Search

Context: Cancer and chronic disease prevention and screening (CCDPS) guidelines are not consistently applied in primary care. Furthermore, while most patients have multiple risks and conditions, guidelines are focused on a specific disease or organ system. The BETTER program (Building on Existing Tools to Improve Chronic Disease Prevention and Screening in Primary Care) involves an evidence-based intervention provided by an allied health professional within a primary care practice who acquires advanced skills in CCDPS and takes on the role of Prevention Practitioner (PP). Using the BETTER toolkit, created through a rigorous process of knowledge synthesis and harmonization of recommendations, the PP meets with patients for a personalized prevention visit. Objective: To describe the: 1) evidence review process used to identify high-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), 2) harmonization of primary prevention and screening recommendations, and 3) identification, development, and refinement of resources and tools for inclusion in the BETTER toolkit. The BETTER toolkit will be used to inform CCDPS in rural, remote, and urban primary care settings across Canada. Methods: In 2017, the BETTER Program conducted a literature review of evidence-based CPGs published between 2010 and 2016. For this update, high-quality international, Canadian, and Provincial CPGs published between 2016 and 2021, focusing on primary prevention and screening of cancer and chronic disease, and applicable to patients 40-69 years of age were identified. A Clinical Working Group consisting of decision-makers, researchers, clinicians, and a patient representative across Canada was split up into 3 topic review teams. A total of 19 CCDPS topics within scope for BETTER were identified. Topic teams reviewed the literature and synthesized guidelines based on evidence for their topic and updated the toolkits to inform the PP role. Results: Development of an updated care map that considers family history and risk factor assessment that is tailored to the patient and adaptable to diverse practice settings. Conclusions: Synthesized and evidence-based integrated care plans can be used to assess patients' CCDPS risk and preferences in diverse populations in Canada. The updated toolkit will facilitate the application of recommendations for the primary prevention of cancer and chronic disease in patients 40-69 years of age., Presenters Donna Manca, MD, MCLSC, Denise Campbell-Scherer, MD, PhD, Carolina Fernandes, MA, MSc, Eva Grunfeld, MD, PhD, FCFP, Kris Aubrey-Bassler, MD, FCFP, MSc, Aisha Lofters, MD, Katherine Latko, CDE, RD, [...]

Aims To evaluate concordance, upgrades and downgrades from biopsy to prostatectomy, and associated clincopathological parameters, using the recently proposed Gleason grade groups/International Society of Urologic Pathology ( ISUP) grades. Methods and results We evaluated 2529 patients who underwent biopsy and prostatectomy in our institution from 2005 to 2014. A global grade group ( GR)/Gleason score ( GS) was used. Factors associated with GR1/ GS ≤6 upgrades and GR2/ GS3 + 4 downgrades were analysed by multivariable logistic regression. The final GR/ GS was identical with the biopsy GR/ GS in 59.3% of cases, with the highest concordance for GR2 and GR5 and lowest for GR4. In GR1-5, identical grades were found in GR: (i) 47.6%, (ii) 73.6%, (iii) 52.8%, (iv) 21.4% and (v) 68.3%, respectively. Final GR was upgraded in 32.3% cases; in GR1-4: (i) 52.4%, (ii) 19.0%, (iii) 16.4% and (iv) 32.9%. Most frequent upgrades occurred from biopsy GR1 to prostatectomy GR2. A final GR downgrade was found in 8.3% cases. For individual GR2-5 the downgrades were found in GR: (i) 7.4%, (ii) 30.8%, (iii) 45.7% and (iv) 31.7%. Upgrades of biopsy GR1 were associated with: age ≥60 years, PSA density ≥0.2, ≥2 positive cores, ≥5% core tissue involvement and perineural invasion [area under receiver operating characteristic ( ROC) curve 0.699]. Downgrades of biopsy GR2 correlated inversely with: age ≥60 years, PSA >10 ng/ml and ≥2 positive core (area under ROC curve 0.623). Conclusions We found highest concordance for GR2 and GR5 and lowest for GR4. The baseline clinical variables associated with GR1 upgrades and GR2 downgrades may play a role in clinical decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Despite high-level evidence of benefit, early repeat resection (ERR) among high-grade T1 bladder cancer (HGT1-BC) patients remains low in several non-Canadian jurisdictions and rates in Canada are largely unreported. We evaluated rates of ERR and trends over time in Alberta. We also examined factors associated with uptake of ERR. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of data from all patients diagnosed with HGT1-BC from 2007 through 2011. Patients were identified from the Alberta Cancer Registry. Patients with a non-urothelial carcinoma of the bladder and those with invasion into the prostate or metastatic disease were excluded. We collected demographic and clinicopathologic information from patients' electronic medical records. Results: A total of 600 patients diagnosed with HCT1-BC were included. Overall, 1 67 patients (27.8%) received an ERR; however, the rate increased in a non-linear fashion from 27.4% in 2007 to 37.8% in 2011. Factors associated with ERR included age <80 years (p=0.021 ) and centre at which the initial transurethral resection of bladder tumour (TURBT) was performed (p=0.013). Median overall survival (OS) was not reached, but five-year OS was 72.7% (95% Cl 68.9, 76.5) for those who received an ERR and 55.3% (95% Cl 52.5, 58.1 ) for those who did not. Conclusions: Use of ERR in patients with HGT1-BC is improving over time. Regional variation in practice suggests the need for implementation strategies (i.e., provincial clinical care pathways) to standardize practice and set indicators for future measurement and reporting. Targeted interventions would require further investigation around the reasons for variation in practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction/Goal: As a research-intensive facility located within a cancer care environment, library