Fertility education for adolescent cancer patients: Gaps in current clinical practice in Europe

Objective: As adolescent cancer patients may suffer from infertility following treatment, fertility counselling is essential. Our aim was to explore the current situation in four European countries in terms of (I) education about the risk for infertility, (II) counselling on fertility preservation, (III) patients' knowledge on fertility, (IV) sufficiency of information and (V) uptake of cryopreservation. Methods: In total, 113 patients (13–20 years) at 11 study centres completed a self-report questionnaire three and six months after cancer diagnosis. Multivariate logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: As many as 80.2% of participants reported having received education about the risk for infertility prior to treatment, 73.2% recalled counselling on fertility preservation. Only 52.3% stated they felt sufficiently informed to make a decision. Inability to recall counselling on fertility preservation (OR = 0.03, CI: 0.00–0.47) and female gender (OR = 0.11, CI: 0.03–0.48) was associated with lower use of cryopreservation, whereas older age was associated with higher use. Conclusion: Fertility counselling was available to a relatively high proportion of patients, and it did influence the utilisation of cryopreservation. However, many patients did not feel sufficiently informed. Further improvement is needed to enable adolescent cancer patients to make an informed decision on fertility preservation

The impact of the temporal sequence of cranial radiotherapy and platin-based chemotherapy on hearing impairment in pediatric and adolescent CNS and head-and-neck cancer patients: A report from the PanCareLIFE consortium.

The impact of the temporal sequence by which cranial radiotherapy (CRT) and platin-based chemotherapy (PCth) are administered on sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) in pediatric and adolescent central nervous system (CNS) and head-and-neck (HN) cancer patients has not yet been studied in detail. We examined the ototoxic effects of sequentially applied CRT and PCth. This study included children and adolescents with CNS and HN tumors who participated in the multicountry PanCareLIFE (PCL) consortium. Audiological outcomes were compared between patients who received CRT prior to PCth and those who received it afterwards. The incidence, degree and posttreatment progression of SNHL, defined as Muenster classification grade ≥MS2b, were evaluated in 141 patients. One hundred and nineteen patients were included in a time-to-onset analysis. Eighty-eight patients received CRT prior to PCth (Group 1) and 53 patients received PCth before CRT (Group 2). Over a median follow-up time of 1.6 years, 72.7% of patients in Group 1 experienced SNHL ≥ MS2b compared to 33.9% in Group 2 (P < .01). A time-to-onset analysis was performed for 74 patients from Group 1 and 45 patients from Group 2. Median time to hearing loss (HL) ≥ MS2b was 1.2 years in Group 1 and 4.4 years in Group 2 (P < .01). Thus, audiological outcomes were better for patients who received CRT after PCth than before. This finding should be further evaluated and considered within clinical practice in order to minimize hearing loss in children and adolescents with CNS and HN tumors

The PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention: A European harmonised approach to person-centred guideline-based survivorship care after childhood, adolescent and young adult cancer.

BACKGROUND Long-term follow-up (LTFU) care, although endorsed, is not available for the majority of adult survivors of childhood, adolescence and young adult (CAYA) cancer. Barriers to implementation include lack of time, knowledge, personnel and funding. Sustainable solutions are urgently needed to address the needs of CAYA cancer survivors to improve the quality of life and reduce the burden of late effects on survivors, health care systems and society. The European Union-funded PanCareFollowUp project, initiated by the Pan-European Network for Care of Survivors after Childhood and Adolescent Cancer, was established to facilitate the implementation of person-centred survivorship care across Europe. PATIENTS AND METHODS The PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention was co-developed with survivors as part of the PanCareFollowUp project. It is a person-centred approach to survivorship care, supported by guidelines and with flexibility to adapt to local health care settings. The Care Intervention consists of three steps: (1) previsit completion of a Survivor Questionnaire (by the survivor) and Treatment Summary (by the health care provider [HCP]), (2) a clinic visit including shared decision-making, and (3) a follow-up call to finalise the individualised Survivorship Care Plan. RESULTS We developed the key components of the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention: a PanCareFollowUp Survivor Questionnaire, Treatment Summary template, Survivorship Care Plan template, and educational materials for HCPs and survivors. Wide implementation of the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention will be supported with a freely distributed Replication Manual on completion of the PanCareFollowUp project. CONCLUSIONS The PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention will support the implementation of person-centred, guideline-based LTFU care in different health care settings across Europe to improve survivors' health and well-being

