Psychological adaptation and recovery in youth with sarcoma: a qualitative study with practical implications for clinical care and research

Objectives: This study explored factors that play a role in psychological adaptation and recovery of young people with sarcoma. / Design: Qualitative study. / Setting: National Health Service hospitals in the UK. / Methods: Using purposive sampling, participants were recruited for semistructured interviews over the telephone or face to face in order to answer questions about how cancer impacted various domains of their life. Data were analysed using a framework approach. / Results: Thirty participants, aged 15–39 years with primary sarcoma diagnosis provided in-depth accounts of their experience. Emerging themes from the interviews were grouped into two overarching themes that relate to one’s adaptation to illness: individual level and environmental level. The qualitative nature of our study sheds light on meaningful connections between various factors and their role in one’s psychological adaptation to sarcoma. We devised a visual matrix to illustrate how risk and protective factors in adaptation vary between and within individuals. / Conclusions: This study demonstrates that young people with sarcoma report an array of both positive and negative factors related to their illness experience. The route to recovery is a multifactorial process and a one-size-fits-all approach to psychosocial care proves inadequate. We propose that moving beyond the latent constructs of resilience and psychopathology towards a dynamic model of psychological adaptation and recovery in this population can result in optimisation of care. We offer some recommendations for professionals working with young people with sarcoma in clinic and research

Experiences of fear of recurrence in patients with sarcoma

Background: Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is often described as the most distressing consequence of cancer and has a negative impact on quality of life. There have been few investigations into the FCR in patients with sarcomas. We sought to explore the patient's FCR after a sarcoma diagnosis to determine when these fears were presented and the strategies patients used to address these fears. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of qualitative semi-structured interview data from patients with sarcoma, as part of a study to develop a patient-reported outcome measure. This study included 121 patients from across the United Kingdom aged 13–82 years. Telephone and face-to-face interviews focused on the experiences of living with and beyond a sarcoma diagnosis, based on the domains of quality of life (physical, emotional, and social well-being). A secondary analysis was performed using the Common-Sense Model. Results: The following four key themes were identified: triggers for FCR (symptoms and events), discussion of FCR, consequences of FCR (negative impact on quality of life), and strategies used to deal with FCR. Conclusion: Patients with sarcoma reported a FCR at different stages of treatment and how these fears played a role in their daily lives. Despite these experiences, the identification and management of FCR have not been reported as a core component of routine clinical practice

Experiences of fear of recurrence in patients with sarcoma

Background: Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is often described as the most distressing consequence of cancer and has a negative impact on quality of life. There have been few investigations into the FCR in patients with sarcomas. We sought to explore the patient's FCR after a sarcoma diagnosis to determine when these fears were presented and the strategies patients used to address these fears. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of qualitative semi-structured interview data from patients with sarcoma, as part of a study to develop a patient-reported outcome measure. This study included 121 patients from across the United Kingdom aged 13–82 years. Telephone and face-to-face interviews focused on the experiences of living with and beyond a sarcoma diagnosis, based on the domains of quality of life (physical, emotional, and social well-being). A secondary analysis was performed using the Common-Sense Model. Results: The following four key themes were identified: triggers for FCR (symptoms and events), discussion of FCR, consequences of FCR (negative impact on quality of life), and strategies used to deal with FCR. Conclusion: Patients with sarcoma reported a FCR at different stages of treatment and how these fears played a role in their daily lives. Despite these experiences, the identification and management of FCR have not been reported as a core component of routine clinical practice

Patients’ Experiences of a Sarcoma Diagnosis: A Process Mapping Exercise of Diagnostic Pathways

Patients with sarcoma often report prolonged time to diagnosis, which is attributed to the rarity of sarcoma and the low awareness of pre-diagnostic signs and symptoms. Aims: To describe patients’ experiences of pre-diagnostic signs/symptoms and pathways to diagnosis, including where help was sought, and the processes involved. Methods: Mixed methods involving quantitative, qualitative and inductive thematic analyses using novel process mapping of patient journey data, as reported by the patients. We examined the time from symptom onset to first professional presentation (patient interval, PI), first consultation to diagnostic biopsy, first consultation to diagnosis (diagnostic interval) and first presentation to diagnosis (total interval). Results: A total of 87 interviews were conducted over 5 months in 2017. Of these, 78 (40 males/38 females) were included. The sarcoma subtypes were bone (n = 21), soft tissue (n = 41), head and neck (n = 9) and gastro-intestinal (GIST; n = 7). Age at diagnosis was 13–24 (n = 7), 25–39 (n = 23), 40–64 (n = 34) and 65+ (n = 14) years. The median PI was 13 days (1–4971) and similar between sarcoma subtypes, with the exception of GIST (mPI = 2 days, (1–60). The longest mPI (31 days, range 4–762) was for those aged 13–24 years. The median diagnostic interval was 87.5 (range 0–5474 days). A total of 21 patients were misdiagnosed prior to diagnosis and symptoms were commonly attributed to lifestyle factors. Conclusions: Prolonged times to diagnosis were experienced by the majority of patients in our sample. Further research into the evolution of pre-diagnostic sarcoma symptoms is required to inform awareness interventions

Extraskeletal osteosarcoma: A European Musculoskeletal Oncology Society study on 266 patients

PURPOSE: Prognosis of extraskeletal osteosarcoma (ESOS) is reported to be poorer than that of skeletal osteosarcoma. This multicenter retrospective study aimed to evaluate factors influencing ESOS prognosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Members of the European Musculoskeletal Oncology Society (EMSOS) submitted institutional data on patients with ESOS. RESULTS: Data from 274 patients treated from 1981 to 2014 were collected from 16 EMSOS centres; 266 patients were eligible. Fifty (18.7%) had metastases at diagnosis. Of 216 patients with localised disease, 211 (98%) underwent surgery (R0 = 70.6%, R1 = 27%). Five-year overall survival (OS) for all 266 patients was 47% (95% CI 40-54%). Five-year OS for metastatic patients was 27% (95% CI 13-41%). In the analysis restricted to the 211 localised patients who achieved complete remission after surgery 5-year OS was 51.4% (95% CI 44-59%) and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 43% (95% CI 35-51%). One hundred twenty-one patients (57.3%) received adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy and 80 patients (37.9%) received radiotherapy. A favourable trend was seen for osteosarcoma-type chemotherapy versus soft tissue sarcoma-type (doxorubicin ± ifosfamide) regimens. For the 211 patients in complete remission after surgery, patient age, tumour size, margins and chemotherapy were positive prognostic factors for DFS and OS by univariate analysis. At multivariate analysis, patient age (≤40 years versus >40 years) (P = 0.05), tumour size (P = 0.0001) and receipt of chemotherapy (P = 0.006) were statistically significant prognostic factors for survival. CONCLUSION: Patient age and tumour size are factors influencing ESOS prognosis. Higher survival was observed in patients who received perioperative chemotherapy with a trend in favour of multiagent osteosarcoma-type regimen which included doxorubicin, ifosfamide and cisplatin.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Mesenchymal chondrosarcoma: prognostic factors and outcome in 113 patients. A European Musculoskeletal Oncology Society study

BACKGROUND: Mesenchymal chondrosarcoma (MCS) is a distinct, very rare sarcoma with little evidence supporting treatment recommendations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Specialist centres collaborated to report prognostic factors and outcome for 113 patients. RESULTS: Median age was 30 years (range: 11-80), male/female ratio 1.1. Primary sites were extremities (40%), trunk (47%) and head and neck (13%), 41 arising primarily in soft tissue. Seventeen patients had metastases at diagnosis. Mean follow-up was 14.9 years (range: 1-34), median overall survival (OS) 17 years (95% confidence interval (CI): 10.3-28.6). Ninety-five of 96 patients with localised disease underwent surgery, 54 additionally received combination chemotherapy. Sixty-five of 95 patients are alive and 45 progression-free (5 local recurrence, 34 distant metastases, 11 combined). Median progression-free survival (PFS) and OS were 7 (95% CI: 3.03-10.96) and 20 (95% CI: 12.63-27.36) years respectively. Chemotherapy administration in patients with localised disease was associated with reduced risk of recurrence (P=0.046; hazard ratio (HR)=0.482 95% CI: 0.213-0.996) and death (P=0.004; HR=0.445 95% CI: 0.256-0.774). Clear resection margins predicted less frequent local recurrence (2% versus 27%; P=0.002). Primary site and origin did not influence survival. The absence of metastases at diagnosis was associated with a significantly better outcome (P<0.0001). Data on radiotherapy indications, dose and fractionation were insufficiently complete, to allow comment of its impact on outcomes. Median OS for patients with metastases at presentation was 3 years (95% CI: 0-4.25). CONCLUSIONS: Prognosis in MCS varies considerably. Metastatic disease at diagnosis has the strongest impact on survival. Complete resection and adjuvant chemotherapy should be considered as standard of care for localised disease

Peatland core domain sets: building consensus on what should be measured in research and monitoring

It is often difficult to compile and synthesise evidence across multiple studies to inform policy and practice because different outcomes have been measured in different ways or datasets and models have not been fully or consistently reported. In the case of peatlands, a critical terrestrial carbon store, this lack of consistency hampers the evidence-based decisions in policy and practice that are needed to support effective restoration and conservation. This study adapted methods pioneered in the medical community to reach consensus over peatland outcomes that could be consistently measured and reported to improve the synthesis of data and reduce research waste. Here we report on a methodological framework for identifying, evaluating and prioritising the outcomes that should be measured. We discuss the subsequent steps to standardise methods for measuring and reporting outcomes in peatland research and monitoring. The framework was used to identify and prioritise sets of key variables (known as core domain sets) for UK blanket and raised bogs, and for tropical peat swamps. Peatland experts took part in a structured elicitation and prioritisation process, comprising two workshops and questionnaires, that focused on climate (32 and 18 unique outcomes for UK and tropical peats, respectively), hydrology (26 UK and 16 tropical outcomes), biodiversity (8 UK and 22 tropical outcomes) and fire-related outcomes (13, for tropical peatlands only). Future research is needed to tackle the challenges of standardising methods for data collection, management, analysis, reporting and re-use, and to extend the approach to other types of peatland. The process reported here is a first step towards creating datasets that can be synthesised to inform evidence-based policy and practice, and contribute towards the conservation, restoration and sustainable management of this globally significant carbon store. evidence-based policy and practice, evidence synthesis, outcomes, standardisationpublishedVersio

Pseudoaneurysm overlying an osteochondroma: a noteworthy complication

Pseuodaneurysms are an extremely rare complication of osteochondromas. We describe a case of traumatic pseudoaneurysm of the brachial artery presenting as a soft tissue mass in a patient who was treated for an osteochondroma 3 years earlier. This case demonstrates that radiographic follow-up of large osteochondromas is mandatory and that, in patients with soft tissue masses and a history of osteochondroma, pseudoaneurysms should be included in the differential diagnosis

The Sarcoma Assessment Measure (SAM): Preliminary Psychometric Validation of a Novel Patient-Reported Outcome Measure

The Sarcoma Assessment Measure (SAM) was developed as a sarcoma-specific patient-reported outcome measure to be used in clinical practice. We have reported in detail how SAM has been developed in collaboration with patients and healthcare professionals. The aim of this paper is to report the preliminary validation of SAM. The 22-item SAM was administered alongside a validated quality of life questionnaire and measure of activities of daily living. Linear modelling was used to build a measure, which had predictive validity in comparison to more established outcome measures. Of the 762 patients who participated in the study, 44.1% identified as male, and participant age ranged from 13 to 82 years. Clinically, participants presented with a range of soft tissue (82.2%) and bone (21.8%) sarcomas. Our preliminary analysis indicates that SAM accounts for 35% of the global quality of life scale and 18% of the Toronto Extremity Salvage Scale (TESS); so psychometrically, it overlaps with quality of life and activities of daily living, but also measures distinct concerns. This demonstrates that this measure picks up issues that are important to patients with sarcoma that are not reflected in other measures. We have established the preliminary validity of SAM and believe it has utility as a patient-reported outcome measure both as a research tool and for assessing the impact of symptoms and dysfunction related to sarcoma as part of clinical care. Further validation using a larger and more clinically diverse sample is now needed