Young adult cancer survivors' follow-up care expectations of oncologists and primary care physicians.

PURPOSE: Young adult cancer survivors face unique challenges associated with their illness. While both oncologists and primary care physicians (PCPs) may be involved in the follow-up care of these cancer survivors, we hypothesized that there is a lack of clarity regarding each physician's roles and responsibilities. METHODS: A self-administered survey was mailed to young adult cancer survivors in British Columbia, Canada, who were aged 20 to 39 years at the time of diagnosis and alive at 2 to 5 years following the diagnosis to capture their expectations of oncologists and PCPs in various important domains of cancer survivorship care. Multivariate logistic regression models that adjusted for confounders were constructed to examine for predictors of the different expectations. RESULTS: Of 722 young cancer survivors surveyed, 426 (59%) responded. Among them, the majority were White women with breast cancer. Oncologists were expected to follow the patient's most recent cancer and treatment-related side effects while PCPs were expected to manage ongoing and future cancer surveillance as well as general preventative care. Neither physician was perceived to be responsible for addressing the return to daily activities, reintegration to interpersonal relationships, or sexual function. Older survivors were significantly less likely to expect oncologists (p = 0.03) and PCPs (p = 0.01) to discuss family planning when compared to their younger counterparts. Those who were White were significantly more likely to expect PCPs to discuss comorbidities (p = 0.009) and preventative care (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Young adult cancer survivors have different expectations of oncologists and PCPs with respect to their follow-up care. Physicians need to better clarify their roles in order to further improve the survivorship phase of cancer care for young adults. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Young adult cancer survivors have different expectations of their oncologists and PCPs. Clarification of the roles of each physician group during follow-up can enhance the quality of survivorship care for young adults.

Population-Based Patterns and Factors Associated With Underuse of Palliative Systemic Therapy in Elderly Patients With Metastatic Colon Cancer.

BACKGROUND: We compared the patterns and factors associated with chemotherapy and bevacizumab use in elderly versus young patients with metastatic colon cancer (mCC) and determined the effect of systemic therapy on overall survival (OS) according to age. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients diagnosed with mCC from 2009 to 2010 in British Columbia, Canada were reviewed and categorized as elderly patients (age ≥ 70 years) and young patients (age < 70 years). Cox regression models adjusted for age and confounders were used to determine the effect of systemic therapy on OS. RESULTS: We identified 1013 patients with a median age of 67 years. Of the 1013 patients, 42% were elderly and 58% were young; 57% were men; and 66% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) 0 or 1. Fewer elderly patients were offered systemic therapy compared with young patients (48% vs. 77%; P < .001). Among those treated, elderly patients were less likely than young patients to receive combination chemotherapy (47% vs. 81%; P < .0001) and bevacizumab (19% vs. 47%; P < .0001). The most common reasons for no treatment were similar for the elderly and young patients: patient choice, poor ECOG PS, and significant comorbidities. Advanced age alone was also cited as a reason for elderly but not for young patients (7% vs. 0%). When treated, the risk of adverse events and treatment interruptions was comparable between age groups. The receipt of systemic therapy was associated with improved OS in both elderly (hazard ratio [HR], 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37-0.56; P < .0001) and young (HR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.35-0.53; P < .0001) patients, regardless of age (interaction P > .05). CONCLUSION: In carefully selected elderly patients, the outcomes from systemic therapy were comparable to those for young patients. Thus, age alone should not be a barrier to treatment of mCC.

Leveraging the power of pooled data for cancer outcomes research.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials continue to be the gold standard for determining the efficacy of novel cancer treatments, but they may also expose participants to the potential risks of unpredictable or severe toxicities. The development of validated tools that better inform patients of the benefits and risks associated with clinical trial participation can facilitate the informed consent process. The design and validation of such instruments are strengthened when we leverage the power of pooled data analysis for cancer outcomes research. MAIN BODY: In a recent study published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology entitled "Determinants of early mortality among 37,568 patients with colon cancer who participated in 25 clinical trials from the adjuvant colon cancer endpoints database," using a large pooled analysis of over 30,000 study participants who were enrolled in clinical trials of adjuvant therapy for early-stage colon cancer, we developed and validated a nomogram depicting the predictors of early cancer mortality. This database of pooled individual-level data allowed for a comprehensive analysis of poor prognostic factors associated with early death; furthermore, it enabled the creation of a nomogram that was able to reliably capture and quantify the benefit-to-risk profile for patients who are considering clinical trial participation. This tool can facilitate treatment decision-making discussions. CONCLUSION: As China and other Asian countries continue to conduct oncology clinical trials, efforts to collate patient-level information from these studies into a large data repository should be strongly considered since pooled data can increase future capacity for cancer outcomes research, which, in turn, can enhance patient-physician discussions and optimize clinical care.