Background

The predominant oncologist-led model in many countries is unsustainable to meet the needs of a growing cohort of breast cancer survivors (BCS). Despite available alternative models, adoption rates have been poor. To help BCS navigate survivorship care, we aimed to systematically develop a decision aid (DA) to guide their choice of follow-up care model and evaluate its acceptability and usability among BCS and health care providers (HCPs).

Methods

We recruited BCS aged ≥ 21 years who have completed primary treatment and understand English. BCS receiving palliative care or with cognitive impairment were excluded. HCPs who routinely discussed post-treatment care with BCS were purposively sampled based on disciplines. Each participant reviewed the DA during a semi-structured interview using the 'think aloud' approach and completed an acceptability questionnaire. Descriptive statistics and directed content analysis were used.

Results

We conducted three rounds of alpha testing with 15 BCS and 8 HCPs. All BCS found the final DA prototype easy to navigate with sufficient interactivity. The information imbalance favouring the shared care option perceived by 60% of BCS in early rounds was rectified. The length of DA was optimized to be 'just right'. Key revisions made included (1) presenting care options side-by-side to improve perceived information balance, (2) creating dedicated sections explaining HCPs' care roles to address gaps in health system contextual knowledge, and (3) employing a multicriteria decision analysis method for preference clarification exercise to reflect the user's openness towards shared care. Most BCS (73%) found the DA useful for decision-making, and 93% were willing to discuss the DA with their HCPs. Most HCPs (88%) agreed that the DA was a reliable tool and would be easily integrated into routine care.

Conclusions

Our experience highlighted the need to provide contextual information on the health care system for decisions related to care delivery. Developers should address potential variability within the care model and clarify inherent biases, such as low confidence levels in primary care. Future work could expand on the developed DA's informational structure to apply to other care models and leverage artificial intelligence to optimize information delivery.

Purpose

With the long-term goal to optimize post-treatment cancer care in Asia, we conducted a qualitative study to gather in-depth descriptions from multiethnic Asian breast cancer survivors on their perceptions and experiences of cancer survivorship and their perceived barriers to post-treatment follow-up.

Methods

Twenty-four breast cancer survivors in Singapore participated in six structured focus group discussions. The focus group discussions were voice recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed by thematic analysis.

Results

Breast cancer survivors were unfamiliar with and disliked the term "survivorship," because it implies that survivors had undergone hardship during their treatment. Cognitive impairment and peripheral neuropathy were physical symptoms that bothered survivors the most, and many indicated that they experienced emotional distress during survivorship, for which they turned to religion and peers as coping strategies. Survivors indicated lack of consultation time and fear of unplanned hospitalization as main barriers to optimal survivorship care. Furthermore, survivors indicated that they preferred receipt of survivorship care at the specialty cancer center.

Conclusion

Budding survivorship programs in Asia must take survivor perspectives into consideration to ensure that survivorship care is fully optimized within the community.

Background

Breast cancer is prevalent and has high cure rates. The resultant increase in numbers of breast cancer survivors (BCS) may overwhelm the current oncology workforce in years to come. We postulate that primary care physicians (PCPs) could play an expanded role in comanaging survivors, provided they are given the appropriate tools and training to do so.

Objective

To explore the perspectives of PCPs towards managing BCS in a community-based shared-care programme with oncologists.

Methods

Eleven focus groups and six in-depth interviews were conducted with seventy PCPs recruited by purposive sampling. All sessions were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and coded by three independent investigators. Thematic data analysis was performed and the coding process facilitated by NVivo 12.

Results

Majority of PCPs reported currently limited roles in managing acute and non-cancer issues, optimizing comorbidities and preventive care. PCPs aspired to expand their role to include cancer surveillance, risk assessment and addressing unmet psychosocial needs. PCPs preferred to harmonize cancer survivorship management of their primary care patients who are also BCS, with defined role distinct from oncologists. Training to understand the care protocol, enhancement of communication skills, confidence and trust were deemed necessary. PCPs proposed selection criteria of BCS and adequacy of their medical information; increased consultation time; contact details and timely access to oncologists (if needed) in the shared-care programme.

Conclusions

PCPs were willing to share the care of BCS with oncologists but recommended role definition, training, clinical protocol, resources and access to oncologist's consultation to optimize the programme implementation.

Background

The adaptability of existing recommendations on shared care implementation to Asian settings is unknown. This qualitative study aims to elicit public- and private-sectors primary care practitioners' (PCPs) perspectives on the sustainable implementation of a shared care model among breast cancer survivors in Singapore.

Methods

Purposive sampling was employed to engage 70 PCPs from SingHealth Polyclinics, National University Polyclinics, National Healthcare Group Polyclinics, and private practice. Eleven focus groups and six in-depth interviews were conducted between June to November 2018. All sessions were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Guided by the RE-AIM framework, we performed deductive thematic analysis in QSR NVivo 12.

Results

PCPs identified low-risk breast cancer survivors who demonstrated clear acceptability of PCPs' involvement in follow-up as suitable candidates for shared care. Engagement with institution stakeholders as early adopters is crucial with adequate support through PCP training, return pathways to oncologists, and survivorship care plans as communication tools. Implementation considerations differed across practices. Selection of participating PCPs could consider seniority and interest for public and private practice, respectively. Proposed adoption incentives included increased renumeration for private PCPs and work recognition for public PCPs. Public PCPs further proposed integrating shared care elements to their existing family medicine clinics.

Conclusions

PCPs perceived shared care favorably as it echoed principles of primary care to provide holistic and well-coordinated care. Contextual factors should be considered when adapting implementation recommendations to Asian settings like Singapore. With limited competitive pressure, the government is then pivotal in empowering primary care participation in survivorship shared care delivery.

Despite being a relatively young nation, Singapore has established itself as a leading multifaceted medical hub, both regionally and globally. Although Singapore continues to pursue excellence in oncology care, cancer supportive care and survivorship care remain in the infancy stage. In an effort to advance this important aspect of oncology care in Singapore, the first cancer supportive and survivorship care forum was held in December 2016, involving 74 oncology practitioners. The primary goals of this forum were to raise awareness of the importance of cancer supportive and survivorship care and to provide a platform for oncology practitioners of diverse backgrounds to converge and address the challenges associated with the delivery of cancer supportive and survivorship care in Singapore. Key challenges identified during this forum included, but were not limited to, care fragmentation in an oncologist-centric model of care, poor integration of allied health and rehabilitation services, passive engagement of community partners, lack of specialized skill sets and knowledge in supportive and survivorship care, and patient-related barriers such as poor health literacy. The survivorship care model commonly used in Singapore places an imbalanced emphasis on surveillance for cancer recurrence and second primary cancers, with little attention given to the supportive and survivorship needs of the survivors. In summary, these challenges set the stage for the development and use of a more survivor-centric model, one that focuses not only on cancer surveillance, but also on the broad and unique physical and psychosocial needs of survivors of cancer in Singapore.

Introduction

Supportive care models considering inclusivity and community services to improve integrated care for cancer survivors are limited. In this case study, we described the implementation of a multidisciplinary care model employing routine distress screening and embedded integrated care pathways to integrate care across disciplines and care sectors, while remaining inclusive of the multi-ethnic and multilingual population in Singapore. We reported implementation outcomes after 18 months of implementation.

Description

We reviewed the model's process indicators from September 2019 to February 2021 at the largest public ambulatory cancer centre. Outcomes assessed included penetration, fidelity to screening protocol, and feasibility in three aspects - inclusiveness of different ethnic and language groups, responsiveness to survivors reporting high distress, and types of community service referrals.

Discussion/conclusion

We elucidated opportunities to promote access to community services and inclusivity. Integration of community services from tertiary settings should be systematic through mutually beneficial educational and outreach initiatives, complemented by their inclusion in integrated care pathways to encourage systematic referrals and care coordination. A hybrid approach to service delivery is crucial in ensuring inclusivity while providing flexibility towards external changes such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Future work should explore using telehealth to bolster inclusiveness and advance community care integration.

Background

Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is a debilitating condition which commonly affects cancer survivors. The management of CRF remains a challenge due to the lack of effective pharmacological interventions. Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) could be a potential therapeutic option for CRF. The modified Xiang Bei Yang Rong Tang (XBYRT) is a TCM herbal decoction, formulated to improve fatigue symptoms in cancer survivors. This clinical trial aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of XBYRT in improving CRF and quality of life (QOL) of cancer survivors.

Methods

This is a single centre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel trial. Eighty cancer survivors will be recruited and randomized to receive the XBYRT or placebo decoction, in a ratio of 1:1. Participants will consume the XBYRT/placebo decoction daily for 8 weeks and undergo assessments at baseline and 4, 8 and 10 weeks after baseline. The participants will be assessed for patient-reported outcomes (PRO), blood biomarkers and adverse events at each time point. The primary outcome is the overall health and QOL status, at 8 weeks follow-up. The secondary outcomes are the effects of XBYRT on fatigue levels, cancer-related cognitive impairment and QOL, as assessed by PRO. The incidence of adverse events and the effects of the XBYRT decoction on blood biomarkers associated with CRF will also be evaluated.

Discussion

Efficacy and safety outcomes from this trial will provide important clinical data to guide future large-scale randomized controlled trials, and the evaluation of the objective blood biomarkers can help to delineate the biological mechanisms of CRF.

Trial registration number

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04104113 . Registered on 26 September 2019.

Introduction: We conducted a randomized controlled trial evaluating the efficacy and tolerability of cryotherapy in preventing chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) in patients with early breast cancer receiving neo/adjuvant weekly paclitaxel. Methods: Patients were recruited from the National Cancer Centre Singapore and randomized (1:1) to receive either cryotherapy or usual care. Cryotherapy was applied as frozen gloves and socks on all extremities from 15 min before paclitaxel until 15 min post-infusion every cycle. Efficacy was measured by patient-reported outcomes (Patient Neurotoxicity Questionnaire [PNQ] and EORTC QLQ-CIPN20) and electrophysiological assessments. The primary endpoint was PNQ severity at 2 weeks after 12 cycles of weekly paclitaxel. Results: A total of 46 patients were recruited, of which 8 dropped out before paclitaxel treatment, leaving 38 evaluable. There was no significant difference in PNQ severity between cryotherapy and usual care at 2 weeks after paclitaxel treatment (sensory: p = 0.721; motor: p = 1.000). A benefit was observed at 3 months post-paclitaxel based on PNQ (sensory: 14.3 vs. 41.2%, p = 0.078; motor: 0 vs. 29.4%, p = 0.012) and CIPN20 (sensory: β = -3.6, 95%CI = -10.5-3.4, p = 0.308; motor: β = -7.3, 95%CI = -14.6-0, p = 0.051). Additionally, cryotherapy subjects have lower CIPN20 autonomic score (β = -5.84, 95%CI = -11.15 to -0.524, p = 0.031) and higher sympathetic skin response hand amplitudes (β = 0.544, 95%CI = 0.108-0.98, p = 0.014), suggesting possible autonomic benefits from cryotherapy. Temporary interruption with cryotherapy occurred in 80.9% of the subjects due to cold intolerance. Conclusions: There is insufficient evidence that cryotherapy prevents sensory neuropathy which may be due to the high rates of cryotherapy interruption in this study. The autonomic benefits of cryotherapy should be further investigated with appropriate outcome measures. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03429972.

Purpose

The Accessible Cancer Care to Enable Support for Cancer Survivors (ACCESS) program adopts a multidisciplinary supportive care model with routine distress screening to triage newly diagnosed cancer survivors for additional support on the basis of distress levels. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical impact of ACCESS over 1 year.

Methods

We performed cluster random assignment at the oncologist level in a 1:1 ratio to receive ACCESS or usual care. Participants 21 years and older, newly diagnosed with breast or gynecologic cancer, and receiving care at National Cancer Centre Singapore were included. Outcomes assessed every 3 months for 1 year included quality of life (QoL) (primary), functioning, physical and psychological symptom burden, and activity levels. Data were analyzed using mixed-effects models.

Results

Participants from 16 clusters (control = 90, intervention = 83) were analyzed. The ACCESS program did not significantly improve QoL (primary outcome). However, compared with usual care recipients, ACCESS recipients reported higher physical functioning (P = .017), role functioning (P = .001), and activity levels (P < .001) at 9 months and lower psychological distress (P = .025) at 12 months. ACCESS recipients screened with high distress had poorer QoL, lower role and social functioning, and higher physical symptom distress at 3 months but had comparable scores with ACCESS recipients without high distress after 12 months.

Conclusion

Compared with usual care, participation in the ACCESS program did not yield QoL improvement but showed earlier functioning recovery related to activities of daily living and reduced psychological distress. Routine distress screening is a promising mechanism to identify survivors with poorer health for more intensive supportive care.

Cancer-related cognitive impairment (CRCI) adversely affects cancer patients. We had previously demonstrated that the BDNF Val66Met genetic polymorphism is associated with lower odds of subjective CRCI in the multitasking and verbal ability domains among breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy. To further assess our previous findings, we evaluated the association of BDNF Val66Met polymorphism with subjective and objective CRCI in a temporally separate cohort of patients and pooled findings from both the original (n = 145) and current (n = 193) cohorts in a meta-analysis. Subjective CRCI was assessed using FACT-Cog. Objective CRCI was evaluated using computerized neuropsychological tests. Genotyping was carried out using Sanger sequencing. The association of BDNF Val66Met genotypes and CRCI was examined with logistic regression. A fixed-effect meta-analysis was conducted using the inverse variance method. In the meta-analysis (n = 338), significantly lower odds of CRCI were associated with Met allele carriers based on the global FACT-Cog score (OR = 0.52, 95% CI 0.29-0.94). Furthermore, Met allele carriers were at lower odds of developing impairment in the domains of memory (OR = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.17-0.70), multitasking (OR = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.18-0.59), and verbal ability (OR = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.24-0.88). Consistent with the previous study, lower odds of subjective CRCI among patients with the BDNF Met allele was observed after adjusting for potential confounders in the multitasking (OR = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.14-0.67) domain. In conclusion, carriers of the BDNF Met allele were protected against global subjective CRCI, particularly in the domains of memory, multitasking, and verbal ability. Our findings further contribute to the understanding of CRCI pathophysiology.