Improving Uptake of Cancer Genetic Risk Assessment in a Remote Tailored Risk Communication and Navigation Intervention: Large Effect Size but Room to Grow
Cancer genetic risk assessment (CGRA) is recommended for women with ovarian cancer or high-risk breast cancer, yet fewer than 30% receive recommended genetic services, with the lowest rates among underserved populations. We hypothesized that compared with usual care (UC) and mailed targeted print (T...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of clinical oncology 2023-05, Vol.41 (15), p.2767-2778 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 2778 |
---|---|
container_issue | 15 |
container_start_page | 2767 |
container_title | Journal of clinical oncology |
container_volume | 41 |
creator | Kinney, Anita Y Walters, Scott T Lin, Yong Lu, Shou-En Kim, Arreum Ani, Julianne Heidt, Emily Le Compte, Circe J G O'Malley, Denalee Stroup, Antoinette Paddock, Lisa E Grumet, Sherry Boyce, Tawny W Toppmeyer, Deborah L McDougall, Jean A |
description | Cancer genetic risk assessment (CGRA) is recommended for women with ovarian cancer or high-risk breast cancer, yet fewer than 30% receive recommended genetic services, with the lowest rates among underserved populations. We hypothesized that compared with usual care (UC) and mailed targeted print (TP) education, CGRA uptake would be highest among women receiving a phone-based tailored risk counseling and navigation intervention (TCN).
In this three-arm randomized trial, women with ovarian or high-risk breast cancer were recruited from statewide cancer registries in Colorado, New Jersey, and New Mexico. Participants assigned to TP received a mailed educational brochure. Participants assigned to TCN received the mailed educational brochure, an initial phone-based psychoeducational session with a health coach, a follow-up letter, and a follow-up navigation phone call.
Participants' average age was 61 years, 25.4% identified as Hispanic, 5.9% identified as non-Hispanic Black, and 17.5% lived in rural areas. At 6 months, more women in TCN received CGRA (18.7%) than those in TP (3%; odds ratio, 7.4; 95% CI, 3.0 to 18.3;
< .0001) or UC (2.5%; odds ratio, 8.9; 95% CI, 3.4 to 23.5;
< .0001). There were no significant differences in CGRA uptake between TP and UC. Commonly cited barriers to genetic counseling were lack of provider referral (33.7%) and cost (26.5%), whereas anticipated difficulty coping with test results (14.0%) and cost (41.2%) were barriers for genetic testing.
TCN increased CGRA uptake in a group of geographically and ethnically diverse high-risk breast and ovarian cancer survivors. Remote personalized interventions that incorporate evidence-based health communication and behavior change strategies may increase CGRA among women recruited from statewide cancer registries. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1200/JCO.22.00751 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10414736</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2777011810</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c385t-90589ef2672d21960813d0016737b06dffb12f9413bf1d19edd56333cb6a91f93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkUFvEzEQhS0EoqFw44x85MAGj51d73JB1aqEoIhKoZW4Wd7dcTDN2qntDWp_Cr8WQ0oFp9HTfHrzRo-Ql8DmwBl7-6m9mHM-Z0yW8IjMoOSykLIsH5MZk4IXUIuvJ-RZjN8Zg0UtyqfkRFSyzjifkZ-rcR_8wbotvdonfY3UG9pq12OgS3SYbE83Nl7TsxgxxhFdotZRTTc4-oT0UtudDzgcodaP4-Rsr5P1GXID_awPdnuUK5cwHLJBFu_oWoct0nNjsE_0i71D2k2JbrwfafJ0GfyP5-SJ0buIL-7nKbn6cH7ZfizWF8tVe7YuelGXqWhYWTdoeCX5wKGpWA1iyK9WUsiOVYMxHXDTLEB0BgZocBjKSgjRd5VuwDTilLw_-u6nbsShzwmD3ql9sKMOt8prq_7fOPtNbf1BAVvAQooqO7y-dwj-ZsKY1Ghjj7udduinqLiUkgHUwDL65oj2wccY0DzcAaZ-96lyn4pz9afPjL_6N9sD_LdA8Qv6P507</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2777011810</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Improving Uptake of Cancer Genetic Risk Assessment in a Remote Tailored Risk Communication and Navigation Intervention: Large Effect Size but Room to Grow</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>American Society of Clinical Oncology Online Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Kinney, Anita Y ; Walters, Scott T ; Lin, Yong ; Lu, Shou-En ; Kim, Arreum ; Ani, Julianne ; Heidt, Emily ; Le Compte, Circe J G ; O'Malley, Denalee ; Stroup, Antoinette ; Paddock, Lisa E ; Grumet, Sherry ; Boyce, Tawny W ; Toppmeyer, Deborah L ; McDougall, Jean A</creator><creatorcontrib>Kinney, Anita Y ; Walters, Scott T ; Lin, Yong ; Lu, Shou-En ; Kim, Arreum ; Ani, Julianne ; Heidt, Emily ; Le Compte, Circe J G ; O'Malley, Denalee ; Stroup, Antoinette ; Paddock, Lisa E ; Grumet, Sherry ; Boyce, Tawny W ; Toppmeyer, Deborah L ; McDougall, Jean A</creatorcontrib><description>Cancer genetic risk assessment (CGRA) is recommended for women with ovarian cancer or high-risk breast cancer, yet fewer than 30% receive recommended genetic services, with the lowest rates among underserved populations. We hypothesized that compared with usual care (UC) and mailed targeted print (TP) education, CGRA uptake would be highest among women receiving a phone-based tailored risk counseling and navigation intervention (TCN).
