Provider Involvement in Care During Initial Cancer Treatment and Patient Preferences for Provider Roles After Initial Treatment

"Care needs to be integrated" Patient and provider perspectives on a cancer shared-care model

PURPOSE

Current early-stage breast and gynecological cancer care models often begin with a referral from a primary care provider (PCP) or gynecologist (OB/Gyn) and end with a patient being transitioned back to the referring provider at the completion of treatment. There is frequently little communication between oncologists and the referring provider during treatment, and this pattern continues after the patient completes their treatment.

METHODS

We convened a diverse Patient Advisory Board (PAB) to identify areas where breast or gynecological cancer patients felt they could benefit from additional support during and after their cancer care. PAB members attended five Zoom meetings and completed four online surveys. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with primary care or OB/Gyn physicians to collect information on current practices.

RESULTS

Patients identified multiple areas in which they needed additional support from their PCP. Providers also identified topics on which they could use additional training. However, there was little overlap between patient and provider priority topics. Both patients and providers agreed that there was inadequate communication between the cancer center and PCPs before, during, and after cancer treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

A shared-care model that emphasizes communication between primary care providers, the oncology care team, and patients is urgently needed. Patients indicated the need for additional support from their PCP on specific topics, and PCPs were interested in continuing their education to better serve their patients with cancer.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

The importance of consistent communication among all parties during the entire cancer journey was emphasized as a key area for improvement.

Oncology and Primary Care Involvement in Breast Cancer Survivorship Care More Than 5 Years After Initial Treatment

PURPOSE

Very little is known about primary care involvement in the care of cancer survivors beyond the initial 5 years post-treatment when transitioning to primary care is guideline-recommended for many survivors.

METHODS

The ICanCare study is a longitudinal survey of women diagnosed with breast cancer in 2014-2015 identified in the Georgia and Los Angeles SEER registries. Women were surveyed during initial treatment and again approximately 6 years later in survivorship (2021-2022; n = 1,412, 60% response rate). Respondents were asked which provider led their survivorship care (oncology, shared care, primary care provider [PCP]) and PCP management of eight common survivorship issues (range, 0-32). Multivariable-adjusted associations of participant characteristics with survivorship care delivery and PCP management of survivorship issues were evaluated using logistic and linear regression models, respectively.

RESULTS

Over half of the women (57.2%) reported oncologist-led survivorship care delivery, 20.5% shared care, and 22.4% PCP-led. PCP management of survivorship issues was moderate (mean, 11.4, 95% CI, 11.0 to 11.8) and was highest (often/always discussed) for medication management (50.1%), improving physical activity (49.1%), and chronic disease management (43.6%). Greater confidence in PCP's ability to manage survivorship care (v no or little confidence) was associated with PCP-led delivery (P = .01) and more PCP management of survivorship issues (P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

In this diverse cohort of breast cancer survivors, primary care involvement in survivorship care delivery and management of common survivorship issues remains low even more than 5 years after completing treatment and little variation was seen across survivor sociodemographic or clinical characteristics. Confidence in PCP ability to manage survivorship care was found to be important and may represent an opportunity to foster transition to primary care-led survivorship care delivery.

Decreasing polypharmacy in older adults with cancer: A pilot cluster-randomized trial protocol

INTRODUCTION

Polypharmacy is prevalent in older adults with cancer and associated with multiple adverse outcomes. A single-site, cluster-randomized clinical trial will enroll older adults with cancer and polypharmacy starting chemotherapy and will assess the effectiveness and feasibility of deprescribing interventions by comparing two arms: a pharmacist-led deprescribing intervention and a patient educational brochure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study will be conducted in two phases. In phase I, focus groups and semi-structured individual interviews will guide adaptation of deprescribing interventions for the oncology clinic (phase Ia), and eight patients will undergo the pharmacist-led deprescribing intervention with iterative adaptations (phase Ib). In phase II, a pilot cluster-randomized trial (n = 72) will compare a pharmacist-led deprescribing intervention with a patient education brochure, with treating oncologists as the cluster. Both efficacy (relative dose intensity of planned chemotherapy, potentially inappropriate medications successfully deprescribed, chemotherapy toxicity, functional status, hospitalizations, falls, and symptoms) and implementation outcomes (barriers and facilitators) will be assessed.

