TY - JOUR
T1 - Qualitative Assessment of a Decision Tool for Stage I Lung Cancer Treatment
AU - Goldstein, Eliana C.
AU - Andrade, D. Carolina
AU - Housten, Ashley J.
AU - Kozower, Benjamin
AU - Puri, Varun
AU - Robinson, Clifford G.
AU - Eggers, Michelle
AU - Politi, Mary C.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 The Author(s)
PY - 2025/6
Y1 - 2025/6
N2 - Background: Some patients are candidates for either surgical resection or stereotactic body radiotherapy for treatment of stage I lung cancer. We refined a previously developed decision tool about this treatment choice and evaluated interest in a personalized risk calculator. Methods: We conducted qualitative interviews from October 2023 to May 2024 with patients who had been treated for stage I lung cancer at a Midwestern comprehensive cancer center and with clinicians who treat such patients. Results: Participants responded positively to the tool and indicated that it could support decisions if provided before or during conversations following diagnosis. There was no consensus on which clinician should deliver the tool. Suggested tool adaptations focused on clarifying eligibility for options and accurately describing the range of patients’ recovery experiences. Participants were open to the idea of a personalized risk calculator but expressed concerns about accuracy and interpretation of the results. Conclusions: Decision tools can help clinicians and patients collaborate on care decisions. Future work will explore opportunities to incorporate personalized risk information and evaluate this decision tool with a diverse group of patients deciding on treatment for stage I lung cancer.
AB - Background: Some patients are candidates for either surgical resection or stereotactic body radiotherapy for treatment of stage I lung cancer. We refined a previously developed decision tool about this treatment choice and evaluated interest in a personalized risk calculator. Methods: We conducted qualitative interviews from October 2023 to May 2024 with patients who had been treated for stage I lung cancer at a Midwestern comprehensive cancer center and with clinicians who treat such patients. Results: Participants responded positively to the tool and indicated that it could support decisions if provided before or during conversations following diagnosis. There was no consensus on which clinician should deliver the tool. Suggested tool adaptations focused on clarifying eligibility for options and accurately describing the range of patients’ recovery experiences. Participants were open to the idea of a personalized risk calculator but expressed concerns about accuracy and interpretation of the results. Conclusions: Decision tools can help clinicians and patients collaborate on care decisions. Future work will explore opportunities to incorporate personalized risk information and evaluate this decision tool with a diverse group of patients deciding on treatment for stage I lung cancer.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105013603785
U2 - 10.1016/j.atssr.2024.10.017
DO - 10.1016/j.atssr.2024.10.017
M3 - Article
C2 - 40525163
AN - SCOPUS:105013603785
SN - 2772-9931
VL - 3
SP - 308
EP - 312
JO - Annals of Thoracic Surgery Short Reports
JF - Annals of Thoracic Surgery Short Reports
IS - 2
ER -