4.5 Article

Racial disparity in the dose and dose intensity of breast cancer adjuvant chemotherapy

期刊

BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT
卷 81, 期 1, 页码 21-31

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1023/A:1025481505537

关键词

breast cancer; chemotherapy; obesity; racial disparity

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose. The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of race and obesity on dose and dose intensity of adjuvant chemotherapy. Methods. We abstracted data on patient/tumor characteristics, treatment course, physicians' intention to give a first cycle dose reduction, and reasons for dose reductions/ delays from oncology records of 489 women treated from 1985 to 1997 in 10 treatment sites in two geographical regions. Administered doses and dose intensity were compared to standard regimens. Multivariate regression models determined the impact of race and body mass index (BMI) on dose proportion ( actual: expected doses) and relative dose intensity (RDI) controlling for patient characteristics, comorbidity, chemotherapy regimen, site, and year of treatment. Logistic regressions explored race and BMI versus use of first cycle dose reductions. Results. African-Americans received lower chemotherapy dose proportion and RDI than whites (0.80 vs. 0.85, p= 0.03 and 0.76 vs. 0.80, p= 0.01). In multivariate analyses, dose proportion was 0.09 lower ( p= 0.002), and RDI was 0.10 ( p< 0.001) lower in non-overweight African-Americans than whites. Obesity was associated with lower dose proportion ( p< 0.01) and RDI ( p< 0.03). Race and BMI were independently associated with first cycle dose reductions. Non-overweight African-Americans ( p< 0.05) and overweight and obese African-American and white women ( p< 0.001) were more likely to have first cycle dose reductions than non-overweight whites. Conclusion. We identified systematic differences in the administration of chemotherapy given to African-Americans and to overweight and obese women. These differences may contribute to documented disparities in outcome.

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

4.5
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