Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Cancer 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research article

Can you un-ring the bell? A qualitative study of how affect influences cancer screening decisions

Authors: S. Michelle Driedger, Gary Annable, Melissa Brouwers, Donna Turner, Ryan Maier

Published in: BMC Cancer | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The belief that early detection is the best protection against cancer underlies cancer screening. Emerging research now suggests harms associated with early detection may sometimes outweigh the benefits. Governments, cancer agencies, and organizations that publish screening guidelines have found it is difficult to “un-ring the bell” on the message that “early detection is your best protection” because of its widespread communication and enduring resonance. This study explores affective factors—and their interplay with relevant analytical factors—in public/laypersons’ decision making about cancer screening.

Methods

A total of 93 people (47 men, 46 women) attended focus groups about, respectively, prostate cancer screening and breast cancer screening in two Canadian cities.

Results

Affective factors were a major influence on many focus group participants’ decision making about cancer screening, including fear of cancer and a generalized enthusiasm for prevention/screening, and they were often inspired by anecdotes about the cancer experiences of family and friends. Affect also existed alongside more analytical factors including assessments of reduced risk in the management of any cancer diagnosis if caught early, and, for men, the belief that an unreliable test is “better than nothing,” and that men deserve prostate cancer screening because women have breast and cervical cancer screening. Affective factors were particularly noticeable in the sub-groups most supportive of screening and the “early detection” message: older women who felt that mammogram screening should begin at age 40 rather than 50, and older men who felt that prostate cancer screening should be expanded beyond its current unorganized, opportunistic usage. In contrast, younger participants displayed less affective attachments to “early detection” messages and had greater concerns about harms of screening and were more receptive to nuanced messages informed by evidence.

