Ethnic neutropenia among women of European, African, and Caribbean backgrounds

6587

Background: Black women are less likely than white women to receive complete chemotherapy for cancer. One reason for interruption of chemotherapy may be a patient's low white blood count (WBC) or absolute neutrophil count (ANC). In studies of white blood cell count (WBC) and race, white individuals’ WBC has been considered the standard, and 25–40% of non-Hispanic black individuals have been described as having “benign ethnic neutropenia.”. We therefore studied the prevalence and severity of ethnic neutropenia among women in six ethnic groups and of the association between neutropenia and serum cytokine and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels and neutrophil elastase (ELA2) polymorphisms. Methods: Following IRB approval, each participant provided a blood sample that was tested for WBC with differentials, cytokines and CRP levels, and ELA2 polymorphisms. We compared median WBC and ANC using Kruskal-Wallis tests. We used Fisher's exact tests to analyze association of severe neutropenia with ethnicity, cytokine and CRP levels, and ELA2 polymorphisms. Results: We enrolled 263 women 20–70 years old who had no cancer diagnosis.. As the table shows, median WBC and ANC differed by group; Dominicans had significantly higher median WBCs and ANCs than all other groups. Of 12 women with severe neutropenia (ANC = 1,500), none was Dominican or European-American. Subjects with a common upregulating ELA2 promoter polymorphism (C-199A) had lower ANC counts than other subjects. No associations were found between ANC counts and either cytokines or CRP levels. Conclusions: Median WBC and ANC and severe neutropenia were associated with ethnicity. Mild neutropenia is considered clinically benign, but because severe neutropenia may result in decreased doses or delays in chemotherapeutic treatment for malignancies, ethnic neutropenia and its role in treatment decisions requires further investigation.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

[Table: see text]

Oral adjuvant treatment choices and local recurrence risk in early stage breast cancer

10625

Background: Among women (W) with early-stage breast cancer (BC) treated with lumpectomy and radiation therapy (RT), those who also receive oral adjuvant therapy (OAT) have a lower risk of local recurrence (LR). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the associations of age (A), race/ethnicity (RE), education (E), socioeconomic status (SS), LR rate, and knowledge about potential side effects (SE) with W’s willingness to receive OAT. Methods: Between 6/05 and 9/05, we asked W with (+) and without (−) BC to participate in an IRB-approved survey. The survey questionnaire presented W with clinical vignettes including information about RT ± 5 years of OAT and the LR and SE associated with treatment options. It then asked W to choose between the treatment options and to rate them, using a time trade-off method, given LR and SE. Results: The distribution of the 161 respondents (55 (+)BC and 106 (−)BC) by A, RE, E, SS is shown in the table below. A and RE were associated with a W’s choice of combined modality treatment (CMT) consisting of RT and OAT, to decrease the risk of LR (p < 0.009 and p < 0.056). Stratified analysis showed an association between CMT and E (p < 0.006) in W (+)BC; A (p < 0.04) and SS (p < 0.04) were associated with CMT choice when SE were described. In W (−) BC, RE (p < 0.02) and SS (p < 0.04) were associated with CMT choice when SE were described. Compared to W who had used oral contraceptive agents (OCA), women who did not use OCA were 45% less likely to trade time to decrease their risk of LR by taking OAT when told about similar SE between OCA and OAT (OR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.28, 1.09), but this association was not statistically significant. Conclusions: W of various A, RE, E and SS who were given information about treatment choices with LR rates chose therapies that gave them the best chance of disease-free survival. For W (+) BC history, level of E significantly influenced the choice to proceed with CMT. A, RE and SS influenced CMT choice when SE were described. W who had used OCA in the past may have been less concerned than others about potential side effects of OAT.

[Table: see text]

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Randomized Trial of Black Cohosh for the Treatment of Hot Flashes Among Women With a History of Breast Cancer

PURPOSE: Most breast cancer survivors experience hot flashes; many use complementary or alternative remedies for these symptoms. We undertook a randomized clinical trial of black cohosh, a widely used herbal remedy for menopausal symptoms, among breast cancer patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients diagnosed with breast cancer who had completed their primary treatment were randomly assigned to black cohosh or placebo, stratified on tamoxifen use. At enrollment, patients completed a questionnaire about demographic factors and menopausal symptoms. Before starting to take the pills and at 30 and 60 days, they completed a 4-day hot flash diary. At the final visit, they completed another menopausal symptom questionnaire. Follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and luteinizing hormone (LH) levels were measured in a subset of patients at the first and final visits.

