The patient with asymptomatic advanced renal failure--obstructive uropathy caused by inflammatory abdominal aortic aneurysm.

Z. Korzets,M. Witz,E. Goldberg,M. Rozin,J. Lehmann,J. Bernheim

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/NDT/13.7.1835

1998-07-01

Abstract:back pain. The patient was known to be a heavy smoker (72 pack years). The only other relevant information was a 5-year history of well-controlled hypertension (140/90 mmHg on atenolol 100 mg daily)

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The current status of survivorship care provision at the state level: a Wisconsin-based assessment

Alexandria L. Cull Weatherer,John K. Krebsbach,Amye J. Tevaarwerk,Sarah C. Kerch,Noelle K. LoConte

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-021-01117-4

2021-10-05

Journal of Cancer Survivorship

Abstract:PurposeAs the number of cancer survivors grows, the responsibility for addressing their unique physical and emotional needs also increases. Survivorship care services vary by geography, health system, and insurance coverage. We aimed to understand the state of survivorship care services in Wisconsin's cancer facilities.MethodsThe selection of cancer treatment facilities sought to provide a geographically representative sample. An adapted Patient-Centered Survivorship Care Index was comprised of questions regarding different aspects of survivorship practices. Areas of interest included disciplines incorporated, services provided, standards of care, and discussion of late-term effects, among others.ResultsOut of 90 sites invited, 40 responded (44.4%). Oncologists, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners were the most common follow-up care disciplines. Risk reduction services, dietary services, access to physical activity, and behavioral health specialist referral were described as standards of care in less than half of sites. All sites reported working with community partners, 92.5% of which worked with YMCA-related programs. Discussion of long-term effects was a standard of care for all sites. Effects such as emotional distress and health practice changes were frequently discussed with almost all patients, while sexual functioning and fertility were not.ConclusionsServices and specialties related to behavioral health, fertility/sexual health, and rehabilitation and physical activity varied between sites. Such services may be offered less often due to variable insurance coverage.Implications for Cancer SurvivorsPolicy solutions should be explored to increase insurance coverage and provision rates of necessary survivorship services to keep up with the projected increase in demand. Given imperfect and evolving measurement tools to assess needs for cancer survivorship care services, cancer survivors should feel empowered to voice when they have unmet needs and request referrals.

oncology,social issues
Developing national cancer survivorship standards to inform quality of care in the United States using a consensus approach

Michelle A Mollica,Gina McWhirter,Emily Tonorezos,Joshua Fenderson,David R Freyer,Michael Jefford,Christopher J Luevano,Timothy Mullett,Shelley Fuld Nasso,Ethan Schilling,Vida Almario Passero,National Cancer Survivorship Standards Subject Matter Expert Group,Catherine Alfano,Precilla Belin,Anne Blaes,Hillary Cavanagh,Lanie Francis,Danielle Friedman,Patricia Ganz,Min He,Batsheva Honig,Shawna Hudson,Linda Jacobs,Nancy Keating,Anne Kirchoff,Michelle Kirschner,Ron Kline,Jessica MacIntyre,Molly Maher,Deborah Mayer,Janette Merrill,Larissa Nekhlyudov,Frank Penedo,Mackenzi Pergolotti,Michael Roth,Tara Sanft,Alyssa Schatz,Kathryn Schmitz,Lisa Schwartz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-024-01602-6

Abstract:Purpose: To develop United States (US) standards for survivorship care that informs (1) essential health system policy and process components and (2) evaluation of the quality of survivorship care. Methods: The National Cancer Institute and the Department of Veterans Affairs led a review to identify indicators of quality cancer survivorship care in the domains of health system policy, process, and evaluation/assessment. A series of three virtual consensus meetings with survivorship care and research experts and advocates was conducted to rate the importance of the indicators and refine the top indicators. The final set of standards was developed, including ten indicators in each domain. Results: Prioritized items were survivor-focused, including processes to both assess and manage physical, psychological, and social issues, and evaluation of patient outcomes and experiences. Specific indicators focused on developing a business model for sustaining survivorship care and collecting relevant business metrics (e.g., healthcare utilization, downstream revenue) to show value of survivorship care to health systems. Conclusions: The National Standards for Cancer Survivorship Care can be used by health systems to guide development of new survivorship care programs or services or to assess alignment and enhance services in existing survivorship programs. Given the variety of settings providing care to survivors, it is necessary for health systems to adapt these standards based on factors including age-specific needs, cancer types, treatments received, and health system resources. Implications for cancer survivors: With over 18 million cancer survivors in the United States, many of whom experience varied symptoms and unmet needs, it is essential for health systems to have a comprehensive strategy to provide ongoing care. The US National Standards for Survivorship Care should serve as a blueprint for what survivors and their families can anticipate after a cancer diagnosis to address their needs.
Advancing survivorship at a comprehensive cancer center: integrating clinical care, education and research initiatives at Northwestern Medicine and the Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center

Sofia F. Garcia,Mary O’Connor,Karen Kinahan,Melissa Duffy,Margo Klein,Angela McCrum,Aarati Didwania,Sheetal M. Kircher

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-023-01518-7

2024-02-02

Journal of Cancer Survivorship

Abstract:The unprecedented and growing number of cancer survivors requires comprehensive quality care that includes cancer surveillance, symptom management, and health promotion to reduce morbidity and mortality and improve quality of life. However, coordinated and sustainable survivorship care has been challenged by barriers at multiple levels. We outline the survivorship programs at Northwestern Medicine and the Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center that have evolved over two decades. Our current survivorship clinics comprise STAR (Survivors Taking Action and Responsibility) for adult survivors of childhood cancers; Adult Specialty Survivorship for survivors of breast, colorectal and testicular cancers, lymphomas, and leukemias; and Gynecologic Oncology Survivorship. Care provision models align with general, disease/treatment-specific, and integrated survivorship models, respectively. Reimbursement for survivorship services has been bolstered by institutional budget allocations. We have standardized survivor education, counseling, and referrals through electronic health record (EHR)-integrated survivorship care plan (SCP) templates that incorporate partial auto-population. We developed EHR-integrated data collection tools (e.g., dashboards; SmartForm, and registry) to facilitate data analytics, personalized patient referrals, and reports to the Commission on Cancer (CoC). We report to the CoC on SCP delivery, dietitian encounters, and DEXA scans. For the last decade, our Cancer Survivorship Institute has aligned the efforts of clinicians, researchers, and educators. The institute promotes evidence-based care, high-impact research, and state-of-the-science educational programs for professionals, survivors, and the community. Future plans include expansion of clinical services and funding for applied research centered on the unique needs of post-treatment cancer survivors.

oncology,social issues
Availability of cancer survivorship support services across the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program network

Jamie M Faro,Emily V Dressler,Carol Kittel,Dori M Beeler,Shirley M Bluethmann,Stephanie J Sohl,Andrew M McDonald,Kathryn E Weaver,Chandylen Nightingale,Landscape Committee,Heather B Neuman,Chandylen L Nightingale,Susan K Parsons,Samilia Obeng-Gyasi,Mary E Cooley,Kah Poh Loh,Scott D Ramsey,Melyssa Foust,Christa Braun-Inglis,Wade T Kyono,Charles W Drescher,Eden G Wood

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jncics/pkae005

2024-01-04

Abstract:Background: National cancer organizations recommend provision of nutrition, physical activity, and mental health supportive services to cancer survivors. However, the availability of these services across diverse community oncology settings remains unclear. Methods: The National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) is a national network of community oncology practices engaged in cancer research. The 2022 NCORP Landscape Assessment (5UG1CA189824) assessed individual practices' establishment of survivorship clinics and nutrition, physical activity, and mental health services, resources, and/or referrals. Descriptive statistics summarized and logistic regression quantified the association between services, practice, and patient characteristics. Results: Of 46 NCORP community sites, 45 (98%) responded to the survey, representing 259 adult practice groups. A total of 41% had a survivorship clinic; 96% offered mental health, 94% nutrition, and 53% physical activity services, resources, and/or referrals. All 3 services were offered in various formats (eg, in-house, referrals, education) by 51% and in-house only by 25% of practices. Practices with advanced practice providers were more likely to have a survivorship clinic (odds ratio [OR] = 3.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.04 to 9.76). Practices with at least 30% Medicare patients (OR = 2.54, 95% CI = 1.39 to 4.66) and more oncology providers (OR = 1.02, 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.04) were more likely to have all 3 services in any format. Practices with at least 30% Medicare patients (OR = 3.41, 95% CI = 1.50 to 7.77) and a survivorship clinic (OR = 2.84, 95% CI = 1.57 to 5.14) were more likely to have all 3 services in-house. Conclusions: Larger oncology practices and those caring for more survivors on Medicare provided more supportive services, resources, and/or referrals. Smaller practices and those without survivorship clinics may need strategies to address potential gaps in supportive services.
Abstract 6301: Mapping survivor-specific supportive care resources: A digital landscape analysis of NCI-designated cancer centers

Alexis Taylor,Katherine Sterba,Evan Graboyes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7445.am2024-6301

IF: 11.2

2024-03-24

Cancer Research

Abstract:Background: Optimal care for cancer survivors requires a comprehensive array of supportive care services to address the multitude of physical, psychological, social, financial, and health promotion needs of this population. To understand options to address their unique needs, survivors and their caregivers may seek information from online sources. Although National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Centers (NCIDCCs) serve as leaders in cancer treatment and care delivery, as well as credible sources for survivors to receive information on their recovery, no study has characterized the digital landscape of survivorship offerings on their website. This study aims to characterize the supportive care services offered to cancer survivors on NCIDCCs. Methods: Of the 72 NCIDCCs, 65 provide clinical care. We reviewed the webpage of each to identify supportive care offerings. Services were categorized based on the four domains of the quality-of-life model: (1) physical well-being, (2) psychological well-being, (3) social well-being, and (4) spiritual well-being. Supportive care services were classified as survivor-specific if the online description included information that specifically catered to cancer survivors. Results: Of the 65 clinical NCIDCC websites, 100% offer supportive care services and 54% offer supportive care services specific to survivors (Table). The most common supportive care service offered was nutrition (90.6%) and the least commonly offered was caregiver support (7.9%). Behavioral medicine was offered most frequently for survivors (28.3%) and caregiver support was offered the least (0%). Out of the four domains of the quality-of-life model, spiritual well-being services were offered the least at NCIDCCs. Conclusion: More than half of the NCIDCC websites provided survivor-specific supportive care services. Supportive care services on websites of NCI-Designated or Comprehensive Cancer Centers (N = 65) Supportive Care Service (n) % Supportive Care Service Specific to Cancer Survivors (n) % Physical Well Being Services Nutrition 58 90.6 14 24.1 Genetics 53 82.8 5 9.4 Pain and Palliative Care 52 81.3 8 15.4 Complementary and Alternative Medicine 49 75.4 6 12.2 Integrative Medicine 47 73.4 9 19.1 Occupational Therapy 45 70.3 6 13.3 Fertility Preservation 43 66.2 6 14 Tobacco Cessation 38 58.5 6 15.8 Speech 36 56.3 3 8.3 Exercise 29 45.3 5 17.2 Primary Care 6 9.2 3 50 Psychological Well-Being Services Behavioral Medicine 53 81.5 15 28.3 Recreational Therapy 36 58.1 5 13.9 Social Well-Being Services Oncology Social Work 56 87.5 5 8.9 Patient Navigation 33 51.6 3 9.1 Financial Counseling 32 50 4 12.5 Self-Image 27 41.5 3 11.1 Reproductive and Sexual Health 22 33.8 5 22.7 Caregiver Support 5 7.9 0 0 Spiritual Well-Being Services Pastoral Services 49 75.4 5 10.2 Citation Format: Alexis Taylor, Katherine Sterba, Evan Graboyes. Mapping survivor-specific supportive care resources: A digital landscape analysis of NCI-designated cancer centers [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2024; Part 1 (Regular s); 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(6_Suppl) nr 6301.

oncology
History and current status of the survivorship care program at the University of California, Los Angeles Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center (UCLA JCCC)

Eden R. Brauer,Patricia A. Ganz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-023-01522-x

2024-01-08

Journal of Cancer Survivorship

Abstract:As one of the first comprehensive cancer centers to receive a designation from the National Cancer Institute, the Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center at UCLA Health has served as a leader in survivorship research for three decades. A clinical survivorship program for childhood cancer survivors was established in the early 2000s as this became a standard of care in pediatric oncology. However, it was not until receipt of external funding and the establishment of a Survivorship Center of Excellence in 2006 that clinical services were expanded to include adult cancer survivors, as well as survivorship care delivery research in the community and at affiliated clinical sites. When this funding ended, there was limited institutional support for expansion of the program, and so the clinical programs did not develop further. Recently, there has been renewed interest in obtaining Commission on Cancer accreditation, and this has prompted an institutional assessment of survivorship care to inform future activities for system-wide program development. As oncology care expands throughout a large regional health system network, the future survivorship program will need to serve as a common resource for the entire health system by providing a repository of specialized services and resources as well as standard processes and pathways for a cohesive approach to care.

oncology,social issues
Evaluation of NCI-Designated Cancer Center and Comprehensive Cancer Center Survivorship-Focused Websites: Information Provided and Accessibility

Rachel T Kurtzman,Lisa Mikesell,Benjamin F Crabtree

DOI: https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2024.7017

2024-08-16

Abstract:Background: Individuals with a history of cancer increasingly seek health information from online resources, including NCI-designated Cancer Center websites. Centers receive NCI designation because they provide excellent care and engage in cutting-edge research. However, the information presented on these webpages and their accessibility is unknown. An evaluation of the survivorship-focused webpages from NCI-designated Cancer Centers is needed to assess survivorship information and accessibility of these webpages. Methods: We conducted an evaluation of the survivorship-focused webpages from 64 NCI-designated Cancer Centers. We evaluated where survivorship-focused webpages were housed, if there was a survivorship clinic or program, target audience of the webpage, how cancer survivor was defined, contact methods, and available resources. Accessibility outcomes included readability, font type, font size, color scheme, and alternative text (alt text) descriptors. An artificial intelligence (AI) audit was conducted to assess if the webpage was compliant with national accessibility guidelines. Results: Most cancer centers had a survivorship-focused webpage, with 72% located on the cancer center's website and 28% on a health system website. Survivorship information available varied considerably and was often lacking in detail. Although three-quarters of webpages targeted patients only, variable definitions of cancer survivor were observed. Accessibility issues identified included inconsistent use of alt text descriptors, font size smaller than 15 points, and color schemes without adequate contrast. The average reading-level of information presented was above 12th grade. Only 9% of webpages were compliant with online accessibility guidelines; 72% semicompliant and 21% were noncompliant. Conclusions: Information presented on NCI-designated Cancer Center survivorship-focused webpages was inconsistent, often lacking, and inaccessible. NCI-designated Cancer Centers are role models for cancer research in the United States and have an obligation to provide survivorship information. Changes to content and website design are needed to provide better information for individuals seeking resources and health information relative to their cancer and care.
[Inhibition of anaphylactic chemical mediator release by tranilast].

H. Yamamura,S. Kohno,K. Ohata,A. Koda,M. Kawai,M. Horiba

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0021-5198(19)58077-5

1987-10-01

Abstract:
Availability of Family Caregiver Programs in US Cancer Centers

J Nicholas Odom,Allison Applebaum,Marie A Bakitas,Tara Bryant,Erin Currie,Kayleigh Curry,Heidi Donovan,Maria E Fernandez,Betty Ferrell,Andres Azuero,Tamryn F Gray,Bailey A Hendricks,Diane Meier,Chandylen Nightingale,Susan Reinhard,Timothy S Sannes,Katherine Sterba,Heather M Young

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.37250

2023-10-02

Abstract:Importance: Family caregivers provide the majority of health care to the 18 million patients with cancer in the US. Yet despite providing complex medical and nursing care, a large proportion of caregivers report no formal support or training. In recognition of this gap, many interventions to support cancer caregivers have been developed and tested over the past 2 decades. However, there are few system-level data on whether US cancer centers have adopted and implemented these interventions. Objective: To describe and characterize the availability of family caregiver support programs in US cancer centers. Design, setting, and participants: This cross-sectional national survey study was conducted between September 1, 2021, and April 30, 2023. Participants comprised clinical and administrative staff of Commission on Cancer-accredited US cancer centers. Data analysis was performed in May and June 2023. Main outcomes and measures: Survey questions about the availability of 11 types of family caregiver programs (eg, peer mentoring, education classes, and psychosocial programs) were developed after literature review, assessment of similar program evaluation surveys, and discussions among a 13-member national expert advisory committee. Family caregiver programs were defined as structured, planned, and coordinated groups of activities and procedures aimed at specifically supporting family caregivers as part of usual care. Survey responses were tabulated using standard descriptive statistics, including means, proportions, and frequencies. Results: Of the surveys sent to potential respondents at 971 adult cancer centers, 238 were completed (response rate, 24.5%). After nonresponse weight adjustment, most cancer centers (75.4%) had at least 1 family caregiver program; 24.6% had none. The most common program type was information and referral services (53.6%). Cancer centers with no programs were more likely to have smaller annual outpatient volumes (χ2 = 11.10; P = .011). Few centers had caregiver programs on training in medical and/or nursing tasks (21.7%), caregiver self-care (20.2%), caregiver-specific distress screening (19.3%), peer mentoring (18.9%), and children caregiving for parents (8.3%). Very few programs were developed from published evidence in a journal (8.1%). The top reason why cancer centers selected their programs was community members requesting the program (26.3%); only 12.3% of centers selected their programs based on scientific evidence. Most programs were funded by the cancer center or hospital (58.6%) or by philanthropy (42.4%). Conclusions and relevance: In this survey study, most cancer centers had family caregiver programs; however, a quarter had none. Furthermore, the scope of programming was limited and rarely evidence based, with few centers offering caregiving education and training. These findings suggest that implementation strategies are critically needed to foster uptake of evidence-based caregiver interventions.
Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2022

Kimberly D. Miller,Leticia Nogueira,Theresa Devasia,Angela B. Mariotto,K. Robin Yabroff,Ahmedin Jemal,Joan Kramer,Rebecca L. Siegel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21731

2022-06-24

CA A Cancer Journal for Clinicians

Abstract:The number of cancer survivors continues to increase in the United States due to the growth and aging of the population as well as advances in early detection and treatment. To assist the public health community in better serving these individuals, the American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute collaborate triennially to estimate cancer prevalence in the United States using incidence and survival data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registries, vital statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Health Statistics, and population projections from the US Census Bureau. Current treatment patterns based on information in the National Cancer Database are presented for the most prevalent cancer types by race, and cancer‐related and treatment‐related side‐effects are also briefly described. More than 18 million Americans (8.3 million males and 9.7 million females) with a history of cancer were alive on January 1, 2022. The 3 most prevalent cancers are prostate (3,523,230), melanoma of the skin (760,640), and colon and rectum (726,450) among males and breast (4,055,770), uterine corpus (891,560), and thyroid (823,800) among females. More than one‐half (53%) of survivors were diagnosed within the past 10 years, and two‐thirds (67%) were aged 65 years or older. One of the largest racial disparities in treatment is for rectal cancer, for which 41% of Black patients with stage I disease receive proctectomy or proctocolectomy compared to 66% of White patients. Surgical receipt is also substantially lower among Black patients with non‐small cell lung cancer, 49% for stages I‐II and 16% for stage III versus 55% and 22% for White patients, respectively. These treatment disparities are exacerbated by the fact that Black patients continue to be less likely to be diagnosed with stage I disease than White patients for most cancers, with some of the largest disparities for female breast (53% vs 68%) and endometrial (59% vs 73%). Although there are a growing number of tools that can assist patients, caregivers, and clinicians in navigating the various phases of cancer survivorship, further evidence‐based strategies and equitable access to available resources are needed to mitigate disparities for communities of color and optimize care for people with a history of cancer. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022;72:000‐000.
Cancer Survivorship at Stanford Cancer Institute

Stephanie M. Smith,Natasha Steele,Jennifer Kim,Ilana R. Yurkiewicz,Catherine Benedict,Ranak Trivedi,Lauren C. Heathcote,Pamela J. Simon,Kelly Bugos,Alison Clayton,Oxana Palesh,Lidia Schapira

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-023-01523-w

2024-01-08

Journal of Cancer Survivorship

Abstract:The Stanford Cancer Survivorship Program is a key initiative of Stanford Cancer Institute. The program's mission is to improve the experience and outcomes of patients and family caregivers throughout all phases of the cancer trajectory by advancing survivorship research, clinical care, and education. The four pillars of the program include clinical care delivery with a focus on primary care–survivorship collaboration and expanding specialty services, education and training of healthcare professionals, transdisciplinary patient-oriented research, and community engagement. Cross-cutting areas of expertise include the following: (a) adolescents and young adults (AYAs), (b) mental health and patient self-management, (c) integration of primary care, and (d) postgraduate medical education. The clinical care model includes embedded survivorship clinics within disease groups in outpatient clinics, novel clinics designed to address unmet needs such as sexual health for women, and primary care-based faculty-led survivorship clinics for patients undergoing active cancer care requiring co-management, those who have completed active therapy and those at high risk for cancer due to genetic risk. Educational initiatives developed to date include an online course and medical textbook for primary care clinicians, a lecture series, monthly research team meetings, and rotations for medical trainees. Patient-facing activities include webinars and a podcast series designed to promote awareness, thus expanding the provision of expert-vetted information. Ongoing research focuses on oncofertility and family building after cancer, improving communication for AYAs, changing mindsets to improve quality of life through targeted digital interventions, increasing capacity to care for cancer survivors, and strengthening collaboration with community partners.

oncology,social issues
Examining experiences of African American patients with breast cancer in a multidisciplinary survivorship clinic.

Madeleine Uelk,Nazzara Chervinko,Cathy Grace Louthen,Arpan Patel,Patricia A. Robinson,Kathleen Fujiu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2023.41.16_suppl.e18621

IF: 45.3

2023-06-01

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract:e18621 Background: Breast cancer (BC) is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in women. More effective therapies have led to improved survival rates, yet, the survival benefit is not shared across all patient (pt) populations, with worse breast cancer outcomes among African American (AA) pts. The American College of Surgeons has mandated that accredited sites have a cancer survivorship program. At the Cardinal Bernardin Cancer Center (CBCC), there remain disparities in access and utilization of the survivorship clinic, especially by AA BC survivors. Of the 385 new BC analytic cases CBCC treated between March 1, 2020, and March 1, 2021, 72 of these were AA pts. Unfortunately, less than 10% of AA BC pts who received curative intent therapy attended the CBCC Survivorship Clinic. As part of the "Bringing Quality Care Training to Komen’s African American Health Equity Initiative" in collaboration with ASCO, CBCC remodeled its survivorship program into a multidisciplinary clinic staffed by medical oncology, oncologic psychology, genetic counselor, nutritionist and social worker in order to provide comprehensive care to pts following diagnosis and treatment. Methods: The CBCC team performed the following: construction of a process map outlining the current pathway for referring pts to the survivorship clinic; creation of a fishbone cause and effect diagram highlighting factors contributing to poor utilization of the clinic; implementation of faculty surveys to assess reasons for lack of referral to survivorship clinic; development of pt experience surveys; and identification of countermeasures. Tumor registry identified BC pts by stage, race, and ethnicity. Results: Review of the CBCC BC registry showed a low attrition rate among 72 AA pts, with only 1.4% (n = 1) of AA pts diagnosed at CBCC treated elsewhere. AA pts made up a disproportionate number of stage IV diagnoses comprising 40% (n = 8). Surveys demonstrated the following reasons for poor utilization of the survivorship clinic by faculty in order of descending importance: providers felt they were providing survivorship care to their pts; pts declined referral due to appointment fatigue; lack of understanding to make referral; no outcomes data to support survivorship clinics; pt misunderstanding the purpose; fear of losing the pt; pt financial burden. Pt surveys (n = 20) showed high pt satisfaction, with an average rating of 4.8 out of 5 for overall care. Conclusions: Lack of utilization of the cancer survivorship clinic among AA BC pts leads to inefficient application of resources, decreased survivorship care, reduced pt experience, and diminished opportunity for survivorship education and increased health literacy. Paths for the future include increased faculty and pt education, faculty engagement, designated scheduler for survivorship clinic, and increased promotional and marketing work.

oncology
Abstract C034: Impact of survivorship care plans on self-reported health and functional well-being

Aly M. Cortella,Katarina Wang,Debby Oh,Niharika Dixit,Zinnia Loya,Kathie Lau,Michelle Wadhwa,Chris Duffy,Salma Shariff-Marco,Kristan Olazo,Vlad Honcharov,Marika Dy,Urmimala Sarkar,Scarlett Lin Gomez

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7755.disp24-c034

2024-09-23

Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention

Abstract:Introduction: Cancer survivors have varying physical, psychosocial, and informational needs. Organizations such as American Society of Clinical Oncology have developed survivorship care plans (SCP) for cancer screening, treatment side effect management, and care coordination. There is a need to better understand SCP utilization among underserved and diverse patient communities. Methods: Adults ages 18+ years with breast or colorectal cancer diagnosed between 2019 and 2021 were recruited from the Greater Bay Area Cancer Registry. Participants completed a 30-minute survey about their survivorship plans, quality of life, health behaviors, and social support. Analysis: Overall comparisons between groups were evaluated with chi-square tests. Associations between demographic characteristics and receipt of any type of survivorship plan were evaluated with univariate binomial logistic regression models, and associations between receipt of any type of survivorship plan and health/well-being outcomes were assessed using univariate ordinal regression models. Multivariable models will be built using relevant variables. Results: Participants (n=872) were on average 59 years (range=24-95) and mostly female (70.2%). Participants had either breast (41.3%) or colorectal cancer (58.7%). Participants were American Indian/Alaska Native (AIAN) (1.0%), Asian American (18.2%), NH Black (12.8%), NH White (38.0%), LatinX (29.0%), and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (0.8%). Receipt of a SCP was reported by 258 (29.6%) participants, 328 (37.6%) had another type of post-treatment guide provided to them, and 224 (25.7%) were not offered any kind of survivorship plan. There were no differences in race/ethnicity, nativity status, non-English language spoken at home, marital status, or educational attainment between those who received any kind of survivorship plan vs. no plan. Being female was associated with 40% lower odds of receiving any kind of survivorship plan (OR=0.60, 95%CI=0.42-0.87). Being on public insurance was also associated with lower odds of receiving a survivorship plan than being on private insurance (OR=0.59, 95%CI=0.43-0.81). Receipt of a survivorship plan was associated with 52% higher odds of reporting a higher level of overall current health (OR=1.52, 95%CI=1.14-2.02) compared to those who did not receive any plan. Receiving a survivorship plan was also associated with higher odds of reporting a higher level of ability to work (OR=1.58, 95%CI=1.18-2.11), more fulfilling work (OR=1.69, 95%CI=1.27-2.23), ability to enjoy life (OR=1.55, 95%CI=1.17-2.06), ability to sleep well (OR=1.35, 95%CI=1.03-1.79), and contentment with their current quality of life (OR=1.51, 95%CI=1.14-1.99). Conclusion: Receipt of any survivorship plan was associated with higher levels of self-reported current overall health and measures of functional well-being. Women, as well as people on public insurance, are less likely to receive a survivorship plan, highlighting disparities in survivorship care planning for these populations. Citation Format: Aly M. Cortella, Katarina Wang, Debby Oh, Niharika Dixit, Zinnia Loya, Kathie Lau, Michelle Wadhwa, Chris Duffy, Salma Shariff-Marco, Kristan Olazo, Vlad Honcharov, Marika Dy, Urmimala Sarkar, Scarlett Lin Gomez. Impact of survivorship care plans on self-reported health and functional well-being [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 C034.

oncology,public, environmental & occupational health
Abstract C043: Exploring underserved cancer survivors' perspectives on survivorship care at community health centers

Bijal A. Balasubramanian,Maram Museitif,Hilary Ma,Simon Lee,Gretchen H. Walton,Aubree Laura Shay

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7755.disp24-c043

2024-09-23

Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention

Abstract:Background: Community Health Centers (CHCs) serve as critical healthcare centers for vulnerable and underserved populations, including those living with cancer (also referred to as cancer survivors), offering essential services and care to survivors who often face numerous barriers to care. Despite the vital role CHCs play, cancer survivors who rely on these centers frequently encounter unique challenges, including managing chronic conditions, accessing specialized care, and addressing social determinants of health (SDOH). Understanding cancer survivors' experiences at CHCs is crucial to enhancing care delivery and improving their overall quality of life. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with adult patients with a history of cancer and other chronic conditions at two Texas-based CHCs. Data analysis employed an adapted version of Crabtree and Miller's immersion and crystallization approach. One researcher and a second coder led the immersion phase, followed by a collaborative crystallization process with a team to identify and refine the emergent themes. Results: Seven female cancer survivors, with a mean age of 70 years and at least two chronic conditions, were interviewed. Three themes emerged: (1) complexity in chronic care management, (2) satisfaction and trust in care, and (3) the role of faith and reminders. In theme 1, cancer survivors discussed their challenges of managing multiple doctor's appointments and the number of medications they need to take while encountering SDOH barriers. Meanwhile, in theme 1, they expressed extreme satisfaction with the care they received at CHC. Finally, in theme 3, spiritual prayers and the use of written reminders helped with coping and managing their medications and multiple doctor's visits. Additionally, during the interviews, survivors were not prompted by the research team about their past cancer history and did not voluntarily mention it to the interviewer. Conclusion: Cancer survivors' at CHCs did not perceive the need for well-coordinated survivorship care. This could be due to survivors not being informed about the necessity of survivorship care and having an insufficient understanding of cancer-related risks. The absence of recognition of their cancer history highlights the importance of shared care between primary care clinicians and specialists, as well as the integration of survivorship care in primary care settings to ensure optimal, high-quality care. Citation Format: Bijal A. Balasubramanian, Maram Museitif, Hilary Ma, Simon Lee, Gretchen H. Walton, Aubree Laura Shay. Exploring underserved cancer survivors' perspectives on survivorship care at community health 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 C043.

oncology,public, environmental & occupational health
International Survey of Psychosocial Care for Cancer Survivors in Low-/Middle- and High-Income Countries: Current Practices, Barriers, and Facilitators to Care

Christina Signorelli,Beverley Lim Høeg,Chioma Asuzu,Isabel Centeno,Tania Estapé,Peter Fisher,Wendy Lam,Inbar Levkovich,Sharon Manne,Anne Miles,Louise Mullen,Larissa Nekhlyudov,Cristina Sade,Joanne Shaw,Anna Singleton,Luzia Travado,Miyako Tsuchiya,Jesse Lemmen,Jie Li,Michael Jefford,International Psycho-Oncology Society Survivorship Special Interest Group,Shiri Altman,Reginald Anang,Maru Barrera,Karen Basen-Engquist,Pernille Bidstrup,Karine Bilodeau,Stephanie Christodoulidou,Andreja Cirila,Andrea Cohee,László Csaba Dégi,Haryana Dhillon,Saskia Duijts,Claire Foster,Valentyn Fournier,Isaiah Gitonga,Savita Goswami,Lauren Ha,Tom Hack,Lauren Heathcote,Fuchsia Howard,Nicholas Hulbert-Williams,Paul Jacobsen,Angelos Kassianos,Bogda Koczwara,Victor Lasebikan,Sophie Lebel,Monica Leslie,Xiaohong Liu,Yvonne Luigjes,Dinorah Martinez Tyson,Carolyn Mazariego,Yurii Mirov,Devi Nandakumar,Ray Nascimento Larissa Nekhlyudo,Philip Odiyo,Paula Ortolan,Maria Reshetova,Kathy Ruble,Ben Smith,Škufca Smrdel,Carolyn Taylor,Jane Turner,Surendran Veeraiah,Elizabeth Wells,Lei Xu,Anao Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/GO.23.00418

Abstract:Purpose: The number of cancer survivors living with and beyond cancer treatment is rising globally. It is fundamental to understand the extent and type of psychosocial care services offered worldwide. We evaluated models of cancer survivorship care, psychosocial care practices in the post-treatment survivorship phase, and barriers/facilitators to delivery of psychosocial care services, including in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: The International Psycho-Oncology Society (IPOS) Survivorship Special Interest Group led a cross-sectional online survey between March and November 2022. Health care professionals and researchers in psycho-oncology were invited through the IPOS global membership, social media, and snowballing. The survey was administered to individuals but included questions related to practices in their country at a national level. Results: Two hundred eighty-three respondents from 37 countries participated (40% from LMICs), with a median of 12 years of experience (IQR, 6-20) in the psycho-oncology field. Participants reported that the most common elements of routine survivorship care were related to the prevention/management of recurrences/new cancers (74%), physical late effects (59%), and chronic medical conditions (53%), whereas surveillance/management of psychosocial late effects (27%) and psychosocial/supportive care (25%) were least common. Service availability was more commonly reported in high-income countries (HICs) than LMICs related to reproductive health (29% v 17%), genetic counseling/support (40% v 20%), and identifying/managing distress (39% v 26%) and pain (66% v 48%). Key barriers included providers focusing on treatment not survivorship (57%), medical not psychosocial care (60%), and a lack of allied health providers to deliver psychosocial care (59%). Conclusion: The psychosocial needs of people living with cancer are not adequately available and/or provided in post-treatment survivorship even in HICs, because of barriers at patient, provider, and system levels.
The Cancer Survivorship Program at the Abramson Cancer Center of the University of Pennsylvania

Linda A. Jacobs

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-023-01524-9

2024-02-02

Journal of Cancer Survivorship

Abstract:The Cancer Survivorship Program was established at the University of Pennsylvania Cancer Center in 2001. The Cancer Center was renamed the Abramson Cancer Center of the University of Pennsylvania in 2002 and the survivorship program was henceforth known as the ACC Survivorship Program. The program was supported from 2001 to 2004 in part by a seed grant from the Lance Armstrong Foundation (LAF). The LIVESTRONG Survivorship Centers of Excellence Network was created by the LAF in 2005 and the ACC Survivorship Program joined the Network in 2007. The seven nationwide Cancer Centers that comprised the Network were supported by the LAF through 2015. A focus on clinical care, research, and education led the development of the ACC Survivorship Program. The program is currently led by an advanced practice provider (APP) and staffed by medical, surgical, and radiation oncology APPs and collaborating oncologists. This program provides care to adult survivors of pediatric cancers, as well as survivors of adult-onset cancers such as breast, genitourinary/prostate, lymphoma, head and neck, gastrointestinal, thoracic, sarcoma, and central nervous system. Research protocols for survivors of specific cancer diagnoses have been developed and have resulted in collaborative research, publications, and conference presentations. Sustaining the ACC Survivorship Program has been challenging despite strong endorsement of services by patients, families, and providers. Challenges include barriers such as cost restraints, changing cancer center priorities, and a reduced oncology workforce, issues experienced across the country that must be addressed in the years to come.

oncology,social issues
Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2016

Kimberly D Miller,Rebecca L Siegel,Chun Chieh Lin,Angela B Mariotto,Joan L Kramer,Julia H Rowland,Kevin D Stein,Rick Alteri,Ahmedin Jemal,Kimberly D. Miller,Rebecca L. Siegel,Angela B. Mariotto,Joan L. Kramer,Julia H. Rowland,Kevin D. Stein

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21349

2016-06-02

Abstract:The number of cancer survivors continues to increase because of both advances in early detection and treatment and the aging and growth of the population. For the public health community to better serve these survivors, the American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute collaborate to estimate the number of current and future cancer survivors using data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registries. In addition, current treatment patterns for the most prevalent cancer types are presented based on information in the National Cancer Data Base and treatment-related side effects are briefly described. More than 15.5 million Americans with a history of cancer were alive on January 1, 2016, and this number is projected to reach more than 20 million by January 1, 2026. The 3 most prevalent cancers are prostate (3,306,760), colon and rectum (724,690), and melanoma (614,460) among males and breast (3,560,570), uterine corpus (757,190), and colon and rectum (727,350) among females. More than one-half (56%) of survivors were diagnosed within the past 10 years, and almost one-half (47%) are aged 70 years or older. People with a history of cancer have unique medical and psychosocial needs that require proactive assessment and management by primary care providers. Although there are a growing number of tools that can assist patients, caregivers, and clinicians in navigating the various phases of cancer survivorship, further evidence-based resources are needed to optimize care. CA Cancer J Clin 2016;66:271-289. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

oncology
Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2019

Kimberly D. Miller,Leticia Nogueira,Angela B. Mariotto,Julia H. Rowland,K. Robin Yabroff,Catherine M. Alfano,Ahmedin Jemal,Joan L. Kramer,Rebecca L. Siegel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21565

2019-06-11

Abstract:<p>The number of cancer survivors continues to increase in the United States because of the growth and aging of the population as well as advances in early detection and treatment. To assist the public health community in better serving these individuals, the American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute collaborate every 3 years to estimate cancer prevalence in the United States using incidence and survival data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registries; vital statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Health Statistics; and population projections from the US Census Bureau. Current treatment patterns based on information in the National Cancer Data Base are presented for the most prevalent cancer types. Cancer‐related and treatment‐related short‐term, long‐term, and late health effects are also briefly described. More than 16.9 million Americans (8.1 million males and 8.8 million females) with a history of cancer were alive on January 1, 2019; this number is projected to reach more than 22.1 million by January 1, 2030 based on the growth and aging of the population alone. The 3 most prevalent cancers in 2019 are prostate (3,650,030), colon and rectum (776,120), and melanoma of the skin (684,470) among males, and breast (3,861,520), uterine corpus (807,860), and colon and rectum (768,650) among females. More than one‐half (56%) of survivors were diagnosed within the past 10 years, and almost two‐thirds (64%) are aged 65 years or older. People with a history of cancer have unique medical and psychosocial needs that require proactive assessment and management by follow‐up care providers. Although there are growing numbers of tools that can assist patients, caregivers, and clinicians in navigating the various phases of cancer survivorship, further evidence‐based resources are needed to optimize care.</p>
Survivorship Care for People Affected by Advanced or Metastatic Cancer: MASCC-ASCO Standards and Practice Recommendations

