The purpose of the eSMART (Electronic Symptom Management using the Advanced Symptom Management System (ASyMS) Remote Technology) study is to evaluate the use of mobile phone technology to manage chemotherapy-related toxicities (CRTs) in people with breast cancer (BC), colorectal cancer (CRC), Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL), and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL)) across multiple European sites. One key objective was to review the published and grey literature on assessment and management of CRTs among patients receiving primary chemotherapy for BC, CRC, HL, and NHL to ensure that ASyMS remained evidence-based and reflected current and local practice. Three electronic databases were searched for English papers, with abstracts available from 01/01/2004-05/04/2014. For the grey literature, relevant clinical practice guidelines (CPGs)/evidence-based resources (EBRs) from the main international cancer organisations were reviewed as were symptom management (SM) protocols from the sites. After full-text screening, 27 publications were included. The majority (n = 14) addressed fatigue and focused on BC patients. Relevant CPGs/EBRs were found for fatigue (n = 4), nausea/vomiting (n = 5), mucositis (n = 4), peripheral neuropathy (n = 3), diarrhoea (n = 2), constipation (n = 2), febrile neutropenia/infection (n = 7), palmar plantar erythrodysesthesia (PPE) (n = 1), and pain (n = 4). SM protocols were provided by >40% of the clinical sites. A need exists for empirical research on SM for PPE, diarrhoea, and constipation. Research is needed on the efficacy of self-care strategies in patients with BC, CRC, HL, and NHL. In general, consistency exists across CPGs/EBRs and local guidelines on the assessment and management of common CRTs.

Background: There has been an international shift in health care, which has seen an increasing focus and development of technological and personalized at-home interventions that aim to improve health outcomes and patient-clinician communication. However, there is a notable lack of empirical evidence describing the preparatory steps of adapting and implementing technology of this kind across multiple countries and clinical settings. Objective: This study aimed to describe the steps undertaken in the preparation of a multinational, multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) to test a mobile phone–based remote symptom monitoring system, that is, Advanced Symptom Management System (ASyMS), designed to enhance management of chemotherapy toxicities among people with cancer receiving adjuvant chemotherapy versus standard cancer center care. Methods: There were 13 cancer centers across 5 European countries (Austria, Greece, Ireland, Norway, and the United Kingdom). Multiple steps were undertaken, including a scoping review of empirical literature and clinical guidelines, translation and linguistic validation of study materials, development of standardized international care procedures, and the integration and evaluation of the technology within each cancer center. Results: The ASyMS was successfully implemented and deployed in clinical practices across 5 European countries. The rigorous and simultaneous steps undertaken by the research team highlighted the strengths of the system in clinical practice, as well as the clinical and technical changes required to meet the diverse needs of its intended users within each country, before the commencement of the RCT. Conclusions: Adapting and implementing this multinational, multicenter system required close attention to diverse considerations and unique challenges primarily related to communication and clinical and technical issues. Success was dependent on collaborative and transparent communication among academics, the technology industry, translation partners, patients, and clinicians as well as a simultaneous and rigorous methodological approach within the 5 relevant countries.

To explore the experiences of a nursing team who implemented an international nurse‐led clinical trial in practice and understand the facilitators to their involvement. The role and responsibilities of the clinical nurse are advancing to encompass research activity to help inform evidence‐based practice. However, several personal and organisational challenges can inhibit nurses' capacity to implement and undertake research within clinical practice. Three focus groups were conducted with members of a nursing team (N = 18). Thematic analysis was employed, and themes were identified and agreed upon by the research team. Five themes were identified: ‘Previous experience of and attitudes to participation in clinical research’, ‘Decision‐making regarding participation in the clinical trial’, ‘Facilitators of participation in the clinical trial’, ‘Challenges of research in nursing practice’ and ‘Future orientation towards research’. Through their experiences of implementing a nurse‐led clinical trial within practice, nurses recognized a number of facilitators and challenges to their participation. The perceived relevance of the clinical trial to the nurses' practice, potential to improve patient care and appreciation of the nurse leader's expertise and understanding of their context were key motivators. Reciprocal trust with the nurse leader who was encouraging, motivating, supportive and accessible resulted in the engagement and commitment of the nursing team. This paper offers a perspective that can inform senior nursing management teams when implementing and conducting evidence‐based research amongst nursing teams and in doing so meet the needs of developing research capacity amongst clinical nurses.

The detrimental impact of smoking on health and wellbeing are irrefutable. Additionally, smoking is associated with the development of cancer, a reduction treatment outcomes and poorer health outcomes. Nevertheless, a significant number of people continue to smoke following a cancer diagnosis. Little is understood of the smoking cessation services provided to smokers with cancer or their engagement with them. This systematic review aimed to identify existing smoking cessation interventions for this cohort diagnosed with breast, head and neck, lung and cervical cancers (linked to risk). Systematic searches of Pubmed, Embase, Psych Info and CINAHL from 1 January 2015 to 15 December 2020 were conducted. Included studies examined the characteristics of smoking cessation interventions and impact on referrals and quit attempts. The impact on healthcare professionals was included if reported. Included studies were restricted to adults with a cancer diagnosis and published in English. No restriction was placed on study designs, and narrative data synthesis was conducted due to heterogeneity. A review protocol was registered on PROSPERO CRD 42020214204, and reporting adheres to PRISMA reporting guidelines. Data were screened, extracted in duplicate and an assessment of the quality of evidence undertaken using Mixed Methods Assessment Tool. 23 studies met the inclusion criteria, representing USA, Canada, England, Lebanon, Australia and including randomized controlled trials (9), observational studies (10), quality improvement (3), and one qualitative study. Hospital and cancer clinics [including a dental clinic] were the settings for all studies. 43% (10/23) of studies reported interventions for smokers diagnosed with head and neck cancer, 13% (3/23) for smokers diagnosed with lung cancer, one study provides evidence for breast cancer, and the remaining nine studies (39%) report on multiple cancers including the ones specified in this review. Methodological quality was variable. There were limited data to identify one optimal intervention for this cohort. Key elements included the timing and frequency of quit conversations, use of electronic records, pharmacotherapy including extended use of varenicline, increased counselling sessions and a service embedded in oncology departments. More studies are required to ensure tailored smoking cessation pathways are co-developed for smokers with a diagnosis of cancer to support this population.