The role of URO17® in diagnosis and follow up of bladder cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: to evaluate the role of urinary URO17® biomarker in the detection of urothelial tumors in haematuria patients and the detection of recurrence in non-muscle invasive bladder urothelial tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our study was formed of two cohorts of patients, group I represents patients presenting with haematuria (n = 98), while group II represents patients with known non-muscle invasive bladder cancers on their scheduled follow up cystoscopic investigation (n = 51). For both groups, patients were asked to provide urine samples before cystoscopy, either primary as part of the haematuria investigation or as a scheduled follow-up. Urine samples were sent anonymously for standard urine cytology and URO17® biomarker immunostaining. Results were compared to cystoscopic findings using Chi-square analysis and Fisher's exact test (P < 0.05). RESULTS: Group I was formed of 98 patients, with an average age of 60 years. URO17® showed 100% sensitivity and 96.15% specificity with a negative predictive value (NPV) of 100 and a positive predictive value (PPV) of 95.83. The results showed statistical significance with P value < 0.001. Group II was formed of 51 patients, with an average age of 75 years. URO17® was shown to have a sensitivity of 85.71% and NPV of 95.45. Eleven patients of group II were on scheduled BacillusCalmette-Guerin (BCG) and another 5 received Mitomycin C (MMC). The overall results of both groups combined (n = 149) showed statistical significance between flexible cystoscopy results and the results of urinary URO17® and urine cytology. CONCLUSION: URO17® has a potential to be a reliable test for diagnosis and follow up of urothelial cancer patients and a screening tool adjunct to flexible cystoscopy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable as the current study is not a clinical trial, as per according to the National Institutes of Health, "studies that involve a comparison of methods and that do not evaluate the effect of the interventions on the participant do not meet the NIH clinical trial definition."

Are education and cohabitation associated with health-related quality of life and self-management during breast cancer follow-up? A longitudinal study.

BACKGROUND: Oncologist-led follow-up after breast cancer (BC) is increasingly replaced with less intensive follow-up based on higher self-management, which may overburden the less resourceful patients. We examined whether socioeconomic factors measured recently after the implementation of a new follow-up program for BC patients were associated with health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and self-management 12 months later. METHODOLOGY: Between January and August 2017, we invited 1773 patients in Region Zealand, Denmark, to participate in baseline and 12 months follow-up questionnaires. The patients had surgery for low- and intermediate risk BC 1-10 years prior to the survey, and they had recently been allocated to the new follow-up program of either patient-initiated follow-up, or in-person or telephone follow-up with a nurse, based on patients' preferences. We examined associations between socioeconomic factors (education and cohabitation) at baseline and two outcomes: HRQoL (EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR23) and self-management factors (health care provider, confidence in follow-up, contact at symptoms of concern, and self-efficacy) at 12 months follow-up. Sensitivity analyses were performed according to time since diagnosis (≤ 5 > 5 years). Furthermore, we investigated whether treatment and self-management factors modified the associations. RESULTS: A total of 987 patients were included in the analyses. We found no statistically significant associations between socioeconomic factors and HRQoL, except in patients ≤ 5 years from diagnosis. For self-management patients with short education were more likely to report that they had not experience relevant symptoms of concern compared to those with medium/long education (OR 1.75 95% CI: 1.04; 2.95). We found no clear patterns indicating that treatment or self-management factors modified the associations between socioeconomics' and HRQoL. CONCLUSION: Overall socioeconomic factors did not influence HRQoL and self-management factors except for experiencing and reporting relevant symptoms of concern. Socioeconomic factors may, however, influence HRQoL in patients within five years of diagnosis.

