Metal sensitive protease(s) associated with corneal proteoglycans.

S. Twining,P. M. Wilson

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Hidden Fermion in Stueckelberg Z' Models as Milli-charged Dark Matter

K. Cheung,T. Yuan

2007-10-10

Abstract:The hidden Stueckelberg Z' model is augmented by a pair of Dirac fermions. If the Z' has a coupling strength comparable to weak scale coupling, one can show that this hidden fermion-antifermion pair could be a milli-charged dark matter candidate with a viable relic density. Monochromatic photon flux coming from the Galactic center due to pair annihilation of these milli-charged particles is calculated and is shown to be within reach of the next generation gamma-ray experiments. Characteristic collider signature of this theoretical endeavor is that the Stueckelberg Z' boson has a large invisible width decaying into the hidden fermion-antifermion pair if kinematically allowed. Singly production of this Z' boson at the LHC and ILC are studied.
Advertising Alternative Cancer Treatments and Approaches on Meta Social Media Platforms: Content Analysis

Marco Zenone,Jeremy Snyder,Jean-Christophe Bélisle-Pipon,Timothy Caulfield,May van Schalkwyk,Nason Maani

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/43548

2023-05-31

JMIR Infodemiology

Abstract:Background: Alternative cancer treatment is associated with a greater risk of death than cancer patients undergoing conventional treatments. Anecdotal evidence suggests cancer patients view paid advertisements promoting alternative cancer treatment on social media, but the extent and nature of this advertising remain unknown. This context suggests an urgent need to investigate alternative cancer treatment advertising on social media. Objective: This study aimed to systematically analyze the advertising activities of prominent alternative cancer treatment practitioners on Meta platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, Messenger, and Audience Network. We specifically sought to determine (1) whether paid advertising for alternative cancer treatment occurs on Meta social media platforms, (2) the strategies and messages of alternative cancer providers to reach and appeal to prospective patients, and (3) how the efficacy of alternative treatments is portrayed. Methods: Between December 6, 2021, and December 12, 2021, we collected active advertisements from alternative cancer clinics using the Meta Ad Library. The information collected included identification number, URL, active/inactive status, dates launched/ran, advertiser page name, and a screenshot (image) or recording (video) of the advertisement. We then conducted a content analysis to determine how alternative cancer providers communicate the claimed benefits of their services and evaluated how they portrayed alternative cancer treatment efficacy. Results: We identified 310 paid advertisements from 11 alternative cancer clinics on Meta (Facebook, Instagram, or Messenger) marketing alternative treatment approaches, care, and interventions. Alternative cancer providers appealed to prospective patients through eight strategies: (1) advertiser representation as a legitimate medical provider (n=289, 93.2%); (2) appealing to persons with limited treatments options (n=203, 65.5%); (3) client testimonials (n=168, 54.2%); (4) promoting holistic approaches (n=121, 39%); (5) promoting messages of care (n=81, 26.1%); (6) rhetoric related to science and research (n=72, 23.2%); (7) rhetoric pertaining to the latest technology (n=63, 20.3%); and (8) focusing treatment on cancer origins and cause (n=43, 13.9%). Overall, 25.8% (n=80) of advertisements included a direct statement claiming provider treatment can cure cancer or prolong life. Conclusions: Our results provide evidence alternative cancer providers are using Meta advertising products to market scientifically unsupported cancer treatments. Advertisements regularly referenced "alternative" and "natural" treatment approaches to cancer. Imagery and text content that emulated evidence-based medical providers created the impression that the offered treatments were effective medical options for cancer. Advertisements exploited the hope of patients with terminal and poor prognoses by sharing testimonials of past patients who allegedly were cured or had their lives prolonged. We recommend that Meta introduce a mandatory, human-led authorization process that is not reliant upon artificial intelligence for medical-related advertisers before giving advertising permissions. Further research should focus on the conflict of interest between social media platforms advertising products and public health.
Cancer-Related Internet Use and Its Association With Patient Decision Making and Trust in Physicians Among Patients in an Early Drug Development Clinic: A Questionnaire-Based Cross-Sectional Observational Study

Goldy C George,Eucharia C Iwuanyanwu,Adrianna S Buford,Sarina A Piha-Paul,Vivek Subbiah,Siqing Fu,Daniel D Karp,Shubham Pant,Christina O Hinojosa,Kenneth R Hess,Charles S Cleeland,Elmer V Bernstam,Funda Meric-Bernstam,David S Hong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/10348

