Protocol for Care After Lymphoma (CALy) trial: a phase II pilot randomised controlled trial of a lymphoma nurse-led model of survivorship care

Lived Experiences of Young Adults With Lymphoma During Acute Survivorship

BACKGROUND

Hodgkin lymphoma and non-Hodgkin lymphoma are hematologic malignancies of the lymphatic system with increased prevalence in young adults. Numerous studies have examined the health-related quality of life dimensions in young adults with lymphoma; yet, limited research has investigated the experiences of this population.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to explore the lived experiences of young adults with Hodgkin lymphoma and non-Hodgkin lymphoma ( n = 8) receiving acute treatment from one National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Center in the Northeastern United States.

METHODS

A qualitative interpretive phenomenological study design and method was applied to explore the lived experiences of young adults with lymphoma during acute survivorship.

RESULTS

The participants lived experiences were shaped by the diagnostic challenges and impediments of cancer and lymphoma in young adults. Through postdiagnosis, they were determined to safeguard parents and close family members from the burden of cancer. The bonds between medical oncologists and nurses offered the participants a dynamic structure to endure acute survivorship.

CONCLUSION

Cancer was challenging to diagnose in this sample of young adults with lymphoma. The presence of nurses was shown to be deeply impactful for young adults with lymphoma. More research is necessary to understand the experiences of young adults with lymphoma through extended or long-term survivorship.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Healthcare providers require additional education regarding the diagnostic guidelines in young adult patients with lymphoma. This study underscores the importance of well-defined and structured postdiagnosis survivorship care in young adults with lymphoma.

Long-Term Follow-Up of Classical Hodgkin Lymphoma and Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma Survivors: Aims and Methodological Approach for Fondazione Italiana Linfomi Systematic Reviews

Simple Summary

In 2019, the Fondazione Italiana Linfomi research team proposed a new project to summarize the evidence on late sequelae after treatment of classical Hodgkin lymphoma and diffuse large B cell lymphoma in long-term survivors (>5 years free of disease). Six systematic reviews were conducted. Clinical research questions focused on the incidence of late toxicities, comparison of toxicities with different chemotherapies, radiotherapies and autologous stem-cell transplantation, and evidence on early detection and long-term follow-up of late sequelae. The six reviews investigated the late impact of treatment on cardiological diseases, secondary neoplasms, metabolic and endocrine, neurological and psychological disorders, preservation of fertility and reproductive status, and the effect of lifestyle and nutrition. The literature search was conducted on Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases up to 2020. This project summarized current evidence in order to see which course of action was best applicable for the clinical management of long-term survivors after Hodgkin lymphoma and diffuse large B cell lymphoma, and highlighted the gaps in the field.

Abstract

Advances in diagnosis and treatment of hematological malignancies has boosted attention on optimal follow-up care of survivors after cancer. To collect evidence that could inform the development of an optimal model for Italian hematology centers and the scientific community, Fondazione Italiana Linfomi (FIL) commissioned an analysis of the international follow-up approaches for long-term survivors after classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) or diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). FIL set up multidisciplinary teams, representing all different skills relevant for cancer survivors. They conducted a series of systematic reviews focused on three main aspects: incidence of long-term toxicity; comparison of old or standard therapies and more recent ones; and evidence on specific follow-up approaches. The teams applied this framework to cardiological, endocrine-metabolic, neurological/cognitive, and psychological disorders, secondary cancers, fertility preservation, and lifestyles. Each team conducted comprehensive literature searches on PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases up to 2020. Screening followed the PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews. The reviews report the results of this wide project covering the main areas of late toxicity and conditions in the long-term survival of cHL and DLBCL patients and their follow-up. From a clinical point of view, the series confirmed that the evidence on follow-up tended to focus on solid tumors with scant evidence on hematological malignancies.

Cultural adaptation and validation of the Survivor Unmet Needs Survey Short-Form among cancer patients in China

AIM

Cancer patients have long been found to have multiple types of unmet needs during their survivorship. Composite psychological instruments are essential for measuring the unmet needs of cancer patients. The objective of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Short-Form Survivor Unmet Needs Survey (SF-SUNS)-Chinese version.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional survey.

METHODS

The Chinese version was developed using the standard Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) translation methodology and 428 Chinese cancer patients participated in the survey between 2016-2017. Inter-rater reliability, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were calculated.

RESULTS

Confirmatory factor analysis supported the four-factor structure with good model fit. Cronbach's alpha of 0.894 for the overall scale and intra-class correlation coefficients (0.869-0.884) indicated that reliability was satisfactory. The EFA extracted four factors with eigenvalues greater than 1 and these factors explained 50.68% of the total variance. The Chinese version of SF-SUNS was confirmed to have the potential to become a useful and valid instrument. It could contribute to the assessment of unmet needs among Chinese cancer patients with accuracy and with respect to Chinese culture and context. This measurement of unmet needs may help promote cancer management and nursing quality. Clinical nurses and researchers could use the simple assessment tool to target the individual needs of Chinese cancer patients and then provide more personalized care efficiently.

A Meta-Ethnography of the Experiences of Adults with Lymphoma During Acute and Chronic Survivorship

OBJECTIVES

The acute and chronic phases of cancer survivorship are the periods of treatment, post-treatment, and early remission. During acute and chronic survivorship, adults with lymphoma have reported both positive and negative changes in health-related quality of life. This meta-ethnography aims to appraise the experiences of adults with lymphoma at the acute and chronic survivorship phases.

DATA SOURCES

This qualitative review used the established meta-ethnography framework from Noblit and Hare and is outlined following the meta-ethnography reporting guidance (eMERGe). A systematic literature search using four unique databases was completed, including the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PubMed, Ovid Emcare, and Clarivate Web of Science.

CONCLUSION

In total, nine research studies were included in this review. Study characteristics and sample evidence were extracted from the included studies to produce the synthesis. The review and synthesis formed three main themes and six subthemes that reflect the challenges of cancer treatment and post-treatment, the communication and support from others, and how lymphoma patients reframe and reprioritize during and following treatment.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

This meta-ethnography provides a comprehensive analysis of adults' experiences with lymphoma at the acute and chronic survivorship phases. Several approaches for the management and care of lymphoma patients were found in this review, including integrating patient support groups from diagnosis through post-treatment, tailored psychological health care services, personalized care and delivery pathways at post-treatment, and the promotion of strategies to cope with cancer in remission. Additional research should examine younger and older adults to discover age-related issues in lymphoma populations in addition to disparities among minority patients with lymphoma and those from low socioeconomic backgrounds.

Management of lymphoma survivor patients in Italy: an evaluation by Fondazione Italiana Linfomi

Several outpatient models for the follow-up of cancer survivors have been developed worldwide. A multidisciplinary approach is often necessary to guarantee the best monitoring of long-term toxicities. Guidelines also indicate a close education on healthy lifestyles. In this context, we have analyzed the Italian follow-up modalities of lymphoma survivors, with the aim to have a starting line to hypothesize and plan the best model for Italian hematology centers.

Follow-up strategies following completion of primary cancer treatment in adult cancer survivors

BACKGROUND

Most cancer survivors receive follow-up care after completion of treatment with the primary aim of detecting recurrence. Traditional follow-up consisting of fixed visits to a cancer specialist for examinations and tests are expensive and may be burdensome for the patient. Follow-up strategies involving non-specialist care providers, different intensity of procedures, or addition of survivorship care packages have been developed and tested, however their effectiveness remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review is to compare the effect of different follow-up strategies in adult cancer survivors, following completion of primary cancer treatment, on the primary outcomes of overall survival and time to detection of recurrence. Secondary outcomes are health-related quality of life, anxiety (including fear of recurrence), depression and cost.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, four other databases and two trials registries on 11 December 2018 together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised trials comparing different follow-up strategies for adult cancer survivors following completion of curatively-intended primary cancer treatment, which included at least one of the outcomes listed above. We compared the effectiveness of: 1) non-specialist-led follow-up (i.e. general practitioner (GP)-led, nurse-led, patient-initiated or shared care) versus specialist-led follow-up; 2) less intensive versus more intensive follow-up (based on clinical visits, examinations and diagnostic procedures) and 3) follow-up integrating additional care components relevant for detection of recurrence (e.g. patient symptom education or monitoring, or survivorship care plans) versus usual care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological guidelines by Cochrane and Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC). We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. For each comparison, we present synthesised findings for overall survival and time to detection of recurrence as hazard ratios (HR) and for health-related quality of life, anxiety and depression as mean differences (MD), with 95% confidence intervals (CI). When meta-analysis was not possible, we reported the results from individual studies. For survival and recurrence, we used meta-regression analysis where possible to investigate whether the effects varied with regards to cancer site, publication year and study quality.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 53 trials involving 20,832 participants across 12 cancer sites and 15 countries, mainly in Europe, North America and Australia. All the studies were carried out in either a hospital or general practice setting. Seventeen studies compared non-specialist-led follow-up with specialist-led follow-up, 24 studies compared intensity of follow-up and 12 studies compared patient symptom education or monitoring, or survivorship care plans with usual care. Risk of bias was generally low or unclear in most of the studies, with a higher risk of bias in the smaller trials. Non-specialist-led follow-up compared with specialist-led follow-up It is uncertain how this strategy affects overall survival (HR 1.21, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.15; 2 studies; 603 participants), time to detection of recurrence (4 studies, 1691 participants) or cost (8 studies, 1756 participants) because the certainty of the evidence is very low. Non-specialist- versus specialist-led follow up may make little or no difference to health-related quality of life at 12 months (MD 1.06, 95% CI -1.83 to 3.95; 4 studies; 605 participants; low-certainty evidence); and probably makes little or no difference to anxiety at 12 months (MD -0.03, 95% CI -0.73 to 0.67; 5 studies; 1266 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We are more certain that it has little or no effect on depression at 12 months (MD 0.03, 95% CI -0.35 to 0.42; 5 studies; 1266 participants; high-certainty evidence). Less intensive follow-up compared with more intensive follow-up Less intensive versus more intensive follow-up may make little or no difference to overall survival (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.14; 13 studies; 10,726 participants; low-certainty evidence) and probably increases time to detection of recurrence (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.92; 12 studies; 11,276 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Meta-regression analysis showed little or no difference in the intervention effects by cancer site, publication year or study quality. It is uncertain whether this strategy has an effect on health-related quality of life (3 studies, 2742 participants), anxiety (1 study, 180 participants) or cost (6 studies, 1412 participants) because the certainty of evidence is very low. None of the studies reported on depression. Follow-up strategies integrating additional patient symptom education or monitoring, or survivorship care plans compared with usual care: None of the studies reported on overall survival or time to detection of recurrence. It is uncertain whether this strategy makes a difference to health-related quality of life (12 studies, 2846 participants), anxiety (1 study, 470 participants), depression (8 studies, 2351 participants) or cost (1 studies, 408 participants), as the certainty of evidence is very low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence regarding the effectiveness of the different follow-up strategies varies substantially. Less intensive follow-up may make little or no difference to overall survival but probably delays detection of recurrence. However, as we did not analyse the two outcomes together, we cannot make direct conclusions about the effect of interventions on survival after detection of recurrence. The effects of non-specialist-led follow-up on survival and detection of recurrence, and how intensity of follow-up affects health-related quality of life, anxiety and depression, are uncertain. There was little evidence for the effects of follow-up integrating additional patient symptom education/monitoring and survivorship care plans.

Test-Retest Reliability of the Short-Form Survivor Unmet Needs Survey

Objective:

Reliable and valid needs assessment measures are important assessment tools in cancer survivorship care. A new 30-item short-form version of the Survivor Unmet Needs Survey (SF-SUNS) was developed and validated with cancer survivors, including hematology cancer survivors; however, test–retest reliability has not been established. The objective of this study was to assess the test–retest reliability of the SF-SUNS with a cohort of lymphoma survivors (n = 40).

Methods:

Test–retest reliability of the SF-SUNS was conducted at two time points: baseline (time 1) and 5 days later (time 2). Test–retest data were collected from lymphoma cancer survivors (n = 40) in a large tertiary cancer center in Western Australia. Intraclass correlation analyses compared data at time 1 (baseline) and time 2 (5 days later). Cronbach's alpha analyses were performed to assess the internal consistency at both time points.

Results:

The majority (23/30, 77%) of items achieved test–retest reliability scores 0.45–0.74 (fair to good). A high degree of overall internal consistency was demonstrated (time 1 = 0.92, time 2 = 0.95), with scores 0.65–0.94 across subscales for both time points.

Conclusions:

Mixed test–retest reliability of the SF-SUNS was established. Our results indicate the SF-SUNS is responsive to the changing needs of lymphoma cancer survivors. Routine use of cancer survivorship specific needs-based assessments is required in oncology care today. Nurses are well placed to administer these assessments and provide tailored information and resources. Further assessment of test–retest reliability in hematology and other cancer cohorts is warranted.