Cancer and the media: how does the news report on treatment and outcomes?

Media coverage of cancer therapeutics: A review of literature

BACKGROUND

Information and stories about cancer treatment are increasingly available to patients and the general public through lay media, websites, blogs and social media. While these resources may be helpful to supplement information provided during physician-patient discussions, there is growing concern about the extent to which media reports accurately reflect advances in cancer care. This review aimed to understand the landscape of published research which has described media coverage of cancer treatments.

METHODS

This literature review included peer-reviewed primary research articles that reported how cancer treatments are portrayed in the lay media. A structured literature search of Medline, EMBASE and Google Scholar was performed. Potentially eligible articles were reviewed by three authors for inclusion. Three reviewers, each independently reviewed eligible studies; discrepancies were resolved by consensus.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies were included. The content of the eligible studies reflected two thematic categories: articles that reviewed specific drugs/cancer treatment (n = 7) and articles that described media coverage of cancer treatment in general terms (n = 7). Key findings include the media's frequent and unfounded use of superlatives and hype for new cancer treatments. Parallel to this, media reports over-emphasize potential treatment benefits and do not present a balanced view of risks of side effects, cost, and death. At a broad level, there is emerging evidence that media reporting of cancer treatments may directly impact patient care and policy-making.

CONCLUSIONS

This review identifies problems in current media reports of new cancer advances - especially with undue use of superlatives and hype. Given the frequency with which patients access this information and the potential for it to influence policy, there is a need for additional research in this space in addition to educational interventions with health journalists. The oncology community - scientists and clinicians - must ensure that we are not contributing to these problems.

Cancer and COVID-19 Vaccines on Twitter:The Voice and Vaccine Attitude of Cancer Community

We investigate social media discourses on the relationship between cancer and COVID-19 vaccines focusing on the key textual topics, themes reflecting the voice of cancer community, authors who contribute to the discourse, and valence toward vaccines. We analyzed 6,427 tweets about cancer and COVID-19 vaccines, posted from when vaccines were approved in the U.S. (December 2020) to the February 2022. We mixed quantitative text mining, manual coding and statistical analysis, and inductive qualitative thematic analysis. Nearly 16% of the tweets posted by a cancer community member mentioned about refusal or delay of their vaccination at the state/local level during the initial rollout despite the CDC's recommendation to prioritize adults with high-risk medical conditions. Most tweets posted by cancer patients (pro = 82.4% vs. anti = 5.1%) and caregivers (pro = 89.2% vs. anti = 4.2%) showed positive valence toward vaccines and advocated for vaccine uptake increase among cancer patients and the general population. Vaccine hesitancy, self-reported adverse events, and COVID-19 disruption of cancer treatment also appeared as key themes. The cancer community called for actions to improve vaccination procedures to become safe and accessible especially for elderly cancer patients, develop COVID-19 vaccines suitable for varying type, stage, and treatment of cancer, and advance cancer vaccines. Future research should continue surveilling conversations around continuous impacts of COVID-19 interference with the cancer control continuum, beyond vaccination, focusing on the voice and concern of cancer community.

Palliative oncology and palliative care

New therapeutic approaches can produce promising results even in severely ill cancer patients. But they also pose new challenges with respect to prognostication, as patients who were once not eligible for treatment, due to age or comorbidities, now are. Palliative oncology constitutes a major part of oncological care, with life prolongation and quality of life as its main goals. Palliative care specialists are experts in symptom control and psychosocial and existential support, and the integration of their expertise early on in patient care can prolong survival. In this article, I discuss the need to integrate specialist palliative care into early cancer treatment plans to achieve quality of life for patients. I also discuss the ways in which palliative care specialists balance the benefits of novel treatments against their adverse effects for patients, particularly for the elderly, the frail and those in advance stages of disease. I highlight the need to ensure equal access to palliative care to improve cancer patients' quality of life but also why futile, burdensome treatments should be avoided especially in the frail, elderly patients. Further, I discuss benefits and problems related to nutritional support in patients with cachexia and exemplify why translational research is needed to link basic research with clinical oncology and effective symptom control.

Is there alignment amongst scientific literature, news media and patient forums regarding topics?: A study of breast and lung cancer

Purpose

During recent years, web technologies and mass media have become prevalent in the context of medicine and health. Two examples of important web technologies used in health are news media and patient forums. Both have a significant role in shaping patients' perspective and behaviour in relation to health and illness, as well as the way that they might choose or change their treatment. In this paper, the authors investigated the application of web technologies using the data analysis approach. The authors did this analysis from the point of view of topics being discussed and disseminated via patients and journalists in breast and lung cancer. The study also investigated the (dis)alignment amongst these two groups and scientists in terms of topics.

Design/methodology/approach

Three data sets comprised documents published between 2014 and 2018 obtained from ProQuest and Web of Science Medline databases, alongside data from three major patient forums on breast and lung cancer. The analysis and visualisation in this paper have been done using the udpipe, igraph R packages and VOSviewer.

Findings

The study’s findings showed that in general scientists focussed more on prognosis and treatment of cancer, whereas patients and journalists focussed more on detection, prevention and role of social and emotional support. The only exception was for news coverage of lung cancer where the largest cluster was related to treatment, research in cancer treatment and therapies. However, when comparing coverage by scientists and journalists in terms of treatment, the focus of news articles in both cancer types was mainly on chemotherapy and complimentary therapies. Finally, topics such as lifestyle or pain management were only discussed by breast cancer patients.

Originality/value

The results obtained from this study may provide valuable insights into topics of interest for each group of scientists, journalist and patients as well as (dis)alignment among them in terms of topics. These findings are important as scientific research is heavily dependent on communication, and research does not exist in a bubble. Scientists and journalists can gain insights from patients' experiences and needs, which in turn may help them to have a more holistic and realistic view.

