4.6 Article

Predictors of adherence and the role of primary non-adherence in antihormonal treatment of breast cancer

期刊

BMC CANCER
卷 22, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-022-10362-4

关键词

Breast cancer; Antihormonal treatment; Tamoxifen; Aromatase inhibitors; Adherence; Primary non-adherence

类别

资金

  1. Norwegian University of Science and Technology
  2. Dam Foundation [FO236264]
  3. Central Norway Regional Health Authority [9051880]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Adherence to antihormonal therapy for breast cancer is suboptimal, with better adherence seen in patients with extremes of age and with metastasis to axillary lymph nodes.
Background: Antihormonal treatment for hormone receptor (HR) positive breast cancer has highly beneficial effects on both recurrence rates and survival. We investigate adherence and persistence in this group of patients.Methods: The study population comprised 1192 patients with HR-positive breast cancer who were prescribed adjuvant antihormonal treatment from 2004 to 2013. Adherence was defined as a medical possession ratio (MPR) of > 80.Results: Of the 1192 included patients, 903 (75.8%) were adherent and 289 (24.2%) were non-adherent. Primary non-adherence was seen in 101 (8.5%) patients. The extremes of age (< 40 and > 80 years) were associated with poor adherence. Patients with metastasis to axillary lymph nodes and those who received radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy were more likely to be adherent. Better adherence was also shown for those who switched medication at 2 years after diagnosis. Primary non-adherence seems to be associated with cancers with a good prognosis.Conclusion: Adherence to antihormonal therapy for breast cancer is suboptimal. Primary non-adherence occurs among patients with a relatively good prognosis. Non-adherent patients tend to terminate their antihormonal therapy in the initial part of the treatment period. Targeted interventions to improve adherence should be focused on the first part of the treatment period.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据