Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 3/2016

01-04-2016 | Epidemiology

Impact of genomic testing and patient-reported outcomes on receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy

Authors: Chalanda N. Evans, Noel T. Brewer, Susan T. Vadaparampil, Marc Boisvert, Yvonne Ottaviano, M. Catherine Lee, Claudine Isaacs, Marc D. Schwartz, Suzanne C. O’Neill

Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Issue 3/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Practice guidelines incorporate genomic tumor profiling, using results such as the Oncotype DX Recurrence Score (RS), to refine recurrence risk estimates for the large proportion of breast cancer patients with early-stage, estrogen receptor-positive disease. We sought to understand the impact of receiving genomic recurrence risk estimates on breast cancer patients’ well-being and the impact of these patient-reported outcomes on receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy. Participants were 193 women (mean age 57) newly diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer. Women were interviewed before and 2–3 weeks after receiving the RS result between 2011 and 2015. We assessed subsequent receipt of chemotherapy from chart review. After receiving their RS, perceived pros (t = 4.27, P < .001) and cons (t = 8.54, P < .001) of chemotherapy increased from pre-test to post-test, while perceived risk of breast cancer recurrence decreased (t = 2.90, P = .004). Women with high RS tumors were more likely to receive chemotherapy than women with low RS tumors (88 vs. 5 %, OR 0.01, 0.00–0.02, P < .001). Higher distress (OR 2.19, 95 % CI 1.05–4.57, P < .05) and lower perceived cons of chemotherapy (OR 0.50, 95 % CI 0.26–0.97, P < .05) also predicted receipt of chemotherapy. Distressed patients who saw few downsides of chemotherapy received this treatment. Clinicians should consider these factors when discussing chemotherapy with breast cancer patients.
Literature
1.
Goldhirsch A, Winer EP, Coates AS, Gelber RD, Piccart-Gebhart M, Thurlimann B, Senn HJ (2013) Personalizing the treatment of women with early breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2013. Ann Oncol 24(9):2206–2223CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
Harris L, Fritsche H, Mennel R, Norton L, Ravdin P, Taube S, Somerfield MR, Hayes DF, Bast RC Jr (2007) American Society of Clinical Oncology 2007 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 25(33):5287–5312CrossRefPubMed
3.
4.
Senkus E, Kyriakides S, Ohno S, Penault-Llorca F, Poortmans P, Rutgers E, Zackrisson S, Cardoso F (2015) Primary breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 26(Suppl 5):v8–v30CrossRefPubMed
5.
Dinan MA, Mi X, Reed SD, Hirsch BR, Lyman GH, Curtis LH (2015) Initial trends in the use of the 21-gene Recurrence Score assay for patients with breast cancer in the Medicare population, 2005–2009. JAMA Oncol 1(2):158–166CrossRefPubMed
6.
Enewold L, Geiger AM, Zujewski J, Harlan LC (2015) Oncotype Dx assay and breast cancer in the United States: usage and concordance with chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat 151(1):149–156CrossRefPubMed
7.
O’Neill SC, Isaacs C, Chao C, Tsai HT, Liu C, Ekezue BF, Selvam N, Kessler LG, Schwartz MD, Lobo T, Potosky AL (2015) Adoption of gene expression profiling for breast cancer in US oncology practice for women younger than 65 years. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 13(10):1216–1224PubMed
8.
9.
Hornberger J, Cosler LE, Lyman GH (2005) Economic analysis of targeting chemotherapy using a 21-gene RT-PCR assay in lymph-node-negative, estrogen-receptor-positive, early-stage breast cancer. Am J Manag Care 11(5):313–324PubMed
10.
Lyman GH, Cosler LE, Kuderer NM, Hornberger J (2007) Impact of a 21-gene RT-PCR assay on treatment decisions in early-stage breast cancer: an economic analysis based on prognostic and predictive validation studies. Cancer 109(6):1011–1018CrossRefPubMed
11.
Augustovski F, Soto N, Caporale J, Gonzalez L, Gibbons L, Ciapponi A (2015) Decision-making impact on adjuvant chemotherapy allocation in early node-negative breast cancer with a 21-gene assay: systematic review and meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 152(3):611–625CrossRefPubMed