In this three-arm randomized trial, women with ovarian or high-risk breast cancer were recruited from statewide cancer registries in Colorado, New Jersey, and New Mexico. Participants assigned to TP received a mailed educational brochure. Participants assigned to TCN received the mailed educational brochure, an initial phone-based psychoeducational session with a health coach, a follow-up letter, and a follow-up navigation phone call.
Participants' average age was 61 years, 25.4% identified as Hispanic, 5.9% identified as non-Hispanic Black, and 17.5% lived in rural areas. At 6 months, more women in TCN received CGRA (18.7%) than those in TP (3%; odds ratio, 7.4; 95% CI, 3.0 to 18.3;
< .0001) or UC (2.5%; odds ratio, 8.9; 95% CI, 3.4 to 23.5;
< .0001). There were no significant differences in CGRA uptake between TP and UC. Commonly cited barriers to genetic counseling were lack of provider referral (33.7%) and cost (26.5%), whereas anticipated difficulty coping with test results (14.0%) and cost (41.2%) were barriers for genetic testing.
TCN increased CGRA uptake in a group of geographically and ethnically diverse high-risk breast and ovarian cancer survivors. Remote personalized interventions that incorporate evidence-based health communication and behavior change strategies may increase CGRA among women recruited from statewide cancer registries.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0732-183X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1527-7755</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1200/JCO.22.00751</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36787512</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Wolters Kluwer Health</publisher><subject>Breast Neoplasms - genetics ; Communication ; Counseling ; Female ; Genetic Counseling ; Humans ; Middle Aged ; ORIGINAL REPORTS ; Ovarian Neoplasms - genetics ; Risk Assessment</subject><ispartof>Journal of clinical oncology, 2023-05, Vol.41 (15), p.2767-2778</ispartof><rights>2023 by American Society of Clinical Oncology 2023 American Society of Clinical Oncology</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c385t-90589ef2672d21960813d0016737b06dffb12f9413bf1d19edd56333cb6a91f93</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c385t-90589ef2672d21960813d0016737b06dffb12f9413bf1d19edd56333cb6a91f93</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-3144-4387 ; 0000-0002-0916-1842 ; 0000-0002-3933-2358 ; 0000-0002-6210-3422 ; 0000-0003-3341-4018 ; 0000-0002-5710-5036 ; 0000-0001-5977-843X ; 0000-0002-9056-1500 ; 0000-0002-1222-4728 ; 0000-0002-2996-9355 ; 0000-0002-8972-5539 ; 0000-0001-7493-447X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,3716,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36787512$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kinney, Anita Y</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Walters, Scott T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lin, Yong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lu, Shou-En</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Arreum</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ani, Julianne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heidt, Emily</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Le Compte, Circe J G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>O'Malley, Denalee</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stroup, Antoinette</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paddock, Lisa E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grumet, Sherry</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boyce, Tawny W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Toppmeyer, Deborah L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McDougall, Jean A</creatorcontrib><title>Improving Uptake of Cancer Genetic Risk Assessment in a Remote Tailored Risk Communication and Navigation Intervention: Large Effect Size but Room to Grow</title><title>Journal of clinical oncology</title><addtitle>J Clin Oncol</addtitle><description>Cancer genetic risk assessment (CGRA) is recommended for women with ovarian cancer or high-risk breast cancer, yet fewer than 30% receive recommended genetic services, with the lowest rates among underserved populations. We hypothesized that compared with usual care (UC) and mailed targeted print (TP) education, CGRA uptake would be highest among women receiving a phone-based tailored risk counseling and navigation intervention (TCN).
