Search

The efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (immunotherapy) is increasingly recognized to be linked to the composition the gut microbiome. Given the high rates of resistance, interventions targeting the gut microbiome are now being investigated for its ability to improve the efficacy of immunotherapy. In light of recently published data demonstrating a strong correlation between the efficacy and toxicity of immunotherapy, there is a risk that efforts to enhance immunotherapy efficacy may be undermined by increases in immune-related adverse events (IrAEs) This is particularly important for microbial interventions aimed at increasing immunotherapy efficacy, with many microbes implicated in tumour response also linked to IrAEs, especially colitis. IrAEs have a profound impact on patient quality of life, causing physical, psychosocial, and financial distress. Here, we outline strategies at the discovery, translational, and clinical research phases to ensure the impact of augmenting immunotherapy efficacy is approached in a manner that considers adverse implications. Adopting these strategies will ensure that our ongoing efforts to overcome immunotherapy resistance are not impacted by unacceptable toxicity.

Aim: Cancer and its treatment produce significant acute and long-term adverse effects in cancer survivors, resulting in a range of supportive cancer care needs across the disease trajectory. To enhance supportive cancer care in Australia, this study sought to understand and describe conventional services offered nationwide, specific to their structure (ownership, setting, duration), process (participants, delivery mode, referral pathways), and outcomes (evaluation). Methods: A survey canvassing 13 conventional supportive cancer care interventions was electronically distributed to 265 cancer organizations in all Australian states and territories over 2019 and 2020. Cancer organizations were invited to participate if they provided at least one cancer-directed treatment (ie, surgery, radiation therapy, or systemic therapies); or clinical cancer care to adults, adolescents, or children; or conventional supportive care interventions to cancer survivors. Results: A response rate of 46% (n = 123/265) was achieved, with 72% of cancer organizations (n = 88) delivering at least one intervention. Most were provided as outpatient or inpatient services, with few at home (<13%) or via telehealth (<10%). Psychological therapy (90%), self-care (82%), exercise (77%), healthy eating (69%), and lymphedema (69%) services were most common. Fatigue management (51%) and pelvic health (32%) were less common. Services offering massage, return-to-work, cognitive therapy, sleep hygiene, and leisure were underrepresented (<31%). Conclusion: Provision of conventional supportive cancer care services continues to evolve in Australia. Multiple areas of care require development of dedicated services to address supportive cancer care intervention shortfalls across the country. Online resources and telemedicine are currently underutilized modalities that are available for further development.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is one of the most common and debilitating adverse effects of cancer and its treatment reported by cancer survivors. Physical activity, psychological interventions and management of concurrent symptoms have been shown to be effective in alleviating CRF. This pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) will determine the feasibility of a telehealth CRF clinic intervention (T-CRF) to implement evidence-based strategies and assess the impact of the intervention on CRF and other clinical factors in comparison to usual care.METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A parallel-arm (intervention vs usual care) pilot RCT will be conducted at the Princess Alexandra Hospital in Queensland, Australia. Sixty cancer survivors aged 18 years and over, who report moderate or severe fatigue on the Brief Fatigue Inventory and meet other study criteria will be recruited. Participants will be randomised (1:1) to receive the T-CRF intervention or usual care (ie, specialist-led care, with a fatigue information booklet). The intervention is a 24-week programme of three telehealth nurse-led consultations and a personalised CRF management plan. The primary objective of this pilot RCT is to determine intervention feasibility, with a secondary objective to determine preliminary clinical efficacy. Feasibility outcomes include the identification of recruitment methods; recruitment rate and uptake; attrition; adherence; fidelity; apathy; and intervention functionality, acceptability and satisfaction. Clinical and resource use outcomes include cancer survivor fatigue, symptom burden, level of physical activity, productivity loss, hospital resource utilisation and carer's fatigue and productivity loss. Descriptive statistics will be used to report on feasibility and process-related elements additional to clinical and resource outcomes.ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This trial is prospectively registered (ACTRN12620001334998). The study protocol has been approved by t

