Women's experiences with genomic testing for breast cancer recurrence risk

Cancer

Volumn 116, Issue 8, 2010, Pages 1992-2000

  Tzeng, Janice P ^a   Mayer, Deborah ^b   Richman, Alice R ^a   Lipkus, Isaac ^c   Han, Paul K ^d   Valle, Carmina G ^a   Carey, Lisa A ^e   Brewer, Noel T ^a  

^a IL   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^c DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Adjuvant therapy; Breast cancer; Decision making; Genomic testing; Recurrence risk; Risk communication

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR; HORMONE;

ADULT; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER ADJUVANT THERAPY; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER RISK; CANCER STAGING; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPREHENSION; CONTROLLED STUDY; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; DISTRESS SYNDROME; EXPERIENCE; FEMALE; GENOMICS; HUMAN; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; LYMPH NODE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEDICAL INFORMATION; MEDICAL RECORD REVIEW; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECURRENCE RISK;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; CHEMOTHERAPY, ADJUVANT; COMMUNICATION; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; GENETIC TESTING; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; PHYSICIAN-PATIENT RELATIONS; RECURRENCE; RISK; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 77951019146     PISSN: 0008543X     EISSN: 10970142     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.24990     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Buyse M, Loi S, van't Veer L, et al. Validation and clinical utility of a 70-gene prognostic signature for women with node-negative breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98:1183-1192. (Pubitemid 44390989)
2. van de Vijver MJ, He YD, van't Veer LJ, et al. A gene-expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:1999-2009. (Pubitemid 35461656)
3. Foekens JA, Atkins D, Zhang Y, et al. Multicenter validation of a gene expression-based prognostic signature in lymph node-negative primary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:1665-1671. (Pubitemid 46622137)
4. Paik S, Shak S, Tang G, et al. A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:2817-2826. (Pubitemid 40051905)
5. van't Veer LJ, Dai H, van de Vijver MJ, et al. Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer. Nature. 2002;415:530-536.
6. Cleator S, Ashworth A. Molecular profiling of breast cancer: clinical implications. Br J Cancer. 2004;90:1120-1124. (Pubitemid 38496800)
7. Sparano JA, Paik S. Development of the 21-gene assay and its application in clinical practice and clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:721-728. (Pubitemid 351264384)
8. Lipkus IM. Numeric, verbal, and visual formats of conveying health risks: suggested best practices and future recommendations. Med Decis Making. 2007;27:696-713.
9. Gurmankin AD, Baron J, Armstrong K. Intended message versus message received in hypothetical physician risk communications: exploring the gap. Risk Anal. 2004;24:1337-1347. (Pubitemid 39532463)
10. Erev I, Cohen BL. Verbal versus numerical probabilities: efficiency, biases, and the preference paradox. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1990;44:1-18.
11. Wallsten TS, Budescu DV, Zwick R, Kemp SM. Preferences and reasons for communicating probabilistic information in verbal or numerical terms. Bull Psychon Soc. 1993;31:135-138.
12. Nelson W, Reyna VF, Fagerlin A, Lipkus I, Peters E. Clinical implications of numeracy: theory and practice. Ann Behav Med. 2008;35:261-274.
13. Harris L, Fritsche H, Mennel R, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology 2007 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:1-26.
14. O'Neill SC, Brewer NT, Lillie SE, et al. Women's interest in gene expression analysis for breast cancer recurrence risk. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:4628-4634.
15. Goldstein LJ, Gray R, Badve S, et al. Prognostic utility of the 21-gene assay in hormone receptor-positive operable breast cancer compared with classical clinicopathologic features. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:4063-4071.
16. Hart LG, Larson EH, Lishner DM. Rural definitions for health policy and research. Am J Public Health. 2005;95:1149-1155. (Pubitemid 40880862)
17. Morrill R, Cronmartie J, Hart LG. Metropolitan, urban, and rural commuting areas: toward a better depiction of the US settlement system. Urban Geography. 1999;20:727-748. (Pubitemid 30423400)
18. Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Black WC, Welch HG. The role of numeracy in understanding the benefit of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127:966-973. (Pubitemid 27516607)
19. Morris NS, MacLean CD, Chew LD, Littenberg B. The single item literacy screener: evaluation of a brief instrument to identify limitedreadingability. BMCFamPract.2006;7:21-27.
20. Lerman C, Daly M, Masny A, Balshem A. Attitudes about genetic testing for breast-ovarian cancer susceptibility. J Clin Oncol. 1994;12:843-850. (Pubitemid 24110927)
21. Degner LF, Sloan JA, Venkatesh P. The control preferences scale. Can J Nurs Res. 1997;29:21-43.
22. Bruera E, Sweeney C, Calder K, Palmer L, Benisch-Tolley S. Patient preferences versus physician perceptions of treatment decisions in cancer care. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:2883-2885. (Pubitemid 32538198)
23. Grunfeld EA, Maher EJ, Browne S, et al. Advanced breast cancer patients' perceptions of decision making for palliative chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:1090-1098. (Pubitemid 46638806)
24. Lillie SE, Brewer NT, O'Neill SC, et al. Retention and use of breast cancer recurrence risk information from genomic tests: the role of health literacy. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2007;16:249-255.
25. Sheridan SL, Pignone MP, Lewis CL. A randomized comparison of patients' understanding of number needed to treat and other common risk reduction formats. J Gen Intern Med. 2003;18:884-892.
26. Croyle RT, Lerman C. Interest in genetic testing for colon cancer susceptibility: cognitive and emotional correlates. Prev Med. 1993;22:284-292. (Pubitemid 23150670)
27. Watson M, Foster C, Eeles R, et al. Psychosocial impact of breast/ovarian (BRCA1/2) cancer-predictive genetic testing in a UK multi-centre clinical cohort. Br J Cancer. 2004;91:1787-1794. (Pubitemid 39664966)
28. Bottorff JL, Richardson C, Balneaves LG, et al. Unraveling women's perceptions of risk for breast cancer. Health Educ Res. 2004;19:469-475. (Pubitemid 38988393)
29. Butow PN, Lobb EA, Meiser B, Barratt A, Tucker KM. Psychological outcomes and risk perception after genetic testing and counselling in breast cancer: a systematic review. Med J Aust. 2003;178:77-81. (Pubitemid 36187626)
30. Matloff ET, Moyer A, Shannon KM, Niendorf KB, Col NF. Healthy women with a family history of breast cancer: impact of a tailored genetic counseling intervention on risk perception, knowledge, and menopausal therapy decision making. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2006;15:843-856. (Pubitemid 46381703)
31. Mikkelsen EM, Sunde L, Johansen C, Johnsen SP. Risk perception among women receiving genetic counseling: a population-based follow-up study. Cancer Detect Prev. 2007;31:457-464. (Pubitemid 350181734)
32. Lerman C, Lustbader E, Rimer B, et al. Effects of individualized breast cancer risk counseling: a randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1995;87:286-292.
33. Gurmnkin AD, Domchek S, Stopfer J, Fels C, Armstrong K. Patients' resistance to risk information in genetic counseling for BRCA1/2. Arch Intern Med. 2005;165:523-529. (Pubitemid 40344383)
34. Vogel BA, Bengel J, Helmes AW. Information and decision making: patients' needs and experiences in the course of breast cancer treatment. Patient Educ Couns. 2008;71:79-85.
35. Keating NL, Guadagnoli E, Landrum MB, Borbas C, Weeks JC. Treatment decision making in early-stage breast cancer: should surgeons match patients' desired level of involvement?J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:1473-1479.
36. Hack TF, Degner LF, Watson P, Sinha L. Do patients benefit from participating in medical decision making? Longitudinal follow-up of women with breast cancer. Psychooncology. 2006;15:9-19. (Pubitemid 43141514)
37. Lantz PM, Janz NK, Fagerlin A, et al. Satisfaction with surgery outcomes and the decision process in a population-based sample of women with breast cancer. Health Serv Res. 2005;40:745-767. (Pubitemid 40791614)
38. Janz NK, Wren PA, Copeland LA, Lowery JC, Goldfarb SL, Wilkins EG. Patient-physician concordance: preferences, perceptions, and factors influencing the breast cancer surgical decision. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:3091-3098.
39. Sparano JA. TAILORx: trial assigning individualized options for treatment. Clin Breast Cancer. 2006;7:347-350. (Pubitemid 44717771)