Feasibility and potential effectiveness of nurse-led video-coaching interventions for childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer survivors: the REVIVER study.

BACKGROUND: Childhood, adolescent, and young adult (CAYA) cancer survivors, at risk for late effects, including cancer-related fatigue, cardiovascular issues, and psychosocial challenges, may benefit from interventions stimulating behaviour adjustments. Three nurse-led eHealth interventions (REVIVER) delivered via video calls and elaborating on person-centred care, cognitive behaviour therapy and/or motivational interviewing were developed. These interventions target: 1) fatigue management, 2) healthier lifestyle behaviours, and 3) self-efficacy and self-management. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and potential effectiveness of the REVIVER interventions for CAYA cancer survivors and healthcare professionals. METHODS: In a single-group mixed methods design, CAYA cancer survivors aged 16-54, more than five years post-treatment, were enrolled. Feasibility, assessed via Bowen's outcomes for feasibility studies, included acceptability, practicality, integration and implementation, demand and adherence. Qualitative data from semi-structured interviews and a focus group interview with survivors and healthcare professionals supplemented the evaluation. Paired sample t-tests assessed changes in self-reported quality of life, fatigue, lifestyle, self-management, and self-efficacy at baseline (T0), post-intervention (T1), and 6-month follow-up (T2). RESULTS: The interventions and video consults were generally acceptable, practical, and successfully integrated and implemented. Success factors included the nurse consultant (i.e., communication, approach, and attitude) and the personalised approach. Barriers included sustainability concerns, technical issues, and short intervention duration. Regarding demand, 71.4%, 65.4%, and 100% of eligible CAYA cancer survivors engaged in the fatigue (N = 15), lifestyle (N = 17) and empowerment (N = 3) intervention, respectively, with 5, 5 and 2 participants interviewed, correspondingly. Low interest (demand) in the empowerment intervention (N = 3) and dropout rates of one-third for both fatigue and empowerment interventions were noted (adherence). Improvements in quality of life, fatigue (fatigue intervention), lifestyle (lifestyle intervention), self-efficacy, and self-management were evident among survivors who completed the fatigue and lifestyle interventions, with medium and large effect sizes observed immediately after the intervention and six months post-intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates the feasibility of nurse-led video coaching (REVIVER interventions) despite lower demand for the empowerment intervention and lower adherence to the fatigue and empowerment interventions. The medium and high effect sizes found for those who completed the interventions hold potential clinical significance for future studies investigating the effectiveness of the REVIVER interventions.

Toward implementation of an evidence-based intervention for fear of cancer recurrence: Feasibility in real-world psycho-oncology practice.

OBJECTIVE: Few evidence-based interventions addressing high levels of fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) have been implemented. Understanding how these might be implemented is crucial to bridge the research-practice gap. This study investigated the feasibility of implementing the blended Survivors' Worries of Recurrent Disease (SWORD) intervention in real-world psycho-oncology practice. METHODS: SWORD was offered for 15 months (2021-2022) as the standard care for clinical FCR in a university hospital, a general hospital, and psycho-oncological center. We evaluated using a mixed-methods design six feasibility outcomes based on Bowen's framework: demand, limited effectiveness, degree of execution, acceptability, practicality, and integration. Anonymous data were collected for all oncology patients on referral. Study participants completed questionnaires before and after treatment, including the Cancer Worry Scale (CWS-6) as the primary measure of effectiveness. Qualitative data included interviews with patients and psychologists, and field notes. RESULTS: Regarding demand, 81 of 644 patients referred (13%) were eligible for SWORD. The uptake of SWORD was 79% (n = 63/80) and the completion rate 73% (n = 46/63). SWORD was effective in reducing FCR (p < 0.001, ηp2  = 0.694). Regarding execution, a variability in the length, planning and number of treatment sessions was found between different settings. Adherence to the treatment manual's content was high (89%). Regarding acceptability, most patients were satisfied with SWORD (average 8.2/10) and psychologists valued the blended format. Psychologists reported SWORD was practical to deliver given their knowledge and skills. Although differences between settings were found, SWORD integrated well into practice. Referral for FCR and a reluctance to contract new eHealth providers were barriers for implementation. CONCLUSIONS: Despite differences between healthcare settings, the implementation of SWORD was evaluated well. The feasibility of SWORD in different settings should inform a national implementation strategy.

Diagnosis and management of isolated serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma: A qualitative focus group study.

OBJECTIVE: A Serous Tubal Intraepithelial Carcinoma (STIC) without concomitant invasive carcinoma is occasionally identified and associated with a high risk of subsequent peritoneal carcinomatosis. Management needs optimisation. This study explores professionals' opinions and clinical practices regarding the diagnosis, counselling, treatment and follow-up of isolated STIC to facilitate clinical decision making and optimise the direction of future research. A secondary aim is to assess international clinical guidelines. DESIGN: Focus group study. SETTING: Four online sessions. POPULATION: International panel (n = 12 countries) of gynaecologists, gynaecologic oncologists, pathologists and medical oncologists (n = 49). METHODS: A semi-structured interview guide was used. Two independent researchers analysed transcripts by open and axial coding. Results were organised in domains. Relevant (inter)national guidelines were screened for recommendations regarding isolated STIC. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Professionals' opinions and clinical practices regarding isolated STIC management. RESULTS: Regarding pathology, most professionals identified the SEE-FIM protocol as standard of care for high-risk patients, whereas variation exists in the histopathological examination of fallopian tubes in the general population. Confirmation of STIC diagnosis by a specialised pathologist was recommended. Regarding work-up and follow-up after STIC diagnosis, there was variety and discordance. Data on outcomes is limited. As for treatment, chemotherapy and PARP inhibitors were not recommended by most. Eleven guidelines provided limited recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: We identified recommendations and highlighted knowledge gaps in the diagnosis and management of isolated STIC. Moreover, recommendations in clinical guidelines are limited. There is an agreed need for international collaboration for the prospective registration of isolated STIC.

Consensus based recommendations for the diagnosis of serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma: an international Delphi study.

AIM: Reliably diagnosing or safely excluding serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma (STIC), a precursor lesion of tubo-ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC), is crucial for individual patient care, for better understanding the oncogenesis of HGSC, and for safely investigating novel strategies to prevent tubo-ovarian carcinoma. To optimize STIC diagnosis and increase its reproducibility, we set up a three-round Delphi study. METHODS AND RESULTS: In round 1, an international expert panel of 34 gynecologic pathologists, from 11 countries, was assembled to provide input regarding STIC diagnosis, which was used to develop a set of statements. In round 2, the panel rated their level of agreement with those statements on a 9-point Likert scale. In round 3, statements without previous consensus were rated again by the panel while anonymously disclosing the responses of the other panel members. Finally, each expert was asked to approve or disapprove the complete set of consensus statements. The panel indicated their level of agreement with 64 statements. A total of 27 statements (42%) reached consensus after three rounds. These statements reflect the entire diagnostic work-up for pathologists, regarding processing and macroscopy (three statements); microscopy (eight statements); immunohistochemistry (nine statements); interpretation and reporting (four statements); and miscellaneous (three statements). The final set of consensus statements was approved by 85%. CONCLUSION: This study provides an overview of current clinical practice regarding STIC diagnosis amongst expert gynecopathologists. The experts' consensus statements form the basis for a set of recommendations, which may help towards more consistent STIC diagnosis.

Evaluating the capacity of the distress thermometer to detect high fear of cancer recurrence.

OBJECTIVES: Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is common and burdensome to patients, but often remains undetected. Oncology professionals report need for tools to improve FCR detection in routine care. Oncology care guidelines recommend the Distress Thermometer (DT) for distress screening, but it has not been validated for FCR. This study evaluated the capacity of the DT and accompanying problem list to detect FCR. METHODS: Amalgamated data of two studies with 149 breast cancer and 74 colorectal cancer survivors were used. We evaluated the Dutch DT including the DT score, problem list fears item and emotional domain score using Receiver Operating Characteristic analyses. The Dutch Cancer Worry Scale-6 (CWS-6) was used as reference measure, with validated cut-off scores ≥10 and ≥12 for high FCR. Sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values were calculated. RESULTS: The DT score showed poor performance in discriminating between low and high FCR. The recommended cut-off ≥4 had low sensitivity (65% for CWS-6≥10; 72% for CWS-6 ≥12) and specificity (67% and 58%). No other cut-off had an acceptable combination of sensitivity and specificity. The fears item had low sensitivity (29% and 44.9%) and high specificity (95% and 94%). The emotional domain score had fair performance in discriminating between low and high FCR but there was no cut-off with acceptable sensitivity and specificity. CONCLUSION: The DT as currently recommended in oncology care guidelines is not suitable to effectively detect FCR in routine care. To improve patients access to psychosocial care, it should be investigated how FCR-specific measures can be integrated in oncology practice.

TUBectomy with delayed oophorectomy as an alternative to risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in high-risk women to assess the safety of prevention: the TUBA-WISP II study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Risk-reducing salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy has gained interest for individuals at high risk for tubo-ovarian cancer as there is compelling evidence that especially high-grade serous carcinoma originates in the fallopian tubes. Two studies have demonstrated a positive effect of salpingectomy on menopause-related quality of life and sexual health compared with standard risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy is non-inferior to the current standard salpingo-oophorectomy for the prevention of tubo-ovarian cancer among individuals at high inherited risk. STUDY HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesize that postponement of oophorectomy after salpingectomy, to the age of 40-45 (BRCA1) or 45-50 (BRCA2) years, compared with the current standard salpingo-oophorectomy at age 35-40 (BRCA1) or 40-45 (BRCA2) years, is non-inferior in regard to tubo-ovarian cancer risk. TRIAL DESIGN: In this international prospective preference trial, participants will choose between the novel salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy and the current standard salpingo-oophorectomy. Salpingectomy can be performed after the completion of childbearing and between the age of 25 and 40 (BRCA1), 25 and 45 (BRCA2), or 25 and 50 (BRIP1, RAD51C, and RAD51D pathogenic variant carriers) years. Subsequent oophorectomy is recommended at a maximum delay of 5 years beyond the upper limit of the current guideline age for salpingo-oophorectomy. The current National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guideline age, which is also the recommended age for salpingo-oophorectomy within the study, is 35-40 years for BRCA1, 40-45 years for BRCA2, and 45-50 years for BRIP1, RAD51C, and RAD51D pathogenic variant carriers. MAJOR INCLUSION/EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Premenopausal individuals with a documented class IV or V germline pathogenic variant in the BRCA1, BRCA2, BRIP1, RAD51C, or RAD51D gene who have completed childbearing are eligible for participation. Participants may have a personal history of a non-ovarian malignancy. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: The primary outcome is the cumulative tubo-ovarian cancer incidence at the target age: 46 years for BRCA1 and 51 years for BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers. SAMPLE SIZE: The sample size to ensure sufficient power to test non-inferiority of salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy compared with salpingo-oophorectomy requires 1500 BRCA1 and 1500 BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers. ESTIMATED DATES FOR COMPLETING ACCRUAL AND PRESENTING RESULTS: Participant recruitment is expected to be completed at the end of 2026 (total recruitment period of 5 years). The primary outcome is expected to be available in 2036 (minimal follow-up period of 10 years). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04294927.

First step in implementation of opportunistic salpingectomy for prevention of ovarian cancer: Current care and its determinants.

INTRODUCTION: Opportunistic salpingectomy (OS) refers to additional removal of the fallopian tubes during abdominal surgery performed for another medical indication, as prevention for ovarian cancer. As OS has been inconsistently implemented, its clinical practice varies worldwide. To reduce this variation, insight is required into current clinical practice and its determinants. Therefore, the study aim was to determine the implementation of counseling and performance of OS between 2015 and 2018, and its patient, surgical, physician, and hospital characteristics. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective study using electronic medical records from six different Dutch hospitals: two academic, two large teaching, and two non-teaching hospitals. Patients were considered eligible for OS if they underwent elective non-obstetric abdominal surgery for a gynecological indication from January 2015 through December 2018. Primary outcomes were uptake of counseling and performance of OS. Multilevel multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify characteristics associated with OS. RESULTS: A total of 3214 patients underwent elective non-obstetric abdominal surgery for a gynecological indication and were eligible for OS. Counseling on OS increased significantly from 2.9% in 2015 to 29.4% in 2018. In this period, 440 patients were counseled on OS, of which 95.9% chose OS. Performance of OS increased significantly from 6.9% in 2015 to 44.5% in 2018. Counseling for and performance of OS were more likely in patients who had surgery by laparoscopic approach, were counseled by a gynecological resident, or had more than three contact moments before surgery. Additionally, OS was less likely in patients who had vaginal surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Although the uptake of OS increased from 2015 to 2018, the majority of patients who were eligible for OS were not counseled and did not undergo OS. Its clinical practice varies on patient, surgery, and physician characteristics. Therefore, an implementation strategy tailored to associated determinants is recommended.

Effectiveness of digital care platform CMyLife for patients with chronic myeloid leukemia: results of a patient-preference trial.

BACKGROUND: Two most important factors determining treatment success in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) are adequate medication compliance and molecular monitoring albeit still being suboptimal. The CMyLife platform is an eHealth innovation, co-created with and for CML patients, aiming to improve their care, leading to an increased quality of life and the opportunity of hospital-free care. OBJECTIVE: To explore the effectiveness of CMyLife in terms of information provision, patient empowerment, medication compliance, molecular monitoring, and quality of life. METHODS: Effectiveness of CMyLife was explored using a patient-preference trial. Upon completion of the baseline questionnaire, participants actively used (intervention group) or did not actively use (questionnaire group) the CMyLife platform for at least 6 months, after which they completed the post-intervention questionnaire. Scores between the intervention group and the questionnaire group were compared with regard to the within-subject change between baseline and post-measurement using Generalized Estimating Equation models. RESULTS: At baseline, 33 patients were enrolled in the questionnaire group and 75 in the intervention group. Online health information knowledge improved significantly when actively using CMyLife and patients felt more empowered. No significant improvements were found regarding medication compliance and molecular monitoring, which were already outstanding. Self-reported effectiveness showed that patients experienced that using CMyLife improved their medication compliance and helped them to oversee their molecular monitoring. Patients using CMyLife reported more symptoms but were better able to manage these. CONCLUSIONS: Since hospital-free care has shown to be feasible in time of the COVID-19 pandemic, eHealth-based innovations such as CMyLife could be a solution to maintain the quality of care and make current oncological health care services more sustainable. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04595955 , 22/10/2020.

Improvement, Implementation, and Evaluation of the CMyLife Digital Care Platform: Participatory Action Research Approach.

BACKGROUND: The evaluation of a continuously evolving eHealth tool in terms of improvement and implementation in daily practice is unclear. The CMyLife digital care platform provides patient-centered care by empowering patients with chronic myeloid leukemia, with a focus on making medication compliance insightful, discussable, and optimal, and achieving optimal control of the biomarker BCR-ABL1. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate to what extent the participatory action research approach is suitable for the improvement and scientific evaluation of eHealth innovations in daily clinical practice (measured by user experiences) combined with the promotion of patient empowerment. METHODS: The study used iterative cycles of planning, action, and reflection, whereby participants' experiences (patients, health care providers, the CMyLife team, and app suppliers) with the platform determined next actions. Co-design workshops were the foundation of this cyclic process. Moreover, patients filled in 2 sets of questionnaires for assessing experiences with CMyLife, the actual use of the platform, and the influence of the platform after 3 and at least 6 months. Data collected during the workshops were analyzed using content analysis, which is often used for making a practical guide to action. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the study population in terms of information related to chronic myeloid leukemia and sociodemographics, and to describe experiences with the CMyLife digital care platform and the actual use of this platform. RESULTS: The co-design workshops provided insights that contributed to the improvement, implementation, and evaluation of CMyLife and empowered patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (for example, simplification of language, and improvement of the user friendliness of functionalities). The results of the questionnaires indicated that (1) the platform improved information provision on chronic myeloid leukemia in 67% (33/49) of patients, (2) the use of the medication app improved medication compliance in 42% (16/38) of patients, (3) the use of the guideline app improved guideline adherence in 44% (11/25) of patients, and (4) the use of the platform caused patients to feel more empowered. CONCLUSIONS: A participatory action research approach is suited to scientifically evaluate digital care platforms in daily clinical practice in terms of improvement, implementation, and patient empowerment. Systematic iterative evaluation of users' needs and wishes is needed to keep care centered on patients and keep the innovation up-to-date and valuable for users.

Primary prevention of ovarian cancer: a patient decision aid for opportunistic salpingectomy.

BACKGROUND: The discovery of the fallopian tube epithelium as the origin of high-grade serous ovarian cancer has brought a new option for ovarian cancer prevention. The fallopian tubes have no known function after completion of childbearing and can be removed to reduce the lifetime risk of ovarian cancer. Although the lifetime risk in the general population does not justify preventive surgery in itself, salpingectomy can be performed during abdominal surgery for other indications, also known as an opportunistic salpingectomy. The popularity of opportunistic salpingectomy is increasing worldwide; however, the variation between gynecologists and hospitals in their advice on opportunistic salpingectomy occurs because of the remaining uncertainty of evidence. Therefore, whether a woman can make her own decision depends on the hospital or gynecologist she visits. We aimed to lower this practice variation by providing standardized and unbiased counseling material. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to develop and test a patient decision aid for opportunistic salpingectomy in women undergoing pelvic gynecologic surgery to either retain the ovaries or opt for sterilization. STUDY DESIGN: We followed a systematic development process based on the International Patient Decision Aid Standards. Data were collected between June 2019 and June 2020, using both qualitative and quantitative methods. The development process that occurred in collaboration with patients and healthcare professionals was overseen by a multidisciplinary steering group and was divided into 4 phases: (1) assessment of decisional needs using individual telephone interviews and questionnaires; (2) development of content and format based on decisional needs, current literature, and guidelines; (3) alpha testing and the first revision round; and (4) alpha testing and the second revision round. RESULTS: An outline of the patient decision aid was developed on the basis of decisional needs, current literature, and guidelines. It became clear that the decision aid should consist of 2 separate paths: one with information specifically for salpingectomy in addition to abdominal surgery and one for salpingectomy as a sterilization method. Both paths contained information on the anatomy and function of ovaries and fallopian tubes, risk reduction of ovarian cancer, and potential benefits and risks of opportunistic salpingectomy. Moreover, the sterilization path contains information on various sterilization methods and risks of unwanted pregnancy. The patient decision aid was developed as an online tool that includes information chapters, a knowledge quiz, consideration statements, and a summary detailing the patient's preferences and considerations. Adjustments were made following alpha testing round 1. The improved patient decision aid was subjected to usability tests (alpha testing round 2), in which it scored an "excellent" in tests with patients and a "good" in tests with gynecologists. Furthermore, our patient decision aid met the requirements of 45 of 49 applicable items from the International Patient Decision Aid Standards criteria. CONCLUSION: In collaboration with patients and healthcare professionals, a patient decision aid was developed on opportunistic salpingectomy and salpingectomy as a sterilization method. Both patients and gynecologists believed it is a useful tool that supports patients in making an informed decision whether to undergo an opportunistic salpingectomy and supports the counseling process by gynecologists.