1
|
Port JR, Riopelle JC, Smith SG, Myers L, Kaiser FK, Lewis MC, Gallogly S, Okumura A, Bushmaker T, Schulz JE, Rosenke R, Prado-Smith J, Carmody A, Bane S, Smith BJ, Saturday G, Feldmann H, Rosenke K, Munster VJ. Infection with mpox virus via the genital mucosae increases shedding and transmission in the multimammate rat (Mastomys natalensis). Nat Microbiol 2024; 9:1231-1243. [PMID: 38649413 DOI: 10.1038/s41564-024-01666-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2023] [Accepted: 03/06/2024] [Indexed: 04/25/2024]
Abstract
The 2022 mpox virus (MPXV) outbreak was sustained by human-to-human transmission; however, it is currently unclear which factors lead to sustained transmission of MPXV. Here we present Mastomys natalensis as a model for MPXV transmission after intraperitoneal, rectal, vaginal, aerosol and transdermal inoculation with an early 2022 human outbreak isolate (Clade IIb). Virus shedding and tissue replication were route dependent and occurred in the presence of self-resolving localized skin, lung, reproductive tract or rectal lesions. Mucosal inoculation via the rectal, vaginal and aerosol routes led to increased shedding, replication and a pro-inflammatory T cell profile compared with skin inoculation. Contact transmission was higher from rectally inoculated animals. This suggests that transmission might be sustained by increased susceptibility of the anal and genital mucosae for infection and subsequent virus release.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julia R Port
- Laboratory of Virology, Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Hamilton, MT, USA
| | - Jade C Riopelle
- Laboratory of Virology, Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Hamilton, MT, USA
| | - Samuel G Smith
- Laboratory of Virology, Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Hamilton, MT, USA
| | - Lara Myers
- Research and Technologies Branch, Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Hamilton, MT, USA
| | - Franziska K Kaiser
- Laboratory of Virology, Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Hamilton, MT, USA
| | - Matthew C Lewis
- Laboratory of Virology, Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Hamilton, MT, USA
| | - Shane Gallogly
- Laboratory of Virology, Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Hamilton, MT, USA
| | - Atsushi Okumura
- Laboratory of Virology, Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Hamilton, MT, USA
| | - Trent Bushmaker
- Laboratory of Virology, Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Hamilton, MT, USA
| | - Jonathan E Schulz
- Laboratory of Virology, Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Hamilton, MT, USA
| | - Rebecca Rosenke
- Rocky Mountain Veterinary Branch, Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Hamilton, MT, USA
| | - Jessica Prado-Smith
- Rocky Mountain Veterinary Branch, Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Hamilton, MT, USA
| | - Aaron Carmody
- Research and Technologies Branch, Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Hamilton, MT, USA
| | - Sidy Bane
- International Center of Excellence in Research (ICER-Mali), University of Sciences, Techniques and Technologies of Bamako, Bamako, Mali
| | - Brian J Smith
- Rocky Mountain Veterinary Branch, Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Hamilton, MT, USA
| | - Greg Saturday
- Rocky Mountain Veterinary Branch, Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Hamilton, MT, USA
| | - Heinz Feldmann
- Laboratory of Virology, Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Hamilton, MT, USA
| | - Kyle Rosenke
- Laboratory of Virology, Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Hamilton, MT, USA.
| | - Vincent J Munster
- Laboratory of Virology, Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Hamilton, MT, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Mullol J, Lund VJ, Wagenmann M, Han JK, Sousa AN, Smith SG, Mayer B, Chan RH, Fokkens WJ. Mepolizumab improves sense of smell in severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: SYNAPSE. Rhinology 2024:3152. [PMID: 38217844 DOI: 10.4193/rhinrhin22.416] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/15/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Loss of smell is one of the most bothersome and difficult-to-treat symptoms in patients with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). METHODOLOGY SYNAPSE was a 52-week Phase III study of 4-weekly mepolizumab (100 mg subcutaneously) plus standard of care in adults with severe bilateral CRSwNP. This post hoc analysis assessed changes from baseline to study end in loss of smell visual analogue scale (VAS) symptom score, in patients stratified by several baseline clinical characteristics. SinoNasal Outcomes Test (SNOT)-22 sense of smell/taste item and University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) scores were also assessed. RESULTS SYNAPSE enrolled 407 patients (mepolizumab=206; placebo=201) with impaired sense of smell at baseline. Improvements from baseline to study end in loss of smell VAS score were greater with mepolizumab versus placebo (treatment difference: -0.37) and most notable in patients with fewer or more recent prior surgeries (treatment difference: 1 vs 2 vs >2 prior surgeries,-1.29 vs -0.23 vs -0.07.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Mullol
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Hospital Clínic, IDIBAPS, Universitat de Barcelona, CIBERES, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
| | - V J Lund
- University College London, London, UK
- Royal National Throat Nose and Ear Hospital, UCLH, London, UK
| | - M Wagenmann
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Düsseldorf University Hospital (UKD), Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - J K Han
- Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Eastern Virginia Medical School, VA, USA
| | - A N Sousa
- Respiratory Patient Centered Outcomes, Value Evidence and Outcomes, GSK, GSK House, Brentford, Middlesex, UK
| | - S G Smith
- Respiratory Therapeutic Area, GSK, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - B Mayer
- Clinical Statistics, GSK, GSK House, Brentford, Middlesex, UK
| | - R H Chan
- Respiratory Patient Centered Outcomes, Value Evidence and Outcomes, GSK, GSK House, Brentford, Middlesex, UK
| | - W J Fokkens
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Mullol J, Lund VJ, Wagenmann M, Han JK, Sousa AN, Smith SG, Mayer B, Chan RH, Fokkens WJ. Mepolizumab improves sense of smell in severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: SYNAPSE. Rhinology 2024; 0:3152. [PMID: 38217844 DOI: 10.4193/rhin22.416] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/01/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Loss of smell is one of the most bothersome and difficult-to-treat symptoms in patients with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP). METHODOLOGY SYNAPSE was a 52-week Phase III study of 4-weekly mepolizumab (100 mg subcutaneously) plus standard of care in adults with severe bilateral CRSwNP. This post hoc analysis assessed changes from baseline to study end in loss of smell visual analogue scale (VAS) symptom score, in patients stratified by several baseline clinical characteristics. SinoNasal Outcomes Test (SNOT)-22 sense of smell/taste item and University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test (UPSIT) scores were also assessed. RESULTS SYNAPSE enrolled 407 patients (mepolizumab=206; placebo=201) with impaired sense of smell at baseline. Improvements from baseline to study end in loss of smell VAS score were greater with mepolizumab versus placebo (treatment difference: −0.37) and most notable in patients with fewer or more recent prior surgeries (treatment difference: 1 vs 2 vs more than 2 prior surgeries,−1.29 vs −0.23 vs −0.07; =3 years since last surgery, −0.89 vs 0.22). Approximately 25% of patients had baseline UPSIT scoresavailable; among those scoring =19 by study end. The SNOT-22 sense of smell/taste item score improved with mepolizumab versus placebo. CONCLUSIONS Mepolizumab treatment improved patients' perceived sense of smell, as measured by loss of smell VAS score and SNOT-22 sense of smell/taste item score in patients with severe refractory CRSwNP.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Mullol
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Hospital Clínic, IDIBAPS, Universitat de Barcelona, CIBERES, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
| | - V J Lund
- University College London, London, UK
- Royal National Throat Nose and Ear Hospital, UCLH, London, UK
| | - M Wagenmann
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Düsseldorf University Hospital (UKD), Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - J K Han
- Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Eastern Virginia Medical School, VA, USA
| | - A N Sousa
- Respiratory Patient Centered Outcomes, Value Evidence and Outcomes, GSK, GSK House, Brentford, Middlesex, UK
| | - S G Smith
- Respiratory Therapeutic Area, GSK, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - B Mayer
- Clinical Statistics, GSK, GSK House, Brentford, Middlesex, UK
| | - R H Chan
- Respiratory Patient Centered Outcomes, Value Evidence and Outcomes, GSK, GSK House, Brentford, Middlesex, UK
| | - W J Fokkens
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Lloyd KE, Hall LH, Ziegler L, Foy R, Green SMC, MacKenzie M, Taylor DG, Smith SG. Acceptability of aspirin for cancer preventive therapy: a survey and qualitative study exploring the views of the UK general population. BMJ Open 2023; 13:e078703. [PMID: 38110374 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-078703] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Aspirin could be offered for colorectal cancer prevention for the UK general population. To ensure the views of the general population are considered in future guidance, we explored public perceptions of aspirin for preventive therapy. DESIGN We conducted an online survey to investigate aspirin use, and awareness of aspirin for cancer prevention among the UK general population. We conducted semistructured interviews with a subsample of survey respondents to explore participants' acceptability towards aspirin for cancer preventive therapy. We analysed the interview data using reflexive thematic analysis and mapped the themes onto the Theoretical Domains Framework, and the Necessity and Concerns Framework. SETTING Online survey and remote interviews. PARTICIPANTS We recruited 400 UK respondents aged 50-70 years through a market research company to the survey. We purposefully sampled, recruited and interviewed 20 survey respondents. RESULTS In the survey, 19.0% (76/400) of respondents were aware that aspirin can be used to prevent cancer. Among those who had previously taken aspirin, 1.9% (4/216) had taken it for cancer prevention. The interviews generated three themes: (1) perceived necessity of aspirin; (2) concerns about side effects; and (3) preferred information sources. Participants with a personal or family history of cancer were more likely to perceive aspirin as necessary for cancer prevention. Concerns about taking aspirin at higher doses and its side effects, such as gastrointestinal bleeding, were common. Many described wanting guidance and advice on aspirin to be communicated from sources perceived as trustworthy, such as healthcare professionals. CONCLUSIONS Among the general population, those with a personal or family history of cancer may be more receptive towards taking aspirin for preventive therapy. Future policies and campaigns recommending aspirin may be of particular interest to these groups. Multiple considerations about the benefits and risks of aspirin highlight the need to support informed decisions on the medication.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kelly E Lloyd
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds Faculty of Medicine and Health, Leeds, UK
| | - Louise H Hall
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds Faculty of Medicine and Health, Leeds, UK
| | - Lucy Ziegler
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds Faculty of Medicine and Health, Leeds, UK
| | - Robbie Foy
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds Faculty of Medicine and Health, Leeds, UK
| | - Sophie M C Green
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds Faculty of Medicine and Health, Leeds, UK
| | | | - David G Taylor
- School of Pharmacy, University College London, London, UK
| | - Samuel G Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds Faculty of Medicine and Health, Leeds, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Green SMC, Hall LH, French DP, Rousseau N, Parbutt C, Walwyn R, Smith SG. Optimization of an Information Leaflet to Influence Medication Beliefs in Women With Breast Cancer: A Randomized Factorial Experiment. Ann Behav Med 2023; 57:988-1000. [PMID: 37494669 PMCID: PMC10578395 DOI: 10.1093/abm/kaad037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/28/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Adherence to adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) is low in women with breast cancer. Negative beliefs about the necessity of AET and high concerns are barriers to adherence. PURPOSE To use the multiphase optimization strategy to optimize the content of an information leaflet intervention, to change AET beliefs. METHODS We conducted an online screening experiment using a 25 factorial design to optimize the leaflet. The leaflet had five components, each with two levels: (i) diagrams about AET mechanisms (on/off); (ii) infographics displaying AET benefits (enhanced/basic); (iii) AET side effects (enhanced/basic); (iv) answers to AET concerns (on/off); (v) breast cancer survivor (patient) input: quotes and photographs (on/off). Healthy adult women (n = 1,604), recruited via a market research company, were randomized to 1 of 32 experimental conditions, which determined the levels of components received. Participants completed the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire before and after viewing the leaflet. RESULTS There was a significant main effect of patient input on beliefs about medication (β = 0.063, p < .001). There was one significant synergistic two-way interaction between diagrams and benefits (β = 0.047, p = .006), and one antagonistic two-way interaction between diagrams and side effects (β = -0.029, p = .093). There was a synergistic three-way interaction between diagrams, concerns, and patient input (β = 0.029, p = .085), and an antagonistic four-way interaction between diagrams, benefits, side effects, and concerns (β = -0.038, p = .024). In a stepped approach, we screened in four components and screened out the side effects component. CONCLUSIONS The optimized leaflet did not contain enhanced AET side effect information. Factorial experiments are efficient and effective for refining the content of information leaflet interventions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophie M C Green
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Louise H Hall
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - David P French
- Manchester Centre for Health Psychology, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Nikki Rousseau
- Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Catherine Parbutt
- Medicines Management and Pharmacy Services, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Rebecca Walwyn
- Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Samuel G Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Green SM, Lloyd KE, Smith SG. Awareness of symptoms, anticipated barriers and delays to help-seeking among women at higher risk of breast cancer: A UK multicentre study. Prev Med Rep 2023; 34:102220. [PMID: 37200677 PMCID: PMC10186484 DOI: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2023.102220] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/09/2023] [Revised: 04/23/2023] [Accepted: 04/24/2023] [Indexed: 05/20/2023] Open
Abstract
Women with a family history of breast cancer have an increased lifetime risk of the disease. Delay in symptom presentation can lead to poorer outcomes. Low awareness of breast cancer symptoms and help-seeking barriers have been associated with delay in presentation in the general population. Symptom awareness and help-seeking barriers among women at increased risk of breast cancer are unknown. We conducted analysis of survey data which included women with moderate and high risk of breast cancer from 20 secondary and tertiary care clinics in England (n = 408). Women completed a validated survey assessing breast cancer symptom awareness, barriers to help-seeking and anticipated delay in help-seeking. Women recognised an average of 9.1/11 breast cancer symptoms (SD = 2.1). Nipple rash was the least recognised symptom (51.0%). Women educated to at least degree level had higher awareness than those with lower education (β = 0.14, 95% CI 0.13, 0.99, p = 0.011). Women at lower socioeconomic status (SES) had lower awareness than those at higher SES (β = -0.13, 95% CI -1.09, -0.07, p = 0.027). Women reported several anticipated help-seeking barriers (mean = 4.0/11, SD = 2.8). Waiting to see if a symptom will pass was the most commonly reported barrier to help-seeking (71.5%). Most women (376/408; 92.2%) reported that they would seek medical help within 2 weeks of discovering a breast cancer symptom. Interventions to increase awareness of non-lump breast cancer symptoms and reduce help-seeking barriers are needed, with considerations of appropriate reading levels and modalities for women with lower education and SES.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Samuel G. Smith
- Corresponding author at: Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, LS2 9LU, UK.