Acceptability of a shared cancer follow-up model of care between general practitioners and radiation oncologists: A qualitative evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: Facilitators to implement shared cancer follow-up care into clinical practice include mechanisms to allow the oncologist to continue overseeing the care of their patient, two-way information sharing and clear follow-up protocols for general practitioners (GPs). This paper aimed to evaluate patients, GPs and radiation oncologists (ROs) acceptance of a shared care intervention. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted pre- and post intervention with patients that were 3 years post radiotherapy treatment for breast, colorectal or prostate cancer, their RO, and their GP. Inductive and deductive thematical analysis was employed. RESULTS: Thirty-two participants were interviewed (19 patients, 9 GPs, and 4 ROs). Pre intervention, there was support for GPs to play a greater role in cancer follow-up care, however, patients were concerned about the GPs cancer-specific skills. Patients, GPs and ROs were concerned about increasing the GPs workload. Post intervention, participants were satisfied that the GPs had specific skills and that the impact on GP workload was comparable to writing a referral. However, GPs expressed concern about remuneration. GPs and ROs felt the model provided patient choice and were suitable for low-risk, stable patients around 2-3 years post treatment. Patients emphasised that they trusted their RO to advise them on the most appropriate follow-up model suited to their individual situation. The overall acceptance of shared care depended on successful health technology to connect the GP and RO. There were no differences in patient acceptance between rural, regional, and cancer types. ROs presented differences in acceptance for the different cancer types, with breast cancer strongly supported. CONCLUSION: Patients, GPs and ROs felt this shared cancer follow-up model of care was acceptable, but only if the RO remained directly involved and the health technology worked. There is a need to review funding and advocate for health technology advances to support integration. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients treated with curative radiotherapy for breast, colorectal and prostate cancer, their RO and their GPs were actively involved in this study by giving their consent to be interviewed.

A call for nurse practitioner-led cancer survivorship clinics: The need for development and adoption within Ontario, Canada.

The growing prevalence of cancer survivors requiring comprehensive follow-up care after the completion of treatment is placing a significant strain on the Canadian healthcare system (Moura et al., 2022). Given the current landscape and the higher workload demands that are further exacerbated by shortages in healthcare staffing, the oncology specialist-led care, as the standard model for survivorship care is unsustainable and suboptimal in addressing a broad range of physical, psychosocial, supportive, informational, and rehabilitative needs of cancer survivors (Brennan et al., 2010; Canadian Partnership Against Cancer & Canadian Association of Provincial Cancer Agencies, 2010). Nurse-led models of survivorship care provided by oncology nurse practitioners (NPs) have been shown to be safe, effective, feasible, and appropriate for follow-up care (Chan et al., 2018). In the province of Ontario, survivorship care is provided mostly by physicians. Specialized NP-led survivorship clinics or programs are currently lacking based on a recent environmental scan. This paper outlines current barriers and opportunities in NP-led survivorship care. This is a call to action and for advocacy regarding the examination of oncology services and outlines the need for the development and implementation of NP-led survivorship clinics in Ontario, Canada.

Addressing colon cancer patients' needs during follow-up consultations at the outpatient clinic: a multicenter qualitative observational study.

PURPOSE: To describe colon cancer patients' needs and how healthcare providers respond to these needs during routine follow-up consultations in hospital. METHODS: A multicenter qualitative observational study, consisting of follow-up consultations by surgeons and specialized oncology nurses. Consultations were analyzed according to Verona Coding Definitions of Emotional Sequences. Patients' questions, cues, and concerns were derived from the data and categorized into supportive care domains. Responses of healthcare providers were defined as providing or reducing space for disclosure. Patient satisfaction with care was measured with a short questionnaire. RESULTS: Consultations with 30 patients were observed. Questions typically centered around the health system and information domain (i.e., follow-up schedule and test results; 92%). Cues and concerns were mostly associated with the physical and daily living domain (i.e., experiencing symptoms and difficulties resuming daily routine; 43%), followed by health system and information (i.e., miscommunication or lack of clarity about follow-up; 28%), and psychological domain (i.e., fear of recurrence and complications; 28%). Problems in the sexuality domain hardly ever arose (0%). Healthcare providers provided space to talk about half of the cues and concerns (54%). Responses to cancer-related versus unrelated problems were similar. Overall, the patients were satisfied with the information and communication received. CONCLUSIONS: Colon cancer patients express various needs during consultations. Healthcare providers respond to different types of needs in a similar fashion. We encourage clinicians to discuss all supportive care domains, including sexuality, and provide space for further disclosure. General practitioners are trained to provide holistic care and could play a greater role.

The development and initial validation of the Breast Cancer Recurrence instrument (BreastCaRe)-a patient-reported outcome measure for detecting symptoms of recurrence after breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Patient-reported outomes (PRO) may facilitate prompt treatment. We describe the development and psychometric properties of the first instrument to monitor for symptoms of breast cancer (BC) recurrence. METHODS: This study is nested in the MyHealth randomized trial of nurse-led follow-up based on electronically-collected PROs. We constructed items assessing symptoms of potential recurrence through expert interviews with six BC specialists in Denmark. Semi-structured cognitive interviews were carried out with a patient panel to assess acceptability and comprehensibility. Items were subsequently tested in a population of 1170 women 1-10 years after completing BC treatment. We carried out multiple-groups confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and Rasch analysis to test dimensionality, local dependence (LD) and differential item functioning (DIF) according to sociodemographic and treatment-related factors. Clinical data was obtained from the Danish Breast Cancer Group registry. RESULTS: Twenty-two items were generated for the Breast Cancer Recurrence instrument (BreastCaRe). Cognitive testing resulted in clearer items. Seven subscales based on general, bone, liver, lung, brain, locoregional and contralateral recurrence symptoms were proposed. Both CFA and Rasch models confirmed the factor structure. No DIF was identified. Five item pairs showed LD but all items were retained to avoid loss of clinical information. Rasch models taking LD into account were used to generate a standardized scoring table for each subscale. CONCLUSIONS: The BreastCaRe has good content and structural validity, patient acceptability and measurement invariance. We are preparing to examine the predictive validity of this new instrument.

Promoting integrated care in prostate cancer through online prostate cancer-specific holistic needs assessment: a feasibility study in primary care.

PURPOSE: This study assessed the feasibility of implementing a novel model of integrated prostate cancer care involving an online prostate cancer-specific holistic needs assessment (sHNA) and shared digital communication between patients and their healthcare professionals (HCPs). The sHNA produces a semi-automated care plan that is finalised in consultation between the patient and their practice nurse. METHODS: Men living with and beyond prostate cancer were invited to participate in a 9-month non-randomised cluster controlled feasibility study. The intervention group was asked to complete the sHNA on three occasions. Data were collected using Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) at baseline, 10 and 24 weeks, and 9 months. Outcomes included recruitment, retention, acceptability, and engagement with the sHNA and PROMs. RESULTS: Fourteen general practices (8 intervention and 6 control), and 41 men (29 intervention and 12 control) participated. Initial patient engagement with the sHNA was high, with all but one receiving practice nurse-led follow-up and an individualised care plan. The sHNA proved useful in identifying 'red flag' symptoms, and helping practice nurses decide when to seek further medical care for the patients. There was a high level of acceptability for patients and HCPs. However, integration of care did not occur as intended because of problems linking hospital and general practice IT systems. CONCLUSION: While the study demonstrated the feasibility of implementing the sHNA, it did not meet the a priori progression criteria; as such, undertaking a definitive randomised controlled trial is not appropriate until the identified methodological and technical issues have been addressed.

Evaluation of the "Shared Community Follow-up" after a germ cell tumour-A novel initiative for remote cancer follow-up enhanced by online patient-reported outcome measures.

