Low-touch, team-based care for co-morbidity management in cancer patients: the ONE TEAM randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: As treatments for cancer have improved, more people are surviving cancer. However, compared to people without a history of cancer, cancer survivors are more likely to die of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Increased risk for CVD-related mortality among cancer survivors is partially due to lack of medication adherence and problems that exist in care coordination between cancer specialists, primary care physicians, and cardiologists. METHODS/DESIGN: The Onco-primary care networking to support TEAM-based care (ONE TEAM) study is an 18-month cluster-randomized controlled trial with clustering at the primary care clinic level. ONE TEAM compares the provision of the iGuide intervention to patients and primary care providers versus an education-only control. For phase 1, at the patient level, the intervention includes video vignettes and a live webinar; provider-level interventions include electronic health records-based communication and case-based webinars. Participants will be enrolled from across North Carolina one of their first visits with a cancer specialist (e.g., surgeon, radiation or medical oncologist). We use a sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART) design. Outcomes (measured at the patient level) will include Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) quality measures of management of three CVD comorbidities using laboratory testing (glycated hemoglobin [A1c], lipid profile) and blood pressure measurements; (2) medication adherence assessed pharmacy refill data using Proportion of Days Covered (PDC); and (3) patient-provider communication (Patient-Centered Communication in Cancer Care, PCC-Ca-36). Primary care clinics in the intervention arm will be considered non-responders if 90% or more of their participating patients do not meet the modified HEDIS quality metrics at the 6-month measurement, assessed once the first enrollee from each practice reaches the 12-month mark. Non-responders will be re-randomized to either continue to receive the iGuide 1 intervention, or to receive the iGuide 2 intervention, which includes tailored videos for participants and specialist consults with primary care providers. DISCUSSION: As the population of cancer survivors grows, ONE TEAM will contribute to closing the CVD outcomes gap among cancer survivors by optimizing and integrating cancer care and primary care teams. ONE TEAM is designed so that it will be possible for others to emulate and implement at scale. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study (NCT04258813) was registered in clinicaltrals.gov on February 6, 2020.

Adherence to cardiovascular disease risk factor medications among patients with cancer: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: The most common cause of mortality for many cancer survivors is cardiovascular disease (CVD). This requires a shift in thinking where control of CVD risk factor-related comorbidity is paramount. Our objective was to provide an understanding of adherence to medications for the management of CVD risk factor-related comorbidities among cancer survivors. METHODS: We systematically searched for articles indexed in MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase, Cochrane (Wiley), PsycINFO, and Scopus (via Elsevier) for articles published from inception to October 31, 2019, and updated the search on June 7, 2021. English language, original research that assessed medication adherence to common CVD risk factor-related comorbidities among cancer survivors was included. We assessed risk of bias using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. RESULTS: Of the 21 studies included, 57% focused on multiple cancer types. Seventy-one percent used pharmacy-based adherence measures. Two were prospective. Adherence was variable across cancer types and CVD risk factor-related comorbidities. Among the studies that examined changes in comorbid medication adherence, most noted a decline in adherence following cancer diagnosis and throughout cancer treatment. There was a focus on breast cancer populations. CONCLUSIONS: CVD risk factor-related medication adherence is low among cancer survivors and declines over time. Given the risk for CVD-mortality among cancer survivors, testing of interventions aimed at improving adherence to non-cancer medications is critically needed. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: For many cancer survivors, regularly taking medications to manage CVD risk is important for longevity. Engaging with primary care throughout the cancer care trajectory may be important to support cardiovascular health.

Opioid Prescribing and Use Among Cancer Survivors: A Mapping Review of Observational and Intervention Studies.

CONTEXT: Recent years show a sharp increase in research on opioid use among cancer survivors, but evidence syntheses are lacking, leaving knowledge gaps. Corresponding research needs are unclear. OBJECTIVES: To provide an evidence synthesis. METHODS: We searched PubMed and Embase, identifying articles related to cancer, and opioid prescribing/use published through September 2020. We screened resulting titles/abstracts. Relevant studies underwent full-text review. Inclusion criteria were quantitative examination of and primary focus on opioid prescribing or use, and explicit inclusion of cancer survivors. Exclusion criteria included end-of-life opioid use and opioid use as a secondary or downstream outcome (for intervention studies). We extracted information on the opioid-related outcome(s) examined (including definitions and terminology used), study design, and methods. RESULTS: Research returned 16,591 articles; 296 were included. Only 22 of 296 studies evaluated an intervention. There were 105 studies evaluating outcomes indicative of potentially high-risk, nonrecommended, or avoidable opioid use, e.g., continuous use-described as chronic use, prolonged use, and persistent use (n = 17); use after completion of curative-intent treatment-described as chronic opioid use, long-term opioid use, persistent opioid use, prolonged opioid use, continued opioid use, late opioid use, post-treatment opioid use (n = 27); use of opioids concurrent with other potentially high-risk medications (n = 13), and opioid misuse (n = 14). CONCLUSIONS: We found lack of consistency in the measurement of and terms used to describe similar opioid use outcomes, and a lack of interventional research targeting well-documented patterns of potentially nonrecommended, potentially avoidable, or potentially high-risk opioid prescribing or use.