Web-based decision aids to support breast cancer screening decisions: systematic review and meta-analysis

Enhancing Patient Decision-Making in Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Decision Aid Efficacy

BACKGROUND

Patients often struggle to select a breast reconstruction option that aligns with their personal values. Decision aids have become popular tools to assist patients in navigating these choices. This systematic review assesses the effectiveness of available breast reconstruction decision aids.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search across five databases from inception to December 2022, identifying studies related to the development, validation, or implementation of decision aids in breast reconstruction.

RESULTS

Out of 4621 reports, 24 studies met inclusion criteria, covering 14 unique decision aids. These included 13 randomized controlled trials, 9 qualitative studies, and 2 case series. Nine studies reported reduced decisional conflict and 2 studies showed decreased decisional regret. Additionally, 13 studies found improved satisfaction with the information provided, and all seven studies that measured knowledge retention showed improvements. However, none of the studies found a reduction in anxiety or depression following the use of decision aids.

CONCLUSIONS

Decision aids are effective in reducing decisional conflict, enhancing patient satisfaction, and improving knowledge retention in breast reconstruction. Future research should focus on integrating these tools into clinical practice.

Comparative Effectiveness of Decision Aids for Cancer-Screening Decision Making: An Overview of Reviews

BACKGROUND

Decision aids (DAs), compared to no DAs, help improve the key aspects of shared decision-making, including increased knowledge, discussion frequency, and reduction in decisional conflict. However, systematic reviews have reported varied conclusions on screening uptake, and which DAs are superior to alternative forms in shared decision-making for cancer screening has not been comprehensively reviewed.

METHODS

An overview of systematic reviews was performed. Multiple databases were searched up to December 31, 2023, for systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized comparative studies (NRCSs) of any size that assessed a decision aid aimed to facilitate cancer-screening decision making communications. Dual screening of abstracts and full-text reports, dual data extraction and quality assessment, and qualitative synthesis were performed.

RESULTS

The 22 eligible publications included 24 reviews on cancer screening DAs for a single specific cancer (8, 8, 7, and 1 on prostate, breast, colorectal, and lung cancer, respectively) and three reviews on multiple aggregate cancers. Individual reviews were based on different primary study designs (92 RCTs and 37 NRCSs); each study was infrequently cited (median citation count 2; range 1-9). Although the DAs had variable formats and delivery methods, the reviews generally focused on use and non-use comparisons. DAs decreased the intention or actual uptake for prostate and breast cancer screening, but increased it for colorectal cancer screening. DAs were associated with increased knowledge, well-informed choice, and reduced decisional conflict, regardless of cancer type. Only four reviews on comparative effectiveness between alternative formats of DAs (based on 14 RCTs and 2 NRCSs) failed to conclude on the specific format that was superior to others.

DISCUSSION

DAs improve cancer screening shared decision-making by boosting cancer screening knowledge and informed choice and lowering decisional conflict and may facilitate preference-based, individualized screening participation. Comparative data on different cancer screening DAs are limited.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO, CRD42021235957.

Impact of graphical display on the intention to undergo risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy and mastectomy in individuals positive for BRCA pathogenic variant

The BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant (PV) increases the risk of breast and ovarian cancer; thus, risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) and mastectomy (RRM) are recommended. We evaluated the effects of the graphical display of cancer risk compared with those of numerical presentation on the decision-making for risk-reducing (RR) surgery. A total of 471 women representing the Korean population were recruited. The lifetime risk of breast/ovarian cancer were given numerically followed by graphically in hypothetical BRCA1/2 PV-positive cases. Subsequently, the study participants were asked for their willingness to undergo RRSO/RRM. When the ovarian cancer risk was shown as 44.0%, the percentage of study participants who chose RRSO was 41.0% after numerical presentation versus 39.9% after graphical display, of which the difference was not significant. When the breast cancer risk was presented as 72.0%, 30.4% of the participants opted for RRM under numerical presentation, whereas this increased to 38.6% under graphical display, of which the difference was significant (p < 0.0075). The average levels of the cancer risk which study participants consider RR surgery were 57.1% for ovarian cancer and 60.6% for breast cancer. This suggests that the impacts of different formats of risk communication on decision about RRSO or RRM may be different by the absolute levels of ovarian or breast cancer.

Breast cancer patients' perspectives and needs about wed-based surgical decision aid: A qualitative study

PURPOSE

Breast cancer diagnosis often presents patients with complex treatment decisions, particularly concerning surgical options. A patient decision aid can assist patients in making better decisions, and ultimately improving health outcomes positively. This study aims to explore the perceptions and needs of breast cancer patients regarding the utilization of wed-based surgical decision aids.

METHODS

A descriptive qualitative study was conducted using semi-structured interviews with purposive sampling that were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. A thematic analysis was conducted using NVivo 12 software. Participants were recruited from a tertiary general hospital in Shanghai, China. Inclusion criteria were being diagnosed with breast cancer, age over 18 years old, considering breast cancer surgery as a treatment option and able/willing to give informed consent.

RESULTS

From March to May 2023, 16 patients consented to participate and completed the interviews. Three major themes were revealed, with corresponding sub-themes: (1) informative and useful content (need to know as much information as possible, easy to understand and presented in multiple ways and highly credible from reliable resource); (2) user-friendly on design (easy to operate, simple function and man-machine interaction); and (3) suggested timing of use.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients' perspectives and needs about wed-based surgical decision aids are numerous and diverse. In designing wed-based surgical decision aids for breast cancer patients, content, design and timing are all factors that need to be taken into consideration to encourage informed surgical decisions. Further work will focus on developing a feasible and acceptable web-based surgical patient decision aid (PtDA), and test its usability in a clinical setting to understand if the PtDA can meet the decisional needs of breast cancer patients, thus to improve quality of decision-making.

People affected by cancer and their carers from gender and sexually diverse communities: their experiences and the role of smartphone applications

BACKGROUND

People living with cancer, or carers who are from lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex or asexual (LGBTQIA+) communities experience unique information and support needs. Accessible technology-based resources providing tailored support are required to promote wellbeing, however this is a growing area of research requiring further investigation. The purpose of this study was to explore the experiences of healthcare services among people living with cancer, and their carers, who belong to sexual or gender diverse communities (LGBTQIA+), and identify how smartphone applications (apps) could support people from LGBTQIA + communities.

METHODS

This was a qualitative descriptive study where people living with cancer or carers from LGBTQIA + communities participated in phone interviews. Participants were recruited across Australia via social media advertisements, LGBTQIA + medical practices, and cancer advocacy groups. Participants were asked questions about their experiences, and were provided with screenshots of an existing app and asked to provide feedback on content and inclusiveness. Transcripts were coded and codes grouped together to form similar and concepts. Inductive and deductive analyses were used to create themes.

RESULTS

13 patients (mean age 56 (SD:13)), and three carers (mean age 64 (SD:19)) completed phone interviews. The majority of participants identified their gender as female (patients n = 9, carers 3), and their sexuality as gay or lesbian (patients n = 10, carers n = 3). Four themes were created: (1) navigating disclosure in healthcare, described emotional challenges surrounding disclosure; (2) the power of positive experiences with clinicians, described positive interactions and gaps in care from clinicians; (3) impact of gender and sexuality on informal support, outlined support received from informal network and gaps in support, and; (4) opportunities to increase inclusivity in smartphone apps, generated ideas on how apps can be tailored to meet needs identified.

CONCLUSION

Disclosure of gender or sexuality, and interactions with clinicians had the potential to impact participants' experience of cancer care. Gaps in informal networks pointed at how to better support LGBTQIA + communities, and identified opportunities for inclusion in an app that will be tailored and trialled for this community. Future work should focus on addressing systems-level processes in acknowledging and supporting priority groups affected by cancer.

Assessing the Content and Effect of Web-Based Decision Aids for Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Web-based decision aids have been shown to have a positive effect when used to improve the quality of decision-making for women facing postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR). However, the existing findings regarding these interventions are still incongruent, and the overall effect is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess the content of web-based decision aids and its impact on decision-related outcomes (ie, decision conflict, decision regret, informed choice, and knowledge), psychological-related outcomes (ie, satisfaction and anxiety), and surgical decision-making in women facing PMBR.

METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. A total of 6 databases, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science Core Collection, were searched starting at the time of establishment of the databases to May 2023, and an updated search was conducted on April 1, 2024. MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) terms and text words were used. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomized controlled trials was used to assess the risk of bias. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.

