Evaluating the feasibility, effectiveness and costs of implementing person-centred follow-up care for childhood cancer survivors in four European countries: the PanCareFollowUp Care prospective cohort study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Long-term survival after childhood cancer often comes at the expense of late, adverse health conditions. However, survivorship care is frequently not available for adult survivors in Europe. The PanCareFollowUp Consortium therefore developed the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention, an innovative person-centred survivorship care model based on experiences in the Netherlands. This paper describes the protocol of the prospective cohort study (Care Study) to evaluate the feasibility and the health economic, clinical and patient-reported outcomes of implementing PanCareFollowUp Care as usual care in four European countries. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this prospective, longitudinal cohort study with at least 6 months of follow-up, 800 childhood cancer survivors will receive the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention across four study sites in Belgium, Czech Republic, Italy and Sweden, representing different healthcare systems. The PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention will be evaluated according to the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance framework. Clinical and research data are collected through questionnaires, a clinic visit for multiple medical assessments and a follow-up call. The primary outcome is empowerment, assessed with the Health Education Impact Questionnaire. A central data centre will perform quality checks, data cleaning and data validation, and provide support in data analysis. Multilevel models will be used for repeated outcome measures, with subgroup analysis, for example, by study site, attained age, sex or diagnosis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study will be conducted in accordance with the guidelines of Good Clinical Practice and the Declaration of Helsinki. The study protocol has been reviewed and approved by all relevant ethics committees. The evidence and insights gained by this study will be summarised in a Replication Manual, also including the tools required to implement the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention in other countries. This Replication Manual will become freely available through PanCare and will be disseminated through policy and press releases. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Netherlands Trial Register (NL8918; https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/8918).

The European multistakeholder PanCareFollowUp project: novel, person-centred survivorship care to improve care quality, effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and accessibility for cancer survivors and caregivers.

BACKGROUND: The majority of childhood cancer survivors are at risk of treatment-related adverse health outcomes. Survivorship care to mitigate these late effects is endorsed, but it is not available for many adult survivors of childhood cancer in Europe. The PanCareFollowUp project was initiated to improve their health and quality of life (QoL) by facilitating person-centred survivorship care. METHODS: The PanCareFollowUp consortium was established in 2018, consisting of 14 project partners from ten European countries, including survivor representatives. The consortium will develop two PanCareFollowUp Interventions, including a person-centred guideline-based model of care (Care Intervention) and eHealth lifestyle coaching (Lifestyle Intervention). Their development will be informed by several qualitative studies and systematic reviews on barriers and facilitators for implementation and needs and preferences of healthcare providers (HCPs) and survivors. Implementation of the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention as usual care will be evaluated prospectively among 800 survivors from Belgium, Czech Republic, Italy and Sweden for survivor empowerment, detection of adverse health conditions, satisfaction among survivors and HCPs, cost-effectiveness and feasibility. The feasibility of the PanCareFollowUp Lifestyle Intervention will be evaluated in the Netherlands among 60 survivors. RESULTS: Replication manuals, allowing for replication of the PanCareFollowUp Care and Lifestyle Intervention, will be published and made freely available after the project. Moreover, results of the corresponding studies are expected within the next five years. CONCLUSIONS: The PanCareFollowUp project is a novel European collaboration aiming to improve the health and QoL of all survivors across Europe by developing and prospectively evaluating the person-centred PanCareFollowUp Care and Lifestyle Interventions.

Large variation in assessment and outcome definitions to describe the burden of long-term morbidity in childhood cancer survivors: A systematic review.

We systematically reviewed outcome assessment methods, outcome classification, and severity grading of reported outcomes in studies investigating the burden of physical long-term morbidity in childhood cancer survivors (CCS). A MEDLINE and EMBASE search identified 56 studies reporting on three or more types of health conditions in 5-year CCS, for which information was extracted on outcome types and classification, methods of outcome ascertainment, and severity grading. There was substantial variability in classification and types of health conditions reported and in methods of outcome ascertainment. Only 59% of the included studies applied severity grading, mainly the common terminology criteria of adverse events. This large variation in assessment and definition of the burden of physical long-term morbidity in CCS challenges interpretation, comparison, and pooling data across studies. Global collaboration is needed to standardize assessments and harmonize definitions of long-term physical morbidity and associated outcomes in childhood cancer survivorship research.

The impact of childhood cancer on parental working status and income in Denmark: Patterns over time and determinants of adverse changes.

Having a child with cancer may affect the socioeconomic situation of the parents. We aimed to assess the impact of childhood cancer on parental working status and income and to identify determinants of adverse changes after the child's cancer diagnosis by calendar period. We conducted a nationwide cohort study using Danish registry data. Parents of children diagnosed with cancer in 1982-2014 (n = 12,418) were matched with comparison parents of cancer-free children (n = 125,014). We analysed annual working status (working/not working) and annual disposable income (lowest quintile/not lowest quintile) of case and comparison parents over a period of 10 years after diagnosis by calendar period (1982-1999 vs. 2000-2014). Logistic regression models were used to identify determinants of adverse changes after diagnosis. Mothers of children diagnosed in 1982-1999 were more likely not working or having a low income than comparison mothers up to 10 years after diagnosis. This risk of not working or low income was lower in mothers of children diagnosed in 2000-2014 compared to 1982-1999 in the first years after diagnosis (pinteraction < 0.05). We observed no consistent patterns among fathers. Low parental education, diagnosis of lymphoid leukaemia and younger age of the child at diagnosis were the main determinants of adverse changes in working status or income after diagnosis. Childhood cancer adversely interfered with parents' socioeconomic situation in the earlier calendar period, particularly among mothers. The absence of such an effect in more recent years emphasises the supportive role of a countries' welfare system alongside the general advances in childhood cancer treatment.

Effect of socioeconomic position on survival after childhood cancer in Denmark.

Background One fifth of all deaths among children in Europe are accounted for by cancer. If this is to be reduced there is a need for studies on not only biology and treatment approaches but also on how social factors influence cure rates. We investigated how various socioeconomic characteristics were associated with survival after childhood cancer. Material and methods In a nationwide cohort of 3797 children diagnosed with cancer [hematological cancer, central nervous system (CNS) tumors, non-CNS solid tumors] before age 20 between 1990 and 2009 we identified parents and siblings and obtained individual level parental socioeconomic variables and vital status through 2012 by linkage to population-based registries. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dying were estimated using multivariate Cox proportional hazard models. Results For all children with cancer combined, survival was slightly but not statistically significantly better the higher the education of the mother or the father, and with maternal income. Significantly better survival was observed when parents were living together compared to living alone and worse survival when the child had siblings compared to none. Young (<20) or older (≥40) maternal age showed non-significant associations, but based on small numbers. For hematological cancers, no significant associations were observed. For CNS tumors, better survival was seen with parents living together (HR 0.70, CI 0.51-0.97). For non-CNS solid tumors, survival was better with high education of the mother (HR 0.66, CI 0.44-0.99) compared to basic and worse for children with one (HR 1.45, CI 1.11-1.89) or two or more siblings (HR 1.29, CI 0.93-1.79) (p for trend 0.02) compared to none. Conclusion The impact of socioeconomic characteristics on childhood cancer survival, despite equal access to protocolled and free-of-charge treatment, warrants further and more direct studies of underlying mechanisms in order to target these as a means to improve survival rates.