ArticleBMC cancer2024
What are the experiences of colorectal cancer patients with biomarker testing in Canada?: a mixed methods study.
Article in BMC cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Prioritizing the Timely Detection and Diagnosis of Early-Age Onset Cancer to Enable Optimal Disease Management and Outcomes.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveMolecular or biomarker testing to guide targeted treatments for colorectal cancer (CRC) has advanced care, specifically by improving treatment specificity. Our objective was to explore patients' experiences and perspectives with biomarker testing in Canada.
methodsWe conducted a mixed-methods study among adults (≥ 18 years) who have been diagnosed with CRC and able to communicate in English. Quantitative data was gathered using an online survey, with questions on awareness of and experiences with biomarker testing. Qualitative data was gathered using semi-structured interviews with a sample of survey respondents to provide context to survey findings.
resultsAmong 55 survey respondents, 76% have heard of biomarker testing and of these, 67% have had biomarker testing done. Among the 33% of respondents that have not had biomarker testing done, reasons were: not offered/referred, fear/anxiety over results, and cost. Respondents who had biomarker testing largely found biomarker testing useful (89%), though, only half indicated that they were able to understand the information on their biomarker testing report. Qualitative analysis of interview transcripts identified four themes: 1) perceived benefits of biomarker testing, 2) knowledge of biomarker testing, 3) experiences with accessing and receiving biomarker testing, and 4) recommendations for addressing challenges with biomarker testing.
conclusionAltogether, our study provides insight into CRC patients' perspectives and experiences with biomarker testing. Ongoing efforts by patient organizations, providers, and policymakers to improve awareness and access to biomarker testing must be informed by the patient perspective.
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.