Conclusion

Policymakers attempting to communicate more nuanced versions of the “early detection” message need to understand the role of affect alongside other judgments brought into laypersons’ decision making processes and anticipate how affective responses to their messages will be shaped, transformed, and potentially subverted by external forces beyond their control. Particularly overt external factors are campaigns by cancer advocacy organizations actively promoting breast and prostate cancer awareness and screening to younger women and men using affectively-charged messages.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference The Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. Recommendations on screening for breast cancer in average-risk women aged 40–74 years. Can Med Assoc J. 2011;183(17):1991–2001. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.110334.CrossRef The Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. Recommendations on screening for breast cancer in average-risk women aged 40–74 years. Can Med Assoc J. 2011;183(17):1991–2001. doi: 10.​1503/​cmaj.​110334.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Bell N, Connor Gorber S, Shane A, Joffres M, Singh H, Dickinson J, et al. Recommendations on screening for prostate cancer with the prostate-specific antigen test. Can Med Assoc J. 2014; doi: 10.1503/cmaj.140703. Bell N, Connor Gorber S, Shane A, Joffres M, Singh H, Dickinson J, et al. Recommendations on screening for prostate cancer with the prostate-specific antigen test. Can Med Assoc J. 2014; doi: 10.​1503/​cmaj.​140703.
5.
go back to reference Petty RE, Cacioppo JT. The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Adv Exp Soc Psychol. 1986;19:123–205.CrossRef Petty RE, Cacioppo JT. The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Adv Exp Soc Psychol. 1986;19:123–205.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Epstein S. Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious. Am Psychol. 1994;49(8):709–24.CrossRefPubMed Epstein S. Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious. Am Psychol. 1994;49(8):709–24.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Chaiken S, Trope Y. Dual-process theories of social psychology. New York: The Guildford Press; 1999. Chaiken S, Trope Y. Dual-process theories of social psychology. New York: The Guildford Press; 1999.
8.
go back to reference Cameron LD, Leventhal H, editors. The self-regulation of health and illness behavior. New York: Routledge; 2003. Cameron LD, Leventhal H, editors. The self-regulation of health and illness behavior. New York: Routledge; 2003.
9.
go back to reference Dunwoody S, Griffin RJ. The role of channel beliefs in risk information seeking. In: Arvai J, Rivers III L, editors. Effective risk communication. New York: Routledge; 2014. p. 220–33. Dunwoody S, Griffin RJ. The role of channel beliefs in risk information seeking. In: Arvai J, Rivers III L, editors. Effective risk communication. New York: Routledge; 2014. p. 220–33.
10.
go back to reference Slovic P, Peters E, Finucane ML, MacGregor DG. Affect, risk, and decision making. Health Psychol. 2005;24(4):S35–40.CrossRefPubMed Slovic P, Peters E, Finucane ML, MacGregor DG. Affect, risk, and decision making. Health Psychol. 2005;24(4):S35–40.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Zajonc R. Feeling and thinking: preferences need no inferences. Am Psychol. 1980;35:151–75.CrossRef Zajonc R. Feeling and thinking: preferences need no inferences. Am Psychol. 1980;35:151–75.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Johnson E, Tversky A. Affect, generalization, and the perception of risk. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1983;45(1):20–31.CrossRef Johnson E, Tversky A. Affect, generalization, and the perception of risk. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1983;45(1):20–31.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Schwarz N, Clore G. How do I feel about it? Informative functions of affective states. In: Fiedler K, Forgas J, editors. Affect, Cognition, and Social Behavior. Toronto: Hogrefe International; 1988. p. 44–62. Schwarz N, Clore G. How do I feel about it? Informative functions of affective states. In: Fiedler K, Forgas J, editors. Affect, Cognition, and Social Behavior. Toronto: Hogrefe International; 1988. p. 44–62.
14.
go back to reference Lowenstein G, Weber E, Hsee C, Welch N. Risk as feelings. Psychol Bull. 2001;127(2):267–86.CrossRef Lowenstein G, Weber E, Hsee C, Welch N. Risk as feelings. Psychol Bull. 2001;127(2):267–86.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Finucane M, Alhakami A, Slovic P, Johnson S. The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits. J Behav Dec Making. 2000;13(1):1–17.CrossRef Finucane M, Alhakami A, Slovic P, Johnson S. The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits. J Behav Dec Making. 2000;13(1):1–17.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference McAllister D. Affect- and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Acad Manag J. 1995;38(1):24–59.CrossRef McAllister D. Affect- and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Acad Manag J. 1995;38(1):24–59.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Tversky A, Kahneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science. 1974;185(4157):1124–31.CrossRefPubMed Tversky A, Kahneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science. 1974;185(4157):1124–31.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Tversky A, Kahneman D. Availability: a heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cogn Psychol. 