Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32997124›Full record

Trial reportJAMA network open2020

Evaluation of a National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines-Based Decision Support Tool in Patients With Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Nonrandomized Clinical Trial.

Susan Y Wu, Ann A Lazar, Matthew A Gubens, Collin M Blakely, Alexander R Gottschalk, David M Jablons, Thierry M Jahan, Victoria E H Wang, Taylor L Dunbar, Melisa L Wong and 4 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA network open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03982459 (Acceptability and Effectiveness of a Novel Internet -Based Decision-Support Aid Based on the NCCN Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patient Guidelines), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03982459 nacompletednot on this map

Acceptability and Effectiveness of a Novel Internet -Based Decision-Support Aid Based on the NCCN Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patient Guidelines

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of California, San FranciscoRan2015 to 2018Enrolled76ConditionsNon-small Cell Lung CancerArmsDecision support tool
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Susan Y WuDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco.
Ann A LazarDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco.
Matthew A GubensDivision of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco.
Collin M BlakelyDivision of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco.
Alexander R GottschalkDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco.
David M JablonsDepartment of Surgery, University of California, San Francisco.
Thierry M JahanDivision of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco.
Victoria E H WangDivision of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco.
Taylor L DunbarDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco.
Melisa L WongDivision of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco.
Jason W ChanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco.
William GuthriePatientsWithPower Inc, Santa Clara, California.
Jeff BelkoraPhilip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California, San Francisco.
Sue S YomDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco.
University of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

Mechanistic Determination of KRAS Lung Cancer Regression upon CRAF SuppressionK08CA249744 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI WANG, VICTORIA · 2020 to 2025
$1.2M
NCI NIH HHS K08 CA249744
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: The association of guideline-based decision support with the quality of care in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is not known. Objective: To evaluate the association of exposure to the National Comprehensive Cancer Center (NCCN) guidelines with guideline-concordant care and patients' decisional conflict. Design, Setting, and Participants: A nonrandomized clinical trial, conducted at a tertiary care academic institution, enrolled patients from February 23, 2015, to September 28, 2017. Data analysis was conducted from July 19, 2019, to April 22, 2020. A cohort of 76 patients with NSCLC seen at diagnosis or disease progression and a retrospective cohort of 157 patients treated before the trial were included. Adherence to 6 NCCN recommendations were evaluated: (1) smoking cessation counseling, (2) adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with stage IB to IIB NSCLC after surgery, (3) pathologic mediastinal staging in patients with stage III NSCLC before surgery, (4) pathologic mediastinal staging in patients with stage III NSCLC before nonsurgical treatment, (5) definitive chemoradiotherapy for patients with stage III NSCLC not having surgery, and (6) molecular testing for epidermal growth factor receptor and anaplastic lymphoma kinase alterations for patients with stage IV NSCLC. Subgroup analysis was conducted to compare the rates of guideline concordance between the prospective and retrospective cohorts. Secondary end points included decisional conflict and satisfaction. Interventions: An online tool customizing the NCCN guidelines to patients' clinical and pathologic features was used during consultation, facilitated by a trained coordinator. Main Outcomes and Measures: Concordance of practice with 6 NCCN treatment recommendations on NSCLC and patients' decisional conflict. Results: Of the 76 patients with NSCLC, 44 were men (57.9%), median age at diagnosis was 68 years (interquartile range [IQR], 41-87 years), and 59 patients (77.6%) had adenocarcinoma. In the retrospective cohort, 91 of 157 patients (58.0%) were men, median age at diagnosis was 66 years (IQR, 61-65 years), and 105 patients (66.9%) had adenocarcinoma. After the intervention, patients received more smoking cessation counseling (4 of 5 [80.0%] vs 1 of 24 [4.2%], P < .001) and less adjuvant chemotherapy (0 of 7 vs 7 of 11 [63.6%]; P = .012). There was no significant change in mutation testing of non-squamous cell stage IV disease (20 of 20 [100%] vs 48 of 57 [84.2%]; P = .10). There was no significant change in pathologic mediastinal staging or initial chemoradiotherapy for patients with stage III disease. After consultation with the tool, decisional conflict scores improved by a median of 20 points (IQR, 3-34; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that exposure to the NCCN guidelines is associated with increased guideline-concordant care for 2 of 6 preselected recommendations and improvement in decisional conflict. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03982459.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungDecision Support Systems, ClinicalLung NeoplasmsQuality of LifeAdenocarcinoma of LungAgedComprehensive Health CareDecision Support TechniquesFemaleHumansMaleNeoplasm StagingPatient SatisfactionPractice Guidelines as TopicPrognosisQuality of Health Care

Identifiers

PMID32997124
PMCPMC7527870
OpenAlexW3090705710

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.