Objectives To identify available literature on prevalence, severity and contributing factors of scan-associated anxiety (‘scanxiety’) and interventions to reduce it. Design Systematic scoping review. Data sources Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid PsycINFO, Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, EBSCO CINAHL and PubMed up to July 2020. Study selection Eligible studies recruited people having cancer-related non-invasive scans (including screening) and contained a quantitative assessment of scanxiety. Data extraction Demographics and scanxiety outcomes were recorded, and data were summarised by descriptive statistics. Results Of 26 693 citations, 57 studies were included across a range of scan types (mammogram: 26/57, 46%; positron-emission tomography: 14/57, 25%; CT: 14/57, 25%) and designs (observation: 47/57, 82%; intervention: 10/57, 18%). Eighty-one measurement tools were used to quantify prevalence and/or severity of scanxiety, including purpose-designed Likert scales (17/81, 21%); the State Trait Anxiety Inventory (14/81, 17%) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (9/81, 11%). Scanxiety prevalence ranged from 0% to 64% (above prespecified thresholds) or from 13% to 83% (‘any’ anxiety, if no threshold). Mean severity scores appeared low in almost all measures that quantitatively measured scanxiety (54/62, 87%), regardless of whether anxiety thresholds were prespecified. Moderate to severe scanxiety occurred in 4%–28% of people in studies using descriptive measures. Nine of 20 studies assessing scanxiety prescan and postscan reported significant postscan reduction in scanxiety. Lower education, smoking, higher levels of pain, higher perceived risk of cancer and diagnostic scans (vs screening scans) consistently correlated with higher scanxiety severity but not age, gender, ethnicity or marital status. Interventions included relaxation, distraction, education and psychological support. Six of 10 interventions showed a reduction in scanxiety. Conclusions Prevalence and severity of scanxiety varied widely likely due to heterogeneous methods of measurement. A uniform approach to evaluating scanxiety will improve understanding of the phenomenon and help guide interventions.

Targeted molecular treatments have changed the way non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is managed. Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK), v-raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B1 (BRAF), and c-ros oncogene 1 (ROS1) mutations are now used to guide specific anti-cancer therapies to improve patient outcomes. New targeted molecular treatments are constantly being developed and evaluated as a means to improve efficacy, overcome resistance, or minimise toxicity. This review article summarises the current evidence for the efficacy, resistance mechanisms, and safety of targeted molecular treatments against specific mutations in NSCLC.

PURPOSE: Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) affects 50%-70% of cancer survivors. This multicenter, single-arm study sought to determine the participant-rated usefulness of an oncologist-delivered FCR intervention.METHODS: Women who completed treatment for early breast cancer (could be receiving endocrine therapy) with baseline FCR > 0 were invited to participate. FCR was measured using a validated 42-item FCR Inventory. The brief oncologist-delivered intervention entailed (1) FCR normalization; (2) provision of personalized prognostic information; (3) recurrence symptoms education, (4) advice on managing worry, and (5) referral to psycho-oncologist if FCR was high. FCR, depression, and anxiety were assessed preintervention (T0), at 1 week (T1), and 3 months (T2) postintervention. The primary outcome was participant-rated usefulness. Secondary outcomes included feasibility and efficacy.RESULTS: Five oncologists delivered the intervention to 61/255 women invited. Mean age was 58 ± 12 years. Mean time since breast cancer diagnosis was 2.5 ± 1.3 years. Forty-three women (71%) were on adjuvant endocrine therapy. Of 58 women who completed T1 assessment, 56 (97%) found the intervention to be useful. FCR severity decreased significantly at T1 (F = 18.5, effect size = 0.39, P < .0001) and T2 (F = 24, effect size = 0.68, P < .0001) compared with baseline. There were no changes in unmet need or depression or anxiety. Mean consultation length was 22 minutes (range, 7-47 minutes), and mean intervention length was 8 minutes (range, 2-20 minutes). The intervention was perceived as useful and feasible by oncologists.CONCLUSION: A brief oncologist-delivered intervention to address FCR is useful and feasible, and has preliminary efficacy in reducing FCR. Plans for a cluster randomized trial are underway.

Background: Scan-associated anxiety (or “scanxiety”) is commonly experienced by people having cancer-related scans. Social media platforms such as Twitter provide a novel source of data for observational research. Objective: We aimed to identify posts on Twitter (or “tweets”) related to scanxiety, describe the volume and content of these tweets, and describe the demographics of users posting about scanxiety. Methods: We manually searched for “scanxiety” and associated keywords in cancer-related, publicly available, English-language tweets posted between January 2018 and December 2020. We defined “conversations” as a primary tweet (the first tweet about scanxiety) and subsequent tweets (interactions stemming from the primary tweet). User demographics and the volume of primary tweets were assessed. Conversations underwent inductive thematic and content analysis. Results: A total of 2031 unique Twitter users initiated a conversation about scanxiety from cancer-related scans. Most were patients (n=1306, 64%), female (n=1343, 66%), from North America (n=1130, 56%), and had breast cancer (449/1306, 34%). There were 3623 Twitter conversations, with a mean of 101 per month (range 40-180). Five themes were identified. The first theme was experiences of scanxiety, identified in 60% (2184/3623) of primary tweets, which captured the personal account of scanxiety by patients or their support person. Scanxiety was often described with negative adjectives or similes, despite being experienced differently by users. Scanxiety had psychological, physical, and functional impacts. Contributing factors to scanxiety included the presence and duration of uncertainty, which was exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic. The second theme (643/3623, 18%) was the acknowledgment of scanxiety, where users summarized or labeled an experience as scanxiety without providing emotive clarification, and advocacy of scanxiety, where users raised awareness of scanxiety without describing personal experiences. The third theme was messages of support (427/3623, 12%), where users expressed well wishes and encouraged positivity for people experiencing scanxiety. The fourth theme was strategies to reduce scanxiety (319/3623, 9%), which included general and specific strategies for patients and strategies that required improvements in clinical practice by clinicians or health care systems. The final theme was research about scanxiety (50/3623, 1%), which included tweets about the epidemiology, impact, and contributing factors of scanxiety as well as novel strategies to reduce scanxiety. Conclusions: Scanxiety was often a negative experience described by patients having cancer-related scans. Social media platforms like Twitter enable individuals to share their experiences and offer support while providing researchers with unique data to improve their understanding of a problem. Acknowledging scanxiety as a term and increasing awareness of scanxiety is an important first step in reducing scanxiety. Research is needed to guide evidence-based approaches to reduce scanxiety, though some low-cost, low-resource practical strategies identified in this study could be rapidly introduced into clinical care.