Search

Importance: Up to 40% of women experience dissatisfaction after breast reconstruction due to unexpected outcomes that are poorly aligned with personal preferences. Identifying what attributes patients value when considering surgery could improve shared decision-making. Adaptive choice-based conjoint (ACBC) analysis can elicit individual-level treatment preferences., Objectives: To identify which attributes of breast reconstruction are most important to women considering surgery and to describe how these attributes differ by those who prefer flap vs implant reconstruction., Design, Setting, and Participants: This web-based, cross-sectional study was conducted from March 1, 2022, to January 31, 2023, at Duke University and between June 1 and December 31, 2022, through the Love Research Army with ACBC analysis. Participants were 105 women at Duke University with a new diagnosis of or genetic predisposition to breast cancer who were considering mastectomy with reconstruction and 301 women with a history of breast cancer or a genetic predisposition as identified through the Love Research Army registry., Main Outcomes and Measures: Relative importance scores, part-worth utility values, and maximum acceptable risks were estimated., Results: Overall, 406 women (105 from Duke University [mean (SD) age, 46.3 (10.5) years] and 301 from the Love Research Army registry [mean (SD) age, 59.2 (11.9) years]) participated. The attribute considered most important was the risk of abdominal morbidity (mean [SD] relative importance [RI], 28% [11%]), followed by chance of major complications (RI, 25% [10%]), number of additional operations (RI, 23% [12%]), appearance of the breasts (RI, 13% [12%]), and recovery time (RI, 11% [7%]). Most participants (344 [85%]) preferred implant-based reconstruction; these participants cared most about abdominal morbidity (mean [SD] RI, 30% [11%]), followed by the risk of complications (mean [SD], RI, 26% [11%]) and additional operations (mean [SD] RI, 21% [12%]). In contrast, participants who preferred flap reconstruction cared most about additional operations (mean [SD] RI, 31% [15%]), appearance of the breasts (mean [SD] RI, 27% [16%]), and risk of complications (mean [SD] RI, 18% [6%]). Factors independently associated with choosing flap reconstruction included being married (odds ratio [OR], 2.30 [95% CI, 1.04-5.08]; P = .04) and higher educational level (college education; OR, 2.43 [95% CI, 1.01-5.86]; P = .048), while having an income level of greater than $75 000 was associated with a decreased likelihood of choosing the flap profile (OR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.21-0.97]; P = .01). Respondents who preferred flap appearance were willing to accept a mean (SD) increase of 14.9% (2.2%) chance of abdominal morbidity (n = 113) or 6.4% (4.8%) chance of complications (n = 115)., Conclusions and Relevance: This study provides information on how women value different aspects of their care when making decisions for breast reconstruction. Future studies should assess how decision aids that elicit individual-level preferences can help tailor patient-physician discussions to focus preoperative counseling on factors that matter most to each patient and ultimately improve patient-centered care.