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Green SM, Hall LH, Rousseau N, French DP, Graham CD, Collinson M, Mason E, Wilkes H, Howdon D, Foy R, Walwyn R, Clark J, Parbutt C, Raine E, Ellison R, Buxton J, Moore SJL, Velikova G, Farrin A, Smith SG. Acceptability, fidelity and trial experience of four intervention components to support medication adherence in women with breast cancer: A process evaluation protocol for a pilot fractional factorial trial. NIHR Open Res 2023; 3:3. [PMID: 37881449 PMCID: PMC10593334 DOI: 10.3310/nihropenres.13337.2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 04/13/2023] [Indexed: 10/27/2023]
Abstract
Background The Refining and Optimising a behavioural intervention to Support Endocrine Therapy Adherence (ROSETA) programme has developed four intervention components aiming to improve medication adherence in women with early-stage breast cancer. These are (a) text messages, (b) information leaflet, (c) Acceptance and Commitment Therapy-based guided self-help (ACT), (d) side-effect management website. Guided by the Multiphase Optimisation Strategy, our pilot trial will use a fractional factorial design to evaluate the feasibility of undertaking a larger optimisation trial. The pilot will include a process evaluation to maximise learning regarding the fidelity and acceptability of the intervention components before proceeding with a larger trial. The trial process evaluation has three aims: to assess the (1) fidelity and (2) acceptability of the intervention components; and (3) to understand participant's trial experience, and barriers and facilitators to recruitment and retention. Methods The process evaluation will use multiple methods. Fidelity of the intervention components will be assessed using self-reported questionnaire data, trial data on intervention component adherence, and observations of the ACT sessions. Acceptability of the intervention components and trial experience will be explored using an acceptability questionnaire and interviews with patients and trial therapists. Trial experience will be assessed using a questionnaire and interviews with participants, while barriers and facilitators to recruitment and retention will be assessed using a questionnaire completed by research nurses and participant interviews. The pilot trial opened for recruitment on 20th May 2022 and was open at the time of submission. Conclusions This process evaluation will provide information regarding whether the intervention components can be delivered with fidelity within a national healthcare setting and are acceptable to participants. We will also better understand participant experience in a pilot trial with a fractional factorial design, and any barriers and facilitators to recruitment and retention. Registration ISRCTN registry ( ISRCTN10487576, 16/12/2021).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophie M.C. Green
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS29NL, UK
| | - Louise H. Hall
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS29NL, UK
| | - Nikki Rousseau
- Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS29NL, UK
| | - David P. French
- Manchester Centre for Health Psychology, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
| | | | - Michelle Collinson
- Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS29NL, UK
| | - Ellen Mason
- Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS29NL, UK
| | - Hollie Wilkes
- Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS29NL, UK
| | - Daniel Howdon
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS29NL, UK
| | - Robbie Foy
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS29NL, UK
| | - Rebecca Walwyn
- Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS29NL, UK
| | - Jane Clark
- Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK
| | - Catherine Parbutt
- Medicines Management and Pharmacy Services, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK
| | - Erin Raine
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS29NL, UK
| | - Rachel Ellison
- Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS29NL, UK
| | | | | | - Galina Velikova
- Leeds Institute of Medical Research at St James’s, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK
- Leeds Cancer Centre, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, St James’s University Hospital, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK
| | - Amanda Farrin
- Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS29NL, UK
| | - Samuel G. Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS29NL, UK
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Lloyd KE, Hall LH, Ziegler L, Foy R, Borthwick GM, MacKenzie M, Taylor DG, Smith SG. GPs' willingness to prescribe aspirin for cancer preventive therapy in Lynch syndrome: a factorial randomised trial investigating factors influencing decisions. Br J Gen Pract 2023; 73:e302-e309. [PMID: 36997217 PMCID: PMC9997655 DOI: 10.3399/bjgp.2021.0610] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/25/2021] [Accepted: 09/27/2022] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) 2020 guidelines recommends aspirin for colorectal cancer prevention for people with Lynch syndrome. Strategies to change practice should be informed by understanding the factors influencing prescribing. AIM To investigate the optimal type and level of information to communicate with GPs to increase willingness to prescribe aspirin. DESIGN AND SETTING GPs in England and Wales (n = 672) were recruited to participate in an online survey with a 23 factorial design. GPs were randomised to one of eight vignettes describing a hypothetical patient with Lynch syndrome recommended to take aspirin by a clinical geneticist. METHOD Across the vignettes, the presence or absence of three types of information was manipulated: 1) existence of NICE guidance; 2) results from the CAPP2 trial; 3) information comparing risks/benefits of aspirin. The main effects and all interactions on the primary (willingness to prescribe) and secondary outcomes (comfort discussing aspirin) were estimated. RESULTS There were no statistically significant main effects or interactions of the three information components on willingness to prescribe aspirin or comfort discussing harms and benefits. In total, 80.4% (540/672) of GPs were willing to prescribe, with 19.7% (132/672) unwilling. GPs with prior awareness of aspirin for preventive therapy were more comfortable discussing the medication than those unaware (P = 0.031). CONCLUSION It is unlikely that providing information on clinical guidance, trial results, and information comparing benefits and harms will increase aspirin prescribing for Lynch syndrome in primary care. Alternative multilevel strategies to support informed prescribing may be warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kelly E Lloyd
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds
| | - Louise H Hall
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds
| | - Lucy Ziegler
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds
| | - Robbie Foy
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds
| | - Gillian M Borthwick
- Translational and Clinical Research Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle
| | | | | | - Samuel G Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Smith SG, Green SMC, Ellison R, Foy R, Graham CD, Mason E, French DP, Hall LH, Wilkes H, McNaught E, Raine E, Walwyn R, Howdon D, Clark J, Rousseau N, Buxton J, Moore SJL, Parbutt C, Velikova G, Farrin A, Collinson M. Refining and optimising a behavioural intervention to support endocrine therapy adherence (ROSETA) in UK women with breast cancer: protocol for a pilot fractional factorial trial. BMJ Open 2023; 13:e069971. [PMID: 36737093 PMCID: PMC9900066 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-069971] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Women with breast cancer who do not adhere to adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) have increased risks of mortality and recurrence. There are multiple barriers to AET adherence, including medication side-effects, beliefs about medication, memory and psychological distress. We developed four intervention components, each targeting a different barrier. This pilot trial is part of the preparation phase of the Multiphase Optimisation Strategy, and aims to establish key trial parameters, establish intervention component adherence, establish availability and feasibility of outcome and process data, estimate variability in planned outcome measures and estimate cost of developing and delivering each intervention component. METHODS AND ANALYSIS The four intervention components are as follows: short message service text reminders (target: memory); a written information leaflet (target: medication beliefs); a guided self-help Acceptance and Commitment Therapy programme (target: psychological flexibility to reduce distress) and a self-management website (target: side-effect management). To evaluate the feasibility of recruitment, acceptability of the intervention components and the availability of outcome data, we will conduct a multisite, exploratory pilot trial using a 24-1 fractional factorial design, with a nested process evaluation. We will randomise 80 women with early-stage breast cancer who have been prescribed AET to one of eight experimental conditions. This will determine the combination of intervention components they receive, ranging from zero to four, with all conditions receiving usual care. Key outcomes of interest include medication adherence and quality of life. Progression to the optimisation phase will be based on predefined criteria for consent rates, patient adherence to intervention components and availability of medication adherence data. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION The study was reviewed by the Wales Research Authority Research Ethics Committee 3 (21/WA/0322). Written informed consent will be obtained from all patients before randomisation. The results of this trial will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ISRTCN10487576.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samuel G Smith
- Academic Unit of Primary Care, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Sophie M C Green
- Academic Unit of Primary Care, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Rachel Ellison
- Complex Interventions Division, Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Robbie Foy
- Academic Unit of Primary Care, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | | | - Ellen Mason
- Complex Interventions Division, Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - David P French
- School of Psychological Sciences, Division of Psychology and Mental Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Louise H Hall
- Academic Unit of Primary Care, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Hollie Wilkes
- Complex Interventions Division, Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Emma McNaught
- Complex Interventions Division, Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Erin Raine
- Academic Unit of Primary Care, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Rebecca Walwyn
- Complex Interventions Division, Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Daniel Howdon
- Academic Unit of Health Economics, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Jane Clark
- Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK
| | - Nikki Rousseau
- Surgical, Diagnostic and Devices Division, Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Jacqueline Buxton
- Academic Unit of Primary Care, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Sally J L Moore
- Academic Unit of Primary Care, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Catherine Parbutt
- Medicines Management and Pharmacy Services, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK
| | - Galina Velikova
- Leeds Institute of Medical Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Amanda Farrin
- Complex Interventions Division, Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Michelle Collinson
- Complex Interventions Division, Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Hopkins C, Han JK, Lund VJ, Bachert C, Fokkens WJ, Diamant Z, Mullol J, Sousa AR, Smith SG, Yang S, Mayer B, Yancey SW, Chan RH, Lee SE. Evaluating treatment response to mepolizumab in patients with severe CRSwNP. Rhinology 2023; 61:108-117. [PMID: 36716382 DOI: 10.4193/rhin22.200] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The SYNAPSE study (NCT03085797) demonstrated that mepolizumab decreased nasal polyp (NP) size and nasal obstruction in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with NP (CRSwNP). METHODS SYNAPSE, a randomized, double-blind study, included patients with recurrent, refractory, severe CRSwNP, eligible for repeated surgery despite receiving standard of care (SoC). Patients received 4-weekly mepolizumab 100 mg or placebo subcutaneously plus SoC for 52 weeks. This post hoc analysis further characterized treatment responses and association with patient characteristics. The proportion of patients meeting any and each of five response criteria indicating improvement in disease-specific quality of life, NP size, nasal obstruction, loss of smell, and overall symptoms at Weeks 24 and 52, were assessed in subgroups: 1) no surgery; 2) neither surgery nor systemic corticosteroids (SCS). RESULTS Of 407 patients in the intention-to-treat population, 381 and 343 patients had no sinus surgery by Weeks 24 and 52, respectively. More mepolizumab- versus placebo-treated patients without surgery by Weeks 24 and 52 met each response criteria. Of the mepolizumab-treated patients without surgery by Week 24, 109 (55%) responded across ≥ 3 criteria, increasing to 126 (67%) by Week 52. Similar response trends were seen for patients with neither surgery nor SCS by Weeks 24 and 52. At either timepoint, there were no major differences in baseline characteristics between mepolizumab-treated full- (5/5 categories) and non-responders (0/5 categories). CONCLUSIONS Most patients who completed SYNAPSE required neither surgery nor SCS use and in addition achieved a progressive and sustained clinical response to mepolizumab underscoring the therapeutic benefits of mepolizumab in severe CRSwNP.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C Hopkins
- Department of ENT, Guy's Hospital and St Thomas' Hospital, King's College London, UK
| | - J K Han
- Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, VA, USA
| | - V J Lund
- Royal National Throat, Nose and Ear Hospital, UCLH NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - C Bachert
- Upper Airways Research Laboratory, Faculty of Medicine, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | - W J Fokkens
- Department of Otolaryngology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Location AMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Z Diamant
- Department of Microbiology Immunology and Transplantation, KU Leuven, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium.,Department of Respiratory Medicine and Allergology, Institute for Clinical Science, Skane University Hospital, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.,Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacololgy, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - J Mullol
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Hospital Clinic, IDIBAPS, Universitat de Barcelona, CIBERES, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
| | - A R Sousa
- Clinical Sciences, Respiratory, GSK, GSK House, Brentford, UK
| | - S G Smith
- Respiratory Therapeutic Area Unit, GSK, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - S Yang
- Value Evidence and Outcomes, GSK, Collegeville, PA, USA
| | - B Mayer
- Clinical Statistics, GSK, GSK House, Brentford, Middlesex, UK
| | - S W Yancey
- Respiratory Therapeutic Area Unit, GSK, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - R H Chan
- Clinical Sciences, Respiratory, GSK, GSK House, Brentford, UK
| | - S E Lee
- Division of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Ghimire B, Landy R, Maroni R, Smith SG, Debiram-Beecham I, Sasieni PD, Fitzgerald RC, Rubin G, Walter FM, Waller J, Offman J. Predictors of the experience of a Cytosponge test: analysis of patient survey data from the BEST3 trial. BMC Gastroenterol 2023; 23:7. [PMID: 36627580 PMCID: PMC9832657 DOI: 10.1186/s12876-022-02630-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/14/2022] [Accepted: 12/20/2022] [Indexed: 01/12/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The Cytosponge is a cell-collection device, which, coupled with a test for trefoil factor 3 (TFF3), can be used to diagnose Barrett's oesophagus, a precursor condition to oesophageal adenocarcinoma. BEST3, a large pragmatic, randomised, controlled trial, investigated whether offering the Cytosponge-TFF3 test would increase detection of Barrett's. Overall, participants reported mostly positive experiences. This study reports the factors associated with the least positive experience. METHODS Patient experience was assessed using the Inventory to Assess Patient Satisfaction (IAPS), a 22-item questionnaire, completed 7-14 days after the Cytosponge test. STUDY COHORT All BEST3 participants who answered ≥ 15 items of the IAPS (N = 1458). STATISTICAL ANALYSIS A mean IAPS score between 1 and 5 (5 indicates most negative experience) was calculated for each individual. 'Least positive' experience was defined according to the 90th percentile. 167 (11.4%) individuals with a mean IAPS score of ≥ 2.32 were included in the 'least positive' category and compared with the rest of the cohort. Eleven patient characteristics and one procedure-specific factor were assessed as potential predictors of the least positive experience. Multivariable logistic regression analysis using backwards selection was conducted to identify factors independently associated with the least positive experience and with failed swallow at first attempt, one of the strongest predictors of least positive experience. RESULTS The majority of responders had a positive experience, with an overall median IAPS score of 1.7 (IQR 1.5-2.1). High (OR = 3.01, 95% CI 2.03-4.46, p < 0.001) or very high (OR = 4.56, 95% CI 2.71-7.66, p < 0.001) anxiety (relative to low/normal anxiety) and a failed swallow at the first attempt (OR = 3.37, 95% CI 2.14-5.30, p < 0.001) were highly significant predictors of the least positive patient experience in multivariable analyses. Additionally, sex (p = 0.036), height (p = 0.032), alcohol intake (p = 0.011) and education level (p = 0.036) were identified as statistically significant predictors. CONCLUSION We have identified factors which predict patient experience. Identifying anxiety ahead of the procedure and discussing particular concerns with patients or giving them tips to help with swallowing the capsule might help improve their experience. Trial registration ISRCTN68382401.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bhagabati Ghimire
- Cancer Prevention Group, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
- Department of Health Sciences, College of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Brunel University London, London, UK
| | - Rebecca Landy
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, Department of Health and Human Services, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Roberta Maroni
- Cancer Research UK and King's College London Cancer Prevention Trials Unit, Cancer Prevention Group, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Samuel G Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Irene Debiram-Beecham
- Early Cancer Institute, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Peter D Sasieni
- Cancer Prevention Group, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Rebecca C Fitzgerald
- Early Cancer Institute, Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Greg Rubin
- Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, 5th Floor, Ridley 1, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK
| | - Fiona M Walter
- The Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Centre for Prevention, Detection and Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, Charterhouse Square, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK
| | - Jo Waller
- Cancer Prevention Group, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Judith Offman
- Cancer Prevention Group, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
- Centre for Prevention, Detection and Diagnosis, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, Charterhouse Square, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Green SMC, French DP, Graham CD, Hall LH, Rousseau N, Foy R, Clark J, Parbutt C, Raine E, Gardner B, Velikova G, Moore SJL, Buxton J, Smith SG. Supporting adjuvant endocrine therapy adherence in women with breast cancer: the development of a complex behavioural intervention using Intervention Mapping guided by the Multiphase Optimisation Strategy. BMC Health Serv Res 2022; 22:1081. [PMID: 36002831 PMCID: PMC9404670 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-022-08243-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/07/2022] [Accepted: 06/21/2022] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) reduces the risk of breast cancer recurrence and mortality. However, up to three-quarters of women with breast cancer do not take AET as prescribed. Existing interventions to support adherence to AET have largely been unsuccessful, and have not focused on the most salient barriers to adherence. This paper describes the process of developing four theory-based intervention components to support adherence to AET. Our aim is to provide an exemplar of intervention development using Intervention Mapping (IM) with guidance from the Multiphase Optimisation Strategy (MOST). METHODS Iterative development followed the six-stage IM framework with stakeholder involvement. Stage 1 involved a literature review of barriers to adherence and existing interventions, which informed the intervention objectives outlined in Stage 2. Stage 3 identified relevant theoretical considerations and practical strategies for supporting adherence. Stage 4 used information from Stages 1-3 to develop the intervention components. Stages 1-4 informed a conceptual model for the intervention package. Stages 5 and 6 detailed implementation considerations and evaluation plans for the intervention package, respectively. RESULTS The final intervention package comprised four individual intervention components: Short Message Service to encourage habitual behaviours surrounding medication taking; an information leaflet to target unhelpful beliefs about AET; remotely delivered Acceptance and Commitment Therapy-based guided self-help to reduce psychological distress; and a website to support self-management of AET side-effects. Considerations for implementation within the NHS, including cost, timing and mode of delivery were outlined, with explanation as to how using MOST can aid this. We detail our plans for the final stage of IM which involve feasibility testing. This involved planning an external exploratory pilot trial using a 24-1 fractional factorial design, and a process evaluation to assess acceptability and fidelity of intervention components. CONCLUSIONS We have described a systematic and logical approach for developing a theoretically informed intervention package to support medication adherence in women with breast cancer using AET. Further research to optimise the intervention package, guided by MOST, has the potential to lead to more effective, efficient and scalable interventions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophie M. C. Green
