The three-item ALERT-B questionnaire provides a validated screening tool to detect chronic gastrointestinal symptoms after pelvic radiotherapy in cancer survivors

Aims: Although pelvic radiotherapy is an effective treatment for various malignancies, around half of patients develop significant gastrointestinal problems. These symptoms often remain undetected, despite the existence of effective treatments. This study developed and refined a simple screening tool to detect common gastrointestinal symptoms in outpatient clinics. These symptoms have a significant effect on quality of life. This tool will increase detection rates and so enable access to specialist gastroenterologists, which will in turn lead to improved symptom control and quality of life after treatment. Materials and methods: A literature review and expert consensus meeting identified four items for the ALERT-B (Assessment of Late Effects of RadioTherapy - Bowel) screening tool. ALERT-B was face tested for its usability and acceptability using cognitive interviews with 12 patients experiencing late gastrointestinal symptoms after pelvic radiotherapy. Thematic analysis and probe category were used to analyse interview transcripts. Interview data were presented to a group of experts to agree on the final content and format of the tool. ALERT-B was assessed for reliability and tested for validity against the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale in a clinical study (EAGLE). Results: Overall, the tool was found to be acceptable in terms of wording, response format and completion time. Participant-reported experiences, including lifestyle modifications and the psychological effect of the symptoms, led to further modifications of the tool. The refined tool includes three questions covering rectal bleeding, incontinence, nocturnal bowel movements and impact on quality of life, including mood, relationships and socialising. ALERT-B was successfully validated against the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale in the EAGLE study with the tool shown broadly to be internally consistent (Cronbach’s alpha=0.61 and all item-subscale correlation [Spearman] coefficients are > 0.6). Conclusion: The ALERT-B screening tool can be used in clinical practice to improve post-treatment supportive care by triggering the clinical assessment of patients suitable for referral to a gastroenterologist

Genetic screening for gynecological cancer: where are we heading?

The landscape of cancer genetics in gynecological oncology is rapidly changing. The traditional family history-based approach has limitations and misses >50% mutation carriers. This is now being replaced by population-based approaches. The need for changing the clinical paradigm from family history-based to population-based BRCA1/BRCA2 testing in Ashkenazi Jews is supported by data that demonstrate population-based BRCA1/BRCA2 testing does not cause psychological harm and is cost effective. This article covers various genetic testing strategies for gynecological cancers, including population-based approaches, panel and direct-to-consumer testing as well as the need for innovative approaches to genetic counseling. Advances in genetic testing technology and computational analytics have facilitated an integrated systems medicine approach, providing increasing potential for population-based genetic testing, risk stratification, and cancer prevention. Genomic information along-with biological/computational tools will be used to deliver predictive, preventive, personalized and participatory (P4) and precision medicine in the future

The ALERT-B questionnaire: A screening tool for the detection of gastroenterological late effects after radiotherapy for prostate cancer

There is an increasing need to measure treatment-related side effects in normal tissues following cancer therapy. The ALERT-B (Assessment of Late Effects of RadioTherapy - Bowel) questionnaire is a screening tool that is composed of four items related specifically to bowel symptoms. Those patients that respond with a “yes” to any of these items are referred on to gastroenterologist in order to improve the long-term consequences of these side effects of radiological treatment. Here we wish to test the ability of this questionnaire to identify these subsequent gastroenterological complications by tracking prostate cancer patients that were positive with respect to ALERT-B. We also carry out receiver-operator curve (ROC) analysis for baseline data for an overall ALERT-B questionnaire score with respect to subscale data for the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS) and the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC-26) questionnaire. 84.4% and 95.7% of patients identified by the ALERT-B questionnaire demonstrated complications diagnosed at 6 and 12 months post-treatment, respectively. ROC curve analysis of baseline data showed that ALERT-B detected clinically relevant levels of side effects established at baseline by the GSRS diarrhoea subscale (AUC = 0.867, 95% CI = 0.795 to 0.926) and at the minimally important level of side effects for the EPIC bowel subscale (AUC = 0.765, 95% CI = 0.617 to 0.913). These results show that ALERT-B provides a simple and effective screening tool for identifying gastroenterological complications after treatment for prostate cancer

Permanence of the information given during oncogenetic counseling to persons at familial risk of breast/ovarian and/or colon cancer