RESULTS: Of 85 patients (59 on tamoxifen, 26 not on tamoxifen) enrolled in the study, 42 were assigned to treatment and 43 were assigned to placebo; 69 completed all three hot flash diaries. Both treatment and placebo groups reported declines in number and intensity of hot flashes; the differences between the groups were not statistically significant. Both groups also reported improvements in menopausal symptoms that were, for the most part, not significantly different. Changes in blood levels of FSH and LH also did not differ in the two groups.

CONCLUSION: Black cohosh was not significantly more efficacious than placebo against most menopausal symptoms, including number and intensity of hot flashes. Our study illustrates the feasibility and value of standard clinical trial methodology in assessing the efficacy and safety of herbal agents.

Variations in the use of adjuvant chemotherapy for node-positive colon cancer in the elderly: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

Since 1990, the recommended adjuvant therapy for patients with surgically resected node-positive colon cancer has been 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), usually in combination with leucovorin or levamisole. The purpose of this study is to assess the distribution of adjuvant 5-FU treatment in the elderly.

METHODS

The Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare database provides population-based information on cancer patients, representing approximately 14% of the United States population, along with health care utilization data from Medicare claims files. We studied patients with node-positive colon cancer diagnosed between 1992 and 1996 who survived at least 120 days beyond diagnosis (N = 4998).

RESULTS

About 50% of elderly patients received 5-FU within 4 months of diagnosis. The proportion of patients treated with 5-FU increased by about 10% from 1992 to 1996. In a multiple logistic regression model, 5-FU treatment was less likely to be given to older patients (compared with those aged 65-69 years, the odds ratio (OR) [95% CI] was 0.82 [0.67-1.00] for ages 70 to 74 years, 0.47 [0.39-0.57] for ages 75 to 79, 0.17 [0.13-0.20] for ages 80 to 84, and 0.04 [0.03-0.05] for ages 85 to 88 years. Non-Hispanic black patients were less likely to be treated than non-Hispanic white patients (OR 0.46 [0.36-0.59]); patients with more than three positive lymph nodes were more likely to be treated than those with three or less, and those with comorbid conditions were less likely to be treated than those without such conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite its proven efficacy in reducing colon cancer mortality, 5-FU-based chemotherapy is not widely used among apparently eligible patients over age 65. Efforts are needed to ensure that elderly and non-Hispanic black patients receive appropriate treatment.

Decision analysis of tamoxifen for the prevention of invasive breast cancer

PURPOSE

The recent Breast Cancer Prevention Trial has shown that tamoxifen may prevent invasive breast cancer. We used a Markov model to estimate the long-term effects of chemoprevention with tamoxifen on survival, quality-adjusted survival, and health care costs.

METHODS

We used a hypothetical cohort of women with breast-cancer risk similar to that of participants in the Breast Cancer Prevention Trial, and a computer-based decision analysis (Markov model and 500 Monte Carlo simulations) to model the outcomes of interest. Survival calculations were from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End-Results (SEER) data; preference ratings from a time trade-off questionnaire administered to a group of average-risk women; and cost estimates from the Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound and the Health Care Financing Administration. We obtained utility measures for quality-adjustment by administering a time trade-off questionnaire to a group of community-based women.

RESULTS

Use of tamoxifen prolonged the average survival of cohort members by 69 days (95% probability interval [PI] 27 to 117) for those who started use at age 35 years; 40 days (95% PI 16 to 67) for those who started use at age 50 years; and 27 days (95% PI 14 to 40) for those who started use at age 60 years. Tamoxifen extended quality-adjusted survival by 38 days (95% PI 0.1 to 82) at age 35, 25 days (95% PI 0 to 50) at age 50, and 22 days (95% PI 5 to 39) days at age 60. Chemoprevention with tamoxifen cost $46,619 (95% PI $27,928 to $98,796) per life year life saved for women who started at age 35; for women over age 50, it cost more than $50,000 per life year saved.

