Cancer Survivorship Care in the United States at Facilities Accredited by the Commission on Cancer.

Importance: Since 2021, American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer (CoC) accreditation standards require providing a survivorship program for patients with adult-onset cancer treated with curative intent. Since more than 70% of all patients with cancer in the US are treated at CoC-accredited facilities, this presents an opportunity for a landscape analysis of survivorship care availability. Objective: To determine the prevalence, types, and outcomes of cancer survivorship services at CoC-accredited facilities. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study used an anonymous, online, cross-sectional survey conducted from May 4 to 25, 2023. Participants were CoC-accredited facilities in the US representing diverse CoC program categories, institutional characteristics, geographic regions, and practice types. Department of Veterans Affairs cancer programs were excluded due to data usage restrictions. Data were analyzed from July to October 2023. Exposure: CoC Survivorship Standard 4.8 was released in October 2019 and programs were expected to adhere to the Standard beginning January 1, 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Questions included self-reported survivorship program characteristics, availability of services aligned to CoC Survivorship Standard 4.8, and perceived program impacts. Response frequencies and proportions were determined in aggregate and by CoC program category. Results: There were 1400 eligible programs, and 384 programs participated (27.4% response rate). All regions and eligible program categories were represented, and most had analytic caseloads of 500 to 4999 patients in 2021. Most survivorship program personnel included nurses (334 programs [87.0%]) and social workers (278 programs [72.4%]), while physical (180 programs [46.9%]) and occupational (87 programs [22.7%]) therapists were less common. Services most endorsed as available for all survivors were screening for new cancers (330 programs [87.5%]), nutritional counseling (325 programs [85.3%]), and referrals to specialists (320 programs [84.7%]), while treatment summaries (242 programs [64.7%]), and survivorship care plans (173 programs [43.0%]), sexual health (217 programs [57.3%]), and fertility (214 programs [56.9%]) were less common. Survivorship services were usually delivered by cancer treatment teams (243 programs [63.3%]) rather than specialized survivorship clinics (120 programs [31.3%]). For resources needed, additional advanced practice clinicians with dedicated survivorship effort (205 programs [53.4%]) and electronic health record enhancements (185 programs [48.2%]) were most endorsed. Lack of referrals and low patient awareness were endorsed as the primary barriers. A total of 335 programs (87.2%) agreed that Survivorship Standard 4.8 helped advance their programs. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings of this survey study of CoC-accredited programs establish a benchmark for survivorship care delivery in the US, identify gaps in specific services and opportunities for intervention, contribute to longitudinal reevaluation for tracking progress nationally, and suggest the value of survivorship care standards.

Diagnostic and therapeutic delays in lung cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic: a single center experience at a German Cancer center.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had negative drawbacks on the healthcare system worldwide and on individuals other than those directly affected by the virus. Delays in cancer therapy and diagnosis have been reported in the literature. We hypothesized similar effects on patients with lung cancer at our center. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data of patients referred to our center with newly diagnosed lung cancer from 2018 to 2022. We considered distribution of UICC Stages and time from case presentation in our multidisciplinary tumor board or from therapeutic indication from treating physician to therapy initiation (surgery, systemic therapies and radiation) to define delays in diagnosis and treatment. RESULTS: 1020 patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer were referred to our center from 2018 to 2022, with a median of 206 cases yearly (range: 200-208). Cases with Stage IV in 2020-2022 were significantly higher than in 2018-2019 (57% vs. 46%, p = 0,001). 228 operative resections took place between 2018 and 2022, 100 from January 2018 to February 2020 and 128 from March 2020 to December 2022. Median time from presentation in our tumor board to resection was also significantly longer after the beginning of the pandemic than before (22 days vs. 15,5 days, p = 0,013). No significant delays were observed for administration of systemic treatment and initiation of radiation. CONCLUSIONS: During the pandemic higher disease stages were reported for patients with lung cancer, yet there were no clinically relevant delays in treatment. In the context of the post-covid era new diagnostic strategies are necessary to facilitate early diagnosis of lung cancer. Despite the pandemic, for patients with suspicious symptoms prompt access to healthcare facilities is essential for early diagnosis.