Non-pharmacological self-management interventions for chemotherapy-induced peripheral neurotherapy (CIPN) are of clinical interest; however, no systematic review has synthesized the evidence for their use in people with advanced cancer. Five databases were searched from inception to February 2022 for randomized controlled trials assessing the effect of non-pharmacological self-management interventions in people with advanced cancer on the incidence and severity of CIPN symptoms and related outcomes compared to any control condition. Data were pooled with meta-analysis. Quality of evidence was appraised using the Revised Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomized Trials (RoB2), with data synthesized narratively. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) was applied to assess the certainty of the evidence. Thirteen studies were included, which had a high (69%) or unclear (31%) risk of bias. Greatest confidence was found for physical exercise decreasing CIPN severity (SMD: -0.89, 95% CI: -1.37 to -0.41; p = 0.0003; I2 = 0%; n = 2 studies, n = 76 participants; GRADE level: moderate) and increasing physical function (SMD: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.02 to 1.00; p = 0.04; I2 = 42%; n = 3 studies, n = 120; GRADE level: moderate). One study per intervention provided preliminary evidence for the positive effects of glutamine supplementation, an Omega-3 PUFA-enriched drink, and education for symptom self-management via a mobile phone game on CIPN symptoms and related outcomes (GRADE: very low). No serious adverse events were reported. The strongest evidence with the most certainty was found for physical exercise as a safe and viable adjuvant to chemotherapy treatment for the prevention and management of CIPN and related physical function in people with advanced cancer. However, the confidence in the evidence to inform conclusions was mostly very low to moderate. Future well-powered and appropriately designed interventions for clinical trials using vali

Aim: To understand the opinions and current practices of health professionals on the topic of addressing cancer-related financial toxicity among patients. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was distributed through Australian clinical oncology professional organizations/networks. The multidisciplinary Clinical Oncology Society of Australia Financial Toxicity Working Group developed 25 questions relating to the frequency and comfort levels of patient–clinician discussions, opinions about their role, strategies used, and barriers to providing solutions for patients. Descriptive statistics were used and subgroup analyses were undertaken by occupational groups. Results: Two hundred and seventy-seven health professionals completed the survey. The majority were female (n = 213, 77%), worked in public facilities (200, 72%), and treated patients with varied cancer types across all of Australia. Most participants agreed that it was appropriate in their clinical role to discuss financial concerns and 231 (88%) believed that these discussions were an important part of high-quality care. However, 73 (28%) stated that they did not have the appropriate information on support services or resources to facilitate such conversations, differing by occupation group; 7 (11%) social workers, 34 (44%) medical specialists, 18 (25%) nurses, and 14 (27%) of other occupations. Hindrances to discussing financial concerns were insufficient resources or support systems to refer to, followed by lack of time in a typical consultation. Conclusion: Health professionals in cancer care commonly address the financial concerns of their patients but attitudes differed across occupations about their role, and frustrations were raised about available solutions. Resources supporting financial-related discussions for all health professionals are urgently needed to advance action in this field.

Background: Understanding how medical experts and their patients process and transfer information is of critical importance for efficient health care provision. Behavioral economics has explored similar credence markets where economic incentives, information asymmetry, and cognitive bias can impact patient and surgeon choice. The aim of the current study is to explore how framing and behavioral bias affect elective restorative surgery decision-making, such as breast reconstruction following cancer treatment. Methods: The authors' study uses a cross-sectional survey data set of specialist surgeons (n = 53), breast care nurses (n = 101), and former or current breast cancer patients (n = 689). Data collected include participant demographics, medical history, a battery of cognitive bias tests, and a behavioral framing experiment. Results: This study finds statistically significant differences in breast reconstruction surgery preference by patients and nurses when decision options are framed in different ways (i.e., positively versus negatively). The authors' analysis of surgeons, nurses, and patients shows no statistically significant difference across eight common forms of cognitive bias. Rather, the authors find that the behavioral biases are prevalent to the same extent in each group. This may indicate that differences in experience and education seem not to mitigate biases that may affect patient choices and medical professional's recommendations. The authors' multivariate analysis identifies patient age (p < 0.0001), body mass index, and self-perceived health (p < 0.05) as negative correlates for choice of implant-based reconstruction. Conclusion: For surgeons, nurses, and patients, the authors find uniform evidence of cognitive bias; more specifically, for patients and nurses, the authors find inconsistency in preference for type of surgical therapy chosen when alternative procedures are framed in different ways (i.e., framing bias).