DISCUSSION

Tamoxifen use may improve long-term survival and quality-adjusted survival among women who are at increased risk of breast cancer, but this benefit diminishes with age. Tamoxifen is cost-effective in comparison with other cancer treatment strategies for younger women only.

Prevention with tamoxifen or other hormones versus prophylactic surgery in BRCA1/2-positive women: a decision analysis

PURPOSE

Recent randomized controlled trials have shown that tamoxifen and raloxifene may prevent invasive breast cancer. This decision analysis study compares the outcomes of chemoprevention with tamoxifen, raloxifene, or oral contraceptives with the outcomes of prophylactic surgery among women with high-risk BRCA1/2 mutations.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We used a simulated cohort of 30-year-old women who tested positive for BRCA1/2 mutations and constructed a Markov model with Monte Carlo simulations, incorporating cumulative breast and ovarian cancer incidence rates from the literature and survival figures from SEER data. We assumed that prophylactic surgery reduces ovarian cancer risk by 45% and breast cancer risk by 90%, that tamoxifen reduces invasive breast cancer risk by 49%, and that raloxifene has similar efficacy and safety in premenopausal and postmenopausal women. We used data obtained from high-risk women by a time trade-off questionnaire to calculate quality-adjusted life-years. We based our cost estimates for hospital and ambulatory care on Health Care Financing Administration payments, the SEER-HCFA database, and the Pharmacy Fundamental Reference.

RESULTS

In our model, a 30-year-old BRCA1/2+ woman could prolong survival by 0.9 years (95% probability interval, 0.4-1.2 years) by having bilateral oophorectomy, 3.4 years (2.7-3.7 years) by having bilateral mastectomy, and 4.3 years (3.6-4.6 years) by having both procedures instead of surveillance alone. Chemoprevention with tamoxifen and raloxifene increased survival by 1.6 years (1.0-2.1 years) and 2.2 years (1.3-2.8 years), respectively. Chemoprevention yielded more quality-adjusted life-years than did prophylactic surgery, even when treatment was delayed to age 40 or 50 years. All these procedures were cost-effective or cost-saving compared with surveillance alone.

DISCUSSION

Our model suggests that although surgery may yield more substantial survival and cost benefits, quality of life issues may make chemoprevention a more attractive option for young women at high genetic risk.

Safety and costs of treating neutropenic fever in an outpatient setting

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to analyze the safety of outpatient treatment for cancer patients with chemotherapy-induced neutropenic fever in a community hospital setting and to compare the costs of outpatient treatment with those of inpatient treatment for such patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We reviewed charts and charges for 32 consecutive patients initially treated for neutropenic fever with broad-spectrum antibiotics in the offices of Hematology/Oncology Associates (HOA) at the Bennett Cancer Center in the Stamford Hospital January 1997-June 1998. We also reviewed charts and charges for eight consecutive HOA patients with neutropenic fever who met the criteria for outpatient treatment but were initially hospitalized for other reasons during this period. We compared these two groups with respect to mean nadir absolute neutrophil count (ANC), mean number of days when ANC < 1,000 cells cu mm, and mean number of days of intravenous antibiotic treatment. We compared costs for ambulatory and hospital care of the two groups using Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) payments in 1998 as a proxy for costs.

RESULTS

Of 32 patients with neutropenic fever initially treated in the outpatient setting, only four required hospitalization. No patients in either group died in connection with neutropenic fever. Although outpatients received an average of 3.6 days and inpatients only 2.5 days of antibiotic treatment, outpatient treatment was significantly less costly than inpatient treatment.

CONCLUSION

In a community hospital setting most cancer patients with neutropenic fever who meet certain criteria can be safely, effectively, and inexpensively treated as outpatients.

The quality of life associated with prophylactic treatments for women with BRCA1/2 mutations

PURPOSE

This study was conducted to obtain and compare the preferences assigned to cancer states and prevention measures by women who had breast cancer, were at high risk for breast cancer, or had neither condition.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We administered a time trade-off questionnaire to 21 breast cancer patients, 28 women with a personal history of multiple breast biopsies or a family history of breast cancer, and 135 women without these conditions (the reference group). We stratified the reference group into two groups aged 20 to 32 years and 33 to 50 years, respectively.

