Prostate cancer in black men: Is it time for personalized screening approaches?

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/137255/1/cncr30685_am.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/137255/2/cncr30685.pd

Adaptation of international guidelines on assessment and management of cancer pain for the Australian context

Aim: To develop clinical practice guidelines for screening, assessing and managing cancer pain in Australian adults. Methods: This three phase project utilised the ADAPTE approach to adapt international cancer pain guidelines for the Australian setting. A Working Party was established to define scope, screen guidelines for adaptation, and develop recommendations to support better cancer pain control through screening, assessment, pharmacological and non-pharmacological management, and patient education. Recommendations with limited evidence were referred to Expert Panels for advice before the draft guidelines were opened for public consultation via the Cancer Council Australia Cancer Guidelines Wiki platform in late 2012. All comments were reviewed by the Working Party and the guidelines revised accordingly. Results: Screening resulted in six international guidelines being included for adaptation - those developed by the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (2008), National Health Service Quality Improvement Scotland (2009), National Comprehensive Cancer Network (2012), European Society of Medical Oncology (2011), European Association for Palliative Care (2011, 2012) and National Institute of Clinical Excellence (2012). Guideline adaptation resulted in 55 final recommendations. The guidelines were officially launched in November 2013. Conclusion: International guidelines can be efficiently reconfigured for local contexts using the ADAPTE approach. Availability of the guidelines via the Cancer Council Australia Wiki is intended to promote uptake and enable recommendations to be kept up to date. Resources to support implementation will also be made available via the Wiki if found to be effective by a randomised controlled trial commencing in 2015

Trends in advanced imaging use for women undergoing breast cancer surgery

BACKGROUND: Evidence‐based guidelines recommend limited perioperative diagnostic imaging for new breast cancer diagnoses. For patients aged >65 years, conventional imaging use (mammography, plain radiographs, and ultrasound) has remained stable, whereas advanced imaging (computed tomography [CT], nuclear medicine scans [positron emission tomography/bone scans], and magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) use has increased. In this study, the authors evaluated traditional and advanced imaging use among younger patients (aged ≤65 years) undergoing breast cancer surgery. METHODS: The MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Research Database from 2005 through 2008 was analyzed to evaluate the use of conventional and advanced diagnostic imaging associated with surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) or stage I through III invasive breast cancer. RESULTS: The study cohort included 52,202 women (13% with DCIS and 87% with stage I‐III breast cancer). The proportion of patients undergoing conventional imaging remained stable, whereas the average number of conventional imaging tests per patient increased from 4.21 tests in 2005 to 4.79 tests per patient in 2008 ( P < .0001). For advanced imaging, the proportion of women who underwent imaging increased from 48.8% in 2005 to 68.8% in 2008 ( P < .0001), as did the number of tests per patient (from 1.53 tests in 2005 to 1.98 tests in 2008; P < .0001). MRI examinations accounted for nearly all of the increase in advanced imaging. Patients who underwent MRI examinations received significantly more traditional imaging tests compared with to those who did not, indicating that these tests are additive and are not replacing traditional imaging. CONCLUSIONS: The current results demonstrate that the use of perioperative breast MRI has increased among women aged <65 years. Further study is indicated to determine whether the benefits of this procedure justify increased use. Cancer 2013. © 2012 American Cancer Society. The use of advanced imaging in women aged <65 years with breast cancer is increasing. Magnetic resonance imaging examinations accounts for nearly all of the increase in advanced imaging and is associated with increased use of traditional imaging, such as mammography and ultrasound.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/96699/1/27838_ftp.pd

Recommendations for the implementation of distress screening programs in cancer centers: Report from the American Psychosocial Oncology Society (APOS), Association of Oncology Social Work (AOSW), and Oncology Nursing Society (ONS) joint task force

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/108593/1/cncr28750.pd

Cost-effectiveness of a mailed educational reminder to increase colorectal cancer screening

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates are low in many areas and cost-effective interventions to promote CRC screening are needed. Recently in a randomized controlled trial, a mailed educational reminder increased CRC screening rates by 16.2% among U.S. Veterans. The aim of our study was to assess the costs and cost-effectiveness of a mailed educational reminder on fecal occult blood test (FOBT) adherence.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In a blinded, randomized, controlled trial, 769 patients were randomly assigned to the usual care group (FOBT alone, n = 382) or the intervention group (FOBT plus a mailed reminder, n = 387). Ten days after picking up the FOBT cards, a 1-page reminder with information related to CRC screening was mailed to the intervention group. Primary outcome was number of returned FOBT cards after 6 months. The costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the intervention were assessed and calculated respectively. Sensitivity analyses were based on varying costs of labor and supplies.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>At 6 months after card distribution, 64.6% patients in the intervention group returned FOBT cards compared with 48.4% in the control group (P < 0.001). The total cost of the intervention was $962 or$2.49 per patient, and the ICER was $15 per additional person screened for CRC. Sensitivity analysis based on a 10$13.50 to $16.50 per additional patient screened for CRC.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>A simple mailed educational reminder increases FOBT card return rate at a cost many health care systems can afford. Compared to other patient-directed interventions (telephone, letters from physicians, mailed reminders) for CRC screening, our intervention was more effective and cost-effective.</p