services provided at the Holy Cross Site closely adhere to an embedded librarian mandate, one where the librarian "actively engages in activities, possesses extensive knowledge of the researcher's work, and offers assistance above and beyond common library service expectations" (Strain, 2011). The Guideline Utilization Resource Unit (GURU) is composed of knowledge management specialists (KMS) and nurse facilitators (NF) who support multidisciplinary teams in developing, implementing, and evaluating provincial clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the diagnosis, staging, treatment and follow-up of cancer. These CPGs are evidence-based documents with consensus recommendations; they are freely available on a public website for access by practitioners and patients, and are a form of grey literature. Team members at GURU consult regularly with the librarian to ensure that the most accurate and comprehensive search strategy is used to develop CPGs. The goal of this paper is to describe the process of organizing and evaluating a journal club involving a unique collaboration between guideline developers and a librarian. Procedure: The journal club is comprised of three KMSs, two NFs, the GURU Manager and an embedded librarian. The group has been meeting once per month since April 2012. Each member takes turns selecting two articles related to CPG development or implementation, and is responsible for leading an informal discussion. To evaluate the usefulness of the journal club and the impact of grey literature on CPG development in Alberta, all members of the journal club (n=7) were interviewed in a focus group setting or a semi-structured interview. Transcripts of audio-recorded interviews will be qualitatively analyzed for repeated themes related to knowledge gained from, and perceived benefits of journal club meetings. Results: First, we hypothesize that monthly participation in the journal club will increase members' knowledge of development, evaluation, and implementation of guidelines. Second, we believe that participants will have acquired a better understanding of the research process and how to critique current guideline research. Finally, we expect that members will report that the journal club provided the opportunity to facilitate discussions around topics that are less familiar to them. It is anticipated that this collaborative venture will further enhance the importance of grey literature and its usefulness for cancer care clinical practice guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Building on Existing Tools To improvE chronic disease pRevention and screening in primary care Wellness of cancer survIvorS and patiEnts (BETTER WISE) was designed to assess the effectiveness of a cancer and chronic disease prevention and screening (CCDPS) programme. Here, we compare outcomes in participants living with and without financial difficulty., Design: Secondary analysis of a cluster-randomised controlled trial., Setting: Patients of 59 physicians from 13 clinics enrolled between September 2018 and August 2019., Participants: 596 of 1005 trial participants who responded to a financial difficulty screening question at enrolment., Intervention: 1-hour CCDPS visit versus usual care., Outcome Measures: Eligibility for a possible 24 CCDPS actions was assessed at baseline and the primary outcome was the percentage of eligible items that were completed at 12-month follow-up. We also compared the change in response to the financial difficulty screening question between baseline and follow-up., Results: 55 of 265 participants (20.7%) in the control group and 69 of 331 participants (20.8%) in the intervention group reported living with financial difficulty. The primary outcome was 29% (95% CI 26% to 33%) for intervention and 23% (95% CI 21% to 26%) for control participants without financial difficulty (p=0.01). Intervention and control participants with financial difficulty scored 28% (95% CI 24% to 32%) and 32% (95% CI 27% to 38%), respectively (p=0.14). In participants who responded to the financial difficulty question at both time points (n=302), there was a net decrease in the percentage of participants who reported financial difficulty between baseline (21%) and follow-up (12%, p<0.001) which was similar in the control and intervention groups. The response rate to this question was only 51% at follow-up., Conclusion: The BETTER intervention improved uptake of CCDPS manoeuvres in participants without financial difficulty, but not in those living with financial difficulty. Improving CCDPS for people living with financial difficulty may require a different clinical approach or that social determinants be addressed concurrently with clinical and lifestyle needs or both., Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN21333761., Competing Interests: Competing interests: DPM, EG, AKL and CF are directors of a Canadian not-for-profit organisation, The BETTER Institute, which provides training and implementation support to practices, organisations and communities interested in adopting or adapting the BETTER approach. There are no other competing interests to report., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Despite the availability of effective and safe human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines that reduce the incidence and impact of cervical cancer and other cancers, HPV vaccine coverage rates remain persistently low and the cervical cancer burden disproportionately high among Indigenous people globally. This study aimed to systematically identify, appraise, and summarize the literature on documented barriers and supports to HPV vaccination in Indigenous populations internationally. Forty-three studies were included and an inductive, qualitative, thematic synthesis was applied. We report on 10 barrier themes and 7 support themes to vaccine uptake, and provide a quantitative summary of metrics. Focusing on Indigenous perspectives reported in the literature, we propose recommendations on community-research collaboration, culturally safe intergenerational and gender-equitable community HPV vaccine education, as well as multi-level