Early integration of basic palliative care in cancer: scoping review of cross-sectorial models - components, facilitators, barriers.

BACKGROUND: Shared care between oncology specialists and general practice regarding the delivery of palliative care (PC) is necessary to meet the demands for a cohesive PC. The primary objective of this study is to investigate models of cross-sectorial integration between primary care and oncology specialists that have been developed to promote early and basic PC and factors influencing the process. METHOD: A scoping review was conducted using publications dated up until April 2023. Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. Complementary searches were performed via reference lists and grey literature. Explicit early PC models aimed at patients with cancer aged ≥18 years with healthcare professionals from primary care and oncology constituted the inclusion criteria. The screening of the papers was performed independently by two reviewers. The reporting adheres to the extension for scoping reviews of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. RESULTS: The search provided 5630 articles of which six met the eligibility criteria, each describing a different model of early and cross-sectorial, integrated PC. 12 active components were identified. Education of staff as well as good communication and cooperation skills are essential factors to succeed with integrated, early PC. CONCLUSION: Integration of PC between general practice and oncology specialists has potential. The components of basic PC have been established. Factors known to influence the process are trust, communication and a common goal. Further research is required into strategies for approaching different levels of integration.

Through Clinicians Eyes: Use of an In-consultation Patient Decision Aid in Radiation Treatment for Early Breast Cancer. A Qualitative Study.

INTRODUCTION: Shared decision making (SDM) has become a crucial element on the political agenda and represents a vital aspect of modern healthcare. However, successful implementation of SDM highly depends on the attitude of clinicians towards SDM. The overall aim of our study was to explore the experience of oncologists and nurses with SDM using the Decision Helper, an in-consultation decision aid, at four Danish radiotherapy departments. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 clinicians. The participants were selected using purposive sampling to include nurses and oncologists, male and female, with different levels of experience with SDM and clinical work. The analysis was a data-driven, iterative process with inductive coding of all interviews and meaning condensation. RESULTS: Two main themes emerged: "Using the Decision Helper changes the consultation" and "Change of attitude among Danish oncologists." Each of the two themes included four elaborative subthemes, which are reported with supporting citations in this paper. In brief, the use of SDM and the Decision Helper should ideally be adjusted to the individual patient and depends highly on the oncologist. The participants described ambitions towards "making the right decision for this patient at this time." The healthcare system, however, has pitfalls that may hinder SDM, e.g., rigid interpretation of guideline-based recommendations. CONCLUSION: Using an in-consultation Decision Helper has the potential for individualized, structured patient engagement in decision making. There is a need for patient decision aids in clinical guidelines to ensure patient engagement in decision making.

Impact of timing and format of patient decision aids for breast cancer patients on their involvement in and preparedness for decision making - the IMPACTT randomised controlled trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: After curative surgery for early-stage breast cancer, patients face a decision on whether to undergo surgery alone or to receive one or more adjuvant treatments, which may lower the risk of recurrence. Variations in survival outcomes are often marginal but there are differences in the side effects and other features of the options that patients may value differently. Hence, the patient's values and preferences are critical in determining what option to choose. It is well-researched that the use of shared decision making and patient decision aids can support this choice in a discussion between patient and clinician. However, it is still to be investigated what impact the timing and format of the patient decision aid have on shared decision making outcomes. In this trial, we aim to investigate the impact of a digital pre-consult compared to a paper-based in-consult patient decision aid on patients' involvement in shared decision making, decisional conflict and preparedness to make a decision. METHODS: The study is a randomised controlled trial with 204 patients at two Danish oncology outpatient clinics. Eligible patients are newly diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer and offered adjuvant treatments after curative surgery to lower the risk of recurrence. Participants will be randomised to receive either an in-consult paper-based patient decision aid or a pre-consult digital patient decision aid. Data collection includes patient and clinician-reported outcomes as well as observer-reported shared decision making based on audio recordings of the consultation. The primary outcome is the extent to which patients are engaged in a shared decision making process reported by the patient. Secondary aims include the length of consultation, preparation for decision making, preferred role in shared decision making and decisional conflict. DISCUSSION: This study is the first known randomised, controlled trial comparing a digital, pre-consult patient decision aid to an identical paper-based, in-consult patient decision aid. It will contribute evidence on the impact of patient decision aids in terms of investigating if pre-consult digital patient decisions aids compared to in-consult paper-based decision aids support the cancer patients in being better prepared for decision making. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05573022).

Shared decision making with breast cancer patients - does it work? Results of the cluster-randomized, multicenter DBCG RT SDM trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Shared decision making (SDM) is a patient engaging process advocated especially for preference-sensitive decisions, such as adjuvant treatment after breast cancer. An increasing call for patient engagement in decision making highlights the need for a systematic SDM approach. The objective of this trial was to investigate whether the Decision Helper (DH), an in-consultation patient decision aid, increases patient engagement in decisions regarding adjuvant whole breast irradiation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Oncologists at four radiotherapy units were randomized to practice SDM using the DH versus usual practice. Patient candidates for adjuvant whole breast irradiation after breast conserving surgery for node-negative breast cancer were eligible. The primary endpoint was patient-reported engagement in the decision process assessed with the Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) (range 0-100, 4 points difference considered clinical relevant). Other endpoints included oncologist-reported patient engagement, decisional conflict, fear of cancer recurrence, and decision regret after 6 months. RESULTS: Of the 674 included patients, 635 (94.2%) completed the SDM-Q-9. Patients in the intervention group reported higher level of engagement (median 80; IQR 68.9 to 94.4) than the control group (71.1; IQR 55.6 to 82.2; p < 0.0001). Oncologist-reported patient engagement was higher in the invention group (93.3; IQR 82.2 to 100) compared to control group (73.3; IQR 60.0 to 84.4) (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Patient engagement in medical decision making was significantly improved with the use of an in-consultation patient decision aid compared to standard. The DH on adjuvant whole breast irradiation is now recommended as standard of care in the Danish guideline.

Improving shared decision-making about cancer treatment through design-based data-driven decision-support tools and redesigning care paths: an overview of the 4D PICTURE project.

Background: Patients with cancer often have to make complex decisions about treatment, with the options varying in risk profiles and effects on survival and quality of life. Moreover, inefficient care paths make it hard for patients to participate in shared decision-making. Data-driven decision-support tools have the potential to empower patients, support personalized care, improve health outcomes and promote health equity. However, decision-support tools currently seldom consider quality of life or individual preferences, and their use in clinical practice remains limited, partly because they are not well integrated in patients' care paths. Aim and objectives: The central aim of the 4D PICTURE project is to redesign patients' care paths and develop and integrate evidence-based decision-support tools to improve decision-making processes in cancer care delivery. This article presents an overview of this international, interdisciplinary project. Design methods and analysis: In co-creation with patients and other stakeholders, we will develop data-driven decision-support tools for patients with breast cancer, prostate cancer and melanoma. We will support treatment decisions by using large, high-quality datasets with state-of-the-art prognostic algorithms. We will further develop a conversation tool, the Metaphor Menu, using text mining combined with citizen science techniques and linguistics, incorporating large datasets of patient experiences, values and preferences. We will further develop a promising methodology, MetroMapping, to redesign care paths. We will evaluate MetroMapping and these integrated decision-support tools, and ensure their sustainability using the Nonadoption, Abandonment, Scale-Up, Spread, and Sustainability (NASSS) framework. We will explore the generalizability of MetroMapping and the decision-support tools for other types of cancer and across other EU member states. Ethics: Through an embedded ethics approach, we will address social and ethical issues. Discussion: Improved care paths integrating comprehensive decision-support tools have the potential to empower patients, their significant others and healthcare providers in decision-making and improve outcomes. This project will strengthen health care at the system level by improving its resilience and efficiency.

