Patients' perceptions of gene expression profiling in breast cancer treatment decisions

被引:23
作者
Bombard, Y. [1 ,2 ]
Rozmovits, L.
Trudeau, M. E. [1 ,3 ]
Leighl, N. B. [1 ,4 ]
Deal, K. [5 ]
Marshall, D. A. [6 ,7 ,8 ]
机构
[1] Univ Toronto, Toronto, ON M5B 1W8, Canada
[2] St Michaels Hosp, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Inst, Toronto, ON M5B 1W8, Canada
[3] Sunnybrook Hlth Sci Ctr, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada
[4] Princess Margaret Canc Ctr, Div Med Oncol, Toronto, ON, Canada
[5] McMaster Univ, DeGroote Sch Business, Hamilton, ON, Canada
[6] McMaster Univ, Dept Clin Epidemiol & Biostat, Hamilton, ON, Canada
[7] St Josephs Healthcare, Hamilton, ON, Canada
[8] Univ Calgary, Dept Community Hlth Sci, Calgary, AB, Canada
关键词
Gene expression profiling; breast cancer; patient perceptions; chemotherapy; decision-making; genomics; risk recurrence; personalized medicine; RECURRENCE SCORE; ASSAY; IMPACT; RECOMMENDATIONS; CHEMOTHERAPY; KNOWLEDGE; SIGNATURE;
D O I
10.3747/co.21.1524
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Introduction Determining the likely benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer patients depends on estimating baseline recurrence risk. Gene expression profile (GEP) testing of tumours informs risk prediction, but evidence of its clinical utility is limited. We explored patient perceptions of GEP testing and the impact of those perceptions on chemotherapy decisions. Methods We conducted one focus group (n = 4) and individual interviews (n = 24) with patients who used GEP testing, recruited through clinics at two hospitals in Ontario. Data were analyzed using content analysis and constant comparison techniques. Results Patients' understanding of GEP testing was variable, and misapprehensions were common. Patients valued the test because it provided them with certainty amidst confusion, with options and a sense of empowerment, and with personalized, authoritative information. They commonly believed that the test was better and fundamentally different from other clinical tests, attributing to it unique power and truth-value. This kind of "magical thinking" was derived from an amplified perception of the test's validity and patients' need for reassurance about their treatment choices. Despite misperceptions or magical thinking, GEP was widely considered to be the deciding factor in treatment decisions. Conclusions Patients tend to overestimate the truth-value of GEP testing based on misperceptions of its validity. Our results identify a need to better support patient understanding of the test and its limitations. Findings illustrate the deep emotional investment patients make in GEP test results and the impact of that investment on their treatment decisions.
引用
收藏
页码:E203 / E211
页数:9
相关论文
共 29 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2008, CAN CANC STAT 2008
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2021, PLYM M PA
[3]   Does oncotype DX recurrence score affect the management of patients with early-stage breast cancer? [J].
Asad, Juhi ;
Jacobson, Allyson F. ;
Estabrook, Alison ;
Smith, Sharon Rosenbaum ;
Boolbol, Susan K. ;
Feldman, Sheldon M. ;
Osborne, Michael P. ;
Boachie-Adjei, Kwadwo ;
Twardzik, Wendy ;
Tartter, Paul I. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2008, 196 (04) :527-529
[4]   Recommendations from the EGAPP Working Group: can tumor gene expression in patients with breast cancer? [J].
Berg, Alfred O. ;
Grp, E. G. A. P. P. Working ;
Armstrong, Katrina ;
Botkin, Jeffrey ;
Calonge, Ned ;
Haddow, James ;
Hayes, Maxine ;
Kaye, Celia ;
Phillips, Kathryn A. ;
Piper, Margaret ;
Richards, Carolyn Sue ;
Scott, Joan A. ;
Strickland, Ora L. ;
Teutsch, Steven .
GENETICS IN MEDICINE, 2009, 11 (01) :66-73
[5]   Translating Genomics in Cancer Care [J].
Bombard, Yvonne ;
Bach, Peter B. ;
Offit, Kenneth .
JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL COMPREHENSIVE CANCER NETWORK, 2013, 11 (11) :1343-1353
[6]   When genomic and standard test results diverge: implications for breast cancer patients' preference for chemotherapy [J].
Brewer, Noel T. ;
Edwards, Alrick S. ;
O'Neill, Suzanne C. ;
Tzeng, Janice P. ;
Carey, Lisa A. ;
Rimer, Barbara K. .
BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2009, 117 (01) :25-29
[7]   Validation and clinical utility of a 70-gene prognostic signature for women with node-negative breast cancer [J].
Buyse, Marc ;
Loi, Sherene ;
van't Veer, Laura ;
Viale, Giuseppe ;
Delorenzi, Mauro ;
Glas, Annuska M. ;
d'Assignies, Mahasti Saghatchian ;
Bergh, Jonas ;
Lidereau, Rosette ;
Ellis, Paul ;
Harris, Adrian ;
Bogaerts, Jan ;
Therasse, Patrick ;
Floore, Arno ;
Amakrane, Mohamed ;
Piette, Fanny ;
Rutgers, Emiel ;
Sotiriou, Christos ;
Cardoso, Fatima ;
Piccart, Martine J. .
JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2006, 98 (17) :1183-1192
[8]   American society of clinical oncology 2007 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast cancer [J].
Harris, Lyndsay ;
Fritsche, Herbert ;
Mennel, Robert ;
Norton, Larry ;
Ravdin, Peter ;
Taube, Sheila ;
Somerfield, Mark R. ;
Hayes, Daniel F. ;
Bast, Robert C., Jr. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2007, 25 (33) :5287-5312
[9]   The Influence of a Gene Expression Profile on Breast Cancer Decisions [J].
Henry, Leonard R. ;
Stojadinovic, Alexander ;
Swain, Sandra M. ;
Prindiville, Sheila ;
Cordes, Rose ;
Soballe, Peter W. .
JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2009, 99 (06) :319-323
[10]   Retention and use of breast cancer recurrence risk information from genomic tests: The role of health literacy [J].
Lillie, Sarah E. ;
Brewer, Noel T. ;
O'Neill, Suzanne C. ;
Morrill, Edward F. ;
Dees, E. Claire ;
Carey, Lisa A. ;
Rimer, Barbara K. .
CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION, 2007, 16 (02) :249-255