RESULTS

In total, 7 studies included 579 women and were published between 2008 and 2023, and the sample size in each study ranged from 26 to 222. The results showed that web-based decision aids used audio and video to present the pros and cons of PMBR versus no PMBR, implants versus flaps, and immediate versus delayed PMBR and the appearance and feel of the PMBR results and the expected recovery time with photographs of actual patients. Web-based decision aids help improve PMBR knowledge, decisional conflict (mean difference [MD]=-5.43, 95% CI -8.87 to -1.99; P=.002), and satisfaction (standardized MD=0.48, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.95; P=.05) but have no effect on informed choice (MD=-2.80, 95% CI -8.54 to 2.94; P=.34), decision regret (MD=-1.55, 95% CI -6.00 to 2.90 P=.49), or anxiety (standardized MD=0.04, 95% CI -0.50 to 0.58; P=.88). The overall Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation quality of the evidence was low.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that the web-based decision aids provide a modern, low-cost, and high dissemination rate effective method to promote the improved quality of decision-making in women undergoing PMBR.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42023450496; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=450496.

Shared decision-making for supporting women's decisions about breast cancer screening

BACKGROUND

In breast cancer screening programmes, women may have discussions with a healthcare provider to help them decide whether or not they wish to join the breast cancer screening programme. This process is called shared decision-making (SDM) and involves discussions and decisions based on the evidence and the person's values and preferences. SDM is becoming a recommended approach in clinical guidelines, extending beyond decision aids. However, the overall effect of SDM in women deciding to participate in breast cancer screening remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of SDM on women's satisfaction, confidence, and knowledge when deciding whether to participate in breast cancer screening.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform on 8 August 2023. We also screened abstracts from two relevant conferences from 2020 to 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs assessing interventions targeting various components of SDM. The focus was on supporting women aged 40 to 75 at average or above-average risk of breast cancer in their decision to participate in breast cancer screening.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and conducted data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and GRADE assessment of the certainty of the evidence. Review outcomes included satisfaction with the decision-making process, confidence in the decision made, knowledge of all options, adherence to the chosen option, women's involvement in SDM, woman-clinician communication, and mental health.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 19 studies with 64,215 randomised women, mostly with an average to moderate risk of breast cancer. Two studies covered all aspects of SDM; six examined shortened forms of SDM involving communication on risks and personal values; and 11 focused on enhanced communication of risk without other SDM aspects. SDM involving all components compared to control The two eligible studies did not assess satisfaction with the SDM process or confidence in the decision. Based on a single study, SDM showed uncertain effects on participant knowledge regarding the age to start screening (risk ratio (RR) 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 2.28; 133 women; very low certainty evidence) and frequency of testing (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.04; 133 women; very low certainty evidence). Other review outcomes were not measured. Abbreviated forms of SDM with clarification of values and preferences compared to control Of the six included studies, none evaluated satisfaction with the SDM process. These interventions may reduce conflict in the decision made, based on two measures, Decisional Conflict Scale scores (mean difference (MD) -1.60, 95% CI -4.21 to 0.87; conflict scale from 0 to 100; 4 studies; 1714 women; very low certainty evidence) and the proportion of women with residual conflict compared to control at one to three months' follow-up (rate of women with a conflicted decision, RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.99; 1 study; 1001 women, very low certainty evidence). Knowledge of all options was assessed through knowledge scores and informed choice. The effect of SDM may enhance knowledge (MDs ranged from 0.47 to 1.44 higher scores on a scale from 0 to 10; 5 studies; 2114 women; low certainty evidence) and may lead to higher rates of informed choice (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.63; 4 studies; 2449 women; low certainty evidence) compared to control at one to three months' follow-up. These interventions may result in little to no difference in anxiety (MD 0.54, 95% -0.96 to 2.14; scale from 20 to 80; 2 studies; 749 women; low certainty evidence) and the number of women with worries about cancer compared to control at four to six weeks' follow-up (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.06; 1 study, 639 women; low certainty evidence). Other review outcomes were not measured. Enhanced communication about risks without other SDM aspects compared to control Of 11 studies, three did not report relevant outcomes for this review, and none assessed satisfaction with the SDM process. Confidence in the decision made was measured by decisional conflict and anticipated regret of participating in screening or not. These interventions, without addressing values and preferences, may result in lower confidence in the decision compared to regular communication strategies at two weeks' follow-up (MD 2.89, 95% CI -2.35 to 8.14; Decisional Conflict Scale from 0 to 100; 2 studies; 1191 women; low certainty evidence). They may result in higher anticipated regret if participating in screening (MD 0.28, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.41) and lower anticipated regret if not participating in screening (MD -0.28, 95% CI -0.42 to -0.14). These interventions increase knowledge (MD 1.14, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.62; scale from 0 to 10; 4 studies; 2510 women; high certainty evidence), while it is unclear if there is a higher rate of informed choice compared to regular communication strategies at two to four weeks' follow-up (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.92; 2 studies; 1805 women; low certainty evidence). These interventions result in little to no difference in anxiety (MD 0.33, 95% CI -1.55 to 0.99; scale from 20 to 80) and depression (MD 0.02, 95% CI -0.41 to 0.45; scale from 0 to 21; 2 studies; 1193 women; high certainty evidence) and lower cancer worry compared to control (MD -0.17, 95% CI -0.26 to -0.08; scale from 1 to 4; 1 study; 838 women; high certainty evidence). Other review outcomes were not measured.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Studies using abbreviated forms of SDM and other forms of enhanced communications indicated improvements in knowledge and reduced decisional conflict. However, uncertainty remains about the effect of SDM on supporting women's decisions. Most studies did not evaluate outcomes considered important for this review topic, and those that did measured different concepts. High-quality randomised trials are needed to evaluate SDM in diverse cultural settings with a focus on outcomes such as women's satisfaction with choices aligned to their values.

