TY - JOUR
T1 - Management decisions made by physician assistants and nurse practitioners in cutaneous malignant melanoma patients
T2 - Impact of a 31-gene expression profile test
AU - Mirsky, Rachel S.
AU - Prado, Giselle
AU - Svoboda, Ryan M.
AU - Glazer, Alex M.
AU - Rigel, Darrell S.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2018
PY - 2018/11
Y1 - 2018/11
N2 - Importance: The 31 gene-expression profiling test (31-GEP) has been shown to provide useful prognostic information in patients with cutaneous melanoma. The test dichotomizes patients into lower risk (Class 1) or higher risk (Class 2) for melanoma metastasis. Previous studies have demonstrated the clinical utility of the test in impacting dermatologists’ management decisions. Physician assistants and nurse practitioners (PA/NPs) account for a significant portion of dermatologic providers. The impact of a 31-GEP assay on clinical management has not been evaluated in this group. Objective: To determine the impact of 31-GEP test results on management decisions made by dermatology PA/NPs for cutaneous melanoma patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: 164 PA/NPs attending a national dermatology conference completed an online survey designed to determine the impact of 31-GEP test results on management decisions in a variety of clinical situations. Participants answered a series of questions related to six melanoma patient vignettes, each featuring different patient and lesion characteristics. Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportion of PA/NPs who would recommend sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNBx) or further imaging for each patient vignette (without 31-GEP results, with a lower risk result, or with a higher risk result). The effect of the test results on the follow-up intervals recommended by PA/NPs was also examined. Results: who ment would toward In the recommend increased majority intensity of SLNBx, cases (more imaging, a lower recommendations risk or quarterly Do 31-GEP test follow-up. Not for result SLNBx Conversely, led to imaging, Copy a statistically a higher or quarterly significant risk 31-GEP follow-up) decrease result in all significantly in cases. the proportion altered of manage- PA/NPs Conclusions PA/NPs regarding and SLNBx Relevance: acquisition The results of imaging of Penalties a 31-GEP and follow-up test appear for to patients significantly Apply with cutaneous impact management melanoma.
AB - Importance: The 31 gene-expression profiling test (31-GEP) has been shown to provide useful prognostic information in patients with cutaneous melanoma. The test dichotomizes patients into lower risk (Class 1) or higher risk (Class 2) for melanoma metastasis. Previous studies have demonstrated the clinical utility of the test in impacting dermatologists’ management decisions. Physician assistants and nurse practitioners (PA/NPs) account for a significant portion of dermatologic providers. The impact of a 31-GEP assay on clinical management has not been evaluated in this group. Objective: To determine the impact of 31-GEP test results on management decisions made by dermatology PA/NPs for cutaneous melanoma patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: 164 PA/NPs attending a national dermatology conference completed an online survey designed to determine the impact of 31-GEP test results on management decisions in a variety of clinical situations. Participants answered a series of questions related to six melanoma patient vignettes, each featuring different patient and lesion characteristics. Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportion of PA/NPs who would recommend sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNBx) or further imaging for each patient vignette (without 31-GEP results, with a lower risk result, or with a higher risk result). The effect of the test results on the follow-up intervals recommended by PA/NPs was also examined. Results: who ment would toward In the recommend increased majority intensity of SLNBx, cases (more imaging, a lower recommendations risk or quarterly Do 31-GEP test follow-up. Not for result SLNBx Conversely, led to imaging, Copy a statistically a higher or quarterly significant risk 31-GEP follow-up) decrease result in all significantly in cases. the proportion altered of manage- PA/NPs Conclusions PA/NPs regarding and SLNBx Relevance: acquisition The results of imaging of Penalties a 31-GEP and follow-up test appear for to patients significantly Apply with cutaneous impact management melanoma.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85062000408&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Article
C2 - 30500144
AN - SCOPUS:85062000408
SN - 1545-9616
VL - 17
SP - 1220
EP - 1223
JO - Journal of Drugs in Dermatology
JF - Journal of Drugs in Dermatology
IS - 11
ER -