For over a decade since the release of the Institute of Medicine report, From Cancer Patient to Cancer Survivor: Lost in Transition, there has been a focus on providing coordinated, comprehensive care for cancer survivors that emphasized the role of primary care. Several models of care have been described which primarily focused on primary care providers (PCPs) as receivers of cancer survivors and specific types of information (e.g. survivorship care plans) from oncology based care, and not as active members of the cancer survivorship team. In this paper, we reviewed survivorship models that have been described in the literature, and specifically focused on strategies aiming to integrate primary care providers in caring for cancer survivors across different settings. We offer insights differentiating primary care providers’ level of expertise in cancer survivorship and how such expertise may be utilized. We provide recommendations for education, clinical practice, research and policy initiatives that may advance the integration of primary care providers in the care of cancer survivors in diverse clinical settings.

Background Cancer survivors engage in cancer screenings and protective health behaviors at suboptimal rates despite their increased risk for future illness. Survivorship care plans and other educational strategies to prepare cancer survivors to adopt engaged roles in managing long-term follow-up care and health risks are needed. In a sample of cancer survivors, we identified patient characteristics and psychosocial predictors associated with increased follow-up care informational needs. Methods Cross-sectional surveys were administered to early stage breast and prostate survivors (N=278; 68% breast) at least two years post-treatment from four community hospital programs in New Jersey between May 2012-July 2013. Patient demographics, medical history, psychosocial characteristics (i.e., worries about the future, fear of disease recurrence, and patient activation) and perceptions of oncology and primary care were assessed. Results African American survivors (AOR =2.69, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.27–5.68) and survivors with higher comorbidity (AOR=1.16, CI 1.01–1.33) were more likely to want additional information to guide follow-up care. Adjusting for race and comorbidities, survivors who wanted more information to guide their follow-up care reported greater worries about the future (p<0.05) and fears about disease recurrence (p<0.05) compared to those who did not want additional information. Conclusions Results emphasize the need to develop cancer survivorship educational strategies that are both responsive to the needs of specific populations (e.g., African American survivors and patients with multiple comorbidities) and the psychosocial profiles that motivate requests for more extensive follow-up guidance.

PURPOSE Despite a burgeoning population of cancer survivors and pending shortages of oncology services, clear definitions and systematic approaches for engaging primary care in cancer survivorship are lacking. We sought to understand how primary care clinicians perceive their role in delivering care to cancer survivors. METHODSWe conducted digitally recorded interviews with 38 clinicians in 14 primary care practices that had national reputations as workforce innovators. Interviews took place during intense case study data collection and explored clinicians' perspectives regarding their role in cancer survivorship care. We analyzed verbatim transcripts using an inductive and iterative immersion-crystallization process. RESULTS Divergent views exist regarding primary care's role in cancer survivor care with a lack of coherence about the concept of survivorship. A few clinicians believed any follow-up care after acute cancer treatment was oncology's responsibility; however, most felt cancer survivor care was within their purview. Some primary care clinicians considered cancer survivors as a distinct population; others felt cancer survivors were like any other patient with a chronic disease. In further interpretative analysis, we discovered a deeply ingrained philosophy of whole-person care that creates a professional identity dilemma for primary care clinicians when faced with rapidly changing specialized knowledge.CONCLUSIONS This study exposes an emerging identity crisis for primary care that goes beyond cancer survivorship care. Facilitated national conversations might help specialists and primary care develop knowledge translation platforms to support the prioritizing, integrating, and personalizing functions of primary care for patients with highly complicated issues requiring specialized knowledge.