Improving the cancer patient journey and respecting personal preferences: an overview of the 4D PICTURE project The 4D PICTURE project aims to help cancer patients, their families and healthcare providers better undertstand their options. It supports their treatment and care choices, at each stage of disease, by drawing on large amounts of evidence from different types of European data. The project involves experts from many different specialist areas who are based in nine European countries. The overall aim is to improve the cancer patient journey and ensure personal preferences are respected.

Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.

BACKGROUND: Patient decision aids are interventions designed to support people making health decisions. At a minimum, patient decision aids make the decision explicit, provide evidence-based information about the options and associated benefits/harms, and help clarify personal values for features of options. This is an update of a Cochrane review that was first published in 2003 and last updated in 2017. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of patient decision aids in adults considering treatment or screening decisions using an integrated knowledge translation approach. SEARCH METHODS: We conducted the updated search for the period of 2015 (last search date) to March 2022 in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, EBSCO, and grey literature. The cumulative search covers database origins to March 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included published randomized controlled trials comparing patient decision aids to usual care. Usual care was defined as general information, risk assessment, clinical practice guideline summaries for health consumers, placebo intervention (e.g. information on another topic), or no intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently screened citations for inclusion, extracted intervention and outcome data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Primary outcomes, based on the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS), were attributes related to the choice made (informed values-based choice congruence) and the decision-making process, such as knowledge, accurate risk perceptions, feeling informed, clear values, participation in decision-making, and adverse events. Secondary outcomes were choice, confidence in decision-making, adherence to the chosen option, preference-linked health outcomes, and impact on the healthcare system (e.g. consultation length). We pooled results using mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), applying a random-effects model. We conducted a subgroup analysis of 105 studies that were included in the previous review version compared to those published since that update (n = 104 studies). We used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: This update added 104 new studies for a total of 209 studies involving 107,698 participants. The patient decision aids focused on 71 different decisions. The most common decisions were about cardiovascular treatments (n = 22 studies), cancer screening (n = 17 studies colorectal, 15 prostate, 12 breast), cancer treatments (e.g. 15 breast, 11 prostate), mental health treatments (n = 10 studies), and joint replacement surgery (n = 9 studies). When assessing risk of bias in the included studies, we rated two items as mostly unclear (selective reporting: 100 studies; blinding of participants/personnel: 161 studies), due to inadequate reporting. Of the 209 included studies, 34 had at least one item rated as high risk of bias. There was moderate-certainty evidence that patient decision aids probably increase the congruence between informed values and care choices compared to usual care (RR 1.75, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.13; 21 studies, 9377 participants). Regarding attributes related to the decision-making process and compared to usual care, there was high-certainty evidence that patient decision aids result in improved participants' knowledge (MD 11.90/100, 95% CI 10.60 to 13.19; 107 studies, 25,492 participants), accuracy of risk perceptions (RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.61 to 2.34; 25 studies, 7796 participants), and decreased decisional conflict related to feeling uninformed (MD -10.02, 95% CI -12.31 to -7.74; 58 studies, 12,104 participants), indecision about personal values (MD -7.86, 95% CI -9.69 to -6.02; 55 studies, 11,880 participants), and proportion of people who were passive in decision-making (clinician-controlled) (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.88; 21 studies, 4348 participants). For adverse outcomes, there was high-certainty evidence that there was no difference in decision regret between the patient decision aid and usual care groups (MD -1.23, 95% CI -3.05 to 0.59; 22 studies, 3707 participants). Of note, there was no difference in the length of consultation when patient decision aids were used in preparation for the consultation (MD -2.97 minutes, 95% CI -7.84 to 1.90; 5 studies, 420 participants). When patient decision aids were used during the consultation with the clinician, the length of consultation was 1.5 minutes longer (MD 1.50 minutes, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.20; 8 studies, 2702 participants). We found the same direction of effect when we compared results for patient decision aid studies reported in the previous update compared to studies conducted since 2015. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Compared to usual care, across a wide variety of decisions, patient decision aids probably helped more adults reach informed values-congruent choices. They led to large increases in knowledge, accurate risk perceptions, and an active role in decision-making. Our updated review also found that patient decision aids increased patients' feeling informed and clear about their personal values. There was no difference in decision regret between people using decision aids versus those receiving usual care. Further studies are needed to assess the impact of patient decision aids on adherence and downstream effects on cost and resource use.

