ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2025
The Johns Hopkins Hope at Hopkins Clinic: supporting the comprehensive needs of individuals with metastatic breast cancer.
Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeIndividuals with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) may live with their disease for many years. We initiated the Johns Hopkins Hope at Hopkins Clinic to assess the needs and optimize the care of these patients. PATIENTS AND
methodsPatients with MBC who agreed to participate in the Clinic in addition to usual care completed patient-reported outcome (PRO) surveys. They met with a navigator and underwent core consults (cancer rehabilitation, integrative medicine, supportive and palliative care, social work, and nutrition), clinical trial eligibility assessment, and optional services based on PRO responses and selection from a Clinic Menu. A medical oncologist provided a Care Plan during a final consult. Participants were asked to complete 3- and 6-month follow-up PRO surveys. We report on initial Clinic implementation, participant characteristics, and baseline PROs.
resultsFrom 11/2020 to 6/2022, 45 patients completed baseline surveys and participated in the Clinic. Median age was 58 (32-86); the majority (71%) were white and had estrogen receptor-positive (84%) tumors. Baseline physical and mental health were not good for ≥ 14 days of the past month for 22 and 10%, respectively. PROMIS measure scores were > 1 standard deviation worse than average for 32% for Physical Health, 16% for Mental Health, and 23% for Physical Function. PHQ-8 and GAD-7 scores suggested depression and anxiety for 22 and 7%, respectively. More than 80% of participants received specific recommendations from the core consultants. Only 20% of participants completed follow-up surveys.
conclusionPatients living with MBC have multiple needs. We used our results to implement routine PRO assessments and to expand services for patients with MBC. Our experience can serve as a model for coordinated care in other systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39869261What 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.