Compliance, attitudes and barriers to post-operative colorectal cancer follow-up

Association Between Racial and Socioeconomic Disparities and Hospital Performance in Treatment and Outcomes for Patients with Colon Cancer

BACKGROUND

Disparities in colon cancer care and outcomes by race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status (SES), and insurance are well recognized; however, the extent to which inequalities are driven by patient factors versus variation in hospital performance remains unclear. We sought to compare disparities in care delivery and outcomes at low- and high-performing hospitals.

METHODS

We identified patients with stage I-III colon adenocarcinoma from the 2012-2017 National Cancer Database. Adequate lymphadenectomy and timely adjuvant chemotherapy administration defined hospital performance. Multilevel regression models evaluated disparities by race/ethnicity, SES, and insurance at the lowest- and highest-performance quartile hospitals.

RESULTS

Of 92,573 patients from 704 hospitals, 45,982 (49.7%) were treated at 404 low-performing hospitals and 46,591 (50.3%) were treated at 300 high-performing hospitals. Low-performing hospitals treated more non-Hispanic (NH) Black, Hispanic, low SES, and Medicaid patients (all p < 0.01). Among low-performing hospitals, patients with low versus high SES (odds ratio [OR] 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.82-0.92), and Medicare (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.85-0.96) and Medicaid (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.80-0.96) versus private insurance, had decreased odds of receiving high-quality care. At high-performing hospitals, NH Black versus NH White patients (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72-0.95) had decreased odds of receiving high-quality care. Low SES, Medicare, Medicaid, and uninsured patients had worse overall survival at low- and high-performing hospitals (all p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Disparities in receipt of high-quality colon cancer care occurred by SES and insurance at low-performing hospitals, and by race at high-performing hospitals. However, survival disparities by SES and insurance exist irrespective of hospital performance. Future steps include improving low-performing hospitals and identifying mechanisms affecting survival disparities.

Colonoscopy, imaging, and carcinoembryonic antigen: Comparison of guideline adherence to surveillance strategies in patients who underwent resection of colorectal cancer - A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Almost one-third of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) experience recurrence after resection. Adherence to surveillance guidelines largely dictates efficacy in early detection of recurrence. We sought to assess and compare adherence to postoperative surveillance guidelines for colonoscopy, imaging, and Carcinoembryonic Antigen (CEA).

METHODS

PubMed, Medline, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, Web of Science, and CINAHL were systematically searched. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed and pooled adherence to each surveillance strategy was assessed for CEA, imaging, and colonoscopy.

RESULTS

Overall 14 studies (55,895 patients) met the inclusion criteria. Adherence to colonoscopy guidelines was the highest (70%, 95%CI 67-73), followed by imaging (63%, 95%CI 47-80), and CEA (54%; 95%CI 42-66). Among 7 (50%) studies that examined adherence to the American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines, compliance with colonoscopy was the highest (73%; 95% CI 70-76), followed by imaging (58%; 95% CI 37-78), and CEA (45%; 95%CI 37-52). Of note, guideline adherence to CEA testing was much lower than colonoscopy among patients with colon (OR 0.21; 95%CI 0.20-0.22) and rectal cancer (OR 0.25; 95%CI 0.23-0.28) (both p < 0.05). This was also noted when compared with imaging recommendations among older patients (OR = 0.62; 95%CI 0.42-0.93) and patients with stage II, (OR = 0.80; 95%CI 0.76-0.84) and stage III disease (OR = 0.88; 95%CI 0.82-0.94) (all p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

While guideline adherence to postoperative surveillance with colonoscopy was high, adherence to CEA testing and imaging surveillance strategies was markedly lower following CRC resection. Future studies should investigate avenues to improve compliance with surveillance guidelines among health care providers and patients to optimize postoperative follow-up for CRC.

Understanding the Attitudes and Beliefs of Oncologists Regarding the Transitioning and Sharing of Survivorship Care

Transitioning survivorship care from oncologists to primary care physicians (PCPs) is a reasonable alternative to oncologist-led care. This study assessed oncologists’ attitudes and beliefs regarding sharing/transitioning survivorship care. A prospective survey of oncologists within a regional cancer program assessing self-reported barriers and facilitators to sharing/transitioning survivorship care was disseminated. In total, 63% (n = 39) of surveyed oncologists responded. Patient preference (89%) and anxiety (84%) are key to transition of care decisions; reduced remuneration (95%) and fewer longitudinal relationships (63%) do not contribute. Oncologists agreed that more patients could be shared/transitioned. Barriers include treatment-related toxicities (82% agree), tumor-specific factors (60–90% agree) and perception of PCP willingness to participate in survivorship care (47% agree). Oncologists appear willing to share/transition more survivors to PCPs, though barriers exist that warrant further study. Understanding these issues is critical to developing policies supporting comprehensive survivorship care models that address both cancer and non-cancer health needs. The demonstrated feasibility of this project warrants a larger-scale survey of oncologists with respect to the transition of survivorship care to PCPs, to further inform effective interventions to support high-quality survivorship care.

