Original Article

You have full text access to this OnlineOpen article

Colon cancer patient information seeking and the adoption of targeted therapy for on-label and off-label indications†

  1. Stacy W. Gray MD, AM1,‡,*,
  2. Katrina Armstrong MD, MSCE2,3,
  3. Angela DeMichele MD, MSCE2,3,
  4. J. Sanford Schwartz MD2,3,
  5. Robert C. Hornik PhD3

Article first published online: 23 FEB 2009

DOI: 10.1002/cncr.24186

Issue

Cancer

Cancer

Volume 115, Issue 7, pages 1424–1434, 1 April 2009

Additional Information

How to Cite

Gray, S. W., Armstrong, K., DeMichele, A., Schwartz, J. S. and Hornik, R. C. (2009), Colon cancer patient information seeking and the adoption of targeted therapy for on-label and off-label indications. Cancer, 115: 1424–1434. doi: 10.1002/cncr.24186

Author Information

  1. 1

    Center for Outcomes and Policy Research, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts

  2. 2

    School of Medicine and Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

  3. 3

    Center of Excellence in Cancer Communication Research, Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

  1. ‡

    Fax: (617) 632-3161

*Center for Outcomes and Policy Research, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 44 Binney Street, SM 224, Boston, MA 02115

  1. †

    The Pennsylvania Department of Health specifically disclaims responsibility for any analyses, interpretations, or conclusions.

Publication History

  1. Issue published online: 19 MAR 2009
  2. Article first published online: 23 FEB 2009
  3. Manuscript Accepted: 21 OCT 2008
  4. Manuscript Revised: 25 SEP 2008
  5. Manuscript Received: 11 JUL 2008

Funded by

  • National Cancer Institute. Grant Number: 5P50CA095856-05

SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (153K)

References

  • 1
    Balint J,Shelton W. Regaining the initiative. Forging a new model of the patient-physician relationship. JAMA. 1996; 275: 887-891.
  • 2
    Laine C,Davidoff F. Patient-centered medicine. A professional evolution. JAMA. 1996; 275: 152-156.
  • 3
    Rimal RN,Ratzan SC,Arnston P,Freimuth VS. Reconceptualizing the “patient”: health care promotion as increasing citizens' decision-making competencies. Health Commun. 1997; 9: 61-74.
  • 4
    Johnson JD. Cancer-Related Information Seeking. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, Inc.; 1997.
  • 5
    Kaplan RM,Frosch DL. Decision making in medicine and health care. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2005; 1: 525-556.
  • 6
    Hesse BW,Moser RP,Rutten LJF,Kreps GL. The Health Information National Trends Survey: research from the baseline. J Health Commun. 2006; 11( suppl 1): vii-xvi.
  • 7
    Viswanath K. Science and society: the communications revolution and cancer control. Nat Rev Cancer. 2005; 5: 828-835.
  • 8
    Eysenbach G. The impact of the Internet on cancer outcomes. CA Cancer J Clin. 2003; 53: 356-371.
    Direct Link:
  • 9
    Anderson JG,Rainey MR,Eysenbach G. The impact of CyberHealthcare on the physician-patient relationship. J Med Syst. 2003; 27: 67-84.
  • 10
    Fox S,Rainie L.The Online Health Care Revolution: How the Web Helps Americans Take Better Care of Themselves: The Pew Internet and American Life Project, Volume 2007. Washington, DC: Pew Charitable Trusts; 2000.
  • 11
    Helft PR,Hlubocky F,Daugherty CK. American oncologists' views of Internet use by cancer patients: a mail survey of American Society of Clinical Oncology members. J Clin Oncol. 2003; 21: 942-947.
  • 12
    Newnham GM,Burns WI,Snyder RD, et al. Attitudes of oncology health professionals to information from the Internet and other media. Med J Aust. 2005; 183: 197-200.
  • 13
    Hiatt RA,Rimer BK. A new strategy for cancer control research. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1999; 8: 957-964.
  • 14
    Berndt ER,Bhattacharjya A,Mishol DN,Arcelus A,Lasky T. An analysis of the diffusion of new antidepressants: variety, quality, and marketing efforts. J Ment Health Policy Econ. 2002; 5: 3-19.
  • 15
    Huckman RS,Pisano GP. Turf battles in coronary revascularization. N Engl J Med. 2005; 352: 857-859.
  • 16
    Phillips KA,Van Bebber SL. Regulatory perspectives on pharmacogenomics: a review of the literature on key issues faced by the United States Food and Drug Administration. Med Care Res Rev. 2006; 63: 301-326.
  • 17
    Stanley A,DeLia D,Cantor JC. Racial disparity and technology diffusion: the case of cardioverter defibrillator implants, 1996-2001. J Natl Med Assoc. 2007; 99: 201-207.
  • 18
    Ferris TG,Kuhlthau K,Ausiello J,Perrin J,Kahn R. Are minority children the last to benefit from a new technology? Technology diffusion and inhaled corticosteriods for asthma. Med Care. 2006; 44: 81-86.
  • 19
    Vanderveen KA,Paterniti DA,Kravitz RL,Bold RJ. Diffusion of surgical techniques in early stage breast cancer: variables related to adoption and implementation of sentinel lymph node biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007; 14: 1662-1669.
  • 20
    Wilson CB. Adoption of new surgical technology. BMJ. 2006; 332: 112-114.
  • 21
    Coleman J,Katz E,Menzel H. The diffusion of an innovation among physicians. Sociometry. 1957; 20: 253-270.
  • 22
    Berndt ER,Bui L,Reiley DR,Urban GL. Information, marketing, and pricing in the US antiulcer drug market. Am Econ Rev. 1995; 85: 100-105.
  • 23
    Geller G,Tambor ES,Bernhardt BA,Rodgers J,Holtzman NA. Houseofficers' reactions to media coverage about the sequencing of the human genome. Soc Sci Med. 2003; 56: 2211-2220.
  • 24
    Phillips DP,Kanter EJ,Bednarczyk B,Tastad PL. Importance of the lay press in the transmission of medical knowledge to the scientific community. N Engl J Med. 1991; 325: 1180-1183.
  • 25
    Bass SB,Ruzek SB,Gordon TF,Fleisher L,McKeown-Conn N,Moore D. Relationship of Internet health information use with patient behavior and self-efficacy: experiences of newly diagnosed cancer patients who contact the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Information Service. J Health Commun. 2006; 11: 219-236.
  • 26
    Czaja R,Manfredi C,Price J. The determinants and consequences of information seeking among cancer patients. J Health Commun. 2003; 8: 529-562.
  • 27
    Shim M,Kelly B,Hornik R. Cancer information scanning and seeking behavior is associated with knowledge, lifestyle choices, and screening. J Health Commun. 2006; 11( suppl 1): 157-172.
  • 28
    Pentz RD,Flamm AL,Sugarman J, et al. Study of the media's potential influence on prospective research participants' understanding of and motivations for participation in a high-profile phase I trial. J Clin Oncol. 2002; 20: 3785-3791.
  • 29
    Dillman D. Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method, 2nd ed. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons; 2000.
  • 30
    American Association for Public Opinion Research. Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys, 4th ed. Lenexa, Kan: American Association for Public Opinion Research; 2006.
  • 31
    Kravitz RL,Epstein RM,Feldman MD, et al. Influence of patients' requests for direct-to-consumer advertised antidepressants: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2005; 293: 1995-2002.
  • 32
    Mintzes B,Barer ML,Kravitz RL, et al. How does direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) affect prescribing? A survey in primary care environments with and without legal DTCA. CMAJ. 2003; 169: 405-412.
  • 33
    Weissman JS,Blumenthal D,Silk AJ,Zapert K,Newman M,Leitman R. Consumers' reports on the health effects of direct-to-consumer drug advertising [supplemental web exclusives]. Health Aff (Millwood). 2003; W3( suppl): 82-95.
  • 34
    Radley DC,Finkelstein SN,Stafford RS. Off-label prescribing among office-based physicians. Arch Intern Med. 2006; 166: 1021-1026.
  • 35
    Laetz T,Silberman G. Reimbursement policies constrain the practice of oncology. JAMA. 1991; 266: 2996-2999.
  • 36
    Kocs D,Fendrick AM. Effect of off-label use of oncology drugs on pharmaceutical costs: the rituximab experience. Am J Manag Care. 2003; 9: 393-400; quiz 401-402.
  • 37
    Giantonio BJ,Catalano PJ,Meropol NJ, et al. Bevacizumab in combination with oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFOX4) for previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer: results from the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Study E3200. J Clin Oncol. 2007; 25: 1539-1544.
  • 38
    Hurwitz H,Fehrenbacher L,Novotny W, et al. Bevacizumab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin for metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004; 350: 2335-2342.
  • 39
    Cunningham D,Humblet Y,Siena S, et al. Cetuximab monotherapy and cetuximab plus irinotecan in irinotecan-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004; 351: 337-345.
  • 40
    Grothey A. Biological therapy and other novel therapies in early-stage disease: are they appropriate? Clin Cancer Res. 2007; 13(22 pt 2): 6909s-6912s.
  • 41
    Stafford RS. Regulating off-label drug use—rethinking the role of the FDA. N Engl J Med. 2008; 358: 1427-1429.
  • 42
    Dai C,Stafford RS,Alexander GC. National trends in cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor use since market release: nonselective diffusion of a selectively cost-effective innovation. Arch Intern Med. 2005; 165: 171-177.
  • 43
    Heavey S. US lawmakers seek J&J, Amgen anemia drug records. Washington, DC: Reuters; 2008. Available at: http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUSN0130607820080401. [Accessed on September 23, 2008.]
  • 44
    Mayer RJ. Two steps forward in the treatment of colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004; 350: 2406-2408.
  • 45
    Irving L,Klegar-Levy K,Everette D. Falling Through the Net: Defining the Digital Divide. A Report on the Telecommunications and Information Technology Gap in America. Washington, DC: National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce; 1999.
  • 46
    Brodie M,Flournoy RE,Altman DE,Blendon RJ,Benson JM,Rosenbaum MD. Health information, the Internet, and the digital divide. Health Aff (Millwood). 2000; 19: 255-265.
  • 47
    Ramanadhan S,Viswanath K. Health and the information nonseeker: a profile. Health Commun. 2006; 20: 131-139.
  • 48
    Rutten LJ,Squiers L,Hesse B. Cancer-related information seeking: hints from the 2003 Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS). J Health Commun. 2006; 11( suppl 1): 147-156.
  • 49
    Carlsson M. Cancer patients seeking information from sources outside the health care system. Support Care Cancer. 2000; 8: 453-457.
  • 50
    Mellink WA,Dulmen AM,Wiggers T,Spreeuwenberg PM,Eggermont AM,Bensing JM. Cancer patients seeking a second surgical opinion: results of a study on motives, needs, and expectations. J Clin Oncol. 2003; 21: 1492-1497.
  • 51
    Selman AE,Niemann TH,Fowler JM,Copeland LJ. Quality assurance of second opinion pathology in gynecologic oncology. Obstet Gynecol. 1999; 94: 302-306.
  • 52
    Mellink WA,Henzen-Logmans SC,Bongaerts AH,Ooijen BV,Rodenburg CJ,Wiggers TH. Discrepancy between second and first opinion in surgical oncological patients. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2006; 32: 108-112.
  • 53
    Solomon DH,Stedman M,Licari A,Weinblatt ME,Maher N,Shadick N. Agreement between patient report and medical record review for medications used for rheumatoid arthritis: the accuracy of self-reported medication information in patient registries. Arthritis Rheum. 2007; 57: 234-239.
    Direct Link:
  • 54
    Klungel OH,de Boer A,Paes AH,Herings RM,Seidell JC,Bakker A. Agreement between self-reported antihypertensive drug use and pharmacy records in a population-based study in the Netherlands. Pharm World Sci. 1999; 21: 217-220.
  • 55
    Klungel OH,de Boer A,Paes AH,Seidell JC,Bakker A. Cardiovascular diseases and risk factors in a population-based study in the Netherlands: agreement between questionnaire information and medical records. Neth J Med. 1999; 55: 177-183.
View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (153K)