Value in care: The contribution of supportive care to value-based lung cancer services-A qualitative semistructured interview study.

INTRODUCTION: Despite significant advances in the management of lung cancer, patients continue to experience a high burden of unmet need impacting quality of life and outcomes of care. Achieving value-based health care, where investment is targeted to services that deliver optimal experience and outcomes of care relative to the cost of delivering that care, requires attention to what people value most in meeting their needs. To date there has been little attention to what matters most to patients with lung cancer (i.e., what they value) as a component of achieving value-based cancer care. This qualitative study was undertaken to investigate components of care valued by people with lung cancer in Australia. METHODS: This qualitative study used semistructured interviews with 23 people with lung cancer. Participants were recruited using a purposive sampling strategy from two metropolitan tertiary public health services. Data collected included demographic characteristics and patient perspectives regarding their priority concerns and components of care identified as most valuable in meeting their needs. Demographic characteristics of participants were analysed descriptively, and qualitative data were analysed thematically using Interpretive Description. RESULTS: Data analysis generated three key themes: valued components of care; benefits of receiving valued care components and consequences of missed opportunities for care. The components of care valued by patients reflect the core dimensions of cancer supportive care, with particular emphasis on ongoing opportunities for consultation (screening for unmet needs) and provision of person-centred information. The facilitation of trust between patients and their treating team, as a consequence of having these valued components evident in their care, was identified as a key characteristic of value-based care. CONCLUSIONS: This study has identified valued components of care described by people with lung cancer. Importantly, the care components identified have been proven to improve access to and coordination of care, and demonstrate the importance of integrating supportive care into care provision to achieve value-based cancer care. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This study was informed by perspectives of lung cancer patients who participated in semistructured interviews. We acknowledge that this contribution does not meet the criteria for patient and public involvement in research as defined by Health Expectations, but this study forms part of a larger program of cancer supportive care work being undertaken by this team, where comprehensive consumer engagement and co-design approaches are embedded in our work.

The effects of lifestyle and behavioural interventions on cancer recurrence, overall survival and quality of life in breast cancer survivors: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Lifestyle/behavioural interventions may improve breast cancer outcomes and quality of life (QoL); however, uncertainty remains about the most effective interventions due to limited evidence. This study aimed to assess and compare the effects of lifestyle/behavioural interventions on cancer recurrence, survival and QoL in breast cancer survivors. Electronic databases including Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and EBM Reviews were searched for relevant literature. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing a lifestyle/behavioural intervention with a control condition in breast cancer survivors were included. Outcomes included cancer recurrence, overall survival and QoL. A network meta-analysis synthesized intervention effect. Studies not included in the analysis were reported narratively. Of 6251 identified articles, 38 studies met the selection criteria. Limited evidence exists on the impacts of lifestyle/behavioural interventions on breast cancer recurrence/survival. Exercise was identified as the most effective intervention in improving overall survival (HR 0.50, 95 % CI 0.36, 0.68). Lifestyle/behavioural interventions may improve QoL; psychosocial interventions (SMD 1.28, 95 % CI 0.80, 1.77) and aerobic-resistance exercise (SMD 0.33, 95 % CI -0.03, 0.69) were the most effective interventions to enhance QoL. This review highlights potential post-breast cancer benefits from lifestyle/behavioural interventions, notably exercise and psychosocial support for QoL and exercise for overall survival. Thus, encouraging active lifestyle, stress management and coping skills programs during and after cancer treatment may enhance physical wellbeing and QoL. However, the findings should be interpreted with caution due to the small number and sample sizes of studies. Future longer-term RCTs are required for conclusive recommendations.

Availability and accessibility of services to address financial toxicity described by Australian lung cancer patients and healthcare professionals.

