↓ Skip to main content

Investigating racial disparities in use of NK1 receptor antagonists to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting among women with breast cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
Title
Investigating racial disparities in use of NK1 receptor antagonists to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting among women with breast cancer
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, March 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10549-016-3747-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Devon K. Check, Katherine E. Reeder-Hayes, Ethan M. Basch, Leah L. Zullig, Morris Weinberger, Stacie B. Dusetzina

Abstract

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a major concern for cancer patients and, if uncontrolled, can seriously compromise quality of life (QOL) and other treatment outcomes. Because of the expense of antiemetic medications used to prevent CINV (particularly oral medications filled through Medicare Part D), disparities in their use may exist. We used 2006-2012 SEER-Medicare data to evaluate the use of neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists (NK1s), a potent class of antiemetics, among black and white women initiating highly emetogenic chemotherapy for the treatment of early-stage breast cancer. We used modified Poisson regression to assess the relationship between race and (1) any NK1 use, (2) oral NK1 (aprepitant) use, and (3) intravenous NK1 (fosaprepitant) use. We report adjusted risk ratios (aRR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI). The study included 1130 women. We observed racial disparities in use of any NK1 (aRR: 0.68, 95 % CI 0.51-0.91) and in use of oral aprepitant specifically (aRR: 0.54, 95 % CI 0.35-0.83). We did not observe disparities in intravenous fosaprepitant use. After controlling for variables related to socioeconomic status, disparities in NK1 and aprepitant use were reduced but not eliminated. We found racial disparities in women's use of oral NK1s for the prevention of CINV. These disparities may be partly explained by racial differences in socioeconomic status, which may translate into differential ability to afford the medication.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Egypt 1 3%
Unknown 38 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Researcher 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 5%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 15 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 16 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 April 2016.
All research outputs
#13,972,009
of 22,856,968 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#3,018
of 4,659 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#152,898
of 299,532 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#30
of 80 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,856,968 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,659 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 299,532 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 80 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.