Investigation of antimicrobial susceptibility patterns, risk factors and their impact on mortality in cancer patients at a tertiary care cancer hospital- A prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients are vulnerable to infections due to immunosuppression caused by cancer itself and its treatment. The emergence of antimicrobial-resistant bacteria further complicates the treatment of infections and increases the mortality and hospital stays. This study aimed to investigate the microbial spectrum, antimicrobial resistance patterns, risk factors, and their impact on clinical outcomes in these patients. METHODS: A prospective study was conducted at a tertiary care cancer hospital in Patna, Bihar, India, which included cancer patients aged 18 years and older with positive microbial cultures. RESULTS: This study analysed 440 patients, 53% (234) of whom were females, with an average age of 49.27 (± 14.73) years. A total of 541 isolates were identified, among which 48.01% (242) were multidrug resistant (MDR), 29.76% (150) were extensively drug resistant (XDR), and 19.84% (112) were sensitive. This study revealed that patients who underwent surgery, chemotherapy, were hospitalized, had a history of antibiotic exposure, and had severe neutropenia were more susceptible to MDR and XDR infections. The average hospital stays were 16.90 (± 10.23), 18.30 (± 11.14), and 22.83 (± 13.22) days for patients with sensitive, MDR, and XDR infections, respectively. The study also revealed overall 30-day mortality rate of 31.81% (140), whereas the MDR and XDR group exhibited 38.92% and 50.29% rates of 30-day mortality respectively (P < 0.001). Possible risk factors identified that could lead to mortality, were cancer recurrence, sepsis, chemotherapy, indwelling invasive devices such as foley catheter, Central venous catheter and ryles tube, MASCC score (< 21) and pneumonia. CONCLUSIONS: This study emphasizes the necessity for personalized interventions among cancer patients, such as identifying patients at risk of infection, judicious antibiotic use, infection control measures, and the implementation of antimicrobial stewardship programs to reduce the rate of antimicrobial-resistant infection and associated mortality and hospital length of stay.

[Community-Based Comprehensive Care System and Cancer Treatment Coordination System from the Viewpoint of Designated Cancer Hospitals].

In promoting the community-based comprehensive care system, designated cancer hospitals are required to provide decision- making support for treatment and care in the face of increasingly sophisticated and diverse treatments, to promote hospitalization and discharge support to shorten the length of hospital stay, and to implement multidisciplinary cooperation for coordination of treatment and care due to the increasing number of elderly and multi-morbidity cancer patients. However, it is difficult at present to link and integrate designated cancer hospitals, which are required to provide cancer treatment in each secondary medical care area, and community comprehensive care systems, which provide medical care and care to support daily life and autonomy and independence of patients and their families in the patients' living areas. In the future, through the promotion of networking and educational activities for healthcare professionals, as demonstrated in previous studies, it will be necessary to establish a system in which cancer treatment and community-based comprehensive care systems are linked to provide high-quality medical care and care to cancer patients.

Trends in financial payments from industry to US cancer centers, 2014-2021.

BACKGROUND: Industry payments to US cancer centers are poorly understood. METHODS: US National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated comprehensive cancer centers were identified (n = 51). Industry payments to NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers from 2014 to 2021 were obtained from Open Payments and National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant funding from NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools (RePORT). Given our focus on cancer centers, we measured the subset of industry payments related to cancer drugs specifically and the subset of NIH funding from the NCI. RESULTS: Despite a pandemic-related decline in 2020-2021, cancer-related industry payments to NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers increased from $482 million in 2014 to $972 million in 2021. Over the same period, NCI research grant funding increased from $2 481  million to $2 724  million. The large majority of nonresearch payments were royalties and licensing payments. CONCLUSION: Industry payments to NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers increased substantially more than NCI funding in recent years but were also more variable. These trends raise concerns regarding the influence and instability of industry payments.

Analysis of travel burden and travel support among patients treated at a comprehensive cancer center in the Southeastern United States.

INTRODUCTION: Travel burden leads to worse cancer outcomes. Understanding travel burden and the level and types of travel support provided at large cancer centers is critical for developing systematic programs to alleviate travel burden. This study analyzed patients who received travel assistance, including their travel burden, types and amount of travel support received, and factors that influenced these outcomes. METHODS: We analyzed 1063 patients who received travel support from 1/1/2021 to 5/1/2023 at Winship Cancer Institute, in which ~18,000 patients received cancer care annually. Travel burden was measured using distance and time to Winship sites from patients' residential address. Travel support was evaluated using the monetary value of total travel support and type of support received. Patients' sociodemographic and clinical factors were extracted from electronic medical records. Area-level socioeconomic disadvantage was coded by the Area Deprivation Index using patient ZIP codes. RESULTS: On average, patients traveled 57.2 miles and 67.3 min for care and received $74.1 in total for travel support. Most patients (88.3%) received travel-related funds (e.g., gas cards), 5% received direct rides (e.g., Uber), 3.8% received vouchers for taxi or public transportation, and 3% received combined travel support. Male and White had longer travel distance and higher travel time than female and other races, respectively. Patients residing in more disadvantaged neighborhoods had an increased travel distance and travel time. Other races and Hispanics received more travel support ($) than Black and White patients or non-Hispanics. Patients with higher travel distance and travel time were more like to receive travel-related financial support. CONCLUSION: Among patients who received travel support, those from socioeconomically disadvantaged neighborhoods had greater travel burden. Patients with greater travel burden were more likely to receive travel funds versus other types of support. Further understanding of the impact of travel burden and travel support on cancer outcomes is needed.

Real-World Impact of an In-House Dihydropyrimidine Dehydrogenase (DPYD) Genotype Test on Fluoropyrimidine Dosing, Toxicities, and Hospitalizations at a Multisite Cancer Center.

