Access to personalized medicine: Factors influencing the use and value of gene expression profiling in treatment decision making.

Authors

null

Yvonne Bombard

Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

Yvonne Bombard, Linda Rozmovits, Maureen E. Trudeau, Natasha B. Leighl, Ken Deal, Deborah Marshall

Organizations

Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada, Independent Qualitative Researcher, Toronto, ON, Canada, Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

Research Funding

No funding sources reported

Background: Genomic information is increasingly used to personalize health care. One example is gene-expression profiling (GEP) tests that estimate recurrence risk to inform chemotherapy decisions in breast cancer treatment. Recently, GEP tests were publicly funded in Ontario. We assessed the clinical utility of GEP tests, exploring the factors facilitating their use and value in treatment decision-making. Methods: As part of a mixed-methods clinical utility study, we conducted interviews with oncologists (n=14), and focus groups and interviews with breast cancer patients (n=28) who underwent GEP, recruited through oncology clinics in Ontario. Data were analyzed using content analysis and constant comparison. Results: Various factors governing access to GEP have given rise to challenges for patients and oncologists. 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. Media attention facilitated patient awareness of GEP but complicated gatekeeping. Additional administration burden and long waits for results led to increased patient anxiety and delayed treatment. Collectively, these factors inadvertently heightened GEP’s perceived value for patients relative to other prognostic indicators because of barriers to access. Conclusions: This study delineates the factors facilitating and restricting access to GEP, and highlights the roles of the media and organization of services in GEP’s perceived value and utilization. Results identify a need for administrative changes and practice guidelines to support streamlined and standardized utilization of the test.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2013 ASCO Quality Care Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

General Poster Session A: Science of Quality

Track

Science of Quality,Health Reform: Implications for Costs and Quality ,Practice of Quality

Sub Track

Communication, Decision Making, and Behavior

Citation

J Clin Oncol 31, 2013 (suppl 31; abstr 10)

Abstract #

10

Poster Bd #

A5

Abstract Disclosures