Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33932097›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2021

Patient perspectives on chemotherapy de-escalation in breast cancer.

Gabrielle B Rocque, Courtney P Williams, Courtney Andrews, Timothy C Childers, Kimberly D Wiseman, Kathleen Gallagher, Nadine Tung, Alan Balch, Valerie M Lawhon, Stacey A Ingram and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Totality of the Evidence: Optimizing Dosage Selection Strategies in Oncology.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
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

16 authors.

Gabrielle B RocqueO'Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4188-9785
Courtney P WilliamsDivision of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5328-7517
Courtney AndrewsUAB College of Arts and Sciences, School of Anthropology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Timothy C ChildersDivision of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Kimberly D WisemanWake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Kathleen GallagherPatient Advocate Foundation, Hampton, VA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3315-8720
Nadine TungBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Alan BalchPatient Advocate Foundation, Hampton, VA, USA.
Valerie M LawhonDivision of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Stacey A IngramDivision of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Thelma BrownO'Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Tara KaufmannDell Medical School, University of Texas at Austin LiveSTRONG Cancer Institute, Austin, TX, USA.
Mary L SmithECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Advocates Committee, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Angela DeMicheleAbramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Antonio C WolffJohn Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Lynne WagnerWake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9685-4796

Funding

ECOG-ACRIN NCORP Research Base - TMISTUG1CA189828 · NCI · ECOG-ACRIN MEDICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION · PI Peter J ODwyer, MITCHELL D. SCHNALL · 2014 to 2026
$199.7M
Tumor Tissue CoreP30CA012197 · NCI · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI Ruben A. Mesa · 1985 to 2026
$55.4M
Wake Forest Clinical and Translational Science AwardUL1TR001420 · NCATS · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI ARD, JAMY D, FOLEY, KRISTIE L · 2015 to 2023
$32.3M
American Cancer Society Mentored Research MRSG-17-051-01-PCSMBreast Cancer Research FoundationECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group 2UG1CA189828-06NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001420NCI NIH HHS P30 CA012197NCI NIH HHS UG1 CA189828Qualitative and Patient-Reported Outcomes Developing Shared Resource of the Wake Forest Baptist Comprehensive Cancer Center's NCI Cancer Center P30CA012197Wake Forest Clinical and Translational Science Institute's NCATS UL1TR001420
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGiven excellent survival outcomes in breast cancer, there is interest in de-escalating the amount of chemotherapy delivered to patients. This approach may be of even greater importance in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic.

methodsThis concurrent mixed methods study included (1) interviews with patients and patient advocates and (2) a cross-sectional survey of women with breast cancer served by a charitable nonprofit organization. Questions evaluated interest in de-escalation trial participation, perceived barriers/facilitators to participation, and language describing de-escalation.

resultsSixteen patient advocates and 24 patients were interviewed. Key barriers to de-escalation included fear of recurrence, worry about decision regret, lack of clinical trial interest, and dislike for focus on less treatment. Facilitators included trust in physician recommendation, toxicity avoidance, monitoring for progression, perception of good prognosis, and impact on daily life. Participants reported that the COVID-19 pandemic made them more likely to avoid chemotherapy if possible. Of 91 survey respondents, many (43%) patients would have been unwilling to participation in a de-escalation clinical trial. The most commonly reported barrier to participation was fear of recurrence (85%). Few patients (19%) considered clinical trials themselves as a barrier to de-escalation trial participation. The most popular terminology describing chemotherapy de-escalation was "lowest effective chemotherapy dose" (53%); no patients preferred the term "de-escalation."

conclusionsFear of recurrence is a common concern among breast cancer survivors and patient advocates, contributing to resistance to de-escalation clinical trial participation. Additional research is needed to understand how to engage patients in de-escalation trials.

Indexed as

Surveys and QuestionnairesAdultAgedAnxietyBreast NeoplasmsCOVID-19Cross-Sectional StudiesFearFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPandemicsQualitative ResearchSARS-CoV-2de-escalationdeimplementationpatient perspectivesrecurrence distress

Identifiers

PMID33932097
PMCPMC8124110

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.