Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Cancer
Published in: BMC Cancer 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Study protocol

Mobilizing social support networks to improve cancer screening: the COACH randomized controlled trial study design

Authors: Olive Mbah, Jean G. Ford, Miaozhen Qiu, Jennifer Wenzel, Lee Bone, Janice Bowie, Ahmed Elmi, Jimmie L. Slade, Michele Towson, Adrian S. Dobs

Published in: BMC Cancer | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Disadvantaged populations face many barriers to cancer care, including limited support in navigating through the complexities of the healthcare system. Family members play an integral role in caring for patients and provide valuable care coordination; however, the effect of family navigators on adherence to cancer screening has not previously been evaluated. Training and evaluating trusted family members and other support persons may improve cancer outcomes for vulnerable patients.

Methods

Guided by principles of community based participatory research (CBPR), “Evaluating Coaches of Older Adults for Cancer Care and Healthy Behaviors (COACH)” is a community-based randomized controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of a trained participant-designated coach (support person or care giver) in navigating cancer-screening for older African American adults, 50–74 years old. Participants are randomly assigned as dyads (participant + coach pair) to receiving either printed educational materials only (PEM—control group) or educational materials plus coach training (COACH—intervention group). We defined a coach as family member, friend, or other lay support person designated by the older adult. The coach training is designed as a one-time, 35- to 40-minute training consisting of: 1) a didactic session that covers the role of the coach, basic facts about colorectal, breast and cervical cancers (including risk factors, signs and symptoms and screening modalities), engaging the healthcare provider in cancer screening, insurance coverage for screening, and related healthcare issues, 2) three video skits addressing misconceptions about and planning for cancer screening, and 3) an interactive role-play session with the trainer to reinforce and practice strategies for encouraging the participant to get screened. The primary study outcome is the difference in the proportion of participants completing at least one of the recommended screenings (for breast, cervix or colorectal cancer) between the control and intervention groups.

Discussion

Building on trusted patient contacts to encourage cancer screening, COACH is a highly sustainable intervention in a high-risk population. It has the potential to minimize the effect of mistrust of the medical establishment on screening behaviors by mobilizing participants’ existing support networks. If effective, the intervention could have a high impact on health care disparities research across multiple diseases.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01613430). Registered June 5, 2012
Literature
1.
2.
Jatoi I, Becher H, Leake CR. Widening disparity in survival between white and african-american patients with breast carcinoma treated in the U. S. Department Of Defense Healthcare System. Cancer. 2003;98(5):894–9.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Kagawa-Singer M, Dadia AV, Yu MC, Surbone A. Cancer, culture, and health disparities: Time to chart a new course? CA Cancer J Clin. 2010;60(1):12–39.CrossRefPubMed
4.
5.
O’keefe EB, Meltzer JP, Bethea TN. Health disparities and cancer: Racial disparities in cancer mortality in the United States, 2000–2010. Front Public Health. 2015;3:51. Apr 15.PubMedCentralPubMed
6.
Smith BD, Smith GL, Hurria A, Hortobagyi GN, Buchholz TA. Future of cancer incidence in the United States: burdens upon an aging, changing nation. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(17):2758–65.CrossRefPubMed
7.
8.
Howlader N, Noone Am, Krapcho M, Garshell J, Neyman N, Altekruse Sf, Kosary Cl, Yu M, Ruhl J, Tatalovich Z, Cho H, Mariotto A, Lewis Dr, Chen Hs, Feuer Ej, Cronin Ka (Eds). Seer Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2010, National Cancer Institute, http://​seer.​cancer.​gov/​archive/​csr/​1975_​2010/​ based On November 2012 Seer Data Submission, Posted To The Seer Web Site, April 2013. Bethesda, Md: National Cancer Institute; 2013.
9.
Curtis E, Quale C, Haggstrom D, Smith-Bindman R. Racial And ethnic differences in breast cancer survival: How much is explained by screening, tumor severity, biology, treatment, comorbidities, and demographics? Cancer. 2008;112(1):171–80.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
10.
Hoffman HJ, Laverda NL, Levine PH, Young HA, Alexander LM, Patierno SR, et al. Having health insurance does not eliminate race/ethnicity-associated delays in breast cancer diagnosis in the District of Columbia. Cancer. 2011;117(16):3824–32.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
11.
Martires KJ, Kurlander DE, Minwell GJ, Dahms EB, Bordeaux JS. Patterns of cancer screening in primary care from 2005 to 2010. Cancer. 2014;120(2):253–61.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Silber JH, Rosenbaum PR, Clark AS, Giantonio BJ, Ross RN, Teng Y, et al. Characteristics associated with differences in survival among black and white women with breast cancer. JAMA. 2013;310(4):389–97.CrossRefPubMed
13.
May FP, Calmario CV, Ponce N, Spiegel BM. Racial minorities are more likely than whites to report lack of provider recommendation for colon cancer screening. Am J Gastroenterol. 2015;12.
14.
15.
Wells KJ, Battaglia TA, Dudley DJ, Garcia R, Greene A, Calhoun E, et al. Patient navigation: State of the art or is it science? Cancer. 2008;113(8):1999–2010.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
16.
Oluwole SF, Ali AO, Adu A, Blane BP, Barlow B, Oropeza R, et al. Impact of a cancer screening program on breast cancer stage at diagnosis in a medically underserved urban community. J Am Coll Surg. 2003;196(2):180–8.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Dignan MB, Burhansstipanov L, Hariton J, Harjo L, Rattler T, Lee R, et al. A comparison of two native american navigator formats: Face-to-face and telephone. Cancer Control. 2005;12 Suppl 2:28–33.PubMedCentralPubMed
18.
19.
Horne HN, Phelan-Emrick DF, Pollack CE, Markakis D, Wenzel J, Ahmed S, et al. Effect of patient navigation on colorectal cancer screening in a community-based randomized controlled trial of Urban African American adults. Cancer Causes Control. 2015;26(2):239–46.CrossRefPubMed
20.
21.
Liberman L, Freeman HP, Chandra S, Stein AL, Mccord C, Godfrey D, et al. Carcinoma detection at the breast examination center of harlem. Cancer. 2002;95(1):8–14.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Lee JH, Fulp W, Wells KJ, Meade CD, Calcano E, Roetzheim R. Patient navigation and time to diagnostic resolution: Results for a cluster randomized trial evaluating the efficacy of patient navigation among patients with breast cancer screening abnormalities, Tampa, Fl. Plos One. 2013;8(9):E74542.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
23.
Freund K, Battaglia TA. Impact of patient navigation on timely cancer care: The patient navigation research program. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106(6):Dju115.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
24.
Glajchen M. The emerging role and needs of family caregivers in cancer care. J Support Oncol. 2004;2(2):145–55.PubMed
25.
Wenzel J, Jones R, Klimmek R, Szanton S, Krumm S. Exploring the role of community health workers in providing cancer navigation: Perceptions Of African American older adults. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2012;39(3):E288–98.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
26.
Wenzel J, Jones RA, Klimmek R, Krumm S, Darrell LP, Song D, et al. Cancer support and resource needs among African American older adults. Clin J Oncol Nurs. 2012;16(4):372–7.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Clayman ML, Roter D, Wissow LS, Bandeen-Roche K. Autonomy-related behaviors of patient companions and their effect on decision-making activity in geriatric primary care visits. Soc Sci Med. 2005;60(7):1583–91.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Griffin JM, Meis LA, Macdonald R, Greer N, Jensen A, Rutks I, et al. Effectiveness of family and caregiver interventions on patient outcomes in adults with cancer: A systematic review. J Gen Intern Med. 2014;29(9):1274–82.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