PURPOSE: Fluoropyrimidine-related toxicity and mortality risk increases significantly in patients carrying certain DPYD genetic variants with standard dosing. We implemented DPYD genotyping at a multisite cancer center and evaluated its impact on dosing, toxicity, and hospitalization. METHODS: In this prospective observational study, patients receiving (reactive) or planning to receive (pretreatment) fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy were genotyped for five DPYD variants as standard practice per provider discretion. The primary end point was the proportion of variant carriers receiving fluoropyrimidine modifications. Secondary end points included mean relative dose intensity, fluoropyrimidine-related grade 3+ toxicities, and hospitalizations. Fisher's exact test compared toxicity and hospitalization rates between pretreatment carriers, reactive carriers, and wild-type patients. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression identified factors associated with toxicity and hospitalization risk. Kaplan-Meier methods estimated time to event of first grade 3+ toxicity and hospitalization. RESULTS: Of the 757 patients who received DPYD genotyping (median age 63, 54% male, 74% White, 19% Black, 88% GI malignancy), 45 (5.9%) were heterozygous carriers. Fluoropyrimidine was modified in 93% of carriers who started treatment. In 442 patients with 3-month follow-up, 64%, 31%, and 30% of reactive carriers, pretreatment carriers, and wild-type patients had grade 3+ toxicity, respectively (P = .085); 64%, 25%, and 13% were hospitalized (P < .001). Reactive carriers had 10-fold higher odds of hospitalization compared with wild-type patients (P = .001), whereas no significant difference was noted between pretreatment carriers and wild-type patients. Time-to-event of toxicity and hospitalization were significantly different between genotype groups (P < .001), with reactive carriers having the earliest onset and highest incidence. CONCLUSION: DPYD genotyping prompted fluoropyrimidine modifications in most carriers. Pretreatment testing reduced toxicities and hospitalizations compared with reactive testing, thus normalizing the risk to that of wild-type patients, and should be considered standard practice.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors-Induced Endocrinopathies: Assessment, Management and Monitoring in a Comprehensive Cancer Centre.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the incidence, presentation, frequency and management of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI)-related endocrinopathies in a comprehensive cancer centre in Oman, particularly with programme death 1/programme death-ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) inhibitors. BACKGROUND: A high number of patients treated with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors for the management of solid tumours developed endocrinopathies. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of patients admitted to Sultan Qaboos Comprehensive Cancer Care and Research Centre (SQCCCRC) from August 2021 to December 2022. All adults diagnosed with solid cancers and have received at least one dose of ICIs were included. Patients with incomplete data were excluded from the analysis. Data regarding the ICI-induced endocrinopathy were collected. RESULTS: A total of 139 patients were included in the study of which 58% were females. The median age of the cohort was 56 years. The incidence of endocrine-related adverse events was 28%. The mean time for the development of endocrine adverse events after treatment initiation was 4.1 ± 2.8 months. Of the patients who developed toxicity, 90% had hypothyroidism. Ten patients developed hyperthyroidism, two patients were diagnosed with secondary adrenal insufficiency/hypophysitis and one patient developed Type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM). Using univariable logistic regression weight and body mass index (BMI) significantly impacted the development of endocrine immune-related adverse events (irAEs). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study from the Sultanate of Oman to assess PD-1/PDL-1 ICI-induced endocrinopathies. The most common endocrine adverse event is thyroid dysfunction, mainly hypothyroidism followed by hyperthyroidism. Hypophysitis, primary adrenal insufficiency and CIADM occur less frequently, but have a more significant effect on the patient's health. The treating physician should be aware of ICI-induced endocrinopathies, screening and treatment. Furthermore, our study showed that patients with a higher BMI have a greater risk of developing irAES. Further studies are needed to establish the predictors of endocrine irAEs.

INCA DE PORTAS ABERTAS 2023: Enfermagem, Fisioterapia e Nutricionista

O INCA de Portas Abertas irá apresentar o Instituto, a atuação de profissionais de diferentes áreas do INCA e de seus alunos dos cursos técnicos, programas de residência, mestrado e doutorado, divulgando relevantes informações sobre saúde e oncologia para profissionais e estudantes que possuem interesse nos programas de ensino da instituição.

Evolution of community outreach and engagement at National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Centers, an evolving journey.

Cancer mortality rates have declined during the last 28 years, but that process is not equitably shared. Disparities in cancer outcomes by race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, sexual orientation and gender identity, and geographic location persist across the cancer care continuum. Consequently, community outreach and engagement (COE) efforts within National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Center (NCI-DCC) catchment areas have intensified during the last 10 years as has the emphasis on COE and catchment areas in NCI's Cancer Center Support Grant applications. This review article attempts to provide a historic perspective of COE within NCI-DCCs. Improving COE has long been an important initiative for the NCI, but it was not until 2012 and 2016 that NCI-DCCs were required to define their catchment areas rigorously and to provide specific descriptions of COE interventions, respectively. NCI-DCCs had previously lacked adequate focus on the inclusion of historically marginalized patients in cancer innovation efforts. Integrating COE efforts throughout the research and operational aspects of the cancer centers, at both the patient and community levels, will expand the footprint of COE efforts within NCI-DCCs. Achieving this change requires sustained commitment by the centers to adjust their activities and improve access and outcomes for historically marginalized communities.

Why location matters: associations between county-level characteristics and availability of National Cancer Oncology Research Program and National Cancer Institute sites.

BACKGROUND: The majority of patients with cancer seek care at community oncology sites; however, most clinical trials are available at National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated sites. Although the NCI National Cancer Oncology Research Program (NCORP) was designed to address this problem, little is known about the county-level characteristics of NCORP site locations. METHODS: This cross-sectional analysis determined the association between availability of NCORP or NCI sites and county-level characteristic theme percentile scores from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention's Social Vulnerability Index themes. Health Resources and Services Administration's Area Health Resource Files were used to determine contiguous counties. We estimated risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using modified Poisson regression models to evaluate the association between county-level characteristics and site availability within singular and singular and contiguous counties. RESULTS: Of 3141 included counties, 14% had an NCORP, 2% had an NCI, and 1% had both sites. Among singular counties, for a standard deviation increase in the racial and ethnic theme score, there was a 22% higher likelihood of NCORP site availability (95% CI = 1.10 to 1.36); for a standard deviation increase in the socioeconomic status theme score, there was a 24% lower likelihood of NCORP site availability (95% CI = 0.67 to 0.87). Associations were of smaller magnitude when including contiguous counties. NCI sites were located in more vulnerable counties. CONCLUSIONS: NCORP sites were more often in racially diverse counties and less often in socioeconomically vulnerable counties. Research is needed to understand how clinical trial representation will increase if NCORP sites strategically increase their locations in more vulnerable counties.

Implementation of quality indicators for vulvar cancer in gynaecological cancer centres certified by the German Cancer Society (DKG).

PURPOSE: In 2018, the first guideline-based quality indicators (QI) for vulvar cancer were implemented in the data-sheets of certified gynaecological cancer centres. The certification process includes guideline-based QIs as a fundamental component. These indicators are specifically designed to evaluate the level of care provided within the centres. This article aims to give an overview of the developing process of guideline based-QIs for women with vulvar cancer and presents the QIs results from the certified gynaecological cancer centres. METHODS: The QIs were derived in a standardized multiple step process during the update of the 2015 S2k guideline "Diagnosis, Therapy, and Follow-Up Care of Vulvar Cancer and its Precursors" (registry-number: no. 015/059) and are based on strong recommendations. RESULTS: In total, there are eight guideline-based QIs for vulvar cancer. Four QIs are part of the certification process. In the treatment year 2021, 2.466 cases of vulvar cancer were treated in 177 centres. The target values in the centres for pathology reports on tumour resection and lymphadenectomy as well as sentinel lymph nodes have increased since the beginning of the certification process and have been above 90% over the past three treatment years (2019-2021). DISCUSSION: QIs based on strong guideline recommendations, play a crucial role in measuring and allowing to quantify essential aspects of patient care. By utilizing QIs, centres are able to identify areas for process optimization and draw informed conclusions. Over the years the quality of treatment of vulvar cancer patients measured by the QIs was improved. The certification system is continuously reviewed to enhance patient care even further by using the outcomes from QIs revaluation.

Changing patterns of bacterial profile and antimicrobial resistance in high-risk patients during the COVID-19 pandemic at a tertiary oncology hospital.

The widespread evolution of phenotypic resistance in clinical isolates over the years, coupled with the COVID-19 pandemic onset, has exacerbated the global challenge of antimicrobial resistance. This study aimed to explore changes in bacterial infection patterns and antimicrobial resistance during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study involved the periods before and during COVID-19: the pre-pandemic and pandemic eras. The surveillance results of bacterial isolates causing infections in cancer patients at an Egyptian tertiary oncology hospital were retrieved. The Vitek®2 or Phoenix systems were utilized for species identification and susceptibility testing. Statistical analyses were performed comparing microbiological trends before and during the pandemic. Out of 2856 bacterial isolates, Gram-negative bacteria (GNB) predominated (69.7%), and Gram-positive bacteria (GPB) comprised 30.3% of isolates. No significant change was found in GNB prevalence during the pandemic (P = 0.159). Elevated rates of Klebsiella and Pseudomonas species were demonstrated during the pandemic, as was a decrease in E. coli and Acinetobacter species (P < 0.001, 0.018, < 0.001, and 0.046, respectively) in hematological patients. In surgical patients, Enterobacteriaceae significantly increased (P = 0.012), while non-fermenters significantly decreased (P = 0.007). GPB species from either hematological or surgical wards exhibited no notable changes during the pandemic. GNB resistance increased in hematological patients to carbapenems, amikacin, and tigecycline and decreased in surgical patients to amikacin and cefoxitin (P < 0.001, 0.010, < 0.001, < 0.001, and 0.016, respectively). The study highlights notable shifts in the microbial landscape during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in the prevalence and resistance patterns of GNB in hematological and surgical wards.

