Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.1055/a-1326-1792
Decision Aids for Preventive Treatment Alternatives for BRCA1/2 Mutation Carriers: a Systematic Review
Article in several languages: English | deutschAbstract
Introduction Women with a pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutation have a markedly increased lifetime risk of developing breast and/or ovarian cancer. The current preventive treatment alternatives that are offered are an intensified breast cancer screening programme and risk-reducing operations. Before deciding on one option, medical and personal factors such as life situation and individual preferences must be weighed carefully. Decision aids are used internationally to support BRCA1/2 mutation carriers during their decision-making process. In this study these are analysed structurally for the first time and their applicability to the German context is examined.
Material and Methods A systematic literature search in five electronic databases and a manual search were performed. The identified decision aids were evaluated with regard to formal criteria, medical content and quality. The qualitative assessment used the criteria of the International Patient Decision Aid Standards Collaboration (IPDASi v4.0), which examined various dimensions (e.g., information, probabilities, values).
Results Twenty decision aids, which were published between 2003 and 2019 in Australia (n = 4), the United Kingdom (n = 3), Canada (n = 2), the Netherlands (n = 2) and the USA (n = 9), were included. Nine focus on BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and eleven include other risk groups. Eighteen include risk-reducing operations as decision options, 14 list screening methods for breast and/or ovarian cancer, and 13 describe the possibility of pharmacological prevention by means of selective oestrogen receptor modulators or aromatase inhibitors. Nine of the 20 decision aids meet fundamental quality criteria (IPDASi v4.0 qualification criteria).
Conclusion International decision aids can serve formally as a basis for a German decision aid for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Some of them differ markedly in content from the recommendations of German guidelines. Only a few achieve a high quality.
Publication History
Received: 07 August 2020
Accepted after revision: 29 November 2020
Article published online:
21 June 2021
© 2021. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
-
References/Literatur
- 1 Balmana J, Diez O, Castiglione M. et al. BRCA in breast cancer: ESMO clinical recommendations. Ann Oncol 2009; 20 (Suppl. 04) 19-20 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdp116.
- 2 Moyer VA. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for BRCA-related cancer in women: U.S. preventive services task force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2014; 160: 271-281 DOI: 10.7326/M13-2747.
- 3 Peto J, Collins N, Barfoot R. et al. Prevalence of BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations in patients with early-onset breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999; 91: 943-949
- 4 Antoniou AC, Pharoah PDP, McMullan G. et al. A comprehensive model for familial breast cancer incorporating BRCA1, BRCA2 and other genes. Br J Cancer 2002; 86: 76 DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6600008.
- 5 Kuchenbaecker KB, Hopper JL, Barnes DR. et al. Risks of breast, ovarian, and contralateral breast cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. JAMA 2017; 317: 2402-2416 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2017.7112.
- 6 Rhiem K, Bucker-Nott HJ, Hellmich M. et al. Benchmarking of a checklist for the identification of familial risk for breast and ovarian cancers in a prospective cohort. Breast J 2019; 25: 455-460 DOI: 10.1111/tbj.13257.
- 7 Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie (Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft, Deutsche Krebshilfe, AWMF). S3-Leitlinie Früherkennung, Diagnose, Therapie und Nachsorge des Mammakarzinoms, Langversion 4.3, AWMF-Registernummer: 032–045OL. 2020. Accessed July 24, 2020 at: http://www.leitlinienprogramm-onkologie.de/leitlinien/mammakarzinom/
- 8 Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie (Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft, Deutsche Krebshilfe, AWMF). S3-Leitlinie Diagnostik, Therapie und Nachsorge maligner Ovarialtumoren, Langversion 4.0, AWMF-Registernummer: 032/035OL. 2020. Accessed July, 24, 2020 at: http://www.leitlinienprogramm-onkologie.de/leitlinien/ovarialkarzinom/
- 9 AGO Breast Committee. Guidelines Breast Version 2020.1D. Diagnostik und Therapie früher und fortgeschrittener Mammakarzinome. Optionen der primären Prävention. Brustkrebsrisiko und Prävention. 2020. Accessed July 24 at: www.ago-online.de/fileadmin/ago-online/downloads/_leitlinien/kommission_mamma/2020/PDF_DE/2020D 02_Brustkrebsrisiko und Praevention.pdf
- 10 Bick U, Engel C, Krug B. et al. High-risk breast cancer surveillance with MRI: 10-year experience from the German consortium for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2019; 175: 217-228 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-019-05152-9.
