The term "cancer survivor" is commonly used by different persons, clinical institutions, academic bodies, and political organizations although it lacks of a unanimous and detailed definition. The objective of the study is to make a systematic review of published and proposed definitions of "cancer survivor." Utilizing a systematic search strategy with different strings of "cancer survivor," we searched the following databases: Medline (June 1975-June 2015), Scopus (all the years), Web of Science (all the years), Google Scholar (all the years), ERIC (all the years). This review suggests that there is not a unique definition of who is a "cancer survivor" and what is "cancer survivorship." However, the most widely used definition sees cancer survivorship as a process that begins at the moment of diagnosis and continues through the balance of life. This definition highlights psychological and legal patient's needs-as well as medical ones-to receive care and assistance from the beginning and, at the same time, it establishes valid criteria for making scientific and statistical sampling research. The extensive use of the term "cancer survivor" indicates that it is a significant term. This review has been written to outline the state of the art and it invites to reflect on a shared definition that could satisfy both clinical and research aspects. Implication for cancer survivors: this compendium of proposed definitions may improve communication among the many patients and patient organizations that use and work with this term.

No abstract

ObjectiveSince its birth about 30 years ago, Narrative Medicine approach has increased in popularity in the medical context as well as in other disciplines. This paper aims to review Narrative Medicine research studies on patients' and their caregivers' illness experience.Setting and participantsMEDLINE, Psycinfo, EBSCO Psychological and Behavioural Science, The Cochrane Library and CINAHL databases were searched to identify all the research studies which focused on the Narrative Medicine approach reported in the title, in the abstract and in the keywords the words ‘Narrative Medicine’ or ‘Narrative-based Medicine’. Primary and secondary outcome measures: number of participants, type of disease, race and age of participants, type of study, dependent variables, intervention methods, assessment.ResultsOf the 325 titles screened, we identified 10 research articles fitting the inclusion criteria. Our systematic review showed that research on Narrative Medicine has no common specific methodology: narrative in Medicine is used as an intervention protocol as well as an assessment tool. Patients' characteristics, types of disease and data analysis procedures differ among the screened studies.ConclusionsNarrative Medicine research in medical practice needs to find clear and specific protocols to deepen the impact of narrative on medical practice and on patients' lives.

Recent studies have reported germline mutations in cases of lobular breast cancer (LBC) not associated with the classical hereditary diffuse gastric cancer syndrome. A multidisciplinary workgroup discussed genetic susceptibility, pathophysiology and clinical management of hereditary LBC (HLBC). The team has established the clinical criteria for screening and results' interpretation, and created consensus guidelines regarding genetic counselling, breast surveillance and imaging techniques, clinicopathological findings, psychological and decisional support, as well as prophylactic surgery and plastic reconstruction. Based on a review of current evidence for the identification of HLBC cases/families, genetic testing is recommended in patients fulfilling the following criteria: (A) bilateral LBC with or without family history of LBC, with age at onset<50 years, and (B) unilateral LBC with family history of LBC, with age at onset <45 years. In asymptomatic mutant carriers, breast surveillance with clinical examination, yearly mammography, contrast-enhanced breast MRI and breast ultrasonography (US) with 6-month interval between the US and the MRI should be implemented as a first approach. In selected cases with personal history, family history of LBC and mutations, prophylactic mastectomy could be discussed with an integrative group of clinical experts. Psychodecisional support also plays a pivotal role in the management of individuals with or without germline alterations. Ultimately, the definition of a specific protocol for genetic screening and ongoing coordinated management of patients with HLBC is crucial for the effective surveillance and early detection of LBC.

E-cigarettes increased the stopping rate as well as the reduction of daily cigarettes in participants who continued smoking. In fact, although all participants reported a significant reduction of tobacco consumption compared to the baseline, the use of e-cigarettes allowed smokers to achieve a better result. It could be worthwhile to associate this device with new ICT-driven models of self-management support in order to enable people to better handle behavioral changes and side effects. This is true for ready-to-quit smokers (such as our participants) but can also be advantageous for less motivated smokers engaged in clinical settings.

Developments in information and communication technology have changed the way healthcare processes are experienced by both patients and healthcare professionals: more and more services are now available through computers and mobile devices. Smartphones are becoming useful tools for managing one’s health, and today, there are many available apps meant to increase self-management, empowerment and quality of life. However, there are concerns about the implications of using mHealth and apps: data protection issues, concerns about sharing information online, and the patients’ capacity for discerning effective and valid apps from useless ones. The new General Data Protection Regulation has been introduced in order to give uniformity to data protection regulations among European countries but shared guidelines for mHealth are yet to develop. A unified perspective across Europe would increase the control over mHealth exploitation, making it possible to think of mHealth as effective and standard tools for future medical practice.

While they account for one-fifth of new cancer cases, rare cancers are difficult to study. A higher than average degree of uncertainty should be accommodated for clinical as well as for population-based decision making. Rules of rational decision making in conditions of uncertainty should be rigorously followed and would need widely informative clinical trials. In principle, any piece of new evidence would need to be exploited in rare cancers. Methodologies to explicitly weigh and combine all the available evidence should be refined, and the Bayesian logic can be instrumental to this end. Likewise, Bayesian-design trials may help optimize the low number of patients liable to be enrolled in clinical studies on rare cancers, as well as adaptive trials in general, with their inherent potential of flexibility when properly applied. While clinical studies are the mainstay to test hypotheses, the potential of electronic patient records should be exploited to generate new hypotheses, to create external controls for future studies (when internal controls are unpractical), to study effectiveness of new treatments in real conditions. Framework study protocols in specific rare cancers to stepwisely test sets of new agents, as from the early post-phase I development stage, should be encouraged. Also the compassionate and the off-label settings should be exploited to generate new evidence, and flexible regulatory innovations such as adaptive licensing could convey new agents early to rare cancer patients, while generating evidence. Though validation of surrogate end points is problematic in rare cancers, the use of an updated notion of tumor response may be of great value in the single patient to optimize the use of therapies, all the more the new ones. Disease-based communities, involving clinicians and patients, should be regularly consulted by regulatory bodies when setting their policies on drug approval and reimbursement in specific rare cancers .

Stress has been extensively studied as a psychosomatic factor associated with breast cancer. This study aims to review the prevalence of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), its associated risk factors, the role of predicting factors for its early diagnosis/prevention, the implications for co-treatment, and the potential links by which stress could impact cancer risk, by closely examining the literature on breast cancer survivors. The authors systematically reviewed studies published from 2002 to 2016 pertaining to PTSD, breast cancer and PTSD, and breast cancer and stress. The prevalence of PTSD varies between 0% and 32.3% mainly as regards the disease phase, the stage of disease, and the instruments adopted to detect prevalence. Higher percentages were observed when the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale was administered. In regard to PTSD-associated risk factors, no consensus has been reached to date; younger age, geographic provenance with higher prevalence in the Middle East, and the presence of previous cancer diagnosis in the family or relational background emerged as the only variables that were unanimously found to be associated with higher PTSD prevalence. Type C personality can be considered a risk factor, together with low social support. In light of the impact of PTSD on cognitive, social, work-related, and physical functioning, co-treatment of cancer and PTSD is warranted and a multidisciplinary perspective including specific training for health care professionals in communication and relational issues with PTSD patients is mandatory. However, even though a significant correlation was found between stressful life events and breast cancer incidence, an unequivocal implication of distress in breast cancer is hard to demonstrate. For the future, overcoming the methodological heterogeneity represents one main focus. Efficacy studies could help when evaluating the effect of co-treating breast cancer and post-traumatic stress symptoms, even if all the criteria for a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders diagnosis are not fulfilled.