An investigation of routes to cancer diagnosis in 10 international jurisdictions, as part of the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership: survey development and implementation

Objectives This paper describes the methods used in the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership Module 4 Survey (ICBPM4) which examines time intervals and routes to cancer diagnosis in 10 jurisdictions. We present the study design with defining and measuring time intervals, identifying patients with cancer, questionnaire development, data management and analyses.
Design and setting Recruitment of participants to the ICBPM4 survey is based on cancer registries in each jurisdiction. Questionnaires draw on previous instruments and have been through a process of cognitive testing and piloting in three jurisdictions followed by standardised translation and adaptation. Data analysis focuses on comparing differences in time intervals and routes to diagnosis in the jurisdictions.
Participants Our target is 200 patients with symptomatic breast, lung, colorectal and ovarian cancer in each jurisdiction. Patients are approached directly or via their primary care physician (PCP). Patients’ PCPs and cancer treatment specialists (CTSs) are surveyed, and ‘data rules’ are applied to combine and reconcile conflicting information. Where CTS information is unavailable, audit information is sought from treatment records and databases.
Main outcomes Reliability testing of the patient questionnaire showed that agreement was complete (κ=1) in four items and substantial (κ=0.8, 95% CI 0.333 to 1) in one item. The identification of eligible patients is sufficient to meet the targets for breast, lung and colorectal cancer. Initial patient and PCP survey response rates from the UK and Sweden are comparable with similar published surveys. Data collection was completed in early 2016 for all cancer types.
Conclusion An international questionnaire-based survey of patients with cancer, PCPs and CTSs has been developed and launched in 10 jurisdictions. ICBPM4 will help to further understand international differences in cancer survival by comparing time intervals and routes to cancer diagnosis.

Preclincial evaluation of Gold-DTDTPA Nanoparticles As Theranostic Agents In Prostate Cancer Radiotherapy

AIM: Gold nanoparticles have attracted significant interest in cancer diagnosis and treatment. Herein, we evaluated the theranostic potential of dithiolated diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid (DTDTPA) conjugated AuNPs (Au@DTDTPA) for CT-contrast enhancement and radiosensitization in prostate cancer.

MATERIALS & METHODS: In vitro assays determined Au@DTDTPA uptake, cytotoxicity, radiosensitizing potential and DNA damage profiles. Human PC3 xenograft tumor models were used to determine CT enhancement and radiation modulating effects in vivo.

RESULTS: Cells exposed to nanoparticles and radiation observed significant additional reduction in survival compared with radiation only. Au@DTDTPA produced a CT enhancement of 10% and a significant extension in tumor growth delay from 16.9 days to 38.3 compared with radiation only.

CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the potential of Au@DTDTPA to enhance CT-image contrast and simultaneously increases the radiosensitivity of prostate tumors.

Breast cancer outcomes following predictive BRCA testing in Northern Ireland

Objectives: Since 1995, BRCA testing has identified 445 women in Northern Ireland who carry a pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutation, without breast cancer (bca) at testing. This study examined outcomes with reference to management, bca risk, and incidence following positive predictive testing. Methods: Patients were identified from the regional genetics database. Electronic clinical records were used to obtain management and outcome details. Median follow-up was to bca diagnosis, risk-reducing mastectomy (rrm), death, or last follow-up. Results: 169 women had a BRCA1 mutation, and 276 BRCA2. ■ BRCA1 cohort: Median follow-up post-testing was 3 years. 56 Women (33%) had rrm, and 12 are awaiting rrm (total 68, 40%) at a median age of 36 years. 12 Women (7%) developed bca, at a median of 2 years following testing. 4 Women were diagnosed with bcas incidentally at rrm. 7 Patients had bilateral mastectomies following a cancer diagnosis. 1 Woman developed bca following rrm (1.7%). Three deaths were reported: 1 breast cancer (1.7%), 1 ovarian cancer (1.7%), and 1 with no recorded breast/ovarian cancer diagnosis. ■ BRCA2 cohort: Median follow-up post-testing was 6 years. rrm was carried out in 75 women (27%), with 20 awaiting rrm (total 95, 35%); median age: 39 years. 16 Women developed bca (5.8%), at a median of 5 years from testing. 6 Women were diagnosed with cancer incidentally at rrm; 9 women had bilateral mastectomy following diagnosis, and 1 developed bca following rrm (1.3%). Five deaths were reported: 1 bca, 1 ovarian cancer, and 3 with no recorded breast/ovarian cancer diagnosis. Conclusions: The uptake of rrm following predictive BRCA testing in Northern Ireland is comparable with that reported elsewhere. The incidence of bca following rrm is low (<2%) in our cohort, with low breast and ovarian cancer–specific mortality following positive predictive testing.

