Advertisement

Supportive Care in Cancer

, Volume 28, Issue 1, pp 271–278 | Cite as

Exploring the role of social support and adjuvant endocrine therapy use among breast cancer survivors

  • Gabriela Toledo
  • Carol Y. Ochoa
  • Albert J. FariasEmail author
Original Article
  • 149 Downloads

Abstract

Background

Adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) significantly reduces recurrence and mortality in women with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Adherence to AET is about 50–60% for 5 years, and while numerous studies have identified barriers to AET adherence, few have identified the role of social support as a facilitator. Therefore, the objective of this study is to explore the role of social support during the ongoing management of AET.

Methods

We conducted semi-structured in-depth interviews with breast cancer survivors (n = 22) who filled a prescription for AET in the previous 12 months. Women were recruited from Los Angeles, California, and Houston, Texas, between 2014 and 2015. Interview questions prompted discussion about AET and how social support affects AET adherence. We analyzed interview transcripts with a grounded theory approach and grouped social support into four categories (emotional, informational, instrumental, and appraisal), then used a thematic content analysis to identify the sources and delivery of support.

Results

Women described that informational support was provided by medical providers who explained the purpose, benefits, and management of AET. Emotional support in the form of reassurance, communication, and empathy was provided by family, survivorship groups, medical providers, and spirituality/religiosity. Women identified several organizations and exercises that provided them with instrumental and appraisal support in the form of physical and emotional benefits, which was also provided by family, friends, and medical providers.

Conclusion

We identified that social support delivered to breast cancer survivors provided women with educational, physical, and emotional benefits that may play an important role in their continuation of AET.

Keywords

Social support AET adherence Emotional support Informational support Instrumental support Appraisal support 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to extend their gratitude to the study participants who provided insight and perspective, and without whom this work would not be possible.

Funding information

This research was supported by a Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award for Individual Pre-doctoral Training grant from the National Cancer Institute F31 CA174338 (A Farias, Principal Investigator). This work was also supported in part by a Postdoctoral Fellowship, University of Texas School of Public Health Cancer Education and Career Development Program-National Cancer Institute/NIH Grant R25 CA57712. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Cancer Institute or the National Institutes of Health.

Compliance with ethical standards

All procedures performed in this study involving human participants were in accordance with ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Ethical approvals were obtained from the University of Washington Institutional Review Board.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Disclaimer

The authors have full control of all primary data and agree to allow the journal to review the data if requested.