RESULTS

All four groups assigned higher preference to breast cancer than to ovarian cancer. Both reference groups preferred using a tamoxifen-like drug to having mastectomy or oophorectomy for cancer prevention; the high-risk and breast cancer groups did not. None of the four groups had a preference between prophylactic mastectomy and breast cancer. All the groups were willing to subtract more years from their life expectancy to protect offspring from genetic risk than to protect themselves. Reference group members in the 33- to 50-year age range had lower mean ratings than the breast cancer group for almost all the health states, and breast cancer patients were less willing than other respondents to trade time for health. Most of these differences were not statistically significant. The high-risk group was similar to the older reference group in time trade-off ratings.

DISCUSSION

The time trade-off-based preferences of healthy women may be used to predict the treatment preferences of women with BRCA1/2 mutations. Obtaining healthy women's ratings of treatment outcomes may help health care policy makers envision the consequences of the difficult choices that high-risk women face.

Benefits and costs of screening Ashkenazi Jewish women for BRCA1 and BRCA2

PURPOSE

To determine the survival benefit and cost-effectiveness of screening Ashkenazi Jewish women for three specific BRCA1/2 gene mutations.

METHODS

We used a Markov model and Monte Carlo analysis to estimate the survival benefit and cost-effectiveness of screening for three specific mutations in a population in which their prevalence is 2.5% and the associated cancer risks are 56% for breast cancer and 16% for ovarian cancer. We assumed that the sensitivity and specificity of the test were 98% and 99%, respectively, that bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy would reduce ovarian cancer risk by 45%, and that bilateral prophylactic mastectomy would reduce breast cancer risk by 90%. We used Medicare payment data for treatment costs and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data for cancer survival.

RESULTS

Our model suggests that genetic screening of this population could prolong average nondiscounted survival by 38 days (95% probability interval, 22 to 57 days) for combined surgery, 33 days (95% probability interval, 18 to 43 days) for mastectomy, 11 days (95% probability interval, 4 to 25 days) for oophorectomy, and 6 days (95% probability interval, 3 to 8 days) for surveillance. The respective cost-effectiveness ratios per life-year saved, with a discount rate of 3%, are $20,717, $29,970, $72,780, and $134,273.

CONCLUSION

In this Ashkenazi Jewish population, with a high prevalence of BRCA1/2 mutations, genetic screening may significantly increase average survival and, depending on costs and screening/treatment strategies, may be cost-effective by the standards of accepted cancer screening tests. According to our model, screening is cost-effective only if all women who test positive undergo prophylactic surgery. These estimates require confirmation through prospective observational studies and clinical trials.

Decision analysis of prophylactic mastectomy and oophorectomy in BRCA1-positive or BRCA2-positive patients

PURPOSE

Young Ashkenazi Jewish women or those from high-risk families who test positive for BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutant genes have a significant risk of developing breast or ovarian cancer by the age of 70 years. Many question whether they should have prophylactic surgical procedures, ie, bilateral mastectomy and/or oophorectomy.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed to determine the survival, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness of prophylactic surgical procedures. The probabilities of developing breast and ovarian cancer were based on literature review among women with the BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene and mortality rates were determined from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) data for 1973 to 1992. The costs for hospital and ambulatory care were estimated from Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) payments in 1995, supplemented by managed care and fee-for-service data. Utility measures for quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were explicitly determined using the time-trade off method. Estimated risks for breast and ovarian cancer after prophylactic surgeries were obtained from the literature.

RESULTS

For a 30-year-old woman, according to her cancer risks, prophylactic oophorectomy improved survival by 0.4 to 2.6 years; mastectomy, by 2.8 to 3.4 years; and mastectomy and oophorectomy, by 3.3 to 6.0 years over surveillance. The QALYs saved were 0.5 for oophorectomy and 1.9 for the combined procedures in the high-risk model. Prophylactic surgeries were cost-effective compared with surveillance for years of life saved, but not for QALYs.

CONCLUSION

Among women who test positive for a BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutation, prophylactic surgery at a young age substantially improves survival, but unless genetic risk of cancer is high, provides no benefit for quality of life. Prophylactic surgery is cost-effective for years of life saved compared with other medical interventions that are deemed cost-effective.