Literature DB >> 22933029

Shared decision-making in breast cancer: discrepancy between the treatment efficacy required by patients and by physicians.

Falk C Thiel1, Michael G Schrauder, Peter A Fasching, Christian R Löhberg, Mayada R Bani, Lothar Häberle, Thorsten Tänzer, Dragan Radosavac, Anton Scharl, Ingo Bauerfeind, Judith Gesslein, Hilde Schulte, Brigitte Overbeck-Schulte, Matthias W Beckmann, Michael P Lux.   

Abstract

Several factors can influence individual perceptions of the expected benefit of recommended adjuvant treatment for breast cancer. This study investigated differences between patients and physicians with regard to the required efficacy of treatment and the factors influencing patients' and physicians' willingness to accept different therapeutic options. A total of 9,000 questionnaires were distributed to patients with breast cancer, and 6,938 questionnaires were distributed to physicians treating breast cancer patients. The patients were asked for personal information and about their medical history and experiences during treatment. The physicians were asked about personal information and their specialty and work environment. The treatment efficacy required by the two groups was assessed using six virtual cases of breast cancer and the treatment regimens proposed, with specific benefits and side effects. A total of 2,155 patients and 527 physicians responded to the questionnaire (return rates of 23.9 and 7.6 %). Significantly different ratings between patients and physicians with regard to the expected benefit of certain treatment options were observed. The differences were noted not only for chemotherapy but also for antihormonal and antibody treatments. Whereas physicians had a quite realistic view of the expected treatment benefits, the patients' expectations were varied. Approximately one-fifth of the patients were willing to accept treatment regimens even with marginal anticipated benefits, whereas one-third required unrealistic treatment benefits. Several influencing factors that were significantly associated with the quality rating of treatment regimens in the groups of breast cancer patients and physicians were also identified. In contrast to physicians, many breast cancer patients required treatment benefits beyond what was realistically possible, although a large group of patients were also satisfied with minimal benefits. Individual factors were also identified in both groups that significantly influence thresholds for accepting adjuvant treatment, independently of risk estimates and therapy guidelines.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22933029     DOI: 10.1007/s10549-012-2218-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat        ISSN: 0167-6806            Impact factor:   4.872


  7 in total

1.  Consensus in controversy: The modified Delphi method applied to Gynecologic Oncology practice.

Authors:  David E Cohn; Laura J Havrilesky; Kathryn Osann; Joseph Lipscomb; Susie Hsieh; Joan L Walker; Alexi A Wright; Ronald D Alvarez; Beth Y Karlan; Robert E Bristow; Paul A DiSilvestro; Mark T Wakabayashi; Robert Morgan; Dana B Mukamel; Lari Wenzel
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2015-07-12       Impact factor: 5.482

2.  Cancer patients' preferences for therapy decisions can be grouped into categories and separated by demographic factors.

Authors:  Jana Arnholdt; Jörg Haier
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-03-30       Impact factor: 4.553

3.  Assessing the Clinical Benefit of Systemic Adjuvant Therapies for Early Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Volker Möbus; Susanne Hell; Marcus Schmidt
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2017-10-26       Impact factor: 2.915

4.  Update Breast Cancer 2018 (Part 2) - Advanced Breast Cancer, Quality of Life and Prevention.

Authors:  Andreas Schneeweiss; Michael P Lux; Wolfgang Janni; Andreas D Hartkopf; Naiba Nabieva; Florin-Andrei Taran; Friedrich Overkamp; Hans-Christian Kolberg; Peyman Hadji; Hans Tesch; Achim Wöckel; Johannes Ettl; Diana Lüftner; Markus Wallwiener; Volkmar Müller; Matthias W Beckmann; Erik Belleville; Diethelm Wallwiener; Sara Y Brucker; Florian Schütz; Peter A Fasching; Tanja N Fehm
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2018-03-21       Impact factor: 2.915

5.  Patient, Caregiver, and Nurse Preferences for Treatments for Bone Metastases from Solid Tumors.

Authors:  Yi Qian; Jorge Arellano; A Brett Hauber; Ateesha F Mohamed; Juan Marcos Gonzalez; Guy Hechmati; Francesca Gatta; Stacey Harrelson; Cynthia Campbell-Baird
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 3.883

6.  Using Probability for Pathological Complete Response (pCR) as a Decision Support Marker for Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in HER2 Negative Breast Cancer Patients - a Survey Among Physicians.

Authors:  Paul Gass; Michael Untch; Volkmar Müller; Volker Möbus; Christoph Thomssen; Lothar Häberle; Ramona Erber; Alexander Hein; Sebastian Michael Jud; Michael P Lux; Carolin C Hack; Arndt Hartmann; Hans-Christian Kolberg; Johannes Ettl; Diana Lüftner; Christian Jackisch; Matthias W Beckmann; Wolfgang Janni; Andreas Schneeweiss; Peter A Fasching; Naiba Nabieva
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2018-07-25       Impact factor: 2.915

7.  Adaptation and qualitative evaluation of encounter decision aids in breast cancer care.

Authors:  Pola Hahlweg; Isabell Witzel; Volkmar Müller; Glyn Elwyn; Marie-Anne Durand; Isabelle Scholl
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2019-01-16       Impact factor: 2.344

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.