Harmonization of clinical practice guidelines for primary prevention and screening: actionable recommendations and resources for primary care.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) synthesize high-quality information to support evidence-based clinical practice. In primary care, numerous CPGs must be integrated to address the needs of patients with multiple risks and conditions. The BETTER program aims to improve prevention and screening for cancer and chronic disease in primary care by synthesizing CPGs into integrated, actionable recommendations. We describe the process used to harmonize high-quality cancer and chronic disease prevention and screening (CCDPS) CPGs to update the BETTER program. METHODS: A review of CPG databases, repositories, and grey literature was conducted to identify international and Canadian (national and provincial) CPGs for CCDPS in adults 40-69 years of age across 19 topic areas: cancers, cardiovascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, hepatitis C, obesity, osteoporosis, depression, and associated risk factors (i.e., diet, physical activity, alcohol, cannabis, drug, tobacco, and vaping/e-cigarette use). CPGs published in English between 2016 and 2021, applicable to adults, and containing CCDPS recommendations were included. Guideline quality was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II tool and a three-step process involving patients, health policy, content experts, primary care providers, and researchers was used to identify and synthesize recommendations. RESULTS: We identified 51 international and Canadian CPGs and 22 guidelines developed by provincial organizations that provided relevant CCDPS recommendations. Clinical recommendations were extracted and reviewed for inclusion using the following criteria: 1) pertinence to primary prevention and screening, 2) relevance to adults ages 40-69, and 3) applicability to diverse primary care settings. Recommendations were synthesized and integrated into the BETTER toolkit alongside resources to support shared decision-making and care paths for the BETTER program. CONCLUSIONS: Comprehensive care requires the ability to address a person's overall health. An approach to identify high-quality clinical guidance to comprehensively address CCDPS is described. The process used to synthesize and harmonize implementable clinical recommendations may be useful to others wanting to integrate evidence across broad content areas to provide comprehensive care. The BETTER toolkit provides resources that clearly and succinctly present a breadth of clinical evidence that providers can use to assist with implementing CCDPS guidance in primary care.

Perioperative Management of Paraneoplastic Necrotizing Myopathy in Thyroidectomy: A Case Report.

Perioperative management of patients with myopathies can be challenging due to the increased risk of malignant hyperthermia (MH) and anesthesia-induced rhabdomyolysis (AIR). However, currently, there is no evidence regarding the optimal anesthetic management for paraneoplastic necrotizing myopathy (PNM) (total intravenous anesthetic vs. volatile anesthetics). Here, I report a case where anesthesia was administered safely using volatile anesthetics. A 63-year-old female presented with PNM associated with papillary thyroid carcinoma, necessitating urgent thyroidectomy. The patient, previously diagnosed with anti-3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase (HMGCR) antibody-associated myopathy, exhibited progressive weakness and dysphagia, prompting suspicion of PNM. The patient's compromised respiratory status, attributed to tracheal compression by a large goiter, necessitated an urgent thyroidectomy. Anesthetic management considerations included the potential effect of HMGCR-M on respiratory muscles and the need for careful planning to mitigate postoperative complications. The patient underwent total thyroidectomy, left central compartment clearance, and tracheostomy. The surgery proceeded uneventfully, with meticulous monitoring and adjustment of anesthetic agents to maintain hemodynamic stability. Postoperatively, the patient recovered well, demonstrating complete resolution of neurological symptoms during a three-month follow-up. The case underscores the importance of recognizing paraneoplastic syndromes in the context of thyroid surgery and highlights potential challenges faced by anesthesiologists. Despite the lack of established safety data for anesthetic drugs in HMGCR-M necrotizing myopathy, the case demonstrates the successful use of sevoflurane and rocuronium.

