Patient navigation across the cancer care continuum: An overview of systematic reviews and emerging literature

Patient navigation is a strategy for overcoming barriers to reduce disparities and to improve access and outcomes. The aim of this umbrella review was to identify, critically appraise, synthesize, and present the best available evidence to inform policy and planning regarding patient navigation across the cancer continuum. Systematic reviews examining navigation in cancer care were identified in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), Epistemonikos, and Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) databases and in the gray literature from January 1, 2012, to April 19, 2022. Data were screened, extracted, and appraised independently by two authors. The JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Review and Research Syntheses was used for quality appraisal. Emerging literature up to May 25, 2022, was also explored to capture primary research published beyond the coverage of included systematic reviews. Of the 2062 unique records identified, 61 systematic reviews were included. Fifty-four reviews were quantitative or mixed-methods reviews, reporting on the effectiveness of cancer patient navigation, including 12 reviews reporting costs or cost-effectiveness outcomes. Seven qualitative reviews explored navigation needs, barriers, and experiences. In addition, 53 primary studies published since 2021 were included. Patient navigation is effective in improving participation in cancer screening and reducing the time from screening to diagnosis and from diagnosis to treatment initiation. Emerging evidence suggests that patient navigation improves quality of life and patient satisfaction with care in the survivorship phase and reduces hospital readmission in the active treatment and survivorship care phases. Palliative care data were extremely limited. Economic evaluations from the United States suggest the potential cost-effectiveness of navigation in screening programs.     

Does a high Mandard score really define a poor response to chemotherapy in oesophageal adenocarcinoma?

Background A high Mandard score implies a non-response to chemotherapy in oesophageal adenocarcinoma. However, some patients exhibit tumour volume reduction and a nodal response despite a high score. This study examines survival and recurrence patterns in these patients.Methods Clinicopathological factors were analysed using multivariable Cox regression assessing time to death and recurrence. Computed tomography-estimated tumour volume change was examined in a subgroup of consecutive patients.Results Five hundred and fifty-five patients were included. Median survival was 55 months (Mandard 1–3) and 21 months (Mandard 4 and 5). In the Mandard 4 and 5 group (332 patients), comparison between complete nodal responders and persistent nodal disease showed improved survival (90 vs 18 months), recurrence rates (locoregional 14.75 vs 28.74%, systemic 24.59 vs 48.42%) and circumferential resection margin positivity (22.95 vs 68.11%). Complete nodal response independently predicted improved survival (hazard ratio 0.34 (0.16–0.74). Post-chemotherapy tumour volume reduction was greater in patients with a complete nodal response (−16.3 vs −7.7 cm³, p = 0.033) with no significant difference between Mandard groups.Conclusion Patients with a complete nodal response to chemotherapy have significantly improved outcomes despite a poor Mandard score. High Mandard score does not correspond with a non-response to chemotherapy in all cases and patients with nodal downstaging may still benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy.Subject terms: Oesophageal cancer, Surgical oncology     

Stage 1 acute kidney injury is independently associated with infection following cardiac surgery

ObjectivesSevere acute kidney injury (AKI) is a known risk factor for infection and mortality. However, whether stage 1 AKI is a risk factor for infection has not been evaluated in adults. We hypothesized that stage 1 AKI following cardiac surgery would independently associate with infection and mortality.MethodsIn this retrospective propensity score–matched study, we evaluated 1620 adult patients who underwent nonemergent cardiac surgery at the University of Colorado Hospital from 2011 to 2017. Patients who developed stage 1 AKI by Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes creatinine criteria within 72 hours of surgery were matched to patients who did not develop AKI. The primary outcome was an infection, defined as a new surgical-site infection, positive blood or urine culture, or development of pneumonia. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality, stroke, and intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay (LOS).ResultsStage 1 AKI occurred in 293 patients (18.3%). Infection occurred in 20.9% of patients with stage 1 AKI compared with 8.1% in the no-AKI group (P < .001). In propensity-score matched analysis, stage 1 AKI independently associated with increased infection (odds ratio [OR]; 2.24, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.37-3.17), ICU LOS (OR, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.71–3.31), and hospital LOS (OR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.17-1.45).ConclusionsStage 1 AKI is independently associated with postoperative infection, ICU LOS, and hospital LOS. Treatment strategies focused on prevention, early recognition, and optimal medical management of AKI may decrease significant postoperative morbidity.