Tobacco Cessation May Improve Lung Cancer Patient Survival.

INTRODUCTION: This study characterizes tobacco cessation patterns and the association of cessation with survival among lung cancer patients at Roswell Park Cancer Institute: an NCI Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. METHODS: Lung cancer patients presenting at this institution were screened with a standardized tobacco assessment, and those who had used tobacco within the past 30 days were automatically referred to a telephone-based cessation service. Demographic, clinical information, and self-reported tobacco use at last contact were obtained via electronic medical records and the Roswell Park Cancer Institute tumor registry for all lung cancer patients referred to the service between October 2010 and October 2012. Descriptive statistics and Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess whether tobacco cessation and other factors were associated with lung cancer survival through May 2014. RESULTS: Calls were attempted to 313 of 388 lung cancer patients referred to the cessation service. Eighty percent of patients (250 of 313) were successfully contacted and participated in at least one telephone-based cessation call; 40.8% (102 of 250) of persons contacted reported having quit at the last contact. After controlling for age, pack year history, sex, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, time between diagnosis and last contact, tumor histology, and clinical stage, a statistically significant increase in survival was associated with quitting compared with continued tobacco use at last contact (HR = 1.79; 95% confidence interval: 1.14-2.82) with a median 9 month improvement in overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: Tobacco cessation among lung cancer patients after diagnosis may increase overall survival.

Structuring survivorship care: discipline-specific clinician perspectives.

INTRODUCTION: Several models for survivorship care are prominent within the cancer literature; however, there is little empirical research that examines what oncology clinicians perceive to be the best approach to caring for cancer survivors, what services survivorship programs should include, and how prepared they feel to care for cancer survivors. METHODS: An IRB approved web-based survey of all clinical staff was conducted at a NCI designated comprehensive cancer center with a 49.8% response rate (N = 377). Data were summarized using frequencies and relative frequencies, and pairwise tests of statistical significance were utilized to evaluate differences between clinician type groups. RESULTS: Overall, the largest proportion of respondents preferred a disease-specific survivorship model (37.6%). This preference was specifically observed in oncology physicians and nurses. When asked where specific survivorship services should be provided, respondents indicated a preference for services directly related to survivors' medical treatment (i.e. information about late effects) to be delivered in a disease-specific survivorship clinic, and ancillary services (i.e. nutrition and fertility counseling) to be housed in a centralized comprehensive survivorship clinic. Physicians felt that they have significantly more information, training, and resources to care for cancer survivors than did oncology nurses. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: These results indicate that oncology clinicians prefer a combination of survivorship care delivery models where continuing medical needs are met in disease-specific clinics, and comprehensive wellness services are offered in a centralized comprehensive survivorship clinic. Results also suggest that planning for survivorship initiatives should include additional resources, education, and training for clinical staff. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: These findings underscore the need for a universally accepted definition of cancer survivorship, and support a model for delivering care to cancer survivors that is a blend of the disease-specific and comprehensive survivorship programs.