This is an archive of papers published by the staff and faculty of Fox Chase Cancer Center. For questions about content, please contact Talbot Research Library
Last updated on
Halbert RJ , Figlin RA , Atkins MB , Bernal M , Hutson TE , Uzzo RG , Bukowski RM , Khan KD , Wood CG , Dubois RW , Peacock S , Apicella C , Andrews L , Tucker K , Bankier A , Daly MB , Hopper JL
Treatment of patients with metastatic renal cell cancer - A RAND appropriateness panel. A discrete choice experiment of preferences for genetic counselling among Jewish women seeking cancer genetics services
Cancer. 2006 Nov;95(10) :1448-1453
AbstractBACKGROUND. New developments in the treatment of patients with metastatic renal cell cancer (MRCC) have suggested a need to reevaluate the role of systemic therapies. The authors convened a panel of medical and urologic oncologists to rate the appropriateness of the main options. METHODS. The authors used the RAND/University of California-Los Angeles Appropriateness Method to evaluate systemic therapy options and cytoreductive nephrectomy. After a comprehensive literature review, an expert panel rated the appropriateness of systemic options (108 permutations) and cytoreductive nephrectomy (24 permutations) for patients with MRCC. RESULTS. The appropriateness evaluation indicated that 27.3% of permutations were rated "appropriate," 46.9% were rated "inappropriate," and 25.8% were rated "uncertain." There was a high rate of agreement (95%). Sunitinib and sorafenib were rated appropriate for patients with low-to-moderate risk regardless of prior treatment. Temsirolimus was rated appropriate for first-line therapy for higher risk patients. Interferon-alpha and low-dose interleukin-2 were rated inappropriate or uncertain. In patients who received prior immunotherapy, cytokines were rated inappropriate. In all permutations for evaluating systemic therapy, enrollment into an investigational trial was considered appropriate, treatment with bevacizumab was uncertain, and thalidomide was inappropriate regardless of risk status or prior therapy. For good surgical risk patients with planned immunotherapy, nephrectomy was rated appropriate in patients who had limited metastatic burden regardless of tumor-related symptoms and in symptomatic patients regardless of metastatic burden. Only the most favorable combination of surgical risk, metastatic burden, and symptoms generated an "appropriate" rating for patients with planned targeted therapy. CONCLUSIONS. The current results begin the process of defining an appropriate role for cytokines, newer targeted therapies, and surgery in the treatment of MRCC. To determine which aspects of breast cancer genetic counselling are important to Ashkenazi Jewish women, a discrete choice experiment was conducted. Participants consisted of 339 Australian Ashkenazi Jewish women who provided a blood sample for research used to test for Ashkenazi Jewish ancestral mutations in the genes BRCA1 and BRCA2, and were offered their genetic test result through a cancer genetics service. Main outcome measures were women's preferences for, and trade-offs between, the genetic counselling aspects of providing cancer, gene, and risk information (information); giving advice about cancer surveillance (surveillance); preparing for genetic testing (preparation); and, assistance with decision-making (direction). Respondents most valued information, about twice as much as advice about surveillance, four times as much as preparation for testing, and nine times as much as assistance with decision-making, which was least valued. Women's preferences were consistent with the major goals of genetic counselling, which include providing information and surveillance advice, and avoiding direction by facilitating autonomous decision-making. There were differences between the women in which aspects they most favoured, suggesting that counselling that elicits and responds to clients' preferences is more likely to meet clients' needs.
NotesISI Document Delivery No.: 105QF Times Cited: 0 Cited Reference Count: 53 Cited References: *FOOD DRUG ADM, FDA APPR NEW TREATM AMATO RJ, 2003, CRIT REV ONCOL HEM S, V46, S59 ATKINS MB, 2004, J CLIN ONCOL, V22, P909 ATZPODIEN J, 2004, J CLIN ONCOL, V22, P1188 BELLDEGRUN A, 2000, CANCER J SCI AM S1, V6, S88 BLEUMER I, 2003, EUR UROL, V44, P65 BOCCARDO F, 1998, TUMORI, V84, P534 BUKOWSKI RM, 1997, CANCER, V80, P1198 CLARK JI, 2003, J CLIN ONCOL, V21, P3133 COHEN HT, 2005, NEW ENGL J MED, V353, P2477 DUBOIS RW, 2001, ARCH DERMATOL, V137, P1217 DUTCHER J, 2002, ONCOLOGY-NY S13, V16, P4 ESCUDIER B, 2005, J CLIN ONCOL, V23 FIGLIN RA, 1999, J CLIN ONCOL, V17, P2521 FLANIGAN RC, 2001, NEW ENGL J MED, V345, P1655 GALE RP, 1998, LEUKEMIA LYMPHOMA, V32, P139 GALE RP, 1999, LEUKEMIA LYMPHOMA, V33, P511 GALE RP, 1999, LEUKEMIA RES, V23, P709 GALE RP, 1999, LEUKEMIA RES, V23, P817 GALE RP, 2000, CLIN TRANSPLANT, V14, P32 GITLITZ BJ, 2003, UROL CLIN N AM, V30, P589 GLEAVE ME, 1998, NEW ENGL J MED, V338, P1265 GOLLOB JA, 2005, CLIN GENITOURIN CANC, V4, P167 HANNINEN EL, 1996, J UROLOGY, V155, P19 HEMINGWAY H, 2001, NEW ENGL J MED, V344, P645 HODGSON DC, 2005, HEALTH POLICY, V71, P57 HUDES G, 2006, J CLIN ONCOL, V18 JAYSON GC, 1998, BRIT J CANCER, V78, P366 LAW TM, 1995, CANCER, V76, P824 MCDERMOTT R, 2002, POLIT PSYCHOL, V23, P133 MICKISCH GHJ, 2001, LANCET, V358, P966 MOTZER RJ, 1999, J CLIN ONCOL, V17, P2530 MOTZER RJ, 2000, J CLIN ONCOL, V18, P2972 MOTZER RJ, 2003, CRIT REV ONCOL HEM S, V46, S33 MOTZER RJ, 2004, J CLIN ONCOL, V22, P4500 MOTZER RJ, 2004, J CLIN ONCOL, V22, P454 MOTZER RJ, 2005, J CLIN ONCOL, V23, P4508 MOTZER RJ, 2006, J CLIN ONCOL, V18 NAGLIERI E, 1998, ANTICANCER RES, V18, P2021 NEGRIER S, 1998, NEW ENGL J MED, V338, P1272 NEGRIER S, 2000, J CLIN ONCOL, V18, P4009 NEGRIER S, 2005, J CLIN ONCOL, V23 POSTON GJ, 2005, J CLIN ONCOL, V23, P7125 PYRHONEN S, 1999, J CLIN ONCOL, V17, P2859 RATAIN MJ, 2004, J CLIN ONCOL, V22, P4501 RATAIN MJ, 2005, J CLIN ONCOL, V23, P4544 RINI BI, 2005, CLIN GENITOURIN CANC, V4, P175 RITCHIE A, 1999, LANCET, V353, P14 SCHWARTZENTRUBER DJ, 2001, J IMMUNOTHER, V24, P287 SHEKELLE PG, 1998, NEW ENGL J MED, V338, P1888 YANG JC, 1995, CANCER, V76, P687 YANG JC, 2003, J CLIN ONCOL, V21, P3127 YANG JC, 2003, NEW ENGL J MED, V349, P427