Characteristics Associated With Nonreceipt of Surveillance Testing and the Relationship With Survival in Stage II and III Colon Cancer

We investigated characteristics of patients with colon cancer that predicted nonreceipt of posttreatment surveillance testing and the subsequent associations between surveillance status and survival outcomes. This was a retrospective cohort study of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database combined with Medicare claims. Patients diagnosed between 2002 and 2009 with disease stages II and III and who were between 66 and 84 years of age were eligible. A minimum of 3 years' follow-up was required, and patients were categorized as having received any surveillance testing (any testing) versus none (no testing). Poisson regression was used to obtain risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals for the relative likelihood of No Testing. Cox models were used to obtain subdistribution hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals for 5- and 10-year cancer-specific and noncancer deaths. There were 16,009 colon cancer cases analyzed. Patient characteristics that predicted No Testing included older age, Black race, stage III disease, and chemotherapy. Patients in the No Testing group had an increased rate of 10-year cancer death that was greater for patients with stage III disease (subdistribution hazard ratio = 1.79, 95% confidence interval: 1.48, 2.17) than those with stage II disease (subdistribution hazard ratio = 1.41, 95% confidence interval: 1.19, 1.66). Greater efforts are needed to ensure all patients receive the highest quality medical care after diagnosis of colon cancer.

Text Message Preferences for Surveillance Colonoscopy Reminders Among Colorectal Cancer Survivors

Background. Surveillance colonoscopy 1-year after colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery effectively reduces CRC mortality, yet less than half of survivors undergo this procedure. Text message reminders can improve CRC screening and other health behaviors, but use of this strategy to address barriers to CRC surveillance has not been reported. Objectives. The goal of this qualitative study was to assess CRC survivor perspectives on barriers to colonoscopy to inform the design of a theory-based, short message service (SMS) intervention to increase surveillance colonoscopy utilization. Method. CRC survivors in Western Washington participated in one of two focus groups to explore perceived barriers to completing surveillance colonoscopy and preferences for SMS communication. Content analysis using codes representative of the health belief model and prospect theory constructs were applied to qualitative data. Results. Thirteen CRC survivors reported individual-, interpersonal-, and system-level barriers to surveillance colonoscopy completion. Participants were receptive to receiving SMS reminders to mitigate these barriers. They suggested that reminders offer supportive, loss-framed messaging; include educational content; and be personalized to communication preferences. Finally, they recommended that reminders begin no earlier than 9 months following CRC surgery and not include response prompts. Conclusions. Our study demonstrates that CRC survivors perceive SMS reminders as an acceptable, valuable tool for CRC surveillance. Furthermore, there may be value in integrating theoretical frameworks to design, implement, and evaluate SMS interventions to address barriers to CRC surveillance. As physicians play a key role in CRC surveillance, provider- and system-level interventions that could additively improve the impact of SMS interventions are also worth exploring.

Improved quality of colon cancer surveillance after implementation of a personalized surveillance schedule

BACKGROUND

Early detection of recurrence through surveillance after curative surgery for primary colon cancer is recommended. We previously reported inadequate quality of surveillance among patients operated for colon cancer. These poor results led to the introduction of a personalized surveillance schedule. This study reassesses the quality of surveillance after the introduction of the personalized schedule.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 93 patients undergoing curative surgery for colon cancer between January 2009 and December 2014 (prospective data registration) were included in this retrospective single-center cohort study. Written informed consent was given by all patients. Compliance with surveillance was compared with national guidelines, as well as with the previous results and analyzed depending on where surveillance was conducted (general practitioner or outpatient clinic).

RESULTS

Adherence to surveillance was higher when performed by oncologists compared to general practitioners with an odds ratio (OR), 6.03 (95%CI: 3.41-10.67, P = .001). Compared with the previous study, adherence to surveillance was significantly higher in the later cohort with an OR = 4.55 (95%CI: 2.50-8.33, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that the implementation of a personalized surveillance schedule improves adherence to recommendations and that awareness can be increased with this simple measure.

A systematic review of patient perspectives on surveillance after colorectal cancer treatment

PURPOSE

Surveillance after colorectal cancer (CRC) treatment is routine, but intensive follow-up may offer little-to-no overall survival benefit. Given the growing population of CRC survivors, we aimed to systematically evaluate the literature for the patient perspective on two questions: (1) How do CRC patients perceive routine surveillance following curative treatment and what do they expect to gain from their surveillance testing or visits? (2) Which providers (specialists, nursing, primary care) are preferred by CRC survivors to guide post-treatment surveillance?

METHODS

Systematic searches of PubMed MEDLINE, Embase, the CENTRAL Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were conducted. Studies were screened for inclusion by two reviewers, with discrepancies adjudicated by a third reviewer. Data were abstracted and evaluated utilizing validated reporting tools (CONSORT, STROBE, CASP) appropriate to study design.

RESULTS

Citations (3691) were screened, 91 full-text articles reviewed, and 23 studies included in the final review: 15 quantitative and 8 qualitative. Overall, 12 studies indicated CRC patients perceive routine surveillance positively, expecting to gain reassurance of continued disease suppression. Negative perceptions described in six studies included anxiety and dissatisfaction related to quality of life or psychosocial issues during follow-up. Although 5 studies supported specialist-led care, 9 studies indicated patient willingness to have follow-up with non-specialist providers (primary care or nursing).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients' perceptions of follow-up after CRC are predominantly positive, although unmet needs included psychosocial support and quality of life.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Survivors perceived follow-up as reassuring, however, surveillance care should be more informative and focused on survivor-specific needs.

Barriers and facilitators to implementing continuous quality improvement programs in colonoscopy services: a mixed methods systematic review

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Continuous quality improvement (CQI) programs may result in quality of care and outcome improvement. However, the implementation of such programs has proven to be very challenging. This mixed methods systematic review identifies barriers and facilitators pertaining to the implementation of CQI programs in colonoscopy services and how they relate to endoscopists, nurses, managers, and patients.

METHODS

We developed a search strategy adapted to 15 databases. Studies had to report on the implementation of a CQI intervention and identified barriers or facilitators relating to any of the four groups of actors directly concerned by the provision of colonoscopies. The quality of the selected studies was assessed and findings were extracted, categorized, and synthesized using a generic extraction grid customized through an iterative process.

RESULTS

We extracted 99 findings from the 15 selected publications. Although involving all actors is the most cited factor, the literature mainly focuses on the facilitators and barriers associated with the endoscopists' perspective. The most reported facilitators to CQI implementation are perception of feasibility, adoption of a formative approach, training and education, confidentiality, and assessing a limited number of quality indicators. Receptive attitudes, a sense of ownership and perceptions of positive impacts also facilitate the implementation. Finally, an organizational environment conducive to quality improvement has to be inclusive of all user groups, explicitly supportive, and provide appropriate resources.

CONCLUSION

Our findings corroborate the current models of adoption of innovations. However, a significant knowledge gap remains with respect to barriers and facilitators pertaining to nurses, patients, and managers.

A Formative Study of Colon Cancer Surveillance Care: Implications for Survivor-Centered Interventions

Colon cancer is one of the most commonly diagnosed cancers in the United States, and an increasing number of survivors has underscored the need for improved colon cancer surveillance care quality. Post-treatment surveillance includes follow-up care visits and tests as well as psychosocial support and lifestyle counseling. This formative study explored the individual, interpersonal, and organizational-level factors related to adherence to surveillance care guidelines to identify modifiable factors for potential educational intervention strategies. A convenience sample of 22 survivors (12 women and 10 men) from two cancer centers were recruited to participate in focus groups or key informant telephone interviews to explore their experiences with care after completing treatment and complete a brief survey. Content analysis was used to identify themes. Results confirmed that survivors navigated a complex surveillance care schedule and described a strong trust in their health care providers that guided their follow-up care experiences. Participants defined the terms "survivorship" and "follow-up" in a variety of different ways. Individual-level themes critical to survivors' experiences included having a positive attitude, relying on one's faith, and coping with fears. Interpersonal-level themes centered around interactions and communication with family and health care providers in follow-up care. While organizational-level factors were highlighted infrequently, participants rated office reminder systems and communication among their multiple providers as valuable. Educational interventions capitalizing on survivors' connections with their physicians and focusing on preparing survivors for what to expect in the next phase of their cancer experience, could be beneficial at the end of treatment to activate survivors for the transition to the post-treatment period.

The impact of osteopontin on prognosis and clinicopathology of colorectal cancer patients: a systematic meta-analysis

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most frequent malignant neoplasms worldwide. Up to now, no biomarker has been used to predict the prognosis and surveillance of patients with CRC. Recently, the association between osteopontin (OPN) overexpression and the prognosis of CRC was investigated widely, but the results were inconsistent. Therefore, the aim of present meta-analysis was to assess the prognostic effect of osteopontin in patients with CRC. PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus and Chinese Medical Database were systematically searched. A total of 15 studies containing 1698 patients were included in our meta-analysis. The pooled data of studies showed that high OPN expression was significantly associated with high tumor grades (OR = 2.24, 95% CI 1.55–3.23), lymph node metastasis (OR = 2.36, 95% CI 1.71–3.26) and tumor distant metastasis (OR = 2.38, 95% CI 1.01–5.60). Moreover, high OPN expression was significantly associated with the 2-year (HR 1.97, 95% CI 1.30–3.00), 3-year (HR 1.82, 95% CI 1.24–2.68), 5 year (HR 1.53, 95% CI 1.28–1.82) survival rates and overall survival (OS, HR 1.70, 95% CI 1.12–2.60), respectively. These results indicated that OPN could serve as a prognostic biomarker and as a potential therapeutic target for CRC.

How can diagnostic assessment programs be implemented to enhance inter-professional collaborative care for cancer?

BACKGROUND

Inter-professional collaborative care (ICC) for cancer leads to multiple system, organizational, professional, and patient benefits, but is limited by numerous challenges. Empirical research on interventions that promote or enable ICC is sparse so guidance on how to achieve ICC is lacking. Research shows that ICC for diagnosis could be improved. Diagnostic assessment programs (DAPs) appear to be a promising model for enabling ICC. The purpose of this study was to explore how DAP structure and function enable ICC, and whether that may be associated with organizational and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

A case study approach will be used to explore ICC among eight DAPs that vary by type of cancer (lung, breast), academic status, and geographic region. To describe DAP function and outcomes, and gather information that will enable costing, recommendations expressed in DAP standards and clinical guidelines will be assessed through retrospective observational study. Data will be acquired from databases maintained by participating DAPs and the provincial cancer agency, and confirmed by and supplemented with review of medical records. We will conduct a pilot study to explore the feasibility of estimating the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio using person-level data from medical records and other sources. Interviews will be conducted with health professionals, staff, and referring physicians from each DAP to learn about barriers and facilitators of ICC. Qualitative methods based on a grounded approach will be used to guide sampling, data collection and analysis.

DISCUSSION

Findings may reveal opportunities for unique structures, interventions or tools that enable ICC that could be developed, implemented, and evaluated through future research. This information will serve as a formative needs assessment to identify the nature of ongoing or required improvements, which can be directly used by our decision maker collaborators, and as a framework by policy makers, cancer system managers, and DAP managers elsewhere to strategically plan for and implement diagnostic cancer services.

Surveillance instructions and knowledge among African American colorectal cancer survivors

INTRODUCTION

African Americans are less likely than other racial/ethnic groups to receive appropriate surveillance, an important component of care to achieve better long-term outcomes and well-being after colorectal cancer (CRC) treatment. This study explored survivors' understanding of surveillance instructions and purpose.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Interviews with 60 African American CRC survivors were recorded and transcribed. Compliance with surveillance guidelines was defined by disease stage and self-reported tests. Four coders (blind to compliance status) independently reviewed transcripts. Frequency of themes was reported by compliance status.

RESULTS

Survivors (4 to 6 years postdiagnosis; women, 57%; age ≥ 65 years, 60%; rural location, 57%; early-stage disease, 62%) were 48% noncompliant. Most survivors reported receiving surveillance instructions from providers (compliant, 80%; noncompliant, 76%). There was variation in recommended frequency of procedures (eg, every 3 or 12 months) and in importance of surveillance stressed by physicians. Most survivors understood the need for follow-up (compliant, 87%; noncompliant, 79%). Lack of knowledge of/interest in surveillance was more common among noncompliant individuals (compliant, 32%; noncompliant, 52%).

CONCLUSION

Patients' limited understanding about the importance of CRC surveillance and procedures may negatively affect compliance with recommendations in African American CRC survivors. Clear and enhanced communications about post-treatment recommendations in this population are warranted.

Receipt of recommended surveillance among colorectal cancer survivors: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Regular surveillance decreases the risk of recurrent cancer in colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors. However, studies suggest that receipt of follow-up tests is not consistent with guidelines. This systematic review aimed to: (1) examine receipt of recommended post-treatment surveillance tests and procedures among CRC survivors, including adherence to established guidelines, and (2) identify correlates of CRC surveillance.