DISCUSSION

This study is anticipated to provide pilot data to inform a nationwide randomized clinical trial of deprescribing in older adults starting cancer treatment. The cluster randomization is intended to provide an initial estimate for the intervention effect as well as oncologists' intra-class correlation coefficient. Deprescribing interventions may improve outcomes in older adults starting cancer treatment, but these interventions are understudied in this population, and it is unknown how best to implement them into oncology practice. The results of this trial will inform the design of large, randomized phase III trials of deprescribing.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov Identifier:NCT05046171. Date of registration: September 16, 2021.

Association of Patient Experience of Care and Radiation Therapy Initiation Among Women With Early-Stage Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

For women diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer, lumpectomy followed by radiation therapy (RT) has been a guideline-recommended treatment. However, lumpectomy followed by hormonal therapy is also an approved treatment for certain women. It is unclear what patient-driven factors are related to decisions to receive RT. This study examined relationships between patient-reported experience of care, an important dimension of health care quality, and receipt of RT after lumpectomy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We used National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data linked to the CMS Medicare Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems patient surveys (SEER-CAHPS) to examine experiences of care among women diagnosed with local/regional stage breast cancer 2000 to 2017 who received lumpectomy, were enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare, completed a CAHPS survey ≤18 months after diagnosis, and survived for this study period. Experience of care was assessed by patient-provided scores for physicians, doctor communication, care coordination, and other aspects of care. Multivariable logistic regression models assessed associations of receipt of external beam RT with care experience and patient sociodemographic and clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

The study population included 824 women; 655 (79%) received RT. Women with higher experience of care scores for their personal doctor were significantly more likely to have received any RT (odds ratio [OR], 1.18; P = .033). Nonsignificant trends were observed for associations of increased RT with higher CAHPS measures of doctor communications (OR, 1.15; P = .055) and care coordination (OR, 1.24; P = .051). In contrast, women reporting higher scores for Part D prescription drug plans were significantly less likely to have received RT (OR, 0.78; P = .030).

CONCLUSIONS

Patient experience of care was significantly associated with receipt of RT after lumpectomy among women with breast cancer. Health care organization leaders may want to consider incorporating experience of care into quality improvement initiatives and other activities that aim to improve patient decision-making, care, and outcomes.

Substance use and mental health burden in head and neck and other cancer survivors: A National Health Interview Survey analysis

BACKGROUND

Tobacco dependence, alcohol abuse, depression, distress, and other adverse patient-level influences are common in head and neck cancer (HNC) survivors. Their interrelatedness and precise burden in comparison with survivors of other cancers are poorly understood.

METHODS

National Health Interview Survey data from 1997 to 2016 were pooled. The prevalence of adverse patient-level influences among HNC survivors and matched survivors of other cancers were compared using descriptive statistics. Multivariable logistic regressions evaluating covariate associations with the primary study outcomes were performed. These included 1) current cigarette smoking and/or heavy alcohol use (>14 drinks per week) and 2) high mental health burden (severe psychological distress [Kessler Index ≥ 13] and/or frequent depressive/anxiety symptoms).

RESULTS

In all, 918 HNC survivors and 3672 matched survivors of other cancers were identified. Compared with other cancer survivors, more HNC survivors were current smokers and/or heavy drinkers (24.6% [95% CI, 21.5%-27.7%] vs 18.0% [95% CI, 16.6%-19.4%]) and exhibited a high mental health burden (18.6% [95% CI, 15.7%-21.5%] vs 13.0% [95% CI, 11.7%-14.3%]). In multivariable analyses, 1) a high mental health burden predicted for smoking and/or heavy drinking (odds ratio [OR], 1.4; 95% CI, 1.0-1.9), and 2) current cigarette smoking predicted for a high mental health burden (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.2-2.3). Furthermore, nonpartnered marital status and uninsured/Medicaid insurance status were significantly associated with both cigarette smoking and/or heavy alcohol use (ORs, 1.9 [95% CI, 1.4-2.5] and 1.5 [95% CI, 1.0-2.1], respectively) and a high mental health burden (ORs, 1.4 [95% CI, 1.1 -1.8] and 3.0 [95% CI, 2.2-4.2], respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Stakeholders should allocate greater supportive care resources to HNC survivors. The interdependence of substance abuse, adverse mental health symptoms, and other adverse patient-level influences requires development of novel, multimodal survivorship care interventions.

Improving the delivery of team-based survivorship care after primary breast cancer treatment through a multi-level intervention: a pilot randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

We developed and tested a multi-level intervention, ConnectedCancerCare (CCC), which includes a tailored website and appointment reminder system for women with early-stage breast cancer and a provider summary letter sent to their medical oncologist and primary care provider to improve the delivery of team-based survivorship care.

METHODS

We conducted a pilot randomized controlled trial to establish the feasibility and acceptability of CCC. Women diagnosed with stages 0-II breast cancer within one year of completing primary treatment were randomized to CCC (intervention) or a static online survivorship care plan (control). Participants completed baseline and 3-month follow-up surveys online. Post-trial interviews with 5 PCPs, 6 oncology providers, and 8 intervention patients were conducted.

RESULTS

Of the 160 eligible women invited to participate, 66 completed the baseline survey and were randomized (41%) and 54 completed a follow-up survey (83%). Participants in the intervention arm found the CCC content to be acceptable, with 82% reporting it was easy to use and 86% reporting they would recommend it to other patients. Women randomized to CCC (vs. control) more often reported scheduling a PCP follow-up visit (64% vs. 42%), communicating with their PCP about provider roles (67% vs. 18%), and higher mean team-based cancer care knowledge scores (3.7 vs. 3.4).

CONCLUSION

Deploying CCC in medical oncology practices was feasible, and the intervention content was acceptable. CCC shows promise for improving patient knowledge and patient-provider communication about provider roles in team-based cancer care and encouraging patients to engage with their PCP early in the survivorship period.

Eliciting primary care and oncology provider perspectives on diabetes management during active cancer treatment

PURPOSE

We sought to elicit the perspectives of primary care providers (PCPs) and oncologists regarding their expectations on who should be responsible for diabetes management, as well as communication mode and frequency about diabetes care during cancer treatment.

METHODS

In-depth interviews were conducted with PCPs (physicians and nurse practitioners) and oncologists who treat cancer patients with type 2 diabetes. Interviews were audio-recorded and professionally transcribed. A grounded theory approach was used to analyze the qualitative data and identify key themes.

RESULTS

Ten PCPs and ten oncologists were interviewed between March and July 2019. Two broad themes emerged from our interviews with PCPs: (1) cancer patients pausing primary care during cancer treatments, and (2) patients with poorer prognoses and advanced cancer. The following theme emerged from our interviews with oncologists: (3) challenges in caring for cancer patients with uncontrolled diabetes. Three common themes emerged from our interviews with both PCPs and oncologists: (4) discomfort with providing care outside of respective specialty, (5) the need to individualize care plans, and (6) lack of communication across primary and oncology care.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that substantial barriers to optimal diabetes management during cancer care exist at the provider level. Interventions prioritizing effective communication and educational resources among PCPs, oncologists, and additional members of the patients' care team should be prioritized to achieve optimal outcomes.

Primary Care Providers' Knowledge, Attitudes, Beliefs, and Practices Regarding Their Preparedness to Provide Cancer Survivorship Care

Recent cancer care delivery models and clinical practice guidelines have expanded the role of primary care providers (PCPs) in routine follow-up of cancer survivors. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of PCPs affiliated with a large healthcare system to (1) examine practices, attitudes, and beliefs regarding preparedness to provide survivorship care and (2) explore predictors of confidence managing cancer survivors. We distributed a self-administered online survey to 1069 clinical affiliates providing primary care services within the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center system. Associations between PCPs' professional characteristics and attitudes and preparedness were evaluated. Multiple logistic regression explored predictors of confidence monitoring common cancer treatment-related symptoms. One hundred twenty-seven eligible PCPs responded. The sample was split between academic and community practice (48.0% vs. 52.0%, respectively), predominantly comprised of physicians (81.8%), and 64.6% had > 15 years direct patient care experience. The majority agreed that PCPs play a valuable role in surveillance and adverse event monitoring in survivors, though less than 25% felt their professional training prepared them to perform each of these domains. Physicians were significantly more likely than advanced practice providers to be among the 65% of PCPs who were confident monitoring ≥ 1 symptom in each of the 5 evaluated symptom clusters (OR 3.6, 95% CI 1.2-10.8). PCPs appear willing to assume an enhanced role in cancer survivorship care but feel unprepared to do so. Enhanced training and dissemination of clinical practice guidelines are needed to facilitate effective implementation of PCP-delivered survivorship care.