1973;5:207–32.CrossRef Tversky A, Kahneman D. Availability: a heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cogn Psychol. 1973;5:207–32.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Wilson RS, Arvai JL. Why less is more: exploring affect-based value neglect. J Risk Res. 2010;13(4):399–409.CrossRef Wilson RS, Arvai JL. Why less is more: exploring affect-based value neglect. J Risk Res. 2010;13(4):399–409.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Slovic P, Finucane ML, Peters E, MacGregor DG. The affect heuristic. In: Gilovich T, Griffin D, Kahneman D, editors. Heuristics and biases: the psychology of intuitive Judgement. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2002. p. 397–420.CrossRef Slovic P, Finucane ML, Peters E, MacGregor DG. The affect heuristic. In: Gilovich T, Griffin D, Kahneman D, editors. Heuristics and biases: the psychology of intuitive Judgement. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2002. p. 397–420.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Siegrist M, Earle T, Gutscher H. Test of a trust and confidence model in the applied context of electromagnetic field (EMF) risks. Risk Anal. 2003;23(4):705–16.CrossRefPubMed Siegrist M, Earle T, Gutscher H. Test of a trust and confidence model in the applied context of electromagnetic field (EMF) risks. Risk Anal. 2003;23(4):705–16.CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Siegrist M, Gutscher H, Earle T. Perception of risk: The influence of general trust, and general confidence. J Risk Res. 2005;8(2):145–56.CrossRef Siegrist M, Gutscher H, Earle T. Perception of risk: The influence of general trust, and general confidence. J Risk Res. 2005;8(2):145–56.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Earle T, Siegrist M. Trust, confidence and cooperation model: a framework for understanding the relation between trust and risk perception. Int J Global Environ Issues. 2008;8(1):17–29.CrossRef Earle T, Siegrist M. Trust, confidence and cooperation model: a framework for understanding the relation between trust and risk perception. Int J Global Environ Issues. 2008;8(1):17–29.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Clarke JN, Everest MM. Cancer in the mass print media: fear, uncertainty and the medical model. Soc Sci Med. 2006;62(10):2591–600.CrossRefPubMed Clarke JN, Everest MM. Cancer in the mass print media: fear, uncertainty and the medical model. Soc Sci Med. 2006;62(10):2591–600.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Rimer BK, Briss PA, Zeller PK, Chan ECY, Woolf SH. Informed decision making: what is its role in cancer screening? Cancer. 2004;101(S5):1214–28.CrossRefPubMed Rimer BK, Briss PA, Zeller PK, Chan ECY, Woolf SH. Informed decision making: what is its role in cancer screening? Cancer. 2004;101(S5):1214–28.CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Farrell M, Murphy M, Schneider C. How underlying patient beliefs can affect physician-patient communication about prostate-specific antigen testing. Eff Clin Pract. 2002;5(3):120–9.PubMed Farrell M, Murphy M, Schneider C. How underlying patient beliefs can affect physician-patient communication about prostate-specific antigen testing. Eff Clin Pract. 2002;5(3):120–9.PubMed
31.
go back to reference Visschers VHM, Wiedemann PM, Gutscher H, Kurzenhäuser S, Seidl R, Jardine CG, et al. Affect-inducing risk communication: current knowledge and future directions. J Risk Res. 2011;15(3):257–71.CrossRef Visschers VHM, Wiedemann PM, Gutscher H, Kurzenhäuser S, Seidl R, Jardine CG, et al. Affect-inducing risk communication: current knowledge and future directions. J Risk Res. 2011;15(3):257–71.CrossRef
39.
go back to reference Domenighetti G, D'Avanzo B, Egger M, Berrino F, Perneger T, Mosconi P, et al. Women's perception of the benefits of mammography screening: population-based survey in four countries. Int J Epidemiol. 2003;32(5):816–21. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyg257.CrossRefPubMed Domenighetti G, D'Avanzo B, Egger M, Berrino F, Perneger T, Mosconi P, et al. Women's perception of the benefits of mammography screening: population-based survey in four countries. Int J Epidemiol. 2003;32(5):816–21. doi: 10.​1093/​ije/​dyg257.CrossRefPubMed
44.
45.
go back to reference Duffy SW, Lynge E, Jonsson H, Ayyaz S, Olsen AH. Complexities in the estimation of overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening. Br J Cancer. 2008;99(7):1176–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Duffy SW, Lynge E, Jonsson H, Ayyaz S, Olsen AH. Complexities in the estimation of overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening. Br J Cancer. 2008;99(7):1176–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
46.
go back to reference Iremashvili V, Pelaez L, Manoharan M, Jorda M, Rosenberg DL, Soloway MS. Pathologic prostate cancer characteristics in patients eligible for active surveillance: a head-to-head comparison of contemporary protocols. Eur Urol. 2012;62(3):462–8. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.03.011.CrossRefPubMed Iremashvili V, Pelaez L, Manoharan M, Jorda M, Rosenberg DL, Soloway MS. Pathologic prostate cancer characteristics in patients eligible for active surveillance: a head-to-head comparison of contemporary protocols. Eur Urol. 2012;62(3):462–8. doi: 10.​1016/​j.​eururo.​2012.​03.​011.CrossRefPubMed
47.
