Establishing the sensitivity and specificity of the gynaecological cancer distress screen.

OBJECTIVE: Nuanced distress screening tools can help cancer care services manage specific cancer groups' concerns more efficiently. This study examines the sensitivity and specificity of a tool specifically for women with gynaecological cancers (called the Gynaecological Cancer Distress Screen or DT-Gyn). METHODS: This paper presents cross-sectional data from individuals recently treated for gynaecological cancer recruited through Australian cancer care services, partner organisations, and support/advocacy services. Receiver operating characteristics analyses were used to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the DT-Gyn against criterion measures for anxiety (GAD-7), depression (patient health questionnaire), and distress (IES-R and K10). RESULTS: Overall, 373 individuals aged 19-91 provided complete data for the study. Using the recognised distress thermometer (DT) cut-off of 4, 47% of participants were classified as distressed, while a cut-off of 5 suggested that 40% had clinically relevant distress. The DT-Gyn showed good discriminant ability across all measures (IES-R: area under the curve (AUC) = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.82-0.90; GAD-7: AUC = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.85-0.93; K10: AUC = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.85-0.92; PHQ-9: AUC = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.81-0.89) and the Youden Index suggested an optimum DT cut-point of 5. CONCLUSIONS: This study established the psychometric properties of the DT-Gyn, a tool designed to identify and manage the common sources of distress in women with gynaecological cancers. We suggest a DT cut point ≥5 is optimal in detecting 'clinically relevant' distress, anxiety, and depression in this population.

Safety and feasibility of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy during interval cytoreductive surgery in patients with advanced high-grade serous ovarian, fallopian tube, peritoneal cancer in an Australian context.

AIMS: To assess the safety and feasibility of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) during cytoreduction surgery (CRS) in advanced high-grade serous ovarian, fallopian tube and peritoneal cancer within an Australian context. METHODS: Data were collected from 25 consecutive patients undergoing CRS and HIPEC from December 2018 to July 2022 at the Peritoneal Malignancy Service at the Mater Hospital Brisbane, Australia. Data collected included demographics, clinical variables, surgical procedures and complications and intra-operative and post-operative indexes of morbidity. RESULTS: Twenty-five women who underwent CRS and HIPEC from December 2018 to July 2022 were included in analysis. Findings indicate that CRS with HIPEC is associated with low morbidity. CONCLUSION: While judicious patient selection is imperative, HIPEC during CRS was well tolerated by all patients and morbidity was comparable to results from the previously reported OVHIPEC-1 trial. HIPEC appears to be a safe and feasible addition to CRS for the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer in Australian practice.

Discussing diet, nutrition, and body weight after treatment for gynecological cancer: a conversation analytic study of outpatient consultations.

PURPOSE: To generate direct observational evidence for understanding how diet, nutrition, and weight-related topics are discussed during follow-up after treatment for gynecological cancer, as recommended by survivorship care guidelines. METHODS: Conversation analysis of 30 audio-recorded outpatient consultations, involving 4 gyne-oncologists, 30 women who had completed treatment for ovarian or endometrial cancer, and 11 family members/friends. RESULTS: From 21 instances in 18 consultations, diet, nutrition, or weight-related talk continued beyond initiation if the issue raised was ostensibly relevant to the clinical activity being undertaken at the time. These instances led to care-related outcomes (i.e., general dietary recommendations, referral to support, behavior change counseling) only when the patient identified needing further support. Diet, nutrition, or weight-related talk was not continued by the clinician if it was not apparently related to the current clinical activity. CONCLUSIONS: The continuation of diet, nutrition, or weight-related talk during outpatient consultations after treatment for gynecological cancer, and the subsequent delivery of care-related outcomes, depends on its immediate clinical relevance and the patient indicating needing further support. The contingent nature of these discussions means there can be missed opportunities for the provision of dietary information and support post-treatment. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: If seeking information or support for diet, nutrition, or weight-related issues post-treatment, cancer survivors may need to be explicit regarding their need for this during outpatient follow-up. Additional avenues for dietary needs assessment and referral should be considered to optimize the consistent delivery of diet, nutrition, and weight-related information and support after treatment for gynecological cancer.

Dietary Practices After Primary Treatment for Ovarian Cancer: A Qualitative Analysis From the OPAL Study.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the dietary practices of women who have completed primary treatment for ovarian cancer, many of whom will go on to have cancer recurrence and further treatment. Knowledge of dietary practices is needed to optimize care. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to identify dietary practices after primary treatment for ovarian cancer and evaluate how these practices differ by disease recurrence and treatment status. DESIGN: Women with invasive epithelial ovarian cancer were provided with the following open-ended question after completing a food frequency questionnaire: "Is there anything we haven't asked you about your diet in the last 1 to 2 months that you feel is important?" PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: Participants were from the OPAL (Ovarian Cancer Prognosis and Lifestyle) Study in Australia. MAIN OUTCOMES: The main outcomes were dietary practices after primary treatment for ovarian cancer and factors affecting these practices. ANALYSIS: Participants' responses were analyzed using content analysis. Individual content codes were categorized and reported by recurrence and treatment status at questionnaire completion. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-six women provided responses on 363 questionnaires. Those undergoing further treatment for recurrence commonly reported dietary regimens with clinical indications (eg, low fiber to avoid bowel obstructions, high energy/protein to minimize nutritional deficits). Those not undergoing further treatment frequently reported "popular" diets (eg, organic, plant-based, and alkaline). For women with cancer recurrence, dietary practices were affected by poor appetite and late effects of treatment. For women without recurrence, other comorbidities, geographical location, family, and friends appeared to influence dietary practices. In both groups, nutrition information sources and personal beliefs informed dietary practices. Participant responses that referenced media or online sources often included misinformation. CONCLUSIONS: After primary treatment for ovarian cancer, women report dietary practices that may not be captured in standard food frequency questionnaires. Dietary practices and factors affecting these practices likely differ by treatment and recurrence status. Improved access to evidence-based dietary information and support is needed.

Information needs of women undergoing gynaecological risk reduction surgery: Applying patient-reported findings to improve service delivery.

BACKGROUND: Women with genetic mutations including BRCA1, BRCA2 and Lynch syndrome are at increased risk of developing gynaecological cancers with management options including surveillance and/or risk reduction surgery. Little is known about the information women require to inform their decisions around having risk reduction surgery, the implication this surgery has for them and the timing preferences to receive this information. AIMS: To identify the information needs of women who are considering or who have had risk reduction surgery due to having a diagnosed or suspected genetic mutation with subsequent increased risk of developing gynaecological cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A pilot survey was undertaken in a tertiary, metropolitan hospital as part of a service improvement project. Women referred to the gynaecology-oncology service for gynaecological risk reduction surgery between January to December 2018 were invited to participate through completing either online or hard copy versions of a 12-item survey. RESULTS: A response rate of 60% (n = 32) was obtained from women between 27 and 77 years of age. Key information topics included sexuality and intimacy (90.6%; n = 29), the surgery itself (87.5%; n = 28) and surgical menopause (87.5%; n = 28). Over 90% (n = 31) of respondents stated they preferred to receive information about surgery pre-operatively and in written format (81.3%; n = 26). The importance of a multidisciplinary approach was recognised with women wanting information from allied health practitioners such as physiotherapists and social workers. CONCLUSIONS: Findings have enabled a better understanding of the type, timing and content of information desired by women making complex decisions about risk reduction surgery. Results have contributed to developing an information resource which will more adequately assist women to meet their information needs when considering gynaecological risk reduction surgery in our hospital.