McCaffery Kirsten, Nickel Brooke, Moynihan Ray, Hersch Jolyn, Teixeira-Pinto Armando, Irwig Les, Barratt Alexandra
Screening and Test Evaluation Program (STEP), Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia Centre for Medical Psychology and Evidence-based Decision-making (CeMPED), The University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, Bond University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.
BMJ Open. 2015 Nov 2;5(11):e008094. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008094.
There have been calls to remove 'carcinoma' from terminology for in situ cancers such as ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), to reduce overdiagnosis and overtreatment. We investigated the effect of describing DCIS as 'abnormal cells' versus 'pre-invasive breast cancer cells' on women's concern and treatment preferences.
Community sample of Australian women (n=269) who spoke English as their main language at home.
Randomised comparison within a community survey. Women considered a hypothetical scenario involving a diagnosis of DCIS described as either 'abnormal cells' (arm A) or 'pre-invasive breast cancer cells' (arm B). Within each arm, the initial description was followed by the alternative term and outcomes reassessed.
Women in both arms indicated high concern, but still indicated strong initial preferences for watchful waiting (64%). There were no differences in initial concern or preferences by trial arm. However, more women in arm A ('abnormal cells' first term) indicated they would feel more concerned if given the alternative term ('pre-invasive breast cancer cells') compared to women in arm B who received the terms in the opposite order (67% arm A vs 52% arm B would feel more concerned, p=0.001). More women in arm A also changed their preference towards treatment when the terminology was switched from 'abnormal cells' to 'pre-invasive breast cancer cells' compared to arm B. In arm A, 18% of women changed their preference to treatment while only 6% changed to watchful waiting (p=0.008). In contrast, there were no significant changes in treatment preference in arm B when the terminology was switched (9% vs 8% changed their stated preference).
In a hypothetical scenario, interest in watchful waiting for DCIS was high, and changing terminology impacted women's concern and treatment preferences. Removal of the cancer term from DCIS may assist in efforts towards reducing overtreatment.
一直有人呼吁从原位癌(如导管原位癌,DCIS)的术语中去除“癌”字,以减少过度诊断和过度治疗。我们研究了将DCIS描述为“异常细胞”与“侵袭前乳腺癌细胞”对女性担忧程度和治疗偏好的影响。
以英语为主要家庭语言的澳大利亚女性社区样本(n = 269)。
社区调查中的随机对照研究。女性考虑一个假设场景,其中DCIS诊断被描述为“异常细胞”(A组)或“侵袭前乳腺癌细胞”(B组)。在每组中,初始描述后接着使用另一个术语,并重新评估结果。
两组女性均表示高度担忧,但仍表示最初强烈倾向于观察等待(64%)。试验组在初始担忧程度或偏好方面没有差异。然而,与按相反顺序接受术语的B组女性相比,A组(第一个术语为“异常细胞”)中更多女性表示如果使用另一个术语(“侵袭前乳腺癌细胞”)会更担忧(A组67% vs B组52%会更担忧,p = 0.001)。与B组相比,当术语从“异常细胞”切换到“侵袭前乳腺癌细胞”时,A组中更多女性改变了对治疗的偏好。在A组中,18%的女性改变了对治疗的偏好,而只有6%改为观察等待(p = 0.008)。相比之下,当术语切换时,B组的治疗偏好没有显著变化(9% vs 8%改变了她们声明的偏好)。
在一个假设场景中,对DCIS观察等待的兴趣很高,术语的改变影响了女性的担忧程度和治疗偏好。从DCIS术语中去除癌症一词可能有助于减少过度治疗的努力。