Patterns and predictors of first-line taxane use in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer in us clinical practice

1Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

We investigated first-line (1L) treatment patterns and predictors of taxane use to better understand the evolving metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) treatment landscape. This retrospective analysis of the Truven Health MarketScan® (Somers, NY, USA) Database included women with mTNBC who received 1L therapy within six months of diagnosis (January 2005–June 2015). Multivariate logistic regression models identified predictors of taxane use, adjusting for prognostic factors. A total of 2,271 women with newly diagnosed mTNBC received 1L treatment during the study period. Half received a 1L taxane (53%), more often in combination than as monotherapy (58% versus 42%), though this varied by specific taxane. Nab-Paclitaxel monotherapy increased substantially after 2010. More recent treatment year (odds ratio, 2.16 (95% CI 1.69–2.76]) and number of metastases (≥3 versus 1: 1.73 (1.25–2.40)) predicted taxane monotherapy versus combination. Having a health maintenance organization versus a preferred provider organization plan predicted less nab-paclitaxel versus paclitaxel (0.32 (0.13–0.80)) or docetaxel (0.30 (0.10–0.89)) use. More recent index year (2011–2015 vs 2005–2010) was the only predictor favoring nab-paclitaxel versus paclitaxel (2.01 (1.26–3.21)) or docetaxel (3.63 (2.11–6.26)). Taxane-containing regimens remained the most common 1L mTNBC treatments. Paclitaxel and nab-paclitaxel use changed substantially over time, with nab-paclitaxel use associated with insurance coverage.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

O’shaughnessy, J., Emens, L. A., Chui, S. Y., Wang, W., Russell, K., Lin, S. W., … Schneeweiss, A. (2021). Patterns and predictors of first-line taxane use in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer in us clinical practice. Current Oncology, 28(4), 2741–2752. https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol28040239

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free