Suppr超能文献

乳腺癌基因表达谱检测与化疗的应用、严重不良反应以及医疗费用。

Gene expression profile testing for breast cancer and the use of chemotherapy, serious adverse effects, and costs of care.

机构信息

Division of General Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 1620 Tremont Street, Boston, MA 02120, USA.

出版信息

Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011 Nov;130(2):619-26. doi: 10.1007/s10549-011-1628-6. Epub 2011 Jun 17.

Abstract

As gene expression profile (GEP) testing for breast cancer may provide additional prognostic information to guide the use of adjuvant chemotherapy, we examined the association between GEP testing and use of chemotherapy, serious chemotherapy-related adverse effects, and total charges during the 12 months following diagnosis. Medical record review was conducted for women age 30-64 years, with incident, non-metastatic, invasive breast cancer diagnosed 2006-2008 in a large, national health plan. Of 534 patients, 25.8% received GEP testing, 68.2% received chemotherapy, and 10.5% experienced a serious chemotherapy-related adverse effect. GEP testing was most commonly used in women at moderate clinical risk of recurrence (52.0 vs. 25.0% of low-risk women and 5.5% of high-risk). Controlling for the propensity to receive GEP testing, women who had GEP were less likely to receive chemotherapy (propensity adjusted odds ratio, 95% confidence interval 0.62, 0.39-0.99). Use of GEP was associated with more chemotherapy use among women at low risk based on clinical characteristics (OR = 42.19; CI 2.50-711.82), but less use among women with a high risk based on clinical characteristics (OR = 0.12; CI 0.03-0.47). Use of GEP was not associated with chemotherapy for the moderate risk group. There was no significant relationship between GEP use and either serious chemotherapy-associated adverse effects or total charges. While GEP testing was associated with an overall decrease in adjuvant chemotherapy, we did not find differences in serious chemotherapy-associated adverse events or charges during the 12 months following diagnosis.

摘要

由于基因表达谱(GEP)测试可为乳腺癌提供额外的预后信息,以指导辅助化疗的使用,因此我们研究了 GEP 测试与化疗、严重化疗相关不良事件以及诊断后 12 个月内总费用之间的关联。我们对年龄在 30-64 岁、2006-2008 年期间患有大型国家健康计划中诊断为非转移性、浸润性乳腺癌的女性进行了病历回顾。在 534 名患者中,25.8%接受了 GEP 测试,68.2%接受了化疗,10.5%经历了严重的化疗相关不良事件。GEP 测试最常用于中度临床复发风险的女性(52.0%与低风险女性的 25.0%和高风险女性的 5.5%)。在考虑接受 GEP 测试的倾向后,接受 GEP 测试的女性接受化疗的可能性较小(倾向调整后的优势比,95%置信区间 0.62,0.39-0.99)。基于临床特征,在低危女性中,使用 GEP 与更多的化疗使用相关(OR=42.19;CI 2.50-711.82),而在高危女性中,使用 GEP 与较少的化疗使用相关(OR=0.12;CI 0.03-0.47)。在中等风险组中,GEP 的使用与化疗无关。GEP 使用与严重化疗相关不良事件或总费用之间没有明显关系。虽然 GEP 测试与辅助化疗的总体减少相关,但我们没有发现诊断后 12 个月内严重化疗相关不良事件或费用的差异。

相似文献

1
Gene expression profile testing for breast cancer and the use of chemotherapy, serious adverse effects, and costs of care.
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011 Nov;130(2):619-26. doi: 10.1007/s10549-011-1628-6. Epub 2011 Jun 17.
2
The impact of gene expression profile testing on confidence in chemotherapy decisions and prognostic expectations.
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019 Jan;173(2):417-427. doi: 10.1007/s10549-018-4988-3. Epub 2018 Oct 10.
7
Adoption of gene expression profile testing and association with use of chemotherapy among women with breast cancer.
J Clin Oncol. 2012 Jun 20;30(18):2218-26. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2011.38.5740. Epub 2012 May 14.
8
Genomic testing and therapies for breast cancer in clinical practice.
Am J Manag Care. 2011 May 1;17(5 Spec No):e174-81.

引用本文的文献

1
Licochalcone H Induces Cell Cycle Arrest and Apoptosis in Human Skin Cancer Cells by Modulating JAK2/STAT3 Signaling.
Biomol Ther (Seoul). 2022 Jan 1;30(1):72-79. doi: 10.4062/biomolther.2021.149.
3
Underutilization of gene expression profiling for early-stage breast cancer in California.
Cancer Causes Control. 2016 Jun;27(6):721-7. doi: 10.1007/s10552-016-0743-4. Epub 2016 Apr 20.
4
The value of multigene predictors of clinical outcome in breast cancer: an analysis of the evidence.
Expert Rev Mol Diagn. 2015 Feb;15(2):277-86. doi: 10.1586/14737159.2015.983476. Epub 2014 Dec 5.
5
Tissue biomarkers of breast cancer and their association with conventional pathologic features.
Br J Cancer. 2013 Feb 5;108(2):351-60. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2012.552. Epub 2013 Jan 8.

本文引用的文献

3
The effects of oncotype DX recurrence scores on chemotherapy utilization in a multi-institutional breast cancer cohort.
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011 Apr;126(3):797-802. doi: 10.1007/s10549-010-1329-6. Epub 2011 Jan 1.
5
Breast cancer risk by breast density, menopause, and postmenopausal hormone therapy use.
J Clin Oncol. 2010 Aug 20;28(24):3830-7. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.26.4770. Epub 2010 Jul 19.
6
Cancer statistics, 2010.
CA Cancer J Clin. 2010 Sep-Oct;60(5):277-300. doi: 10.3322/caac.20073. Epub 2010 Jul 7.
7
Economic implications of 21-gene recurrence score assay: US multicenter experience.
J Clin Oncol. 2010 Aug 1;28(22):e382; author reply e383. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2010.28.8944. Epub 2010 May 24.
8
Cost-effectiveness analysis of recurrence score-guided treatment using a 21-gene assay in early breast cancer.
Oncologist. 2010;15(5):457-65. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2009-0275. Epub 2010 Apr 26.
9
Economic implications of 21-gene breast cancer risk assay from the perspective of an Israeli-managed health-care organization.
Value Health. 2010 Jun-Jul;13(4):381-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2010.00724.x. Epub 2010 Apr 15.
10
Physician cost profiling--reliability and risk of misclassification.
N Engl J Med. 2010 Mar 18;362(11):1014-21. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa0906323.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验