Differences in baseline risk estimated by physicians and patients with early breast cancer

Author(s):  
Makiko Mori ◽  
Akiyo Yoshimura ◽  
Masataka Sawaki ◽  
Masaya Hattori ◽  
Haruru Kotani ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Physicians recommend adjuvant therapy to patients based on baseline risk. A common recognition for baseline risk between patients and physicians is critical for successful adjuvant therapy. We prospectively investigated the differences in estimated baseline risk between physicians and patients with early breast cancer. Methods This analysis was performed at a single institution in Japan. Early breast cancer patients over 18 years old were enrolled after surgery. After explaining the pathological results, physicians asked each patient about an estimated baseline risk. Differences in estimated baseline risk were defined as the baseline risk estimated by patients minus the baseline risk estimated by physicians. The primary endpoint was that the number of patients who estimate baseline risk higher than physicians was higher than those who estimate a lower baseline risk. The secondary endpoints were differences in estimated baseline risk by stage, subtype and the influence of patient factors to differences in estimated baseline risk. Results From July 2017 to December 2018, 262 patients were enrolled. Among the 262 patients, 190 estimated a higher baseline risk than physicians, 53 estimated a lower baseline risk and 19 estimated the same. Overall, patients estimated a significantly higher baseline risk than physicians (P < 0.001). Differences in estimated baseline risk was significantly smaller in patients who knew the term ‘baseline risk’ than patients who did not (P = 0.0037). Differences in estimated baseline risk were also significantly smaller in patients with stage II breast cancer than patients with stage I (P = 0.0239). However, there were no statistically significant differences of differences in estimated baseline risk according to other factors. Conclusions Patients with early breast cancer estimated a significantly higher baseline risk than physicians. Physicians should accurately explain baseline risk to patients for shared decision making.

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10565-10565
Author(s):  
S. M. Benn ◽  
G. Jha ◽  
T. W. Ratliff ◽  
K. Spiers ◽  
R. Baskin ◽  
...  

10565 Background: Data from 3 large randomized trials documenting the efficacy of T in the adjuvant setting were reported at ASCO 2005, and subsequently published in NEJM 2005; 353: (16) pp 1659–72 and 1673–1684 . We decided to offer T, and attempted to assess patients’ characteristics that influence its acceptance, in a subgroup of HER2 + patients that had already completed adjuvant chemotherapy at our institution within 12 months prior to these reported results. Methods: Using Electronic Medical Records (OpTx, Canada), we identified HER2+ breast cancer patients who had completed adjuvant therapy within the prior 12 months and administered an informational synopsis about the study results. They then completed a questionnaire, including their demographic information, that established their understanding of the data and documented their decision to receive or to not receive adjuvant T as an afterthought. Results: We identified 1442 breast cancer patients in Optx that were seen at UTCI for initial or follow up visits between May 2004 and May 2005. Those with 3 or fewer visits within the last year and those who received no chemotherapy (n = 770) were excluded. Of the remaining 672 patients, only 104 (15%) had documented HER2+ disease. Fourteen HER2+ patients had metastatic disease, while 84 patients, though HER2+, had either completed adjuvant chemotherapy greater than 12 months prior or were currently receiving adjuvant therapy or T, and/or had other reasons to not be suitable for T. Six patients qualified for this study; 5 decided to receive adjuvant T and 1 chose not to because she perceived the additional benefit to be minimal. Conclusions: While our sample size was too small in the end to draw conclusions about patients’ attitudes towards new data on adjuvant T, we were struck by the small number of patients who could be offered T as an afterthought despite our large patient volume. The magnitude of the perceived economic burden and its imminence after the release of these data may have been overestimated. [Table: see text]


2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (8) ◽  
pp. 1603-1605
Author(s):  
Badir Chahuan ◽  
Cristian Soza‐Ried ◽  
Ariel Fariña ◽  
Felipe A. Calvo ◽  
Filippo Marangoni ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donato Mele ◽  
Patrizia Malagutti ◽  
Monica Indelli ◽  
Lucia Ferrari ◽  
Francesca Casadei ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document