Interventions are needed to support patient-provider decision-making for DCIS: a scoping review

DCIS knowledge of women choosing between active surveillance and surgery for low-risk DCIS

BACKGROUND

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) can progress to invasive breast cancer (IBC), but often never will. As we cannot predict accurately which DCIS-lesions will or will not progress to IBC, almost all women with DCIS undergo breast-conserving surgery supplemented with radiotherapy, or even mastectomy. In some countries, endocrine treatment is prescribed as well. This implies many women with non-progressive DCIS undergo overtreatment. To reduce this, the LORD patient preference trial (LORD-PPT) tests whether mammographic active surveillance (AS) is safe by giving women with low-risk DCIS a choice between treatment and AS. For this, sufficient knowledge about DCIS is crucial. Therefore, we assessed women's DCIS knowledge in association with socio-demographic and clinical characteristics.

METHODS

LORD-PPT participants (N = 376) completed a questionnaire assessing socio-demographic and clinical characteristics, risk perception, treatment choice and DCIS knowledge after being informed about their diagnosis and treatment options.

RESULTS

66 % of participants had poor knowledge (i.e., answered ≤3 out of 7 knowledge items correctly). Most incorrect answers involved overestimating the safety of AS and misunderstanding of DCIS prognostic risks. Overall, women with higher DCIS knowledge score perceived their risk of developing IBC as being somewhat higher than women with poorer knowledge (p = 0.049). Women with better DCIS knowledge more often chose surgery whilst most women with poorer knowledge chose active surveillance (p = 0.049).

DISCUSSION

Our findings show that there is room for improvement of information provision to patients. Decision support tools for patients and clinicians could help to stimulate effective shared decision-making about DCIS management.

Impact of an online decision support tool for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) using a pre-post design (AFT-25)

BACKGROUND

The heterogeneous biology of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), as well as the variable outcomes, in the setting of numerous treatment options have led to prognostic uncertainty. Consequently, making treatment decisions is challenging and necessitates involved communication between patient and provider about the risks and benefits. We developed and investigated an interactive decision support tool (DST) designed to improve communication of treatment options and related long-term risks for individuals diagnosed with DCIS.

FINDINGS

The DST was developed for use by individuals aged > 40 years with DCIS and is based on a disease simulation model that integrates empirical data and clinical characteristics to predict patient-specific impacts of six DCIS treatment choices. Personalized risk predictions for each treatment option were communicated using icon arrays and percentages for each outcome. Users of the DST were asked before and after interacting with the DST about: (1) awareness of DCIS treatment options, (2) willingness to consider these options, (3) knowledge of risks associated with DCIS, and (4) helpfulness of the DST. Data were collected from January 2019 to April 2022. Users' median estimated risk of dying from DCIS in 10 years decreased from 9% pre-tool to 3% post-tool (p < 0.0001). 76% (n = 101/132) found the tool helpful.

CONCLUSIONS

Information about DCIS treatment options and related risk predictions was effectively communicated, and a large majority participants found the DST to be helpful. Successfully informing patients about their treatment options and how their individual risks affect those options is a critical step in the decision-making process.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov Identifier NCT02926911.

Unsupervised representation learning of chromatin images identifies changes in cell state and tissue organization in DCIS

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a pre-invasive tumor that can progress to invasive breast cancer, a leading cause of cancer death. We generate a large-scale tissue microarray dataset of chromatin images, from 560 samples from 122 female patients in 3 disease stages and 11 phenotypic categories. Using representation learning on chromatin images alone, without multiplexed staining or high-throughput sequencing, we identify eight morphological cell states and tissue features marking DCIS. All cell states are observed in all disease stages with different proportions, indicating that cell states enriched in invasive cancer exist in small fractions in normal breast tissue. Tissue-level analysis reveals significant changes in the spatial organization of cell states across disease stages, which is predictive of disease stage and phenotypic category. Taken together, we show that chromatin imaging represents a powerful measure of cell state and disease stage of DCIS, providing a simple and effective tumor biomarker.

Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: finding the balance between overtreatment and undertreatment

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) accounts for 15-25% of all breast cancer diagnoses. Its prognosis is excellent overall, the main risk being the occurrence of local breast events, as most cases of DCIS do not progress to invasive cancer. Systematic screening has greatly increased the incidence of this non-obligate precursor of invasion, lending urgency to the need to identify DCIS that is prone to invasive progression and distinguish it from non-invasion-prone DCIS, as the latter can be overdiagnosed and therefore overtreated. Treatment strategies, including surgery, radiotherapy, and optional endocrine therapy, decrease the risk of local events, but have no effect on survival outcomes. Active surveillance is being evaluated as a possible new option for low-risk DCIS. Considerable efforts to decipher the biology of DCIS have led to a better understanding of the factors that determine its variable natural history. Given this variability, shared decision making regarding optimal, personalised treatment strategies is the most appropriate course of action. Well designed, risk-based de-escalation studies remain a major need in this field.

Adherence to guideline recommendations for follow-up in patients with DCIS at a large teaching hospital in the Netherlands

PURPOSE

Ductal-carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a pre-invasive form of breast cancer with good prognosis. Follow-up guidelines in the Netherlands are currently the same as for invasive breast cancer. Due to fear of invasive breast cancer or recurrence, it is hypothesized that follow-up for DCIS after treatment is more intense in practice resulting in potentially unnecessary high costs. This study investigates the follow-up in practice for patients with DCIS compared to the recommendations in order to inform clinicians and policy makers how to utilize these guidelines.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with pure DCIS between 2004 and 2014 were followed up until 2018. Information on duration and frequency of follow-up visits, reasons and decision makers for shortening, and prolonging follow-up was collected. Prolonged follow-up was defined as deviation from the Dutch guideline: more than 5 years of follow-up and older than 60 years.

RESULTS

Of the 227 patients the mean number of visits per year was 1.4 and mean years of follow-up was 6.0. Thirty-three percent had prolonged follow-up and 26% shorter follow-up than recommended. A majority (78%) of decision for prolonged follow-up was being made by clinicians.

CONCLUSION

Follow-up duration is in almost half of patients with DCIS according to guidelines and with most prolonged follow-up only up to a year longer than recommended. In most cases suspicious findings and the timing of the population screening program appeared to cause prolonged follow-up. If accepted by patients and clinicians, future DCIS specific guidelines should address these reasons and tailor to the individual risks.

The long-term psychosocial consequences of screen-detected ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer

OBJECTIVE

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a risk factor for invasive breast cancer (IBC). The prognosis of DCIS is considerably better than for IBC, yet women do not distinguish between the threat. We aimed to compare the psychosocial consequences of screen-detected DCIS and IBC, and to examine this comparison over time.

METHODS

We surveyed a Danish mammography-screening cohort from 2004 to 2018. We assessed outcomes at six-time points: baseline, 1, 6, 18, 36 months, and 14 years after the screening. We measured psychosocial consequences with the Consequences Of Screening - Breast Cancer (COS-BC): a condition-specific questionnaire that is psychometrically validated and encompasses 14 psychosocial dimensions. We used weighted linear models with generalized estimating equations to compare responses between groups. We used a 1% level of significance.

RESULTS

170 out of 1309 women were diagnosed with breast cancer (13.0%). 23 were diagnosed with DCIS (13.5%) and 147 with IBC (86.5%). From baseline to six months after diagnosis, there were no significant differences between women with DCIS and IBC. However, mean scores indicated that IBC generally was more affected than DCIS. After six months, we observed that women with DCIS and IBC might be affected differently in the long term; mean scores and mean differences showed that IBC were more affected on some scales, while DCIS were on others.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the DCIS and IBC experienced similar levels of psychosocial consequences. Women might benefit from renaming DCIS to exclude cancer nomenclature.

"Is it cancer or not?" A qualitative exploration of survivor concerns surrounding the diagnosis and treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ

BACKGROUND

Of the nearly 50,000 women in the United States who undergo treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) annually, many may not benefit from treatment. To better understand the impact of a DCIS diagnosis, patients self-identified as having had DCIS were engaged regarding their experience.

METHODS

In July 2014, a web-based survey was administered through the Susan Love Army of Women breast cancer listserv. The survey included open-ended questions designed to assess patients' perspectives about DCIS diagnosis and treatment. Deductive and inductive codes were applied to the responses; common themes were summarized.

RESULTS

Among the 1832 women included in the analytic sample, the median age at diagnosis was 60 years. Four primary themes were identified: 1) uncertainty surrounding a DCIS diagnosis, 2) uncertainty about DCIS treatment, 3) concern about treatment side effects, and 4) concern about recurrence and/or developing invasive breast cancer. When diagnosed, participants were often uncertain about whether they had cancer or not and whether they should be considered a "survivor." Uncertainty about treatment manifested as questioning the appropriateness of the amount of treatment received. Participants expressed concern about the "cancer spreading" or becoming invasive and that they were not necessarily "doing enough" to prevent recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large, national sample, participants with a history of DCIS reported confusion and concern about the diagnosis and treatment, which caused worry and significant uncertainty. Developing strategies to improve patient and provider communications regarding the nature of DCIS and acknowledging gaps in the current knowledge of management options should be a priority.

A web-based personalized decision support tool for patients diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ: development, content evaluation, and usability testing

PURPOSE

Patients diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) face trade-offs when deciding among different treatments, including surgery, radiation, and endocrine therapy. A less chosen option is active monitoring. While evidence from clinical trials is not yet available, observational studies show comparable results for active monitoring and immediate treatment on cancer outcomes in select subgroups of patients. We developed and tested a web-based decision support tool (DST) to help patients explore current knowledge about DCIS and make an informed choice.

METHODS

The DST, an interactive web application, was informed by literature reviews and formative work with patients, breast surgeons, and health communication experts. We conducted iterative interviews to evaluate the DST content among women with and without a history of breast cancer, as well as breast cancer experts. For usability testing, we conducted an online survey among women with and without a history of breast cancer.

RESULTS

For content evaluation, 5 women with and 10 women without a history of DCIS were interviewed. The sample included 11 White and 4 non-White women, with a mean age of 64 years. The expert sample consisted of 5 attendings and a physician assistant. The feedback was used to add, clarify, or reorganize information in the DST. For usability testing, 22 participants with a mean age of 61 years were recruited including 15 White and 7 Black women and 6 women with a history of DCIS. The mean usability score was 3.7 out of 5. Most participants (86%) found that the DST provided unbiased information about treatments. To improve usability, we reduced the per-page content and added navigation cues.

CONCLUSION

Content and usability evaluation showed that the DST helps patients explore trade-offs of active monitoring and immediate treatment. By adopting a personalized approach, the tool will enable informed decisions aligned with patients' values and expectations.

Cannabinoids, their cellular receptors, and effects on the invasive phenotype of carcinoma and metastasis

BACKGROUND

The morbidity and mortality of cancer are significantly impacted by the invasive and metastatic potential of particular subgroups of malignant cells within a tumor. The particular pre-metastatic properties of cancerous cells are thus a critical target for novel therapeutics in the oncology field. Cannabinoid molecules have been investigated in recent years in the context of invasion and metastasis of various malignancies, with varying effects reported in the literature.

RECENT FINDINGS

There was substantial variability in the findings reported by the literature of the effects of cannabinoid molecules on cancer cell invasion and metastasis. These effects varied depending on which ligand and which of the CB1, CB2, or GPR55 receptors were investigated. These findings suggest a role for the phenomenon of biased signaling in explaining the diversity of effects of cannabinoid molecules on cancer cell invasion.

CONCLUSION

While substantially more investigation is required into the effects of cannabinoid molecules on cancer cell invasion and metastasis, we describe in this review the significant diversity in the responses of cancer cells to cannabinoid molecules in terms of their invasive and metastatic capacities.

Factors involved in treatment decision making for women diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ: A qualitative study

Whilst some of the diversity in management of women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) may be explained by tumour characteristics, the role of patient preference and the factors underlying those preferences have been less frequently examined. We have used a descriptive qualitative study to explore treatment decisions for a group of Australian women diagnosed with DCIS through mammographic screening. Semi-structured telephone interviews were performed with 16 women diagnosed with DCIS between January 2012 and December 2018, recruited through the LifePool dataset (a subset of BreastScreen participants who have agreed to participate in research). Content analysis using deductive coding identified three themes: participants did not have a clear understanding of their diagnosis or prognosis; reported involvement in decision making about management varied; specific factors including the psychosexual impact of mastectomy and perceptions of radiotherapy, could act as barriers or facilitators to specific decisions about treatment. The treatment the women received was not simply determined by the characteristics of their disease. Interaction with the managing clinician was pivotal, however many other factors played a part in individual decisions. Recognising that decisions are not purely a function of disease characteristics is important for both women with DCIS and the clinicians who care for them.

Experiencing communication related to knowing the cancer diagnosis and prognosis: A multi-perspective interpretative phenomenological study

PURPOSE

To understand the phenomenon of communication related to knowing the diagnosis and prognosis, by exploring the perspectives of patients with advanced cancer and those of their caregivers, physicians and nurses.

METHODS

Drawing upon a multi-perspective design, a total of 27 semi-structured interviews involving four different groups of stakeholders (7 patients, 7 caregivers, 6 physicians, and 7 nurses) -who were linked by a carer-cared relationship-were conducted in two Oncology Departments of two Italian hospitals. Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis was used to interpret the participants' narratives.

RESULTS

Two overarching themes were identified: The first theme "the «what is it?» and the «what will happen to me?»" illustrates the two different paths of communication of diagnosis and prognosis. The second theme "Matching and mismatching in identifying the others as speakers" shows that not each of the four parties recognizes the others as reciprocal speakers on topics related to diagnosis and prognosis, although all of them display reciprocal communication interactions.

CONCLUSIONS

Communication related to diagnosis and prognosis is often handled by health professionals without a comprehensive and integrated understanding of the communication approach. There is a correspondence between the nurses' perception of their extraneousness to the diagnosis and the prognosis related communication, and the descriptions and perceptions of the nurse's role reported by the other participants. Understanding how the different groups of stakeholders reciprocally interact and influence each other, can help to identify potential positive resources and detect hindrance in the implementation of an effective patient-centered approach, while avoiding silo cultures.

Non-surgical treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breasts - a prospective study on patient's perspective

INTRODUCTION

Several ongoing trials are currently investigating the feasibility and non-inferiority of active surveillance for managing low-risk DCIS. However, little is known on the proposed non-surgical treatment for DCIS from patient's perspective.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study was performed on 1000 consecutive patients aged 18 to 90 years old with various breast disorders between 1st July 2019 and 31st December 2019. Patients were asked about their opinions on non-surgical treatments for DCIS after thorough explanation of the clinical scenario.

RESULTS

Median age was 55 years old (Range 18 - 87). 692 patients had past history of breast cancer, 279 patients had benign breast conditions, 29 patients had borderline breast lesions. 891 (89.1%) patients opted for standard surgical excision for low-risk DCIS, most of them (N = 757, 85.0%) decided for operative management for DCIS to avoid life-time anxiety of disease progression. Patients of older age and with history of malignant breast conditions are more likely to choose surgical treatment for DCIS (p<0.0001). Of note, 112 (11.2%) patients in the cohort had history of DCIS with excision done, 111 (99.1%) patients would still decide for surgical excision as the treatment of DCIS, only 1 patient expressed the wish for conservative treatment for DCIS.

CONCLUSION

Majority of patients decided for surgical treatment for DCIS despite being offered the condition that conservative treatment could be oncologically safe. Patient anxiety and cost of extensive breast surveillance are two important factors.

Quality of life outcomes from a randomized controlled trial of patient navigation in Latina breast cancer survivors

INTRODUCTION

Breast cancer survivorship is a life-long process involving challenges to health-care communities and individuals, especially Latinas. Patient Navigation has shown some success in meeting these challenges. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of an enhanced Patient Navigation program (Intervention; PN+) vs Control (PN) over time on general cancer and breast cancer-specific quality of life (QoL) in Latina breast cancer survivors (BCS).

METHODS

We conducted a 2-year, two-arm randomized controlled trial of the "Staying Healthy" program among Latina BCS. The design compared PN+ vs PN over time. We recruited 60 patients into each study arm and randomized them by sequential numerical assignment. PN+ participants received culturally tailored educational materials and active, personalized Patient Navigation services, including phone calls, transportation, and care coordination. PN participants were navigated only upon request. Primary outcomes included general cancer (Functional Assessments of Cancer Therapy [FACTS]-G) and breast cancer-specific (FACT-B) QoL.