OBJECTIVE: Replying to germ cell tumour patients' needs, we implemented "Shared Community Follow-up"-a collaborative initiative, enabling remote delivery of specialist cancer care across large geographical areas. Blood, radiological investigations and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are completed remotely and integrated within the electronic patient records for specialist review without patients requiring appointments. We describe the service evaluation estimating the feasibility, safety and acceptability of this initiative versus traditional Standard Follow-up. METHODS: This cross-sectional evaluation estimated feasibility (uptake, adherence) and safety (via missed appointments, timeliness, cancellations) using routinely collected service process data. An acceptability questionnaire, evaluating patient satisfaction, was administered to 91 patients. RESULTS: The new service is feasible. Across 2 years (2014-2016), uptake increased 54% (N = 123 to N = 270) and only 4.8% (N = 13) of patients were non-adherent. Fewer missed/cancelled investigations (N = 39, 5.9% vs. N = 566, 85.5%), timelier investigations (seven vs. 14 timely investigations) and equal relapse detection suggest its safety. PROMs replaced 3 appointments/patient. Patients were as satisfied with both services (3.4/4 vs. 3.6/4). CONCLUSION: New follow-up services, with investigations completed remotely and shared between community providers and cancer centres, offer an alternative to traditional appointments with advantages for patients and the National Health Service.

"My gut feeling is we could do more..." a qualitative study exploring staff and patient perspectives before and after the implementation of an online prostate cancer-specific holistic needs assessment.

BACKGROUND: Men surviving prostate cancer report a wide range of unmet needs. Holistic needs assessments (HNA) are designed to capture these, but are traditionally paper-based, generic, and only carried out in secondary care despite national initiatives advocating a "shared care" approach. We developed an online prostate cancer-specific HNA (sHNA) built into existing IT healthcare infrastructure to provide a platform for service integration. Barriers and facilitators to implementation and use of the sHNA were explored from both the patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) perspectives. METHODS: This qualitative study consisted of two phases. Phase 1 used semi-structured interviews to explore HCPs (n = 8) and patients (n = 10) perceptions of the sHNA, prior to implementation. Findings were used to develop an implementation strategy. Phase 2 used semi-structured interviews to explore HCPs (n = 4) and patients (n = 7) experienced barriers and motivators to using the sHNA, 9 to 12 months after implementation. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed. Themes were mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework. RESULTS: HCPs and patients anticipated many benefits from using the sHNA. Barriers to implementation included: confidence to work in depth with prostate cancer patients, organisational and cultural change, and patient factors. Our implementation strategy addressed these barriers by the provision of disease specific training delivered in part by a clinical nurse specialist; and a peer-led IT supporter. Following implementation HCPs and patients perceived the sHNA as beneficial to their practice and care, respectively. However, some patients experienced barriers in using the sHNA related predominately to symptom perception and time since treatment. HCPs suggested minor software refinements. CONCLUSIONS: This work supports the importance of identifying barriers and motivators to implementation, and using targeted action via the development of an implementation strategy to address these. Whilst this process should be on-going, undertaking this work at an early stage will help to optimise the implementation of the sHNA for future trials.

Disparities in receipt of follow-up care instructions among female adult cancer survivors: Results from a national survey.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate predictors of receipt of follow-up instructions at completion of cancer treatment among women with breast and gynecologic cancers (cervical, endometrial, ovarian) in the United States, and determine if the factors differ by cancer type. METHODS: We designed a cross-sectional study using data from the "Cancer Survivorship" module of the 2016 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS). We created logistic regression models to determine characteristics associated with receipt of follow-up care instructions, and stratified by models by cancer type to evaluate differences in factors. RESULTS: Our sample included 954 (66%) and 492 (34%) women with breast and gynecologic cancers respectively. Even after adjustment, women treated for gynecologic cancer had 63% lower odds [0.37 (0.25-0.55)] of receiving follow-up instructions compared to women with breast cancer. Among breast cancer patients, those with an income <$25,000 per year had lower odds of receiving follow-up instructions [0.53(0.31-0.92)], while patients with high BMI (BMI ≥30 kg/m2) had higher odds of receiving follow-up instructions [1.91 (1.15-3.18)]. Among gynecologic cancer patients, those diagnosed 51-75 years had higher odds of receiving follow-up instructions compared to those diagnosed ≤50 years [2.54 (1.13-5.70)]. CONCLUSION: In our study, gynecologic cancer patients less frequently received follow-up instructions compared to breast cancer patients. Receipt of follow-up instructions also differed by demographic and lifestyle factors. The results provide evidence for the need of public health initiatives to increase the frequency of follow-up instructions for gynecologic cancer patients, which can potentially increase the rate of follow-up and improve long-term outcomes.

A multicentre integration of a computer-led follow-up of prostate cancer is valid and safe.

OBJECTIVE: To test a computer-led follow-up service for prostate cancer in two UK hospitals; the testing aimed to validate the computer expert system in making clinical decisions according to the individual patient's clinical need with a valid model accurately identify patients with disease recurrence or treatment failure based on their blood test and clinical picture. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A clinical-decision support system (CDSS) was developed from European (European Association of Urology) and national (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) guidelines along with knowledge acquired from Urologists. This model was then applied in two UK hospitals to review patients after prostate cancer treatment. These patients' data (n = 200) were then reviewed by two independent urology consultants (blinded from the CDSS and the other consultant's rating) and the agreement was calculated by kappa statistics for validation. The second endpoint was to verify the system by estimating the system reliability. RESULTS: The two individual urology consultants identified 12% and 15% of the patients to have potential disease progression and recommended their referral to urology care. The kappa coefficient for the agreement between the CDSS and the two consultants was 0.81 (P < 0.001) and 0.84 (P < 0.001). The agreement amongst both specialist was also high with k = 0.83 (P < 0.001). The system reliability was estimated on all cases and this demonstrated 100% repeatability of the decisions. CONCLUSION: A CDSS follow-up is a valid model for providing safe follow-up for prostate cancer.

Imaging surveillance and survival for surgically resected non-small-cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The importance of imaging surveillance after treatment for lung cancer is not well characterized. We examined the association between initial guideline recommended imaging surveillance and survival among early-stage resected non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data (1995-2010). Surgically resected patients, with stage I and II NSCLC, were categorized by imaging received during the initial surveillance period (4-8 mo) after surgery. Primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary treatment interventions were examined as intermediary outcomes. RESULTS: Most (88%) patients had at least one outpatient clinic visit, and 24% received an initial computerized tomography (CT) during the first surveillance period. Five-year survival by initial surveillance imaging was 61% for CT, 58% for chest radiography, and 60% for no imaging. After adjustment, initial CT was not associated with improved overall survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.96-1.14). On subgroup analysis, restricted to patients with demonstrated initial postoperative follow-up, CT was associated with a lower overall risk of death for stage I patients (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.74-0.98), but not for stage II (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.71-1.42). There was no significant difference in rates of secondary interventions predicted by type of initial imaging surveillance. CONCLUSIONS: Initial surveillance CT is not associated with improved overall or lung cancer-specific survival among early-stage NSCLC patients undergoing surgical resection. Stage I patients with early follow-up may represent a subpopulation that benefits from initial surveillance although this may be influenced by healthy patient selection bias.

Mucins and Cytokeratins as Serum Tumor Markers in Breast Cancer.

Structural and functional characteristics of mucins and cytokeratins are shortly described. Thereafter, those commonly used in breast cancer as serum tumor markers are considered. First CA15.3, MCA, CA549, CA27.29 mucins and CYFRA21.1, TPA, TPS cytokeratins alone or in association have been examined in different stages and conditions. Then their usefulness in monitoring disease-free breast cancer patients is evaluated. The central role of the established cut-off and critical change, the "early" treatment of recurrent disease and the potential benefit in survival are other issues that have been highlighted and discussed. The successive sections and subsections deal with the monitoring of advanced disease. In them, the current recommendations and the principal findings on using the above mentioned mucins and cytokeratins have been reported. A computer program for interpreting consecutive measurements of serum tumor markers also has been illustrated. The final part of the chapter is devoted to mucins and cytokeratins as markers of circulating and disseminated tumor cells and their usefulness for prognosis.