PURPOSE: Although the financial burden and impact of a cancer diagnosis has been widely described in international literature, less understood is the availability and accessibility of services to ameliorate this need. This study reports the experiences of Australian lung cancer patients and health professionals delivering care, regarding factors that exacerbate and mitigate financial stress, and availability and accessibility of services to support people following a cancer diagnosis. METHODS: Qualitative semi-structured interviews with twenty-three lung cancer patients attending two metropolitan tertiary health services and eleven health professionals delivering care were undertaken during July-August 2021. RESULTS: Neither health service systematically screened for financial toxicity nor routinely provided information regarding potential financial impacts during consultations. Patients experienced lengthy delays in accessing welfare supports, provoking financial stress and worry. Health professionals reported limited resources and referral services to support patients with financial need; this was especially problematic for patients with lung cancer. They described its psychological impact on patients and their family members or carers and warned of its impact on ability to adhere to treatment. CONCLUSION: Available and accessibility of services addressing financial toxicity in Australian lung cancer patients is inadequate. Although financial stress is a common, distressing problem, health professionals feel hampered in their ability to help due to limited service availability. Left unaddressed, financial toxicity can impact treatment adherence, directly influencing health outcomes, and increase risk of poverty, amplifying social inequities. Findings highlight opportunity for actionable interventions like financial consent and routine screening and discussion of financial toxicity across care pathways.

Relationship between survivorship care plans and unmet information needs, quality of life, satisfaction with care, and propensity to engage with, and attend, follow-up care.

BACKGROUND: The impact of survivorship care plans (SCPs) on the proximal and distal outcomes of adult and childhood cancer survivors, and parent proxies, is unclear. This study aimed to determine the relationship between SCP receipt and these outcomes. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of adult and childhood cancer survivors (and parent proxies for survivors aged younger than 16 years) across Australia and New Zealand was conducted. Multivariate regression models were fitted to measure the impact of SCP receipt on proximal (unmet information needs and propensity to engage with, and attend, cancer-related follow-up care) and distal outcomes (quality of life and satisfaction with cancer-related follow-up care) with control for cancer history and sociodemographic factors. RESULTS: Of 1123 respondents, 499 were adult cancer survivors and 624 were childhood cancer survivors (including 222 parent proxies). We found that SCP receipt was predictive of greater attendance at, and awareness of, cancer-related follow-up care (adult: odds ratio [OR], 2.46; 95% CI, 1.18-5.12; OR, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.07-5.29; child/parent: OR, 2.61; 95% CI, 1.63-4.17; OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.06-2.50; respectively). SCP receipt also predicted fewer unmet information needs related to "follow-up care required" and "possible late effects" (adult: OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.20-0.96; OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.13-0.64; child/parent: OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.30-0.72; OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.38-0.85; respectively). In terms of distal outcomes, SCP receipt predicted a better global quality of life for adult cancer survivors (ß, 0.08; 95% CI, -0.01-7.93), proxy-reported health-related quality of life (ß, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.44-7.12), and satisfaction with follow-up care for childhood cancer survivors (OR, 2.93; 95% CI, 1.64-5.23). CONCLUSIONS: Previous studies have shown little impact of SCPs on distal end points. Results suggest that SCPs may be beneficial to cancer survivors' proximal and distal outcomes.

Factors Influencing COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy among Patients with Serious Chronic Illnesses during the Initial Australian Vaccine Rollout: A Multi-Centre Qualitative Analysis Using the Health Belief Model.

Background: People with chronic illnesses have increased morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19 infection. The influence of a person's serious and/or comorbid chronic illness on COVID-19 vaccine uptake is not well understood. Aim: To undertake an in-depth exploration of factors influencing COVID-19 vaccine uptake among those with various serious and/or chronic diseases in the Australian context, using secondary data analysis of a survey study. Methods: Adults with cancer, diabetes and multiple sclerosis (MS) were recruited from 10 Australian health services to undertake a cross-sectional online survey (30 June to 5 October 2021) about COVID-19 vaccine uptake, vaccine hesitancy, confidence and complacency and disease-related decision-making impact. Free-text responses were invited regarding thoughts and feelings about the interaction between the participant's disease, COVID-19, and vaccination. Qualitative thematic analysis was undertaken using an iterative process and representative verbatim quotes were chosen to illustrate the themes. Results: Of 4683 survey responses (cancer 3560, diabetes 842, and MS 281), 1604 (34.3%) included free-text comments for qualitative analysis. Participants who provided these were significantly less likely to have received a COVID-19 vaccination than those who did not comment (72.4% and 86.2%, respectively). People with diabetes were significantly less likely to provide free-text comments than those with cancer or MS (29.0%, 35.1% and 39.9%, respectively). Four key themes were identified from qualitative analysis, which were similar across disease states: (1) having a chronic disease heightened perceived susceptibility to and perceived severity of COVID-19; (2) perceived impact of vaccination on chronic disease management and disease-related safety; (3) uncertain benefits of COVID-19 vaccine; and (4) overwhelming information overload disempowering patients. Conclusions: This qualitative analysis highlights an additional layer of complexity related to COVID-19 vaccination decision making in people with underlying health conditions. Appreciation of higher susceptibility to severe COVID-19 outcomes appears to be weighed against uncertain impacts of the vaccine on the progression and management of the comorbid disease. Interactions by clinicians addressing individual factors may alleviate concerns and maximise vaccine uptake in people with significant underlying health conditions.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in Australian Patients with Solid Organ Cancers.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination is the cornerstone of the global public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Excess morbidity and mortality of COVID-19 infection is seen in people with cancer. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy has been observed in this medically vulnerable population, although associated attitudes and beliefs remain poorly understood. METHODS: An online cross-sectional survey of people with solid organ cancers was conducted through nine health services across Australia. Demographics, cancer-related characteristics and vaccine uptake were collected. Perceptions and beliefs regarding COVID-19 vaccination were assessed using the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale, the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Confidence and Complacency Scale and the Disease Influenced Vaccine Acceptance Scale-6. RESULTS: Between June and October 2021, 2691 people with solid organ cancers completed the survey. The median age was 62.5 years (SD = 11.8; range 19-95), 40.9% were male, 71.3% lived in metropolitan areas and 90.3% spoke English as their first language. The commonest cancer diagnoses were breast (36.6%), genitourinary (18.6%) and gastrointestinal (18.3%); 59.2% had localized disease and 56.0% were receiving anti-cancer therapy. Most participants (79.7%) had at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose. Vaccine uptake was higher in people who were older, male, metropolitan, spoke English as a first language and had a cancer diagnosis for more than six months. Vaccine hesitancy was higher in people who were younger, female, spoke English as a non-dominant language and lived in a regional location, and lower in people with genitourinary cancer. Vaccinated respondents were more concerned about being infected with COVID-19 and less concerned about vaccine safety and efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: People with cancer have concerns about acquiring COVID-19, which they balance against vaccine-related concerns about the potential impact on their disease progress and/or treatment. Detailed exploration of concerns in cancer patients provides valuable insights, both for discussions with individual patients and public health messaging for this vulnerable population.

Serious Underlying Medical Conditions and COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: A Large Cross-Sectional Analysis from Australia.

As COVID-19 vaccinations became available and were proven effective in preventing serious infection, uptake amongst individuals varied, including in medically vulnerable populations. This cross-sectional multi-site study examined vaccine uptake, hesitancy, and explanatory factors amongst people with serious and/or chronic health conditions, including the impact of underlying disease on attitudes to vaccination. A 42-item survey was distributed to people with cancer, diabetes, or multiple sclerosis across ten Australian health services from 30 June to 5 October 2021. The survey evaluated sociodemographic and disease-related characteristics and incorporated three validated scales measuring vaccine hesitancy and vaccine-related beliefs generally and specific to their disease: the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale, the Oxford COVID-19 Vaccine Confidence and Complacency Scale and the Disease Influenced Vaccine Acceptance Scale-Six. Among 4683 participants (2548 [54.4%] female, 2108 [45.0%] male, 27 [0.6%] other; mean [SD] age, 60.6 [13.3] years; 3560 [76.0%] cancer, 842 [18.0%] diabetes, and 281 [6.0%] multiple sclerosis), 3813 (81.5%) self-reported having at least one COVID-19 vaccine. Unvaccinated status was associated with younger age, female sex, lower education and income, English as a second language, and residence in regional areas. Unvaccinated participants were more likely to report greater vaccine hesitancy and more negative perceptions toward vaccines. Disease-related vaccine concerns were associated with unvaccinated status and hesitancy, including greater complacency about COVID-19 infection, and concerns relating to vaccine efficacy and impact on their disease and/or treatment. This highlights the need to develop targeted strategies and education about COVID-19 vaccination to support medically vulnerable populations and health professionals.

Treatment patterns after poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in epithelial ovarian cancer patients.

OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this study was to describe treatment patterns after poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitor in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. Secondary objectives were to evaluate duration of response, time to first subsequent therapy, progression-free survival and overall survival. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer treated with PARP inhibitor therapy at six Australian gynecological oncology centers. Eligible patients were identified via clinics, trial databases and pharmacy dispensing logs between January 2005 and September 2019. Information regarding clinico-pathological characteristics and treatment outcomes were collated from medical records. RESULTS: A total of 85 patients with epithelial ovarian cancer were identified. Of these, 61% had germline BRCA1/2 mutations, 9% had somatic BRCA1/2 mutations, 5% had confirmed homologous recombination deficiency and 25% were BRCA1/2 wildtype mutations. A total of seventy-seven (91%) patients received chemotherapy after PARP inhibitor, with fifty-six (72.7%) of these patients receiving platinum-based chemotherapy. Four patients (5%) had a complete response, 15 (20%) a partial response, 15 (20%) stable disease and 41 (55%) progressive disease. Median duration of response to chemotherapy was 7.0 months (range 0.2-20.4). Median time to first subsequent therapy was 17.6 and 15.1 months in patients who received a PARP inhibitor as maintenance therapy and treatment, respectively. Median progression-free survival of first line treatment after PARP inhibitor was 9.6, 3.5 and 4.6 months for platinum doublet, single agent platinum and non-platinum chemotherapy, respectively. Adjusting for age and FIGO (Federation of Gynecological Oncologists classification) stage progression-free survival did not differ between treatment groups (p=0.14). Median overall survival for the cohort was 69 months, and patients with platinum sensitive ovarian cancer had improved survival compared with those with platinum refractory or resistant disease. CONCLUSION: Platinum doublet chemotherapy resulted in non-significant improved progression-free survival compared with other regimens, suggesting potential independent mechanisms of resistance between PARP inhibitor and platinum compounds.

Disparities in quality of life, social distress and employment outcomes in Australian cancer survivors.

PURPOSE: To examine how socio-demographic, comorbidities and information needs influence quality of life (QoL) outcomes of survivors of breast, colorectal, or prostate cancer, non-Hodgkin lymphoma or melanoma. METHODS: Cross-sectional postal survey with eligible participants identified through a population-based cancer registry. QoL outcomes were assessed by EQ-5D-5L, social difficulties index (SDI) and, for those employed at diagnosis, current employment. Regression analyses explored associations between outcome variables and cancer type, age, time since diagnosis, residential location, socio-economic disadvantage, comorbidities and unmet information needs. Mediation analyses examined whether comorbidities and information needs explained relationships between outcome variables and socio-economic disadvantage. RESULTS: 2115 survivors participated. Mean EQ-5D-5L scores (mean = 0.84) were similar to population averages and SDI scores were low for the entire sample (mean = 3.80). In multivariate analyses, being aged over 80, greater socio-economic disadvantage, comorbidities and unmet information needs decreased EQ-5D-5L scores. Higher SDI scores were associated with socio-economic disadvantage, comorbidities and unmet information needs. Not being employed was associated with being aged over 50, more comorbidities and socio-economic disadvantage. Comorbidities but not information needs partially mediated the impact of socio-economic disadvantage on EQ-5D-5L and SDI accounting for 17% and 14% of the total effect of socio-economic disadvantage respectively. Neither comorbidities nor information needs mediated the association between socio-economic disadvantage and employment outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: To improve quality of life, survivorship care should be better tailored to address the needs of individuals given their overall health and impact of comorbidities, their age and type of cancer and not simply time since diagnosis.

COVID-19 vaccination rates, intent, and hesitancy in patients with solid organ and blood cancers: A multicenter study.

INTRODUCTION: People with cancer are at higher risk of serious illness and death from COVID-19 infection. We investigated COVID-19 vaccine uptake among patients with solid organ and blood cancers and explored factors related to hesitancy. METHODS: Cross-sectional online survey of adults with a history of cancer at three health services across metropolitan and regional Victoria. Vaccine hesitancy was measured by the validated Oxford COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale. RESULTS: There were 1073 respondents: 56% female; median age 62 years (range 23 - 91). Commonest tumor types included breast 29%, gastrointestinal 19%, hematological 15%, genitourinary 15%, and lung 8%. Thirty-six percent had metastatic disease, and 54% were receiving active anticancer treatment. Eighty-four percent of respondents indicated positive intent toward COVID-19 vaccination, 10% were undecided, and 6% indicated negative attitudes. At least one vaccine dose had been received by 65% of respondents, leaving 35% unvaccinated. Fifty-eight percent of unvaccinated patients answered that they would "definitely" or "probably" take a vaccine. Higher vaccine uptake was significantly associated with older age, male gender, English as first language, longer time since cancer diagnosis, and not being on current anticancer treatment. Concerns regarding vaccine side effects, particularly thrombosis, and the desire for clear medical advice were prominent among unvaccinated respondents. CONCLUSION: Despite being eligible for COVID-19 vaccination since March 2021, a substantial minority of patients with cancer remained unvaccinated as of August 2021. Targeted communication and educational resources addressing vaccine safety in the context of cancer are key to promoting vaccine uptake in this vulnerable population.

