Search

Purpose: Long-term follow-up (LTFU) care for childhood cancer survivors (CCSs) is essential to improve and maintain their quality of life. The Survivorship Passport (SurPass) is a digital tool which can aid in the delivery of adequate LTFU care. During the European PanCareSurPass (PCSP) project, the SurPass v2.0 will be implemented and evaluated at six LTFU care clinics in Austria, Belgium, Germany, Italy, Lithuania and Spain. We aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the SurPass v2.0 with regard to the care process as well as ethical, legal, social and economical aspects. Methods: An online, semi-structured survey was distributed to 75 stakeholders (LTFU care providers, LTFU care program managers and CCSs) affiliated with one of the six centres. Barriers and facilitators identified in four centres or more were defined as main contextual factors influencing implementation of SurPass v2.0. Results: Fifty-four barriers and 50 facilitators were identified. Among the main barriers were a lack of time and (financial) resources, gaps in knowledge concerning ethical and legal issues and a potential increase in health-related anxiety in CCSs upon receiving a SurPass. Main facilitators included institutions' access to electronic medical records, as well as previous experience with SurPass or similar tools. Conclusions: We provided an overview of contextual factors that may influence SurPass implementation. Solutions should be found to overcome barriers and ensure effective implementation of SurPass v2.0 into routine clinical care. Implications for Cancer Survivors: These findings will be used to inform on an implementation strategy tailored for the six centres. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Long-term follow-up (LTFU) care is essential to optimise health outcomes in childhood cancer survivors (CCS). We aimed to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on LTFU services and providers.Methods: A COVID-19 working group within the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group (IGHG) distributed a questionnaire to LTFU service providers in 37 countries across Europe, Asia, North America, Central/South America, and Australia. The questionnaire assessed how care delivery methods changed during the pandemic and respondents' level of worry about the pandemic's impact on LTFU care delivery, their finances, their health, and that of their family and friends.Results: Among 226 institutions, providers from 178 (79%) responded. Shortly after the initial outbreak, 42% of LTFU clinics closed. Restrictions during the pandemic resulted in fewer in-person consultations and an increased use of telemedicine, telephone, and email consultations. The use of a risk assessment to prioritise the method of LTFU consultation for individual CCS increased from 12 to 47%. While respondents anticipated in-person consultations to remain the primary method for LTFU service delivery, they expected significantly increased use of telemedicine and telephone consultations after the pandemic. On average, respondents reported highest levels of worry about psychosocial well-being of survivors.Conclusions: The pandemic necessitated changes in LTFU service delivery, including greater use of virtual LTFU care and risk-stratification to identify CCS that need in-person evaluations.Implications For Cancer Survivors: Increased utilisation of virtual LTFU care and risk stratification is likely to persist post-pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: With increasing numbers of childhood cancer survivors (CCS), it is important to identify the impact of cancer and CCS' needs for support services that can mitigate the long-term impact on psychosocial wellbeing, including health-related quality of life (HRQOL). We aimed (1) to describe survivors' wellbeing, impact of cancer, and supportive care needs and (2) to determine how socio-demographic or clinical characteristics and impact of cancer relate to survivors' unmet needs. Method: In this mixed methods study, a quantitative survey was used to assess HRQOL, psychological distress, impact of cancer, and supportive care needs. Qualitative interviews were conducted to explore the meaning of wellbeing, health, and impact of cancer. Results: Overall, 69 CCS participated in the survey of which 28 participated in qualitative interviews (aged ≥ 18 years, diagnosed with cancer ≤ 18 years). Few CCS (13%) reported poor physical HRQOL, but almost half reported poor mental HRQOL (49%) and psychological distress (42%). Health was considered to encompass both: physical and emotional aspects of wellbeing. Cancer positively impacted CCS' ability to care and attitude towards life, whereas relationships and insurance were negatively impacted. Risks for unmet needs increased in CCS with self-reported low health status, late effects, psychological distress, with older age at study or longer time since end of treatment. Conclusion: In our study, many CCS experienced various psychosocial, psychological and informational unmet needs, indicating that survivors' needs are currently not duly addressed. Current efforts to provide supportive psychosocial care in Switzerland should be further operationalized to provide adequate support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The successful transition of childhood cancer survivors from pediatric- to adult-focused long-term follow-up care is crucial and can be a critical period. Knowledge