Gender inequalities across ethnicities in primary care cancer referrals: scoping review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Early cancer diagnosis is associated with improved mortality and morbidity; however, studies indicate that women and individuals from ethnic minorities experience longer times to diagnosis and worse prognosis compared to their counterparts for various cancers. In countries with a gatekeeper healthcare system, such as UK, most suspected cancer referrals are initiated in primary care. AIM: To understand the extent of evidence available on the relationship between primary care cancer referral pathways and cancer outcomes in relation to gender across different ethnic groups. This will identify research gaps and enable development of strategies to ease potential inequalities in cancer diagnosis. DESIGN & SETTING: A scoping review based on the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. PRISMA-ScR will be used. METHOD: Electronic databases and private collections of the team members will be searched for studies. Two independent reviewers will carry out the study selection and data extraction. Based on participants, concept and context framework, this review will consider studies after year 2000 that explored the relationship between gender, across various ethnic groups, and cancer outcomes following primary care cancer referral in countries with gatekeeper healthcare systems (UK, New Zealand, Sweden, Australia, Canada, Denmark, Ireland and Norway). Results will be presented as a narrative analysis. CONCLUSION: The results are expected to provide an overview of the discrepancies in primary care cancer referrals based on gender across ethnic groups, which will be crucial to define an appropriate range of strategies to ease any inequalities in primary healthcare cancer diagnosis. OPEN SCIENCE FRAMEWORK PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/jvtxb.

Cardiovascular health assessment in routine cancer follow-up in community settings: survivor risk awareness and perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend cardiovascular risk assessment and counseling for cancer survivors. For effective implementation, it is critical to understand survivor cardiovascular health (CVH) profiles and perspectives in community settings. We aimed to (1) Assess survivor CVH profiles, (2) compare self-reported and EHR-based categorization of CVH factors, and (3) describe perceptions regarding addressing CVH during oncology encounters. METHODS: This cross-sectional analysis utilized data from an ongoing NCI Community Oncology Research Program trial of an EHR heart health tool for cancer survivors (WF-1804CD). Survivors presenting for routine care after potentially curative treatment recruited from 8 oncology practices completed a pre-visit survey, including American Heart Association Simple 7 CVH factors (classified as ideal, intermediate, or poor). Medical record abstraction ascertained CVD risk factors and cancer characteristics. Likert-type questions assessed desired discussion during oncology care. RESULTS: Of 502 enrolled survivors (95.6% female; mean time since diagnosis = 4.2 years), most had breast cancer (79.7%). Many survivors had common cardiovascular comorbidities, including high cholesterol (48.3%), hypertension or high BP (47.8%) obesity (33.1%), and diabetes (20.5%); 30.5% of survivors received high cardiotoxicity potential cancer treatment. Less than half had ideal/non-missing levels for physical activity (48.0%), BMI (18.9%), cholesterol (17.9%), blood pressure (14.1%), healthy diet (11.0%), and glucose/ HbA1c (6.0%). While > 50% of survivors had concordant EHR-self-report categorization for smoking, BMI, and blood pressure; cholesterol, glucose, and A1C were unknown by survivors and/or missing in the EHR for most. Most survivors agreed oncology providers should talk about heart health (78.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Tools to promote CVH discussion can fill gaps in CVH knowledge and are likely to be well-received by survivors in community settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03935282, Registered 10/01/2020.

The role of funded partnerships in working towards decreasing COVID-19 vaccination disparities, United States, March 2021-December 2022.

During the COVID-19 vaccination rollout from March 2021- December 2022, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention funded 110 primary and 1051 subrecipient partners at the national, state, local, and community-based level to improve COVID-19 vaccination access, confidence, demand, delivery, and equity in the United States. The partners implemented evidence-based strategies among racial and ethnic minority populations, rural populations, older adults, people with disabilities, people with chronic illness, people experiencing homelessness, and other groups disproportionately impacted by COVID-19. CDC also expanded existing partnerships with healthcare professional societies and other core public health partners, as well as developed innovative partnerships with organizations new to vaccination, including museums and libraries. Partners brought COVID-19 vaccine education into farm fields, local fairs, churches, community centers, barber and beauty shops, and, when possible, partnered with local healthcare providers to administer COVID-19 vaccines. Inclusive, hyper-localized outreach through partnerships with community-based organizations, faith-based organizations, vaccination providers, and local health departments was critical to increasing COVID-19 vaccine access and building a broad network of trusted messengers that promoted vaccine confidence. Data from monthly and quarterly REDCap reports and monthly partner calls showed that through these partnerships, more than 295,000 community-level spokespersons were trained as trusted messengers and more than 2.1 million COVID-19 vaccinations were administered at new or existing vaccination sites. More than 535,035 healthcare personnel were reached through outreach strategies. Quality improvement interventions were implemented in healthcare systems, long-term care settings, and community health centers resulting in changes to the clinical workflow to incorporate COVID-19 vaccine assessments, recommendations, and administration or referrals into routine office visits. Funded partners' activities improved COVID-19 vaccine access and addressed community concerns among racial and ethnic minority groups, as well as among people with barriers to vaccination due to chronic illness or disability, older age, lower income, or other factors.

