Search

We developed the Navigate intervention to improve survival among vulnerable lung cancer patients. In this intervention-only study, we examined feasibility in terms of recruitment, retention, attendance, adherence, and acceptability to specify adjustments to study procedures and intervention components prior to a randomized trial. The Navigate intervention includes nurse navigation, patient-reported outcomes, and physical exercise. Patients ≥ 18 years old, diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer at any stage, with performance status ≤ 2, eligible for cancer treatment and vulnerable according to a screening instrument were included. The recruitment goal of eligible patients was 40% while the retention goal was 85%. The predefined cut-offs for sufficient attendance and adherence were ≥ 75%. Acceptability was evaluated by semi-structured interviews with participants, nurse navigators, and physiotherapists. Seventeen (56%) out of 30 screened patients were considered vulnerable and eligible for the study, 14 (82%) accepted participation, and 3 (21%) were subsequently excluded due to ineligibility, leaving 11 patients. Four patients dropped out (36%) and four patients died (36%) during follow-up and 3 (27%) were retained. All 11 patients participated in nurse sessions (mean 16, range 1–36) with 88% attendance and dialogue tools being applied in 68% of sessions. Ninety-one percent of patients responded to PROs (mean of 9 PROs, range 1–24) with 76% of the PRO questionnaires used (attendance) and 100% adherence (completion of all questions in PRO questionnaires), and 55% participated in exercise sessions with 58% attendance and 85% adherence. We identified important barriers primarily related to transportation, but overall acceptability was high. The Navigate intervention was feasible with high participation, acceptability and satisfactory adherence. Retention and exercise attendance were low, which resulted in adjustments., We developed the Navigate intervention to improve survival among vulnerable lung cancer patients. In this intervention-only study, we examined feasibility in terms of recruitment, retention, attendance, adherence, and acceptability to specify adjustments to study procedures and intervention components prior to a randomized trial. The Navigate intervention includes nurse navigation, patient-reported outcomes, and physical exercise. Patients ≥ 18 years old, diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer at any stage, with performance status ≤ 2, eligible for cancer treatment and vulnerable according to a screening instrument were included. The recruitment goal of eligible patients was 40% while the retention goal was 85%. The predefined cut-offs for sufficient attendance and adherence were ≥ 75%. Acceptability was evaluated by semi-structured interviews with participants, nurse navigators, and physiotherapists. Seventeen (56%) out of 30 screened patients were considered vulnerable and eligible for the study, 14 (82%) accepted participation, and 3 (21%) were subsequently excluded due to ineligibility, leaving 11 patients. Four patients dropped out (36%) and four patients died (36%) during follow-up and 3 (27%) were retained. All 11 patients participated in nurse sessions (mean 16, range 1–36) with 88% attendance and dialogue tools being applied in 68% of sessions. Ninety-one percent of patients responded to PROs (mean of 9 PROs, range 1–24) with 76% of the PRO questionnaires used (attendance) and 100% adherence (completion of all questions in PRO questionnaires), and 55% participated in exercise sessions with 58% attendance and 85% adherence. We identified important barriers primarily related to transportation, but overall acceptability was high. The Navigate intervention was feasible with high participation, acceptability and satisfactory adherence. Retention and exercise attendance were low, which resulted in adjustments. Trial registration: The feasibility study was i

Background: Oncologist-led follow-up after breast cancer (BC) is increasingly replaced with less intensive follow-up based on higher self-management, which may overburden the less resourceful patients. We examined whether socioeconomic factors measured recently after the implementation of a new follow-up program for BC patients were associated with health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and self-management 12 months later. Methodology: Between January and August 2017, we invited 1773 patients in Region Zealand, Denmark, to participate in baseline and 12 months follow-up questionnaires. The patients had surgery for low- and intermediate risk BC 1–10 years prior to the survey, and they had recently been allocated to the new follow-up program of either patient-initiated follow-up, or in-person or telephone follow-up with a nurse, based on patients’ preferences. We examined associations between socioeconomic factors (education and cohabitation) at baseline and two outcomes: HRQoL (EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR23) and self-management factors (health care provider, confidence in follow-up, contact at symptoms of concern, and self-efficacy) at 12 months follow-up. Sensitivity analyses were performed according to time since diagnosis (≤ 5 > 5 years). Furthermore, we investigated whether treatment and self-management factors modified the associations. Results: A total of 987 patients were included in the analyses. We found no statistically significant associations between socioeconomic factors and HRQoL, except in patients ≤ 5 years from diagnosis. For self-management patients with short education were more likely to report that they had not experience relevant symptoms of concern compared to those with medium/long education (OR 1.75 95% CI: 1.04; 2.95). We found no clear patterns indicating that treatment or self-management factors modified the associations between socioeconomics’ and HRQoL. Conclusion: Overall socioeconomic factors did not influence HRQoL and self-managem

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, teleconsultations (TC) have been increasingly used in cancer care as an alternative to outpatient visits. We aimed to examine patient-related and cancer-specific characteristics associated with experiences with TC among patients with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic. Material and methods: This population-based survey included patients with breast, lung, gastrointestinal, urological, and gynaecological cancers with appointments in the outpatient clinics, Department of Clinical Oncology and Palliative Care, Zealand University Hospital, Denmark in March and April 2020. Age- and sex-adjusted logistic regression analyses were used to study associations of sociodemographics, cancer and general health, anxiety, and health literacy with patients’ experiences of TC in regards to being comfortable with TC, confident that the doctor could provide information or assess symptoms/side effects and the perceived outcome of TC. Results: Of the 2119 patients with cancer receiving the electronic survey, 1160 (55%) participated. Two thirds of patients (68%) had consultations with a doctor changed to TC. Being male, aged 65–79 years, and having TC for test results were statistically significantly associated with more comfort, confidence, and perceived better outcome of TC. Having breast cancer, anxiety, low health literacy, or TC for a follow-up consultation were statistically significantly associated with less positive experiences with TC. Living alone, short education, disability pension, and comorbidity were statistically significantly associated with anxiety and low health literacy. Conclusions: Most patients reported positive experiences with TC, but in particular patients with anxiety and low health literacy, who were also the patients with fewest socioeconomic and health resources, felt less comfortable and confident with and were more likely to perceive the outcome negatively from this form of consultation. TC may be suitable for i

Udgivelsesdato: 2008-null, BACKGROUND: Soluble vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is a promising biomarker in monitoring rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but studies of pre-analytical and biologic variability are few. METHODS: VEGF was measured by ELISA methods in serum and plasma from healthy persons and RA patients. Pre-analytical factors were investigated. A reference interval for VEGF was established in serum and plasma from 306 healthy persons. Diurnal, day-to-day, week-to-week, long-term variability, and impact of exercise were evaluated. RESULTS: Delayed processing time, room temperature, low centrifugal force and contamination of plasma with cellular elements lead to significant increases in VEGF levels, whereas storage for up to 2 years at -80 degrees C or up to 10 freeze/thaw cycles did not affect VEGF levels. Serum VEGF levels were 7-10 fold higher than plasma VEGF levels. Reference intervals for VEGF (plasma: 45 pg/ml (range: non-detectable to 352); serum: 328 pg/ml (53-1791)) were independent of gender and age. Short- and long-term biologic variability included diurnal variation (sampling should take place after 7 AM) and impact of exercise (increased VEGF immediately after bicycling normalised within 1 hour). CONCLUSIONS: Pre-analytical factors and biologic variability including diurnal variation and impact of exercise should be accounted for in future studies that include circulating VEGF as a biological marker.