Assessment of Bone Health Education in US Multiple Myeloma and Solid Tumor Patients at Risk for Skeletal-Related Events

Assessment of Bone Health Awareness and Education in Breast Cancer Patients with Bone Metastasis in the USA

Bone metastases are common in advanced breast cancer (BC) patients and increase the risk for skeletal-related events (SREs), which present a significant health and economic burden. Bone targeting agents (BTAs) can improve health-related quality of life by delaying or preventing SREs; nevertheless, a significant portion of eligible BC patients are not receiving this therapy. A bone health education needs assessment survey was conducted to examine cancer-related bone health awareness and to identify opportunities to improve bone health education. Direct-to-patient outreach was used to recruit adult BC patients in the USA self-reporting a diagnosis of bone metastasis within the past 3 years. Of the 200 patients, 59% experienced at least one SRE prior to survey participation (44% radiation to bone, 29% bone fracture, 17% spinal cord compression, 15% surgery to bone), and 83% were currently receiving a BTA. Awareness of general cancer bone health, protection strategies against SREs, and screening tests were low to moderate. Patients currently not receiving a BTA were least knowledgeable about cancer bone health, with only 40% aware of BTAs as a protective strategy, and only 26% were very or extremely satisfied with the information received from healthcare providers. Sixty-two percent of patients wanted to receive information by more than one mode of communication. Notable gaps in bone health education were observed in bone metastatic BC patients at risk for SREs, suggesting the need for earlier and more effective communication and education strategies to promote appropriate BTA use and better health outcomes.

A cross-sectional study on Chinese oncology nurses' knowledge of bone health among cancer patients

OBJECTIVE

To understand the knowledge status, obstacle factors, and management confidence of oncology nurses on the bone health of cancer patients, and in addition to provide reference for establishing bone health knowledge training system for oncology nurses and guiding them to manage bone health of cancer patients.

METHODS

A total of 602 nurses engaged in oncology nursing in 6 hospitals in Hebei Province were selected by cluster sampling, and an online anonymous survey was conducted by sending questionnaires to oncology nurses from the Hebei Cancer Prevention and Control Association. The questionnaire was developed by the study team. There are 4 parts, namely general information, nurses' role and job responsibilities, knowledge of skeletal-related events (SREs) and cancer treatment-induced bone loss (CTIBL), and understanding and confidence in bone health management, for a total of 33 questions.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven percent of oncology nurses received training on bone health and other related contents; 40.48% of oncology nurses used domestic and foreign guidelines when managing patients with bone metastases or CTIBL. Only approximately one-third of oncology nurses had confidence in managing the side effects of bone metastases and bone modification drugs and identifying patients at risk of CTIBL and fracture; only 33.04% of oncology nurses believed that weight-bearing exercise can prevent bone loss; less than 50% of oncology nurses believed that aromatase inhibitor therapy, ovarian suppression therapy, androgen deprivation therapy, and low body weight were risk factors for pathological fractures. The reasons that hindered oncology nurses from optimizing the management of patients with bone metastases and understanding the preventive measures and risk factors for bone loss mainly included lack of relevant knowledge training, lack of understanding of effective intervention measures, and lack of training and professionalism of specialized nurses, including insufficient development time and guidelines for clinical nursing practice.

CONCLUSION

Managers must continuously improve the training system of oncology nurses, enrich the content of training pertaining to bone health for cancer patients, formulate clinical nursing practice guidelines, and give oncology nurses more time for professional development.

Medication adherence with denosumab in patients with bone metastases from solid tumors treated in routine clinical settings: a retrospective study

PURPOSE

To describe (non)adherence with denosumab among patients with solid tumors and bone metastases.

METHODS

This retrospective, observational study pooled data from two completed prospective, multicenter cohort studies (X-TREME; Study 240) in adult patients with bone metastases from primary breast, prostate, lung, kidney, or other solid cancer types and administered denosumab 120 mg in routine clinical practice in Germany and Central and Eastern Europe. The studies were conducted between May 2012 and May 2017; pooled analysis was completed in August 2021. Medication adherence was described according to a three-component consensus taxonomy: initiation (first-ever administration ≤ 90 days from bone metastasis diagnosis), implementation (actual vs prescribed dosing; optimal implementation = regular/consistent dosing), and persistence (≤ 60-day gap between administrations at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months). Descriptive analyses were conducted for each cancer type.

RESULTS

The analysis included 1748 patients with solid tumors and bone metastases. Adherence with denosumab was generally high across the initiation, implementation, and persistence phases. Most patients experienced timely initiation (from 64.4% [kidney cancer] to 81.2% [breast cancer]) and optimal implementation (from 62.4% [lung cancer] to 72.5% [breast cancer]). The proportion of patients who were persistent with treatment at 6 months ranged from 41.4% (lung cancer) to 77.8% (prostate cancer).

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed variations by cancer type in the initiation, implementation, and persistence of denosumab in patients with solid tumors and bone metastases in routine clinical practice. Further cancer-specific studies are warranted to examine the determinants of (non)adherence with denosumab, and potential ways to improve medication adherence.