PURPOSE: To estimate the effects on survival, quality-adjusted survival, and health care costs of using tamoxifen for primary prevention in subgroups of women at very high risk for breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A decision analysis was performed using a hypothetical cohort of women that included subgroups with atypical hyperplasia, Gail risk greater than 5, lobular carcinoma-in-situ, or two or more first-degree relatives with breast cancer. Data sources were the Breast Cancer Prevention Trial, the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End-Results program, time trade-off preference ratings, the Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound, and the United States Health Care Financing Administration. RESULTS: Our model predicted that tamoxifen would prolong the average survival of cohort members initiating use at ages 35, 50, and 60 years by 70, 42, and 27 days, respectively. It would prolong survival even more for those in the higher-risk groups, especially those with atypical hyperplasia (202, 89, and 45 days). Tamoxifen use was also projected to extend quality-adjusted survival by 158, 80, and 50 days in the atypical hyperplasia group. For younger women in the highest risk groups, chemoprevention with tamoxifen was estimated to have cost savings or be cost-effective, both with and without quality adjustments. CONCLUSION: Chemoprevention with tamoxifen may be particularly beneficial to women with atypical hyperplasia, 5-year Gail model risk greater than 5%, lobular carcinoma-in-situ, or two or more first-degree relatives with breast cancer. The benefits may be greater if tamoxifen is initiated before age 50 years rather than after and if the breast cancer risk reduction conferred by tamoxifen lasts longer than 5 years. For women with a very high risk of invasive breast cancer, chemoprevention with tamoxifen seems to be cost-effective.
PURPOSE: To estimate the effects on survival, quality-adjusted survival, and health care costs of using tamoxifen for primary prevention in subgroups of women at very high risk for breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A decision analysis was performed using a hypothetical cohort of women that included subgroups with atypical hyperplasia, Gail risk greater than 5, lobular carcinoma-in-situ, or two or more first-degree relatives with breast cancer. Data sources were the Breast Cancer Prevention Trial, the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End-Results program, time trade-off preference ratings, the Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound, and the United States Health Care Financing Administration. RESULTS: Our model predicted that tamoxifen would prolong the average survival of cohort members initiating use at ages 35, 50, and 60 years by 70, 42, and 27 days, respectively. It would prolong survival even more for those in the higher-risk groups, especially those with atypical hyperplasia (202, 89, and 45 days). Tamoxifen use was also projected to extend quality-adjusted survival by 158, 80, and 50 days in the atypical hyperplasia group. For younger women in the highest risk groups, chemoprevention with tamoxifen was estimated to have cost savings or be cost-effective, both with and without quality adjustments. CONCLUSION: Chemoprevention with tamoxifen may be particularly beneficial to women with atypical hyperplasia, 5-year Gail model risk greater than 5%, lobular carcinoma-in-situ, or two or more first-degree relatives with breast cancer. The benefits may be greater if tamoxifen is initiated before age 50 years rather than after and if the breast cancer risk reduction conferred by tamoxifen lasts longer than 5 years. For women with a very high risk of invasive breast cancer, chemoprevention with tamoxifen seems to be cost-effective.
Authors: Alexander Stojadinovic; Christina Eberhardt; Leonard Henry; John Eberhardt; Eric A Elster; George E Peoples; Aviram Nissan; Craig D Shriver Journal: Eplasty Date: 2010-03-29
Authors: Elena B Elkin; Deborah A Marshall; Nathalie A Kulin; Ilia L Ferrusi; Michael J Hassett; Uri Ladabaum; Kathryn A Phillips Journal: Genet Med Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Robert Cook-Deegan; Christopher DeRienzo; Julia Carbone; Subhashini Chandrasekharan; Christopher Heaney; Christopher Conover Journal: Genet Med Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Alexander Stojadinovic; Thomas A Summers; John Eberhardt; Albert Cerussi; Warren Grundfest; Charles M Peterson; Michael Brazaitis; Elizabeth Krupinski; Harold Freeman Journal: J Cancer Date: 2011-04-20 Impact factor: 4.207
Authors: Hong Cai; Edwina Scott; Abeer Kholghi; Catherine Andreadi; Alessandro Rufini; Ankur Karmokar; Robert G Britton; Emma Horner-Glister; Peter Greaves; Dhafer Jawad; Mark James; Lynne Howells; Ted Ognibene; Michael Malfatti; Christopher Goldring; Neil Kitteringham; Joanne Walsh; Maria Viskaduraki; Kevin West; Andrew Miller; David Hemingway; William P Steward; Andreas J Gescher; Karen Brown Journal: Sci Transl Med Date: 2015-07-29 Impact factor: 17.956