go back to reference Consedine NS, Magai C, Krivoshekova YS, Ryzewicz L, Neugut AI. Fear, anxiety, worry, and breast cancer screening behavior: a critical review. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2004;13(4):501–10. Consedine NS, Magai C, Krivoshekova YS, Ryzewicz L, Neugut AI. Fear, anxiety, worry, and breast cancer screening behavior: a critical review. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2004;13(4):501–10.
50.
51.
go back to reference Kiviniemi MT, Hay JL, James AS, Lipkus IM, Meissner HI, Stefanek M, et al. Decision making about cancer screening: an assessment of the state of the science and a suggested research agenda from the ASPO behavioral oncology and cancer communication special interest group. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2009;18(11):3133–7. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-18-11-aspo.CrossRef Kiviniemi MT, Hay JL, James AS, Lipkus IM, Meissner HI, Stefanek M, et al. Decision making about cancer screening: an assessment of the state of the science and a suggested research agenda from the ASPO behavioral oncology and cancer communication special interest group. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2009;18(11):3133–7. doi: 10.​1158/​1055-9965.​epi-18-11-aspo.CrossRef
52.
go back to reference Myers RE. Decision counseling in cancer prevention and control. Health Psychol. 2005;24(4 (Supplement)):S71–S7.CrossRefPubMed Myers RE. Decision counseling in cancer prevention and control. Health Psychol. 2005;24(4 (Supplement)):S71–S7.CrossRefPubMed
54.
go back to reference Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Sox HC, Fischhoff B, Welch HG. US women's attitudes to false positive mammography results and detection of ductal carcinoma in situ: cross sectional survey. BMJ. 2000;320(7250):1635–40.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Sox HC, Fischhoff B, Welch HG. US women's attitudes to false positive mammography results and detection of ductal carcinoma in situ: cross sectional survey. BMJ. 2000;320(7250):1635–40.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
55.
go back to reference Morrison BJ. Screening for breast cancer. In: The Canadian guide to clinical preventive health care. Ottawa: Canada Communication Group; 1994. p. 787–95. Morrison BJ. Screening for breast cancer. In: The Canadian guide to clinical preventive health care. Ottawa: Canada Communication Group; 1994. p. 787–95.
56.
go back to reference Ringash J. The Canadian task force on preventive health care. Preventive health care, 2001 update: screening mammography among women aged 40–49 years at average risk of breast cancer. Can Med Assoc J. 2001;164(4):469–76. Ringash J. The Canadian task force on preventive health care. Preventive health care, 2001 update: screening mammography among women aged 40–49 years at average risk of breast cancer. Can Med Assoc J. 2001;164(4):469–76.
57.
go back to reference Weeks C. New breast cancer screening guidelines inflame debate, add to confusion. Toronto: Globe and Mail. November 21, 2011. Weeks C. New breast cancer screening guidelines inflame debate, add to confusion. Toronto: Globe and Mail. November 21, 2011.
58.
go back to reference Canadian Partnership Against Cancer. Organized breast cancer screening programs in Canada: report on program performance in 2007 and 2008. Toronto: Canadian Partnership Against Cancer; 2013. Canadian Partnership Against Cancer. Organized breast cancer screening programs in Canada: report on program performance in 2007 and 2008. Toronto: Canadian Partnership Against Cancer; 2013.
59.
go back to reference Canadian Partnership Against Cancer. Breast cancer screening guidelines across Canada: environmental scan. Toronto: Canadian Partnership Against Cancer; 2014. Canadian Partnership Against Cancer. Breast cancer screening guidelines across Canada: environmental scan. Toronto: Canadian Partnership Against Cancer; 2014.
60.
go back to reference Canadian Partnership Against Cancer. Breast control in Canada: a system performance focus report. Toronto: Canadian Partnership Against Cancer; 2012. Canadian Partnership Against Cancer. Breast control in Canada: a system performance focus report. Toronto: Canadian Partnership Against Cancer; 2012.
61.
go back to reference Rossi R. Scrapping the PSA test for prostate cancer is an injustice to men. Toronto: Globe and Mail. October 28, 2014. Rossi R. Scrapping the PSA test for prostate cancer is an injustice to men. Toronto: Globe and Mail. October 28, 2014.
62.
go back to reference Canadian Urological Association. Press release to: Canadian urological community. October 27, 2014. Canadian Urological Association. Press release to: Canadian urological community. October 27, 2014.
63.
go back to reference Prostate Cancer Canada. Prostate Cancer Canada reminds men that early detection using ‘smart screening’ for prostate cancer can save lives: Prostate Cancer Canada; 2014. Prostate Cancer Canada. Prostate Cancer Canada reminds men that early detection using ‘smart screening’ for prostate cancer can save lives: Prostate Cancer Canada; 2014.
64.
go back to reference Ubelacker S. Canadian task force advises against screening for prostate cancer using PSA test. Winnipeg: Winnipeg Free Press. October 27, 2014. Ubelacker S. Canadian task force advises against screening for prostate cancer using PSA test. Winnipeg: Winnipeg Free Press. October 27, 2014.
65.
go back to reference Kirkey S. Expert panel urges Canadian doctors to stop screening for prostate cancer. Toronto: Postmedia News. October 27, 2014. Kirkey S. Expert panel urges Canadian doctors to stop screening for prostate cancer. Toronto: Postmedia News. October 27, 2014.
68.