What does competently delivered neuropsychological assessment feedback look like? Development and validation of a competency evaluation tool.

Objective: Neuropsychological assessment (NP) feedback helps patients and caregivers understand assessment results to maximise their utility and impact in everyday life. Yet feedback practices are inconsistent and there are no evidence-based guidelines for how feedback should be most effectively delivered. The aim of our study was to develop a psychometrically sound feedback competency checklist, the Psychology Competency Assessment Tool - Feedback (PsyCET-F), for use in research, training, and clinical settings. Method: The Delphi method of expert consensus was used to establish checklist items that clearly described competencies important for NP feedback. To examine the inter-rater reliability of the checklist, two experienced neuropsychologists rated the competencies demonstrated by trainee neuropsychologists across four feedback sessions. Results: After two Delphi rounds, consensus was reached on the 20-item checklist. Consensus was defined as at least 80% agreement amongst the panel of 20 experts. Four item categories resulted from the Delphi: (a) Opening the Session; (b) Applying Specific Feedback Techniques; (c) Engagement, Collaboration, and Alliance; and (d) Structuring and Ending the Session. Inter-rater reliability was moderate (κW = 0.79, p <.001, 80.52% agreement) when using a simple coding system, coded as Beginner, Intermediate, Competent, and Skilful; and strong (κW = 0.82, p <.001) when competency level was coded using an 8-point, detailed coding method. Conclusions: The PsyCET-F is psychometrically sound and fit-for-purpose for measuring competencies in giving NP feedback. It can be used in the training of clinicians to develop effective feedback skills. International benchmarking and usability testing will be conducted in a future study.

Interviews with Indigenous Maori with type 1 diabetes using open-source automated insulin delivery in the CREATE randomised trial.

Purpose: Open-source automated insulin delivery (AID) is used by thousands of people with type 1 diabetes (T1D), but has unknown generalisability to marginalised ethnic groups. This study explored experiences of Indigenous Maori participants in the CREATE trial with use of an open-source AID system to identify enablers/barriers to health equity. Methods: The CREATE randomised trial compared open-source AID (OpenAPS algorithm on an Android phone with a Bluetooth-connected pump) to sensor-augmented pump therapy. Kaupapa Maori Research methodology was used in this sub-study. Ten semi-structured interviews with Maori participants (5 children, 5 adults) and whanau (extended family) were completed. Interviews were recorded and transcribed, and data were analysed thematically. NVivo was used for descriptive and pattern coding. Results: Enablers/barriers to equity aligned with four themes: access (to diabetes technologies), training/support, operation (of open-source AID), and outcomes. Participants described a sense of empowerment, and improved quality of life, wellbeing, and glycaemia. Parents felt reassured by the system's ability to control glucose, and children were granted greater independence. Participants were able to use the open-source AID system with ease to suit whanau needs, and technical problems were manageable with healthcare professional support. All participants identified structures in the health system precluding equitable utilisation of diabetes technologies for Maori. Conclusion: Maori experienced open-source AID positively, and aspired to use this therapy; however, structural and socio-economic barriers to equity were identified. This research proposes strength-based solutions which should be considered in the redesign of diabetes services to improve health outcomes for Maori with T1D.Trial Registration: The CREATE trial, encompassing this qualitative sub-study, was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12620000034932p) on the 20th January 2020. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40200-023-01215-3.