A NEw MOdel of individualized and patient-centered follow-up for women with gynecological cancer (the NEMO study)-protocol and rationale of a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Follow-up programs for gynecological cancer patients are currently under revision. There is limited evidence that traditional follow-up and clinical examinations improve survival in an early-stage gynecological setting. Further, traditional follow-up programs fail to accommodate the patient's need for psychosocial and sexual supportive care and to actively involve patients and their relatives in the follow-up process. Individualized programs may replace traditional routine follow-up with fixed intervals and length. Focusing on alarm-symptoms and self-reporting may ensure detection of recurrence while allowing a continuous attention to the patient's well-being and return to daily life. In this study, a nurse-led, individualized, and need-based intervention with a specific focus on patient empowerment is tested against a standard physician-led model primarily focusing on the detection of recurrence. METHODS: The study is designed as a clinical, randomized trial conducted in one of four national onco-gynecological centers in Denmark. Patients with early-stage cervical or endometrial cancer are eligible for inclusion. The intervention group undergoes individualized, nurse-led follow-up supporting patient empowerment including repeated use of electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) before each contact as a dialogue support tool. The follow-up contacts are mainly conducted by telephone. All project nurses attended a special training program before project start and are all well-educated and dedicated onco-gynecological nurses. The control group receives standard, physician-led, follow-up without use of ePROMs or specific focus on empowerment. The effect of the intervention is evaluated by questionnaires completed by patients at baseline (3 months after surgery) and 12, 18, and 36 months after surgery. Outcomes include empowerment using the Skill and technique subscale of the HEI-Q questionnaire as the primary outcome while fear of cancer recurrence and health-related quality of life as well as the remaining subscales of the HEI-Q represent secondary outcomes. Data is collected by use of the REDCap technology, which also provides a customized visual support function for the dialogue tool. DISCUSSION: This study will provide new information about follow-up in early-stage gynecological cancer settings and thereby contribute to improvement of future follow-up programs. Importantly, the study will provide knowledge about the impact of specific focus on patient empowerment in follow-up programs and, further, how to facilitate empowerment among patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov: ID no. NCT03838861. Registered on 6 February 2019. Protocol version 2, issue date 21 November 2022.

The Value of Tumour Markers in the Detection of Relapse-Lessons Learned from the Swiss Austrian German Testicular Cancer Cohort Study.

The tumour markers alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), beta human chorionic gonadotropin (ßHCG), and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) have established roles in the management and follow-up of testicular cancer. While a tumour marker rise can serve as an indicator of relapse, the frequency of false-positive marker events has not been studied systematically in larger cohorts. We assessed the validity of serum tumour markers for the detection of relapse in the Swiss Austrian German Testicular Cancer Cohort Study (SAG TCCS). This registry was set up to answer questions on the diagnostic performance and impact of imaging and laboratory tests in the management of testicular cancer, and has included 948 patients between January 2014 and July 2021.A total of 793 patients with a median follow-up of 29.0 mo were included. In total, 71 patients (8.9%) had a proven relapse, which was marker positive in 31 patients (43.6%). Of all patients, 124 (15.6%) had an event of a false-positive marker elevation. The positive predictive value (PPV) of the markers was limited, highest for ßHCG (33.8%) and lowest for LDH (9.4%). PPV tended to increase with higher levels of elevation. These findings underline the limited accuracy of the conventional tumour markers to indicate or rule out a relapse. Especially, LDH as part of routine follow-up should be questioned. Patient summary: With the diagnosis of testicular cancer, the three tumour markers alpha-fetoprotein, beta human chorionic gonadotropin, and lactate dehydrogenase are routinely measured during follow-up to monitor for relapse. We demonstrate that these markers are often falsely elevated, and, by contrast, many patients do not have marker elevations despite a relapse. The results of this study can lead to improved use of these tumour markers during follow-up of testis cancer patients.