IF: 7.076

2019-03-14

Journal of Medical Internet Research

Abstract:BACKGROUND: The role of cancer-related internet use on the patient-physician relationship has not been adequately explored among patients who are cancer-related internet users (CIUs) in early-phase clinical trial clinics.OBJECTIVE: We examined the association between cancer-related internet use and the patient-physician relationship and decision making among CIUs in an early drug development clinic.METHODS: Of 291 Phase I clinic patients who completed a questionnaire on internet use, 179 were CIUs. Generations were defined by the year of patient's birth: "millennials" (after 1990) and "Generation X/Y" (1965-1990) grouped as "Millennials or Generation X/Y"; "Baby Boomers" (1946-1964); and "Greatest or Silent Generation" (1945 and earlier). Statistical analyses included the Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test and the Mann-Whitney U test.RESULTS: CIUs were 52% (94/179) female, 44% (78/179) were older than 60 years, and 60% (108/179) had household incomes exceeding US $60,000. The sources of information on cancer and clinical trials included physicians (171/179, 96%), the internet (159/179, 89%), and other clinical trial personnel (121/179, 68%). For the overall sample and each generation, the median values for trust in referring and Phase I clinical trial physicians among early drug development clinic CIUs were 5 on a 0-5 scale, with 5 indicating "complete trust." CIUs' trust in their referring (5) and phase 1 (5) physicians was higher than CIUs' trust in Web-based cancer-related information (3; P<.001 for both). CIUs who reported visiting the National Cancer Institute (NCI) website, NCI.org, to learn about cancer reported higher levels of trust in Web-based cancer-related information than CIUs who did not use the NCI website (P=.02). Approximately half of CIUs discussed internet information with their doctor. Only 14% (23/165) of CIUs had asked their physician to recommend cancer-related websites, and 24% (35/144) of CIUs reported at least occasional conflict between their physician's advice and Web-based information.CONCLUSIONS: Despite the plethora of websites related to cancer and cancer clinical trials, patients in early-phase clinical trial settings trust their physicians more than Web-based information. Cancer-related organizations should provide regularly updated links to trustworthy websites with cancer and clinical trial information for patients and providers and educate providers on reliable cancer websites so that they can better direct their patients to appropriate internet content.

health care sciences & services,medical informatics
Abstract B025: Assessing the content and quality of online patient education material on clinical trials from NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers

Trista Beard,Diana Morales,Fatimata Sanogo,Chanita Hughes Halbert

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7755.disp24-b025

2024-09-23

Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention

Abstract:Background: Online patient educational material on cancer clinical trials is available on NCI- designated comprehensive cancer center websites and official YouTube channels. Online health information is an important resource for patients seeking to learn more about treatment options. Objective: Examine the quality and content themes in online patient educational material (PEM) related to cancer clinical trials published by comprehensive cancer centers. Methods: A random sample of comprehensive cancer centers (21) was chosen to represent the national network of cancer centers. Each website was searched for webpages containing patient-oriented clinical trial information. Official YouTube channels were also searched for relevant video material. Each webpage and video (N=196) were assessed for quality and content themes. Quality was measured using an abbreviated Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool which scores understandability and actionability of text and audio-visual materials, and content themes were assessed by the use of a content characteristic codebook. Results: Common content themes in the sample (N=196) of online PEM from comprehensive cancer centers were defines purpose of trials, physician speaker, animated or illustrated elements, and defines phases of trials. Online PEM had an average score of 83 for understandability and 26 for actionability, an area for improvement. Only 10% of materials reviewed scored high for understandability (>90) and for actionability (>70). Online webpages that mixed text and video scored highest on the quality assessment. Video-only content scored lowest on the quality assessment. Only a small percentage of PEM included FAQs (10%), instructions on how to find a trial (16%), mentioned consent (14%) or costs associated with trials (12%). Mentions or depictions of minority populations were not commonly observed in the material (11%). Conclusions: Online PEM published by comprehensive cancer centers is an important and easily accessible resource for patients looking to learn more about clinical trials. Cancer centers should add various audio-visual formats and interactive tools to their webpages to increase the quality of the clinical trial resources. Including representation of historically underserved populations and adding actionable advice for patients has the potential to engage patients' interest and increase enrollment in cancer clinical trials. Citation Format: Trista Beard, Diana Morales, Fatimata Sanogo, Chanita Hughes Halbert. Assessing the content and quality of online patient education material on clinical trials from NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 17th AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2024 Sep 21-24; Los Angeles, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2024;33(9 Suppl) nr B025.

oncology,public, environmental & occupational health
Using Social Media Data to Understand the Impact of Promotional Information on Laypeople's Discussions: A Case Study of Lynch Syndrome.

Jiang Bian,Yunpeng Zhao,Ramzi G Salloum,Yi Guo,Mo Wang,Mattia Prosperi,Hansi Zhang,Xinsong Du,Laura J Ramirez-Diaz,Zhe He,Yuan Sun

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.9266

IF: 7.076

2017-01-01

Journal of Medical Internet Research

Abstract:BACKGROUND:Social media is being used by various stakeholders among pharmaceutical companies, government agencies, health care organizations, professionals, and news media as a way of engaging audiences to raise disease awareness and ultimately to improve public health. Nevertheless, it is unclear what effects this health information has on laypeople. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to provide a detailed examination of how promotional health information related to Lynch syndrome impacts laypeople's discussions on a social media platform (Twitter) in terms of topic awareness and attitudes. METHODS:We used topic modeling and sentiment analysis techniques on Lynch syndrome-related tweets to answer the following research questions (RQs): (1) what are the most discussed topics in Lynch syndrome-related tweets?; (2) how promotional Lynch syndrome-related information on Twitter affects laypeople's discussions?; and (3) what impact do the Lynch syndrome awareness activities in the Colon Cancer Awareness Month and Lynch Syndrome Awareness Day have on laypeople's discussions and their attitudes? In particular, we used a set of keywords to collect Lynch syndrome-related tweets from October 26, 2016 to August 11, 2017 (289 days) through the Twitter public search application programming interface (API). We experimented with two different classification methods to categorize tweets into the following three classes: (1) irrelevant, (2) promotional health information, and (3) laypeople's discussions. We applied a topic modeling method to discover the themes in these Lynch syndrome-related tweets and conducted sentiment analysis on each layperson's tweet to gauge the writer's attitude (ie, positive, negative, and neutral) toward Lynch syndrome. The topic modeling and sentiment analysis results were elaborated to answer the three RQs. RESULTS:Of all tweets (N=16,667), 87.38% (14,564/16,667) were related to Lynch syndrome. Of the Lynch syndrome-related tweets, 81.43% (11,860/14,564) were classified as promotional and 18.57% (2704/14,564) were classified as laypeople's discussions. The most discussed themes were treatment (n=4080) and genetic testing (n=3073). We found that the topic distributions in laypeople's discussions were similar to the distributions in promotional Lynch syndrome-related information. Furthermore, most people had a positive attitude when discussing Lynch syndrome. The proportion of negative tweets was 3.51%. Within each topic, treatment (16.67%) and genetic testing (5.60%) had more negative tweets compared with other topics. When comparing monthly trends, laypeople's discussions had a strong correlation with promotional Lynch syndrome-related information on awareness (r=.98, P<.001), while there were moderate correlations on screening (r=.602, P=.05), genetic testing (r=.624, P=.04), treatment (r=.69, P=.02), and risk (r=.66, P=.03). We also discovered that the Colon Cancer Awareness Month (March 2017) and the Lynch Syndrome Awareness Day (March 22, 2017) had significant positive impacts on laypeople's discussions and their attitudes. CONCLUSIONS:There is evidence that participative social media platforms, namely Twitter, offer unique opportunities to inform cancer communication surveillance and to explore the mechanisms by which these new communication media affect individual health behavior and population health.
Considerations for Implementation of Cancer Molecular Diagnostics Into Clinical Care

Daniel F Hayes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/EDBK_160236

Abstract:Physicians have provided personalized care with as much precision as possible for several centuries. However, increasingly sophisticated understanding of the human genome and of cancer biology has permitted identification of genetic and phenotypic distinctions that might permit development of new tumor biomarker tests for risk categorization, screening, differential diagnosis, prognosis, prediction, and monitoring. Both commercial and academic laboratories are offering tests for single analytes, panels of tests of single analytes, multiparameter assays coalesced into a signature, and total genomic, transcriptomic, or proteomic analyses. However, the absence of a consistent regulatory environment has led to marketing of assays without proven analytic validity or clinical utility. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval or clearance does not necessarily imply that use of the test will improve patient outcomes, and FDA discretion to permit laboratory-developed tests results in unknown benefit, or harm, of others. In this regard, a "bad tumor marker is as bad as a bad drug." Caveat emptor is not a satisfactory approach to delivering high-quality care. Rather, adoption of tumor biomarker tests should be based on high levels of evidence generated in scientifically rigorous studies that demonstrate both analytical validity and clinical utility. Doing so will ensure that clinicians and patients are confident that a tumor biomarker test is likely to improve their outcomes.
Modeling autism-relevant behavioral phenotypes in rats and mice: Do ‘autistic’ rodents exist?

M. Servadio,L. Vanderschuren,V. Trezza

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/FBP.0000000000000163

2015-09-01

Behavioural Pharmacology

Abstract:Autism spectrum disorders (ASD) are among the most severe developmental psychiatric disorders known today, characterized by impairments in communication and social interaction and stereotyped behaviors. However, no specific treatments for ASD are as yet available. By enabling selective genetic, neural, and pharmacological manipulations, animal studies are essential in ASD research. They make it possible to dissect the role of genetic and environmental factors in the pathogenesis of the disease, circumventing the many confounding variables present in human studies. Furthermore, they make it possible to unravel the relationships between altered brain function in ASD and behavior, and are essential to test new pharmacological options and their side-effects. Here, we first discuss the concepts of construct, face, and predictive validity in rodent models of ASD. Then, we discuss how ASD-relevant behavioral phenotypes can be mimicked in rodents. Finally, we provide examples of environmental and genetic rodent models widely used and validated in ASD research. We conclude that, although no animal model can capture, at once, all the molecular, cellular, and behavioral features of ASD, a useful approach is to focus on specific autism-relevant behavioral features to study their neural underpinnings. This approach has greatly contributed to our understanding of this disease, and is useful in identifying new therapeutic targets.
The FOR US (Fostering Opportunities in Research Using Marketing Strategies) study.

Ryan Huu-Tuan Nguyen,Leslie Carnahan,Eliza Brumer Cohn,Kauthar Salum,Neha Hippalgaonkar,Tigist Mersha,Ana Williams,Robbin Block,Kent Hoskins,Vida Henderson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2023.41.16_suppl.e18577

IF: 45.3

2023-06-01

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract:e18577 Background: Black patients are less likely to be enrolled in clinical trials compared with White patients, resulting in reduced access to breakthrough treatments and limited understanding of treatment effect in diverse populations. Ineffective dissemination of cancer research, education, and interventions among the public contributes to cancer inequities. Dissemination rarely involves engagement with non-research audiences and end-users. Efforts to promote equity in clinical trial participation may benefit from business marketing strategies traditionally applied in the business sector. Our team is conducting community-engaged research using focus groups with Black community members and family members of cancer survivors, facilitated by a professional marketing agency to create a culturally responsive public service announcement (PSA) video to increase awareness of clinical trials among Black audiences. Methods: We will conduct 6 focus groups over two phases with: 1) social support networks of Black cancer survivors (n = 20, 2 focus groups) and 2) Black community members (n = 40, 4 focus groups) to inform the content and design of a 60 second PSA to be disseminated through media and public health outlets. Phase 1 focus groups will inform content for the PSA. Data will be triangulated with qualitative data from Black patients diagnosed with breast cancer, oncologists, clinical trial staff, and community advocates from a concurrent study. Phase 2 focus groups will garner feedback on video script and style prior to development. Content and thematic analysis approaches will identify themes and PSA recommendations. Results: Phase 1 focus groups (n = 3) are completed. We used maximum variation sampling techniques to recruit Black participants (n = 30) varied in age, geographic location, education, and gender. Themes identified include: 1) mistrust about clinical trials due to past and current experiences of racism persists but diminishes with younger respondents or those with clinical trials; 2) clinical trial trust-building was associated with transparency from medical experts, information from someone in the Black community, and stories from clinical trial participants; 3) invasive procedures (i.e., ingesting or injecting a treatment) are a big factor in weighing the costs and benefits of clinical trial participation; 4) messages that are not coercive, yet support decision-making are more credible; and 5) sharing the PSA on social media with links to primary resources was a favorable dissemination strategy. Next steps are to develop and focus group test creative content and then PSA video production. Conclusions: Applying marketing communication strategies to expand awareness about clinical trial participation among general Black audiences may directly and indirectly facilitate clinical trial participation decision-making processes among Black patients diagnosed with cancer and their support systems.

oncology
Publicly Funded Clinical Trials and the Future of Cancer Care

Richard L. Schilsky

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2012-0423

2013-01-30

The Oncologist

Abstract:Abstract Publicly sponsored trials, conducted primarily by cooperative groups sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, and commercially sponsored trials are necessary to create new knowledge, improve the care of oncology patients, and develop new drugs and devices. Commercial sponsors launch clinical trials that will result in drug approval, label extension, expansion of market share, and an increase in shareholder value. Conversely, publicly sponsored trials seek to optimize therapy for a particular disease, create new knowledge, and improve public health; these trials can also result in label extension of a drug and even in initial drug approval. Publicly sponsored trials may combine and/or compare drugs developed by different commercial sponsors, develop multimodality therapies (e.g., the combination of chemotherapy and radiation), or develop novel treatment schedules or routes of drug administration (e.g., intraperitoneal chemotherapy). Publicly sponsored trials are more likely to focus on therapies for rare diseases and to study survivorship and quality of life; these areas may not be a priority for commercial entities. Screening and prevention strategies have been developed almost exclusively by the public sector given the large sample size and long follow-up period needed to complete the trial and, therefore, the lack of short-term commercial gain. Finally, given the public nature of the funding, clinical investigators are expected to publish their results even if the outcomes are unfavorable for the investigational therapy. With the ongoing reorganization of the cooperative groups to form a national clinical trials network, opportunities exist to create a robust platform for biomarker discovery and validation through the expanded collection of well-annotated biospecimens obtained from clinical trial participants. Thus, publicly funded trials are vital to developing and refining new cancer treatments and disseminating results to the medical community and the general public.
A call to action to advance patient‐focused and decentralized clinical trials

R. Donald Harvey,Therica M. Miller,Patricia A. Hurley,Ramya Thota,Lora J. Black,Suanna S. Bruinooge,Leigh M. Boehmer,Mark E. Fleury,Jasmine Kamboj,Mujahid A. Rizvi,Banu E. Symington,William D. Tap,David M. Waterhouse,Laura A. Levit,Janette K. Merrill,Sheila A. Prindiville,Teri Pollastro,Jamie R. Brewer,Leslie P. Byatt,Leila Hamroun,Edward S. Kim,Nicole Holland,Grzegorz S. Nowakowski

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.35145

IF: 6.9209

2024-01-11

Cancer

Abstract:This commentary is a call to action for a concerted commitment and effort to transform clinical trials and enable people with cancer to participate in clinical trials closer to home. Three key strategies are identified to address major barriers: confront challenges with the interpretation of US Food and Drug Administration Form 1572 requirements (Statement of Investigator); broaden acceptance of local laboratories and imaging centers; and invest in the creation of effective, sustainable partnerships between research centers and local providers.

oncology
The Digital Health Revolution: Exploring the Impact of Online Cancer Information on Self-Reported Preventive Behaviors

Bryan Yavari,Nilofar Kolbehdari,Lindsay Gann,Mercedes Portillo,Alexandria Rumschlag,Melanie Aldridge,Walker Mellon,Gissel Marquez Alcaraz,Harley Richker,Mané Sarkissian,Zachary T. Compton,Athena Aktipis,Carlo Maley,Cristina Baciu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.05.20.24307517

2024-09-23

Abstract:Cancer, one of the leading causes of death worldwide, is a disease characterized by uncontrolled cell growth within the body. While there have been many improvements in the treatment of cancer clinically, there is now an urgent need to improve cancer-related communication. This study explores the impact of online health information, specifically cancer-related information and prevention, among members of the general public. Through a randomized survey, we examined what information leads people to take action to minimize their cancer risk and communicate with their providers. Through evaluation of the various modes of communication, we were able to provide insight into which are more effective and better received by members of the general public. Through this, ways of bettering these avenues of communication and strengthening the bond between them will be highlighted and more easily elaborated on by future studies. The results of our study indicated that 60% of participants asserted that they are motivated by online preventive information to take steps to limit their cancer risk, while only roughly 44% of participants overall agreed that their doctor has communicated with them about when proper cancer screenings should be scheduled for the future. Although patients may be turning to the Internet now more than ever due to various reasons, when comparing self-reported rates of comprehension among the study participants, 35% agreed that the cancer-related information they can access online is confusing, while fewer than 22% of participants agreed that the cancer-related information they receive directly from their doctor is confusing. This is indicative of the limitations the Internet may have when undertaking the role of being a medical resource, especially when acting as a replacement for in-person medical appointments where patients can communicate directly with their physicians. Ultimately, these results provide a unique perspective into how people receive, evaluate, and implement cancer-preventive steps and general health-related information in a post-COVID-19 world, where the Internet is now strongly embedded in healthcare.
Implementation of Digital Awareness Strategies to Engage Patients and Providers in a Lung Cancer Screening Program: Retrospective Study

Dana L Jessup,McKinley Glover,Dania Daye,Lynda Banzi,Philip Jones,Garry Choy,Jo-Anne O Shepard,Efrén J Flores,McKinley Glover IV

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.8932

IF: 7.076

2018-02-15

Journal of Medical Internet Research

Abstract:BACKGROUND: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States. Despite mandated insurance coverage for eligible patients, lung cancer screening rates remain low. Digital platforms, including social media, provide a potentially valuable tool to enhance health promotion and patient engagement related to lung cancer screening (LCS).OBJECTIVE: The aim was to assess the effectiveness of LCS digital awareness campaigns on utilization of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) and visits to institutional online educational content.METHODS: A pay-per-click campaign utilizing Google and Facebook targeted adults aged 55 years and older and caregivers aged 18 years and older (eg, spouses, adult children) with LCS content during a 20-week intervention period from May to September 2016. A concurrent pay-per-click campaign using LinkedIn and Twitter targeted health care providers with LCS content. Geographic target radius was within 60 miles of an academic medical center. Social media data included aggregate demographics and click-through rates (CTRs). Primary outcome measures were visits to institutional Web pages and scheduled LDCT exams. Study period was 20 weeks before, during, and after the digital awareness campaigns.RESULTS: Weekly visits to the institutional LCS Web pages were significantly higher during the digital awareness campaigns compared to the 20-week period prior to implementation (mean 823.9, SD 905.8 vs mean 51, SD 22.3, P=.001). The patient digital awareness campaign surpassed industry standard CTRs on Google (5.85%, 1108/18,955 vs 1.8%) and Facebook (2.59%, 47,750/1,846,070 vs 0.8%). The provider digital awareness campaign surpassed industry standard CTR on LinkedIn (1.1%, 630/57,079 vs 0.3%) but not Twitter (0.19%, 1139/587,133 vs 0.25%). Mean scheduled LDCT exam volumes per week before, during, and after the digital awareness campaigns were 17.4 (SD 7.5), 20.4 (SD 5.4), and 26.2 (SD 6.4), respectively, with the difference between the mean number of scheduled exams after the digital awareness campaigns and the number of exams scheduled before and after the digital awareness campaigns being statistically significant (P<.001).CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of the LCS digital awareness campaigns was associated with increased visits to institutional educational Web pages and scheduled LDCT exams. Digital platforms are an important tool to enhance health promotion activities and engagement with patients and providers.

health care sciences & services,medical informatics
Physician justification for anti-cancer treatment decisions in the evolving oncology market.