- 11 AGO Breast Committee. Guidelines Breast Version 2020.1D. Diagnostik und Therapie früher und fortgeschrittener Mammakarzinome. Optionen der primären Prävention. Veränderbare Lifestyle-Faktoren. 2020. Accessed July 24 2020 at: http://www.ago-online.de/fileadmin/ago-online/downloads/_leitlinien/kommission_mamma/2020/PDF_DE/2020D 01_Optionen der primaeren Praevention.pdf
- 12 OʼConnor AM. User Manual – Decisional Conflict Scale. 2010 Accessed July 24, 2020 at: http://decisionaid.ohri.ca/docs/develop/User_Manuals/UM_Decisional_Conflict.pdf
- 13 Brehaut JC, OʼConnor AM, Wood TJ. et al. Validation of a decision regret scale. Med Decis Making 2003; 23: 281-292 DOI: 10.1177/0272989x03256005.
- 14 Gattellari M, Ward JE. Will men attribute fault to their GP for adverse effects arising from controversial screening tests? An australian study using scenarios about PSA screening. J Med Screen 2004; 11: 165-169 DOI: 10.1258/0969141042467386.
- 15 Rini C, OʼNeill SC, Valdimarsdottir H. et al. Cognitive and emotional factors predicting decisional conflict among high-risk breast cancer survivors who receive uninformative BRCA1/2 results. Health Psychol 2009; 28: 569-578 DOI: 10.1037/a0015205.
- 16 Bundesgesetzblatt. Gesetz zur Verbesserung der Rechte von Patientinnen und Patienten. 2013. Accessed July 25, 2020 at: https://www.bgbl.de/xaver/bgbl/start.xav?start=//*%255B@attr_id=%2527bgbl113s0277.pdf%2527%255D%23__bgbl__%252F%252F*%255B%2540attr_id%253D%2527bgbl113s0277.pdf%2527%255D__1595843636263
- 17 Bundesministerium für Gesundheit. Ziele des Nationalen Krebsplans. Handlungsfeld 4. 2020. Accessed July 24, 2020 at: http://www.bundesgesundheitsministerium.de/themen/praevention/nationaler-krebsplan/handlungsfelder/ziele-des-nationalen-krebsplans.html%23c3379
- 18 International Patient Decision Aid Standards Collaboration. What are patient decision aids? 2017. Accessed July 25, 2020 at: http://ipdas.ohri.ca/what.html
- 19 OHRI. Decision Coaching. 2015. Accessed September 21, 2020 at: https://decisionaid.ohri.ca/coaching.html
- 20 Stacey D, Legare F, Lewis K. et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; (04) CD001431 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub5.
- 21 Krassuski L, Vennedey V, Stock S. et al. Effectiveness of decision aids for female BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: a systematic review. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2019; 19: 154 DOI: 10.1186/s12911-019-0872-2.
- 22 OʼConnor AM. Validation of a decisional conflict scale. Med Decis Making 1995; 15: 25-30 DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9501500105.
- 23 Kautz-Freimuth S, Vodermaier A, Krassuski L. et al. Entwicklung zweier Entscheidungshilfen (EH) für Frauen mit BRCA1/2-Mutation, die entweder gesund oder einseitig an Brustkrebs erkrankt sind. Poster P152, Deutscher Kongress für Versorgungsforschung des Deutschen Netzwerks Versorgungsforschung, Berlin 2017.
