Literature DB >> 23670130

Shared decision-making in metastatic breast cancer: discrepancy between the expected prolongation of life and treatment efficacy between patients and physicians, and influencing factors.

Michael P Lux1, Christian M Bayer, Christian R Loehberg, Peter A Fasching, Michael G Schrauder, Mayada R Bani, Lothar Häberle, Anne Engel, Katharina Heusinger, Thorsten Tänzer, Dragan Radosavac, Anton Scharl, Ingo Bauerfeind, Judith Gesslein, Hilde Schulte, Brigitte Overbeck-Schulte, Matthias W Beckmann, Alexander Hein.   

Abstract

Treatment decisions in oncology are based on a balance between the efficacy of therapy and its side effects. Patients with metastases and patients with a limited prognosis are a particular challenge, since communication about the disease situation and the expected therapeutic benefit is difficult not only for patients, but also for physicians. The aim of this study was therefore to compare the benefits expected of therapy by patients and physicians. Questionnaires were sent to 9,000 breast cancer patients and to 6,938 physicians. The questionnaires described 10 cases of breast cancer in the metastatic setting. The patients and physicians were asked to state the treatment benefit they would require to decide for the therapy options chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, antibody therapy, radiotherapy, and bisphosphonates. Additionally, the participants provided data on patient and physician characteristics. Expected treatment benefits were compared between patients and physicians, and influencing factors that modified the expected benefit were identified. Patients expected much greater benefits from the therapies offered than the physicians. For all treatment modalities, about 50 % or more of patients expected more than a 12-month increase in overall survival from all therapies. Among the doctors, this proportion ranged from 7 to 30 %. Among patients, previous experience of side effects and having young children in the family were the strongest influencing factors. Among the doctors, age and level of education had a strong influence on the expected prognostic improvement to indicate a therapy option. As expectations of treatment differ greatly between patients and doctors, a structured approach to solving this conflict is required. There appear to be some indicators that might help address the problem, such as the physicians' level of training and experience and the patients' specific social circumstances.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23670130     DOI: 10.1007/s10549-013-2557-3

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


  12 in total

1.  Chemotherapy and targeted therapy for women with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (or unknown) advanced breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline.

Authors:  Ann H Partridge; R Bryan Rumble; Lisa A Carey; Steven E Come; Nancy E Davidson; Angelo Di Leo; Julie Gralow; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Beverly Moy; Douglas Yee; Shelley B Brundage; Michael A Danso; Maggie Wilcox; Ian E Smith
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-09-02       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Goals and Adverse Effects: Rate of Concordance Between Patients and Providers.

Authors:  Katharine E Duckworth; Robert Morrell; Gregory B Russell; Bayard Powell; Mollie Canzona; Stephanie Lichiello; Olivia Riffle; Aimee Tolbert; Richard McQuellon
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2019-07-29       Impact factor: 3.840

Review 3.  Systemic therapy for patients with advanced human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline.

Authors:  Sharon H Giordano; Sarah Temin; Jeffrey J Kirshner; Sarat Chandarlapaty; Jennie R Crews; Nancy E Davidson; Francisco J Esteva; Ana M Gonzalez-Angulo; Ian Krop; Jennifer Levinson; Nancy U Lin; Shanu Modi; Debra A Patt; Edith A Perez; Jane Perlmutter; Naren Ramakrishna; Eric P Winer
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-05-05       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Prospective Decision Analysis Study of Clinical Genomic Testing in Metastatic Breast Cancer: Impact on Outcomes and Patient Perceptions.

Authors:  Daniel G Stover; Raquel E Reinbolt; Elizabeth J Adams; Sarah Asad; Katlyn Tolliver; Mahmoud Abdel-Rasoul; Cynthia D Timmers; Susan Gillespie; James L Chen; Siraj Mahamed Ali; Katharine A Collier; Mathew A Cherian; Anne M Noonan; Sagar Sardesai; Jeffrey VanDeusen; Robert Wesolowski; Nicole Williams; Clara N Lee; Charles L Shapiro; Erin R Macrae; Bhuvaneswari Ramaswamy; Maryam B Lustberg
Journal:  JCO Precis Oncol       Date:  2019-11-18

5.  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

Review 6.  The availability and effectiveness of tools supporting shared decision making in metastatic breast cancer care: a review.

Authors:  Inge Spronk; Jako S Burgers; François G Schellevis; Liesbeth M van Vliet; Joke C Korevaar
Journal:  BMC Palliat Care       Date:  2018-05-11       Impact factor: 3.234

Review 7.  Psychosocial aspects and life project disruption in young women diagnosed with metastatic hormone-sensitive HER2-negative breast cancer.

Authors:  Mireia Margelí Vila; Sonia Del Barco Berron; Miguel Gil-Gil; Cristian Ochoa-Arnedo; Rafael Villanueva Vázquez
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2020-06-26       Impact factor: 4.380

8.  Terminal Versus Advanced Cancer: Do the General Population and Health Care Professionals Share a Common Language?

Authors:  Sang Hyuck Kim; Dong Wook Shin; So Young Kim; Hyung Kook Yang; Eunjoo Nam; Hyun Jung Jho; Eunmi Ahn; Be Long Cho; Keeho Park; Jong-Hyock Park
Journal:  Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2015-08-10       Impact factor: 4.679

Review 9.  Empowering patients in decision-making in radiation oncology - can we do better?

Authors:  Michelle Leech; Matthew S Katz; Joanna Kazmierska; Julie McCrossin; Sandra Turner
Journal:  Mol Oncol       Date:  2020-04-13       Impact factor: 6.603

10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.