Cited by 30Breast Cancer Treatment StudiesBRCA gene mutations in cancerPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Access to Personalized Medicine: Factors Influencing the Use and Value of Gene Expression Profiling in Breast Cancer Treatment

Open access

Abstract

Genomic information is increasingly being used to personalize health care. One example is gene expression profiling (gep) tests, which estimate recurrence risk to inform chemotherapy decisions in breast cancer. Recently, gep tests were publicly funded in Ontario. We explored the perceived utility of gep tests, focusing on the factors influencing their use and value in treatment decision-making by patients and oncologists. Methods: We conducted interviews with oncologists (n = 14) and interviews and a focus group with early-stage breast cancer patients (n = 28) who underwent gep testing. Both groups were recruited through oncology clinics in Ontario. Data were analyzed using the content analysis and constant comparison techniques. Results: Narratives from patients and oncologists provided insights into various factors facilitating and restricting access to gep. First, oncologists are positioned as gatekeepers of gep, providing access in medically appropriate cases. However, varying perceptions of appropriateness led to perceived inequities in access and negative impacts on the doctor–patient relationship. Second, media attention facilitated patient awareness of gep, but also complicated gatekeeping. Third, the dedicated administration attached to gep was burdensome and led to long waits for results and also to increased patient anxiety and delayed treatment. Collectively, because of barriers to access, those factors inadvertently heightened the perceived value of gep for patients relative to other prognostic indicators. Conclusions: Our study delineates the factors facilitating and restricting access to gep, and highlights the roles of media and organization of services in the perceived value and utilization of gep. The results identify a need for administrative changes and practice guidelines to support streamlined and standardized use of gep tests.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3747/co.21.1782

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Bombard, Y., Rozmovits, L., Trudeau, M., Leighl, N. B., Deal, K., & Marshall, D. A.
Affiliations
  • St. Michael's Hospital (CA)
  • Sunnybrook Health Science Centre (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • McMaster University (CA)
  • University of Calgary (CA)
Corresponding author
Bombard, Y.
Venue
Current Oncology
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2014-06-01
Volume
21
Issue
3
Pages
426-433
ISSN
  • 1198-0052 (ISSN-L)
  • 1718-7729
OpenAlex
W2111465038
Cited by
30
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 6
FWCI
1.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Oncology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Cancer Care Ontario
  • Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control
  • Government of Ontario
  • Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care
  • Canada Research Chairs
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › BRCA gene mutations in cancer
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Keywords
gene expression profiling, breast cancer, gatekeeping, oncologists, patient perspectives, perceived value, recurrence risk, chemotherapy decision-making, media attention, waiting time, physician-patient relationship, health equity, Ontario

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review