Abstract 3541
Background
Cancer follow-up care continues to evolve to incorporate complex programs of supportive care to address long-term disease consequences. However, care may be prescriptive and fragmented, contributing to uncertainty among cancer survivors. As major stakeholders in follow-up care for cancer survivors, nurses are ideally positioned to ensure supportive care is person-centred and responsive to patients’ needs. We recently conducted a study to summarize the evidence related to cancer survivors’ preferences for supportive care and examine the ways in which these preferences are embedded in current guidelines and policies informing cancer survivorship care. This presentation discusses specific implications of these findings for oncology nursing.
Methods
Phase 1 of the study comprises an integrative review of the empirical literature regarding cancer survivors’ preferences for supportive care, with literature sourced from bibilographic databases and analysed according to principles of thematic analysis. In Phase 2, clinical practice guidelines and policy documents guiding supportive care in cancer survivorship are evaluated using content analysis methods to ascertain alignment with the findings of Phase 1. Finally, we conduct a critical analysis of the results through the lens of oncology nursing practice.
Results
Findings of the integrative review and content analysis of practice and policy guidelines highlight issues related to where and when supportive care is accessed and the types and features of supportive care services. Given that these gaps intersect with nursing practice, they serve as potential targets of knowledge translation activities. Impacts on survivors’ experiences are illustrated with exemplars derived from recent qualitative studies conducted in Canadian and Irish contexts.
Conclusions
As novel programs are developed to meet the needs of the growing population of cancer survivors, a consideration of survivors’ preferences is essential. We offer specific ways in which nursing practice and scholarship can be leveraged to ensure the translation of this knowledge into care, making visible the survivors’ voice in this process.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
2901 - IFN-γ/IL-10 ratio as predictive biomarker for response to anti-PD-1 therapy in metastatic melanoma patients
Presenter: Emilio Giunta
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2306 - Multiplex Chromogenic Immunohistochemistry (IHC) for Spatial Analysis of Checkpoint-Positive Tumor Infiltrating Lymphocytes (TILs)
Presenter: Scott Ely
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
1678 - The role of PD-L1 expression as a predictive biomarker in advanced renal cell carcinoma: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
Presenter: Alberto Carretero-Gonzalez
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5138 - Radiomic Features as a Non-invasive Biomarker to Predict Response to Immunotherapy in Recurrent or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma
Presenter: Kye Jin Park
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5800 - Integrative combination of high-plex digital profiling techniques and cluster analysis to reveal complex immune biology in the tumor microenvironment of mesothelioma
Presenter: Carmen Ballesteros-Merino
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5736 - Predictive factors of response to immunotherapy in 198 patients with metastatic non-microcytic lung cancer (mNSCLC): real world data from 2 university hospitals in Spain
Presenter: Juan Felipe Cordoba Ortega
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5645 - Evaluating Lung CT Density Changes Among Patients with Extensive Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer (ES-SCLC) Treated with Thoracic Radiotherapy (TRT) alone or TRT Followed by Combined Ipilimumab (IPI) and Nivolumab (NIVO).
Presenter: Kujtim Latifi
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
1540 - Immuno-oncology therapy biomarkers differences between polyoma-virus positive and negative Merkel cell carcinomas
Presenter: Zoran Gatalica
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4538 - Can we improve patient selection for phase 1 clinical trials (Ph1) based on Immuno-Oncology score prognostic index (VIO)?
Presenter: Ignacio Matos Garcia
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
5544 - Evaluation of a radiomic signature of CD8 cells in patients treated with immunotherapy-radiotherapy in three clinical trials.
Presenter: Roger Sun
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract