ArticleJournal of oncology practice2012
Attitudes of patients with cancer about personalized medicine and somatic genetic testing.
Article in Journal of oncology practice, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 76 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
76 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Factors Associated With Implementation of Biomarker Testing and Strategies to Improve Its Clinical Uptake in Cancer Care: Systematic Review Using Theoretical Domains Framework.JCO precision oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Healthcare professionals' and consumers' knowledge, attitudes, perspectives, and education needs in oncology pharmacogenomics: A systematic review.Clinical and translational science · 2023Pooled it
- Patients' perspectives related to ethical issues and risks in precision medicine: a systematic review.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Pooled it
- The Patient in Precision Medicine: A Systematic Review Examining Evaluations of Patient-Facing Materials.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2018Pooled it
- Trial
- Trial
- Consent, Concern, and Capacity: Factors Associated With Attitudes Toward Pharmacogenetic Testing Among Patients With Gastrointestinal Cancer.Clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Beliefs and perceptions of genetic testing by clinical, demographic, and health characteristics: A U.S.-based study utilizing the health information national trends (HINTS) survey.Preventive medicine reports · 2025Article
- Precision Medicine: Transforming Cancer Research through Targeted Therapies.Current genomics · 2025Review
- Protocol for a type 3 hybrid implementation cluster randomized clinical trial to evaluate the effect of patient and clinician nudges to advance the use of genomic medicine across a diverse health system.Implementation science : IS · 2024Article
- Oncologists' perceptions of tumor genomic profiling and barriers to communicating secondary hereditary risks to African American cancer patients.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- Using the Translational Science Benefits Model to assess the impact of the Penn Implementation Science Center in Cancer Control.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2024Article
- Preparing for the unexpected: Recommendations for returning secondary findings in late-stage cancer care.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2024Article
- Development of a novel measure of advanced cancer patients' perceived utility of secondary germline findings from tumor genomic profiling.PEC innovation · 2023Article
- Protocol to evaluate sequential electronic health record-based strategies to increase genetic testing for breast and ovarian cancer risk across diverse patient populations in gynecology practices.Implementation science : IS · 2023Article
- The Impact of an Educational Video in Arabic Language on Patients' Knowledge and Attitudes Towards Genetic Testing for Cancer Therapy.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2023Article
- Understanding inequities in precision oncology diagnostics.Nature cancer · 2023Review
- Breast Cancer Screening Should Embrace Precision Medicine: Evidence by Reviewing Economic Evaluations in China.Advances in therapy · 2023Review
- A Comparison of Patients' and Physicians' Knowledge and Expectations Regarding Precision Oncology Tests.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Article
- Toward a More Just System of Care in Molecular Pathology.The Milbank quarterly · 2022Article
16 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeDramatic advances in genomic technology stand to revolutionize cancer care; however, little is known about patients' understanding and acceptance of personalized medicine and widespread genetic testing (GT). PATIENTS AND
methodsWe conducted a formative, semi-structured interview study with a random sample of patients with lung, colorectal, and breast cancers to assess awareness of personalized medicine and GT and attitudes about somatic GT. Willingness to undergo GT was elicited through hypothetic scenarios.
resultsSixty-nine patients participated; 71% were women; 42% were black; median age was 59 years; and 42% had an education level ≥ college. We found that a majority of patients either were not aware of the term "personalized medicine" or defined it in unexpected ways. Although many patients identified relevant benefits of somatic testing (eg, informs treatment), many patients also expressed significant concerns (ie, psychological harm and discrimination). A majority of patients expressed a willingness to undergo somatic (predictive, 96%, prognostic, 93%) and germline (cancer risk without incidental information, 87%; cancer risk with incidental information, 81%; pharmacogenetic, 91%) testing; however, far fewer patients expressed a willingness to undergo full genome sequencing (62%). Reluctance was attributed to concerns over incidental findings, information overload, and the lack of a clear benefit.
conclusionMany patients relayed misunderstandings about somatic testing and a reluctance to undergo full sequencing; oncologists must carefully consider how they present testing to patients so that concerns over discrimination and psychological harm do not hinder test uptake. More work is needed to identify effective ways to communicate complex genomic concepts to patients and research participants.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.