transparency to ensure informed consent is secured in the context of reciprocal relationships. Although the voices of key informant groups (e.g., HPV-vaccine eligible youth and community Elders) are underrepresented in the literature, the identification of barriers and supports to HPV vaccination in a global Indigenous context might help inform researchers and health policy makers who aim to improve HPV vaccine uptake in Indigenous populations., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 MacDonald et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Introduction: Cancer care has expanded from a disease-focused, survival-oriented model to an approach that now considers how survivors can live well in the aftermath of intensive therapy, where they may deal with significant changes to their bodies, mental health or emotional well-being. Research evidence supports the benefit of exercise during and following cancer treatments for cancer-related symptoms, physical functioning and fitness, and health-related quality of life. To move this efficacy evidence into practice, we designed and launched a 5-year study to evaluate the relative benefit from implementing a clinic-to-community-based cancer and exercise model of care., Methods and Analysis: A hybrid effectiveness and implementation trial design is being used to evaluate the effectiveness of delivery of community-based exercise and to collect data on implementation of the programme. The study opened in January 2017, with estimated completion by January 2022. The programme will be delivered in seven cities across the province of Alberta, Canada, with sites including three academic institutions, six YMCA locations, Wellspring Edmonton and Calgary, and six municipal fitness centres. Participants are adult cancer survivors (n=2500) from all tumour groups and stages and at any time point along their cancer treatment trajectory, up to 3 years post treatment completion. Survivors take part in a minimum of 60 min of mild-to-moderate intensity full body exercise twice weekly for a 12-week period. The primary effectiveness outcome is the proportion of participants meeting or exceeding 150 min of moderate intensity exercise per week at 1-year follow-up. The Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework will be utilised to capture individual-level and organizational-level impact of the exercise programme at 12 and 24 weeks and 1-year follow-up. The cohort of survivors participating in the study will allow for long-term (>5-year) evaluation of rates of cancer recurrence and secondary cancers beyond the funding period., Ethics and Dissemination: The study was approved by the Health Research Ethics Board of Alberta. The study is funded by Alberta Innovates and the Alberta Cancer Foundation. The study will help to answer critical questions on the effectiveness of cancer-specific community-based exercise programming in both the short-term and the long-term. Collectively, the findings will help to inform the acceptability, adoption, feasibility, reach and sustainability of community-based exercise., Trial Registration Number: NCT02984163; Pre-results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Importance: Head and neck cancers often require complex, labor-intensive surgeries, especially when free flap reconstruction is required. Enhanced recovery is important in this patient population but evidence-based protocols on perioperative care for this population are lacking., Objective: To provide a consensus-based protocol for optimal perioperative care of patients undergoing head and neck cancer surgery with free flap reconstruction., Evidence Review: Following endorsement by the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society to develop this protocol, a systematic review was conducted for each topic. The PubMed and Cochrane databases were initially searched to identify relevant publications on head and neck cancer surgery from 1965 through April 2015. Consistent key words for each topic included "head and neck surgery," "pharyngectomy," "laryngectomy," "laryngopharyngectomy," "neck dissection," "parotid lymphadenectomy," "thyroidectomy," "oral cavity resection," "glossectomy," and "head and neck." The final selection of literature included meta-analyses and systematic reviews as well as randomized controlled trials where available. In the absence of high-level data, case series and nonrandomized studies in head and neck cancer surgery patients or randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews in non-head and neck cancer surgery patients, were considered. An international panel of experts in major head and neck cancer surgery and enhanced recovery after surgery reviewed and assessed the literature for quality and developed recommendations for each topic based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. All recommendations were graded following a consensus discussion among the expert panel., Findings: The literature search, including a hand search of reference lists, identified 215 relevant publications that were considered to be the best evidence for the topic areas. A total of 17 topic areas were identified for inclusion in the protocol for the perioperative care of patients undergoing major head and neck cancer surgery with free flap reconstruction. Best practice includes several elements of perioperative care. Among these elements are the provision of preoperative carbohydrate treatment, pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis, perioperative antibiotics in clean-contaminated procedures, corticosteroid and antiemetic medications, short acting anxiolytics, goal-directed fluid management, opioid-sparing multimodal analgesia, frequent flap monitoring, early mobilization, and the avoidance of preoperative fasting., Conclusions and Relevance: The evidence base for specific perioperative care elements in head and neck cancer surgery is variable and in many cases information from different surgerical procedures form the basis for these recommendations. Clinical evaluation of these recommendations is a logical next step and further research in this patient population is warranted.

