Effectiveness of a computer-facilitated intervention on improving provider delivery of tobacco treatment in a thoracic surgery and oncology outpatient setting: A pilot study.

INTRODUCTION: Effective tobacco treatments are available but are often not delivered to individuals with an actual or potential diagnosis of thoracic malignancy. The specific aims of this study were to identify the prevalence of tobacco use and examine the effectiveness of the Clinical and community Effort Against Smoking and secondhand smoke Exposure (CEASE), a system-level computer-facilitated intervention, to improve provider delivery of tobacco treatment in a thoracic surgery and oncology outpatient setting. METHODS: A pre-post-test design was used to assess the effectiveness of CEASE. A 3-step approach was used to integrate tobacco treatment into routine care: ask about tobacco use, assist with cessation, and refer to a quitline. An end-of-visit survey was conducted to collect prevalence of tobacco use and delivery of tobacco treatment. Descriptive statistics and Fisher's exact test were used for analysis. RESULTS: A total of 218 individuals were enrolled; 105 participants were in usual care (UC) and 113 were in the CEASE group. Of those who enrolled, 27.6% were never smokers in UC and 27.7% in CEASE, 60% were former smokers in UC and 50% in CEASE, and 12.4% were current smokers in UC and 21.4% in CEASE. Significant differences were noted in delivery of tobacco treatment with 15.4% having received tobacco treatment in UC compared to 62.5% in CEASE (p<0.004). CONCLUSIONS: A computer-facilitated intervention increased provider delivery of tobacco treatment in a thoracic surgery and oncology outpatient setting. This intervention provided a low-resource approach that has the potential to be scaled and implemented more broadly.

Predictors of Nicotine Replacement Therapy Adherence: Mixed-Methods Research With a Convergent Parallel Design.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined the effect of baseline attitudes toward nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) on its actual adherence in a smoking cessation intervention. PURPOSE: This study (i) examined the predictability of baseline variables (quantitative data) on NRT adherence and (ii) explored the congruence of participants' statements about NRT products (qualitative data) during counseling sessions with their baseline attitudes. METHODS: This is a mixed-methods research study using a convergent parallel design. Participants included 74 individuals in the treatment group who received behavioral counseling and combination NRT. A Poisson regression analysis was performed to identify baseline variables predicting NRT adherence. Thematic analysis was completed with a subset of participants (n = 38) who varied in NRT attitude scores and adherence. A joint display was created to integrate quantitative and qualitative data and discover convergence. RESULTS: Approximately 59% of the participants (41/74) used NRT continuously for ≥5 weeks. Having negative attitudes toward NRT and depressive symptoms predicted NRT adherence even after controlling for education and anxiety symptoms. Thematic analysis revealed that NRT adherence is a learning process that consists of the following three distinctive but interrelated phases: (i) information needs, (ii) comprehensive readiness, and (iii) experiential learning. Of the 38 participants, 34 (89.5%) showed convergence between baseline attitude scores and statements about NRT made during counseling sessions. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals who have negative attitudes toward NRT are less likely to use the products in a smoking cessation intervention. Counselors should assess attitudes toward NRT at baseline and address them proactively during counseling sessions.

Few research studies have explored how attitudes toward nicotine substitutes (nicotine patches, gum, and lozenges) affect people's adherence to those substitutes (using them consistently as directed). This study examined (i) whether age, gender, education, attitudes toward the substitutes, and depressive and anxiety symptoms would predict peoples' adherence to these nicotine substitutes during a study to help stop smoking and (ii) whether peoples' statements about their experiences with the substitutes would reveal any patterns. The study was conducted with 74 individuals who received behavioral counseling and combination nicotine substitutes. Having negative attitudes toward the substitutes and depressive symptoms predicted adherence. Age, gender, education, positive attitudes, and anxiety symptoms did not. Statements from a subset of participants (n = 38) revealed that adherence to the substitutes is a learning process that consists of the following three phases: (i) needing more information assuring the safety of the substitutes, (ii) being mentally and situationally ready, and (iii) learning while being involved in the process such as "trial and error." Individuals who have negative attitudes toward the substitutes are less likely to use them, and counselors should assess attitudes toward nicotine replacement therapy before suggesting their use and address these attitudes proactively during smoking cessation counseling sessions.

Dispensary personnel's views and experiences regarding oncologic cannabis and the counsel they offer adults with cancer.

BACKGROUND: A minority of oncologists feel qualified to advise adults with cancer on issues pertaining to medicinal cannabis. Adults with cancer frequently access medicinal cannabis information from non-medical sources such as cannabis dispensaries. We explored dispensary personnel's views and experiences regarding oncologic cannabis and the counsel they extend individuals with cancer. METHODS: Snowball sampling in this qualitative study facilitated recruitment across 13 states (N = 26). Semi-structured phone interviews ceased with thematic saturation. A multi-stage thematic analysis combined inductive and deductive codes. RESULTS: Of the 26 dispensary personnel interviewed, 54% identified as female and 19% as non-white. Median age was 40 years. A consensus emerged among participants concerning the botanical's efficacy for cancer-related symptoms; less so regarding its antineoplastic potential. Principles for serving those with cancer included provision of client-centered, symptom-based, and trial-and-error approaches. Non-inhalation modes of administration were generally recommended. No consensus was reached as to whether delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinal (THC)- or cannabidiol-predominant products were preferable in this population. Challenges in oncologic advising included successfully identifying individuals with cancer at the dispensary counter, financial toxicity, the special treatment required for the THC-naïve, and operating in the absence of standardized guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: These informed assertions suggest that members of the oncologic community should grapple with the extent to which they feel comfortable with both the nature and degree of counsel adults with cancer receive through dispensaries.

Cannabis use among cancer survivors before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, 2019-2021.

We estimated the prevalence of past 30-day cannabis use, evaluated reasons for use, and identified individual-level factors associated with cannabis use among cancer survivors before (2019) and during (2020 and 2021) the COVID-19 pandemic. Cancer survivors, aged 18 years and older, were identified from the 2019 (n = 8185), 2020 (n = 11 084), and 2021 (n = 12 248) Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Prevalence of past 30-day cannabis use among survivors held steady through the pandemic (8.7%, 7.4%, and 8.4% in 2019, 2020 and 2021, respectively). Of those who used cannabis, 48.7% used it for medical reasons in 2019, 54.5% in 2020, and 43.5% in 2021. Survivors were more likely to report past 30-day cannabis use if they were younger, male, current or former tobacco smokers, and binge alcohol consumers and if they experienced poor mental health in the past 30-days. Our study identified subpopulations of cancer survivors that need to be targeted for evidence-informed discussions about cannabis use.

Medical cannabis-related stigma: cancer survivors' perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Although the vast majority of medical cannabis laws in the USA includes cancer as a qualifying condition and medical cannabis-related stigma influences decision-making regarding the botanical, few studies have explored the phenomenon in oncology. Early findings indicated oncologic cannabis-related stigma to be quite widespread. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with 24 adults with cancer histories using medical cannabis were analyzed using the Health Stigma and Discrimination Framework. RESULTS: Sixteen out of 24 participants discussed medical cannabis-related stigma in some depth. The phenomena emerged as more pervasive in medical than personal/professional domains and was internalized as well as experienced directly. It led some participants, but not others, to practice partial or complete secrecy. DISCUSSION: Taken together, our findings suggest that, while medical cannabis-related stigma remains widespread and led some study participants to alter behavior, an early shift in ethos towards greater medical cannabis acceptance could be underway. If so, this transition may be occurring more rapidly in non-medical than in clinical settings. CONCLUSION: Cancer survivors may experience heightened medical cannabis-related stigma in the clinic as compared to their personal/professional lives. Healthcare providers who depend on patient transparency when gathering medical histories and devising care plans may wish to neutralize perceptions of medical cannabis-related stigma.

Protocol for a randomized controlled trial of the Enhanced Smoking Cessation Approach to Promote Empowerment (ESCAPE) digitalized intervention to promote lung health in high-risk individuals who smoke.

Low dose computed tomography (LDCT) is an effective screening test to decrease lung cancer deaths. Lung cancer screening may be a teachable moment helping people who smoke to quit, which may result in increased benefit of screening. Innovative strategies are needed to engage high-risk individuals in learning about LDCT screening. More precise methods such as polygenic risk scores quantify genetic predisposition to tobacco use, and optimize lung health interventions. We present the ESCAPE (Enhanced Smoking Cessation Approach to Promote Empowerment) protocol. This study will test a smoking cessation intervention using personal stories and a lung cancer screening decision-aide compared to standard care (brief advice, referral to a quit line, and a lung cancer screening decision-aide), examine the relationship between a polygenic risk score and smoking abstinence, and describe perceptions about integration of genomic information into smoking cessation treatment. A randomized controlled trial followed by a sequential explanatory mixed methods approach will compare the efficacy of the interventions. Interviews will add insight into the use of genomic information and risk perceptions to tailor smoking cessation treatment. Two-hundred and fifty individuals will be recruited from primary care, community-based organizations, mailing lists and through social media. Data will be collected at baseline, 1, 3 and 6-months. The primary outcomes are 7-day point prevalence smoking abstinence and stage of lung cancer screening at 6-months. The results from this study will provide information to refine the ESCAPE intervention and facilitate integration of precision health into future lung health interventions. Clinical trial registration number: NCT0469129T.

