SDM POSSIBLE: A Breast Cancer Treatment Decision Aid for Women 70+ With Low-Risk Stage I Breast Cancers
SDMPOSSIBLE
SDM POSSIBLE: A Cluster RCT of a Breast Cancer Treatment Decision Aid for Women 70+ With Low-Risk Stage I Breast Cancers
1 other identifier
interventional
402
1 country
11
Brief Summary
Investigators aim to conduct a type 1 hybrid effectiveness-implementation surgeon-level cluster randomized clinical trial (RCT) of a multi-level intervention, a shared decision making training for surgeons plus patient decision aid vs. usual care (UC), at 7 large health systems across the U.S. to learn the intervention's effectiveness. Decision aids will be mailed and sent via patient portal and/or via email (when portal/email addresses are available) to patients before their first surgical encounter. The central hypothesis is that the novel intervention will be a key resource to support shared decision making leading to higher quality treatment decisions and as result improved care and outcomes.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P75+ for not_applicable breast-cancer
Started Feb 2026
Longer than P75 for not_applicable breast-cancer
11 active sites
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
First Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
March 18, 2025
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
March 26, 2025
CompletedStudy Start
First participant enrolled
February 4, 2026
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
October 1, 2032
ExpectedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
September 30, 2033
March 2, 2026
February 1, 2026
6.7 years
March 18, 2025
February 27, 2026
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (4)
Receipt of aggressive treatment within 6 months of First Surgical Encounter (Arm A)
Research staff will review the medical records for all participants with eligible tumor and study characteristics seen by a participating surgeon during the trial to learn whether aggressive treatments were received (mastectomy, radiation treatment, sentinel lymph node biopsy \[SLNB\] or axillary dissections and/or systemic therapy) within 6 months of each participant's first surgical consultation.
6 months
Participant Perceived Shared Decision Making Quality Scale Score (Arm D)
Assessed by the SDM Process Scale: 4 items-scored 0-4 with a total scores range of 0 to 8; patient/caregiver participant perspectives on how much surgeon reviewed reasons for having/not having radiotherapy after breast conserving surgery and for having SLNB. It also assesses if participants perceive being given a choice or asked about preferences.
at 1 week
Participant Perceived Shared Decision Making Quality Scale Score (Arm A)
Assessed by the SDM Process Scale: 4 items-scored 0-4 with a total scores range of 0 to 8; patient/caregiver participant perspectives on how much surgeon reviewed reasons for having/not having radiotherapy after breast conserving surgery and for having SLNB. It also assesses if participants perceive being given a choice or asked about preferences.
at 1 week
Receipt of aggressive treatment within 6 months of First Surgical Encounter (Arm D)
Research staff will review the medical records for all participants with eligible tumor and study characteristics seen by a participating surgeon during the trial to learn whether aggressive treatments were received (mastectomy, radiation treatment, sentinel lymph node biopsy \[SLNB\] or axillary dissections and/or systemic therapy) within 6 months of each participant's first surgical consultation.
6 months
Secondary Outcomes (20)
Participant Decisional Conflict Scale Score (Arm A)
1 week
Participant Decisional Conflict Scale Score (Arm D)
1 week
Participant Knowledge Score at 1 week (Arm A)
1 week
Participant Knowledge Score at 6 Months (Arm A)
6 months
Participant Knowledge Score at 1 week (Arm D)
1 week
- +15 more secondary outcomes
Study Arms (2)
Surgeons + SDM/DA
EXPERIMENTAL22 enrolled surgeon participants will be randomized and will complete: * Baseline questionnaire * Virtual 1 hour training on SDM * 3-month training follow up survey * At Month 12: 6 surgeon participants will take part in a semi-structured interview with research assistant/PI by phone, in-person, or virtually * End-of-study survey * At end of study 6 surgeon participants will take part in a semi-structured interview with research assistant/PI by phone, in-person, or virtually. Approximately, 153 patients and 17 caregivers will be in this arm. They will complete a survey at 1 week and 6 months. At 12 months investigators will ask 12 patients and 4 caregivers to complete a qualitative interview. At end of study investigators will ask 12 patients and 4 caregivers to complete a qualitative semi-structured interview with research assistant/PI by phone, in-person, or virtually.
