Evaluation of the satisfaction and experiences of oncology patients and doctors using teleconsultation during the COVID-19 pandemic

INTRODUCTION

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the Gustave Roussy Cancer Center introduced teleconsultation via telephone, as an alternative to face-to-face consultation to reduce patient hospital visits. This study was designed to assess patient and doctor satisfaction with this modality of care in oncology patient care during the period of the pandemic and beyond.

METHODS

We designed two questionnaires based on validated scores to assess satisfaction from teleconsultation in patients (EORTC OUT-PATSAT 35 and Telemedicine Satisfaction Questionnaire [TSQ] scores) and doctors (Telehealth Usability Questionnaire [TUQ]), and anxiety levels in both groups (anxiety section of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [HADS], HADS-A). These were electronically sent to patients and doctors with experience of at least one remote consultation during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

239 patients and 32 doctors were eligible for the analyses. In the patient group, the mean satisfaction scores were 79.5 (SD 18.1) and 74.92 (SD 15.3) for EORTC OUT-PATSAT 35 and TSQ, respectively. In the doctor group, the mean satisfaction scores were 67.1 (SD 12.7) and 64.9 (SD 13.9) for TUQ and TUQ for Skype for Business, respectively. 65.7% of patients and 81.2% of doctors had no/low anxiety. Univariable analyses in patients showed correlation of the EORTC OUT-PATSAT 35 and TSQ scores with anxiety and gender, with lower mean scores in women compared to men. Multivariable analysis showed correlation of the EORTC OUT-PATSAT 35 and TSQ scores to anxiety in both patients and doctors.

CONCLUSIONS

Teleconsultation via telephone is an acceptable modality of care for oncology patients, with high satisfaction from its implementation during the pandemic reported by patients and doctors. This was consistent across responder groups with different characteristics. An individualized approach to patients should be implemented for the safe and effective use of teleconsultation in oncology beyond the pandemic.

Pattern and risk factors of isolated local relapse among women with hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative breast cancer and lymph node involvement: 10-year follow-up analysis of the PACS 01 and PACS 04 trials

PURPOSE

We aimed to determine the pattern of isolated local recurrences (ILR) in women with stage II-III hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 breast cancer (HR + /HER2-BC) after 10-year follow-up.

METHODS

UNICANCER-PACS 01 and PACS 04 trials included 5,008 women with T1-T3 and N1-N3 to evaluate the efficacy of different anthracycline ± taxanes-containing regimens after modified mastectomy or lumpectomy plus axillary lymph node dissection. We analyzed the data from 2,932 women with HR + /HER2- BC to evaluate the cumulative incidence of ILR and describe the factors associated with ILR.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 9.1 years (95% CI 9.0-9.2 years), the cumulative incidence of ILR increased steadily between 1 and 10 years from 0.2% to 2.5%. The multivariable analysis showed that older age (subhazard ratios [sHR] = 0.95, 95% CI 0.92-0.99) and mastectomy (sHR = 0.39, 95% CI 0.17-0.86) were associated with lower risk of ILR, and no adjuvant endocrine therapy (sHR = 2.73, 95% CI 1.32 7-5.67) with increased risk of ILR.

CONCLUSION

In this population of high-risk patients with localized HR + /HER2- BC, the risk of ILR was low but remained constant over 10 years. Younger age at diagnosis, breast-conserving surgery, and adjuvant endocrine therapy were independent risk factors of ILR.

Facing points of view: Representations on adjuvant endocrine therapy of premenopausal patients after breast cancer and their healthcare providers in France. The FOR-AD study

PURPOSE

Adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) for 5-10 years is the backbone of the therapeutic strategy in patients with hormone receptor positive (HR+) early breast cancer (BC). However, long-term adherence to adjuvant ET represents a major challenge for most patients. According to prior studies, side effects of adjuvant ET are an important reason for poor adherence. In contrast, better communication and relational bond between patients and healthcare providers (HCPs) may improve adherence. The FOR-AD (Focus on non-adherence) study aimed at better understanding the representation of adjuvant ET by patients and their HCPs, in order to improve the care process.

METHODS

Three focus groups of premenopausal women (receiving adjuvant ET for variable amount of time) and two focus groups of HCPs (including oncologists, pharmacists, and nurses) were conducted, each including around ten participants. Thematic analyses using a general inductive approach were constructed to report participants' representations.

RESULTS

Two main themes emerged across groups, and appeared of major importance. Representations on adjuvant ET were often homogenous within each group, but differed between patients and their HCPs. The relationship between both groups was considerably discussed, particularly its importance in facilitating adherence to adjuvant ET. Suggestions on improving the care process were also given, such as systematically including psychologists in follow-up care paths and having a nurse navigator follow patients under treatment with adjuvant ET.

CONCLUSION

The present qualitative exploration may help buildi future tailored interventions to improve adherence to adjuvant ET, in particular regarding the role of nurse navigators.

COVID-19 in breast cancer patients: a subanalysis of the OnCovid registry

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients are at higher risk of COVID-19 complications and mortality than the rest of the population. Breast cancer patients seem to have better prognosis when infected by SARS-CoV-2 than other cancer patients.

METHODS

We report a subanalysis of the OnCovid study providing more detailed information in the breast cancer population.

RESULTS

We included 495 breast cancer patients with a SARS-CoV-2 infection. Mean age was 62.6 years; 31.5% presented more than one comorbidity. The most frequent breast cancer subtype was luminal-like (n = 245, 49.5%) and 177 (35.8%) had metastatic disease. A total of 332 (67.1%) patients were receiving active treatment, with radical intent in 232 (47.6%) of them. Hospitalization rate was 58.2% and all-cause mortality rate was 20.3%. One hundred twenty-nine (26.1%) patients developed one COVID-19 complication, being acute respiratory failure the most common (n = 74, 15.0%). In the multivariable analysis, age older than 70 years, presence of COVID-19 complications, and metastatic disease were factors correlated with worse outcomes, while ongoing anticancer therapy at time of COVID-19 diagnosis appeared to be a protective factor. No particular oncological treatment was related to higher risk of complications. In the context of SARS-CoV-2 infection, 73 (18.3%) patients had some kind of modification on their oncologic treatment. At the first oncological reassessment (median time: 46.9 days ± 36.7), 255 (51.6%) patients reported to be fully recovered from the infection. There were 39 patients (7.9%) with long-term SARS-CoV-2-related complications.

CONCLUSION

In the context of COVID-19, our data confirm that breast cancer patients appear to have lower complications and mortality rate than expected in other cancer populations. Most breast cancer patients can be safely treated for their neoplasm during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Oncological treatment has no impact on the risk of SARS-CoV-2 complications, and, especially in the curative setting, the treatment should be modified as little as possible.

Treatment Outcome of metastatic lesions from renal cell carcinoma underGoing Extra-cranial stereotactic body radioTHERapy: The together retrospective study

OBJECTIVES

stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) use has increased overtime for the management of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients, with a likely good control of irradiated lesions. We planned a retrospective multicenter Italian study, with the aim of investigating the outcome of treatment with SBRT for non-brain secondary lesions in mRCC patients.

METHODS

all consecutive metastatic non-brain lesions from mRCC that underwent SBRT at nine Italian institutions from January 2015 to June 2017 were considered. The primary endpoint of the study was the lesion-PFS, calculated from SBRT initiation to the local progression of the irradiated lesion.

RESULTS

57 extracranial metastatic lesions from 48 patients with primary mRCC were treated with SBRT. At the median follow-up of 26.4 months, the median lesion-PFS was not reached (43 censored); 72.4% of lesions were progression-free at 40 months, with significantly better lesion-PFS for small metastatic lesions (<14 mm). SBRT was safe and the 1-year local disease control was 87.7%. After SBRT, 18 patients (37.5%) permanently interrupted systemic therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

consistently with the previous literature, our findings support the use of SBRT in selected mRCC patients.