Care coordination for complex cancer survivors in an integrated safety-net system: a study protocol

Exploring the impact of primary care utilization and health information exchange upon treatment patterns and clinical outcomes of glioblastoma patients

PURPOSE

There is limited literature describing care coordination for patients with glioblastoma (GBM). We aimed to investigate the impact of primary care and electronic health information exchange (HIE) between neurosurgeons, oncologists, and primary care providers (PCP) on GBM treatment patterns, postoperative outcomes, and survival.

METHODS

We identified adult GBM patients undergoing primary resection at our institution (2007-2020). HIE was defined as shared electronic medical information between PCPs, oncologists, and neurosurgeons. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to determine the effect of PCPs and HIE upon initiation and completion of adjuvant therapy. Kaplan-Meier and multivariate Cox regression models were used to evaluate overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Among 374 patients (mean age ± SD: 57.7 ± 13.5, 39.0% female), 81.0% had a PCP and 62.4% had electronic HIE. In multivariate analyses, having a PCP was associated with initiation (OR: 7.9, P < 0.001) and completion (OR: 4.4, P < 0.001) of 6 weeks of concomitant chemoradiation, as well as initiation (OR: 4.0, P < 0.001) and completion (OR: 3.0, P = 0.007) of 6 cycles of maintenance temozolomide thereafter. Having a PCP (median OS [95%CI]: 14.6[13.1-16.1] vs. 10.8[8.2-13.3] months, P = 0.005) and HIE (15.40[12.82-17.98] vs. 13.80[12.51-15.09] months, P = 0.029) were associated with improved OS relative to counterparts in Kaplan-Meier analysis and in multivariate Cox regression analysis (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.7, [95% CI] 0.5-1.0, P = 0.048). In multivariate analyses, chemoradiation (HR = 0.34, [95% CI] 0.2-0.7, P = 0.002) and maintenance temozolomide (HR = 0.5, 95%CI 0.3-0.8, P = 0.002) were associated with improved OS relative to counterparts.

CONCLUSION

Effective care coordination between neurosurgeons, oncologists, and PCPs may offer a modifiable avenue to improve GBM outcomes.

Factors influencing implementation of a care coordination intervention for cancer survivors with multiple comorbidities in a safety-net system: an application of the Implementation Research Logic Model

BACKGROUND

Under- and uninsured cancer survivors have significant medical, social, and economic complexity. For these survivors, effective care coordination between oncology and primary care teams is critical for high-quality, comprehensive care. While evidence-based interventions exist to improve coordination between healthcare teams, testing implementation of these interventions for cancer survivors seen in real-world safety-net settings has been limited. This study aimed to (1) identify factors influencing implementation of a multicomponent care coordination intervention (nurse coordinator plus patient registry) focused on cancer survivors with multiple comorbidities in an integrated safety-net system and (2) identify mechanisms through which the factors impacted implementation outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews (patients, providers, and system leaders), structured observations of primary care and oncology operations, and document analysis during intervention implementation between 2016 and 2020. The practice change model (PCM) guided data collection to identify barriers and facilitators of implementation; the PCM, Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, and Implementation Research Logic Model guided four immersion/crystallization data analysis and synthesis cycles to identify mechanisms and assess outcomes. Implementation outcomes included appropriateness, acceptability, adoption, and penetration.

RESULTS

The intervention was appropriate and acceptable to primary care and oncology teams based on reported patient needs and resources and the strength of the evidence supporting intervention components. Active and sustained partnership with system leaders facilitated these outcomes. There was limited adoption and penetration early in implementation because the study was narrowly focused on just breast and colorectal cancer patients. This created barriers to real-world practice where patients with all cancer types receive care. Over time, flexibility intentionally designed into intervention implementation facilitated adoption and penetration. Regular feedback from system partners and rapid cycles of implementation and evaluation led to real-time adaptations increasing adoption and penetration.

DISCUSSION

Evidence-based interventions to coordinate care for underserved cancer survivors across oncology and primary care teams can be implemented successfully when system leaders are actively engaged and with flexibility in implementation embedded intentionally to continuously facilitate adoption and penetration across the health system.

Coping During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Experiences of Complex Cancer Survivors

Patients with cancer and multiple chronic conditions (complex cancer survivors) are vulnerable to the negative impacts of COVID-19. However, their experiences and coping strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic have not been e.

Importance of primary care for underserved cancer patients with multiple chronic conditions

PURPOSE

To understand the impact of pre-existing conditions on healthcare utilization among under- and uninsured patients in the transition from cancer treatment to post-treatment survivorship.

METHODS

Using electronic health record data, we constructed a cohort of patients seen in an integrated county health system between 1/1/2010 and 12/31/2016. Six hundred thirty-one adult patients diagnosed with non-metastatic breast or colorectal cancer during this period (cases) were matched 1:1 on sex and Charlson comorbidity index to non-cancer patients who had at least two chronic conditions and with at least one visit to the health system during the study period (controls). Conditional fixed effects Poisson regression models compared number of primary care and emergency department (ED) visits and completed [vs. no show or missed] appointments between cancer and non-cancer patients.

RESULTS

Cancer patients had significantly lower number of visits compared with non-cancer patients (N = 46,965 vs. 85,038). Cancer patients were less likely to have primary care (IRR = 0.25; 95% CI: 0.24, 0.27) and ED visits (IRR = 0.57; 95% CI: 0.50, 0.64) but more likely to complete a scheduled appointment (AOR = 4.83; 95% CI: 4.32, 5.39) compared with non-cancer patients. Cancer patients seen in primary care at a higher rate were more likely to visit the ED (IRR = 2.06; 95% CI: 1.52, 2.80) than those seen in primary care at a lower rate.

CONCLUSION

Health systems need to find innovative, effective solutions to increase primary care utilization among cancer patients with chronic care conditions to ensure optimal management of both chronic conditions and cancer.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Maintaining regular connections with primary care providers during active cancer treatment should be promoted.

The Women's Health Initiative cancer survivorship clinic incorporating electronic patient-reported outcomes: a study protocol for the Linking You to Support and Advice (LYSA) randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The improved survival rate for many cancers in high-income countries demands a coordinated multidisciplinary approach to survivorship care and service provision to ensure optimal patient outcomes and quality of life. This study assesses the feasibility of introducing a Women's Health Initiative cancer survivorship clinic in Ireland.

METHODS

The trial https://spcare.bmj.com/content/9/2/209.short comprises an intervention and control arm. Two hundred participants will be recruited. Key eligibility (1) women with early-stage hormone receptor-positive breast or gynecologic cancer (cervix or endometrial), within 12 months of completion of primary curative therapy, and (2) access to the Internet. The complex intervention comprises a nurse-led clinic targeting symptom management through a trigger alert system, utilizing electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) assessments at baseline, and 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 months. It also includes input from a dietitian monitoring diet and nutritional status. The control group will receive their usual care pathway standard of care and attend the cancer survivorship clinic and complete ePRO assessments at the start and end of the study. The primary endpoint (feasibility) includes the proportion of enrolled participants who complete baseline and follow-up ePRO surveys and partake in health professional consultations after ePRO data triggers. Secondary endpoints include changes in cancer-related symptom scores assessed by ePROs, health-related Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ) scores, Appraisal Self-Care Agency-R scores, and adjuvant endocrine therapy medication adherence. A process evaluation will capture the experiences of participation in the study, and the healthcare costs will be examined as part of the economic analysis. Ethical approval was granted in December 2020, with accrual commencing in March 2021.

DISCUSSION

This protocol describes the implementation of a parallel arm randomized controlled trial (RCT) which examines the feasibility of delivering a Cancer Survivorship Clinic. The ePRO is an innovative symptom monitoring system which detects the treatment-related effects and provides individualized support for cancer survivors. The findings will provide direction for the implementation of future survivorship care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT05035173 . Retrospectively registered on September 5, 2021.

Understanding the Delivery of Patient-Centered Survivorship Care Planning: An Exploratory Interview Study With Complex Cancer Survivors

Introduction:

Understanding key elements of the survivorship care planning process, such as patient-centered communication (PCC) and health self-efficacy, are critical for delivering patient-centered survivorship care to cancer survivors with multiple chronic conditions (“complex cancer survivors”). Building upon our team’s recent research efforts to examine the survivorship care planning process from a patient-centered lens, this exploratory study leveraged an ongoing quasi-experimental trial to elucidate the experience of complex cancer survivors with survivorship care planning and post-treatment management.

Methods:

We conducted a hypothesis-generating thematic content analysis on 8 interview transcripts.

Results:

Survivors reported positive experiences communicating with their oncology care team but the presence of multiple chronic conditions in addition to cancer creates additional barriers to patient-centered survivorship care.

Conclusion:

These findings support the need for further in-depth research aimed at improving PCC across all care teams and enabling self-management by delivering more personalized survivorship care planning that aligns with survivor’s needs, values, and preferences.

Thematic Analysis of Challenges of Care Coordination for Underinsured and Uninsured Cancer Survivors With Chronic Conditions

IMPORTANCE

Although a majority of underinsured and uninsured patients with cancer have multiple comorbidities, many lack consistent connections with a primary care team to manage chronic conditions during and after cancer treatment. This presents a major challenge to delivering high-quality comprehensive and coordinated care.

OBJECTIVE

To describe challenges and opportunities for coordinating care in an integrated safety-net system for patients with both cancer and other chronic conditions.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This multimodal qualitative study was conducted from May 2016 to July 2019 at a county-funded, vertically integrated safety-net health system including ambulatory oncology, urgent care, primary care, and specialty care. Participants were 93 health system stakeholders (clinicians, leaders, clinical, and administrative staff) strategically and snowball sampled for semistructured interviews and observation during meetings and daily processes of care. Data collection and analysis were conducted iteratively using a grounded theory approach, followed by systematic thematic analysis to organize data, review, and interpret comprehensive findings. Data were analyzed from March 2019 to March 2020.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Multilevel factors associated with experiences of coordinating care for patients with cancer and chronic conditions among oncology and primary care stakeholders.

RESULTS

Among interviews and observation of 93 health system stakeholders, system-level factors identified as being associated with care coordination included challenges to accessing primary care, lack of communication between oncology and primary care clinicians, and leadership awareness of care coordination challenges. Clinician-level factors included unclear role delineation and lack of clinician knowledge and preparedness to manage the effects of cancer and chronic conditions.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Primary care may play a critical role in delivering coordinated care for patients with cancer and chronic diseases. This study's findings suggest a need for care delivery strategies that bridge oncology and primary care by enhancing communication, better delineating roles and responsibilities across care teams, and improving clinician knowledge and preparedness to care for patients with cancer and chronic conditions. Expanding timely access to primary care is also key, albeit challenging in resource-limited safety-net settings.

Disparities in accessibility to evidence-based breast cancer care facilities by rural and urban areas in Bavaria, Germany

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer (BC), which is most common in elderly women, requires a multidisciplinary and continuous approach to care. With demographic changes, the number of patients with chronic diseases such as BC will increase. This trend will especially hit rural areas, where the majority of the elderly live, in terms of comprehensive health care.

METHODS

Accessibility to several cancer facilities in Bavaria, Germany, was analyzed with a geographic information system. Facilities were identified from the national BC guideline and from 31 participants in a proof-of-concept study from the Breast Cancer Care for Patients With Metastatic Disease registry. The timeframe for accessibility was defined as 30 or 60 minutes for all population points. The collection of address information was performed with different sources (eg, a physician registry). Routine data from the German Census 2011 and the population-based Cancer Registry of Bavaria were linked at the district level.

RESULTS

Females from urban areas (n = 2,938,991 [ie, total of females living in urban areas]) had a higher chance for predefined accessibility to the majority of analyzed facilities in comparison with females from rural areas (n = 3,385,813 [ie, total number of females living in rural areas]) with an odds ratio (OR) of 9.0 for cancer information counselling, an OR of 17.2 for a university hospital, and an OR of 7.2 for a psycho-oncologist. For (inpatient) rehabilitation centers (OR, 0.2) and genetic counselling (OR, 0.3), women from urban areas had lower odds of accessibility within 30 or 60 minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

Disparities in accessibility between rural and urban areas exist in Bavaria. The identification of underserved areas can help to inform policymakers about disparities in comprehensive health care. Future strategies are needed to deliver high-quality health care to all inhabitants, regardless of residence.

