"Should I Prioritize My Cancer or My Diabetes?": Patient-Perceived Barriers to Co-Managing Cancer and Diabetes Mellitus.

Among patients with cancer, diabetes mellitus (DM) is a prevalent comorbid condition. With an aging population and an increase in the prevalence of cancer and DM, the number of cancer patients with DM will rise. To date, studies have largely focused on understanding the context of cancer and DM co-management from the perspectives of oncology and primary care providers. To better understand the potential barriers to optimal cancer and DM co-management, we conducted 17 semi-structured interviews with DM patients receiving cancer care at New York-Presbyterian Weill Cornell Medical Center outpatient oncology clinics in New York, NY. In total, 53% patients were female, 35% were non-White, and the mean age was 64.75 (SD 11.10) years. We qualitatively analyzed our data and identified the following nine themes: (1) patients develop DM during or after cancer treatment; (2) patients do not know about the possible interactions between DM and cancer treatment; (3) cancer care is prioritized over DM management; (4) severity of DM symptoms drive patients' DM self-management during cancer care; (5) impact of cancer treatment on quality of life; (6) demands from cancer care make DM management more difficult; (7) patients want individualized treatment plans that integrate DM and cancer co-management; (8) need for greater patient activation; (9) lack of patient-centered educational resources on DM management during cancer care. Owing to these results, our findings highlight the need to increase patient engagement by developing and disseminating patient-centered educational resources on cancer and DM to improve self-management practices and patient outcomes.

Diabetes and Cancer Co-management Education: Leveraging the Patient Activated Learning System (PALS) for Patients with Breast Cancer.

More than 70% of cancer patients have one or more comorbid conditions, and diabetes is one of the most common and burdensome comorbidities. However, existing patient-centered education materials often fail to acknowledge how to co-manage cancer and diabetes, leaving patients feeling overwhelmed and searching for guidance. Our team sought to fill this knowledge gap by using the Patient Activated Learning System (PALS), a patient-centered, publicly available platform, to generate patient-centered education materials about co-managing diabetes and cancer. Using insights from 15 patient interview transcripts, we developed eight reusable knowledge objects (RKOs) for a variety of common questions that patients have about co-managing diabetes and cancer. The RKOs were written in collaboration with researchers and clinicians and then peer reviewed by experts. The eight evidence-based RKOs have the potential to equip patients with the knowledge to support cancer and diabetes co-management. There are no existing patient-centered educational resources to help patients manage their diabetes during cancer treatments. We filled this gap by using the Patient Activated Learning System (PALS) to generate evidence-based, patient-facing educational information that was written by researchers and clinicians and peer reviewed by experts. This educational content will support cancer and diabetes co-management for patients.

Diabetes and cancer co-management: patient-reported challenges, needs, and priorities.

INTRODUCTION: Twenty percent of breast cancer survivors have co-occurring diabetes and face a 50% greater risk of 10-year mortality compared to survivors without diabetes. Individuals with cancer are often overwhelmed during cancer treatment and have less time for their diabetes, contributing to worse outcomes. We elicited perspectives of breast cancer survivors with diabetes regarding their specific needs for diabetes and cancer co-management. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with women with breast cancer aged 40 + years at three New York City hospitals from May 2021 to March 2022. Eligible participants had type 2 diabetes or pre-diabetes. Interviews were audio-recorded, professionally transcribed, and coded by two independent reviewers. RESULTS: We conducted interviews with 15 females with breast cancer of mean age 61.5 years (SD 7.2); 70% were Black, Hispanic, or Asian/Pacific Islander, and 20% had only a high school education. Most (73%) patients were insured by Medicaid or Medicare, and 73% underwent chemotherapy as part of their cancer care. Of the 15 participants, 60% reported that their glucose levels were of control during cancer treatment and nearly 50% reported glucose levels > 200 mg/dL. We identified distinct themes that reflect patient-reported challenges (worse glucose control after initiation of cancer treatment, lack of information on co-managing diabetes, negative psychosocial effects, burden of diabetes management during cancer care) and needs/priorities (designated provider to help, educational resources specific to diabetes and cancer, and individualized care plans). CONCLUSIONS: Patients co-managing diabetes and cancer face challenges and have unmet needs that should be addressed to improve diabetes control during cancer treatment. Our findings can directly inform interventions aimed at improving glucose control in this population.

Fatalistic cancer beliefs and self-reported cancer screening behaviors among diverse urban residents.

Cancer fatalism-the belief that death is inevitable when cancer is present-has been identified as a barrier to cancer screening, detection, and treatment. Our study examined the relationship between self-reported cancer fatalism and adherence to cancer screening guidelines of the breasts, cervix, colon, and prostate among a diverse sample of urban-dwelling adults in Brooklyn, New York. Between May 2019 and August 2020, we conducted a cross-sectional survey of adults 40 + years of age (n = 2,341) residing in Brooklyn neighborhoods with high cancer mortality. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess the odds of reporting cancer screening completion across three fatalistic cancer belief categories (low, med, high). Participants' median age was 61 (IQR 51, 71) years, 61% were women, 49% self-identified as non-Hispanic black, 11% Hispanic, 4% Asian, and 6% more than one race. There were no statistically significant differences in the proportion of low, some, or high fatalistic beliefs identified among male respondents compared to women. Among women, we observed that high fatalistic cancer beliefs were associated with higher odds (OR 2.01; 95% CI 1.10-3.65) of completing breast but not cervical (1.04; CI 0.55-1.99) or colon (1.54; CI 0.88-2.69) cancer screening. Men with high fatalistic cancer beliefs had a trend towards lower odds of prostate screening (OR 0.53: 95% CI 0.18-1.57) compared to men with low fatalistic beliefs, but neither was statistically significant. Findings suggest that high fatalistic cancer beliefs may be an important factor in cancer screening utilization among women. Further examination in longitudinal cohorts with a larger sample of men may be needed in order to identify any significant effect.