Standard-of-Care
NO INTERVENTION22 enrolled surgeons will be randomized to usual care and will complete: * Baseline questionnaire * End-of-study survey * May choose to participat in End-of-study virtual 1 hour training on SDM * 3-month training follow up survey evaluating the training Approximately, 153 patients and 17 care-givers will be in this arm. They will complete a survey at 1 week and 6 months.
Interventions
The intervention includes training surgeons in shared decision making techniques and providing eligible participants with a tailored breast cancer treatment decision aid prior to the initial surgical consultation.
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Non-resident surgeon \>18 years old
- Cares for women \>/= 70 years at one of the recruitment practices.
- Ability and willingness to provide verbal consent
- Biological female
- aged 70 or older
- first primary invasive breast cancer
- clinically \</=2 cm
- clinically lymph node negative
- estrogen receptor positive (ER+) -HER2-
- scheduled with a participating surgeon for an initial encounter. Females with ER+ breast cancer will be included regardless of their progesterone receptor (PR) status since treatment decisions are similar for ER+/PR+ and ER+/PR- women.
- Biological female
- aged 70 or older
- a first primary invasive breast cancer
- clinically \</=2 cm
- clinically lymph node negative
- +15 more criteria
You may not qualify if:
- Resident surgeon
- Non-surgeons
- Psychiatric illness situations that would limit compliance with study requirements
- Age \<70
- Biological males: Biological males will be excluded since the data informing the DA were obtained from studies of biological females and treatment recommendations and outcomes tend to be worse for biological males with breast cancer.
- Non English or non-Spanish speaking: Women who do not speak English or Spanish will be excluded since these women are not eligible for the DA.
- History of invasive breast cancer
- History ductal carcinoma in situ treated with radiation (since these women are generally not be eligible for radiation treatment)
- Women with Paget's disease because treatment options differ
- inflammatory breast cancer because treatment options differ
- Phyllodes tumor because treatment options differ.
- In hospice
- Surgeon not willing to participate
- Age \<70
- Biological males: Biological males will be excluded since the data informing the DA were obtained from studies of biological females and treatment recommendations and outcomes tend to be worse for biological males with breast cancer.
- +27 more criteria
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (11)
Beckman Research Institute of the City of Hope
Los Angeles, California, 91010, United States
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
Boston, Massachusetts, 02115, United States
Brigham and Women's Hospital
Boston, Massachusetts, 02115, United States
Dana Farber Cancer Institute
Boston, Massachusetts, 02215, United States
Lahey Hospital and Medical Center
Burlington, Massachusetts, 01805, United States
Beth Israel Deaconess Hospital
Needham, Massachusetts, 02492, United States
Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center at South Shore Hospital
Weymouth, Massachusetts, 02198, United States
Rutgers State University of New Jersey Medical School
Newark, New Jersey, 07103, United States
University of New Mexico
Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87131, United States
University of Rochester
Rochester, New York, 14642, United States
Duke University
Durham, North Carolina, 27705, United States
Related Publications (51)
Holmes-Rovner M, Kroll J, Schmitt N, Rovner DR, Breer ML, Rothert ML, Padonu G, Talarczyk G. Patient satisfaction with health care decisions: the satisfaction with decision scale. Med Decis Making. 1996 Jan-Mar;16(1):58-64. doi: 10.1177/0272989X9601600114.
PMID: 8717600BACKGROUNDMcNaughton CD, Cavanaugh KL, Kripalani S, Rothman RL, Wallston KA. Validation of a Short, 3-Item Version of the Subjective Numeracy Scale. Med Decis Making. 2015 Nov;35(8):932-6. doi: 10.1177/0272989X15581800. Epub 2015 Apr 15.
PMID: 25878195BACKGROUNDDegner LF, Kristjanson LJ, Bowman D, Sloan JA, Carriere KC, O'Neil J, Bilodeau B, Watson P, Mueller B. Information needs and decisional preferences in women with breast cancer. JAMA. 1997 May 14;277(18):1485-92.
