The patient perspective: Investigating patient empowerment enablers and barriers within the oncological care process

Patient empowerment is a multi-factorial concept and its relevance has led to a growing body of literature; despite this attention, there is still no agreement regarding the elements that define its expression. While several studies have already investigated the positive effect of empowerment interventions on the care process outcome, the aim of this study is to investigate which factors can foster an empowered management of the cancer condition from the patient\u2019s perspective. To examine patients\u2019 perception of empowerment enablers, we asked for participants\u2019 input on the role of three factors frequently cited as positively affected by empowerment: care quality, perception of direct control and relationships within the care context, during the care process. Three focus groups were conducted with 34 cancer patients. The results highlight the perception of direct control on their treatment as the least valued element (2.87, SD 0.566) when compared with care quality (3.75, SD 0.649) and relational support in the care context (3.91, SD 0.274). Unlike traditional approaches to empowerment, patient\u2019s expression of empowerment does not mainly reside in the direct control of their condition as much as in an active role within the relationship with caretakers, such as the ability to choose the doctor, the care team or the health organisation in charge of their healthcare. Emerging aspects from this analysis of patient\u2019s perspective are central in order to adequately consider empowerment in the care process and to provide more effective care strategies

Methodology to sustain common information spaces for research collaborations

Information and knowledge sharing collaborations are essential for scientific research and innovation. They provide opportunities to pool expertise and resources. They are required to draw on today’s wealth of data to address pressing societal challenges. Establishing effective collaborations depends on the alignment of intellectual and technical capital. In this thesis we investigate implications and influences of socio-technical aspects of research collaborations to identify methods of facilitating their formation and sustained success. We draw on our experience acquired in an international federated seismological context, and in a large research infrastructure for solid-Earth sciences. We recognise the centrality of the users and propose a strategy to sustain their engagement as actors participating in the collaboration. Our approach promotes and enables their active contribution in the construction and maintenance of Common Information Spaces (CISs). These are shaped by conceptual agreements that are captured and maintained to facilitate mutual understanding and to underpin their collaborative work. A user-driven approach shapes the evolution of a CIS based on the requirements of the communities involved in the collaboration. Active users’ engagement is pursued by partitioning concerns and by targeting their interests. For instance, application domain experts focus on scientific and conceptual aspects; data and information experts address knowledge representation issues; and architects and engineers build the infrastructure that populates the common space. We introduce a methodology to sustain CIS and a conceptual framework that has its foundations on a set of agreed Core Concepts forming a Canonical Core (CC). A representation of such a CC is also introduced that leverages and promotes reuse of existing standards: EPOS-DCAT-AP. The application of our methodology shows promising results with a good uptake and adoption by the targeted communities. This encourages us to continue applying and evaluating such a strategy in the future

Patient Preferences for Lung Cancer Treatment: A Qualitative Study Protocol Among Advanced Lung Cancer Patients

Introduction: Lung cancer is the deadliest and most prevalent cancer worldwide. Lung cancer treatments have different characteristics and are associated with a range of benefits and side effects for patients. Such differences may raise uncertainty among drug developers, regulators, payers, and clinicians regarding the value of these treatment effects to patients. The value of conducting patient preference studies (using qualitative and/or quantitative methods) for benefits and side effects of different treatment options has been recognized by healthcare stakeholders, such as drug developers, regulators, health technology assessment bodies, and clinicians. However, evidence-based guidelines on how and when to conduct and use these studies in drug decision-making are lacking. As part of the Innovative Medicines Initiative PREFER project, we developed a protocol for a qualitative study that aims to understand which treatment characteristics are most important to lung cancer patients and to develop attributes and levels for inclusion in a subsequent quantitative preference survey. Methods: The study protocol specifies a four-phased approach: (i) a scoping literature review of published literature, (ii) four focus group discussions with stage III and IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer patients, (iii) two nominal group discussions with stage III and IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer patients, and (iv) multi-stakeholder discussions involving clinicians and preference experts. Discussion: This protocol outlines methodological and practical steps as to how qualitative research can be applied to identify and develop attributes and levels for inclusion in patient preference studies aiming to inform decisions across the drug life cycle. The results of this study are intended to inform a subsequent quantitative preference survey that assesses patient trade-offs regarding lung cancer treatment options. This protocol may assist researchers, drug developers, and decision-makers in designing qualitative studies to understand which treatment aspects are most valued by patients in drug development, regulation, and reimbursement

Maintenance of active chromatin states by HMGN2 is required for stem cell identity in a pluripotent stem cell model

Background: Members of the HMGN protein family modulate chromatin structure and influence epigenetic modifications. HMGN1 and HMGN2 are highly expressed during early development and in the neural stem/progenitor cells of the developing and adult brain. Here, we investigate whether HMGN proteins contribute to the chromatin plasticity and epigenetic regulation that is essential for maintaining pluripotency in stem cells. Results: We show that loss of Hmgn1 or Hmgn2 in pluripotent embryonal carcinoma cells leads to increased levels of spontaneous neuronal differentiation. This is accompanied by the loss of pluripotency markers Nanog and Ssea1, and increased expression of the pro-neural transcription factors Neurog1 and Ascl1. Neural stem cells derived from these Hmgn-knockout lines also show increased spontaneous neuronal differentiation and Neurog1 expression. The loss of HMGN2 leads to a global reduction in H3K9 acetylation, and disrupts the profile of H3K4me3, H3K9ac, H3K27ac and H3K122ac at the Nanog and Oct4 loci. At endodermal/mesodermal genes, Hmgn2-knockout cells show a switch from a bivalent to a repressive chromatin configuration. However, at neuronal lineage genes whose expression is increased, no epigenetic changes are observed and their bivalent states are retained following the loss of HMGN2. Conclusions: We conclude that HMGN1 and HMGN2 maintain the identity of pluripotent embryonal carcinoma cells by optimising the pluripotency transcription factor network and protecting the cells from precocious differentiation. Our evidence suggests that HMGN2 regulates active and bivalent genes by promoting an epigenetic landscape of active histone modifications at promoters and enhancers

Patient Preferences for Lung Cancer Treatments: A Study Protocol for a Preference Survey Using Discrete Choice Experiment and Swing Weighting

Background: Advanced treatment options for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) consist of immunotherapy, chemotherapy, or a combination of both. Decisions surrounding NSCLC can be considered as preference-sensitive because multiple treatments exist that vary in terms of mode of administration, treatment schedules, and benefit–risk profiles. As part of the IMI PREFER project, we developed a protocol for an online preference survey for NSCLC patients exploring differences in preferences according to patient characteristics (preference heterogeneity). Moreover, this study will evaluate and compare the use of two different preference elicitation methods, the discrete choice experiment (DCE) and the swing weighting (SW) task. Finally, the study explores how demographic (i.e., age, gender, and educational level) and clinical (i.e., cancer stage and line of treatment) information, health literacy, health locus of control, and quality of life may influence or explain patient preferences and the usefulness of a digital interactive tool in providing information on preference elicitation tasks according to patients. Methods: An online survey will be implemented with the aim to recruit 510 NSCLC patients in Belgium and Italy. Participants will be randomized 50:50 to first receive either the DCE or the SW. The survey will also collect information on participants' disease-related status, health locus of control, health literacy, quality of life, and perception of the educational tool. Discussion: This protocol outlines methodological and practical steps to quantitatively elicit and study patient preferences for NSCLC treatment alternatives. Results from this study will increase the understanding of which treatment aspects are most valued by NSCLC patients to inform decision-making in drug development, regulatory approval, and reimbursement. Methodologically, the comparison between the DCE and the SW task will be valuable to gain information on how these preference methods perform against each other in eliciting patient preferences. Overall, this protocol may assist researchers, drug developers, and decision-makers in designing quantitative patient preferences into decision-making along the medical product life cycle