Search

Simple Summary: Treatment for osteosarcoma (OS) has remained largely unchanged over the past 25 years. This is due in part to the low incidence of the disease, which makes the design of and recruitment to clinical trials challenging. The aim of our ongoing study is to establish a platform for the recruitment of newly diagnosed OS patients across the UK, with corresponding collection of clinical and patient-reported outcome (PRO) data, as well as biospecimen sample collection. In Stage 1 of the study, we established the feasibility of patient recruitment and patient data and sample collection. In Stage 2, biological and clinical data will be correlated with outcomes to develop prognostic biomarkers and inform the development of future clinical trials. There has been little change to the standard treatment for osteosarcoma (OS) over the last 25 years and there is an unmet need to identify new biomarkers and novel therapeutic approaches if outcomes are to improve. Furthermore, there is limited evidence on the impact of OS treatment on patient-reported outcomes (PROs). ICONIC (Improving Outcomes through Collaboration in Osteosarcoma; NCT04132895) is a prospective observational cohort study recruiting newly diagnosed OS patients across the United Kingdom (UK) with matched longitudinal collection of clinical, biological, and PRO data. During Stage 1, which assessed the feasibility of recruitment and data collection, 102 patients were recruited at 22 sites with representation from patient groups frequently excluded in OS studies, including patients over 50 years and those with less common primary sites. The feasibility of collecting clinical and biological samples, in addition to PRO data, has been established and there is ongoing analysis of these data as part of Stage 2. ICONIC will provide a unique, prospective cohort of newly diagnosed OS patients representative of the UK patient population, with fully annotated clinical outcomes linked to molecularly characterised biospecimens, allowing for comprehensive analyses to better understand biology and develop new biomarkers and novel therapeutic approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: The Sarcoma Assessment Measure (SAM) is a special questionnaire for patients with sarcomas, a type of cancer. It was created with input from both patients and healthcare professionals and is meant to be used by professionals to better understand how sarcoma affects a patient's life. We tested the SAM on 762 patients who had different types of sarcomas and ranged in age from 13 to 82. We found that the SAM could be a useful tool for both researchers and healthcare professionals to assess how sarcoma symptoms impact a patient's life. However, more testing with a larger and more diverse group of patients is needed to be sure it is a good outcome measure in drug trials. The Sarcoma Assessment Measure (SAM) was developed as a sarcoma-specific patient-reported outcome measure to be used in clinical practice. We have reported in detail how SAM has been developed in collaboration with patients and healthcare professionals. The aim of this paper is to report the preliminary validation of SAM. The 22-item SAM was administered alongside a validated quality of life questionnaire and measure of activities of daily living. Linear modelling was used to build a measure, which had predictive validity in comparison to more established outcome measures. Of the 762 patients who participated in the study, 44.1% identified as male, and participant age ranged from 13 to 82 years. Clinically, participants presented with a range of soft tissue (82.2%) and bone (21.8%) sarcomas. Our preliminary analysis indicates that SAM accounts for 35% of the global quality of life scale and 18% of the Toronto Extremity Salvage Scale (TESS); so psychometrically, it overlaps with quality of life and activities of daily living, but also measures distinct concerns. This demonstrates that this measure picks up issues that are important to patients with sarcoma that are not reflected in other measures. We have established the preliminary validity of SAM and believe it has utility as a patient-reported outcome measure both as a research tool and for assessing the impact of symptoms and dysfunction related to sarcoma as part of clinical care. Further validation using a larger and more clinically diverse sample is now needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Sarcomas are uncommon cancers growing in bones and soft tissue. As they are uncommon, we know less about them. Patients with sarcoma take longer to be diagnosed. This study examines what 78 people with different types of sarcomas told us about being diagnosed. We found out that approximately 7/10 people go to their General Practitioner (GP) first and do this within about 2 weeks of noticing something is wrong; however, those aged 13–24 years waited longer, at just over 4 weeks. Most people took approximately 3 months from noticing a symptom to being diagnosed, while those with soft tissue sarcoma took 5 months. More research is needed to help us diagnose sarcomas more quickly. Patients with sarcoma often report prolonged time to diagnosis, which is attributed to the rarity of sarcoma and the low awareness of pre-diagnostic signs and symptoms. Aims: To describe patients' experiences of pre-diagnostic signs/symptoms and pathways to diagnosis, including where help was sought, and the processes involved. Methods: Mixed methods involving quantitative, qualitative and inductive thematic analyses using novel process mapping of patient journey data, as reported by the patients. We examined