Advantages and Challenges of Total-Body PET/CT at a Tertiary Cancer Center: Insights from Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center.

In recent decades, researchers worldwide have directed their efforts toward enhancing the quality of PET imaging. The detection sensitivity and image resolution of conventional PET scanners with a short axial field of view have been constrained, leading to a suboptimal signal-to-noise ratio. The advent of long-axial-field-of-view PET scanners, exemplified by the uEXPLORER system, marked a significant advancement. Total-body PET imaging possesses an extensive scan range of 194 cm and an ultrahigh detection sensitivity, and it has emerged as a promising avenue for improving image quality while reducing the administered radioactivity dose and shortening acquisition times. In this review, we elucidate the application of the uEXPLORER system at the Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, including the disease distribution, patient selection workflow, scanning protocol, and several enhanced clinical applications, along with encountered challenges. We anticipate that this review will provide insights into routine clinical practice and ultimately improve patient care.

Patients' satisfaction with cancer pain treatment at adult oncologic centers in Northern Ethiopia; a multi-center cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Patient satisfaction is an important indicator of the quality of healthcare. Pain is one of the most common symptoms among cancer patients that needs optimal treatment; rather, it compromises the quality of life of patients. OBJECTIVE: To assess the levels and associated factors of satisfaction with cancer pain treatment among adult patients at cancer centers found in Northern Ethiopia in 2023. METHODS: After obtaining ethical approval, a multi-center cross-sectional study was conducted at four cancer care centers in northern Ethiopia. The data were collected using an interviewer-administered structured questionnaire that included the Lubeck Medication Satisfaction Questionnaire (LMSQ). The severity of pain was assessed by a numerical rating scale from 0 to 10 with a pain score of 0 = no pain, 1-3 = mild pain, 4-6 = moderate pain, and 7-10 = severe pain Binary logistic regression analysis was employed, and the strength of association was described in an adjusted odds ratio with a 95% confidence interval. RESULT: A total of 397 cancer patients participated in this study, with a response rate of 98.3%. We found that 70.3% of patients were satisfied with their cancer pain treatment. Being married (AOR = 5.6, CI = 2.6-12, P < 0.001) and being single (never married) (AOR = 3.5, CI = 1.3-9.7, P = 0.017) as compared to divorced, receiving adequate pain management (AOR = 2.4, CI = 1.1-5.3, P = 0.03) as compared to those who didn't receive it, and having lower pain severity (AOR = 2.6, CI = 1.5-4.8, P < 0.001) as compared to those who had higher level of pain severity were found to be associated with satisfaction with cancer pain treatment. CONCLUSION: The majority of cancer patients were satisfied with cancer pain treatment. Being married, being single (never married), lower pain severity, and receiving adequate pain management were found to be associated with satisfaction with cancer pain treatment. It would be better to enhance the use of multimodal analgesia in combination with strong opioids to ensure adequate pain management and lower pain severity scores.

