Lost Opportunities: Physicians' Reasons and Disparities in Breast Cancer Treatment

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18) ◽  
pp. 2516-2521 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nina A. Bickell ◽  
Felice LePar ◽  
Jason J. Wang ◽  
Howard Leventhal

Purpose Women with breast cancer do not consistently receive adjuvant treatments that have been shown to increase survival. Acquiring an understanding of the reasons for these lost opportunities may inform strategies for quality improvement. Methods Interviews were conducted with surgeons treating 119 women who did not receive guideline-recommended adjuvant therapy to ascertain reasons underlying treatment omission. Primary reason for underuse was categorized as not recommended, recommended but declined, or system failure (treatment recommended, not refused but did not ensue). Logistic regression identified patient characteristics, and surgeons' practice and referral patterns associated with underuse. Results Surgeons did not recommend adjuvant treatment for 41 (34%) of 119 women, most often because perceived risks exceeded benefits (37 of 119; 31%); unawareness of treatment benefits was rare (four of 119; 3%). Among the 78 (66%) of 119 for whom surgeons recommended treatment, 37 (31%) declined therapy; 41 (34%) system failures occurred. System failures occurred more commonly among minority than white women (73% v 54%; P < .01), and more commonly in women who were receiving Medicaid or were uninsured than those with Medicare or commercial insurance (54% v 19%; P < .01). Women treated by a surgeon who works closely with oncologists were less likely to experience a system failure (84% v 68%; P < .05). Conclusion One third of underuse episodes were attributable to surgeons' perceptions that treatment was not indicated, one third because women did not accept recommendations, and one third were the result of system failures. Reasons for underuse of adjuvant breast cancer treatments appear multifactorial and this heterogeneity suggests the need for simultaneous development of different strategies to improve care.

2019 ◽  
pp. 33-36
Author(s):  
Eunjung Kim ◽  
Leanna J Standish ◽  
M Robyn Andersen

Objectives: This paper compared Recurrence and Morality rates among women with breast cancer who received all recommended treatment (Receivers) and who did not (Decliners). Methods: 427 women were recruited through integrative oncology clinics and the Cancer Surveillance System (CSS) registry in Western Washington State. Secondary data analysis were conducted using descriptive statistics, t-tests, X2 tests, and R. Self-reported data included household income and comorbidity; medical records included dates of diagnosis, recurrence and last visit with medical oncologist; and CSS registry data included demographic, disease characteristics, and records on recommended treatments and receiving/declining them, and date of death. Results: 9% of Receivers and 2% of Decliners experienced a Disease Free Survival (DFS) limiting event commonly a recurrence, while 3% of Receivers and 2% of Decliners died. After controlling for stage at diagnosis and cohort, no difference was found on the Adjusted Hazard ratio of recurrence or mortality between Receivers and Decliners. Adjusted Hazard ratio of Decliners relative to Receivers was 0.29 (95% CI; 0.04 – 2.22, p = 0.22) for DFS and 0.50 (95% CI: 0.04, 6.49, p = 0.59) for mortality. Conclusions: Better clinical predictors among Decliners may be related to no rate difference in recurrence and mortality between Decliners than Receivers.


2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (8_suppl) ◽  
pp. 107-107
Author(s):  
Nina A. Bickell ◽  
Maria Castaldi ◽  
Ajay Shah ◽  
Alan Sickles ◽  
Theophilus Lewis ◽  
...  