Angelena Moseley,Margaret Brierly

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2024.42.16_suppl.e23317

IF: 45.3

2024-06-01

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract:e23317 Background: Oncology is a rapidly expanding pharmaceutical space, driven by innovative research and clinical technology. Continued growth in anti-cancer therapy has generated an exceedingly competitive market. As treatment options increase, physicians must weigh a variety of factors to make individualized care decisions. Many elements are patient-specific, but physician biases may also impact selection. As the market evolves, it is unknown whether oncology providers will shift priorities to align with contemporary findings or continue to trust in historical experiences. Methods: The Ipsos Global Oncology Monitor is an online, multi-center medical chart review of oncology patients receiving drug therapy. Over 1,900 cancer-treating physicians in the United States were screened for seniority and caseload and submitted data on 253,051 cancer patients (aggregate; all tumor types) between January 2020 to December 2023. Upon record submission, physicians were prompted to select up to three responses most associated with the reason for prescribing the reported therapy. Responses were chosen from a finite list of closed-ended options. Results: Influence of “Approved Standard of Care” fell amongst sampled physicians, cited as a reason for selecting treatment in 61% of reported annual patients in 2023, declining by 2.94 percentage points since 2020. “Biomarker results” recorded increased influence on therapy selection, rising in association with 8% of reported patients in 2020 to 11% in 2023. Within tumor-specific cohorts, “Maintain/improve quality of life” was a notable reason for drug therapy decisions in both breast and colorectal cancer patient subsets in 2023 (10% and 19% respectively). Contrary to the overall patient cohort, drug therapy choice for reported prostate cancer patients has increasingly shown association with “Approved Standard of Care” (53% in 2020 to 60% in 2023). Conclusions: Results of this study highlight the evolution of factors influencing anti-cancer treatment decisions in sampled physicians. Sampled providers appear to be shifting away from universal treatments, as shown by lowered association with “Approved Standard of Care”. Sampled physicians seem to be opting for specific therapies, demonstrated by rising influence of “Biomarker results”. Discrepancies between tumors merit expansion of research in rarer indications and emphasize the importance of diagnostic testing to continue improving quality of care. Further investigation using comparator cohort is warranted.

oncology
Stem Cell Clinics Online: The Direct-to-Consumer Portrayal of Stem Cell Medicine

Darren Lau,Ubaka Ogbogu,Benjamin Taylor,Tania Stafinski,Devidas Menon,Timothy Caulfield

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stem.2008.11.001

IF: 23.9

2008-12-01

Cell Stem Cell

Abstract:Despite the immature state of stem cell medicine, patients are seeking and accessing putative stem cell therapies in an "early market" in which direct-to-consumer advertising via the internet likely plays an important role. We analyzed stem cell clinic websites and appraised the relevant published clinical evidence of stem cell therapies to address three questions about the direct-to-consumer portrayal of stem cell medicine in this early market: What sorts of therapies are being offered? How are they portrayed? Is there clinical evidence to support the use of these therapies? We found that the portrayal of stem cell medicine on provider websites is optimistic and unsubstantiated by peer-reviewed literature.

cell biology,cell & tissue engineering
Alternative cancer clinics' use of Google listings and reviews to mislead potential patients

Marco Zenone,Jeremy Snyder,May van Schalkwyk,Jean-Christophe Bélisle-Pipon,Greg Hartwell,Timothy Caulfield,Nason Maani

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s44276-024-00071-9

Abstract:Background: Alternative cancer clinics, who provide treatment associated with earlier time to death, actively seek to create favorable views of their services online. An unexplored means where alternative cancer clinics can shape their appeal is their Google search results. Methods: We retrieved the Google listing and Google reviews of 47 prominent alternative cancer clinics on August 22, 2022. We then conducted a content analysis to assess the information cancer patients are faced with online. Results: Google listings of alternative treatment providers rarely declared the clinic was an alternative clinic versus a conventional primary cancer treatment provider (12.8% declared; 83.0% undeclared). The clinics were highly rated (median, 4.5 stars of 5). Reasons for positive reviews included treatment quality (n = 519), care (n = 420), and outcomes (n = 316). 288 reviews presented the clinics to cure or improve cancer. Negative reviews presented alternative clinics to financially exploit patients with ineffective treatment (n = 98), worsen patients' condition (n = 72), provide poor care (n = 41), and misrepresent outcomes (n = 23). Conclusions: The favorable Google listing and reviews of alternative clinics contribute to harmful online ecosystems. Reviews provide compelling narratives but are an ineffective indicator of treatment outcomes. Google lacks safeguards for truthful reviews and should not be used for medical decision-making.
Stakeholder perspectives on addressing adverse events from adjuvant cancer therapy: A qualitative study

Syril D Pettit,Pamela Silberman,Kristen Hassmiller Lich,Rebecca A Kirch,Steven E Lipshultz,Randall Teal,Ethan Basch

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.32448

IF: 6.9209

2019-12-15

Cancer

Abstract:Background: With increasing survival rates, a growing population of patients with cancer have received or will receive adjuvant therapy to prevent cancer recurrences. Patients and caregivers will confront the complexities of balancing the preventative benefits of adjuvant therapy with possible near-term or long-term adverse events (AEs). Adjuvant treatment-related AEs (from minimal to severe) can impact therapeutic adherence, quality of life, emotional and physical health, and survival. However, to the authors' knowledge, limited information is available regarding how stakeholders use or desire to use adjuvant-related AE information to inform the care of patients with cancer. Methods: A qualitative, purposeful sampling approach was used to elicit stakeholder feedback via semistructured interviews (24 interviews). Drug development, drug regulatory, clinical, payer, and patient/patient advocacy stakeholders were questioned about the generation, dissemination, and use of adjuvant treatment-related AE information to inform the care of patients with cancer. Transcripts were coded independently by 2 senior health care researchers and reconciled to identify key themes. Results: All stakeholder groups in the current study identified needed improvements in each of the following 4 areas: 1) improving the accessibility and relevance of AE-related information; 2) better integrating and implementing available information regarding AEs for decisions; 3) connecting contemporary cultural and economic value systems to the generation and use of information regarding adjuvant treatment-related AEs; and 4) addressing a lack of alignment and ownership of stakeholder efforts to improve the use of AE information in the adjuvant setting. Conclusions: Despite commonalities in the overall needs identified by the diverse stakeholders in the current study, broad systemic change has been stymied. The current study identified the lack of alignment and the absence of a central "owner" of these diffuse efforts as a previously unrecognized hurdle to realizing the desired systemic improvements. Future initiatives aimed at improving quality of life and outcomes for patients receiving adjuvant therapy through the improved use of AE information must address this challenge through innovative collectives and novel leadership strategies.
Cancer misinformation on social media

Stacy Loeb,Aisha T. Langford,Marie A. Bragg,Robert Sherman,June M. Chan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21857

2024-06-20

CA A Cancer Journal for Clinicians

Abstract:Social media is widely used globally by patients, families of patients, health professionals, scientists, and other stakeholders who seek and share information related to cancer. Despite many benefits of social media for cancer care and research, there is also a substantial risk of exposure to misinformation, or inaccurate information about cancer. Types of misinformation vary from inaccurate information about cancer risk factors or unproven treatment options to conspiracy theories and public relations articles or advertisements appearing as reliable medical content. Many characteristics of social media networks—such as their extensive use and the relative ease it allows to share information quickly—facilitate the spread of misinformation. Research shows that inaccurate and misleading health‐related posts on social media often get more views and engagement (e.g., likes, shares) from users compared with accurate information. Exposure to misinformation can have downstream implications for health‐related attitudes and behaviors. However, combatting misinformation is a complex process that requires engagement from media platforms, scientific and health experts, governmental organizations, and the general public. Cancer experts, for example, should actively combat misinformation in real time and should disseminate evidence‐based content on social media. Health professionals should give information prescriptions to patients and families and support health literacy. Patients and families should vet the quality of cancer information before acting upon it (e.g., by using publicly available checklists) and seek recommended resources from health care providers and trusted organizations. Future multidisciplinary research is needed to identify optimal ways of building resilience and combating misinformation across social media.

oncology
Marketing Drugs, Marketing Health Care Relationships: A Content Analysis of Visual Cues in Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Advertising

Rebecca J. Welch Cline,Henry N. Young

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327027hc1602_1

IF: 3.501

2004-04-01

Health Communication

Abstract:Proponents and opponents of direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) of prescription drugs argue that it promotes greater participation in health care by consumers with significant implications for public health and health care outcomes. This article (a). proposes a social cognitive theoretical framework to explain DTCA's effects, and (b). reports the first in a series of studies on DTCA's observational learning functions that may influence consumer behavior and the physician-patient relationship. This investigation addresses visual features of print DTCA. Results focus on the prevalence and nature of models featured in the ads and how visual cues may offer identity and relational motivators while reinforcing the value of prescription drug treatments. Further, DTCA may market disenfranchising images that increase disparity in health care information and access, despite their argued educational function.

health policy & services,communication
“See Your Doctor”: the Impact of Direct-to-consumer Advertising on Patients with Different Affliction Levels

Qiang Liu,Hongju Liu,Manohar Kalwani

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-020-09514-y

2015-01-01

SSRN Electronic Journal

Abstract:Pharmaceutical firms continue to advertise more and more prescription drugs directly to consumers, advocating them to discuss the focal health condition and the efficacy of the advertised drug with their physicians. In this paper, we investigate the effectiveness of such direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) on different types of patients. Specifically, we examine the impact of DTCA on patients with different affliction levels and the effectiveness of television versus print ads as an influence on more severely versus mildly afflicted patients to visit their physicians. Briefly, using data from the erectile dysfunction category, we find that DTCA generates a stronger response from new patients with severer versus milder afflictions. We also find that DTCA in print media generate a stronger response from new patients with severer versus milder afflictions whereas DTCA on television is more effective for new patients with milder conditions. We discuss the implications of our findings for policy makers concerned with improving public health as well as for pharmaceutical firms seeking to target different types of patients through print versus television ads.
Abstract 1008: Pilot evaluation of an online course for primary care providers on preparing patients for cancer discussions with their oncologists

Alyssa Crowe,Elisa S. Weiss,Margo Michaels,Domenic Durante,Maria Sae-Hau,Andrea Cassells,Carla L. Fisher,Jason Arnold,Taylor Vasquez,Ana Natale-Pereira,Raymond Mailhot,Zhongyue Zhang,Carma L. Bylund

