RESUMO
Purpose of Review: Cancer incidence and mortality are decreasing, but inequities in outcomes persist. This paper describes the San Francisco Cancer Initiative (SF CAN) as a model for the systematic application of epidemiological evidence to reduce the cancer burden and associated inequities. Recent Findings: SF CAN is a multi-institutional implementation of existing evidence on the prevention and early detection of five common cancers (i.e., breast, prostate, colorectal, liver, and lung/tobacco-related cancers) accounting for 50% of cancer deaths in San Francisco. Five Task Forces follow individual logic models designating inputs, outputs, and outcomes. We describe the progress made and the challenges faced by each Task Force after 5 years of activity. Summary: SF CAN is a model for how the nation's Comprehensive Cancer Centers are ideally positioned to leverage cancer epidemiology for evidence-based initiatives that, along with genuine community engagement and multiple stakeholders, can reduce the population burden of cancer.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Primary care providers (PCPs) are critical to the provision of comprehensive care for cancer survivors, yet there is very little data on the practices and quality of survivorship care occurring in safety net primary care settings. This study aimed to assess the knowledge and attitudes of PCPs and preferences for care models for breast and colon cancer survivors in a safety net health network. METHODS: A modified National Cancer Institute Survey of Physician Attitudes Regarding the Care of Cancer Survivors was sent electronically to 220 PCPs in 12 primary care clinics in the San Francisco Health Network affiliated with Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center. RESULTS: The response rate was 50% (110/220). About half of PCPs strongly/somewhat agreed (vs. strongly/somewhat disagreed) that PCPs have the knowledge needed to provide follow-up care related to breast (50%) and colon cancer (54%). Most providers (93%) correctly reported recommended frequency of mammography, however, frequency of blood tests and other imaging surveillance were not as well recognized for breast or colon cancer. Recognition of long-term side effects of chemotherapy drugs ranged from 12% for oxaliplatin to 44% for doxorubicin. Only 33% of providers reported receiving any survivorship training. The most preferred model for survivorship care was shared care model (40%). CONCLUSIONS: Safety net PCPs prefer a shared care model for care of cancer survivors but are limited by lack of training, poor communication, and poor delineation of roles. Patient-centered survivorship care can be improved through effective oncologist-PCP-patient partnerships and coordination.