Search

Abstract Objective Molecular or biomarker testing to guide targeted treatments for colorectal cancer (CRC) has advanced care, specifically by improving treatment specificity. Our objective was to explore patients’ experiences and perspectives with biomarker testing in Canada. Methods We conducted a mixed-methods study among adults (≥ 18 years) who have been diagnosed with CRC and able to communicate in English. Quantitative data was gathered using an online survey, with questions on awareness of and experiences with biomarker testing. Qualitative data was gathered using semi-structured interviews with a sample of survey respondents to provide context to survey findings. Results Among 55 survey respondents, 76% have heard of biomarker testing and of these, 67% have had biomarker testing done. Among the 33% of respondents that have not had biomarker testing done, reasons were: not offered/referred, fear/anxiety over results, and cost. Respondents who had biomarker testing largely found biomarker testing useful (89%), though, only half indicated that they were able to understand the information on their biomarker testing report. Qualitative analysis of interview transcripts identified four themes: 1) perceived benefits of biomarker testing, 2) knowledge of biomarker testing, 3) experiences with accessing and receiving biomarker testing, and 4) recommendations for addressing challenges with biomarker testing. Conclusion Altogether, our study provides insight into CRC patients’ perspectives and experiences with biomarker testing. Ongoing efforts by patient organizations, providers, and policymakers to improve awareness and access to biomarker testing must be informed by the patient perspective.

Abstract Background With the burden of colorectal cancer in Canada, there is a need to address the psycho‐oncologic challenges, including mental health. This study aims to explore the lived mental health experiences in patients with CRC across the phases of the CRC care continuum. Methods We employed a patient‐oriented constructivist grounded theory design and recruited English speaking participants ≥18 years, diagnosed with CRC within the last 10 years, residing in Canada. We collected data through semi‐structured individual interviews using a guide co‐constructed with patient research partners. Data collection and analysis were iterative, employed theoretical sampling, and culminated in a theoretical model. Results Twenty‐eight participants diagnosed with CRC (18 females, 10 males), aged 18–63 years at time of diagnosis were interviewed, with representation across all CRC stages. There were 10 participants (36%) in treatment, 12 participants (43%) in follow‐up, and 6 participants (21%) in the beyond phase. We constructed a patient‐oriented theory illustrating the dynamic nature between one's self‐identity and their mental health experiences across the CRC care continuum. Mental health experiences encompass emotional and cognitive‐behavioral responses, expressed differently across phases. Mental health care experiences are also shaped by barriers, facilitators, and individual contextual factors, all of which influence their access to care. Conclusion Our theory provides insight into the mental health experiences of patients with CRC across phases of the CRC care continuum. Understanding patients' emotional and cognitive‐behavioral responses and care experiences can help identify opportunities to integrate mental health into CRC care.

Over the last two decades, patient engagement in cancer research has evolved significantly, especially in addressing the unique challenges faced by adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer populations. This paper introduces a framework for meaningful engagement with AYA cancer patient research partners, drawing insights from the “FUTURE” Study, a qualitative study that utilizes focus groups to explore the impact of cancer diagnosis and treatment on the sexual and reproductive health of AYA cancer patients in Canada. The framework’s development integrates insights from prior works and addresses challenges with patient engagement in research specific to AYA cancer populations. The framework is guided by overarching principles (safety, flexibility, and sensitivity) and includes considerations that apply across all phases of a research study (collaboration; iteration; communication; and equity, diversity, and inclusion) and tasks that apply to specific phases of a research study (developing, conducting, and translating the study). The proposed framework seeks to increase patient engagement in AYA cancer research beyond a supplementary aspect to an integral component for conducting research with impact on patients.

BackgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) is estimated to be the fourth most common cancer diagnosis in Canada (except for nonmelanoma skin cancers) and the second and third leading cause of cancer-related death in male and female individuals, respectively. ObjectiveThe rising incidence of early age-onset colorectal cancer (EAO-CRC; diagnosis at less than 50 years) calls for a better understanding of patients’ pathway to diagnosis. Therefore, we evaluated patterns of prescription medication use before EAO-CRC diagnosis. MethodsWe used linked administrative health databases in British Columbia (BC), Canada, to identify individuals diagnosed with EAO-CRC between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as “cases”), along with cancer-free controls (1:10), matched by age and sex. We identified all prescriptions dispensed from community pharmacies during the year prior to diagnosis and used the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical Classification system Level 3 to group prescriptions according to the drug class. A parallel assessment was conducted for individuals diagnosed with average age-onset CRC (diagnosis at age 50 years and older). ResultsWe included 1001 EAO-CRC cases (n=450, 45% female participants; mean 41.0, SD 6.1 years), and 12,989 prescriptions were filled in the year before diagnosis by 797 (79.7%) individuals. Top-filled drugs were antidepressants (first; n=1698, 13.1%). Drugs for peptic ulcer disease and gastroesophageal reflux disease (third; n=795, 6.1%) were more likely filled by EAO-CRC cases than controls (odds ratio [OR] 1.4, 95% CI 1.2-1.7) and with more frequent fills (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.7-1.9). We noted similar patterns for topical agents for hemorrhoids and anal fissures, which were more likely filled by EAO-CRC cases than controls (OR 7.4, 95% CI 5.8-9.4) and with more frequent fills (OR 15.6, 95% CI 13.1-18.6). ConclusionsWe observed frequent prescription medication use in the year before diagnosis of EAO-CRC, including for drugs to treat commonly reported symptoms of EAO-CRC.

Research suggests that colorectal cancer (CRC) is associated with mental health disorders, primarily anxiety and depression. To synthesize this evidence, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies evaluating the onset of anxiety and depression among patients with CRC. We searched EMBASE and Medline from inception to June 2022. We included original, peer-reviewed studies that: used an epidemiologic design; included patients with CRC and a comparator group of individuals without cancer; and evaluated anxiety and depression as outcomes. We used random effects models to obtain pooled measures of associations. Quality assessment was completed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Of 7326 articles identified, 8 were eligible; of which 6 assessed anxiety and depression and 2 assessed depression only. Meta-analyses showed a non-significant association between CRC and anxiety (pooled HR 1.67; 95% CI 0.88 to 3.17) and a significant association between CRC and depression (pooled HR 1.78; 95% CI 1.23 to 2.57). Predictors of anxiety and depression among patients with CRC included clinical characteristics (e.g., comorbidities, cancer stage, cancer site), cancer treatment (e.g., radiotherapy, chemotherapy, colostomy), and sociodemographic characteristics (e.g., age, sex). The impacts of anxiety and depression in patients with CRC included increased mortality and decreased quality of life. Altogether, our systematic review and meta-analysis quantified the risks and impacts of CRC on anxiety and depression, particularly an increased risk of depression after CRC diagnosis. Findings provide support for oncologic care that encompasses mental health supports for patients with CRC.

Abstract Background Given the rising incidence of young-onset colorectal cancer (yCRC) among individuals younger than 50 years old, understanding the economic burden of yCRC is required to inform the delivery of healthcare services. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of studies assessing the direct medical costs of yCRC, and where relevant average-age onset CRC (aCRC). Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science from inception to May 2022 for original, peer-reviewed studies, that reported direct medical costs (e.g., chemotherapy, radiotherapy, outpatient visits, inpatient care, prescription medications) for yCRC and aCRC. We used a modified version of the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist to appraise the studies. Costs were inflation-adjusted to 2020 US dollars. Results We included 14 studies from 10 countries, including the USA, England, France, Korea, Vietnam, China, Italy, Australia, Canada and Japan. Five studies focused on prevalent disease and reported annualized per-capita cost of prevalent yCRC, ranging from $2,263 to $16,801 and $1,412 to $14,997 among yCRC and aCRC cases, respectively. Nine studies estimated the cost of incident disease. Synthesis of per-capita costs incurred 12 months following colorectal cancer diagnosis ranged from $23,368 to $89,945 for yCRC and $19,929 to $67,195 for aCRC. Five studies used multivariable approaches to compare costs associated with yCRC and aCRC, four showed no differences and one suggested greater costs with yCRC. Conclusion Our synthesis of direct medical costs of yCRC across multiple jurisdictions provide relevant information for healthcare decisions, including on-going considerations for expanding CRC screening strategies to younger adults.

Given the increasing incidence of young-onset colorectal cancer (yCRC;

BackgroundExisting systems to document adverse drug events often use free text data entry, which produces nonstandardized and unstructured data that are prone to misinterpretation. Standardized terminology may improve data quality; however, it is unclear which data standard is most appropriate for documenting adverse drug event symptoms and diagnoses. ObjectiveThis study aims to compare the utility, strengths, and weaknesses of different data standards for documenting adverse drug event symptoms and diagnoses. MethodsWe performed a mixed methods substudy of a multicenter retrospective chart review. We reviewed the research records of prospectively diagnosed adverse drug events at 5 Canadian hospitals. A total of 2 pharmacy research assistants independently entered the symptoms and diagnoses for the adverse drug events using four standards: Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA), Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine (SNOMED) Clinical Terms, SNOMED Adverse Reaction (SNOMED ADR), and International Classification of Diseases (ICD) 11th Revision. Disagreements between research assistants regarding the case-specific utility of data standards were discussed until a consensus was reached. We used consensus ratings to determine the proportion of adverse drug events covered by a data standard and coded and analyzed field notes from the consensus sessions. ResultsWe reviewed 573 adverse drug events and found that MedDRA and ICD-11 had excellent coverage of adverse drug event symptoms and diagnoses. MedDRA had the highest number of matches between the research assistants, whereas ICD-11 had the fewest. SNOMED ADR had the lowest proportion of adverse drug event coverage. The research assistants were most likely to encounter terminological challenges with SNOMED ADR and usability challenges with ICD-11, whereas least likely to encounter challenges with MedDRA. ConclusionsUsability, comprehensiveness, and accuracy are important features of data standards for documenting adverse drug event symptoms and diagnoses. On the basis of our results, we recommend the use of MedDRA.