Breath Volatile Organic Compounds in Surveillance of Gastric Cancer Patients following Radical Surgical Management.

As of today, there is a lack of a perfect non-invasive test for the surveillance of patients for potential relapse following curative treatment. Breath volatile organic compounds (VOCs) have been demonstrated to be an accurate diagnostic tool for gastric cancer (GC) detection; here, we aimed to prove the yield of the markers in surveillance, i.e., following curative surgical management. Patients were sampled in regular intervals before and within 3 years following curative surgery for GC; gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and nanosensor technologies were used for the VOC assessment. GC-MS measurements revealed a single VOC (14b-Pregnane) that significantly decreased at 12 months, and three VOCs (Isochiapin B, Dotriacontane, Threitol, 2-O-octyl-) that decreased at 18 months following surgery. The nanomaterial-based sensors S9 and S14 revealed changes in the breath VOC content 9 months after surgery. Our study results confirm the cancer origin of the particular VOCs, as well as suggest the value of breath VOC testing for cancer patient surveillance, either during the treatment phase or thereafter, for potential relapse.

Risk Factors for Fear of Recurrence in Head and Neck Cancer Patients.

OBJECTIVE: Fear of recurrence (FoR) affects the quality of life of head and neck cancer survivors. Identification of factors predisposing to FoR may help to recognize and treat patients at risk. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For this exploratory study, 101 disease-free head and neck cancer survivors completed a cross-sectional survey in 2017 that included the FoR questionnaire at a random point in time during their follow-up. Additionally, the patients were asked to choose their favorite among four follow-up schedules with or without systematic imaging and varying frequency of visits. RESULTS: Elevated FoR was present in 36.6% of patients. Females and patients ≤65 years showed significantly higher FoR overall scores than males (score difference 3.40; CI 0.49-6.32; p = 0.022) and patients >65 years (score difference 4.25; CI 1.58-6.92; p = 0.002). A history of cancer recurrence or second primary malignancy increased the relative risk (RR) for elevated FoR (RR 1.7; CI 1.01-2.86; p = 0.046). Tumor stage and treatment modality were not significantly associated with elevated FoR or FoR overall score. Higher FoR overall scores were recorded in patients who favored intensive follow-up plans (mean overall FoR score 18 vs. 15; SD 7.7; p = 0.076) and systematic imaging in follow-up (17 vs. 13, SD 7.1; p = 0.034). CONCLUSION: Fear of recurrence in head and neck cancer patients is associated with female sex, younger age, and history of a past recurrence or second primary malignancy. Due to its high prevalence, it should be addressed in clinical practice and future research. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 133:1630-1637, 2023.

Patients' acceptance of a shared cancer follow-up model of care between general practitioners and radiation oncologists: A population-based survey using the theoretical Framework of Acceptability.

INTRODUCTION: International and national guidelines highlight the need for general practitioner involvement during and after active cancer treatment and throughout long-term follow-up care. This paper aimed to evaluate patients' acceptance of radiation oncology shared follow-up care using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA). METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted at two cancer care centres in the Illawarra Shoalhaven region of Australia. A sample of patients scheduled for a radiation oncology follow-up consultation in 2021 were sent a 32-point self-complete paper-based survey. Data were analysed using descriptive, parametric and non-parametric statistical analysis. This paper followed the Checklist for Reporting of Survey Studies (CROSS). RESULTS: Of the 414 surveys returned (45% response rate), the acceptance for radiation oncology shared cancer follow-up care was high (80%). Patients treated with only radiotherapy were 1.7 times more likely to accept shared follow-up care than those treated with multiple modalities. Patients who preferred follow-up care for fewer than three years were 7.5 times more likely to accept shared care than those who preferred follow-up care for five years. Patients who travelled more than 20 minutes to their radiation oncologist or to the rural cancer centre were slightly more likely to accept shared care than those who travelled less than twenty minutes to the regional cancer centre. A high understanding of shared care (Intervention Coherence) and a positive feeling towards shared care (Affective Attitude) were significant predictive factors in accepting shared radiation oncology follow-up care. CONCLUSION: Health services need to ensure patient preferences are considered to provide patient-centred cancer follow-up care. Shared cancer follow-up care implementation should start with patients who prefer a shorter follow-up period and understand the benefits of shared care. However, patients' involvement needs to be considered alongside other clinical risk profiles and organisational factors. Future qualitative research using the TFA constructs is warranted to inform clinical practice change.

