IT-Related Barriers and Facilitators to the Implementation of a New European eHealth Solution, the Digital Survivorship Passport (SurPass Version 2.0): Semistructured Digital Survey.

BACKGROUND: To overcome knowledge gaps and optimize long-term follow-up (LTFU) care for childhood cancer survivors, the concept of the Survivorship Passport (SurPass) has been invented. Within the European PanCareSurPass project, the semiautomated and interoperable SurPass (version 2.0) will be optimized, implemented, and evaluated at 6 LTFU care centers representing 6 European countries and 3 distinct health system scenarios: (1) national electronic health information systems (EHISs) in Austria and Lithuania, (2) regional or local EHISs in Italy and Spain, and (3) cancer registries or hospital-based EHISs in Belgium and Germany. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify and describe barriers and facilitators for SurPass (version 2.0) implementation concerning semiautomation of data input, interoperability, data protection, privacy, and cybersecurity. METHODS: IT specialists from the 6 LTFU care centers participated in a semistructured digital survey focusing on IT-related barriers and facilitators to SurPass (version 2.0) implementation. We used the fit-viability model to assess the compatibility and feasibility of integrating SurPass into existing EHISs. RESULTS: In total, 13/20 (65%) invited IT specialists participated. The main barriers and facilitators in all 3 health system scenarios related to semiautomated data input and interoperability included unaligned EHIS infrastructure and the use of interoperability frameworks and international coding systems. The main barriers and facilitators related to data protection or privacy and cybersecurity included pseudonymization of personal health data and data retention. According to the fit-viability model, the first health system scenario provides the best fit for SurPass implementation, followed by the second and third scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides essential insights into the information and IT-related influencing factors that need to be considered when implementing the SurPass (version 2.0) in clinical practice. We recommend the adoption of Health Level Seven Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources and data security measures such as encryption, pseudonymization, and multifactor authentication to protect personal health data where applicable. In sum, this study offers practical insights into integrating digital health solutions into existing EHISs.

Guidance regarding COVID-19 for survivors of childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer: A statement from the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group.

Childhood, adolescent, and young adult (CAYA) cancer survivors may be at risk for a severe course of COVID-19. Little is known about the clinical course of COVID-19 in CAYA cancer survivors, or if additional preventive measures are warranted. We established a working group within the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group (IGHG) to summarize existing evidence and worldwide recommendations regarding evidence about factors/conditions associated with risk for a severe course of COVID-19 in CAYA cancer survivors, and to develop a consensus statement to provide guidance for healthcare practitioners and CAYA cancer survivors regarding COVID-19.

A Review of Infants With Localized Neuroblastoma That Evolve to Stage 4s Disease.

The authors describe a newborn diagnosed with localized neuroblastoma that evolved to stage 4s at the age of 5 months. Peculiar features of the case included a bilateral adrenal primary, the skin as the only metastatic site, and the development of a muscular lesion late in the clinical course. The patient underwent left adrenalectomy and all other lesions regressed without further therapy. The case prompted a search for similar cases both in the Italian Neuroblastoma Registry and in the literature. All patients identified, although variously treated, survived with the exception of the 2 with MYCN gene amplification. We conclude that infants with neuroblastoma who undergo a transition from a localized to stage 4s disease could be less rare than expected. In the absence of unfavorable biology, a wait-and-see policy with strict follow-up could be adopted for these patients, avoiding potentially damaging systemic therapy.

Nerve Sheath Myxoma in Pregnancy: A Case Report.

Nerve sheath myxoma (NSM) is a rare benign peripheral nerve sheath tumor that affects young adults. NSMs are asymptomatic, slow-growing swellings located in the upper extremities, more rarely in the lower extremities. Given the high risk of recurrence, it is recommended to perform a complete exeresis. To our knowledge, the evolution and management of NMS during pregnancy have not been described yet. We report the first case of recurrent pretibial NSM in a pregnant girl and its follow-up and outcome during and after pregnancy. NSM is difficult to diagnose clinically or using imaging. The final diagnosis remains histopathological. It is known how various types of benign and malignant skin tumors can develop or change during pregnancy. With our case, however, we documented that pregnancy does not affect the growth and evolution of NSM. Given the benign nature of the lesions and their tendency to grow slowly, during pregnancy, follow-up of NSMs can be conducted through ultrasonography and surgical treatment postponed after delivery. Our case highlights the importance of careful monitoring and individualized decision making, especially in rare scenarios such as NSM, where data on the progression of benign lesions are limited. Our case highlights the importance of a careful monitoring and a tailored treatment in rare scenarios such as NSM, where data on the progression of benign lesions are limited. Considering the benign nature of the lesions and their tendency to grow slowly, follow-up of NSMs during pregnancy can be conducted through ultrasonography, and surgical treatment can be postponed after delivery.

