a Sydney Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of Sydney, Camperdown; Department of Medical Oncology, Calvary Mater Newcastle, Waratah; School of Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Newcastle, Callaghan; Centre for Medical Psychology & Evidence-Based Decision-Making, School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Camperdown; Breast and Surgical Oncology at the Poche Centre, The Mater Hospital, North Sydney; Clinical Research Design and Statistics Support Unit, Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights; Consumer Advisory Panel, Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Newcastle; Trials Department, Australia and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Newcastle; and Patricia Ritchie Centre for Cancer Care and Research, North Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Background: Neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NAST) is an increasingly used treatment option for women with large operable or highly proliferative breast cancer. With equivalent survival outcomes between NAST and up-front surgery, the situation-specific preference-sensitive nature of the decision makes it suitable for a decision aid (DA). This study aimed to develop and evaluate a DA for this population. Methods: A DA booklet was developed according to international standards, including information about adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatment, outcome probabilities, and a values clarification exercise. Eligible women, considered by investigators as candidates for NAST, were enrolled in a multi-institutional, single-arm, longitudinal study. Patient-reported outcome measure questionnaires were completed pre- and post-DA, between chemotherapy and surgery, and at 12 months. Outcomes were feasibility (percentage of eligible patients accessing the DA); acceptability to patients (percentage who would recommend it to others) and clinicians (percentage who would use the DA in routine practice); and decision-related outcomes. Results: From 77 eligible women, 59 were enrolled, of whom 47 (79.7%; 95% CI, 69.4–89.9) reported having read the DA; 51 completed the first post-DA questionnaire. Of these 51, 41 participants (80.4%; 95% CI, 69.5–91.3) found the DA useful for their decision about NAST. Of 18 responding investigators, 16 (88.9%; 95% CI, 74.4–103.4) indicated they would continue to use the DA in routine practice. Post-DA, decisional conflict decreased significantly (P<.01); anxiety and distress decreased significantly; and 86.3% (95% CI, 73.7–94.3) achieved at least as much decisional control as they desired. Conclusions: This DA was feasible and acceptable to patients and clinicians, and improvement in decision-related outcomes was demonstrated when used in combination with clinical consultations. This DA could safely be implemented into routine practice for women considering NAST for operable breast cancer.
Author contributions:Study concept and design: Zdenkowski, Butow, Douglas, Boyle. Data acquisition: Zdenkowski, Spillane, Snook, Boyle. Data analysis and interpretation: Zdenkowski, Butow, Jones, Oldmeadow, Douglas, Boyle. Manuscript preparation: All authors. Critical revision: All authors.Correspondence: Nicholas Zdenkowski, BMed, FRACP, Department of Medical Oncology, Calvary Mater Newcastle, Edith Street, Waratah, NSW, 2298, Australia. Email: firstname.lastname@example.org