4.7 Article

Update on triple-negative breast cancer disparities for the United States: A population-based study from the United States Cancer Statistics database, 2010 through 2014

Journal

CANCER
Volume 125, Issue 19, Pages 3412-3417

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.32207

Keywords

continental population groups; epidemiology; ethnic groups; health status disparities; registries; triple-negative breast neoplasms

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) has been associated with a more aggressive histology, poorer prognosis, and nonresponsiveness to hormone therapy. It is imperative that cancer research identify factors that drive disparities and focus on prevention. Methods Using the United States Cancer Statistics database, the authors examined differences between TNBCs compared with all other breast cancers with regard to age, race/ethnicity, and stage at diagnosis. Results A total of 1,151,724 cases of breast cancer were identified from 2010 through 2014, with the triple-negative phenotype accounting for approximately 8.4% of all cases. In unadjusted analyses, non-Hispanic black women (odds ratio [OR], 2.27; 95% CI, 2.23-2.31) and Hispanic women (OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.19-1.25) had higher odds of diagnosis when compared with non-Hispanic white women. Women aged <40 years had the highest odds of diagnosis compared with women aged 50 to 64 years (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.90-2.01). Diagnosis at American Joint Committee on Cancer stage III and beyond conferred higher odds of the diagnosis of TNBC (OR for stage III, 1.69 [95% CI, 1.68-1.72]; and OR for stage IV, 1.47 [95% CI, 1.43-1.51]). Results varied slightly in adjusted analyses. Conclusions The results of the current study demonstrated that there is a significant burden of disease in TNBC diagnosed among women of color, specifically non-Hispanic black women, and younger women. Additional studies are needed to determine drivers of disparities between race, age, and stage of disease at diagnosis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available