Eden R Brauer1, Patricia A Ganz1, Huibrie C Pieters1. 1. University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) School of Nursing; UCLA Schools of Medicine and Public Health; and UCLA Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) are an important and effective hormonal adjuvant treatment for early-stage breast cancer. Up to 50% of women stop AIs prematurely, missing a valuable therapeutic intervention. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used grounded theory methodology to conduct in-depth, semistructured interviews and analyze data among patients with breast cancer diagnosed at age 65 years or older who were receiving an AI. The goal of the interviews was to understand decision making regarding persisting with AIs. Interview transcripts were systematically analyzed to identify emergent categories and relationships. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 27 women. After completion of primary treatment, women in our sample found themselves "winging it" as they faced substantial struggles with infrequent support during this new phase of the cancer trajectory. Self-management of AI adverse effects occurred in the contexts of older age and early survivorship. "Bearing it" emerged as another important management process regarding the impact of AIs on quality of everyday life. The complex decision to persist with the AI involved weighing the possibility of a cancer-free future against the burden of adverse effects. Women relied on informal networks for support, rather than oncology providers, highlighting the need for practical self-management strategies. The notion of a tipping point in persistence revealed their susceptibility to early discontinuation. CONCLUSION: This study provides insight into potential decisional pathways leading to early discontinuation of AIs among older women with breast cancer. Better support is needed for these women.
PURPOSE: Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) are an important and effective hormonal adjuvant treatment for early-stage breast cancer. Up to 50% of women stop AIs prematurely, missing a valuable therapeutic intervention. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used grounded theory methodology to conduct in-depth, semistructured interviews and analyze data among patients with breast cancer diagnosed at age 65 years or older who were receiving an AI. The goal of the interviews was to understand decision making regarding persisting with AIs. Interview transcripts were systematically analyzed to identify emergent categories and relationships. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 27 women. After completion of primary treatment, women in our sample found themselves "winging it" as they faced substantial struggles with infrequent support during this new phase of the cancer trajectory. Self-management of AI adverse effects occurred in the contexts of older age and early survivorship. "Bearing it" emerged as another important management process regarding the impact of AIs on quality of everyday life. The complex decision to persist with the AI involved weighing the possibility of a cancer-free future against the burden of adverse effects. Women relied on informal networks for support, rather than oncology providers, highlighting the need for practical self-management strategies. The notion of a tipping point in persistence revealed their susceptibility to early discontinuation. CONCLUSION: This study provides insight into potential decisional pathways leading to early discontinuation of AIs among older women with breast cancer. Better support is needed for these women.
Authors: Catherine M Bender; Amanda L Gentry; Adam M Brufsky; Frances E Casillo; Susan M Cohen; Meredith M Dailey; Heidi S Donovan; Jacqueline Dunbar-Jacob; Rachel C Jankowitz; Margaret Q Rosenzweig; Paula R Sherwood; Susan M Sereika Journal: Oncol Nurs Forum Date: 2014-05 Impact factor: 2.172
Authors: Harold J Burstein; Sarah Temin; Holly Anderson; Thomas A Buchholz; Nancy E Davidson; Karen E Gelmon; Sharon H Giordano; Clifford A Hudis; Diana Rowden; Alexander J Solky; Vered Stearns; Eric P Winer; Jennifer J Griggs Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-05-27 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Caitlin C Murphy; L Kay Bartholomew; Melissa Y Carpentier; Shirley M Bluethmann; Sally W Vernon Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2012-06-12 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: N Lynn Henry; Faouzi Azzouz; Zereunesay Desta; Lang Li; Anne T Nguyen; Suzanne Lemler; Jill Hayden; Karineh Tarpinian; Elizabeth Yakim; David A Flockhart; Vered Stearns; Daniel F Hayes; Anna Maria Storniolo Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2012-02-13 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Cynthia Owusu; Diana S M Buist; Terry S Field; Timothy L Lash; Soe Soe Thwin; Ann M Geiger; Virginia P Quinn; Floyd Frost; Marianne Prout; Marianne Ulcickas Yood; Feifei Wei; Rebecca A Silliman Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-12-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Alison Harrow; Ruth Dryden; Colin McCowan; Andrew Radley; Mark Parsons; Alastair M Thompson; Mary Wells Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2014-06-12 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: K M de Ligt; M Heins; J Verloop; N P M Ezendam; C H Smorenburg; J C Korevaar; S Siesling Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2019-09-11 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Kirsti I Toivonen; Devesh Oberoi; Kathryn King-Shier; Katherine-Ann L Piedalue; Joshua A Rash; Linda E Carlson; Tavis S Campbell Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2021-07-05 Impact factor: 3.677
Authors: Leah K Lambert; Lynda G Balneaves; A Fuchsia Howard; Stephen K Chia; Carolyn C Gotay Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2018-07-11 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Kelly M de Ligt; Laurentine S E van Egdom; Linetta B Koppert; Sabine Siesling; Janine A van Til Journal: Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) Date: 2019-05-09 Impact factor: 2.328