Patient perceptions around the use of clinico-pathologic and genomic tools in the management of early breast cancer.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Pub Date : 2025-11-01 Epub Date: 2025-08-21 DOI:10.1007/s10549-025-07797-1
Ana-Alicia Beltran-Bless, Deanna Saunders, Lucas Clemons, Igor Machado, Gregory Pond, Brian Hutton, Khaled El-Emam, Sharon McGee, Terry L Ng, Marie-France Savard, John Hilton, Moira Rushton, Gail Larocque, Sabine Siesling, Andreanne Leblanc, Lisa Vandermeer, Mark Clemons
{"title":"Patient perceptions around the use of clinico-pathologic and genomic tools in the management of early breast cancer.","authors":"Ana-Alicia Beltran-Bless, Deanna Saunders, Lucas Clemons, Igor Machado, Gregory Pond, Brian Hutton, Khaled El-Emam, Sharon McGee, Terry L Ng, Marie-France Savard, John Hilton, Moira Rushton, Gail Larocque, Sabine Siesling, Andreanne Leblanc, Lisa Vandermeer, Mark Clemons","doi":"10.1007/s10549-025-07797-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Clinico-pathologic (including nomograms) and genomic tools are widely used to determine prognosis and predict benefit from treatment in early breast cancer (EBC). However, little is reported on patient perceptions of these tools and whether they enhance understanding of their individual risk of recurrence or benefits from therapy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with EBC were surveyed to evaluate the use of prognostic/predictive tools in clinical practice and their self-reported recurrence risk. Their actual risk of local, contralateral and distant recurrence was estimated using the INFLUENCE 2.0 tool. Information was also collected on key aspects that patients wanted these tools to address, as well as the anticipated benefits that would make receiving chemotherapy worthwhile from their perspective.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Completed surveys were received from 210 patients. Despite the use of NHS PREDICT 2.1 in 50% (105/210) and Oncotype DX in 10.9% (23/210) of patients, only 26% (45/210) stated they knew such a test had been performed. There was a mild association between patient self-assessment of distant recurrence risk and their actual risk as per INFLUENCE 2.0. When asked to rank what they wanted from prediction tools, patients identified chance of metastases (36.1%, 56/155) and chance of being disease free (31.3%, 46/147) as most important. Patients would consider chemotherapy if the survival benefit was ≥ 1% (31, 17.7%), 2-5% (23, 13.3%), 5-10% (24, 13.7%), ≥ 10% (36, 20.6%). These thresholds for benefit were significantly lower for patients who had received chemotherapy compared with those who had not.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Despite the widespread use of prognostic and predictive tools, patients often appeared unaware that one had been used. This may in part explain the lack of relationship between self-perceived and actual risk of disease recurrence.</p>","PeriodicalId":9133,"journal":{"name":"Breast Cancer Research and Treatment","volume":"214 1","pages":"87-99"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Breast Cancer Research and Treatment","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-025-07797-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Clinico-pathologic (including nomograms) and genomic tools are widely used to determine prognosis and predict benefit from treatment in early breast cancer (EBC). However, little is reported on patient perceptions of these tools and whether they enhance understanding of their individual risk of recurrence or benefits from therapy.

Methods: Patients with EBC were surveyed to evaluate the use of prognostic/predictive tools in clinical practice and their self-reported recurrence risk. Their actual risk of local, contralateral and distant recurrence was estimated using the INFLUENCE 2.0 tool. Information was also collected on key aspects that patients wanted these tools to address, as well as the anticipated benefits that would make receiving chemotherapy worthwhile from their perspective.

Results: Completed surveys were received from 210 patients. Despite the use of NHS PREDICT 2.1 in 50% (105/210) and Oncotype DX in 10.9% (23/210) of patients, only 26% (45/210) stated they knew such a test had been performed. There was a mild association between patient self-assessment of distant recurrence risk and their actual risk as per INFLUENCE 2.0. When asked to rank what they wanted from prediction tools, patients identified chance of metastases (36.1%, 56/155) and chance of being disease free (31.3%, 46/147) as most important. Patients would consider chemotherapy if the survival benefit was ≥ 1% (31, 17.7%), 2-5% (23, 13.3%), 5-10% (24, 13.7%), ≥ 10% (36, 20.6%). These thresholds for benefit were significantly lower for patients who had received chemotherapy compared with those who had not.

Conclusion: Despite the widespread use of prognostic and predictive tools, patients often appeared unaware that one had been used. This may in part explain the lack of relationship between self-perceived and actual risk of disease recurrence.

患者对早期乳腺癌管理中使用临床病理和基因组工具的看法。
目的:临床病理(包括nomogram)和基因组学工具被广泛用于确定早期乳腺癌(EBC)的预后和预测治疗的获益。然而,很少报道患者对这些工具的看法,以及它们是否提高了对个体复发风险的理解或从治疗中获益。方法:对EBC患者进行调查,评估预后/预测工具在临床实践中的使用情况及其自我报告的复发风险。使用INFLUENCE 2.0工具估计他们局部、对侧和远处复发的实际风险。还收集了患者希望这些工具解决的关键方面的信息,以及从他们的角度来看,接受化疗值得的预期益处。结果:210例患者完成问卷调查。尽管50%(105/210)的患者使用了NHS PREDICT 2.1, 10.9%(23/210)的患者使用了Oncotype DX,但只有26%(45/210)的患者表示他们知道已经进行了这样的检测。患者对远期复发风险的自我评估与实际风险之间存在轻度关联。当被要求对他们想要的预测工具进行排序时,患者认为转移的机会(36.1%,56/155)和无病的机会(31.3%,46/147)是最重要的。如果生存获益≥1%(31,17.7%),2-5%(23,13.3%),5-10%(24,13.7%),≥10%(36,20.6%),患者会考虑化疗。与未接受化疗的患者相比,接受化疗的患者的获益阈值明显较低。结论:尽管预后和预测工具广泛使用,但患者往往不知道已经使用了一种工具。这可能在一定程度上解释了自我认知和疾病复发的实际风险之间缺乏联系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
2.60%
发文量
342
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment provides the surgeon, radiotherapist, medical oncologist, endocrinologist, epidemiologist, immunologist or cell biologist investigating problems in breast cancer a single forum for communication. The journal creates a "market place" for breast cancer topics which cuts across all the usual lines of disciplines, providing a site for presenting pertinent investigations, and for discussing critical questions relevant to the entire field. It seeks to develop a new focus and new perspectives for all those concerned with breast cancer.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信