The development and process evaluation of PEER : a camp-based programme for adolescents impacted by cancer

Adolescents impacted by their own or a relative’s cancer diagnosis experience significant psychosocial needs. Residential programmes provide opportunities to address these, yet limited evaluation research and unclear reporting of therapeutic and theoretical underpinnings complicate efforts to understand programme effects. This paper reports the development and process evaluation of PEER, a four-day programme with psychosocial (acceptance and commitment therapy, self-compassion) and recreational components for adolescents impacted by their own or a parent/sibling’s cancer. Staff (N = 51) and adolescents (N = 148, 12–17 years) who attended a PEER programme participated in this evaluation. The evaluation of fidelity included measures of facilitators’ confidence to deliver content, adherence to the programme manual, quality of programme delivery, participants’ engagement, and overall satisfaction. The process evaluation included assessment of quality of life, distress, and process variables (psychological flexibility, mindfulness, self-compassion) at pre-programme, post-programme, and two-month follow-up, as well as qualitative feedback from participants and facilitators. Moderation analyses identified predictors of clinically significant improvement in psychosocial outcomes. The programme was delivered with good fidelity, and participants reported high satisfaction and engagement. Approximately 15–20% of participants experienced clinically-meaningful improvements in distress and quality of life; those who reported higher distress and lower baseline psychological flexibility, mindfulness and self-kindness experienced greater improvements. Qualitative feedback additionally evidenced the value of peer connection and support. The evaluation evidences PEER’s feasibility, acceptability and value for adolescents impacted by cancer, particularly those experiencing greater distress. Its success indicates the potential of the therapeutic approaches used, and for community organisations to develop interventions complementing services offered by healthcare systems

Management of stage I and II nonsmall cell lung cancer

The incidence of stage I and II nonsmall cell lung cancer is likely to increase with the ageing population and introduction of screening for high-risk individuals. Optimal management requires multidisciplinary collaboration. Local treatments include surgery and radiotherapy and these are currently combined with (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy in specific cases to improve long-term outcome. Targeted therapies and immunotherapy may also become important therapeutic modalities in this patient group. For resectable disease in patients with low cardiopulmonary risk, complete surgical resection with lobectomy remains the gold standard. Minimally invasive techniques, conservative and sublobar resections are suitable for a subset of patients. Data are emerging that radiotherapy, especially stereotactic body radiation therapy, is a valid alternative in compromised patients who are high-risk candidates for surgery. Whether this is also true for good surgical candidates remains to be evaluated in randomised trials. In specific subgroups adjuvant chemotherapy has been shown to prolong survival; however, patient selection remains important. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy may yield similar results as adjuvant chemotherapy. The role of targeted therapies and immunotherapy in early stage nonsmall cell lung cancer has not yet been determined and results of randomised trials are awaited

Cross-validation of the ego dissolution scale: implications for studying psychedelics

IntroductionEgo dissolution, variously called Ego-Loss, self-loss, and ego disintegration, is a hallmark of psychedelic drug use. We cross-validated the 10-item Ego Dissolution Scale, which we developed to assess ego dissolution in everyday life, and we included comparator variables that expanded our original assessment of construct validity.MethodsUndergraduate college student volunteers (N = 527) completed the measures online.ResultsWe replicated the original two factor structure (i.e., subfactors: Ego-Loss and Unity/connectedness with others, the world, universe), and we determined that the total score (Cronbach’s α = 0.79) and subfactors (Ego-Loss = 78; Unity = 0.83) possessed adequate-to-good reliability and strong convergent validity (e.g., mindfulness, hallucination-predisposition, sleep variables, personality variables, positive/negative affect transliminality, dissociation/depersonalization), while neuroticism, social desirability did not correlate highly with ego dissolution. We identified distinct patterns of relations of measures associated with the Ego-Loss vs. Unity subfactors.DiscussionWe discuss the implications of the use of the EDS for studying everyday aspects of ego dissolution, the long-term effects of psychedelic use, and the value of using the scale in conjunction with measures of the acute effects of psychedelics

Improving the Quality of Dentistry (IQuaD):a cluster factorial randomised controlled trial comparing the effectiveness and cost-benefit of oral hygiene advice and/or periodontal instrumentation with routine care for the prevention and management of periodontal disease in dentate adults attending dental primary care

Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank Mark Forrest and the programming team at CHaRT; Cynthia Fraser, our information specialist, for assistance with referencing; Moira Swan, who was the dental research nurse and part of the OA team in Newcastle upon Tyne; Louise Campbell for secretarial support and data management; our original statistician in the group, Andy Elders; senior IT manager Gladys Macpherson; senior trial administrator at the TCOD Marilyn Laird; Luke Vale for his involvement with the design of the health economic analysis at the inception of the trial; Maria Dimitrova, who assisted the health economists in the collection of unit costs; staff of the Scottish Primary Care Research Network, who assisted with screening eligible patients at dental practices; staff of the North East Commissioning Support Unit who assisted with research payments to dental practices in the north-east; members of the TMC and Periodontal Advisory Group for their ongoing advice and support of the trial; the independent members of the TSC and DMC; and the staff at recruitment sites who facilitated recruitment, treatment and follow-up of trial participants. The Health Services Research Unit and the Health Economics Research Unit is core funded by the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorate.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Functional analysis of drug resistance-associated mutations in the Trypanosoma brucei Adenosine Transporter 1 (TbAT1) and the proposal of a structural model for the protein

The Trypanosoma brucei aminopurine transporter P2/TbAT1 has long been implicated in the transport of, and resistance to, the diamidine and melaminophenyl arsenical classes of drugs that form the backbone of the pharmacopoeia against African trypanosomiasis. Genetic alterations including deletions and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) have been observed in numerous strains and clinical isolates. Here, we systematically investigate each reported mutation and assess their effects on transporter function after expression in a tbat1 -/- T. brucei line. Out of a set of six reported SNPs from a reported ‘resistance allele’, none significantly impaired sensitivity to pentamidine, diminazene or melarsoprol, relative to the TbAT1-WT allele, although several combinations, and the deletion of the codon for residue F316, resulted in highly significant impairment. These combinations of SNPs, and ΔF316, also strongly impaired the uptake of [3H]-adenosine and [3H]-diminazene, identical to the tbat1-/- control. The TbAT1 protein model predicted that residues F19, D140 and F316 interact with the substrate of the transporter. Mutation of D140 to alanine resulted in an inactive transporter, whereas the mutation F19A produced a transporter with a slightly increased affinity for [3H]-diminazene, but reduced the uptake rate. The results presented here validate earlier hypotheses of drug binding motifs for TbAT1

"Surviving discrimination by pulling together" : LGBTQI cancer patient and carer experiences of minority stress and social support

Background: Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and/or intersex (LGBTQI) people with cancer and their carers report poorer psychological outcomes than the general non-LGBTQI cancer population. There is growing acknowledgement that these health inequities can be explained by minority stress, which can be buffered by social support. Study Aim: To examine subjective experiences of minority stress and social support for LGBTQI people with cancer and their carers, drawing on qualitative findings from the Out with Cancer study. Method: An online survey including open ended items was completed by 430 LGBTQI cancer patients and 132 partners and other carers, representing a range of tumor types, sexual and gender identities, age and intersex status. A sub-sample of 104 patients and 31 carers completed an interview, with a follow-up photovoice activity and second interview completed by 45 patients and 10 carers. Data was thematically analysed using an intersectional theoretical framework. Results: Historical and present-day experiences of discrimination, violence, family rejection and exclusion created a legacy of distress and fear. This impacted on trust of healthcare professionals and contributed to distress and unmet needs in cancer survivorship and care. Social support, often provided by partners and other chosen family, including intimate partners and other LGBTQI people, buffered the negative impacts of minority stress, helping LGBTQI patients deal with cancer. However, some participants lacked support due to not having a partner, rejection from family of origin and lack of support within LGBTQI communities, increasing vulnerability to poor psychological wellbeing. Despite the chronic, cumulative impacts of minority stress, LGBTQI patients and carers were not passive recipients of discriminatory and exclusion in cancer care, demonstrating agency and resistance through collective action and advocacy. Conclusion: LGBTQI people have unique socio-political histories and present-day psycho-social experiences that contribute to distress during cancer. Social support serves to buffer and ameliorate this distress. There is a need for cancer healthcare professionals and support services to be aware of and responsive to these potential vulnerabilities, including the intersectional differences in experiences of minority stress and social support. There is also a need for recognition and facilitation of social support among LGBTQI people with cancer and their carers

LGBTQI cancer patients' quality of life and distress : a comparison by gender, sexuality, age, cancer type and geographical remoteness

