Article

Socioeconomic Factors Associated With Adjuvant Hormone Therapy Use in Older Breast Cancer Survivors

Division of Surgical Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53226, USA.
Cancer (Impact Factor: 4.9). 01/2011; 117(2):398-405. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.25412
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The authors sought to identify socioeconomic (SES) factors associated with adjuvant hormone therapy (HT) use among a contemporary population of older breast cancer survivors.
Telephone surveys were conducted among women (ages 65-89 years) residing in 4 states (California, Florida, Illinois, and New York) who underwent initial breast cancer surgery in 2003. Demographic, SES, and treatment information was collected.
Of 2191 women, 67% received adjuvant HT with either tamoxifen or an aromatase inhibitor (AI); 71% of those women were on an AI. When adjusting for multiple demographic and SES factors, predictors of HT use were better education (high school degree or higher), better informational/emotional support, and younger age (ages 65-79 years). Race/ethnicity, income, and insurance coverage for medication costs were not associated with receiving HT. For those on HT, when adjusting for all other factors, women were more likely to receive an AI if they had insurance coverage for some or all medication costs, if they were wealthier, if they had better informational/emotional support, and if they were younger (ages 65-69 years).
The majority of older women in this population-based cohort received adjuvant HT, and the adoption of AIs was early. The results indicted that providers should be aware that a woman's education level and support system influence her decision to take HT. Given the high cost of AIs, their benefits in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer, and the current finding that women with no insurance coverage for medication costs were significantly less likely to receive an AI, we recommend that policymakers address this issue.

Full-text

Available from: Tina W F Yen, Apr 16, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
90 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: We examined the mediating effect of health insurance on poverty-breast cancer care and survival relationships and the moderating effect of poverty on health insurance-breast cancer care and survival relationships in California. METHODS: Registry data for 6,300 women with breast cancer diagnosed between 1996 and 2000 and followed until 2011 on stage at diagnosis, surgeries, adjuvant treatments and survival were analyzed. Socioeconomic data were obtained for residences from the 2000 census to categorize neighborhoods: high poverty (30% or more poor), middle poverty (5%-29% poor) and low poverty (less than 5% poor). Primary payers or health insurers were Medicaid, Medicare, private or uninsured. RESULTS: Evidence of survival mediation was observed for women with node negative breast cancer. The apparent effect of poverty disappeared in the presence of Medicare or private health insurance. Women who were so insured were advantaged on 8-year survival compared to the uninsured or those insured by Medicaid (OR = 1.89). Evidence of payer moderation by poverty was also observed for women with node negative breast cancer. The survival advantaging effect of Medicare or private insurance was stronger in low poverty (OR = 1.81) than it was in middle poverty (OR = 1.57) or in high poverty neighborhoods (OR = 1.16). This same pattern of mediated and moderated effects was also observed for early stage at diagnosis, shorter waits for adjuvant radiation therapy and for the receipt of sentinel lymph node biopsies. These findings are consistent with the theory that more facilitative social and economic capital is available in low poverty neighborhoods, where women with breast cancer may be better able to absorb the indirect and direct, but uncovered, costs of care. As for treatments, main protective effects as well as moderator effects indicative of protection, particularly in high poverty neighborhoods were observed for women with private health insurance. CONCLUSIONS: America's multi-tiered health insurance system mediates the quality of breast cancer care. The system is inequitable and unjust as it advantages the well insured and the well to do. Recent health care reforms ought to be enacted in ways that are consistent with their federal legislative intent, that high quality health care be truly available to all.
    International Journal for Equity in Health 01/2013; 12(1):6. DOI:10.1186/1475-9276-12-6 · 1.71 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The high expense of newer, more effective adjuvant endocrine therapy agents (aromatase inhibitors [AIs]) for postmenopausal breast cancer contributes to socioeconomic disparities in breast cancer outcomes. This study compares endocrine therapy costs for breast cancer patients during the first five years of Medicare Part D implementation, and when generic alternatives became available. The out of pocket patient costs for AIs and tamoxifen under Medicare Part D drug plans were determined for 2006-2011 from the CMS Website for the 50 US states and District of Columbia. Between 2006 and 2010, the mean annual patient drug cost under Medicare Part D in the median state rose 19% for tamoxifen, 113% for anastrozole, 89% for exemestane, and 129% for letrozole, resulting in median annual out of pocket costs in 2010 of $701, $3050, $2804, and $3664 respectively. However, the 2011 availability of generic AI preparations led to median annual costs in 2011 of $804, $872, $1837, and $2217 respectively. Not included in the reported patient costs, the mean monthly drug premiums in the median state increased 58% in 2011 compared to 2007. The more effective AI agents became considerably more expensive during the first several years of the Medicare Part D program. Cost decreased with the introduction of generic agents, an intervention that was independent of the Part D program. It is unlikely that the Part D program ameliorated existing socioeconomic disparities in survival among breast cancer patients, but the availability of generic agents may do so.
    SpringerPlus 01/2015; 4:54. DOI:10.1186/s40064-015-0827-8
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Adjuvant endocrine therapy for breast cancer reduces recurrence and improves survival rates. Many patients never start treatment or discontinue prematurely. A better understanding of factors associated with endocrine therapy initiation and persistence could inform practitioners how to support patients. We analyzed data from a longitudinal study of 2,268 women diagnosed with breast cancer and reported to the Metropolitan Detroit and Los Angeles SEER cancer registries in 2005-2007. Patients were surveyed approximately both 9 months and 4 years after diagnosis. At the 4-year mark, patients were asked if they had initiated endocrine therapy, terminated therapy, or were currently taking therapy (defined as persistence). Multivariable logistic regression models examined factors associated with initiation and persistence. Of the 743 patients eligible for endocrine therapy, 80 (10.8 %) never initiated therapy, 112 (15.1 %) started therapy but discontinued prematurely, and 551 (74.2 %) continued use at the second time point. Compared with whites, Latinas (OR 2.80, 95 % CI 1.08-7.23) and black women (OR 3.63, 95 % CI 1.22-10.78) were more likely to initiate therapy. Other factors associated with initiation included worry about recurrence (OR 3.54, 95 % CI 1.31-9.56) and inadequate information about side effects (OR 0.24, 95 % CI 0.10-0.55). Factors associated with persistence included two or more medications taken weekly (OR 4.19, 95 % CI 2.28-7.68) and increased age (OR 0.98, 95 % CI 0.95-0.99). Enhanced patient education about potential side effects and the effectiveness of adjuvant endocrine therapy in improving outcomes may improve initiation and persistence rates and optimize breast cancer survival.
    Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 03/2013; DOI:10.1007/s10549-013-2499-9 · 4.20 Impact Factor