of current transition practices, especially regarding barriers and facilitators perceived by survivors and health care professionals, is important to develop sustainable transition processes and implement them into daily clinical practice. We performed a systematic review with the aim of assessing transition practices, readiness tools, and barriers and facilitators. Methods: We searched three databases (PubMed, Embase/Ovid, CINAHL) and included studies published between January 2000 and January 2020. We performed this review according to the PRISMA guidelines and registered the study protocol on PROSPERO; two reviewers independently extracted the content of the included studies. Results: We included 26 studies: six studies described current transition practices, six assessed transition readiness tools, and 15 assessed barriers and facilitators to transition. Conclusion: The current literature describing transition practices is limited and overlooks adherence to follow-up care as a surrogate marker of transition success. However, the literature provides deep insight into barriers and facilitators to transition and theoretical considerations for the assessment of transition readiness. We showed that knowledge and education are key facilitators to transition that should be integrated into transition practices tailored to the individual needs of each survivor and the possibilities and limitations of each country's health care system. Implications for Cancer Survivors: The current knowledge on barriers and facilitators on transition should be implemented in clinical practice to support sustainable transition processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Purpose: Good news: Survival rates in childhood cancer have increased from 20% up to over 80% in Europe, depending on cancer type and country. Not so good news: This great success comes with the price that up to 60 to 70% of childhood cancer survivors suffer from cancer- and treatment-related long-term effects that need life-long follow-up care. Bad news: transition from paediatric health care to adult health care still poses a great problem for childhood cancer survivors due to the lack of adequate long-term care structures for adult survivors of childhood cancer. Patients and methods: Ongoing initiatives and projects driven forward jointly by survivors, parents and health care professionals tackle this gap: Childhood Cancer International Europe (CCI-E) and its Survivors Network (CCI-ESN), the Pan-European Network for Care of Survivors after Childhood and Adolescent Cancer (PanCare) and the European Society for Paediatric Oncology (SIOP Europe) are working on and advocating for better long-term follow-up care structures across Europe. Results: Three ongoing best practice projects are presented—each reflecting one important element in the delivery and provision of comprehensive long-term follow-up care: The PanCareFollowUp Project, the Survivorship-Passport and the ZONE-project. Conclusion: The Childhood Cancer International Europe Survivors Network call for action: We need the support of politicians and our health care systems to make sure that every single survivor gets the long-term care that they need. So #RaiseYourHands4Survivors and help us close the gap! [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This study aimed to elucidate experiences and preferences for survivorship care delivery among adolescent and young adult (AYA) childhood cancer survivors who experienced healthcare transitions.Methods: Eight focus groups were conducted with two groups of AYA survivors and their parents: (1) those who recently completed cancer treatment and are beginning follow-up care and (2) those who disengaged in follow-up care after the transition from pediatric to adult survivorship clinics. Interviewers used a structured interview guide that contained questions about perceptions and preferences for survivorship care models, resources, and tools (e.g., a survivorship care plan). We employed directed content analysis techniques to identify and organize relevant themes.Results: Results of this study support six primary themes for optimizing survivorship care models for AYA: (1) improve knowledge of late effects and need for LTFU; (2) provide supportive services that help to address fear and uncertainty about health; (3) adapt survivorship care to be consistent with AYA developmental factors; (4) increase support surrounding healthcare transitions; (5) improve survivorship care communication and coordination between patients and families, and between providers; and (6) incorporate digital health tools.Conclusions: These groups represent vulnerable patient populations in AYA survivorship care and their perspectives highlight potential clinical and research priorities for enhancing long-term care models.Implications For Cancer Survivors: Elucidating AYA and parent recommendations for survivorship care delivery can help to promote continuous engagement in care, target unmet needs, and promote health through survivorship models that are deemed acceptable to both patients and families. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Childhood cancer survivors need regular, risk-adapted, long-term survivor care. This retrospective study describes the proportion of survivors seen for an initial survivor clinic visit within a large pediatric oncology program.Methods: Patients diagnosed with non-central nervous system childhood malignancies from 2007 to 2012 were followed from the time of survivor clinic eligibility (2 years following completion of therapy) through their initial survivor clinic visit or end of study. Demographic, cancer-related, and logistical factors related to clinic attendance were examined using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional regressions.Results: Eligible survivors were 53.0% male, 51.5% non-Hispanic white, and 30.9% survivors of leukemia. Among the 866 eligible survivors for this study, 610 (70.4%) completed their initial visit. After controlling for sex and time eligible, survivors who received surgery only (aHR 0.04 (0.02, 0.08)) or radiation only (0.24 (0.15, 0.39)) and who had Medicaid (0.77 (0.64, 0.92)) were significantly less likely to have an initial visit as were those of black or other/mixed race and those who lived > 25 mi from the clinic (p < 0.01). Survivors aged 6-11 years or 12-17 years at eligibility were significantly more likely to complete an initial visit as compared to those aged 2-5 years (1.55 (1.24, 1.93) and 1.44 (1.14, 1.83), respectively).Conclusions: Nearly a third of survivors were not seen in a pediatric survivor clinic despite the importance of survivor care. These results identify populations at risk for not pursuing long-term survivorship care.Implications For Cancer Survivors: Failure to transition to pediatric survivor care may lead to lifelong non-engagement and incorrect perceptions about future health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Childhood cancer patients report low physical activity levels despite the risk for long-term complications that may benefit from exercise. Research is lacking regarding exercise barriers, preferences, and beliefs among patients (1) on- and off-therapy and (2) across the age spectrum.Methods: Cross-sectional study in the Yale Pediatric Hematology-Oncology Clinic (October 2013-October 2014). Participants were ≥ 4 years old, > 1 month after cancer diagnosis at < 20 years, not acutely ill, expected to live > 6 months, and received chemotherapy and/or radiation. Participants (or parents if < 13 years) completed a survey.Results: The 162 patients (99% participated) were 34% children (4.0-12.9 years), 31% adolescents (13.0-17.9 years), and 35% adults (≥ 18 years). Most had leukemia/lymphoma (66%); 32% were on-therapy. On-therapy patients were more likely than off-therapy patients (73 vs. 48%; p = 0.003) to report ≥ 1 barrier related to physical complaints, such as "just too tired" (46 vs. 28%; p = 0.021) or "afraid" of injury (22 vs. 9%; p = 0.027). The majority preferred walking (73%), exercising at home (91%), exercising in the afternoon (79%), and a maximum travel time of 10-20 min (54%); preferences did not vary significantly by therapy status or age. Most respondents (94%) recognized the benefits of exercise after cancer, but 50% of on- vs. 12% of off-therapy patients believed "their cancer diagnosis made it unsafe to exercise regularly" (p < 0.001).Conclusions: Physical activity barriers pertaining to physical complaints and safety concerns were more pronounced in on-therapy childhood cancer patients but persisted off-therapy. Preferences and beliefs were relatively consistent. Our data can inform interventions in different patient subgroups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Given childhood cancer survivors' risk of treatment-induced late effects, long-term follow-up care is recommended. We explored experiences with late effects-related care and preferences for long-term follow-up care among adult survivors of childhood malignant lymphoma in Norway.Methods: We conducted five focus group interviews with 34 survivors (19 females; 21 Hodgkin/13 non-Hodgkin lymphoma survivors; mean age 39 years; mean time from diagnosis 26 years). Data was analyzed using principles of thematic analysis.Results: Two main themes were identified: (1) the survivors' experiences with late effects-related care and (2) their preferences for long-term follow-up care. Most of the survivors were dissatisfied with their late effects-related care due to perceptions of poor coordination of healthcare needs in a fragmented system, combined with a perceived lack of knowledge of late effects among themselves and general practitioners (GPs). All survivors valued long-term follow-up care. Oncologists were the preferred care providers, but GPs were considered acceptable providers if they had sufficient knowledge of late effects and routine examinations, short waiting times, and improved GP-oncologist collaboration.Conclusions: Our results suggest that a shared care model of long-term follow-up care involving specialists, GPs, and the survivors themselves is likely to fulfill several of the currently unmet needs among adult survivors of childhood cancers. Improved patient education about late effects and follow-up care would aid self-management. The survivors' concerns regarding lack of sufficient knowledge of late effects among GPs suggest a need for improving access to, and dissemination of, information of late effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Focusing on primary care providers (PCPs) of known childhood cancer survivors, we used a mixed methods approach to understand providers' experiences with the survivorship care plan (SCP), as well as preferences and barriers regarding survivorship care.Methods: The SCP was sent to 202 eligible PCPs of patients attending a