Chronic disease prevention and screening outcomes for patients with and without financial difficulty: a secondary analysis of the BETTER WISE cluster randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Building on Existing Tools To improvE chronic disease pRevention and screening in primary care Wellness of cancer survIvorS and patiEnts (BETTER WISE) was designed to assess the effectiveness of a cancer and chronic disease prevention and screening (CCDPS) programme. Here, we compare outcomes in participants living with and without financial difficulty. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a cluster-randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Patients of 59 physicians from 13 clinics enrolled between September 2018 and August 2019. PARTICIPANTS: 596 of 1005 trial participants who responded to a financial difficulty screening question at enrolment. INTERVENTION: 1-hour CCDPS visit versus usual care. OUTCOME MEASURES: Eligibility for a possible 24 CCDPS actions was assessed at baseline and the primary outcome was the percentage of eligible items that were completed at 12-month follow-up. We also compared the change in response to the financial difficulty screening question between baseline and follow-up. RESULTS: 55 of 265 participants (20.7%) in the control group and 69 of 331 participants (20.8%) in the intervention group reported living with financial difficulty. The primary outcome was 29% (95% CI 26% to 33%) for intervention and 23% (95% CI 21% to 26%) for control participants without financial difficulty (p=0.01). Intervention and control participants with financial difficulty scored 28% (95% CI 24% to 32%) and 32% (95% CI 27% to 38%), respectively (p=0.14). In participants who responded to the financial difficulty question at both time points (n=302), there was a net decrease in the percentage of participants who reported financial difficulty between baseline (21%) and follow-up (12%, p<0.001) which was similar in the control and intervention groups. The response rate to this question was only 51% at follow-up. CONCLUSION: The BETTER intervention improved uptake of CCDPS manoeuvres in participants without financial difficulty, but not in those living with financial difficulty. Improving CCDPS for people living with financial difficulty may require a different clinical approach or that social determinants be addressed concurrently with clinical and lifestyle needs or both. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN21333761.

Results from the BETTER WISE trial: a pragmatic cluster two arm parallel randomized controlled trial for primary prevention and screening in primary care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Cancer and chronic diseases are a major cost to the healthcare system and multidisciplinary models with access to prevention and screening resources have demonstrated improvements in chronic disease management and prevention. Research demonstrated that a trained Prevention Practitioner (PP) in multidisciplinary team settings can improve achievement of patient level prevention and screening actions seven months after the intervention. METHODS: We tested the effectiveness of the PP intervention in a pragmatic two-arm cluster randomized controlled trial. Patients aged 40-65 were randomized at the physician level to an intervention group or to a wait-list control group. The intervention consisted of a patient visit with a PP. The PP received training in prevention and screening and use of the BETTER WISE tool kit. The effectiveness of the intervention was assessed using a composite outcome of the proportion of the eligible prevention and screening actions achieved between intervention and control groups at 12-months. RESULTS: Fifty-nine physicians were recruited in Alberta, Ontario, and Newfoundland and Labrador. Of the 1,005 patients enrolled, 733 (72.9%) completed the 12-month analysis. The COVID-19 pandemic occurred during the study time frame at which time nonessential prevention and screening services were not available and in-person visits with the PP were not allowed. Many patients and sites did not receive the intervention as planned. The mean composite score was not significantly higher in patients receiving the PP intervention as compared to the control group. To understand the impact of COVID on the project, we also considered a subset of patients who had received the intervention and who attended the 12-month follow-up visit before COVID-19. This assessment demonstrated the effectiveness of the BETTER visits, similar to the findings in previous BETTER studies. CONCLUSIONS: We did not observe an improvement in cancer and chronic disease prevention and screening (CCDPS) outcomes at 12 months after a BETTER WISE prevention visit: due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the study was not implemented as planned. Though benefits were described in those who received the intervention before COVID-19, the sample size was too small to make conclusions. This study may be a harbinger of a substantial decrease and delay in CCDPS activities under COVID restrictions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN21333761. Registered on 19/12/2016. http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN21333761 .

Facilitators and Barriers to the Implementation of BETTER WISE, a Chronic Disease and Prevention Intervention in Canada: A Qualitative Study.

The aim of the BETTER WISE intervention is to address cancer and chronic disease prevention and screening (CCDPS) and lifestyle risks in patients aged 40-65. The purpose of this qualitative study is to better understand facilitators and barriers to the implementation of the intervention. Patients were invited for a 1-h visit with a prevention practitioner (PP), a member of a primary care team, with specific skills in prevention, screening, and cancer survivorship. We collected and analyzed data from 48 key informant interviews and 17 focus groups conducted with 132 primary care providers and from 585 patient feedback forms. We analyzed all qualitative data using a constant comparative method informed by grounded theory and then employed the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) in a second round of coding. The following key elements were identified: (1) Intervention characteristics-relative advantage and adaptability; (2) Outer setting-PPs compensating for increased patient needs and decreased resources; (3) Characteristics of individuals-PPs (patients and physicians described PPs as compassionate, knowledgeable, and helpful); (4) Inner setting-network and communication (collaboration and support in teams or lack thereof); and (5) Process-executing the implementation (pandemic-related issues hindered execution, but PPs adapted to challenges). This study identified key elements that facilitated or hindered the implementation of BETTER WISE. Despite the interruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the BETTER WISE intervention continued, driven by the PPs and their strong relationships with their patients, other primary care providers, and the BETTER WISE team.

Adoption of Patient-Generated Health Data in Oncology: A Report From the NCCN EHR Oncology Advisory Group.

BACKGROUND: Collecting, monitoring, and responding to patient-generated health data (PGHD) are associated with improved quality of life and patient satisfaction, and possibly with improved patient survival in oncology. However, the current state of adoption, types of PGHD collected, and degree of integration into electronic health records (EHRs) is unknown. METHODS: The NCCN EHR Oncology Advisory Group formed a Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Workgroup to perform an assessment and provide recommendations for cancer centers, researchers, and EHR vendors to advance the collection and use of PGHD in oncology. The issues were evaluated via a survey of NCCN Member Institutions. Questions were designed to assess the current state of PGHD collection, including how, what, and where PGHD are collected. Additionally, detailed questions about governance and data integration into EHRs were asked. RESULTS: Of 28 Member Institutions surveyed, 23 responded. The collection and use of PGHD is widespread among NCCN Members Institutions (96%). Most centers (90%) embed at least some PGHD into the EHR, although challenges remain, as evidenced by 88% of respondents reporting the use of instruments not integrated. Forty-seven percent of respondents are leveraging PGHD for process automation and adherence to best evidence. Content type and integration touchpoints vary among the members, as well as governance maturity. CONCLUSIONS: The reported variability regarding PGHD suggests that it may not yet have reached its full potential for oncology care delivery. As the adoption of PGHD in oncology continues to expand, opportunities exist to enhance their utility. Among the recommendations for cancer centers is establishment of a governance process that includes patients. Researchers should consider determining which PGHD instruments confer the highest value. It is recommended that EHR vendors collaborate with cancer centers to develop solutions for the collection, interpretation, visualization, and use of PGHD.

NCCN Policy Summit: Defining, Measuring, and Applying Quality in an Evolving Health Policy Landscape and the Implications for Cancer Care.

Quality measurement is a critical component of advancing a health system that pays for performance over volume. Although there has been significant attention paid to quality measurement within health systems in recent years, significant challenges to meaningful measurement of quality care outcomes remain. Defining cost can be challenging, but is arguably not as elusive as quality, which lacks standard measurement methods and units. To identify industry standards and recommendations for the future, NCCN recently hosted the NCCN Oncology Policy Summit: Defining, Measuring, and Applying Quality in an Evolving Health Policy Landscape and the Implications for Cancer Care. Key stakeholders including physicians, payers, policymakers, patient advocates, and technology partners reviewed current quality measurement programs to identify success and challenges, including the Oncology Care Model. Speakers and panelists identified gaps in quality measurement and provided insights and suggestions for further advancing quality measurement in oncology. This article provides insights and recommendations; however, the goal of this program was to highlight key issues and not to obtain consensus.

Managing Cancer Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Agility and Collaboration Toward a Common Goal.

The first confirmed case of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the United States was reported on January 20, 2020, in Snohomish County, Washington. At the epicenter of COVID-19 in the United States, the Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, and University of Washington are at the forefront of delivering care to patients with cancer during this public health crisis. This Special Feature highlights the unique circumstances and challenges of cancer treatment amidst this global pandemic, and the importance of organizational structure, preparation, agility, and a shared vision for continuing to provide cancer treatment to patients in the face of uncertainty and rapid change.

A phase I trial of two sequence-specific schedules of decitabine and vorinostat in patients with acute myeloid leukemia.