107 Background: System failures, a cause of underuse in which doctors order care, patients don’t refuse but care doesn’t ensue, tend to happen more at safety net hospitals (SNH). Tracking & follow-up approaches that close referral loops in SNHs may reduce underuse. In a randomized trial, we tested a Tracking & Feedback (T&F) tool to reduce underuse of adjuvant breast cancer treatment. Methods: We recruited 5 community & 5 municipal SNHs that serve a large proportion of minorities in the NYC metropolitan area. We implemented rapid case ascertainment, a T&F tool and trained point persons at each site to determine if women with newly operated stage 1-3 breast cancer, connected with the oncologist since such connections are associated with getting treated. The tool created a daily “to do” reminder for point persons to ascertain if patients were seen by the oncologist. Point persons then relayed this information to surgeons to follow through as they deemed necessary. Underuse includes: no RT after lumpectomy or mastectomy with > 4 positive nodes; no chemo for HR- and no hormonal therapy for HR+ tumors > 1cm; no trastuzumab for Her2+ tumors. We interviewed key informants about tool usefulness. We conducted intention to treat and pre-post analyses to assess tool and implementation effectiveness, respectively. Results: Pre-intervention, despite randomizing hospitals, intervention (INT) hospitals had fewer whites (4% vs 14%; p = 0.0005), poorer follow-up approaches (0.68 vs 0.80; p = 0.07), less Medicaid & uninsured patients (36% vs 62%; p < .0001) and more underuse (28% vs 15%; p = 0.002) compared to control (CNTL) hospitals; comorbidities and stage were similar. The RCT found no difference in underuse rates (9% at INT & 11% at CNTL hospitals; p = 0.8). Because randomization did not result in equivalent distributions, we modeled pre- (N = 403) and post (N = 191) populations controlling for time period and clustering & found that hospitals with better follow-up (OR = 0.82; 95% CI: 0.71-0.96) had less underuse. In settings with poor follow-up & tracking approaches, key informants found the tool useful. Conclusions: While the RCT findings were negative, they suggest a T&F tool may help reduce underuse in SNHs with poor follow-up capabilities. Clinical trial information: NCT01544374.


2017 ◽  
Vol 72 ◽  
pp. S13
Author(s):  
H. Aula ◽  
T. Skyttä ◽  
T. Luukkaala ◽  
M. Hämäläinen ◽  
E. Moilanen ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (13) ◽  
pp. 2157-2162 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dawn L. Hershman ◽  
Joseph M. Unger ◽  
William E. Barlow ◽  
Laura F. Hutchins ◽  
Silvana Martino ◽  
...  

PurposeWomen of African ancestry (AA) have lower WBC counts and are more likely to have treatment delays and discontinue adjuvant breast cancer therapy early compared with white women. We assessed the association between race and treatment discontinuation/delay, WBC counts, and survival in women enrolled onto breast cancer clinical trials.Patients and MethodsAA and white women from Southwest Oncology Group adjuvant breast cancer trials (S8814/S8897) were matched by age and protocol. Only the treatment arms in which patients were scheduled to receive six cycles of chemotherapy were analyzed.ResultsA total of 317 pairs of patients (n = 634) were analyzed. At baseline, AA women had higher body-surface area (P < .0001) and lower WBC (P = .0009). AA women were more likely to have tumors that were ≥ 2 cm (P = .01) and hormone receptor negative (P < .0001). AA women, versus white women, were marginally more likely to discontinue treatment early (11% v 7%, respectively; P = .07) or have one or more treatment delays (85% v 79%, respectively; P = .07) and were significantly more likely to experience the combined end point (discontinuation/delay; 87% v 81%, respectively; P = .04). The mean relative dose-intensity (RDI) was similar for both groups (87% in AA women v 86% in white women); however, overall, 43% had an RDI of less than 85%. After adjusting for baseline WBC and prognostic factors in a multivariate model, AA women had worse disease-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.56; 95% CI, 1.15 to 2.11; P = .005) and overall survival (HR = 1.95; 95% CI, 1.36 to 2.78; P = .0002). The inclusion of RDI and treatment delivery/quality in the regression had little impact on the results.ConclusionOn cooperative group breast cancer trials, AA and white women had similar RDIs, but AA women were more likely to experience early discontinuation or treatment delay. Despite correcting for these factors and known predictors of outcome, AA women still had worse survival.


2018 ◽  
Vol 88 (7-8) ◽  
pp. 745-750 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melinda Pattanasri ◽  
Kenneth Elder ◽  
Carolyn Nickson ◽  
Samuel Cooke ◽  
Dorothy Machalek ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document