- grid.9909.90000 0004 1936 8403Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Clarendon Way, Leeds, LS2 9NL UK
| | - David P. French
- grid.5379.80000000121662407Manchester Centre for Health Psychology, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Christopher D. Graham
- grid.4777.30000 0004 0374 7521Department of Psychology, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | - Louise H. Hall
- grid.9909.90000 0004 1936 8403Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Clarendon Way, Leeds, LS2 9NL UK
| | - Nikki Rousseau
- grid.9909.90000 0004 1936 8403Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Robbie Foy
- grid.9909.90000 0004 1936 8403Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Clarendon Way, Leeds, LS2 9NL UK
| | - Jane Clark
- grid.443984.60000 0000 8813 7132St. James’s University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK
| | - Catherine Parbutt
- grid.443984.60000 0000 8813 7132St. James’s University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK
| | - Erin Raine
- grid.9909.90000 0004 1936 8403Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Clarendon Way, Leeds, LS2 9NL UK
| | - Benjamin Gardner
- grid.13097.3c0000 0001 2322 6764Department of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Galina Velikova
- grid.443984.60000 0000 8813 7132Leeds Institute of Medical Research at St James’s, University of Leeds, St James’s University Hospital, Leeds, UK ,grid.443984.60000 0000 8813 7132Leeds Cancer Centre, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, St James’s University Hospital, Leeds, UK
| | - Sally J. L. Moore
- grid.9909.90000 0004 1936 8403Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Clarendon Way, Leeds, LS2 9NL UK
| | - Jacqueline Buxton
- grid.9909.90000 0004 1936 8403Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Clarendon Way, Leeds, LS2 9NL UK
| | | | - Samuel G. Smith
- grid.9909.90000 0004 1936 8403Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Clarendon Way, Leeds, LS2 9NL UK
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Lloyd KE, Foy R, Hall LH, Ziegler L, Green SMC, Haider ZF, Taylor DG, MacKenzie M, Smith SG. Barriers and facilitators to using aspirin for preventive therapy: a qualitative study exploring the views and experiences of people with Lynch syndrome and healthcare providers. Hered Cancer Clin Pract 2022; 20:30. [PMID: 35999639 PMCID: PMC9396868 DOI: 10.1186/s13053-022-00235-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2022] [Accepted: 07/26/2022] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NG151) recommends considering daily aspirin for people with Lynch syndrome to reduce colorectal cancer risk. However, deciding whether to initiate aspirin could be a complex decision for patients and their healthcare providers, as both the potential benefits and harms need to be considered. METHODS We conducted semi-structured interviews to explore the barriers and facilitators to using aspirin for preventive therapy. We recruited 15 people with Lynch syndrome, and 23 healthcare providers across multiple professions in primary, and specialist care (e.g. clinical genetics) in the United Kingdom. Interview schedules were informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework. RESULTS There were three themes: 1) Considering potential harms and benefits; 2) Healthcare pathway; 3) Patients' level of interest in aspirin. All healthcare providers, across primary and specialist care, viewed general practitioners (GPs) as being responsible for prescribing and overseeing the use of aspirin. However, GPs were unfamiliar with aspirin for preventive therapy, and concerned about prescribing at higher doses (300-600 mg). To support decision-making, GPs wanted clarification from specialist clinicians on the evidence and dose to prescribe. Not all participants with Lynch syndrome received information on aspirin from their healthcare provider, and several were unsure who to discuss aspirin with. GPs were more inclined to prescribe aspirin for patients with expressed preferences for the medication, however several patients were uncertain and wanted further guidance. CONCLUSIONS Coordinated and multilevel strategies are needed, addressing the needs of both GPs and people with Lynch syndrome, to ensure consistent implementation of national guidance on aspirin for preventive therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kelly E Lloyd
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Clarendon Way, Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK.
| | - Robbie Foy
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Clarendon Way, Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK
| | - Louise H Hall
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Clarendon Way, Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK
| | - Lucy Ziegler
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Clarendon Way, Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK
| | - Sophie M C Green
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Clarendon Way, Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK
| | - Zainab F Haider
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Clarendon Way, Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK
| | - David G Taylor
- School of Pharmacy, University College London, London, UK
| | | | - Samuel G Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Clarendon Way, Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Green SMC, French DP, Hall LH, Bartlett YK, Rousseau N, Raine E, Parbutt C, Gardner B, Smith SG. Co-development of a text messaging intervention to support adherence to adjuvant endocrine therapy in women with breast cancer: A mixed-methods approach (Preprint). J Med Internet Res 2022; 25:e38073. [DOI: 10.2196/38073] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/11/2022] [Revised: 03/06/2023] [Accepted: 03/30/2023] [Indexed: 04/01/2023] Open
|
15
|
Maroni R, Barnes J, Offman J, Scheibl F, Smith SG, Debiram-Beecham I, Waller J, Sasieni P, Fitzgerald RC, Rubin G, Walter FM. Patient-reported experiences and views on the Cytosponge test: a mixed-methods analysis from the BEST3 trial. BMJ Open 2022; 12:e054258. [PMID: 35393308 PMCID: PMC8990713 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054258] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/09/2021] [Accepted: 03/07/2022] [Indexed: 01/10/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The BEST3 trial demonstrated the efficacy and safety of the Cytosponge-trefoil factor 3, a cell collection device coupled with the biomarker trefoil factor 3, as a tool for detecting Barrett's oesophagus, a precursor of oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC), in primary care. In this nested study, our aim was to understand patient experiences. DESIGN Mixed-methods using questionnaires (including Inventory to Assess Patient Satisfaction, Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-6 and two-item perceived risk) and interviews. OUTCOME MEASURES Participant satisfaction, anxiety and perceived risk of developing OAC. SETTING General practices in England. PARTICIPANTS Patients with acid reflux enrolled in the intervention arm of the BEST3 trial and attending the Cytosponge appointment (N=1750). RESULTS 1488 patients successfully swallowing the Cytosponge completed the follow-up questionnaires, while 30 were interviewed, including some with an unsuccessful swallow.Overall, participants were satisfied with the Cytosponge test. Several items showed positive ratings, in particular convenience and accessibility, staff's interpersonal skills and perceived technical competence. The most discomfort was reported during the Cytosponge removal, with more than 60% of participants experiencing gagging. Nevertheless, about 80% were willing to have the procedure again or to recommend it to friends; this was true even for participants experiencing discomfort, as confirmed in the interviews.Median anxiety scores were below the predefined level of clinically significant anxiety and slightly decreased between baseline and follow-up (p < 0.001). Interviews revealed concerns around the ability to swallow, participating in a clinical trial, and waiting for test results.The perceived risk of OAC increased following the Cytosponge appointment (p<0.001). Moreover, interviews suggested that some participants had trouble conceptualising risk and did not understand the relationships between test results, gastro-oesophageal reflux and risk of Barrett's oesophagus and OAC. CONCLUSIONS When delivered during a trial in primary care, the Cytosponge is well accepted and causes little anxiety. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ISRCTN68382401.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Roberta Maroni
- Cancer Research UK and King's College London Cancer Prevention Trials Unit (CPTU), Cancer Prevention Group, School of Cancer & Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Jessica Barnes
- Cancer Research UK and King's College London Cancer Prevention Trials Unit (CPTU), Cancer Prevention Group, School of Cancer & Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Judith Offman
- Cancer Prevention Group, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Fiona Scheibl
- Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK
| | - Samuel G Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Irene Debiram-Beecham
- MRC Cancer Unit, Hutchison-MRC Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Jo Waller
- Cancer Prevention Group, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Peter Sasieni
- Cancer Research UK and King's College London Cancer Prevention Trials Unit (CPTU), Cancer Prevention Group, School of Cancer & Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
- Cancer Prevention Group, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Rebecca C Fitzgerald
- MRC Cancer Unit, Hutchison-MRC Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Greg Rubin
- Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Fiona M Walter
- The Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health & Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Smith SG, Ellison R, Hall L, Clark J, Hartley S, Mason E, Metherell J, Olivier C, Napp V, Naik J, Buckley S, Hirst C, Hartup S, Neal RD, Velikova G, Farrin A, Collinson M, Graham CD. Acceptance and Commitment Therapy to support medication decision-making and quality of life in women with breast cancer: protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial. Pilot Feasibility Stud 2022; 8:33. [PMID: 35135619 PMCID: PMC8822728 DOI: 10.1186/s40814-022-00985-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/01/2021] [Accepted: 01/19/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Adherence to adjuvant endocrine therapy is affected by medication side-effects and associated distress. Previous interventions focused on educating women to enhance adherence have proved minimally effective. We co-designed an Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) intervention to enhance medication decision-making and quality of life by targeting a broader range of factors, including side-effect management and psychological flexibility. This study aims to establish key trial parameters, assess the acceptability of the intervention and the extent to which it can be delivered with fidelity, and to demonstrate "proof of principle" regarding its efficacy on primary and process outcomes. METHODS The ACTION intervention includes an individual 1:1 ACT session followed by three group sessions involving 8-10 women and two practitioner psychologists. Participants are also provided with access to a website containing evidence-based methods for self-managing side-effects. The ACT sessions were adapted during the COVID-19 pandemic to be remotely delivered via video conferencing software. To evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of this intervention, a multi-site, exploratory, two-arm, individually randomised external pilot trial with a nested qualitative study will be undertaken. Eighty women with early stage breast cancer prescribed adjuvant endocrine therapy will be randomised (1:1) to receive treatment as usual or treatment as usual plus the ACTION intervention. The planned future primary outcome is medication adherence assessed by the ASK-12 measure. Progression to a phase III RCT will be based on criteria related to recruitment and follow-up rates, acceptability to patients, competency and fidelity of delivery, and proof of principle for change in medication adherence. DISCUSSION This external pilot trial will be used to ascertain the feasibility of undertaking a future phase III RCT to definitively evaluate an ACT-based intervention to support medication taking behaviour and quality of life in women with early stage breast cancer on adjuvant endocrine therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION ISRCTN: 12027752. Registered 24 December 2020, https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN12027752.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samuel G Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Science, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK.
| | - Rachel Ellison
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Louise Hall
- Leeds Institute of Health Science, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Jane Clark
- Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, St James's University Hospital, Beckett Street, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK
| | - Suzanne Hartley
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Ellen Mason
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Jamie Metherell
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Catherine Olivier
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Vicky Napp
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Jay Naik
- Department of Oncology, Harrogate & District Foundation Trust, Park Road, Lancaster, HG2 7SX, UK
| | - Sarah Buckley
- Department of Clinical Research, Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust, Aberford Road, Wakefield, WF1 4AL, UK
| | - Charlotte Hirst
- Department of Clinical Research, Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust, Aberford Road, Wakefield, WF1 4AL, UK
| | - Sue Hartup
- St James's University Hospital, Beckett Street, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK
| | - Richard D Neal
- Leeds Institute of Health Science, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Galina Velikova
- St James's University Hospital, Beckett Street, Leeds, LS9 7TF, UK
| | - Amanda Farrin
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Michelle Collinson
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
Lloyd KE, Hall LH, King N, Thorneloe RJ, Rodriguez-Lopez R, Ziegler L, Taylor DG, MacKenzie M, Smith SG. Aspirin use for cancer prevention: A systematic review of public, patient and healthcare provider attitudes and adherence behaviours. Prev Med 2022; 154:106872. [PMID: 34762964 PMCID: PMC8803547 DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2021.106872] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/15/2021] [Revised: 09/08/2021] [Accepted: 11/04/2021] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
We undertook a systematic review to synthesise the data on attitudes and behaviour towards the use of aspirin for cancer prevention, and healthcare providers' attitudes towards implementing aspirin in practice. Searches were carried out across 12 databases (e.g. MEDLINE, EMBASE). We used the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool to evaluate study quality, and conducted a narrative synthesis of the data. The review was pre-registered (PROSPERO: CRD42018093453). Thirty-eight studies were identified. Uptake and adherence data were all from trials. Trials recruited healthy participants, those at higher risk of cancer, and those with cancer. Four studies reported moderate to high (40.9-77.7%) uptake to an aspirin trial among people who were eligible. Most trials (18/22) reported high day-to-day adherence (≥80%). Three trials observed no association between gender and adherence. One trial found no association between adherence and colorectal cancer risk. Three studies reported moderate to high (43.6-76.0%) hypothetical willingness to use aspirin. Two studies found that a high proportion of healthcare providers (72.0-76.0%) perceived aspirin to be a suitable cancer prevention option. No qualitative studies were identified. The likelihood that eligible users of aspirin would participate in a trial evaluating the use of aspirin for preventive therapy was moderate to high. Among participants in a trial, day-to-day adherence was high. Further research is needed to identify uptake and adherence rates in routine care, the factors affecting aspirin use, and the barriers to implementing aspirin into clinical care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kelly E Lloyd
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
| | - Louise H Hall
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Natalie King
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Rachael J Thorneloe
- Centre for Behavioural Science & Applied Psychology, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK
| | | | - Lucy Ziegler
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - David G Taylor
- School of Pharmacy, University College London, London, UK
| | | | - Samuel G Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Hall LH, King NV, Graham CD, Green SMC, Barber A, Neal RD, Foy R, Clark J, Lloyd KE, Smith SG. Strategies to self-manage side-effects of adjuvant endocrine therapy among breast cancer survivors: an umbrella review of empirical evidence and clinical guidelines. J Cancer Surviv 2021; 16:1296-1338. [PMID: 34664199 DOI: 10.1007/s11764-021-01114-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/06/2021] [Accepted: 09/13/2021] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Side-effects of adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) are common in breast cancer survivors, and can affect adherence to treatment. We synthesised the evidence for strategies to self-manage these side-effects. METHODS We searched for systematic reviews and clinical guidelines on self-management strategies for AET side-effects (arthralgia, fatigue, hot flashes, gastrointestinal discomfort, nausea, vulvovaginal symptoms, and sleep disturbance). We searched oncology organisation's websites and eight databases (Inception-November 2020). Screening, data extraction and quality assessment were completed independently in duplicate. PROSPERO 2019CRD4201914001. RESULTS We identified 33 systematic reviews and 18 clinical guidelines. 21% of reviews were high quality, and the average quality score for guidelines was 44%. Evidence for most strategies was absent or weak. There was consensus from a low-quality review and multiple guidelines to recommend moisturisers, gels and lubricants for vulvovaginal symptoms. Evidence was weak for physical activity for self-managing most symptoms, although two high-quality reviews indicated yoga and aerobic exercise could reduce fatigue. Primary research was often biased by weak and underpowered study designs. Eleven reviews did not report information on adverse events. CONCLUSIONS Most self-management strategies for breast cancer survivors experiencing side-effects from AET lack evidence. Primary research is needed using high-quality well-powered designs focusing on implementable strategies. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS Patients and clinicians should be aware that although the risk of harm is low for these self-management strategies, the likelihood of benefit is often unclear. Women should consider moisturisers, gels or lubricants for self-managing vulvovaginal symptoms, and yoga or aerobic exercise for alleviating fatigue.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Louise H Hall
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9NL, England, UK
| | - Natalie V King
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9NL, England, UK
| | - Christopher D Graham
- Department of Psychology, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, BT7 1NN, Northern Ireland, UK
| | - Sophie M C Green
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9NL, England, UK
| | - Alice Barber
- School of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9NL, England, UK
| | - Richard D Neal
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9NL, England, UK
| | - Robbie Foy
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9NL, England, UK
| | - Jane Clark
- Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, LS9 7TF, England, UK
| | - Kelly E Lloyd
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9NL, England, UK
| | - Samuel G Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9NL, England, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Smith SG, Sestak I, Morris MA, Harvie M, Howell A, Forbes J, Cuzick J. The impact of body mass index on breast cancer incidence among women at increased risk: an observational study from the International Breast Intervention Studies. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2021; 188:215-223. [PMID: 33656637 PMCID: PMC8233270 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-021-06141-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2020] [Accepted: 02/08/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND We investigated the association between body mass index (BMI) and breast cancer risk in women at increased risk of breast cancer receiving tamoxifen or anastrozole compared with placebo using data from the International Breast Cancer Intervention Studies [IBIS-I (tamoxifen) and IBIS-II (anastrozole)]. METHODS Baseline BMI was calculated from nurse assessed height and weight measurements for premenopausal (n = 3138) and postmenopausal (n = 3731) women in IBIS-I and postmenopausal women in IBIS-II (n = 3787). The primary endpoint was any breast cancer event (invasive and ductal carcinoma in situ). We used Cox proportional hazards regression to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) for risk after adjustment for covariates. RESULTS There were 582 (IBIS-I) and 248 (IBIS-II) breast cancer events [median follow-up = 16.2 years (IQR 14.4-17.7) and 10.9 years (IQR 8.8-13.0), respectively]. In adjusted analysis, women with a higher BMI had an increased breast cancer risk in both IBIS-I [HR = 1.06 per 5 kg/m2 (0.99-1.15), p = 0.114] and in IBIS-II [HR per 5 kg/m2 = 1.21 (1.09-1.35), p < 0.001]. In IBIS-I, the association between BMI and breast cancer risk was positive in postmenopausal women [adjusted HR per 5 kg/m2 = 1.14 (1.03-1.26), p = 0.01] but not premenopausal women [adjusted HR per 5 kg/m2 = 0.97 (0.86-1.09), p = 0.628]. There was no interaction between BMI and treatment group for breast cancer risk in either IBIS-I (p = 0.62) or IBIS-II (p = 0.55). CONCLUSIONS Higher BMI is associated with greater breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women at increased risk of the disease, but no effect was observed in premenopausal women. The lack of interaction between BMI and treatment group on breast cancer risk suggests women are likely to experience benefit from preventive therapy regardless of their BMI. Trial registration Both trials were registered [IBIS-I: ISRCTN91879928 on 24/02/2006, retrospectively registered ( http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN91879928 ); IBIS-II: ISRCTN31488319 on 07/01/2005, retrospectively registered ( http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN31488319 )].