Introduction: In patients with non-metastatic muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) fit for curative therapy, a multidisciplinary approach consisting is recommended. This approach includes local treatment (usually radical cystectomy), ideally combined with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). Despite a survival benefit with NACT, uptake remains low. We assessed NACT consultation in Alberta and examined associative factors, as well as the relationship to survival., Methods: Patients with MIBC were identified through the Alberta Cancer Registry. Demographic and clinicopathologic information was collected from electronic medical records between 2007 and 2011. In addition to descriptive statistics, logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with receiving NACT consultation. Overall survival was described using a Kaplan-Meier estimate., Results: Of the 315 radical cystectomy patients, 140 (45.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 39.5, 50.8) received NACT consultation. Patients ≥80 years (odds ratio [OR] 0.21, 95% CI 0.08, 0.57, p = 0.002) and those treated in Calgary (OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.05, 0.25, p < 0.001) were less likely to receive NACT consultation. The rate of NACT consultation increased steadily from 2007 to 2011 (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.04, 1.45 per year of diagnosis, p = 0.018). After a median follow-up of 28.1 months (range: 14.6-50.3), median survival was 54.7 months for patients who received NACT consultation versus 31.2 months for those who did not (p = 0.030)., Conclusions: NACT consultation in patients with MIBC undergoing radical cystectomy has improved over time; however, regional differences underscore the need for a standardized approach to NACT consultation, including common referral mechanisms.

The side effects of mastectomy can be significant. Breast reconstruction may alleviate some distress; however, there are currently no provincial recommendations regarding the integration of reconstruction with breast cancer therapy. The purpose of the present article is to provide evidence-based strategies for the management of patients who are candidates for reconstruction. A systematic review of meta-analyses, guidelines, clinical trials and comparative studies published between 1980 and 2013 was conducted using the PubMed and EMBASE databases. Reference lists of publications were manually searched for additional literature. The National Guidelines Clearinghouse and SAGE directory, as well as guideline developers' websites, were also searched. Recommendations were developed based on the available evidence. Reconstruction consultation should be made available for patients undergoing mastectomy. Tumour characteristics, cancer therapy, patient comorbidities, body habitus and smoking history may affect reconstruction outcomes. Although immediate reconstruction should be considered whenever possible, delayed reconstruction is acceptable when immediate is not available or appropriate. The integration of reconstruction and postmastectomy radiotherapy should be addressed in a multidisciplinary setting. The decision as to which type of procedure to perform (autologous or alloplastic with or without acellular dermal matrices) should be left to the discretion of the surgeons and the patient after providing counselling. Skin-sparing mastectomy is safe and appropriate. Nipple-sparing is generally not recommended for patients with malignancy, but could be considered for carefully selected patients. Immediate reconstruction requires resources to coordinate operating room time between the general and plastic surgeons, to provide supplies including acellular dermal matrices, and to develop the infrastructure needed to facilitate multidisciplinary discussions.

Bone loss is common in patients with breast cancer. Bone modifying agents (BMAs), such as bisphosphonates and denosumab, have been shown to reverse or stabilize bone loss and may be useful in the primary and metastatic settings. The purpose of this review is to provide clear evidence-based strategies for the management of bone loss and its symptoms in breast cancer. A systematic review of clinical trials and meta-analyses published between 1996 and 2012 was conducted of MEDLINE and EMBASE. Reference lists were hand-searched for additional publications. Recommendations were developed based on the best available evidence. Zoledronate, pamidronate, clodronate, and denosumab are recommended for metastatic breast cancer patients; however, no one agent can be recommended over another. Zoledronate or any oral bisphosphonate and denosumab should be considered in primary breast cancer patients who are postmenopausal on aromatase inhibitor therapy and have a high risk of fracture and/or a low bone mineral density and in premenopausal primary breast cancer patients who become amenorrheic after therapy. No one agent can be recommended over another. BMAs are not currently recommended as adjuvant therapy in primary breast cancer for the purpose of improving survival, although a major Early Breast Cancer Cooperative Trialists' Group meta-analysis is underway which may impact future practice. Adverse events can be managed with appropriate supportive care.