Anti-cancer therapy made easier: a 25-year update.

In 1993, the Internal Medicine Journal published 'Chemotherapy made easier', outlining developments in supportive care of patients undergoing chemotherapy. This described the contemporary state of anti-emetics, colony stimulating factors, cardiac toxicity, neurotoxicity, development of drug analogues and venous access devices. Twenty-five years later, we update the measures that improve the tolerability of the plethora of new anti-cancer therapies, which have extended well beyond traditional chemotherapy agents to include immunotherapy and targeted therapies. Optimisation of supportive care is paramount to allow safe delivery with the least possible impact on quality of life of these new treatments, many of which have resulted dramatically improved outcomes across multiple cancer types. This state of the art update summarises advances in supportive care therapies relating to improving the patient experience during and after anti-cancer treatment, including new anti-emetics, hair preservation techniques, bone marrow support and improved venous access devices; the ongoing challenge of neurotoxicity; and the advent of multidisciplinary sub-specialised fields such as cardio-oncology and oncofertility. Supportive care medications for immuno-oncology therapies is a new section; these highly effective (although not universally so) agents were a mere illusion in 1993.

Assessing suitability for long-term colorectal cancer shared care: a scenario-based qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Shared care is the preferred model for long-term survivorship care by cancer survivors, general practitioners and specialists. However, survivorship care remains specialist-led. A risk-stratified approach has been proposed to select suitable patients for long-term shared care after survivors have completed adjuvant cancer treatment. This study aims to use patient scenarios to explore views on patient suitability for long-term colorectal cancer shared care across the risk spectrum from survivors, general practitioners and specialists. METHODS: Participants completed a brief questionnaire assessing demographics and clinical issues before a semi-structured in-depth interview. The interviews focused on the participant's view on suitability for long term cancer shared care, challenges and facilitators in delivering it and resources that would be helpful. We conducted thematic analysis using an inductive approach to discover new concepts and themes. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 10 cancer survivors, 6 general practitioners and 9 cancer specialists. The main themes that emerged were patient-centredness, team resilience underlined by mutual trust and stronger system supports by way of cancer-specific training, survivorship care protocols, shared information systems, care coordination and navigational supports. CONCLUSIONS: Decisions on the appropriateness of this model for patients need to be made collaboratively with cancer survivors, considering their trust and relationship with their general practitioners and the support they need. Further research on improving mutual trust and operationalising support systems would assist in the integration of shared survivorship care.

When will I feel normal again? Trajectories and predictors of persistent symptoms and poor wellbeing after primary chemotherapy for ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVES: After treatment for ovarian cancer, women want to know when they will feel 'normal' again. Our objective was to document the proportions of women with high levels of physical and emotional symptoms at the end of treatment, determine if/when they return to normal and identify groups at risk of persistent symptoms/delayed recovery. METHODS: Women in the OPAL (Ovarian cancer Prognosis And Lifestyle) study who received ≥3 cycles of first-line chemotherapy and completed patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires on or < 6 weeks after completing chemotherapy (baseline) were included in this analysis (n = 527). PRO measures included anxiety, depression, insomnia, fatigue and wellbeing (quality-of-life) at baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 18 months post-baseline. Group-based trajectory models identified clusters of individuals who followed similar patterns. Logistic and Cox regression identified factors associated with persistent symptoms and delayed recovery, respectively. RESULTS: At baseline, 57% of women reported moderate-to-severe fatigue, 22% anxiety, 20% depression, 14% clinical insomnia and 45% had quality-of-life scores significantly lower than the general population. Between 50 and 75% of individual PRO scores normalised within six months, with the exception of emotional wellbeing (42%), but approximately two-in-five women still had at least one persistently poor PRO at 18 months. Women with more severe symptoms at baseline, who were younger, or had a history of anxiety/depression were more likely to have persistent symptoms or delayed recovery. CONCLUSIONS: Two-in-five women might never fully return to 'normal' after completing primary treatment for ovarian cancer. Those with risk factors should be triaged for early supportive interventions.

Self-reported health, lifestyle and social circumstances of Australian adult cancer survivors: A propensity score weighted cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: With the prevalence of cancer survivors increasing, their unique needs must be better understood. We examined the health, lifestyles and social circumstances of adults with and without a history of cancer. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study, using exposure and outcome data from the baseline survey (2006-2009) of participants in the 45 and Up Study, a prospective cohort study in New South Wales, Australia. We compared 20,811 cancer registry-verified adult cancer survivors with 207,148 participants without a history of cancer using propensity score weighting and accounting for multiple testing. The propensity weighting included age, sociodemographic factors and number of self-reported co-morbidities. RESULTS: Cancer survivors were more likely to report poorer physical and psychological health and quality of life compared to those without a cancer history, with most deficits still evident more than 10 years after cancer diagnosis. Cancer survivors were more likely to have a higher body mass index, but were less likely to smoke. Cancer survivors had greater functional limitations, including sexual, and were less likely to work full time, volunteer and spend time outdoors. Their social connectedness was, however, similar. Those with haematological cancer, lung cancer, or distant metastases, and those diagnosed at an older age, had the greatest health deficits and functional limitations. CONCLUSIONS: A history of cancer is associated with poorer health and less paid and unpaid work. Our findings reinforce the importance of routine long-term, integrated multidisciplinary care for cancer survivors and indicate the subgroups with the greatest unmet needs.

Cardiovascular Toxicity of Targeted Therapies for Cancer: An Overview of Systematic Reviews.

BACKGROUND: Several targeted therapies for cancer have been associated with cardiovascular toxicity. The evidence for this association has not been synthesized systematically nor has the quality of evidence been considered. We synthesized systematic review evidence of cardiovascular toxicity of individual targeted agents. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for systematic reviews with meta-analyses of cardiovascular outcomes for individual agents published to May 2020. We selected reviews according to prespecified eligibility criteria (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42017080014). We classified evidence of cardiovascular toxicity as sufficient, probable, possible, or indeterminate for specific cardiovascular outcomes based on statistical significance, study quality, and size. RESULTS: From 113 systematic reviews, we found at least probable systematic review evidence of cardiovascular toxicity for 18 agents, including high- and all-grade hypertension for bevacizumab, ramucirumab, axitinib, cediranib, pazopanib, sorafenib, sunitinib, vandetanib, aflibercept, abiraterone, and enzalutamide, and all-grade hypertension for nintedanib; high- and all-grade arterial thromboembolism (includes cardiac and/or cerebral events) for bevacizumab and abiraterone, high-grade arterial thromboembolism for trastuzumab, and all-grade arterial thromboembolism for sorafenib and tamoxifen; high- and all-grade venous thromboembolism (VTE) for lenalidomide and thalidomide, high-grade VTE for cetuximab and panitumumab, and all-grade VTE for bevacizumab; high- and all-grade left ventricular ejection fraction decline or congestive heart failure for bevacizumab and trastuzumab, and all-grade left ventricular ejection fraction decline/congestive heart failure for pazopanib and sunitinib; and all-grade corrected QT interval prolongation for vandetanib. CONCLUSIONS: Our review provides an accessible summary of the cardiovascular toxicity of targeted therapy to assist clinicians and patients when managing cardiovascular health.

OVQUEST - Life after the diagnosis and treatment of ovarian cancer - An international survey of symptoms and concerns in ovarian cancer survivors.

OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to investigate the prevalence and potential risk factors for persistent and troublesome physical and psychological symptoms following treatment for ovarian cancer (OC). METHODS: OvQuest is an international, internet-based, cross-sectional questionnaire which explored symptom burden and quality of life (QOL) after treatment for OC. Eligible women were aged 18 and over, diagnosed with OC at least 6 months previously and had received chemotherapy. Self-report data were collected including demographics, diagnosis and treatment, and standardised instruments for treatment-related toxicities, QOL, physical activity (PA) and supportive care needs. RESULTS: The survey included 1360 patients, of whom 421 (31%) had been treated for recurrent OC. 78% reported symptoms of peripheral neuropathy, 60% significant fatigue, 48% mood disturbance and 59% moderate-severe insomnia. Rates of fatigue, mood disorders, neuropathy and insomnia did not differ between women with or without recurrence. The majority of respondents were overweight or obese (high BMI, 59%) and 35% reported low PA. Low PA and high BMI were associated with poorer QOL scores and higher symptom burden across a range of domains. CONCLUSION: Women living after a diagnosis of OC report a substantial and ongoing symptom burden which impacts significantly on their quality of life across multiple domains. The reported associations between obesity, physical inactivity and poor QOL warrant prospective evaluation of lifestyle interventions to improve QOL.

Reproductive outcomes following treatment for a gynecological cancer diagnosis: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Fertility treatments are available for women diagnosed with a gynecological malignancy, which is important for women who desire a biological family subsequent to treatment. The objective of this study was to report reproductive outcomes following fertility-sparing treatment for a gynaecological cancer. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched to identify studies that reported on reproductive outcomes after treatment for a gynecological malignancy. RESULTS: In total, 77 studies were included which reported on reproductive outcomes after treatment for cervical cancer, endometrial cancer, gestational trophoblastic disease, and ovarian cancer. The main treatments included vaginal or abdominal radical trachelectomy, progestin therapy, salpingo-oophorectomy, and chemotherapy. The mean age at diagnosis for the study population and at birth were 30.5 years and 30.3 years, respectively. There were 4749 pregnancies (42%) reported for the included studies, with a miscarriage rate of 15% and a medical termination rate of 5%. The live birth rate was 74% with a 10% preterm rate. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Patients should be offered timely discussions, information, and counseling regarding the impact of gynecological cancer treatment on a patient's fertility. Furthermore, fertility-sparing strategies and fertility preservation should be discussed prior to starting treatment.

Fertility and pregnancy in cancer survivors.

Cancer survivors are increasing as improvements in cancer diagnosis and treatment translate to improved outcomes. As cancer survivors in their reproductive years contemplate pregnancy, it is important to understand the impact of cancer and its treatment on fertility and pregnancy outcomes. Cancer treatments such as chemotherapy and radiotherapy can affect patients' fertility, and strategies are available to help preserve the future fertility of survivors. The potential impact of previous cancer diagnoses and treatments on pregnancy and maternal and fetal outcomes needs to be assessed and discussed with survivors, with support from materno-fetal medicine specialists and high-risk antenatal services as needed.

Cardiovascular toxicity of targeted therapies for cancer: a protocol for an overview of systematic reviews.

INTRODUCTION: The introduction of targeted therapies for cancer has contributed to dramatic improvements in patient survival. Nevertheless, several targeted therapies have been associated with 'off-target' adverse effects, based on varying levels of evidence. To date, this evidence has not been systematically synthesised. We will synthesise published systematic review evidence of cardiovascular toxicity associated with targeted cancer therapies. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will include systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials and observational studies that report on cardiovascular outcomes for individual agents. We will identify systematic reviews by applying predeveloped, standardised search strategies within Embase, Medline and Cochrane Central. Two independent reviewers will identify reviews published up to 31 December 2016 using predefined eligibility criteria. They will resolve ambiguous cases through consensus, arbitrated by a third reviewer if required. The reviewers will extract and report data according to methodological guidelines for overviews provided by the Cochrane Collaboration, Joanna Briggs Institute and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols. They will assess the quality of included reviews by applying the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews tool. They will judge the quality of evidence in included reviews based on their assessment of bias and incorporation into the interpretation of findings. In synthesising the evidence, we will classify agents based on systematic review evidence of toxicity (sufficient, probable, possible or indeterminate) for specific cardiovascular outcomes (congestive heart failure, myocardial infarction, ischaemic heart disease, left ventricular ejection fraction decline, cerebrovascular disease, pulmonary embolism, thrombosis and hypertension). This will provide clinicians and patients with an accessible synthesis based on robust methodology. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required for overviews. We will conduct the study in collaboration with consumer representatives. We will submit results for peer-review publication, and disseminate them through established clinical and consumer networks. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017080014.