Barton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Anne F. Schott
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Daniel F. Hayes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jennifer J. Griggs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. N. Lynn Henry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

KCK: Conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, validation, visualization, writing—original draft, review, and editing. KMK: Data curation, formal analysis, methodology, software, and writing—review and editing. DLB: Conceptualization, supervision, and writing—review and editing. JG: Conceptualization, supervision, and writing—review and editing. AFS: Writing—review and editing. DFH: Writing—review and editing. NLH: Conceptualization, data curation, funding acquisition, investigation, project administration, resources, supervision, writing—original draft, review, and editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to N. Lynn Henry.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors report no conflicts of interest specific to the content of the submitted manuscript. NLH and DFH have conflicts of interest not related to the current manuscript which are documented on the signed Conflict of Interest Disclosure Forms submitted with the manuscript. All authors report no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kadakia, K.C., Kidwell, K.M., Barton, D.L. et al. Factors influencing the use of extended adjuvant endocrine therapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat 175, 181–189 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-019-05145-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-019-05145-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation