Psychosocial consequences of head and neck cancer symptom burden after chemoradiation: a mixed-method study.

PURPOSE: Patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) experience significant symptom burden from combination chemotherapy and radiation (chemoradiation) that affects acute and long-term health-related quality of life (HRQOL). However, psychosocial impacts of HNC symptom burden are not well understood. This study examined psychosocial consequences of treatment-related symptom burden from the perspectives of survivors of HNC and HNC healthcare providers. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional, mixed-method study conducted at an NCI-designated comprehensive cancer center. Participants (N = 33) were survivors of HNC who completed a full course of chemoradiation (n = 20) and HNC healthcare providers (n = 13). Participants completed electronic surveys and semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: Survivors were M = 61 years old (SD = 9) and predominantly male (75%), White (90%), non-Hispanic (100%), and diagnosed with oropharynx cancer (70%). Providers were mostly female (62%), White (46%) or Asian (31%), and non-Hispanic (85%) and included physicians, registered nurses, an advanced practice nurse practitioner, a registered dietician, and a speech-language pathologist. Three qualitative themes emerged: (1) shock, shame, and self-consciousness, (2) diminished relationship satisfaction, and (3) lack of confidence at work. A subset of survivors (20%) reported clinically low social wellbeing, and more than one-third of survivors (35%) reported clinically significant fatigue, depression, anxiety, and cognitive dysfunction. CONCLUSION: Survivors of HNC and HNC providers described how treatment-related symptom burden impacts psychosocial identity processes related to body image, patient-caregiver relationships, and professional work. Results can inform the development of supportive interventions to assist survivors and caregivers with navigating the psychosocial challenges of HNC treatment and survivorship.

Plasma cell-free DNA methylome profiling in pre- and post-surgery oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma.

Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), a highly heterogeneous disease that involves multiple anatomic sites, is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Although the utility of noninvasive biomarkers based on circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) methylation profiling has been widely recognized, limited studies have been reported so far regarding the dynamics of cfDNA methylome in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma (OCSCC). It is hypothesized in this study that comparison of methylation profiles in pre- and postsurgery plasma samples will reveal OCSCC-specific prognostic and diagnostic biomarkers. As a strategy to further prioritize tumor-specific targets, top differential methylated regions (DMRs) were called by reanalyzing methylation data from paired tumor and normal tissue collected in the the cancer genome atlas head-neck squamous cell carcinoma (TCGA) head and neck cancer cohort. Matched plasma samples from eight patients with OCSCC were collected at Moffitt Cancer Center before and after surgical resection. Plasma-derived cfDNA was analyzed by cfMBD-seq, which is a high-sensitive methylation profiling assay. Differential methylation analysis was then performed based on the matched samples profiled. In the top 200 HNSCC-specific DMRs detected based on the TCGA data set, a total of 23 regions reached significance in the plasma-based DMR test. The top five validated DMR regions (ranked by the significance in the plasma study) are located in the promoter regions of genes PENK, NXPH1, ZIK1, TBXT, and CDO1, respectively. The genome-wide cfDNA DMR analysis further highlighted candidate biomarkers located in genes SFRP4, SOX1, IRF4, and PCDH17. The prognostic relevance of candidate genes was confirmed by survival analysis using the TCGA data. This study supports the utility of cfDNA-based methylome profiling as a promising noninvasive biomarker source for OCSCC and HNSCC.

Telemedicine Adoption in an NCI-Designated Cancer Center During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Report on Patient Experience of Care.

BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer require timely access to care so that healthcare providers can prepare an optimal treatment plan with significant implications for quality of life and mortality. The COVID-19 pandemic spurred rapid adoption of telemedicine in oncology, but study of patient experience of care with telemedicine in this population has been limited. We assessed overall patient experience of care with telemedicine at an NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center during the COVID-19 pandemic and examined changes in patient experience over time. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective study of outpatient oncology patients who received treatment at Moffitt Cancer Center. Press Ganey surveys were used to assess patient experience. Data from patients with appointments between April 1, 2020, and June 30, 2021, were analyzed. Patient experience was compared between telemedicine and in-person visits, and patient experience with telemedicine over time was described. RESULTS: A total of 33,318 patients reported Press Ganey data for in-person visits, and 5,950 reported Press Ganey data for telemedicine visits. Relative to patients with in-person visits, more patients with telemedicine visits gave higher satisfaction ratings for access (62.5% vs 75.8%, respectively) and care provider concern (84.2% vs 90.7%, respectively) (P<.001). When adjusted for age, race/ethnicity, sex, insurance, and clinic type, telemedicine visits consistently outperformed in-person visits over time regarding access and care provider concern (P<.001). There were no significant changes over time in satisfaction with telemedicine visits regarding access, care provider concern, telemedicine technology, or overall assessment (P>.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, a large oncology dataset showed that telemedicine resulted in better patient experience of care in terms of access and care provider concern compared with in-person visits. Patient experience of care with telemedicine visits did not change over time, suggesting that implementing telemedicine was effective.

Patient and caregiver experience with telehealth for surgical cancer care: A qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic led to telemedicine adoption for many medical specialties, including surgical cancer care. To date, the evidence for patient experience of telemedicine among patients with cancer undergoing surgery is limited to quantitative surveys. Thus, this study qualitatively assessed the patient and caregiver experience of telehealth visits for surgical cancer care. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with 25 patients with cancer and three caregivers who had completed a telehealth visit for preanesthesia or postoperative visits. Interviews covered visit descriptions, overall satisfaction, system experience, visit quality, what roles caregivers had, and thoughts on what types of surgery-related visits would be appropriate through telehealth versus in-person. RESULTS: Telehealth delivery for surgical cancer care was generally viewed positively. Multiple factors influenced the patient experience, including prior experience with telemedicine, ease of scheduling visits, smooth connection experiences, having access to technical support, high communication quality, and visit thoroughness. Participants identified use cases on telehealth for surgical cancer care, including postoperative visits for uncomplicated surgical procedures and educational visits. CONCLUSIONS: Patient experiences with telehealth for surgical care are influenced by smooth system experiences, high-quality patient-clinician communications, and a patient-centered focus. Interventions are needed to optimize telehealth delivery (e.g., improve telemedicine platform usability).

Patient satisfaction and cost savings analysis of the telemedicine program within a neuro-oncology department.

PURPOSE: Unique challenges exist in the utilization of telemedicine for neurological and surgical specialties. We examined the differences in patient satisfaction for telemedicine versus in-person visits within a Neuro-Oncology Program to assess whether there was a difference between surgical and medical specialties. We also examined the potential cost savings benefits of utilizing telemedicine. METHODS: 1189 Press Ganey surveys in the Department of Neuro-Oncology (982 in-person and 207 telemedicine) by surgical and medical neuro-oncology patients between 04/01/2020 and 06/30/2021 were reviewed. Survey results were divided into 4 categories (Access, Provider, Technology (telemedicine only), and Overall Satisfaction). Results were analyzed for the impact of telemedicine versus in-person visits, and gender, age, insurance, and specialty. Cost savings were calculated based on potential travel distance and lost productivity. RESULTS: Survey results from telemedicine visits demonstrated that patients with private insurance returned higher scores in the Provider (p = 0.0089), Technology (p = 0.00187), and Overall (p = 0.00382) categories. Surgical patients returned higher scores for Access (p = 0.0015), Technology (p = 0.0002), and Overall (p = 0.0019). When comparing telemedicine to in-person scores, in-person scored higher in Provider (p = 0.0092) for all patients, while in-person scored higher in Access (p = 0.0252) amongst surgical patients. Cost analysis revealed that telemedicine allowed patients to save an average of 4.1 to 5.6 h per visit time and a potential cost savings of up to $223.3 ± 171.4. CONCLUSION: Telemedicine yields equivalent patient satisfaction when employed in surgical as compared to medical Neuro-Oncology patients with the potential to lessen the financial and time burden on neuro-oncology patients.

Considerations for developing supportive care interventions for survivors of head and neck cancer: A qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe considerations for developing supportive care interventions targeted to head and neck cancer (HNC) survivors. METHODS: One-time semi-structured interviews (N = 33) were conducted with HNC survivors who had recently finished treatment (n = 20) and HNC providers (e.g., physicians, nurses; n = 13). Interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded using inductive applied thematic analysis techniques to identify themes. RESULTS: HNC survivors (75% male; M = 61 years old) and providers (54% physicians; 62% female) were unanimously supportive of developing HNC-specific supportive care interventions. Participants described potential benefits of offering interventions at various points throughout the HNC treatment and survivorship trajectory rather than at a single critical time. Many participants preferred group-based interventions because of the high value of peer-support. Others described how group interventions may not be appropriate for all HNC survivors due to risks for negative social comparisons and exacerbated anxiety. Participants suggested topics that should be addressed in HNC-specific interventions including education about acute and long-term side effects, symptom management, nutritional support, relationship/social role changes, grief/loss, and fear of recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: HNC-specific supportive care interventions are critically needed, as survivors experience persistent symptoms and distinct psychosocial concerns that impact quality of life. Findings from this study can inform the development of supportive care interventions targeted to the unique psychosocial concerns of HNC survivors.

