Clinical Utility of the 12-Gene DCIS Score Assay: Impact on Radiotherapy Recommendations for Patients with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ

Objective

The aim of this study was to determine the impact of the results of the 12-gene DCIS Score assay on (i) radiotherapy recommendations for patients with pure ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) following breast-conserving surgery (BCS), and (ii) patient decisional conflict and state anxiety.

Methods

Thirteen sites across the US enrolled patients (March 2014–August 2015) with pure DCIS undergoing BCS. Prospectively collected data included clinicopathologic factors, physician estimates of local recurrence risk, DCIS Score results, and pre-/post-assay radiotherapy recommendations for each patient made by a surgeon and a radiation oncologist. Patients completed pre-/post-assay decisional conflict scale and state-trait anxiety inventory instruments.

Results

The analysis cohort included 127 patients: median age 60 years, 80 % postmenopausal, median size 8 mm (39 % ≤5 mm), 70 % grade 1/2, 88 % estrogen receptor-positive, 75 % progesterone receptor-positive, 54 % with comedo necrosis, and 18 % multifocal. Sixty-six percent of patients had low DCIS Score results, 20 % had intermediate DCIS Score results, and 14 % had high DCIS Score results; the median result was 21 (range 0–84). Pre-assay, surgeons and radiation oncologists recommended radiotherapy for 70.9 and 72.4 % of patients, respectively. Post-assay, 26.4 % of overall recommendations changed, including 30.7 and 22.0 % of recommendations by surgeons and radiation oncologists, respectively. Among patients with confirmed completed questionnaires (n = 32), decision conflict (p = 0.004) and state anxiety (p = 0.042) decreased significantly from pre- to post-assay.

Conclusions

Individualized risk estimates from the DCIS Score assay provide valuable information to physicians and patients. Post-assay, in response to DCIS Score results, surgeons changed treatment recommendations more often than radiation oncologists. Further investigation is needed to better understand how such treatment changes may affect clinical outcomes.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1245/s10434-016-5583-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Does a special interest in laparoscopy affect the treatment of acute cholecystitis?

BACKGROUND

We tested the hypothesis that the treatment of patients with acute cholecystitis (AC) would be improved under the care of laparoscopic specialists.

METHODS

The records of patients undergoing cholecystectomy for AC from 1 January 1996 to 31 December 1998 were reviewed retrospectively. Of 170 patients, 48 were cared for by three laparoscopic specialists (LS group), whereas 122 were treated by nine general surgeons who perform only laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) (GS group). The rates of successful LC, complications, and length of hospital stay were compared. Multivariate analysis was used to control for baseline differences.

RESULTS

The patients in the GS group were older (median age, 63 vs 53 years; p = 0.01). In all, 31 LS patients (65%), as compared with 44 GS patients (36%), had successful laparoscopic treatment (p = 0.001). The operating time was the same (median, 70 min). The proportion of patients with postoperative complications was similar in the two groups (37% in the GS vs 31% in the LS group; p = 0.6). The median postoperative hospital stay (3 vs 5 days; p <0.01) was shorter in the LS group. On logistic regression analysis, significant predictors of a successful laparoscopic operation included LS group (p <0.01) and age (p = 0). Predictors of prolonged length of hospital stay were age (p <0.01) and comorbidity score (p <0.01), with LS group status not a significant factor (p = 0.21).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with AC are more likely to undergo successful LC if cared for by a surgeon with an interest in laparoscopy. However, length of hospital stay is influenced more by patient factors in a multivariate model.