Nicolas H. Hart,Larissa Nekhlyudov,Thomas J. Smith,Jasmine Yee,Margaret I. Fitch,Gregory B. Crawford,Bogda Koczwara,Fredrick D. Ashbury,Maryam B. Lustberg,Michelle Mollica,Andrea L. Smith,Michael Jefford,Fumiko Chino,Robin Zon,Meera R. Agar,Raymond J. Chan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/op.23.00716

2024-04-29

JCO Oncology Practice

Abstract:PURPOSE People with advanced or metastatic cancer and their caregivers may have different care goals and face unique challenges compared with those with early-stage disease or those nearing the end of life. These Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC)-ASCO standards and practice recommendations seek to establish consistent provision of quality survivorship care for people affected by advanced or metastatic cancer. METHODS A MASCC-ASCO expert panel was formed. Standards and recommendations relevant to the provision of quality survivorship care for people affected by advanced or metastatic cancer were developed through conducting (1) a systematic review of unmet supportive care needs; (2) a scoping review of cancer survivorship, supportive care, and palliative care frameworks and guidelines; and (3) an international modified Delphi consensus process. RESULTS A systematic review involving 81 studies and a scoping review of 17 guidelines and frameworks informed the initial standards and recommendations. Subsequently, 77 experts (including eight people with lived experience) across 33 countries (33% were low- to middle-resource countries) participated in the Delphi study and achieved ≥94.8% agreement for seven standards, (1) Person-Centered Care; (2) Coordinated and Integrated Care; (3) Evidence-Based and Comprehensive Care; (4) Evaluated and Communicated Care; (5) Accessible and Equitable Care; (6) Sustainable and Resourced Care; and (7) Research and Data-Driven Care, and ≥84.2% agreement across 45 practice recommendations. CONCLUSION Standards of survivorship care for people affected by advanced or metastatic cancer are provided. These MASCC-ASCO standards support optimization of health outcomes and care experiences by providing guidance to stakeholders (health care professionals, leaders, and administrators; governments and health ministries; policymakers; advocacy agencies; cancer survivors and caregivers). Practice recommendations may be used to facilitate future research, practice, policy, and advocacy efforts. Additional information is available at www.mascc.org , www.asco.org/standards and www.asco.org/survivorship-guidelines .

oncology
The development and flux of the University of Minnesota Survivorship Program: progress, challenges, and opportunities

Tara J. Rick,Jill Lee,Sasha Skendzel,Kaia Verich,Ashley Schempp,Char Napurski,Holly Kreuser,Lucie Turcotte,Shernan Holtan,Karim Sadak,Anne Blaes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11764-023-01520-z

2024-02-02

Journal of Cancer Survivorship

Abstract:For the past 30 years, the University of Minnesota's Cancer Survivorship Program has been dedicated to providing exceptional care to patients who have lived the cancer experience. Our model is consultative, risk-stratified, and oncologist-led but executed predominately by advanced practice providers. Care is personalized and serves three survivor populations: children, adults, and patients who received BMT with over 500 new patients evaluated annually. As guidelines and survivorship standards have changed, our clinical programs have evolved from a focus on survivorship care plans to supportive care. The program offers a wide range of supportive services from acupuncture to nutritional services as well as several educational programs for patients. The program has a strong research legacy, notably as the birthplace of research that led to the Children's Oncology Group Guidelines as well as advancements in cardio-oncology and frailty after bone marrow transplantation. In 2021, we hosted the first annual Survivorship Research Forum, providing the opportunity and space for experts across disciplines to exchange ideas on a broad range of survivorship topics not possible at other national cancer-related conferences. With successes and challenges, we have identified opportunities for growth as our program continues to evolve and grow in our goal to improve cancer outcomes along a wide spectrum of physical, emotional, functional, and social dimensions.

oncology,social issues

The patient with asymptomatic advanced renal failure--obstructive uropathy caused by inflammatory abdominal aortic aneurysm.

The current status of survivorship care provision at the state level: a Wisconsin-based assessment

Developing national cancer survivorship standards to inform quality of care in the United States using a consensus approach

Advancing survivorship at a comprehensive cancer center: integrating clinical care, education and research initiatives at Northwestern Medicine and the Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center

Availability of cancer survivorship support services across the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program network

Abstract 6301: Mapping survivor-specific supportive care resources: A digital landscape analysis of NCI-designated cancer centers

History and current status of the survivorship care program at the University of California, Los Angeles Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center (UCLA JCCC)

Evaluation of NCI-Designated Cancer Center and Comprehensive Cancer Center Survivorship-Focused Websites: Information Provided and Accessibility

[Inhibition of anaphylactic chemical mediator release by tranilast].

Availability of Family Caregiver Programs in US Cancer Centers

Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2022

Cancer Survivorship at Stanford Cancer Institute

Examining experiences of African American patients with breast cancer in a multidisciplinary survivorship clinic.

Abstract C034: Impact of survivorship care plans on self-reported health and functional well-being

Abstract C043: Exploring underserved cancer survivors' perspectives on survivorship care at community health centers

International Survey of Psychosocial Care for Cancer Survivors in Low-/Middle- and High-Income Countries: Current Practices, Barriers, and Facilitators to Care

The Cancer Survivorship Program at the Abramson Cancer Center of the University of Pennsylvania

Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2016

Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2019

Survivorship Care for People Affected by Advanced or Metastatic Cancer: MASCC-ASCO Standards and Practice Recommendations

The development and flux of the University of Minnesota Survivorship Program: progress, challenges, and opportunities