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samuel G Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Science, University of Leeds, Clarendon Way, Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK.
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
| | - Ivana Sestak
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Michelle A Morris
- Leeds Institute for Data Analytics, School of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Michelle Harvie
- Prevent Breast Cancer Unit, Nightingale Breast Screening Centre, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Anthony Howell
- Prevent Breast Cancer Unit, Nightingale Breast Screening Centre, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
- Institute of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | | | - Jack Cuzick
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Fitzgerald RC, di Pietro M, O'Donovan M, Maroni R, Muldrew B, Debiram-Beecham I, Gehrung M, Offman J, Tripathi M, Smith SG, Aigret B, Walter FM, Rubin G, Sasieni P. Cytosponge-trefoil factor 3 versus usual care to identify Barrett's oesophagus in a primary care setting: a multicentre, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2020; 396:333-344. [PMID: 32738955 PMCID: PMC7408501 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(20)31099-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 118] [Impact Index Per Article: 29.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2020] [Revised: 04/29/2020] [Accepted: 04/30/2020] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Treatment of dysplastic Barrett's oesophagus prevents progression to adenocarcinoma; however, the optimal diagnostic strategy for Barrett's oesophagus is unclear. The Cytosponge-trefoil factor 3 (TFF3) is a non-endoscopic test for Barrett's oesophagus. The aim of this study was to investigate whether offering this test to patients on medication for gastro-oesophageal reflux would increase the detection of Barrett's oesophagus compared with standard management. METHODS This multicentre, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial was done in 109 socio-demographically diverse general practice clinics in England. Randomisation was done both at the general practice clinic level (cluster randomisation) and at the individual patient level, and the results for each type of randomisation were analysed separately before being combined. Patients were eligible if they were aged 50 years or older, had been taking acid-suppressants for symptoms of gastro-oesophageal reflux for more than 6 months, and had not undergone an endoscopy procedure within the past 5 years. General practice clinics were selected by the local clinical research network and invited to participate in the trial. For cluster randomisation, clinics were randomly assigned (1:1) by the trial statistician using a computer-generated randomisation sequence; for individual patient-level randomisation, patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by the general practice clinics using a centrally prepared computer-generated randomisation sequence. After randomisation, participants received either standard management of gastro-oesophageal reflux (usual care group), in which participants only received an endoscopy if required by their general practitioner, or usual care plus an offer of the Cytosponge-TFF3 procedure, with a subsequent endoscopy if the procedure identified TFF3-positive cells (intervention group). The primary outcome was the diagnosis of Barrett's oesophagus at 12 months after enrolment, expressed as a rate per 1000 person-years, in all participants in the intervention group (regardless of whether they had accepted the offer of the Cytosponge-TFF3 procedure) compared with all participants in the usual care group. Analyses were intention-to-treat. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN68382401, and is completed. FINDINGS Between March 20, 2017, and March 21, 2019, 113 general practice clinics were enrolled, but four clinics dropped out shortly after randomisation. Using an automated search of the electronic prescribing records of the remaining 109 clinics, we identified 13 657 eligible patients who were sent an introductory letter with 14 days to opt out. 13 514 of these patients were randomly assigned (per practice or at the individual patient level) to the usual care group (n=6531) or the intervention group (n=6983). Following randomisation, 149 (2%) of 6983 participants in the intervention group and 143 (2%) of 6531 participants in the usual care group, on further scrutiny, did not meet all eligibility criteria or withdrew from the study. Of the remaining 6834 participants in the intervention group, 2679 (39%) expressed an interest in undergoing the Cytosponge-TFF3 procedure. Of these, 1750 (65%) met all of the eligibility criteria on telephone screening and underwent the procedure. Most of these participants (1654 [95%]; median age 69 years) swallowed the Cytosponge successfully and produced a sample. 231 (3%) of 6834 participants had a positive Cytosponge-TFF3 result and were referred for an endoscopy. Patients who declined the offer of the Cytosponge-TFF3 procedure and all participants in the usual care group only had an endoscopy if deemed necessary by their general practitioner. During an average of 12 months of follow-up, 140 (2%) of 6834 participants in the intervention group and 13 (<1%) of 6388 participants in the usual care group were diagnosed with Barrett's oesophagus (absolute difference 18·3 per 1000 person-years [95% CI 14·8-21·8]; rate ratio adjusted for cluster randomisation 10·6 [95% CI 6·0-18·8], p<0·0001). Nine (<1%) of 6834 participants were diagnosed with dysplastic Barrett's oesophagus (n=4) or stage I oesophago-gastric cancer (n=5) in the intervention group, whereas no participants were diagnosed with dysplastic Barrett's oesophagus or stage I gastro-oesophageal junction cancer in the usual care group. Among 1654 participants in the intervention group who swallowed the Cytosponge device successfully, 221 (13%) underwent endoscopy after testing positive for TFF3 and 131 (8%, corresponding to 59% of those having an endoscopy) were diagnosed with Barrett's oesophagus or cancer. One patient had a detachment of the Cytosponge from the thread requiring endoscopic removal, and the most common side-effect was a sore throat in 63 (4%) of 1654 participants. INTERPRETATION In patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux, the offer of Cytosponge-TFF3 testing results in improved detection of Barrett's oesophagus. Cytosponge-TFF3 testing could also lead to the diagnosis of treatable dysplasia and early cancer. This strategy will lead to additional endoscopies with some false positive results. FUNDING Cancer Research UK, National Institute for Health Research, the UK National Health Service, Medtronic, and the Medical Research Council.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rebecca C Fitzgerald
- MRC Cancer Unit, Hutchison-MRC Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Cambridge University Hospitals National Health Service Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.
| | - Massimiliano di Pietro
- MRC Cancer Unit, Hutchison-MRC Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Cambridge University Hospitals National Health Service Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Maria O'Donovan
- MRC Cancer Unit, Hutchison-MRC Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Cambridge University Hospitals National Health Service Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Roberta Maroni
- Cancer Research UK and King's College London Cancer Prevention Trials Unit, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Beth Muldrew
- Cancer Research UK and King's College London Cancer Prevention Trials Unit, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Irene Debiram-Beecham
- MRC Cancer Unit, Hutchison-MRC Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Marcel Gehrung
- Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Judith Offman
- Cancer Prevention Group, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Monika Tripathi
- MRC Cancer Unit, Hutchison-MRC Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Cambridge University Hospitals National Health Service Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Samuel G Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Benoit Aigret
- Cancer Research UK and King's College London Cancer Prevention Trials Unit, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Fiona M Walter
- The Primary Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Greg Rubin
- Institute of Population Health Sciences, Newcastle University, Sir James Spence Institute, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Peter Sasieni
- Cancer Research UK and King's College London Cancer Prevention Trials Unit, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Shahab L, Smith SG. Response to letter: Causes of cancer: Perceptions versus the scientific evidence by Bandara and Carpenter. Eur J Cancer 2019; 124:217-218. [PMID: 31718862 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2019.10.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/04/2019] [Accepted: 10/10/2019] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Lion Shahab
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK.
| | - Samuel G Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Ghimire B, Maroni R, Vulkan D, Shah Z, Gaynor E, Timoney M, Jones L, Arvanitis R, Ledson M, Lukehirst L, Rutherford P, Clarke F, Gardner K, Marcus MW, Hill S, Fidoe D, Mason S, Smith SG, Quaife SL, Fitzgerald K, Poirier V, Duffy SW, Field JK. Erratum to "Evaluation of a health service adopting proactive approach to reduce high risk of lung cancer: The Liverpool Healthy Lung Programme" [Lung Cancer 134 (August) (2019) 66-71]. Lung Cancer 2019; 139:224. [PMID: 31690469 DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2019.10.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Bhagabati Ghimire
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, UK.
| | - Roberta Maroni
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, UK
| | - Daniel Vulkan
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, UK
| | - Zoheb Shah
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, UK
| | - Edward Gaynor
- National Health Service (NHS) Liverpool Clinical Commissioning Group, UK
| | - Michelle Timoney
- National Health Service (NHS) Liverpool Clinical Commissioning Group, UK
| | - Lisa Jones
- National Health Service (NHS) Liverpool Clinical Commissioning Group, UK
| | - Rachel Arvanitis
- National Health Service (NHS) Liverpool Clinical Commissioning Group, UK
| | | | | | | | | | - Katy Gardner
- Macmillan General Practitioner, NHS Liverpool Clinical Commissioning Group, UK
| | - Michael W Marcus
- Roy Castle Lung Cancer Research Programme, University of Liverpool Cancer Research Centre, UK
| | - Sarah Hill
- Roy Castle Lung Cancer Research Programme, University of Liverpool Cancer Research Centre, UK
| | - Darcy Fidoe
- Roy Castle Lung Cancer Research Programme, University of Liverpool Cancer Research Centre, UK
| | - Sabrina Mason
- Roy Castle Lung Cancer Research Programme, University of Liverpool Cancer Research Centre, UK
| | - Samuel G Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, UK
| | - Samantha L Quaife
- Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, UK
| | - Karen Fitzgerald
- Accelerate, Coordinate, Evaluate (ACE) Team, Cancer Research, UK
| | | | - Stephen W Duffy
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, UK
| | - John K Field
- Roy Castle Lung Cancer Research Programme, University of Liverpool Cancer Research Centre, UK
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Okan Y, Smith SG, Bruine de Bruin W. How is cervical cancer screening information communicated in UK websites? Cross-sectional analysis of content and quantitative presentation formats. BMJ Open 2019; 9:e029551. [PMID: 31662361 PMCID: PMC6830680 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029551] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/30/2019] [Revised: 09/03/2019] [Accepted: 09/13/2019] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To investigate whether UK websites about cervical cancer screening targeted to the public include (1) information about benefits and risks of screening, possible screening results and cervical cancer statistics, (2) quantitative presentation formats recommended in the risk communication literature and (3) appeals for participation and/or informed decision-making. DESIGN Cross-sectional analysis of websites using a comprehensive checklist of information items on screening benefits, risks, possible results and cervical cancer statistics. OUTCOME MEASURES We recorded the number of websites that contained each of the information items, and the presentation format used for probabilistic information (no quantification provided, verbal quantifiers only, different types of numerical formats and/or graphs). We also recorded the number of websites containing appeals for participation and/or informed decision-making. SETTING Websites were identified through the most common Google search terms used in the UK to find information on cervical screening, according to GoogleTrends and a commercial internet-monitoring programme. Two additional websites were identified by the authors as relevant. RESULTS After applying exclusion criteria, 14 websites were evaluated, including websites of public and private health service providers, charities, a medical society and a pharmacy. The websites mentioned different benefits, risks of screening and possible results. However, specific content varied between websites. Probabilistic information was often presented using non-recommended formats, including relative risk reductions to express screening benefits, and verbal quantifiers without numbers to express risks. Appeals for participation were present in most websites, with almost half also mentioning informed decision-making. CONCLUSIONS UK websites about cervical cancer screening were generally balanced. However, benefits and risks were presented using different formats, potentially hindering comparisons. Additionally, recommendations from the literature to facilitate understanding of quantitative information and facilitate informed decisions were often not followed. Designing websites that adhere to existing recommendations may support informed screening uptake.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yasmina Okan
- Centre for Decision Research, Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Samuel G Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Wändi Bruine de Bruin
- Centre for Decision Research, Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
- Department of Engineering and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Okan Y, Petrova D, Smith SG, Lesic V, Bruine de Bruin W. How Do Women Interpret the NHS Information Leaflet about Cervical Cancer Screening? Med Decis Making 2019; 39:738-754. [PMID: 31556840 PMCID: PMC6843617 DOI: 10.1177/0272989x19873647] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/29/2019] [Accepted: 07/17/2019] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Background. Organized screening programs often rely on written materials to inform the public. In the United Kingdom, women invited for cervical cancer screening receive a leaflet from the National Health Service (NHS) to support screening decisions. However, information about screening may be too complex for people to understand, potentially hindering informed decision making. Objectives. We aimed to identify women's difficulties in interpreting the leaflet used in England and negative and positive responses to the leaflet. Methods. We used a sequential mixed-methods design involving 2 steps: cognitive think-aloud interviews (n = 20), followed by an England-wide survey (n = 602). Data were collected between June 2017 and December 2018, and participants included women aged 25 to 64 y with varying sociodemographics. Results. Interview results revealed misunderstandings concerning screening results, benefits, and additional tests and treatment, although participants tended to react positively to numerical information. Participants were often unfamiliar with the potential harms associated with screening (i.e., screening risks), key aspects of human papillomavirus, and complex terms (e.g., dyskaryosis). Survey results indicated that interpretation difficulties were common (M correct items = 12.5 of 23). Lower understanding was associated with lower educational level (β's >0.15, P's <0.001), lower numeracy scores (β = 0.36, P < 0.001), and nonwhite ethnicity (β = 0.10, P = 0.007). The leaflet was evaluated positively overall. Conclusions. Despite previous user testing of the leaflet, key information may be too complex for some recipients. As a consequence, they may struggle to make informed decisions about screening participation based on the information provided. We discuss implications for the improvement of communications about screening and decision support.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yasmina Okan
- Centre for Decision Research, Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Dafina Petrova
- />Cancer Registry of Granada, Andalusian School of Public Health, Granada, Spain
- />Instituto de Investigación Biosanitaria de Granada (ibs.GRANADA), University of Granada, Spain
- />CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain
| | | | - Vedran Lesic
- Centre for Decision Research, Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Wändi Bruine de Bruin
- />Centre for Decision Research, Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
- />Department of Engineering and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Allen CG, Fohner AE, Landry L, Paul JL, Smith SG, Turbitt E, Roberts MC. Perspectives From Early Career Investigators Who Are "Staying in the Game" of Precision Public Health Research. Am J Public Health 2019; 109:1186-1187. [PMID: 31390241 PMCID: PMC6687233 DOI: 10.2105/ajph.2019.305199] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 05/17/2019] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Caitlin G Allen
- Caitlin G. Allen is with the Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, GA. Alison E. Fohner is with the Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle. Latrice Landry is with Harvard School of Public Health, Cambridge, MA. Jean L. Paul is with the Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria. Samuel G. Smith is with Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom. Erin Turbitt is with the Graduate School of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, Australia. Megan C. Roberts is with the Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, University of North Carolina Eshelman School of Pharmacy, Chapel Hill
| | - Alison E Fohner
- Caitlin G. Allen is with the Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, GA. Alison E. Fohner is with the Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle. Latrice Landry is with Harvard School of Public Health, Cambridge, MA. Jean L. Paul is with the Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria. Samuel G. Smith is with Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom. Erin Turbitt is with the Graduate School of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, Australia. Megan C. Roberts is with the Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, University of North Carolina Eshelman School of Pharmacy, Chapel Hill
| | - Latrice Landry
- Caitlin G. Allen is with the Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, GA. Alison E. Fohner is with the Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle. Latrice Landry is with Harvard School of Public Health, Cambridge, MA. Jean L. Paul is with the Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria. Samuel G. Smith is with Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom. Erin Turbitt is with the Graduate School of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, Australia. Megan C. Roberts is with the Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, University of North Carolina Eshelman School of Pharmacy, Chapel Hill
| | - Jean L Paul
- Caitlin G. Allen is with the Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, GA. Alison E. Fohner is with the Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle. Latrice Landry is with Harvard School of Public Health, Cambridge, MA. Jean L. Paul is with the Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria. Samuel G. Smith is with Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom. Erin Turbitt is with the Graduate School of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, Australia. Megan C. Roberts is with the Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, University of North Carolina Eshelman School of Pharmacy, Chapel Hill
| | - Samuel G Smith
- Caitlin G. Allen is with the Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, GA. Alison E. Fohner is with the Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle. Latrice Landry is with Harvard School of Public Health, Cambridge, MA. Jean L. Paul is with the Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria. Samuel G. Smith is with Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom. Erin Turbitt is with the Graduate School of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, Australia. Megan C. Roberts is with the Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, University of North Carolina Eshelman School of Pharmacy, Chapel Hill
| | - Erin Turbitt
- Caitlin G. Allen is with the Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, GA. Alison E. Fohner is with the Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle. Latrice Landry is with Harvard School of Public Health, Cambridge, MA. Jean L. Paul is with the Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria. Samuel G. Smith is with Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom. Erin Turbitt is with the Graduate School of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, Australia. Megan C. Roberts is with the Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, University of North Carolina Eshelman School of Pharmacy, Chapel Hill
| | - Megan C Roberts
- Caitlin G. Allen is with the Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, GA. Alison E. Fohner is with the Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle. Latrice Landry is with Harvard School of Public Health, Cambridge, MA. Jean L. Paul is with the Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria. Samuel G. Smith is with Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom. Erin Turbitt is with the Graduate School of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, Australia. Megan C. Roberts is with the Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, University of North Carolina Eshelman School of Pharmacy, Chapel Hill
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Allen CG, Fohner AE, Landry L, Paul J, Smith SG, Turbitt E, Roberts MC. Early career investigators and precision public health. Lancet 2019; 394:382-383. [PMID: 31379330 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(19)30498-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/01/2019] [Accepted: 02/26/2019] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Caitlin G Allen
- Behavioral Sciences and Health Education Department, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA.
| | - Alison E Fohner
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Latrice Landry
- Laboratory for Molecular Medicine, Partners Medicine, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Jean Paul
- The Village Research Project, Mental Health Research Program, Ludwig Boltzmann Gesellschaft/Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
| | - Samuel G Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Erin Turbitt
- Discipline of Genetic Counselling, Graduate School of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Megan C Roberts
- Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, University of North Carolina, Eshelman School of Pharmacy, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Stevens C, Smith SG, Vrinten C, Waller J, Beeken RJ. Lifestyle changes associated with participation in colorectal cancer screening: Prospective data from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. J Med Screen 2019; 26:84-91. [PMID: 30336731 PMCID: PMC6484824 DOI: 10.1177/0969141318803973] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2018] [Accepted: 09/10/2018] [Indexed: 12/01/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Population-based cancer screening has been described as a teachable moment for behaviour change. This research examined the effect of faecal occult blood testing (FOBT) participation on smoking, alcohol consumption, fruit and vegetable consumption and physical activity. SETTING Data were from screening-naïve men within the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing, receiving their first FOBT invitation (n = 774). Four waves of data were included in analyses (wave 4, 2008/2009 - wave 7, 2014/2015). Baseline data were from the wave prior to FOBT invitation, and follow-up data were from the next consecutive wave (two years later). METHODS The effects of FOBT participation, time and group-by-time interactions on health behaviours were investigated using generalised estimating equations. Almost two-thirds of the sample (62.5%; n = 484) had participated in FOBT. RESULTS Screening participants were less likely to smoke (odds ratio (OR): 0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.29-0.68) and more likely to meet fruit and vegetable consumption guidelines (OR: 1.70, 95% CI: 1.14-2.55). Smoking decreased over time (OR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.62-0.89), but adherence to alcohol guidelines also decreased (OR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.53-0.91). A group-by-time interaction was found for vigorous physical activity; the odds of taking part in vigorous physical activity increased for FOBT participants, but decreased for non-participants (OR: 1.40, 95% CI: 1.01-1.95). CONCLUSIONS This research provides tentative support for FOBT as a teachable moment for increasing vigorous physical activity. However, overall, there was limited evidence for spontaneous improvement in multiple health behaviours following participation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claire Stevens
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Samuel G Smith
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Charlotte Vrinten
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Jo Waller
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Rebecca J Beeken
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Ghimire B, Maroni R, Vulkan D, Shah Z, Gaynor E, Timoney M, Jones L, Arvanitis R, Ledson M, Lukehirst L, Rutherford P, Clarke F, Gardner K, Marcus MW, Hill S, Fidoe D, Mason S, Smith SG, Quaife SL, Fitzgerald K, Poirier V, Duffy SW, Field JK. Evaluation of a health service adopting proactive approach to reduce high risk of lung cancer: The Liverpool Healthy Lung Programme. Lung Cancer 2019; 134:66-71. [PMID: 31319997 DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2019.05.026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/11/2019] [Revised: 05/21/2019] [Accepted: 05/26/2019] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES This Liverpool Healthy Lung Programme is a response to high rates of lung cancer and respiratory diseases locally and aims to diagnose lung cancer at an earlier stage by proactive approach to those at high risk of lung cancer. The objective of this study is to evaluate the programme in terms of its likely effect on mortality from lung cancer and its delivery to deprived populations. METHODS Persons aged 58-75 years, with a history of smoking or a diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)2 according to general practice records were invited for lung health check in a community health hub setting. A detailed risk assessment and spirometry were performed in eligible patients. Those with a 5% or greater five-year risk of lung cancer were referred for a low dose CT3 scan. RESULTS A total of 4 566 subjects attended the appointment for risk assessment and 3 591 (79%) consented to data sharing. More than 80% of the patients were in the most deprived quintile of the index of multiple deprivation. Of those attending, 63% underwent spirometry and 43% were recommended for a CT scan. A total of 25 cancers were diagnosed, of which 16 (64%) were stage I. Comparison with the national stage distribution implied that the programme was reducing lung cancer mortality by 22%. CONCLUSIONS Community based proactive approaches to early diagnosis of lung cancer in health deprived regions are likely to be effective in early detection of lung cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bhagabati Ghimire
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, UK.
| | - Roberta Maroni
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, UK
| | - Daniel Vulkan
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, UK
| | - Zoheb Shah
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, UK
| | - Edward Gaynor
- National Health Service (NHS) Liverpool Clinical Commissioning Group, UK
| | - Michelle Timoney
- National Health Service (NHS) Liverpool Clinical Commissioning Group, UK
| | - Lisa Jones
- National Health Service (NHS) Liverpool Clinical Commissioning Group, UK
| | - Rachel Arvanitis
- National Health Service (NHS) Liverpool Clinical Commissioning Group, UK
| | | | | | | | | | - Katy Gardner
- Macmillan General Practitioner, NHS Liverpool Clinical Commissioning Group, UK
| | - Michael W Marcus
- Roy Castle Lung Cancer Research Programme, University of Liverpool Cancer Research Centre, UK
| | - Sarah Hill
- Roy Castle Lung Cancer Research Programme, University of Liverpool Cancer Research Centre, UK
| | - Darcy Fidoe
- Roy Castle Lung Cancer Research Programme, University of Liverpool Cancer Research Centre, UK
| | - Sabrina Mason
- Roy Castle Lung Cancer Research Programme, University of Liverpool Cancer Research Centre, UK
| | - Samuel G Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, UK
| | - Samantha L Quaife
- Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, UK
| | - Karen Fitzgerald
- Accelerate, Coordinate, Evaluate (ACE) team, Cancer Research, UK
| | | | - Stephen W Duffy
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, UK
| | - John K Field
- Roy Castle Lung Cancer Research Programme, University of Liverpool Cancer Research Centre, UK
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Stevens C, Vrinten C, Smith SG, Waller J, Beeken RJ. Acceptability of receiving lifestyle advice at cervical, breast and bowel cancer screening. Prev Med 2019; 120:19-25. [PMID: 30578909 PMCID: PMC6380892 DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2018.12.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2018] [Revised: 11/29/2018] [Accepted: 12/16/2018] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
Cancer screening could be an opportunity to deliver cancer prevention advice, but it is not known how such information would be received. We explored willingness to receive lifestyle advice in the context of the English National Health Service cervical, breast, and bowel (FS; flexible sigmoidoscopy) screening programmes. A population-based survey was conducted in 2016 to collect nationally representative data on willingness to receive lifestyle advice across cervical (n = 768), breast (n = 420) and FS (n = 308) screening programmes. Additional items assessed the impact of lifestyle advice on screening attendance, preference for receiving advice in the event of an abnormal screening result, and timing of advice. Most respondents were willing to receive lifestyle advice around the time of cancer screening (cervical 78.9%, breast 79.4%, FS 81.8%), and if their results were abnormal (cervical 86.3%, breast 83.0%, FS 85.1%). A small proportion indicated it may discourage future attendance (cervical 4.9%, breast 7.0%, FS 8.8%). Most preferred information to be delivered at the screening appointment (cervical 69.8%, breast 72.6%, FS 70.7%). There were no associations between sociodemographic characteristics and willingness to receive lifestyle advice at breast screening. For those intending to attend cervical screening, non-White ethnicity and higher education were associated with increased willingness to receive lifestyle advice. Women were more likely to be willing to receive advice at FS screening than men. Providing lifestyle advice at cancer screening is likely to be acceptable to the general population. The optimal approach for delivery needs careful consideration to minimise potential negative effects on screening attendance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claire Stevens
