Search

Clinical practice guidelines are widely used in oncology to guide clinical decision making and inform health policy and planning. In recent years, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and the American Society of Clinical Oncology, as well as other international groups, have developed resource-stratified guidelines to guide clinicians and policymakers on cancer diagnosis and management in settings with various levels of resource constraints. Current methods for developing resource-stratified guidelines rely heavily on supporting evidence originating from high-income countries. In this commentary, the authors discuss limitations of the existing methods to develop resource-stratified guidelines and offer perspective on ways to strengthen the guidelines and their evidence base. Pulling from conceptual frameworks in the health policy domain, the authors outline a more inclusive approach to evidence synthesis that seeks to integrate the growing volume of cancer research emerging from low- and middle-income countries. The authors also introduce a revised evidence framework that provides transparency into the generalizability of evidence within the guidelines. These changes have the potential to enhance resource-stratified guidelines and bring us one step closer to the goal of evidence-based guidelines that are appropriate for diverse settings and unique patient populations across the world., (© 2024 The Author(s). Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Cancer Society.)

Background: Loneliness and social isolation are significant public health problems that are being exacerbated during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Little is known about the associations between loneliness and symptom burden in oncology patients before and during the pandemic. Study purposes include determining the prevalence of loneliness in a sample of oncology patients; evaluating for differences in demographic, clinical, and symptom characteristics between lonely and nonlonely patients; and determining which demographic, clinical, and symptom characteristics were associated with membership in the lonely group., Methods: A convenience sample (n = 606) completed online surveys that evaluated the severity of loneliness, social isolation, and common symptoms (ie, anxiety, depression, fatigue, sleep disturbance, cognitive dysfunction, and pain) in oncology patients. Parametric and nonparametric tests were used to evaluate for differences in scores between the lonely and nonlonely groups. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine risk factors for membership in the loneliness group., Results: Of the 606 patients, 53.0% were categorized in the lonely group. The lonely group reported higher levels of social isolation, as well as higher symptom severity scores for all of the symptoms evaluated. In the multivariate model, being unmarried, having higher levels of social isolation, as well as higher levels of anxiety and depressive symptoms were associated with membership in the lonely group., Conclusions: Study findings suggest that a significant number of oncology patients are experiencing loneliness, most likely as a result of mandate social distancing and isolation procedures. The symptom burden of these patients is extremely high and warrants clinical evaluation and interventions., (© 2021 American Cancer Society.)

Background: Phase 3 studies of bevacizumab in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (APCA) demonstrated no improvement in outcome. To the authors' knowledge, no validated predictive biomarkers for bevacizumab exist, although emerging data suggest that subsets of patients with APCA may benefit from treatment with bevacizumab. The authors evaluated baseline serum albumin (b-alb) as a predictive biomarker in a pooled analysis from 7 prospective clinical trials of gemcitabine-based therapy with or without bevacizumab., Methods: Data were collected from individual databases from 7 prospective clinical trials. Patients were grouped by exposure to bevacizumab and by b-alb level (≥ 3.4 g/L or < 3.4 g/dL). Overall survival (OS), time to disease progression (TTP), overall response rate, and disease control rate (overall response rate plus stable disease lasting ≥ 16 weeks) were compared between groups. Univariate and multivariable analyses of prognostic factors were performed., Results: A total of 264 patients were included. The median age was 59 years (range, 31 years-85 years) and all patients had stage IV disease per TNM staging. Normal b-alb was associated with significantly improved median OS (10.2 months vs 4.1 months; P = .0001), median TTP (6.2 months vs 3.7 months; P = 0.0488), and disease control rate (71% vs 46%; P = .007) for patients receiving bevacizumab, but not for those treated without bevacizumab. Multivariable analysis revealed a significant influence of normal b-alb on OS (P = .0008) and TTP (P = .033)., Conclusions: Patients with APCA with normal b-alb derive benefit from treatment with bevacizumab. Future prospective investigations of bevacizumab in patients with APCA should consider selecting patients with normal b-alb to maximize potential benefit., (© 2014 American Cancer Society.)