12.
Levine MN, Julian JA, Bedard PL, Eisen A, Trudeau ME, Higgins B, Bordeleau L, Pritchard KI (2015) Prospective evaluation of the 21-gene Recurrence Score assay for breast cancer decision-making in Ontario. J Clin Oncol. doi:10.​1200/​JCO.​2015.​62.​8053 PubMedCentral
13.
Rutter CE, Yao X, Mancini BR, Aminawung JA, Chagpar AB, Saglam O, Hofstatter EW, Abu-Khalaf M, Gross CP, Evans SB (2016) Influence of a 21-gene Recurrence Score assay on chemotherapy delivery in breast cancer. Clin Breast Cancer 16(1):59–62CrossRefPubMed
14.
Fried G, Moskovitz M (2014) Treatment decisions in estrogen receptor-positive early breast cancer patients with intermediate oncotype DX Recurrence Score results. Springerplus 3:71CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
Bombard Y, Rozmovits L, Trudeau ME, Leighl NB, Deal K, Marshall DA (2014) Patients’ perceptions of gene expression profiling in breast cancer treatment decisions. Curr Oncol 21(2):e203–e211CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
Bombard Y, Rozmovits L, Trudeau M, Leighl NB, Deal K, Marshall DA (2015) The value of personalizing medicine: medical oncologists’ views on gene expression profiling in breast cancer treatment. Oncologist 20(4):351–356CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
Spellman E, Sulayman N, Eggly S, Peshkin BN, Isaacs C, Schwartz MD, O’Neill SC (2013) Conveying genomic recurrence risk estimates to patients with early-stage breast cancer: oncologist perspectives. Psychooncology 22(9):2110–2116CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
Whelan T, Levine M, Willan A, Gafni A, Sanders K, Mirsky D, Chambers S, O’Brien MA, Reid S, Dubois S (2004) Effect of a decision aid on knowledge and treatment decision making for breast cancer surgery: a randomized trial. JAMA 292(4):435–441CrossRefPubMed
19.
Duric VM, Fallowfield LJ, Saunders C, Houghton J, Coates AS, Stockler MR (2005) Patients’ preferences for adjuvant endocrine therapy in early breast cancer: what makes it worthwhile? Br J Cancer 93(12):1319–1323CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
Duric VM, Stockler MR, Heritier S, Boyle F, Beith J, Sullivan A, Wilcken N, Coates AS, Simes RJ (2005) Patients’ preferences for adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer: what makes AC and CMF worthwhile now? Ann Oncol 16(11):1786–1794CrossRefPubMed
21.
Duric VM, Butow PN, Sharpe L, Heritier S, Boyle F, Beith J, Wilcken NR, Coates AS, Simes RJ, Stockler MR (2008) Comparing patients’ and their partners’ preferences for adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer. Patient Educ Couns 72(2):239–245CrossRefPubMed
22.
Duric VM, Butow PN, Sharpe L, Boyle F, Beith J, Wilcken NR, Heritier S, Coates AS, John SR, Stockler MR (2007) Psychosocial factors and patients’ preferences for adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer. Psychooncology 16(1):48–59CrossRefPubMed
23.
Mandelblatt JS, Sheppard VB, Hurria A, Kimmick G, Isaacs C, Taylor KL, Kornblith AB, Noone AM, Luta G, Tallarico M et al (2010) Breast cancer adjuvant chemotherapy decisions in older women: the role of patient preference and interactions with physicians. J Clin Oncol 28(19):3146–3153CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
Horowitz M, Wilner N, Alvarez W (1979) Impact of Event Scale: a measure of subjective stress. Psychosom Med 41(3):209–218CrossRefPubMed
25.
O’Neill SC, Brewer NT, Lillie SE, Morrill EF, Dees EC, Carey LA, Rimer BK (2007) Women’s interest in gene expression analysis for breast cancer recurrence risk. J Clin Oncol 25(29):4628–4634CrossRefPubMed
26.
O’Neill SC, Valdimarsdottir HB, DeMarco TA, Peshkin BN, Graves KD, Brown K, Hurley KE, Isaacs C, Hecker S, Schwartz MD (2010) BRCA1/2 test results impact risk management attitudes, intentions, and uptake. Breast Cancer Res Treat 124(3):755–764CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
27.
Hamelinck VC, Bastiaannet E, Pieterse AH, Jannink I, van de Velde CJ, Liefers GJ, Stiggelbout AM (2014) Patients’ preferences for surgical and adjuvant systemic treatment in early breast cancer: a systematic review. Cancer Treat Rev 40(8):1005–1018CrossRefPubMed