Would shared decision-making be useful in breast cancer screening programmes? A qualitative study using focus group discussions to gather evidence from French women with different socioeconomic backgrounds

BACKGROUND

To inform the development of an online tool to be potentially used in shared decision-making about breast cancer screening, French women were questioned about participation in breast cancer screening, the health professional's role, and their perceptions of the proposed tool.

METHODS

We organised focus group discussions with 55 French women. Two different strategies were used to recruit women from high and low socioeconomic backgrounds. We applied both inductive and deductive approaches to conduct a thematic analysis of the discussions. We analysed the responses by using the main determinants from different health behaviour models and compared the two groups.

RESULTS

Independently of socioeconomic status, the most important determinant for a woman's participation in breast cancer screening was the perceived severity of breast cancer and the perceived benefits of its early detection by screening. Cues to action reported by both groups were invitation letters; recommendations by health professionals, or group/community activities and public events were reported by women from high and low socioeconomic backgrounds, respectively. Among other positive determinants, women from high socioeconomic backgrounds reported making informed decisions and receiving peer support whereas women from low socioeconomic backgrounds reported community empowerment through group/community events. Fear of cancer was reported as a barrier in both groups. Among other barriers, language issues were reported only by women from low socioeconomic backgrounds; women from high socioeconomic backgrounds reported breast cancer screening-related risks other than overdiagnosis and/or overtreatment. Barriers to accessing the online tool to be developed were mainly reported by women from high socioeconomic backgrounds.

CONCLUSION

Limitations in implementing shared decision-making for women from low socioeconomic backgrounds were highlighted. An online tool that is suitable for all women, regardless of socioeconomic status, would provide "on-demand" reliable and tailored information about breast cancer screening and improve access to health professionals and social exchanges.

A Scoping Review of Personalized, Interactive, Web-Based Clinical Decision Tools Available for Breast Cancer Prevention and Screening in the United States

Introduction. Personalized web-based clinical decision tools for breast cancer prevention and screening could address knowledge gaps, enhance patient autonomy in shared decision-making, and promote equitable care. The purpose of this review was to present evidence on the availability, usability, feasibility, acceptability, quality, and uptake of breast cancer prevention and screening tools to support their integration into clinical care. Methods. We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews Checklist to conduct this review. We searched 6 databases to identify literature on the development, validation, usability, feasibility, acceptability testing, and uptake of the tools into practice settings. Quality assessment for each tool was conducted using the International Patient Decision Aid Standard instrument, with quality scores ranging from 0 to 63 (lowest-highest). Results. We identified 10 tools for breast cancer prevention and 9 tools for screening. The tools included individual (e.g., age), clinical (e.g., genomic risk factors), and health behavior (e.g., alcohol use) characteristics. Fourteen tools included race/ethnicity, but no tool incorporated contextual factors (e.g., insurance, access) associated with breast cancer. All tools were internally or externally validated. Six tools had undergone usability testing in samples including White (median, 71%; range, 9%-96%), insured (99%; 97%-100%) women, with college education or higher (60%; 27%-100%). All of the tools were developed and tested in academic settings. Seven (37%) tools showed potential evidence of uptake in clinical practice. The tools had an average quality assessment score of 21 (range, 9-39). Conclusions. There is limited evidence on testing and uptake of breast cancer prevention and screening tools in diverse clinical settings. The development, testing, and integration of tools in academic and nonacademic settings could potentially improve uptake and equitable access to these tools.

Highlights

There were 19 personalized, interactive, Web-based decision tools for breast cancer prevention and screening.Breast cancer outcomes were personalized based on individual clinical characteristics (e.g., age, medical history), genomic risk factors (e.g., BRCA1/2), race and ethnicity, and health behaviors (e.g., smoking). The tools did not include contextual factors (e.g., insurance status, access to screening facilities) that could potentially contribute to breast cancer outcomes.Validation, usability, acceptability, and feasibility testing were conducted mostly among White and/or insured patients with some college education (or higher) in academic settings. There was limited evidence on testing and uptake of the tools in nonacademic clinical settings.

Making the BEST decision-the BESTa project development, implementation and evaluation of a digital Decision Aid in Swedish cancer screening programmes- a description of a research project

BACKGROUND

Sweden has a long tradition of organized national population-based screening programmes. Participation rates differ between programmes and regions, being relatively high in some groups, but lower in others. To ensure an equity perspective on screening, it is desirable that individuals make an informed decision based on knowledge rather than ignorance, misconceptions, or fear. Decision Aids (DAs) are set to deliver information about different healthcare options and help individuals to visualize the values associated with each available option. DAs are not intended to guide individuals to choose one option over another. The advantage of an individual Decision Aid (iDA) is that individuals gain knowledge about cancer and screening by accessing one webpage with the possibility to communicate with health professionals and thereafter make their decision regarding participation. The objective is therefore to develop, implement and evaluate a digital iDA for individuals invited to cancer screening in Sweden.

METHODS

This study encompasses a process-, implementation-, and outcome evaluation. Multiple methods will be applied including focus group discussions, individual interviews and the usage of the think aloud technique and self-reported questionnaire data. The project is based on The International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) framework and the proposed model development process for DAs. Individuals aged 23-74, including women (the cervical-, breast- and CRC screening module) and men (the CRC screening module), will be included in the developmental process. Efforts will be made to recruit participants with self-reported physical and mental limitations, individuals without a permanent residence and ethnic minorities.

DISCUSSION

To the best of our knowledge, the present study is the first attempt aimed at developing an iDA for use in the Swedish context. The iDA is intended to facilitate shared decision making about participation in screening. Furthermore, the iDA is expected to increase knowledge and raise awareness about cancer and cancer screening.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Lay people are involved throughout the whole development and implementation process of the digital DA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT05512260.

A prospective study of shared decision-making in brain tumor surgery

PURPOSE

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a key tenet of personalized care and is becoming an essential component of informed consent in an increasing number of countries. The aim of this study is to analyze patient and healthcare staff satisfaction with the SDM process before and after SDM was officially introduced as the standard of care. Decision grids are important tools in the SDM process, and we developed them for three different types of intracranial tumors.

METHODS

This prospective study was conducted in a high-volume neuro-oncological center on all consecutive eligible patients undergoing consideration of treatment for intracranial glioma and metastases. Twenty-two patients participated before and 74 after the introduction of SDM. Six and 5 staff members respectively participated in the analysis before and after team training and the introduction of SDM. The main outcome was patient and healthcare staff satisfaction with the SDM process.

RESULTS

Patients reported high satisfaction with the SDM process before (mean CollaboRATE score 26 of 27 points) and after (mean CollaboRATE score 26.3 of 27 points, p = 0.23) the introduction of SDM. Interestingly, staff attitude toward SDM improved significantly from 61.68 before to 90.95% after the introduction of SDM (p-value < 0.001). Decision grids that were developed for three different types of intracranial tumors are presented.

CONCLUSIONS

Team training in SDM and the introduction of techniques into daily practice can increase staff satisfaction with the SDM process. High levels of patient satisfaction were observed before, with a non-significant increase after the introduction of SDM. Decision grids are an important tool to facilitate the conveyance and understanding of complex information and to achieve SDM in daily clinical practice.

Tumor Microenvironment, Radiology, and Artificial Intelligence: Should We Consider Tumor Periphery?

OBJECTIVES

The tumor microenvironment (TME) consists of cellular and noncellular components which enable the tumor to interact with its surroundings and plays an important role in the tumor progression and how the immune system reacts to the malignancy. In the present study, we investigate the diagnostic potential of the TME in differentiating benign and malignant lesions using image quantification and machine learning.

METHODS

A total of 229 breast lesions and 220 cervical lymph nodes were included in the study. A group of expert radiologists first performed medical imaging and segmented the lesions, after which a rectangular mask was drawn, encompassing all of the contouring. The mask was extended in each axis up to 50%, and 29 radiomics features were extracted from each mask. Radiomics features that showed a significant difference in each contour were used to develop a support vector machine (SVM) classifier for benign and malignant lesions in breast and lymph node images separately.

RESULTS

Single radiomics features extracted from extended contours outperformed radiologists' contours in both breast and lymph node lesions. Furthermore, when fed into the SVM model, the extended models also outperformed the radiologist's contour, achieving an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.887 and 0.970 in differentiating breast and lymph node lesions, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results provide convincing evidence regarding the importance of the tumor periphery and TME in medical imaging diagnosis. We propose that the immediate tumor periphery should be considered for differentiating benign and malignant lesions in image quantification studies.

Women's Breast Cancer Screening Confidence by Screening Modality and Breast Density: A Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium Survey Study

Objective: Little is known about women's confidence in their breast cancer screening. We sought to characterize breast cancer screening confidence by imaging modality and clinically assessed breast density. Materials and Methods: We undertook a cross-sectional survey of women ages 40-74 years who received digital mammography (DM), digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), and/or breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with a normal screening exam in the prior year. The main outcome was women's confidence (Very, Somewhat, A little, Not at all) in their breast cancer screening detecting any cancer. Multivariable logistic regression identified correlates of being very confident in breast cancer screening by screening modality group: Group 1) DM vs. DBT and Group 2) DM or DBT alone vs. with supplemental MRI. Results: Overall, 2329 of 7439 (31.3%) invitees participated, with 30%-61% being very confident in their screening across modality and density subgroups. Having dense versus nondense breasts was associated with lower odds of being very confident (Group 1: odds ratio [OR]: 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.46-0.79; Group 2: OR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.40-0.79). There were no differences by modality within Group 1, but for Group 2, women undergoing MRI had higher odds of being very confident (OR: 1.69; 95% CI: 1.21-2.37). Other correlates of greater screening confidence were as follows: Group 1-being offered a screening test choice and cost not influencing modality received, and Group 2-decision satisfaction and worry. Conclusions: Women with dense breasts had lower screening confidence regardless of screening modality and those undergoing MRI had higher confidence regardless of density. The importance of informing women about screening options is underscored by observed associations between screening choice, decision satisfaction, and screening confidence. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02980848.

Mammography and Decision Aid Use for Breast Cancer Screening in Older Women

INTRODUCTION

Decision aids for breast cancer screening are increasingly being used by physicians, but the association between physician practice decision-aid use and mammography rates remains uncertain. Using national data, this study examines the association between practice-level decision-aid use and mammography use among older women.

METHODS

Physician practice responses to the 2017/2018 National Survey of Healthcare Organizations and Systems (n=1,236) were linked to 2016 and 2017 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiary data from eligible beneficiaries (n=439,684) aged 65-74 years. In 2021, multivariable generalized linear models estimated the association of practice decision-aid use for breast cancer screening and advanced health information technology functions with mammography use, controlling for practice and beneficiary characteristics.

RESULTS

Overall, 60.1% of eligible beneficiaries had a screening mammogram, and 37.3% of physician practices routinely used decision aids for breast cancer screening. In adjusted analyses, advanced health information technology functions (OR=1.19, p=0.04) were associated with mammography use, but practice use of decision aids was not (OR=0.95, p=0.21). Beneficiary clinical and socioeconomic characteristics, including race, comorbidities, Medicare and Medicaid eligibility, and median household income were more strongly associated with mammography use than practice-level decision-aid use or advanced health information technology functions.

CONCLUSIONS

Health information technology‒enabled automation of mammography reminders and other advanced health information technology functions may support mammography, whereas breast cancer decision aids may reduce patients' propensities to be screened through the alignment of their preferences and screening decision. More resources may be needed for decision aids to be routinely implemented to improve solicitation of patient preferences and targeting of mammography services.

Study on the Effect of Positive Psychological Intervention Based on PERMA Model on Perioperative Patients with AIDS Complicated with Breast Cancer

Objective. To study the effect of positive psychological intervention based on PERMA model on perioperative AIDS patients complicated with breast cancer. Methods. A total of 120 perioperative patients with AIDS complicated with breast cancer treated in our hospital from January 2021 to December 2021 were randomly divided into research group ( $n=60$ ) and control group ( $n=60$ ). The research group received positive psychological intervention based on PERMA model, while the control group received routine nursing. The scores of disease uncertainty scale (MUIS), Frankl treatment compliance scale, cancer-related fatigue scale, self-rating anxiety scale (SAS), self-rating depression scale (SDS), and quality of life scale EORTCQLQ-C30 (v3.0) were studied. Results. After 12-week nursing, the MUIS score of the research group was lower than that of the control group, and the difference was statistically significant ( $P<0.05$ ). After 12 weeks of nursing, the score of Frankl treatment compliance scale in the research group was higher than that in the control group, and the difference was statistically significant ( $P<0.05$ ). Following 12-week nursing, the scores of SAS and SDS in the research group were lower than those in the control group, and the difference was statistically significant ( $P<0.05$ ). After 12 weeks of nursing, the score of cancer-related fatigue scale in the research group was lower than that in the control group, and the difference was statistically significant ( $P<0.05$ ). The EORTCQLQ-C30 (v3.0) scale-symptom domain score in the research group was lower than that in the control group following 12-week nursing, and the difference was statistically significant ( $P<0.05$ ). After 12 weeks of nursing, the EORTCQLQ-C30 (v3.0) scale-overall health domain score and functional domain score in the research group were higher than those in the control group, and the difference was statistically significant ( $P<0.05$ ). Conclusion. The application value of positive psychological intervention based on PERMA model in perioperative patients with AIDS complicated with breast cancer is more significant. It contributes more to treatment compliance and improves negative feelings of anxiety and depression.

Women's perceptions of PERSPECTIVE: a breast cancer risk stratification e-platform

Background

Breast cancer risk stratification categorizes a woman’s potential risk of developing the disease as near-population, intermediate, or high. In accordance, screening and follow up for breast cancer can readily be tailored following risk assessment. Recent efforts have focussed on developing more accessible means to convey this information to women. This study sought to document the relevance of an informational e-platform developed for these purposes.

Objective

To begin to assess a newly developed breast cancer risk stratification and decision support e-platform called PERSPECTIVE (PErsonalised Risk Stratification for Prevention and Early deteCTIon of breast cancer) among women who do not know their personal breast cancer risk (Phase 1). Changes (pre- and post- e-platform exposure) in knowledge of breast cancer risk and interest in undergoing genetic testing were assessed in addition to perceptions of platform usability and acceptability.

Methods

Using a pre-post design, women (N = 156) of differing literacy and education levels, aged 30 to 60, with no previous breast cancer diagnosis were recruited from the general population and completed self-report e-questionnaires.

Results

Mean e-platform viewing time was 18.67 min (SD 0.65) with the most frequently visited pages being breast cancer-related risk factors and risk assessment. Post-exposure, participants reported  significantly higher breast cancer-related knowledge (p < .001). Increases in knowledge relating to obesity, alcohol, breast density, menstruation, and the risk estimation process remained even when sociodemographic variables age and education were controlled. There were no significant changes in genetic testing interest post-exposure. Mean ratings for e-platform acceptability and usability were high: 26.19 out of 30 (SD 0.157) and 42.85 out of 50 (SD 0.267), respectively.

Conclusions

An informative breast cancer risk stratification e-platform targeting healthy women in the general population can significantly increase knowledge as well as support decisions around breast cancer risk and assessment. Currently underway, Phase 2, called PERSPECTIVE, is seeking further content integration and broader implementation .

A scoping review of interactive and personalized web-based clinical tools to support treatment decision making in breast cancer

The increasing attention on personalized breast cancer care has resulted in an explosion of new interactive, tailored, web-based clinical decision tools for guiding treatment decisions in clinical practice. The goal of this study was to review, compare, and discuss the clinical implications of current tools, and highlight future directions for tools aiming to improve personalized breast cancer care. We searched PubMed, Embase, PsychInfo, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of Science, and Scopus to identify web-based decision tools addressing breast cancer treatment decisions. There was a total of 17 articles associated with 21 unique tools supporting decisions related to surgery, radiation therapy, hormonal therapy, bisphosphonates, HER2-targeted therapy, and chemotherapy. The quality of the tools was assessed using the International Patient Decision Aid Standard instrument. Overall, the tools considered clinical (e.g., age) and tumor characteristics (e.g., grade) to provide personalized outcomes (e.g., survival) associated with various treatment options. Fewer tools provided the adverse effects of the selected treatment. Only one tool was field-tested with patients, and none were tested with healthcare providers. Future studies need to assess the feasibility, usability, acceptability, as well as the effects of personalized web-based decision tools on communication and decision making from the patient and clinician perspectives.

Decision aids for breast cancer screening in women approximately 50 years of age: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Review the content, quality and effect of breast cancer screening decision aids (BCS-DAs) in women approximately 50 years of age to provide a basis for the development of DAs.

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer screening (BCS) decisions are complex and should vary depending on a woman's risk of breast cancer and her values and preferences. Decision aids (DAs) can help support women and medical staff in shared decision-making (SDM) when solving BCS problems.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

Four databases were searched starting at the time of establishment of the database to March 2021. The PRISMA checklist was followed. The meta-analysis was carried out using Review Manager 5.3 software. The quality of the studies was assessed using the risk of bias tool recommended by the Cochrane Handbook. The quality of the DAs was assessed using the International Standards for Decision Aid (IPDASi v4.0).

RESULTS

The search strategy obtained 2024 references. After abstraction and full text screening, a total of seven studies were included. This article systematically reviews the content, quality and effectiveness of DAs in seven RCTs in helping women to make BCS decisions. The DAs were mostly in paper or online form and displayed disease screening information, analysed the benefits and harms of options and clarified the value to patients. Among all the DAs, only one met the minimum quality standards of IPDASi v4.0. Comprehensive analysis shows that DAs can significantly improve knowledge and increase the proportion of women who make informed choices, but they have no effect on screening attitude, intention, decision conflict or regret.

CONCLUSIONS

In the future, nurses should be encouraged to develop DAs in accordance with strict standards and to make them applicable to young women of different backgrounds.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The result may be provide a basis for the development of DAs to promote women's informed screening choices.

Web-based decision aids for cancer clinical decisions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of web-based decision aids (WDAs) on cancer-related clinical care in terms of different decision categories and by different cancer types.

METHODS

Literature retrieval utilized highly inclusive algorithms searching randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library and manual searching of eligible studies from reference lists of relevant articles. Two researchers examined the articles selected separately and extracted the information about the studies (e.g., decision category, sample sizes, and outcome indicators) using a data-extracting form and performed risk of bias assessment of the included studies with Begg's test, Egger's test, and Cochrane Collaboration's tool. Meta-analysis of the pooled effects of WDAs on outcome indicators was performed via Review Manager 5.2.

RESULTS

A total of 24 RCTs met the inclusion criteria, involving 9846 participants. Overall meta-analysis revealed statistically significant effects on cancer decisional conflict, knowledge, and making informed choice with the overall effect sizes being -0.29 (standardized mean difference, SMD), 0.47 (SMD), and 1.92 (risk ratio, RR) respectively. Subgroup analysis revealed significant effects in indicators including decisional conflict, knowledge, satisfaction, participation in decision-making, and screening behavior, though some extent of heterogeneity and quality flaws existed among the included studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Although our research results showed evidence of WDA effects on certain outcome indicators of cancer decisions, these results should be interpreted with caution given the heterogeneity and quality flaws. It is still premature to conclude whether WDA was effective in optimizing cancer clinical decision-making, and more efforts are needed in this area.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020218991.