Ann H Partridge1,2, Karen Sepucha3,4, Anne O'Neill5, Kathy D Miller6, Emily Baker5, Chau T Dang7, Donald W Northfelt8, George W Sledge6,9, Bryan P Schneider6. 1. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA, 02215, USA. ann_partridge@dfci.harvard.edu. 2. Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. ann_partridge@dfci.harvard.edu. 3. Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 4. Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 5. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA, 02215, USA. 6. Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Cancer Center, Indianapolis, IN, USA. 7. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. 8. Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA. 9. Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aimed to examine how biomarker information would impact patients' preferences and physicians' recommendations for adjuvant breast cancer therapy. METHODS: At the 18-month follow-up, participants in a large, double-blind randomized controlled trial of adjuvant chemotherapy with bevacizumab or placebo (E5103) were surveyed about their preferred treatment (either chemotherapy A alone or chemotherapy A+B) in two hypothetical scenarios: (1) without biomarker information; and (2) after learning that they tested positive for a "B-receptor" which modestly increased both the benefit and toxicity expected with chemotherapyA+B. We performed a cross-sectional analysis of the prospectively collected survey data and used the McNemar's test to examine changes in treatment preferences. A one-time survey of clinical investigators who enrolled patients on the trial evaluated physician recommendations in response to the same biomarker information. RESULTS:439 patients completed both scenarios on 18-month survey. Most participants preferred A+B in both scenario 1 and 2 (77 and 76% respectively). The increase in benefit and toxicity associated with the positive biomarker information in scenario 2 led 60/439 (14%) of patients to switch their treatment preference. The corresponding physician survey revealed that most physicians chose regimen A+B in scenario 1 (77%), and moreso after the biomarker information was available in scenario 2 (84%). CONCLUSIONS: Information about a positive biomarker indicating increased benefit and toxicity from additional chemotherapy did not change many participants' preferred treatment. The majority preferred the most effective course in both scenarios. Similarly, most investigators discounted increased toxicity and valued increased benefit. Parent Trial Registration: NCT00433511.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: This study aimed to examine how biomarker information would impact patients' preferences and physicians' recommendations for adjuvant breast cancer therapy. METHODS: At the 18-month follow-up, participants in a large, double-blind randomized controlled trial of adjuvant chemotherapy with bevacizumab or placebo (E5103) were surveyed about their preferred treatment (either chemotherapy A alone or chemotherapy A+B) in two hypothetical scenarios: (1) without biomarker information; and (2) after learning that they tested positive for a "B-receptor" which modestly increased both the benefit and toxicity expected with chemotherapy A+B. We performed a cross-sectional analysis of the prospectively collected survey data and used the McNemar's test to examine changes in treatment preferences. A one-time survey of clinical investigators who enrolled patients on the trial evaluated physician recommendations in response to the same biomarker information. RESULTS: 439 patients completed both scenarios on 18-month survey. Most participants preferred A+B in both scenario 1 and 2 (77 and 76% respectively). The increase in benefit and toxicity associated with the positive biomarker information in scenario 2 led 60/439 (14%) of patients to switch their treatment preference. The corresponding physician survey revealed that most physicians chose regimen A+B in scenario 1 (77%), and moreso after the biomarker information was available in scenario 2 (84%). CONCLUSIONS: Information about a positive biomarker indicating increased benefit and toxicity from additional chemotherapy did not change many participants' preferred treatment. The majority preferred the most effective course in both scenarios. Similarly, most investigators discounted increased toxicity and valued increased benefit. Parent Trial Registration: NCT00433511.
Entities:
Keywords:
Adjuvant therapy; Biomarkers; Breast cancer; Patient preferences; Risk; Toxicity
Authors: Lyndsay N Harris; Nofisat Ismaila; Lisa M McShane; Fabrice Andre; Deborah E Collyar; Ana M Gonzalez-Angulo; Elizabeth H Hammond; Nicole M Kuderer; Minetta C Liu; Robert G Mennel; Catherine Van Poznak; Robert C Bast; Daniel F Hayes Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2016-02-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Bryan P Schneider; Molin Wang; Milan Radovich; George W Sledge; Sunil Badve; Ann Thor; David A Flockhart; Bradley Hancock; Nancy Davidson; Julie Gralow; Maura Dickler; Edith A Perez; Melody Cobleigh; Tamara Shenkier; Susan Edgerton; Kathy D Miller Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-10-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Noel T Brewer; Alrick S Edwards; Suzanne C O'Neill; Janice P Tzeng; Lisa A Carey; Barbara K Rimer Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2008-09-11 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Bryan P Schneider; Robert J Gray; Milan Radovich; Fei Shen; Gail Vance; Lang Li; Guanglong Jiang; Kathy D Miller; Julie R Gralow; Maura N Dickler; Melody A Cobleigh; Edith A Perez; Tamara N Shenkier; Kirsten Vang Nielsen; Sven Müller; Ann Thor; George W Sledge; Joseph A Sparano; Nancy E Davidson; Sunil S Badve Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2013-01-22 Impact factor: 12.531
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
Authors: Laura E Leggett; Diane L Lorenzetti; Tom Noseworthy; Simran Tiwana; Gail Mackean; Fiona Clement Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2014-03-05 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Rafeek A Yusuf; Deevakar Rogith; Shelly R A Hovick; Susan K Peterson; Allison M Burton-Chase; Bryan M Fellman; Yisheng Li; Carolyn McKinney; Elmer V Bernstam; Funda Meric-Bernstam Journal: Cancer Date: 2014-09-10 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Kathy D Miller; Anne O'Neill; William Gradishar; Timothy J Hobday; Lori J Goldstein; Ingrid A Mayer; Stuart Bloom; Adam M Brufsky; Amye J Tevaarwerk; Joseph A Sparano; Nguyet Anh Le-Lindqwister; Carolyn B Hendricks; Donald W Northfelt; Chau T Dang; George W Sledge Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-07-24 Impact factor: 44.544