Cancer‐associated malnutrition, or cachexia, stemming from cancer or its treatments, is particularly prevalent in metastatic cancers, and is often interrelated with sarcopenia and frailty. Evidence suggests that dietary supplements play a role in managing these conditions. As metastatic cancer cells are associated with notable genomic and phenotypic alterations, response to dietary supplements may differ between metastatic and non‐metastatic cancers. However, research in this area is lacking. This scoping review aims to identify the dietary supplements that have been studied in patients with metastatic cancers and malnutrition‐related conditions, along with their proposed effects, mechanisms, outcome measures, and tools used. A systematic search was conducted across databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and clinical trial registries. Of the initial 6535 records screened, a total of 48 studies were included, covering a range of dietary supplements— vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, proteins, amino acids, fatty acids, fiber, and others. While the types of dietary supplements included varied across cancer types, omega‐3 and carnitine were investigated most often. Proposed relevant attributes of dietary supplements included their antioxidant, anti‐inflammatory, anti‐cancer, and immunomodulatory properties. Overall, there was a paucity of interventional studies, and more randomized controlled trials are warranted.

Perspectives of cancer survivors, caregivers, and social workers as key stakeholders on the clinical management of financial toxicity (FT) are critical to identify opportunities for better FT management. Semi-structured interviews (cancer survivors, caregivers) and a focus group (social workers) were undertaken using purposive sampling at a quaternary public hospital in Australia. People with any cancer diagnosis attending the hospital were eligible. Data were analysed using inductive-deductive content analysis techniques. Twenty-two stakeholders (n = 10 cancer survivors of mixed-cancer types, n = 5 caregivers, and n = 7 social workers) participated. Key findings included: (i) genuine concern for FT of cancer survivors and caregivers shown through practical support by health care and social workers; (ii) need for clarity of role and services; (iii) importance of timely information flow; and (iv) proactive navigation as a priority. While cancer survivors and caregivers received financial assistance and support from the hospital, the lack of synchronised, shared understanding of roles and services in relation to finance between cancer survivors, caregivers, and health professionals undermined the effectiveness and consistency of these services. A proactive approach to anticipate cancer survivors’ and caregivers’ needs is recommended. Future research may develop and evaluate initiatives to manage cancer survivors and families FT experiences and outcomes.

Purpose To critically assess the effectiveness and implementation of different models of post-treatment cancer survivorship care compared to specialist-led models of survivorship care assessed in published systematic reviews. Methods MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched from January 2005 to May 2021. Systematic reviews that compared at least two models of cancer survivorship care were included. Article selection, data extraction, and critical appraisal were conducted independently by two authors. The models were evaluated according to cancer survivorship care domains, patient and caregiver experience, communication and decision-making, care coordination, quality of life, healthcare utilization, costs, and mortality. Barriers and facilitators to implementation were also synthesized. Results Twelve systematic reviews were included, capturing 53 primary studies. Effectiveness for managing survivors’ physical and psychosocial outcomes was found to be no different across models. Nurse-led and primary care provider-led models may produce cost savings to cancer survivors and healthcare systems. Barriers to the implementation of different models of care included limited resources, communication, and care coordination, while facilitators included survivor engagement, planning, and flexible services. Conclusions Despite evidence regarding the equivalent effectiveness of nurse-led, primary care-led, or shared care models, these models are not widely adopted, and evidence-based recommendations to guide implementation are required. Further research is needed to address effectiveness in understudied domains of care and outcomes and across different population groups. Implications for Cancer Survivors Rather than aiming for an optimal “one-size fits all” model of survivorship care, applying the most appropriate model in distinct contexts can improve outcomes and healthcare efficiency.

