Nurse navigation, symptom monitoring and exercise in vulnerable patients with lung cancer: feasibility of the NAVIGATE intervention.

We developed the Navigate intervention to improve survival among vulnerable lung cancer patients. In this intervention-only study, we examined feasibility in terms of recruitment, retention, attendance, adherence, and acceptability to specify adjustments to study procedures and intervention components prior to a randomized trial. The Navigate intervention includes nurse navigation, patient-reported outcomes, and physical exercise. Patients ≥ 18 years old, diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer at any stage, with performance status ≤ 2, eligible for cancer treatment and vulnerable according to a screening instrument were included. The recruitment goal of eligible patients was 40% while the retention goal was 85%. The predefined cut-offs for sufficient attendance and adherence were ≥ 75%. Acceptability was evaluated by semi-structured interviews with participants, nurse navigators, and physiotherapists. Seventeen (56%) out of 30 screened patients were considered vulnerable and eligible for the study, 14 (82%) accepted participation, and 3 (21%) were subsequently excluded due to ineligibility, leaving 11 patients. Four patients dropped out (36%) and four patients died (36%) during follow-up and 3 (27%) were retained. All 11 patients participated in nurse sessions (mean 16, range 1-36) with 88% attendance and dialogue tools being applied in 68% of sessions. Ninety-one percent of patients responded to PROs (mean of 9 PROs, range 1-24) with 76% of the PRO questionnaires used (attendance) and 100% adherence (completion of all questions in PRO questionnaires), and 55% participated in exercise sessions with 58% attendance and 85% adherence. We identified important barriers primarily related to transportation, but overall acceptability was high. The Navigate intervention was feasible with high participation, acceptability and satisfactory adherence. Retention and exercise attendance were low, which resulted in adjustments.Trial registration: The feasibility study was initiated prior to the multicenter randomized controlled trial registered by ClinicalTrials.gov (number: NCT05053997; date 23/09/2021).

Who are the vulnerable lung cancer patients at risk for not receiving first-line curative or palliative treatment?

BACKGROUND: To identify non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients in need of comprehensive support, we examined the association between patient and disease-related factors of vulnerability related to not receiving guideline-recommended treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We identified 14,597 non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with performance status <3 during 2013-2018 in the Danish Lung Cancer Registry. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to estimate Odds Ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for receiving guideline-recommended treatment according to stage, comorbidities, age, performance status, long distance to hospital, cohabitation status, education and alcohol abuse. RESULTS: 21% of stage I-IIIA NSCLC patients did not receive curative treatment while 10% with stage IIIB-IV did not receive any oncological therapy. Factors associated with reduced likelihood of receiving curative treatment included: advanced stage (OR = 0.45; 95% CI = 0.42-0.49), somatic comorbidity (OR = 0.72; 95% CI = 0.63-0.83), age ≥ 80 years (OR = 0.59; 95% CI = 0.55-0.64), performance status = 2 (OR = 0.33; 95% CI = 0.28-0.39) and living alone (OR = 0.79; 95% CI = 0.69-0.90). Results were similar for stage IIIB-IV NSCLC patients, although a statistically significant association was also seen for long distances to the hospital (OR = 0.71; 95% CI = 0.58-0.86). CONCLUSIONS: Several factors are associated with not receiving guideline-recommended NSCLC treatment with age, performance status, comorbidity and stage being most predictive of no treatment receipt. Efforts should be made to develop support for vulnerable lung cancer patients to improve adherence to optimal first-line therapy.

NAVIGATE: improving survival in vulnerable patients with lung cancer through nurse navigation, symptom monitoring and exercise - study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION AND AIM: Low socioeconomic position (SEP) has been shown to be strongly associated with impaired lung cancer survival. Barriers related to receiving recommended treatment among patients with lung cancer with low SEP may include adverse health behaviour and limited physical and psychosocial resources influencing the ability to react on high-risk symptoms and to navigate the healthcare system. To address the underlying factors that drive both decisions of treatment, adherence to treatment and follow-up in vulnerable patients with lung cancer, we developed the Navigate intervention. The aim of this randomised controlled trial is to investigate the effect of the intervention on survival (primary outcome), lung cancer treatment adherence, health-related quality of life and other psychosocial outcomes as well as health costs and process evaluation (secondary outcomes) in a study population of vulnerable patients with lung cancer. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This two-armed multicentre randomised trial will recruit patients from five lung cancer clinics in Denmark identified as vulnerable according to a screening instrument with nine clinical and patient-reported vulnerability criteria developed for the study. We will enrol 518 vulnerable patients >18 years old diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer at all stages with a performance status <2. Participants will be randomly allocated to either standard treatment and intervention or standard treatment alone. The Navigate intervention is based on principles from motivational interviewing and includes three components of nurse navigation, systematic monitoring of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and physical exercise in a person-centred delivery model. Data will be collected at baseline and 3, 6, 12 months after randomisation using questionnaires, clinical data and physical function tests. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics Committee, Region Zealand (SJ-884/EMN-2020-37380) and the Data Protection Agency in Region Zealand (REG-080-2021) approved the trial. Participants will provide written informed consent. Results will be reported in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05053997.

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.

Is the health literacy of informal caregivers associated with the psychological outcomes of breast cancer survivors?

PURPOSE: To investigate whether health literacy (HL) among informal caregivers of breast cancer (BC) survivors is associated with patient psychological outcomes. METHODS: We used data (n = 340 pairs) from baseline questionnaires administered in the MyHealth trial investigating nurse-led BC follow-up. All BC survivors and their invited caregivers were included immediately after completion of primary treatment. We performed multivariate regression analyses to examine the association between caregiver HL (nine dimensions as measured by the Health Literacy Questionnaire) as exposure and patient depression, anxiety, and health-related quality of life (HQoL) as outcomes. We further examined whether any association differed according to type of caregiver, patient HL, and patient activation (skill in managing one's health). RESULTS: Three dimensions, "ability to engage with providers" (ß = - 0.2), "navigating the system" (ß = - 0.2), and "understand health information" (ß = - 0.2), were significantly associated with lower patient depression (p < 0.05), while four dimensions, "having sufficient information" (ß = 0.3), "navigating the system" (ß = 0.2), "find health information" (ß = 0.2), and "understand health information" (ß = 0.2), were significantly associated with better patient HQoL (p < 0.05). No significant associations were found for anxiety. Patient HL and activation did not significantly modify the associations, while certain associations for depression were stronger in patients with non-partner caregivers. CONCLUSIONS: The HL of informal caregivers may play an important role in optimizing psychological outcomes in cancer survivors. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Involving informal caregivers, who can provide support related to health information and services, may be beneficial for the psychological well-being of cancer survivors.

Whose perspective is it anyway? Dilemmas of patient involvement in the development of a randomized clinical trial - a qualitative study.

Background: Patient and public involvement (PPI) is increasingly becoming a requirement in the effort to improve the relevance and quality of healthcare research. We examined how involving patients with lower education levels affected PPI in the development of the MyHealth randomized clinical trial of breast cancer follow-up from the perspectives of the patients and professionals. Material and methods: Eight women who had completed breast cancer treatment, four with fewer than 10 years of education, were recruited as members of a patient panel advising researchers in the development of the trial. We carried out individual and focus group interviews with panel members and recruiting nurses between April and September 2016. Researcher observations and changes made based on panel feedback were also documented. Patients were asked to evaluate the process according to a PPI theoretical framework with four dimensions: (i) ways of involvement, (ii) research vs. patient concerns, (iii) strength of the patient's voice, and (iv) degree of change. A combination of inductive and deductive thematic analysis was conducted whereby emerging themes were organized using the above framework. Results: All patient contributors reported high satisfaction with being involved and PPI improved trial materials and recruitment strategy. However, contradictory perspectives between lay and expert approaches to research led to dilemmas not related to educational background. Patients were often more concerned with unmet needs after cancer than with research, and the scientific hierarchy made it difficult for researchers to include the patient perspective if it challenged research requirements. Nurses also faced ethical dilemmas when recruiting patients as PPI contributors. Conclusions: Our findings challenged the assumption that PPI automatically leads to a broad range of patient perspectives that can directly improve research relevance and quality. This highlights the need for more research and better guidance on the use of PPI in research.

Mindfulness significantly reduces self-reported levels of anxiety and depression: results of a randomised controlled trial among 336 Danish women treated for stage I-III breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: As the incidence of and survival from breast cancer continue to raise, interventions to reduce anxiety and depression before, during and after treatment are needed. Previous studies have reported positive effects of a structured 8-week group mindfulness-based stress reduction program (MBSR) among patients with cancer and other conditions. PURPOSE: To test the effect of such a programme on anxiety and depression among women with breast cancer in a population-based randomised controlled study. METHODS: A total of 336 women who had been operated on for breast cancer (stage I-III) were randomised to usual care or MBSR+usual care. Questionnaires including the Symptom Checklist-90r anxiety and depression subscales and the Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression scale were administered before randomisation and immediately, 6 and 12 months after the intervention. RESULTS: Intention-to-treat analyses showed differences between groups in levels of anxiety (p=0.0002) and depression (SCL-90r, p<0.0001; CES-D, p=0.0367) after 12 months. Graphical comparisons of participants with higher levels of anxiety and depression at baseline showed a significantly greater decrease in the intervention group throughout follow-up and no differences among least affected participants. Medium-to-large effects were found for all outcomes in the intervention group in analyses of change scores after 12 months' follow-up. CONCLUSION: The 8-week group based MBSR intervention had clinically meaningful, statistically significant effects on depression and anxiety after 12 months' follow-up, and medium-to-large effect sizes. Our findings support the dissemination of MBSR among women with breast cancer. (Clintrials.gov No.: NCT00990977).