PMID: 9145723BACKGROUNDBrehaut JC, O'Connor AM, Wood TJ, Hack TF, Siminoff L, Gordon E, Feldman-Stewart D. Validation of a decision regret scale. Med Decis Making. 2003 Jul-Aug;23(4):281-92. doi: 10.1177/0272989X03256005.
PMID: 12926578BACKGROUNDGarvelink MM, Boland L, Klein K, Nguyen DV, Menear M, Bekker HL, Eden KB, LeBlanc A, O'Connor AM, Stacey D, Legare F. Decisional Conflict Scale Use over 20 Years: The Anniversary Review. Med Decis Making. 2019 May;39(4):301-314. doi: 10.1177/0272989X19851345. Epub 2019 May 29.
PMID: 31142194BACKGROUNDFowler FJ Jr, Sepucha KR, Stringfellow V, Valentine KD. Validation of the SDM Process Scale to Evaluate Shared Decision-Making at Clinical Sites. J Patient Exp. 2021 Nov 26;8:23743735211060811. doi: 10.1177/23743735211060811. eCollection 2021.
PMID: 34869847BACKGROUNDMcCreight MS, Rabin BA, Glasgow RE, Ayele RA, Leonard CA, Gilmartin HM, Frank JW, Hess PL, Burke RE, Battaglia CT. Using the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM) to qualitatively assess multilevel contextual factors to help plan, implement, evaluate, and disseminate health services programs. Transl Behav Med. 2019 Nov 25;9(6):1002-1011. doi: 10.1093/tbm/ibz085.
PMID: 31170296BACKGROUNDGlasgow RE, Harden SM, Gaglio B, Rabin B, Smith ML, Porter GC, Ory MG, Estabrooks PA. RE-AIM Planning and Evaluation Framework: Adapting to New Science and Practice With a 20-Year Review. Front Public Health. 2019 Mar 29;7:64. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2019.00064. eCollection 2019.
PMID: 30984733BACKGROUNDWagner TH, Yoon J, Jacobs JC, So A, Kilbourne AM, Yu W, Goodrich DE. Estimating Costs of an Implementation Intervention. Med Decis Making. 2020 Nov;40(8):959-967. doi: 10.1177/0272989X20960455. Epub 2020 Oct 20.
PMID: 33078681BACKGROUNDFalkenbach P, Raudasoja AJ, Vernooij RWM, Mustonen JMJ, Agarwal A, Aoki Y, Blanker MH, Cartwright R, Garcia-Perdomo HA, Kilpelainen TP, Lainiala O, Lamberg T, Nevalainen OPO, Raittio E, Richard PO, Violette PD, Tikkinen KAO, Sipila R, Turpeinen M, Komulainen J. Reporting of costs and economic impacts in randomized trials of de-implementation interventions for low-value care: a systematic scoping review. Implement Sci. 2023 Aug 21;18(1):36. doi: 10.1186/s13012-023-01290-3.
PMID: 37605243BACKGROUNDSchonberg MA, Jacobson AR, Karamourtopoulos M, Aliberti GM, Pinheiro A, Smith AK, Schuttner LC, Park ER, Hamel MB. Scripts and Strategies for Discussing Stopping Cancer Screening with Adults > 75 Years: a Qualitative Study. J Gen Intern Med. 2020 Jul;35(7):2076-2083. doi: 10.1007/s11606-020-05735-z. Epub 2020 Mar 3.
PMID: 32128689BACKGROUNDJindal SK, Karamourtopoulos M, Jacobson AR, Pinheiro A, Smith AK, Hamel MB, Schonberg MA. Strategies for discussing long-term prognosis when deciding on cancer screening for adults over age 75. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2022 Jun;70(6):1734-1744. doi: 10.1111/jgs.17723. Epub 2022 Feb 28.