RESULTS

PN+ participants had significantly improved QoL measures compared to PN at 6-month follow-up on all subscales (P-values .007-.04) except physical well-being (PWB; P = .11). Intervention effect size coefficient (standard error) for FACT-G overall was 7.9 (3.1); P = .01. For FACT-B, it was 10.9 (3.9); P = .006. Again, all subscales showed significant effects [range 1.7-3.1 (0.8-1.2); P-values .006-.04], except for PWB [1.5 (1.0); P = .16] and social/family well-being (SWB) [2.1 (1.1); P = .06]. There were no differences between groups at baseline.

DISCUSSION

Multiple cultural, psychosocial, and socioeconomic variables contributing to these intervention effects will be addressed in future studies. As the national BCS population continues to increase, more Patient Navigation-focused partnerships among patients, health-care professionals, research groups, and community organizations are needed to improve BCS experiences. The Staying Healthy program has the potential to serve as a national survivorship care model for improving Latina BCS QoL.

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS): The importance of patient-reported outcomes (PRO)

Purpose

Patient reported outcomes (PROs) are an optimal method for assessing quality of life (QOL), including physical and psychosocial health. This review summarizes PROs frequently assessed in the setting of a DCIS diagnosis.

Recent findings

Health-related QOL has generally been found to be modestly affected in women with DCIS and similar to women with invasive breast cancer. Several studies reported a substantial negative impact on sexual health and body image, including some differences based on surgery type. Some patients experience pain after treatment, although many physical symptoms resolve. The prevalence of anxiety and depression varied based on assessment timing, with symptoms improving over time. Women with DCIS often overestimate the risks associated both with DCIS and invasive cancer.

Summary

PROs provide critical information regarding the experiences of women following a DCIS diagnosis. Continued inclusion of PROs in clinical trials is warranted, further informing treatment decisions and adequately preparing patients for what to expect following treatment.

Identifying opportunities to support patient-centred care for ductal carcinoma in situ: qualitative interviews with clinicians

Background

Women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) report poor patient-clinician communication, and long-lasting confusion and anxiety about their treatment and prognosis. Research shows that patient-centred care (PCC) improves patient experience and outcomes. Little is known about the clinician experience of delivering PCC for DCIS. This study characterized communication challenges faced by clinicians, and interventions they need to improve PCC for DCIS.

Methods

Purposive and snowball sampling were used to recruit Canadian clinicians by specialty, gender, years of experience, setting, and geographic location. Qualitative interviews were conducted by telephone. Data were analyzed using constant comparison. Findings were mapped to a cancer-specific, comprehensive PCC framework to identify opportunities for improvement.

Results

Clinicians described approaches they used to address the PCC domains of fostering a healing relationship, exchanging information, and addressing emotions, but do not appear to be addressing the domains of managing uncertainty, involving women in making decisions, or enabling self-management. However, many clinicians described challenges or variable practices for all PCC domains but fostering a healing relationship. Clinicians vary in describing DCIS as cancer based on personal beliefs. When exchanging information, most find it difficult to justify treatment while assuring women of a good prognosis, and feel frustrated when women remain confused despite their efforts to explain it. While they recognize confusion and anxiety among women, clinicians said that patient navigators, social workers, support groups and high-quality information specific to DCIS are lacking. Despite these challenges, clinicians said they did not need or want communication interventions.

Conclusions

Findings represent currently unmet opportunities by which to help clinicians enhance PCC for DCIS, and underscore the need for supplemental information and supportive care specific to DCIS. Future research is needed to develop and test communication interventions that improve PCC for DCIS. If effective and widely implemented, this may contribute to improved care experiences and outcomes for women diagnosed with and treated for DCIS.

Quality of DCIS information on the internet: a content analysis

PURPOSE

Women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) experience lingering confusion and anxiety, and may use the Internet for supplemental information. This study assessed the content and quality of DCIS information on the Internet.