28.
Street RL Jr, Elwyn G, Epstein RM (2012) Patient preferences and healthcare outcomes: an ecological perspective. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 12(2):167–180CrossRefPubMed
29.
Horowitz M (1982) Stress response syndromes and their treatment. In: Goldberger L, Breznitz S (eds) Handbook of stress: theoretical and clinical aspects. Free Press, New York, pp 711–732
30.
Sparano JA, Gray RJ, Makower DF, Pritchard KI, Albain KS, Hayes DF, Geyer CE Jr, Dees EC, Perez EA, Olson JA Jr et al (2015) Prospective validation of a 21-gene expression assay in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. doi:10.​1056/​NEJMoa1510764 PubMed
31.
Lo SS, Mumby PB, Norton J, Rychlik K, Smerage J, Kash J, Chew HK, Gaynor ER, Hayes DF, Epstein A, Albain KS (2010) Prospective multicenter study of the impact of the 21-gene Recurrence Score assay on medical oncologist and patient adjuvant breast cancer treatment selection. J Clin Oncol 28(10):1671–1676CrossRefPubMed
32.
Holt S, Bertelli G, Humphreys I, Valentine W, Durrani S, Pudney D, Rolles M, Moe M, Khawaja S, Sharaiha Y et al (2013) A decision impact, decision conflict and economic assessment of routine Oncotype DX testing of 146 women with node-negative or pNImi, ER-positive breast cancer in the UK. Br J Cancer 108(11):2250–2258CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
33.
Retel VP, Groothuis-Oudshoorn CG, Aaronson NK, Brewer NT, Rutgers EJ, van Harten WH (2013) Association between genomic recurrence risk and well-being among breast cancer patients. BMC Cancer 13:295CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
34.
Wiebe DJ, Korbel C (2003) Defensive denial, effect, and the self-regulation of health threats. In: Cameron LD, Leventhal H (eds) The self-regulation of health and illness behaviour. Routledge, New York, pp 184–203
35.
O’Donnell S, Goldstein B, Dimatteo MR, Fox SA, John CR, Obrzut JE (2010) Adherence to mammography and colorectal cancer screening in women 50–80 years of age the role of psychological distress. Womens Health Issues 20(5):343–349CrossRefPubMed
36.
Schwartz MD, Isaacs C, Graves KD, Poggi E, Peshkin BN, Gell C, Finch C, Kelly S, Taylor KL, Perley L (2012) Long-term outcomes of BRCA1/BRCA2 testing: risk reduction and surveillance. Cancer 118(2):510–517CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
37.
Ganz PA (2008) Psychological and social aspects of breast cancer. Oncology 22(6):642–646, 650
Metadata
Title
Impact of genomic testing and patient-reported outcomes on receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy
Authors
Chalanda N. Evans
Noel T. Brewer
Susan T. Vadaparampil
Marc Boisvert
Yvonne Ottaviano
M. Catherine Lee
Claudine Isaacs
Marc D. Schwartz
Suzanne C. O’Neill
Publication date
01-04-2016
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment / Issue 3/2016
Print ISSN: 0167-6806
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7217
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-016-3780-5

Other articles of this Issue 3/2016

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 3/2016 Go to the issue

Epidemiology

Medication use trajectories of postmenopausal breast cancer survivors and matched cancer-free controls

Clinical trial

Prognostic implication of the tumor location according to molecular subtypes in axillary lymph node-positive invasive ductal cancer in a Korean population

Clinical trial

Risk of regional recurrence in triple-negative breast cancer patients: a Dutch cohort study

Brief Report

MxA expression is associated with tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and is a prognostic factor in triple-negative breast cancer

Clinical trial

Randomized sham-controlled pilot trial of weekly electro-acupuncture for the prevention of taxane-induced peripheral neuropathy in women with early stage breast cancer

Review

Peri-operative biology in primary breast cancer: a credible therapeutic target
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

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
Image Credits