Search

Somatic mutations in key oncogenes in non-small cell lung cancer ( NSCLC) and melanoma are important determinants of tumour sensitivity to targeted therapies. Molecular screening for these predictive biomarkers is routinely used to inform treatment decisions; however, little is known about how best to communicate testing and results to patients. This qualitative study aimed to explore advanced cancer patients' attitudes and experiences regarding somatic tumour screening to identify their information and support needs. Sixteen NSCLC and eight melanoma patients who had undergone screening participated in a semi-structured face-to-face or telephone interview exploring their understanding, views, preferences and needs regarding screening. Interviews were audiotaped, transcribed and analysed for thematic patterns. Participants expressed positive views and unequivocal acceptance of screening, and understood its role in guiding treatment selection. They preferred to receive information verbally through simple, non-technical language from their oncologist with additional take-home materials. Patients were interested in learning about their test results, but wanted discussion to be focused on practical matters relevant to treatment. While receiving their screening results was not considered burdensome, information overload and cancer-related distress were identified as barriers to test comprehension. Patients may benefit from information and decision-related tools to better understand genomic information and adequately support psychosocial outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To describe the (a) number and type of cancer care providers that radiation oncology outpatients report discussing life expectancy with, and (b) perceptions of the acceptability and utility of life expectancy information. Methods: A cross‐sectional survey of patients receiving radiotherapy was undertaken in four treatment centres. Patients indicated whether they had discussed life expectancy with a cancer doctor (i.e., medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, surgeon, haematologists) and/or other cancer care provider (i.e., general practitioner, radiation therapist, nurse); and acceptability and utility of information. Results: Of 207 respondents, 133 (64%) had discussed life expectancy with at least one provider. General practitioners (GPs) were the most frequent source of information. Of those who had discussed life expectancy, half (n = 110/207) perceived cancer would not impact life expectancy. Information was easy to understand (91%), discussed sensitively (90%), helped plan for future (83%) and gave them certainty (86%). The information made 11% feel overloaded and 34% feel anxious. Conclusion: Two‐thirds of respondents had discussed life expectancy with at least one cancer care provider. Providers from the range of disciplines involved in cancer care need to be skilled at communicating life expectancy information and recognising the adverse impact this may have on some patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]