Introduction: We sought to examine patient and provider perspectives regarding modifiable contributors to breast cancer treatment and to assess perceptual alignment between these two groups., Materials: Participants were women≥18 y with stage 0-IV breast cancer who received all oncologic care in a single health system and physicians and advanced practice providers who provided medical, radiation, or surgical oncology care for breast cancer. All completed ∼45-min semistructured interviews that were recorded and transcribed verbatim. A 5-stage approach to thematic analysis was conducted, with emergent themes and exemplar quotes placed into clinical, psychological, social/logistical, financial, and lifestyle categories using a multilevel conceptual framework., Results: Eighteen patients (9 Black, 9 White, and median age 60 y) and 10 providers (6 physicians and 4 advanced practice providers) were interviewed from May to November 2018. Both patients and providers perceived suboptimal communication, parking and transportation, and competing family-caregiving responsibilities as modifiable barriers to care. Treatment costs were cited by patients as barriers that were inadequately addressed even with referrals to financial counselors, but providers did not raise the issue of cost unless prompted by patients and did not feel prepared to discuss the topic when it arose. Providers cited obesity as a barrier to treatment, a view not shared by patients., Conclusions: Several modifiable factors were recognized by both patients and providers as either promoting or detracting from treatment receipt, but there was also significant incongruence and asymmetry. Alignment of provider and patient perceptions regarding contributors to guideline-concordant care receipt could mitigate disparities in breast cancer treatment and outcomes., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Breast reconstruction plays an important role for many in restoring form and function of the breast after mastectomy. However, rates of breast reconstruction in the USA vary significantly by race, ethnicity and socioeconomic status. The lower rates of breast reconstruction in non-white women and in women of lower socioeconomic status may reflect a complex interplay between patient and physician factors and access to care. It remains unknown what community-specific barriers may be impacting receipt of breast reconstruction., Methods and Analysis: This is a mixed-methods study combining qualitative patient interview data with quantitative practice patterns to develop an actionable plan to address disparities in breast reconstruction in the local community. The primary aims are to (1) capture barriers to breast reconstruction for patients in the local community, (2) quantitatively evaluate practice patterns at the host institution and (3) identify issues and prioritise interventions for change using community-based engagement., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethics approval was obtained at the investigators' institution. Results from both the quantitative and qualitative portions of the study will be circulated via peer-review publication. These findings will also serve as pilot data for extramural funding to implement and evaluate these proposed solutions., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Purpose: Patients diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) face trade-offs when deciding among different treatments, including surgery, radiation, and endocrine therapy. A less chosen option is active monitoring. While evidence from clinical trials is not yet available, observational studies show comparable results for active monitoring and immediate treatment on cancer outcomes in select subgroups of patients. We developed and tested a web-based decision support tool (DST) to help patients explore current knowledge about DCIS and make an informed choice., Methods: The DST, an interactive web application, was informed by literature reviews and formative work with patients, breast surgeons, and health communication experts. We conducted iterative interviews to evaluate the DST content among women with and without a history of breast cancer, as well as breast cancer experts. For usability testing, we conducted an online survey among women with and without a history of breast cancer., Results: For content evaluation, 5 women with and 10 women without a history of DCIS were interviewed. The sample included 11 White and 4 non-White women, with a mean age of 64 years. The expert sample consisted of 5 attendings and a physician assistant. The feedback was used to add, clarify, or reorganize information in the DST. For usability testing, 22 participants with a mean age of 61 years were recruited including 15 White and 7 Black women and 6 women with a history of DCIS. The mean usability score was 3.7 out of 5. Most participants (86%) found that the DST provided unbiased information about treatments. To improve usability, we reduced the per-page content and added navigation cues., Conclusion: Content and usability evaluation showed that the DST helps patients explore trade-offs of active monitoring and immediate treatment. By adopting a personalized approach, the tool will enable informed decisions aligned with patients' values and expectations., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Breast reconstruction is associated with improved patient well-being after mastectomy; however, factors that contribute to post-surgical dissatisfaction remain poorly characterized., Methods: Adult women who underwent post-mastectomy implant-based or autologous breast reconstruction between 2015 and 2019 were recruited to participate in semi-structured interviews regarding their lived experiences with reconstructive care. Participants completed the BREAST-Q, and tabulated scores were used to dichotomize patient-reported outcomes as satisfied or dissatisfied (high or low) for each BREAST-Q domain. A convergent mixed-methods analysis was used to evaluate interviews for content related to satisfaction or dissatisfaction with breast reconstruction., Results: Overall, we interviewed 21 women and identified 17 subcodes that corresponded with the five BREAST-Q domains. Sources of dissatisfaction were found to be related to the following domains: (a) low breast satisfaction due to asymmetry, cup size, and lack of sensation and physical feeling (n = 8, 38%); (b) poor sexual well-being due to shape, look and feel (n = 7, 78% [of 9 who discussed sexual well-being]); (c) reduced physical well-being of the chest due to persistent pain and weakness (n = 11, 52%); (d) reduced abdominal well-being due to changes in abdominal strength, numbness, and posture (n = 6, 38% [of 16 who underwent abdominally based reconstruction]); and (e) low psychosocial well-being impacted by an unexpected appearance that negatively influenced self-confidence and self-identity (n = 13, 62%)., Conclusion: Patients may be unprepared for the physical, sexual, and psychosocial outcomes of breast reconstruction. Targeted strategies to improve preoperative education and shared decision making are needed to mitigate unexpectedness associated with breast reconstruction and related outcomes., (© 2021. Society of Surgical Oncology.)