The impact of intimate partner violence on breast and cervical cancer survivors in an integrated, safety-net setting

PURPOSE

Characterize prevalence of intimate partner violence (IPV) among breast and cervical survivors receiving care in an urban safety-net healthcare system; Examine the relationship between IPV and clinical characteristics, receipt of cancer treatment, and guideline-recommended survivorship care.

METHODS

From 2010 to 2017, breast and cervical cancer survivors were identified and recruited from a large, integrated, safety-net hospital system. Electronic health records (EHR; to measure survivorship care), cancer registry (to measure clinical characteristics), and patient telephone surveys (to measure IPV) were triangulated among 312 survivors. Bivariate and multivariable models assessed the relationship between victimization and clinical characteristics, cancer treatment, and guideline-recommended survivorship care.

RESULTS

Among the 312 participants, 54% identified as IPV+. Among breast cancer, IPV+ cancer participants were twice more likely to develop estrogen receptor negative ER- and/or progesterone receptor negative PR- tumor receptors compared with IPV- cancer participants (AOR = 2.31; 95% CI, 1.20, 4.44). IPV+ breast cancer participants were less likely to have surgery and less likely to have hormone therapy as a first course of treatment compared with IPV- participants. There was no relationship between IPV and adherence to guideline-recommended cancer survivorship care.

CONCLUSIONS

This study expands our current knowledge on how victimization, and specifically IPV, impact health among specialty care. Future research should determine the feasibility of implementing Trauma-Informed Care in oncology practices to better optimize care.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

At integrated hospital systems, IPV+ cancer participants should utilize social workers, within their oncology clinics, to connect to victim services.

Assessing Patients' Perceptions of Cancer Care Coordination in a Community-Based Setting

PURPOSE

Effective care coordination (CC) is a hallmark of a high-quality cancer care. However, efforts to improve cancer care delivery are limited by the lack of a clinically useful tool to assess CC. In this study, we examined patients' perceptions of cancer CC using a novel tool, the Care Coordination Instrument (CCI), and evaluated the quality of the CCI.

METHODS

The CCI is a 29-item patient questionnaire that assesses CC across varied practice settings and patient populations overall and for three critical domains of CC: communication, navigation, and operational. We conducted univariable and multivariable regression analyses to identify patient clinical and practice characteristics associated with optimal versus suboptimal CC.

RESULTS

Two hundred patients with cancer completed the CCI questionnaire between October 2018 and January 2019, of whom 189 were used for the analysis. The presence of a family caregiver and a diagnosis of a blood cancer were correlated with overall positive reports of CC (P < .001 and P < .05, respectively). Poorer perceptions of CC were associated with having a head and neck cancer and the absence of family caregiver support. The effects of cancer disease stage and having access to a patient navigator on CC were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Integrating a patient-centered tool to assess cancer CC can be a strategy to optimize cancer care delivery. Understanding factors associated with effective and ineffective CC can help inform efforts to improve overall quality of care and care delivery.

Tracking the Nonenrolled: Lung Cancer Screening Patterns Among Individuals not Accrued to a Clinical Trial

INTRODUCTION

For lung cancer screening, the available data are often derived from patients enrolled prospectively in clinical trials. We, therefore, investigated lung cancer screening patterns among individuals eligible for, but not enrolled in, a screening trial.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From February 2017 through February 2019, we enrolled subjects in a trial examining telephone-based navigation during low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) for lung cancer screening. We identified patients for whom LDCT was ordered and who were approached, but not enrolled, in the trial. We categorized nonenrollment as the patient had declined or could not be reached. We compared the characteristics and LDCT completion rates among these groups and the enrolled population using the 2-sample t test and χ² test.

RESULTS

Of 900 individuals approached for participation (mean age, 62 years; 45% women, 53% black), 447 were enrolled in the screening clinical trial. No significant demographic differences were found between the enrolled and nonenrolled cohorts. Of the 453 individuals not enrolled, 251 (55%) had declined participation and 202 (45%) could not be reached, despite up to 6 attempts. LDCT completion was significantly associated with enrollment status: 81% of enrolled individuals, 73% of individuals who declined participation, and 49% of those who could not be reached (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

In the present single-center study, demographic factors did not predict for participation in a lung cancer screening trial. Lung cancer screening adherence rates were substantially lower for those not enrolled in a screening trial, especially for those who could not be contacted. These findings may inform the broader implementation of screening programs.

General Health Care Utilization Among Nonelderly Cancer Survivors Before and After Affordable Care Act Implementation: Early Results

PURPOSE

The number of nonelderly cancer survivors is expected to grow and so are their health care costs. Many cancer survivors worry about medical bills. This study examined the impact of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on the rate of insurance, average annual health care expenditure, and patient care experience among cancer survivors and investigated the patient characteristics that were associated with highly rated care experiences before and after ACA implementation.

METHODS

The study is a cross-sectional analysis of adult, nonelderly cancer survivors in the 2011 and 2016 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey who completed health care experience questionnaires. Percent covered by insurance both before and after the ACA was calculated, including total out-of-pocket (OOP) expenses as a percentage of overall health care expenditure per patient. Regression was performed to determine characteristics associated with patient experience ratings.

RESULTS

Health insurance coverage for cancer survivors was higher in 2016 than in 2011 (98.4% v 94.4%; P = .006). OOP spending as a percentage of health care expenditure among those with expenses decreased and was most striking in those with no insurance. Privately insured individuals were 3 times as likely to rate their care experience high compared with those with no insurance (odds ratio, 3.31; P < .0001). Those with above-average ratings of self-health and with few comorbidities rated their care experiences highly.

CONCLUSION

After the ACA, OOP costs have decreased for all types of insurance coverage. The association between patient experience and health status warrants additional study to better manage and coordinate the care of such patients.

Development and psychometric evaluation of a questionnaire to measure cancer patients' perception of care coordination

BACKGROUND

Although the importance of care coordination (CC) is well-recognized, cancer patients often receive poorly coordinated care across varied care settings and different oncology providers. Efforts to improve cancer care are hampered by lack of adequate measures. In this two-part, mixed-method study, we describe the development, refinement, and validation of a new care coordination instrument (CCI) designed to assess cancer patients' perception of CC.

METHODS

In Study 1, an initial CCI was developed incorporating questions based on literature review. The items were then modified following four field tests conducted in a large academic hospital with oncology nurses (n = 20) and cancer patients (n = 120). This modified instrument was used to determine whether the CCI was able to distinguish CC between two practices (30 GI and 30 myeloma patients) within the same hospital setting. In Study 2, 68 patients receiving community-based care participated in seven focus groups. Based on these discussions, the CCI items were again refined, and psychometric evaluation was conducted to assess the quality of the instrument.

RESULTS

Based on field tests, 3 domains of the CCI, Communication, Navigation, and Operational, were defined as critical components of CC. The Operational domain evaluates efficiency of care and is unique to this CCI. The field test demonstrated that GI patients reported significantly better CC Overall and for the Communication and Navigation domains (all p < .05). In Study 2, patients expressed concordance with the CCI items and their CC experiences, establishing validity of the CCI. Qualitative analysis of the focus group discussions indicated that the items with the highest frequencies of participants' comments were related to the concepts of Navigator, Team, Survey, and Communication. Quantitative analysis identified items with a limited response range or high rates of "neutral" responses; accordingly, those items were removed. The final CCI survey is a 29 item, multiple-choice questionnaire with excellent reliability, Cronbach's α = .922.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed a novel, patient-centered tool with excellent psychometric properties that can be utilized across varied practice settings to assess patients' perception of cancer care coordination.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Not required; retrospectively registered ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03594006 20 July 2018.

Patient and provider perspectives on delivery of oral cancer therapies

OBJECTIVE

The introduction of oral cancer therapies presents new challenges to delivery of quality cancer care. Little is known about how patients and providers address and overcome these challenges. We conducted a qualitative study exploring the range of patient and provider perspectives on oral cancer therapies.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with patients and providers at a tertiary referral center and county safety-net hospital in Dallas, TX. Interviews probed perspectives on differences between parenteral chemotherapy and oral therapies, adherence, communication, and cost/insurance. Interview transcripts were analyzed thematically using a deductively-driven coding scheme corresponding to the interview guide.

RESULTS

We conducted 22 patient (13 at tertiary referral center, 9 at safety-net hospital) and 10 provider (7 oncologists, 2 nurses, 1 pharmacist) interviews. Key themes from interviews included: (1) differences in parenteral chemotherapy vs. oral therapy; (2) adherence and dosing; and (3) experiences related to cost and communication.

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly all providers described challenges engaging with and educating patients about oral cancer therapies. Despite our initial hypothesis, safety-net patients encountered few barriers accessing oral therapies compared to patients receiving care in the tertiary referral center.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Our findings will guide future interventions to monitor and support cancer patients receiving oral therapies.

VA Provider Perspectives on Coordinating COPD Care Across Health Systems

BACKGROUND

More and more Veterans are receiving care from community providers, increasing the need for effective coordination across health systems. For Veterans with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), this need is intensified by complex comorbidity patterns that often include multiple providers co-managing patient care.

OBJECTIVES

We sought to understand how VA providers perceive coordination with community providers for Veterans with COPD.

DESIGN

Qualitative study of VA providers.

METHODS

We selected six geographically diverse VA sites and conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with providers practicing in inpatient and/or outpatient settings who care for Veterans with COPD.

MAIN MEASURES

Interviews focused on communication with community providers about discharge information and clinic management. We analyzed responses according to the principles of conventional content analysis, allowing inductive themes to emerge.

KEY RESULTS

We interviewed 25 providers during the period of June to October 2017. Qualitative data analysis yielded five themes: (1) VA providers perceive communication challenges between VA and community providers, including difficult, inadequate, and delayed communication; (2) communication is facilitated by personal relationships across health systems; (3) the lack of electronic health record (EHR) interoperability impairs communication, resulting in transmission of unstructured data; (4) poor communication leads to duplicative efforts and wasted resources; and (5) providers frequently rely on patients to communicate about care taking place in the community.

CONCLUSIONS

VA providers described major challenges in coordinating with community providers, leading to perceptions of delayed, missed, or duplicative care and jeopardizing the overall quality, safety, and efficiency of Veteran care. Our study highlights the need for system-level solutions to support coordination across health systems for Veterans with COPD and may have implications for other conditions that lead to recurrent hospitalization and/or care in the community.

Rationale and design of extended cancer education for longer term survivors (EXCELS): a randomized control trial of 'high touch' vs. 'high tech' cancer survivorship self-management tools in primary care

Background

Breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer survivors are at increased risk for late and long-term effects post-treatment. The post-treatment phase of care is often poorly coordinated and survivors navigate follow-up care with minimal information or guidance from their healthcare team. This manuscript describes the Extended Cancer Education for Longer-term Survivors (EXCELS) in Primary Care protocol. EXCELS is a randomized controlled trial to test the efficacy of patient-level self-management educational strategies on adherence to preventative health service use and cancer survivorship follow-up guidelines.

Methods

The EXCELS trial compares four conditions: (1) EXCELS-website (e.g., a mobile-optimized technology platform); (2) EXCELS-health coaching; (3) EXCELS-website and health coaching; and (4) a print booklet. Approximately 480 breast, colorectal, and prostate survivors will be recruited through the New Jersey Primary Care Research Network (NJPCRN) and New Jersey State Cancer Registry (NJSCR). Eligible survivors (diagnosed stages 1–3) must have completed active treatment, access to a phone and a computer, smartphone or tablet with internet access, and be able to speak and read English. Patient assessments occur at baseline, 6, 12, and 18 months. The primary outcomes are increased engagement in preventive health services and monitoring for cancer recurrence and treatment-related late effects.

Discussion

The EXCELS trial is the first to test cancer survivorship educational self-management interventions for cancer survivors in a primary care context. Findings from this trial will inform successful implementation and engagement strategies for longer-term, post-treatment cancer survivors managed in primary care settings.

Trial registration

Registered August 1, 2017 at ClinicalTrials.gov, trial # NCT03233555.