Psychosocial and Quality of Life in Women Receiving the 21-Gene Recurrence Score Assay: The Impact of Decision Style in Women with Intermediate RS

Multigene assays such as the 21-gene recurrence score (RS) quantify risk for recurrence and potential benefit from chemotherapy in early-stage, ER+ breast cancers. Few studies have assessed the impact of testing on patient-reported outcomes such as cancer-related distress or quality of life. The few studies that have assessed these outcomes do not consider potential modifiers, such as the patients' level of involvement in the treatment decision-making process. In the current study, 81 breast cancer patients who received the RS assay completed cross-sectional surveys. We used linear multiple regression to assess whether test result, decision-making role (passive versus shared/active), and their interaction contributed to current levels of distress, quality of life, and decisional conflict. There were no associations between these variables and test result or decision-making role. However, women who received an intermediate RS and took a passive role in their care reported higher-cancer-related distress and cancer worry and lower quality of life than those who took a shared or active role. These data should be confirmed in prospective samples, as these poorer outcomes could be amenable to intervention.

[1]  Valerie F. Reyna,et al.  Improving communication of breast cancer recurrence risk , 2012, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[2]  P. Butow,et al.  Meeting the decision-making preferences of patients with breast cancer in oncology consultations: impact on decision-related outcomes. , 2012, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[3]  F. Rojo,et al.  Prospective transGEICAM study of the impact of the 21-gene Recurrence Score assay and traditional clinicopathological factors on adjuvant clinical decision making in women with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) node-negative breast cancer. , 2012, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[4]  B. Coles,et al.  Cancer genetic risk assessment for individuals at risk of familial breast cancer. , 2012, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[5]  E. D. Geijsen,et al.  Shared decision making: prostate cancer patients' appraisal of treatment alternatives and oncologists' eliciting and responding behavior, an explorative study. , 2011, Patient education and counseling.

[6]  N. Sion-Vardy,et al.  The impact of the 21-gene recurrence score assay on decision making about adjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage estrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer in an oncology practice with a unified treatment policy. , 2011, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[7]  G. Baek,et al.  Patients' preferred and retrospectively perceived levels of involvement during decision-making regarding carpal tunnel release. , 2011, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[8]  Jonathan Ira Epstein,et al.  Treatment decision‐making for localized prostate cancer: What younger men choose and why , 2011, The Prostate.

[9]  R. Kelley,et al.  Evidence for drugs and biomarkers in oncology guidelines (GLs): A survey of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) colon cancer panel. , 2011, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[10]  E. Mamounas,et al.  Impact of the 21-Gene Recurrence Score Assay Compared With Standard Clinicopathologic Guidelines in Adjuvant Therapy Selection for Node-Negative, Estrogen Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer , 2011, Annals of Surgical Oncology.

[11]  T. Lancet Taking shared decision making more seriously , 2011, The Lancet.

[12]  M. Broder,et al.  Physician survey of the effect of the 21-gene recurrence score assay results on treatment recommendations for patients with lymph node-positive, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. , 2011, Journal of oncology practice.

[13]  J. Mackey,et al.  Predictors of distress and quality of life in patients undergoing cancer therapy: impact of treatment type and decisional role , 2010, Psycho-oncology.

[14]  D. Bowen,et al.  Communicating Genetic and Genomic Information: Health Literacy and Numeracy Considerations , 2010, Public Health Genomics.

[15]  L. Carey,et al.  Women's experiences with genomic testing for breast cancer recurrence risk , 2010, Cancer.

[16]  Jack Cuzick,et al.  Prediction of risk of distant recurrence using the 21-gene recurrence score in node-negative and node-positive postmenopausal patients with breast cancer treated with anastrozole or tamoxifen: a TransATAC study. , 2010, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[17]  S. Paik,et al.  Association between the 21-gene recurrence score assay and risk of locoregional recurrence in node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer: results from NSABP B-14 and NSABP B-20. , 2010, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[18]  D. Hayes,et al.  Prospective multicenter study of the impact of the 21-gene recurrence score assay on medical oncologist and patient adjuvant breast cancer treatment selection. , 2010, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[19]  J. Griggs,et al.  Decision involvement and receipt of mastectomy among racially and ethnically diverse breast cancer patients. , 2009, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[20]  Rachel E. Goldsmith,et al.  Distress among women receiving uninformative BRCA1/2 results: 12‐month outcomes , 2009, Psycho-oncology.

[21]  Rachel E. Goldsmith,et al.  Cognitive and emotional factors predicting decisional conflict among high-risk breast cancer survivors who receive uninformative BRCA1/2 results. , 2009, Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association.

