Availability of patient-centered cancer support services: A statewide survey of cancer centers

Causes of death among people living with metastatic cancer

Studying survivorship and causes of death in patients with advanced or metastatic cancer remains an important task. We characterize the causes of death among patients with metastatic cancer, across 13 cancer types and 25 non-cancer causes and predict the risk of death after diagnosis from the diagnosed cancer versus other causes (e.g., stroke, heart disease, etc.). Among 1,030,937 US (1992-2019) metastatic cancer survivors, 82.6% of patients (n = 688,529) died due to the diagnosed cancer, while 17.4% (n = 145,006) died of competing causes. Patients with lung, pancreas, esophagus, and stomach tumors are the most likely to die of their metastatic cancer, while those with prostate and breast cancer have the lowest likelihood. The median survival time among patients living with metastases is 10 months; our Fine and Gray competing risk model predicts 1 year survival with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.754 (95% CI [0.754, 0.754]). Leading non-cancer deaths are heart disease (32.4%), chronic obstructive and pulmonary disease (7.9%), cerebrovascular disease (6.1%), and infection (4.1%).

Incidence, Timing, and Factors Associated With Suicide Among Patients Undergoing Surgery for Cancer in the US

Importance

The risk and timing of suicide among patients who undergo surgery for cancer remain largely unknown, and, to our knowledge, there are currently no organized programs in place to implement regular suicide screening among this patient population.

Objective

To evaluate the incidence, timing, and factors associated with suicide among patients undergoing cancer operations.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective population-based cohort study used data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program database to examine the incidence of suicide, compared with the general US population, and timing of suicide among patients undergoing surgery for the 15 deadliest cancers in the US from 2000 to 2016. A Fine-Gray competing risks regression model was used to identify factors associated with an increased risk of suicide among patients in the cohort. Data were analyzed from September 2021 to January 2022.

Exposures

Surgery for cancer.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Incidence, compared with the general US population, timing, and factors associated with suicide after surgery for cancer.

Results

From 2000 to 2016, 1 811 397 patients (74.4% female; median [IQR] age, 62.0 [52.0-72.0] years) met study inclusion criteria. Of these patients, 1494 (0.08%) committed suicide after undergoing surgery for cancer. The incidence of suicide, compared with the general US population, was statistically significantly higher among patients undergoing surgery for cancers of the larynx (standardized mortality ratio [SMR], 4.02; 95% CI, 2.67-5.81), oral cavity and pharynx (SMR, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.93-3.03), esophagus (SMR, 2.25; 95% CI, 1.43-3.38), bladder (SMR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.53-2.78), pancreas (SMR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.29-3.19), lung (SMR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.47-2.02), stomach (SMR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.22-2.31), ovary (SMR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.13-2.31), brain (SMR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.12-2.26), and colon and rectum (SMR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.16-1.40). Approximately 3%, 21%, and 50% of suicides were committed within the first month, first year, and first 3 years after surgery, respectively. Patients who were male, White, and divorced or single were at greatest risk of suicide.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study, the incidence of suicide among patients undergoing cancer operations was statistically significantly elevated compared with the general population, highlighting the need for programs to actively implement regular suicide screening among such patients, especially those whose demographic and tumor characteristics are associated with the highest suicide risk.

Development of a national health policy logic model to accelerate the integration of oncology and palliative care: a nationwide Delphi survey in Japan

BACKGROUND

Despite recommendations to deliver palliative care to cancer patients and their caregivers, their distress has not been alleviated satisfactorily. National health policies play a pivotal role in achieving a comprehensive range of quality palliative care delivery for the public. However, there is no standardised logic model to appraise the efficacy of these policies. This study aimed to develop a logic model of a national health policy to deliver cancer palliative care and to reach consensus towards specific policy proposals.

METHODS

A draft version of the logic model and specific policy proposals were formulated by the research team and the internal expert panel, and the independent external expert panel evaluated the policy proposals based on the Delphi survey to reach consensus.

RESULTS

The logic model was divided into three major conceptual categories: 'care-delivery at cancer hospitals', 'community care coordination', and 'social awareness of palliative care'. There were 18 and 45 major and minor policy proposals, which were categorised into four groups: requirement of government-designated cancer hospitals; financial support; Basic Plan to Promote Cancer Control Programs; and others. These policy proposals were independently evaluated by 64 external experts and the first to third Delphi round response rates were 96.9-98.4%. Finally, 47 policy proposals reached consensus. The priority of each proposal was evaluated within the four policy groups.

CONCLUSIONS

A national health policy logic model was developed to accelerate the provision of cancer palliative care. Further research is warranted to verify the study design to investigate the efficacy of the logic model.

Molecular Pathology Education: A Suggested Framework for Primary Care Resident Training in Genomic Medicine: A Report of the Association for Molecular Pathology Training and Education Committee

Developments in genomics are profoundly influencing medical practice. With increasing use of genetic and genomic testing across every aspect of the health care continuum, patients and their families are increasingly turning to primary care physicians (PCPs) for discussion and advice regarding tests, implications, and results. Yet, with the rapid growth of information, technology, and applications, PCPs are finding it challenging to fill the gaps in knowledge and support the growing needs of their patients. A critical component in expanding PCP genomic literacy lies in the education of physicians in training and in practice. Although a framework for developing physician competencies in genomics has already been developed, the Association for Molecular Pathology is uniquely situated to actively utilize the skills of its members to engage and support PCPs in this effort. This report provides an overview and a suggested basic teaching framework, which can be used by molecular professionals in their individual institutions as a starting point for educational outreach.

Existing and Emerging Breast Cancer Detection Technologies and Its Challenges: A Review

Breast cancer is the most leading cancer occurring in women and is a significant factor in female mortality. Early diagnosis of breast cancer with Artificial Intelligent (AI) developments for breast cancer detection can lead to a proper treatment to affected patients as early as possible that eventually help reduce the women mortality rate. Reliability issues limit the current clinical detection techniques, such as Ultra-Sound, Mammography, and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) from screening images for precise elucidation. The capability to detect a tumor in early diagnosis, expensive, relatively long waiting time due to pandemic and painful procedure for a patient to perform. This article aims to review breast cancer screening methods and recent technological advancements systematically. In addition, this paper intends to explore the progression and challenges of AI in breast cancer detection. The next state of the art between image and signal processing will be presented, and their performance is compared. This review will facilitate the researcher to insight the view of breast cancer detection technologies advancement and its challenges.

Not seeing the forest for the trees: a systematic review of comprehensive distress management programs and implementation strategies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Clinically significant distress is common in patients with cancer and if untreated can be associated with adverse outcomes. This article offers a review of current approaches to implementing and reporting the minimum components of distress screening and management interventions in cancer services.

RECENT FINDINGS

Twenty-two relevant published articles were identified from January 2018 to February 2020. The reporting of recommended minimum components of distress screening and management interventions in these articles was not consistent. The majority of studies used validated tools to conduct initial screening. However, recommendations were either not reported or not followed regarding subsequent pathway components, secondary assessment, referral pathways linked to screening results and rescreening. The majority of studies did not include a description of the implementation of the distress screening program. A small number of studies described a comprehensive set of implementation strategies.

SUMMARY

Distress screening and management interventions in cancer are an important component of comprehensive cancer care. To improve patient outcomes and guide researchers and services to identify effective models, studies must include and evaluate minimum recommended components and implementation strategies. Addressing these limitations with high-quality, robust interventions is vital for advancing the implementation of effective distress management.

Barriers and strategies to integrate medical genetics and primary care in underserved populations: a scoping review

Despite clinical and technological advances, serious gaps remain in delivering genetic services due to disparities in workforce distribution and lack of coverage for genetic testing and counseling. Genetic services delivery, particularly in medically underserved populations, may rely heavily on primary care providers (PCPs). This study aims to identify barriers to integrating genetic services and primary care, and strategies to support integration, by conducting a scoping review. Literature synthesis found barriers most frequently cited by PCPs including insufficient knowledge about genetics and risk assessment, lack of access to geneticists, and insufficient time to address these challenges. Telegenetics, patient-centered care, and learning communities are strategies to overcome these barriers. Telegenetics supplements face-to-face clinics by providing remote access to genetic services. It may also be used for physician consultations and education. Patient-centered care allows providers, families, and patients to coordinate services and resources. Access to expert information provides a critical resource for PCPs. Learning communities may represent a mechanism that facilitates information exchange and knowledge sharing among different providers. As PCPs often play a crucial role caring for patients with genetic disorders in underserved areas, barriers to primary care-medical genetics integration must be addressed to improve access. Strategies, such as telegenetics, promotion of evidence-based guidelines, point-of-care risk assessment tools, tailored education in genetics-related topics, and other system-level strategies, will facilitate better genetics and primary care integration, which in turn, may improve genetic service delivery to patients residing in underserved communities.

Patterns and characteristics of patients' selection of cancer surgeons

OBJECTIVE

Despite evidence of volume-outcome relationships for cancer surgery, treatment at low-volume hospitals remains common. Our objective was to evaluate whether individuals actively involved in selecting their cancer surgeon were more likely to go to hospitals recognized for quality cancer care.

METHODS

Individuals diagnosed with breast, prostate and colorectal cancer in 2015 completed online surveys in 2017-2018. Participants were categorized as "directed" to a surgeon (relied on referral) or "active" (sought additional information), and hospitals were categorized by NCI-designation, CoC accreditation, and academic affiliation.

RESULTS

Of 299 participants, 42% were active. Individuals with breast cancer were more active (aOR = 2.46,95%CI:1.32-4.59). Active participants had nonsignificantly higher odds of surgery at NCI-designated facilities (aOR = 2.04,95%CI:0.95-4.38), or academic centers (aOR = 1.51,95%CI:0.86-2.64).

CONCLUSIONS

While most participants were directed to their cancer surgeon, active participants tended to select NCI-designated/academic hospitals. Although centralization of cancer care would require altering referral patterns, decision-support resources may help patients make informed choices.