In this three-arm randomized trial, women with ovarian or high-risk breast cancer were recruited from statewide cancer registries in Colorado, New Jersey, and New Mexico. Participants assigned to TP received a mailed educational brochure. Participants assigned to TCN received the mailed educational brochure, an initial phone-based psychoeducational session with a health coach, a follow-up letter, and a follow-up navigation phone call.
Participants' average age was 61 years, 25.4% identified as Hispanic, 5.9% identified as non-Hispanic Black, and 17.5% lived in rural areas. At 6 months, more women in TCN received CGRA (18.7%) than those in TP (3%; odds ratio, 7.4; 95% CI, 3.0 to 18.3;
< .0001) or UC (2.5%; odds ratio, 8.9; 95% CI, 3.4 to 23.5;
< .0001). There were no significant differences in CGRA uptake between TP and UC. Commonly cited barriers to genetic counseling were lack of provider referral (33.7%) and cost (26.5%), whereas anticipated difficulty coping with test results (14.0%) and cost (41.2%) were barriers for genetic testing.
TCN increased CGRA uptake in a group of geographically and ethnically diverse high-risk breast and ovarian cancer survivors. Remote personalized interventions that incorporate evidence-based health communication and behavior change strategies may increase CGRA among women recruited from statewide cancer registries.</description><subject>Breast Neoplasms - genetics</subject><subject>Communication</subject><subject>Counseling</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Genetic Counseling</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>ORIGINAL REPORTS</subject><subject>Ovarian Neoplasms - genetics</subject><subject>Risk Assessment</subject><issn>0732-183X</issn><issn>1527-7755</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpVkUFvEzEQhS0EoqFw44x85MAGj51d73JB1aqEoIhKoZW4Wd7dcTDN2qntDWp_Cr8WQ0oFp9HTfHrzRo-Ql8DmwBl7-6m9mHM-Z0yW8IjMoOSykLIsH5MZk4IXUIuvJ-RZjN8Zg0UtyqfkRFSyzjifkZ-rcR_8wbotvdonfY3UG9pq12OgS3SYbE83Nl7TsxgxxhFdotZRTTc4-oT0UtudDzgcodaP4-Rsr5P1GXID_awPdnuUK5cwHLJBFu_oWoct0nNjsE_0i71D2k2JbrwfafJ0GfyP5-SJ0buIL-7nKbn6cH7ZfizWF8tVe7YuelGXqWhYWTdoeCX5wKGpWA1iyK9WUsiOVYMxHXDTLEB0BgZocBjKSgjRd5VuwDTilLw_-u6nbsShzwmD3ql9sKMOt8prq_7fOPtNbf1BAVvAQooqO7y-dwj-ZsKY1Ghjj7udduinqLiUkgHUwDL65oj2wccY0DzcAaZ-96lyn4pz9afPjL_6N9sD_LdA8Qv6P507</recordid><startdate>20230520</startdate><enddate>20230520</enddate><creator>Kinney, Anita Y</creator><creator>Walters, Scott T</creator><creator>Lin, Yong</creator><creator>Lu, Shou-En</creator><creator>Kim, Arreum</creator><creator>Ani, Julianne</creator><creator>Heidt, Emily</creator><creator>Le Compte, Circe J G</creator><creator>O'Malley, Denalee</creator><creator>Stroup, Antoinette</creator><creator>Paddock, Lisa E</creator><creator>Grumet, Sherry</creator><creator>Boyce, Tawny W</creator><creator>Toppmeyer, Deborah L</creator><creator>McDougall, Jean A</creator><general>Wolters Kluwer Health</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3144-4387</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0916-1842</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3933-2358</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6210-3422</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3341-4018</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5710-5036</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5977-843X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9056-1500</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1222-4728</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2996-9355</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8972-5539</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7493-447X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230520</creationdate><title>Improving Uptake of Cancer Genetic Risk Assessment in a Remote Tailored Risk Communication and Navigation Intervention: Large Effect Size but Room to Grow</title><author>Kinney, Anita Y ; Walters, Scott T ; Lin, Yong ; Lu, Shou-En ; Kim, Arreum ; Ani, Julianne ; Heidt, Emily ; Le Compte, Circe J G ; O'Malley, Denalee ; Stroup, Antoinette ; Paddock, Lisa E ; Grumet, Sherry ; Boyce, Tawny W ; Toppmeyer, Deborah L ; McDougall, Jean A</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c385t-90589ef2672d21960813d0016737b06dffb12f9413bf1d19edd56333cb6a91f93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Breast Neoplasms - genetics</topic><topic>Communication</topic><topic>Counseling</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Genetic Counseling</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>ORIGINAL REPORTS</topic><topic>Ovarian Neoplasms - genetics</topic><topic>Risk Assessment</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kinney, Anita Y</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Walters, Scott T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lin, Yong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lu, Shou-En</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Arreum</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ani, Julianne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heidt, Emily</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Le Compte, Circe J G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>O'Malley, Denalee</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stroup, Antoinette</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paddock, Lisa E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grumet, Sherry</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boyce, Tawny W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Toppmeyer, Deborah L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McDougall, Jean A</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of clinical oncology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kinney, Anita Y</au><au>Walters, Scott T</au><au>Lin, Yong</au><au>Lu, Shou-En</au><au>Kim, Arreum</au><au>Ani, Julianne</au><au>Heidt, Emily</au><au>Le Compte, Circe J G</au><au>O'Malley, Denalee</au><au>Stroup, Antoinette</au><au>Paddock, Lisa E</au><au>Grumet, Sherry</au><au>Boyce, Tawny W</au><au>Toppmeyer, Deborah L</au><au>McDougall, Jean A</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Improving Uptake of Cancer Genetic Risk Assessment in a Remote Tailored Risk Communication and Navigation Intervention: Large Effect Size but Room to Grow</atitle><jtitle>Journal of clinical oncology</jtitle><addtitle>J Clin Oncol</addtitle><date>2023-05-20</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>41</volume><issue>15</issue><spage>2767</spage><epage>2778</epage><pages>2767-2778</pages><issn>0732-183X</issn><eissn>1527-7755</eissn><abstract>Cancer genetic risk assessment (CGRA) is recommended for women with ovarian cancer or high-risk breast cancer, yet fewer than 30% receive recommended genetic services, with the lowest rates among underserved populations. We hypothesized that compared with usual care (UC) and mailed targeted print (TP) education, CGRA uptake would be highest among women receiving a phone-based tailored risk counseling and navigation intervention (TCN).
In this three-arm randomized trial, women with ovarian or high-risk breast cancer were recruited from statewide cancer registries in Colorado, New Jersey, and New Mexico. Participants assigned to TP received a mailed educational brochure. Participants assigned to TCN received the mailed educational brochure, an initial phone-based psychoeducational session with a health coach, a follow-up letter, and a follow-up navigation phone call.
Participants' average age was 61 years, 25.4% identified as Hispanic, 5.9% identified as non-Hispanic Black, and 17.5% lived in rural areas. At 6 months, more women in TCN received CGRA (18.7%) than those in TP (3%; odds ratio, 7.4; 95% CI, 3.0 to 18.3;
< .0001) or UC (2.5%; odds ratio, 8.9; 95% CI, 3.4 to 23.5;
< .0001). There were no significant differences in CGRA uptake between TP and UC. Commonly cited barriers to genetic counseling were lack of provider referral (33.7%) and cost (26.5%), whereas anticipated difficulty coping with test results (14.0%) and cost (41.2%) were barriers for genetic testing.
TCN increased CGRA uptake in a group of geographically and ethnically diverse high-risk breast and ovarian cancer survivors. Remote personalized interventions that incorporate evidence-based health communication and behavior change strategies may increase CGRA among women recruited from statewide cancer registries.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Wolters Kluwer Health</pub><pmid>36787512</pmid><doi>10.1200/JCO.22.00751</doi><tpages>12</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3144-4387</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0916-1842</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3933-2358</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6210-3422</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3341-4018</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5710-5036</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5977-843X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9056-1500</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1222-4728</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2996-9355</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8972-5539</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7493-447X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0732-183X |
ispartof | Journal of clinical oncology, 2023-05, Vol.41 (15), p.2767-2778 |
issn | 0732-183X 1527-7755 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10414736 |
source | MEDLINE; American Society of Clinical Oncology Online Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Breast Neoplasms - genetics Communication Counseling Female Genetic Counseling Humans Middle Aged ORIGINAL REPORTS Ovarian Neoplasms - genetics Risk Assessment |
title | Improving Uptake of Cancer Genetic Risk Assessment in a Remote Tailored Risk Communication and Navigation Intervention: Large Effect Size but Room to Grow |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-31T09%3A41%3A26IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Improving%20Uptake%20of%20Cancer%20Genetic%20Risk%20Assessment%20in%20a%20Remote%20Tailored%20Risk%20Communication%20and%20Navigation%20Intervention:%20Large%20Effect%20Size%20but%20Room%20to%20Grow&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20clinical%20oncology&rft.au=Kinney,%20Anita%20Y&rft.date=2023-05-20&rft.volume=41&rft.issue=15&rft.spage=2767&rft.epage=2778&rft.pages=2767-2778&rft.issn=0732-183X&rft.eissn=1527-7755&rft_id=info:doi/10.1200/JCO.22.00751&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2777011810%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2777011810&rft_id=info:pmid/36787512&rfr_iscdi=true |