Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 14 de 14
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
País/Región como asunto
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Cancer ; 130(13): 2325-2338, 2024 Jul 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38436396

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The 2020 American Cancer Society (ACS) guidelines are the most recent national guidelines for cervical cancer screening. These guidelines propose two major changes from current practice: initiating screening at age 25 years and using primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing. Adoption of guidelines often occurs slowly, and therefore understanding clinician attitudes is important to facilitate practice change. METHODS: Interviews with a national sample of clinicians who perform cervical cancer screening in a variety of settings explored attitudes toward the two major changes from the 2020 ACS cervical cancer screening guidelines. Clinicians participated in 30- to 60-min interviews exploring their attitudes toward various aspects of cervical cancer screening. Qualitative analysis was performed. RESULTS: Seventy clinicians participated from across the United States. Few respondents were initiating screening at age 25 years, and none were using primary HPV testing. However, over half would be willing to adopt these practices if supported by scientific evidence and recommended by professional medical organizations. Barriers to adoption included the lack of endorsement by professional societies, lack of laboratory availability and insurance coverage, limited autonomy within large health care systems, and concerns related to missed disease. CONCLUSIONS: Few clinicians have adopted screening initiation or primary HPV testing, as recommended by the 2020 ACS guidelines, but over half were open to adopting these changes. Implementation may be facilitated via professional organization endorsement, clinician education, and laboratory, health care system, and insurance support. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: In 2020, the American Cancer Society (ACS) released updated guidelines for cervical cancer screening. The main changes to current practices were to initiate screening at age 25 years instead of age 21 years and to screen using primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing rather than cytology alone or in combination with HPV testing. We performed in-depth interviews with 70 obstetrics and gynecology, family medicine, and internal medicine physicians and advanced practice providers about their attitudes toward these guidelines. Few clinicians are following the 2020 ACS guidelines, but over half were open to changing practice if the changes were supported by evidence and recommended by professional medical organizations. Barriers to adoption included the lack of endorsement by professional medical organizations, logistical issues, and concerns about missed disease.


Asunto(s)
American Cancer Society , Actitud del Personal de Salud , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Infecciones por Papillomavirus , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Investigación Cualitativa , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino , Humanos , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/diagnóstico , Femenino , Estados Unidos , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/psicología , Adulto , Infecciones por Papillomavirus/diagnóstico , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina , Tamizaje Masivo , Masculino
2.
J Behav Med ; 47(2): 295-307, 2024 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38127175

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) and liver cancer are two of the leading causes of cancer death in the United States and persistent disparities in CRC and liver cancer incidence and outcomes exist. Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is one of the main contributors to liver cancer. Effective screening for both CRC and HCV exist and are recommended for individuals based upon age, regardless of gender or sex assigned at birth. Recommendations for both screening behaviors have been recently updated. However, screening rates for both CRC and HCV are suboptimal. Targeting adoption of multiple screening behaviors has the potential to reduce cancer mortality and disparities. OBJECTIVE: To examine psychosocial factors associated with completion of CRC and HCV screenings in order to inform a multi-behavioral educational intervention that pairs CRC and HCV screening information. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted with participants (N = 50) recruited at two community health centers in Florida (United States). Kruskal-Wallis and Fisher's exact tests were used to examine associations between completion of both CRC and HCV screening, CRC and HCV knowledge, Preventive Health Model constructs (e.g., salience and coherence, response efficacy, social influence), and sociodemographic variables. RESULTS: Most participants were White (84%), female (56%), insured (80%), and reported a household income of $25,000 or less (53%). 30% reported ever previously completing both CRC and HCV screenings. Prior completion of both screening behaviors was associated with higher educational attainment (p = .014), having health insurance (p = .022), being U.S.-born (p = .043), and higher salience and coherence scores for CRC (p = .040) and HCV (p = .004). CONCLUSIONS: Findings demonstrate limited uptake of both CRC and HCV screenings among adults born between 1945 and 1965. Uptake was associated with multiple sociodemographic factors and health beliefs related to salience and coherence. Salience and coherence are modifiable factors associated with completion of both screening tests, suggesting the importance of incorporating these health beliefs in a multi-behavioral cancer education intervention. Additionally, health providers could simultaneously recommend and order CRC and HCV screening to improve uptake among this age cohort.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , Hepatitis C Crónica , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Adulto , Recién Nacido , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Femenino , Estudios Transversales , Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Colorrectales/psicología , Hepacivirus , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/psicología , Tamizaje Masivo , Centros Comunitarios de Salud
3.
J Soc Work End Life Palliat Care ; 20(2): 120-132, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38635421

RESUMEN

Ovarian cancer is considered the most fatal and costly gynecologic cancer. Although personalized therapies have improved ovarian cancer prognosis, they have resulted in increased financial toxicity concerns among this population. This study evaluated financial toxicity in patients with advanced ovarian cancer. Using secondary data from a study of barriers to palliative care, financial toxicity (FT) was measured through the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity scale. Univariate and bivariate analyses were used to assess the relationship between selected demographic (i.e., age, race, ethnicity, education, place of birth, insurance type, yearly household income, employment status) and treatment-specific variables (i.e., years since diagnosis, surgery, chemotherapy, radiation, hormonal and targeted therapy) with clinically relevant financial toxicity. Characteristics were compared using Fisher's exact or chi squared tests. A total of 38 participants with advanced ovarian cancer were included in this study; 24% (n = 9) reported clinically significant FT. Income (p = .001), place of birth (p = .048) and employment status (p = .001) were related to FT. Study findings highlight that advanced ovarian cancer patients experience high FT, particularly those with low income, who are not able to work and were born outside the US. Further research using larger datasets and more representative samples is needed to inform intervention development and implementation.


Asunto(s)
Estrés Financiero , Renta , Neoplasias Ováricas , Humanos , Femenino , Neoplasias Ováricas/terapia , Neoplasias Ováricas/patología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Estrés Financiero/psicología , Renta/estadística & datos numéricos , Cuidados Paliativos , Factores Socioeconómicos , Empleo/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Factores Sociodemográficos
4.
Patient Educ Couns ; 123: 108200, 2024 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38368784

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To develop theory-informed human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine education materials that appeal to 18-26-year-olds. METHODS: First, draft materials informed by Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and Health Belief Model (HBM) were developed. Next, an initial set of Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR)-guided interviews were conducted with 18-26-year-old participants to receive feedback about content, format, appeal, implementation facilitators and barriers, and potential delivery modalities. Then, interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed using thematic analysis. Next, materials were modified based upon feedback. Finally, another set of interviews was conducted. RESULTS: Most participants (n = 15) were female (93%), White (60%), and non-Hispanic (93%). All (100%) had heard of HPV and the HPV vaccine, and 80% reported having received the vaccine. Participant feedback on materials included emphasizing vaccine benefits and efficacy, rewording to enhance comprehension, and adding images represent diversity beyond race/ethnicity and sexual orientation. Suggested delivery methods included social media, print materials, and posters. CONCLUSION: Qualitative interviews with young adults suggest that HPV education materials targeted to 18-26-year-olds should include health behavior theory-aligned messaging, inclusive imagery, and be disseminated through multiple modalities. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Providers should consider utilizing theory-based education materials that are relevant and appealing to young adults.


Asunto(s)
Infecciones por Papillomavirus , Vacunas contra Papillomavirus , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Adulto Joven , Adolescente , Adulto , Infecciones por Papillomavirus/prevención & control , Conductas Relacionadas con la Salud , Vacunación , Virus del Papiloma Humano , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud
5.
Womens Health Issues ; 34(3): 257-267, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38383228

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: National guidelines recommend cervical cancer screening with Papanicolaou (Pap) testing at 3-year intervals or with human papillomavirus (HPV) testing alone or HPV/Pap cotesting at 5-year intervals for average-risk individuals aged 30-65 years. METHODS: We explored factors associated with clinician-reported guideline-concordant screening, as well as facilitators and barriers to appropriate cervical cancer screening. RESULTS: A national sample of clinicians (N = 1,251) completed surveys; a subset (n = 55) completed interviews. Most (94%) reported that they screened average-risk patients aged 30-65 years with cotesting. Nearly all clinicians who were categorized as nonadherent to national guidelines were overscreening (98%). Guideline concordant screening was reported by 47% and 82% of those using cotesting and HPV testing, respectively (5-year intervals), and by 62% of those using Pap testing only (3-year intervals). Concordant screening was reported more often by clinicians who were aged <40 years, non-Hispanic, and practicing in the West or Midwest, and less often by obstetrician-gynecologists and private practice physicians. Concordant screening was facilitated by beliefs that updated guidelines were evidence-based and reduced harms, health care system dissemination of guidelines, and electronic medical record prompts. Barriers to concordant screening included using outdated guidelines, relying on personal judgment, concern about missing cancers, inappropriate patient risk assessment, and lack of support for guideline adoption through health care systems or electronic medical records. CONCLUSIONS: Most clinicians screened with Pap/HPV cotesting and approximately one-half endorsed a 5-year screening interval. Clinician knowledge gaps include understanding the evidence underlying 5-year intervals and appropriate risk assessment to determine which patients should be screened more frequently. Education and tracking systems can promote guideline-concordant screening.


Asunto(s)
Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Adhesión a Directriz , Tamizaje Masivo , Prueba de Papanicolaou , Infecciones por Papillomavirus , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino , Frotis Vaginal , Humanos , Femenino , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/diagnóstico , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto , Frotis Vaginal/estadística & datos numéricos , Infecciones por Papillomavirus/diagnóstico , Adhesión a Directriz/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricos
6.
Womens Health Issues ; 2024 Jul 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38960815

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Cervical cancer disproportionately affects those who are underscreened. Human papillomavirus self-collection is a promising tool to expand screening. OBJECTIVE: Study objectives were to examine 1) factors (provider characteristics and practice type) associated with and 2) attitudes (perceived benefits and concerns) toward using human papillomavirus self-collection for cervical cancer screening in clinical practice. METHODS: This study had a mixed method design; prior to regulatory approval of self-collection, we conducted a national survey and interviews of health care providers who perform cervical cancer screening. Quantitative measures included provider and practice characteristics, willingness to recommend, and preferences related to self-collection. Qualitative interviews further elucidated provider perspectives. RESULTS: A total of 1,251 providers completed surveys, and 56 completed interviews. Among survey respondents, 33.4% reported they were likely to offer self-collection, 28.6% were unsure, and 38.0% reported they were unlikely. Most would offer self-collection either in the clinic or at home per patient preference. Male participants, advanced practice providers, internal and family physicians, and those practicing in academic medical center, hospital, or community health settings were more likely than female participants, obstetrician-gynecologist physicians, and those in private practice to indicate they were likely to offer self-collection. Concerns expressed in both surveys and interviews included the adequacy of sample collection and the ability to follow-up. Respondents felt that self-collection would be particularly beneficial for those who did not have access to clinician-collected screening, as well as for patients who may have difficulty with pelvic examinations for any reason. CONCLUSION: Providers considered human papillomavirus self-collection to be a way to expand access for patients with health care barriers and pelvic examination difficulties. They had concerns related to sample adequacy and follow-up after abnormal results.

7.
Patient Educ Couns ; 127: 108338, 2024 Oct.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38878586

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: This study explored patients and providers' perspectives on therapeutic vaccines for cervical cancer and assessed barriers and facilitators. METHODS: Qualitative semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with patients who had cervical dysplasia, or a past or current cervical cancer diagnosis and providers who provided care to patients with cervical abnormalities or cervical cancer. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis in NVivo. RESULTS: A total of 28 in-depth interviews were conducted with patients (N = 15) and providers (N = 13). Participants in both groups expressed enthusiasm for the prospect of a therapeutic vaccine for cervical cancer and were encouraged by less invasive treatment opportunities. Perceived patient barriers included concerns about side effects, eligibility criteria, costs, transportation, and logistical obstacles. Providers echoed these concerns, highlighted additional structural barriers such as racism and limited availability of culturally sensitive educational aids, and underscored the need for provider training on this topic. CONCLUSION: Our results reinforce the need for future multi-level interventions discussing vaccine efficacy, durability, and safety, as well as addressing factors such as awareness, knowledge, and beliefs. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Our findings can contribute to the development of provider and patient-centered tools that promote therapeutic vaccine acceptance.


Asunto(s)
Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Entrevistas como Asunto , Investigación Cualitativa , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino , Humanos , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/terapia , Femenino , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud/psicología , Vacunas contra Papillomavirus/administración & dosificación , Vacunas contra Papillomavirus/uso terapéutico , Percepción , Actitud del Personal de Salud , Personal de Salud/psicología , Vacunas contra el Cáncer/uso terapéutico , Infecciones por Papillomavirus/prevención & control , Anciano
8.
Prev Med Rep ; 38: 102602, 2024 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38375175

RESUMEN

Providers' recommendation is among the strongest predictors to patients engaging in preventive care. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare providers' Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) screening recommendation quality between high-risk and average-risk patients to determine if providers are universally recommending HCV screening, regardless of risk behaviors. This cross-sectional survey of 284 Indiana providers in 2020 assessed provider characteristics, HCV screening recommendation practices (strength, presentation, frequency, timeliness), self-efficacy, and barriers to recommending HCV screening. T-test and Chi-square compared recommendation practices for high-risk and average-risk patients. Prevalence ratios were calculated for variables associated with HCV recommendation strength comparing high-risk and average-risk patients. Logistic regression analyses examined factors associated with HCV recommendation strength for high- and average-risk patients, with odds ratios. Compared to average-risk patients, high-risk patients received higher proportion of HCV recommendations that were strong (70.4 % v. 42.4 %), routine (61.9 % v. 55.6 %), frequent (37.7 % v. 28 %), and timely (74.2 % v. 54.9 %) (P-values < 0.001). Compared to average-risk patients, providers with high-risk patients had a lower percentage of giving a strong recommendation if they were nurse practitioner (PR = 0.49). For high-risk patients, providers with higher self-efficacy (aOR = 2.16;95 %CI = 0.99-4.69) had higher odds, while those with higher perceived barriers (aOR = 0.19;95 %CI = 0.09-0.39) and those with an internal medicine specialty compared to family medicine (aOR = 0.22;95 %CI = 0.08-0.57) had lower odds of giving a strong recommendation. These data suggest providers are not universally recommending HCV screening for all adults regardless of reported risk. Future research should translate these findings into multilevel interventions to improve HCV screening recommendations regardless of patient risk status.

9.
PEC Innov ; 4: 100248, 2024 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38292078

RESUMEN

Objective: Hepatobiliary tumors have evolving management guidelines. Patient educational needs and interest in community engagement are unknown. This study serves as a needs assessment. Methods: A prospective, needs assessment, survey study of hepatobiliary patients was performed (2016-2019). Surveys (n = 169) were distributed covering three domains of interest: informational needs, interest in outreach, and engagement preferences. Results: Seventy patients completed the survey (response rate = 41.4%). Most patients had completed surgical treatment (84.3%). Cancer treatment was ranked as their primary topic of interest (n = 39, 55.7bold%), followed by symptom management, nutrition, and survivorship. Most patients did not participate in screening (n = 57, 81.4%), though were interested in learning more about these programs. Thirty-nine patients (55.7%) stated they would want to receive more education. Only 17 (24.3%) were interested in attending in-person events. Patients preferred online methods for education (n = 49, 70%). While patients were aware of their case presentation at tumor board, only 38 (54.3%) felt well-informed about recommendations. Conclusion: Multidisciplinary care is complex and difficult for patients to navigate. Most patients have interest in educational resources and prefer online modalities. Patients understand multidisciplinary tumor boards, but communication could be improved. Innovation: These data inform a new, innovative, approach to outreach efforts in this population.

10.
Cancer Med ; 13(13): e7440, 2024 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38989639

RESUMEN

Cancer genomic services (CGS) can support genetic risk-stratified cancer prevention and treatment. Racial/ethnic minority groups are less likely to access and utilize CGS compared with non-Hispanic Whites. Little research has described characteristics of interventions targeted at CGS among Latinos. This scoping review aimed to (1) describe interventions promoting uptake of CGS among Latinos in the United States and Latin America, (2) describe intervention adaptations for Latino participants, and (3) summarize intervention implementation factors suggested by reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. We conducted a search in English and Spanish of literature published between 2005 and 2022 across PubMed and Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature databases. Sixteen of 2344 papers met the inclusion criteria of the analysis. Efforts to promote CGS among Latino communities were limited in the US and lower in Latin America. This review highlights the need for in-depth exploration of acculturation-informed interventions and better reporting on implementation factors to enhance their scalability across diverse settings.


