Observational studyBMC psychology2020
Psychosocial impact of prognostic genetic testing in uveal melanoma patients: a controlled prospective clinical observational study.
Observational study in BMC psychology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Management of Uveal Melanoma: Updated Cancer Care Alberta Clinical Practice Guideline.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Guideline
- Predictors of emotional distress in uveal melanoma survivors: a systematic review.Eye (London, England) · 2023Pooled it
- Digital PCR-based genetic profiling from vitreous fluid as liquid biopsy for primary uveal melanoma: a proof-of-concept study.Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR · 2025Article
- Review
- Knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding floaters among patients.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Observational
- The association between fear of progression and medical coping strategies among people living with HIV: a cross-sectional study.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Release of Cell-Free Tumor DNA in the Plasma of Uveal Melanoma Patients Under Radiotherapy.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2023Article
- Attitudes of patients with cutaneous melanoma toward prognostic testing using the 31-gene expression profile test.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Uveal melanoma patient attitudes towards prognostic testing using gene expression profiling.Melanoma management · 2022Article
- Is accurate routine cancer prognostication psychologically harmful? 5-year outcomes of life expectancy prognostication in uveal melanoma survivors.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe risk of metastases in uveal melanoma can accurately be estimated through genetic analysis of the tumor. A growing number of patients decide to receive information on their prognosis, although this can be extremely burdensome. Studies on the psychosocial impact of testing are sparse. The objective of this study was to examine traits of patients opting for prognostication, to investigate its psychosocial impact and the use of psycho-oncological services over time. We further examined characteristics of patients utilizing these services and risk factors of prolonged psychological distress. DESIGN AND
methodsThis study is a non-randomized controlled prospective clinical observational trial. Patients availing for prognostication formed the test group, while those who opted out constituted the observational group. The psychosocial impact of genetic testing was assessed with the following variables: resilience, social support, fear of tumor progression, depression, general distress, health-related quality of life, estimation of the perceived risk, and the utilization of psycho-oncological interventions. Data were assessed at five different time points over a period of 12 months. We applied binary logistic regression analysis, multiple linear regressions and a mixed model.
resultsOf 175 patients, 63 decided to obtain prognostic information. Treatment method (enucleation > brachytherapy), lower social support and higher general distress could significantly predict patient's choice for prognostic testing. After result announcement, perceived risk of metastases was significantly increased in patients with poor prognosis, while it decreased in those with good prognosis. Overall, a significant decrease over time appeared concerning fear of progression, general distress, depression and anxiety. Mental quality of life increased over time. The utilization of psycho-oncological interventions increased significantly after prognostication; however, this was equivalent in the test and observational groups. Female sex, higher general distress and higher anxiety predicted greater use of psycho-oncological interventions. DISCUSSION: Availing of prognostic testing is not associated with poorer subsequent psychological well-being. It rather may help to alleviate distress and promote a more realistic risk perception. However, psychological support should be available to all patients, independent of prognosis and treatment, especially considering that patients with low social support and high distress increasingly opt for prognostication.
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.