Backgrounds and Trainings in Cannabis Therapeutics of Dispensary Personnel.

PURPOSE: A growing body of scientific research indicates that oncology teams tend to offer individuals with cancer little clinical advice regarding medicinal cannabis (MC) and that individuals with cancer instead turn to cannabis dispensaries for MC guidance. Our objective was to investigate dispensary personnel's backgrounds and trainings in MC advising. METHODS: The study design was semistructured interviews across 13 states with cannabis dispensary personnel in managerial or client-facing positions. Of 38 recruited, 26 (68%) completed interview. The primary outcome was training in MC advising. Researchers targeted thematic saturation and adhered to Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research. RESULTS: Of 26 participants, 54% were female, with an average age of 40 (range: 22-64) years. Half worked in client-facing roles; half worked in managerial ones. Study participants endorsed passionate commitment to their profession, often motivated by personal experience with MC therapeutics. Cannabis dispensaries often privileged sales skills over cannabis therapeutics knowledge when hiring, resulting in uneven baseline levels of cannabis therapeutics expertise among staff. Most participants reported workplace cannabis therapeutics training to be unstandardized and weak. They described dispensary personnel as resourceful in pursuing cannabis knowledge, self-financing learning in off-hours, sampling dispensary products, and exchanging knowledge. Nearly half the participants called for quality, standardized cannabis therapeutics training for dispensary personnel. CONCLUSION: The many oncology teams who defer to dispensary personnel regarding MC advising rely on a workforce who views themselves as unevenly trained. Further research should include a national survey of cannabis dispensary personnel to learn whether these findings hold true in a larger sample. If so, the oncology community must determine the best approach to clinically advising individuals with cancer about MC.

Feasibility of collecting computer-facilitated patient-reported tobacco use, interest, and preferences for smoking cessation in an outpatient thoracic surgery and oncology setting.

INTRODUCTION: Effective strategies are needed to facilitate collection of tobacco use information and integrate smoking cessation treatment into the routine care of all high-risk patient populations to improve clinical outcomes. The objective of this study was to establish the feasibility of collecting computer-facilitated patient-reported tobacco use, identify patient interest and preferences for smoking cessation in an outpatient thoracic surgery and oncology setting with higher prevalence of tobacco use than the general population. METHODS: A brief patient-administered tobacco screening survey was handed out on an iPad in the waiting room of a thoracic surgery and oncology practice setting to sequential patients with varying diagnoses. Tobacco use, household exposure to tobacco, and interest and preferences for smoking cessation treatment were recorded. Descriptive statistics and Pearson's chi-squared test were used for analysis. RESULTS: Of the 599 surveys administered, 594 (99%) were completed. Self-reported smoking status included 36.4% (n=218) never smokers, 53.3% (n=319) former smokers, and 10.4% (n=62) current smokers. Among current smokers, 45.2% (n=28) were interested in receiving smoking cessation treatment. Preferences for treatment included: 21.4% (n=6) who wanted Quitline only, 25% (n=7) medication alone, and 53.6% (n=15) combined Quitline plus medication. Current smokers (55.7%, n=34) were more likely to live in households with tobacco exposure compared to those with former (11.4%, n=36) or never smokers (8.3%, n=18) (p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Implementing a computer-facilitated system to screen for current smoking and provide smoking cessation services was feasible in the outpatient thoracic surgery and oncology setting. Almost half of the smokers indicated an interest in receipt of smoking cessation treatment. Household exposure was more frequent among current smokers, therefore routine screening for secondhand smoke exposure from other household members is an important consideration in developing smoking cessation treatment plans to mitigate health risks among vulnerable patient populations.

Cancer Patients' Experiences with and Perspectives on the Medicinal Cannabis "High".

Background: Patients with cancer employ medicinal cannabis for poly-symptom management and as cancer-directed therapy. Little is known about their perspectives on the medicinal cannabis "high." Methods: Qualitative interviews across eight states with medicinal cannabis users with physician-verified cancer diagnoses (n = 24). Results: Every participant referenced and 15 spoke in depth about the medicinal cannabis "high." Antitheticals characterized it: sleepiness versus heightened attention; calm versus "agitation." The intensity of the "high" served as a proxy metric by which participant's judged medicinal cannabis' cancer-directed therapy and symptom management efficacies. Overall, however, study participants viewed the "high" as a barrier to medicinal cannabis use and worked to avoid experiencing for prolonged periods. Conclusions: The "high" is central to the manner with which patients with cancer experience medicinal cannabis. Clinicians should be aware that patients may struggle to fine-tune medicinal cannabis dosing in the setting of the "high," and this challenge should be included in clinical discussions regarding oncological medicinal cannabis use.

Knowledge and psychosocial impact of genetic counseling and multigene panel testing among individuals with ovarian cancer.

In a sample of individuals with ovarian cancer, we aimed to (a) identify factors associated with the psychosocial impact of genetic counseling and multigene panel testing, (b) identify factors associated with cancer genetics knowledge, and (c) summarize patient-reported recommendations to improve the genetic counseling and multigene panel testing process. Eligible participants in this secondary analysis of quantitative and qualitative survey data were English-speaking adults with ovarian cancer. Psychosocial impact was assessed using the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA) questionnaire. Knowledge of cancer genetics was assessed using the KnowGene scale. Significant predictors of MICRA and KnowGene scores were identified using multiple regression. Open-ended survey item responses were analyzed using conventional content analysis. Eighty-seven participants met eligibility criteria. A positive genetic test result was associated with greater adverse psychosocial impact (B = 1.13, p = 0.002). Older age (B = - 0.07, p = 0.044) and being a member of a minority racial or ethnic group (B = - 3.075, p = 0.033) were associated with lower knowledge, while a personal history of at least one other type of cancer (B = 1.975, p = 0.015) was associated with higher knowledge. In open-ended item responses, participants wanted clinicians to assist with family communication, improve result disclosure, and enhance patient and family understanding of results. A subset of individuals with ovarian cancer who receive a positive genetic test result may be at risk for adverse psychosocial outcomes. Tailored cancer genetics education is necessary to promote the equitable uptake of targeted ovarian cancer treatment and risk-reducing therapies. Interventions to enhance patient-clinician communication in this setting are a research priority.

Cancer patient's attitudes of using medicinal cannabis for sleep.

PURPOSE: Poor sleep is one of the most common side effects of cancer treatment. One increasingly popular approach to manage side effects of cancer treatment is use of medicinal cannabis (MC). DESIGN: Cancer patients using MC participated in semi-structured interviews to assess their experiences with MC (n = 24). A multi-stage thematic analysis was applied to interview transcripts. Themes related to use of MC for sleep were extracted. FINDINGS: The majority reported MC use for sleep. These participants reported that MC improved sleep initiation and continuity, resulted in decreased use of sleep medications, and that improved sleep led to better health. No participant reported MC was ineffectual for sleep or caused undesirable side effects when used for sleep. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer patients often utilize MC to specifically manage poor sleep. There is a need for rigorous studies assessing prevalence of use for this indication and clinical trials to assess comparative efficacy and safety.

Informing models of cancer genetics care in the era of multigene panel testing with patient-led recommendations.

The study describes patient-reported experiences and recommendations to improve the genetic counseling and multigene panel testing (MGPT) process. A descriptive mixed-method study with concurrently collected and integrated qualitative and quantitative data was conducted. Eligible participants were English-speaking adults with a breast or gynecologic cancer diagnosis who had received genetic counseling and testing with a MGPT from one Comprehensive Cancer Center. Satisfaction with the genetic counseling, genetic knowledge using a recently validated scale (KnowGene), the multidimensional impact of cancer risk assessment (MICRA), family communication, and the association with demographic factors were evaluated. To supplement the large quantitative data set, qualitative focus group responses and open-ended text items were collected. Univariate and multivariable associations between each outcome of interest and personal characteristics were assessed. Qualitative data were content-analyzed. 603 participants completed the survey (48% response rate) and 10 individuals participated in the focus groups. Participants were mostly Caucasian, educated with a college degree or more, and female with median age 58 (24-91), and 78% of participants had a breast cancer diagnosis. Of all individuals undergoing genetic testing using a MGPT, 13% had a pathogenic variant identified, and 30% had a variant of uncertain significance (VUS). Overall, participants reported satisfaction with the genetic counseling and testing process (mean 36.9 [SD 4.7]). On average, participants had 7 incorrect answers out of 19 on the genetic knowledge scale (mean 12.3 [SD 3.4]). MICRA scores showed overall low levels of distress and uncertainty, as well as positive experiences, with wide variability (median 17 [0-84]). Age, marital status, education level, type of cancer diagnosis, and genetic testing results were significantly associated with outcomes. Most participants communicated genetic testing results to mainly female first-degree relatives. A wide range of individual preferences affecting overall satisfaction, or suggestions for improvement were shared. As new models of streamlined cancer genetic services are being clinically implemented, approaches should continue to assess and tailor the process based on patients' informational and emotional needs.

Cancer patients' experiences with medicinal cannabis-related care.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about medical cannabis (MC)-related care for patients with cancer using MC. METHODS: Semistructured telephone interviews were conducted in a convenience sample of individuals (n = 24) with physician-confirmed oncologic diagnoses and state/district authorization to use MC (Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts, Oregon, New York, and Washington, DC) from April 2017 to March 2019. Standard qualitative techniques were used to assess the degree of MC-related health care oversight, MC practices, and key information sources. RESULTS: Among 24 participants (median age, 57 years; range, 30-71 years; 16 women [67%]), MC certifications were typically issued by a professional new to a patient's care after a brief, perfunctory consultation. Patients disclosed MCuse to their established medical teams but received little medical advice about whether and how to use MC. Patients with cancer used MC products as multipurpose symptom management and as cancer-directed therapy, sometimes in lieu of standard-of-care treatments. Personal experimentation, including methodical self-monitoring, was an important source of MC know-how. Absent formal advice from medical professionals, patients relied on nonmedical sources for MC information. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with cancer used MC with minimal medical oversight. Most received MC certifications through brief meetings with unfamiliar professionals. Participants desired but were often unable to access high-quality clinical information about MC from their established medical teams. Because many patients are committed to using MC, a product sustained by a growing industry, medical providers should familiarize themselves with the existing data for MM and its limitations to address a poorly met clinical need.

Insights from Bereaved Family Members about End-of-Life Care and Bereavement.

Background: Bereavement programs provide institutions with an avenue for obtaining feedback from family members about their experiences during a patient's illness and end-of-life (EOL) period that can be used to improve both patient care and the care of bereaved individuals. Objective: We examined family members' experiences about the clinical care their loved one received at EOL and the perceived effect this care had on their subsequent bereavement. Design: Survey. Setting/Subjects: One hundred forty bereaved family members from our cancer institute completed a bereavement survey. Of these family members, 67% were female, 66% were 60 years of age or older, and 81% were widowed. Measurement: We analyzed open-ended responses using NVivo 11 Plus© that asked bereaved family members about the ways the clinical (oncology) team was helpful or not in dealing with their loss. Results: The findings showed that compassionate care, competency, receiving honest facts, and outreach after the death favorably influenced the bereavement experience. Conversely, impersonal contact, lack of contact, including lack of caregiver support, and lack of information about EOL and death were identified as actions taken by the clinical team that were unhelpful in dealing with their loss. Conclusions: The feedback from bereaved family members highlights two areas that could benefit from quality improvement efforts: (1) communication skills that focus on enhancing compassionate connection, including conveying empathy, and providing reassurance and guidance to patients and their families and (2) communication skills that focus on delivering information about prognosis and the EOL period in an honest and direct way.

Development and testing of the KnowGene scale to assess general cancer genetic knowledge related to multigene panel testing.

PURPOSE: To develop and evaluate a measure of cancer genetics knowledge relevant to multigene panel testing. METHODS: The instrument was developed using systematic input from a national panel of genetics experts, acceptability evaluation by patient advocates, and cognitive testing. Twenty-four candidate items were completed by 591 breast or gynecological patients who had undergone genetic counseling and multigene panel testing in the past 18 months. A unidimensional item response theory model was fit with a mix of 2-parameter logistic nested response (2 plnrm) and 2-parameter logistic (2 pl) items. RESULTS: Key domains addressing cancer genetics knowledge were found to be overlapping. Of the 24 candidate items, 8 items were removed due to poor discrimination or local dependence. The remaining 16 items had good fit (RMSEA = 0.045, CFI = 0.946) and discrimination parameters ranging from 0.49 to 1.60. The items specified as 2 plnrm distinguish between those answering incorrect versus don't know, with discrimination ranging from 0.51 to 1.02. Information curves were highest among those with lower knowledge. CONCLUSION: KnowGene is a rigorously developed and effective measure of knowledge after cancer genetic counseling and multigene panel testing. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Measuring knowledge in a systematic way will inform practice and research initiatives in cancer genetics.