在早期子宫内膜癌中实施分子分类的挑战--NRG 肿瘤学合作小组混合方法研究。

IF 6.1 2区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY
Cancer Pub Date : 2024-10-17 DOI:10.1002/cncr.35596
Elise M Wilson, Ruizhi Huang, Kristen D Jones, Ian S Hagemann, Sarah M Temkin, Jessica N McAlpine, Matthew A Powell, Maura M Kepper, Andrea R Hagemann
{"title":"在早期子宫内膜癌中实施分子分类的挑战--NRG 肿瘤学合作小组混合方法研究。","authors":"Elise M Wilson, Ruizhi Huang, Kristen D Jones, Ian S Hagemann, Sarah M Temkin, Jessica N McAlpine, Matthew A Powell, Maura M Kepper, Andrea R Hagemann","doi":"10.1002/cncr.35596","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Professional guidelines recommend molecular profiling for mismatch repair (MMR), p53, and polymerase epsilon (POLE) status in endometrial cancer (EC). However, adoption in the United States has not been documented, and barriers to the implementation of testing have not been described.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this mixed-methods study, implementation science frameworks were used to develop a quantitative survey. Gynecologic oncologists, medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, and pathologists affiliated with NRG Oncology programs were contacted through snowball sampling and were surveyed during 2022-2023. A subset of respondents was interviewed. Statistical and thematic analyses were performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At least 403 NRG Oncology-affiliated providers were contacted for the survey, and 107 (26.6%) responded. Greater than 90% of respondents perceived POLE, MMR, and p53 status as important for clinical care. MMR and p53 tests were perceived as easy to obtain, but only 24.2% of respondents reported that POLE testing was moderately or very easy to obtain. Respondents from academic sites reported better access to molecular classification and perceived greater importance of molecular classification compared with respondents from community sites. In thematic analysis of 13 qualitative interviews, cost concerns were reported as large barriers to testing. Interviewees reported a desire for prospective data to guide treatment selection based on classification results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although integrating molecular classification into standard pathologic reporting is recommended, and clinicians perceive molecular profiling in early stage EC as important, survey respondents noted significant implementation barriers. Implementation challenges that differ between community oncology and academic practice settings were identified. Strategies to improve equitable access to molecular classification of early stage EC are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":138,"journal":{"name":"Cancer","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Challenges in implementation of molecular classification in early stage endometrial cancer-An NRG Oncology cooperative group mixed-methods study.\",\"authors\":\"Elise M Wilson, Ruizhi Huang, Kristen D Jones, Ian S Hagemann, Sarah M Temkin, Jessica N McAlpine, Matthew A Powell, Maura M Kepper, Andrea R Hagemann\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/cncr.35596\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Professional guidelines recommend molecular profiling for mismatch repair (MMR), p53, and polymerase epsilon (POLE) status in endometrial cancer (EC). However, adoption in the United States has not been documented, and barriers to the implementation of testing have not been described.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this mixed-methods study, implementation science frameworks were used to develop a quantitative survey. Gynecologic oncologists, medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, and pathologists affiliated with NRG Oncology programs were contacted through snowball sampling and were surveyed during 2022-2023. A subset of respondents was interviewed. Statistical and thematic analyses were performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At least 403 NRG Oncology-affiliated providers were contacted for the survey, and 107 (26.6%) responded. Greater than 90% of respondents perceived POLE, MMR, and p53 status as important for clinical care. MMR and p53 tests were perceived as easy to obtain, but only 24.2% of respondents reported that POLE testing was moderately or very easy to obtain. Respondents from academic sites reported better access to molecular classification and perceived greater importance of molecular classification compared with respondents from community sites. In thematic analysis of 13 qualitative interviews, cost concerns were reported as large barriers to testing. Interviewees reported a desire for prospective data to guide treatment selection based on classification results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although integrating molecular classification into standard pathologic reporting is recommended, and clinicians perceive molecular profiling in early stage EC as important, survey respondents noted significant implementation barriers. Implementation challenges that differ between community oncology and academic practice settings were identified. Strategies to improve equitable access to molecular classification of early stage EC are needed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":138,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cancer\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.35596\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.35596","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:专业指南建议对子宫内膜癌(EC)的错配修复(MMR)、p53和聚合酶ε(POLE)状态进行分子分析。然而,在美国采用这种方法的情况尚无文献记载,实施检测的障碍也未作描述:在这项混合方法研究中,实施科学框架被用于制定一项定量调查。在 2022-2023 年期间,通过滚雪球式抽样联系了隶属于 NRG 肿瘤项目的妇科肿瘤学家、肿瘤内科医生、肿瘤放射科医生和病理学家,并对他们进行了调查。对部分受访者进行了访谈。调查进行了统计和专题分析:调查联系了至少 403 名 NRG 肿瘤科附属医疗机构,其中 107 人(26.6%)做出了回应。超过 90% 的受访者认为 POLE、MMR 和 p53 状态对临床治疗很重要。受访者认为 MMR 和 p53 检测很容易获得,但只有 24.2% 的受访者表示 POLE 检测比较容易或非常容易获得。与来自社区的受访者相比,来自学术机构的受访者更容易获得分子分类,并认为分子分类更为重要。在对 13 个定性访谈进行的专题分析中,成本问题被认为是检测的主要障碍。受访者表示希望获得前瞻性数据,以便根据分类结果指导治疗选择:尽管建议将分子分类纳入标准病理报告,临床医生也认为早期EC的分子谱分析非常重要,但调查对象指出了实施过程中的重大障碍。社区肿瘤学和学术实践环境的实施挑战有所不同。有必要制定相关策略,以提高早期EC分子分类的公平性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Challenges in implementation of molecular classification in early stage endometrial cancer-An NRG Oncology cooperative group mixed-methods study.

Background: Professional guidelines recommend molecular profiling for mismatch repair (MMR), p53, and polymerase epsilon (POLE) status in endometrial cancer (EC). However, adoption in the United States has not been documented, and barriers to the implementation of testing have not been described.

Methods: In this mixed-methods study, implementation science frameworks were used to develop a quantitative survey. Gynecologic oncologists, medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, and pathologists affiliated with NRG Oncology programs were contacted through snowball sampling and were surveyed during 2022-2023. A subset of respondents was interviewed. Statistical and thematic analyses were performed.

Results: At least 403 NRG Oncology-affiliated providers were contacted for the survey, and 107 (26.6%) responded. Greater than 90% of respondents perceived POLE, MMR, and p53 status as important for clinical care. MMR and p53 tests were perceived as easy to obtain, but only 24.2% of respondents reported that POLE testing was moderately or very easy to obtain. Respondents from academic sites reported better access to molecular classification and perceived greater importance of molecular classification compared with respondents from community sites. In thematic analysis of 13 qualitative interviews, cost concerns were reported as large barriers to testing. Interviewees reported a desire for prospective data to guide treatment selection based on classification results.

Conclusions: Although integrating molecular classification into standard pathologic reporting is recommended, and clinicians perceive molecular profiling in early stage EC as important, survey respondents noted significant implementation barriers. Implementation challenges that differ between community oncology and academic practice settings were identified. Strategies to improve equitable access to molecular classification of early stage EC are needed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cancer
Cancer 医学-肿瘤学
CiteScore
13.10
自引率
3.20%
发文量
480
审稿时长
2-3 weeks
期刊介绍: The CANCER site is a full-text, electronic implementation of CANCER, an Interdisciplinary International Journal of the American Cancer Society, and CANCER CYTOPATHOLOGY, a Journal of the American Cancer Society. CANCER publishes interdisciplinary oncologic information according to, but not limited to, the following disease sites and disciplines: blood/bone marrow; breast disease; endocrine disorders; epidemiology; gastrointestinal tract; genitourinary disease; gynecologic oncology; head and neck disease; hepatobiliary tract; integrated medicine; lung disease; medical oncology; neuro-oncology; pathology radiation oncology; translational research
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信