scholarly journals Screening for distress and needs: Findings from a multinational validation of the Adolescent and Young Adult Psycho‐Oncology Screening Tool with newly diagnosed patients

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pandora Patterson ◽  
Norma M. D Agostino ◽  
Fiona E. J. McDonald ◽  
Terry David Church ◽  
Daniel S. J. Costa ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10556-10556
Author(s):  
Andrew Brian Smitherman ◽  
Vanessa L Ayer Miller ◽  
Natalia Mitin ◽  
Allison Mary Deal ◽  
Hyman B. Muss

10556 Background: The mechanism of accelerated aging among survivors of childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer is not clearly understood. Cellular senescence may contribute to this process. We measured peripheral blood T lymphocyte p16INK4a expression, a biomarker of cellular senescence and aging, among pediatric and young adult cancer survivors hypothesizing that p16INK4a expression is higher due to chemotherapy exposure and among frail survivors. Methods: Two cohorts were enrolled from January 2018 to December 2019 at an academic medical center. One, a cross-sectional cohort of young adult cancer survivors and age-matched, cancer-free controls in whom we assessed p16INK4a expression and clinical frailty. Frailty was measured with the modified Fried Frailty Index that evaluates skeletal muscle index, weakness, slowness, leisure energy expenditure, and exhaustion. A second cohort underwent prospective measurement of p16INK4a expression before and after cancer chemotherapy. Eligibility among survivors and newly diagnosed patients required treatment with an alkylating agent, an anthracycline / anthracenedione, or both. Multivariable linear regression was used to model expression of p16INK4a by patient age at assessment, treatment intensity, and frailty status. Results: The cross-sectional cohort enrolled 60 young adult survivors and 29 age-matched, cancer-free controls with median age 21 years and range 17-29 years for both groups. Survivors were a median of 5.5 years from end of treatment. The prospective cohort enrolled nine newly diagnosed patients (range 1-18 years). Expression of p16INK4a was higher among young adult cancer survivors as compared to age-matched controls (9.6 v. 8.9 log2 p16 units, p < 0.01) representing a 25-year age acceleration in the survivors. Expression of p16INK4a increased among newly diagnosed patients from matched pre- to post-treatment samples (7.3 to 8.9 log2 p16 units, p = 0.002). Nine survivors (16%) met criteria for being frail and had higher p16INK4a expression as compared to robust survivors (10.5 [frail] v. 9.5 [robust] log2 p16 units, p = 0.055). Conclusions: Chemotherapy is associated with increased cellular senescence in pediatric and young adult cancer survivors as reflected in expression of p16INK4a indicating an increase in molecular age following chemotherapy exposure. The large proportion of frail survivors in this study also exhibited higher levels of p16INK4a suggesting that cellular senescence may be associated with early aging observed among these survivors.



2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e24180-e24180
Author(s):  
Jenna Sopfe ◽  
Rebekah Marsh ◽  
Leslie C. Appiah ◽  
James L. Klosky ◽  
Pamela N Peterson ◽  
...  

e24180 Background: Up to half of adolescent and young adult (AYA) childhood cancer survivors (CCS) experience sexual dysfunction (SD) as a result cancer or its treatment. SD in CCS is under-recognized, with low levels of routine screening due to barriers such as discomfort, time, and awareness. This study explores solutions to these barriers by describing AYA CCS preferences for implementation of screening for SD and evaluating the utility of a validated adult screening tool (PROMIS SexFS Brief) in this population. Methods: 16 AYA CCS (aged 15-24 years) completed semi-structured interviews followed by questionnaire completion. Interviews explored patients’ prior experiences with SD screening, along with preferences for screening type (e.g., discussion, screening tool), delivery modality, and timing. Patients then completed the PROMIS SexFS Brief while verbalizing their thoughts and providing open-ended responses to each item. Transcribed interviews were inductively coded and analyzed, guided by content analysis methodology. Results: This analysis represents 2/3 of planned interviews, and all will be completed by April 1, 2020. Interviews were performed with 11 females and 5 males (median age 21). Preliminary analysis demonstrates that participants had minimal experience with SD conversations, but had preferences regarding by whom, how, and when screening/education should occur. Who: Participants felt providers should have preexisting rapport with their patients; preferences existed for provider role and sex/age. How: A combination of written materials and in-person conversations was preferred. Several acknowledged a desire to have a “warning” that the conversation would happen, such as through a questionnaire. Participants did not have a preference regarding delivery modality (paper vs. online). The PROMIS SexFS Brief appeared to demonstrate content validity and acceptability in AYA CCS. When: Participants wanted education and screening to occur regularly throughout cancer therapy and survivorship. SD conversations should be tailored developmentally to the patient. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate a theme throughout interviews of the importance of patient/provider rapport. Further, while AYA CCS prefer in-person conversations about SD, conversations should be preceded by written information or a questionnaire to increase patient preparedness/comfort. Preliminary findings suggest that the PROMIS SexFS Brief is a promising tool for screening SD in this population; further studies evaluating use in clinical settings is warranted.