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - Charlotte Vrinten
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - Samuel G Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9NL, UK; Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - Jo Waller
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - Rebecca J Beeken
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9NL, UK; Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Stevens C, Smith SG, Quaife SL, Vrinten C, Waller J, Beeken RJ. Interest in lifestyle advice at lung cancer screening: Determinants and preferences. Lung Cancer 2019; 128:1-5. [PMID: 30642439 PMCID: PMC6345624 DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2018.11.036] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/23/2018] [Revised: 11/23/2018] [Accepted: 11/26/2018] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Lung cancer screening could be a 'teachable moment' for behaviour change. Little is known about how advice about smoking cessation, or other behavioural cancer risk factors, would be received in this setting. METHODS Using a population-based survey of 459 English adults (current smokers and recent quitters aged 50-75) we assessed willingness to receive lifestyle advice (about smoking, diet, weight, physical activity, alcohol consumption) at lung screening. Additional items assessed whether advice should be provided following abnormal screening results, the potential impact of advice on screening uptake, and preferred timing of advice. RESULTS Overall, 64% (n = 292) of participants were willing to receive lifestyle advice at lung screening. A greater proportion of participants were willing to receive advice in a scenario where results required further investigation (83%; p < 0.01). However, 14% indicated the provision of lifestyle advice would make them less willing to attend lung screening. Non-White ethnicity and greater cancer risk factor awareness were associated with willingness to receive advice (p < 0.05). Half of smokers (51%) were willing to receive cessation advice. There was also interest in advice about diet (47%), weight (43%), physical activity (32%), and alcohol consumption (17%) among people not meeting current recommendations for these behaviours. There was a preference for advice to be delivered at the screening appointment (38%, n = 108) over other time-points. CONCLUSIONS Lung screening may offer an opportunity to provide advice about behavioural cancer risk factors. Future work should consider how to deliver effective interventions in this setting to support behaviour change, without affecting screening uptake.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claire Stevens
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - Samuel G Smith
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK; Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK
| | - Samantha L Quaife
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - Charlotte Vrinten
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - Jo Waller
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - Rebecca J Beeken
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK; Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Smith SG, Beard E, McGowan JA, Fox E, Cook C, Pal R, Waller J, Shahab L. Development of a tool to assess beliefs about mythical causes of cancer: the Cancer Awareness Measure Mythical Causes Scale. BMJ Open 2018; 8:e022825. [PMID: 30552257 PMCID: PMC6303629 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022825] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/09/2018] [Revised: 08/09/2018] [Accepted: 10/17/2018] [Indexed: 01/11/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES We aimed to develop a reliable and valid measure to assess public beliefs in mythical causes of cancer: the Cancer Awareness Measure-MYthical Causes Scale (CAM-MYCS). DESIGN AND SETTING Cancer myth items were generated from a literature review, social media and interviews (n=16). The CAM-MYCS was prepared by reducing items using (a) an online sample (n=527) with exploratory factor analysis and (b) cancer experts with Delhpi methodology (n=13). To assess test-retest reliability and sensitivity to change, students (n=91) completed the CAM-MYCS at baseline and 1 week after exposure to information on lifestyle-related cancer causes or control information. Construct validity was tested by comparing CAM-MYCS scores between cancer experts (n=25) and students (n=91). Factor structure and internal reliability were investigated in a national sample (n=1993). RESULTS Out of 42 items generated, 12 were retained based on factor loadings, prevalence of endorsement and expert consensus. CAM-MYCS scores improved (fewer myths endorsed) among students exposed to information on cancer causes compared with the control group (p<0.001) and showed high test-retest reliability (r=0.90, p<0.001). Cancer experts reported higher CAM-MYCS scores (fewer myths endorsed) than students (p<0.001). The factor structure of the CAM-MYCS was confirmed in the national sample and internal reliability was high (α=0.86). Inclusion of the CAM-MYCS alongside items assessing knowledge of actual cancer causes did not affect responses. CONCLUSIONS The CAM-MYCS tool is a reliable and valid tool assessing beliefs in mythical causes of cancer, and it can be used alongside items assessing known causes of cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samuel G Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
- Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Emma Beard
- Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
- Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, UK
| | - Jennifer A McGowan
- Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Emma Fox
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA
| | | | - Radhika Pal
- Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Jo Waller
- Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Lion Shahab
- Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Russell AM, Smith SG, Bailey SC, Belter LT, Pandit AU, Hedlund LA, Bojarski EA, Rush SR, Wolf MS. Older Adult Preferences of Mobile Application Functionality Supporting Medication Self-Management. J Health Commun 2018; 23:1064-1071. [PMID: 30526400 DOI: 10.1080/10810730.2018.1554728] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
Abstract
Health systems and insurers alike are increasingly interested in leveraging mHealth (mobile health) tools to support patient health-related behaviors including medication adherence. However, these tools are not widely used by older patients. This study explores patient preferences for functionality in a smartphone application (app) that supports medication self-management among older adults with multiple chronic conditions. We conducted six discussion groups in Chicago, Miami, and Denver (N = 46). English-speaking older adults (55 and older) who owned smartphones and took five or more prescription medicines were invited to participate. Discussions covered familiarity with and use of current apps and challenges with taking multidrug regimens. Participants reviewed a range of possible mobile app functions and were asked to give feedback regarding the acceptability and desirability of each to support medication management. Very few participants (n = 3) reported current use of a mobile app for medication support, although all were receptive. Challenges to medication use were forgetfulness, fear of adverse events, and managing medication information from multiple sources. Desired features included (1) a list and consolidated schedule of medications, (2) identification and warning of unsafe medication interactions, (3) reminder alerts to take medicine, and (4) the ability record when medications were taken. Features relating to refill ordering, pharmacy information, and comparing costs for medication were not considered to be as important for an app.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrea M Russell
- a Division of General Internal Medicine , Feinberg School of Medicine at Northwestern University , Chicago , IL , USA
| | - Samuel G Smith
- b Leeds Institute of Health Sciences , University of Leeds , Leeds , UK
| | - Stacy C Bailey
- c Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy , UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy , Chapel Hill , NC , USA
| | - Lisa T Belter
- a Division of General Internal Medicine , Feinberg School of Medicine at Northwestern University , Chicago , IL , USA
| | - Anjali U Pandit
- a Division of General Internal Medicine , Feinberg School of Medicine at Northwestern University , Chicago , IL , USA
| | - Laurie A Hedlund
- a Division of General Internal Medicine , Feinberg School of Medicine at Northwestern University , Chicago , IL , USA
| | - Elizabeth A Bojarski
- a Division of General Internal Medicine , Feinberg School of Medicine at Northwestern University , Chicago , IL , USA
| | - Steven R Rush
- d UnitedHealth Group Health Literacy Innovations Program , United HealthCare Services Inc , Minneapolis , MN , USA
| | - Michael S Wolf
- a Division of General Internal Medicine , Feinberg School of Medicine at Northwestern University , Chicago , IL , USA
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Shahab L, McGowan JA, Waller J, Smith SG. Prevalence of beliefs about actual and mythical causes of cancer and their association with socio-demographic and health-related characteristics: Findings from a cross-sectional survey in England. Eur J Cancer 2018; 103:308-316. [PMID: 29705530 PMCID: PMC6202672 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2018.03.029] [Citation(s) in RCA: 40] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/24/2018] [Revised: 03/21/2018] [Accepted: 03/23/2018] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Literature on population awareness about actual causes of cancer is growing but comparatively little is known about the prevalence of people's belief concerning mythical causes of cancer. This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of these beliefs and their association with socio-demographic characteristics and health behaviours. METHODS A survey containing validated measures of beliefs about actual and mythical cancer causes and health behaviours (smoking, alcohol consumption, physical activity, fruit and vegetable consumption, overweight) was administered to a representative English population sample (N = 1330). RESULTS Awareness of actual causes of cancer (52% accurately identified; 95% confidence interval [CI] 51-54) was greater than awareness of mythical cancer causes (36% accurately identified; 95% CI 34-37; P < 0.01). The most commonly endorsed mythical cancer causes were exposure to stress (43%; 95% CI 40-45), food additives (42%; 95% CI 39-44) and non-ionizing electromagnetic frequencies (35%; 95% CI 33-38). In adjusted analysis, greater awareness of actual and mythical cancer causes was independently associated with younger age, higher social grade, being white and having post-16 qualifications. Awareness of actual but not mythical cancer causes was associated with not smoking and eating sufficient fruit and vegetables. CONCLUSIONS Awareness of actual and mythical cancer causes is poor in the general population. Only knowledge of established risk factors is associated with adherence to behavioural recommendations for reducing cancer risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lion Shahab
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK.
| | - Jennifer A McGowan
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK; Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - Jo Waller
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - Samuel G Smith
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK; Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Smith SG. Capsule commentary on Kurtzman et al., Social incentives and gamification to promote weight loss: the LOSE IT randomized, controlled trial. J Gen Intern Med 2018; 33:1782. [PMID: 30054886 PMCID: PMC6153253 DOI: 10.1007/s11606-018-4603-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Samuel G Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Offman J, Muldrew B, O’Donovan M, Debiram-Beecham I, Pesola F, Kaimi I, Smith SG, Wilson A, Khan Z, Lao-Sirieix P, Aigret B, Walter FM, Rubin G, Morris S, Jackson C, Sasieni P, Fitzgerald RC. Barrett's oESophagus trial 3 (BEST3): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial comparing the Cytosponge-TFF3 test with usual care to facilitate the diagnosis of oesophageal pre-cancer in primary care patients with chronic acid reflux. BMC Cancer 2018; 18:784. [PMID: 30075763 PMCID: PMC6091067 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-018-4664-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/08/2018] [Accepted: 07/10/2018] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Early detection of oesophageal cancer improves outcomes; however, the optimal strategy for identifying patients at increased risk from the pre-cancerous lesion Barrett's oesophagus (BE) is not clear. The Cytosponge, a novel non-endoscopic sponge device, combined with the biomarker Trefoil Factor 3 (TFF3) has been tested in four clinical studies. It was found to be safe, accurate and acceptable to patients. The aim of the BEST3 trial is to evaluate if the offer of a Cytosponge-TFF3 test in primary care for patients on long term acid suppressants leads to an increase in the number of patients diagnosed with BE. METHODS The BEST3 trial is a pragmatic multi-site cluster-randomised controlled trial set in primary care in England. Approximately 120 practices will be randomised 1:1 to either the intervention arm, invitation to a Cytosponge-TFF3 test, or the control arm usual care. Inclusion criteria are men and women aged 50 or over with records of at least 6 months of prescriptions for acid-suppressants in the last year. Patients in the intervention arm will receive an invitation to have a Cytosponge-TFF3 test in their general practice. Patients with a positive TFF3 test will receive an invitation for an upper gastro-intestinal endoscopy at their local hospital-based endoscopy clinic to test for BE. The primary objective is to compare histologically confirmed BE diagnosis between the intervention and control arms to determine whether the offer of the Cytosponge-TFF3 test in primary care results in an increase in BE diagnosis within 12 months of study entry. DISCUSSION The BEST3 trial is a well-powered pragmatic trial testing the use of the Cytosponge-TFF3 test in the same population that we envisage it being used in clinical practice. The data generated from this trial will enable NICE and other clinical bodies to decide whether this test is suitable for routine clinical use. TRIAL REGISTRATION This trial was prospectively registered with the ISRCTN Registry on 19/01/2017, trial number ISRCTN68382401 .
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Judith Offman
- School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Beth Muldrew
- Cancer Prevention Trials Unit, Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Maria O’Donovan
- Department of Histopathology, Addenbrooke’s Hospital, Cambridge, UK
| | - Irene Debiram-Beecham
- MRC Cancer Unit, Hutchison/MRC Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Francesca Pesola
- School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Irene Kaimi
- Cancer Prevention Trials Unit, Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Samuel G. Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Ashley Wilson
- Cancer Prevention Trials Unit, Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Zohrah Khan
- Cancer Prevention Trials Unit, Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | | | - Benoit Aigret
- Cancer Prevention Trials Unit, Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Fiona M. Walter
- The Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Greg Rubin
- Institute of Health and Society, Sir James Spence Institute, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Steve Morris
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
| | | | - Peter Sasieni
- School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine, King’s College London, London, UK
- Cancer Prevention Trials Unit, Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Rebecca C. Fitzgerald
- MRC Cancer Unit, Hutchison/MRC Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - on behalf of the BEST3 Trial team
- School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine, King’s College London, London, UK
- Cancer Prevention Trials Unit, Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
- Department of Histopathology, Addenbrooke’s Hospital, Cambridge, UK
- MRC Cancer Unit, Hutchison/MRC Research Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
- Astra Zeneca, Cambridge, UK
- The Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
- Institute of Health and Society, Sir James Spence Institute, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
- MRC Biostatistic Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Hackett J, Thorneloe R, Side L, Wolf M, Horne R, Cuzick J, Smith SG. Uptake of breast cancer preventive therapy in the UK: results from a multicentre prospective survey and qualitative interviews. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2018; 170:633-640. [PMID: 29687178 PMCID: PMC6022517 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-018-4775-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/27/2018] [Accepted: 03/30/2018] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Uptake of preventive therapy for women at increased breast cancer risk in England is unknown following the introduction of UK clinical guidelines in 2013. Preventive therapy could create socioeconomic inequalities in cancer incidence if it is more readily accepted by particular socio-demographic groups. In this multicentre study, we investigated uptake of tamoxifen and evaluated socio-demographic and clinical factors associated with initiation. We explored women's experiences of treatment decision-making using qualitative interview data. METHODS Between September 2015 and December 2016, women (n = 732) attending an appointment at one of 20 centres in England to discuss breast cancer risk were approached to complete a survey containing socio-demographic details and nulliparity. Of the baseline survey respondents (n = 408/732, 55.7% response rate), self-reported uptake of tamoxifen at 3-month follow-up was reported in 258 (63.2%). Sixteen women participated in semi-structured interviews. RESULTS One in seven (38/258 = 14.7%) women initiated tamoxifen. Women who had children were more likely to report use of tamoxifen than those without children (OR = 5.26; 95%CI: 1.13-24.49, p = 0.035). Interview data suggested that women weigh up risks and benefits of tamoxifen within the context of familial commitments, with exposure to significant other's beliefs and experiences of cancer and medication a basis for their decision. CONCLUSIONS Uptake of tamoxifen is low in clinical practice. There were no socio-demographic differences in uptake, suggesting that the introduction of breast cancer preventive therapy is unlikely to create socioeconomic inequalities in cancer incidence. Women's decision-making was influenced by familial priorities, particularly having children.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julia Hackett
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Worsley Building, Clarendon Way, Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK
| | - Rachael Thorneloe
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Worsley Building, Clarendon Way, Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK
| | - Lucy Side
- Wessex Clinical Genetics Service, University Hospitals Southampton, Southampton, UK
- UCL Institute for Women's Health, London, UK
| | - Michael Wolf
- Division of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Northwestern University, Chicago, USA
| | - Rob Horne
- Centre for Behavioural Medicine, School of Pharmacy, University College London, London, UK
| | - Jack Cuzick
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Samuel G Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Worsley Building, Clarendon Way, Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK.
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Stevens C, Vrinten C, Smith SG, Waller J, Beeken RJ. Determinants of willingness to receive healthy lifestyle advice in the context of cancer screening. Br J Cancer 2018; 119:251-257. [PMID: 29991698 PMCID: PMC6048170 DOI: 10.1038/s41416-018-0160-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2018] [Revised: 05/31/2018] [Accepted: 06/04/2018] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Providing lifestyle advice at cancer screening may help reduce the cancer burden attributable to health-related behaviour. We examined determinants of willingness to receive advice about several behavioural cancer risk factors. METHODS A population-based sample of English adults eligible for cancer screening (n = 1221) completed items on willingness to receive lifestyle advice. Sociodemographic, psychological (risk perceptions, cancer risk factor awareness) and behavioural factors were used to predict interest in advice about diet, weight, physical activity, smoking and alcohol consumption. RESULTS Two thirds (62-67%) reported interest in advice about diet, weight, and physical activity; 17% were willing to receive advice about smoking, and 32% about alcohol consumption. Willingness to receive advice was higher in those not adhering to guidelines for weight, physical activity, smoking and alcohol consumption (all p < 0.01). Non-White ethnicity was associated with interest in advice about diet, physical activity and smoking (all p < 0.01). Willingness to receive advice about diet, weight, physical activity and alcohol consumption increased with greater recognition of cancer risk factors (all p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS Willingness to receive lifestyle advice at cancer screening was high, suggesting this context may provide an opportunity to support behaviour change. Increasing awareness of cancer risk factors may facilitate interest in lifestyle advice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claire Stevens
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - Charlotte Vrinten
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - Samuel G Smith
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK
| | - Jo Waller
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - Rebecca J Beeken
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK.