How long counselees retain the information given during their genetic consultation is of major importance. To address this issue, we conducted a survey among the 3500 families that have been offered genetic counseling at our Center since 1988. In August 2007, we mailed a questionnaire to a representative subset of 579 persons belonging to breast/ovarian or colon cancer families seen in the last 10 years, either carrying an identified mutation or not. Targeted topics included the meaning of hereditary predisposition, the medical prevention related to the familial risk, the steps to undertake for a new family member to enter the genetic testing program and general knowledge of hereditary predisposition to cancer. A total of 91 randomized non-respondents were sent a second, more inciting letter, in order to assess any non-response bias. Overall, 337 questionnaires were collected: response rate was 58%. Standardized average knowledge was 7.28±1.52 of 10. Scores were lowest concerning medical prevention. The level of knowledge decreased with age (P<10−6), but increased with educational level (P<10−5) and mutation status (P=0.01). Surprisingly, no erosion of patients' knowledge over the time was observed (P=0.41). Among persons at hereditary risk of colon cancer, the level of knowledge tended to improve with time, in contrast to the breast/ovarian group (P=0.017). Among persons with a familial risk of breast/ovarian or colon cancer, a renewal of oncogenetic counseling does not seem necessary to maintain the level of specific knowledge. Measures to help patients follow their medical prevention, as organizing or checking their medical examinations, seem indicated

How do women at increased, but unexplained, familial risk of breast cancer perceive and manage their risk? A qualitative interview study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The perception of breast cancer risk held by women who have not had breast cancer, and who are at increased, but unexplained, familial risk of breast cancer is poorly described. This study aims to describe risk perception and how it is related to screening behaviour for these women.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Participants were recruited from a population-based sample (the Australian Breast Cancer Family Study - ABCFS). The ABCFS includes women diagnosed with breast cancer and their relatives. For this study, women without breast cancer with at least one first- or second-degree relative diagnosed with breast cancer before age 50 were eligible unless a <it>BRCA1 </it>or <it>BRCA2 </it>mutation had been identified in their family. Data collection consisted of an audio recorded, semi-structured interview on the topic of breast cancer risk and screening decision-making. Data was analysed thematically.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 24 interviews were conducted, and saturation of the main themes was achieved. Women were classified into one of five groups: don't worry about cancer risk, but do screening; concerned about cancer risk, so do something; concerned about cancer risk, so why don't I do anything?; cancer inevitable; cancer unlikely.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The language and framework women use to describe their risk of breast cancer must be the starting point in attempts to enhance women's understanding of risk and their prevention behaviour.</p

Towards optimal use of antithrombotic therapy of people with cancer at the end of life: a research protocol for the development and implementation of the SERENITY shared decision support tool Thrombosis Research

Background: Even though antithrombotic therapy has probably little or even negative effects on the well-being of people with cancer during their last year of life, deprescribing antithrombotic therapy at the end of life is rare in practice. It is often continued until death, possibly resulting in excess bleeding, an increased disease burden and higher healthcare costs. Methods: The SERENITY consortium comprises researchers and clinicians from eight European countries with specialties in different clinical fields, epidemiology and psychology. SERENITY will use a comprehensive approach combining a realist review, flash mob research, epidemiological studies, and qualitative interviews. The results of these studies will be used in a Delphi process to reach a consensus on the optimal design of the shared decision support tool. Next, the shared decision support tool will be tested in a randomised controlled trial. A targeted implementation and dissemination plan will be developed to enable the use of the SERENITY tool across Europe, as well as its incorporation in clinical guidelines and policies. The entire project is funded by Horizon Europe.Results: SERENITY will develop an information-driven shared decision support tool that will facilitate treatment decisions regarding the appropriate use of antithrombotic therapy in people with cancer at the end of life. Conclusions: We aim to develop an intervention that guides the appropriate use of antithrombotic therapy, prevents bleeding complications, and saves healthcare costs. Hopefully, usage of the tool leads to enhanced empowerment and improved quality of life and treatment satisfaction of people with advanced cancer and their care givers

Misunderstandings Concerning Genetics Among Patients Confronting Genetic Disease

Critical questions arise about misunderstandings of genetics. We interviewed for 2 h each, 64 individuals who had or were at risk for Huntington's disease (HD), breast cancer or Alpha‐1 antitrypsin deficiency. These individuals revealed various misunderstandings that can affect coping, and testing, treatment and reproductive decisions. A therapeutic misconception about testing appeared: that testing would be helpful in and of itself. Many believed they could control genetic disorders (even HD), yet these beliefs were often incorrect, and could impede coping, testing, and treatment. Misunderstandings about statistics and genetics often fueled each other, and reflected denial, and desires for hope and control. Emotional needs can thus outweigh understandings of genetics and statistics, and providers’ input. Individuals often maintained non‐scientific beliefs, though embarrassed by these. These data have implications for care, and public and professional education. Misunderstandings’ persistence, despite realization of their inaccuracy, suggests that providers need to address not just cognitive facts, but underlying emotional issues