2019 ◽  
Vol 66 (11) ◽  
Author(s):  
Leena Nahata ◽  
Taylor L. Morgan ◽  
Keagan G. Lipak ◽  
Olivia E. Clark ◽  
Nicholas D. Yeager ◽  
...  




2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Supplement_6) ◽  
pp. vi85-vi86
Author(s):  
Nayan Lamba ◽  
Bryan Iorgulescu

Abstract INTRODUCTION Few data exist regarding the epidemiology of brain metastases (BMs) in adolescent and young adult (AYA) patients. Herein we use national cancer registry data to dissect their epidemiology and compare to the adult population. METHODS AYA patients (15 ≤ age ≤ 39) who newly presented with a BM between 2010 and 2017 were identified in the National Cancer Database (comprising &gt;70% of all newly-diagnosed cancers in the U.S.). The epidemiology of BMs was analyzed by primary cancer of origin, and compared between AYA and adult patients. Overall survival was analyzed with multivariable Cox regression. RESULTS 2,773 AYA patients presenting with BMs were identified (98% with histopathological diagnosis), compared to 156,103 adult patients (94% with histopathological diagnosis). Whereas 39.6% of newly-diagnosed brain tumors with histopathological confirmation were BMs in adults, BMs represented only 5.8% of such tumors in AYA patients. Additionally, the distributions of primary cancer types differed substantially between adults and AYA patients: notably, NSCLC dominated in adults (64.2%) vs representing only 31.6% of BMs in AYA patients. AYA patients were more likely to present with BMs from melanoma (13.0% of AYA BMs vs 3.7% in adult), soft tissue (4.5% vs 0.3%), testicular (in males 26.2% vs 0.1%), and breast (in females 29.5% vs 7.8%) primaries. Among breast BMs in females, AYA patients were less likely to have HR+/HER2- primaries (40.2% vs 47.8%) and more likely to have HER2+ (25.2% vs 20.1%) and triple positive (11.1% vs. 9.8%) primaries than adults. Overall survival was significantly longer for AYA patients with BMs (HR=0.61 compared to adult patients, 95%CI:0.58-0.64, p&lt; 0.001) even after adjusting for primary cancer type, patient sex. CONCLUSIONS The epidemiology and cancer types of BMs in AYA patients differ substantially from adult patients. Future research aimed at understanding the unique differences in pathophysiology and outcomes of BMs in AYA patients is warranted.



2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9506-9506 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. A. Canner ◽  
T. A. Alonzo ◽  
J. Franklin ◽  
D. R. Freyer ◽  
A. S. Gamis ◽  
...  


2012 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 112-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annette Leibetseder ◽  
Michael Ackerl ◽  
Birgit Flechl ◽  
Adelheid Wöhrer ◽  
Georg Widhalm ◽  
...  


2017 ◽  
Vol 85 (7) ◽  
pp. 676-688 ◽  
Author(s):  
James F. Boswell ◽  
Nicole M. Cain ◽  
Jennifer M. Oswald ◽  
Andrew A. McAleavey ◽  
Robert Adelman


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document