METHODS

We searched Google for English-language, publicly available DCIS information tools published from 2010 to current by non-profit organizations. We summarized tool characteristics, DCIS labels, and information important to women with DCIS corresponding to domains of a patient-centred care (PCC) framework. Tool quality was appraised with the DISCERN instrument.

RESULTS

Of 39 tools included, most were plain language summaries published since 2016. Tools employed a median of 2.0 labels (range 1.0 to 5.0) for DCIS, most frequently non-invasive breast cancer (29, 74.4%), abnormal cells (14, 35.9%), pre-cancer (14, 35.9%), and early form of breast cancer (13, 33.3%). Tools addressed a median of 4.0 (range 2.0 to 5.0) PCC domains. Few tools contained content in the domains of fostering the relationship (30.8%), addressing emotions (41.0%), or follow-up (41.0%); 74.4% noted the risk of progression or recurrence but provided vague details. Tools were assessed as high (25.6%), moderate (48.7%), and low (25.6%) quality.

CONCLUSIONS

Few DCIS information tools available to women on the Internet meet quality criteria for consumer health information or address concerns of importance to women with DCIS. By identifying a range of poorly defined terms used to label DCIS, and specific content domains that were lacking, this study identified how existing tools could be improved, and identified higher-quality tools that clinicians can use when discussing DCIS with patients.

Psychological morbidity in women diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ compared with women with early breast cancer receiving radiotherapy

PURPOSE

Despite having an excellent prognosis, patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) report significant anxiety and depression following diagnosis. This study evaluated psychological morbidity using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) in patients with DCIS compared with women with early-stage invasive breast cancer (EIBC) receiving radiotherapy (RT).

METHODS

We identified patients diagnosed with DCIS or EIBC (stage I or II breast cancer) from 2011 to 2017 who had at least one ESAS completed pre- and post-RT. Data on systemic treatment, radiation, patient demographics, and disease stage were extracted from existing databases. Psychological morbidity was evaluated through measurement of depression, anxiety, and overall wellbeing within the ESAS. The Wilcoxon rank-sum test or chi-square test was performed for continuous or categorical variables.

RESULTS

This study included 137 women with DCIS and 963 women with EIBC. ESAS was completed on average 28 days before RT (baseline) and 142 days after RT. Baseline ESAS scores showed significantly higher rates of depression among women with EIBC compared with those with DCIS (p = 0.006). Patients with EIBC also reported higher levels of anxiety and lower overall wellbeing than patients with DCIS, but this difference was not statistically significant. Post-RT ESAS scores showed significantly higher anxiety in patients with EIBC compared with DCIS (p = 0.049). Post-RT measures of anxiety and overall wellbeing were higher in patients with EIBC but differences were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Women with DCIS experience relatively less psychological morbidity than women with EIBC, pre- and post-RT.

National consensus recommendations on patient-centered care for ductal carcinoma in situ

PURPOSE

The purpose of this research was to generate recommendations on strategies to achieve patient-centered care (PCC) for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS).

METHODS

Thirty clinicians (surgeons, medical/radiation oncologists, radiologists, nurses, navigators) who manage DCIS and 32 DCIS survivors aged 18 or older were nominated. Forty-six recommendations to support PCC for DCIS were derived from primary research, and rated in a two-round Delphi process from March to June 2018.

RESULTS

A total of 29 clinicians and 27 women completed Round One, and 28 clinicians and 22 women completed Round Two. The 29 recommendations retained by both women and clinicians reflected the PCC domains of fostering patient-physician relationship (5), exchanging information (5), responding to emotions (1), managing uncertainty (4), making decisions (9), and enabling patient self-management (5). An additional 13 recommendations were retained by women only: fostering patient-physician relationship (1), exchanging information (3), responding to emotions (2), making decisions (3), and enabling patient self-management (4). Some recommendations refer to processes (i.e., ask questions about lifestyle or views about risks/outcomes to understand patient preferences); others to tools (i.e., communication aid). Panelists recommended a separate consensus process to refine the language that clinicians use when describing DCIS.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to generate guidance on how to achieve PCC for DCIS. Organizations that deliver or oversee health care can use these recommendations on PCC for DCIS to plan, evaluate, or improve services. Ongoing research is needed to develop communication tools, and establish labels and language for DCIS that optimize communication.