Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37947134›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2023

"Clinical trials are space travel": Factors of psychological response to recurrence among oncologists enrolling patients in treatment optimization trials.

Nicole Lynn Henderson, Courtney Andrews, Stacey A Ingram, Lisa Zubkoff, Nadine Tung, Lynne I Wagner, Lauren P Wallner, Antonio Wolff, Gabrielle B Rocque

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

9 authors.

Nicole Lynn HendersonUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham Heersink School of Medicine, Birmingham, Alabama, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2101-3065
Courtney AndrewsUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham Heersink School of Medicine, Birmingham, Alabama, USA.
Stacey A IngramUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham Heersink School of Medicine, Birmingham, Alabama, USA.
Lisa ZubkoffUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham Heersink School of Medicine, Birmingham, Alabama, USA.
Nadine TungBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Lynne I WagnerDepartment of Social Sciences and Health Policy, Wake Forest University Health Sciences, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9685-4796
Lauren P WallnerUniversity of Michigan, Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1279-8617
Antonio WolffJohn Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Gabrielle B RocqueUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham Heersink School of Medicine, Birmingham, Alabama, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4188-9785

Funding

UAB Cancer Prevention and Control Training Program (T32)T32CA047888 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI Ritu Aneja, Ellen Mary Lavoie Smith · 2018 to 2026
$3.2M
NCI NIH HHS T32 CA047888NIH HHS T32 CA47888Susan G. Komen SAC170001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCancer recurrence after treatment is a concern for patients and oncologists alike. The movement towards treatment optimization, with trials testing less than the current standard of care (SoC), complicates this experience. Our objective was to assess oncologists' psychological response to patient recurrence on optimization-focused trials and identify factors that influence those experiences.

methodsClinical oncologists participated in a semi-structured interview regarding patient enrollment in treatment optimization trials. We identified factors that influence the degree of psychological response that the oncologist may feel after patient recurrence. Residual agreement analysis was used to identify whether differences in reported psychological response was associated with alternative emphases on identified factors.

resultsThirty-six oncologists identified 20 factors spanning five major themes that affected their psychological response to patient recurrence. All oncologists expressed willingness to enroll patients in treatment optimization clinical trials; however, half indicated that they were more likely to experience a negative psychological response after a treatment optimization trial than after a traditional intensification trial, and a quarter reported that patient recurrence on an optimization trial would impact their recommendations for future trial enrollment. Oncologists who reported more negative psychological responses to patient recurrence after participation in an optimization trial were more likely to emphasize introspective factors, while those who reported no difference in response emphasized patient- and process-focused factors.

conclusionsAlthough most oncologists recognize the importance of treatment optimization trials, a significant proportion indicated a greater potential for psychological distress following patient recurrence in such trials and offered insight into how trial design and the process of patient enrollment can be improved to minimize those negative psychological responses.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsOncologistsClinical Trials as TopicHumansDe-escalationpersonalized medicinerecurrence distresstreatment optimization

Identifiers

PMID37947134
PMCPMC10726815

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.