Kruiswijk Anouk A, Vlug Lisa A E, Acem Ibtissam, Engelhardt Ellen G, Gronchi Alessandro, Callegaro Dario, Haas Rick L, van de Wal Robert J P, van de Sande Michiel A J, van Bodegom-Vos Leti
Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Medical Decision Making, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Orthopedic Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Ann Surg Oncol. 2025 Apr;32(4):2958-2970. doi: 10.1245/s10434-024-16849-7. Epub 2025 Feb 1.
Risk prediction models (RPMs) are statistical tools that predict outcomes on the basis of clinical characteristics and can thereby support (shared) decision-making. With the shift toward personalized medicine, the number of RPMs has increased exponentially, including in multimodal sarcoma care. However, their integration into routine soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) care remains largely unknown. Therefore, we inventoried RPM use in sarcoma care during tumor board discussions and patient consultations as well as the attitudes toward the use of RPMs to support (shared) decision-making among STS clinicians.
A 29-item survey was disseminated online to members of international sarcoma societies.
This study enrolled 278 respondents. Respectively, 68% and 65% of the clinicians reported using RPMs during tumor board discussions and/or patient consultations. During tumor board discussions, RPMs were used primarily to assess the potential benefits of (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy. During patient consultations, RPMs were used to predict patient prognosis upon request and to assist in decision-making regarding (neo)adjuvant therapies. The reliability of patient risk predicted by RPMs and the absence of guidelines regarding the use of RPMs were identified as barriers. Additionally, some clinicians questioned the applicability of estimates from RPMs to individual patients and expressed concerns about causing unnecessary anxiety when discussing prognostic outcomes.
Responding STS clinicians frequently use RPMs to support decision-making about (neo)adjuvant therapies. However, they expressed concerns about the applicability of RPM estimates to individual patients and reported challenges in communicating prognostic outcomes with patients. These findings highlight the difficulties clinicians face when integrating RPMs into patient consultations.
风险预测模型(RPMs)是基于临床特征预测结果的统计工具,从而能够支持(共同)决策。随着向个性化医疗的转变,RPMs的数量呈指数级增长,包括在多模式肉瘤治疗中。然而,它们在常规软组织肉瘤(STS)治疗中的整合情况仍 largely unknown。因此,我们调查了RPMs在肿瘤委员会讨论和患者咨询期间在肉瘤治疗中的使用情况,以及STS临床医生对使用RPMs支持(共同)决策的态度。
向国际肉瘤协会成员在线发放了一份包含29个条目的调查问卷。
本研究招募了278名受访者。分别有68%和65%的临床医生报告在肿瘤委员会讨论和/或患者咨询期间使用RPMs。在肿瘤委员会讨论期间,RPMs主要用于评估(新)辅助化疗的潜在益处。在患者咨询期间,RPMs用于应要求预测患者预后,并协助就(新)辅助治疗进行决策。RPMs预测的患者风险的可靠性以及缺乏关于RPMs使用的指南被确定为障碍。此外,一些临床医生质疑RPMs对个体患者的估计的适用性,并对在讨论预后结果时引起不必要的焦虑表示担忧。
做出回应的STS临床医生经常使用RPMs来支持关于(新)辅助治疗的决策。然而,他们对RPMs估计对个体患者的适用性表示担忧,并报告在与患者沟通预后结果方面存在挑战。这些发现凸显了临床医生在将RPMs整合到患者咨询中时所面临的困难。