M Dankner1,2, J Senecal1,2, N S Neubarth1,3, N Bertos4, M Park1,4,5,6, B Issa-Chergui5,7, J Asselah7,8, P M Siegel1,2,3,4,6, N Bouganim7,8. 1. Goodman Cancer Research Centre, Montreal, QC. 2. Department of Experimental Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC. 3. Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology, McGill University, Montreal, QC. 4. Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC. 5. Department of Pathology, McGill University, Montreal, QC. 6. Department of Biochemistry, McGill University, Montreal, QC. 7. Cedars Cancer Centre, Montreal, QC. 8. McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC.
Abstract
Background: In the early developmental phase of a postmortem rapid tissue donation (rtd) program for patients with metastatic cancer, we surveyed health care professionals (hcps) and oncology patients at the McGill University Health Centre (muhc) to assess their knowledge and attitudes pertaining to rtd from metastatic cancer patients for research purposes. Methods: A 23-item survey was developed and distributed to hcps at tumour board meetings, and a related 26-item survey was developed and distributed to oncology patients at the muhc Cedars Cancer Centre. Results: The survey attracted participation from 73 hcps, including 37 attending physicians, and 102 oncology patients. Despite the fact that 88% of hcps rated their knowledge of rtd as none or limited, 42% indicated that they would feel comfortable discussing rtd with their cancer patients. Of the responding hcps, 67% indicated that their current knowledge of rtd would affect their decision to discuss such a program with patients, which implies the importance of education for hcps to facilitate enrolment of patients into a rtd program. Of responding patients, 78% indicated that they would not be uncomfortable if their doctor discussed rtd with them, and 61% indicated that they would like it if their doctor were to discuss rtd with them. The hcps and patients felt that the best time for patients to be approached about consenting to a rtd program would be at the transition to palliative care when no treatment options remain. Conclusions: At the muhc, hcps and patients are generally enthusiastic about adopting a rtd program for patients with metastatic cancer. Education of hcps and patients will be an important determinant of the program's success.
Background: In the early developmental phase of a postmortem rapid tissue donation (rtd) program for patients with metastatic cancer, we surveyed health care professionals (hcps) and oncology patients at the McGill University Health Centre (muhc) to assess their knowledge and attitudes pertaining to rtd from metastatic cancerpatients for research purposes. Methods: A 23-item survey was developed and distributed to hcps at tumour board meetings, and a related 26-item survey was developed and distributed to oncology patients at the muhc Cedars Cancer Centre. Results: The survey attracted participation from 73 hcps, including 37 attending physicians, and 102 oncology patients. Despite the fact that 88% of hcps rated their knowledge of rtd as none or limited, 42% indicated that they would feel comfortable discussing rtd with their cancerpatients. Of the responding hcps, 67% indicated that their current knowledge of rtd would affect their decision to discuss such a program with patients, which implies the importance of education for hcps to facilitate enrolment of patients into a rtd program. Of responding patients, 78% indicated that they would not be uncomfortable if their doctor discussed rtd with them, and 61% indicated that they would like it if their doctor were to discuss rtd with them. The hcps and patients felt that the best time for patients to be approached about consenting to a rtd program would be at the transition to palliative care when no treatment options remain. Conclusions: At the muhc, hcps and patients are generally enthusiastic about adopting a rtd program for patients with metastatic cancer. Education of hcps and patients will be an important determinant of the program's success.
Authors: Michael A Williams; Pamela A Lipsett; Cynda H Rushton; Eugene C Grochowski; Ivor D Berkowitz; Stephen L Mann; John H Shatzer; M Priscilla Short; Myron Genel Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Karen E A Burns; Mark Duffett; Michelle E Kho; Maureen O Meade; Neill K J Adhikari; Tasnim Sinuff; Deborah J Cook Journal: CMAJ Date: 2008-07-29 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Kathryn Alsop; Heather Thorne; Shahneen Sandhu; Anne Hamilton; Christopher Mintoff; Elizabeth Christie; Odette Spruyt; Scott Williams; Orla McNally; Linda Mileshkin; Sumitra Ananda; Julene Hallo; Sherene Loi; Clare Scott; Peter Savas; Lisa Devereux; Patricia O'Brien; Sameera Gunawardena; Clare Hampson; Kate Strachan; Rufaro Diana Jaravaza; Victoria Francis; Gregory Young; David Ranson; Ravindra Samaranayake; David Stevens; Samantha Boyle; Clare Fedele; Monique Topp; Gwo Ho; Zhi Ling Teo; Renea A Taylor; Melissa M Papargiris; Mitchell G Lawrence; Hong Wang; Gail P Risbridger; Nicole M Haynes; Mikolaj Medon; Ricky W Johnstone; Eva Vidacs; Gisela Mir Arnau; Ismael A Vergara; Anthony T Papenfuss; Grant McArthur; Paul Waring; Shirley Carvosso; Christopher Angel; David Gyorki; Benjamin Solomon; Gillian Mitchell; Sue Shanley; Prudence A Francis; Sarah-Jane Dawson; Amy Haffenden; Erin Tidball; Mila Volchek; Jan Pyman; Mohammed Madadin; Jodie Leditschke; Stephen Cordner; Mark Shackleton; David D Bowtell Journal: Nat Biotechnol Date: 2016-09-12 Impact factor: 54.908
Authors: Matthew B Schabath; Jessica McIntyre; Christie Pratt; Luis E Gonzalez; Teresita Munoz-Antonia; Eric B Haura; Gwendolyn P Quinn Journal: J Med Ethics Date: 2013-04-04 Impact factor: 2.903
Authors: Tala Achkar; John Wilson; Jacqueline Simon; Margaret Rosenzweig; Shannon Puhalla Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2015-12-24 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Jun Fan; Raya Khanin; Hitomi Sakamoto; Yi Zhong; Chelsea Michael; Derwin Pena; Breanna Javier; Laura D Wood; Christine A Iacobuzio-Donahue Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2016-10-11