Childhood Cancer Survivorship Passport Challenges in the European Health Data Space.

Innovation in cancer therapy has increased childhood cancer survival rates. However, survivors are still at risk of developing late effects. In the digital transformation of the health sector, the Survivorship Passport (SurPass) can support long-term follow-up care plans. Gaps in seamless connectivity among hospital departments, primary care, combined with the time of health professionals required to collect and fill-in health data in SurPass, are barriers to its adoption in daily clinical practice. The PanCareSurPass (PCSP) project was motivated to address these gaps by a new version of SurPass (v2.0) that supports semi-automatic assembly from organizational Electronic Health Record (EHR) systems of the treatment summary data using HL7 FHIR, to create SurPass, and to link it to regional or national digital health infrastructures in six European countries. In this paper we present the methodology used to develop the SurPass technical implementation strategy with special focus on the European Health Data Space (EHDS). The recently provisionally approved EHDS regulation instruments a digital health data ecosystem with opportunities for cost-effective SurPass implementation across Europe. Moving forward, a European HL7 FHIR SurPass Implementation Guide along with synthetic data sets, and validation tools can enrich the European Electronic Health Record Exchange Format (EEHRxF) with use cases on health & wellness of childhood cancer survivors.

Healthcare providers' expected barriers and facilitators to the implementation of person-centered long-term follow-up care for childhood cancer survivors: A PanCareFollowUp study.

BACKGROUND: Childhood cancer survivors face high risks of adverse late health effects. Long-term follow-up care for childhood cancer survivors is crucial to improve their health and quality of life. However, implementation remains a challenge. To support implementation of high-quality long-term follow-up care, we explored expected barriers and facilitators for establishing this follow-up care among healthcare providers from four European clinics. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted using four focus groups comprising 30 healthcare providers in total. The semi-structured interview guide was developed based on the Grol and Wensing framework. Data was analyzed following a thematic analysis, combining both inductive and deductive approaches to identify barriers and facilitators across the six levels of Grol and Wensing: innovation, professional, patient, social, organizational and economic and political. RESULTS: Most barriers were identified on the organizational level, including insufficient staff, time, capacity and psychosocial support. Other main barriers included limited knowledge of late effects among healthcare providers outside the long-term follow-up care team, inability of some survivors to complete the survivor questionnaire and financial resources. Main facilitators included motivated healthcare providers and survivors, a skilled hospital team, collaborations with important stakeholders like general practitioners, and psychosocial care facilities, utilization of the international collaboration and reporting long-term follow-up care results to convince hospital managers. CONCLUSION: This study identified several factors for successful implementation of long-term follow-up care for childhood cancer survivors. Our findings showed that specific attention should be given to knowledge, capacity, and financial issues, along with addressing psychosocial issues of survivors.

Barriers, facilitators, and other factors associated with health behaviors in childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer survivors: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Healthy behaviors are paramount in preventing long-term adverse health outcomes in childhood, adolescent, and young adult (CAYA) cancer survivors. We systematically reviewed and synthesized existing literature on barriers, facilitators, and other factors associated with health behaviors in this population. METHODS: MEDLINE and PsycInfo were searched for qualitative and quantitative studies including survivors aged 16-50 years at study, a cancer diagnosis ≤25 years and ≥2 years post diagnosis. Health behaviors included physical activity, smoking, diet, alcohol consumption, sun exposure, and a combination of these behaviors (defined as health behaviors in general). RESULTS: Barriers, facilitators, and other factors reported in ≥2 two studies were considered relevant. Out of 4529 studies, 27 were included (n = 31,905 participants). Physical activity was the most frequently examined behavior (n = 12 studies), followed by smoking (n = 7), diet (n = 7), alcohol (n = 4), sun exposure (n = 4), and health behavior in general (n = 4). Relevant barriers to physical activity were fatigue, lack of motivation, time constraints, and current smoking. Relevant facilitators were perceived health benefits and motivation. Influence of the social environment and poor mental health were associated with more smoking, while increased energy was associated with less smoking. No relevant barriers and facilitators were identified for diet, alcohol consumption, and sun exposure. Barriers to healthy behavior in general were unmet information needs and time constraints whereas lifestyle advice, information, and discussions with a healthcare professional facilitated healthy behavior in general. Concerning other factors, women were more likely to be physically inactive, but less likely to drink alcohol and more likely to comply with sun protection recommendations than men. Higher education was associated with more physical activity, and lower education with more smoking. CONCLUSION: This knowledge can be used as a starting point to develop health behavior interventions, inform lifestyle coaches, and increase awareness among healthcare providers regarding which survivors are most at risk of unhealthy behaviors.

Assessment of HL7 FHIR Interoperability Between EHR Systems and the Survivorship Passport v2.0 Platform to Generate Treatment Summaries for Childhood Cancer Survivors in Six Clinics: Preliminary Testing Results.

The Survivorship Passport (SurPass) for childhood cancer survivors provides a personalized treatment summary together with a care plan for long-term screening of possible late effects. HL7 FHIR connectivity of Electronic Health Record (EHR) systems with the SurPass has been proposed to reduce the burden of collecting and organizing the relevant information. We present the results of testing and validation efforts conducted across six clinics in Austria, Belgium, Germany, Italy, Lithuania, and Spain. We also discuss ways in which this experience can be used to reduce efforts for the SurPass integration in other clinics across Europe.

Scaling up and implementing the digital Survivorship Passport tool in routine clinical care - The European multidisciplinary PanCareSurPass project.

BACKGROUND: Childhood cancer survivors (CCS), of whom there are about 500,000 living in Europe, are at an increased risk of developing health problems [1-6] and require lifelong Survivorship Care. There are information and knowledge gaps among CCS and healthcare providers (HCPs) about requirements for Survivorship Care [7-9] that can be addressed by the Survivorship Passport (SurPass), a digital tool providing CCS and HCPs with a comprehensive summary of past treatment and tailored recommendations for Survivorship Care. The potential of the SurPass to improve person-centred Survivorship Care has been demonstrated previously [10,11]. METHODS: The EU-funded PanCareSurPass project will develop an updated version (v2.0) of the SurPass allowing for semi-automated data entry and implement it in six European countries (Austria, Belgium, Germany, Italy, Lithuania and Spain), representative of three infrastructure healthcare scenarios typically found in Europe. The implementation study will investigate the impact on person-centred care, as well as costs and processes of scaling up the SurPass. Interoperability between electronic health record systems and SurPass v2.0 will be addressed using the Health Level Seven (HL7) International interoperability standards. RESULTS: PanCareSurPass will deliver an interoperable digital SurPass with comprehensive evidence on person-centred outcomes, technical feasibility and health economics impacts. An Implementation Toolkit will be developed and freely shared to promote and support the future implementation of SurPass across Europe. CONCLUSIONS: PanCareSurPass is a novel European collaboration that will improve person-centred Survivorship Care for CCS across Europe through a robust assessment of the implementation of SurPass v2.0 in different healthcare settings.

Interindividual variation in ovarian reserve after gonadotoxic treatment in female childhood cancer survivors - a genome-wide association study: results from PanCareLIFE.

OBJECTIVE: To discover new variants associated with low ovarian reserve after gonadotoxic treatment among adult female childhood cancer survivors using a genome-wide association study approach. DESIGN: Genome-wide association study. SETTING: Not applicable. PATIENTS: A discovery cohort of adult female childhood cancer survivors from the pan-European PanCareLIFE cohort (n = 743; median age: 25.8 years), excluding those who received bilateral ovarian irradiation, bilateral oophorectomy, central nervous system or total body irradiation, or stem cell transplantation. Replication was attempted in the US-based St. Jude Lifetime Cohort (n = 391; median age: 31.3 years). EXPOSURE: Female childhood cancer survivors are at risk of therapy-related gonadal impairment. Alkylating agents are well-established risk factors, and the interindividual variability in gonadotoxicity may be explained by genetic polymorphisms. Data were collected in real-life conditions, and cyclophosphamide equivalent doses were used to quantify alkylation agent exposure. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels served as a proxy for ovarian function, and the findings were combined in a meta-analysis. RESULTS: Three genome-wide significant (<5.0 × 10-8) and 16 genome-wide suggestive (<5.0 × 10-6) loci were associated with log-transformed AMH levels, adjusted for cyclophosphamide equivalent dose of alkylating agents, age at diagnosis, and age at study in the PanCareLIFE cohort. On the basis of the effect allele frequency (EAF) (>0.01 if not genome-wide significant), and biologic relevance, 15 single nucleotide polymorphisms were selected for replication. None of the single nucleotide polymorphisms were statistically significantly associated with AMH levels. A meta-analysis indicated that rs78861946 was associated with borderline genome-wide statistical significance (reference/effect allele: C/T; effect allele frequency: 0.04, beta (SE): -0.484 (0.091). CONCLUSION: This study found no genetic variants associated with a lower ovarian reserve after gonadotoxic treatment because the findings of this genome-wide association study were not statistically significant replicated in the replication cohort. Suggestive evidence for the potential importance of 1 variant is briefly discussed, but the lack of statistical significance calls for larger cohort sizes. Because the population of childhood cancer survivors is increasing, large-scale and systematic research is needed to identify genetic variants that could aid predictive risk models of gonadotoxicity as well as fertility preservation options for childhood cancer survivors.

Fat-to-lean mass ratio as a tool to detect the dysmetabolic profile in childhood cancer survivors.

INTRODUCTION: Survival after childhood cancer has significantly improved in recent decades. Nevertheless, an increased incidence of metabolic syndrome and cardiovascular disease among childhood cancer survivors (CCS) has been reported. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether fat-to-lean mass ratio (FLR) is associated with a dysmetabolic profile in CCS. METHODS: At least 2 years from completion of therapy, data from CCS aged 10 to 16 years at follow-up and without any concurrent steroid treatment were collected. Body mass index, waist circumference (WC), WC-to-height ratio, laboratory blood tests, and FLR calculated by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry measurements were considered. Body mass index >85th percentile and >97th percentile, WC >90th percentile, and WC-to-height ratio > 0.5 were chosen as criteria of overweight and obesity, visceral obesity, and increased cardiovascular risk, respectively. RESULTS: We enrolled 205 CCS previously treated for hematologic cancer or solid or central nervous system tumor. The best cutoff of FLR was 0.6. CCS; those with FLR ≥0.6 (43%) were more frequently overweight and obese (P < 0.001), and presented with higher levels of triglycerides (P = 0.011), homeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance (P = 0.001), alanine transaminase (P = 0.004), and trunk fat (P < 0.001) and lower levels of insulin-like growth factor 1 (P < 0.001) and lean mass (P = 0.009). WC >90th percentile (P = 0.007), insulin-like growth factor 1 (P = 0.002), and trunk fat (P = 0.006) were independent predictors of FLR ≥0.6 in a model including all the previous variables. CONCLUSIONS: An increased FLR is suggestive of altered body composition phenotype, allowing identification of CCS at higher risk of metabolic syndrome. Diet and physical activity are needed from commencement of oncological treatments to preserve overall nutritional status and maintain it over the long term.

Current practices of follow-up programs for childhood cancer survivors in Italy.

INTRODUCTION: Quality of life in childhood cancer survivors is largely affected by survivorship care and transition from treatment to long-term follow-up (LTFU). Referring to evidence-based recommendations, we wanted to evaluate LTFU care for survivors through a survey among the Italian Association for Pediatric Hematology-Oncology (AIEOP) centers. The project aimed to evaluate the availability of services in Italy, investigate strengths and weaknesses, analyze improvements of awareness in the field, and identify the gaps that need to be addressed by different centers. METHODS: Together with the family representatives, on behalf of AIEOP's Late Effects Working Group, we developed a questionnaire on assisting childhood cancer survivors. All AIEOP centers received one questionnaire including information on local health system organizations; LTFU for childhood cancer survivors; services for adult survivors of childhood cancer; information provided to survivors/caregivers and care plan delivery. RESULTS: Forty-eight AIEOP centers were contacted and 42 replied, with a response rate of 87.5%. The majority of respondents confirmed their interest in assisting patients with a survivorship care plan (95.2%), regardless of a clinic or dedicated staff. DISCUSSION: This is the first overview of LTFU in Italy, which provides detailed results at national levels, prompting consideration of improvements in the last decade. Although there is a high level of interest in survivorship care, many centers lack resources to implement such programs. The identification of these challenges is useful for planning future strategies.

European recommendations for short-term surveillance of health problems in childhood, adolescent and young adult cancer survivors from the end of treatment to 5 years after diagnosis: a PanCare guideline.

PURPOSE: Childhood, adolescent and young adult (CAYA) cancer survivors require ongoing surveillance for health problems from the end of cancer treatment throughout their lives. There is a lack of evidence-based guidelines on optimal surveillance strategies for the period from the end of treatment to 5 years after diagnosis. We aimed to address this gap by developing recommendations for short-term surveillance of health problems based on existing long-term follow-up (LTFU) care guidelines. METHODS: The guideline working group, consisting of healthcare professionals, parents and survivor representatives from 10 countries, worked together to identify relevant health problems that may occur in survivors between the end of treatment and 5 years after diagnosis and to develop recommendations for short-term surveillance of health problems. The recommendations were drawn from existing LTFU guidelines and adapted where necessary based on clinical expertise. RESULTS: The working group developed 44 recommendations for short-term surveillance of health problems, which were divided into four categories based on the level of surveillance required: awareness only (n = 11), awareness, history and/or physical examination without surveillance test (n = 15), awareness, history and/or physical examination with potential surveillance test (n = 1) and awareness, history and/or physical examination with surveillance test (n = 17). CONCLUSION: The development of a guideline for short-term surveillance of health problems fills a critical gap in survivorship care for CAYA cancer survivors, providing much-needed support immediately after treatment up to 5 years after diagnosis. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: This guideline will support healthcare professionals to provide appropriate follow-up care and improve the quality of life of CAYA cancer survivors.

Perceived barriers and facilitators to health behaviors in European childhood cancer survivors: A qualitative PanCareFollowUp study.

BACKGROUND: Healthy behaviors, that is, engaging in regular physical activities, maintaining a healthy diet, limiting alcohol consumption, and avoiding tobacco and drug use, decrease the risk of developing late adverse health conditions in childhood cancer survivors. However, childhood cancer survivors may experience barriers to adopting and maintaining healthy behaviors. This study aimed to assess these barriers and facilitators to health behavior adoption and maintenance in childhood cancer survivors. METHODS: A focus group ( n = 12) and semi-structured telephone interviews ( n = 20) were conducted with a selected sample of European and Dutch childhood cancer survivors, respectively. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) was used to inform the topic guide and analysis. Inductive thematic analysis was applied to identify categories relating to barriers and facilitators of health behavior adoption and maintenance, after which they were deductively mapped onto the TDF. RESULTS: Ten TDF domains were identified in the data of which "Knowledge," "Beliefs about consequences," "Environmental context and resources," and "Social influences" were most commonly reported. Childhood cancer survivors expressed a need for knowledge on the importance of healthy behaviors, possibly provided by healthcare professionals. They indicated physical and long-term benefits of healthy behaviors, available professional support, and a supporting and health-consciously minded work and social environment to be facilitators. Barriers were mostly related to a lack of available time and an unhealthy environment. Lastly, (social) media was perceived as both a barrier and a facilitator to healthy behaviors. CONCLUSION: This study has identified education and available professional support in health behaviors and the relevance of healthy behaviors for childhood cancer survivors as key opportunities for stimulating health behavior adoption in childhood cancer survivors. Incorporating health behavior support and interventions for this population should therefore be a high priority.

Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of a new European eHealth solution (SurPass v2.0): the PanCareSurPass Open Space study.

PURPOSE: To identify barriers and facilitators for implementing the Survivorship Passport (SurPass) v2.0 in six long-term follow-up (LTFU) care centres in Europe. METHODS: Stakeholders including childhood cancer survivors (CCSs), healthcare providers (HCPs), managers, information and technology (IT) specialists, and others, participated in six online Open Space meetings. Topics related to Care, Ethical, Legal, Social, Economic, and Information & IT-related aspects of implementing SurPass were evaluated. RESULTS: The study identified 115 barriers and 159 facilitators. The main barriers included the lack of standardised LTFU care in centres and network cooperation, uncertainty about SurPass accessibility, and uncertainty about how to integrate SurPass into electronic health information systems. The main facilitators included standardised and coordinated LTFU care in centres, allowing CCSs to conceal sensitive information in SurPass and (semi)automatic data transfer and filing. CONCLUSIONS: Key barriers to SurPass implementation were identified in the areas of care, ethical considerations, and information & IT. To address these barriers and facilitate the implementation on SurPass, we have formulated 27 recommendations. Key recommendations include using the internationally developed protocols and guidelines to implement LTFU care, making clear decisions about which parties have access to SurPass data in accordance with CCSs, and facilitating (semi)automated data transfer and filing using Health Level 7 (HL7) Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR). IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: The findings of this study can help to implement SurPass and to ensure that cancer survivors receive high-quality LTFU care with access to the necessary information to manage their health effectively.

Healthcare professionals' perceived barriers and facilitators of health behavior support provision: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Childhood cancer survivors (CCSs) have an increased risk of developing chronic health conditions. Evidence suggests that poor health behaviors further increase health risks. Healthcare professionals (HCPs) involved in survivorship care have a key role in providing health behavior support (HBS) but can feel limited in their ability to do so. This study aims to explore European HCPs perceived facilitators and barriers to providing HBS to CCSs. METHODS: Five focus groups with 30 HCPs from survivorship care clinics across Europe were conducted. Topic guides were informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to capture domains that may influence provision of HBS. Focus groups were analyzed with thematic analysis. Transcripts were inductively coded, after which axial coding was applied to organize codes into categories. Finally, categories were mapped onto the TDF domains. RESULTS: Nine TDF domains were identified in the data. The most commonly reported TDF domains were "Knowledge", "Skills", and "Environmental context and resources". HCPs indicated that their lack of knowledge of the association between late effects and health behaviors, besides time restrictions, were barriers to HBS. Facilitators for HBS included possession of skills needed to pass on health behavior information, good clinic organization, and an established network of HCPs. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified education and training of HCPs as key opportunities to improve HBS. Survivorship care clinics should work towards establishing well-integrated structured care with internal and external networks including HBS being part of routine care. Proper understanding of facilitators and barriers should lead to better survivorship care for CCSs.

Barriers and facilitators to implementation of the interoperable Survivorship Passport (SurPass) v2.0 in 6 European countries: a PanCareSurPass online survey study.

PURPOSE: Long-term follow-up (LTFU) care for childhood cancer survivors (CCSs) is essential to improve and maintain their quality of life. The Survivorship Passport (SurPass) is a digital tool which can aid in the delivery of adequate LTFU care. During the European PanCareSurPass (PCSP) project, the SurPass v2.0 will be implemented and evaluated at six LTFU care clinics in Austria, Belgium, Germany, Italy, Lithuania and Spain. We aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the SurPass v2.0 with regard to the care process as well as ethical, legal, social and economical aspects. METHODS: An online, semi-structured survey was distributed to 75 stakeholders (LTFU care providers, LTFU care program managers and CCSs) affiliated with one of the six centres. Barriers and facilitators identified in four centres or more were defined as main contextual factors influencing implementation of SurPass v2.0. RESULTS: Fifty-four barriers and 50 facilitators were identified. Among the main barriers were a lack of time and (financial) resources, gaps in knowledge concerning ethical and legal issues and a potential increase in health-related anxiety in CCSs upon receiving a SurPass. Main facilitators included institutions' access to electronic medical records, as well as previous experience with SurPass or similar tools. CONCLUSIONS: We provided an overview of contextual factors that may influence SurPass implementation. Solutions should be found to overcome barriers and ensure effective implementation of SurPass v2.0 into routine clinical care. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: These findings will be used to inform on an implementation strategy tailored for the six centres.

Childhood cancer survivorship care during the COVID-19 pandemic: an international report of practice implications and provider concerns.

