View Item 

Show simple item record

Chemotherapy decisions and patient experience with the recurrence score assay for early‐stage breast cancer
dc.contributor.authorFriese, Christopher R.
dc.contributor.authorLi, Yun
dc.contributor.authorBondarenko, Irina
dc.contributor.authorHofer, Timothy P.
dc.contributor.authorWard, Kevin C.
dc.contributor.authorHamilton, Ann S.
dc.contributor.authorDeapen, Dennis
dc.contributor.authorKurian, Allison W.
dc.contributor.authorKatz, Steven J.
dc.date.accessioned2017-01-10T19:03:17Z
dc.date.available2018-03-01T16:43:50Zen
dc.date.issued2017-01-01
dc.identifier.citationFriese, Christopher R.; Li, Yun; Bondarenko, Irina; Hofer, Timothy P.; Ward, Kevin C.; Hamilton, Ann S.; Deapen, Dennis; Kurian, Allison W.; Katz, Steven J. (2017). "Chemotherapy decisions and patient experience with the recurrence score assay for early‐stage breast cancer." Cancer 123(1): 43-51.
dc.identifier.issn0008-543X
dc.identifier.issn1097-0142
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/135174
dc.publisherJohn Wiley & Sons
dc.subject.otherhealth services
dc.subject.othergenomics
dc.subject.otherchemotherapy
dc.subject.otherbreast neoplasms
dc.subject.otheradjuvant
dc.subject.othersurveys and questionnaires
dc.titleChemotherapy decisions and patient experience with the recurrence score assay for early‐stage breast cancer
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollow
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelPublic Health
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelOncology and Hematology
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciences
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Reviewed
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/135174/1/cncr30324_am.pdf
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/135174/2/cncr30324.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/cncr.30324
dc.identifier.sourceCancer
dc.identifier.citedreferencePartridge AH, Hughes ME, Warner ET, et al. Subtype‐dependent relationship between young age at diagnosis and breast cancer survival. J Clin Oncol. 2016. pii: JCO658013. [Epub ahead of print].
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHudis CA. Biology before anatomy in early breast cancer—precisely the point. N Engl J Med. 2015; 373: 2079 – 2080.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNational Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: breast cancer. https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/f_guidelines.asp#breast. Accessed May 4, 2016.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHarris LN, Ismaila N, McShane LM, et al. Use of biomarkers to guide decisions on adjuvant systemic therapy for women with early‐stage invasive breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2016; 34: 1134 – 1150.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSparano JA, Gray RJ, Makower DF, et al. Prospective validation of a 21‐gene expression assay in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015; 373: 2005 – 2014.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHassett MJ, Silver SM, Hughes ME, et al. Adoption of gene expression profile testing and association with use of chemotherapy among women with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2012; 30: 2218 – 2226.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDinan MA, Mi X, Reed SD, Hirsch BR, Lyman GH, Curtis LH. Initial trends in the use of the 21‐gene recurrence score assay for patients with breast cancer in the Medicare population, 2005‐2009. JAMA Oncol. 2015; 1: 158 – 166.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRoberts MC, Weinberger M, Dusetzina SB, et al. Racial variation in adjuvant chemotherapy initiation among breast cancer patients receiving oncotype DX testing. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2015; 153: 191 – 200.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRoberts MC, Weinberger M, Dusetzina SB, et al. Racial variation in the uptake of oncotype DX testing for early‐stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2016; 34: 130 – 138.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePotosky AL, O’Neill SC, Isaacs C, et al. Population‐based study of the effect of gene expression profiling on adjuvant chemotherapy use in breast cancer patients under the age of 65 years. Cancer. 2015; 121: 4062 – 4070.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDinan MA, Mi X, Reed SD, Lyman GH, Curtis LH. Association between use of the 21‐gene recurrence score assay and receipt of chemotherapy among Medicare beneficiaries with early‐stage breast cancer, 2005‐2009. JAMA Oncol. 2015; 1: 1098 – 1109.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePartin JF, Mamounas EP. Impact of the 21‐gene recurrence score assay compared with standard clinicopathologic guidelines in adjuvant therapy selection for node‐negative, estrogen receptor–positive breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011; 18: 3399 – 3406.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMarkopoulos C. Overview of the use of Oncotype DX ® as an additional treatment decision tool in early breast cancer. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2013; 13: 179 – 194.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAlbain KS, Barlow WE, Shak S, et al. Prognostic and predictive value of the 21‐gene recurrence score assay in postmenopausal women with node‐positive, oestrogen‐receptor–positive breast cancer on chemotherapy: a retrospective analysis of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010; 11: 55 – 65.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLevine MN, Julian JA, Bedard PL, et al. Prospective evaluation of the 21‐gene recurrence score assay for breast cancer decision‐making in Ontario. J Clin Oncol. 2016; 34: 1065 – 1071.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCanSORT: Cancer Surveillance and Outcomes Research Team. http://cansort.med.umich.edu/. Accessed June 2, 2015.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMorrow M, Jagsi R, Alderman AK, et al. Surgeon recommendations and receipt of mastectomy for treatment of breast cancer. JAMA. 2009; 302: 1551 – 1556.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDillman DA, Smyth JD, Christian LM. Internet, Phone, Mail, and Mixed‐Mode Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. 4th ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2014.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHamilton AS, Hofer TP, Hawley ST, et al. Latinas and breast cancer outcomes: population‐based sampling, ethnic identity, and acculturation assessment. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2009; 18: 2022 – 2029.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGroves RM, Fowler FJ Jr, Couper MP, Lepkowski JM, Singer E, Torangeau R. Survey Methodology. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2011.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRaghunathan TE, Lepkowski JM, VanHoewyk J, Solenberger P. A Multivariate technique for multiply imputing missing values using a sequence of regression models. Survey Methodol. 2001; 27: 85 – 95.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRubin DB. Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 1987.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSun Z, Prat A, Cheang MC, Gelber RD, Perou CM. Chemotherapy benefit for ‘ER‐positive’ breast cancer and contamination of nonluminal subtypes—waiting for TAILORx and RxPONDER. Ann Oncol. 2015; 26: 70 – 74.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceShak S, Petkov V, Miller DP, et al. Breast cancer specific mortality in patients with early‐stage hormone receptor–positive invasive breast cancer and oncotype DX recurrence score results in the SEER database. Paper presented at: American Society of Clinical Oncology Quality Care Symposium; February 26‐27, 2016; Phoenix, AZ.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLo SS, Mumby PB, Norton J, et al. Prospective multicenter study of the impact of the 21‐gene recurrence score assay on medical oncologist and patient adjuvant breast cancer treatment selection. J Clin Oncol. 2010; 28: 1671 – 1676.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHamelinck VC, Bastiaannet E, Pieterse AH, et al. Patients’ preferences for surgical and adjuvant systemic treatment in early breast cancer: a systematic review. Cancer Treat Rev. 2014; 40: 1005 – 1018.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRay GT, Mandelblatt J, Habel LA, et al. Breast cancer multigene testing trends and impact on chemotherapy use. Am J Manag Care. 2016; 22: e153 – e160.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNational Cancer Institute. The TAILORx breast cancer trial. http://www.cancer.gov/types/breast/research/tailorx. Accessed June 20, 2016.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePusztai L. Chemotherapy and the recurrence score—results as expected? Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2015; 12: 690 – 692.
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
cncr30324_am.pdf
Size:
690.0KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open
Name:
cncr30324.pdf
Size:
344.9KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.