29.
Hartmann M, Bazner E, Wild B, Eisler I, Herzog W. Effects of interventions involving the family in the treatment of adult patients with chronic physical diseases: A meta-analysis. Psychother Psychosom. 2010;79(3):136–48.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Hughes R, editor. Patient safety and quality: An evidence-based handbook for nurses. Rockville: Agency For Healthcare Research And Quality; 2008.
31.
32.
33.
34.
Martinez KA, Pollack CE, Phelan DF, Markakis D, Bone L, Shapiro G, et al. Gender differences in correlates of colorectal cancer screening among black medicare beneficiaries in Baltimore. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2013;22(6):1037–42.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
35.
36.
National Cancer Institute. Mammograms. Not Just Once But For A Lifetime. National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; 1998. Report No.: Nih Publication No. 98-3418v.
37.
38.
US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer: U.S. preventive services task force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(10):716–26. W-236.CrossRef
39.
40.
Minkler M, Wallerstein N. Community-based participatory research for health. San Francisco: Jossey Bass; 2003.
41.
42.
Laveist TA, Isaac LA, Williams KP. Mistrust of health care organizations is associated with underutilization of health services. Health Serv Res. 2009;44(6):2093–105. Sep 2.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
43.
Laveist TA, Nickerson KJ, Bowie JV. Attitudes about racism, medical mistrust, and satisfaction with care among African American and white cardiac patients. Med Care Res Rev. 2000;57 Suppl 1:146–61.CrossRefPubMed
44.
Agency For Healthcare Quality. 2004 National Healthcare Disparities Report. Rockville, Maryland: 2004 December. Report No.: Ahrq Publication No. 05–0014.
45.
Sabik Lm, Bradley Cj. The Impact Of Near-Universal Insurance Coverage On Breast And Cervical Cancer Screening: Evidence From Massachusetts. Health Econ. 2015 Feb 18. doi: 10.​1002/​hec.​3159.
46.
Jemal A, Clegg LX, Ward E, Ries LA, Wu X, Jamison PM, et al. Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975–2001, with a special feature regarding survival. Cancer. 2004;101(1):3–27.CrossRefPubMed
47.
Capitman J, Bhalotra S, Claderon-Rosado V, Beaston-Blaakman A, Cahow E, Constantine R, et al. Cancer Prevention And Treatment Demonstration For Ethnic And Racial Minorities. Baltimore: Brandeis University; 2003.
48.
American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures For African Americans 2005–2006. Atlanta, Ga: American Cancer Society; 2005.
49.
Klassen AC, Curriero FC, Hong JH, Williams C, Kulldorff M, Meissner HI, et al. The role of area-level influences on prostate cancer grade and stage at diagnosis. Prev Med. 2004;39(3):441–8.CrossRefPubMed
50.
Heflin MT, Oddone EZ, Pieper CF, Burchett BM, Cohen HJ. The effect of comorbid illness on receipt of cancer screening by older people. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2002;50(10):1651–8.CrossRefPubMed
51.
Bickell NA, Mcevoy MD. Physicians’ reasons for failing to deliver effective breast cancer care: A framework for underuse. Med Care. 2003;41(3):442–6.PubMed
52.
Vacek PM, Skelly JM. A prospective study of the use and effects of screening mammography in women aged 70 and older. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2015;63(1):1–7.CrossRefPubMed
53.
Stairmand J, Signal L, Sarfati D, Jackson C, Batten L, Holdaway M, et al. Consideration of comorbidity in treatment decision making in multidisciplinary cancer team meetings: A systematic review. Ann Oncol. 2015;26(7):1325–32.PubMed
54.
Miller DP, Brownlee CD, Mccoy TP, Pignone MP. The effect of health literacy on knowledge and receipt of colorectal cancer screening: A survey study. BMC Fam Pract. 2007;8:16.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
55.
Lindau S, Tomori C, Lyons T, Langseth L, Bennett C, Garcia P. The association of health literacy with cervical cancer prevention knowledge and health behaviors in a multiethnic cohort of women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;186(5):938–43.CrossRefPubMed
56.
Legg JS, Clement DG, White KR. Are women with self-reported cognitive limitations at risk for underutilization of mammography? J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2004;15(4):688–702.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Mobilizing social support networks to improve cancer screening: the COACH randomized controlled trial study design
Authors
Olive Mbah
Jean G. Ford
Miaozhen Qiu
Jennifer Wenzel
Lee Bone
Janice Bowie
Ahmed Elmi
Jimmie L. Slade
Michele Towson
Adrian S. Dobs
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Cancer / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2407
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-015-1920-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

BMC Cancer 1/2015 Go to the issue

Research article

Elevated expression of HSP90 and the antitumor effect of an HSP90 inhibitor via inactivation of the Akt/mTOR pathway in undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma

Research article

Cannabis exposure and risk of testicular cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Research article

Preoperative serum CA125: a useful marker for surgical management of endometrial cancer

Research article

The regulatory and predictive functions of miR-17 and miR-92 families on cisplatin resistance of non-small cell lung cancer

Research article

NAT1 and NAT2 genetic polymorphisms and environmental exposure as risk factors for oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a case-control study

Research article

Impact of cancer and chemotherapy on autonomic nervous system function and cardiovascular reactivity in young adults with cancer: a case-controlled feasibility study
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Image Credits