[22]  J. Hamilton,et al.  Emotional distress following genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: a meta-analytic review. , 2009, Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association.

[23]  J. Marrero,et al.  NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: hepatobiliary cancers. , 2009, Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN.

[24]  O. Olopade,et al.  Advances in Breast Cancer: Pathways to Personalized Medicine , 2008, Clinical Cancer Research.

[25]  A. Barratt,et al.  Evidence Based Medicine and Shared Decision Making: the challenge of getting both evidence and preferences into health care. , 2008, Patient education and counseling.

[26]  L. Romero,et al.  Changing Paradigms in Breast Cancer Management: Introducing Molecular Genetics into the Treatment Algorithm , 2008, The American surgeon.

[27]  P. Tartter,et al.  Does oncotype DX recurrence score affect the management of patients with early-stage breast cancer? , 2008, American journal of surgery.

[28]  S. Swain,et al.  The influence of a Gene expression profile on breast cancer decisions , 2008, Journal of surgical oncology.

[29]  S. Paik,et al.  Development of the 21-gene assay and its application in clinical practice and clinical trials. , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[30]  R. Bast,et al.  American Society of Clinical Oncology 2007 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast cancer. , 2007, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[31]  R. Bast,et al.  American Society of Clinical Oncology 2007 Update of Recommendations for the Use of Tumor Markers in Breast Cancer. , 2007, Journal of oncology practice.

[32]  A. Cohn,et al.  Impact of a commercial reference laboratory test recurrence score on decision making in early-stage breast cancer. , 2007, Journal of oncology practice.

[33]  S. Klang,et al.  A prospective study of the impact of the 21-gene recurrence score assay on treatment decisions in N-, ER+ early stage breast cancer patients , 2007 .

[34]  M. Rogers,et al.  Decision aids and breast cancer: do they influence choice for surgery and knowledge of treatment options? , 2007, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[35]  M. Morrow,et al.  Factors associated with patient involvement in surgical treatment decision making for breast cancer. , 2007, Patient education and counseling.

[36]  P. Ravdin,et al.  A decision aid to assist in adjuvant therapy choices for breast cancer , 2006, Psycho-oncology.

[37]  M. Cronin,et al.  Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. , 2006, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[38]  Peter Watson,et al.  Do patients benefit from participating in medical decision making? Longitudinal follow‐up of women with breast cancer , 2006, Psycho-oncology.

[39]  Angela Fagerlin,et al.  Patient involvement in surgery treatment decisions for breast cancer. , 2005, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[40]  Angela Fagerlin,et al.  Satisfaction with surgery outcomes and the decision process in a population-based sample of women with breast cancer. , 2005, Health services research.

[41]  S. Crawford,et al.  Quality of life among younger women with breast cancer. , 2005, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[42]  J. Emery,et al.  Psychological impact of genetic counseling for familial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2004, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[43]  Kevin Barraclough,et al.  I and i , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[44]  P. Butow,et al.  Sharing decisions in cancer care. , 2001, Social science & medicine.

[45]  P. Ravdin,et al.  Computer program to assist in making decisions about adjuvant therapy for women with early breast cancer. , 2001, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[46]  N. Urban,et al.  Involvement in decision-making and breast cancer survivor quality of life , 1999, Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine.

[47]  K C Carriere,et al.  Information needs and decisional preferences in women with breast cancer. , 1997, JAMA.

[48]  D S Tulsky,et al.  Reliability and validity of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast quality-of-life instrument. , 1997, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[49]  A. O'Connor Validation of a Decisional Conflict Scale , 1995, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[50]  L. Degner,et al.  Preferences for treatment control among adults with cancer. , 1988, Research in nursing & health.

[51]  M. Horowitz,et al.  Impact of Event Scale: A Measure of Subjective Stress , 1979, Psychosomatic medicine.

[52]  Karen R. Sepucha,et al.  Decision making about surgery for early-stage breast cancer. , 2012, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[53]  W. Marsden I and J , 2012 .

[54]  D. Bowen,et al.  Involvement in decision-making and breast cancer survivor quality of life. , 2009, Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association.

[55]  Iroon Polytechniou Influence of cultivation temperature on the ligninolytic activity of selected fungal strains , 2006 .

[56]  J. Emery,et al.  Psychological Impact of Genetic Counseling for Familial Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis , 2005, Familial Cancer.

[57]  B. Trock,et al.  Psychological side effects of breast cancer screening. , 1991, Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association.