References

  1. 1.
    American Cancer Society. Breast Cancer Facts & Figures 2017-2018. Atlanta: American Cancer Society, Inc. 2017.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    NCCN Breast Cancer Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology, 2014. Available at: https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/breast.pdf. Accessed February 7, 2018. Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    DeSantis C et al (2014) Breast cancer statistics, 2013. CA Cancer J Clin 64(1):52–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Howell A et al (2005) Results of the ATAC (Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination) trial after completion of 5 years’ adjuvant treatment for breast cancer. Lancet 365(9453):60–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Davies C 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(9793):771–784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Partridge AH, LaFountain A, Mayer E, Taylor BS, Winer E, Asnis-Alibozek A (2008) Adherence to initial adjuvant anastrozole therapy among women with early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 26(4):556–562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sedjo RL, Devine S (2011) Predictors of non-adherence to aromatase inhibitors among commercially insured women with breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 125(1):191–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Farias AJ, Ornelas IJ, Hohl SD, Zeliadt SB, Hansen RN, Li CI, Thompson B (2017) Exploring the role of physician communication about adjuvant endocrine therapy among breast cancer patients on active treatment: a qualitative analysis. Support Care Cancer 25(1):75–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Demissie S, Silliman RA, Lash TL (2001) Adjuvant tamoxifen: predictors of use, side effects, and discontinuation in older women. J Clin Oncol 19(2):322–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Strom JL, Egede LE (2012) The impact of social support on outcomes in adult patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review. Curr Diab Rep 12(6):769–781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    House JS (1981) Work stress and social support. Addison-Wesley, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    van Dam HA et al (2005) Social support in diabetes: a systematic review of controlled intervention studies. Patient Educ Couns 59(1):1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    van Londen GJ, Donovan HS, Beckjord EB, Cardy AL, Bovbjerg DH, Davidson NE, Morse JQ, Switzer GE, Verdonck-de Leeuw IM, Dew MA (2014) Perspectives of postmenopausal breast cancer survivors on adjuvant endocrine therapy-related symptoms. Oncol Nurs Forum 41(6):660–668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Samuel CA, Turner K, Donovan HAS, Beckjord E, Cardy A, Dew MA, van Londen GJ (2017) Provider perspectives on barriers and facilitators to adjuvant endocrine therapy-related symptom management. Support Care Cancer 25(12):3723–3731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yamamoto S, Tazumi K, Arao H (2015) Support not corresponding to transition to a new treatment: women’s perceptions of support provided by their male partners during hormonal therapy. Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being 10:29283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ford ME, Tilley BC, McDonald PE (1998) Social support among African-American adults with diabetes. Part 1: theoretical framework. J Natl Med Assoc 90(6):361–365PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cohen, S., et al., Social support: theory, research and applications. 1985CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cohen S, Wills TA (1985) Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis. Psychol Bull 98(2):310–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vaux A (1988) Social support: theory, research, and intervention. Social support: theory, research, and intervention. England: Praeger Publishers. xiv, New York, p 346Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Thoits, P.A., Social support and psychological well-being: theoretical possibilities. . Social support: theory, research, and application, ed. S.B. Sarason IG. 1985Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kroenke C et al (2018) Personal and clinical social support and adherence to adjuvant endocrine therapy among hormone receptor-positive breast cancer patients in an integrated health care system. Breast Cancer Res Treat 170(3):623–631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lambert LK, Balneaves LG, Howard AF, Gotay CC (2018) Patient-reported factors associated with adherence to adjuvant endocrine therapy after breast cancer: an integrative review. Breast Cancer Res Treat 167(3):615–633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wuensch P, Hahne A, Haidinger R, Meißler K, Tenter B, Stoll C, Senf B, Huebner J (2015) Discontinuation and non-adherence to endocrine therapy in breast cancer patients: is lack of communication the decisive factor? J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 141(1):55–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lambert LK, Balneaves LG, Howard AF, Chia SK, Gotay CC (2018) Understanding adjuvant endocrine therapy persistence in breast cancer survivors. BMC Cancer 18(1):732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lotzke D et al (2016) Iyengar-Yoga compared to exercise as a therapeutic intervention during (neo)adjuvant therapy in women with stage I-III breast cancer: health-related quality of life, mindfulness, spirituality, life satisfaction, and cancer-related fatigue. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med 2016:5931816CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ekinci E, Nathoo S, Korattyil T, Vadhariya A, Zaghloul HA, Niravath PA, Abughosh SM, Trivedi MV (2018) Interventions to improve endocrine therapy adherence in breast cancer survivors: what is the evidence? J Cancer Surviv 12(3):348–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Murphy C et al (2012) Adherence to adjuvant hormonal therapy among breast cancer survivors in clinical practice: a systematic review. Breast Cancer Res Treat 134(2):459–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Cahir C, Guinan E, Dombrowski SU, Sharp L, Bennett K (2015) Identifying the determinants of adjuvant hormonal therapy medication taking behaviour in women with stages I–III breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Patient Educ Couns 98(12):1524–1539CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gabriela Toledo
    • 1
  • Carol Y. Ochoa
    • 1
  • Albert J. Farias
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Preventive MedicineUniversity of Southern CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA
  2. 2.Department of Preventive Medicine, The Gehr Family Center for Health Systems ScienceUniversity of Southern CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations