Evaluating cancer patient-reported experience measures against health literacy best practices.

PURPOSE: Positive patient experiences can lead to better adherence to cancer treatment and greater patient health outcomes. The primary aim of this descriptive study was to determine whether commonly used cancer PREMs have been developed according to health literacy best practices. The secondary and third aims were to examine the development of PREMs and to assess their comprehensiveness against principles of patient-centered care. METHODS: To assess adherence to best practice literacy principles regarding readability and understandability of commonly used cancer PREMs, three validated readability calculators and a validated instrument were utilized. To better understand how PREMs were developed, data about survey items, patient involvement, and expert consultation were collected. Finally, the Picker framework was used to evaluate the comprehensiveness of PREMs against principles of patient-centered care. RESULTS: Thirty-five PREMs studies met inclusion criteria for the study. The mean reading grade level of cancer PREMs was 9.7 (SD = 0.75, range = 8.2-11.2) with best practice recommendation being a grade 6 reading grade level. Twenty-eight PREMs were rated on understandability, with a mean score of 74% (SD = 10.6, range = 46-93%, with optimal score of greater than 80%). The mean number of items across PREMs was 49 (SD = 31, range = 13-136). Recommendations for the number of items to include in a questionnaire is 25-30 items. Most PREMs (n = 33, 94.3%) asked ≥ 1 double-barreled question. All PREMs addressed ≥ 2 patient-centered care principles. CONCLUSION: Cancer PREMs included in this study did not meet evidence-informed thresholds for readability and understandability. As such, it is possible that there may be gaps in how we understand the care experiences of low health literacy populations. Future development of PREMs should engage patients with low health literacy to ensure their perspectives are accurately captured and that PREMs are designed to meet the needs of all patients.

A randomized phase III trial of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for patients with up to 10 oligometastases and a synchronous primary tumor (SABR-SYNC): study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Emerging randomized data, mostly from phase II trials, have suggested that patients with oligometastatic cancers may benefit from ablative treatments such as stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR). However, phase III data testing this paradigm are lacking, and many studies have examined SABR in the setting of metachronous oligometastatic disease. The goal of the SABR-SYNC trial is to assess the effect of SABR in patients with oligometastatic cancers and a synchronous primary tumor. METHODS: One hundred and eighty patients will be randomized in a 1:2 ratio between standard of care (SOC) palliative-intent treatments vs. SOC + ablative therapy (SABR preferred) to all sites of known disease. Randomization will be stratified based on histology and number of metastases at enrollment. SABR may be delivered in 1-, 3- and 5-fraction regimens, with recommended doses of 20 Gy, 30 Gy, and 35 Gy, respectively. Non-SABR local modalities (e.g. surgery, thermal ablation, conventional radiation) may be used for treatment of the primary or metastases at the discretion of the treating physicians, if those modalities are clinically preferred. The primary endpoint is overall survival, and secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, time to development of new metastatic lesions, time to initiation of next systemic therapy, quality of life, and toxicity. Translational endpoints include assessment of circulating tumor DNA and immunological predictors of outcomes. DISCUSSION: SABR-SYNC will provide phase III data to assess the impact of SABR on overall survival in a population of patients with synchronous oligometastases. The translational component will attempt to identify novel prognostic and predictive biomarkers to aid in clinical decision making. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT05717166 (registration date: Feb. 8, 2023).

Stereotactic Ablative Radiation for Oligoprogressive Cancers: Results of the Randomized Phase 2 STOP Trial.

PURPOSE: This trial examined if patients with ≤5 sites of oligoprogression benefit from the addition of SABR to standard of care (SOC) systemic therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We enrolled patients with 1 to 5 metastases progressing on systemic therapy, and after stratifying by type of systemic therapy (cytotoxic vs noncytotoxic), randomized 1:2 between continued SOC treatment versus SABR to all progressing lesions plus SOC. The trial was initially limited to non-small cell lung cancer but was expanded to include all nonhematologic malignancies to meet accrual goals. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), lesional control, quality of life, adverse events, and duration of systemic therapy postrandomization. RESULTS: Ninety patients with 127 oligoprogressive metastases were enrolled across 8 Canadian institutions, with 59 randomized to SABR and 31 to SOC. The median age was 67 years, and 39 (43%) were women. The most common primary sites were lung (44%), genitourinary (23%), and breast (13%). Protocol adherence in the SOC arm was suboptimal, with 11 patients (35%) either receiving high-dose/ablative therapies (conflicting with trial protocol) or withdrawing from the study. The median follow-up was 31 months. There was no difference in PFS between arms (median PFS 8.4 months in the SABR arm vs 4.3 months in the SOC arm, but curves cross and 2-year PFS was 9% vs 24%, respectively; P = .91). The median OS was 31.2 months versus 27.4 months, respectively (P = .22). Lesional control was superior with SABR (70% vs 38%, respectively; P = .0015). There were 2 (3.4%) grade 3 and no grade 4/5 adverse events attributable to SABR. CONCLUSIONS: SABR was well-tolerated with superior lesional control but did not improve PFS or OS. Accrual to this study was difficult, and the results may have been impacted by an unwillingness to forgo ablative treatments on the SOC arm. (NCT02756793).

Evaluation of a National Radiation Oncology Research and Mentorship Program.

PURPOSE: The Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology Annual Scientific Meeting Medical Student Research and Mentorship Award was established in 2020 to support medical students pursuing radiation oncology (RO) research and RO as a career. This study is an evaluation of the effect of this national research and mentorship award on medical students, resident mentors, and research supervisors over 3 iterations. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Three separate surveys were created for medical student mentees, RO resident mentors, and attending research supervisors. These surveys were developed using best practice strategies for medical education surveys and circulated for peer review among experts in oncology medical education. The surveys were sent to the 52 individuals (18 students, 18 residents, 16 supervisors) who participated in 3 cycles of Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology ASM MSRMA (2020-21, 2021-22, 2022-23). After anonymization, quantitative answers were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and narrative responses were evaluated using a grounded theory approach. RESULTS: There was a 90% survey response rate. For medical student mentees, the award maintained (71%) or increased (24%) interest in pursuing an RO career. Students reported receiving helpful tips for residency applications and insight into RO residency, research, and career planning advice. Only the first student cohort currently has matching results for residency, with approximately 50% matching to RO. All resident mentor respondents felt the program either maintained or increased motivation to mentor students in RO. Research project supervisors unanimously enjoyed their role in this program and would recommend and participate in this program again. CONCLUSIONS: A national research and mentorship award for medical students has shown a positive effect on participants. Medical students felt this award program motivated them to continue pursuing oncology research and a potential career in RO. The program also enhanced mentorship skills in residents and research supervisors, which encourages further RO mentorship, teaching, and exposure for future generations of students.

Stereotactic Radiation for Ultra-Central Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Safety and Efficacy Trial (SUNSET).

PURPOSE: The use of stereotactic body radiation therapy for tumors in close proximity to the central mediastinal structures has been associated with a high risk of toxicity. This study (NCT03306680) aimed to determine the maximally tolerated dose of stereotactic body radiation therapy for ultracentral non-small cell lung carcinoma, using a time-to-event continual reassessment methodology. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with T1-3N0M0 (≤6 cm) non-small cell lung carcinoma were eligible. The maximally tolerated dose was defined as the dose of radiation therapy associated with a ≤30% rate of grade (G) 3 to 5 prespecified treatment-related toxicity occurring within 2 years of treatment. The starting dose level was 60 Gy in 8 daily fractions. The dose-maximum hotspot was limited to 120% and within the planning tumor volume; tumors with endobronchial invasion were excluded. This primary analysis occurred 2 years after completion of accrual. RESULTS: Between March 2018 and April 2021, 30 patients were enrolled at 5 institutions. The median age was 73 years (range, 65-87) and 17 (57%) were female. Planning tumor volume was abutting proximal bronchial tree in 19 (63%), esophagus 5 (17%), pulmonary vein 1 (3.3%), and pulmonary artery 14 (47%). All patients received 60 Gy in 8 fractions. The median follow-up was 37 months (range, 8.9-51). Two patients (6.7%) experienced G3-5 adverse events related to treatment: 1 patient with G3 dyspnea and 1 G5 pneumonia. The latter had computed tomography findings consistent with a background of interstitial lung disease. Three-year overall survival was 72.5% (95% CI, 52.3%-85.3%), progression-free survival 66.1% (95% CI, 46.1%-80.2%), local control 89.6% (95% CI, 71.2%-96.5%), regional control 96.4% (95% CI, 77.2%-99.5%), and distant control 85.9% (95% CI, 66.7%-94.5%). Quality-of-life scores declined numerically over time, but the decreases were not clinically or statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Sixty Gy in 8 fractions, planned and delivered with only a moderate hotspot, has a favorable adverse event rate within the prespecified acceptability criteria and results in excellent control for ultracentral tumors.

The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Lung Cancer Staging Project: Proposals for Revision of the TNM Stage Groups in the Forthcoming (Ninth) Edition of the TNM Classification for Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The TNM classification of lung cancer is periodically revised. The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer collected and analyzed a new database to inform the forthcoming ninth edition of the TNM classification. The results are herewith presented. METHODS: After exclusions, 76,518 patients from a total of 124,581 registered patients were available for analyses: 58,193 with clinical stage, 39,192 with pathologic stage, and 62,611 with best stage NSCLC. The proposed new N2 subcategories (N2a, involvement of single ipsilateral mediastinal or subcarinal nodal station, and N2b, involvement of multiple ipsilateral mediastinal nodal stations with or without involvement of the subcarinal nodal station) and the new M1c subcategories (M1c1, multiple extrathoracic metastases in one organ system, and M1c2, multiple extrathoracic metastases in multiple organ systems) were considered in the survival analyses. Several potential stage groupings were evaluated, using multiple analyses, including recursive partitioning, assessment of homogeneity within and discrimination between potential groups, clinical and statistical significance of survival differences, multivariable regression, and broad assessment of generalizability. RESULTS: T1N1, T1N2a, and T3N2a subgroups are assigned to IIA, IIB, and IIIA stage groups, respectively. T2aN2b and T2bN2b subgroups are assigned to IIIB. M1c1 and M1c2 remain in stage group IVB. Analyses reveal consistent ordering, discrimination of prognosis, and broad generalizability of the proposed ninth edition stage classification of lung cancer. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed stages for the ninth edition TNM improve the granularity of nomenclature about anatomic extent that has benefits as treatment approaches become increasingly differentiated and complex.

Stereotactic Radiation Therapy in Early Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer and Interstitial Lung Disease: A Nonrandomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD) and early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have been reported to be at high risk of toxic effects after stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR), but for many patients, there are limited alternative treatment options. Objective: To prospectively assess the benefits and toxic effects of SABR in this patient population. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study was conducted at 6 academic radiation oncology institutions, 5 in Canada and 1 in Scotland, with accrual between March 7, 2019, and January 12, 2022. Patients aged 18 years or older with fibrotic ILD and a diagnosis of T1-2N0 NSCLC who were not candidates for surgical resection were enrolled. Intervention: Patients were treated with SABR to a dose of 50 Gy in 5 fractions every other day. Main Outcomes and Measures: The study prespecified that SABR would be considered worthwhile if median overall survival-the primary end point-was longer than 1 year, with a grade 3 to 4 risk of toxic effects less than 35% and a grade 5 risk of toxic effects less than 15%. Secondary end points included toxic effects, progression-free survival (PFS), local control (LC), quality-of-life outcomes, and changes in pulmonary function. Intention-to-treat analysis was conducted. Results: Thirty-nine patients enrolled and received SABR. Median age was 78 (IQR, 67-83) years and 59% (n = 23) were male. At baseline, 70% (26 of 37) of patients reported dyspnea, median forced expiratory volume in first second of expiration was 80% (IQR, 66%-90%) predicted, median forced vital capacity was 84% (IQR, 69%-94%) predicted, and median diffusion capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide was 49% (IQR, 38%-61%) predicted. Median follow-up was 19 (IQR, 14-25) months. Overall survival at 1 year was 79% (95%, CI 62%-89%; P < .001 vs the unacceptable rate), and median overall survival was 25 months (95% CI, 14 months to not reached). Median PFS was 19 months (95% CI, 13-28 months), and 2-year LC was 92% (95% CI, 69%-98%). Adverse event rates (highest grade per patient) were grade 1 to 2: n = 12 (31%), grade 3: n = 4 (10%), grade 4: n = 0, and grade 5: n = 3 (7.7%, all due to respiratory deterioration). Conclusions and Relevance: In this trial, use of SABR in patients with fibrotic ILD met the prespecified acceptability thresholds for both toxicity and efficacy, supporting the use of SABR for curative-intent treatment after a careful discussion of risks and benefits. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03485378.

The Impact on Peer Mentorship After Implementation of a Competency-Based Residency Curriculum in Canadian Radiation Oncology Training Programs.

Purpose: Peer mentorship provides professional and personal support between physicians with similar experiences and levels of training. While peer mentorship has shown to benefit academic success and professional growth, little data has examined contextual factors, such as curricular change, that may affect the quality of these relationships. This study aims to explore the impact of a new, nationwide radiation oncology (RO) residency curriculum, known as competence by design (CBD), on peer mentorship experiences between Canadian RO residents. Methods and Materials: A qualitative study, with a social constructivist approach, was conducted with 2 groups of Canadian RO residents. The first were those in the academic year before CBD implementation (non-CBD cohort), and the second were those in the inaugural year of CBD (CBD cohort). Semistructured 1-on-1 interviews were conducted to explore experiences of peer mentorship as it related to curriculum change. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed with deductive and inductive methods until data saturation. Results: Between April and December 2021, 14 participants (6 non-CBD and 8 CBD residents) from 8 out of 10 eligible English-speaking RO training programs across Canada participated. Three major themes were identified: (1) the CBD cohort identified fewer opportunities for peer mentorship, with specific concerns regarding new evaluation processes and uncertainty about the later stages of training; (2) there was minimal impact on specialty-specific learning; and (3) peer mentorship thrived when occurring as spontaneous in-person interactions. Conclusions: Inaugural residents of a CBD curriculum perceived fewer opportunities for peer mentorship. There were specific concerns about new evaluative processes, though this did not affect specialty-specific learning. Peer mentorship was most impactful as informal and in-person interactions. Our findings suggest that unintended consequences of curriculum change may be mitigated by improving communication about new training objectives and increasing opportunities for informal interactions between residents.

Performance Data Advocacy for Continuing Professional Development in Health Professions.

ABSTRACT: Efforts to optimize continuing professional development (CPD) are ongoing and include advocacy for the use of clinician performance data. Several educational and quality-based frameworks support the use of performance data to achieve intended improvement outcomes. Although intuitively appealing, the role of performance data for CPD has been uncertain and its utility mainly assumed. In this Scholarly Perspective, the authors briefly review and trace arguments that have led to the conclusion that performance data are essential for CPD. In addition, they summarize and synthesize a recent and ongoing research program exploring the relationship physicians have with performance data. They draw on Collins, Onwuegbuzie, and Johnson's legitimacy model and Dixon-Woods' integrative approach to generate inferences and ways of moving forward. This interpretive approach encourages questioning or raising of assumptions about related concepts and draws on the perspectives (i.e., interpretive work) of the research team to identify the most salient points to guide future work. The authors identify 6 stimuli for future programs of research intended to support broader and better integration of performance data for CPD. Their aims are to contribute to the discourse on data advocacy for CPD by linking conceptual, methodologic, and analytic processes and to stimulate discussion on how to proceed on the issue of performance data for CPD purposes. They hope to move the field from a discussion on the utility of data for CPD to deeper integration of relevant conceptual frameworks.

Efficacy of the Rehabilitation Planning Consult for Survivors of Head and Neck Cancer: A Phase 2 Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: Survivors of head and neck cancer may have significant lasting impairments and poor access to rehabilitation. To address this, our group developed and evaluated a rehabilitation planning consult (RPC). The RPC is conducted through an initial consultation and a single follow-up session with a rehabilitation professional. During the initial consultation, rehabilitation needs are determined and the survivor sets individualized goals and plans. They then implement their plans independently and are facilitated to evaluate and modify plans as necessary during the follow-up session. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We used a waitlist control design to compare the proportion of participants attaining a minimally importantly different change in quality of life (QOL) on the Short Form 36 Physical Health Summary Score from baseline to 3 months after study enrollment, between patients randomized to receive (n = 77) or wait 14 ± 3 weeks to receive (n = 76) the RPC. Additional outcomes included goal attainment indicators measured using the Brief Rehabilitation Assessment for Survivors of Head and Neck Cancer (BRASH). RESULTS: Of 153 participants recruited, 95 (62%) completed the intervention; 57 were in the immediate (RPC) group and 38 were in the waiting list control (WLC) group. No significant between-group differences were seen in the proportion of patients achieving a minimally important improvement (2.5 units) on the Physical Health Summary Score from baseline to 3 months after recruitment. No between-group differences were seen on any secondary QOL indicators. Among the 67 (RPC n = 42, WLC n = 22) participants who set individualized rehabilitation goals, BRASH scores on goal performance and satisfaction with goal performance were significantly better in the RPC group. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the RPC may provide benefit in patients' individualized domains of choice among those who set goals, without affecting overall QOL. Future work could refine the subset of patients who benefit and explore the optimal timing and intensity of the intervention.

A Qualitative Analysis of Medical Student Reflections Following Participation in a Canadian Radiation Oncology Studentship.

Exposure to radiation oncology in medical school curricula is limited; thus, mentorship and research opportunities like the Dr. Pamela Catton Summer Studentship Program attempt to bridge this gap and stimulate interest in the specialty. In 2021, the studentship was redesigned as virtual research, mentorship, and case-based discussions due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This study explores the impact of COVID-19 on the studentship, on students' perceptions of the program, and on medical training and career choice. Fifteen studentship completion essays during 2021-2022 were obtained and anonymized. Thematic analysis was performed to interpret the essays with NVivo. Two independent reviewers coded the essays. Themes were established by identifying connections between coded excerpts. Consensus was achieved through multiple rounds of discussion and iteratively reviewing each theme. Representative quotes were used to illustrate the themes. The themes confirmed the studentship was feasible during the pandemic. Perceived benefits of the program included mentorship and networking opportunities; gaining practical and fundamental knowledge in radiation oncology; developing clinical and research skills; and creating positive attitudes towards radiation oncology and the humanistic aspect of the field. The studentship supported medical specialty selection by helping define student values, shaping perceptions of the specialty, and promoting self-reflection upon students' personal needs. This study informs future iterations of the studentship to promote radiation oncology in Canadian medical school curricula. It serves as a model for studentships in other specialties that have limited exposure and similar challenges with medical student recruitment.

Numeracy Education for Health Care Providers: A Scoping Review.

INTRODUCTION: Health numeracy (numerical literacy) refers to an individual's ability to use numerical information to make effective health decisions. Numeracy is fundamental in the role of a health care provider, forming the basis of evidence-based medicine and effective patient-provider communication. Despite a high level of education, many health care providers struggle with numeracy. Numeracy is often integrated into training curricula; however, teaching modality, competencies covered, learner satisfaction, and effectiveness of these educational interventions varies. METHOD: A scoping review was conducted to explore and summarize what is known about numeracy skills education programs for health care providers. A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2010 to April 2021 in 10 databases. Controlled vocabulary terms and text words were used. The search was restricted to human studies, adults, and the English language. Articles were included if they were related to numeracy education for health care providers or trainees and provided details regarding methods, evaluation, and results. RESULTS: The literature search retrieved 31,611 results and 71 met the inclusion criteria. Most interventions were conducted in a university setting, and targeted nursing students, medical students, resident physicians, and pharmacy students. Common numeracy concepts included statistics/biostatistics, medication calculations, evidence-based medicine, research methodology, and epidemiology. A variety of teaching modalities were used, which most often combined active approaches (eg, workshops, laboratories, small-group exercises, and discussion boards) with passive approaches (eg, traditional lectures and didactic teaching). Measured outcomes included knowledge and skills, self-efficacy, attitudes, and engagement. DISCUSSION: Although efforts have been made to incorporate numeracy into training curricula, greater emphasis should be placed on developing strong numeracy skills in health care providers, particularly given the role numerical information plays in clinical decision making, evidence-based practices, and patient-provider communication.

On the advantages and disadvantages of virtual continuing medical education: a scoping review.

Introduction: With the COVID-19 pandemic, most continuing medical education activities became virtual (VCME). The authors conducted a scoping review to synthesize the advantages and disadvantages of VCME to establish the impact of this approach on inequities that physicians face along the intersections of gender, race, and location of practice. Methods: Guided by the methodological framework of Arksey and O'Malley, the search included six databases and was limited to studies published between January 1991 to April 2021. Eligible studies included those related to accredited/non-accredited post-certification medical education, conferences, or meetings in a virtual setting focused on physicians. Numeric and inductive thematic analyses were performed. Results: 282 studies were included in the review. Salient advantages identified were convenience, favourable learning formats, collaboration opportunities, effectiveness at improving knowledge and clinical practices, and cost-effectiveness. Prominent disadvantages included technological barriers, poor design, cost, lack of sufficient technological skill, and time. Analysis of the studies showed that VCME was most common in the general/family practice specialty, in suburban settings, and held by countries in the Global North. A minority of studies reported on gender (35%) and race (4%). Discussion: Most studies report advantages of VCME, but disadvantages and barriers exist that are contextual to the location of practice and medical subspecialty. VCME events are largely organized by Global North countries with suboptimized accessibility for Global South attendees. A lack of reported data on gender and race reveals a limited understanding of how VCME affects vulnerable populations, prompting potential future considerations as it evolves.

Introduction: Par suite de la pandémie de la COVID-19, la plupart des activités de formation médicale continue ont été offertes en ligne. Les auteurs ont effectué une revue exploratoire de la littérature visant à faire la synthèse des avantages et des inconvénients de la formation médicale continue en mode virtuel (FMCV) et à évaluer les effets de cette approche sur les inégalités qui affectent les médecins en fonction du sexe, de la race et du lieu d'exercice. Méthodes: Suivant le cadre méthodologique d'Arksey et O'Malley, nous avons effectué une recherche dans six banques de données, que nous avons limitée aux études publiées entre janvier 1991 et avril 2021. Les études incluses étaient celles relatives à la formation médicale post-certification, accréditée ou non, aux conférences et aux réunions destinées aux médecins qui se sont déroulées dans un cadre virtuel. Une analyse numérique et une analyse thématique inductive ont été réalisées. Résultats: Au total, 282 articles ont été inclus dans l'étude. Les principaux avantages identifiés sont la commodité, les formats favorables à l'apprentissage, les possibilités de collaboration, l'efficacité pour l'amélioration des connaissances et des pratiques cliniques et le rapport coût-efficacité. Les principaux inconvénients sont les obstacles technologiques, les défauts de conception, le coût, les compétences technologiques insuffisantes et le manque de temps. L'analyse des études a montré que la FMCV était plus courante dans la spécialité de la médecine générale/familiale, dans les banlieues et dans les pays du Nord. Quelques études prennent en compte sexe (35 %) et race (4 %). Discussion: La plupart des études évoquent les avantages de la FMCV, mais il existe des inconvénients et des obstacles liés au lieu de pratique et à la surspécialité médicale. La plupart des activités de FMCV sont organisées dans les pays du Nord et leur accessibilité n'est pas optimale pour les participants provenant des pays du Sud. Le manque de données sur e sexe et la race des participants limite à notre compréhension de la façon dont la FMCV affecte les populations vulnérables. Ces facteurs seraient à prendre en considération dans les recherches futures sur le sujet au fur et à mesure que la FMCV évolue.

Exploring Family Physician Training Needs to Improve Cancer Patient Care.

Family physicians have multifaceted roles in cancer patient care and oncology education among this group is unfortunately inadequate. This study explored the needs and perspectives of family physicians regarding their oncology training and experiences. As well, physician cancer care experiences, knowledge use, and continuing education practices were elucidated. The authors employed a qualitative approach with family physicians participating in semi-structured interviews. General practitioners in oncology were excluded. Purposeful sampling was used, with recruitment through Ontario regional primary cancer care leads and social media. Interviews were transcribed, and thematic analysis was conducted. Thirteen participants were interviewed-1.6:1 female: male, ages 30-39, practicing for an average of 9 years (0.5-30 years), with urban and suburban practices. Most trained in Canada as undergraduates and completed their residency in Ontario; 62% had participated in at least one oncology continuing medical education session. Three major themes emerged: delineation of roles, oncology knowledge and education, and palliative care. Participants reported role uncertainty after cancer diagnosis, with oncology teaching at all levels described as lacking relevance. Palliative care rotations were an avenue for oncology education and where participants returned to cancer care. Changing existing teaching, information access, and avenues of oncology experiences may be the next step to supporting successful cancer care by family physicians.

Evaluating the childcare needs of cancer patients undergoing radiation therapy.

PURPOSE: About one-fifth of newly diagnosed cancer patients are parents to young children. These patients are at higher risk of psychosocial stress and inability to attend treatment due to having to balance their own healthcare needs with childcare duties. This study aims to explore the impact of childcare on cancer parents and elicit their perspectives on potential supports. The results could help inform the implementation of suitable childcare programs to remove this barrier in accessing care. METHODS: Patients at a large Canadian cancer treatment center were screened by oncologists for having minor children at home. Secure electronic surveys were then distributed to consenting participants. Domains surveyed included patient demographics, childcare burden, impact on treatment, and preference for childcare supports. RESULTS: The mean age of correspondents was 43.9 (range 33-54), 46 patients (92%) were female, and breast cancer was the most common primary tumor. The median number of children per correspondent was two, and their mean age was 8.4. Balancing childcare with cancer treatment had a significant impact on self-reported stress levels for most correspondents. Twenty (40%) participants had to reschedule and 7 (14%) participants missed at least one appointment due to childcare conflicts. During the COVID-19 pandemic, access to childcare resources decreased while childcare responsibilities increased. Three-quarters of correspondents reported that a flexible childcare would make it easier for them to adhere to appointment schedules. CONCLUSION: Childcare is a significant psychosocial barrier for patients accessing cancer care. Our results indicate that most parents undergoing treatment may benefit from hospital-based childcare services.