Background: There is growing acknowledgement of the psycho-social vulnerability of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and/or intersex (LGBTQI) people with cancer. The majority of research to date has focused on cisgender adults with breast or prostate cancer. Study Aim: This study examined psycho-social factors associated with distress and quality of life for LGBTQI cancer patients and survivors, across a range of sexualities and gender identities, intersex status, tumor types, ages and urban/ rural/remote location using an intersectional theoretical framework. Method: 430 LGBTQI people with cancer completed an online survey, measuring distress, quality of life (QOL), and a range of psycho-social variables. Participants included 216 (50.2%) cisgender women, 145 (33.7%) cisgender men, and 63 (14.7%) transgender and gender diverse (TGD) people. Thirty-one (7.2%) participants reported intersex variation and 90 (20%) were adolescents or young adults (AYA), aged 15-39. The majority lived in urban areas (54.4%) and identified as lesbian, gay or bisexual (73.7%), with 10.9% identifying as bisexual, and 10.5% as queer, including reproductive (32.4%) and non-reproductive (67.6%) cancers. Results: Forty-one percent of participants reported high or very high distress levels, 3-6 times higher than previous non-LGBTQI cancer studies. Higher rates of distress and lower QOL were identified in TGD compared to cisgender people, AYAs compared to older people, those who identify as bisexual or queer, compared to those who identify as lesbian, gay or homosexual, and those who live in rural or regional areas, compared to urban areas. Elevated distress and lower QOL was associated with greater minority stress (discrimination in life and in cancer care, discomfort being LGBTQI, lower outness) and lower social support, in these subgroups. There were no differences between reproductive and non-reproductive cancers. For the whole sample, distress and poor QOL were associated with physical and sexual concerns, the impact of cancer on gender and LGBTQI identities, minority stress, and lack of social support. Conclusion: LGBTQI people with cancer are at high risk of distress and impaired QOL. Research and oncology healthcare practice needs to recognize the diversity of LGBTQI communities, and the ways in which minority stress and lack of social support may affect wellbeing

Attitudes, knowledge and practice behaviours of oncology health care professionals towards lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and intersex (LGBTQI) patients and their carers : a mixed-methods study

Objective: There is growing recognition that health care professionals (HCPs) and policy makers are insufficiently equipped to provide culturally competent care to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and intersex (LGBTQI) cancer patients and their families. We examined HCP attitudes, knowledge, and practices regarding LGBTQI cancer care using a mixed-methods research design. Method: Surveys were completed by 357 oncology HCPs in nursing (40%), medical (24%), allied health (19%), and clinical leadership roles (11%); 48 of the surveyed HCPs were interviewed. Results: Most HCPs reported being comfortable treating LGBTQI patients, but reported low levels of confidence and knowledge and systemic barriers to LGBTQI cancer care. Most wanted more education and training, particularly on trans and gender-diverse people (TGD) and those born with intersex variations. Conclusion: Education of HCPs and health system changes are required to overcome barriers to the provision of culturally competent cancer care for LGBTQI patients. Practice implications: These findings reinforce the need for inclusion of LGBTQI content in HCP education and professional training curricula, and institutional support for LGBTQI-inclusive practice behaviours. This includes administrative and visual cues to signal safety of LGBTQI patients within cancer care, facilitating inclusive environments, and the provision of tailored patient-centred care

LGBTQI inclusive cancer care : a discourse analytic study of health care professional, patient and carer perspectives

Background: Awareness of the specific needs of LGBTQI cancer patients has led to calls for inclusivity, cultural competence, cultural safety and cultural humility in cancer care. Examination of oncology healthcare professionals’ (HCP) perspectives is central to identifying barriers and facilitators to inclusive LGBTQI cancer care. Study Aim: This study examined oncology HCPs perspectives in relation to LGBTQI cancer care, and the implications of HCP perspectives and practices for LGBTQI patients and their caregivers. Method: 357 oncology HCPs in nursing (40%), medical (24%), allied health (19%) and leadership (11%) positions took part in a survey; 48 HCPs completed an interview. 430 LGBTQI patients, representing a range of tumor types, sexual and gender identities, age and intersex status, and 132 carers completed a survey, and 104 LGBTQI patients and 31 carers undertook an interview. Data were analysed using thematic discourse analysis. Results: Three HCP subject positions – ways of thinking and behaving in relation to the self and LGBTQI patients – were identified:’Inclusive and reflective’ practitioners characterized LGBTQI patients as potentially vulnerable and offered inclusive care, drawing on an affirmative construction of LGBTQI health. This resulted in LGBTQI patients and their carers feeling safe and respected, willing to disclose sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) status, and satisfied with cancer care. ‘Egalitarian practitioners’ drew on discourses of ethical responsibility, positioning themselves as treating all patients the same, not seeing the relevance of SOGI information. This was associated with absence of LGBTQI-specific information, patient and carer anxiety about disclosure of SOGI, feelings of invisibility, and dissatisfaction with healthcare. ‘Anti-inclusive’ practitioners’ expressed open hostility and prejudice towards LGBTQI patients, reflecting a cultural discourse of homophobia and transphobia. This was associated with patient and carer distress, feelings of negative judgement, and exclusion of same-gender partners. Conclusion: Derogatory views and descriptions of LGBTQI patients, and cis-normative practices need to be challenged, to ensure that HCPs offer inclusive and affirmative care. Building HCP’s communicative competence to work with LGBTQI patients needs to become an essential part of basic training and ongoing professional development. Visible indicators of LGBTQI inclusivity are essential, alongside targeted resources and information for LGBTQI people