- 24 Kautz-Freimuth S, Redaèlli M, Rhiem K. et al. Development of decision aids for female BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers in Germany to support preference-sensitive decision-making. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak; accepted for publication.
- 25 Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J. et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 2009; 6: e1000097 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097.
- 26 Joseph-Williams N, Newcombe R, Politi M. et al. Toward minimum standards for certifying patient decision aids: A modified Delphi consensus process. Med Decis Making 2014; 34: 699-710 DOI: 10.1177/0272989X13501721.
- 27 Culver JO, MacDonald DJ, Thornton AA. et al. Development and evaluation of a decision aid for BRCA carriers with breast cancer. J Genet Couns 2011; 20: 294-307 DOI: 10.1007/s10897-011-9350-4.
- 28 Metcalfe KA, Poll A, OʼConnor A. et al. Development and testing of a decision aid for breast cancer prevention for women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Clin Genet 2007; 72: 208-217 DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-0004.2007.00859.x.
- 29 Jabaley T, Underhill-Blazey ML, Berry DL. Development and testing of a decision aid for unaffected women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. J Cancer Educ 2020; 35: 339-344 DOI: 10.1007/s13187-019-1470-9.
- 30 Metcalfe KA, Dennis CL, Poll A. et al. Effect of decision aid for breast cancer prevention on decisional conflict in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation: a multisite, randomized, controlled trial. Genet Med 2017; 19: 330-336 DOI: 10.1038/gim.2016.108.
- 31 Armstrong K, Weber B, Ubel PA. et al. Individualized survival curves improve satisfaction with cancer risk management decisions in women with BRCA1/2 mutations. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 9319-9328 DOI: 10.1200/jco.2005.06.119.
- 32 Collins IM, Bickerstaffe A, Ranaweera T. et al. iPrevent(R): a tailored, web-based, decision support tool for breast cancer risk assessment and management. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2016; 156: 171-182 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-016-3726-y.
- 33 Kurian AW, Munoz DF, Rust P. et al. Online tool to guide decisions for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. J Clin Oncol 2012; 30: 497-506 DOI: 10.1200/jco.2011.38.6060.
- 34 Harmsen MG, Steenbeek MP, Hoogerbrugge N. et al. A patient decision aid for risk-reducing surgery in premenopausal BRCA1/2 mutation carriers: Development process and pilot testing. Health Expect 2018; 21: 659-667 DOI: 10.1111/hex.12661.
- 35 van Roosmalen MS, Stalmeier PF, Verhoef LC. et al. Randomised trial of a decision aid and its timing for women being tested for a BRCA1/2 mutation. Br J Cancer 2004; 90: 333-342 DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6601525.
- 36 Kaufman EM, Peshkin BN, Lawrence WF. et al. Development of an interactive decision aid for female BRCA1/BRCA2 carriers. J Genet Couns 2003; 12: 109-129 DOI: 10.1023/a:1022698112236.
- 37 Healthwise. Breast cancer: What should I do if Iʼm at high risk? 2019. Accessed July 24, 2020 at: https://www.healthwise.net/ohridecisionaid/Content/StdDocument.aspx?DOCHWID=zx3084
- 38 Tiller K, Meiser B, Reeson E. et al. A decision aid for women at increased risk for ovarian cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2003; 13: 15-22
- 39 Centre for Genetics Education, NSW Health. Information for women considering preventive mastectomy. 2012. Accessed July 24, 2020 at: http://www.genetics.edu.au/publications-and-resources/booklets-and-pamphlets/information-for-women-considering-preventive-mastectomy-because-of-a-strong-family-history-of-breast-cancer
- 40 Healthwise. Ovarian cancer: Should I have my ovaries removed to prevent ovarian cancer? 2019. Accessed July 24, 2020 at: https://www.healthwise.net/ohridecisionaid/Content/StdDocument.aspx?DOCHWID=zx3060
- 41 Witt J. The Oophorectomy Decision Explorer. A decision support intervention to facilitate deliberation and coping efforts in women at increased risk of ovarian cancer. 2013. Accessed July 25, 2020 at: https://orca.cf.ac.uk/56817/1/2014WITTJPhD.pdf
- 42 Mayo Clinic. Preventive (prophylactic) mastectomy: Surgery to reduce breast cancer risk. 2019. Accessed July 25, 2020 at: http://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/mastectomy/in-depth/prophylactic-mastectomy/art-20047221
- 43 Mayo Clinic. Prophylactic oophorectomy: Preventing cancer by surgically removing your ovaries. 2019. Accessed July 25, 2020 at: http://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/oophorectomy/in-depth/breast-cancer/art-20047337
- 44 Centre for Genetics Education, NSW Health. Surgery to reduce the risk of ovarian cancer. Information for women at increased risk. 2017. Accessed July 25, 2020 at: http://www.genetics.edu.au/publications-and-resources/booklets-and-pamphlets/SurgeryToReduceTheRiskOfOvarianCancer.pdf
- 45 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Taking a medicine to reduce the chance of developing breast cancer. Decision aid for postmenopausal women at high risk. 2017. Accessed July 25, 2020 at: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg164/resources/taking-a-medicine-to-reduce-the-chance-of-developing-breast-cancer-decision-aid-for-postmenopausal-women-at-high-risk-4422436672
- 46 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Taking a medicine to reduce the chance of developing breast cancer. Decision aid for premenopausal women at high risk. 2017. Accessed July 25, 2020 at: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg164/resources/taking-tamoxifen-to-reduce-the-chance-of-developing-breast-cancer-decision-aid-for-premenopausal-women-at-high-risk-4422436670
- 47 Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie (Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft, Deutsche Krebshilfe, AWMF). S3-Leitlinie Kolorektales Karzinom, Langversion 2.1, AWMF Registrierungsnummer: 021/007OL. 2019. Accessed July 24, 2020 at: http://www.leitlinienprogramm-onkologie.de/leitlinien/kolorektales-karzinom/
- 48 Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN). Management of epithelial ovarian cancer. A national clinical guideline. 2018. Accessed June 04, 2020 at: https://www.sign.ac.uk/assets/sign135_oct2018.pdf
- 49 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Ovarian cancers: Evolving paradigms in research and care. Washington (DC): National Academies Press; 2016: 97-146
- 50 Kim J, Skrzynia C, Mersereau JE. A pilot study of BRCA mutation carriersʼ knowledge about the clinical impact of prophylactic-oophorectomy and views on fertility consultation: A single-center pilot study. J Genet Counsel 2015; 24: 149-157 DOI: 10.1007/s10897-014-9747-y.
- 51 Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss. EDCP-BRCA – Evaluation eines Decision Coaching Programms zur Entscheidungsunterstützung im Rahmen der Prävention bei BRCA1/2-Mutationsträgerinnen. Accessed September 24, 2020 at: https://innovationsfonds.g-ba.de/projekte/versorgungsforschung/edcp-brca-evaluation-eines-decision-coaching-programms-zur-entscheidungsunterstuetzung-im-rahmen-der-praevention-bei-brca1-2-mutationstraegerinnen.160
- 52 Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss. iKNOW – Entwicklung und Evaluation eines online-gestützten Beratungstools für BRCA1/2-Mutationsträgerinnen. Accessed September 24, 2020 at: https://innovationsfonds.g-ba.de/projekte/versorgungsforschung/iknow-entwicklung-und-evaluation-eines-online-gestuetzten-beratungstools-fuer-brca1-2-mutationstraegerinnen.126
- 53 Isselhard A, Topper M, Berger-Hoger B. et al. Implementation and evaluation of a nurse-led decision-coaching program for healthy breast cancer susceptibility gene (BRCA1/2) mutation carriers: a study protocol for the randomized controlled EDCP-BRCA study. Trials 2020; 21: 501 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-020-04431-x.