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7445.am2024-1008

IF: 11.2

2024-03-22

Cancer Research

Abstract:Abstract Introduction: Cancer clinical trial (CCT) accrual is only 5-8%, and barriers to participate can be more acute for underserved groups. Enrollment of racial/ethnic minorities, older adults, adolescents, and young adults is not adequate to understand treatment outcomes unique to these populations. Education before seeing an oncologist can increase patients’ willingness to ask and consider receiving treatment through a CCT. Because primary care providers (PCPs) interact with patients during diagnosis, provide ongoing care, and are a trusted source of information, they can educate and normalize inquiries about therapeutic CCTs. The aim of this study was to pilot test an innovative, tailored online CCT course for PCPs. Methods: To participate, PCPs (MD, DO, NP, or PA) had to provide care in an outpatient setting, refer patients to a cancer treatment specialist in the past year, and be an English speaker residing in the U.S. or its territories. PCPs were recruited from Clinical Directors Network, University of Pennsylvania, and University of Florida. The 1-hour online course includes four modules hosted by a PCP and radiation oncologist with video segments of a CCT expert who summarized CCT recruitment research. Participants interact with patient scenarios and learn about the patient’s cancer diagnosis and medical/personal background. Videos of actors playing the roles of patient and doctor demonstrate communication skills taught in the course. PCPs completed short surveys prior to and immediately after completing the course. Results: 28 PCPs participated. PCPs were mainly MDs (88.9%), residents (17, 60.7%), White (46.4%), non-Hispanic/Latino (92.9%), and 50% women. Mean knowledge of CCTs scores (0-100%) increased significantly from pre (M=56.7, SD=17.5) to post (M=82.1, SD=12; p<.001) indicating that PCPs answered more true/false statements about CCTs correctly after training. Using a 1-5 scale with 5=strongly agree, PCPs’ attitudes and beliefs scores also increased significantly from pre (M=4.2, SD=.6) to post (4.7, SD=.4, p<.001) indicating that PCPs were more likely to agree they have a role in their patients’ cancer treatment, including CCTs, after training. Using the same scale, PCPs’ willingness to communicate about CCTs increased significantly from pre (M=4.4, SD= .5) to post (M=4.7, SD=.5, p=.007), indicating that PCPs were more willing to engage with patients diagnosed with cancer before referring them to a cancer specialist after training. Conclusions: Significant pilot findings in knowledge, attitudes and beliefs, and communication scores demonstrate that the online course was effective at educating PCPs about CCTs, and improving PCPs’ attitudes about the CCT referral process, and their willingness to engage in their patients’ cancer care. Future research will include a larger sample and explore the course’s impact on PCP’s referral behavior. Citation Format: Alyssa Crowe, Elisa S. Weiss, Margo Michaels, Domenic Durante, Maria Sae-Hau, Andrea Cassells, Carla L. Fisher, Jason Arnold, Taylor Vasquez, Ana Natale-Pereira, Raymond Mailhot, Zhongyue Zhang, Carma L. Bylund. Pilot evaluation of an online course for primary care providers on preparing patients for cancer discussions with their oncologists [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2024; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(6_Suppl):Abstract nr 1008.

oncology

Metal sensitive protease(s) associated with corneal proteoglycans.

Hidden Fermion in Stueckelberg Z' Models as Milli-charged Dark Matter

Advertising Alternative Cancer Treatments and Approaches on Meta Social Media Platforms: Content Analysis

Cancer-Related Internet Use and Its Association With Patient Decision Making and Trust in Physicians Among Patients in an Early Drug Development Clinic: A Questionnaire-Based Cross-Sectional Observational Study

Abstract B025: Assessing the content and quality of online patient education material on clinical trials from NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers

Using Social Media Data to Understand the Impact of Promotional Information on Laypeople's Discussions: A Case Study of Lynch Syndrome.

Considerations for Implementation of Cancer Molecular Diagnostics Into Clinical Care

Modeling autism-relevant behavioral phenotypes in rats and mice: Do ‘autistic’ rodents exist?

The FOR US (Fostering Opportunities in Research Using Marketing Strategies) study.

Publicly Funded Clinical Trials and the Future of Cancer Care

A call to action to advance patient‐focused and decentralized clinical trials

The Digital Health Revolution: Exploring the Impact of Online Cancer Information on Self-Reported Preventive Behaviors

Implementation of Digital Awareness Strategies to Engage Patients and Providers in a Lung Cancer Screening Program: Retrospective Study

Physician justification for anti-cancer treatment decisions in the evolving oncology market.

Stem Cell Clinics Online: The Direct-to-Consumer Portrayal of Stem Cell Medicine

Alternative cancer clinics' use of Google listings and reviews to mislead potential patients

Stakeholder perspectives on addressing adverse events from adjuvant cancer therapy: A qualitative study

Cancer misinformation on social media

Marketing Drugs, Marketing Health Care Relationships: A Content Analysis of Visual Cues in Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Advertising

“See Your Doctor”: the Impact of Direct-to-consumer Advertising on Patients with Different Affliction Levels

Abstract 1008: Pilot evaluation of an online course for primary care providers on preparing patients for cancer discussions with their oncologists