Evaluation of endocrine therapy and patients preferences in early breast cancer: results of Elena study.

PURPOSE: The development of the adjuvant therapy requires that clinicians and patients should discuss the magnitude of benefit of treatment for individual patient, estimating the pros and cons and the personal preferences. The aim of the present study was to determine the preferences of women treated with adjuvant hormonal therapy (HT) for breast cancer. METHODS: The analyses were conducted into three different groups of early breast cancer patients to evaluate the survival benefit needed to make treatment worthwhile before starting HT (A), after a few months from the beginning (B) and after several years of HT (C). The questionnaires, showing hypothetical scenarios based on potential survival times and rates without HT, were used to determine the lowest gains women judged necessary to make the treatment worthwhile. RESULTS: A total of 452 patients were included in the study: 149 in group A, 150 in group B and 153 in group C. In group C, 65% of patients were receiving HT with aromatase inhibitors (with or without a LHRH analogue). In the groups A, B, C 8%, 20% and 26%, respectively, received adjuvant chemotherapy. Overall, 355 women (79%) had children. The responses were quite similar between the three groups. A median gain of 10 years was judged necessary to make adjuvant HT worthwhile based on the hypothetical scenario of untreated mean survival time of 5 and 15 years. Median gain of 20% more women surviving was judged necessary to make adjuvant HT worthwhile based on an untreated 5-year survival rate expectation of 60%. Cognitive dysfunction was considered the side effect least compatible with the continuation of treatment in all three groups. CONCLUSIONS: This is a large study of patient preferences on HT. Compared with other studies with similar design, the patients included in the present study required larger benefits to make adjuvant therapy worthwhile.