Decision regret regarding treatments among women with early-stage breast cancer: a systematic review protocol

Contemporary Review of the Management and Treatment of Young Breast Cancer Patients

Approximately 11% of all new breast cancer cases annually are diagnosed in young women, and this continues to be the leading cause of death in women age 20 to 49. Young, premenopausal breast cancer patients present with more advanced stages and with a higher proportion of aggressive subtypes such as triple negative and HER2-enriched tumors. Recently, the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) lowered the age threshold to initiate screening mammograms to age 40 to aid in earlier detection. Young age at diagnosis increases the likelihood for a pathogenic mutation, and genetic testing is recommended for all patients age 50 and younger. This population is often underrepresented in landmark clinical trials, and data is extrapolated for the treatment of young women with breast cancer. Despite there being no survival benefit to more extensive surgical treatments, such as mastectomy or contralateral prophylactic mastectomy, many patients opt against breast conservation. Young patients with breast cancer face issues related to treatment toxicities, potential overtreatment of their disease, mental health, sexual health, and fertility preservation. This unique population requires a multidisciplinary care team of physicians, surgeons, genetic counselors, fertility specialists, mental health professionals, physical therapists, and dieticians to provide individualized, comprehensive care. Our aim is to (1) provide a narrative review of retrospective studies, relevant society guidelines, and clinical trials focused on the contemporary treatment and management of YBC patients and (2) discuss important nuances in their care as a guide for members of their multidisciplinary treatment team.

Long-Term Regret and Satisfaction With Decision Following Gender-Affirming Mastectomy

Importance

There has been increasing legislative interest in regulating gender-affirming surgery, in part due to the concern about decisional regret. The regret rate following gender-affirming surgery is thought to be approximately 1%; however, previous studies relied heavily on ad hoc instruments.

Objective

To evaluate long-term decisional regret and satisfaction with decision using validated instruments following gender-affirming mastectomy.

Design, Setting, and Participants

For this cross-sectional study, a survey of patient-reported outcomes was sent between February 1 and July 31, 2022, to patients who had undergone gender-affirming mastectomy at a US tertiary referral center between January 1, 1990, and February 29, 2020.

Exposure

Decisional regret and satisfaction with decision to undergo gender-affirming mastectomy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Long-term patient-reported outcomes, including the Holmes-Rovner Satisfaction With Decision scale, the Decision Regret Scale, and demographic characteristics, were collected. Additional information was collected via medical record review. Descriptive statistics and univariable analysis using Fisher exact and Wilcoxon rank sum tests were performed to compare responders and nonresponders.

Results

A total of 235 patients were deemed eligible for the study, and 139 responded (59.1% response rate). Median age at the time of surgery was 27.1 (IQR, 23.0-33.4) years for responders and 26.4 (IQR, 23.1-32.7) years for nonresponders. Nonresponders (n = 96) had a longer postoperative follow-up period than responders (median follow-up, 4.6 [IQR, 3.1-8.6] vs 3.6 [IQR, 2.7-5.3] years, respectively; P = .002). Nonresponders vs responders also had lower rates of depression (42 [44%] vs 94 [68%]; P < .001) and anxiety (42 [44%] vs 97 [70%]; P < .001). No responders or nonresponders requested or underwent a reversal procedure. The median Satisfaction With Decision Scale score was 5.0 (IQR, 5.0-5.0) on a 5-point scale, with higher scores noting higher satisfaction. The median Decision Regret Scale score was 0.0 (IQR, 0.0-0.0) on a 100-point scale, with lower scores noting lower levels of regret. A univariable regression analysis could not be performed to identify characteristics associated with low satisfaction with decision or high decisional regret due to the lack of variation in these responses.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cross-sectional survey study, the results of validated survey instruments indicated low rates of decisional regret and high levels of satisfaction with decision following gender-affirming mastectomy. The lack of dissatisfaction and regret impeded the ability to perform a more complex statistical analysis, highlighting the need for condition-specific instruments to assess decisional regret and satisfaction with decision following gender-affirming surgery.

Current status and influencing factors of participating satisfaction during surgical treatment decision-making among breast cancer patients with immediate breast reconstruction

OBJECTIVE

Breast reconstruction (BR) is a positive contribution to aesthetic effect among breast cancer patients. Identification of influenced factors for participating satisfaction may provide insights on the decision-making theory to promote patient's autonomy in surgical choice. The purpose of this study was to examine the level of participating satisfaction with surgical treatment decision-making and its predictors among breast cancer patients with immediate BR.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted including 163 breast cancer patients with immediate BR in Mainland China. Data was collected using patients' participation satisfaction in medical decision-making scale (PSMDS), Big five Short-Form (BFI) Scale, Patient Participation Competence Scale(PPCS) and Patients' Preference (MPP) scale. Descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate regression analyses were used.