Asunto(s)
Genómica , Hispánicos o Latinos , Neoplasias , Humanos , Neoplasias/genética , Neoplasias/terapia , Neoplasias/etnología , Genómica/métodos , Estados Unidos , América Latina
11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39102787

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Genetic tests, including germline and tumor (somatic) testing, can optimize the clinical care and outcomes of cancer patients and their family members. However, evidence on cancer patients' use of genetic testing and discussion of genetic testing with healthcare providers is limited. METHODS: Study participants included cancer survivors aged 18 or older, drawn from the 2021 Health Information and National Trends Survey (HINTS)-Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) linked database, which comprises three United States (US) cancer registries: Iowa, New Mexico, and the Greater Bay Area. Sociodemographic factors (e.g., age, sex, income, education) at the time of survey and clinical characteristics (e.g., cancer site, stage) at the time of diagnosis were compared based on self-reported genetic testing status and provider discussions using survey-designed-adjusted analysis. RESULTS: The weighted study sample comprised 415,978 cancer survivors with a mean age of 70.5 years when surveyed. Overall, 17.0% reported having germline testing, 8.5% having tumor testing, and 8.6% discussing tumor testing with their healthcare providers. Higher proportions of germline genetic testing were observed among survivors under age 65 at the time of the survey, females, those holding college degrees, and those with private insurance coverage compared to their respective counterparts - males, those aged 65 or above when surveyed, with lower educational attainment, and with public insurance or uninsured. The proportion of those who reported tumor testing was greater for those diagnosed in recent years (2015-2017 vs. before 2002). Regarding clinical characteristics, survivors who had ovarian and breast cancers had a 7.0%-36.4% higher prevalence of both testing compared to those with other cancer types lacking germline indication. More cancer survivors diagnosed in distant stages (vs. regional) or between 2015-2017 (vs. 2003-2010) reported having provider discussions about tumor testing. CONCLUSION: Findings showed that the highest reports of germline testing were among young female cancer survivors and those with higher education and private insurance. Survivors diagnosed in recent years or with advanced-stage disease were more likely to report discussing tumor testing with providers. Further research is warranted to better understand the barriers and educational needs of cancer patients, caregivers, and providers to optimize genetic testing strategies.

12.
J Cancer Surviv ; 2024 Mar 23.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38520598

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Adherence to oral endocrine therapy (ET) remains an issue for up to half of women prescribed these medications. There is emerging data that Black breast cancer survivors (BCS) have lower rates of ET adherence. Given the disparities in breast cancer recurrence and survival for Black BCS compared to their White counterparts, the goal of this study is to better understand barriers to ET adherence among Black BCS from the patient and provider perspectives. METHODS: In this qualitative study, we conducted semi-structured interviews between October 29, 2021, and March 1, 2023. Interviews were recorded and transcribed, and coded data were organized into primary and secondary themes. Participants were recruited from a single academic cancer center. A convenience sample of 24 Black BCS and 9 medical oncology providers was included. Eligible BCS were 18 years or older, English-speaking, diagnosed with stage I-III hormone receptor-positive breast cancer, who had initiated ET. RESULTS: Mean age of the BCS was 55 years (interquartile range, IQR 17 years). About one-fourth had a high school diploma or less (26.1%) and 47% completed a college education or higher. Approximately one-third of participants had annual household incomes of $40,000 or less (30.4%) or more than $100,000 (30.4%). Forty-three percent of the patient participants had private insurance; 11% were insured through Medicaid or the federal healthcare exchange; 26.1% had Medicare; and 13% were uninsured. Of the 9 medical oncology providers interviewed, 2 were advanced practice providers, and 7 were medical oncologists. We found 3 major themes: (1) Black BCS often had concerns about ET before initiation; (2) after initiation, both BCS and providers reported side effects as the most impactful barrier to ET adherence; and (3) survivors experienced challenges with managing ET side effects. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that multifaceted support interventions for managing ET-related symptoms may lead to improved adherence to ET among Black women and may reduce disparities in outcomes. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Multifaceted support interventions for managing ET-related symptoms may lead to improved adherence to ET among Black breast cancer survivors.

