Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40130222›Full record

ArticleBMJ oncology2025

Improving patient understanding of GEP test results (IMPARTER4): an RCT.

Lesley Fallowfield, Ivonne Solis-Trapala, Rachel Starkings, Lucy Matthews, Shirley May, Valerie Jenkins

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors.

Lesley FallowfieldSHORE-C, Brighton & Sussex Medical School, University of Sussex, Brighton, England, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0577-4518
Ivonne Solis-TrapalaClinical Trials Unit, Keele University Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, Keele, Staffordshire, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1264-1396
Rachel StarkingsSHORE-C, Brighton & Sussex Medical School, University of Sussex, Brighton, England, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1947-018X
Lucy MatthewsSHORE-C, Brighton & Sussex Medical School, University of Sussex, Brighton, England, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4190-2097
Shirley MaySHORE-C, Brighton & Sussex Medical School, University of Sussex, Brighton, England, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3167-9891
Valerie JenkinsSHORE-C, Brighton & Sussex Medical School, University of Sussex, Brighton, England, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8939-0081

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

abstractObjective: Explaining gene expression profiling (GEP) test results to patients can be challenging. We examined the utility of two 8 min films about Oncotype DX and Prosigna to aid the knowledge and decision-making of women with early-stage oestrogen receptor positive (ER+) breast cancer. Methods and analysis: Patients awaiting GEP test results completed an anxiety questionnaire and the intolerance of uncertainty scale (IUS) before randomisation and divided into Group A (standard verbal and/or written hospital information) or Group B (standard information plus GEP film). Prior to results, they were interviewed about their GEP test knowledge and how the recurrence risk helps determine treatment options. After the results consultation, participants answered two further questionnaires. Participating clinicians completed IUS scales and reported their satisfaction with the results discussions. Results: 230/251 patients completed the study (Group A (n=106) and Group B (n=124)). The total knowledge score was higher in Group B (estimated between groups mean difference of 2.5 (95% CI:1.7 to 3.4) p<0.001). Most treatment decisions adhered to recommended risk of recurrence thresholds, although patients with higher trait anxiety were more likely to make less apparently rational decisions OR=0.93 (95%CI 0.88 to 0.97) p=0.002 (163/230; 70.8% received ET alone; 65/230; 28% ET plus chemotherapy, and two sought second opinions). Clinicians reported slightly longer consultations for Group A participants who tended to ask more difficult and unexpected questions. Conclusion: Patients who received standard verbal and written information plus film had increased knowledge about GEP tests compared with standard information alone. Trial registration number: ISRCTN28497350.

Indexed as

Adjuvant therapyBreast cancer (female)Gene expressionPsycho-oncology

Identifiers

PMID40130222
PMCPMC11931957

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.