Does screening with the Galleri test in the NHS reduce the likelihood of a late-stage cancer diagnosis? A randomised clinical trial.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Sasieni ◽  
Simranjeet Mehta
2009 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 160-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beth A. Virnig ◽  
Nancy N. Baxter ◽  
Elizabeth B. Habermann ◽  
Roger D. Feldman ◽  
Cathy J. Bradley

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 799-799
Author(s):  
Candice Reel ◽  
J Hunter Williams ◽  
Emma Brennan ◽  
Jonna Williams ◽  
Kristen Payne ◽  
...  

Abstract Many studies have examined the effects of caregiving burden and many others have focused on the effects of having a caregiver (Haynes-Lewis et al., 2018; Trevino, Prigerson, & Maciejewski, 2018; Semere et al., 2020). However, there is little data on the experience of role reversal, once responsible for caring for others and now being cared for while living with cancer. This project aims to identify ways in which women living with cancer cope with the internal struggles of receiving care. The current project is a case study of two females, one age 67, NHW, with a breast cancer diagnosis and one age 60, Black, with an ovarian cancer diagnosis, who once were caregivers and are now being cared for by family. Two semi-structured interviews were conducted that were approximately 60 minutes each. The study data are from a larger project focused on the self-perception of older women with late-stage cancer. Four independent researchers used thematic analysis to uncover common themes of coping between the two women receiving care. The themes uncovered were acceptance of the loss of autonomy, positive death attitudes, good relationships with their caregivers, and religiosity were identified and coded as coping strategies. The qualitative data showed that the use of these coping strategies helped the women be more accepting to care with less internal conflict. Future research should focus on generalizing these findings on a larger sample and use the data to help cancer patients better accept care from others.


2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 264-270
Author(s):  
Bo Ram Park ◽  
So Young Kim ◽  
Dong Wook Shin ◽  
Hyung Kook Yang ◽  
Jong Hyock Park

2012 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
pp. 978-990 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lee R. Mobley ◽  
Tzy-Mey (May) Kuo ◽  
Lisa Watson ◽  
G. Gordon Brown

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (31_suppl) ◽  
pp. 60-60
Author(s):  
Sarah Bracey Garrett ◽  
Christopher J Koenig ◽  
Daniel Paul Dohan

60 Background: Late-stage cancer patients (LSCPs) face complex choices as they exhaust standard treatment options, including whether to seek enrollment in an early phase (EP) clinical trial and how they may engage palliative care. Existing research describes patient-level decisional motivations, but less is known about the process by which patients arrive at decisions and the institutional barriers or facilitators that shape it. We investigate this process and the key barriers and facilitators for initiating an EP trial. Methods: We collected longitudinal, ethnographic data on 96 LSCPs from breast, genitourinary, gastrointestinal, lung, gynecology, and melanoma clinics at two large academic medical centers. We used constant comparative analysis to inductively identify factors that shaped patients’ paths towards or away from EP trial initiation. Results: Four key factors shaped patients’ pathways and help explain why most patients did not join a trial. These arose during two distinct periods. The first, “Setting the Stage,” concerned achieving both (a) patient and (b) physician interest in and support for the patient’s involvement in an EP trial. These achievements depended on the patient’s knowledge and opinions of experimental research, the physician’s awareness of relevant EP trials, and whether the physician considered the patient a good EP candidate, among other influences. The second period, “Securing an Experimental Seat,” concerned aligning (c) the availability of a specific EP trial with (d) the patient meeting the trial’s eligibility requirements. Disease progression, type and timing of past treatments, and dynamic trial enrollment windows all complicated this alignment. Despite the complexity of Securing a Seat, our data suggest that Setting the Stage was the more consequential period in terms of when patients exited the EP trial pathway. Conclusions: Patients’ priorities and decision-making are only one part of a multi-level process. LSCPs’ paths onto an EP trial depend not only on their making a particular decision, but also on relational, clinical and system-level conditions. This suggests that boosting EP trials participation requires interventions on multiple levels.


2021 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 104-109
Author(s):  
Lauren Lin ◽  
Aparna Soni ◽  
Lindsay M. Sabik ◽  
Coleman Drake

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document