Healthcare professionals' perceived barriers and facilitators of health behavior support provision : A qualitative study

Background: Childhood cancer survivors (CCSs) have an increased risk of developing chronic health conditions. Evidence suggests that poor health behaviors further increase health risks. Healthcare professionals (HCPs) involved in survivorship care have a key role in providing health behavior support (HBS) but can feel limited in their ability to do so. This study aims to explore European HCPs perceived facilitators and barriers to providing HBS to CCSs. Methods: Five focus groups with 30 HCPs from survivorship care clinics across Europe were conducted. Topic guides were informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to capture domains that may influence provision of HBS. Focus groups were analyzed with thematic analysis. Transcripts were inductively coded, after which axial coding was applied to organize codes into categories. Finally, categories were mapped onto the TDF domains. Results: Nine TDF domains were identified in the data. The most commonly reported TDF domains were “Knowledge”, “Skills”, and “Environmental context and resources”. HCPs indicated that their lack of knowledge of the association between late effects and health behaviors, besides time restrictions, were barriers to HBS. Facilitators for HBS included possession of skills needed to pass on health behavior information, good clinic organization, and an established network of HCPs. Conclusions: This study identified education and training of HCPs as key opportunities to improve HBS. Survivorship care clinics should work towards establishing well-integrated structured care with internal and external networks including HBS being part of routine care. Proper understanding of facilitators and barriers should lead to better survivorship care for CCSs

Perceived barriers and facilitators to health behaviors in European childhood cancer survivors : A qualitative PanCareFollowUp study

Background: Healthy behaviors, that is, engaging in regular physical activities, maintaining a healthy diet, limiting alcohol consumption, and avoiding tobacco and drug use, decrease the risk of developing late adverse health conditions in childhood cancer survivors. However, childhood cancer survivors may experience barriers to adopting and maintaining healthy behaviors. This study aimed to assess these barriers and facilitators to health behavior adoption and maintenance in childhood cancer survivors. Methods: A focus group (n = 12) and semi-structured telephone interviews (n = 20) were conducted with a selected sample of European and Dutch childhood cancer survivors, respectively. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) was used to inform the topic guide and analysis. Inductive thematic analysis was applied to identify categories relating to barriers and facilitators of health behavior adoption and maintenance, after which they were deductively mapped onto the TDF. Results: Ten TDF domains were identified in the data of which “Knowledge,” “Beliefs about consequences,” “Environmental context and resources,” and “Social influences” were most commonly reported. Childhood cancer survivors expressed a need for knowledge on the importance of healthy behaviors, possibly provided by healthcare professionals. They indicated physical and long-term benefits of healthy behaviors, available professional support, and a supporting and health-consciously minded work and social environment to be facilitators. Barriers were mostly related to a lack of available time and an unhealthy environment. Lastly, (social) media was perceived as both a barrier and a facilitator to healthy behaviors. Conclusion: This study has identified education and available professional support in health behaviors and the relevance of healthy behaviors for childhood cancer survivors as key opportunities for stimulating health behavior adoption in childhood cancer survivors. Incorporating health behavior support and interventions for this population should therefore be a high priority

European PanCareFollowUp Recommendations for surveillance of late effects of childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer

Background: Long-term follow-up (LTFU) care for childhood, adolescent, and young adult (CAYA) cancer survivors is essential to preserve health and quality of life (QoL). Evidence-based guidelines are needed to inform optimal surveillance strategies, but many topics are yet to be addressed by the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group (IGHG). Therefore, the PanCareFollowUp Recommendations Working Group collaborated with stakeholders to develop European harmonised recommendations in anticipation of evidence-based IGHG guidelines. Methods: The PanCareFollowUp Recommendations Working Group, consisting of 23 late effects specialists, researchers, and survivor representatives from nine countries, collaborated in the first Europe-wide effort to provide unified recommendations in anticipation of evidence-based guidelines. A pragmatic methodology was used to define recommendations for topics where no evidence-based IGHG recommendations exist. The objective was to describe the surveillance requirements for high-quality care while balancing the different infrastructures and resources across European health care systems. The process included two face-to-face meetings and an external consultation round involving 18 experts from 14 countries. Results: Twenty-five harmonised recommendations for LTFU care were developed collaboratively and address topics requiring awareness only (n = 6), awareness, history and/or physical examination (n = 9), or additional surveillance tests (n = 10). Conclusions: The PanCareFollowUp Recommendations, representing a unique agreement across European stakeholders, emphasise awareness among survivors and health care providers in addition to tailored clinical evaluation and/or surveillance tests. They include existing IGHG guidelines and additional recommendations developed by a pragmatic methodology and will be used in the Horizon 2020–funded PanCareFollowUp project to improve health and QoL of CAYA cancer survivors

Evaluating the feasibility, effectiveness and costs of implementing person-centred follow-up care for childhood cancer survivors in four European countries : the PanCareFollowUp Care prospective cohort study protocol

Long-term survival after childhood cancer often comes at the expense of late, adverse health conditions. However, survivorship care is frequently not available for adult survivors in Europe. The PanCareFollowUp Consortium therefore developed the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention, an innovative person-centred survivorship care model based on experiences in the Netherlands. This paper describes the protocol of the prospective cohort study (Care Study) to evaluate the feasibility and the health economic, clinical and patient-reported outcomes of implementing PanCareFollowUp Care as usual care in four European countries. Methods and analysis In this prospective, longitudinal cohort study with at least 6 months of follow-up, 800 childhood cancer survivors will receive the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention across four study sites in Belgium, Czech Republic, Italy and Sweden, representing different healthcare systems. The PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention will be evaluated according to the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance framework. Clinical and research data are collected through questionnaires, a clinic visit for multiple medical assessments and a follow-up call. The primary outcome is empowerment, assessed with the Health Education Impact Questionnaire. A central data centre will perform quality checks, data cleaning and data validation, and provide support in data analysis. Multilevel models will be used for repeated outcome measures, with subgroup analysis, for example, by study site, attained age, sex or diagnosis. Ethics and dissemination This study will be conducted in accordance with the guidelines of Good Clinical Practice and the Declaration of Helsinki. The study protocol has been reviewed and approved by all relevant ethics committees. The evidence and insights gained by this study will be summarised in a Replication Manual, also including the tools required to implement the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention in other countries. This Replication Manual will become freely available through PanCare and will be disseminated through policy and press releases. Trial registration number Netherlands Trial Register (NL8918; https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/8918)

Evaluating the feasibility, effectiveness and costs of implementing person-centred follow-up care for childhood cancer survivors in four European countries: the PanCareFollowUp Care prospective cohort study protocol

INTRODUCTION: Long-term survival after childhood cancer often comes at the expense of late, adverse health conditions. However, survivorship care is frequently not available for adult survivors in Europe. The PanCareFollowUp Consortium therefore developed the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention, an innovative person-centred survivorship care model based on experiences in the Netherlands. This paper describes the protocol of the prospective cohort study (Care Study) to evaluate the feasibility and the health economic, clinical and patient-reported outcomes of implementing PanCareFollowUp Care as usual care in four European countries. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this prospective, longitudinal cohort study with at least 6 months of follow-up, 800 childhood cancer survivors will receive the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention across four study sites in Belgium, Czech Republic, Italy and Sweden, representing different healthcare systems. The PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention will be evaluated according to the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance framework. Clinical and research data are collected through questionnaires, a clinic visit for multiple medical assessments and a follow-up call. The primary outcome is empowerment, assessed with the Health Education Impact Questionnaire. A central data centre will perform quality checks, data cleaning and data validation, and provide support in data analysis. Multilevel models will be used for repeated outcome measures, with subgroup analysis, for example, by study site, attained age, sex or diagnosis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study will be conducted in accordance with the guidelines of Good Clinical Practice and the Declaration of Helsinki. The study protocol has been reviewed and approved by all relevant ethics committees. The evidence and insights gained by this study will be summarised in a Replication Manual, also including the tools required to implement the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention in other countries. This Replication Manual will become freely available through PanCare and will be disseminated through policy and press releases. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Netherlands Trial Register (NL8918; https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/8918)

The PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention: A European harmonised approach to person-centred guideline-based survivorship care after childhood, adolescent and young adult cancer

Background: Long-term follow-up (LTFU) care, although endorsed, is not available for the majority of adult survivors of childhood, adolescence and young adult (CAYA) cancer. Barriers to implementation include lack of time, knowledge, personnel and funding. Sustainable solutions are urgently needed to address the needs of CAYA cancer survivors to improve the quality of life and reduce the burden of late effects on survivors, health care systems and society. The European Union–funded PanCareFollowUp project, initiated by the Pan-European Network for Care of Survivors after Childhood and Adolescent Cancer, was established to facilitate the implementation of person-centred survivorship care across Europe. Patients and methods: The PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention was co-developed with survivors as part of the PanCareFollowUp project. It is a person-centred approach to survivorship care, supported by guidelines and with flexibility to adapt to local health care settings. The Care Intervention consists of three steps: (1) previsit completion of a Survivor Questionnaire (by the survivor) and Treatment Summary (by the health care provider [HCP]), (2) a clinic visit including shared decision-making, and (3) a follow-up call to finalise the individualised Survivorship Care Plan. Results: We developed the key components of the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention: a PanCareFollowUp Survivor Questionnaire, Treatment Summary template, Survivorship Care Plan template, and educational materials for HCPs and survivors. Wide implementation of the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention will be supported with a freely distributed Replication Manual on completion of the PanCareFollowUp project. Conclusions: The PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention will support the implementation of person-centred, guideline-based LTFU care in different health care settings across Europe to improve survivors’ health and well-being

Barriers, facilitators, and other factors associated with health behaviors in childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer survivors: A systematic review

Abstract Background Healthy behaviors are paramount in preventing long‐term adverse health outcomes in childhood, adolescent, and young adult (CAYA) cancer survivors. We systematically reviewed and synthesized existing literature on barriers, facilitators, and other factors associated with health behaviors in this population. Methods MEDLINE and PsycInfo were searched for qualitative and quantitative studies including survivors aged 16–50 years at study, a cancer diagnosis ≤25 years and ≥2 years post diagnosis. Health behaviors included physical activity, smoking, diet, alcohol consumption, sun exposure, and a combination of these behaviors (defined as health behaviors in general). Results Barriers, facilitators, and other factors reported in ≥2 two studies were considered relevant. Out of 4529 studies, 27 were included (n = 31,905 participants). Physical activity was the most frequently examined behavior (n = 12 studies), followed by smoking (n = 7), diet (n = 7), alcohol (n = 4), sun exposure (n = 4), and health behavior in general (n = 4). Relevant barriers to physical activity were fatigue, lack of motivation, time constraints, and current smoking. Relevant facilitators were perceived health benefits and motivation. Influence of the social environment and poor mental health were associated with more smoking, while increased energy was associated with less smoking. No relevant barriers and facilitators were identified for diet, alcohol consumption, and sun exposure. Barriers to healthy behavior in general were unmet information needs and time constraints whereas lifestyle advice, information, and discussions with a healthcare professional facilitated healthy behavior in general. Concerning other factors, women were more likely to be physically inactive, but less likely to drink alcohol and more likely to comply with sun protection recommendations than men. Higher education was associated with more physical activity, and lower education with more smoking. Conclusion This knowledge can be used as a starting point to develop health behavior interventions, inform lifestyle coaches, and increase awareness among healthcare providers regarding which survivors are most at risk of unhealthy behaviors