Transition practices for survivors of childhood cancer: a report from the Children's Oncology Group

Care coordination models for transition and long-term follow-up among childhood cancer survivors: a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

Childhood cancer survivors may experience complex health issues during transition and long-term follow-up (LTFU); therefore, high-quality healthcare is warranted. Care coordination is one of the essential concepts in advanced healthcare. Care coordination models vary among childhood cancer survivors in transition and LTFU. This study aimed to identify care coordination models for childhood cancer survivors in transition and LTFU and synthesise essential components of the models.

DESIGN

This scoping review was guided by the methodological framework from Arksey and O'Malley and was reported with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. A systematic literature search was conducted on six databases using possible combinations of terms relevant to childhood cancer survivors, transition/LTFU and care coordination model. Data were analysed by descriptive and content analysis.

DATA SOURCES

The literature search was first conducted in May 2023 and updated in May 2024. Six databases including Medline, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL and Cochrane Library were searched; meanwhile, a hand search was also conducted.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Studies relevant to describing any models, interventions or strategies about care coordination of transition or LTFU healthcare services among childhood cancer survivors were included.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers independently screened and included studies. Basic information as well as care coordination model-related data in the included studies were extracted. Descriptive summary and content analysis were used for data analysis.

RESULTS

In the 20 545 citations generated by the search strategy, seven studies were identified. The critical determinants of the models in the included studies were the collaboration of the multidisciplinary team, integration of the navigator role and the provision of patient-centred, family-involved, needs-oriented clinical services. The main functions of the models included risk screening and management, primary care-based services, psychosocial support, health education and counselling, and financial assistance. Models of care coordination were evaluated at patient and clinical levels. Based on this review, core concepts of successful care coordination models for childhood cancer survivors in transition or LTFU were synthesised and proposed as the '3 I' framework: individualisation, interaction and integration.

CONCLUSION

This scoping review summarised core elements of care coordination models for childhood cancer survivors' transition and LTFU. A proposed conceptual framework to support and guide the development of care coordination strategies for childhood cancer survivors' transition and LTFU care was developed. Future research is needed to test the proposed model and develop appropriate care coordination strategies for providing high-quality healthcare for childhood cancer survivors' transition and LTFU.

Developing national cancer survivorship standards to inform quality of care in the United States using a consensus approach

PURPOSE

To develop United States (US) standards for survivorship care that informs (1) essential health system policy and process components and (2) evaluation of the quality of survivorship care.

METHODS

The National Cancer Institute and the Department of Veterans Affairs led a review to identify indicators of quality cancer survivorship care in the domains of health system policy, process, and evaluation/assessment. A series of three virtual consensus meetings with survivorship care and research experts and advocates was conducted to rate the importance of the indicators and refine the top indicators. The final set of standards was developed, including ten indicators in each domain.

RESULTS

Prioritized items were survivor-focused, including processes to both assess and manage physical, psychological, and social issues, and evaluation of patient outcomes and experiences. Specific indicators focused on developing a business model for sustaining survivorship care and collecting relevant business metrics (e.g., healthcare utilization, downstream revenue) to show value of survivorship care to health systems.

CONCLUSIONS

The National Standards for Cancer Survivorship Care can be used by health systems to guide development of new survivorship care programs or services or to assess alignment and enhance services in existing survivorship programs. Given the variety of settings providing care to survivors, it is necessary for health systems to adapt these standards based on factors including age-specific needs, cancer types, treatments received, and health system resources.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

With over 18 million cancer survivors in the United States, many of whom experience varied symptoms and unmet needs, it is essential for health systems to have a comprehensive strategy to provide ongoing care. The US National Standards for Survivorship Care should serve as a blueprint for what survivors and their families can anticipate after a cancer diagnosis to address their needs.

Health Care Transitions Among Adolescents and Young Adults With Cancer

Survivors of adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancers, defined as individuals diagnosed with a primary malignancy between age 15 and 39 years, are a growing population with unique developmental, psychosocial, and health-related needs. These individuals are at excess risk of developing a wide range of chronic comorbidities compared with the general population and, therefore, require lifelong, risk-based, survivorship care to optimize long-term health outcomes. The health care needs of survivors of AYA cancers are particularly complicated given the often heterogeneous and sometimes fragmented care they receive throughout the cancer care continuum. For example, AYA survivors are often treated in disparate settings (pediatric v adult) on dissimilar protocols that include different recommendations for longitudinal follow-up. Specialized tools and techniques are needed to ensure that AYA survivors move seamlessly from acute cancer care to survivorship care and, in many cases, from pediatric to adult clinics while still remaining engaged in long-term follow-up. Systematic, age-appropriate transitional practices involving well-established clinical models of care, survivorship care plans, and survivorship guidelines are needed to facilitate effective transitions between providers. Future studies are necessary to enhance and optimize the clinical effectiveness of transition processes in AYA cancer survivors.

Features of Studies on Transition Interventions for Childhood Cancer Survivors: A Scoping Review

PURPOSE

in this scoping review, previously reported data were described and synthesized to document transition interventions in CCSs, and the features of intervention components of the current transition studies for CCSs were summarized.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Ovid, and the Cochrane Library following the PRISMA-ScR statement. All original studies (n = 9) investigating transition interventions in CCSs were included.

RESULTS

The current studies identified essential elements for transition programs, such as delivering knowledge, developing skills for coordination of care, and addressing psychosocial needs. However, the current transition interventions were generally in their infancy, and major deficits were found, including poorly reported intervention components and procedures, a limited number of relevant validated outcomes, and a failure to incorporate conceptual frameworks and international consensus statements.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review mapped current evidence of transition interventions for CCSs and highlighted the paucity of data in this area. More high-quality and well-reported randomized controlled trials are needed for the enrichment and standardization of future transition interventions.

Implementation of a Pilot Clinic for Pediatric to Adult Cancer Survivorship Transitions

Childhood cancer survivors are recommended to have lifelong survivorship care, yet many become disengaged during pediatric to adult care transitions. We implemented a pilot clinic for adult survivors of pediatric or adolescent and young adult (AYA) leukemia transitioning to adult-focused survivorship care. The clinic featured AYA-specific care, bidirectional communication with primary care, and a quality improvement (QI) cycle. During the 1-year QI period, 27 patients were seen and 21 completed postvisit interviews. The clinic was positively received by patients and primary care providers, showed promise for improving self-management and care coordination, and highlighted the need for novel approaches to connect survivors with primary care.

Cancer center-based follow-up among pediatric and adolescent/young adult cancer survivors: the role of a community-based organization and the social determinants of health

PURPOSE

Adherence to survivorship care is suboptimal among pediatric and adolescent/young adult (AYA) cancer survivors. We evaluated predictors of cancer center-based follow-up among pediatric/AYA cancer survivors, with an emphasis on social determinants of health (SDOH).

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used electronic health record data at an academic medical center to identify patients aged 0-29 years at last cancer treatment who completed treatment 2010-2019. Cancer center-based follow-up was defined by oncology or survivorship clinic visits through 12/31/2022. Multivariate logistic regression models (overall, ages 0-19 [pediatric], 20-29 [YA]) evaluated the association of demographics, clinical/treatment characteristics, and SDOH (insurance type, distance to cancer center, area deprivation index) with clinic attendance. Further modeling accounted for the service area of a community-based organization (CBO) that supports families of children with cancer.

RESULTS

A total of 2210 survivors were included (56% pediatric, 44% YA; 66% non-White). Cancer center-based follow-up decreased from 94% 1-year post-treatment to 35% at > 5-7 years. In adjusted analysis, AYAs had the lowest follow-up (5-7 years post-treatment: OR 0.25 [0.15-0.41] for age 25-29; OR 0.25 [0.16-0.41] for age 20-24; OR 0.32 [0.20-0.52] for age 15-19). Survivors residing within the CBO service area were twice as likely to follow-up (OR 2.10 [1.34-3.29]).

CONCLUSIONS

Among a diverse population, AYA survivors were vulnerable to loss to follow-up. Other SDOH were not consistently associated with follow-up. Support from a CBO may partly explain these findings.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

CBOs may strengthen survivorship follow-up within medically underserved communities. More research is needed to understand community support in survivorship.

Children's Oncology Group 2023 blueprint for research: Cancer care delivery research

The National Cancer Institute (NCI) has a 40-year history of initiatives to encourage the participation of community oncology sites into clinical trials research and clinical care. In 2014, the NCI re-organized to form the NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) network across seven research bases, including the Children's Oncology Group (COG), and numerous community sites. The COG portfolio for Cancer Care Delivery Research (CCDR), mirroring the larger NCORP network, has included two studies addressing guideline congruence, as an important marker of quality cancer care, and another focusing on financial toxicity, addressing the pervasive problems of healthcare cost. CCDR is a cross-cutting field that frequently examines intersectional aspects of healthcare delivery. With that in mind, we explicitly define domains of CCDR to propel our research agenda into the next phase of the NCORP CCDR program while acknowledging the complex and dynamic fields of clinical care, policy level decisions, research findings, and needs of communities served by the NCORP network that will inform the subsequent research questions. To ensure programmatic success, we will engage a broad interdisciplinary group of investigators and clinicians with expertise and dedication to community oncology and the populations they serve.