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

Development and evaluation of a cancer-related fatigue patient education program: protocol of a randomized controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) and its impact on patients' quality of life has been an increasing subject of research. However, in Germany there is a lack of evidence-based interventions consistent with the multidimensional character of fatigue. The objective of this study is to develop and evaluate a self-management program for disease-free cancer patients to cope with CRF.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Based on evidence extracted from a literature review, a curriculum for the self-management program was elaborated. The curriculum was reviewed and validated by an interdisciplinary expert group and the training-modules will be pretested with a small number of participants and discussed in terms of feasibility and acceptance.</p> <p>To determine the efficacy of the program a randomised controlled trial will be carried out: 300 patients will be recruited from oncological practices in Bremen, Germany, and will be allocated to intervention or control group. The intervention group participates in the program, whereas the control group receives standard care and the opportunity to take part in the program after the end of the follow-up (waiting control group). Primary outcome measure is the level of fatigue, secondary outcome measures are quality of life, depression, anxiety, self-efficacy and physical activity. Data will be collected before randomisation, after intervention, and after a follow-up of 6 months.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Because there are no comparable self-management programs for cancer survivors with fatigue, the development of the curriculum has been complex; therefore, the critical appraisal by the experts was an important step to validate the program and their contributions have been integrated into the curriculum. The experts appreciated the program as filling a gap in outpatient cancer care.</p> <p>If the results of the evaluation prove to be satisfactory, the outpatient care of cancer patients can be broadened and supplemented.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials NCT00552552</p

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors for febrile neutropenia prophylaxis following chemotherapy: systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Febrile neutropenia (FN) occurs following myelosuppressive chemotherapy and is associated with morbidity, mortality, costs, and chemotherapy reductions and delays. Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) stimulate neutrophil production and may reduce FN incidence when given prophylactically following chemotherapy. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the effectiveness of G-CSFs (pegfilgrastim, filgrastim or lenograstim) in reducing FN incidence in adults undergoing chemotherapy for solid tumours or lymphoma. G-CSFs were compared with no primary G-CSF prophylaxis and with one another. Nine databases were searched in December 2009. Meta-analysis used a random effects model due to heterogeneity. Results: Twenty studies compared primary G-CSF prophylaxis with no primary G-CSF prophylaxis: five studies of pegfilgrastim; ten of filgrastim; and five of lenograstim. All three G-CSFs significantly reduced FN incidence, with relative risks of 0.30 (95% CI: 0.14 to 0.65) for pegfilgrastim, 0.57 (95% CI: 0.48 to 0.69) for filgrastim, and 0.62 (95% CI: 0.44 to 0.88) for lenograstim. Overall, the relative risk of FN for any primary G-CSF prophylaxis versus no primary G-CSF prophylaxis was 0.51 (95% CI: 0.41 to 0.62). In terms of comparisons between different G-CSFs, five studies compared pegfilgrastim with filgrastim. FN incidence was significantly lower for pegfilgrastim than filgrastim, with a relative risk of 0.66 (95% CI: 0.44 to 0.98). Conclusions: Primary prophylaxis with G-CSFs significantly reduces FN incidence in adults undergoing chemotherapy for solid tumours or lymphoma. Pegfilgrastim reduces FN incidence to a significantly greater extent than filgrastim