The Sarcoma Assessment Measure (SAM): Preliminary Psychometric Validation of a Novel Patient-Reported Outcome Measure.

The Sarcoma Assessment Measure (SAM) was developed as a sarcoma-specific patient-reported outcome measure to be used in clinical practice. We have reported in detail how SAM has been developed in collaboration with patients and healthcare professionals. The aim of this paper is to report the preliminary validation of SAM. The 22-item SAM was administered alongside a validated quality of life questionnaire and measure of activities of daily living. Linear modelling was used to build a measure, which had predictive validity in comparison to more established outcome measures. Of the 762 patients who participated in the study, 44.1% identified as male, and participant age ranged from 13 to 82 years. Clinically, participants presented with a range of soft tissue (82.2%) and bone (21.8%) sarcomas. Our preliminary analysis indicates that SAM accounts for 35% of the global quality of life scale and 18% of the Toronto Extremity Salvage Scale (TESS); so psychometrically, it overlaps with quality of life and activities of daily living, but also measures distinct concerns. This demonstrates that this measure picks up issues that are important to patients with sarcoma that are not reflected in other measures. We have established the preliminary validity of SAM and believe it has utility as a patient-reported outcome measure both as a research tool and for assessing the impact of symptoms and dysfunction related to sarcoma as part of clinical care. Further validation using a larger and more clinically diverse sample is now needed.

The Impact of Specialist Care on Teenage and Young Adult Patient-Reported Outcomes in England: A BRIGHTLIGHT Study.

Purpose: In England, health care policy promotes specialized age-appropriate cancer services for teenagers and young adults (TYA), for those aged 13-24 years at diagnosis. Specialist Principal Treatment Centers (PTCs) provide enhanced age-specific care for TYA, although many still receive all or some of their care in adult or children's cancer services. Our aim was to determine the patient-reported outcomes associated with TYA-PTC based care. Methods: We conducted a multicenter cohort study, recruiting 1114 TYA aged 13-24 years at diagnosis. Data collection involved a bespoke survey at 6,12,18, 24, and 36 months after diagnosis. Confounder adjusted analyses of perceived social support, illness perception, anxiety and depression, and health status, compared patients receiving NO-TYA-PTC care with those receiving ALL-TYA-PTC and SOME-TYA-PTC care. Results: Eight hundred and thirty completed the first survey. There was no difference in perceived social support, anxiety, or depression between the three categories of care. Significantly higher illness perception was observed in the ALL-TYA-PTC and SOME-TYA-PTC group compared to the NO-TYA-PTC group, (adjusted difference in mean (ADM) score on Brief Illness Perception scale 2.28 (95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.48-4.09) and 2.93 [1.27-4.59], respectively, p = 0.002). Similarly, health status was significantly better in the NO-TYA-PTC (ALL-TYA-PTC: ADM -0.011 [95%CI -0.046 to 0.024] and SOME-TYA-PTC: -0.054 [-0.086 to -0.023]; p = 0.006). Conclusion: The reason for the difference in perceived health status is unclear. TYA who accessed a TYA-PTC (all or some care) had higher perceived illness. This may reflect greater education and promotion of self-care by health care professionals in TYA units.

Young people's opinions of cancer care in England: the BRIGHTLIGHT cohort.

OBJECTIVES: The BRIGHTLIGHT cohort study was the national evaluation of cancer services for teenager and young adults (TYA). This was analysis of free-text survey data to better understand their experiences of cancer care. DESIGN: Cohort study SETTING: National Health Service hospitals delivering cancer care in England PARTICIPANTS: 830 young people newly diagnosed with cancer. INTERVENTIONS: Exposure to specialist care in the first 6 months after diagnosis defined as care in a TYA Principal Treatment Centre (PTC). This was categorised as follows: all care in a TYA-PTC (ALL-TYA-PTC), no care in a TYA-PTC (NO-TYA-PTC) so care delivered in a children/adult unit only and some care in a TYA-PTC with additional care in a children's/adult unit (SOME-TYA-PTC). PRIMARY OUTCOME: Data were collected through the BRIGHTLIGHT survey included free-text questions which asked patients 'what was the best aspects of their experiences of care' and 'what aspects could be improved'. These comments were analysed using content analysis. Themes were compared between categories of care, then ranked in order of frequency, ranging from the most endorsed to the least. RESULTS: Overall, young people were most positive about their healthcare team, while the area highlighted for improvement was diagnostic experience. Differences between the three groups suggested those who had some or all treatment in a TYA-PTC valued the place of care. Regardless of where TYA were treated their healthcare teams were favourably viewed. Age appropriate place of care was highlighted to be of value for those in PTCs. CONCLUSIONS: These data show the value young people placed on the care they received in TYA specific wards. Young people who accessed some or all of their care in a TYA-PTC highly endorsed their place of care as one of the best elements of their care, and it is further emphasised by those who had shared care who experienced difficulty with lack of age-appropriate care when treated outside the TYA-PTC.

