ArticleCancer2017
Chemotherapy decisions and patient experience with the recurrence score assay for early-stage breast cancer.
Article in Cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Personalised medicine and the decision to withhold chemotherapy in early breast cancer with intermediate risk of recurrence - a systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2020Pooled it
- Real-world analysis of clinical and economic impact of 21-gene recurrence score (RS) testing in early-stage breast cancer (ESBC) in Ireland.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2021Observational
- Automated volumetric radiomic analysis of breast cancer vascularization improves survival prediction in primary breast cancer.Scientific reports · 2020Observational
- Expected Monetary Impact of Oncotype DX Score-Concordant Systemic Breast Cancer Therapy Based on the TAILORx Trial.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2020Article
- Gene Expression Profiling Tests for Early-Stage Invasive Breast Cancer: A Health Technology Assessment.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2020Article
- Impact of Genomic Assay Testing and Clinical Factors on Chemotherapy Use After Implementation of Standardized Testing Criteria.The oncologist · 2019Article
- Racial/ethnic differences in the utilization of chemotherapy among stage I-III breast cancer patients, stratified by subtype: Findings from ten National Program of Cancer Registries states.Cancer epidemiology · 2019Article
- The impact of gene expression profile testing on confidence in chemotherapy decisions and prognostic expectations.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2019Article
- Ginkgolic acids induce HepG2 cell death via a combination of apoptosis, autophagy and the mitochondrial pathway.Oncology letters · 2018Article
- Recent Trends in Chemotherapy Use and Oncologists' Treatment Recommendations for Early-Stage Breast Cancer.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2018Article
- Personomics: The Missing Link in the Evolution from Precision Medicine to Personalized Medicine.Journal of personalized medicine · 2017Article
- Oncologists' influence on receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy: does it matter whom you see for treatment of curable breast cancer?Breast cancer research and treatment · 2017Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe 21-gene recurrence score (RS) assay stratifies early-stage, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer by recurrence risk. Few studies have examined the ways in which physicians use the RS to recommend adjuvant systemic chemotherapy or patients' experiences with testing and decision making.
methodsThis study surveyed 3880 women treated for breast cancer in 2013-2014; they were identified from the Los Angeles County and Georgia Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries (response rate, 71%). Women reported chemotherapy recommendations, the receipt of chemotherapy, testing experiences, and decision satisfaction. Registries linked the tumor data, RS, and surveys. Regression models examined factors associated with chemotherapy recommendations and receipt by the RS and subgroups.
resultsThere were 1527 patients with stage I/II, estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor 2-negative disease: 778 received an RS (62.6% of patients with node-negative, favorable disease, 24.3% of patients with node-negative, unfavorable disease, and 13.0% of patients with node-positive disease; P < .001). Overall, 47.2% of the patients received a recommendation against chemotherapy, and 40.5% received a recommendation for it. RS results correlated with recommendations: nearly all patients with high scores (31-100) received a chemotherapy recommendation (86.9%-96.5% across clinical subgroups), whereas the majority of the patients with low-risk results (0-18) received a recommendation against it (65.9%-78.2% across subgroups). Most patients with high RSs received chemotherapy (87.0%, 91.1%, and 100% across subgroups), whereas few patients with low scores received it (2.9%, 9.5%, and 26.6% across subgroups). There were no substantial racial/ethnic differences in testing or treatment. Women were largely satisfied with the RS and chemotherapy decisions.
conclusionsOncologists use the RS to personalize treatment, even for those with node-positive disease. High satisfaction and an absence of disparities in testing and treatment suggest that precision-medicine advances have improved systemic breast cancer treatment. Cancer 2017;43-51. © 2016 American Cancer Society.
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.