The role of URO17® in diagnosis and follow up of bladder cancer patients

OBJECTIVE

to evaluate the role of urinary URO17® biomarker in the detection of urothelial tumors in haematuria patients and the detection of recurrence in non-muscle invasive bladder urothelial tumors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Our study was formed of two cohorts of patients, group I represents patients presenting with haematuria (n = 98), while group II represents patients with known non-muscle invasive bladder cancers on their scheduled follow up cystoscopic investigation (n = 51). For both groups, patients were asked to provide urine samples before cystoscopy, either primary as part of the haematuria investigation or as a scheduled follow-up. Urine samples were sent anonymously for standard urine cytology and URO17® biomarker immunostaining. Results were compared to cystoscopic findings using Chi-square analysis and Fisher's exact test (P < 0.05).

RESULTS

Group I was formed of 98 patients, with an average age of 60 years. URO17® showed 100% sensitivity and 96.15% specificity with a negative predictive value (NPV) of 100 and a positive predictive value (PPV) of 95.83. The results showed statistical significance with P value < 0.001. Group II was formed of 51 patients, with an average age of 75 years. URO17® was shown to have a sensitivity of 85.71% and NPV of 95.45. Eleven patients of group II were on scheduled BacillusCalmette-Guerin (BCG) and another 5 received Mitomycin C (MMC). The overall results of both groups combined (n = 149) showed statistical significance between flexible cystoscopy results and the results of urinary URO17® and urine cytology.

CONCLUSION

URO17® has a potential to be a reliable test for diagnosis and follow up of urothelial cancer patients and a screening tool adjunct to flexible cystoscopy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Not applicable as the current study is not a clinical trial, as per according to the National Institutes of Health, "studies that involve a comparison of methods and that do not evaluate the effect of the interventions on the participant do not meet the NIH clinical trial definition."

Acceptability of a shared cancer follow-up model of care between general practitioners and radiation oncologists: A qualitative evaluation

INTRODUCTION

Facilitators to implement shared cancer follow-up care into clinical practice include mechanisms to allow the oncologist to continue overseeing the care of their patient, two-way information sharing and clear follow-up protocols for general practitioners (GPs). This paper aimed to evaluate patients, GPs and radiation oncologists (ROs) acceptance of a shared care intervention.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted pre- and post intervention with patients that were 3 years post radiotherapy treatment for breast, colorectal or prostate cancer, their RO, and their GP. Inductive and deductive thematical analysis was employed.

RESULTS

Thirty-two participants were interviewed (19 patients, 9 GPs, and 4 ROs). Pre intervention, there was support for GPs to play a greater role in cancer follow-up care, however, patients were concerned about the GPs cancer-specific skills. Patients, GPs and ROs were concerned about increasing the GPs workload. Post intervention, participants were satisfied that the GPs had specific skills and that the impact on GP workload was comparable to writing a referral. However, GPs expressed concern about remuneration. GPs and ROs felt the model provided patient choice and were suitable for low-risk, stable patients around 2-3 years post treatment. Patients emphasised that they trusted their RO to advise them on the most appropriate follow-up model suited to their individual situation. The overall acceptance of shared care depended on successful health technology to connect the GP and RO. There were no differences in patient acceptance between rural, regional, and cancer types. ROs presented differences in acceptance for the different cancer types, with breast cancer strongly supported.

CONCLUSION

Patients, GPs and ROs felt this shared cancer follow-up model of care was acceptable, but only if the RO remained directly involved and the health technology worked. There is a need to review funding and advocate for health technology advances to support integration.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Patients treated with curative radiotherapy for breast, colorectal and prostate cancer, their RO and their GPs were actively involved in this study by giving their consent to be interviewed.

Breath Volatile Organic Compounds in Surveillance of Gastric Cancer Patients following Radical Surgical Management

As of today, there is a lack of a perfect non-invasive test for the surveillance of patients for potential relapse following curative treatment. Breath volatile organic compounds (VOCs) have been demonstrated to be an accurate diagnostic tool for gastric cancer (GC) detection; here, we aimed to prove the yield of the markers in surveillance, i.e., following curative surgical management. Patients were sampled in regular intervals before and within 3 years following curative surgery for GC; gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and nanosensor technologies were used for the VOC assessment. GC-MS measurements revealed a single VOC (14b-Pregnane) that significantly decreased at 12 months, and three VOCs (Isochiapin B, Dotriacontane, Threitol, 2-O-octyl-) that decreased at 18 months following surgery. The nanomaterial-based sensors S9 and S14 revealed changes in the breath VOC content 9 months after surgery. Our study results confirm the cancer origin of the particular VOCs, as well as suggest the value of breath VOC testing for cancer patient surveillance, either during the treatment phase or thereafter, for potential relapse.

A Web-Based Prostate Cancer-Specific Holistic Needs Assessment (CHAT-P): Multimethod Study From Concept to Clinical Practice

BACKGROUND

Men with prostate cancer experience immediate and long-term consequences of the disease and its treatment. They require both long-term monitoring for recurrence or progression and follow-up to identify and help manage psychosocial and physical impacts. Holistic Needs Assessment aims to ensure patient-centered continuing cancer care. However, paper-based generic tools have had limited uptake within cancer services, and there is little evidence of their impact. With the expansion of remote methods of care delivery and to enhance the value of generic tools, we developed a web-based Composite Holistic Needs Assessment Adaptive Tool-Prostate (CHAT-P) specifically for prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE

This paper described the context, conceptual underpinning, and approach to design that informed the development of CHAT-P, starting from the initial concept to readiness for deployment. Through this narrative, we sought to contribute to the expanding body of knowledge regarding the coproduction process of innovative digital systems with potential for enhanced cancer care delivery.

METHODS

The development of CHAT-P was guided by the principles of coproduction. Men with prostate cancer and health care professionals contributed to each stage of the process. Testing was conducted iteratively over a 5-year period. An initial rapid review of patient-reported outcome measures identified candidate items for inclusion. These items were categorized and allocated to overarching domains. After the first round of user testing, further items were added, improvements were made to the adaptive branching system, and response categories were refined. A functioning version of CHAT-P was tested with 16 patients recruited from 3 outpatient clinics, with interviewers adopting the think-aloud technique. Interview transcripts were analyzed using a framework approach. Interviews and informal discussions with health care professionals informed the development of a linked care plan and clinician-facing platform, which were incorporated into a separate feasibility study of digitally enhanced integrated cancer care.

RESULTS

The findings from the interview study demonstrated the usability, acceptability, and potential value of CHAT-P. Men recognized the benefits of a personalized approach and the importance of a holistic understanding of their needs. Preparation for the consultation by the completion of CHAT-P was also recognized as empowering. The possible limitations identified were related to the importance of care teams responding to the issues selected in the assessment. The subsequent feasibility study highlighted the need for attention to men's psychological concerns and demonstrated the ability of CHAT-P to capture red flag symptoms requiring urgent investigation.

CONCLUSIONS

CHAT-P offers an innovative means by which men can communicate their concerns to their health care teams before a physical or remote consultation. There is now a need for a full evaluation of the implementation process and outcomes where CHAT-P is introduced into the clinical pathway. There is also scope for adapting the CHAT-P model to other cancers.

Factors associated with loss to follow-up after radiation therapy for head and neck cancer

OBJECTIVES

Head and neck cancer (HNC) patients are at high risk for late occurring radiation-related morbidity and recurrence, necessitating close long-term medical surveillance. This study identified factors associated with becoming lost to follow-up (LTFU) at a comprehensive cancer center.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients were drawn from survivors who received radiation for HNC at a single institution between 2001 and 2018. LTFU was defined as living patients without a clinical encounter within 2 years of the data query.

RESULTS

In total, 537 patients met the inclusion criteria and 57 (10.6%) were identified as LTFU. Individual comparisons identified time since completing radiation, non-White race and being unmarried as associated with LTFU. Multiple regression identified time since treatment and being unmarried as factors associated with LTFU. A decision tree correctly sorted 89.4% using time, distance, and marital status.

CONCLUSION

Time since radiation, distance to clinic, and being unmarried were factors associated with becoming LTFU.

Evaluation of the "Shared Community Follow-up" after a germ cell tumour-A novel initiative for remote cancer follow-up enhanced by online patient-reported outcome measures

OBJECTIVE

Replying to germ cell tumour patients' needs, we implemented "Shared Community Follow-up"-a collaborative initiative, enabling remote delivery of specialist cancer care across large geographical areas. Blood, radiological investigations and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are completed remotely and integrated within the electronic patient records for specialist review without patients requiring appointments. We describe the service evaluation estimating the feasibility, safety and acceptability of this initiative versus traditional Standard Follow-up.

METHODS

This cross-sectional evaluation estimated feasibility (uptake, adherence) and safety (via missed appointments, timeliness, cancellations) using routinely collected service process data. An acceptability questionnaire, evaluating patient satisfaction, was administered to 91 patients.

RESULTS

The new service is feasible. Across 2 years (2014-2016), uptake increased 54% (N = 123 to N = 270) and only 4.8% (N = 13) of patients were non-adherent. Fewer missed/cancelled investigations (N = 39, 5.9% vs. N = 566, 85.5%), timelier investigations (seven vs. 14 timely investigations) and equal relapse detection suggest its safety. PROMs replaced 3 appointments/patient. Patients were as satisfied with both services (3.4/4 vs. 3.6/4).

CONCLUSION

New follow-up services, with investigations completed remotely and shared between community providers and cancer centres, offer an alternative to traditional appointments with advantages for patients and the National Health Service.

Developing a Manually Annotated Corpus of Clinical Letters for Breast Cancer Patients on Routine Follow-Up

This paper introduces the annotation schema and annotation process for a corpus of clinical letters describing the disease course and treatment of oestrogen receptor positive breast cancer patients, after completion of primary surgery and radiotherapy treatment. Concepts related to therapy, clinical signs, and recurrence, as well as relationships linking these, are identified and annotated in 200 letters. This corpus will provide the basis for development of natural language processing tools for automatic extraction of key clinical factors from such letters.

Family physician involvement in cancer care follow-up: the experience of a cohort of patients with lung cancer

PURPOSE

There has been little research describing the involvement of family physicians in the follow-up of patients with cancer, especially during the primary treatment phase. We undertook a prospective longitudinal study of patients with lung cancer to assess their family physician's involvement in their follow-up at the different phases of cancer.

METHODS

In 5 hospitals in the province of Quebec, Canada, patients with a recent diagnosis of lung cancer were surveyed every 3 to 6 months, whether they had metastasis or not, for a maximum of 18 months, to assess aspects of their family physician's involvement in cancer care.

RESULTS

Of the 395 participating patients, 92% had a regular family physician but only 60% had been referred to a specialist by him/her or a colleague for the diagnosis of their lung cancer. A majority of patients identified the oncology team or oncologists as mainly responsible for their cancer care throughout their cancer journey, except at the advanced phase, where a majority attributed this role to their family physician. At baseline, only 16% of patients perceived a shared care pattern between their family physician and oncologists, but this proportion increased with cancer progression. Most patients would have liked their family physician to be more involved in all aspects of cancer care.

CONCLUSIONS

Although patients perceive that the oncology team is the main party responsible for the follow-up of their lung cancer, they also wish their family physicians to be involved. Better communication and collaboration between family physicians and the oncology team are needed to facilitate shared care in cancer follow-up.