Fatigue is one of the most common and debilitating symptoms experienced by patients with cancer. Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is characterized by feelings of tiredness, weakness, and lack of energy, and is distinct from the "normal" drowsiness experienced by healthy individuals in that it is not relieved by rest or sleep. It occurs both as a consequence of the cancer itself and as a side effect of cancer treatment, although the precise underlying pathophysiology is largely unknown. CRF may be an early symptom of malignant disease and is reported by as many as 40% of patients at diagnosis. Virtually all patients expect fatigue from cancer therapy. Up to 90% of patients treated with radiation and up to 80% of those treated with chemotherapy experience fatigue. CRF continues for months and even years following completion of treatment in approximately one third of the patients with cancer. The impact of CRF on a patient's quality of life (QoL), particularly in relation to physical functioning and the ability to perform activities of daily living, is both profound and pervasive. In addition, CRF is associated with considerable psychological distress and can impose a significant financial burden by limiting a patient's ability to work. These effects can extend to caregivers and family members, who may also have to reduce their working capacity in order to provide additional care for a patient with CRF. This paper examines the prevalence of CRF and explores the impact of this distressing symptom on patients' functioning and QoL. The Oncologist 2007;12(suppl 1):4-10

No abstract

Introduction-The Cancer Behavior Inventory-Brief Version (CBI-B), a 12-item measure of self-efficacy for coping with cancer derived from the longer 33-item version (CBI-L), was subjected to psychometric analysis.

Background There is limited high quality evidence regarding the impact of patient navigation (PN) on outcomes for patients with diagnosed cancer. Methods We pooled data from two sites from the national Patient Navigation Research Program (PNRP). Patients (n=438) with newly diagnosed breast (n=353) or colorectal cancer (n=85) were randomized to PN or usual care. Trained lay navigators met with patients randomized to PN to help them assess treatment barriers and identify resources to overcome barriers. We used intent-to-treat analysis to assess time to completion of primary treatment, psychological distress (Impact of Events Scale) and satisfaction (Patient Satisfaction with Cancer-Related Care) within three months after initiation of cancer treatment. Results The sample was predominantly middle-aged (mean age=57) and female (90%); 44% were race-ethnic minorities (44%), 46% reported lower education levels, 18% were uninsured and 9% reported a non-English primary language. The randomized groups were comparable in baseline characteristics. Primary analysis showed no statistically significant group differences in time to completion of primary cancer treatment, satisfaction with cancer-related care, or psychological distress. Subgroup analysis showed that socially disadvantaged patients (i.e. uninsured, low English proficiency and non-English primary language) who received PN reported higher satisfaction than those receiving usual care (all ps < 0.05). Navigated patients living alone reported greater distress than those receiving usual care. Conclusions Although the primary analysis showed no overall benefit, the subgroup analysis suggests that PN may improve satisfaction with care for certain disadvantaged individuals. Impact PN for cancer patients may not necessarily reduce treatment time nor distress.

Objective We examined how navigation, defined as the assessment and alleviation of barriers to adequate health care, influences patients' perspectives on the quality of their cancer care. Methods We conducted post-study patient interviews from a randomized controlled trial (usual care vs. patient navigation services) from cancer diagnosis through treatment completion. Patients were recruited from 11 primary care, hospital and community oncology practices in New York. We interviewed patients about their expectations and experience of patient navigation or, for non-navigated patients, other sources of assistance. Results Thirty-five patients newly diagnosed with breast or colorectal cancer. Valued aspects of navigation included emotional support, assistance with information needs and problem-solving, and logistical coordination of cancer care. Unmet cancer care needs expressed by patients randomized to usual care consisted of lack of assistance or support with childcare, household responsibilities, coordination of care, and emotional support. Conclusion Cancer patients value navigation. Instrumental benefits were the most important expectations for navigation from navigated and non-navigated patients. Navigated patients received emotional support and assistance with information needs, problem-solving, and logistical aspects of cancer care coordination. Practice Implications Navigation services may help improve cancer care outcomes important to patients by addressing fragmented, confusing, uncoordinated, or inefficient care.