Search

Abstract Background Two million people in the UK are living with or beyond cancer and a third of them report poor quality of life (QoL) due to problems such as fatigue, fear of cancer recurrence, and concerns about returning to work. We aimed to develop and evaluate an intervention based on acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT), suited to address the concerns of cancer survivors and in improving their QoL. We also recognise the importance of exercise and vocational activity on QoL and therefore will integrate options for physical activity and return to work/vocational support, thus ACT Plus (+). Methods We will conduct a multi-centre, pragmatic, theory driven, randomised controlled trial. We will assess whether ACT+ including usual aftercare (intervention) is more effective and cost-effective than usual aftercare alone (control). The primary outcome is QoL of participants living with or beyond cancer measured using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy: General scale (FACT-G) at 52 weeks. We will recruit 344 participants identified from secondary care sites who have completed hospital-based treatment for cancer with curative intent, with low QoL (determined by the FACT-G) and randomise with an allocation ratio of 1:1 to the intervention or control. The intervention (ACT+) will be delivered by NHS Talking Therapies, specialist services, and cancer charities. The intervention consists of up to eight sessions at weekly or fortnightly intervals using different modalities of delivery to suit individual needs, i.e. face-to-face sessions, over the phone or skype. Discussion To date, there have been no robust trials reporting both clinical and cost-effectiveness of an ACT based intervention for people with low QoL after curative cancer treatment in the UK. We will provide high quality evidence of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of adding ACT+ to usual aftercare provided by the NHS. If shown to be effective and cost-effective then commissioners, providers and cancer charities will know how to improve QoL in cancer survivors and their families. Trial registration ISRCTN: ISRCTN67900293 . Registered on 09 December 2019. All items from the World Health Organization Trial Registration Data Set for this protocol can be found in Additional file 2 Table S1.

Introduction Health care professionals who identify as members of underrepresented and racial minority groups may experience bias from patients and patient families. These occurrences disrupt the educational and therapeutic environments, distress the targeted individuals and allies, and create potential legal liability. Yet there are few educational opportunities for individuals to brainstorm and implement strategies for responding professionally during such instances. Methods Presented first as a grand rounds, then an invited workshop, and finally an invited series, this educational activity was developed in a stepwise manner over the course of a year. Each format was sequentially modified based on feedback from participants—more than 200 physicians and other health care professionals—using evaluation forms that were voluntary and anonymous. The educational activity used an adaptation of forum theater, in which participants role-played an instance of oppression with a goal of altering the ultimate outcome. This approach provided participants with the opportunity to develop and rehearse responses to workplace bias in a way that preserved the provider-patient relationship. Results Feedback for these educational sessions was overwhelmingly positive. Participants noted the importance of acknowledging and addressing bias in the workplace and encouraged facilitators to expand the sessions in length, frequency, and scope. Discussion Forum theater is a methodology that can be employed in health care to teach appropriate and authentic responses to expressed patient bias while maintaining the therapeutic relationship. The positive reception from participants in our preliminary sessions established a strong foundation for future improvements to this work.

“Although aberrant promoter DNA hypermethylation is a hallmark of cancer, it is not clear whether it is sufficient to drive transformation. Here, the authors use CRISPR-dCas9 to perform hit-and-run epigenetic editing, which prevents senescence entry in primary breast cells from healthy donors.”

Introduction: Menopausal problems are among the most prevalent and distressing problems following breast cancer treatment, with 70% women experiencing hot flushes and night sweats (HFNS). A working party was set up to support the development of new research into the management of these problems. Methods: We conducted surveys to explore the need as perceived by women with breast cancer and establish current UK management practices. A patient survey was conducted through a charity, Breast Cancer Care, and a health professional survey via the UK Breast Intergroup. The HFNS Problem Rating Scale was used, as well as specific questions addressing the aims of the study. Results: Six hundred and sixty-five patients responded and 185 health professionals. Twenty-eight percent women had considered stopping adjuvant endocrine treatment because of HFNS, yet 34% had never been asked about HFNS by any health professional. The most commonly offered interventions were SSRIs, such as venlafaxine, yet only 25% patients had been offered these drugs. Cognitive behavioural therapy was rarely suggested (2%) despite good evidence. Discussion: This study shows a lack of coherence in the management of HFNS in breast cancer survivors, which may lead to reduced adherence to adjuvant therapy. There is an urgent need to develop guidelines to support management of HFNS after breast cancer.

Skeletal muscle disuse leads to atrophy, declines in muscle function, and metabolic dysfunction that are often slow to recover. Strategies to mitigate these effects would be clinically relevant. In a double-blind randomized-controlled pilot trial, we examined the safety and tolerability as well as the atrophy mitigating effect of a novel amino acid composition (AXA2678), during single limb immobilization. Twenty healthy young men were randomly assigned (10 per group) to receive AXA2678 or an excipient- and energy-matched non-amino acid containing placebo (PL) for 28d: days 1–7, pre-immobilization; days 8–15, immobilization; and days 16–28 post-immobilization recovery. Muscle biopsies were taken on d1, d8 (immobilization start), d15 (immobilization end), and d28 (post-immobilization recovery). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was utilized to assess quadriceps muscle volume (Mvol), muscle cross-sectional area (CSA), and muscle fat-fraction (FF: the fraction of muscle occupied by fat). Maximal voluntary leg isometric torque was assessed by dynamometry. Administration of AXA2678 attenuated muscle disuse atrophy compared to PL (p < 0.05) with changes from d8 to d15 in PL: ΔMvol = −2.4 ± 2.3% and ΔCSA = −3.1% ± 2.1%, both p < 0.001 vs. zero; against AXA2678: ΔMvol: −0.7 ± 1.8% and ΔCSA: −0.7 ± 2.1%, both p > 0.3 vs. zero; and p < 0.05 between treatment conditions for CSA. During immobilization, muscle FF increased in PL but not in AXA2678 (PL: 12.8 ± 6.1%, AXA2678: 0.4 ± 3.1%; p < 0.05). Immobilization resulted in similar reductions in peak leg isometric torque and change in time-to-peak (TTP) torque in both groups. Recovery (d15–d28) of peak torque and TTP torque was also not different between groups, but showed a trend for better recovery in the AXA2678 group. Thrice daily consumption of AXA2678 for 28d was found to be safe and well-tolerated. Additionally, AXA2678 attenuated atrophy, and attenuated accumulation of fat during short-term disuse. Further investigations on the administration of AXA2678 in conditions of muscle disuse are warranted.Clinical Trial Registration:https://clinicaltrials.gov, identifier: NCT03267745.

This study evaluated the Beliefs about Medicine Questionnaire to explore adherence to adjuvant endocrine therapy after treatment for breast cancer (BMQ-AET). Factor structure of the BMQ-AET was explored alongside internal consistency, convergent validity and acceptability. The BMQ-AET Specific Scale fitted the original 10 item model. Internal consistency of the BMQ-AET was much improved compared to the original BMQ and convergent validity showed predicted direction of correlation, although correlation with BMQ-AET concerns scale was low. Acceptability was good. The evaluation of the BMQ-AET is encouraging, and could facilitate future research around adherence to AET.

Background: There is uncertainty about the chemotherapy sensitivity of some oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancers. Multiparameter assays that measure the expression of several tumour genes simultaneously have been developed to guide the use of adjuvant chemotherapy for this breast cancer subtype. The assays provide prognostic information and have been claimed to predict chemotherapy sensitivity. There is a dearth of prospective validation studies. The Optimal Personalised Treatment of early breast cancer usIng Multiparameter Analysis preliminary study (OPTIMA prelim) is the feasibility phase of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) designed to validate the use of multiparameter assay directed chemotherapy decisions in the NHS. Objectives: OPTIMA prelim was designed to establish the acceptability to patients and clinicians of randomisation to test-driven treatment assignment compared with usual care and to select an assay for study in the main RCT. Design: Partially blinded RCT with adaptive design. Setting: Thirty-five UK hospitals. Participants: Patients aged ≥ 40 years with surgically treated ER-positive HER2-negative primary breast cancer and with 1–9 involved axillary nodes, or, if node negative, a tumour at least 30 mm in diameter. Interventions: Randomisation between two treatment options. Option 1 was standard care consisting of chemotherapy followed by endocrine therapy. In option 2, an Oncotype DX® test (Genomic Health Inc., Redwood City, CA, USA) performed on the resected tumour was used to assign patients either to standard care [if ‘recurrence score’ (RS) was > 25] or to endocrine therapy alone (if RS was ≤ 25). Patients allocated chemotherapy were blind to their randomisation. Main outcome measures: The pre-specified success criteria were recruitment of 300 patients in no longer than 2 years and, for the final 150 patients, (1) an acceptance rate of at least 40%; (2) recruitment taking no longer than 6 months; and (3) chemotherapy starting within 6 weeks of consent in at least 85% of patients. Results: Between September 2012 and 3 June 2014, 350 patients consented to join OPTIMA prelim and 313 were randomised; the final 150 patients were recruited in 6 months, of whom 92% assigned chemotherapy started treatment within 6 weeks. The acceptance rate for the 750 patients invited to participate was 47%. Twelve out of the 325 patients with data (3.7%, 95% confidence interval 1.7% to 5.8%) were deemed ineligible on central review of receptor status. Interviews with researchers and recordings of potential participant consultations made as part of the integral qualitative recruitment study provided insights into recruitment barriers and led to interventions designed to improve recruitment. Patient information was changed as the result of feedback from three patient focus groups. Additional multiparameter analysis was performed on 302 tumour samples. Although Oncotype DX, MammaPrint®/BluePrint® (Agendia Inc., Irvine, CA, USA), Prosigna® (NanoString Technologies Inc., Seattle, WA, USA), IHC4, IHC4 automated quantitative immunofluorescence (AQUA®) [NexCourse BreastTM (Genoptix Inc. Carlsbad, CA, USA)] and MammaTyper® (BioNTech Diagnostics GmbH, Mainz, Germany) categorised comparable numbers of tumours into low- or high-risk groups and/or equivalent molecular subtypes, there was only moderate agreement between tests at an individual tumour level (kappa ranges 0.33–0.60 and 0.39–0.55 for tests providing risks and subtypes, respectively). Health economics modelling showed the value of information to the NHS from further research into multiparameter testing is high irrespective of the test evaluated. Prosigna is currently the highest priority for further study. Conclusions: OPTIMA prelim has achieved its aims of demonstrating that a large UK clinical trial of multiparameter assay-based selection of chemotherapy in hormone-sensitive early breast cancer is feasible. The economic analysis shows that a trial would be economically worthwhile for the NHS. Based on the outcome of the OPTIMA prelim, a large-scale RCT to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of multiparameter assay-directed chemotherapy decisions in hormone-sensitive HER2-negative early breast would be appropriate to take place in the NHS. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN42400492. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 10. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. The Government of Ontario funded research at the Ontario Institute for Cancer Research. Robert C Stein received additional support from the NIHR University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre.

Abstract As a part of the Double Helix curriculum at the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, six themes are addressed throughout 4 years of medical education. One of these themes is that of diversity. The goal of the diversity theme curriculum is to have students develop an understanding of how features of culture and society, economy, and social structures are related to health and disease in populations. This resource contains a three-part activity that includes a student narrative, an interactive large-group activity, and small-group work. The student narrative is prepared in advance while the large- and small-group activities are conducted in the course of a half day. The small-group work allows for debriefing from the large-group activity as well as for students' to provide peer feedback regarding the patient experiences outlined in their narratives. Expert faculty feedback is provided in addition through written critique of the narratives. These materials can be used for students who are at any level of training as long as they are interfacing with real patients. In general, the presentation is well received by the students. Although we do not have a pre- or postassessment data, we have noted that a number of students come to speak independently to speak with the course director, and ask for further insights or resources pertaining to the content.