This phase I trial evaluated two schedules of escalating vorinostat in combination with decitabine every 28 days: (i) sequential or (ii) concurrent. There were three dose-limiting toxicities: grade 3 fatigue and generalized muscle weakness on the sequential schedule (n = 1) and grade 3 fatigue on the concurrent schedule (n = 2). The maximum tolerated dose was not reached on both planned schedules. The overall response rate (ORR) was 23% (three complete response [CR], two CR with incomplete incomplete blood count recovery [CRi], one partial response [PR] and two morphological leukemic free state [MLFS]). The ORR for all and previously untreated patients in the sequential arm was 13% (one CRi; one MLFS) and 0% compared to 30% (three CR; one CRi; one PR; one MLFS) and 36% in the concurrent arm (p = 0.26 for both), respectively. Decitabine plus vorinostat was safe and has clinical activity in patients with previously untreated acute myeloid leukemia. Responses appear higher with the concurrent dose schedule. Cumulative toxicities may limit long-term usage on the current dose/schedules.

A randomized phase II study of cediranib alone versus cediranib in combination with dasatinib in docetaxel resistant, castration resistant prostate cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Activation of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) and the oncogenic Src pathway has been implicated in the development of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) in preclinical models. Cediranib and dasatinib are multi-kinase inhibitors targeting VEGFR and Src respectively. Phase II studies of cediranib and dasatinib in CRPC have shown single agent activity. METHODS: Docetaxel-pretreated CRPC patients were randomized to arm A: cediranib alone (20 mg/day) versus arm B: cediranib (20 mg/day) plus dasatinib (100 mg/day) given orally on 4-week cycles. Primary endpoint was 12-week progression-free survival (PFS) as per the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group (PCWG2). Patient reported outcomes were evaluated using Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) and Present Pain Intensity (PPI) scales. Correlative studies of bone turnover markers (BTM), including bone alkaline phosphate (BAP) and serum beta-C telopeptide (B-CTx) were serially assayed. Results A total of 22 patients, 11 per arm, were enrolled. Baseline demographics were similar in both arms. Median number of cycles =4 in arm A (range 1-12) and 2 in arm B (range 1-9). Twelve-week PFS was 73 % in arm A versus 18 % in arm B (p = 0.03). Median PFS in months (arm A versus B) was: 5.2 versus 2.6 (95 % CI: 1.9-6.5 versus 1.4-not reached). Most common grade 3 toxicities were hypertension, anemia and thrombocytopenia in arm A and hypertension, diarrhea and fatigue in arm B. One treatment-related death (retroperitoneal hemorrhage) was seen in arm A. FACT-P and PPI scores did not significantly change in either arm. No correlation between BTM and PFS was seen in either arm. CONCLUSIONS: Although limited by small numbers, this randomized study showed that the combination of VEGFR and Src targeted therapy did not result in improved efficacy and may be associated with a worse outcome than VEGFR targeted therapy alone in patients with CRPC. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01260688.

IPA-3 inhibits the growth of liver cancer cells by suppressing PAK1 and NF-κB activation.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the major malignancies worldwide and is associated with poor prognosis due to the high incidences of metastasis and tumor recurrence. Our previous study showed that overexpression of p21-activated protein kinase 1 (PAK1) is frequently observed in HCC and is associated with a more aggressive tumor behavior, suggesting that PAK1 is a potential therapeutic target in HCC. In the current study, an allosteric small molecule PAK1 inhibitor, IPA-3, was evaluated for the potential in suppressing hepatocarcinogenesis. Consistent with other reports, inhibition of PAK1 activity was observed in several human HCC cell lines treated with various dosages of IPA-3. Using cell proliferation, colony formation and BrdU incorporation assays, we demonstrated that IPA-3 treatment significantly inhibited the growth of HCC cells. The mechanisms through which IPA-3 treatment suppresses HCC cell growth are enhancement of apoptosis and blockage of activation of NF-κB. Furthermore, our data suggested that IPA-3 not only inhibits the HCC cell growth, but also suppresses the metastatic potential of HCC cells. Nude mouse xenograft assay demonstrated that IPA-3 treatment significantly reduced the tumor growth rate and decreased tumor volume, indicating that IPA-3 can suppress the in vivo tumor growth of HCC cells. Taken together, our demonstration of the potential preclinical efficacy of IPA-3 in HCC provides the rationale for cancer therapy.

Potential of fibroblast cell therapy for recessive dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa.

Recessive dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa (RDEB) is a severe inherited skin-blistering disorder caused by mutations in the COL7A1 gene that lead to reduced type-VII collagen and defective anchoring fibrils at the dermal-epidermal junction (DEJ). Presently there are no effective treatments for this disorder. Recent mouse studies have shown that intradermal injections of normal human fibroblasts can generate new human type-VII collagen and anchoring fibrils at the DEJ. To assess potential clinical benefits in humans, we gave single intradermal injections of allogeneic fibroblasts to five subjects with RDEB. We noted increased type-VII collagen at the DEJ at 2 weeks and at 3 months following injection and increased anchoring fibrils, although none of these had normal morphology. No adverse effects, clinical or immunopathologic, were noted. We believe the major effect of allogeneic fibroblasts is to increase the recipients' own COL7A1 mRNA levels with greater deposition of mutant type-VII collagen at the DEJ and formation of additional rudimentary anchoring fibrils. Nevertheless, this mutant protein may be partially functional and capable of increasing adhesion at the DEJ. This is the first study demonstrating that intradermal injections of allogeneic fibroblasts have therapeutic potential in human subjects with RDEB.

Patients with recessive dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa develop squamous-cell carcinoma regardless of type VII collagen expression.

Recent data suggest that individuals with recessive dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa (RDEB) only develop squamous-cell carcinoma (SCC) in the presence of the NC1 domain of type VII collagen. This conclusion was based on experimental work in which cryosections of SCCs from 10 people with RDEB all showed positive type VII collagen immunostaining and observations in a murine model of SCC development in which tumors only occurred using keratinocytes from RDEB subjects that expressed detectable levels of the NC1 domain of the type VII collagen protein. To assess whether the clinical interpretation was valid in another cohort of RDEB patients, we examined expression of type VII collagen in 17 SCC tumors excised from 11 patients. Indirect immunofluorescent staining of SCC cryosections and Western blotting of cultured keratinocyte lysates identified two RDEB individuals who did not express detectable levels of type VII collagen. Mutation analysis revealed that these two patients harbor compound heterozygous nonsense mutations within the region of the COL7A1 gene encoding the NC1 domain. These data suggest that individuals with RDEB can develop SCC regardless of type VII collagen expression and that additional factors have a role in explaining the high incidence of tumors complicating this genodermatosis.

Therapeutic potential of antisense oligodeoxynucleotides to down-regulate thymidylate synthase in mesothelioma.

Malignant mesothelioma is an aggressive tumor of the serosal surfaces of the lungs, heart, and abdomen. Survival rates are poor and effective treatments are not available. However, recent therapeutic regimens targeting thymidylate synthase (TS) in malignant mesothelioma patients have shown promise. We have reported the use of an antisense oligodeoxynucleotide targeting TS mRNA (antisense TS ODN 83) to inhibit growth of human tumor cells. To test the potential for antisense targeting of TS mRNA in treatment of malignant mesothelioma, we assessed and compared the effects of antisense TS ODN 83 on three human malignant mesothelioma cell lines (211H, H2052, and H28) and human nonmalignant mesothelioma cells (HT29 colorectal adenocarcinoma, HeLa cervical carcinoma, and MCF7 breast tumor cell lines). We report that ODN 83 applied as a single agent effectively reduced TS mRNA and protein in malignant mesothelioma cell lines. Furthermore, it inhibited malignant mesothelioma growth significantly more effectively than it inhibited growth of nonmalignant mesothelioma human tumor cell lines: a difference in susceptibility was not observed in response to treatment with TS protein-targeting drugs. In malignant mesothelioma cells, antisense TS both induced apoptotic cell death and reduced proliferation. In nonmalignant mesothelioma cells, only reduced proliferation was observed. Thus, antisense TS-mediated induction of apoptosis may be the basis for the high malignant mesothelioma sensitivity to antisense targeting of TS. Further preclinical and clinical study of TS antisense oligodeoxynucleotides, alone and in combination with TS-targeting chemotherapy drugs, in mesothelioma is warranted.