ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Institute2023
The influence of the "cancer" label on perceptions and management decisions for low-grade prostate cancer.
Article in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Evolving Landscape of Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Pooled it
- The "good cancer" paradox: Decisional conflict and unmet support needs in patients with thyroid cancer facing surgical decisions-A mixed-methods study.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2026Article
- Thinking, Feeling, Choosing: How Affect Is Reflected in Prostate Cancer Treatment Decision Making-A Qualitative Study.Psycho-oncology · 2026Article
- Shared Decision-Making in IPMN of the Pancreas: A Framework for Surgical Decisions Under Uncertainty.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Review
- Key Determinants Influencing Treatment Decision-Making for and Adherence to Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
- Cancer Labeling, Risk Perception, and Treatment Choices in Clonal Cytopenia of Undetermined Significance.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- CORR Insights®: How Do Individuals Perceive Diagnostic Labels and Explanations for Hip Pain? A Qualitative Study Among Adults With Persistent Hip Pain.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2025Article
- Projected outcomes of reduced-biopsy management of Grade Group 1 prostate cancer: implications for relabeling.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2025Article
- Article
- Impact of a simple informative leaflet on Brazilian doctors' attitudes towards active surveillance of thyroid microcarcinomas.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Impact of the diagnostic label for a low-risk prostate lesion: protocol for two online factorial randomised experiments.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Putting patients first to redefine prostate cancer classifications.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGrade Group 1 (GG1) prostate cancer should be managed with active surveillance (AS). Global uptake of AS remains disappointingly slow and heterogeneous. Removal of cancer labels has been proposed to reduce GG1 overtreatment. We sought to determine the impact of GG1 disease terminology on individual's perceptions and decision making.
methodsDiscrete choice experiments were conducted on 3 cohorts: healthy men, canonical partners (partners), and patients with GG1 (patients). Participants reported preferences in a series of vignettes with 2 scenarios each, permuting key opinion leader-endorsed descriptors: biopsy (adenocarcinoma, acinar neoplasm, prostatic acinar neoplasm of low malignant potential [PAN-LMP], prostatic acinar neoplasm of uncertain malignant potential), disease (cancer, neoplasm, tumor, growth), management decision (treatment, AS), and recurrence risk (6%, 3%, 1%, <1%). Influence on scenario selection were estimated by conditional logit models and marginal rates of substitution. Two additional validation vignettes with scenarios portraying identical descriptors except the management options were embedded into the discrete choice experiments.
resultsAcross cohorts (194 healthy men, 159 partners, and 159 patients), noncancer labels PAN-LMP or prostatic acinar neoplasm of uncertain malignant potential and neoplasm, tumor, or growth were favored over adenocarcinoma and cancer (P < .01), respectively. Switching adenocarcinoma and cancer labels to PAN-LMP and growth, respectively, increased AS choice by up to 17%: healthy men (15%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 10% to 20%, from 76% to 91%, P < .001), partners (17%, 95% CI = 12% to 24%, from 65% to 82%, P < .001), and patients (7%, 95% CI = 4% to 12%, from 75% to 82%, P = .063). The main limitation is the theoretical nature of questions perhaps leading to less realistic choices.
conclusions"Cancer" labels negatively affect perceptions and decision making regarding GG1. Relabeling (ie, avoiding word "cancer") increases proclivity for AS and would likely improve public health.
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.