scholarly journals Streamlined genetic education is effective in preparing women newly diagnosed with breast cancer for decision making about treatment-focused genetic testing: a randomized controlled noninferiority trial

2016 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 448-456 ◽  
Author(s):  
Veronica F. Quinn ◽  
◽  
Bettina Meiser ◽  
Judy Kirk ◽  
Kathy M. Tucker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Genetic Testing ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Genetic Education ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Noninferiority Trial

Facilitating decision-making in women undergoing genetic testing for hereditary breast cancer: BRECONDA randomized controlled trial results

The Breast ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 36 ◽  
pp. 79-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kerry A. Sherman ◽  
Christopher J. Kilby ◽  
Laura-Kate Shaw ◽  
Caleb Winch ◽  
Judy Kirk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Genetic Testing ◽  
Hereditary Breast Cancer ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Randomized Controlled

scholarly journals Personalized Decision Making on Genomic Testing in Early Breast Cancer: Expanding the MINDACT Trial with Decision-Analytic Modeling

2021 ◽  
pp. 0272989X2199117
Author(s):  
Ewout W. Steyerberg ◽  
Liesbeth C. de Wreede ◽  
David van Klaveren ◽  
Patrick M. M. Bossuyt
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Genetic Testing ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Pragmatic Trial ◽  
Genomic Signature ◽  
Genomic Testing ◽  
Analytic Modeling ◽  
Clinical Risk ◽  
Genomic Test

Background Genomic tests may improve upon clinical risk estimation with traditional prognostic factors. We aimed to explore how evidence on the prognostic strength of a genomic signature (clinical validity) can contribute to individualized decision making on starting chemotherapy for women with breast cancer (clinical utility). Methods The MINDACT trial was a randomized trial that enrolled 6693 women with early-stage breast cancer. A 70-gene signature (Mammaprint) was used to estimate genomic risk, and clinical risk was estimated by a dichotomized version of the Adjuvant!Online risk calculator. Women with discordant risk results were randomized to the use of chemotherapy. We simulated the full risk distribution of these women and estimated individual benefit, assuming a constant relative effect of chemotherapy. Results The trial showed a prognostic effect of the genomic signature (adjusted hazard ratio 2.4). A decision-analytic modeling approach identified far fewer women as candidates for genetic testing (4% rather than 50%) and fewer benefiting from chemotherapy (3% rather than 27%) as compared with the MINDACT trial report. The selection of women benefitting from genetic testing and chemotherapy depended strongly on the required benefit from treatment and the assumed therapeutic effect of chemotherapy. Conclusions A high-quality pragmatic trial was insufficient to directly inform clinical practice on the utility of a genomic test for individual women. The indication for genomic testing may be far more limited than suggested by the MINDACT trial.

A randomized, controlled study of Internet peer-to-peer interactions among women newly diagnosed with breast cancer

2010 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 441-446 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark S. Salzer ◽  
Steven C. Palmer ◽  
Katy Kaplan ◽  
Eugene Brusilovskiy ◽  
Thomas Ten Have ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Peer Interactions ◽  
Peer To Peer ◽  
Randomized Controlled Study ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Barriers to genetic testing in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients: Do surgeons limit testing?

2017 ◽  
Vol 214 (1) ◽  
pp. 105-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Hafertepen ◽  
Alyssa Pastorino ◽  
Nichole Morman ◽  
Jennifer Snow ◽  
Deepa Halaharvi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Genetic Testing ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document