regional survivorship clinic. The PCPs then completed quantitative postal surveys. Sixteen PCPs underwent an additional qualitative interview. Provider characteristics were examined as potential predictors of experiences, preferences, and barriers regarding survivorship care. Grounded theory was utilized to analyze the qualitative data.Results: Respondents (n=134) included 55% pediatricians, 23% internists, 20% family practitioners, and 2% obstetricians/gynecologists. Only 8% of PCPs preferred to have primary responsibility for survivorship care; 46% favored a specialized clinic. A minority of PCPs reported that they felt "very comfortable" using the SCP to guide surveillance (31%) or deliver all survivorship care (3%). Endorsed barriers included lack of knowledge/training (74%), not recalling or understanding the contents of the SCP (69%), and uncertainty about who is responsible for providing care (58%). Two distinct themes emerged from the qualitative interviews: a preference not to be responsible for survivorship care, and uncertain utility of the SCP.Conclusions: Our study suggests that PCPs of childhood cancer survivors generally felt uncomfortable using the SCP and providing survivorship care. Even with the availability of the SCP, the biggest barrier was lack of knowledge. Our data suggests that including PCPs in survivorship care will require additional educational opportunities and evaluation of more collaborative models of care delivery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Because many survivors do not receive recommended follow-up, we sought to characterize patterns and predictors of survivorship clinic attendance in a population-based sample of childhood cancer survivors.Methods: Using the Connecticut Tumor Registry, we identified all patients diagnosed with cancer at age ≤ 18 years from March 1, 1998 to March 1, 2008, still in follow-up 5 years post-diagnosis, and living <100 miles from Yale. Survivorship clinic attendance, demographics, disease characteristics, and treatment exposures were ascertained. Vital status was confirmed with the National Death Index. The Kaplan-Meier curves and hazard ratios were calculated for survivorship clinic attendance.Results: Four hundred eighty-nine eligible survivors currently 19.1 ± 6.2 years old were diagnosed at a mean age of 9.1 ± 5.8 years with leukemias/lymphomas (47.2 %), central nervous system tumors (16.4 %), sarcomas (11.2 %), thyroid cancers or melanomas (7.8 %), and other solid tumors (17.4 %). The 10-year post-diagnosis clinic attendance probability was 27.8 % (SE = 2.3) overall, and 36.9 % (SE = 4.4) and 40.8 % (SE = 3.8), in patients with radiation and anthracycline exposure, respectively. In adjusted analysis, patients with insurance (HR = 2.90; p < 0.01 for private and HR = 2.05; p = 0.02 for public assistance), treated with anthracyclines (HR = 3.05; p < 0.01), and treated with radiation (HR = 1.90; p < 0.01) were significantly more likely to attend clinic.Conclusions: The majority of childhood cancer survivors in our population-based sample had not attended survivorship clinic, even among those with high-risk exposures. Health care access, as measured by insurance status, was an important predictor of clinic attendance.Implications For Cancer Survivors: More research is needed to clarify the link between insurance status and survivorship care to increase appropriate late effects surveillance in this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Childhood cancer survivors require life-long care focused on the specific late effects that may arise from their cancer and its treatment. In many centers, survivors are required to transition from follow-up care in a paediatric cancer center, to care provided in an adult care setting. The purpose of this study was to identify the psychological factors involved in this transition to adult care long-term follow-up clinics.Methods: Qualitative interviews were conducted with ten paediatric survivors still in paediatric care, as well as 28 adult survivors of whom 11 had transitioned successfully to adult care (attended three long-term follow-up (LTFU) appointments consecutively); ten who failed to transition (attended at least one LTFU appointment as an adult, but were inconsistent with subsequent attendance); and seven who had never transitioned (did not attend any LTFU care as an adult). Line-by-line coding was used to establish categories and themes. Constant comparison was used to examine relationships within and across codes and categories.Results: Two overall categories and four subthemes were identified: (1) Identification with being a cancer survivor included the subthemes of 'cancer identity' and 'cancer a thing of the past' and; (2) Emotional components included the subthemes of 'fear and anxiety' and 'gratitude and gaining perspective'. The analysis revealed that the same factor could act as either a motivator or a hindrance to successful transition in different survivors (e.g., fear of recurrence of cancer might be a barrier or a facilitator depending on the survivor's life experience).Conclusions: Psychological factors are an important consideration when preparing cancer survivors for transition to adult long-term follow-up care. Identifying and addressing the individual psychological needs of childhood cancer survivors may improve the likelihood of their successful transition to adult care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]