RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: In Canada, Indigenous people have higher human papillomavirus (HPV) infection rates, lower screening rates for cervical cancer, and higher rates of invasive cancer, leading to worse cervical cancer-related outcomes than observed in non-Indigenous Canadian women. Lingering harms from European colonization drive these health inequities and create public health challenges. Policy guidance is needed to optimize HPV vaccination rates and, thereby, decrease the burden of HPV-related illness, including high-morbidity surgical procedures and chemo-radiotherapy. The Enhancing HPV Vaccination In First Nations Populations in Alberta (EHVINA) project focuses on First Nations, a diverse subset of recognized Indigenous people in Canada, and seeks to increase HPV vaccination among girls and boys living in First Nation communities. METHODS: Developing an effective strategy requires partnership with affected communities to better understand knowledge and perceptions about cancer, healthcare, and the HPV vaccine. A 2017 community gathering was convened to engage First Nations community members, health directors, and health services researchers in dialogue around unique barriers and supports to HPV vaccination in Alberta. Voices of community Elders, parents, health directors, and cancer survivors (n=24) are presented as qualitative evidence to help inform intervention design. RESULTS: Key findings from discussions indicate barriers to HPV vaccination include resource constraints and service infrastructure gaps, historical mistrust in healthcare systems, impacts of changing modes of communication, and community sensitivities regarding sexual health promotion. Supports were identified as strengthened inter-generational relationships in communities. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTION: Ongoing dialogue and co-development of community-based strategies to increase HPV vaccine uptake are required. The identification of possible barriers to HPV vaccination in a Canadian Indigenous population contributes to limited global literature on this subject and may inform researchers and policy makers who work with Indigenous populations in other regions.
Assuntos
Serviços de Saúde Comunitária/métodos , Serviços de Saúde do Indígena/organização & administração , Indígenas Norte-Americanos/psicologia , Infecções por Papillomavirus/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra Papillomavirus/administração & dosagem , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde/etnologia , Canadá , Feminino , Humanos , MasculinoRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Survival in uveal melanoma has remained unchanged since the early 1970s. Because outcomes are highly related to the size of the tumour, timely and accurate diagnosis can increase the chance for cure. METHODS: A consensus-based guideline was developed to inform practitioners. PubMed was searched for publications related to this topic. Reference lists of key publications were hand-searched. The National Guidelines Clearinghouse and individual guideline organizations were searched for relevant guidelines. Consensus discussions by a group of content experts from medical, radiation, and surgical oncology were used to formulate the recommendations. RESULTS: Eighty-four publications, including five existing guidelines, formed the evidence base. SUMMARY: Key recommendations highlight that, for uveal melanoma and its indeterminate melanocytic lesions in the uveal tract, management is complex and requires experienced specialists with training in ophthalmologic oncology. Staging examinations include serum and radiologic investigations. Large lesions are still most often treated with enucleation, and yet radiotherapy is the most common treatment for tumours that qualify. Adjuvant therapy has yet to demonstrate efficacy in reducing the risk of metastasis, and no systemic therapy clearly improves outcomes in metastatic disease. Where available, enrolment in clinical trials is encouraged for patients with metastatic disease. Highly selected patients might benefit from surgical resection of liver metastases.
RESUMO
Patients with cancer are at increased risk of venous thromboembolism (vte). Anticoagulation therapy has been shown to prevent vte; however, unique clinical circumstances in patients with cancer can often complicate the decisions surrounding the administration of prophylactic anticoagulation. No national Canadian guidelines on the prevention of cancer-associated thrombosis have been published. We therefore aimed to develop a consensus-based, evidence-informed guideline on the topic. PubMed was searched for clinical trials and meta-analyses published between 2002 and 2013. Reference lists of key articles were hand-searched for additional publications. Content experts from across Canada were assembled to review the evidence and make recommendations. Low molecular weight heparin can be used prophylactically in cancer patients at high risk of developing vte. Direct oral anticoagulants are not recommended for vte prophylaxis at this time. Specific clinical scenarios, including renal insufficiency, thrombocytopenia, liver disease, and obesity can warrant modifications in the administration of prophylactic anticoagulant therapy. There is no evidence to support the monitoring of anti-factor Xa levels in clinically stable cancer patients receiving prophylactic anticoagulation; however, factor Xa levels could be checked at baseline and periodically in patients with renal insufficiency. The use of anticoagulation therapy to prolong survival in cancer patients without the presence of risk factors for vte is not recommended.
RESUMO
Patients with cancer are at increased risk of venous thromboembolism (vte). Anticoagulation therapy is used to treat vte; however, patients with cancer have unique clinical circumstances that can often make decisions surrounding the administration of therapeutic anticoagulation complicated. No national Canadian guidelines on the management of established cancer-associated thrombosis have been published. We therefore aimed to develop a consensus-based, evidence-informed guideline on the topic. PubMed was searched for clinical trials and meta-analyses published between 2002 and 2013. Reference lists of key articles were hand-searched for additional publications. Content experts from across Canada were assembled to review the evidence and make recommendations. Low molecular weight heparin is the treatment of choice for cancer patients with established vte. Direct oral anticoagulants are not recommended for the treatment of vte at this time. Specific clinical scenarios, including the presence of an indwelling venous catheter, renal insufficiency, and thrombocytopenia, warrant modifications in the therapeutic administration of anticoagulation therapy. Patients with recurrent vte should receive extended (>3 months) anticoagulant therapy. Incidental vte should generally be treated in the same manner as symptomatic vte. There is no evidence to support the monitoring of anti-factor Xa levels in clinically stable cancer patients receiving prophylactic anticoagulation; however, levels of anti-factor Xa could be checked at baseline and periodically thereafter in patients with renal insufficiency. Follow-up and education about the signs and symptoms of vte are important components of ongoing patient care.
RESUMO
Venous thromboembolism (vte) is a serious, life-threatening complication of cancer. Anticoagulation therapy such as low molecular weight heparin (lmwh) has been shown to treat and prevent vte. Cancer therapy is often complex and ongoing, making the management of vte less straightforward in patients with cancer. There are no published Canadian guidelines available to suggest appropriate strategies for the management of vte in patients with solid tumours. We therefore aimed to develop a clear, evidence-based guideline on this topic. A systematic review of clinical trials and meta-analyses published between 2002 and 2013 in PubMed was conducted. Reference lists were hand-searched for additional publications. The National Guidelines Clearinghouse was searched for relevant guidelines. Recommendations were developed based on the best available evidence. In patients with solid tumours, lmwh is recommended for those with established vte and for those without established vte but with a high risk for developing vte. Options for lmwh include dalteparin, enoxaparin, and tinzaparin. No one agent can be recommended over another, but in the setting of renal insufficiency, tinzaparin is preferred. Unfractionated heparin can be used under select circumstances only (that is, when rapid clearance of the anticoagulant is desired). The most common adverse event is bleeding, but major events are rare, and with appropriate follow-up care, bleeding can be monitored and appropriately managed.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Now more than ever, cancer patients want health information. Little has been published to characterize the information needs and preferred sources of that information for patients who have completed cancer treatment. METHODS: We used a nationally validated instrument to prospectively survey patients attending a cancer clinic for a post-treatment follow-up visit. All patients who came to the designated clinics between December 2011 and June 2012 were approached (N = 648), and information was collected only from those who agreed to proceed. RESULTS: The 411 patients who completed the instrument included individuals with a wide range of primary malignancies. Their doctor or health professional was overwhelmingly the most trusted source of cancer information, followed by the Internet, family, and friends. The least trusted sources of information included radio, newspaper, and television. Patients most preferred to receive personalized written information from their health care provider. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer survivors are keenly interested in receiving information about cancer, despite having undergone or finished active therapy. The data indicate that, for patients, their health care provider is the most trusted source of cancer information. Cancer providers should ask patients about the information they want and should direct them to trusted sources.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Late radiation tissue injury is a serious complication of radiotherapy for patients with gynecologic malignancies. Strategies for managing pain and other clinical features have limited efficacy; however, hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBO(2)) may be an effective option for some patients. METHODS: In a systematic review of the literature, the Ovid medline, embase, Cochrane Library, National Guidelines Clearinghouse, and Canadian Medical Association Infobase databases were searched to June 2009 for clinical practice guidelines, systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, or other relevant evidence. Studies that did not evaluate soft tissue necrosis, cystitis, proctitis, bone necrosis, and other complications were excluded. RESULTS: Two randomized trials, eleven nonrandomized studies, and five supporting documents comprise the evidence base. In addition, information on the harms and safety of treatment with HBO(2) were reported in three additional sources. There is modest direct evidence and emerging indirect evidence that the use of HBO(2) is broadly effective for late radiation tissue injury of the pelvis in women treated for gynecologic malignancies. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the evidence and expert consensus opinion, HBO(2) is likely effective for late radiation tissue injury of the pelvis, with demonstrated efficacy specifically for radiation damage to the anus and rectum;the main indication for HBO(2) therapy in gynecologic oncology is in the management of otherwise refractory chronic radiation injury;HBO(2) may provide symptomatic benefit in certain clinical settings (for example, cystitis, soft-tissue necrosis, and osteonecrosis); andHBO(2) may reduce the complications of gynecologic surgery in patients undergoing surgical removal of necrosis.