Protocol of an iterative qualitative study to develop a molecular testing decision aid for shared decision-making in patients with lung cancer after surgery

Xing Wei, Yangjun Liu, Hongfan Yu, Wei Dai, Ding Yang, Kunpeng Zhang, Jing Sun, Wei Xu, Ruoyan Gong, Qingsong Yu, Yang Pu, Yaqin Wang, Jia Liao, Yunfei Mu, Yuanqiang Zhang, Wenhong Feng, Qi Pan, Qiang Li, Qiuling Shi, Xing Wei, Yangjun Liu, Hongfan Yu, Wei Dai, Ding Yang, Kunpeng Zhang, Jing Sun, Wei Xu, Ruoyan Gong, Qingsong Yu, Yang Pu, Yaqin Wang, Jia Liao, Yunfei Mu, Yuanqiang Zhang, Wenhong Feng, Qi Pan, Qiang Li, Qiuling Shi

Abstract

Introduction: Although molecular testing is crucial for many patients with lung cancer, the decision to carry out molecular testing is not easy to make in actual clinical scenarios. Using a specific decision aid (DA) to conduct shared decision-making (SDM) may help ameliorate this problem. However, no DA currently exists for lung cancer molecular testing (DA_LCMT). We aim to develop an evidence-based, iteratively refined DA, which may facilitate SDM and improve the quality of SDM.

Methods and analysis: After considering the Ottawa Decision Support Framework, International Patient Decision Aid Standards and Food and Drug Administration guidance about methods to identify what is important to patients, semistructured interviews with qualitative research methods will be used to generate the decision-making needs of patients with lung cancer diagnosed with lung adenocarcinoma by intraoperative frozen pathological sections. Input will be provided by patients and other stakeholders, including thoracic surgeons, nurses, hospital administrators, molecular testing company staff and insurance company staff. Then, a modified Delphi method will be used to develop the DA_LCMT V.1.0 (DA_LCMT 1.0). Structured interviews with qualitative research methods will be used in the cognitive debriefing (alpha tests) and field testing (beta tests) to revise and improve the DA_LCMT from version 1.0 to the final version, version 3.0. Descriptive statistics will be used to summarise the baseline characteristics of the patients and other stakeholders. Qualitative data will be analysed using the three steps of grounded theory: generate a codebook, update the codebook and create a comprehensive list of related items.

Ethics and dissemination: Ethics Committee for Medical Research and New Medical Technology of Sichuan Cancer Hospital approved this study. This protocol is based on the latest version 1.0, dated 31 October 2021. The study was also approved by the Ethics Committees of The Third People's Hospital of Chengdu, Zigong First People's Hospital and Jiangyou People's Hospital. The results of this study will be presented at medical conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.

Trial registration number: NCT05191485.

Keywords: molecular aspects; oncogenes; respiratory tract tumours; thoracic surgery.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram of this study. DA_LCMT, Decision Aid for Lung Cancer Molecular Testing.

References

    1. National Comprehensive Cancer Network . NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: non-small cell lung cancer. version 6 2020. Available: [Accessed 31 Aug 2020].
    1. Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology, Expert Committee on Non-small Cell Lung Cancer . [Chinese expert consensus on next generation sequencing diagnosis for non-small cell lung cancer (2020 edition)]. Zhongguo Fei Ai Za Zhi 2020;23:741–61. 10.3779/j.issn.1009-3419.2020.101.45
    1. Hirsch FR, Scagliotti GV, Mulshine JL, et al. . Lung cancer: current therapies and new targeted treatments. Lancet 2017;389:299–311. 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30958-8
    1. Reck M, Rabe KF. Precision diagnosis and treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med 2017;377:849–61. 10.1056/NEJMra1703413
    1. Barlesi F, Mazieres J, Merlio J-P, et al. . Routine molecular profiling of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: results of a 1-year nationwide programme of the French Cooperative Thoracic Intergroup (IFCT). Lancet 2016;387:1415–26. 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00004-0
    1. Kelly K, Altorki NK, Eberhardt WEE, et al. . Adjuvant erlotinib versus placebo in patients with stage IB-IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer (RADIANT): a randomized, double-blind, phase III trial. J Clin Oncol 2015;33:4007–14. 10.1200/JCO.2015.61.8918
    1. Wu Y-L, Tsuboi M, He J, et al. . Osimertinib in resected EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med 2020;383:1711–23. 10.1056/NEJMoa2027071
    1. Marushima H, Kimura H, Miyazawa T, et al. . Survival outcomes of adjuvant chemotherapy with modified weekly nab-paclitaxel and carboplatin for completely resected nonsmall cell lung cancer: FAST-nab. Anticancer Drugs 2020;31:177–82. 10.1097/CAD.0000000000000857
    1. Pignon J-P, Tribodet H, Scagliotti GV, et al. . Lung adjuvant cisplatin evaluation: a pooled analysis by the LACE Collaborative Group. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:3552–9. 10.1200/JCO.2007.13.9030
    1. Smeltzer MP, Wynes MW, Lantuejoul S, et al. . The International association for the study of lung cancer global survey on molecular testing in lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol 2020;15:1434–48. 10.1016/j.jtho.2020.05.002
    1. Haga SB, Mills R, Pollak KI, et al. . Developing patient-friendly genetic and genomic test reports: formats to promote patient engagement and understanding. Genome Med 2014;6:58. 10.1186/s13073-014-0058-6
    1. Li W, Yang X-N, Liao R-Q, et al. . Intraoperative frozen sections of the regional lymph nodes contribute to surgical decision-making in non-small cell lung cancer patients. J Thorac Dis 2016;8:1974–80. 10.21037/jtd.2016.06.49
    1. Liu S, Wang R, Zhang Y, et al. . Precise diagnosis of intraoperative frozen section is an effective method to guide resection strategy for peripheral small-sized lung adenocarcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2016;34:307–13. 10.1200/JCO.2015.63.4907
    1. Trejo Bittar HE, Incharoen P, Althouse AD, et al. . Accuracy of the IASLC/ATS/ERS histological subtyping of stage I lung adenocarcinoma on intraoperative frozen sections. Mod Pathol 2015;28:1058–63. 10.1038/modpathol.2015.71
    1. Dai W, Dai Z, Wei X, et al. . Early patient-reported outcomes after Uniportal vs multiportal thoracoscopic lobectomy. Ann Thorac Surg 2021:20210929. 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2021.08.058
    1. Wei X, Yu H, Dai W, et al. . Patient-reported outcomes of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery versus thoracotomy for locally advanced lung cancer: a longitudinal cohort study. Ann Surg Oncol 2021;28:8358–71. 10.1245/s10434-021-09981-1
    1. Ahn M-J. Molecular testing in lung cancer: still big gap in implementation for real-world use. J Thorac Oncol 2020;15:1399–400. 10.1016/j.jtho.2020.06.006
    1. Barry MJ, Edgman-Levitan S. Shared decision making—pinnacle of patient-centered care. N Engl J Med 2012;366:780–1. 10.1056/NEJMp1109283
    1. Tanner NT, Silvestri GA. Shared decision-making and lung cancer screening: let’s get the conversation started. Chest 2019;155:21–4. 10.1016/j.chest.2018.10.013
    1. Redberg RF. Failing grade for shared decision making for lung cancer screening. JAMA Intern Med 2018;178:1295–6. 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.3527
    1. Dobler CC. Shared decision making rarely happens for lung cancer screening. JAMA Intern Med 2019;179:122. 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.6983
    1. Nelson HD. Screening Women in their 40s. In: Houssami N, Miglioretti D, eds. Breast cancer screening. Boston: Academic Press, 2016: 219–40.
    1. Demiris G, Oliver DP, Washington KT. A road map to behavioral intervention research in hospice and palliative care. In: Demiris G, Oliver DP, Washington KT, eds. Behavioral intervention research in hospice and palliative care. Academic Press, 2019: 1–15.
    1. Légaré F, Boivin A, van der Weijden T, et al. . Patient and public involvement in clinical practice guidelines: a knowledge synthesis of existing programs. Med Decis Making 2011;31:E45–74. 10.1177/0272989X11424401
    1. O’Connor AM, Jacobsen MJ, Stacey D. An evidence-based approach to managing women’s decisional conflict. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 2002;31:570–81. 10.1111/j.1552-6909.2002.tb00083.x
    1. National Quality Forum . National standards for the certification of patient decision, 2016. Available: [Accessed 17 Dec 2021].
    1. Stacey D, Légaré F, Lewis K, et al. . Decision AIDS for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017;4:CD001431. 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub5
    1. Volk RJ, Llewellyn-Thomas H, Stacey D, et al. . Ten years of the International patient decision aid standards collaboration: evolution of the core dimensions for assessing the quality of patient decision AIDS. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2013;13:S1. 10.1186/1472-6947-13-S2-S1
    1. Joseph-Williams N, Newcombe R, Politi M, et al. . Toward minimum standards for certifying patient decision AIDS: a modified Delphi consensus process. Med Decis Making 2014;34:699–710. 10.1177/0272989X13501721
    1. Ottawa Hospital Research Institute . Ottawa decision support framework (ODSF), 2021. Available: [Accessed 16 Dec 2021].
    1. Stacey D, Légaré F, Boland L, et al. . 20th anniversary Ottawa decision support framework: Part 3 overview of systematic reviews and updated framework. Med Decis Making 2020;40:379–98. 10.1177/0272989X20911870
    1. Hoefel L, O’Connor AM, Lewis KB, et al. . 20th anniversary update of the Ottawa decision support framework Part 1: a systematic review of the decisional needs of people making health or social decisions. Med Decis Making 2020;40:555–81. 10.1177/0272989X20936209
    1. Hoefel L, Lewis KB, O’Connor A, et al. . 20th anniversary update of the Ottawa decision support framework: Part 2 subanalysis of a systematic review of patient decision AIDS. Med Decis Making 2020;40:522–39. 10.1177/0272989X20924645
    1. International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) Collaboration . Chinese version of the International patient decision aid standards. v.4.0 and interpretations (3 categories, 44 items), 2018. Available: [Accessed 29 Jun 2021].
    1. Elwyn G, O’Connor A, Stacey D, et al. . Developing a quality criteria framework for patient decision AIDS: online international Delphi consensus process. BMJ 2006;333:417. 10.1136/
    1. FDA . Guidance for industry, Food and Drug Administration staff, and other stakeholders. Patient-focused drug development: methods to identify what is important to patients, 2019. Available: [Accessed 16 Oct 2021].
    1. Coulter A, Stilwell D, Kryworuchko J, et al. . A systematic development process for patient decision AIDS. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2013;13:S2. 10.1186/1472-6947-13-S2-S2
    1. Wei X, Yu H, Dai W, et al. . Discrepancy in the perception of symptoms among patients and healthcare providers after lung cancer surgery. Support Care Cancer 2022;30:1169–79. 10.1007/s00520-021-06506-0
    1. Vitous CA, Byrnes ME, De Roo A, et al. . Exploring emotional responses after postoperative complications: a qualitative study of practicing surgeons. Ann Surg 2022;275:e124–31. 10.1097/SLA.0000000000004041
    1. Glaser BG, Strauss AL. The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1968.
    1. Klipin M, Mare I, Hazelhurst S, et al. . The process of installing REDCap, a web based database supporting biomedical research: the first year. Appl Clin Inform 2014;5:916–29. 10.4338/ACI-2014-06-CR-0054
    1. Yu H, Yu Q, Nie Y, et al. . Data quality of longitudinally collected patient-reported outcomes after thoracic surgery: comparison of paper- and web-based assessments. J Med Internet Res 2021;23:e28915. 10.2196/28915

Source: PubMed

赞助者和合作者

医疗条件

药物干预

3
订阅