Background: The number of cancer survivors in Australia is growing. General practitioners (GPs) have a key role in providing holistic care to people experiencing a cancer diagnosis, receiving treatment or enduring long-term effects of cancer and its treatment. Cancer survivors experience a range of unique biopsychosocial issues, requiring significant and coordinated care to optimise their quality of life. Objective: The aim of this article is to provide an overview of management strategies for GPs in addressing three highly distressing cancer-related issues: fear of cancer recurrence, financial toxicity and management of relationships. Discussion: Recommendations are provided for effective screening and monitoring of cancer-related issues, with management strategies outlined to facilitate GP-initiated discussions and referral to credible resources and other health services. Useful materials relevant to the Australian primary care setting are presented together with an overview of information to support GP provision of cancer survivorship care for fear of cancer recurrence, financial toxicity and relationship issues.

Background: The optimal duration of infusion set use to prevent life-threatening catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) is unclear. We aimed to compare the effectiveness and costs of 7-day (intervention) versus 4-day (control) infusion set replacement to prevent CRBSI in patients with central venous access devices (tunnelled cuffed, non-tunnelled, peripherally inserted, and totally implanted) and peripheral arterial catheters. Methods: We did a randomised, controlled, assessor-masked trial at ten Australian hospitals. Our hypothesis was CRBSI equivalence for central venous access devices and non-inferiority for peripheral arterial catheters (both 2% margin). Adults and children with expected greater than 24 h central venous access device–peripheral arterial catheter use were randomly assigned (1:1; stratified by hospital, catheter type, and intensive care unit or ward) by a centralised, web-based service (concealed before allocation) to infusion set replacement every 7 days, or 4 days. This included crystalloids, non-lipid parenteral nutrition, and medication infusions. Patients and clinicians were not masked, but the primary outcome (CRBSI) was adjudicated by masked infectious diseases physicians. The analysis was modified intention to treat (mITT). This study is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12610000505000 and is complete. Findings: Between May 30, 2011, and Dec, 9, 2016, from 6007 patients assessed, we assigned 2944 patients to 7-day (n=1463) or 4-day (n=1481) infusion set replacement, with 2941 in the mITT analysis. For central venous access devices, 20 (1·78%) of 1124 patients (7-day group) and 16 (1·46%) of 1097 patients (4-day group) had CRBSI (absolute risk difference [ARD] 0·32%, 95% CI −0·73 to 1·37). For peripheral arterial catheters, one (0·28%) of 357 patients in the 7-day group and none of 363 patients in the 4-day group had CRBSI (ARD 0·28%, −0·27% to 0·83%). There were no treatment-related adverse

Background: Fatigue is the most common and debilitating symptom experienced by oncology patients undergoing chemotherapy. Little is known about patient characteristics that predict changes in fatigue severity over time. Purpose: To predict the severity of evening fatigue in the week following the administration of chemotherapy using machine learning approaches. Methods: Outpatients with breast, gastrointestinal, gynecological, or lung cancer (N = 1217) completed questionnaires one week prior to and one week following administration of chemotherapy. Evening fatigue was measured with the Lee Fatigue Scale (LFS). Separate prediction models for evening fatigue severity were created using clinical, symptom, and psychosocial adjustment characteristics and either evening fatigue scores or individual fatigue item scores. Prediction models were created using two regression and three machine learning approaches. Results: Random forest (RF) models provided the best fit across all models. For the RF model using individual LFS item scores, two of the 13 individual LFS items (i.e. ‘worn out’, ‘exhausted’) were the strongest predictors. Conclusion: This study is the first to use machine learning techniques to predict evening fatigue severity in the week following chemotherapy from fatigue scores obtained in the week prior to chemotherapy. Our findings suggest that the language used to assess clinical fatigue in oncology patients is important and that two simple questions may be used to predict evening fatigue severity.