Purpose: Although financial toxicity is a well-documented aspect of cancer care, little is known about how patients narratively characterize financial experiences related to breast cancer treatment. We sought to examine these patient experiences through mixed methods analysis., Methods: Women (≥ 18 years old) with a history of breast cancer were recruited from the Love Research Army and Sisters Network to complete an 88-item electronic survey including an open-ended response. Quantitative data were used to sort and stratify responses to the open-ended question, which comprised the qualitative data evaluated here. Descriptive statistics and qualitative content analysis were used to evaluate the financial costs and other burdens resulting from breast cancer surgery., Results: In total, 511 respondents completed the survey in its entirety and wrote an open-ended response. Participants reported significant financial burden in different categories including direct payments for medical care and indirect costs such as lost wages and travel expenses. Treatment-related costs burdened participants for years after diagnosis, forming a financial arc for many participants. Discrepancies existed between the degree of financial burden reported on multiple-choice questions and participants' corresponding open-ended descriptions of financial burden. Participants described a lack of communication surrounding costs with their providers and difficulty negotiating payments with insurance., Conclusion: Breast cancer care can result in ongoing financial burden years after diagnosis among all patients, even those with adequate insurance patient populations., Competing Interests: Terry HyslopConsulting or Advisory Role: AbbvieTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: AbbvieOther Relationship: Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, National Academy of Medicine, Patient Advocate Foundation Stephanie B. WheelerResearch Funding: PfizerTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Pfizer S. Yousuf ZafarEmployment: Shattuck LabsStock and Other Ownership Interests: Shattuck LabsConsulting or Advisory Role: AIM Specialty Health, McKesson, RTI Health Solutions, Discern Health, WIRB-Copernicus GroupResearch Funding: AstraZeneca(OPTIONAL) Uncompensated Relationships: Vivor, Family Reach Foundation Rachel GreenupHonoraria: Novartis, GenentechNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Background: Cancer treatment costs are not routinely addressed in shared decisions for breast cancer surgery. Thus, we sought to characterize cost awareness and communication among surgeons treating breast cancer., Methods: We conducted a self-administered, confidential electronic survey among members of the American Society of Breast Surgeons from 1 July to 15 September 2018. Questions were based on previously published or validated survey items, and assessed surgeon demographics, cost sensitivity, and communication. Descriptive summaries and cross-tabulations with Chi-square statistics were used, with exact tests where warranted, to assess findings., Results: Of those surveyed (N = 2293), 598 (25%) responded. Surgeons reported that 'risk of recurrence' (70%), 'appearance of the breast' (50%), and 'risks of surgery' (47%) were the most influential on patients' decisions for breast cancer surgery; 6% cited out-of-pocket costs as significant. Over half (53%) of the surgeons agreed that doctors should consider patient costs when choosing cancer treatment, yet the majority of surgeons (58%) reported 'infrequently' (43%) or 'never' (15%) considering patient costs in medical recommendations. The overwhelming majority (87%) of surgeons believed that patients should have access to the costs of their treatment before making medical decisions. Surgeons treating a higher percentage of Medicaid or uninsured patients were more likely to consistently consider costs (p < 0.001). Participants reported that insufficient knowledge or resources (61%), a perceived inability to help with costs (24%), and inadequate time (22%) impeded cost discussions. Notably, 20% of participants believed that discussing costs might impact the quality of care patients receive., Conclusions: Cost transparency remains rare, however in shared decisions for breast cancer surgery, improved cost awareness by surgeons has the potential to reduce financial hardship.