Social, Ethical and Treatment Related Problems Faced by Healthcare Workers in the Care of Head and Neck Cancer Patients: A Narrative Review from the Bioethics Consortium from India.

Head and neck cancer (HNC) presents a variety of ethical difficulties for an oncologist involved in screening, diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation that are challenging to address, especially for those professionals/people who are not trained in medical ethics. The bioethics department has spent the last ten years compiling information and rating the seriousness of numerous niche ethical concerns and their effects on healthcare professionals practising in India. Based on these findings, the current analysis makes an effort to outline the different challenges faced by oncologists when screening, diagnosing, treating, and rehabilitating people affected with HNC, particularly in a traditional nation like India. According to the authors, this is the first overview to address these issues from an Indian viewpoint, and it represents a small effort to document a crucial but unaddressed component of cancer treatment. It is hoped that these endeavours would aid in educating upcoming healthcare professionals on how to effectively handle the difficulties.

Response assessment of post-treatment head and neck cancers to determine further management using NI-RADS (Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System): a subgroup analysis of a randomized controlled trial.

Objective: Interpreting complex post-treatment changes in head and neck cancer (HNC) is challenging with further added perplexity due to variable interobserver interpretation and hence evolved the NI-RADS lexicon. We evaluated the accuracy of NI-RADS in predicting disease status on 1st post-treatment follow-up CECT in a homogenous cohort of those who received only chemoradiation. Methods: Retrospective analysis of imaging was done for LASHNC patients who received radical chemoradiation in an open-label, investigator-initiated, phase 3 randomized trial (2012-2018) randomly assigned to either radical radiotherapy with concurrent weekly cisplatin (CRT) or CRT with the same schedule plus weekly nimotuzumab (NCRT). 536 patients were accrued, and 74 patients who did not undergo PET/CECT after 8 weeks post-CRT were excluded. After assessing 462 patients for eligibility to allocate NI-RADS at primary and node sites, 435 cases fell in the Primary disease cohort and 412 cases in the Node disease cohort. We evaluated sensitivity, disease prevalence, the positive and negative predictive value of the NI-RADS lexicon, and accuracy, which were expressed as percentages. We also prepared flow charts to determine concordance with allocated NI-RADS category and established accuracy with which it can identify disease status. Results: Out of 435 primary disease cohort, 92%, 55%, 48%,70% were concordant and had 100%, 72%, 70%, 82% accuracy in NI-RADS1 (n=12), NI-RADS2 (n=261), NIRADS3 (n=105), and NI-RADS 4 (n=60) respectively. Out of 412 nodes disease cohort, 95%, 90%, 48%, 70%were concordant and had 92%, 97%, 90%, 67% accuracy in NI-RADS1 (n=57), NI-RADS2 (n=255), NI-RADS3 (n=105) and NI-RADS4 (n=60) respectively. % concordance of PET/CT and CECT across all primary and node disease cohorts revealed that PET/CT was 91% concordant in primary NI-RADS2 as compared to 55% concordance of CECT whereas concordance of CECT was better with 57% in primary NI-RADS3 cohort as compared to PET/CT concordance of 41%. Conclusion: The accuracy with which the NI-RADS lexicon performed in our study at node sites was better than that at the primary site. There is a great scope of research to understand if CECT performs better over clinical disease status in NI-RADS 3 and 4 categories. Further research should be carried out to understand if PET/CECT can be used for close interval follow-up in stage III/IV NI-RADS 2 cases.