Background: Cancer patients often experience severe financial distress due to the high cost of their treatment, and strategies are needed to objectively measure this financial distress. The COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity-Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (COST-FACIT) is one instrument used to measure such financial distress. This study aimed to translate the COST-FACIT (Version 2) [COST-FACIT-v2] instrument into traditional Chinese (COST-FACIT-v2 [TC]) and evaluate its psychometric properties. Methods: The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) translation method was adopted. The translated version was reviewed by an expert panel and by 20 cancer patients for content validity and face validity, respectively, and 640 cancer patients, recruited from three oncology departments, completed the translated scale. Its reliability was evaluated in terms of internal consistency and test–retest reliability. Confirmatory factor analysis has been used to evaluate the one- and two-factor structures of the instrument reported in the literature. The convergent validity was examined by the correlation with health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and psychological distress. Known-group validity was examined by the difference in the COST-FACIT-v2 (TC) total mean score between groups with different income levels and frequency of health care service use. Results: The COST-FACIT-v2 (TC) showed good content and face validity and demonstrated high internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha, 0.86) and acceptable test–retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.71). Confirmatory factor analysis showed that the one- and two-factor structures of the instrument that have been reported in the literature could not be satisfactorily fitted to the data. Psychological distress correlated significantly with the COST-FACIT-v2 (TC) score (r = 0.47; p < 0.001). HRQOL showed a weak to moderate negative correlation with the COST-FACIT-v2 (TC) score

Rapid developments in digital mobile and sensor technology have facilitated the active and passive collection of detailed, personalized data in increasingly affordable ways [1]. Researchers may be familiar with the daily diary, portable computers, or the pedometer for the collection of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) [2] in cancer survivorship research [3]. Such methods, termed ecological momentary assessment (EMA), have evolved with technological advances, e.g., collecting data or providing interventions (ecological momentary intervention, EMI) via apps or devices such as smartphones [4]. These smart technology–adapted sEMA/sEMI methods are more widely used in affective disorders or addictive behavior research [5, 6] but are currently still under-utilized in cancer survivorship research. A recent scoping review on the use of active EMA among cancer survivors identified twelve articles published between 1993 and 2018 [7]. Most of the included studies in that review used portable computers. This commentary will discuss the utility of sEMA/sEMI in cancer survivorship research and call for action to advance this area of science.

BACKGROUND: Despite tremendous progress in understanding the unmet needs of cancer survivors, our understanding of oncology nurses' perspectives and practices in the delivery of survivorship care is inadequate.OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to assess oncology nurses' perceptions about their responsibility and frequency of delivery of survivorship care to cancer patients and to examine the factors influencing such care.METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was administered to 81 nurses working in the oncology unit of hospitals in Hong Kong. Participants completed an investigator-developed questionnaire designed to assess oncology nurses' perceptions of responsibility, practices, and barriers regarding the provision of survivorship care for cancer patients.RESULTS: Results revealed discrepancies between oncology nurses' perceptions of responsibility and practices, with high levels of perceptions of various survivorship care as their responsibility but low levels in delivery of such care. Despite that discussing and managing pain was agreed by most oncology nurses as their responsibility (95.1%), 34.6% of them have never managed survivors' pain. Besides, 33.3% of nurses have never discussed and managed survivors' sexuality issues. Lack of time (79.0%), inadequate educational resources for family members (59.3%), and lack of knowledge and skills (54.4%) were major factors that impeded survivorship care provision.CONCLUSIONS: This study provides further evidence for inadequacies of oncology nurses in delivering survivorship care and their perceived barriers. Further studies are required to enhance our understanding of the strategies for improving the quality of cancer survivorship care.IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Results underscore the need to develop educational resources and enhance training in survivorship care for oncology nurses.