Literature DB >> 28490937

Uptake of a 21-gene expression assay in breast cancer practice: views of academic and community-based oncologists.

M A O'Brien1, S Dhesy-Thind2, C Charles3, M Hammond Mobilio4, N B Leighl5, E Grunfeld1,6.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Advances in personalized medicine have produced novel tests and treatment options for women with breast cancer. Relatively little is known about the process by which such tests are adopted into oncology practice. The objectives of the present study were to understand the experiences of medical oncologists with multigene expression profile (gep) tests, including their adoption into practice in early-stage breast cancer, and the perceptions of the oncologists about the influence of test results on treatment decision-making.
METHODS: We conducted a qualitative descriptive study involving interviews with medical oncologists from academic and community cancer centres or hospitals in 8 communities in Ontario. A 21-gene breast cancer assay was used as the example of gep testing. Qualitative analytic techniques were used to identify the main themes.
RESULTS: Of 28 oncologists who were approached, 21 (75%) participated in the study [median age: 43 years; 12 women (57%)]. Awareness and knowledge of gep testing were derived from several sources: international scientific meetings, participation in clinical studies, discussions with respected colleagues, and manufacturer-sponsored meetings. Oncologists observed that incorporating gep testing into their clinical practice resulted in several changes, including longer consultation times, second visits, and taking steps to minimize treatment delays. Oncologists expressed divergent opinions about the strength of evidence and added value of gep testing in guiding treatment decisions.
CONCLUSIONS: Incorporation of gep testing into clinical practice in early-stage breast cancer required oncologists to make changes to their usual routines. The opinions of oncologists about the quality of evidence underpinning the test affected how much weight they gave to test results in treatment decision-making.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast cancer; decision-making; gene expression profile testing

Year:  2017        PMID: 28490937      PMCID: PMC5407877          DOI: 10.3747/co.24.3395

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Oncol        ISSN: 1198-0052            Impact factor:   3.677


  21 in total

1.  Qualitative methods in research on healthcare quality.

Authors:  C Pope; P van Royen; R Baker
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2002-06

2.  Job stress and job satisfaction of cancer care workers.

Authors:  Eva Grunfeld; Louise Zitzelsberger; Marjorie Coristine; Timothy J Whelan; Faye Aspelund; William K Evans
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 3.894

3.  Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer.

Authors:  Soonmyung Paik; Gong Tang; Steven Shak; Chungyeul Kim; Joffre Baker; Wanseop Kim; Maureen Cronin; Frederick L Baehner; Drew Watson; John Bryant; Joseph P Costantino; Charles E Geyer; D Lawrence Wickerham; Norman Wolmark
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2006-05-23       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Addressing overtreatment in breast cancer: The doctors' dilemma.

Authors:  Steven J Katz; Monica Morrow
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2013-08-02       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Fighting overtreatment in adjuvant breast cancer therapy.

Authors:  Michael Gnant; Guenther G Steger
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2009-12-10       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer.

Authors:  Soonmyung Paik; Steven Shak; Gong Tang; Chungyeul Kim; Joffre Baker; Maureen Cronin; Frederick L Baehner; Michael G Walker; Drew Watson; Taesung Park; William Hiller; Edwin R Fisher; D Lawrence Wickerham; John Bryant; Norman Wolmark
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2004-12-10       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Gene expression profiling for guiding adjuvant chemotherapy decisions in women with early breast cancer: an evidence-based and economic analysis.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2010-12-01

8.  Conveying genomic recurrence risk estimates to patients with early-stage breast cancer: oncologist perspectives.

Authors:  Elizabeth Spellman; Nadiyah Sulayman; Susan Eggly; Beth N Peshkin; Claudine Isaacs; Marc D Schwartz; Suzanne C O'Neill
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2013-02-28       Impact factor: 3.894

9.  Prospective multicenter study of the impact of the 21-gene recurrence score assay on medical oncologist and patient adjuvant breast cancer treatment selection.

Authors:  Shelly S Lo; Patricia B Mumby; John Norton; Karen Rychlik; Jeffrey Smerage; Joseph Kash; Helen K Chew; Ellen R Gaynor; Daniel F Hayes; Andrew Epstein; Kathy S Albain
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-01-11       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Adoption of gene expression profile testing and association with use of chemotherapy among women with breast cancer.

Authors:  Michael J Hassett; Samuel M Silver; Melissa E Hughes; Douglas W Blayney; Stephen B Edge; James G Herman; Clifford A Hudis; P Kelly Marcom; Jane E Pettinga; David Share; Richard Theriault; Yu-Ning Wong; Jonathan L Vandergrift; Joyce C Niland; Jane C Weeks
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-05-14       Impact factor: 44.544

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.