PMID: 35225351BACKGROUNDMinami CA, Bryan AF, Freedman RA, Revette AC, Schonberg MA, King TA, Mittendorf EA. Assessment of Oncologists' Perspectives on Omission of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Women 70 Years and Older With Early-Stage Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer. JAMA Netw Open. 2022 Aug 1;5(8):e2228524. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.28524.
PMID: 36001314BACKGROUNDSchonberg MA, Li V, Marcantonio ER, Davis RB, McCarthy EP. Predicting Mortality up to 14 Years Among Community-Dwelling Adults Aged 65 and Older. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2017 Jun;65(6):1310-1315. doi: 10.1111/jgs.14805. Epub 2017 Feb 21.
PMID: 28221669BACKGROUNDDossett LA, Mott NM, Bredbeck BC, Wang T, Jobin CT, Hughes TM, Hawley ST, Zikmund-Fisher BJ. Using Tailored Messages to Target Overuse of Low-Value Breast Cancer Care in Older Women. J Surg Res. 2022 Feb;270:503-512. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2021.10.005. Epub 2021 Nov 19.
PMID: 34801801BACKGROUNDCarleton N, Zou J, Fang Y, Koscumb SE, Shah OS, Chen F, Beriwal S, Diego EJ, Brufsky AM, Oesterreich S, Shapiro SD, Ferris R, Emens LA, Tseng G, Marroquin OC, Lee AV, McAuliffe PF. Outcomes After Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy and Radiotherapy in Older Women With Early-Stage, Estrogen Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer. JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Apr 1;4(4):e216322. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.6322.
PMID: 33856473BACKGROUNDStacey D, Lewis KB, Smith M, Carley M, Volk R, Douglas EE, Pacheco-Brousseau L, Finderup J, Gunderson J, Barry MJ, Bennett CL, Bravo P, Steffensen K, Gogovor A, Graham ID, Kelly SE, Legare F, Sondergaard H, Thomson R, Trenaman L, Trevena L. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Jan 29;1(1):CD001431. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub6.
PMID: 38284415BACKGROUNDSchonberg MA, Birdwell RL, Bychkovsky BL, Hintz L, Fein-Zachary V, Wertheimer MD, Silliman RA. Older women's experience with breast cancer treatment decisions. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2014 May;145(1):211-23. doi: 10.1007/s10549-014-2921-y. Epub 2014 Mar 31.
PMID: 24682710BACKGROUNDChagpar AB, Horowitz N, Sanft T, Wilson LD, Silber A, Killelea B, Moran MS, DiGiovanna MP, Hofstatter E, Chung G, Pusztai L, Lannin DR. Does lymph node status influence adjuvant therapy decision-making in women 70 years of age or older with clinically node negative hormone receptor positive breast cancer? Am J Surg. 2017 Dec;214(6):1082-1088. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2017.07.036. Epub 2017 Sep 18.
PMID: 28939252BACKGROUNDBoughey JC, Haffty BG, Habermann EB, Hoskin TL, Goetz MP. Has the Time Come to Stop Surgical Staging of the Axilla for All Women Age 70 Years or Older with Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer? Ann Surg Oncol. 2017 Mar;24(3):614-617. doi: 10.1245/s10434-016-5740-z. Epub 2017 Jan 4. No abstract available.
PMID: 28054190BACKGROUNDBiganzoli L, Battisti NML, Wildiers H, McCartney A, Colloca G, Kunkler IH, Cardoso MJ, Cheung KL, de Glas NA, Trimboli RM, Korc-Grodzicki B, Soto-Perez-de-Celis E, Ponti A, Tsang J, Marotti L, Benn K, Aapro MS, Brain EGC. Updated recommendations regarding the management of older patients with breast cancer: a joint paper from the European Society of Breast Cancer Specialists (EUSOMA) and the International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG). Lancet Oncol. 2021 Jul;22(7):e327-e340. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30741-5. Epub 2021 May 14.
PMID: 34000244BACKGROUNDLiang S, Hallet J, Simpson JS, Tricco AC, Scheer AS. Omission of axillary staging in elderly patients with early stage breast cancer impacts regional control but not survival: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Geriatr Oncol. 2017 Mar;8(2):140-147. doi: 10.1016/j.jgo.2016.12.003. Epub 2016 Dec 13.
PMID: 27986500BACKGROUNDGentilini OD, Botteri E, Sangalli C, Galimberti V, Porpiglia M, Agresti R, Luini A, Viale G, Cassano E, Peradze N, Toesca A, Massari G, Sacchini V, Munzone E, Leonardi MC, Cattadori F, Di Micco R, Esposito E, Sgarella A, Cattaneo S, Busani M, Dessena M, Bianchi A, Cretella E, Ripoll Orts F, Mueller M, Tinterri C, Chahuan Manzur BJ, Benedetto C, Veronesi P; SOUND Trial Group. Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy vs No Axillary Surgery in Patients With Small Breast Cancer and Negative Results on Ultrasonography of Axillary Lymph Nodes: The SOUND Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol. 2023 Nov 1;9(11):1557-1564. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2023.3759.
PMID: 37733364BACKGROUNDInternational Breast Cancer Study Group; Rudenstam CM, Zahrieh D, Forbes JF, Crivellari D, Holmberg SB, Rey P, Dent D, Campbell I, Bernhard J, Price KN, Castiglione-Gertsch M, Goldhirsch A, Gelber RD, Coates AS. Randomized trial comparing axillary clearance versus no axillary clearance in older patients with breast cancer: first results of International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial 10-93. J Clin Oncol. 2006 Jan 20;24(3):337-44. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.01.5784. Epub 2005 Dec 12.
PMID: 16344321BACKGROUNDMartelli G, Boracchi P, Ardoino I, Lozza L, Bohm S, Vetrella G, Agresti R. Axillary dissection versus no axillary dissection in older patients with T1N0 breast cancer: 15-year results of a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg. 2012 Dec;256(6):920-4. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31827660a8.
PMID: 23154393BACKGROUNDMann GB, Skandarajah AR, Zdenkowski N, Hughes J, Park A, Petrie D, Saxby K, Grimmond SM, Murugasu A, Spillane AJ, Chua BH, Badger H, Braggett H, Gebski V, Mou A, Collins JP, Rose AK. Postoperative radiotherapy omission in selected patients with early breast cancer following preoperative breast MRI (PROSPECT): primary results of a prospective two-arm study. Lancet. 2024 Jan 20;403(10423):261-270. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(23)02476-5. Epub 2023 Dec 5.
PMID: 38065194BACKGROUNDPotter R, Gnant M, Kwasny W, Tausch C, Handl-Zeller L, Pakisch B, Taucher S, Hammer J, Luschin-Ebengreuth G, Schmid M, Sedlmayer F, Stierer M, Reiner G, Kapp K, Hofbauer F, Rottenfusser A, Postlberger S, Haider K, Draxler W, Jakesz R; Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group. Lumpectomy plus tamoxifen or anastrozole with or without whole breast irradiation in women with favorable early breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007 Jun 1;68(2):334-40. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.12.045. Epub 2007 Mar 23.
PMID: 17363187BACKGROUNDKunkler IH, Williams LJ, Jack WJL, Cameron DA, Dixon JM. Breast-Conserving Surgery with or without Irradiation in Early Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2023 Feb 16;388(7):585-594. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2207586.
PMID: 36791159BACKGROUNDKunkler IH, Williams LJ, Jack WJ, Cameron DA, Dixon JM; PRIME II investigators. Breast-conserving surgery with or without irradiation in women aged 65 years or older with early breast cancer (PRIME II): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015 Mar;16(3):266-73. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)71221-5. Epub 2015 Jan 28.
PMID: 25637340BACKGROUNDChesney TR, Yin JX, Rajaee N, Tricco AC, Fyles AW, Acuna SA, Scheer AS. Tamoxifen with radiotherapy compared with Tamoxifen alone in elderly women with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast conserving surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiother Oncol. 2017 Apr;123(1):1-9. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2017.02.019.
PMID: 28391871BACKGROUNDGennari R, Curigliano G, Rotmensz N, Robertson C, Colleoni M, Zurrida S, Nole F, de Braud F, Orlando L, Leonardi MC, Galimberti V, Intra M, Veronesi P, Renne G, Cinieri S, Audisio RA, Luini A, Orecchia R, Viale G, Goldhirsch A. Breast carcinoma in elderly women: features of disease presentation, choice of local and systemic treatments compared with younger postmenopasual patients. Cancer. 2004 Sep 15;101(6):1302-10. doi: 10.1002/cncr.20535.
PMID: 15316944BACKGROUNDSchonberg MA, Karamourtopoulos M, Jacobson AR, Aliberti GM, Pinheiro A, Smith AK, Davis RB, Schuttner LC, Hamel MB. A Strategy to Prepare Primary Care Clinicians for Discussing Stopping Cancer Screening With Adults Older Than 75 Years. Innov Aging. 2020 Jul 7;4(4):igaa027. doi: 10.1093/geroni/igaa027. eCollection 2020.
PMID: 32793815BACKGROUNDSchonberg MA, Freedman RA, Recht AR, Jacobson AR, Aliberti GM, Karamourtopoulos M, Nakhlis F, McCarthy EP, Pories SE, Sharma R, Dominici LS. Developing a patient decision aid for women aged 70 and older with early stage, estrogen receptor positive, HER2 negative, breast cancer. J Geriatr Oncol. 2019 Nov;10(6):980-986. doi: 10.1016/j.jgo.2019.05.004. Epub 2019 May 24.
PMID: 31130442BACKGROUNDMinami CA, Freedman RA, Karamourtopoulos M, Pinheiro A, Gilliam E, Aliberti G, Pories SE, Recht A, Lotz M, Dominici LS, Schonberg MA. Acceptability of a patient decision aid for women aged 70 and older with stage I, estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer. J Geriatr Oncol. 2021 Jun;12(5):724-730. doi: 10.1016/j.jgo.2021.02.028. Epub 2021 Mar 5.
PMID: 33678596BACKGROUNDFyles AW, McCready DR, Manchul LA, Trudeau ME, Merante P, Pintilie M, Weir LM, Olivotto IA. Tamoxifen with or without breast irradiation in women 50 years of age or older with early breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004 Sep 2;351(10):963-70. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa040595.
PMID: 15342804BACKGROUNDSarkar U, Schillinger D, Lopez A, Sudore R. Validation of self-reported health literacy questions among diverse English and Spanish-speaking populations. J Gen Intern Med. 2011 Mar;26(3):265-71. doi: 10.1007/s11606-010-1552-1. Epub 2010 Nov 6.
PMID: 21057882BACKGROUNDBychkovsky BL, Schonberg MA. Poor persistence with hormonal therapy among women with breast cancer. J Geriatr Oncol. 2016 May;7(3):154-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jgo.2016.04.002. Epub 2016 Apr 28. No abstract available.
PMID: 27133286BACKGROUNDLee SJ, Leipzig RM, Walter LC. Incorporating lag time to benefit into prevention decisions for older adults. JAMA. 2013 Dec 25;310(24):2609-10. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.282612. No abstract available.
PMID: 24322396BACKGROUNDGlasgow RE, Vogt TM, Boles SM. Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework. Am J Public Health. 1999 Sep;89(9):1322-7. doi: 10.2105/ajph.89.9.1322.
PMID: 10474547BACKGROUNDShickh S, Leventakos K, Lewis MA, Bombard Y, Montori VM. Shared Decision Making in the Care of Patients With Cancer. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2023 Jun;43:e389516. doi: 10.1200/EDBK_389516.
PMID: 37339391BACKGROUNDTseng J, Bazan JG, Minami CA, Schonberg MA. Not Too Little, Not Too Much: Optimizing More Versus Less Locoregional Treatment for Older Patients With Breast Cancer. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2023 Jun;43:e390450. doi: 10.1200/EDBK_390450.
PMID: 37327467BACKGROUNDHawkins AT, Fayanju OM, Maduekwe UN. Shared Decision-Making in the Surgical Sciences. JAMA Surg. 2023 Nov 1;158(11):1121-1122. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2023.2396.
PMID: 37466987BACKGROUNDSimmons L, Leavitt L, Ray A, Fosburgh B, Sepucha K. Shared Decision Making in Common Chronic Conditions: Impact of a Resident Training Workshop. Teach Learn Med. 2016;28(2):202-9. doi: 10.1080/10401334.2016.1146600.
PMID: 27064722BACKGROUNDSepucha KR, Simmons LH, Barry MJ, Edgman-Levitan S, Licurse AM, Chaguturu SK. Ten Years, Forty Decision Aids, And Thousands Of Patient Uses: Shared Decision Making At Massachusetts General Hospital. Health Aff (Millwood). 2016 Apr;35(4):630-6. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2015.1376.
PMID: 27044963BACKGROUNDStacey D, Samant R, Bennett C. Decision making in oncology: a review of patient decision aids to support patient participation. CA Cancer J Clin. 2008 Sep-Oct;58(5):293-304. doi: 10.3322/CA.2008.0006. Epub 2008 Aug 28.
PMID: 18755939BACKGROUNDHind D, Wyld L, Beverley CB, Reed MW. Surgery versus primary endocrine therapy for operable primary breast cancer in elderly women (70 years plus). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Jan 25;(1):CD004272. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004272.pub2.
PMID: 16437480BACKGROUNDHolmes-Rovner M. International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS): beyond decision aids to usual design of patient education materials. Health Expect. 2007 Jun;10(2):103-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2007.00445.x. No abstract available.
PMID: 17524003BACKGROUNDMinami CA, Jin G, Freedman RA, Schonberg MA, King TA, Mittendorf EA. Trends in Locoregional Therapy in Older Women with Early-Stage Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer by Frailty and Life Expectancy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2024 Feb;31(2):920-930. doi: 10.1245/s10434-023-14446-8. Epub 2023 Oct 18.
PMID: 37851196BACKGROUNDSchonberg MA, Marcantonio ER, Ngo L, Silliman RA, McCarthy EP. Does Life Expectancy Affect Treatment of Women Aged 80 and Older with Early Stage Breast Cancers? J Geriatr Oncol. 2012 Jan 1;3(1):8-16. doi: 10.1016/j.jgo.2011.10.002.
PMID: 22368726BACKGROUNDDiab SG, Elledge RM, Clark GM. Tumor characteristics and clinical outcome of elderly women with breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000 Apr 5;92(7):550-6. doi: 10.1093/jnci/92.7.550.
PMID: 10749910BACKGROUNDSchonberg MA, Marcantonio ER, Li D, Silliman RA, Ngo L, McCarthy EP. Breast cancer among the oldest old: tumor characteristics, treatment choices, and survival. J Clin Oncol. 2010 Apr 20;28(12):2038-45. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.25.9796. Epub 2010 Mar 22.
PMID: 20308658BACKGROUND
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Interventions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Mara Schonberg, MD
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
Central Study Contacts
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- NONE
- Purpose
- HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Principal Investigator
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
March 18, 2025
First Posted
March 26, 2025
Study Start
February 4, 2026
Primary Completion (Estimated)
October 1, 2032
Study Completion (Estimated)
September 30, 2033
Last Updated
March 2, 2026
Record last verified: 2026-02
Data Sharing
- IPD Sharing
- Will share
- Shared Documents
- STUDY PROTOCOL, ANALYTIC CODE
- Time Frame
- Data can be shared no earlier than one year following the date of publication or one year after completion of the grant.
- Access Criteria
- All deidentified study data will be made available as public use data to the research community via a Harvard Dataverse Repository. Users will be required to agree to terms that prohibit unlawful uses and intentional violations of privacy, and require attribution. Use of the data will be otherwise unrestricted and free of charge.
All deidentified study data will be made available as public use data to the research community via a Harvard Dataverse Repository. Users will be required to agree to terms that prohibit unlawful uses and intentional violations of privacy, and require attribution. Use of the data will be otherwise unrestricted and free of charge.