Xianglin L Du1, David R Lairson, Charles E Begley, Shenying Fang. 1. Division of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, 1200 Herman Pressler Dr, Room RAS-E631, Houston, TX 77030, USA. xdu@sph.uth.tmc.edu
Abstract
PURPOSE: Hematopoietic growth factors have played a major role in preventing infection and shortening the duration of neutropenia in patients receiving cancer chemotherapy. Little information is available on how these growth factors are used in patients with cancer outside the clinical trial setting. We performed descriptive and exploratory analyses on the patterns and correlates of the use of hematopoietic growth factors in community-dwelling elderly patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified 5,843 women from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare-linked data cohorts who were diagnosed with breast cancer at age 65 or older in 1992 to 1999 from the 11 SEER areas and received chemotherapy. RESULTS: Overall, 17.3% of the elderly women with breast cancer chemotherapy received filgrastim and 6.8% received epoetin. The use of the growth factors increased significantly over time from 1992 to 1999 (P < .001 for trend). Compared with patients diagnosed in 1992 to 1994, patients diagnosed in 1998 to 1999 were more than five times and 65 times more likely to receive filgrastim and epoetin, respectively, after controlling for other factors such as age and comorbidity. There also was substantial geographic variation in the use of hematopoietic growth factors, ranging from 10.6% in Seattle to 22.9% in Atlanta. Significant predictors of growth factors included patient age, race, tumor stage, and comorbidity. CONCLUSION: There were substantial temporal and geographic variations in the use of hematopoietic growth factors among patients receiving chemotherapy for breast cancer. The nationwide and population-based Medicare claims provide potential for examining the effectiveness, medical costs, and cost effectiveness of hematopoietic growth factors in the community.
PURPOSE: Hematopoietic growth factors have played a major role in preventing infection and shortening the duration of neutropenia in patients receiving cancer chemotherapy. Little information is available on how these growth factors are used in patients with cancer outside the clinical trial setting. We performed descriptive and exploratory analyses on the patterns and correlates of the use of hematopoietic growth factors in community-dwelling elderly patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified 5,843 women from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare-linked data cohorts who were diagnosed with breast cancer at age 65 or older in 1992 to 1999 from the 11 SEER areas and received chemotherapy. RESULTS: Overall, 17.3% of the elderly women with breast cancer chemotherapy received filgrastim and 6.8% received epoetin. The use of the growth factors increased significantly over time from 1992 to 1999 (P < .001 for trend). Compared with patients diagnosed in 1992 to 1994, patients diagnosed in 1998 to 1999 were more than five times and 65 times more likely to receive filgrastim and epoetin, respectively, after controlling for other factors such as age and comorbidity. There also was substantial geographic variation in the use of hematopoietic growth factors, ranging from 10.6% in Seattle to 22.9% in Atlanta. Significant predictors of growth factors included patient age, race, tumor stage, and comorbidity. CONCLUSION: There were substantial temporal and geographic variations in the use of hematopoietic growth factors among patients receiving chemotherapy for breast cancer. The nationwide and population-based Medicare claims provide potential for examining the effectiveness, medical costs, and cost effectiveness of hematopoietic growth factors in the community.
Authors: Xianglin L Du; Wenyaw Chan; Sharon Giordano; Jane M Geraci; George L Delclos; Keith Burau; Shenying Fang Journal: Cancer Date: 2005-09-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Gary H Lyman; David C Dale; Jonathan Friedberg; Jeffrey Crawford; Richard I Fisher Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-09-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Xianglin L Du; Charles R Key; Cynthia Osborne; Jonathan D Mahnken; James S Goodwin Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2003-01-21 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Lena E Winestone; Kelly D Getz; Tamara P Miller; Jennifer J Wilkes; Leah Sack; Yimei Li; Yuan-Shung Huang; Alix E Seif; Rochelle Bagatell; Brian T Fisher; Andrew J Epstein; Richard Aplenc Journal: Am J Hematol Date: 2016-12-07 Impact factor: 10.047
Authors: Wendy J Langeberg; Conchitina C Siozon; John H Page; P K Morrow; Victoria M Chia Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2014-03-21 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Mi Rim Choi; Craig A Solid; Victoria M Chia; Anne H Blaes; John H Page; Richard Barron; Thomas J Arneson Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2014-02-04 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Gregory S Calip; Judith A Malmgren; Wan-Ju Lee; Stephen M Schwartz; Henry G Kaplan Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2015-10-08 Impact factor: 4.872