Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs最新文献

Drawing from insights from communication science and behavioral economics, the University of Pennsylvania Telehealth Research Center of Excellence (Penn TRACE) is designing and testing telehealth strategies with the potential to transform access to care, care quality, outcomes, health equity, and health-care efficiency across the cancer care continuum, with an emphasis on understanding mechanisms of action. Penn TRACE uses lung cancer care as an exemplar model for telehealth across the care continuum, from screening to treatment to survivorship. We bring together a diverse and interdisciplinary team of international experts and incorporate rapid-cycle approaches and mixed methods evaluation in all center projects. Our initiatives include a pragmatic sequential multiple assignment randomized trial to compare the effectiveness of telehealth strategies to increase shared decision-making for lung cancer screening and 2 pilot projects to test the effectiveness of telehealth to improve cancer care, identify multilevel mechanisms of action, and lay the foundation for future pragmatic trials. Penn TRACE aims to produce new fundamental knowledge and advance telehealth science in cancer care at Penn and nationally.

Background: Telehealth use increased during the COVID-19 pandemic and remains a complementary source of cancer care delivery. Understanding research funding trends in cancer-related telehealth can highlight developments in this area of science and identify future opportunities.

Methods: Applications funded by the US National Cancer Institute (NCI) between fiscal years 2016 and 2022 and focused on synchronous patient-provider telehealth were analyzed for grant characteristics (eg, funding mechanism), cancer focus (eg, cancer type), and study features (eg, type of telehealth service). Of 106 grants identified initially, 60 were retained for coding after applying exclusion criteria.

Results: Almost three-quarters (73%) of telehealth grants were funded during fiscal years 2020-2022. Approximately 67% were funded through R01 or R37 mechanism and implemented as randomized controlled trials (63%). Overall, telehealth grants commonly focused on treatment (30%) and survivorship (43%); breast cancer (12%), hematologic malignancies (10%), and multiple cancer sites (27%); and health disparity populations (ie, minorities, rural residents) (73%). Both audio and video telehealth were common (65%), as well as accompanying mHealth apps (20%). Telehealth services centered on psychosocial care, self-management, and supportive care (88%); interventions were commonly delivered by mental health professionals (30%).

Conclusion: NCI has observed an increase in funded synchronous patient-provider telehealth grants. Trends indicate an evolution of awards that have expanded across the cancer control continuum, applied rigorous study designs, incorporated additional digital technologies, and focused on populations recognized for disparate cancer outcomes. As telehealth is integrated into routine cancer care delivery, additional research evidence will be needed to inform clinical practice.

Cancer is a stigmatized disease in many countries that impacts the quality of life and mental health of people affected by cancer. This commentary examines some dimensions of cancer stigma and has been developed based on insights from participants in a Union for International Cancer Control program dedicated to cancer patient organizations in low- and middle-income countries. Aimed at program managers and policy makers, this commentary highlights the importance of developing strategies to reduce cancer stigma in cancer control programs in different contexts, working closely with community-based civil society organizations and those with lived experience of cancer to understand, evaluate, and take action regarding the impact of cancer stigma on health-seeking behavior and patients' quality of life.

Background: Vietnam is experiencing a growing burden of cancer, including among people living with HIV. Stigma acts as a sociocultural barrier to the prevention and treatment of both conditions. This study investigates how cultural notions of "respected personhood" (or "what matters most") influence manifestations of HIV-related stigma and cancer stigma in Hanoi, Vietnam.

Methods: Thirty in-depth interviews were conducted with people living with HIV in Hanoi, Vietnam. Transcripts were thematically coded via a directed content analysis using the What Matters Most conceptual framework. Coding was done individually and discussed in pairs, and any discrepancies were reconciled in full-team meetings.

Results: Analyses elucidated that having chữ tín-a value reflecting social involvement, conscientiousness, and trustworthiness-and being successful (eg, in career, academics, or one's personal life) are characteristics of respected people in this local cultural context. Living with HIV and having cancer were seen as stigmatized and interfering with these values and capabilities. Intersectional stigma toward having both conditions was seen to interplay with these values in some ways that had distinctions compared with stigma toward either condition alone. Participants also articulated how cultural values like chữ tín are broadly protective against stigmatization and how getting treatment and maintaining employment can help individuals resist stigmatization's most acute impacts.

Conclusions: HIV-related and cancer stigma each interfere with important cultural values and capabilities in Vietnam. Understanding these cultural manifestations of these stigmas separately and intersectionally can allow for greater ability to measure and respond to these stigmas through culturally tailored intervention.

Background: Innovations in lung cancer control and care have started to transform the landscape of lung cancer outcomes, but lung cancer stigma and biases have been implicated as a deterrent to realizing the promise of these innovations. Research has documented lung cancer stigma among the general public and lung cancer survivors (self-blame), as well as clinicians across many disciplines. However, studies have not explored lung cancer stigma in health-care trainees. These data seek to address that gap and inform efforts to prevent the emergence or mitigate the presence of lung cancer stigma among future clinicians.

Methods: Using clinical vignettes and a 2x2 factorial design, this investigation evaluated the impact of a history of smoking (yes vs no) and cancer diagnosis (lung vs colorectal) on perceptions of the described patient among 2 groups of preclinical health-care trainees (medical = 94 and nursing = 138). A charitable giving paradigm also asked participants to donate provided funds to 1 of 2 cancer advocacy organizations: one serving the lung cancer community and one serving the colorectal cancer community.

Results: In study 1, results revealed a consistent pattern of statistically significant and medium to large effect size differences regarding stigmatized perceptions (eg, higher stigmatizing behavior, increased pity, greater anger, and less helping) for individuals with a history of smoking but no reliable differences regarding cancer diagnosis. Analysis of data from nursing trainees in study 2 showed a similar pattern of statistically significant and medium to large effects pertaining to stigma behavior and perceptions of individuals who had a history of smoking depicted in the vignettes. The charitable giving paradigm did not identify any reliable difference between the groups in either study.

Conclusions: Findings revealed a consistent pattern of health-care trainee perceptions that varied by smoking status but much less evidence that the cancer diagnosis contributed to different perceptions. This suggests that efforts to integrate consideration of stigma and biases in health-care training needs to adopt an approach that seeks to mitigate or eliminate stigmatizing perceptions and behaviors toward individuals with a history of smoking.

Stigma is a social process characterized by negative beliefs, attitudes, and stereotypes associated with a specific attribute or characteristic that leads to discrimination and social exclusion. Stigma manifests across the cancer control continuum and remains a key challenge for cancer prevention and control worldwide. In this commentary, we provide an overview of the U.S. National Cancer Institute's (NCI) Global Cancer Stigma Research Workshop, a multi-disciplinary international conference held virtually in September 2022, which focused on the intersection of cancer and stigma. The meeting was unique in its convening of researchers, advocates, clinicians, and non-governmental and governmental organizations, who-as a collective-provided overarching topics, cross-cutting considerations, and future directions for the cancer stigma research community to consider, which we describe herein. In summary, studying cancer stigma comprehensively requires a holistic, adaptive, and multifaceted approach-and should consider interrelated factors and their intersection within diverse cultural and social contexts worldwide. Collectively, there was a call for: an inclusive approach, encouraging researchers and practitioners to identify and measure cancer stigma as a driver for cancer health inequities globally; an expansion of existing research methodology to include diversity of experiences, contexts, and perspectives; and collaborations among diverse stakeholders to develop more effective strategies for reducing stigma and improving cancer outcomes. Such efforts are essential to cultivating effective and equitable approaches to preventing and treating cancer worldwide.

Effective communication about cancer diagnosis and prognosis in sub-Saharan African oncology settings is often challenged by the cancer-related shame and stigma patients and families experience. Enhancing empathic communication between health care providers, including physicians and nurses, and oncology patients and their families can not only reduce cancer stigma but also improve patient engagement, treatment satisfaction, and quality of life. To reduce lung cancer stigma, we adapted an evidence-based empathic communication skills training intervention to reduce patients' experience of stigma in Nigeria and conducted a pilot study examining the feasibility and acceptability of the empathic communication skills training. Thirty health care providers, recruited from University College Hospital, Ibadan, and Obafemi Awolowo University Teaching Hospitals Complex, Ile-Ife, participated in a 2.25-hour didactic and experiential training session. Participant surveys were completed before and after the training. Overall, participants reported highly favorable training evaluations, with at least 85% of health care providers agreeing or strongly agreeing to survey items assessing training relevance, novelty, clarity, and facilitator effectiveness. Self-efficacy to communicate empathically with patients increased significantly from before-training (Mean [SD] = 3.93 [0.28]) to after-training (Mean [SD] = 4.55 [0.15]; t29 = 3.51, P < .05). Significant improvements were observed in health care provider reports of empathy toward lung cancer survivors and attitude toward lung cancer care as well as significant reductions in lung cancer blame were noted. The empathic communication skills training was feasible, well received by oncology clinicians in Nigeria, and demonstrated improvements in health care provider-reported outcomes from before- to after-training.

Persons with HIV-associated Kaposi's sarcoma (KS) experience three co-existing stigmatizing health conditions: skin disease, HIV, and cancer, which contribute to a complex experience of stigmatization and to delays in diagnosis and treatment. Despite the importance of stigma among these patients, there are few proven stigma-reduction strategies for HIV-associated malignancies. Using qualitative methods, we explore how people with HIV-associated KS in western Kenya between August 2022 and 2023 describe changes in their stigma experience after participation in a multicomponent navigation strategy, which included 1) physical navigation and care coordination, 2) video-based education with motivational survivor stories, 3) travel stipend, 4) health insurance enrollment assistance, 5) health insurance stipend, and 6) peer mentorship. A purposive sample of persons at different stages of chemotherapy treatment were invited to participate. Participants described how a multicomponent navigation strategy contributed to increased knowledge and awareness, a sense of belonging, hope to survive, encouragement, and social support, which served as stigma mitigators, likely counteracting the major drivers of intersectional stigma in HIV-associated KS.