RESULTS

Scores of PSMD were 86.38 ± 15.74. Multiple regression analyses indicated autonomous decision-making, marital statue, information acquisition competence, agreeableness, and decision-making preferences as indicators, explaining 29.6% of the response variation (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The level of PSMD in breast cancer patients with immediate BR need to be improved. Patients with greater autonomous decision-making, married, higher information acquisition competence, agreeableness, and collaborative role are more likely to have an preferable PSMD. A comprehensive assessment and effective decision-making support are needed initially for BC patients to promote positive participation when making surgical decision.

Mapping the literature on decision regret in patients with non-communicable diseases (NCDs): a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Decision regret refers to feelings of remorse or dissatisfaction with a decision made regarding the treatment. Mapping the meaningful aspects of decision regret in patients with non-communicable diseases (NCDs) is necessary to provide a comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon and inform the development of effective interventions to address it. For this reason, this protocol aimed to describe the methodological aspects of a scoping review focused on mapping all the meaningful aspects of decision regret in patients with NCDs and provide a conceptual and comprehensive framework of the phenomenon.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The study described in this protocol will be performed following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology for scoping reviews. The anticipated starting time is July/August 2023 and the anticipated end of the review is June 2024. This scoping review will include quantitative, qualitative, primary and secondary literature, as well as grey literature on decision regret in patients with NCDs. The systematic search will be performed by consulting PubMed, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library and Google Scholar. English-language articles from any context will be eligible for inclusion. Two independent reviewers will take part in an iterative process of evaluating literature, choosing papers and extracting data. Disagreements among reviewers will be solved through consensus meetings. Results will be presented in relation to the review question by employing tables, figures and narrative summaries.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This scoping review did not require ethical approval since it involves a literature review and does not include new data collection from human participants. The results of the review will provide a summary of the available literature on decision regret experienced by patients with NCDs, which is crucial for developing preventive educational interventions in situations where multiple therapeutic options are available.

Treatment decision regret in long-term survivors after radical prostatectomy: a longitudinal study

OBJECTIVES

To investigate prevalence, course, and predictors of longitudinal decision regret in long-term prostate cancer (PCa) survivors treated by radical prostatectomy (RP).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 1003 PCa survivors from the multicentre German Familial PCa Database completed questionnaires on average 7 years after RP in 2007 and at follow-up 13 years later in 2020. Patients completed standardised patient-reported outcome measures on decision regret, decision-making, health-related quality of life, and psychosocial factors. Hierarchical multivariable logistic regression was used to assess predictors of longitudinal decision regret.

RESULTS

Decision regret increased significantly over time (9.0% after 6.9 years in 2007 and 12% after 19 years in 2020; P = 0.009). Favourable localised PCa (odds ratio [OR] 1.97, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-3.68), decision regret in 2007 (OR 6.38, 95% CI 3.55-11.47), and a higher depression score (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.03-1.83) were associated with decision regret in 2020. Shared decision-making (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.33-0.93) was associated with less decision regret.

CONCLUSION

The findings of the present study underline the perseverance of decision regret in long-term PCa survivors and the definitive need for involving patients in the decision-making process to mitigate regret over the long term.

The use of the Decision Regret Scale in non-clinical contexts

The Decision Regret Scale (DRS) was assessed for its psychometric qualities in measuring decision regret in ordinary life scenarios. Although the scale has typically been used with patients and in the context of medical decision-making in earlier studies, this contribution shows that the instrument may have a variety of uses, retaining excellent metric properties even in non-medical contexts. The tool showed good fits with both the CFA and the gender Measurement Invariance. A non-probabilistic selection of 2,534 Italian university students was conducted. The internal consistency measures were found to be completely appropriate. Correlations with the General Decision-Making Style (GDMS) and Scale of Regulatory Modes were used to check for convergent validity (SRM). Convergence analysis showed that participants with higher regret scores were those who favored a rational decision-making style, while lower regret scores correlated with avoidant and spontaneous styles. With regard to the regulatory modes, the relationship between regret and locomotion was positive. Overall, the directions of association point to an interesting predictive measure of a person's decision-making and self-regulatory orientation through the evaluation of regret using the DRS. The excellent psychometric properties found foreshadow a reliable use in various contexts where knowledge of post-decisional attitude becomes important: school, university, professional orientation, marketing studies, relationship choices, as well as for use in research.