The impact of medication side effects on adherence and persistence to hormone therapy in breast cancer survivors: A quantitative systematic review

POLARized Risk for Local Recurrence on the Basis of Tumor Biology: Is It That Simple?

“…19 Given the reality that many patients will refuse or stop taking hormone therapy within the first 3 years of treatment, genomic signatures like POLAR may be particularly relevant for assessing inherent LRR among patients who do not take or are at risk for discontinuing hormone therapy prematurely because of the fact that POLAR was developed and validated in a cohort of hormone therapy-naïve patients. 18 Furthermore, given the known toxicities of hormone therapy, there is increasing interest in identifying a subgroup of patients who may forego hormone therapy in lieu of radiation or safely forego both hormone therapy and radiation all together as noted above. For example, among the SweBCG91-RT who had a high POLAR score, the 10-year LRR was 8% with RT alone and without hormone therapy, a LRR rate comparable with current rates observed in patients treated with both adjuvant therapies.…”

Refining and optimising a behavioural intervention to support endocrine therapy adherence (ROSETA) in UK women with breast cancer: protocol for a pilot fractional factorial trial

“… 62 68–72 Side-effects also likely impact medication adherence, 68 73–75 although evidence is mixed. 76 Oncologists perceive side-effects to be a major deterrent to AET adherence, 77 which is corroborated by patients. 27 78 Women feel unsupported in managing side-effects, 27 57 78 and would like clearer information on self-management strategies.…”

“…AET side effects (eg, hot flushes and arthralgia62–67) reduce quality of life 62 68–72. Side-effects also likely impact medication adherence,68 73–75 although evidence is mixed 76. Oncologists perceive side-effects to be a major deterrent to AET adherence,77 which is corroborated by patients 27 78.…”

An herbal drug combination identified by knowledge graph alleviates the clinical symptoms of plasma cell mastitis patients: a nonrandomized controlled trial

“…In brief, ℎ represents the target hitting rates of each drug entity in the combination and was calculated as follows, ℎ 𝑛 /𝑡 ; n i is the number of hitting targets for each drug entity in the combination; Again, t refers to the total number of targets constituting the knowledge graph for the disease; Noteworthy, the concept of hitting rates towards discrete targets has been used in the scoring function for the selection of synergistic drug combinations 23 . ℎ represents the phenotype relativeness of each drug entity in the combination and ℎ 𝑐 * 1/𝑥, where 𝑥 is the number of drug entities in the combination and 𝑐 is the parameter; Namely, if the drug entity is related to the phenotype of the disease (co-occurrence with the disease phenotype in the literature), then 𝑐 value is set to 1 otherwise 𝑐 value is set to 0; ℎ represents the literature relativeness or confidence of each drug entity in the combination and calculated as follows, ℎ 𝑐 * log ∑ 𝑙 𝑗 𝑘 [4] in which 𝑙 is the number of studies/publications that validated the association of drug entity with the specific disease (herein in the knowledge graph refers to cancer immunotherapy), 𝑗 and 𝑘 refer to if the relations of the drug entity with the disease have been validated in cell lines or patient (or animal) tissues, respectively. Namely, if the drug entity was validated in cancer cell lines or patient tissues, the j or k value will be set to 1, respectively.…”

“…Unfortunately, neither surgical resection nor hormone therapy could prevent recurrence of PCM. Moreover, the serious side effects for hormone therapy are still problematic 4 . Therefore, the discovery of effective PCM treatment or therapeutics with minimal side effects is clearly warranted.…”