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Smith SG, Sestak I, Morris MA, Howell A, Forbes JF, Cuzick JM. Overweight and breast cancer risk in the International Breast Cancer Intervention studies I and II. J Clin Oncol 2018. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2018.36.15_suppl.1560] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
| | - Ivana Sestak
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | | | | | | | - Jack M. Cuzick
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Lakens D, Adolfi FG, Albers CJ, Anvari F, Apps MAJ, Argamon SE, Baguley T, Becker RB, Benning SD, Bradford DE, Buchanan EM, Caldwell AR, Van Calster B, Carlsson R, Chen SC, Chung B, Colling LJ, Collins GS, Crook Z, Cross ES, Daniels S, Danielsson H, DeBruine L, Dunleavy DJ, Earp BD, Feist MI, Ferrell JD, Field JG, Fox NW, Friesen A, Gomes C, Gonzalez-Marquez M, Grange JA, Grieve AP, Guggenberger R, Grist J, van Harmelen AL, Hasselman F, Hochard KD, Hoffarth MR, Holmes NP, Ingre M, Isager PM, Isotalus HK, Johansson C, Juszczyk K, Kenny DA, Khalil AA, Konat B, Lao J, Larsen EG, Lodder GMA, Lukavský J, Madan CR, Manheim D, Martin SR, Martin AE, Mayo DG, McCarthy RJ, McConway K, McFarland C, Nio AQX, Nilsonne G, de Oliveira CL, de Xivry JJO, Parsons S, Pfuhl G, Quinn KA, Sakon JJ, Saribay SA, Schneider IK, Selvaraju M, Sjoerds Z, Smith SG, Smits T, Spies JR, Sreekumar V, Steltenpohl CN, Stenhouse N, Świątkowski W, Vadillo MA, Van Assen MALM, Williams MN, Williams SE, Williams DR, Yarkoni T, Ziano I, Zwaan RA. Justify your alpha. Nat Hum Behav 2018. [DOI: 10.1038/s41562-018-0311-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 221] [Impact Index Per Article: 36.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
|
40
|
Wolf MS, Smith SG, Pandit AU, Condon DM, Curtis LM, Griffith J, O'Conor R, Rush S, Bailey SC, Kaplan G, Haufle V, Martin D. Development and Validation of the Consumer Health Activation Index. Med Decis Making 2018; 38:334-343. [PMID: 29436308 DOI: 10.1177/0272989x17753392] [Citation(s) in RCA: 39] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although there has been increasing interest in patient engagement, few measures are publicly available and suitable for patients with limited health literacy. OBJECTIVE We sought to develop a Consumer Health Activation Index (CHAI) for use among diverse patients. METHODS Expert opinion, a systematic literature review, focus groups, and cognitive interviews with patients were used to create and revise a potential set of items. Psychometric testing guided by item response theory was then conducted among 301 English-speaking, community-dwelling adults. This included differential item functioning analyses to evaluate item performance across participant health literacy levels. To determine construct validity, CHAI scores were compared to scales measuring similar personality constructs. Associations between the CHAI and physical and mental health established predictive validity. A second study among 9,478 adults was used to confirm CHAI associations with health outcomes. RESULTS Exploratory factor analyses revealed a single-factor solution with a 10-item scale. The CHAI showed good internal consistency (alpha = 0.81) and moderate test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.53). Reading grade level was found to be at the 6th grade. Moderate to strong correlations were found with similar constructs (Multidimensional Health Locus of Control, r = 0.38, P < 0.001; Conscientiousness, r = 0.41, P < 0.001). Predictive validity was demonstrated through associations with functional health status measures (depression, r = -0.28, P < 0.001; anxiety, r = -0.22, P < 0.001; and physical functioning, r = 0.22, P < 0.001). In the validation sample, the CHAI was significantly associated with self-reported physical and mental health ( r = 0.31 and 0.32 respectively; both P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS The CHAI appears to be a valid, reliable, and easily administered tool that can be used to assess health activation among adults, including those with limited health literacy. Future studies should test the tool in actual use and explore further applications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael S Wolf
- Health Literacy and Learning Program, Division of General Internal Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine at Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA.,Department of Learning Sciences, School of Education and Social Policy, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA
| | - Samuel G Smith
- Health Literacy and Learning Program, Division of General Internal Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine at Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA.,Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, UK
| | - Anjali U Pandit
- Health Literacy and Learning Program, Division of General Internal Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine at Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - David M Condon
- Department of Medical Social Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine at Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Laura M Curtis
- Health Literacy and Learning Program, Division of General Internal Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine at Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - James Griffith
- Department of Medical Social Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine at Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Rachel O'Conor
- Health Literacy and Learning Program, Division of General Internal Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine at Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Steven Rush
- UnitedHealthcare and UnitedHealth Group, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - Stacy C Bailey
- Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, USA
| | - Gordon Kaplan
- Optum, Consumer Solutions Group, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | | | - David Martin
- UnitedHealthcare and UnitedHealth Group, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Sestak I, Smith SG, Howell A, Forbes JF, Cuzick J. Early participant-reported symptoms as predictors of adherence to anastrozole in the International Breast Cancer Intervention Studies II. Ann Oncol 2018; 29:504-509. [PMID: 29126161 PMCID: PMC5834118 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdx713] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Anastrozole reduces breast cancer risk in women at high risk, but implementing preventive therapy in clinical practice is difficult. Here, we evaluate adherence to anastrozole in the International Breast Cancer Intervention Study (IBIS)-II prevention and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) trials, and its association with early symptoms. Patients and methods In the prevention trial, 3864 postmenopausal women were randomized to placebo versus anastrozole. A total of 2980 postmenopausal women with DCIS were randomized to tamoxifen versus anastrozole. Adherence to trial medication was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and all P-values were two-sided. Results In the prevention trial, adherence was 65.8% [anastrozole (65.7%) versus placebo (65.9%); HR = 0.97 (0.87-1.09), P = 0.6]. Adherence was lower for those reporting arthralgia in the placebo group (P = 0.02) or gynecological symptoms in the anastrozole group (P = 0.003), compared with those not reporting these symptoms at 6 months. In the DCIS study, adherence was 66.7% [anastrozole (67.5%) versus tamoxifen (65.8%); HR = 1.06 (0.94-1.20), P = 0.4]. Hot flashes were associated with greater adherence in the anastrozole arm (P = 0.02). In both studies, symptoms were mostly mild or moderately severe, and adherence decreased with increasing severity for most symptoms. Drop-outs were highest in the first 1.5 years of therapy in both trials. Conclusions In the IBIS-II prevention and DCIS trials, over two-thirds of women were adherent to therapy, with no differences by treatment groups. Participants who reported specific symptoms in the IBIS-II prevention trial had a small but significant effect on adherence, which strengthened as severity increased. Strategies to promote adherence should target the first year of preventive therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- I Sestak
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
| | - S G Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Science, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - A Howell
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - J F Forbes
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Calvary Mater Newcastle Hospital, Newcastle, Australia
| | - J Cuzick
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Noonan S, Pasa A, Fontana V, Caviglia S, Bonanni B, Costa A, Smith SG, Peccatori F, DeCensi A. A Survey among Breast Cancer Specialists on the Low Uptake of Therapeutic Prevention with Tamoxifen or Raloxifene. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 2018; 11:38-43. [PMID: 29061559 DOI: 10.1158/1940-6207.capr-17-0162] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/24/2017] [Revised: 08/03/2017] [Accepted: 10/12/2017] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
With this survey, we aimed to address the reasons why physicians are reluctant to prescribe breast cancer-preventive therapy with the selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERM) tamoxifen or raloxifene despite a strong evidence of efficacy. A self-administered 5-point Likert questionnaire was given during breast cancer meetings in Europe or sent via email to rank the importance of 10 predefined reasons for low uptake of SERMs for breast cancer therapeutic prevention. Analyses tested the associations between the stated reasons and physician characteristics such as gender, age, country of work, and specialty. Of 246 delivered questionnaires, 27 were incomplete and were excluded from analysis. Overall, there was a small variability in response scores, with a tendency for physicians to give moderate importance (score = 3) to all 10 statements. However, the top five reasons were: the expected greater preventive effectiveness of aromatase inhibitors (70.3% with score >3), difficulty applying current risk models in clinical practice (69.9%), the lack of clarity on the most appropriate physician for prevention advice (68.4%), the lack of reliable short-term biomarkers of effectiveness (67.5%), and the lack of commercial interest in therapeutic prevention (66.0%). The lack of reliable short-term biomarkers showed a tendency to discriminate between medical oncologists and other breast specialists (OR = 2.42; 95% CI, 0.93-6.25). This survey highlights the complexity of prescribing decisions among physicians in this context. Coupled with the known barriers among eligible women, these data may help to identify strategies to increase uptake of breast cancer therapeutic prevention. Cancer Prev Res; 11(1); 38-43. ©2017 AACR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Silvia Noonan
- Medical Oncology, E.O. Ospedali Galliera, Genoa, Italy
| | - Ambra Pasa
- Medical Oncology, E.O. Ospedali Galliera, Genoa, Italy
| | - Vincenzo Fontana
- Clinical Epidemiology Unit, IRCCS AOU San Martino IST, Genoa, Italy
| | | | - Bernardo Bonanni
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Genetics, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Samuel G Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, United Kingdom
| | - Fedro Peccatori
- European School of Oncology Milan, Italy
- Gynecologic Oncology Division, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy
| | - Andrea DeCensi
- Medical Oncology, E.O. Ospedali Galliera, Genoa, Italy.
- Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Sehmi R, Smith SG, Kjarsgaard M, Radford K, Boulet LP, Lemiere C, Prazma CM, Ortega H, Martin JG, Nair P. Role of local eosinophilopoietic processes in the development of airway eosinophilia in prednisone-dependent severe asthma. Clin Exp Allergy 2017; 46:793-802. [PMID: 26685004 DOI: 10.1111/cea.12695] [Citation(s) in RCA: 82] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/18/2015] [Revised: 12/07/2015] [Accepted: 12/13/2015] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In severe asthmatics with persistent airway eosinophilia, blockade of interleukin-5 has significant steroid-sparing effects and attenuates blood and sputum eosinophilia. The contribution of local maturational processes of progenitors within the airways relative to the recruitment of mature cells from the peripheral circulation to the development of airway eosinophilia is not known. We hypothesize that local eosinophilopoiesis may be the predominant process that drives persistent airway eosinophilia and corticosteroid requirement in severe asthmatics. OBJECTIVES In a cross-sectional study, the number and growth potential of eosinophil-lineage-committed progenitors (EoP) were assayed in 21 severe eosinophilic asthmatics, 19 mild asthmatics, eight COPD patients and eight normal subjects. The effect of anti-IL-5 treatment on mature eosinophils and EoP numbers was made in severe eosinophilic asthmatics who participated in a randomized clinical trial of mepolizumab (substudy of a larger GSK sponsored global phase III trial, MEA115575) where subjects received mepolizumab (100 mg, n = 9) or placebo (n = 8), as six monthly subcutaneous injections. RESULTS Mature eosinophil and EoP numbers were significantly greater in the sputum of severe asthmatics compared with all other subject groups. In colony-forming assays, EoP from blood of severe asthmatics demonstrated a greater response to IL-5 than mild asthmatics. Treatment of severe asthmatics with mepolizumab significantly attenuated blood eosinophils and increased EoP numbers consistent with blockade of systemic eosinophilopoiesis. There was however no significant treatment effect on mature eosinophils, sputum EoP numbers or the prednisone maintenance dose. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Patients with severe eosinophilic asthma have an exaggerated eosinophilopoeitic process in their airways. Treatment with 100 mg subcutaneous mepolizumab significantly attenuated systemic differentiation of eosinophils, but did not suppress local airway eosinophil differentiation to mature cells. Targeting IL-5-driven eosinophil differentiation locally within the lung maybe of relevance for optimal control of airway eosinophilia and asthma.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Sehmi
- Department of Medicine, McMaster University and Firestone Institute for Respiratory Health, St. Joseph's Healthcare, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - S G Smith
- Department of Medicine, McMaster University and Firestone Institute for Respiratory Health, St. Joseph's Healthcare, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - M Kjarsgaard
- Department of Medicine, McMaster University and Firestone Institute for Respiratory Health, St. Joseph's Healthcare, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - K Radford
- Department of Medicine, McMaster University and Firestone Institute for Respiratory Health, St. Joseph's Healthcare, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - L-P Boulet
- Institut Universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec, Québec, QC, Canada
| | - C Lemiere
- Division of Pneumologie, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - C M Prazma
- GlaxoSmithKline, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - H Ortega
- GlaxoSmithKline, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
| | - J G Martin
- Meakins-Christie Laboratories, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - P Nair
- Department of Medicine, McMaster University and Firestone Institute for Respiratory Health, St. Joseph's Healthcare, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Smith SG, Jackson SE, Kobayashi LC, Steptoe A. Social isolation, health literacy, and mortality risk: Findings from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. Health Psychol 2017; 37:160-169. [PMID: 29172607 DOI: 10.1037/hea0000541] [Citation(s) in RCA: 55] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/10/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To investigate the relationships between social isolation, health literacy, and all-cause mortality, and the modifying effect of social isolation on the latter relationship. METHODS Data were from 7731 adults aged ≥50 years participating in Wave 2 (2004/2005) of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. Social isolation was defined according to marital/cohabiting status and contact with children, relatives, and friends, and participation in social organizations. Scores were split at the median to indicate social isolation (yes vs. no). Health literacy was assessed as comprehension of a medicine label and classified as "high" (≥75% correct) or "low" (<75% correct). The outcome was all-cause mortality up to February 2013. Cox proportional hazards models were adjusted for sociodemographic factors, health status, health behaviors, and cognitive function. RESULTS Mortality rates were 30.3% versus 14.3% in the low versus high health literacy groups, and 23.5% versus 13.7% in the socially isolated versus nonisolated groups. Low health literacy (adj. HR = 1.22, 95% CI 1.02-1.45 vs. high) and social isolation (adj. HR = 1.28, 95% CI 1.10-1.50) were independently associated with increased mortality risk. The multiplicative interaction term for health literacy and social isolation was not statistically significant (p = .81). CONCLUSIONS Low health literacy and high social isolation are risk factors for mortality. Social isolation does not modify the relationship between health literacy and mortality. Clinicians should be aware of the health risks faced by socially isolated adults and those with low health literacy. (PsycINFO Database Record
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Sarah E Jackson
- Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London
| | | | - Andrew Steptoe
- Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Smith SG, Foy R, McGowan J, Kobayashi LC, Burn J, Brown K, Side L, Cuzick J. General practitioner attitudes towards prescribing aspirin to carriers of Lynch Syndrome: findings from a national survey. Fam Cancer 2017; 16:509-516. [PMID: 28434157 PMCID: PMC5603645 DOI: 10.1007/s10689-017-9986-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/08/2023]
Abstract
A dose non-inferiority study comparing 100 mg, 300 mg and 600 mg of aspirin for cancer prevention among Lynch Syndrome carriers is underway (Colorectal Adenoma/Carcinoma Prevention Programme trial 3, CaPP3). To guide implementation of the findings, we investigated general practitioner (GP) attitudes towards aspirin prescribing for Lynch Syndrome carriers. We surveyed 1007 UK GPs (9.6% response rate). Using a within-subjects design, GPs read a statement on harms and benefits of aspirin and indicated their willingness to prescribe aspirin at three doses (100 mg, 300 mg, 600 mg). Approximately two-thirds (70.8%) of GPs had heard of Lynch Syndrome or its associated names, and among those 46.7% were aware of the cancer preventive effects of aspirin among carriers. Two-thirds (68.1%) of GPs reported feeling comfortable discussing harms and benefits of aspirin with a Lynch Syndrome patient. Willingness to prescribe was 91.3% at 100 mg, and declined to 81.8% at 300 mg and 62.3% at 600 mg (p < 0.001). In multivariable analyses, willingness to prescribe (600 mg) was higher among GPs ≥50 years (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.03-2.07), more experienced GPs (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.10-2.04), GPs who were aware of the cancer preventive effects of aspirin (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.20-2.09), and those who reported seeing a Lynch Syndrome patient in practice (OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.01-2.05, p = 0.045). GPs report limited awareness of Lynch Syndrome and the preventive effects of aspirin among carriers. To ensure the optimal dose identified in the CaPP3 trial is readily available to patients, prescribing guidance and strategies to educate GPs should be developed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samuel G Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Floor 10, Worsley Building, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK.
