These findings indicate that not only is the FSFI psychometrically sound when used with women with breast cancer, but it is perceived as being easy to use and relevant. It is recommended that the FSFI subscale scores can be used in both clinical and research settings as a screening tool to identify women experiencing sexual dysfunction following breast cancer.

Breast cancer patients are at increased risk of sexual dysfunction. Despite this, both patients and practitioners are reluctant to initiate a conversation about sexuality. A sexual dysfunction screening tool would be helpful in clinical practice and research, however, no scale has yet been identified as a “gold standard” for this purpose. The present review aimed at evaluating the scales used in breast cancer research in respect to their psychometric properties and the extent to which they measure the DSM-5/ICD-10 aspects of sexual dysfunction. A comprehensive search of the literature was conducted for the period 1992–2013, yielding 129 studies using 30 different scales measuring sexual functioning, that were evaluated in the present review. Three scales (Arizona Sexual Experience Scale, Female Sexual Functioning Index, and Sexual Problems Scale) were identified as most closely meeting criteria for acceptable psychometric properties and incorporation of the DSM-5/ICD-10 areas of sexual dysfunction. Clinical implications for implementation of these measures are discussed as well as directions for further research.

Purpose Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and targeted therapy (TT) have improved the survival of people with metastatic melanoma. We assessed the feasibility, acceptability, and utility of a novel model of nurse-led, telehealth-delivered survivorship care (MELCARE) for this survivor group. Methods People ≥ 18 years diagnosed with unresectable stage III or stage IV melanoma who were ≥ 6 months post initiation of ICI/TT with a radiological response suggestive of a long-term response to ICI/TT were recruited from a specialist melanoma centre in Australia. All participants received MELCARE, a nurse-led survivorship program involving two telehealth consultations 3 months apart, needs assessment using the Distress Thermometer (DT) and Problem List, and creation of a survivorship care plan. Feasibility, acceptability, and utility were assessed using rates of consent and study completion, time taken to complete each component of MELCARE, the Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM), and a customised utility survey. Results 31/54 (57%) people consented. Participants were male (21, 68%), with a median age of 67 (range: 46–82). Eleven (35%) were receiving/had received ipilimumab and nivolumab and 27 (87%) had ceased treatment. Feasibility was demonstrated with 97% completing MELCARE. Utility was demonstrated on a customised survey and supported by a reduction in the mean DT score (initial: 5.6, SD: 2.9; follow-up: 1.5, SD: 1.2). Acceptability was demonstrated on 3/4 AIM items. Conclusion MELCARE was feasible and acceptable with high levels of utility. However, the consent rate was 57% indicating some people do not require support. Future studies should consider MELCARE’s optimal timing, resourcing, and cost-effectiveness.

Sexual dysfunction following breast cancer treatment is common and screening for this is recommended. This study determined the reliability, validity, and acceptability of a breast cancer-specific adaptation of the Female Sexual Function Index, the FSFI-BC. This new measure addresses limitations in the FSFI when assessing sexual dysfunction of women with breast cancer regarding applicability to non-sexually active women, measuring distress and changes after cancer. Female breast cancer survivors (n = 596; 429 sexually active, 166 non-sexually active) completed an online survey including demographic/medical information, the FSFI-BC, and scales measuring sexual functioning, fatigue, body image, physical and mental health, and relationship adjustment (Time 1). Three weeks later, 326 women (245 sexually active; 81 non-sexually active) completed the Time 2 survey including the FSFI-BC, and questions regarding its acceptability and perceived change in sexual functioning. Reliability, construct validity, and acceptability were examined using standard scale validation techniques. Exploratory factor analysis delineated seven factors: Changes after cancer, desire/arousal, lubrication, orgasm, pain, satisfaction, and distress, accounting for 79.98 % (sexually active) and 77.19 % (non-active) variance in responses. Acceptable internal consistencies (non-active: α = 0.71-0.96; sexually active: α = 0.89-0.96) and test-retest reliabilities (non-active: r = 0.63-0.86; sexually active: r = 0.71-0.88) were evident. Inter-scale correlations provided evidence for convergent and divergent validities of the FSFI-BC. Both sexually active and non-active women provided positive feedback about the FSFI-BC. The optional partner questions demonstrated clinical utility. With desirable psychometric properties and acceptability to participants, the FSFI-BC is suitable for screening for sexual dysfunction in women with breast cancer.