Patients' Experiences of a Sarcoma Diagnosis: A Process Mapping Exercise of Diagnostic Pathways.

Patients with sarcoma often report prolonged time to diagnosis, which is attributed to the rarity of sarcoma and the low awareness of pre-diagnostic signs and symptoms. AIMS: To describe patients' experiences of pre-diagnostic signs/symptoms and pathways to diagnosis, including where help was sought, and the processes involved. METHODS: Mixed methods involving quantitative, qualitative and inductive thematic analyses using novel process mapping of patient journey data, as reported by the patients. We examined the time from symptom onset to first professional presentation (patient interval, PI), first consultation to diagnostic biopsy, first consultation to diagnosis (diagnostic interval) and first presentation to diagnosis (total interval). RESULTS: A total of 87 interviews were conducted over 5 months in 2017. Of these, 78 (40 males/38 females) were included. The sarcoma subtypes were bone (n = 21), soft tissue (n = 41), head and neck (n = 9) and gastro-intestinal (GIST; n = 7). Age at diagnosis was 13-24 (n = 7), 25-39 (n = 23), 40-64 (n = 34) and 65+ (n = 14) years. The median PI was 13 days (1-4971) and similar between sarcoma subtypes, with the exception of GIST (mPI = 2 days, (1-60). The longest mPI (31 days, range 4-762) was for those aged 13-24 years. The median diagnostic interval was 87.5 (range 0-5474 days). A total of 21 patients were misdiagnosed prior to diagnosis and symptoms were commonly attributed to lifestyle factors. CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged times to diagnosis were experienced by the majority of patients in our sample. Further research into the evolution of pre-diagnostic sarcoma symptoms is required to inform awareness interventions.

A Qualitative Study of the Factors Influencing Patients' Experience of Soft Tissue Sarcoma in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of soft tissue sarcoma frequently involves extensive surgery, loss of mobility, and complex rehabilitation programs. Poorer patient-reported outcomes are reported in comparison to those from patients with other cancer types. Understanding patient experience is therefore important to support patients and improve care. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was an in-depth exploration of patients' experience of being diagnosed with soft tissue sarcoma. METHODS: Semistructured interviews and focus groups were conducted with 68 patients with soft tissue sarcoma (59% female; aged 23-82 years). These were analyzed using adapted framework analysis. RESULTS: Two overarching themes explained the factors influencing patients' experiences: individual and social factors to manage the impact of soft tissue sarcoma; and context and processes of care. Access to professionals with sarcoma expertise and services in specialist hospitals had an impact on patients' well-being. Lack of access to specialist services and coordinated care were associated with worse experiences. These were influenced by age and support from family/friends/other patients and were crucial in patients' adaptation to living with and beyond a sarcoma diagnosis. CONCLUSION: We describe factors that both negatively and positively influenced the experience of patients with soft tissue sarcoma. Access to specialist soft tissue sarcoma and rehabilitation services and support tailored to patients' age and disease trajectory are needed to improve these experiences. IMPLICATION FOR PRACTICE: Nurses are important for helping patients manage the long-term effects and directing them to supportive care services. Rehabilitation services need to be available and easily accessible.

Associations between diagnostic time intervals and health-related quality of life, clinical anxiety and depression in adolescents and young adults with cancer: cross-sectional analysis of the BRIGHTLIGHT cohort.

BACKGROUND: The association of diagnostic intervals and outcomes is poorly understood in adolescents and young adults with cancer (AYA). We investigated associations between diagnostic intervals and health-related quality of life (HRQoL), anxiety and depression in a large AYA cohort. METHODS: Participants aged 12-24 completed interviews post-diagnosis, providing data on diagnostic experiences and the patient-reported outcomes (PROs) HRQoL, anxiety and depression. Demographic and cancer information were obtained from clinical and national records. Six diagnostic intervals were considered. Relationships between intervals and PROs were examined using regression models. RESULTS: Eight hundred and thirty participants completed interviews. In adjusted models, across 28 of 30 associations, longer intervals were associated with poorer PROs. Patient intervals (symptom onset to first seeing a GP) of ≥1 month were associated with greater depression (adjusted odds ratio (aOR):1.7, 95% Confidence Interval (CI):1.1-2.5) compared to <1 month. ≥3 pre-referral GP consultations were associated with greater anxiety (aOR:1.6, CI:1.1-2.3) compared to 1-2 consultations. Symptom onset to first oncology appointment intervals of ≥2 months was associated with impaired HRQoL (aOR:1.8, CI:1.2-2.5) compared to <2 months. CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged diagnostic intervals in AYA are associated with an increased risk of impaired HRQoL, anxiety and depression. Identifying and delivering interventions for this high-risk group is a priority.

The BRIGHTLIGHT National Survey of the Impact of Specialist Teenage and Young Adult Cancer Care on Caregivers' Information and Support Needs.

BACKGROUND: Teenage and young adult cancer services in England are centralized in 13 principal treatment centers (TYA-PTC). These "specialist services" are designed to support caregivers as well as young people. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether caregivers of young people with cancer had fewer unmet information and support needs if they had all/some care in a TYA-PTC. METHODS: Participants in a cohort study of young people with cancer nominated their main carer to complete the BRIGHTLIGHT Carer Questionnaire, completed 6 months after diagnosis. Comparisons were made according to where young people's care was delivered: all, some, or no care in a TYA-PTC. Principal components analysis reduced the questionnaire to 5 dimensions, which were used as dependent variables in subsequent regression analysis. RESULTS: Four hundred seventy-six responses of 514 returned questionnaires (92%) were included in the analysis. The majority of caregivers were white, middle-aged, married/cohabiting mothers. Adjusted analysis indicated caregivers who had all/some care in a TYA-PTC had more satisfaction with support and also with services specifically provided for carers. Those who had some TYA-PTC care had greater satisfaction with information but less opportunity to be involved in decisions. CONCLUSIONS: Caregivers of young people who had no TYA-PTC care have the most unmet information and support needs. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Nurses outside of the TYA-PTC need to be supported by the TYA-PTC in providing information/support for caregivers. When a young person is receiving care in multiple hospitals, nurses need to optimize opportunities for caregivers to be involved in decision making.

SARC025 arms 1 and 2: A phase 1 study of the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor niraparib with temozolomide or irinotecan in patients with advanced Ewing sarcoma.

BACKGROUND: In preclinical Ewing sarcoma (ES) models, poly(adenosine diphosphate ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors were identified as a potential therapeutic strategy with synergy in combination with cytotoxic agents. This study evaluated the safety and dosing of the PARP1/2 inhibitor niraparib (NIR) with temozolomide (TMZ; arm 1) or irinotecan (IRN; arm 2) in patients with pretreated ES. METHODS: Eligible patients in arm 1 received continuous NIR daily and escalating TMZ (days 2-6 [D2-6]) in cohort A. Subsequent patients received intermittent NIR dosing (cohort B), with TMZ re-escalation in cohort C. In arm 2, patients were assigned to NIR (days 1-7 [D1-7]) and escalating doses of IRN (D2-6). RESULTS: From July 2014 to May 2018, 29 eligible patients (23 males and 6 females) were enrolled in arms 1 and 2, which had 7 dose levels combined. Five patients experienced at least 1 dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) in arm 1 (grade 4 [G4] neutropenia for >7 days or G4 thrombocytopenia), and 3 patients experienced at least 1 DLT in arm 2 (grade 3 [G3] colitis, G3 anorexia, or G3 alanine aminotransferase elevation). The maximum tolerated dose was NIR at 200 mg every day on D1-7 plus TMZ at 30 mg/m2 every day on D2-6 (arm 1) or NIR at 100 mg every day on D1-7 plus IRN at 20 mg/m2 every day on D2-6 (arm 2). One confirmed partial response was observed in arm 2; the median progression-free survival was 9.0 weeks (95% CI, 7.0-10.1 weeks) and 16.3 weeks (95% CI, 5.1-69.7 weeks) in arms 1 and 2, respectively. The median decrease in tumor poly(ADP-ribose) activity was 89% (range, 83%-98%). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of NIR and TMZ or IRN was tolerable, but at lower doses in comparison with conventional cytotoxic combinations. A triple-combination study of NIR, IRN, and TMZ has commenced.

