Models of Care-There Is More Than One Way to Deliver

The power of art and the powers of adolescents with cancer: Age-specific projects at Italian pediatric oncology centers

This article describes the oncology programs developed in Italy for adolescents and young adults with cancer, with a specific focus on the local projects created in pediatric oncology centers. A common feature of such projects is the emphasis on creative and artistic activities and laboratories (involving music, photography, novel writing, fashion design, and so on) designed to give young patients innovative means of expression.This article highlights the amazing powers of adolescents involved in these projects: the power to produce beautiful things in a place that is not normally associated with the idea of beauty; the power to make their doctors smile and grasp the profound sense of life; the power to make hospitals become places for producing culture.

I was only sixteen

This short piece describes a new project developed by the adolescent patients with cancer involved in the Youth Project at the Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori in Milan, Italy. This is a scheme dedicated to young cancer patients with the dual aim of optimizing medical aspects of their care and promoting a holistic approach to their needs. "I was only sixteen" is a ballad, written in English by the patients, that became a song with the help of professional musicians (and among them international star Tony Hadley, former frontman of Spandau Ballet). This song sounds like hymn to life for teenagers with cancer in the world. It emphasizes again the value of giving young patients novel creative ways to express themselves.

Young people's opinions of cancer care in England: the BRIGHTLIGHT cohort

OBJECTIVES

The BRIGHTLIGHT cohort study was the national evaluation of cancer services for teenager and young adults (TYA). This was analysis of free-text survey data to better understand their experiences of cancer care.

DESIGN

Cohort study SETTING: National Health Service hospitals delivering cancer care in England PARTICIPANTS: 830 young people newly diagnosed with cancer.

INTERVENTIONS

Exposure to specialist care in the first 6 months after diagnosis defined as care in a TYA Principal Treatment Centre (PTC). This was categorised as follows: all care in a TYA-PTC (ALL-TYA-PTC), no care in a TYA-PTC (NO-TYA-PTC) so care delivered in a children/adult unit only and some care in a TYA-PTC with additional care in a children's/adult unit (SOME-TYA-PTC).

PRIMARY OUTCOME

Data were collected through the BRIGHTLIGHT survey included free-text questions which asked patients 'what was the best aspects of their experiences of care' and 'what aspects could be improved'. These comments were analysed using content analysis. Themes were compared between categories of care, then ranked in order of frequency, ranging from the most endorsed to the least.

RESULTS

Overall, young people were most positive about their healthcare team, while the area highlighted for improvement was diagnostic experience. Differences between the three groups suggested those who had some or all treatment in a TYA-PTC valued the place of care. Regardless of where TYA were treated their healthcare teams were favourably viewed. Age appropriate place of care was highlighted to be of value for those in PTCs.

CONCLUSIONS

These data show the value young people placed on the care they received in TYA specific wards. Young people who accessed some or all of their care in a TYA-PTC highly endorsed their place of care as one of the best elements of their care, and it is further emphasised by those who had shared care who experienced difficulty with lack of age-appropriate care when treated outside the TYA-PTC.

Treatment de-escalation for stage II seminoma

International Germ Cell Cancer Collaborative Group good-risk metastatic seminoma has cure rates of >95%. Within this risk group, patients with stage II disease exhibit the best oncological outcomes with the standard-of-care treatment strategies of radiotherapy or combination chemotherapy. However, these treatments can be associated with substantial early and late toxic effects. Therapy de-escalation aims to reduce treatment morbidity whilst preserving oncological outcomes. The evidence supporting such approaches is largely from non-randomized institutional data, and therefore this strategy is not recognized as standard of care. Current de-escalation approaches for stage II seminoma include single-agent chemotherapy, radiotherapy and surgery based on early data from clinical studies. Increased recognition of emerging data on treatment modification to reduce morbidity whilst maintaining cure rates and consideration of therapy de-escalation could improve patient survivorship outcomes.

Needs, Barriers and Facilitators of Adolescents Participating in a Lifestyle Promotion Program in Oncology: Stakeholders, Adolescents and Parents’ Perspective