13.
Contemp Clin Trials ; 142: 107576, 2024 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38763306

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: This protocol paper describes the overall design for HPV MISTICS, a multilevel intervention to increase human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination initiation and completion rates among adolescents aged 11-17. METHODS: We will conduct a hybrid type 1 implementation-effectiveness trial using a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial in eight federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) in Florida. Intervention components target three levels: system, providers, and parents. Outcomes will be assessed using quantitative (e.g., vaccination data, survey data) and qualitative methods (e.g., staff and parent interviews). We expect to quantify changes in HPV vaccine series initiation and completion rates for adolescents ages 11-17 in the eight FQHCs. We have hypothesized a 20-percentage point increase in HPV vaccine series initiation and a 10-percentage point increase in series completion. We also anticipate being able to explore factors at the system, provider, and patient levels as potential covariates. Implementation outcomes, barriers, and facilitators identified in the study will help characterize the implementation process and inform potential future intervention scale-up. RESULTS: The project is ongoing; effectiveness and implementation outcomes will be determined following project completion. CONCLUSIONS: Findings will provide evidence of an equity-informed research design and implementation procedures that could help improve HPV vaccination rates in similar health systems. CLINICAL TRIALS IDENTIFIER: NCT05677360 (date registered: 2022-12-22); https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05677360?lead=Moffitt%20Cancer%20Center%20&aggFilters=status:rec&page=2&rank=17.


Asunto(s)
Infecciones por Papillomavirus , Vacunas contra Papillomavirus , Padres , Humanos , Vacunas contra Papillomavirus/administración & dosificación , Adolescente , Infecciones por Papillomavirus/prevención & control , Niño , Femenino , Padres/psicología , Florida , Masculino , Proyectos de Investigación
14.
Front Oncol ; 14: 1362244, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39109281

RESUMEN

Introduction: Cancer-associated cachexia (CC) is a progressive syndrome characterized by unintentional weight loss, muscle atrophy, fatigue, and poor outcomes that affects most patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The ability to identify and classify CC stage along its continuum early in the disease process is challenging but critical for management. Objectives: The main objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of CC stage overall and by sex and race and ethnicity among treatment-naïve PDAC cases using clinical, nutritional, and functional criteria. Secondary objectives included identifying the prevalence and predictors of higher symptom burden, supportive care needs, and quality of life (QoL), and examining their influence on overall survival (OS). Materials and methods: A population-based multi-institutional prospective cohort study of patients with PDAC was conducted between 2018 and 2021 by the Florida Pancreas Collaborative. Leveraging patient-reported data and laboratory values, participants were classified at baseline into four stages [non-cachexia (NCa), pre-cachexia (PCa), cachexia (Ca), and refractory cachexia (RCa)]. Multivariate regression, Kaplan Meier analyses, and Cox regression were conducted to evaluate associations. Results: CC stage was estimated for 309 PDAC cases (156 females, 153 males). The overall prevalence of NCa, PCa, Ca, and RCa was 12.9%, 24.6%, 54.1%, and 8.4%, respectively. CC prevalence across all CC stages was highest for males and racial and ethnic minorities. Criteria differentiated NCa cases from other groups, but did not distinguish PCa from Ca. The most frequently reported symptoms included weight loss, fatigue, pain, anxiety, and depression, with pain significantly worsening over time. The greatest supportive care needs included emotional and physical domains. Males, Black people, and those with RCa had the worst OS. Conclusions: Using clinical, nutritional, and functional criteria, nearly one-quarter of the PDAC cases in our diverse, multi-institutional cohort had PCa and 62.5% had Ca or RCa at the time of diagnosis. The PCa estimate is higher than that reported in prior studies. We recommend these criteria be used to aid in CC classification, monitoring, and management of all incident PDAC cases. Findings also highlight the recommendation for continued emotional support, assistance in alleviating pain, and supportive care needs throughout the PDAC treatment journey.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA