Evolving landscape of cancer survivorship research: an analysis of the Journal of Cancer Survivorship, 2007-2020

A scoping review exploring cancer survivorship in Africa: 2011 to 2024

PURPOSE

The scope of cancer survivorship in Africa remains largely unexplored. This scoping review aims to describe current survivorship-related factors and care delivery characteristics in Africa, and to provide insights that can inform a more systematic integration of survivorship care into the broader cancer care continuum.

METHODS

Four databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science: Core, CINAHL Plus) were searched for journal articles and grey literature published from 2011 to August 2024 in English. Articles were included if they focused on post-treatment care for African cancer survivors. Covidence® was utilised for screening and data collection. Microsoft Excel was used for data cleaning and analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 9417 articles were screened and 181 included. The number of studies per year grew from 6 (2011) to 32 (2023). These comprised 71 conference abstracts and 110 journal articles conducted in 19 African countries. The study methodologies utilised include 97 quantitative, 42 qualitative, 25 programme descriptions, and 18 mixed methods. Childhood survivorship was the focus for 40 studies. Psychosocial effects of cancer and its treatment were discussed in 104 studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Interest in post-treatment cancer survivorship and related care is increasing across Africa. While significant research has explored the physical and psychosocial effects of cancer, there remains a critical need for studies focused on care coordination, targeted interventions, and strategies to improve quality-of-life outcomes for survivors.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

The overall scope of post-treatment cancer survivorship care in Africa primarily centres on psychosocial outcomes, with limited emphasis on care coordination. This underscores the need for further research and the development of context-relevant, feasible, and integrated care models within African health systems.

Survivorship research in advanced gynecological cancer: A scoping review of cohort studies

BACKGROUND

Recent calls to action highlight the need to address gaps in our understanding of survivorship for those living with advanced gynecological cancer to support optimal care. To ensure future research fills these knowledge gaps, we need to understand the breadth of existing survivorship research in this patient group, including the outcomes assessed, the populations included and the duration and retention in follow-up.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic scoping review searching PubMed, PsychINFO, and CINAHL during the month of November 2022 to identify prospective cohort studies measuring survivorship outcomes among participants with advanced (stage III-IV) gynecological cancer, or in cohorts in which ≥50% of participants had advanced cancer, or which provide results separately for patients with advanced cancer. Articles were screened, and data extracted using a standard form.

RESULTS

We assessed 33 articles from 21 unique studies, which overall included 6023 participants with gynecological cancer. Of these, 45% had cervical cancer, 44% ovarian, 10% endometrial/uterine, and 1% vaginal/vulvar cancer. The most frequently measured survivorship outcome was quality of life. Of the 33 articles, most reported on participant age (n = 31), but relatively few reported on comorbidities (n = 10), physical status (n = 6), ethnic background (n = 4), the country of birth (n = 2), or the area of participant residence (n = 2). None included details on indigenous status. Recruitment proportions ranged from 48% to 100%. Retention proportions ranged from 15% to 97%.

CONCLUSION

Our findings highlight gaps in survivorship research for advanced gynecological cancers and emphasize the need for future studies to include and describe the experiences of diverse and underrepresented groups.

Current landscape of cancer survivorship research in Australia

AIM

Response to the substantial and long-term impacts that a cancer diagnosis and treatment has on the growing population of cancer survivors, requires priority-driven, impactful research. This study aimed to map Australian cancer survivorship research activities to identify gaps and opportunities for improvement and compare activities against identified survivorship research priorities.

METHODS

An online survey was completed by Australian researchers regarding their cancer survivorship research, and the barriers they identified to conducting such research. Current research activity was compared to recently established Australian survivorship research priorities.

RESULTS

Overall, 178 participants completed the online survey. The majority of the research undertaken utilized survey or qualitative designs and focused on breast cancer, adult populations, and those in early survivorship (<5 years post-treatment). Barriers to conducting survivorship research included funding, collaboration and networking, mentoring, and time constraints. There was moderate alignment with existing research priorities. Investigating models of care and health service delivery were the most frequently researched priorities. Research priorities that were less commonly investigated included patient navigation, patient-reported outcomes, multimorbidity, fear of cancer recurrence, and economic issues.

CONCLUSION

This study provides the first snapshot of Australian survivorship research activity. Comparison to established priorities demonstrates health services research is receiving attention and highlights areas for potential pursuits, such as rare cancers or multimorbidity. Findings indicate the need for improved funding and infrastructure to support researchers in advancing the survivorship research agenda.

Prevalence of comorbidities and their impact on survival among older adults with the five most common cancers in Taiwan: a population study

Because of the cancer incidence increase and population aging in Taiwan, we aimed to assess the cancer prevalence, to summarize the comorbidities of older patients with the five most common cancers (i.e., breast, colorectal, liver, lung, and oral), and to develop a Taiwan cancer comorbidity index (TCCI) for studying their actual prognosis. The linkage of the Taiwan Cancer Registry, Cause of Death Database, and National Health Insurance Research Database was used. We followed the standard statistical learning steps to obtain a survival model with good discriminatory accuracy in predicting death due to noncancer causes, from which we obtained the TCCI and defined comorbidity levels. We reported the actual prognosis by age, stage, and comorbidity level. In Taiwan, cancer prevalence nearly doubled in 2004-2014, and comorbidities were common among older patients. Stage was the major predictor of patients' actual prognoses. For localized and regional breast, colorectal, and oral cancers, comorbidities correlated with noncancer-related deaths. Compared with the US, the chances of dying from comorbidities in Taiwan were lower and the chances of dying from cancer were higher for breast, colorectal, and male lung cancers. These actual prognoses could help clinicians and patients in treatment decision-making and help policymakers in resource planning.

Social Wellbeing in Cancer Survivorship: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Self-Reported Relationship Closeness and Ambivalence from a Community Sample

Improvements in early screening and treatment have contributed to the growth of the number of cancer survivors. Understanding and mitigating the adverse psychosocial, functional, and economic outcomes they experience is critical. Social wellbeing refers to the quality of the relationship with partners/spouses, children, or significant others. Close relationships contribute to quality of life and self-management; however, limited literature exists about social wellbeing during survivorship. This study examined positive and negative self-reported changes in a community sample of 505 cancer survivors. Fourteen items assessed changes in communication, closeness with partner/children, stability of the relationship, and caregiving burden. An exploratory factor analysis was conducted using a robust weighted least square procedure. Differences by sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were investigated. Respondents were mostly male, non-Hispanic white, and ≥4 years since diagnosis. Two factors, labeled Relationship Closeness and Ambivalence, emerged from the analysis. Women, younger survivors, individuals from minority groups, and those with lower income experienced greater negative changes in social wellbeing. Variations by treatment status, time since diagnosis, and institution were also reported. This contribution identifies groups of cancer survivors experiencing affected social wellbeing. Results emphasize the need to develop interventions sustaining the quality of interpersonal relationships to promote long-term outcomes.

Home-built environment interventions and inflammation biomarkers: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

BACKGROUND

Inflammation control is a fundamental part of chronic care in patients with a history of cancer and comorbidity. As the risk-benefit profile of anti-inflammatory drugs is unclear in survivors of cancer, GPs and patients could benefit from alternative non-pharmacological treatment options for dysregulated inflammation. There is a potential for home-built environment (H-BE) interventions to modulate inflammation; however, discrepancies exist between studies.

AIM

To evaluate the effectiveness of H-BE interventions on cancer-associated inflammation biomarkers.

DESIGN & SETTING

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised and non-randomised trials in community-dwelling adults.

METHOD

PubMed and MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Google Scholar will be searched for clinical trials published in January 2000 onwards. The study will include H-BE interventions modifying air quality, thermal comfort, non-ionising radiation, noise, nature, and water. No restrictions to study population will be applied to allow deriving expectations for effects of the interventions in cancer survivors from available source populations. Outcome measures will be inflammatory biomarkers clinically and physiologically relevant to cancer. The first reviewer will independently screen articles together with GPs and extract data that will be verified by a second reviewer. The quality of studies will be assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tools. Depending on the clinical and methodological homogeneity of populations, interventions, and outcomes, a meta-analysis will be conducted using random-effects models.

CONCLUSION

Findings will determine the effectiveness of H-BE interventions on inflammatory parameters, guide future directions for its provision in community-dwelling survivors of cancer and support GPs with safer anti-inflammatory treatment options in high-risk patients for clinical complications.

A multinational investigation of healthcare needs, preferences, and expectations in supportive cancer care: co-creating the LifeChamps digital platform

Purpose

This study is to evaluate healthcare needs, preferences, and expectations in supportive cancer care as perceived by cancer survivors, family caregivers, and healthcare professionals.

Methods

Key stakeholders consisted of cancer survivors diagnosed with breast cancer, prostate cancer, or melanoma; adult family caregivers; and healthcare professionals involved in oncology. Recruitment was via several routes, and data were collected via either online surveys or telephone interviews in Greece, Spain, Sweden, and the UK. Framework analysis was applied to the dataset.

Results

One hundred and fifty-five stakeholders participated: 70 cancer survivors, 23 family caregivers, and 62 healthcare professionals (13 clinical roles). Cancer survivors and family caregivers’ needs included information and support on practical/daily living, as frustration was apparent with the lack of follow-up services. Healthcare professionals agreed on a multidisciplinary health service with a “focus on the patient” and availability closer to home. Most healthcare professionals acknowledged that patient-reported outcomes may provide “better individualised care”. Cancer survivors and family caregivers generally felt that the digital platform would be useful for timely personalised support and aided communication. Healthcare professionals were supportive of the “proactive” functionality of the platform and the expected advantages. Anticipated challenges were integration obstacles such as workload/infrastructure and training/support in using the new technology.

Conclusions

Obtaining key stakeholders’ insights provided a foundation for action to further co-create the LifeChamps digital platform to meet needs and priorities and deliver enhanced supportive care to “older” cancer survivors.

Implications for cancer survivors

Co-creation provided insight into gaps where digital support may enhance health and well-being.

Defining research and infrastructure priorities for cancer survivorship in Australia: a modified Delphi study

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to establish research and infrastructure priorities for cancer survivorship.

METHODS

A two-round modified online Delphi study was completed by Australian experts in cancer survivorship. Initial priorities were generated from the literature and organized into four research categories: physiological outcomes, psychosocial outcomes, population groups, and health services; and one research infrastructure category. In round 1 (R1), panelists ranked the importance of 77 items on a five-point scale (not at all important to very important). In round 2 (R2), panelists ranked their top 5 priorities within each category. Panelists also specified the type of research needed, such as biological, exploratory, intervention development, or implementation, for the items within each research category.

RESULTS

Response rates were 76% (63/82) and 82% (68/82) respectively. After R1, 12 items were added, and 16 items combined or reworded. In R2, the highest prioritized research topics and the preferred type of research in each category were: biological research in cancer progression and recurrence; implementation and dissemination research for fear of recurrence; exploratory research for rare cancer types; and implementation research for quality of care topics. Data availability was listed as the most important priority for research infrastructure.

CONCLUSIONS

This study has defined priorities that can be used to support coordinated action between researchers, funding bodies, and other key stakeholders. Designing future research which addresses these priorities will expand our ability to meet survivors' diverse needs and lead to improved outcomes.