The efficacy, challenges, and facilitators of telemedicine in post-treatment cancer survivorship care: an overview of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Telemedicine services have been increasingly used to facilitate post-treatment cancer survivorship care, including improving access; monitoring health status, health behaviors, and symptom management; enhancing information exchange; and mitigating the costs of care delivery, especially since the COVID-19 pandemic. To inform guidance for the use of telemedicine in the post-COVID era, the aim of this overview of systematic reviews (SRs) was to evaluate the efficacy of, and survivor engagement in, telemedicine interventions in the post-treatment survivorship phase, and to consider implementation barriers and facilitators.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched. SRs that examined the use of telemedicine in the post-treatment phase of cancer survivorship, published between January 2010 and April 2021, were included. Efficacy data were synthesized narratively. Implementation barriers and facilitators were synthesized using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine SRs were included. A substantive body of evidence found telemedicine to benefit the management of psychosocial and physical effects, particularly for improving fatigue and cognitive function. There was a lack of evidence on the use of telemedicine in the prevention and surveillance for recurrences and new cancers as well as management of chronic medical conditions. This overview highlights a range of diverse barriers and facilitators at the patient, health service, and system levels.

CONCLUSIONS

This review highlights the benefits of telemedicine in addressing psychosocial and physical effects, but not in other areas of post-treatment cancer survivorship care. This large review provides practical guidance for use of telemedicine in post-treatment survivorship care.

Scalp hypothermia as a preventative measure for chemotherapy-induced alopecia: a review of controlled clinical trials

Chemotherapy-induced alopecia (CIA) is a temporary, yet psychologically devastating form of hair loss that affects 65% of patients receiving cancer chemotherapy. In the 1970s, scalp hypothermia was introduced as a preventative measure against the development of CIA. Numerous studies provide evidence for the effectiveness of scalp cooling to prevent CIA, although results varied because of differences in chemotherapy regimen, cooling technique, mode of administration and patient factors. However, many of the existing studies are uncontrolled or consist of small sample sizes, and data from randomized, randomized studies are limited. To date, no clear guidelines have been established for optimum scalp cooling use as a treatment modality and its efficacy remain unknown. Nonetheless, scalp cooling remains the most widely utilized method for the prevention of CIA, and in December 2015, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) cleared the DigniCap^® Scalp Cooling System (Dignitana AB, Sweden) for marketing and the Orbis from Paxman^® Coolers Ltd. received clearance in 2017. This literature review is one of the first to provide up-to-date review and side-by-side comparisons of controlled and randomized clinical trials (CCTs and RCTs) evaluating scalp hypothermia for the prevention of CIA. Our analyses of CCTs and RCTs to date show that scalp hypothermia is effective in reducing the occurrence rate of CIA, by 2.7-fold in the CCTs and 3.9-fold in the RCTs. These results suggest that scalp hypothermia represents an effective preventative measure for CIA, and provide guidance for management of anticipated alopecia following chemotherapy and for future investigations.

Uses of cancer registries for public health and clinical research in Europe: Results of the European Network of Cancer Registries survey among 161 population-based cancer registries during 2010-2012

AIM

To provide insight into cancer registration coverage, data access and use in Europe. This contributes to data and infrastructure harmonisation and will foster a more prominent role of cancer registries (CRs) within public health, clinical policy and cancer research, whether within or outside the European Research Area.

METHODS

During 2010-12 an extensive survey of cancer registration practices and data use was conducted among 161 population-based CRs across Europe. Responding registries (66%) operated in 33 countries, including 23 with national coverage.

RESULTS

Population-based oncological surveillance started during the 1940-50s in the northwest of Europe and from the 1970s to 1990s in other regions. The European Union (EU) protection regulations affected data access, especially in Germany and France, but less in the Netherlands or Belgium. Regular reports were produced by CRs on incidence rates (95%), survival (60%) and stage for selected tumours (80%). Evaluation of cancer control and quality of care remained modest except in a few dedicated CRs. Variables evaluated were support of clinical audits, monitoring adherence to clinical guidelines, improvement of cancer care and evaluation of mass cancer screening. Evaluation of diagnostic imaging tools was only occasional.

CONCLUSION

Most population-based CRs are well equipped for strengthening cancer surveillance across Europe. Data quality and intensity of use depend on the role the cancer registry plays in the politico, oncomedical and public health setting within the country. Standard registration methodology could therefore not be translated to equivalent advances in cancer prevention and mass screening, quality of care, translational research of prognosis and survivorship across Europe. Further European collaboration remains essential to ensure access to data and comparability of the results.