the time from symptom onset to first professional presentation (patient interval, PI), first consultation to diagnostic biopsy, first consultation to diagnosis (diagnostic interval) and first presentation to diagnosis (total interval). Results: A total of 87 interviews were conducted over 5 months in 2017. Of these, 78 (40 males/38 females) were included. The sarcoma subtypes were bone (n = 21), soft tissue (n = 41), head and neck (n = 9) and gastro-intestinal (GIST; n = 7). Age at diagnosis was 13–24 (n = 7), 25–39 (n = 23), 40–64 (n = 34) and 65+ (n = 14) years. The median PI was 13 days (1–4971) and similar between sarcoma subtypes, with the exception of GIST (mPI = 2 days, (1–60). The longest mPI (31 days, range 4–762) was for those aged 13–24 years. The median diagnostic interval was 87.5 (range 0–5474 days). A total of 21 patients were misdiagnosed prior to diagnosis and symptoms were commonly attributed to lifestyle factors. Conclusions: Prolonged times to diagnosis were experienced by the majority of patients in our sample. Further research into the evolution of pre-diagnostic sarcoma symptoms is required to inform awareness interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: After a cancer diagnosis, the fear that it could come back is one of the most difficult negative emotions to manage. Sarcoma is a rare cancer of connective tissue affecting soft tissue and bone that has a high rate of recurrence and metastases. It can present itself in any age group from childhood to older adulthood. The experience of fear of cancer recurrence has not yet been explored in-depth among those with sarcoma. We, therefore, conducted an online survey to identify the prevalence of fear of cancer recurrence and factors that may be associated with it. A total of 229 people with sarcoma submitted responses, and the majority expressed interest in receiving support for fear of cancer recurrence. Overall, fear of cancer recurrence levels was found to be higher than those reported by patients with most other types of cancer. Emotional distress and being able to manage emotions were associated with fear of cancer recurrence. Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is a persistent concern among those living with cancer and is associated with a variety of negative psychosocial outcomes. However, people with sarcoma have been underrepresented within this area of research. We aimed to determine the prevalence of FCR experienced by people with sarcoma in the United Kingdom and explore factors that may predict FCR, such as the perceived impact of cancer and psychological flexibility. Participants (n = 229) with soft tissue (n = 167), bone (n = 25), and gastrointestinal stromal tumours (n = 33) completed an online survey including the self-reported measures of FCR, the perceived physical and psychological impact of cancer and psychological flexibility, and demographic information. Data were analysed using ANOVA and multiple regression modelling. Mean FCR scores (M = 91.4; SD = 26.5) were higher than those reported in meta-analytic data inclusive of all cancer types (M = 65.2; SD = 28.2). Interest in receiving support for FCR was also high (70%). Significant factors associated with FCR included cognitive and emotional distress and psychological flexibility, but not perceptions of the physical impact of cancer (R2 = 0.56). The negative association between psychological flexibility and FCR suggests the potential benefit of intervention approaches which foster psychological flexibility, such as acceptance and commitment therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: In England, specialist cancer services for adolescents and young adults (young people) aged 15–24 are provided in 13 specialist units, with additional care provided in child and adult cancer units in the region. As a result of specialization, health care professionals (HCPs) have refined their competence, to deliver holistic care that has become central to the culture of young people's cancer care. We sought to understand and describe how HCPs developed this competence. Methods: We conducted a multiple case study in four regions across England in 24 hospitals. Data were collected through observation of clinical areas, shadowing members of the multidisciplinary team, and semistructured interviews with young people. Data were analyzed thematically and triangulated to draw meaning applicable to a range of contexts. Results: Young people (n = 29) and HCP (n = 41) across 24 different care settings were interviewed. Holistic competence enabled HCPs to deliver care that considered the age-specific needs of young people, including social, emotional, and psychological needs, in accordance with their life stage and psychosocial development. Development of holistic competence was facilitated by the following four factors: the environment, the experience continuum, enthusiasm, and education. Conclusion: The four factors facilitating holistic competence were interlinked. Working in a specialist/dedicated environment for young people increased HCPs' exposure to young people. This enabled them to become experienced in young people's cancer care, supported through education and training. Without frequent exposure to young people, HCPs were less able to achieve holistic competence, the impact of which was acutely felt by young people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The end of active treatment is a period of high stress for young people with cancer, but limited literature exists about their information and support needs during this phase. This study aimed to understand the needs of young people with cancer, how these needs are currently being met, and how best to provide information and support at the end of active treatment.Methods: This was a multi-stage, mixed methods study exploring the end of treatment experience from the perspectives of young people, and the healthcare professionals caring for them. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with healthcare professionals, which informed a survey administered nationally. Subsequently, semi-structured interviews were conducted with young people. These combined results informed a co-design workshop to develop recommendations.Results: Telephone interviews were conducted with 12 healthcare professionals and 49 completed the online survey. A total of 11 young people aged 19-26 years (female = 8; 73%) were interviewed. The stakeholder workshop was attended by both healthcare professionals (n = 8) and young people (n = 3). At the end of treatment young people experience numerous ongoing physical issues including pain, fatigue and insomnia; in addition to a range of psychosocial and emotional issues including anxiety, fear of recurrence and isolation. The top three priorities for end of treatment care were: earlier provision and preparation around on-going impact of cancer and cancer treatment; standardised and continued follow-up of young people's emotional well-being; and development of more information and resources specific to young people.Conclusion: The access and availability of appropriate information and sources of support at the end of treatment is variable and inequitable. Young people's needs would be more effectively met by timely, structured and accessible information, and support provision at the end of treatment to both prepare and enable adaptation across their transition to living with and beyond cancer. This will require both organisational and practical adjustments in care delivery, in addition to a renewed and updated understanding of what the 'end of treatment' transition process means. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To maximize retention of participants in a longitudinal cohort study, we sought to understand young peoples' views about barriers and facilitators to continuing study participation. Methods: Ten young people with a previous cancer diagnosis aged 15–24 participated in a 1 day workshop. The workshop used participatory methodology consisting of three exercises as follows: role play/scene setting; force field analysis of research participation in small groups; and focus group discussion. A final prioritization exercise was administered individually after the workshop. Results: Twenty-four barriers to maintaining participation were summarized in five themes as follows: life commitments; concerns specific to the study; emotional barriers; practical barriers; and other reasons. The top 3 specific barriers were as follows: not a priority/other things are more important; too time consuming; and forgetting/memory. The top 3 facilitators for participation were as follows: wishing to help other young people; giving back to the cancer community; and honoring an initial commitment to participation. The top 3 suggested solutions to encourage continued participation were as follows: reminder text message or email before each survey to check preferred method of delivery; breaking up the online survey into modules to make completion less overwhelming; and consolidation of study information in one location. Conclusion: Involving young people in designing a retention strategy for young people with cancer has informed the BRIGHTLIGHT retention strategy. Patient and public involvement is imperative for successful research but measuring impact is challenging. The success of implementing the changes to optimize retention was shown in the increase in retention in Wave 3 from 30% to final participation of 58%. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To review the qualitative literature on experiences of and preferences for end-of-life care of people with cancer aged 16-40 years (young adults) and their informal carers. A systematic review using narrative synthesis of qualitative studies using the 2006 UK Economic and Social Research Council research methods program guidance. Seven electronic bibliographic databases, two clinical trials databases, and three relevant theses databases were searched from January 2004 to October 2015. Eighteen articles were included from twelve countries. The selected studies included at least 5% of their patient sample within the age range 16-40 years. The studies were heterogeneous in their aims, focus, and sample, but described different aspects of end-of-life care for people with cancer. Positive experiences included facilitating adaptive coping and receiving palliative home care, while negative experiences were loss of 'self' and nonfacilitative services and environment. Preferences included a family-centered approach to care, honest conversations about end of life, and facilitating normality. There is little evidence focused on the end-of-life needs of young adults. Analysis of reports including some young adults does not explore experience or preferences by age; therefore, it is difficult to identify age-specific issues clearly. From this review, we suggest that supportive interventions and education are needed to facilitate open and honest communication at an appropriate level with young people. Future research should focus on age-specific evidence about the end-of-life experiences and preferences for young adults with cancer and their informal carers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]