Physician knowledge, practice patterns, and barriers encountered regarding guideline-concordant use of bone modifying agents for prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend bone-modifying agents (BMAs) for patients with castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and bone metastasis, but not for castrate-sensitive prostate cancer (CSPC). Physicians beliefs and practices regarding BMA therapy are poorly understood. METHODS: This was a qualitative interview study with embedded Likert-scale elements. Study participants were physicians who treat prostate cancer, located within an academic cancer center or an affiliated community-based network. Participants were asked about their experiences and practice patterns regarding BMA therapy. Participants used Likert-scale items to identify the most common barriers to guideline-concordant BMA use and the most effective potential interventions. Participants were subsequently asked to rank the three most common barriers and the three most effective interventions to reduce underuse (for CRPC) and overuse (for CSPC). RESULTS: Nineteen physicians were invited and 15 participated; one physician did not answer some questions as outside of their practice scope. All were aware of the recommendation for BMAs in CRPC. 14% (2/14) were unaware of the recommendation against BMA use for CSPC; an additional 29% (4/14) believed that BMA use could be appropriate for CSPC depending on the metastatic disease burden. 36% (5/14) were unaware of recommendations for screening and treatment of low bone mineral density. The most common barriers (occurring "often" or "sometimes") were obtaining dental clearance (11/15) and insufficient clinic time (6/15). The interventions identified as most effective to reduce underuse were dental navigation (11/15) and electronic medical record (EMR)-based guidance (9/15). The interventions identified as most effective to reduce overuse were peer-to-peer education (14/15) and EMR-based guidance (13/15). CONCLUSIONS: Awareness of guideline recommendations for screening and treatment of low bone mineral density and against BMA use for CSPC was good, but not complete. Dental navigation, peer-to-peer education, and EMR-based guidance were preferred intervention strategies to improve guideline-concordant use.

Integrated Analysis of Clinical and Microbiome Risk Factors Associated with the Development of Oral Candidiasis during Cancer Chemotherapy.

Oral candidiasis is a common side effect of cancer chemotherapy. To better understand predisposing factors, we followed forty-five subjects who received 5-fluorouracil- or doxorubicin-based treatment, during one chemotherapy cycle. Subjects were evaluated at baseline, prior to the first infusion, and at three additional visits within a two-week window. We assessed the demographic, medical and oral health parameters, neutrophil surveillance, and characterized the salivary bacteriome and mycobiome communities through amplicon high throughput sequencing. Twenty percent of all subjects developed oral candidiasis. Using multivariate statistics, we identified smoking, amount of dental plaque, low bacteriome and mycobiome alpha-diversity, and the proportions of specific bacterial and fungal taxa as baseline predictors of oral candidiasis development during the treatment cycle. All subjects who developed oral candidiasis had baseline microbiome communities dominated by Candida and enriched in aciduric bacteria. Longitudinally, oral candidiasis was associated with a decrease in salivary flow prior to lesion development, and occurred simultaneously or before oral mucositis. Candidiasis was also longitudinally associated with a decrease in peripheral neutrophils but increased the neutrophil killing capacity of Candida albicans. Oral candidiasis was not found to be associated with mycobiome structure shifts during the cycle but was the result of an increase in Candida load, with C. albicans and Candida dubliniensis being the most abundant species comprising the salivary mycobiome of the affected subjects. In conclusion, we identified a set of clinical and microbiome baseline factors associated with susceptibility to oral candidiasis, which might be useful tools in identifying at risk individuals, prior to chemotherapy.

Head and Neck Cancer Survivorship Care Guideline: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Endorsement of the American Cancer Society Guideline.

Purpose This guideline provides recommendations on the management of adults after head and neck cancer (HNC) treatment, focusing on surveillance and screening for recurrence or second primary cancers, assessment and management of long-term and late effects, health promotion, care coordination, and practice implications. Methods ASCO has a policy and set of procedures for endorsing clinical practice guidelines that have been developed by other professional organizations. The American Cancer Society (ACS) HNC Survivorship Care Guideline was reviewed for developmental rigor by methodologists. An ASCO Expert Panel reviewed the content and recommendations, offering modifications and/or qualifying statements when deemed necessary. Results The ASCO Expert Panel determined that the ACS HNC Survivorship Care Guideline, published in 2016, is clear, thorough, clinically practical, and helpful, despite the limited availability of high-quality evidence to support many of the recommendations. ASCO endorsed the ACS HNC Survivorship Care Guideline, adding qualifying statements aimed at promoting team-based, multispecialty, multidisciplinary, collaborative head and neck survivorship care. Recommendations The ASCO Expert Panel emphasized that caring for HNC survivors requires a team-based approach that includes primary care clinicians, oncology specialists, otolaryngologists, dentists, and other allied professionals. The HNC treatment team should educate the primary care clinicians and patients about the type(s) of treatment received, the likelihood of potential recurrence, and the potential late and long-term complications. Primary care clinicians should recognize symptoms of recurrence and coordinate a prompt evaluation. They should also be prepared to manage late effects either directly or by referral to appropriate specialists. Health promotion is critical, particularly regarding tobacco cessation and dental care. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/HNC-Survivorship-endorsement and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki .