Dataset Information

Compliance with cancer screening and influenza vaccination guidelines in non-Hodgkin lymphoma survivors.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Compliance with US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) age-appropriate cancer screening and immunization guidelines in lymphoma survivors is not known. We sought to measure compliance in non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) survivors and identify any differences based on patient, disease, and treatment characteristics.

Methods

Eligible NHL survivors were identified from the Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) prospective cohort study. Survivors self-reported colorectal, breast, and prostate cancer screening and influenza immunization in a questionnaire 3 years post-diagnosis (FU3). The USPSTF guidelines were used to define compliance. Chi-square tests were used to compare characteristics of compliant versus non-compliant survivors.

Results

A total of 1833 MER participants from 2005 to 2012 completed a FU3. Rates of breast and prostate cancer screening were 96% and 72%, respectively. No differences in compliance based on patient or disease characteristics or treatment were observed. Ninety-two percent of survivors were compliant with colorectal cancer screening. Older age, indolent lymphoma histology, and 2008-2012 year of diagnosis were associated with higher compliance. Eighty-two percent of survivors were compliant with influenza vaccination and older age was associated with higher compliance.

Conclusion

NHL survivors have high compliance with USPSTF recommendations for cancer screening and immunization. Survivors who are younger or have aggressive lymphomas are less likely to meet the colorectal cancer screening guidelines. Older survivors are more likely to receive influenza vaccination.

Implications for cancer survivors

Measures to further improve preventive care for NHL survivors, especially those younger in age, are necessary.

SUBMITTER: Pophali PA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7261247 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDecisions aids (DA) can support patients to make informed decisions about screening tests. This study describes the development and initial evaluation of a lung cancer screening (LCS) DA targeted towards survivors of Hodgkin lymphoma (HL).MethodsA prototype decision aid booklet was developed and subsequently reviewed by a steering group who provided feedback. Revisions were made to produce the DA tested in this study. HL survivors were recruited to an online survey and/or focus groups. Lymphoma practitioners were invited to an interview study. In the online survey, decisional conflict scales and knowledge scales were completed before and after accessing the DA. The focus groups and interviews explored acceptability and comprehensibility and the decisional needs of stakeholders. Focus groups and interviews were audio recorded. The framework method was used to analyse qualitative data.Results38 HL survivors completed the online survey. Following exposure to the DA, knowledge of LCS and risk factors and decisional conflict scores (total score and subscale scores) improved significantly. 11 HL survivors took part in two focus groups (n = 5 and n = 6) and 11 practitioners were interviewed. Focus group and interview results: The language, format and length were considered acceptable. Both groups felt the DA was balanced and presented a choice. Icon arrays were felt to aid comprehension of absolute risk values and for some survivors, they reduced affective risk perceptions. Among survivors, the impact of radiation risk on decision making varied according to gender and screening interval, whilst practitioners did not anticipate it to be a major concern for patients. Both groups expressed that a screening offer could mitigate anxiety about lung cancer risk. As anticipated by practitioners, survivors expressed a desire to seek advice from their clinical team. Practitioners thought the DA would meet their informational needs regarding LCS when supporting survivors.ConclusionsThe DA is considered acceptable by HL survivors and practitioners. The DA reduces decisional conflict and improves knowledge in HL survivors, suggesting that it would support HL survivors to make informed decisions when considering LCS in a future clinical trial.