PURPOSE: Long-term follow-up (LTFU) care is essential to optimise health outcomes in childhood cancer survivors (CCS). We aimed to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on LTFU services and providers. METHODS: A COVID-19 working group within the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group (IGHG) distributed a questionnaire to LTFU service providers in 37 countries across Europe, Asia, North America, Central/South America, and Australia. The questionnaire assessed how care delivery methods changed during the pandemic and respondents' level of worry about the pandemic's impact on LTFU care delivery, their finances, their health, and that of their family and friends. RESULTS: Among 226 institutions, providers from 178 (79%) responded. Shortly after the initial outbreak, 42% of LTFU clinics closed. Restrictions during the pandemic resulted in fewer in-person consultations and an increased use of telemedicine, telephone, and email consultations. The use of a risk assessment to prioritise the method of LTFU consultation for individual CCS increased from 12 to 47%. While respondents anticipated in-person consultations to remain the primary method for LTFU service delivery, they expected significantly increased use of telemedicine and telephone consultations after the pandemic. On average, respondents reported highest levels of worry about psychosocial well-being of survivors. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic necessitated changes in LTFU service delivery, including greater use of virtual LTFU care and risk-stratification to identify CCS that need in-person evaluations. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Increased utilisation of virtual LTFU care and risk stratification is likely to persist post-pandemic.

Evaluating the feasibility, effectiveness and costs of implementing person-centred follow-up care for childhood cancer survivors in four European countries: the PanCareFollowUp Care prospective cohort study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Long-term survival after childhood cancer often comes at the expense of late, adverse health conditions. However, survivorship care is frequently not available for adult survivors in Europe. The PanCareFollowUp Consortium therefore developed the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention, an innovative person-centred survivorship care model based on experiences in the Netherlands. This paper describes the protocol of the prospective cohort study (Care Study) to evaluate the feasibility and the health economic, clinical and patient-reported outcomes of implementing PanCareFollowUp Care as usual care in four European countries. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this prospective, longitudinal cohort study with at least 6 months of follow-up, 800 childhood cancer survivors will receive the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention across four study sites in Belgium, Czech Republic, Italy and Sweden, representing different healthcare systems. The PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention will be evaluated according to the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance framework. Clinical and research data are collected through questionnaires, a clinic visit for multiple medical assessments and a follow-up call. The primary outcome is empowerment, assessed with the Health Education Impact Questionnaire. A central data centre will perform quality checks, data cleaning and data validation, and provide support in data analysis. Multilevel models will be used for repeated outcome measures, with subgroup analysis, for example, by study site, attained age, sex or diagnosis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study will be conducted in accordance with the guidelines of Good Clinical Practice and the Declaration of Helsinki. The study protocol has been reviewed and approved by all relevant ethics committees. The evidence and insights gained by this study will be summarised in a Replication Manual, also including the tools required to implement the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention in other countries. This Replication Manual will become freely available through PanCare and will be disseminated through policy and press releases. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Netherlands Trial Register (NL8918; https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/8918).

The PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention: A European harmonised approach to person-centred guideline-based survivorship care after childhood, adolescent and young adult cancer.

BACKGROUND: Long-term follow-up (LTFU) care, although endorsed, is not available for the majority of adult survivors of childhood, adolescence and young adult (CAYA) cancer. Barriers to implementation include lack of time, knowledge, personnel and funding. Sustainable solutions are urgently needed to address the needs of CAYA cancer survivors to improve the quality of life and reduce the burden of late effects on survivors, health care systems and society. The European Union-funded PanCareFollowUp project, initiated by the Pan-European Network for Care of Survivors after Childhood and Adolescent Cancer, was established to facilitate the implementation of person-centred survivorship care across Europe. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention was co-developed with survivors as part of the PanCareFollowUp project. It is a person-centred approach to survivorship care, supported by guidelines and with flexibility to adapt to local health care settings. The Care Intervention consists of three steps: (1) previsit completion of a Survivor Questionnaire (by the survivor) and Treatment Summary (by the health care provider [HCP]), (2) a clinic visit including shared decision-making, and (3) a follow-up call to finalise the individualised Survivorship Care Plan. RESULTS: We developed the key components of the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention: a PanCareFollowUp Survivor Questionnaire, Treatment Summary template, Survivorship Care Plan template, and educational materials for HCPs and survivors. Wide implementation of the PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention will be supported with a freely distributed Replication Manual on completion of the PanCareFollowUp project. CONCLUSIONS: The PanCareFollowUp Care Intervention will support the implementation of person-centred, guideline-based LTFU care in different health care settings across Europe to improve survivors' health and well-being.