Abstract

Capecitabine is often offered as a first-line chemotherapy option for metastatic breast cancer (MBC). In this study, we compare characteristics of and survival among women prescribed first-line capecitabine or taxane monotherapy for MBC. Women receiving first-line chemotherapy for MBC from 1998 to 2005 were identified from the North Carolina tumor registry linked with Medicaid and Medicare claims records, and were followed through the end of 2005 with survival data from the National Death Index. T Tests and Chi-square tests were used to compare baseline characteristics. Overall survival and cancer-specific survival were examined using Cox proportional hazard modeling. There were 257 patients with MBC starting first-line chemotherapy with capecitabine (n=71) or a taxane (n=186). No differences in age, race, or Charlson comorbidity status were observed between groups. Hormone receptor negative tumors (31.0 vs. 17.7%, p=0.02) and patients insured by Medicaid (28 vs. 12%, p=0.002) were more prevalent in the capecitabine group. Time from metastasis to first-line chemotherapy was longer in the capecitabine group (52 vs. 26% began after 3 months, p<0.001). In multivariate analysis, treatment received was not associated with overall or cancer-specific survival. Among standard demographics, age was the only factor significantly associated with overall survival (HR 1.02, p=04). In this population-based study, women who received capecitabine as first-line treatment for MBC were more often hormone receptor negative and insured by Medicaid. In multivariate analysis, first-line capecitabine and taxane for MBC yielded similar overall and cancer-specific survival outcomes.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.