Hormone-Replacement Therapy and Its Association with Breast Cancer Subtypes: A Large Retrospective Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: The study examined trends in breast cancer incidence, mammography testing rates, hormone-replacement therapy (HRT) use and breast cancer subtypes in a large Israeli health maintenance organization during 2000-2014. METHODS: Annual rates of mammography tests and HRTs use were analyzed in women age ≥45. Annual incidence rates of breast cancer were analyzed in women age ≥20. Estimated annual percentage changes were used to test changes in incidence rates. Invasive breast cancer subtypes were approximated by treatments received. We compared annual rates and duration of HRTs use between women diagnosed with breast cancer and those who were not, as well as HRT use between subtypes of invasive breast cancer. RESULTS: We identified 14,092 breast cancer cases (88% invasive, 12% in situ). The age-adjusted incidence rate of invasive breast cancer peaked in 2005, consistent with increased mammography screening that year, and decreased thereafter. HRT use decreased from 13.2% in 2002 to 4.6% in 2014. The subtypes distribution of 7771 patients diagnosed with invasive breast cancer during 2007-2014 was: luminal A and B without HER2 over-expression (HR+/HER2-), 69.7%; Luminal B with HER2 over-expression (HR+/HER2+), 8.9%; Hormone receptor-negative HER2 enriched (HR-/HER2+), 5.4%; triple negative (HR-/HER2-), 10.0%; unknown, 6.0%. Overall, in women age ≥45 diagnosed with invasive breast cancer, 76-86% did not have HRT exposure vs 14-24% who were current (within 1 year before the breast cancer diagnosis), recent (within 2-5 years), or past users (>5 years). Current/recent HRT use was statistically significantly higher in luminal vs non-luminal/unknown breast cancer subtypes (13.9% vs 8.9%, respectively; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our results show a decrease in breast cancer incidence that parallels the global and local decrease in HRT use. Yet, our results imply that current/recent HRT exposure may contribute to the incidence of luminal breast cancer tumors in particular. The magnitude of the effect supports findings from population-based studies.

Silicone breast implants and the risk of autoimmune/rheumatic disorders: a real-world analysis.

Objectives: Several epidemiological studies have investigated the link between silicone breast implants (SBIs) and autoimmune/rheumatic disorders, reporting inconsistent results. We aimed to evaluate the association between SBIs and the most clinically relevant autoimmune/rheumatic disorders using a large, population-based database. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, we used the computerized databases of Maccabi Healthcare Services (MHS), which include up to 20 years of data on 2 million members. Women with SBIs were identified by procedure and diagnosis codes, clinical breast examinations and mammography referrals. Autoimmune/rheumatic disorders were identified using the International Classification of Diseases 9th revision (ICD-9) codes. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A Cox's proportional hazards model was used to calculate the hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs among a subgroup of SBI recipients for whom the year of SBIs insertion was available. Results: We included 24 651 SBI recipients and 98 604 matched SBI-free women. The adjusted OR between SBIs and being diagnosed with any autoimmune/rheumatic disorders was 1.22 (95% CI 1.18-1.26). The strongest association with SBIs (OR > 1.5, p < 0.001) was recorded for Sjögren's syndrome, systemic sclerosis (SSc) and sarcoidosis (OR of 1.58, 1.63 and 1.98, respectively). Similar results were calculated when analysis was limited to women with no breast cancer history. A multivariable Cox regression model yielded a HR of 1.45 (95% CI 1.21-1.73) for being diagnosed with at least one autoimmune/rheumatic disorder in women with SBI compared with those without. Conclusions: SBIs seem to be associated with higher likelihood of autoimmune/rheumatic disorders diagnosis.

Characterization of adherence and persistence profile in a real-life population of patients treated with adalimumab.

AIMS: Published data on long-term adherence and persistence with adalimumab (Humira® ) in clinical practice are scarce and often limited to selected patient populations. This study assessed adherence with adalimumab across different indications and identified correlates and outcomes of poor adherence. METHODS: We analysed data originating from the electronic database of Maccabi Healthcare Services (MHS) that includes 2.1 million enrolees. We randomly selected patients with at least one dispense of adalimumab since it was included in the local health basket in Israel in 2008 until the end of 2013. Patients with the following indications (n = 1339) were included: Crohn's disease (CD), ulcerative colitis (UC), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PSA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and psoriasis. Adherence with therapy was assessed by the medication possession ratio (MPR) during the follow-up period. RESULTS: Good adherence (MPR ≥ 80%) was observed among 80% of study patients and was associated with lower risk for ≥1 hospitalization per year of follow-up (adjusted-OR = 1.94, 95% CI:1.15-3.28). Patients with AS and CD persisted on adalimumab therapy the most, reaching median use of 27.0 and 26.7 months, respectively. Half (52.4%) of the patients discontinued treatment during a mean (SD) follow-up of 3.07 (1.71) years. High socioeconomic status was associated with lower risk for discontinuation (adjusted-HR = 0.74; 0.60-0.91). UC and concomitant prednisolone use were associated with increased risk for treatment discontinuation (HR = 1.31; 1.00-1.72, and HR = 1.40; 1.17-1.68, respectively). CONCLUSION: Our results indicate encouraging persistence and adherence with adalimumab of patients with inflammatory conditions.