Search

Purpose: Workforce shortages will impact oncologists' ability to provide both active and survivorship care. While primary care provider (PCP) or survivorship clinic transition has been emphasized, there is little evidence regarding patient comfort., Methods: We developed an online survey in partnership with patient advocates to assess survivors' comfort with PCP or survivorship clinic care and distributed the survey to online, cancer-specific patient communities from June to August 2020. Descriptive and logistic regression analyses were conducted., Results: A total of 975 surveys were complete. Most respondents were women (91%) and had private insurance (65%). Thirty-six cancer types were reported. Ninety-three percent had a PCP. Twenty-four percent were comfortable seeing a PCP for survivorship care. Higher odds of comfort were seen among respondents who were Black or had stage 0 cancer; female sex was associated with lower odds. Fifty-five percent were comfortable with a survivorship clinic. Higher odds of comfort were seen with lymphoma or ovarian cancer, > 15 years from diagnosis, and non-US government insurance. Lower odds were seen with melanoma, advanced stage, Medicaid insurance, and one late effect. Preference for PCP care was 87% for general health, 32% for recurrence monitoring, and 37% for late effect management., Conclusions: One quarter of cancer survivors were comfortable with PCP-led survivorship care and about half with a survivorship clinic. Most preferred oncologist care for recurrence monitoring and late-effect management., Implications for Cancer Survivors: Patient preference and comfort should be considered when developing survivorship care models. Future efforts should focus on facilitating patient-centered transitions to non-oncologist care., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

The growing number of cancer survivors and the high prevalence of cancer-related physical and psychosocial effects pose important and pressing challenges to health systems. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to further stressors on cancer survivors and health care systems. As the pandemic continues to have substantial impact on the world, it is critical to focus attention on the health care needs of cancer survivors. In this commentary, we propose an adoption of essential steps that should be part of a continuous adaptive approach to promote effective cancer survivorship care during ongoing COVID-19 waves and beyond., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The role of radiation therapy in metastatic cancer is rapidly evolving with increased understanding of the oligometastatic state and improved technologies to deliver higher doses of radiation with greater precision and avoidance of normal tissues than before. Recent data have demonstrated that the use of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) in oligometastatic disease confers a survival benefit. Yet, the current enthusiasm must be balanced with caution. Here we summarize the evidence in favor of SABR for oligometastatic patients as well as the concerns regarding rapid adoption into clinical practice and outline broad principles to guide clinical trials evaluating the role of SABR in oligometastatic disease. As oncologists, we must exercise due diligence and gather the appropriate evidence necessary to 1) understand the oligometastatic disease state and 2) optimize benefit in those patients before broadly offering SABR to all. Any alternative path forward will do our field and our patients a great injustice., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors, also known as statins, are commonly prescribed medications that lower serum cholesterol and decrease cardiac morbidity and mortality. These agents inhibit the rate-limiting step of the mevalonate pathway, an effect that influences cholesterol homeostasis and other diverse cellular functions. Preclinical data suggest statins have pleiotropic antineoplastic effects in a variety of tumors, but clinical studies have provided conflicting data regarding whether statins may increase or decrease the risk of cancer. Abnormal cholesterol metabolism in cancer is poorly understood but should be considered when evaluating the antineoplastic effects of statins. Emerging evidence suggests that atherosclerosis and cancer have similar underlying molecular mechanisms, both having lipid abnormalities and a pro-inflammatory phenotype. Like nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents, statins target lipid metabolism, have significant anti-inflammatory effects, and can influence cardiovascular mortality. Recent studies show that statins may have chemopreventive effects and may complement cytotoxic chemotherapy or radiotherapy as a biologic response modifier in established cancer, but current data do not support their use as monotherapy. The preclinical data supporting anticancer activity, their additional health benefits, and the safety and relative low cost of statins compared to other 'targeted' agents currently under development all favor conducting prospective clinical trials of these drugs in cancer chemoprevention and therapy.