Evaluating a shared care pathway intervention for people receiving chemotherapy to reduce post-treatment unplanned hospital presentations: a randomised controlled trial.

PURPOSE: The aim of this randomised controlled trial (RCT) was to explore whether a community nursing intervention for outpatients receiving systemic therapy reduced unplanned hospital presentations and improved physical and psychosocial health outcomes over the first three cycles of treatment compared to a control group receiving standard care. METHODS: The number of and reasons for unplanned presentations were obtained for 170 intervention and 176 control group adult patients with solid tumours starting outpatient chemotherapy. Poisson regression was used to compare the number of presentations between the intervention and control groups. Patients self-completed the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, the Cancer Behavior Inventory and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) at the start of the first four cycles. Linear regression techniques were used to compare quality of life outcomes. RESULTS: The reduction in unplanned presentations in the intervention group relative to the control group was 12% (95% CI, - 25%, 37%; P = 0.48). At the start of cycle 4, there was no difference in anxiety (difference = 0.47 (95% CI, - 0.28, 1.22; P = 0.22)), depression (difference = 0.57 (95% CI, - 0.18, 1.31; P = 0.13)) or EORTC QLQ-C30 summary score (difference = 0.16 (95% CI, - 2.67, 3.00; P = 0.91)). Scores for self-efficacy as measured by the Cancer Behavior Inventory were higher in the intervention group (difference = 4.3 (95% CI, 0.7, 7.9; P = 0.02)). CONCLUSION: This RCT did not demonstrate a benefit in reducing unplanned presentations to hospital. The trial identified improved cancer-based self-efficacy in patients receiving the intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered at Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12614001113640, registered 21/10/2014.

E-Mail Communication Practices and Preferences Among Patients and Providers in a Large Comprehensive Cancer Center.

PURPOSE: Little is known about how electronic mail (e-mail) is currently used in oncology practice to facilitate patient care. The objective of our study was to understand the current e-mail practices and preferences of patients and physicians in a large comprehensive cancer center. METHODS: Separate cross-sectional surveys were administered to patients and physicians (staff physicians and clinical fellows) at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with current e-mail use. Record review was performed to assess the impact of e-mail communication on care. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 833 patients. E-mail contact with a member of the health care team was reported by 41% of respondents. The team members contacted included administrative assistants (52%), nurses (45%), specialist physicians (36%), and family physicians (18%). Patient factors associated with a higher likelihood of e-mail contact with the health care team included younger age, higher education, higher income, enrollment in a clinical trial, and receipt of multiple treatments. Eighty percent of physicians (n = 63 of 79) reported previous contact with a patient via e-mail. Physician factors associated with a greater likelihood of e-mail contact with patients included older age, more senior clinical position, and higher patient volume. Nine hundred sixty-two patient records were reviewed, with e-mail correspondence documented in only 9% of cases. CONCLUSION: E-mail is commonly used for patient care but is poorly documented. The use of e-mail in this setting can be developed with appropriate guidance; however, there may be concerns about widening the gap between certain groups of patients.

Predictive in vivo animal models and translation to clinical trials.

Vast resources are expended during the development of new cancer therapeutics, and selection of optimal in vivo models should improve this process. Genetically engineered mouse models (GEMM) of cancer have progressively improved in technical sophistication and, accurately recapitulating the human cognate condition, have had a measureable impact on our knowledge of tumourigenesis. However, the application of GEMMs to facilitate the development of innovative therapeutic and diagnostic approaches has lagged behind. GEMMs that recapitulate human cancer offer an additional opportunity to accelerate drug development, and should complement the role of the widely used engraftment tumour models.