PURPOSE: Primary endocrine therapy (PET) is the treatment of primary, operable breast cancer with drugs, such as tamoxifen, rather than surgery. It is in widespread use in the UK with 40% of women over 70 years old being treated in this way. PET is associated with inferior rates of local control compared with the standard surgical therapies, but there is no difference in overall survival. There has been no published research regarding the attitudes of older women concerning these two alternative approaches to treatment; what may influence their treatment choice or their experience of either treatment modality. This study aimed to address these questions. METHOD: In-depth qualitative interviews were undertaken to explore the views of a group of 21 purposively selected older women (>70 years old), who had been treated by PET or surgery for breast cancer. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using Framework Analysis. RESULTS: Both surgery and PET were well tolerated and had high satisfaction ratings from most women. This was the case even for those who had complications following surgery or needed a change of management in the PET group. Older women expressed no age-specific fears for operative procedures. The women were passive information seekers and relied heavily on 'expert' advice in making their treatment choices. Neither social support or age were factors in their decision-making. Their main concern was to ensure that their quality of life and independence remained unaffected. CONCLUSION: Older women have no strong preference for either treatment option but are concerned that the treatment is effective and causes minimal disruption to their quality of life and independence. This study suggests that medical consultations may need to be adapted to reflect the passive acceptance of 'expert' advice in the majority of women in this age group. Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
PURPOSE: Primary endocrine therapy (PET) is the treatment of primary, operable breast cancer with drugs, such as tamoxifen, rather than surgery. It is in widespread use in the UK with 40% of women over 70 years old being treated in this way. PET is associated with inferior rates of local control compared with the standard surgical therapies, but there is no difference in overall survival. There has been no published research regarding the attitudes of older women concerning these two alternative approaches to treatment; what may influence their treatment choice or their experience of either treatment modality. This study aimed to address these questions. METHOD: In-depth qualitative interviews were undertaken to explore the views of a group of 21 purposively selected older women (>70 years old), who had been treated by PET or surgery for breast cancer. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using Framework Analysis. RESULTS: Both surgery and PET were well tolerated and had high satisfaction ratings from most women. This was the case even for those who had complications following surgery or needed a change of management in the PET group. Older women expressed no age-specific fears for operative procedures. The women were passive information seekers and relied heavily on 'expert' advice in making their treatment choices. Neither social support or age were factors in their decision-making. Their main concern was to ensure that their quality of life and independence remained unaffected. CONCLUSION: Older women have no strong preference for either treatment option but are concerned that the treatment is effective and causes minimal disruption to their quality of life and independence. This study suggests that medical consultations may need to be adapted to reflect the passive acceptance of 'expert' advice in the majority of women in this age group. Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Authors: Mara A Schonberg; Robyn L Birdwell; Brittany L Bychkovsky; Lindsay Hintz; Valerie Fein-Zachary; Michael D Wertheimer; Rebecca A Silliman Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2014-03-31 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: A R Bradbury; L Patrick-Miller; D Fetzer; B Egleston; S A Cummings; A Forman; L Bealin; C Peterson; M Corbman; J O'Connell; M B Daly Journal: Clin Genet Date: 2010-10-12 Impact factor: 4.438
Authors: Angela R Bradbury; Linda Patrick-Miller; Brian L Egleston; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Mary B Daly; Cynthia W Moore; Colleen B Sands; Helen Schmidheiser; Preethi K Kondamudi; Maia Feigon; Comfort N Ibe; Christopher K Daugherty Journal: Cancer Date: 2012-01-09 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Angela R Bradbury; Linda Patrick-Miller; Brian L Egleston; Lisa A Schwartz; Colleen B Sands; Rebecca Shorter; Cynthia W Moore; Lisa Tuchman; Paula Rauch; Shreya Malhotra; Brianne Rowan; Stephanie Van Decker; Helen Schmidheiser; Lisa Bealin; Patrick Sicilia; Mary B Daly Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2012-10-14 Impact factor: 4.872