scholarly journals Using a Twitter chat to rapidly identify barriers and policy solutions for metastatic breast cancer care: A qualitative study (Preprint)

Author(s):  
Riti Shimkhada ◽  
Deanna Attai ◽  
AJ Scheitler ◽  
Susan Babey ◽  
Beth Glenn ◽  
...  
1998 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 338-345
Author(s):  
John Horton

Background Breast cancer is a significant cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide, although death rates in the United States and some other countries are beginning to fall. Methods Several sources of information in 1998, including publications and presentations at the 1998 meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, are pertinent to contemporary breast cancer care. Results It is now possible to prescribe hormonal therapy that will reduce the incidence of breast cancer. Methods are available to reduce the morbidity from axillary node dissection, and improvements in adjuvant therapy and management of metastatic breast cancer are now at hand. Conclusions The information presented provides a broad-based platform for new standards of care for breast cancer that will serve as a sound base for further progress in this important disease.


2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6640-6640 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yvonne Y. Lei ◽  
Katharine M. Quain ◽  
Don S. Dizon ◽  
Rachel Jimenez ◽  
Jennifer Adrienne Shin ◽  
...  

6640 Background: Costs of cancer care may impact access to therapy, adherence, and distress among patients. However, the degree to which patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) wish to discuss financial issues when making treatment decisions is unknown. Methods: In a single arm feasibility trial, 40 women with newly diagnosed or progressive MBC completed a 1-page survey regarding goals and priorities for discussion with the oncology team. The survey included 17 potential priorities for discussion in the domains: treatment options, symptom management, emotional concerns, planning for the future, and lifestyle. We evaluated participants’ interest in prioritizing discussion of financial issues and sociodemographic and clinical correlates of this preference. We examined the relationship between desire to discuss financial issues and both distress on the Distress Thermometer (DT) and satisfaction with cancer care using Fisher’s exact test. Results: Among 40 participants, 11 (28%) reported interest in discussing financial issues when making treatment decisions, 29 (72%) were not interested. Average age was 57 (range 31-73), and the majority were white (85%) and college graduates (66%). Only 18% of white patients were interested in addressing cost, while 83% of non-white patients were interested (p < 0.01). Those with a college education were less likely to prioritize financial discussion compared to no college (16% vs. 47%, p = 0.04). Patients interested in discussing cost were more likely to have a household income < $50,000 (50% vs. 22% > $50,000, n.s.) and to have Medicaid (50% vs. 25% other insurance, n.s.). Additionally, patients with higher levels of distress (35% vs. 21% DT < 4, n.s.) and those on novel targeted or biologic therapy (42% vs. 21% other therapy, n.s.) were more likely to prioritize discussion of costs. Desire to discuss cost was not related to satisfaction with care. Conclusions: A substantial minority of patients with MBC, particularly those from less advantaged backgrounds, wish to discuss financial issues at time of treatment decisions. Financial toxicity research should recognize that not all patients desire this discussion and evaluate methods to screen for financial concerns and barriers to care.


2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 11622-11622
Author(s):  
Jeffrey M. Peppercorn ◽  
Yvonne Y. Lei ◽  
Nora Horick ◽  
Katharine M. Quain ◽  
Don S. Dizon ◽  
...  

11622 Background: Individualized treatment planning is a critical part of quality cancer care, but how best to achieve this for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is unclear. We evaluated the feasibility, acceptability and impact of using a simple and scalable “Individualized Goals of Care Discussion Guide” (IGCDG) to facilitate patient-provider communication at the time of treatment decisions. Methods: We developed the IGCDG based on structured interviews with MBC patients and input from experts in cancer care, decision sciences, psychology and palliative care. We then conducted a single arm feasibility trial among patients with newly diagnosed or progressive MBC. Prior to clinic, patients received the IGCDG, an 8-page MBC informational brochure and 1-page questionnaire regarding treatment preferences, personal goals and priorities for care planning. The completed questionnaire was provided to the oncology team at the patient’s visit. Pre and post assessment included the Distress Thermometer (DT), Patient Satisfaction with Cancer Care Scale and the Control Preferences Scale. Feasibility was defined as: 1) accrual of > 50%, 2) attrition rate < 32%, and 3) < 50% of patients experiencing increased distress following the intervention. Results: Among 60 eligible patients, 42 participated (70% accrual), 40 completed all surveys (2% attrition), and only 7 (18%) reported increased distress. Mean age was 57 (range 31 – 79), 85% were white, 7% black, 5% Hispanic, 66% were college graduates, and 40% reported high baseline distress (DT > 4). Patient priorities for discussion included cancer directed therapy (70%), symptom management (70%), and prognosis/planning ahead (60%). At 2-month follow-up, 53% reported decreased distress compared to baseline. Satisfaction with cancer care was high at baseline and follow-up. Most patients preferred shared decision making (77%), and 79% reported decision roles concordant with preferences. Overall, 72% of participants found the IGCDG helpful, 93% found the questionnaire easy to complete, and 44% felt it improved communication with their doctor (49% unsure). Conclusions: Administration of the Individualized Goals of Care Discussion Guide is feasible and provides patients with MBC an opportunity to define their goals of care and priorities for discussion in clinic. Clinical trial information: NCT03375827.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document