An exploration of men’s experiences of undergoing active surveillance for favourable-risk prostate cancer: A mixed methods study protocol

Background
Prostate cancer is one of the most common male cancers worldwide. Active Surveillance (AS) has been developed to allow men with lower risk disease to postpone or avoid the adverse side effects associated with curative treatments until the disease progresses. Despite the medical benefits of AS, it is reported that living with untreated cancer can create a significant emotional burden for patients.

Methods/design
The aim of this study is to gain insight into the experiences of men eligible to undergo AS for favourable-risk PCa.

This study has a mixed-methods sequential explanatory design consisting of two phases: quantitative followed by qualitative. Phase 1 has a multiple point, prospective, longitudinal exploratory design. Ninety men diagnosed with favourable-risk prostate cancer will be assessed immediately post-diagnosis (baseline) and followed over a period of 12 months, in intervals of 3 month. Ninety age-matched men with no cancer diagnosis will also be recruited using peer nomination and followed up in the same 3 month intervals. Following completion of Phase 1, 10–15 AS participants who have reported both the best and worst psychological functioning will be invited to participate in semi-structured qualitative interviews. Phase 2 will facilitate further exploration of the quantitative results and obtain a richer understanding of participants’ personal interpretations of their illness and psychological wellbeing.

Discussion
To our knowledge, this is the first study to utilise early baseline measures; include a healthy comparison group; calculate sample size through power calculations; and use a mixed methods approach to gain a deeper more holistic insight into the experiences of men diagnosed with favourable-risk prostate cancer.

Prostate cancer markers and uses thereof

The present invention relates to composition and methods of cancer diagnosis, research and therapy including, but not limited to, cancer markers. In particular, the present invention relates to LRG1 protein markers for use in the diagnosis, prognosis and determination of treatment of prostate cancer.

Non-pharmacological interventions for cognitive impairment due to systemic cancer treatment (Review)

Background

It is estimated that up to 75% of cancer survivors may experience cognitive impairment as a result of cancer treatment and given the increasing size of the cancer survivor population, the number of affected people is set to rise considerably in coming years. There is a need, therefore, to identify effective, non-pharmacological interventions for maintaining cognitive function or ameliorating cognitive impairment among people with a previous cancer diagnosis.
Objectives

To evaluate the cognitive effects, non-cognitive effects, duration and safety of non-pharmacological interventions among cancer patients targeted at maintaining cognitive function or ameliorating cognitive impairment as a result of cancer or receipt of systemic cancer treatment (i.e. chemotherapy or hormonal therapies in isolation or combination with other treatments).
Search methods

We searched the Cochrane Centre Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, PUBMED, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and PsycINFO databases. We also searched registries of ongoing trials and grey literature including theses, dissertations and conference proceedings. Searches were conducted for articles published from 1980 to 29 September 2015.
Selection criteria

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of non-pharmacological interventions to improve cognitive impairment or to maintain cognitive functioning among survivors of adult-onset cancers who have completed systemic cancer therapy (in isolation or combination with other treatments) were eligible. Studies among individuals continuing to receive hormonal therapy were included. We excluded interventions targeted at cancer survivors with central nervous system (CNS) tumours or metastases, non-melanoma skin cancer or those who had received cranial radiation or, were from nursing or care home settings. Language restrictions were not applied.
Data collection and analysis

