Oncology providers’ perspectives on endocrine therapy prescribing and management
Authors Wheeler S, Roberts M, Bloom D, Reeder-Hayes K, Espada M, Peppercorn J, Golin C, Earp JA
Received 2 September 2015
Accepted for publication 11 February 2016
Published 30 September 2016 Volume 2016:10 Pages 2007—2019
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single-blind
Peer reviewers approved by Dr Doris YP Leung
Peer reviewer comments 3
Editor who approved publication: Dr Johnny Chen
Stephanie B Wheeler,1,2 Megan C Roberts,1 Diane Bloom,1 Katherine E Reeder-Hayes,2,3 Maya Espada,1 Jeffrey Peppercorn,4 Carol E Golin,5,6 Jo Anne Earp2,5
1Department of Health Policy and Management, 2Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, 3Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 4Division of Hematology/Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, 5Department of Health Behavior, 6Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
Purpose: Adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) can reduce the risk of recurrence among females with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. Overall, initiation and adherence to ET are suboptimal, though reasons are not well described. The study’s objective was to better understand ET decision making, prescribing, and patient management from oncology providers’ perspectives.
Methods: Using purposive sampling, we recruited oncology providers who saw five or more breast cancer patients per week (n=20). We conducted 30–45-minute telephone interviews, using a semistructured guide to elicit perspectives on ET use. We used thematic content analysis to systematically identify categories of meaning and double-coded transcripts using Atlas.ti.
Results: Providers recommend ET to all eligible patients except those with contraindications or other risk factors. Providers base their ET prescribing decisions on the patient’s menopausal status, side effects, and comorbidities. ET is typically discussed multiple times: at the onset of breast cancer treatment and in more detail after other treatment completion. Providers felt that the associated recurrence risk reduction is the most compelling argument for patients during ET decision making. While providers rarely perceived noninitiation as a problem, nonadherence was prevalent, often due to unresolvable side effects.
Conclusion: From the clinicians’ perspectives, side effects from ET are the dominant factor in nonadherence. Efforts to improve adherence should focus on strategies to minimize side effects and ensure clinicians and patients are well informed regarding optimal side effect management. This finding has important implications for novel endocrine regimens that offer improved outcomes through longer duration or more intensive therapy.
Keywords: breast cancer, endocrine therapy, oncology, oncologist, qualitative interviews
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]