"I have cancer during COVID; that's a special category": a qualitative study of head and neck cancer patient and provider experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has drastically changed cancer care delivery strategies. Patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer (LA-HNC) may be particularly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, as they often undergo treatments that require daily clinic visits (e.g., radiation therapy). The goal of this study was to characterize the lived experience of LA-HNC patients and their healthcare providers during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: LA-HNC patients who completed a full course of chemotherapy and radiation therapy during the COVID19 pandemic (N = 20) and LA-HNC healthcare providers (N = 13) participated in semi-structured interviews. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed for qualitative themes. RESULTS: The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on patients' overall quality of life and health care. Results were organized in four main themes: (1) increased psychological distress; (2) exacerbated social isolation; (3) added stress in clinic for patients and providers; and (4) delays in health care. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight myriad ways LA-HNC patients and providers have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Results can inform the development of supportive interventions to assist LA-HNC in managing COVID-19-related stress and unmet needs related to social isolation and in-clinic support.

Health Care Providers' and Professionals' Experiences With Telehealth Oncology Implementation During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Rapid implementation of telehealth for cancer care during COVID-19 required innovative and adaptive solutions among oncology health care providers and professionals (HPPs). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this qualitative study was to explore oncology HPPs' experiences with telehealth implementation during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This study was conducted at Moffitt Cancer Center (Moffitt), an NCI (National Cancer Institute)-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. Prior to COVID-19, Moffitt piloted telehealth visits on a limited basis. After COVID-19, Moffitt rapidly expanded telehealth visits. Telehealth visits included real-time videoconferencing between HPPs and patients and virtual check-ins (ie, brief communication with an HPP by telephone only). We conducted semistructured interviews with 40 oncology HPPs who implemented telehealth during COVID-19. The interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed for themes using Dedoose software (version 4.12). RESULTS: Approximately half of the 40 participants were physicians (n=22, 55%), and one-quarter of the participants were advanced practice providers (n=10, 25%). Other participants included social workers (n=3, 8%), psychologists (n=2, 5%), dieticians (n=2, 5%), and a pharmacist (n=1, 3%). Five key themes were identified: (1) establishing and maintaining patient-HPP relationships, (2) coordinating care with other HPPs and informal caregivers, (3) adapting in-person assessments for telehealth, (4) developing workflows and allocating resources, and (5) future recommendations. Participants described innovative strategies for implementing telehealth, such as coordinating interdisciplinary visits with multiple HPPs and inviting informal caregivers (eg, spouse) to participate in telehealth visits. Health care workers discussed key challenges, such as workflow integration, lack of physical exam and biometric data, and overcoming the digital divide (eg, telehealth accessibility among patients with communication-related disabilities). Participants recommended policy advocacy to support telehealth (eg, medical licensure policies) and monitoring how telehealth affects patient outcomes and health care delivery. CONCLUSIONS: To support telehealth growth, implementation strategies are needed to ensure that HPPs and patients have the tools necessary to effectively engage in telehealth. At the same time, cancer care organizations will need to engage in advocacy to ensure that policies are supportive of oncology telehealth and develop systems to monitor the impact of telehealth on patient outcomes, health care quality, costs, and equity.

Sensor Data Integration: A New Cross-Industry Collaboration to Articulate Value, Define Needs, and Advance a Framework for Best Practices.

Data integration, the processes by which data are aggregated, combined, and made available for use, has been key to the development and growth of many technological solutions. In health care, we are experiencing a revolution in the use of sensors to collect data on patient behaviors and experiences. Yet, the potential of this data to transform health outcomes is being held back. Deficits in standards, lexicons, data rights, permissioning, and security have been well documented, less so the cultural adoption of sensor data integration as a priority for large-scale deployment and impact on patient lives. The use and reuse of trustworthy data to make better and faster decisions across drug development and care delivery will require an understanding of all stakeholder needs and best practices to ensure these needs are met. The Digital Medicine Society is launching a new multistakeholder Sensor Data Integration Tour of Duty to address these challenges and more, providing a clear direction on how sensor data can fulfill its potential to enhance patient lives.

Survival outcomes of patients with subglottic squamous cell carcinoma : a study of the National Cancer Database.

BACKGROUND: Subglottic squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) represents less than 5% of all laryngeal cancers. Our objective was to better characterize survival using the National Cancer Database (NCDB) registry from 2004 to 2015. RESULTS: 403 patients met inclusion criteria. 63.8% presented with advanced-stage disease. Treatment regimens were as follows: 15.9% underwent surgery alone, 16.9% underwent surgery followed by adjuvant therapy, and 67.2% underwent primary chemo/radiation (C/RT). Five-year overall survival (OS) was 58.6% for Stage I and II patients, 49.1% for Stage III, and 36.3% for stage IV. Adjusted OS for all-stage patients was worse with C/RT compared to upfront surgery (40.6% vs. 58.4%; HR 1.83 [95%CI 1.29-2.61] p < 0.001) and adjusted OS for stage 4 disease was significantly worse with C/RT compared to surgery (26.0% vs. 45.2%, HR 1.79 [95%CI 1.17-2.73] p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: Majority of patients were treated with primary C/RT. Adjusted survival favors upfront surgery versus C/RT, especially in patients with Stage IV disease.