The experience of surgical cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic at a large cancer centre in London.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had an enormous impact on the experiences of patients across all health disciplines, especially those of cancer patients. The study aimed to understand the experiences of cancer patients who underwent surgery during the first two waves of the pandemic at Guy's Cancer Centre, which is a large tertiary cancer centre in London. METHODS: A mixed-methods approach was adopted for this study. Firstly, a survey was co-designed by the research team and a patient study group. Patients who underwent surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic were invited to take part in this survey. Results were analysed descriptively. Three discussion groups were then conducted to focus on the main themes from the survey findings: communication, COVID-19 risk management and overall experience. These discussion groups were transcribed verbatim and underwent a thematic analysis using the NVivo software package. RESULTS: Out of 1657 patients invited, a total of 250 (15%) participants took part in the survey with a mean age of 66 (SD 12.8) and 52% females. The sample was representative of a wide range of tumour sites and was reflective of those invited to take part. Overall, the experience of the cancer patients was positive. They felt that the safety protocols implemented at the hospital were effective. Communication was considered key, and patients were receptive to a change in the mode of communication from in-person to virtual. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the immense challenges faced by our Cancer Centre, patients undergoing surgery during the first two waves of the COVID-19 pandemic had a generally positive experience with minimal disruptions to their planned surgery and ongoing care. Together with the COVID-19 safety precautions, effective communication between the clinical teams and the patients helped the overall patient experience during their surgical treatment.

Adult cancer patients' barriers to and satisfaction with care at a National Cancer Hospital in Vietnam.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the overall satisfaction with oncological care, including barriers to care, and identified its associated predictors among adult cancer patients in Vietnam. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we enrolled 300 adult cancer patients receiving inpatient care at a large urban oncological hospital between June and July 2022. Multivariable linear regression analyses examined associations between patient experiences and overall satisfaction ratings with cancer care. RESULTS: The mean overall satisfaction with oncological care was 8.82 out of 10, with 98.0% recommending this facility to their friends and family. In an adjusted model, being female (ß = 0.29, 95%CI: 0.04, 0.53), endorsing satisfaction with patient-nurse communication (ß = 0.33, 95%CI: 0.13, 0.53), patient-doctor communication (ß = 0.40, 95%CI: 0.11, 0.70), and psychoeducation about oncological medication management (ß = 0.30, 95%CI: 0.14, 0.45) were positively associated with overall ratings. In contrast, individuals with delays in treatment scheduling reported lower overall satisfaction with oncological care (ß = -0.38, 95%CI: -0.64, -0.13). Patients perceived health system, social/environmental, and individual barriers to care: worries about income loss due to attending treatment (43.3%); fear, depression, anxiety, and distress (36.8%); concerns about affordability of treatment (36.7%) and transportation problems (36.7%); and excessive waiting times for appointments (28.8%). CONCLUSION: This study showed high overall patient satisfaction with cancer care quality. Patient-centered communication strategies and psychoeducation about oncological medication management may be targeted to further enhance the cancer inpatient experience. Raising awareness about treatment options and services, and integrating mental health awareness into oncological care may ameliorate patient distress and facilitate greater satisfaction with oncological treatment processes.

The impact of robotic rectal cancer surgery at a Canadian regional cancer centre: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Although robotic surgery has several advantages over other minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques for rectal cancer surgery, the uptake in Canada has been limited owing to a perceived increase in cost and lack of training. The objective of this study was to determine the impact of access to robotic surgery in a Canadian setting. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study involving consecutive adults undergoing surgical resection for rectal cancer between 2017 and 2020. The primary exposure was access to robotic surgery. Outcomes included MIS utilization, short-term outcomes, total cost of care, and quality of surgical resection. We completed univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: We included 171 individuals in this cohort study (85 in the prerobotic period and 86 in the robotic period). The 2 groups had similar baseline characteristics. A higher proportion of individuals underwent successful MIS in the robotic phase (86% v. 46%, p < 0.001). Other benefits included a shorter mean length of hospital stay (5.1 d v. 9.2 d, p < 0.001). The quality of surgical resection was similar between groups. The total cost of care was $16 746 in the robotic period and $18 808 in the prerobotic period (mean difference -$1262, 95% confidence interval -$4308 to $1783; p = 0.4). CONCLUSION: Access to robotic rectal cancer surgery increased successful completion of MIS and shortened hospital stay, with a similar total cost of care. Robotic rectal cancer surgery can enhance patient outcomes in the Canadian setting.