Tobacco use and cancer-related symptom burden: Analysis of the US Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the relationship between tobacco use and symptom burden may inform tobacco treatment interventions tailored to the needs of individuals with cancer. METHODS: The study included 1409 adult cancer survivors from Wave 5 of the US Food and Drug Administration Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study. A multivariate analysis of variance controlling for age, sex, and race/ethnicity assessed the association of cigarette smoking and vaping on cancer-related symptom burden (fatigue, pain, emotional problems) and quality of life (QoL). Generalized linear mixed models controlling for the same factors were used to assess associations among symptom burden, QoL, and quit-smoking intentions, quit-smoking likelihood, and past 12-month smoking quit attempts. RESULTS: Weighted rates of current cigarette smoking and vaping were 14.21% and 2.88%, respectively. Current smoking was associated with greater fatigue (p < .0001; partial η 2  = .02), pain (p < .0001; partial η 2  = .08), emotional problems (p < .0001; partial η 2  = .02), and worse QoL (p < .0001; partial η 2  = .08). Current vaping was associated with greater fatigue (p = .001; partial η 2  = .008), pain (p = .009; partial η 2  = .005), and emotional problems (p = .04; partial η 2  = .003), but not worse QoL (p = .17). Higher cancer symptom burden was not associated with reduced interest in quitting, likelihood of quitting, or odds of past year quit attempts (p > .05 for each). CONCLUSIONS: Among adults with cancer, current smoking and vaping were associated with greater symptom burden. Survivors' interest in and intentions to quit smoking were not related to symptom burden. Future research should examine the role of tobacco cessation in improving symptom burden and QoL.

The Gap in Insurance Liability for Blood and Research Gamma Irradiators.

ABSTRACT: In 2019, a federal contractor accidently breached a 2,900 Ci 137 Cs sealed source while decommissioning it from a University of Washington research building, releasing a single digit curie of its contents. This event contaminated 13 people as well as all seven floors of the research building, which housed the radiation source. Estimates for clean-up costs and lost revenue exceeded $150 million. The magnitude of this cost prompted licensees in possession of such radioactive sources to question whether their insurance coverage is adequate to cover a large-scale incident and if coverage for such exposure even exists. In this article, we identify potential gaps in commercially available insurance policies by evaluating and assessing associated risks, damages, and accountability. While insurance can mitigate the expense associated with remediation, it is unlikely that sufficient limits would exist to fully protect healthcare institutions from direct financial liability in the event that their radioactive sources are implicated in a nuclear, chemical, biological, or radiological (NCBR) (sometimes called CBRN in other literature) mass contamination event. This paper seeks to outline how the risks and liability to healthcare institutions having such gamma irradiators can be reduced significantly by removing them rather than seeking to insure against the cost of remediation in the event of a leak and/or mass contamination. As such, licensees are encouraged to check their policies for the correct coverage and make sure any coverage restriction is removed from their policies. In addition, licensees are also encouraged to explore financial incentives offered by the US government programs to not only dispose of their present gamma irradiator sources at no cost but also to provide financial support to replace them with alternative technologies.

Revising the Suspected-Cancer Guidelines: Impacts on Patients' Primary Care Contacts and Costs.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to explore the impact of revising suspected-cancer referral guidelines on primary care contacts and costs. METHODS: Participants had incident cancer (colorectal, n = 2000; ovary, n = 763; and pancreas, n = 597) codes in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink or England cancer registry. Difference-in-differences analyses explored guideline impacts on contact days and nonzero costs between the first cancer feature and diagnosis. Participants were controls ("old National Institute for Health and Care Excellence [NICE]") or "new NICE" if their index feature was introduced during guideline revision. Model assumptions were inspected visually and by falsification tests. Sensitivity analyses reclassified participants who subsequently presented with features in the original guidelines as "old NICE." For colorectal cancer, sensitivity analysis (n = 3481) adjusted for multimorbidity burden. RESULTS: Median contact days and costs were, respectively, 4 (interquartile range [IQR] 2-7) and £117.69 (IQR £53.23-£206.65) for colorectal, 5 (IQR 3-9) and £156.92 (IQR £78.46-£272.29) for ovary, and 7 (IQR 4-13) and £230.64 (IQR £120.78-£408.34) for pancreas. Revising ovary guidelines may have decreased contact days (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0.74; 95% confidence interval 0.55-1.00; P = .05) with unchanged costs, but parallel trends assumptions were violated. Costs decreased by 13% (equivalent to -£28.05, -£50.43 to -£5.67) after colorectal guidance revision but only in sensitivity analyses adjusting for multimorbidity. Contact days and costs remained unchanged after pancreas guidance revision. CONCLUSIONS: The main analyses of symptomatic patients suggested that prediagnosis primary care costs remained unchanged after guidance revision for pancreatic cancer. For colorectal cancer, contact days and costs decreased in analyses adjusting for multimorbidity. Revising ovarian cancer guidelines may have decreased primary care contact days but not costs, suggesting increased resource-use intensity; nevertheless, there is evidence of confounding.