METHODS

Systematic searches of Medline, PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL Plus, and Scopus databases were conducted using terms adapted for each database's keywords and subject headings. Studies were screened for inclusion using a three-step process: (1) lead author reviewed abstracts of all eligible studies; (2) coauthors reviewed random 5 % samples of abstracts; and (3) two sets of coauthors reviewed all "maybe" abstracts. Discrepancies were adjudicated through discussion.

RESULTS

Thirty-four studies are included in the review. Overall adherence ranged from 12 to 87 %. Within the initial 12 to 18 months post-treatment, adherence to recommended office visits was 93 %. Adherence ranged from 78 to 98 % for physical exams, 18-61 % for colonoscopy, and 17-71 % for carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) testing. By 2 to 3 years post-treatment, cumulative adherence ranged from 70 to 88 % for office visits, 89-93 % for physical exams, 49-94 % for colonoscopy, and 7-79 % for CEA testing. Between 18 and 28 % of CRC survivors received greater than recommended overall surveillance; overuse of physical exams (42 %), colonoscopy (24-76 %), and metastatic disease testing (1-29 %) was also prevalent. Studies of correlates of CRC surveillance focused on sociodemographic and disease/treatment characteristics, and patterns of association were inconsistent across studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Deviation from surveillance recommendations includes both under- and overuse. Examination of modifiable determinants is needed to inform interventions targeting appropriate and timely receipt of recommended surveillance.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Among CRC survivors, it remains unclear what modifiable psychosocial factors are associated with the observed under- and overuse of surveillance. Understanding and intervening with these psychosocial factors is critical to improving adherence to guideline-recommended surveillance and thereby reducing mortality among this group of survivors.

Large variation between hospitals in follow-up for colorectal cancer in southern Netherlands

PURPOSE

The aims of the study were to describe the follow-up of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients in southern Netherlands and examine their overall and disease-free survival.

METHODS

Patients newly diagnosed with CRC in 2003-2005 and 2008 with a survival of at least 1 year after diagnosis and recorded in the retrospective Eindhoven Cancer Registry were included (n = 579). Follow-up was defined as at least one liver imaging and at least two carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) measurements. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to assess determinants of follow-up. Proportions of patients undergoing colonoscopy, CEA measurements and liver and chest imaging were calculated. Overall and disease-free survival were calculated.

RESULTS

Patients ≥75 years (odds ratio (OR) 0.5 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.3-0.7)) were less likely to receive follow-up, contrasting patients <50 years (OR 3.1 (95% CI 1.3-7.4)). In 2008, follow-up intensity increased (OR 2.3 (95% CI 1.2-4.3)), especially for liver imaging and CEA measurements. There were large differences in follow-up intensity and activities between hospitals, which were unaffected by comorbidity: ranges for colonoscopy 15-73 %, CEA measurement 46-91 % and imaging of the liver 22-70 % between hospitals. No effect of follow-up intensity was found on 5-year disease-free survival for patients aged <75 years (64 vs. 68 %; p = 0.6). Similarly, no effect of follow-up intensity on 5-year overall survival was found in these patients (77 vs. 82 %; p = 0.07).

CONCLUSION

Large variation in follow-up was found for patients with CRC, mainly declining with age and hospital of follow-up. Over time, follow-up became more intensive, especially with respect to liver imaging and CEA measurements. However, follow-up consisting of at least one liver imaging and at least two CEA measurements did not improve overall and disease-free survival.

Surveillance after resection for colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Professional societies recommend posttreatment surveillance for colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors. This study describes the use of surveillance over time, with a particular focus on racial/ethnic disparities, and also examines the role of area characteristics, such as capacity for CRC screening, on surveillance.

METHODS

Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data were used to identify individuals aged 66 to 85 years who were diagnosed with CRC from 1993 to 2005 and treated with surgery. The study examined factors associated with subsequent receipt of a colonoscopy, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) testing, primary care (PC) visits, and a composite measure of overall surveillance.

RESULTS

Of eligible subjects, 61.0% had a colonoscopy, 68.0% had CEA testing, 77.1% had PC visits, and 43.0% received overall surveillance. After adjustment, blacks were less likely than whites to undergo colonoscopy (odds ratio [OR] 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.69-0.83) and to receive CEA testing and overall surveillance, whereas white/Hispanic rates did not differ. Rates for all outcomes increased from 1993 to 2005, but black/white disparities remained. Individuals in areas with greatest capacity for CRC screening were more likely (OR = 1.09, 95% CI = 1.02-1.18) to receive colonoscopy, and those in areas with the greatest percentage of blacks were less likely (OR = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.83-0.95) to receive colonoscopy. Those living in areas with shortage of PC were less likely to receive PC visits (OR = 0.55, 95% CI = 0.48-0.64) and overall surveillance (OR = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.71-0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

Many CRC survivors do not get recommended surveillance, and black/white disparities in rates of surveillance have not improved. Characteristics of the area where an individual lives contribute to the use of surveillance.

Impact of a dedicated cancer center surveillance program on guideline adherence for patients with stage II and III colorectal cancer

Surveillance after curative treatment for stage II/III colorectal cancer identifies surgically resectable disease and improves survival. We evaluated adherence to guidelines and outcomes for 408 patients enrolled in an innovative follow-up program at our cancer center. We found that a dedicated intensive surveillance program can impact adherence to guidelines for patients with colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND

Our aims were to evaluate adherence to guidelines on colorectal cancer surveillance and outcomes for patients enrolled in an innovative follow-up program at our cancer center.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted at the Cross Cancer Institute in Edmonton, Canada. Patients with stage II/III colorectal cancer who completed treatment and who entered into the program from December 1, 2007, to December 31, 2009, were identified. The minimum standard of care follow-up was defined as (1) carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) testing every 120 days for 3 years; (2) computed tomography of chest, abdomen, and pelvis at 10 to 14 months and 22 to 26 months after surgery; and (3) colonoscopy within 14 months of surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 408 patients met inclusion criteria. Two hundred (49.0%) patients were adherent to all 3 components of surveillance. Among all patients, 57 (14.0%) were nonadherent to computed tomography imaging, 135 (33.1%) were nonadherent to colonoscopy, and 96 (23.5%) were nonadherent to CEA testing. Determinants of nonadherence are described. In total, 192 (47.2%) patients had an abnormal surveillance investigation that led to 307 follow-up events. After a median of 1.6 years, 69 (16.9%) patients had documented tumor recurrence. Sixty-one (88.4%) of these 69 patients had recurrence diagnosed via surveillance, and 31 (44.9%) patients were considered potentially resectable.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrated an improvement in CEA testing since the program began; however, adherence rates for all components are not yet optimal. Alterations to surveillance program management are outlined. Further investigation will determine whether intense follow-up improves patient survival locally.

Integrating a prospective surveillance model for rehabilitation into breast cancer survivorship care

At some point during or after treatment, breast cancer may be considered a chronic illness, presenting many choices for managing the disease, its adverse treatment-related effects, other medical comorbidities as well as the biobehavioral burden of having a life-threatening disease, even for individuals with potentially curable breast cancer. Health care models, such as the chronic care model, the medical home, and the shared care model, provide a context for building survivorship health care models. Goals and characteristics of recently proposed shared care models for cancer survivorship health care delivery closely align with the goals and concepts of the prospective surveillance model (PSM) proposed elsewhere in this supplement to the journal Cancer. Given these similarities, along with the growth and expansion of survivorship care models and impending mandates for delivery, there is merit to considering how implementation of the PSM can be integrated with models of survivorship care delivery. The PSM model will likely face many similar challenges and barriers that have impeded widespread dissemination of other survivorship models of care. There exist opportunities to integrate lessons learned as well as to align efforts to achieve greater impact on the shared goal of improving health outcomes for breast cancer survivors.

Information needs across the colorectal cancer care continuum: scoping the literature

Because cancer care requires a multifaceted approach, providing useful and timely information to people with colorectal cancer may be fragmented and inconsistent. Our interest was in examining what has and has not captured the attention of researchers speaking to the information needs of people with colorectal cancer. We followed Arksey and O'Malley's framework for the methodology of scoping review. Focusing solely on colorectal cancer, we analysed 239 articles to get a picture of which information needs and sources of information, as well as the timing of providing information, were attended to. Treatment-related information received the most mentions (26%). Healthcare professionals (49%) were mentioned as the most likely source of information. Among articles focused on one stage of the care continuum, post-treatment (survivorship) received the most attention (16%). Only 27% of the articles consulted people with colorectal cancer and few attended to diet/nutrition and bowel management. This study examined the numerical representation of issues to which researchers attend, not the quality of the mentions. We ponder, however, on the relationship between the in/frequency of mentions and the actual information needs of people with colorectal cancer as well as the availability, sources and timing of information.

Adherence to national guidelines for surveillance after curative resection of nonmetastatic colon and rectum cancer: a survey among Norwegian gastrointestinal surgeons

AIM

National guidelines recommend enrollment of patients in surveillance programmes following curative resection of colorectal carcinoma (CRC) in order to detect recurrence or distant metastasis at an asymptomatic/early stage when secondary curative treatment can be offered. Little is known about surgeons' adherence to such guidelines. In this national survey we analyse adherence and attitudes to postoperative follow up among Norwegian gastrointestinal surgeons involved in the care of patients with CRC.

METHOD

We performed a nationwide survey of all hospitals performing surgery for colon and/or rectum cancer. The presence of a surveillance programme, the type of programme, adherence to national guidelines or report on any deviation thereof, location of follow up at the hospital or with a general practitioner (GPs) and the estimated annual volume of surgery were queried through mail and telephone.

RESULTS

All hospitals (n=41) performing colorectal surgery responded, of which 25 (61%) conducted postoperative follow up by surgeons in the hospital outpatient clinics, four (10%) carried out follow up with a combination of hospital outpatient visits and visits to GPs, and 12 (29%) referred surveillance to the GP alone. For total reported patient numbers, almost two-thirds (60%) received surveillance according to national recommendations through outpatient visits with the surgeon or GP, while one-third (37%) were subject to other alternative routines. A small number (2%) received informal 'ad hoc' surveillance only. More liberal use of imaging outside guideline recommendations was reported for rectal cancer patients, while colon cancer patients treated in larger hospitals were more likely to be referred for GP surveillance.

CONCLUSION

All hospitals reported having a strategy for surveillance after surgery for colon and rectal cancer, but there was considerable variance in strategy. A scientific audit of the true level of compliance, effectiveness and cost-benefit is warranted at a national level.

Concordance with ASCO guidelines for surveillance after colorectal cancer treatment: a population-based analysis

PURPOSE

Intensive surveillance after curative treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC) is associated with improved overall survival. This study examined concordance with the 2005 ASCO surveillance guidelines at the population level.

METHODS

A cohort of 250 patients diagnosed with stage II or III CRC in 2004 and alive 42 months after diagnosis was identified from health administrative data in Manitoba, Canada. Colonoscopy, liver imaging, and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) testing were assessed over 3 years. Guidelines were met if patients had at least one colonoscopy in 3 years and at least one liver imaging test and three CEA tests annually. Multivariate logistic regression assessed the effect of patient and physician characteristics and disease and treatment factors on guideline concordance.

RESULTS

Guidelines for colonoscopy, liver imaging, and CEA were met by 80.4%, 47.2%, and 22% of patients, respectively. Guideline concordance for colonoscopy was predicted by annual contact with a surgeon, higher income, and the diagnosis of colon (rather than rectal) cancer. Adherence was lower in those older than 70 years and with higher comorbidity. For liver imaging, significant predictors were annual contact with an oncologist, receipt of chemotherapy, and diagnosis of colon cancer. Concordance with CEA guidelines was higher with annual contact with an oncologist and high levels of family physician contact, and lower in urban residents, in those older than 70, and in those with stage II disease.

CONCLUSION

Completion of recommended liver imaging and CEA testing fall well below guidelines in Manitoba, whereas colonoscopy is better provided. Addressing this gap should improve outcomes for CRC survivors.

How can we improve cancer care? A review of interprofessional collaboration models and their use in clinical management

BACKGROUND

Multimodal cancer care requires collaboration among different professionals in various settings. Practice guidelines provide little direction on how this can best be achieved. Research shows that collaborative cancer management is limited, and challenged by numerous issues. The purpose of this research was to describe conceptual models of collaboration, and analyze how they have been applied in the clinical management of cancer patients.

METHODS

A review of the literature was performed using a two-phase meta-narrative approach. The first phase involved searching for conceptual models of collaboration. Their components and limitations were summarized. The second phase involved targeted searching for empirical research on evaluation of these concepts in the clinical management of cancer patients. Data on study objective, design, and findings were tabulated, and then summarized according to collaborative model and phase of clinical care to identify topics warranting further research.

RESULTS

Conceptual models for teamwork, interprofessional collaboration, integrated care delivery, interorganizational collaboration, continuity of care, and case management were described. All concepts involve two or more health care professionals that share patient care goals and interact on a continuum from consultative to integrative, varying according to extent and nature of interaction, degree to which decision making is shared, and the scope of patient management (medical versus holistic). Determinants of positive objective and subjective patient, team and organizational outcomes common across models included system or organizational support, team structure and traits, and team processes. Twenty-two studies conducted in ten countries examining these concepts for cancer care were identified. Two were based on an explicit model of collaboration. Many health professionals function through parallel or consultative models of care and are not well integrated. Few interventions or strategies have been applied to promote models that support collaboration.

CONCLUSIONS

Ongoing development, implementation and evaluation of collaborative cancer management, in the context of both practice and research, would benefit from systematic planning and operationalization. Such an approach is likely to improve patient, professional and organizational outcomes, and contribute to a collective understanding of collaborative cancer care.

Surveillance after curative resection of colorectal cancer

Surgical resection is the primary treatment modality for patients with localized colorectal cancer, but unfortunately one-third to one-half of these patients will develop a recurrence. If detected early, recurrent disease may be amenable to surgical resection and this provides the rationale for a follow-up strategy in patients with resected colorectal cancer. Despite eight published randomized controlled trials and six published systematic reviews evaluating different follow-up strategies, there is still no consensus as to the appropriateness of follow-up in colorectal cancer patients. In the present article the authors explore the reasons behind the controversy and the arguments used to support each side. They outline the current published guidelines and the data to support these recommendations, including the use of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels, liver imaging, and colonoscopy. Finally, they speculate on the future developments that may impact on this debate.

Clinical significance of the upregulated osteopontin mRNA expression in human colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

Osteopontin (OPN) is a phosphorylated glycoprotein which is associated with tumor progression, development, and metastasis. Recently, it has been reported that OPN is highly upregulated in a variety of human malignancies. The aim of this study is to investigate the clinical significance of OPN mRNA expression in colorectal cancer (CRC).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Conventional reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and Western blot assays were performed to detect the expression of OPN mRNA and protein in human CRC cell lines and normal cell line. Real-time quantitative RT-PCR assay was performed to analyze the expression of OPN mRNA in 82 CRC tissue samples and corresponding non-tumor tissues. Immunohistochemistry was also performed to detect the expression of OPN protein in above tissues. Finally, the correlation between the status of OPN mRNA expression and clinicopathological factors and clinical outcome was evaluated.

RESULTS

Compared with normal human intestinal epithelial cell line, human CRC cell lines showed high level of OPN gene expression at both transcriptional and translational levels. Moreover, the results of real-time quantitative RT-PCR and immunohistochemistry showed that the expression levels of OPN mRNA and protein in tumor tissues were significantly higher than those in the corresponding non-tumor tissues (P < 0.001). The expression level of OPN mRNA was significantly correlated with lymph node metastasis, lymphatic or venous invasion, and TNM stage (P = 0.0033, 0.0061, 0.0008, and 0.0012, respectively). Moreover, we also observed that the disease-free and overall survival rates in patients with high OPN mRNA expression were significantly shorter than those in patients with low OPN mRNA expression (P = 0.0047 and 0.0125). Additionally, the status of OPN mRNA expression was an independent prognostic factor for the prognosis of CRC patients (P = 0.008; RR, 2.775; 95% confidence interval, 2.334-3.811).

CONCLUSION

OPN might play an important role in CRC progression and the status of OPN mRNA expression could be a novel prognostic molecular marker for CRC patients.

Association of health beliefs and colonoscopy use among survivors of colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVES

Clinical practice guidelines recommend ongoing testing (surveillance) for colorectal cancer survivors because they remain at risk for both local recurrences and second primary tumors. However, survivors often do not receive colorectal cancer surveillance. We used the Health Belief Model (HBM) to identify health beliefs that predict intentions to obtain routine colonoscopies among colorectal cancer survivors.

METHODS

We completed telephone interviews with 277 colorectal cancer survivors who were diagnosed 4 years earlier, between 2003 and 2005, in North Carolina. The interview measured health beliefs, past preventive behaviors, and intentions to have a routine colonoscopy in the next 5 years.

RESULTS

In bivariate analyses, most HBM constructs were associated with intentions. In multivariable analyses, greater perceived likelihood of colorectal cancer (OR = 2.00, 95% CI = 1.16-3.44) was associated with greater intention to have a colonoscopy. Survivors who already had a colonoscopy since diagnosis also had greater intentions of having a colonoscopy in the future (OR = 9.47, 95% CI = 2.08-43.16).

CONCLUSIONS

Perceived likelihood of colorectal cancer is an important target for further study and intervention to increase colorectal cancer surveillance among survivors. Other health beliefs were unrelated to intentions, suggesting that the health beliefs of colorectal cancer survivors and asymptomatic adults may differ due to the experience of cancer.