Expanding Access to Cancer Clinical Trials for Patients With Mental Illness

The Risk and The Course of Cancer Among People with Severe Mental Illness

The paucity of data regarding patients with Serious Mental Illness (SMI) and cancer is alarming given the fact that people with SMI, especially schizophrenia, bipolar disorders and severe depressive disorders, have in general poorer access to physical health care and higher morbidity and mortality because of physical illnesses. The aims of this review were to examine the current evidence from existing literature on the risk of developing cancer and its course among people with SMI. Equivocal results emerge regarding the risk of developing some kind of cancer among people with SMI, with contrasting data on a possible higher, similar or lower risk in comparison with the general population. In contrast, a series of studies have pointed out that patients with SMI who develop cancer are less likely to receive standard levels of cancer care, both in terms of screening, diagnosis and treatment. Also, the mortality for cancer has been confirmed to be higher than the general population. A global sensitization about these problems is mandatory in an era in which community psychiatry has been developed in all countries and that policies of prevention, treatment, follow up, and palliative care should regard all the segments of the population, including people with SMI, through an interdisciplinary approach.

Patients With Serious Mental Illness Can Engage in Tobacco Treatment Trials and Tobacco Cessation Interventions During Cancer Treatment

PURPOSE

More than half of individuals with serious mental illness (SMI) smoke, contributing to premature cancer mortality. A cancer diagnosis provides an opportunity to assist with smoking cessation; however, supportive oncology trials frequently exclude patients with SMI. To fill this gap, we examined differences in engagement and tobacco cessation in a pragmatic clinical trial.

METHODS

We recruited 303 participants from two National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers, of which 10% had prior diagnoses of SMI (major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia spectrum disorders). We compared self-reported smoking behaviors, patient attitudes and beliefs about cessation, and rates of trial completion, engagement, and smoking abstinence among recently diagnosed patients with cancer with and without SMI. Six months after trial completion, we completed qualitative interviews on barriers and facilitators to tobacco cessation in a random sample of participants with SMI.

RESULTS

Trial participants with SMI had similar motivation to quit smoking as those without SMI. Additionally, participants with SMI had a similar ability to engage in a tobacco treatment trial (6.5 counseling sessions completed v 7.3 sessions) and benefit from tobacco treatment as those without SMI (32.3% v 27.8% 6-month quit rates).

CONCLUSION

Patients with cancer and SMI were able to engage in and benefit from a tobacco cessation trial integrated into cancer care. A cancer diagnosis provides an opportunity to assist patients with SMI with smoking cessation referrals and treatment. Pragmatic supportive oncology trials that include a diverse population of adults with SMI are needed to inform care delivery and improve cancer outcomes for patients with SMI and cancer.

Study protocol for a randomized trial of bridge: Person-centered collaborative care for serious mental illness and cancer

BACKGROUND

Individuals with serious mental illness (SMI) experience inequities in cancer care that contribute to increased cancer mortality. Involving mental health at the time of cancer diagnosis may improve cancer care delivery for patients with SMI yet access to care remains challenging. Collaborative care is a promising approach to integrate mental health and cancer care that has not yet been studied in this marginalized population.

METHODS/DESIGN

We describe a 24-week, two-arm, single-site randomized trial of person-centered collaborative care (Bridge) for patients with SMI (schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, or major depression with psychiatric hospitalization) and their caregivers. 120 patients are randomized 1:1 to Bridge or Enhanced Usual Care (EUC) along with their caregivers. Researchers proactively identify individuals with SMI and a new breast, lung, gastrointestinal, or head and neck cancer that can be treated with curative intent. EUC includes informing oncologists about the patient's psychiatric diagnosis, notifying patients about available psychosocial services, and tracking patient and caregiver outcomes. Bridge includes a proactive assessment by psychiatry and social work, a person-centered, team approach including collaboration between mental health and oncology, and increased access to evidence-based psycho-oncology care. The primary outcome is cancer care disruptions evaluated by a blinded panel of oncologists. Secondary outcomes include patient and caregiver-reported outcomes and healthcare utilization. Barriers to Bridge implementation and dissemination are assessed using mixed methods.

DISCUSSION

This trial will inform efforts to systematically identify individuals with SMI and cancer and generate the first experimental evidence for the impact of person-centered collaborative care on cancer care for this underserved population.

OUP accepted manuscript

We define cancer equity as all people having as the same opportunity for cancer prevention, treatment, and survivorship care. However, marginalized populations continue to experience avoidable and unjust disparities in cancer care, access to clinical trials, and cancer survival. Racial and ethnic minorities, and individuals with low socioeconomic status, Medicaid insurance, limited health literacy, disabilities, and mental health disorders are more likely to experience delays to cancer diagnosis and less likely to receive guideline-concordant cancer care. These disparities are impacted by the social determinants of health including structural discrimination, racism, poverty, and inequities in access to healthcare and clinical trials. There is an urgent need to develop and adapt evidence-based interventions in collaboration with community partners that have potential to address the social determinants of health and build capacity for cancer care for underserved populations. We established the Virtual Equity Hub by developing a collaborative network connecting a comprehensive cancer center, academic safety net hospital, and community health centers and affiliates. The Virtual Equity Hub utilizes a virtual tumor board, an evidence-based approach that increases access to multi-specialty cancer care and oncology subspecialty expertise. We adapted the tumor board model by engaging person-centered teams of multi-disciplinary specialists across health systems, addressing the social determinants of health, and applying community-based research principles with a focus on populations with poor cancer survival. The virtual tumor board included monthly videoconferences, case discussion, sharing of expertise, and a focus on addressing barriers to care and trial participation. Specifically, we piloted virtual tumor boards for breast oncology, neuro-oncology, and individuals with cancer and serious mental illness. The Virtual Equity Hub demonstrated promise at building capacity for clinicians to care for patients with complex needs and addressing barriers to care. Research is needed to measure the impact, reach, and sustainability of virtual equity models for patients with cancer.

Barriers to cancer care for people with significant mental health difficulties: What healthcare staff say?

OBJECTIVES

Despite similar rates in cancer morbidity, patients with comorbid significant mental health difficulties (SMHD) experience higher mortality rates. This population has largely been neglected in cancer care research. Little is known about how to improve cancer outcomes for patients with SMHD. The aim of this research is to explore the views of healthcare professionals concerning the provision of cancer care to individuals with SMHD in an Irish context.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with healthcare professionals (n = 28) providing care to people with SMHD and cancer. This included oncology and psychiatry consultants (n = 10); clinical nurse specialists (n = 8); clinical psychologists (n = 6); and medical social workers (n = 4). Data were analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Four overarching themes were generated from the data highlighting the challenges associated with healthcare provision for this cohort. The themes were: Fragmentation of Care, Healthcare Providers' Understanding of SMHD, Complex Nature of Presentation, and Specialised Care Needs.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings contribute to advancing our understanding of cancer care provision for patients with SMHD. They identify important barriers and facilitators to cancer care provision for this population from the perspective of healthcare professionals in Ireland. These findings will help to shape future research and contribute to improving the quality-of-care for people with SMHD and cancer.