Peer review

The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-06-2020-0228

Whose cancer? Visualising the distribution of mentions to cancer sites on instagram

This article presents a quantitative analysis of mentions to cancer on Instagram. Using thousands of images with cancer-related hashtags, we build several visualisations to capture their distribution. Source images are clustered by their visual traits and by the incidence, prevalence, and mortality of the cancer site they refer to. Our goal is three-fold: to provide a quantitative basis for future research on the representation of cancer online; to offer an interpretation of the sources of the imbalanced representation of the different cancer sites; and to motivate a debate on how that representation may affect patients and families.

Personalized Cancer Medicine in the Media: Sensationalism or Realistic Reporting?

BACKGROUND

Given that media coverage can shape healthcare expectations, it is essential that we understand how the media frames "personalized medicine" (PM) in oncology, and whether information about unproven technologies is widely disseminated.

METHODS

We conducted a content analysis of 396 news reports related to cancer and PM published between 1 January 1998 and 31 December 2011. Two coders independently coded all the reports using a pre-defined framework. Determination of coverage of "standard" and "non-standard" therapies and tests was made by comparing the media print/broadcast date to the date of Federal Drug Administration approval or incorporation into clinical guidelines.

RESULTS

Although the term "personalized medicine" appeared in all reports, it was clearly defined only 27% of the time. Stories more frequently reported PM benefits than challenges (96% vs. 48%, p < 0.001). Commonly reported benefits included improved treatment (89%), prediction of side effects (30%), disease risk prediction (33%), and lower cost (19%). Commonly reported challenges included high cost (28%), potential for discrimination (29%), and concerns over privacy and regulation (21%). Coverage of inherited DNA testing was more common than coverage of tumor testing (79% vs. 25%, p < 0.001). Media reports of standard tests and treatments were common; however, 8% included information about non-standard technologies, such as experimental medications and gene therapy.

CONCLUSION

Confusion about personalized cancer medicine may be exacerbated by media reports that fail to clearly define the term. While most media stories reported on standard tests and treatments, an emphasis on the benefits of PM may lead to unrealistic expectations for cancer genomic care.

What cancer research makes the news? A quantitative analysis of online news stories that mention cancer studies

Journalists’ health and science reporting aid the public’s direct access to research through the inclusion of hyperlinks leading to original studies in peer-reviewed journals. While this effort supports the US-government mandate that research be made widely available, little is known about what research journalists share with the public. This cross-sectional exploratory study characterises US-government-funded research on cancer that appeared most frequently in news coverage and how that coverage varied by cancer type, disease incidence and mortality rates. The subject of analysis was 11436 research articles (published in 2016) on cancer funded by the US government and 642 news stories mentioning at least one of these articles. Based on Altmetric data, researchers identified articles via PubMed and characterised each based on the news media attention received online. Only 1.88% (n = 213) of research articles mentioning US government-funded cancer research included at least one mention in an online news publication. This is in contrast to previous research that found 16.8% (n = 1925) of articles received mention by online mass media publications. Of the 13 most common cancers in the US, 12 were the subject of at least one news mention; only urinary and bladder cancer received no mention. Traditional news sources included significantly more mentions of research on common cancers than digital native news sources. However, a general discrepancy exists between cancers prominent in news sources and those with the highest mortality rate. For instance, lung cancer accounted for the most deaths annually, while melanoma led to 56% less annual deaths; however, journalists cited research regarding these cancers nearly equally. Additionally, breast cancer received the greatest coverage per estimated annual death, while pancreatic cancer received the least coverage per death. Findings demonstrated a continued misalignment between prevalent cancers and cancers mentioned in online news media. Additionally, cancer control and prevention received less coverage from journalists than other cancer continuum stages, highlighting a continued underrepresentation of prevention-focused research. Results revealed a need for further scholarship regarding the role of journalists in research dissemination.

'There were some clues': a qualitative study of heuristics used by parents of adolescents to make credibility judgements of online health news articles citing research

OBJECTIVE

To identify how parents judge the credibility of online health news stories with links to scientific research.

DESIGN

This qualitative study interviewed parents who read online stories about e-cigarettes and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination published by top-tier US news organisations. Researchers asked participants to describe elements of a story that influenced their judgement about content credibility. Researchers analysed transcripts using inductive and deductive techniques. Deductive analysis drew on cognitive heuristics previously identified as being used by the public to judge online health information. Inductive analysis allowed the emergence of new heuristics, especially relating to health.

SETTING

The US National Cancer Institute's Audience Research Lab in Maryland, in August-November 2018.

PARTICIPANTS

Sixty-four parents with at least one child between the ages of 9 and 17 residing in Maryland, Virginia, or the District of Columbia participated. Researchers randomly assigned 31 parents to the HPV vaccination story and 33 to the e-cigarette story.

RESULTS

Evidence of existing heuristics, including reputation, endorsement, consistency, self-confirmation, expectancy violation and persuasive intent emerged from the interviews, with participants deeming stories credible when mentioning physicians (reputation heuristic) and/or consistent with information provided by personal physicians (consistency heuristic). Participants also described making credibility judgements based on presence of statistics, links to scientific research and their general feelings about news media. In relation to presence of statistics and links, participants reported these elements increased the credibility of the news story, whereas their feelings about the news media decreased their credibility judgement.

CONCLUSIONS

Parents used a constellation of heuristics to judge the credibility of online health news stories. Previously identified heuristics for online health information are also applicable in the context of health news stories. The findings have implications for initiatives in education, health communication and journalism directed towards increasing the public's engagement with health news and their credibility judgements.

Evaluation of Volume of News Reporting and Opioid-Related Deaths in the United States: Comparative Analysis Study of Geographic and Socioeconomic Differences

Background

News media coverage is a powerful influence on public attitude and government action. The digitization of news media covering the current opioid epidemic has changed the landscape of coverage and may have implications for how to effectively respond to the opioid crisis.

Objective

This study aims to characterize the relationship between volume of online opioid news reporting and opioid-related deaths in the United States and how these measures differ across geographic and socioeconomic county-level factors.

Methods

Online news reports from February 2018 to April 2019 on opioid-related events in the United States were extracted from Google News. News data were aggregated at the county level and compared against opioid-related death counts. Ordinary least squares regression was used to model opioid-related death rate and opioid news coverage with the inclusion of socioeconomic and geographic explanatory variables.

Results

A total of 35,758 relevant news reports were collected representing 1789 counties. Regression analysis revealed that opioid-related death rate was positively associated with news reporting. However, opioid-related death rate and news reporting volume showed opposite correlations with educational attainment and rurality. When controlling for variation in death rate, counties in the Northeast were overrepresented by news coverage.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that regional variation in the volume of opioid-related news reporting does not reflect regional variation in opioid-related death rate. Differences in the amount of media attention may influence perceptions of the severity of opioid epidemic. Future studies should investigate the influence of media reporting on public support and action on opioid issues.

Generating comparative evidence on new drugs and devices before approval

Fewer than half of new drugs have data on their comparative benefits and harms against existing treatment options at the time of regulatory approval in Europe and the USA. Even when active-comparator trials exist, they might not produce meaningful data to inform decisions in clinical practice and health policy. The uncertainty associated with the paucity of well designed active-comparator trials has been compounded by legal and regulatory changes in Europe and the USA that have created a complex mix of expedited programmes aimed at facilitating faster access to new drugs. Comparative evidence generation is even sparser for medical devices. Some have argued that the current process for regulatory approval needs to generate more evidence that is useful for patients, clinicians, and payers in health-care systems. We propose a set of five key principles relevant to the European Medicines Agency, European medical device regulatory agencies, US Food and Drug Administration, as well as payers, that we believe will provide the necessary incentives for pharmaceutical and device companies to generate comparative data on drugs and devices and assure timely availability of evidence that is useful for decision making. First, labelling should routinely inform patients and clinicians whether comparative data exist on new products. Second, regulators should be more selective in their use of programmes that facilitate drug and device approvals on the basis of incomplete benefit and harm data. Third, regulators should encourage the conduct of randomised trials with active comparators. Fourth, regulators should use prospectively designed network meta-analyses based on existing and future randomised trials. Last, payers should use their policy levers and negotiating power to incentivise the generation of comparative evidence on new and existing drugs and devices, for example, by explicitly considering proven added benefit in pricing and payment decisions.

The relationship between fears of cancer recurrence and patient age: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Fears of cancer recurrence (FCR) is one of the most prevalent concerns and a common unmet need reported by cancer patients. Patient age is a demographic variable that has been linked to FCR, among others. Although it is recognised by researchers that age and FCR may be negatively correlated, the strength of this correlation has yet to be established.

AIM

The aims of this study were to (a) conduct a meta-analysis to investigate the overall association of patient age in years with FCR across studies from 2009 to February 2019 and (b) scrutinise for patterns of these effect sizes across studies.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Peer-reviewed papers were gathered from the literature via online databases (PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO). Systematic review guidelines including a quality assessment were applied to the 31 selected studies (pooled participant N size = 19 777). The meta-analysis demonstrated a significant negative association between age and FCR (ES = -0.12; 95% CI, -0.17, -0.07). Meta-regression revealed the association of patient age and FCR significantly reduced over the last decade. A significant effect (β = -0.17, P = 0.005) of breast cancer versus other cancers on this age by FCR association was also identified.

CONCLUSION

The reliable and readily accessible personal information of age of patient can be utilised as a weak indicator of FCR level especially in the breast cancer field, where the majority of studies were drawn. The suggestion that age and FCR association may be attenuated in recent years requires confirmation.

From sweeteners to cell phones-Cancer myths and beliefs among journalism undergraduates

OBJECTIVE

The media are an important source of health information that can help people make their own medical decisions. However, medical news can also transmit biases produced by different factors, such as the previously held beliefs of journalists. This study identifies which cancer myths are more popular among future journalists and whether their beliefs are related to their chosen source of health information.

METHODS

A survey was conducted among journalism undergraduates (N = 249) to determine which cancer myths existed and how widespread they were. The survey included a list with different sources of health information and eight questions regarding cancer-related myths.

RESULTS

The most extensive myths among the undergraduate respondents were that sweeteners (40.2%) and cell phones (48.2%) produce cancer and that a patient's good or bad attitude can determine the outcome of such an illness (52.2%). Respondents who relied on their family and friends as a source of health information were more prone to believe in cancer myths.

CONCLUSION

This research focuses on future journalists as a group of special interest for improving knowledge about cancer. Future campaigns to debunk cancer misconceptions should pay attention to the role played by family and friends as agents of health information transmittance.

Making headlines: an analysis of US government-funded cancer research mentioned in online media

OBJECTIVE

To characterise how online media coverage of journal articles on cancer funded by the US government varies by cancer type and stage of the cancer control continuum and to compare the disease prevalence rates with the amount of funded research published for each cancer type and with the amount of media attention each receives.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional study.

SETTING

The United States.

PARTICIPANTS

The subject of analysis was 11 436 journal articles on cancer funded by the US government published in 2016. These articles were identified via PubMed and characterised as receiving online media attention based on data provided by Altmetric.

RESULTS

16.8% (n=1925) of articles published on US government-funded research were covered in the media. Published journal articles addressed all common cancers. Frequency of journal articles differed substantially across the common cancers, with breast cancer (n=1284), lung cancer (n=630) and prostate cancer (n=586) being the subject of the most journal articles. Roughly one-fifth to one-fourth of journal articles within each cancer category received online media attention. Media mentions were disproportionate to actual burden of each cancer type (ie, incidence and mortality), with breast cancer articles receiving the most media mentions. Scientific articles also covered the stages of the cancer continuum to varying degrees. Across the 13 most common cancer types, 4.4% (n=206) of articles focused on prevention and control, 11.7% (n=550) on diagnosis and 10.7% (n=502) on therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings revealed a mismatch between prevalent cancers and cancers highlighted in online media. Further, journal articles on cancer control and prevention received less media attention than other cancer continuum stages. Media mentions were not proportional to actual public cancer burden nor volume of scientific publications in each cancer category. Results highlight a need for continued research on the role of media, especially online media, in research dissemination.

Key Concepts for assessing claims about treatment effects and making well-informed treatment choices

Background: The Informed Health Choices (IHC) Key Concepts are standards for judgement, or principles for evaluating the trustworthiness of treatment claims and treatment comparisons (evidence) used to support claims, and for making treatment choices. The list of concepts provides a framework, or starting point, for teachers, journalists and other intermediaries for identifying and developing resources (such as longer explanations, examples, games and interactive applications) to help people to understand and apply the concepts. The first version of the list was published in 2015 and has been updated yearly since then. We report here the changes that have been made from when the list was first published up to the current (2018) version. Methods: We developed the IHC Key Concepts by searching the literature and checklists written for the public, journalists, and health professionals; and by considering concepts related to assessing the certainty of evidence about the effects of treatments. We have revised the Key Concepts yearly, based on feedback and suggestions; and learning from using the IHC Key Concepts, other relevant frameworks, and adaptation of the IHC Key Concepts to other types of interventions besides treatments. Results: We have made many changes since the Key Concepts were first published in 2015. There are now 44 Key Concepts compared to the original 32; the concepts have been reorganised from six to three groups; we have added higher-level concepts in each of those groups; we have added short titles; and we have made changes to many of the concepts. Conclusions: We will continue to revise the IHC Key Concepts in response to feedback. Although we and others have found them helpful since they were first published, we anticipate that there are still ways in which they can be further improved. We welcome suggestions for how to do this.

Key Concepts for assessing claims about treatment effects and making well-informed treatment choices

Background: The Informed Health Choices (IHC) Key Concepts are standards for judgement, or principles for evaluating the trustworthiness of treatment claims and treatment comparisons (evidence) used to support claims, and for making treatment choices. The list of concepts provides a framework, or starting point, for teachers, journalists and other intermediaries for identifying and developing resources (such as longer explanations, examples, games and interactive applications) to help people to understand and apply the concepts. The first version of the list was published in 2015 and has been updated yearly since then. We report here the changes that have been made from when the list was first published up to the current (2018) version. Methods: We developed the IHC Key Concepts by searching the literature and checklists written for the public, journalists, and health professionals; and by considering concepts related to assessing the certainty of evidence about the effects of treatments. We have revised the Key Concepts yearly, based on feedback and suggestions; and learning from using the IHC Key Concepts, other relevant frameworks, and adaptation of the IHC Key Concepts to other types of interventions besides treatments. Results: We have made many changes since the Key Concepts were first published in 2015. There are now 44 Key Concepts compared to the original 32; the concepts have been reorganised from six to three groups; we have added higher-level concepts in each of those groups; we have added short titles; and we have made changes to many of the concepts. Conclusions: The IHC Key Concepts have proven useful in designing learning resources, evaluating them, and organising them. We will continue to revise the IHC Key Concepts in response to feedback. We welcome suggestions for how to do this.

Key Concepts for assessing claims about treatment effects and making well-informed treatment choices

Background: The Informed Health Choices (IHC) Key Concepts are standards for judgement, or principles for evaluating the trustworthiness of treatment claims and treatment comparisons (evidence) used to support claims, and for making treatment choices. The list of concepts provides a framework, or starting point, for teachers, journalists and other intermediaries for identifying and developing resources (such as longer explanations, examples, games and interactive applications) to help people to understand and apply the concepts. The first version of the list was published in 2015 and has been updated yearly since then. We report here the changes that have been made from when the list was first published up to the current (2018) version. Methods: We developed the IHC Key Concepts by searching the literature and checklists written for the public, journalists, and health professionals; and by considering concepts related to assessing the certainty of evidence about the effects of treatments. We have revised the Key Concepts yearly, based on feedback and suggestions; and learning from using the IHC Key Concepts, other relevant frameworks, and adaptation of the IHC Key Concepts to other types of interventions besides treatments. Results: We have made many changes since the Key Concepts were first published in 2015. There are now 44 Key Concepts compared to the original 32; the concepts have been reorganised from six to three groups; we have added higher-level concepts in each of those groups; we have added short titles; and we have made changes to many of the concepts. Conclusions: The IHC Key Concepts have proven useful in designing learning resources, evaluating them, and organising them. We will continue to revise the IHC Key Concepts in response to feedback. We welcome suggestions for how to do this.

SunSmart news? Traditional media coverage of sun protection issues during springtime in New Zealand

ISSUES ADDRESSED

Cutaneous melanomas and keratinocyte carcinomas (nonmelanoma skin cancer) are highly prevalent in New Zealand (NZ), making skin cancer a priority area for cancer control. Spring is an important time for encouraging sun-safety, due to ultraviolet radiation (UVR) levels becoming hazardous. The news media have a potential to play an important role in reminding people and emphasising the importance of sun-safety. This study aimed to describe how the traditional NZ media portrayed sun-safety and skin cancer in spring news stories.

METHODS

A media monitoring company collated stories related to cancer during spring 2016. These were reviewed for inclusion and content was coded according to the cancer type described. Stories focused on skin cancer and sun protection issues were coded according to the position on the cancer control continuum.

RESULTS

Skin cancer and sun-safety represented 3.6% (n = 110) of all cancer stories published. Stories mainly related to primary prevention (72%), early detection (37%) and survivorship (27%). The main risk factors identified included sun exposure (49%) and tanning (25%).

CONCLUSIONS

Traditional media coverage of skin cancer remains relatively low during springtime. It is heartening to see that most stories included prevention information. SO WHAT?: Given the impact of skin cancer in NZ, and the importance of springtime as a period for behaviour change to reduce risk, there is considerable scope for increased media coverage and advocacy. Further research could usefully analyse media trends throughout the year and within specific media platforms, both traditional and new, in order to further disseminate information to the NZ public.

UK newspaper reporting of the NHS cancer drugs fund, 2010 to 2015: a retrospective media analysis

Objective We wished to explore how UK national newspapers had covered the creation and operation of the Cancer Drugs Fund from 2010 to 2015. This was introduced to provide cancer patients in England with access to drugs not appraised or approved by the National Institute for health and Care Excellence. Design We sought stories in nine newspapers from the Factiva database, and copied their salient details to a spreadsheet. They were categorised by whether they were supportive or critical of the Cancer Drugs Fund and their main arguments, which drugs they mentioned and for which cancers. Settings Not applicable Participants Not applicable Main outcome results Press coverage was mainly very positive, arguing for the Cancer Drugs Fund's extension to Scotland and Wales, and a bigger budget, but neglecting the lack of patient benefit and the severe side effects that sometimes occurred. Leading this support was the Daily Mail, whose influence (measured by the product of number of stories and the paper's circulation) was almost greater than that of the other newspapers combined. Results Press coverage was mainly very positive, arguing for the Cancer Drugs Fund's extension to Scotland and Wales, and a bigger budget, but neglecting the lack of patient benefits and the severe side effects that sometimes occurred. Leading this support was the Daily Mail, whose influence (measured by the product of number of stories and the paper's circulation) was almost greater than that of the other newspapers combined. Conclusions Although there was some critical analysis of the Cancer Drugs Fund, our analysis shows that most press coverage was largely positive and unrepresentative in comparison with the lack of overall benefits to patients and society. It is likely that it contributed to the Cancer Drugs Fund's continuation despite mounting evidence of its ineffectiveness.

Increasing Information Dissemination in Cancer Communication: Effects of Using "Palliative," "Supportive," or "Hospice" Care Terminology

BACKGROUND

When attempting to share information about comfort-oriented care, many use "palliative," "supportive," and "hospice" care terminology interchangeably, but we lack evidence about the effects of using these different terms.

OBJECTIVES

This study was designed to test whether the use of "palliative," "supportive," or "hospice" terminology can improve the dissemination of information among breast cancer patients-a large and growing oncology population. Design, Setting, and Measurement: This experimental study was conducted at a major U.S. hospital serving a diverse population. Patients visiting a cancer clinic encountered opportunities to learn more about cancer care. They were offered health materials that were described as reporting on "palliative," "supportive," or "hospice" care and the primary outcome was whether a patient decided to select or reject each. As a secondary outcome, the study measured the patient's level of interest in receiving each.

RESULTS

Compared with alternatives, materials labeled as "supportive" care were most likely to be selected and considered valuable (p value <0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, the terminology used had a large effect and, compared with alternatives, the information labeled as being about "supportive" care was significantly more likely to be selected. If these effects are supported by additional research, there may be low-cost, highly feasible changes in language choice that increase the dissemination of relevant health information.

Mapping the cancer patient information landscape: A comparative analysis of patient groups across Europe and North America

AIM

Little is known about how patient groups provide information for patients. We invited 838 patient groups from Europe and North America to participate in an online survey.

METHODS

The survey covered: (i) availability, accessibility and quality of information provided; (ii) methods by which patient groups communicate; (iii) ways in which patient groups acquire information and confirm its veracity/accuracy; (iv) how people access information online.

RESULTS

European patient groups were significantly less effective in providing medical-related information than their North American counterparts in: clinical trials, potential causes of cancer, medical research, diagnosis/screening, symptoms, treatments (all p < 0.0001); Recommendations of best practice/care (p < 0.03), healthcare services(p = 0.029) and complimentary medicine (p = 0.01). Clinical trials (p = 0.0006), medical research (p = 0.006) and diagnosis/screening (p = 0.0024) were also areas where North American patients were more likely to require medical-related information. Similar patterns emerged for non-medical information with nutrition (<0.0001), watchful waiting (p = 0.0003), self-management of care (p = 0.0003), prevention (p = 0.002) and emotional issues (p = 0.016) being less effectively communicated by European patient groups. Nutrition was also an area where North American patients were more likely to require non-medical-related information. The main barriers in accessing online information which showed differences between European and North American patients were: perceived lack of need, mainly due to faith in their doctors (p = 0.0001); limited access to the internet (p = 0.0005), limited computer skills (p = 0.02); and lower income (p = 0.027).

CONCLUSION

These results emphasise the more mature nature of cancer patient engagement/information provision in North America, providing valuable insights and guidance to inform development of more robust and effective cancer patient information communication platforms in Europe.

Comparing Strategies for Health Information Dissemination: Messengers That Can Help or Hinder

PURPOSE

To test the effects of different messengers on the dissemination of health information.

DESIGN

An experimental study exposed participants to 12 news articles pertaining to 1 of 3 health topics framed from the perspective of 4 generic messengers: religious figures, doctors, celebrity patients, or ordinary patients. Participants select as many of the 12 articles as desired.

SETTING

A cancer clinic within a large, urban hospital serving a sociodemographically diverse patient population.

PARTICIPANTS

Eighty-nine patients with a history of cancer.

MEASURES

The primary outcome was the frequency with which each news story was selected.

ANALYSIS

Summary statistics and a general estimating equation model.

RESULTS

For each health topic, news articles using celebrity messengers were the least likely to be selected; almost half of the participants (36 [41.4%] of 87) rejected all such articles. Articles linked to religious figures were equally unpopular ( P = .59). Articles that used doctors or ordinary patients as the messenger were very likely to be selected: Nearly all women (84 [96.6%] of 87) selected at least one of these. Furthermore, the odds of choosing articles linked to celebrities or religious leaders were statistically significantly lower than the odds of choosing those linked to ordinary patients or doctors ( P < .01).

CONCLUSION

Commonly used generic messengers had large effects on the dissemination of information. Health materials linked to celebrities or religious figures were consistently less likely to be selected than those linked to ordinary patients, or doctors.

Doctors' reports about palliative systemic treatment: A medical record study

BACKGROUND

Decisions about palliative systemic treatment are key elements of palliative and end-of-life care. Such decisions must often be made in complex, clinical situations.

AIM

To explore the content of medical records of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer and pancreatic cancer with specific emphasis on doctors' notes about decisions on palliative systemic treatment.

DESIGN

Medical record review (2009-2012) of 147 cancer patients containing 276 notes about palliative systemic treatment. We described the proportion of notes/medical records containing pre-specified items relevant to palliative systemic treatment. We selected patients using the nationwide Netherlands Cancer Registry.

SETTING

Hospital based.

RESULTS

About 75% of all notes reported doctors' considerations to start/continue palliative systemic treatment, including information about the prognosis (47%), possible survival gain (22%), patients' wish for palliative systemic treatment (33%), impact on quality of life (8%), and patient's age (3%). Comorbidity (82%), smoking status (78%) and drinking behaviour (63%) were more often documented than patients' performance status (16%). Conversations with the patient/family about palliative systemic treatment were reported in 49% of all notes. Response measurements and dose adaptations were documented in 75% and 71% of patients who received palliative systemic treatment respectively.

CONCLUSION

Medical records provide insight into the decision-making process about palliative systemic treatment. The content and detail of doctors' notes, however, widely varies especially concerning their palliative systemic treatment considerations. Registries that aim to measure the quality of (end-of-life) care must be aware of this outcome. Future research should further explore how medical records can best assist in evaluating the quality of the decision-making process in the patient's final stage of life.

Oral cancer: exploring the stories in United Kingdom newspaper articles

Objective Reports suggest that patients with oral cancer delay seeking help because they are unaware of the symptoms. The majority of adults (95%) engage with news reports and 40% read newspapers. Newspaper oral cancer stories may influence awareness and health-seeking behaviour. The aim of this study was to explore how oral cancer is portrayed in UK newspaper print media.Design Qualitative content analysis of articles from ten newspapers with the widest UK print circulation. All articles using the terms 'mouth cancer' and 'oral cancer' over a three year period were retrieved. Duplicates, non-cancer and non-human articles were excluded.Results 239 articles were analysed. Common topics included 'recent research', 'survivor stories', 'health information' and 'celebrity linkage'. Articles were often emotive, featuring smoking, alcohol, sex and celebrity. Articles lacked a proper evidence base and often failed to provide accurate information about signs and symptoms, information about prevention and signposting to treatment.Conclusions Opportunities to save lives are being missed. Further work to improve social responsibility in the media and develop guidance to enhance the quality of information, health reporting and signposting to help are indicated.

Media Reporting of Practice-Changing Clinical Trials in Oncology: A North American Perspective

INTRODUCTION

Media reporting of clinical trials impacts patient-oncologist interactions. We sought to characterize the accuracy of media and Internet reporting of practice-changing clinical trials in oncology.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The first media articles referencing 17 practice-changing clinical trials were collected from 4 media outlets: newspapers, cable news, cancer websites, and industry websites. Measured outcomes were media reporting score, social media score, and academic citation score. The media reporting score was a measure of completeness of information detailed in media articles as scored by a 15-point scoring instrument. The social media score represented the ubiquity of social media presence referencing 17 practice-changing clinical trials in cancer as determined by the American Society of Clinical Oncology in its annual report, entitled Clinical Cancer Advances 2012; social media score was calculated from Twitter, Facebook, and Google searches. The academic citation score comprised total citations from Google Scholar plus the Scopus database, which represented the academic impact per clinical cancer advance.

RESULTS

From 170 media articles, 107 (63%) had sufficient data for analysis. Cohen's κ coefficient demonstrated reliability of the media reporting score instrument with a coefficient of determination of 94%. Per the media reporting score, information was most complete from industry, followed by cancer websites, newspapers, and cable news. The most commonly omitted items, in descending order, were study limitations, exclusion criteria, conflict of interest, and other. The social media score was weakly correlated with academic citation score.

CONCLUSION

Media outlets appear to have set a low bar for coverage of many practice-changing advances in oncology, with reports of scientific breakthroughs often omitting basic study facts and cautions, which may mislead the public. The media should be encouraged to use a standardized reporting template and provide accessible references to original source information whenever feasible.

Drugs, cancer and end-of-life care: a case study of pharmaceuticalization?

There is evidence from some countries of a trend towards increasingly aggressive pharmacological treatment of patients with advanced, incurable cancer. To what extent should this be understood as a progressive development in which technological innovations address previously unmet needs, or is a significant amount of this expansion explained by futile or even harmful treatment? In this article it is argued that while some of this growth may be consistent with a progressive account of medicines consumption, part of the expansion is constituted by the inappropriate and overly aggressive use of drugs. Such use is often explained in terms of individual patient consumerism and/or factors to do with physician behaviour. Whilst acknowledging the role of physicians and patients' expectations, this paper, drawing on empirical research conducted in the US, the EU and the UK, examines the extent to which upstream factors shape expectations and drive pharmaceuticalisation, and explores the value of this concept as an analytical tool.

How do medical journalists treat cancer-related issues?

Cancer patients can obtain information about their illness through a variety of media sources. Therefore, it is important to know how medical journalists treat cancer-related issues; to that end, we sent self-administered questionnaires to 364 journalists in 82 organisations who had reported on medical issues for the Japanese media, asking for their reasons for reporting on cancer-related issues and the difficulties they had faced. The most common reason for reporting on health-related issues was their personal interest in a particular issue (n = 36). They mainly covered conventional therapies (n = 33), healthcare policy (n = 30), new therapies (n = 25), and diagnosis (n = 25). All of the journalists that were surveyed experienced some difficulties in reporting health issues. Significant concerns included the quality of information (n = 36), social impact (n = 35), lack of technical knowledge (n = 35), and difficulty in understanding technical terms (n = 35). Journalists commonly used personal networks, including physicians, as information sources (n = 42), as well as social media (e.g., e-mail, Twitter and Facebook) (n = 32). Topic selection was biased, with 35 of 48 journalists having never reported on topics concerning hospices. Physicians were the most trusted source of information about cancer, and journalists attached high importance to interviewing them. As medical knowledge is advancing rapidly, journalists may have increasing difficulty covering cancer-related issues.

The media and cancer: education or entertainment? An ethnographic study of European cancer journalists

The media plays a vital role in informing the public about new developments in cancer research and influencing cancer policy. This is no easy task, in view of the myriad of trials and wonder drugs that purport to be the 'magic bullet'. However, misrepresentation can have profound consequences. In this qualitative study, we sought to understand the interaction between the media and cancer through the perspective of European science journalists by defining their attitudes towards current cancer research and challenges faced when reporting science news. A total of 67 respondents took part in this online survey, which was distributed by the European CanCer Organisation (ECCO) to all its media contacts between June and September 2013. Fifty-three per cent had over 20 years experience in reporting science news stories. The respondents utilised a number of media formats, including newsprint, online services, and radio. Fifty per cent ranked public interest as the greatest influence on their selection of cancer research topics, followed by topicality. Respondents were conscious of being fed ambiguous and exaggerated results from trials by the research community. Sixty-five per cent of respondents would appreciate access to a forum of experts willing to provide comment on new research findings. Seventy per cent highlighted the importance of prompt responses from scientists and researchers during correspondence, and the need to have advance warning of new developments (49%). To conclude - coverage of cancer related issues and scientific advances require greater collaboration between the press and cancer healthcare community to provide both credibility and accountability for the health information disseminated. Key areas include a more precise definition of the research context and differentiation of absolute and relative risks, as well as individual and population risks and an informed discussion about the realities and limitations of cancer care and research.

Navigating the cancer information environment: The reciprocal relationship between patient-clinician information engagement and information seeking from nonmedical sources

Prior theory has argued and empirical studies have shown that cancer patients rely on information from their health care providers as well as lay sources to understand and make decisions about their disease. However, research on the dynamic and interdependent nature of cancer patients' engagement with different information sources is lacking. This study tested the hypotheses that patient-clinician information engagement and information seeking from nonmedical sources influence one another longitudinally among a representative cohort of 1,293 cancer survivors in Pennsylvania. The study hypotheses were supported in a series of lagged multiple regression analyses. Baseline seeking information from nonmedical sources positively predicted subsequent patient-clinician information engagement at 1-year follow-up. The reverse relationship was also statistically significant; baseline patient-clinician information engagement positively predicted information seeking from nonmedical sources at follow-up. These findings suggest that cancer survivors move between nonmedical and clinician sources in a dynamic way to learn about their disease.

Scared witless about death--ovarian cancer narratives compared

Fifty years ago, doctors did not tell their patients they had cancer. Improved patient-physician communication, feminization of the medical profession and increased patient empowerment may have improved matters. However, death is still a subject many doctors find difficult to deal with. We explore this issue in the context of medical humanities. In order to examine the different strategies in coping with illness and death, we compared illness perceptions in a literary text, W;t by Margaret Edson, about a woman who dies of ovarian cancer, with a personal narrative of a patient with ovarian cancer. Although there are many differences between the two patients in historical and cultural background, similarities were found in the way they cope with illness and death anxiety. Insight into illness perceptions and coping strategies of patients with cancer is important for raising awareness in clinicians, leading to improved understanding and better treatment of patients.

'Burden to others' as a public concern in advanced cancer: a comparative survey in seven European countries

Background

Europe faces an enormous public health challenge with aging populations and rising cancer incidence. Little is known about what concerns the public across European countries regarding cancer care towards the end of life. We aimed to compare the level of public concern with different symptoms and problems in advanced cancer across Europe and examine factors influencing this.

Methods

Telephone survey with 9,344 individuals aged ≥16 in England, Flanders, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal and Spain. Participants were asked about nine symptoms and problems, imagining a situation of advanced cancer with less than one year to live. These were ranked and the three top concerns examined in detail. As ‘burden to others’ showed most variation within and between countries, we determined the relative influence of factors on this concern using GEE and logistic regression.

Results

Overall response rate was 21%. Pain was the top concern in all countries, from 34% participants (Italy) to 49% (Flanders). Burden was second in England, Germany, Italy, Portugal, and Spain. Breathlessness was second in Flanders and the Netherlands. Concern with burden was independently associated with age (70+ years, OR 1.50; 95%CI 1.24-1.82), living alone (OR 0.82, 95%CI 0.73-0.93) and preferring quality rather than quantity of life (OR 1.43, 95%CI 1.14-1.80).

Conclusions

When imagining a last year of life with cancer, the public is not only concerned about medical problems but also about being a burden. Public education about palliative care and symptom control is needed. Cancer care should include a routine assessment and management of social concerns, particularly for older patients with poor prognosis.

Targeted therapy at the end of life in advanced cancer patients

OBJECTIVE

We describe the use of systemic therapy in advanced cancer patients admitted to an acute care hospital, with a focus on targeted therapy. We aim to spotlight the utilization of targeted agents in the last months of life.

METHODS

Adult patients (N=252) with advanced solid tumors who died as inpatients in the National University Hospital, Singapore, were included in this retrospective study. Patients' demographic and clinical data were extracted from hospital records. Information on systemic therapy was extracted from the time of diagnosis and all other data limited to the last three months before death.

RESULTS

187 adult patients received palliative systemic therapy from the time of diagnosis, of which 125 (66.8%) received it within three months of death. Of patients receiving only nontargeted systemic treatment (n=106), 60 (56.6%) and 26 (24.5%) received it within three months and one month of death respectively. Comparatively, 81 patients received palliative targeted systemic therapy, of which 65 (80.3%) and 40 (49.4%) had treatment within three months and one month of death respectively (p=0.001 and p<0.001). Targeted therapy was first initiated in the last three months of life in 38 patients. Oral agents targeting epidermal growth factor receptor (lung cancer patients) and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (non-lung cancer patients) pathways were commonly employed. Lung cancer patients were more likely to have targeted therapy as their last line of systemic therapy: 26/54 lung cancer patients compared with 29/133 non-lung cancer patients (48.1% versus 21.8%, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Targeted therapy is used in more than half of patients who received systemic therapy within three months of death. The degree to which these agents are being utilized near the end of life suggests the need to reexamine the risk/benefit profile of targeted therapy for this population, and the decision-making process around their use.

Understanding provision of chemotherapy to patients with end stage cancer: qualitative interview study

OBJECTIVE

To examine health professionals' experiences of and attitudes towards the provision of chemotherapy to patients with end stage cancer.

DESIGN

Purposive, qualitative design based on in-depth interviews. Setting Oncology departments at university hospitals and general hospitals in the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

14 physicians and 13 nurses who cared for patients with metastatic cancer.

RESULTS

Physicians and nurses reported trying to inform patients fully about their poor prognosis and treatment options. They would carefully consider the (side) effects of chemotherapy and sometimes doubted whether further treatment would contribute to patients' quality of life. Both groups considered the patients' wellbeing to be important, and physicians seemed inclined to try to preserve this by offering further chemotherapy, often followed by the patient. Nurses were more often inclined to express their doubts about further treatment, preferring to allow patients to make the best use of the time that is left. When confronted with a treatment dilemma and a patient's wish for treatment, physicians preferred to make compromises, such as by "trying out one dose." Discussing death or dying with patients while at the same time administering chemotherapy was considered contradictory as this could diminish the patients' hope.

CONCLUSIONS

The trend to greater use of chemotherapy at the end of life could be explained by patients' and physicians' mutually reinforcing attitudes of "not giving up" and by physicians' broad interpretation of patients' quality of life, in which taking away patients' hope by withholding treatment is considered harmful. To rebalance the ratio of quantity of life to quality of life, input from other health professionals, notably nurses, may be necessary.

Palliative and terminal care at home as portrayed in Dutch newspapers in 2009 compared to 2000

BACKGROUND

Terminal care at home is receiving increased attention from the Dutch media, which is relevant for primary care providers.

OBJECTIVES

To explore the portrayal of terminal care at home in newspapers in the Netherlands in 2000 and in 2009.

METHOD

We performed a systematic analysis of documents retrieved from the LexisNexis Academic NL database. We compared data regarding the 'point of reference' (or 'frame') and the 'moral judgments' in articles appearing in the first six months of 2009 to the same period in 2000.

RESULTS

In the year 2000, the framing of articles in regional newspapers appeared to be predominantly consumer-oriented (66%) and in national newspapers predominantly contextual (63%). The moral judgment in the regional articles was predominantly positive (66%), in the national newspapers predominantly negative (58%). In 2009, articles in regional and national newspapers were categorized mainly as consumer-oriented (73% and 55%, respectively), and new themes appeared, i.e. self care and medical topics. For moral judgment, again regional articles were mainly positive (76%) and national articles were mainly negative (39%) and neutral (31%).

CONCLUSION

Regarding the theme 'terminal care at home' as published in Dutch newspapers in 2009 as compared to 2000, the diversity of the framing was more prominent and over all moral judgments were more positive, particularly in regional newspapers. Health care providers should realize that the portrayal of palliative and terminal care at home may differ depending on the type of newspaper--regional or national.

What is palliative medicine? motivations and skills

Palliative care began in the UK hospice movement in the late 1960s and has rapidly developed in many countries since. In some, it has become a fully recognized specialty with comprehensive training programs and recognized expertise in areas such as pain and symptom control. It is important to examine the formative influences and characteristic clinical expertise in palliative medicine. This article considers some of the conceptual, practical, and administrative challenges that have been faced in an effort to establish palliative medicine as a discrete field of specialized practice from a US perspective. We also comment on current issues in regard to education and research, and development of comprehensive palliative care programs in the United States.