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.     

Lysophosphatidylcholine‐induced cytotoxicity and protection by heparin in mouse brain bEND.3 endothelial cells

A pathological feature in atherosclerosis is the dysfunction and death of vascular endothelial cells (EC). Oxidized low‐density lipoprotein (LDL), known to accumulate in the atherosclerotic arterial walls, impairs endothelium‐dependent relaxation and causes EC apoptosis. A major bioactive ingredient of the oxidized LDL is lysophosphatidylcholine (LPC), which at higher concentrations causes apoptosis and necrosis in various EC. There is hitherto no report on LPC‐induced cytotoxicity in brain EC. In this work, we found that LPC caused cytosolic Ca²⁺ overload, mitochondrial membrane potential decrease, p38 activation, caspase 3 activation and eventually apoptotic death in mouse cerebral bEND.3 EC. In contrast to reported reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation by LPC in other EC, LPC did not trigger ROS formation in bEND.3 cells. Pharmacological inhibition of p38 alleviated LPC‐inflicted cell death. We examined whether heparin could be cytoprotective: although it could not suppress LPC‐triggered Ca²⁺ signal, p38 activation and mitochondrial membrane potential drop, it did suppress LPC‐induced caspase 3 activation and alleviate LPC‐inflicted cytotoxicity. Our data suggest LPC apoptotic death mechanisms in bEND.3 might involve mitochondrial membrane potential decrease and p38 activation. Heparin is protective against LPC cytotoxicity and might intervene steps between mitochondrial membrane potential drop/p38 activation and caspase 3 activation.     

A Type 1 diabetes technology pathway: consensus statement for the use of technology in Type 1 diabetes

In both adults and children with diabetes, technologies such as continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion using insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitoring can help improve diabetes control, reduce hypoglycaemia and improve quality of life. Access to these technologies in the UK is very variable. Some technologies are recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, while others have not been appraised, and new technologies are emerging all the time. Additionally, different guidelines for adults and children further complicate access to diabetes technology in the transition from paediatric to adult care. Against this background, Diabetes UK and NHS England have brought together a multidisciplinary group of experts, including clinicians and people with diabetes, to develop this consensus guideline, combining the different technologies into a common pathway to aid clinical and policy decision‐making. We created a pathway that supports the incremental addition of technology as monotherapy and then dual therapy in the same way that we incrementally add in therapeutic agents to support people with Type 2 diabetes to achieve their personalized glycaemic targets. The pathway emphasizes the importance of structured education, specialist support and appropriate access to psychological therapies, as essential pillars for optimized use of diabetes‐related technology, and recommends the re‐evaluation of its use when the individual is unable either to use the technology appropriately or to achieve the intended outcomes. This pathway is endorsed by UK‐wide clinical and patient associations and we recommend that providers and commissioners use it to ensure the right individual with diabetes has access to the right technology in a timely way to help achieve better outcomes.