BRIGHTLIGHT researchers as 'dramaturgs': creating There is a Light from complex research data.

BACKGROUND: BRIGHTLIGHT is a national evaluation of cancer services for young people aged 13-24 years in England. It is a mixed methods study with six interlinked studies aiming to answer the question: do specialist cancer services for teenagers and young adults add value? http://www.brightlightstudy.com/. Young people have been integral to study development and management, working as co-researchers, consultants and collaborators throughout. We aimed to share results in a way that was meaningful to young people, the public, and multidisciplinary professionals. This paper reports the development of 'There is a Light: BRIGHTLIGHT', a theatrical interpretation of study results by young people, and offers insight into the impact on the cast, researchers and audiences. METHODS: The BRIGHTLIGHT team collaborated with Contact Young Company, a youth theatre group in Manchester. Twenty members of Contact Young Company and four young people with cancer worked together over an eight-week period during which BRIGHTLIGHT results were shared along with explanations of cancer, healthcare policy and models of care in interactive workshops. Through their interpretation, the cast developed the script for the performance. The impact of the process and performance on the cast was evaluated through video diaries. The research team completed reflective diaries and audiences completed a survey. RESULTS: 'There is a Light' contained five acts and lasted just over an hour. It played 11 performances in six cities in the United Kingdom, to approximately 1377 people. After nine performances, a 30-min talk-back between members of the cast, creative team, an expert healthcare professional, and the audience was conducted, which was attended by at least half the audience. Analysis of cast diaries identified six themes: initial anxieties; personal development; connections; cancer in young people; personal impact; interacting with professionals. The cast developed strong trusting relationships with the team. Professionals stated they felt part of the process rather than sitting on the periphery sharing results. Both professional and lay audiences described the performance as meaningful and understandable. Feedback was particularly positive from those who had experienced cancer themselves. CONCLUSIONS: Using theatre to present research enabled BRIGHTLIGHT results to be accessible to a larger, more diverse audience.

Development of a patient-reported experience questionnaire for patients with sarcoma: the Sarcoma Assessment Measure (SAM).

PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to develop a patient-reported outcome measure for patients with sarcoma-the Sarcoma Assessment Measure (SAM). METHODS AND RESULTS: The systematic development of SAM included a three-stage, mixed-methods study using semi-structured interviews, focus groups and questionnaires, with all stages involving patients from across the United Kingdom. In-depth interviews were conducted with 121 patients (50% male; aged 13-82; with soft tissue sarcoma (62%), bone tumours (28%) and gastrointestinal stromal tumours (10%)). Content analysis of the interview transcripts identified 1415 post-diagnosis experience statements. Experience statements were reviewed, repetition was removed and sentences were refined to form 395 'items' which were included in an Item Reduction Questionnaire (IRQ) grouped as physical, emotional, social and financial wellbeing and sexuality. The IRQ was completed by 250 patients who rated each item on importance and worry. Items with a mean score above 5 (6 in the emotional domain) were removed, which reduced the list to 166 items. After review by the research team, 23 clinicians and 34 patients, 66 items were retained to test content validity. Items with a content validity ratio of < .33 were removed. Cognitive interviews were conducted with 10 patients on the final 22 items to test comprehension. Minor changes were made to four. CONCLUSION: SAM comprises of 22 items reflecting physical, emotional, social, financial wellbeing and sexuality. This systematic process of using patient experience to develop the content of SAM will ensure that it measures what is important to patients.