Author pairs independently screened, selected, extracted data and rated the risk of bias of studies. We were unable to conduct planned meta-analyses due to heterogeneity in the type of interventions and outcomes, with the exception of compensatory strategy training interventions for which we pooled data for mental and physical well-being outcomes. We report a narrative synthesis of intervention effectiveness for other outcomes.
Main results

Five RCTs describing six interventions (comprising a total of 235 participants) met the eligibility criteria for the review. Two trials of computer-assisted cognitive training interventions (n = 100), two of compensatory strategy training interventions (n = 95), one of meditation (n = 47) and one of physical activity intervention (n = 19) were identified. Each study focused on breast cancer survivors. All five studies were rated as having a high risk of bias. Data for our primary outcome of interest, cognitive function were not amenable to being pooled statistically. Cognitive training demonstrated beneficial effects on objectively assessed cognitive function (including processing speed, executive functions, cognitive flexibility, language, delayed- and immediate- memory), subjectively reported cognitive function and mental well-being. Compensatory strategy training demonstrated improvements on objectively assessed delayed-, immediate- and verbal-memory, self-reported cognitive function and spiritual quality of life (QoL). The meta-analyses of two RCTs (95 participants) did not show a beneficial effect from compensatory strategy training on physical well-being immediately (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.59 to 0.83; I2= 67%) or two months post-intervention (SMD - 0.21, 95% CI -0.89 to 0.47; I2 = 63%) or on mental well-being two months post-intervention (SMD -0.38, 95% CI -1.10 to 0.34; I2 = 67%). Lower mental well-being immediately post-intervention appeared to be observed in patients who received compensatory strategy training compared to wait-list controls (SMD -0.57, 95% CI -0.98 to -0.16; I2 = 0%). We assessed the assembled studies using GRADE for physical and mental health outcomes and this evidence was rated to be low quality and, therefore findings should be interpreted with caution. Evidence for physical activity and meditation interventions on cognitive outcomes is unclear.
Authors' conclusions

Overall, the, albeit low-quality evidence may be interpreted to suggest that non-pharmacological interventions may have the potential to reduce the risk of, or ameliorate, cognitive impairment following systemic cancer treatment. Larger, multi-site studies including an appropriate, active attentional control group, as well as consideration of functional outcomes (e.g. activities of daily living) are required in order to come to firmer conclusions about the benefits or otherwise of this intervention approach. There is also a need to conduct research into cognitive impairment among cancer patient groups other than women with breast cancer.

Digoxin use after diagnosis of prostate cancer and survival: a population-based cohort study

PURPOSE:
Preclinical studies have shown that digoxin exerts anticancer effects on different cancer cell lines including prostate cancer. A recent observational study has shown that digoxin use was associated with a 25% reduction in prostate cancer risk. The aim of this study was to investigate whether digoxin use after diagnosis of prostate cancer was associated with decreased prostate cancer-specific mortality.
METHODS:
A cohort of 13 134 patients with prostate cancer newly diagnosed from 1998 to 2009 was identified from English cancer registries and linked to the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (to provide digoxin and other prescription records) and to the Office of National Statistics mortality data (to identify 2010 prostate cancer-specific deaths). Using time-dependent Cox regression models, unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for the association between post-diagnostic exposure to digoxin and prostate cancer-specific mortality.
RESULTS:
Overall, 701 (5%) patients with prostate cancer used digoxin after diagnosis. Digoxin use was associated with an increase in prostate cancer-specific mortality before adjustment (HR = 1.59; 95% CI 1.32-1.91), but after adjustment for confounders, the association was attenuated (adjusted HR = 1.13; 95% CI 0.93-1.37) and there was no evidence of a dose response.
CONCLUSIONS:
In this large population-based prostate cancer cohort, there was no evidence of a reduction in prostate cancer-specific mortality with digoxin use after diagnosis.