ArticleCancer medicine2021
Surgeon and medical oncologist peer network effects on the uptake of the 21-gene breast cancer recurrence score assay.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Are There Socio-Demographic Inequalities in the Utilisation of Tumour and ctDNA Somatic Mutation Testing in Solid Tumours? A Systematic Review.Cancer medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Implementation of precision medicine in treating non-communicable diseases: a systematic review.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Peer effects on appropriate antibiotic prescribing within a patient-sharing physician network in China.Communications medicine · 2025Article
- A Scoping Review of Multilevel Patient-Sharing Network Measures in Health Services Research.Medical care research and review : MCRR · 2025Article
- Exploiting relationship directionality to enhance statistical modeling of peer-influence across social networks.Statistics in medicine · 2024Article
- Physicians' Hierarchy of Tumor Biomarkers for Optimizing Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer Care.The oncologist · 2024Article
- Surgeon perspectives on the STITCH trial: a mixed methods study.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Development of a Machine Learning Model to Identify Colorectal Cancer Stage in Medicare Claims.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2023Article
- A measure of local uniqueness to identify linchpins in a social network with node attributes.Applied network science · 2021Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDrivers behind the adoption of gene expression profiling in breast cancer oncology have been shown to include exposure to physician colleagues' use of a given genomic test. We examined adoption of the Oncotype DX 21-gene breast cancer recurrence score assay (ODX) in the United States after its incorporation into clinical guidelines. The influence of patient-sharing ties and co-location with prior adopters and the role of these potential exposures across medical specialties on peers' adoption of the test were examined.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of women with incident breast cancer using a 100% sample of fee-for-service Medicare enrollee claims over 2008-2011. Peer networks connecting medical oncologists and surgeons treating these patients were constructed using patient-sharing and geographic co-location. The impact of peer connections on the adoption of ODX by physicians and testing of patients was modeled with multivariable hierarchical regression.
resultsAltogether, 156,229 women identified with incident breast cancer met criteria for cohort inclusion. A total of 7689 ODX prescribing physicians were identified. Co-location with medical oncologists who adopted the test in the early period (2008-2009) was associated with a 1.38-fold increase in the odds of a medical oncologist adopting ODX in 2010-2011 (95% CI = 1.04-1.83), as was co-location with early-adopting surgeons (odds ratio [OR] = 1.25, 95% CI = 1.00-1.58). Patients whose primary medical oncologist was linked to an early-adopting surgeon through co-location (OR = 1.17, 95% CI = 1.04-1.32) or both patient-sharing and co-location (OR = 1.17, 95% CI = 1.03-1.34) were more likely to receive ODX.
conclusionsExposure to surgeon early adopters through peer networks and co-location was predictive of ODX uptake by medical oncologists and testing of patients. Interventions focused on the role of surgeons in molecular testing may improve the implementation of best practices in breast cancer care.
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.