ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2016
Racial differences in receipt of adjuvant hormonal therapy among Medicaid enrollees in South Carolina diagnosed with breast cancer.
Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Racial and Geographic Disparities in Endocrine Therapy Adherence Among Younger Breast Cancer Survivors.American journal of clinical oncology · 2020Article
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Several factors contribute to the pervasive Black-White disparity in breast cancer mortality in the U.S., such as tumor biology, access to care, and treatments received including adjuvant hormonal therapy (AHT), which significantly improves survival for hormone receptor-positive breast cancers (HR+). We analyzed South Carolina Central Cancer Registry-Medicaid linked data to determine if, in an equal access health care system, racial differences in the receipt of AHT exist. We evaluated 494 study-eligible, Black (n = 255) and White women (n = 269) who were under 65 years old and diagnosed with stages I-III, HR+ breast cancers between 2004 and 2007. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to assess receipt of ≥1 AHT prescriptions at any point in time following (ever-use) or within 12 months of (early-use) breast cancer diagnosis. Seventy-two percent of the participants were ever-users (70 % Black, 74 % White) and 68 % were early-users (65 % Black, 71 % White) of AHT. Neither ever-use (adjusted OR (AOR) = 0.75, 95 % CI 0.48-1.17) nor early-use (AOR = 0.70, 95 % CI 0.46-1.06) of AHT differed by race. However, receipt of other breast cancer-specific treatments was independently associated with ever-use and early-use of AHT [ever-use: receipt of surgery (AOR = 2.15, 95 % CI 1.35-3.44); chemotherapy (AOR = 1.97, 95 % CI 1.22-3.20); radiation (AOR = 2.33, 95 % CI 1.50-3.63); early-use: receipt of surgery (AOR = 2.03, 95 % CI 1.30-3.17); chemotherapy (AOR = 1.90, 95 % CI 1.20-3.03); radiation (AOR = 1.73, 95 % CI 1.14-2.63)]. No racial variations in use of AHT among women with HR+ breast cancers insured by Medicaid in South Carolina were identified, but overall rates of AHT use by these women is low. Strategies to improve overall use of AHT should include targeting breast cancer patients who do not receive adjuvant chemotherapy and/or radiation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.