Assessing Ethnic Inequalities in Diagnostic Interval of Common Cancers: A Population-Based UK Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: This study investigated ethnic differences in diagnostic interval (DI)-the period between initial primary care presentation and diagnosis. METHODS: We analysed the primary care-linked data of patients who reported features of seven cancers (breast, lung, prostate, colorectal, oesophagogastric, myeloma, and ovarian) one year before diagnosis. Accelerated failure time (AFT) models investigated the association between DI and ethnicity, adjusting for age, sex, deprivation, and morbidity. RESULTS: Of 126,627 eligible participants, 92.1% were White, 1.99% Black, 1.71% Asian, 1.83% Mixed, and 2.36% were of Other ethnic backgrounds. Considering all cancer sites combined, the median (interquartile range) DI was 55 (20-175) days, longest in lung [127, (42-265) days], and shortest in breast cancer [13 (13, 8-18) days]. DI for the Black and Asian groups was 10% (AFT ratio, 95%CI 1.10, 1.05-1.14) and 16% (1.16, 1.10-1.22), respectively, longer than for the White group. Site-specific analyses revealed evidence of longer DI in Asian and Black patients with prostate, colorectal, and oesophagogastric cancer, plus Black patients with breast cancer and myeloma, and the Mixed group with lung cancer compared with White patients. DI was shorter for the Other group with lung, prostate, myeloma, and oesophagogastric cancer than the White group. CONCLUSION: We found limited and inconsistent evidence of ethnic differences in DI among patients who reported cancer features in primary care before diagnosis. Our findings suggest that inequalities in diagnostic intervals, where present, are unlikely to be the sole explanation for ethnic variations in cancer outcomes.

Ethnic inequalities in routes to diagnosis of cancer: a population-based UK cohort study.

BACKGROUND: UK Asian and Black ethnic groups have poorer outcomes for some cancers and are less likely to report a positive care experience than their White counterparts. This study investigated ethnic differences in the route to diagnosis (RTD) to identify areas in patients' cancer journeys where inequalities lie, and targeted intervention might have optimum impact. METHODS: We analysed data of 243,825 patients with 10 cancers (2006-2016) from the RTD project linked to primary care data. Crude and adjusted proportions of patients diagnosed via six routes (emergency, elective GP referral, two-week wait (2WW), screen-detected, hospital, and Other routes) were calculated by ethnicity. Adjusted odds ratios (including two-way interactions between cancer and age, sex, IMD, and ethnicity) determined cancer-specific differences in RTD by ethnicity. RESULTS: Across the 10 cancers studied, most patients were diagnosed via 2WW (36.4%), elective GP referral (23.2%), emergency (18.2%), hospital routes (10.3%), and screening (8.61%). Patients of Other ethnic group had the highest proportion of diagnosis via the emergency route, followed by White patients. Asian and Black group were more likely to be GP-referred, with the Black and Mixed groups also more likely to follow the 2WW route. However, there were notable cancer-specific differences in the RTD by ethnicity. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that, where inequalities exist, the adverse cancer outcomes among Asian and Black patients are unlikely to be arising solely from a poorer diagnostic process.

Utilisation, access and recommendations regarding technologies for people living with type 1 diabetes: consensus statement of the ADS/ADEA/APEG/ADIPS Working Group.

INTRODUCTION: Type 1 diabetes presents significant challenges for optimal management. Despite intensive glycaemic control being the standard of care for several decades, glycaemic targets are infrequently achieved and the burden of complications remains high. Therefore, the advancement of diabetes management technologies has a major role in reducing the clinical and economic impact of the disease on people living with type 1 diabetes and on health care systems. However, a national framework is needed to ensure equitable and sustainable implementation of these technologies as part of holistic care. MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS: This consensus statement considers technologies for insulin delivery, glucose sensing and insulin dose advice that are commercially available in Australia. While international position statements have provided recommendations for technology implementation, the ADS/ADEA/APEG/ADIPS Working Group believes that focus needs to shift from strict trial-based glycaemic criteria towards engagement and individualised management goals that consider the broad spectrum of benefits offered by technologies. CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AS RESULT OF THIS STATEMENT: This Australian consensus statement from peak national bodies for the management of diabetes across the lifespan outlines a national framework for the optimal implementation of technologies for people with type 1 diabetes. The Working Group highlights issues regarding equity of access to technologies and services, scope of clinical practice, credentialling and accreditation requirements, regulatory issues with "do-it-yourself" technology, national benchmarking, safety reporting, and ongoing patient advocacy.

Comparison of two questionnaires for assessment of emotional eating in people undergoing treatment for obesity.

PURPOSE: Emotional eating may contribute to weight gain and difficulty with weight loss. Questionnaires are currently the primary method used to identify this behaviour but there is no gold standard for detecting emotional eating, making it difficult to know which questionnaire to use for this purpose. This study assesses two questionnaires validated for assessment of emotional eating in patients with obesity, with the aim of investigating their interchangeability in the clinical setting. METHODS: 387 adult participants were recruited from the obesity treatment service at a tertiary metropolitan hospital. Responses were obtained for the 25-item Emotional Eating Scale (EES) and the 4-item coping subscale of the Palatable Eating Motives Scale (PEMS). Agreement was analysed using quadratically weighted Cohen's κ scores. Substantial agreement was defined as κ 0.61-0.80. RESULTS: The median (interquartile range) body mass index and age of participants was 42.1 kg/m2 (36.4-48.9 kg/m2) and 51.6 years (41.1-61.4 years), respectively, and 70.5% of participants were female. The EES and PEMS were found to have substantial agreement (κ 0.71; 95% CI 0.65-0.76). Agreement remained substantial when analysing responses from men (0.61; 95% CI 0.47-0.73), women (0.73; 95% CI 0.67-0.79) and post-bariatric surgery patients (0.72; 95% CI 0.62-0.82) separately. CONCLUSION: Despite focusing on different elements of emotional eating behaviour, the substantial agreement between the EES and PEMS coping subscale suggests that they identify respondents' susceptibility to emotional eating with consistency, including in people who have undergone bariatric surgery. LEVEL V: Opinions of respected authorities, based on descriptive studies, narrative reviews, clinical experience, or reports of expert committees. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: This observational study has not been registered as a clinical trial.

Patient-reported financial toxicity, quality of life, and health behaviors in insured US cancer survivors.

PURPOSE: Fighting cancer is a costly battle, and understanding the relationship between patient-reported financial toxicity (FT) and health outcomes can help inform interventions for post-treatment cancer survivors. METHODS: Stages I-III solid tumor, insured US cancer survivors (N = 103) completed a survey addressing FT (as measured by the standardized COST measure) and clinically relevant health outcomes (including health-related quality of life [HRQOL] and adherence to recommended survivorship health behaviors). Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to assess demographic and disease-specific correlates of FT, and to assess the predictive value of FT on HRQOL and adherence to survivorship health behaviors. RESULTS: Approximately 18% of respondents noted FT levels associated with significant financial burden. In univariate analyses, after correcting for multiple comparisons, greater FT was associated with unpartnered status, non-retirement, and lower level of educational attainment. Greater FT was also significantly associated with HRQOL components of anxiety, fatigue, pain, physical functioning, and social functioning. FT was not significantly associated with any measured survivorship health behaviors. In multivariate analyses, FT was found to be a meaningful predictor of patient-reported anxiety, fatigue, physical functioning, and social functioning above and beyond theoretically and statistically relevant demographic characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Although overall levels of FT were lower among cancer survivors in this sample, as compared with active treatment patients assessed in previous studies, financial burden continued to be a concern for a significant minority of cancer survivors and was associated with components of reduced HRQOL. Further research is needed to understand FT among underinsured survivors and those treated in community oncology settings. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Incorporation of FT assessment into survivorship care planning could enhance clinical assessment of survivors' FT vulnerability, help address the dynamic and persistent challenges of survivorship, and help identify those most in need of intervention across the cancer care continuum.

Quantifying the impact of pre-existing conditions on the stage of oesophagogastric cancer at diagnosis: a primary care cohort study using electronic medical records.

BACKGROUND: Pre-existing conditions interfere with cancer diagnosis by offering diagnostic alternatives, competing for clinical attention or through patient surveillance. OBJECTIVE: To investigate associations between oesophagogastric cancer stage and pre-existing conditions. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study using Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) data, with English cancer registry linkage. Participants aged ≥40 years had consulted primary care in the year before their incident diagnosis of oesophagogastric cancer in 01/01/2010-31/12/2015. CPRD records pre-diagnosis were searched for codes denoting clinical features of oesophagogastric cancer and for pre-existing conditions, including those providing plausible diagnostic alternatives for those features. Logistic regression analysed associations between stage and multimorbidity (≥2 conditions; reference category: no multimorbidity) and having 'diagnostic alternative(s)', controlling for age, sex, deprivation and cancer site. RESULTS: Of 2444 participants provided, 695 (28%) were excluded for missing stage, leaving 1749 for analysis (1265/1749, 72.3% had advanced-stage disease). Multimorbidity was associated with stage [odds ratio 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47-0.85, P = 0.002], with moderate evidence of an interaction term with sex (1.76, 1.08-2.86, P = 0.024). There was no association between alternative explanations and stage (odds ratio 1.18, 95% CI 0.87-1.60, P = 0.278). CONCLUSIONS: In men, multimorbidity is associated with a reduced chance of advanced-stage oesophagogastric cancer, to levels seen collectively for women.

Diagnosing cancer is complicated by existing medical conditions. Diagnosis may be delayed if conditions explain cancer symptoms, or dominate appointments. Diagnosis may be quicker if conditions increase doctor­patient contact. We studied the association between existing illness and stage (early or advanced) of diagnosis with cancer of the stomach or gullet. We studied the primary-care records of patients aged ≥40 years, diagnosed in 01/01/2010­31/12/2015, and got stage from English cancer registry data. We searched the primary-care records for cancer symptoms (e.g. difficulty swallowing), and for 27 conditions that were common or explained cancer symptoms (e.g. difficulty swallowing following a stroke). We analysed cancer stage, looking at age, sex, multimorbidity (two or more conditions) and explanations for symptoms. We studied 1749 patients, of whom 1265 (72.3%) had advanced-stage cancer. The chance of advanced stage was similar in women with (71%, 95% CI 66­75%) or without (69%, 62­76%) multimorbidity. It was lower for men with (70%, 67­74%) than without (79%, 75­83%) multimorbidity. Stage of cancer was not affected by having explanations for cancer symptoms. In summary, for men, multimorbidity is associated with a reduced chance of advanced-stage cancer of the stomach or gullet to levels seen collectively for women.

Cancer diagnostic tools to aid decision-making in primary care: mixed-methods systematic reviews and cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Tools based on diagnostic prediction models are available to help general practitioners diagnose cancer. It is unclear whether or not tools expedite diagnosis or affect patient quality of life and/or survival. OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to evaluate the evidence on the validation, clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and availability and use of cancer diagnostic tools in primary care. METHODS: Two systematic reviews were conducted to examine the clinical effectiveness (review 1) and the development, validation and accuracy (review 2) of diagnostic prediction models for aiding general practitioners in cancer diagnosis. Bibliographic searches were conducted on MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science) in May 2017, with updated searches conducted in November 2018. A decision-analytic model explored the tools' clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in colorectal cancer. The model compared patient outcomes and costs between strategies that included the use of the tools and those that did not, using the NHS perspective. We surveyed 4600 general practitioners in randomly selected UK practices to determine the proportions of general practices and general practitioners with access to, and using, cancer decision support tools. Association between access to these tools and practice-level cancer diagnostic indicators was explored. RESULTS: Systematic review 1 - five studies, of different design and quality, reporting on three diagnostic tools, were included. We found no evidence that using the tools was associated with better outcomes. Systematic review 2 - 43 studies were included, reporting on prediction models, in various stages of development, for 14 cancer sites (including multiple cancers). Most studies relate to QCancer® (ClinRisk Ltd, Leeds, UK) and risk assessment tools. DECISION MODEL: In the absence of studies reporting their clinical outcomes, QCancer and risk assessment tools were evaluated against faecal immunochemical testing. A linked data approach was used, which translates diagnostic accuracy into time to diagnosis and treatment, and stage at diagnosis. Given the current lack of evidence, the model showed that the cost-effectiveness of diagnostic tools in colorectal cancer relies on demonstrating patient survival benefits. Sensitivity of faecal immunochemical testing and specificity of QCancer and risk assessment tools in a low-risk population were the key uncertain parameters. SURVEY: Practitioner- and practice-level response rates were 10.3% (476/4600) and 23.3% (227/975), respectively. Cancer decision support tools were available in 83 out of 227 practices (36.6%, 95% confidence interval 30.3% to 43.1%), and were likely to be used in 38 out of 227 practices (16.7%, 95% confidence interval 12.1% to 22.2%). The mean 2-week-wait referral rate did not differ between practices that do and practices that do not have access to QCancer or risk assessment tools (mean difference of 1.8 referrals per 100,000 referrals, 95% confidence interval -6.7 to 10.3 referrals per 100,000 referrals). LIMITATIONS: There is little good-quality evidence on the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of diagnostic tools. Many diagnostic prediction models are limited by a lack of external validation. There are limited data on current UK practice and clinical outcomes of diagnostic strategies, and there is no evidence on the quality-of-life outcomes of diagnostic results. The survey was limited by low response rates. CONCLUSION: The evidence base on the tools is limited. Research on how general practitioners interact with the tools may help to identify barriers to implementation and uptake, and the potential for clinical effectiveness. FUTURE WORK: Continued model validation is recommended, especially for risk assessment tools. Assessment of the tools' impact on time to diagnosis and treatment, stage at diagnosis, and health outcomes is also recommended, as is further work to understand how tools are used in general practitioner consultations. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017068373 and CRD42017068375. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 66. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

In the UK, people with cancer tend to die sooner than people with cancer in other European countries. This may be because their cancers are caught at a later stage, perhaps after they have spread. Spotting cancer earlier in people, and testing them sooner, may extend people's lives. Researchers have developed 'diagnostic tools', which give the probability of having cancer, based on a patient's symptoms, blood test results and other information. The tools help family doctors decide who needs further testing for possible cancer, including cancers of the digestive, urinary and reproductive systems, and in the blood. We do not know how many family doctors have these tools, or how well the tools work. We systematically reviewed published studies about how these tools were developed, how good and accurate they are, and what effects their use has on patients. We found that many tools have been developed, but there is little evidence that they improve the quality or length of life. We sent surveys to family doctors all over the UK asking if they had the tools at their practice and if they used them. Based on the replies we received, we estimate that the tools are in about one in three practices. They are likely to be used in about half of the practices where they are available. For practices in England only, we looked for, but did not find, any association between using the tools and the number of urgent appointments made for cancer testing. We used a computer model to show what might happen if family doctors used the tools for patients who have symptoms of bowel cancer. In our model, if general practitioners used the tools, patients would need fewer appointments before they were referred to a specialist. This should reduce the time to diagnosis and treatment, compared with not using the tools. However, there is very little evidence as to whether or not this is indeed the case. Therefore, at the moment, we cannot say whether or not the use of such tools by general practitioners is better for patients and the NHS. More research is needed on what effect these tools have on patients, especially as to whether or not quality and length of life are improved.

Effect of pre-existing conditions on bladder cancer stage at diagnosis: a cohort study using electronic primary care records in the UK.

BACKGROUND: Pre-existing concurrent medical conditions (multimorbidity) complicate cancer diagnosis when they provide plausible diagnostic alternatives for cancer symptoms. AIM: To investigate associations in bladder cancer between: first, pre-existing condition count and advanced-stage diagnosis; and, second, comorbidities that share symptoms with bladder cancer and advanced-stage diagnosis. DESIGN AND SETTING: This observational UK cohort study was set in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink with Public Health England National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service linkage. METHOD: Included participants were aged ≥40 years with an incident diagnosis of bladder cancer between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2015, and primary care records of attendance for haematuria, dysuria, or abdominal mass in the year before diagnosis. Stage at diagnosis (stage 1 or 2 versus stage 3 or 4) was the outcome variable. Putative explanatory variables using logistic regression were examined, including patient-level count of pre-existing conditions and 'alternative-explanations', indicating whether pre-existing condition(s) were plausible diagnostic alternatives for the index cancer symptom. RESULTS: In total, 1468 patients (76.4% male) were studied, of which 399 (35.6%) males and 217 (62.5%) females had alternative explanations for their index cancer symptom, the most common being urinary tract infection with haematuria. Females were more likely than males to be diagnosed with advanced-stage cancer (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.62; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.20 to 2.18; P = 0.001). Alternative explanations were strongly associated with advanced-stage diagnosis in both sexes (aOR 1.69; 95% CI = 1.20 to 2.39; P = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Alternative explanations were associated with advanced-stage diagnosis of bladder cancer. Females were more likely than males to be diagnosed with advanced-stage disease, but the effect was not driven entirely by alternative explanations.

Changes in the presenting symptoms of lung cancer from 2000-2017: a serial cross-sectional study of observational records in UK primary care.

BACKGROUND: Most patients diagnosed with lung cancer present with symptoms. It is not known if the proportions of patients presenting with each symptom has changed over time. Identifying trends in lung cancer's presenting symptoms is important for medical education and early-diagnosis initiatives. AIM: To identify the first reported symptom of possible lung cancer (index symptom), and to test whether the percentages of patients with each index symptom changed during 2000-2017. DESIGN AND SETTING: This was a serial, cross-sectional, observational study using UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) data with cancer registry linkage. METHOD: The index symptom was identified for patients with an incident diagnosis of lung cancer in annual cohorts between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2017. Searches were constrained to symptoms in National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) suspected-cancer referral guidelines, and to the year before diagnosis. Generalised linear models (with a binomial function) were used to test if the percentages of patients with each index symptom varied during 2000-2017. RESULTS: The percentage of patients with an index symptom of cough (odds ratio [OR] 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.00 to 1.02 per year; P<0.0001) or dyspnoea (OR 1.05; CI = 1.05 to 1.06 per year; P<0.0001) increased. The percentages of patients with other index symptoms decreased, notably haemoptysis (OR 0.93; CI = 0.92 to 0.95; P<0.0001) and appetite loss (OR 0.94; CI = 0.90 to 0.97; P<0.0001). CONCLUSION: During 2000-2017, the proportions of lung cancer patients with an index symptom of cough or dyspnoea increased, while the proportion of those with the index symptom haemoptysis decreased. This trend has implications for medical education and symptom awareness campaigns.

Parental and Provider Perceptions of Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Interventions in the First 1000 Days: A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Novel approaches to reduce sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption during the first 1000 days-pregnancy through age 2 years-are urgently needed. OBJECTIVE: To examine perceptions of SSB consumption and acceptability of potential intervention strategies to promote SSB avoidance in low-income families in the first 1000 days. METHODS: In this qualitative research, we performed semistructured, in-depth interviews of 25 women and 7 nutrition/health care providers. Eligible women were Women, Infants, and Children program-enrolled and pregnant or had an infant younger than age 2 years. Eligible providers cared for families during the first 1000 days. Using immersion-crystallization techniques, we examined perceptions, barriers, and facilitators related to avoidance of SSB consumption; acceptability of messages framed as positive gains or negative losses; and perceived influence on SSB consumption of various intervention modalities. RESULTS: Themes related to SSB consumption included parental confusion about healthy beverage recommendations and maternal feelings of lack of control over beverage choices due to pregnancy cravings and infant tastes. Themes surrounding message frames included negative health consequences of sugary drink consumption are strong motivators for behavior change; and savings and cost count, but are not top priority. Highly acceptable intervention strategies included use of images showing health consequences of SSB consumption, illustrations of sugar content at the point of purchase, and multimodal delivery of messages. CONCLUSIONS: Messages focused on infant health consequences and parental empowerment to evaluate and select healthier beverages based on sugar content should be tested in interventions to reduce SSB consumption in the first 1000 days.

Tobacco Use Assessment and Treatment in Cancer Patients: A Scoping Review of Oncology Care Clinician Adherence to Clinical Practice Guidelines in the U.S.

BACKGROUND: Smoking after a cancer diagnosis negatively impacts health outcomes; smoking cessation improves symptoms, side effects, and overall prognosis. The Public Health Service and major oncology organizations have established guidelines for tobacco use treatment among cancer patients, including clinician assessment of tobacco use at each visit. Oncology care clinicians (OCCs) play important roles in this process (noted as the 5As: Asking about tobacco use, Advising users to quit, Assessing willingness to quit, Assisting in quit attempts, and Arranging follow-up contact). However, OCCs may not be using the "teachable moments" related to cancer diagnosis, treatment, and survivorship to provide cessation interventions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this scoping literature review of articles from 2006 to 2017, we discuss (1) frequency and quality of OCCs' tobacco use assessments with cancer patients and survivors; (2) barriers to providing tobacco treatment for cancer patients; and (3) the efficacy and future of provider-level interventions to facilitate adherence to tobacco treatment guidelines. RESULTS: OCCs are not adequately addressing smoking cessation with their patients. The reviewed studies indicate that although >75% assess tobacco use during an intake visit and >60% typically advise patients to quit, a substantially lower percentage recommend or arrange smoking cessation treatment or follow-up after a quit attempt. Less than 30% of OCCs report adequate training in cessation interventions. CONCLUSION: Intervention trials focused on provider- and system-level change are needed to promote integration of evidence-based tobacco treatment into the oncology setting. Attention should be given to the barriers faced by OCCs when targeting interventions for the oncologic context. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This article reviews the existing literature on the gap between best and current practices for tobacco use assessment and treatment in the oncologic context. It also identifies clinician- and system-level barriers that should be addressed in order to lessen this gap and provides suggestions that could be applied across different oncology practice settings to connect patients with tobacco use treatments that may improve overall survival and quality of life.

Rationale and design of the Clinic and Community Approaches to Healthy Weight Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of family-centered, pediatric weight management programs in reducing childhood obesity. Yet, programs to optimize the care of low-income children with obesity are needed. We sought to examine the comparative effectiveness of two, potentially scalable pediatric weight management programs delivered to low-income children in a clinical or community setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Clinic and Community Approaches to Healthy Weight Trial is a randomized trial in two communities in Massachusetts that serve a large population of low-income children and families. The two-arm trial compares the effects of a pediatric weight management program delivered in the Healthy Weight Clinics of two federally qualified health centers (FQHC) to the Healthy Weight and Your Child programs delivered in two YMCAs. Eligible children are 6 to 12 years old with a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 85th percentile seen in primary care at the two FQHCs. Both programs are one-year in duration and have at least 30 contact hours throughout the year. Measures are collected at baseline, 6 months, and 1 year. The main outcome is 1-year change in BMI (kg/m2) and percent change of the 95th percentile (%BMIp95). CONCLUSION: The Clinic and Community Approaches to Healthy Weight Trial seeks to 1) examine the comparative effects of a clinical and community based intervention in improving childhood obesity, and 2) inform the care of >7 million children with obesity covered by the Children's Health Insurance Program or Medicaid.