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
| | - Robbie Foy
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Floor 10, Worsley Building, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK
| | - Jennifer McGowan
- Institute of Epidemiology and Healthcare, University College London, London, UK
| | - Lindsay C Kobayashi
- Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Center for Population and Development Studies, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | - John Burn
- Institute of Genetic Medicine, Newcastle University, Newcastle, UK
| | - Karen Brown
- Department of Cancer Studies, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | - Lucy Side
- Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Jack Cuzick
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Smith SG, Wardle J, Atkin W, Raine R, McGregor LM, Vart G, Morris S, Duffy SW, Moss S, Hackshaw A, Halloran S, Kralj-Hans I, Howe R, Snowball J, Handley G, Logan RF, Rainbow S, Smith S, Thomas M, Counsell N, von Wagner C. Reducing the socioeconomic gradient in uptake of the NHS bowel cancer screening Programme using a simplified supplementary information leaflet: a cluster-randomised trial. BMC Cancer 2017; 17:543. [PMID: 28806955 PMCID: PMC5556676 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-017-3512-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/09/2016] [Accepted: 07/28/2017] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Uptake of colorectal cancer screening is low in the English NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP). Participation in screening is strongly associated with socioeconomic status. The aim of this study was to determine whether a supplementary leaflet providing the 'gist' of guaiac-based Faecal Occult Blood test (gFOBt) screening for colorectal cancer could reduce the socioeconomic status (SES) gradient in uptake in the English NHS BCSP. METHODS The trial was integrated within routine BCSP operations in November 2012. Using a cluster randomised controlled design all adults aged 59-74 years who were being routinely invited to complete the gFOBt were randomised based on day of invitation. The Index of Multiple Deprivation was used to create SES quintiles. The control group received the standard information booklet ('SI'). The intervention group received the SI booklet and the Gist leaflet ('SI + Gist') which had been designed to help people with lower literacy engage with the invitation. Blinding of hubs was not possible and invited subjects were not made aware of a comparator condition. The primary outcome was the gradient in uptake across IMD quintiles. RESULTS In November 2012, 163,525 individuals were allocated to either the 'SI' intervention (n = 79,104) or the 'SI + Gist' group (n = 84,421). Overall uptake was similar between the intervention and control groups (SI: 57.3% and SI + Gist: 57.6%; OR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.92-1.13, p = 0.77). Uptake was 42.0% (SI) vs. 43.0% (SI + Gist) in the most deprived quintile and 65.6% vs. 65.8% in the least deprived quintile (interaction p = 0.48). The SES gradient in uptake was similar between the study groups within age, gender, hub and screening round sub-groups. CONCLUSIONS Providing supplementary simplified information in addition to the standard information booklet did not reduce the SES gradient in uptake in the NHS BCSP. The effectiveness of the Gist leaflet when used alone should be explored in future research. TRIAL REGISTRATION ISRCTN74121020 , registered: 17/20/2012.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samuel G. Smith
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9LB UK
| | - Jane Wardle
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, WC1E 7HB UK
| | - Wendy Atkin
- Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College London, London, W2 1NY UK
| | - Rosalind Raine
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, WC1E 7HB UK
| | - Lesley M. McGregor
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, WC1E 7HB UK
| | - Gemma Vart
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, WC1E 7HB UK
- Research & Enterprise Royal Holloway University of London, London, England
| | - Steve Morris
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, WC1E 7HB UK
| | - Stephen W. Duffy
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, EC1M 6BQ UK
| | - Susan Moss
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, EC1M 6BQ UK
| | - Allan Hackshaw
- Cancer Research UK & UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, WC1E 7HB UK
| | - Stephen Halloran
- Bowel Cancer Screening Southern Programme Hub, Guildford, GU2 7XX UK
| | - Ines Kralj-Hans
- Academic Neuroscience Centre, King’s College London, London, SE5 8AF UK
| | - Rosemary Howe
- Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College London, London, W2 1NY UK
| | - Julia Snowball
- Bowel Cancer Screening Southern Programme Hub, Guildford, GU2 7XX UK
| | - Graham Handley
- North East Bowel Cancer Screening Hub, Gateshead, NE9 6SX UK
| | - Richard F. Logan
- Eastern Hub of the Bowel Cancer Screening Programme, Nottingham, NG7 2UH UK
| | - Sandra Rainbow
- Bowel Cancer Screening Programme London Programme Hub, London, HA1 3UJ UK
| | - Steve Smith
- Midlands & North West Bowel Cancer Screening Programme Hub, Rugby, CV22 5PX UK
| | - Mary Thomas
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, WC1E 7HB UK
| | - Nicholas Counsell
- Cancer Research UK & UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, WC1E 7HB UK
| | - Christian von Wagner
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, WC1E 7HB UK
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Smith SG, Foy R, McGowan JA, Kobayashi LC, de Censi A, DeCensi A, Brown K, Side L, Cuzick J. Prescribing tamoxifen in primary care for the prevention of breast cancer: a national online survey of GPs' attitudes. Br J Gen Pract 2017; 67:e414-e427. [PMID: 28193617 PMCID: PMC5442957 DOI: 10.3399/bjgp17x689377] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/22/2016] [Accepted: 01/12/2017] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The cancer strategy for England (2015-2020) recommends GPs prescribe tamoxifen for breast cancer primary prevention among women at increased risk. AIM To investigate GPs' attitudes towards prescribing tamoxifen. DESIGN AND SETTING In an online survey, GPs in England, Northern Ireland, and Wales (n = 928) were randomised using a 2 × 2 between-subjects design to read one of four vignettes describing a healthy patient seeking a tamoxifen prescription. METHOD In the vignette, the hypothetical patient's breast cancer risk (moderate versus high) and the clinician initiating the prescription (GP prescriber versus secondary care clinician [SCC] prescriber) were manipulated in a 1:1:1:1 ratio. Outcomes were willingness to prescribe, comfort discussing harms and benefits, comfort managing the patient, factors affecting the prescribing decision, and awareness of tamoxifen and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guideline CG164. RESULTS Half (51.7%) of the GPs knew tamoxifen can reduce breast cancer risk, and one-quarter (24.1%) were aware of NICE guideline CG164. Responders asked to initiate prescribing (GP prescriber) were less willing to prescribe tamoxifen than those continuing a prescription initiated in secondary care (SCC prescriber) (68.9% versus 84.6%, P<0.001). The GP prescribers reported less comfort discussing tamoxifen (53.4% versus 62.5%, P = 0.01). GPs willing to prescribe were more likely to be aware of the NICE guideline (P = 0.039) and to have acknowledged the benefits of tamoxifen (P<0.001), and were less likely to have considered its off-licence status (P<0.001). CONCLUSION Initiating tamoxifen prescriptions for preventive therapy in secondary care before asking GPs to continue the patient's care may overcome some prescribing barriers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samuel G Smith
- Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, and Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London
| | - Robbie Foy
- Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds
| | - Jennifer A McGowan
- Institute of Epidemiology and Healthcare; Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London
| | - Lindsay C Kobayashi
- Center for Population and Development Studies, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA
| | | | - Andrea DeCensi
- Division of Medical Oncology, Ospedali Galliera, Genoa, and Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London
| | - Karen Brown
- Department of Cancer Studies, University of Leicester, Leicester
| | - Lucy Side
- Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London
| | - Jack Cuzick
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Forster AS, Rockliffe L, Chorley AJ, Marlow LAV, Bedford H, Smith SG, Waller J. Ethnicity-specific factors influencing childhood immunisation decisions among Black and Asian Minority Ethnic groups in the UK: a systematic review of qualitative research. J Epidemiol Community Health 2017; 71:544-549. [PMID: 27531844 PMCID: PMC5484038 DOI: 10.1136/jech-2016-207366] [Citation(s) in RCA: 40] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/11/2016] [Revised: 07/04/2016] [Accepted: 07/27/2016] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Uptake of some childhood immunisations in the UK is lower among those from some Black and Asian Minority Ethnic (BAME) backgrounds. This systematic review of qualitative research sought to understand the factors that are associated with ethnicity that influence the immunisation decisions of parents from BAME backgrounds living in the UK. METHODS Databases were searched on 2 December 2014 for studies published at any time using the terms 'UK' and 'vaccination' and 'qualitative methods' (and variations of these). Included articles comprised participants who were parents from BAME backgrounds. Thematic synthesis methods were used to develop descriptive and higher order themes. Themes specific to ethnicity and associated factors are reported. RESULTS Eight papers were included in the review. Most participants were from Black (n=62) or Asian (n=38) backgrounds. Two ethnicity-related factors affected immunisation decisions. First, factors that are related to ethnicity itself (namely religion, upbringing and migration, and language) affected parents' perceived importance of immunisations, whether immunisations were permitted or culturally acceptable and their understanding of immunisation/the immunisation schedule. Second, perceived biological differences affected decision-making and demand for information. CONCLUSIONS Factors related to ethnicity must be considered when seeking to understand immunisation decisions among parents from BAME backgrounds. Where appropriate and feasible, vaccination information should be targeted to address beliefs about ethnic differences held by some individuals from some BAME backgrounds.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | - Samuel G Smith
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Jo Waller
- Health Behaviour Research Centre, UCL, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Freeman M, Offman J, Walter FM, Sasieni P, Smith SG. Acceptability of the Cytosponge procedure for detecting Barrett's oesophagus: a qualitative study. BMJ Open 2017; 7:e013901. [PMID: 28255095 PMCID: PMC5353314 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013901] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/15/2016] [Revised: 01/17/2017] [Accepted: 02/07/2017] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To investigate the acceptability of the Cytosponge, a novel sampling device to detect Barrett's oesophagus (BE), a precursor to oesophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), among people with risk factors for this condition. DESIGN A qualitative study using semistructured interviews and focus group discussions. Data were explored by three researchers using thematic analysis. SETTING Community setting in London, UK. PARTICIPANTS A recruitment company identified 33 adults (17 men, 16 women) aged 50-69 years with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD), a risk factor for BE. The majority of participants were white British (73%). The focus groups were stratified by gender and education. 10 individuals were interviewed and 23 participated in four focus groups. RESULTS 3 key themes emerged from the data: the anticipated physical experience, preferences for the content of information materials and comparisons with the current gold-standard test. Overall acceptability was high, but there was initial concern about the physical experience of taking the test, including swallowing and extracting the Cytosponge. These worries were reduced after handling the device and a video demonstration of the procedure. Knowledge of the relationship between GERD, BE and EAC was poor, and some suggested they would prefer not to know about the link when being offered the Cytosponge. Participants perceived the Cytosponge to be more comfortable, practical and economical than endoscopy. CONCLUSIONS These qualitative data suggest the Cytosponge was acceptable to the majority of participants with risk factors for BE, and could be used as a first-line test to investigate GERD symptoms. Concerns about the physical experience of the test were alleviated through multimedia resources. The development of patient information materials is an important next step to ensuring patients are adequately informed and reassured about the procedure. Patient stakeholders should be involved in this process to ensure their concerns and preferences are considered. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ISRCTN68382401; pre-results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Madeleine Freeman
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
- Institute of Epidemiology and Healthcare, University College London, London, UK
| | - Judith Offman
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Fiona M Walter
- Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health & Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Peter Sasieni
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Samuel G Smith
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
- Institute of Epidemiology and Healthcare, University College London, London, UK
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Raine R, Atkin W, von Wagner C, Duffy S, Kralj-Hans I, Hackshaw A, Counsell N, Moss S, McGregor L, Palmer C, Smith SG, Thomas M, Howe R, Vart G, Band R, Halloran SP, Snowball J, Stubbs N, Handley G, Logan R, Rainbow S, Obichere A, Smith S, Morris S, Solmi F, Wardle J. Testing innovative strategies to reduce the social gradient in the uptake of bowel cancer screening: a programme of four qualitatively enhanced randomised controlled trials. Programme Grants Appl Res 2017. [DOI: 10.3310/pgfar05080] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
BackgroundBowel cancer screening reduces cancer-specific mortality. There is a socioeconomic gradient in the uptake of the English NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme (BCSP), which may lead to inequalities in cancer outcomes.ObjectiveTo reduce socioeconomic inequalities in uptake of the NHS BCSP’s guaiac faecal occult blood test (gFOBt) without compromising uptake in any socioeconomic group.DesignWorkstream 1 explored psychosocial determinants of non-uptake of gFOBt in focus groups and interviews. Workstream 2 developed and tested four theoretically based interventions: (1) ‘gist’ information, (2) a ‘narrative’ leaflet, (3) ‘general practice endorsement’ (GPE) and (4) an ‘enhanced reminder’ (ER). Workstream 3 comprised four national cluster randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of the cost-effectiveness of each intervention.MethodsInterventions were co-designed with user panels, user tested using interviews and focus groups, and piloted with postal questionnaires. RCTs compared ‘usual care’ (existing NHS BCSP invitations) with usual care plus each intervention. The four trials tested: (1) ‘gist’ leaflet (n = 163,525), (2) ‘narrative’ leaflet (n = 150,417), (3) GPE on the invitation letter (n = 265,434) and (4) ER (n = 168,480). Randomisation was based on day of mailing of the screening invitation. The Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) score associated with each individual’s home address was used as the marker of socioeconomic circumstances (SECs). Change in the socioeconomic gradient in uptake (interaction between treatment group and IMD quintile) was the primary outcome. Screening uptake was defined as the return of a gFOBt kit within 18 weeks of the invitation that led to a ‘definitive’ test result of either ‘normal’ (i.e. no further investigation required) or ‘abnormal’ (i.e. requiring referral for further testing). Difference in overall uptake was the secondary outcome.ResultsThe gist and narrative trials showed no effect on the SECs gradient or overall uptake (57.6% and 56.7%, respectively, compared with 57.3% and 58.5%, respectively, for usual care; allp-values > 0.05). GPE showed no effect on the gradient (p = 0.5) but increased overall uptake [58.2% vs. 57.5% in usual care, odds ratio (OR) = 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04 to 1.10;p < 0.0001]. ER showed a significant interaction with SECs (p = 0.005), with a stronger effect in the most deprived IMD quintile (14.1% vs. 13.3% in usual care, OR = 1.11, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.20;p = 0.003) than the least deprived (34.7% vs. 34.9% in usual care OR = 1.00, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.06;p = 0.98), and higher overall uptake (25.8% vs. 25.1% in usual care, OR = 1.07, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.11;p = 0.001). All interventions were inexpensive to provide.LimitationsIn line with NHS policy, the gist and narrative leaflets supplemented rather than replaced existing NHS BCSP information. This may have undermined their effect.ConclusionsEnhanced reminder reduced the gradient and modestly increased overall uptake, whereas GPE increased overall uptake but did not reduce the gradient. Therefore, given their effectiveness and very low cost, the findings suggest that implementation of both by the NHS BCSP would be beneficial. The gist and narrative results highlight the challenge of achieving equitable delivery of the screening offer when all communication is written; the format is universal and informed decision-making mandates extensive medical information.Future workSocioculturally tailored research to promote communication about screening with family and friends should be developed and evaluated.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN74121020.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full inProgramme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 5, No. 8. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rosalind Raine
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
| | - Wendy Atkin
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Christian von Wagner
- Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Stephen Duffy
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Ines Kralj-Hans
- Department of Biostatistics, King’s Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
| | - Allan Hackshaw
- University College London Cancer Trials Centre, London, UK
| | | | - Sue Moss
- Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Lesley McGregor
- Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Cecily Palmer
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
| | - Samuel G Smith
- Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Mary Thomas
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
| | - Rosemary Howe
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Gemma Vart
- Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Roger Band
- Patient and Public Involvement Representative, Evesham, UK
| | - Stephen P Halloran
- NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme Southern Hub, Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford, UK
- Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK
| | - Julia Snowball
- NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme Southern Hub, Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford, UK
| | - Neil Stubbs
- NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme Southern Hub, Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford, UK
| | - Graham Handley
- NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme North East Hub, Gateshead Health NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Gateshead, UK
| | - Richard Logan
- NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme Eastern Hub, Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham, UK
| | - Sandra Rainbow
- NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme London Hub, Northwick Park and St Marks Hospitals NHS Trust, Harrow, UK
| | - Austin Obichere
- North Central London Bowel Cancer Screening Centre, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Stephen Smith
- NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme Midlands and North West Hub, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Hospital of St Cross, Rugby, UK
| | - Stephen Morris
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
| | - Francesca Solmi
- Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
| | - Jane Wardle
- Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|