In a new study published online today by Clinical Therapeutics, researchers from Adheris, Inc., an inVentiv Health company, found that patients new to chronic disease medication face the greatest risk of medication discontinuation during the first 30 days of treatment—with rates of discontinuation ranging from 29.6% to 78.1%. Unlike most previous adherence studies, this robust study looked at the rate of discontinuation across multiple medication classes. A copy of this study can be downloaded by clicking here.

Medication discontinuation among 2.17 million patients prescribed agents for asthma, glaucoma, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis, breast cancer, and high cholesterol was measured over one year following the initial prescription. Patients considered new to therapy (naïve patients) included both newly diagnosed patients and patients restarting treatment after a lapse of 6 or more months.

Medication inexperience and patient age were strongly and more consistently associated with the risk of discontinuation than co-payment, income and sex in all the medication classes investigated. Overall rates of discontinuation for naïve patients were 12 times greater in the first month of treatment than during any subsequent month. Discontinuation was most rapid among naïve patients prescribed asthma inhalers, asthma pills, and glaucoma drops; intermediate for patients prescribed medications for breast cancer, diabetes (insulin), and osteoporosis; and least rapid for patients prescribed medications for cardiovascular illness, high cholesterol, and oral medications for diabetes. Three of the four medication classes most likely to be discontinued were all non-oral medications (inhaled steroids, glaucoma drops, and insulin injections).

Across all medication classes studied, patients who are aged 35 or younger faced a risk of discontinuation 19% to 196% higher than patients aged 65 or older. Of note, patients receiving medications for breast cancer who were less than 35 years faced almost three times the risk of discontinuation as did patients older than 65 years.

According to lead author Mark Vanelli, MD, MHS, Chief Medical Officer at Adheris and Harvard Medical School faculty member, “This study has clear and practical implications for improving routine clinical care and helping reduce healthcare costs. It pinpoints the need to provide patients who are new to medication or resuming medication after a lapse, with better education and follow-up during the first 30 days of treatment irrespective of the medication class prescribed.”

A healthy, balanced diet – it’s every parent’s goal for their child. But a new survey finds that when it comes to getting kids to eat healthy, moms and dads have their plates full.

According to the Ronzoni Smart Taste Family Table Survey nearly half of all parents (47%) of kids ages 3-12 have a difficult time feeding them nutritious, healthy foods. Older moms (ages 45-54) have the hardest time (57%). Parents from the western part of the country seem to have an easier time than those in other regions. Dads find it slightly more difficult than moms to interest their children in healthy meals (49% vs. 45%). Only 26% of parents find it very easy to feed their kids healthy meals.

There are many reasons why kids resist nutritious options, the survey finds. Parents say taste (32%) is by far the biggest reason healthy foods are rejected. Looks (10%) and texture (9%) follow.

And which good-for-you foods rank among the most offensive to children? Sardines top the list at 63%, followed by liver (59%) and beets (50%). Coming in closely behind are Brussels sprouts (49%) and okra (48%). Among the least offensive foods are carrots, with only 15% of parents saying their children find fault with them.

To dramatize the everyday challenges that moms and dads have in getting their kids to eat healthy foods, Ronzoni Smart Taste has created the video “Supermom.” The piece depicts the stunts one health-conscious mom goes through to sway her skeptical kids at the family table.

Harris Interactive® fielded the Ronzoni Smart Taste Family Table study on behalf of Ronzoni from October 29 – November 2, 2009 via its QuickQuerySM online omnibus service, interviewing a nationwide sample of 2,392 U.S. adults ages 18+, of whom 330 are the parent/legal guardian of a child/children ages 3-12. This online survey is not based on a probability sample and therefore no estimate of theoretical sampling error can be calculated. For complete survey methodology, including weighting variables, please contact Kristen Ryan.

Recent changes to the national mammography guidelines has led to mass confusion and justifiable outrage among women who are worried that future generations of women will lose access to a critical tool that saved their life, according to Ambassador Nancy G. Brinker, founder of Susan G. Komen for the Cure and the global leader of the breast cancer movement. Brinker told an audience at the National Press Club this afternoon that we must improve access to screening today and we must improve the technology for the future.

“We have worked so hard to build public trust and to urge people to get screened. And now they hear that maybe they shouldn’t bother. That is dangerous,” said Brinker. “Let me say this as clearly as I can: mammography saves lives, even this report says that. Keep doing what you are doing. And always, talk with your doctor.” Brinker also noted that Komen for the Cure was not changing its guidelines, continuing to recommend annual mammograms beginning at age 40.

Brinker noted that breast cancer is still the leading killer of women between the ages of 40 and 60, and that 1 in 8 women in the U.S. will be diagnosed with breast cancer in her lifetime. Yet one-third of women – 23 million – are not getting the most basic screening and mammography today.

Noting that mammography, while the best currently available screening tool, is not perfect, Brinker called on the government and the scientific community to close the technology gap and develop tools that are more predictive, available and personal, but are less expensive and aggressive.

“I call on the President and Congress to report to the American people on investments they’ve made in screening technology and to commit to us that they will redouble their efforts to create technology that is more specific, more accessible and with more sensitivity,” said Brinker. “If we can make the technology better, we can avoid having this discussion five or ten years from now.”