go back to reference Canadian Cancer Society's Advisory Committee on Cancer Statistics. Canadian cancer statistics 2012. Toronto: Canadian Cancer Society; 2012. Canadian Cancer Society's Advisory Committee on Cancer Statistics. Canadian cancer statistics 2012. Toronto: Canadian Cancer Society; 2012.
69.
go back to reference Beaulac JA, Fry RN, Onysko J. Lifetime and recent prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening of men for prostate cancer in Canada. Can J Public Health. 2006;97(3):171–6.PubMed Beaulac JA, Fry RN, Onysko J. Lifetime and recent prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening of men for prostate cancer in Canada. Can J Public Health. 2006;97(3):171–6.PubMed
70.
go back to reference Sher J. Prostate cancer screening test costs Ontario patients $30. Toronto: Toronto Star. May 21, 2012. Sher J. Prostate cancer screening test costs Ontario patients $30. Toronto: Toronto Star. May 21, 2012.
71.
go back to reference Krueger RA. Focus groups: a practical guide for applied research. Newbury Park: Sage Publications; 1988. Krueger RA. Focus groups: a practical guide for applied research. Newbury Park: Sage Publications; 1988.
72.
go back to reference Morgan DL, Krueger RA. When to use focus groups and why. In: Morgan DL, editor. Successful focus groups: advancing the state of the art. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications; 1993. p. 3–19.CrossRef Morgan DL, Krueger RA. When to use focus groups and why. In: Morgan DL, editor. Successful focus groups: advancing the state of the art. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications; 1993. p. 3–19.CrossRef
73.
go back to reference Liamputtong P. Focus group methodology: principles and practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications; 2011.CrossRef Liamputtong P. Focus group methodology: principles and practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications; 2011.CrossRef
74.
go back to reference Neuendorf KA. The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage; 2002. Neuendorf KA. The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage; 2002.
75.
go back to reference Strauss AL, Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.; 1998. Strauss AL, Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.; 1998.
76.
go back to reference Moyer VA. Screening for prostate cancer: U.S. preventive services task force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2012;157(2):120–34.CrossRefPubMed Moyer VA. Screening for prostate cancer: U.S. preventive services task force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2012;157(2):120–34.CrossRefPubMed
77.
go back to reference Finucane M, Peters E, Slovic P. Judgment and decision making: the dance of affect and reason. In: Schneider S, Shanteau J, editors. Emerging perspectives on judgment and decision research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2003. p. 327–64.CrossRef Finucane M, Peters E, Slovic P. Judgment and decision making: the dance of affect and reason. In: Schneider S, Shanteau J, editors. Emerging perspectives on judgment and decision research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2003. p. 327–64.CrossRef
78.
go back to reference Rossi R. Ontario should pay for prostate cancer testing. Toronto: Toronto Star. May 28, 2014. Rossi R. Ontario should pay for prostate cancer testing. Toronto: Toronto Star. May 28, 2014.
80.
go back to reference Hersch J, Jansen J, Barratt A, Irwig L, Houssami N, Howard K, et al. Women's views on overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening: a qualitative study. BMJ. 2013;346:f158.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hersch J, Jansen J, Barratt A, Irwig L, Houssami N, Howard K, et al. Women's views on overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening: a qualitative study. BMJ. 2013;346:f158.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
82.
go back to reference Cabana M, Rand C, Powe N, Wu A, Wilson M, Abboud P, et al. Why don't physicians follow clinical practice guidelines? A framework for improvement. JAMA. 1999;282:1458–65.CrossRefPubMed Cabana M, Rand C, Powe N, Wu A, Wilson M, Abboud P, et al. Why don't physicians follow clinical practice guidelines? A framework for improvement. JAMA. 1999;282:1458–65.CrossRefPubMed
85.
go back to reference Hoffman RM, Lewis CL, Pignone MP, Couper MP, Barry MJ, Elmore JG, et al. Decision-making processes for breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer screening: the DECISIONS survey. Med Decis Mak. 2010;30(5 Suppl):53S–64S. doi: 10.1177/0272989X10378701.CrossRef Hoffman RM, Lewis CL, Pignone MP, Couper MP, Barry MJ, Elmore JG, et al. Decision-making processes for breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer screening: the DECISIONS survey. Med Decis Mak. 2010;30(5 Suppl):53S–64S. doi: 10.​1177/​0272989X10378701​.CrossRef
87.
go back to reference Picard A. Warning on prostate tests sparks debate. Toronto: Globe & Mail. May 22, 2012; p. A1. Picard A. Warning on prostate tests sparks debate. Toronto: Globe & Mail. May 22, 2012; p. A1.
Metadata
Title
Can you un-ring the bell? A qualitative study of how affect influences cancer screening decisions
Authors
S. Michelle Driedger
Gary Annable
Melissa Brouwers
Donna Turner
Ryan Maier
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Cancer / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2407
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-017-3596-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

BMC Cancer 1/2017 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine