Ellen Engelhardt - Academia.edu (original) (raw)

Papers by Ellen Engelhardt

Cancers

As ongoing trials study the safety of an active surveillance strategy for low-risk ductal carcino... more As ongoing trials study the safety of an active surveillance strategy for low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), there is a need to explain why particular choices regarding treatment strategies are made by eligible women as well as their oncologists, what factors enter the decision process, and how much each factor affects their choice. To measure preferences for treatment and surveillance strategies, women with newly-diagnosed, primary low-risk DCIS enrolled in the Dutch CONTROL DCIS Registration and LORD trial, and oncologists participating in the Dutch Health Professionals Study were invited to complete a discrete choice experiment (DCE). The relative importance of treatment strategy-related attributes (locoregional intervention, 10-year risk of ipsilateral invasive breast cancer (iIBC), and follow-up interval) were discerned using conditional logit models. A total of n = 172 patients and n = 30 oncologists completed the DCE. Patient respondents had very strong preferences for...

The Breast

Objective: The majority of 'low-risk' (grade I/II) Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS) may not progre... more Objective: The majority of 'low-risk' (grade I/II) Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS) may not progress to invasive breast cancer during a women's lifetime. Therefore, the safety of active surveillance versus standard surgical treatment for DCIS is prospectively being evaluated in clinical trials. If proven safe and selectively implemented in clinical practice, a significant group of women with low-risk DCIS may forego surgery and radiotherapy in the future. Identification of modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors associated with prognosis after a primary DCIS would also enhance our care of women with low-risk DCIS. Methods: To identify modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors for subsequent breast events after DCIS, we performed a systematic literature search in PUBMED, EMBASE and Scopus. Results: Six out of the 3870 articles retrieved were included for final data extraction. These six studies included a total of 4950 patients with primary DCIS and 640 recorded subsequent breast events. There was moderate evidence for an association of a family history of breast cancer, premenopausal status, high BMI, and high breast density with a subsequent breast cancer or further DCIS. Conclusion: There is a limited number of recent studies published on the impact of modifiable and nonmodifiable risk factors on subsequent events after DCIS. The available evidence is insufficient to identify potential targets for risk reduction strategies, reflecting the relatively small numbers and the lack of longterm follow-up in DCIS, a low-event condition.

Medical Decision Making

Background. Adjuvant systemic treatment for early stage breast cancer significantly reduces the r... more Background. Adjuvant systemic treatment for early stage breast cancer significantly reduces the risk of mortality but is associated with side effects, reducing patients’ quality of life. Decisions about adjuvant treatment are preference sensitive and are thus ideally suited to a shared decision making (SDM) approach. Whether and how SDM affects patients’ trust in their oncologist is currently unknown. We investigated the association between patients’ trust in their oncologist and 1) observed level of SDM in the consultation, 2) congruence between patients’ preferred and perceived level of participation, and 3) patient and oncologist characteristics. Methods. Decision consultations ( n = 101) between breast cancer patients and their medical oncologist were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Patients’ trust in their oncologist was measured using the Trust in Oncologist Scale (TiOS). The observed level of SDM was scored using the 12-item Observing Patient Involvement In Decision ...

Journal of Cancer Survivorship

Purpose Cancer-related cognitive problems (cancer-related cognitive problems) in working cancer s... more Purpose Cancer-related cognitive problems (cancer-related cognitive problems) in working cancer survivors are found to affect work outcomes. We aimed to generate in-depth information regarding cancer-related cognitive problems in working cancer survivors, strategies used to cope with cancer-related cognitive problems at work, and needs of cancer survivors and professionals regarding cancer-related cognitive problems at work. Methods Five focus groups were formed, amongst which three focus groups with cancer survivors (n = 8, n = 7, and n = 8) and two focus groups with professionals (n = 7, n = 8). Thematic analysis of the transcripts was performed to create concepts. Results Both cancer survivors and professionals confirmed that cancer-related cognitive problems, which occurred in several domains of neurocognitive functioning, affect work functioning. Cancer survivors used several strategies (e.g., applying practical adjustments, re-organization of work, and accepting limitations) t...

BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making

Background: Decision-making about palliative care for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) consist... more Background: Decision-making about palliative care for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) consists of many different treatment-related decisions, and there generally is no best treatment option. Decision support systems (DSS), e.g., prognostic calculators, can aid oncologists' decision-making. DSS that contain features tailored to the needs of oncologists are more likely to be implemented in clinical practice. Therefore, our aim is to inventory colorectal cancer specialists' unmet decision support needs. Methods: We asked oncologists from the Dutch colorectal cancer group (DCCG), to participate in an online inventory questionnaire on their unmet decision support needs. To get more in-depth insight in required features of the DSS they need, we also conducted semi-structured telephone interviews. Results: Forty-one oncologists started the inventory questionnaire, and 27 of them completed all items. Of all respondents, 18 were surgeons (44%), 22 were medical oncologists (54%), and 28 (68%) had more than 10 years of experience treating mCRC. In both the inventory questionnaire and interviews, respondents expressed a need for an overarching DSS incorporating multiple treatment options, and presenting both the treatment benefits and harms. Respondents found it relevant for other outcomes, such as cost-effectiveness of treatment or quality of life, to be incorporated in DSS. There was also a wish for DSS incorporating an up-to-date "personalized" overview of the ongoing trials for which a specific patient is eligible. Conclusions: Experienced oncologists indicate that their treatment advice is currently almost solely based on the available clinical guidelines. They experience a lack of good quality DSS to help them personalize their treatment advice. New tools integrating multiple treatment options and providing a broad range of clinically relevant outcomes are urgently needed to stimulate and safeguard more personalized treatment decision-making.

Journal of Cancer Education

Treatment decision-making for patients with incurable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is compl... more Treatment decision-making for patients with incurable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is complex due to the rapidly increasing number of treatments and discovery of new biomarkers. Decision support systems (DSS) could assist thoracic oncologists (TO) weighing of the pros and cons of treatments in order to arrive at an evidence-based and personalized treatment advice. Our aim is to inventory (1) TO's needs with regard to DSS in the treatment of incurable (stage IIIB/IV) NSCLC patients, and (2) preferences regarding the development of future tools in this field. We disseminated an online inventory questionnaire among all members of the Section of Oncology within the Society of Physicians in Chest Medicine and Tuberculosis. Telephone interviews were conducted to better contextualize the findings from the questionnaire. In total, 58 TO completed the questionnaire and expressed a need for new DSS. They reported that it is important for tools to include genetic and immune markers, to be sufficiently validated, regularly updated, and time-efficient. Also, future DSS should incorporate multiple treatment options, integrate estimates of toxicity, quality of life and costeffectiveness of treatments, enhance communication between caregivers and patients, and use IT solutions for a clear interface and continuous updating of tools. With this inventory among Dutch TO, we summarized the need for new DSS to aid treatment decision-making for patients with incurable NSCLC. To meet the expressed needs, substantial additional efforts will be required by DSS developers, above already existing tools.

Journal of Argumentation in Context

If the arguments to support a recommendation are partly implicit, the free exchange of ideas betw... more If the arguments to support a recommendation are partly implicit, the free exchange of ideas between discussants can be hampered. In this paper, we will focus on the potential pitfall for clinicians when informing patients about treatment options: implicit persuasion. We will describe a set of implicitly persuasive behaviors observed during decision-making consultations, and reflect on how these behaviors could undermine efforts to stimulate patient participation in decision-making. We will also reflect on possible explanations for why clinicians exhibit such behaviors.

The oncologist, Jan 29, 2018

Systemic treatment for advanced cancer offers uncertain and sometimes limited benefit, while the ... more Systemic treatment for advanced cancer offers uncertain and sometimes limited benefit, while the burden can be high. This study examines the effect of shared decision-making (SDM) training for medical oncologists on observed SDM in standardized patient assessments. A randomized controlled trial comparing training with standard practice was conducted. Medical oncologists and oncologists-in-training ( = 31) participated in a video-recorded, standardized patient assessment at baseline (T0) and after 4 months (T1, after training). The training was based on a four-stage SDM model and consisted of a reader, two group sessions (3.5 hours each), a booster session (1.5 hours), and a consultation card. The primary outcome was observed SDM as assessed with the Observing Patient Involvement scale (OPTION12) coded by observers blinded for arm. Secondary outcomes were observed SDM per stage, communication skills, and oncologists' satisfaction with communication. The training had a significant...

Clinical Colorectal Cancer

A systematic review of the literature was performed to provide a comprehensive overview of the av... more A systematic review of the literature was performed to provide a comprehensive overview of the available decision support tools for incurable metastatic colorectal cancer, and to assess their clinical usefulness. We identified 14 tools. The evidence regarding the quality of the information they provide is too limited to currently recommend their use to guide treatment decision-making. Background: Decision-making regarding palliative treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is complex and comprises numerous decisions. Decision-making should be guided by the premise of maintaining and/or improving patients' quality of life, by patient preference, and by the trade-off between treatment benefits and harm. Decision support systems (DSSs) for clinicians (eg, nomograms) can assist in this process. The present systematic review aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of the available DSSs for incurable mCRC and to assess their clinical usefulness. Materials and Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. We extracted information on the DSS characteristics and their discriminatory ability, calibration, and user-friendliness. Results: From 5205 studies, we identified 14 DSSs for decisions regarding palliative resection of the primary tumor (n ¼ 3), radiotherapy for metastases (n ¼ 2), treatment type (invasive vs. symptomatic only; n ¼ 7), and selection of chemotherapy (n ¼ 2). The predictors varied greatly among the DSSs, and only 1 DSS incorporated a genetic marker (ie, UGT1A1). None of the DSSs included > 1 treatment option, nor did any DSS present estimates of treatment benefits and harms. Five tools had not been externally validated, two had only been validated in < 35 patients, and the rest had only been validated in populations similar to the population used for their development. Discriminatory accuracy was generally moderate to poor. Calibration measures were only reported for 2 tools. Conclusion: A limited number of DSSs are available to support palliative treatment decisions for patients with mCRC, and the evidence regarding their discriminatory ability and calibration is too limited to recommend their use. New DSSs comparing multiple treatment options and presenting both treatment benefits and harms are needed.

European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990), Jun 14, 2017

Online prognostication tools such as PREDICT and Adjuvant! are increasingly used in clinical prac... more Online prognostication tools such as PREDICT and Adjuvant! are increasingly used in clinical practice by oncologists to inform patients and guide treatment decisions about adjuvant systemic therapy. However, their validity for young breast cancer patients is debated. To assess first, the prognostic accuracy of PREDICT's and Adjuvant! 10-year all-cause mortality, and second, its breast cancer-specific mortality estimates, in a large cohort of breast cancer patients diagnosed <50 years. Hospital-based cohort. General and cancer hospitals. A consecutive series of 2710 patients without a prior history of cancer, diagnosed between 1990 and 2000 with unilateral stage I-III breast cancer aged <50 years. Calibration and discriminatory accuracy, measured with C-statistics, of estimated 10-year all-cause and breast cancer-specific mortality. Overall, PREDICT's calibration for all-cause mortality was good (predicted versus observed) meandifference: -1.1% (95%CI: -3.2%-0.9%; P = 0...

European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990), Jan 12, 2016

Shared decision making (SDM) is widely advocated, especially for preference-sensitive decisions l... more Shared decision making (SDM) is widely advocated, especially for preference-sensitive decisions like those on adjuvant treatment for early-stage cancer. Here, decision making involves a subjective trade-off between benefits and side-effects, and therefore, patients' informed preferences should be taken into account. If clinicians consciously or unconsciously steer patients towards the option they think is in their patients' best interest (i.e. implicit persuasion), they may be unwittingly subverting their own efforts to implement SDM. We assessed the frequency of use of implicit persuasion during consultations and whether the use of implicit persuasion was associated with expected treatment benefit and/or decision making. Observational study design in which consecutive consultations about adjuvant systemic therapy with stage I-II breast cancer patients treated at oncology outpatient clinics of general teaching hospitals and university medical centres were audiotaped, transcr...

Advances in Breast Cancer Research, 2015

Objective: It is unclear if and to what extent family history of breast/ovarian cancer or BRCA1/2... more Objective: It is unclear if and to what extent family history of breast/ovarian cancer or BRCA1/2mutation carriership influences breast cancer treatment strategy. We investigated whether treatment differed between patients from BRCA1/2 families and those unselected for family history. Methods: We included 478 BRCA1/2-related patients referred for genetic testing before or after diagnosis. Two references were used: 13,498 population-based and 6896 hospital-based patients. Surgical treatment and adjuvant chemotherapy use was analyzed using logistic regression models, stratified by tumor size, nodal status, age at and period of diagnosis, and estrogen receptor status (ER). Results: BRCA1/2 cases aged 35-52 years at diagnosis and/or with tumors < 2 cm were more likely to have undergone a modified radical mastectomy (Odd Ratios (OR) ranging from 2.8 to 5.1) compared to the references. This effect was most pronounced in patients treated after 1995 (OR 5.7 to 10.3). Compared to the reference groups, chemotherapy was more often administered to BRCA1 and ER-negative BRCA1/2-cases irrespective of age and nodal status (OR 1.9 E. G. Engelhardt et al. 88 to 24.3). Conclusion: After 1995 treatment of BRCA1/2-associated patients consisted notably of more mastectomies and adjuvant chemotherapy than their population-based counterparts with the same tumor characteristics. There is a need to be aware of such differences in daily practice and interpretation of survival studies on BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden), Jan 3, 2015

The first step in shared decision making (SDM) is creating choice awareness. This is particularly... more The first step in shared decision making (SDM) is creating choice awareness. This is particularly relevant in consultations concerning preference-sensitive treatment decisions, e.g. those addressing (neo-)adjuvant therapy. Awareness can be achieved by explicitly stating, as the 'reason for encounter', that a treatment decision needs to be made. It is unknown whether oncologists express such reason for encounter. This study aims to establish: 1) if 'making a treatment decision' is stated as a reason for the encounter and if not, what other reason for encounter is provided; and 2) whether mentioning that a treatment decision needs to be made is associated with enhanced patient involvement in decision making. Consecutive first consultations with: 1) radiation oncologists and rectal cancer patients; or 2) medical oncologists and breast cancer patients, facing a preference-sensitive treatment decision, were audiotaped. The tapes were transcribed and coded using an instrum...

Familial cancer, Jan 21, 2015

It is expected that rapid genetic counseling and testing (RGCT) will lead to increasing numbers o... more It is expected that rapid genetic counseling and testing (RGCT) will lead to increasing numbers of breast cancer (BC) patients knowing their BRCA1/2 carrier status before primary surgery. Considering the potential impact of knowing one's status on uptake and timing of risk-reducing contralateral mastectomy (RRCM), we aimed to evaluate trends over time in RRCM, and differences between carriers identified either before (predictively) or after (diagnostically) diagnosis. We collected data from female BRCA1/2 mutation carriers diagnosed with BC between 1995 and 2009 from four Dutch university hospitals. We compared the timing of genetic testing and RRCM in relation to diagnosis in 1995-2000 versus 2001-2009 for all patients, and predictively and diagnostically tested patients separately. Of 287 patients, 219 (76 %) had a diagnostic BRCA1/2 test. In this cohort, the median time from diagnosis to DNA testing decreased from 28 months for those diagnosed between 1995 and 2000 to 14 mont...

Acta Oncologica, 2014

Purpose. Risk prediction models (RPM) in breast cancer quantify survival benefit from adjuvant sy... more Purpose. Risk prediction models (RPM) in breast cancer quantify survival benefit from adjuvant systemic treatment. These models [e.g. Adjuvant! Online (AO)] are increasingly used during consultations, despite their not being designed for such use. As still little is known about oncologists' views on and use of RPM to communicate prognosis to patients, we investigated if, why, and how they use RPM. Methods. We disseminated an online questionnaire that was based on the literature and individual and group interviews with oncologists. results. Fifty-one oncologists (partially) completed the questionnaire. AO is the best known (95%) and most frequently used RPM (96%). It is used to help oncologists decide whether or not to recommend chemotherapy ( 85%), to inform (86%) and help patients decide about treatment ( 80%), or to persuade them to follow the proposed course of treatment (74%). Most oncologists (74%) believe that using AO helps patients understand their prognosis. conclusion. RPM have found a place in daily practice, especially AO. Oncologists think that using AO helps patients understand their prognosis, yet studies suggest that this is not always the case. Our findings highlight the importance of exploring whether patients understand the information that RPM provide.

International journal of cancer. Journal international du cancer, Jan 15, 2015

A large genotyping project within the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC) recently identi... more A large genotyping project within the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC) recently identified 41 associations between single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and overall breast cancer (BC) risk. We investigated whether the effects of these 41 SNPs, as well as six SNPs associated with estrogen receptor (ER) negative BC risk are modified by 13 environmental risk factors for BC. Data from 22 studies participating in BCAC were pooled, comprising up to 26,633 cases and 30,119 controls. Interactions between SNPs and environmental factors were evaluated using an empirical Bayes-type shrinkage estimator. Six SNPs showed interactions with associated p-values (pint )…

The Lancet Oncology, 2014

Adjuvant! Online is a prediction tool that can be used to aid clinical decision making in patient... more Adjuvant! Online is a prediction tool that can be used to aid clinical decision making in patients with breast cancer. It was developed in a patient population aged 69 years or younger, and subsequent validation studies included small numbers of older patients. Since older patients with breast cancer differ from younger patients in many aspects, the aim of this study was to investigate the validity of Adjuvant! Online in a large cohort of unselected older patients. We included patients from the population-based FOCUS cohort, which included all consecutive patients aged 65 years or older who were diagnosed with invasive or in-situ breast cancer between Jan 1, 1997, and Dec 31, 2004, in the southwestern part of the Netherlands. We included all patients who fulfilled the criteria as stated by Adjuvant! Online: patients with unilateral, unicentric, invasive adenocarcinoma; no evidence of metastatic or residual disease; no evidence of T4 features; and no evidence of inflammatory breast cancer. We entered data from all patients with the &amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;average for age&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; comorbidity status (model 1) and with an individualised comorbidity status (model 2). We included 2012 patients. Median age of patients in the cohort was 74·0 years (IQR 69·0-79·0). 904 (45%) of 2012 patients died during follow-up, whereas 326 (16%) patients had recurrence. Median follow-up for overall survival was 9·0 years (IQR 7·4-10·7), and 6·6 years (4·4-6·6) for patients without recurrence. Using model 1, Adjuvant! Online overestimated 10-year overall survival by 9·8% ([95% CI 5·9-13·7], p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;0·0001) and 10-year cumulative recurrence survival by 8·7% ([6·7-10·7], p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;0·0001). By contrast, when using model 2, Adjuvant! Online underestimated the 10-year overall survival by -17·1% ([95% CI -21·0 to -13·2], p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;0·0001). However, when using model 2, Adjuvant! Online predicted cumulative recurrence accurately in all patients (-0·7% [95% CI -2·7-1·3], p=0·48). Adjuvant! Online does not accurately predict overall survival and recurrence in older patients with early breast cancer. Dutch Cancer Foundation.

Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, 2012