Search

Introduction: Polypharmacy in patients with advanced cancer represents a major public health problem, leading to risk of iatrogenesis, decrease of quality of life and increase of healthcare costs. In the field of geriatrics, health policies have been developed to address polypharmacy through the use of deprescribing tools. Recently, palliative care initiatives have been introduced, yet these have not fully considered the specificities of this population, particularly their perceptions. It is therefore important to better understand patients' perceptions of deprescribing in order to adapt tools and actions to make these approaches more effective. Objectives: The aim is to investigate patients' perceptions of deprescribing in palliative oncology care, and to explore factors that may influence patients' attitudes and beliefs about deprescribing and to validate a specific questionnaire (rPATD) in this population. An ancillary study will investigate the relationship between patients' health literacy and their perception of deprescribing. Method: A prospective, observational, multicenter study will be conducted using a sequential mixed exploratory design in a population of patients living with advanced cancer and with a physician-estimated life expectancy of less than 1 year. The study will include an initial qualitative phase. Individual semi-structured interviews using a descriptive approach (thematic analysis) will be conducted (upon saturation). Following analysis of the qualitative data, a quantitative study including 300 patients will be realized to meet secondary objectives. Several data will be collected and 2 self-questionnaires will be administered: the BMQ (beliefs about medicine) and rPATD (perception of deprescribing) possibly supplemented by additional items if required by the qualitative analysis. The auxiliary study will be conducted during this second phase, using a validated self-questionnaire to assess patients' level of literacy. Conclusion: The disparate outcomes will facilitate the understanding of the perception of deprescribing in palliative oncology care, enabling the development of tailored approaches adapted to this population. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials Identifier: NCT06193083. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. This study aimed to develop and perform a content validation of a brief French tool for self-assessment of supportive and palliative care needs in patients with cancer, using four different approaches: issue's importance, problem intensity, problem burden, and expressed need for help. Methods. Items, questions, and response scales were based on a literature review and discussions within a multidisciplinary scientific committee. A panel of experts evaluated the relevance, comprehensiveness, and comprehensibility of each item and question using the Delphi method. These properties were also assessed through cognitive debriefing interviews with cancer patients. Results. Eleven domains were selected from the literature review: physical, role, social, psychological, patient care and support, healthcare, information, financial, activities of daily living, spirituality, and sexuality. A scientific committee created 15 items and five questions. Two Delphi rounds were required to reach a consensus among the 29 experts on a pilot version. Twenty-three cancer patients were involved in the cognitive debriefing interviews. All items and questions were considered as relevant. Acceptability was good, and four items were reformulated based on patients' comments. Conclusion. This brief French tool has a very good content validity and can be used in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Posttraumatic growth inventory (PTGI) aims to assess the positive psychological changes that individuals can perceive after a traumatic life event such as a cancer diagnosis. Several French translations of the PTGI have been proposed, but comprehensive data on their psychometric properties are lacking. This study aimed to provide a more complete assessment of the psychometric properties of one of the most used PTGI translations in early-stage breast cancer and melanoma patients.Methods: A sample of 379 patients completed the PTGI two years after their cancer diagnosis. A confirmatory analysis was first performed to determine whether the initial five-factor structure of the PTGI was adequate for this French version. As issues were identified in the translation and in the questionnaire structure, we performed an exploratory analysis to determine the most suitable structure for this questionnaire. Validity and reliability of the evidenced structured were then assessed.Results: The exploratory analysis evidenced a four-factor structure close to the initial structure: four of the five initial domains were recovered, and items from the unrecovered domain were split into the other domains. This new structure showed good internal consistency and acceptable validity.Conclusions: This study highlights that the process of translation and cross-cultural validation of questionnaires is crucial to obtain valid and reliable psychometric instruments. We advise French psycho-oncology researchers and psychotherapists to (i) use the revised translation of Lelorain et al. (2010) proposed in this manuscript and (ii) use the four scores newly evidenced with a grouping of two response categories. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cancer patients (CPs) are considered more vulnerable and as a high mortality group regarding COVID-19. In this analysis, we aimed to describe asymptomatic COVID (+) CPs and associated factors. Methods: We conducted a prospective study in CPs and health care workers (HCWs) in 4 French cancer centers (PAPESCO [ PAtients et PErsonnels de Santé des Centres de Lutte Contre le Cancer pendant l'épidémie de COvid-19 ] study). This analysis used data recorded between June 17, 2020 and November 30, 2020 in CPs (first 2 waves, no variants). At inclusion and quarterly, CPs reported the presence of predefined COVID-19 symptoms and had a blood rapid diagnostic test; a reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) was done in case of suspected infection. Results: A total 878 CPs were included; COVID-19 prevalence was similar in both CPs (8%) and HCWs (9.5%); of the 70 CPs (8%) who were COVID (+), 29 (41.4%) were and remained asymptomatic; 241/808 of the COVID (−) (29.8%) were symptomatic. 18 COVID (+) were hospitalized (2% of CPs), 1 in intensive care unit (ICU) and 1 died (0.1% of CPs and 2.4% of symptomatic COVID [+] CPs). Only the inclusion center was associated with clinical presentation (in Nancy, Angers, Nantes, and Clermont-Ferrand: 65.4%, 35%, 28.6%, and 10% CPs were asymptomatic, respectively). Conclusions: Seroprevalence of COVID-19 in CPs was similar to that observed in HCWs; mortality related to COVID-19 among CPs was 0.1%. More than 40% of COVID (+) CPs were asymptomatic and one third of COVID (−) CPs had symptoms. Only geographic origin was associated with the presence or absence of symptoms. Social distancing and protective measures must be applied in CPs at home and when hospitalized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: A diagnosis of breast cancer or melanoma is a traumatic life event that patients have to face. However, their locus-of-control (LOC) beliefs and coping strategies as well as the associations with health-related quality of life (HRQoL) changes over time are still not well known and rarely compared by cancer site.Methods: The objective of this longitudinal study was to assess the association of LOC (Cancer Locus-of-Control Scale) and coping (Brief Cope) changes, with change in HRQoL (EORTC QLQ-C30) over time in newly diagnosed breast cancer and melanoma patients at 1, 6, 12, and 24 month post-diagnosis. Mixed models were used to compare LOC and coping longitudinal changes as well as their associations with HRQoL changes in early-stage breast cancer and melanoma patients.Results: Overall, 215 breast cancer and 78 melanoma patients participated in the study. At baseline, HRQoL levels were often higher for breast cancer compared to melanoma patients. For breast cancer and melanoma patients, negative coping strategies and perceived control over the course of illness were negatively and positively associated with HRQoL changes, respectively. For breast cancer patients only, emotional coping and internal causal attribution were negatively associated with HRQoL changes. For both cancer sites, living with a partner correlated with worse HRQoL.Conclusions: Understanding coping strategies and LOC beliefs used by patients soon after their cancer diagnosis and over the course of illness can help identifying psychological and supportive care to modify maladaptive thoughts and beliefs and promote more adaptive behaviors to ultimately improve patients' well-being and HRQoL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: COVID-19 has some clinical manifestations that are similar to the side effects of cancer treatments such that cancer patients may fail to distinguish COVID-19 symptoms from those of their treatments. The PAPESCO-19 study investigated 13 COVID-19 symptoms and confirmed that in combination with anorexia, fever, headache, and rhinorrhea, anosmia has a strong association with COVID-19 for cancer patients while dysgeusia/ageusia does not. Background: Cancer patients may fail to distinguish COVID-19 symptoms such as anosmia, dysgeusia/ageusia, anorexia, headache, and fatigue, which are frequent after cancer treatments. We aimed to identify symptoms associated with COVID-19 and to assess the strength of their association in cancer and cancer-free populations. Methods: The multicenter cohort study PAPESCO-19 included 878 cancer patients and 940 healthcare workers (HCWs). At baseline and quarterly thereafter, they reported the presence or absence of 13 COVID-19 symptoms observed over 3 months and the results of routine screening RT-PCR, and they were systematically tested for SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies. We identified the symptom combinations significantly associated with COVID-19. Results: Eight percent of cancer patients were COVID-19 positive, and 32% were symptomatic. Among the HCWs, these proportions were 9.5 and 52%, respectively. Anosmia, anorexia, fever, headache, and rhinorrhea together accurately discriminated (c-statistic = 0.7027) COVID-19 cases from cancer patients. Anosmia, dysgeusia/ageusia, muscle pain, intense fatigue, headache, and chest pain better discriminated (c-statistic = 0.8830) COVID-19 cases among the HCWs. Anosmia had the strongest association in both the cancer patients (OR = 7.48, 95% CI: 2.96–18.89) and HCWs (OR = 5.71, 95% CI: 2.21–14.75). Conclusions: COVID-19 symptoms and their diagnostic performance differ in the cancer patients and HCWs. Anosmia is associated with COVID-19 in cancer patients, while dysgeusia/ageusia is not. Cancer patients deserve tailored preventive measures due to their particular COVID-19 symptom pattern. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]