PURPOSE Depression in post-treatment cancer survivors is common and can impair quality of life. CanDirect is a novel, telephone-delivered depression self-care intervention for cancer survivors. We conducted a randomized controlled superiority trial to compare CanDirect with usual care (UC) in this population. METHODS Participants completing cancer treatment within the past 10 years who had mild-moderate depressive symptoms with or without major depression were recruited from clinical and community settings in Quebec and Ontario. Permuted block random assignment allocated participants to CanDirect plus UC or to UC alone. Assessments of depression severity (Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression scale [CES-D]; primary outcome) and secondary outcomes health-related quality of life (Short Form Survey-12 mental and physical component summaries), anxiety symptoms (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), activation (Patient Activation Measure), depression diagnosis (Structured Clinical Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV), and health services (self-report) were conducted at baseline, as well as 3 and 6 months (primary time point). Analyses of outcomes were adjusted for covariates using linear regression and missing data by inverse probability weighting. RESULTS Participants recruited between September 2016 and October 2018 were randomly assigned to CanDirect (n = 121) or UC (n = 124). Among 245 participants randomly assigned, 218 (89.0%) completed the primary outcome at 6 months. CanDirect participants reported less severe depressive symptoms on the CES-D than UC participants at 6 months, adjusted effect size (ES) 0.61 (95% CI, 0.33 to 0.88). CanDirect participants also had significantly greater quality of life, lower anxiety, more activation, and lower rates of depression diagnoses, compared with UC. Exploratory analysis suggested that sex was a modifier of the primary outcome (interaction term P value = .03); the intervention was less effective in men (ES, 0.12; 95% CI, −0.45 to 0.69). CONCLUSION The findings suggest that CanDirect is an effective method of managing mild-moderate depression symptoms in cancer survivors.

Supported self-care interventions are a low-intensity treatment for depression that has received little research attention in the cancer population. This is a phase II intervention only study to test the feasibility, acceptability and preliminary effectiveness of a depression self-care intervention for cancer patients who have completed their primary treatment and have moderate depressive symptoms. The self-care intervention was adapted from a successful model for people with chronic physical conditions, following focus groups with cancer care professionals and patients. The support was delivered by telephone by a trained lay coach who provided up to 8 weekly coaching contacts. A variety of recruitment methods were tested; those with the highest yield of eligible subjects per research staff time were electronic mailings to community support group members and social media posting. Sixty-eight people were contacted about the study over an 11-month period, of whom 34 (49%) were eligible; 32 were enrolled (94% recruitment rate); and 25 completed 2-month follow-up (78% retention). The mean severity of PHQ-9 depression decreased significantly from screening to 2 months (12.8 to 7.0, p < .0001). The intervention is a promising treatment option for cancer survivors, demonstrating sufficient effectiveness and feasibility to proceed with a phase III clinical trial. K E Y W O R D Scancer survivorship, depression, feasibility, intervention, self-care, self-management

Background: St Mary’s Hospital is an affiliated McGill Teaching University Hospital in Montreal, receiving ~700 new cancer patients yearly. In 2008, the oncology department implemented Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) on paper. In 2014-17, electronic PROs were implemented through the Improving Patient Experience and Health in Outcomes Collaborative (iPEHOC) Implementation Project, as part of a PRO Canadian Initiative to improve the Patient Experience across the cancer journey through standardized measurement that accelerates optimal care and measures impact (health-related outcomes for patients) across Canada. Methodology: The PROs measures included the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESASr), four additional secondary PROMs for Fatigue, Anxiety, Depression, and Pain, the Social Difficulties Inventory-21 and a single item Quality of Life. PRO data was scored in real-time; nurses and patients received a printed summary report. Nurses were provided with an algorithm (Global Response to Distress) and follow-up instructions. Monthly Distress Screening Dashboard ware generated with number of screenings, number of patients screened, symptom prevalence, secondary PROMs trigger rates, Social Difficulties triggered and clinically significant symptoms changes on the four secondary PROMs. In 2016, all patients receiving chemotherapy were assessed at each cycle of treatment (screening). After project completion, due to nursing staff shortage, the frequency of screenings was reduced and offered at pre-established time-points (assessment). Yearly Dashboard results were used to promote a discussion with clinicians and address sustainability constraints of PROs in real-word oncology practice. Results: In 2016, a total of 366 patients were screened, resulting in 1366 annual screens. In 2018, 325 patients were screened resulting in 753 annual screens. This change in practice, that culminated organically, allows for an observation analysis between screening versus assessment. Noteworthy comparison between 2018 and 2016 showed that the decrease in frequency of screenings resulted in significant increase in symptom severity in all health-related outcomes. Breast cancer represented 35% of all screens completed. We propose to present a three year retrospectively cross analyzed patient data to examine symptom change over time, frequencies of screening, the impact on patients’ health outcomes, the overlapping sustainability constraints encountered and mitigation plans. Discussion: Embedding the use of PRO into existing hospital structures requires constant review involving administrative, clinician and patient engagement. PRO data can be used to better identify the needs of a specific cancer type population and create tailored care paths. Citation Format: Ashley Kushneryk, Rosana Faria. Real-word implementation of patient report outcomes: Sustainability constraints and impact on patients health outcomes [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-17-17.

the program demonstrates the continued contributions of Radiation Therapist led research to the body of knowledge in radiation medicine. This year's program showcases research in such realms as ''Patient Engagement and Supportive Care'', ''Practice Innovation'', ''Outcomes and Toxicities'', ''Education'' and ''Quality Improvement''; highlighting the integral role Radiation Therapists play in all aspects of care. As evidenced by the following abstracts, collaborations across the radiation medicine community highlight the interprofessional contribution of radiation therapists to research, education, and practice innovations. The editorial team looks forward to receiving these manuscripts for consideration for publication within the JMIRS. We are privileged to continue our partnership with the JMIRS to publish proceedings from the conference in 2017 as part of our knowledge translation strategy. For more information, please visit www.RTi3.com for conference information for RTi3 2017.

291 Background: St Mary’s Hospital, an affiliated McGill Teaching University Hospital, receives ~700 new cancer patients yearly. In 2014-17, electronic PROs were implemented through the Improving Patient Experience and Health in Outcomes Collaborative in partnership with Cancer Care Ontario, granted by Canadian Partnership against Cancer and Rossy Cancer Network, as part of a PRO Canadian Initiative to improve the Patient Experience across Canada through standardized measurement of health-related outcomes for patients. Methods: The PROs measures included the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS), additional measures for Fatigue, Anxiety, Depression, and Pain, the Social Difficulties Inventory-21 and Quality of Life. PRO-data was scored in real-time; nurses and patients received a printed summary report. Nurses were provided with an algorithm and instructions. Monthly Distress Screening Dashboard were generated with key indicators. In 2016, all patients receiving chemotherapy were assessed at each cycle of treatment. After project completion, due to nursing staff shortage, the frequency of screenings was reduced. Yearly Dashboard results were used to promote discussion with clinicians and address sustainability constraints of PROs in real-word oncology practice. Results: In 2016 1366 total screens completed ( 376 patients) and in 2018, 753 total screens (325 patients). This comparison indicates that a decrease in frequency of screenings resulted in an increase in symptom severity in all health-related outcomes. Physicians’ participation was proposed as mitigation plan to increase screening frequency. We propose to present a three year retrospectively cross analyzed patient data to examine symptom change over time, frequencies of screening, impact on patients’ health outcomes, overlapping sustainability constraints encountered and mitigation plans. Conclusions: Embedding the use of PRO into existing hospital structures requires constant review involving administrative, clinician and patient engagement.