ArticleInternational journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics2018
Patient Experiences and Clinician Views on the Role of Radiation Therapy for Ductal Carcinoma In Situ.
Article in International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quality of life issues in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ: a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Pooled it
- Perceptions, educational expectations and knowledge gaps of patients with non-metastatic breast cancer regarding radiotherapy: Integrative review.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2025Review
- Overcoming Barriers in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Management: From Overtreatment to Optimal Treatment.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2022Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of Adjuvant Treatment for Ductal Carcinoma In Situ.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2021Article
- Association of lifestyle and clinical characteristics with receipt of radiotherapy treatment among women diagnosed with DCIS in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2020Article
- Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: an update for the pathologist in the era of individualized risk assessment and tailored therapies.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2019Review
- Patterns of Practice in Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer in Korea.Journal of breast cancer · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate patient experiences with decisions regarding radiation therapy (RT) for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), and to assess clinician views on the role of RT for DCIS with favorable features in the present era. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A sample of women with newly diagnosed breast cancer from the population-based Georgia and Los Angeles County Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registries were sent surveys approximately 2 months after undergoing breast-conserving surgery (BCS), with a 70% response rate. The analytic sample was limited to 538 respondents with unilateral DCIS. We also surveyed 761 surgeons and radiation oncologists treating breast cancer in those regions, of whom, 539 responded (71%).
resultsAfter BCS, 23% of patients omitted RT, with twice the rate of omission in Los Angeles County relative to Georgia (31% vs 16%; P < .001). The most common reasons for omitting RT were advice from a clinician that it was not needed (62%) and concern about side effects (24%). Cost and transportation were not reported as influential considerations. After covariate adjustment, low- and intermediate-grade disease (odds ratio [OR] 5.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.5-12; and OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.7-6.1, respectively) and Los Angeles County SEER site (OR 4.3, 95% CI 2.3-8.2) were significantly associated with greater RT omission. Of the responding clinicians, 62% would discuss RT omission for a patient with DCIS with favorable features. Clinicians in Los Angeles County were more likely to discuss RT omission than were those in Georgia (67% vs 56%; P = .01). Approximately one third of clinicians would obtain the Oncotype DX DCIS score.
conclusionsThe heterogeneity in RT omission after BCS for DCIS continues to be substantial, with systematic differences in provider opinions across the 2 regions we studied. Enhanced precision of recurrence estimates, guidance from professional organizations, and better communication are needed to improve the consistency of treatment in this controversial area.
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.