uality of life and experiences of sarcoma trajectories (the study): protocol for an international observational cohort study on diagnostic pathways of sarcoma patients

The prediagnostic general practitioner care of sarcoma patients: A real-world data study

BACKGROUND

Limited understanding exists regarding early sarcoma symptoms presented during general practitioner (GP) consultations. The study explores GP visit patterns and recorded diagnoses in the 12 months preceding sarcoma diagnosis.

METHODS

Sarcoma cases diagnosed from 2010 to 2020 were identified through the Netherlands Cancer Registry alongside general practice data. Sarcoma cases were age and gender matched to cancer-free controls (2:1 or 1:1 ratio).

RESULTS

A total of 787 individuals with soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) and 188 individuals with bone sarcoma (BS) were identified. There was a significant difference in monthly GP contacts from 4 months to the last month before STS diagnosis, and 2 months before BS diagnosis between cases and controls. Most prevalent diagnoses recorded by the GP for STS cases included musculoskeletal neoplasm (26.6%), uncomplicated hypertension (15.6%), and cystitis/other urinary infections (12.2%). For BS cases, musculoskeletal neoplasm (42.8%), knee symptoms/complaints (9.7%), and shoulder symptoms/complaints (9.7%) were most frequent.

CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION

A significant difference in GP contacts between cases and controls preceding sarcoma diagnosis. STS cases were predominantly diagnosed with nonspecific symptoms, whereas BS cases with diagnoses more suggestive of BS. Better understanding of the prediagnostic trajectory could aid GPs in early identification of sarcoma.

A Prospective Observational Cohort Study for Newly Diagnosed Osteosarcoma Patients in the UK: ICONIC Study Initial Results

There has been little change to the standard treatment for osteosarcoma (OS) over the last 25 years and there is an unmet need to identify new biomarkers and novel therapeutic approaches if outcomes are to improve. Furthermore, there is limited evidence on the impact of OS treatment on patient-reported outcomes (PROs). ICONIC (Improving Outcomes through Collaboration in Osteosarcoma; NCT04132895) is a prospective observational cohort study recruiting newly diagnosed OS patients across the United Kingdom (UK) with matched longitudinal collection of clinical, biological, and PRO data. During Stage 1, which assessed the feasibility of recruitment and data collection, 102 patients were recruited at 22 sites with representation from patient groups frequently excluded in OS studies, including patients over 50 years and those with less common primary sites. The feasibility of collecting clinical and biological samples, in addition to PRO data, has been established and there is ongoing analysis of these data as part of Stage 2. ICONIC will provide a unique, prospective cohort of newly diagnosed OS patients representative of the UK patient population, with fully annotated clinical outcomes linked to molecularly characterised biospecimens, allowing for comprehensive analyses to better understand biology and develop new biomarkers and novel therapeutic approaches.

Improving Diagnosis and Care for Patients With Sarcoma: Do Real-World General Practitioners Data and Prospective Data Collections Have a Place Next to Clinical Trials?

There has been growing interest in the use of real-world data (RWD) to address clinically and policy-relevant (research) questions that cannot be answered with data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) alone. This is, for example, the case in rare malignancies such as sarcomas as limited patient numbers pose challenges in conducting RCTs within feasible timeliness, a manageable number of collaborators, and statistical power. This narrative review explores the potential of RWD to generate real-world evidence (RWE) in sarcoma research, elucidating its application across different phases of the patient journey, from prediagnosis to the follow-up/survivorship phase. For instance, examining electronic health records (EHRs) from general practitioners (GPs) enables the exploration of consultation frequency and presenting symptoms in primary care before a sarcoma diagnosis. In addition, alternative study designs that integrate RWD with well-designed observational RCTs may offer relevant information on the effectiveness of clinical treatments. As, especially in cases of ultrarare sarcomas, it can be an extreme challenge to perform well-powered randomized prospective studies. Therefore, it is crucial to support the adaptation of novel study designs. Regarding the follow-up/survivorship phase, examining EHR from primary and secondary care can provide valuable insights into identifying the short- and long-term effects of treatment over an extended follow-up period. The utilization of RWD also comes with several challenges, including issues related to data quality and privacy, as described in this study. Notwithstanding these challenges, this study underscores the potential of RWD to bridge, at least partially, gaps between evidence and practice and holds promise in contributing to the improvement of sarcoma care.

Understanding quality of life's challenges in sarcoma patients: A mixed-methods study

PURPOSE

Sarcoma, a highly aggressive form of cancer, profoundly affects patients both physically and psychologically. This study aimed to assess sarcoma patients' health-related quality of life and explore their experiences of living with the disease and their specific care requirements.

METHODS

This research employed a convergent parallel mixed-methods design. Fifty-two sarcoma patients completed the European Portuguese version of the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire, and seven of them participated in semi-structured interviews. Descriptive measures, Cronbach alpha for internal consistency, t-teste-Anova and stepwise regression were employed in the quantitative analysis. Qualitative data was analysed thematically.

RESULTS

The most affected Quality of life (QoL) dimensions were role functioning and global health, areas of functioning that were also described as impacted in patients' experiences. Symptoms like insomnia, pain, and fatigue were frequently reported. Symptoms such as fatigue, pain, and financial difficulty explain QoL variance. No significant differences in QoL were found according to the different forms of treatment. Analysis of the interviews revealed three overarching themes: (1) disruption of daily life, (2) adaptation to life with sarcoma, and (3) the demand for more personalized care, allowing to gain a deeper understanding of living with sarcoma.

CONCLUSION

The results underscore the significance of delivering care that enhances the quality of life for sarcoma patients, addressing both their physical and psychosocial needs, and providing personalized support throughout all stages of the disease.

Psychosocial Aspects of Living Long Term with Advanced Cancer and Ongoing Systemic Treatment: A Scoping Review

(1) Background: Studies examining the psychosocial impact of living long term on systemic treatment in advanced cancer patients are scarce. This scoping review aimed to answer the research question “What has been reported about psychosocial factors among patients living with advanced cancer receiving life-long systemic treatment?”, by synthesizing psychosocial data, and evaluating the terminology used to address these patients; (2) Methods: This scoping review was conducted following the five stages of the framework of Arksey and O’Malley (2005); (3) Results: 141 articles published between 2000 and 2021 (69% after 2015) were included. A large variety of terms referring to the patient group was observed. Synthesizing qualitative studies identified ongoing uncertainty, anxiety and fear of disease progression or death, hope in treatment results and new treatment options, loss in several aspects of life, and worries about the impact of disease on loved ones and changes in social life to be prominent psychosocial themes. Of 82 quantitative studies included in the review, 76% examined quality of life, 46% fear of disease progression or death, 26% distress or depression, and 4% hope, while few studies reported on adaptation or cognitive aspects. No quantitative studies focused on uncertainty, loss, or social impact; (4) Conclusion and clinical implications: Prominent psychosocial themes reported in qualitative studies were not included in quantitative research using specific validated questionnaires. More robust studies using quantitative research designs should be conducted to further understand these psychological constructs. Furthermore, the diversity of terminology found in the literature calls for a uniform definition to better address this specific patient group in research and in practice.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in Sarcoma: A scoping review

PURPOSE

Sarcoma is a heterogeneous group of tumours, usually affecting young patients and related to both endogenous and exogenous risk factors. The importance of obtaining the patient's perspective of the illness experience is imperative. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are the outcomes that come directly from the patient. They include symptoms, functional health, well-being, quality of life, psychological issues, among other indicators reported by the patients. The objective of this scoping review was to map the PROs in sarcoma patients and how they are measured.

METHODS

The review process was guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist for scoping reviews.

RESULTS

The search identified 116 potentially relevant studies, with 27 articles meeting the inclusion criteria. The most common PRO evaluated in the selected studies were health-related quality of life (HRQoL), followed by functional outcome, aspects of mental health, and specific symptoms. Generic HRQoL questionnaires were widely used. Quantitative studies usually applied more than one type of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) to measure different PROs.

CONCLUSIONS

PROs should be carefully analysed to better understand the sarcoma patient's needs. The PROMs used in the selected studies about sarcoma were not specific to sarcoma, therefore, to better reflect on the perceptions of sarcoma patients, a different new and specific measurement strategy should be considered.