Family caregiver constructs and outcome measures in neuro-oncology: A systematic review

Background As a first step to reach consensus on the key constructs and outcomes in neuro-oncology caregiver research, we performed a systematic review to evaluate the constructs that are being evaluated in research studies and how these have been assessed. Methods All peer-reviewed publications with primary data reporting on outcomes of family caregivers of adult primary brain tumor patients were eligible. Electronic databases PubMed/Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Emcare, Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO were searched up to September 2021. Using Covidence, title and abstract screening, full-text review, and data extraction were done by two researchers independently, with a third guiding consensus. Constructs as reported in each study, and how these were assessed were the primary result. Results Searches yielded 1090 unique records, with 213 remaining after title/abstract screening. Of these, 157 publications met inclusion criteria, comprising 120 unique studies. These originated from 18 countries and were published between 1996 and 2022. Most were observational (75%) cross-sectional (61%) studies, reporting on quantitative methods (62%). Twenty-seven different constructs were assessed and mapped along the Caregiver Health Model (CGHM) categories, namely, caregiver health, needs, tasks, beliefs and attitudes, and environment. Seventeen questionnaires were used >2 times to measure the same construct, with the vast majority of questionnaires only used across one or two studies. Conclusions Neuro-oncology caregiving research is a field gaining traction, but lags behind in clear definition of key constructs, and consistency in assessment of these constructs. Developing consensus or guidance will improve comparability of studies, meta-analyses, and advance the science more quickly

A randomised phase II trial of temozolomide with or without cannabinoids in patients with recurrent glioblastoma (ARISTOCRAT):Protocol for a multi-centre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BackgroundGlioblastoma (GBM) is the most common adult malignant brain tumour, with an incidence of 5 per 100,000 per year in England. Patients with tumours showing O -methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation represent around 40% of newly diagnosed GBM. Relapse/tumour recurrence is inevitable. There is no agreed standard treatment for patients with GBM, therefore, it is aimed at delaying further tumour progression and maintaining health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Limited clinical trial data exist using cannabinoids in combination with temozolomide (TMZ) in this setting, but early phase data demonstrate prolonged overall survival compared to TMZ alone, with few additional side effects. Jazz Pharmaceuticals (previously GW Pharma Ltd.) have developed nabiximols (trade name Sativex®), an oromucosal spray containing a blend of cannabis plant extracts, that we aim to assess for preliminary efficacy in patients with recurrent GBM.MethodsARISTOCRAT is a phase II, multi-centre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial to assess cannabinoids in patients with recurrent MGMT methylated GBM who are suitable for treatment with TMZ. Patients who have relapsed ≥ 3 months after completion of initial first-line treatment will be randomised 2:1 to receive either nabiximols or placebo in combination with TMZ. The primary outcome is overall survival time defined as the time in whole days from the date of randomisation to the date of death from any cause. Secondary outcomes include overall survival at 12 months, progression-free survival time, HRQoL (using patient reported outcomes from QLQ-C30, QLQ-BN20 and EQ-5D-5L questionnaires), and adverse events.DiscussionPatients with recurrent MGMT promoter methylated GBM represent a relatively good prognosis sub-group of patients with GBM. However, their median survival remains poor and, therefore, more effective treatments are needed. The phase II design of this trial was chosen, rather than phase III, due to the lack of data currently available on cannabinoid efficacy in this setting. A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial will ensure an unbiased robust evaluation of the treatment and will allow potential expansion of recruitment into a phase III trial should the emerging phase II results warrant this development.Trial registration ISRCTN: 11460478. ClinicalTrials.Gov: NCT0562970

Depression and anxiety in glioma patients

Glioma patients carry the burden of having both a progressive neurological disease and cancer, and may face a variety of symptoms, including depression and anxiety. These symptoms are highly prevalent in glioma patients (median point prevalence ranging from 16-41% for depression and 24-48% for anxiety when assessed by self-report questionnaires) and have a major impact on health-related quality of life and even overall survival time. A worse overall survival time for glioma patients with depressive symptoms might be due to tumor progression and/or its supportive treatment causing depressive symptoms, an increased risk of suicide or other (unknown) factors. Much is still unclear about the etiology of depressive and anxiety symptoms in glioma. These psychiatric symptoms often find their cause in a combination of neurophysiological and psychological factors, such as the tumor and/or its treatment. Although these patients have a particular idiosyncrasy, standard treatment guidelines for depressive and anxiety disorders apply, generally recommending psychological and pharmacological treatment. Only a few nonpharmacological trials have been conducted evaluating the efficacy of psychological treatments (eg, a reminiscence therapy-based care program) in this population, which significantly reduced depressive and anxiety symptoms. No pharmacological trials have been conducted in glioma patients specifically. More well-designed trials evaluating the efficacy of nonpharmacological treatments for depressive and anxiety disorders in glioma are urgently needed to successfully treat psychiatric symptoms in brain tumor patients and to improve (health-related) quality of life

Gender balance and suitable positive actions to promote gender equality among healthcare professionals in neuro-oncology: The EANO positive action initiative

Background The proportion of women among healthcare and biomedical research professionals in neuro-oncology is growing. With changes in cultural expectations and work-life balance considerations, more men aspire to nonfull-time jobs, yet, leadership positions remain dominated by men. Methods The European Association of Neuro-Oncology (EANO) disparity committee carried out a digital survey to explore gender balance and actions suitable to promote gender equality. The survey was distributed among EANO members in 2021, with responses analyzed descriptively. Results In total, 262 participants completed the survey (141 women, 53.8%; median age 43). Respondents were neurosurgeons (68, 26.0%); neurologists (67, 25.6%), medical oncologists (43, 16.4%), or other healthcare or research professionals; 208 participants (79.4%) worked full-time. Positive action to enforce the role of women in neuro-oncology was deemed necessary by 180 participants (68.7%), but only 28 participants (10.7%) agreed that women only should be promoted until gender balance is reached. A majority of respondents (162, 61.8%) felt that women with an equivalent CV should be prioritized over men to reach gender balance. If in the future the balance favored women at higher positions, 112 respondents (42.7%) agreed to apply positive action for men. The top indicators considered relevant to measure gender balance were: salary for similar positions (183/228, 80.3%), paid overtime (176/228, 77.2%), number of permanent positions (164/228, 71.9%), protected time for research (161/227, 70.9%), and training opportunities (157/227, 69.2%). Conclusions Specific indicators may help to measure and promote gender balance and should be considered for implementation among healthcare professionals in neuro-oncology

Depression and anxiety in glioma patients

AbstractGlioma patients carry the burden of having both a progressive neurological disease and cancer, and may face a variety of symptoms, including depression and anxiety. These symptoms are highly prevalent in glioma patients (median point prevalence ranging from 16-41% for depression and 24-48% for anxiety when assessed by self-report questionnaires) and have a major impact on health-related quality of life and even overall survival time. A worse overall survival time for glioma patients with depressive symptoms might be due to tumor progression and/or its supportive treatment causing depressive symptoms, an increased risk of suicide or other (unknown) factors. Much is still unclear about the etiology of depressive and anxiety symptoms in glioma. These psychiatric symptoms often find their cause in a combination of neurophysiological and psychological factors, such as the tumor and/or its treatment. Although these patients have a particular idiosyncrasy, standard treatment guidelines for depressive and anxiety disorders apply, generally recommending psychological and pharmacological treatment. Only a few nonpharmacological trials have been conducted evaluating the efficacy of psychological treatments (eg, a reminiscence therapy-based care program) in this population, which significantly reduced depressive and anxiety symptoms. No pharmacological trials have been conducted in glioma patients specifically. More well-designed trials evaluating the efficacy of nonpharmacological treatments for depressive and anxiety disorders in glioma are urgently needed to successfully treat psychiatric symptoms in brain tumor patients and to improve (health-related) quality of life

A cross-over, randomised feasibility study of digitally printed versus hand-painted artificial eyes in adults: PERSONAL-EYE-S - a study protocol [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]

Background/objectives: Around 11,500 artificial eyes are required yearly for new and existing patients. Artificial eyes have been manufactured and hand-painted at the National Artificial Eye Service (NAES) since 1948, in conjunction with approximately 30 local artificial eye services throughout the country. With the current scale of demand, services are under significant pressure. Manufacturing delays as well as necessary repainting to obtain adequate colour matching, may severely impact a patient’s rehabilitation pathway to a normal home, social and work life. However, advances in technology mean alternatives are now possible. The aim of this study is to establish the feasibility of conducting a large-scale study of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of digitally printed artificial eyes compared to hand-painted eyes. Methods: A cross-over, randomised feasibility study evaluating a digitally-printed artificial eye with a hand-painted eye, in patients aged ≥18 years with a current artificial eye. Participants will be identified in clinic, via ophthalmology clinic databases and two charity websites. Qualitative interviews will be conducted in the later phases of the study and focus on opinions on trial procedures, the different artificial eyes, delivery times, and patient satisfaction. Discussion: Findings will inform the feasibility, and design, of a larger fully powered randomised controlled trial. The long-term aim is to create a more life-like artificial eye in order to improve patients’ initial rehabilitation pathway, long term quality of life, and service experience. This will allow the transition of research findings into benefit to patients locally in the short term and National Health Service wide in the medium to long term. ISRCTN registration: ISRCTN85921622 (prospectively registered on 17/06/2021

A cross-over, randomised feasibility study of digitally-printed versus hand-painted artificial eyes in adults: PERSONAL-EYE-S

Abstract Background/objectives Over 60,000 patients in the United Kingdom are estimated to have artificial eyes. Manufacturing and hand-painting of artificial eyes have not changed significantly since 1948. Delays and colour-matching issues may severely impact a patient’s rehabilitation pathway. Technology advances mean alternatives are now possible. This cross-over, randomised feasibility trial aimed to determine the feasibility of conducting a full-scale trial of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of digitally-printed artificial eyes compared to hand-painted. Subjects/methods Patients aged ≥18 years who were longstanding artificial eye users requiring a replacement were randomised to receive either a hand-painted or digitally-printed eye first followed by the other type of eye. Participants were asked to approach a close contact (CC) willing to participate alongside them. A subset of participants, their CCs, and staff were interviewed about their opinions on trial procedures, artificial eyes, delivery times and satisfaction. Results Thirty-five participants were randomised and 10 CCs consented. Participant retention at final follow-up was 85.7%. Outcome data completion rates ranged from 91–100%. EQ-5D-5L completion ranged from 83–97%. Resource-use completion ranged from 0–94% with total costs at £347 for hand-painted and £404 for digitally-printed eye. There were two adverse events. Twelve participants, five CCs, and five staff were interviewed. There were positive and negative features of both types of eyes. We identified that social and psychological wellbeing is affected, often for many years after eye removal. Participation in the feasibility study was well accepted. Conclusions The feasibility study outcomes indicate that a full trial is achievable. Trial registration number ISRCTN85921622