Communicating without a Shared Language: A Qualitative Study of Language Barriers in Language-Discordant Cancer Communication.

We use language to achieve understanding, and language barriers can have major health consequences for patients with serious illness. While ethnic minorities are more likely to experience social inequalities in health and health care, communicative processes in language-discordant cancer care remain unexplored. This study aimed to investigate communication between patients with cancer and limited Danish proficiency and oncology clinicians, with special emphasis on how linguistic barriers influenced patient involvement and decision-making. 18 participant observations of clinical encounters were conducted. Field notes and transcriptions of audio recordings were analyzed, and three themes were identified: Miscommunication and uncertainty as a basic linguistic condition; Impact of time on patient involvement; Unequally divided roles and (mis)communication responsibilities. The results showed that professional interpreting could not eradicate miscommunication but was crucial for achieving understanding. Organizational factors related to time and professional interpreting limited patient involvement. Without professional interpreting, patients' relatives were assigned massive communication responsibilities. When no Danish-speaking relatives partook, clinicians' ethical dilemmas further increased as did patient safety risks. Language barriers have consequences for everyone who engages in health communication, and the generated knowledge about how linguistic inequality manifests itself in clinical practice can be used to reduce social inequalities in health and health care.

Prognostic impact of early ctDNA dynamics during chemotherapy of metastatic cancer.

Aim: Clinical utility of the dynamics of ctDNA is sparse. This study aimed at evaluating the prognostic impact of early ctDNA dynamics in patients with metastatic cancer treated with chemotherapy. Materials & methods: The ctDNA dynamics were evaluated in 595 patients with metastatic cancer using droplet digital PCR. Results: Patients with an increase in ctDNA after one treatment cycle (n = 73; 12.2%) had an overall survival of 5.6 months compared with 8.6 months in patients with stable or decreasing ctDNA (n = 328; 55.1%) and 21.0 months in patients with undetectable ctDNA (p < 0.001; hazard ratio: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.41-0.53). Conclusion: Early ctDNA dynamics hold important prognostic information and have great implications for evaluation with the perspective of a more individualized treatment strategy.

Impact of an in-consult patient decision aid on treatment choices and outcomes of management for patients with an endoscopically resected malignant colorectal polyp: a study protocol for a non-randomised clinical phase II study.

INTRODUCTION: Management of an endoscopically resected malignant colorectal polyps can be challenging due to the risk of residual tumour and lymphatic spread. International studies have shown, that of those choosing surgical management instead of surveillance strategy, there are between 54% and 82% of bowel resections without evidence of residual tumour or lymphatic spread. As surgical management entails risks of complications and surveillance strategy entails risks of residual tumour or recurrence, a clinical dilemma arises when choosing a management strategy. Shared decision-making is a concept that can be used in preference-sensitive decision-making to facilitate patient involvement and empowerment to facilitate active patient participation in the decision-making process. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study protocol describes our clinical multi-institutional, non-randomised, interventional phase II study at Danish surgical departments planned to commence in the second quarter of 2024. The aim of this study is to examine whether shared decision-making and using a patient decision aid in consultations affect patients' choice of management, comparing with retrospective data. The secondary aim is to investigate patients' experiences, perceived involvement, satisfaction, decision conflict and other outcomes using questionnaire feedback directly from the patients. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: There are no conflicts of interest for principal or local investigators in any of the study sites. All results will be published at Danish and international meetings, and in English language scientific peer-reviewed journals. Our study underwent evaluation by the Regional Committees on Health Research Ethics for Southern Denmark (file number 20232000-47), concluding that formal approval was not required for this kind of research. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05776381.

Development, implementation and evaluation of patient decision aids supporting shared decision making in women with recurrent ovarian cancer.

Objective: Shared decision making (SDM) and use of patient decision aids (PtDAs) are key components in patient-centered care in relapsed ovarian cancer. This paper describes the development and implementation process of PtDAs into a clinical routine in three departments. Methods: Two PtDAs were developed in collaboration between patients and clinicians. Acceptability and usability of the PtDAs were tested on clinicians and patients using items from the internationally validated questionnaire "Preparation for Decision Making Scale". Results: Ten patients and 15 clinicians participated in the study. Most patients indicated that PtDAs would be helpful as preparation for the decision-making process with the clinicians. Ten (75%) of the clinicians responded that the PtDAs helped the patients to understand the benefits and disadvantages of each treatment option. Generally, the clinicians indicated that they would use SDM if they had a PtDA tailored to the clinical situation. Conclusions: Two PtDAs were systematically developed, tested, and implemented thereby supporting an SDM intervention. The PtDAs are still in use at the participating departments. Innovation: This study was successful in reusing a generic template for a patient decision aid (PtDA) developed at one institution and implemented in two other institutions. This was guided by a well-described systematic development process for PtDAs.

"SDM:HOSP"- a generic model for hospital-based implementation of shared decision making.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making (SDM) is a core element in the meeting between patient and healthcare professionals, but has proved difficult to implement and sustain in routine clinical practice. One of five Danish regions set out to succeed and to develop a model that ensures lasting SDM based on learnings from large-scale real-world implementation initiatives that go beyond the 'barriers' and 'facilitators' research approach. This paper describes this process and development of a generic implementation model, SDM:HOSP. METHODS: This project was carried out in the Region of Southern Denmark with five major hospital units. Based on existing theory of SDM, SDM implementation, implementation science and improvement methodology, a process of four phases were described; development of conceptual elements, field-testing, evaluation, and development of the final implementation model. The conceptual elements developed aimed to prepare leaders, train SDM teachers, teach clinicians to perform SDM, support development of patient decision aids, and support systematic planning, execution and follow-up. Field testing was done including continuous participant evaluations and an overall evaluation after one year. RESULTS: Data from field testing and learnings from the implementation process, illustrated the need for a dynamic and easy adjustable model. The final SDM:HOSP model included four themes; i)Training of Leaders, ii) Training of Teachers and Clinicians, iii) Decision Helper, and iv) 'Process', each with details in three levels, 1) shared elements, 2) recommendations, and 3) local adaption. CONCLUSIONS: A feasible and acceptable model for implementation of SDM across hospitals and departments that accounts for different organizations and cultures was developed. The overall design can easily be adapted to other organizations and can be adjusted to fit the specific organization and culture. The results from the ongoing and overall evaluation suggest promising avenues for future work in further testing and research of the usability of the model.

Neurofilament light chain as a biomarker of axonal damage in sensory neurons and paclitaxel-induced peripheral neuropathy in patients with ovarian cancer.

ABSTRACT: Paclitaxel-induced peripheral neuropathy (PIPN) is a barrier to effective cancer treatment and impacts quality of life among patients with cancer. We used a translational approach to assess the utility of neurofilament light chain (NFL) as a biomarker of PIPN in a human cell model and in patients with ovarian cancer. We measured NFL in medium from human induced pluripotent stem cell-derived sensory neurons (iPSC-SNs) exposed to paclitaxel. Serum NFL (sNFL) levels were quantified in 190 patients with ovarian cancer receiving paclitaxel/carboplatin chemotherapy at baseline and after each of the following 2 or 6 cycles. Adverse outcomes related to PIPN were retrospectively obtained, and Cox regression model was performed with different sNFL cut-offs after first cycle. The apparent elimination half-life of sNFL was estimated in patients who discontinued paclitaxel. Paclitaxel neurotoxicity in iPSC-SNs was accompanied by NFL release in a concentration-dependent manner ( P < 0.001, analysis of variance). Serum NFL levels increased substantially in patients during paclitaxel/carboplatin chemotherapy with considerable interindividual variability. Patients with sNFL >150 pg/mL after first cycle had increased risk to discontinue paclitaxel early (unadjusted HR: 2.47 [95% CI 1.16-5.22], adjusted HR: 2.25 [95% CI: 0.88-5.79]). Similar trends were shown for risk of severe PIPN and paclitaxel dose reduction because of PIPN. The median elimination half-life of sNFL was 43 days (IQR 27-82 days). Neurofilament light chain constitutes an objective biomarker of neurotoxicity in iPSC-SNs and in ovarian cancer patients with high sNFL predicting PIPN-related adverse outcomes. If prospectively validated, NFL can be used to study PIPN and may guide clinical decision making and personalize treatment with paclitaxel.

CA-125 KELIM as a Potential Complementary Tool for Predicting Veliparib Benefit: An Exploratory Analysis From the VELIA/GOG-3005 Study.

PURPOSE: In VELIA trial, veliparib combined with carboplatin-paclitaxel, followed by maintenance (veliparib-throughout) was associated with improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with carboplatin-paclitaxel alone in patients with high-grade ovarian carcinomas. We explored the prognostic value of the modeled cancer antigen (CA)-125 elimination rate constant K (KELIM), which is known to be an indicator of the intrinsic tumor chemosensitivity (the faster the rate of CA-125 decline, the higher the KELIM and the higher the chemosensitivity), and its association with benefit from veliparib. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Individual KELIM values were estimated from longitudinal CA-125 kinetics. Patients were categorized as having favorable (≥ median) or unfavorable (< median) KELIM. The prognostic value of KELIM for veliparib-related PFS benefit was explored in cohorts treated with primary or interval debulking surgery, according to the surgery completeness, the disease progression risk group, and the homologous recombination (HR) status (BRCA mutation, HR deficiency [HRD], or HR proficiency [HRP]). RESULTS: The data from 854 of 1,140 enrolled patients were analyzed (primary debulking surgery, n = 700; interval debulking surgery, n = 154). Increasing KELIM values were associated with higher benefit from veliparib in HRD cancer, as were decreasing KELIM values in HRP cancer. The highest PFS benefit from veliparib was observed in patients with both favorable KELIM and BRCA mutation (hazard ratio, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.61) or BRCA wild-type HRD cancer (hazard ratio, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.26 to 0.70), consistent with the association between poly (adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor efficacy and platinum sensitivity. In contrast, seventy-four percent of patients with a BRCA mutation and unfavorable KELIM progressed within 18 months while on veliparib. The patients with HRP cancer and unfavorable KELIM might have benefited from the veliparib chemosensitizing effect. CONCLUSION: In addition to HRD/BRCA status, the tumor primary chemosensitivity observed during the first-line chemotherapy might be another complementary determinant of poly (adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor efficacy.

Single-cell and bulk RNA sequencing reveal ligands and receptors associated with worse overall survival in serous ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Serous ovarian carcinoma is the most frequent histological subgroup of ovarian cancer and the leading cause of death among gynecologic tumors. The tumor microenvironment and cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs) have a critical role in the origin and progression of cancer. We comprehensively characterized the crosstalk between CAFs and ovarian cancer cells from malignant fluids to identify specific ligands and receptors mediating intercellular communications and disrupted pathways related to prognosis and therapy response. METHODS: Malignant fluids of serous ovarian cancer, including tumor-derived organoids, CAFs-enriched (eCAFs), and malignant effusion cells (no cultured) paired with normal ovarian tissues, were explored by RNA-sequencing. These data were integrated with single-cell RNA-sequencing data of ascites from ovarian cancer patients. The most relevant ligand and receptor interactions were used to identify differentially expressed genes with prognostic values in ovarian cancer. RESULTS: CAF ligands and epithelial cancer cell receptors were enriched for PI3K-AKT, focal adhesion, and epithelial-mesenchymal transition signaling pathways. Collagens, MIF, MDK, APP, and laminin were detected as the most significant signaling, and the top ligand-receptor interactions THBS2/THBS3 (CAFs)-CD47 (cancer cells), MDK (CAFs)-NCL/SDC2/SDC4 (cancer cells) as potential therapeutic targets. Interestingly, 34 genes encoding receptors and ligands of the PI3K pathway were associated with the outcome, response to treatment, and overall survival in ovarian cancer. Up-regulated genes from this list consistently predicted a worse overall survival (hazard ratio > 1.0 and log-rank P < 0.05) in two independent validation cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: This study describes critical signaling pathways, ligands, and receptors involved in the communication between CAFs and cancer cells that have prognostic and therapeutic significance in ovarian cancer. Video abstract.

Decisional needs of patients with recurrent high-grade glioma and their families.

Background: High-grade gliomas are aggressive and life-threatening brain tumors. At the time of recurrence, the patients and their families need to decide on future treatment. None of the treatment options are curative, and tradeoffs between benefits and harms must be made. This study aimed to explore the patients' and family members' decisional needs when making the decision. Methods: We performed semi-structured individual interviews with patients and family members to explore their experiences during the decision making. A phenomenological hermeneutical analysis was conducted. Results: A total of 15 patients and 14 family members aged 22-79 years participated in the study. Most of the family members were partners to the patient. The findings were centered around three interrelated and concurrently occurring themes: (I) A patient- and family-centered decision making, including the subtheme of being a supportive family member; (II) Balanced information and a trustful professional encounter; and (III) The value of hope. We found that both the patients and family members preferred to be involved in the decision making and that a trustful relationship with the surgeon, balanced and tailored information, and sufficient time to make the decision were essential. The experience of hope had a significant influence on patients' decisions. Conclusion: This study found that patient and family involvement, balanced information, and hope were the primary decisional needs of patients and family members at the time of recurrent high-grade glioma. Patients and family members can have different decisional needs, making individual needs assessment essential to decisional support.

Shared Decision Making with Acutely Hospitalized, Older Poly-Medicated Patients: A Mixed-Methods Study in an Emergency Department.

Shared decision making (SDM) about medicine with older poly-medicated patients is vital to improving adherence and preventing medication-related hospital admissions, but it is difficult to achieve in practice. This study's primary aim was to provide insight into the extent of SDM in medication decisions in the Emergency Department (ED) and to compare how it aligns with older poly-medicated patients' preferences and needs. We applied a mixed-methods design to investigate SDM in medication decisions from two perspectives: (1) observational measurements with the observing patient involvement (OPTION 5) instrument of healthcare professionals' SDM behavior in medication decisions and (2) semi-structured interviews with older poly-medicated patients. A convergent parallel analysis was performed. Sixty-five observations and fourteen interviews revealed four overall themes: (1) a low degree of SDM about medication, (2) a variation in the pro-active and non-active patients approach to conversations about medicine, (3) no information on side effects, and (4) a preference for medication reduction. The lack of SDM with older patients in the ED may increase inequality in health. Patients with low health literacy are at risk of safety threats, nonadherence, and preventable re-admissions. Therefore, healthcare professionals should systematically investigate older poly-medicated patients' preferences and discuss the side effects and the possibility of reducing harmful medicine.

Development of a Patient Decision Aid to Support Shared Decision Making for Patients with Recurrent High-Grade Glioma.

When high-grade gliomas recur, patients, their families, and clinicians face difficult medical decisions. There is no curable treatment, and the treatment options all come with a risk of complications and adverse effects. The patients are often cognitively affected, and they need tailored decision support. The objective of this study was to develop a patient decision aid (PtDA) targeted at patients with recurrent high-grade gliomas. Based on existing knowledge and the International Patient Decision Aids Standards, the PtDA was developed through an iterative process. The PtDA was alpha-tested by potential users to assess its acceptability and usability. The development team comprised three clinicians, two patients, two family members, and a researcher. The fifth version of the PtDA was submitted to the alpha test. Eleven patients, nine family members, and eleven clinicians assessed the PtDA and found it acceptable. Three changes were made during the alpha test. Most participants perceived the PtDA to prepare patients for decision making and improve consultations. The involvement of potential users was emphasized during the development and alpha test process. The PtDA was assessed as useful and acceptable by patients, family members, and clinicians in the decision-making situation of recurrent high-grade glioma.