Treatments for adolescent cancer can cause debilitating side effects in the short- and long-term such as nausea and malnutrition but also cardiometabolic disturbances. Although the risk for cardiometabolic complications is greater for adolescents with cancer than younger ones, adolescents typically respond poorly to family-oriented health promotion programs. This study aims to assess the needs, barriers and facilitators to healthy lifestyle promotion interventions for adolescents with cancer and how to best adapt these interventions for them. Interviews were held with adolescents treated for cancer (n = 9) and parents (n = 6), focus groups were conducted with stakeholders working in oncology (n = 12) and self-report questionnaires were sent to stakeholders involved in a health promotion intervention (n = 6). At the time of interview, mean age of adolescent participants (40% female) was 17.0 ± 1.9 years (mean age at diagnosis: 14.6 ± 1.6 years). Verbatim and responses to questionnaires were coded and analyzed using qualitative methods. Stakeholder stated that adolescents with cancer need to access activities adapted to their age, to communicate with peers going through a similar experience, and to preserve their schooling and friendships. Barriers to intervention reported by adolescents, parents and stakeholders include lack of motivation, schedule conflicts, fatigue and treatment side effects. Some of the barriers mentioned by adolescents and parents include pain, post-surgery problems, school, physical deconditioning, and lack of time. Facilitators mentioned by adolescents and parents comprise trust in stakeholders’ expertise, personalized approaches, scheduling flexibility. Stakeholders recommended to build trust in the relationship, favoring non-moralizing teachings, adapt interventions to adolescents’ limited attention span and avoiding the use of long-term health benefits as a motivator.

Italian pediatric and adult oncology communities join forces for a national project dedicated to adolescents and young adults with cancer

Adolescents and young adults with cancer have substantially different clinical and psychological needs compared to those of pediatric patients and of older adult patients. We describe the development of an Italian national project dedicated to adolescents and young adults with cancer.

Specialist cancer services for teenagers and young adults in England: BRIGHTLIGHT research programme

Background

When cancer occurs in teenagers and young adults, the impact is far beyond the physical disease and treatment burden. The effect on psychological, social, educational and other normal development can be profound. In addition, outcomes including improvements in survival and participation in clinical trials are poorer than in younger children and older adults with similar cancers. These unique circumstances have driven the development of care models specifically for teenagers and young adults with cancer, often focused on a dedicated purpose-designed patient environments supported by a multidisciplinary team with expertise in the needs of teenagers and young adults. In England, this is commissioned by NHS England and delivered through 13 principal treatment centres. There is a lack of evaluation that identifies the key components of specialist care for teenagers and young adults, and any improvement in outcomes and costs associated with it.

Objective

To determine whether or not specialist services for teenagers and young adults with cancer add value.

Design

A series of multiple-methods studies centred on a prospective longitudinal cohort of teenagers and young adults who were newly diagnosed with cancer.

Settings

Multiple settings, including an international Delphi study of health-care professionals, qualitative observation in specialist services for teenagers and young adults, and NHS trusts.

Participants

A total of 158 international teenage and young adult experts, 42 health-care professionals from across England, 1143 teenagers and young adults, and 518 caregivers.

Main outcome measures

The main outcomes were specific to each project: key areas of competence for the Delphi survey; culture of teenagers and young adults care in the case study; and unmet needs from the caregiver survey. The primary outcome for the cohort participants was quality of life and the cost to the NHS and patients in the health economic evaluation.

Data sources

Multiple sources were used, including responses from health-care professionals through a Delphi survey and face-to-face interviews, interview data from teenagers and young adults, the BRIGHTLIGHT survey to collect patient-reported data, patient-completed cost records, hospital clinical records, routinely collected NHS data and responses from primary caregivers.

Results

Competencies associated with specialist care for teenagers and young adults were identified from a Delphi study. The key to developing a culture of teenage and young adult care was time and commitment. An exposure variable, the teenagers and young adults Cancer Specialism Scale, was derived, allowing categorisation of patients to three groups, which were defined by the time spent in a principal treatment centre: SOME (some care in a principal treatment centre for teenagers and young adults, and the rest of their care in either a children’s or an adult cancer unit), ALL (all care in a principal treatment centre for teenagers and young adults) or NONE (no care in a principal treatment centre for teenagers and young adults). The cohort study showed that the NONE group was associated with superior quality of life, survival and health status from 6 months to 3 years after diagnosis. The ALL group was associated with faster rates of quality-of-life improvement from 6 months to 3 years after diagnosis. The SOME group was associated with poorer quality of life and slower improvement in quality of life over time. Economic analysis revealed that NHS costs and travel costs were similar between the NONE and ALL groups. The ALL group had greater out-of-pocket expenses, and the SOME group was associated with greater NHS costs and greater expense for patients. However, if caregivers had access to a principal treatment centre for teenagers and young adults (i.e. in the ALL or SOME groups), then they had fewer unmet support and information needs.

Limitations

Our definition of exposure to specialist care using Hospital Episode Statistics-determined time spent in hospital was insufficient to capture the detail of episodes or account for the variation in specialist services. Quality of life was measured first at 6 months, but an earlier measure may have shown different baselines.

Conclusions

We could not determine the added value of specialist cancer care for teenagers and young adults as defined using the teenage and young adult Cancer Specialism Scale and using quality of life as a primary end point. A group of patients (i.e. those defined as the SOME group) appeared to be less advantaged across a range of outcomes. There was variation in the extent to which principal treatment centres for teenagers and young adults were established, and the case study indicated that the culture of teenagers and young adults care required time to develop and embed. It will therefore be important to establish whether or not the evolution in services since 2012–14, when the cohort was recruited, improves quality of life and other patient-reported and clinical outcomes.

Future work

A determination of whether or not the SOME group has similar or improved quality of life and other patient-reported and clinical outcomes in current teenage and young adult service delivery is essential if principal treatment centres for teenagers and young adults are being commissioned to provide ‘joint care’ models with other providers.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 9, No. 12. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Processes of care and survival associated with treatment in specialist teenage and young adult cancer centres: results from the BRIGHTLIGHT cohort study

OBJECTIVE

Survival gains in teenagers and young adults (TYA) are reported to be lower than children and adults for some cancers. Place of care is implicated, influencing access to specialist TYA professionals and research.Consequently, age-appropriate specialist cancer care is advocated for TYA although systematic investigation of associated outcomes is lacking. In England, age-appropriate care is delivered through 13 Principal Treatment Centres (TYA-PTC). BRIGHTLIGHT is the national evaluation of TYA cancer services to examine outcomes associated with differing places and levels of care. We aimed to examine the association between exposure to TYA-PTC care, survival and documentation of clinical processes of care.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

109 National Health Service (NHS) hospitals across England.

PARTICIPANTS

1114 TYA, aged 13-24, newly diagnosed with cancer between 2012 and 2014.

INTERVENTION

Participants were assigned a TYA-PTC category dependent on the proportion of care delivered in a TYA-PTC in the first year after diagnosis: all care in a TYA-PTC (ALL-TYA-PTC, n=270), no care in a TYA-PTC (NO-TYA-PTC, n=359), and some care in a TYA-PTC with additional care in a children's/adult unit (SOME-TYA-PTC, n=419).

PRIMARY OUTCOME

Data were collected on documented processes indicative of age-appropriate care using clinical report forms, and survival through linkage to NHS databases.

RESULTS

TYA receiving NO-TYA-PTC care were less likely to have documentation of molecular diagnosis, be reviewed by a children's or TYA multidisciplinary team, be assessed by supportive care services or have a fertility discussion. There was no significant difference in survival according to category of care. There was weak evidence that the association between care category and survival differed by age (p=0.08) with higher HRs for those over 19 receiving ALL or SOME-TYA-PTC compared with NO-TYA-PTC.

CONCLUSION

TYA-PTC care was associated with better documentation of clinical processes associated with age-appropriate care but not improved survival.

Adolescents and young adults (AYA) with cancer: a position paper from the AYA Working Group of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the European Society for Paediatric Oncology (SIOPE)

It is well recognised that adolescents and young adults (AYA) with cancer have inequitable access to oncology services that provide expert cancer care and consider their unique needs. Subsequently, survival gains in this patient population have improved only modestly compared with older adults and children with cancer. In 2015, the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the European Society for Paediatric Oncology (SIOPE) established the joint Cancer in AYA Working Group in order to increase awareness among adult and paediatric oncology communities, enhance knowledge on specific issues in AYA and ultimately improve the standard of care for AYA with cancer across Europe. This manuscript reflects the position of this working group regarding current AYA cancer care, the challenges to be addressed and possible solutions. Key challenges include the lack of specific biological understanding of AYA cancers, the lack of access to specialised centres with age-appropriate multidisciplinary care and the lack of available clinical trials with novel therapeutics. Key recommendations include diversifying interprofessional cooperation in AYA care and specific measures to improve trial accrual, including centralising care where that is the best means to achieve trial accrual. This defines a common vision that can lead to improved outcomes for AYA with cancer in Europe.

Supporting the Needs of Adolescents and Young Adults: Integrated Palliative Care and Psychiatry Clinic for Adolescents and Young Adults with Cancer

Simple Summary

Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer experience a high level of distress and have unique unmet palliative and supportive care needs. There is limited knowledge about the symptom burden, quality of life, and type of care that AYA patients receive. In 2017, a dedicated AYA-specialized palliative care clinic was established at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre in Canada, with a collaborative approach between palliative care and psychiatry. This study aims to describe the demographics and symptoms burden of AYA cancer patients who attended the integrated palliative care and psychiatry clinic, measure the impact of the clinic on AYAs’ symptom control, and examine their end-of-life outcomes.

Abstract

Clinical guidelines aimed at cancer care for adolescents and young adults (AYAs) encourage early integration of palliative care, yet there are scarce data to support these recommendations. We conducted a retrospective chart review of AYA patients, aged 15 to 39 years, who were referred to the Integrated AYA Palliative Care and Psychiatry Clinic (IAPCPC) at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre between May 2017 and November 2019 (n = 69). Demographic data, symptom prevalence, change in symptom scores between baseline consultation and first follow-up, and intensity of end-of-life care were collected from the patients’ medical charts, analyzed, and reported. Of the 69 patients, 59% were female, and sarcoma was the most common cancer. A majority of patients had at least one symptom scored as moderate to severe; tiredness, pain, and sleep problems were the highest scored symptoms. More than one-third used medical cannabis to manage their symptoms. Symptom scores improved in 61% after the first clinic visit. Out of the 69 patients, 50 (72.5%) had died by October 2020, with a median time between the initial clinic referral and death of 5 months (range 1–32). Three patients (6%) received chemotherapy, and eight (16%) were admitted to an intensive care unit during the last month of life. In conclusion, AYAs with advanced cancer have a high burden of palliative and psychosocial symptoms. Creating a specialized AYA palliative care clinic integrated with psychiatry showed promising results in improving symptom scores and end-of-life planning.

Longitudinal cohort study of the impact of specialist cancer services for teenagers and young adults on quality of life: outcomes from the BRIGHTLIGHT study

OBJECTIVES

In England, healthcare policy advocates specialised age-appropriate services for teenagers and young adults (TYA), those aged 13 to 24 years at diagnosis. Specialist Principal Treatment Centres (PTC) provide enhanced TYA age-specific care, although many still receive care in adult or children's cancer services. We present the first prospective structured analysis of quality of life (QOL) associated with the amount of care received in a TYA-PTC DESIGN: Longitudinal cohort study.

SETTING

Hospitals delivering inpatient cancer care in England.

PARTICIPANTS

1114 young people aged 13 to 24 years newly diagnosed with cancer.

INTERVENTION

Exposure to the TYA-PTC defined as patients receiving NO-TYA-PTC care with those receiving ALL-TYA-PTC and SOME-TYA-PTC care.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

Quality of life measured at five time points: 6, 12, 18, 24 and 36 months after diagnosis.

RESULTS

Group mean total QOL improved over time for all patients, but for those receiving NO-TYA-PTC was an average of 5.63 points higher (95% CI 2.77 to 8.49) than in young people receiving SOME-TYA-PTC care, and 4·17 points higher (95% CI 1.07 to 7.28) compared with ALL-TYA-PTC care. Differences were greatest 6 months after diagnosis, reduced over time and did not meet the 8-point level that is proposed to be clinically significant. Young people receiving NO-TYA-PTC care were more likely to have been offered a choice of place of care, be older, from more deprived areas, in work and have less severe disease. However, analyses adjusting for confounding factors did not explain the differences between TYA groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Receipt of some or all care in a TYA-PTC was associated with lower QOL shortly after cancer diagnosis. The NO-TYA-PTC group had higher QOL 3 years after diagnosis, however those receiving all or some care in a TYA-PTC experienced more rapid QOL improvements. Receipt of some care in a TYA-PTC requires further study.

Adolescent and Young Adult Perspectives on Challenges and Improvements to Cancer Survivorship Care: How Are We Doing?

Purpose: The purpose was to review main challenges experienced by adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer survivors (18-34 years) during transition to survivorship and their suggestions regarding improvements needed in care. Methods: A national survey was conducted to identify experiences with follow-up care 1-3 years after cancer treatment. The survey included open-ended questions for respondents to add topics of importance and details for deeper insight. This study presents analysis of open-ended questions about main challenge faced by AYA respondents and their suggestions for improvements in care. Results: Of 575 AYA survey respondents, 497 (86.4%) commented regarding main challenges. Twenty-one indicated that they had no challenges. Of those reporting challenges, 209 (43.9%) named one challenge, 267 (56.1%) identified more than one. In total, 955 challenges were identified with the most frequently cited being physical (n = 462, 48.4%) and psychological (n = 234, 24.5%). A total of 391 survivors wrote 679 suggestions about improvements in care with the majority (n = 248, 69.4%) offering more than one. The most frequently cited suggestions included information/communication (n = 191, 29.8%), naming a range of topics for which information was desired, and access to post-treatment therapies/services (n = 164, 25.5%) such as counseling, physiotherapy, and occupational therapy. The overarching theme was, "I need follow-up care that fits me." Conclusions: AYA cancer survivors are diverse and face unique challenges following treatment, which can have life-long implications and impede their recovery. Personalized follow-up care is highly recommended by these survivors.