WORKSHOP 1: Neuroplasticity: Real World, Scientific Solutions to Address Cancer Related Brain

Heather Palmer
Maximum Capacity, Bradford, Canada

Abstract: Cancer-related brain fog, commonly referred to as ‘chemo brain’ can be frustrating and life altering. T hose experiencing cancer-related brain fog often note changes in memory, attention, concentration, executive functions, motor coordination, spatial skills and psychological well being. Although chemotherapy is considered to be the leading cause of these changes, other possible causes include the cancer itself, additional cancer related treatments, genetics and psychosocial constructs. Fortunately, it is now well understood that the brain does have the capacity to develop new connections between brain regions to compensate for areas of weakness (a concept commonly referred to as neuroplasticity). The ‘Brain Fog’ program, founded on principles of neuroplasticity, promotes neural networking to improve thinking capacity, enabling cancer survivors to function at their cognitive best. An overview of the ‘Brain Fog’ program will be provided with an emphasis placed on the most successful techniques and strategies that are taught. Running since 2006, the Brain Fog program has helped over 4000 cancer survivors think, feel and function better. Learning Objectives: 1. As a result of participating in this activity, the participant will be able Discuss the prevalence and symptoms of cancer-related brain fog. 2. As a result of participating in this activity, the participant will be able to summarize the current theories surrounding possible causes of cancer related brain fog.  3.  As a result of participating in this activity, the participant will be able to learn about neuroplasticity and the importance of strengthening and nurturing pathways between brain regions to help compensate for cognitive changes. fMRI studies supporting neuroplasticity will be shared.  4.  As a result of participating in this activity, the participant will be able to learn a variety of techniques and strategies to nurture those pathways in order to address the many cognitive changes cancer patients’ experience. References: 1. Hot off the press: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-andfitness/health/cutting-through-the-fog-of-chemo-brain-to-improve-cancertherapy/article24189998/. 2. Nelson, W.L., Suls, J., & Padgett, L. (2014). Understanding ‘ChemoBrain’ : A Challenge and Invitation to Psychological Scientists. Observer, Vol. 12, No. 2. 3. Von Ah, D., Carpenter, J. S., Saykin, A., Monahan, P., Wu, J., Yu, M., Unverzagt, F. (2012). Advanced cognitive training for breast cancer survivors: A randomized controlled trial. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 135, 799–809. 4. Wefel, J. S., & Schagen, S. B. (2012). Chemotherapy-related cognitive dysfunction. Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports, 12, 267–275.

WORKSHOP 2: Working with Native Populations to Improve Cancer Care Equity

Mary Koithan, Natalie Pool, Teshia Solomon
University of Arizona College of Nursing, Tucson, AZ, USA

Abstract: American Indian/Native Alaskan (AI/NA) populations suffer significant cancer care disparities that arise from a diverse set of factors and issues. If we are to positively impact outcomes of cancer care in this population, students entering the field of oncology as either a provider or researcher must be sensitized to these issues. This workshop will address two issues that have been found to most significantly affect cancer care disparities: health beliefs and behaviors and the conduct of research in tribal communities. Learning Objectives: 1. As a result of participating in this activity, participants will be able to describe how health beliefs impact cancer care screening and treatment behaviors in native populations. 2. As a result of participating in this activity, participants will be able to describe how traditional values impact healthcare decision making patterns in native populations. 3. As a result of participating in this activity, participants will be able to identify two significant historical events that impact AI/NA decisions to participate in cancer research. 4. As a result of participating in this activity, participants will be able to describe how health beliefs and values impact cancer research in native populations. References: 1. Kahn-Jahn, M. & Koithan, M. (2015). “Living in Health, Harmony, and Beauty: The Diné (Navajo) Hózhó Wellness Philosophy. Global Advances in Health and Medicine, 4(2), 24-30. 2. Solomon, T. & Randall, L. (2014). Conducting Health Research in Native American Communities. American Public Health Association.

WORKSHOP 3: Steps, Stairs and Skills: Climbing Your Way toward Cancer Education that Embraces Culture and Literacy!

¹Cathy Meade, ²Kristen Wells, ¹Clement K Gwede
¹H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA, ²San Diego State University, San Diego, CA, USA

Abstract: Have you ever thought about ways to increase the suitability of your educational messages for diverse audiences? This session calls attention to the value of systematic, iterative and learner-centered processes that allow you to apply behavioral and theoretical principles and integrate design science into the development of crisp, visually attractive and actionable messages that consider culture and literacy. This workshop is intended for educators and researchers who are interested in sharpening their education skills and draws from the presenters’ extensive backgrounds in public health, nursing and cancer communications. Join us in this interactive workshop that illustrates key steps and skills used to produce cancer education screening interventions that address: a) cervical cancer– using an embodied conversational agent-based (ECA) and low literacy teaching cards to reach Hispanic farmworkers; and b) colorectal cancer screening – using a photonovella approach (DVD/brochure) to reach English and Spanish-language preferring patients seen at community clinics. Learning Objectives: 1. As a result of participating in this activity, the participant will be able to summarize how formative data provide a blueprint for message design and development. 2. As a result of participating in this activity, the participant will be able to relate how educational messages take shape through iterative systematic processes. 3. As a result of participating in this activity, the participant will be able to highlight methodological steps that enhance the cultural, linguistic and literacy salience of messages. References: 1. Wells KJ, Otero CV, Bredice, M, Meade CD, Chaet A, Rivera M, Arroyo G, Proctor S, Barnes LE. (in press).Acceptability of a virtual patient educator for Hispanic women. Hispanic Health Care International. 2. Gwede CK, Koskan AM, Quinn GP, Davis SN, Ealey J, Abdulla R, Vadaparampil ST, Elliott G, Lopez D, Shibata D, Roetzheim RG, Meade CD, and the Tampa Bay Community Cancer Network (T BCCN). Patients’ perceptions of Colorectal Cancer Screening Tests and Prepatory Education in Federally Qualified Health Centers. J Cancer Educ 2014 Sep 24. [Epub ahead of print] PMID: 25249181 3. Wells KJ, Quinn GP, Meade CD, Fletcher M, Tyson DM, Jim H, Jacobsen PB. (2012). Development of a cancer clinical trials multi-media intervention: Clinical trials: Are they right for you? Patient Educ Couns. Apr 21. [Epub ahead of print] PMID: 22525803 4. Simmons VN Quinn GP Litvin EB, Rojas A, Jiménez J, Castro E, Meade CD, Brandon T H. (2011). Transcreation of validated smoking relapse-prevention booklets for use with Hispanic populations. J Health Care Poor Underserved. Aug;22(3):886-93. PMID: 21841285; PMC3804252; doi:1353/hpu.2011.0091; NIHMS472107.

This workshop has been canceled.

WORKSHOP 4: Genomics and Cancer Care

¹Mitesh Board, ²John Carpten
¹Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, Scottsdale, AZ, USA, ²T-Gen, Phoenix, AZ, USA

Abstract: This workshop will cover the basics of genomics in the diagnosis and treatment for patients diagnosed with cancer. Educators will learn basic genetic terms used in the practice as well as updates on current treatments and research focused on individualized care from the genetic perspective.

WORKSHOP 5: Geriatric Oncology

¹Martine Puts, ²Ewa Szumacher
¹Lawrence S. Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada, ²Sunnybrook, Toronto, Canada

Abstract: Screening tools for multidimensional health problems warranting a geriatric assessment in older cancer patients: an update on SIOG recommendations. Learning Objectives: 1. As a result of participating in this activity, the participant will be able to describe physiological changes that occur with aging and how they interact with cancer and its treatment; to describe the uniqueness of older adults. 2. As a result of participating in this activity, the participant will be able to understand the core components of a comprehensive geriatric assessment and commonly used instruments. 3. As a result of participating in this activity, the participant will be able to describe interventions that can be implemented on the basis of the comprehensive geriatric assessment findings. 4. As a result of participating in this activity, the participant will be able to work on case-studies related to different geriatric oncology patients. 5. As a result of participating in this activity, the participant will be aware of different international geriatric oncology care models and resources available. References: 1. J Clin Oncol. 2014 Aug 20;32(24):2595-603. International Society of Geriatric Oncology consensus on geriatric assessment in older patients with cancer. 2. Wildiers H, Heeren P, Puts M, Topinkova E, Janssen-Heijnen ML, Extermann M, Falandry C, Artz A, Brain E, Colloca G, Flamaing J, Karnakis T, Kenis C, Audisio RA, Mohile S, Repetto L, Van Leeuwen B, Milisen K, Hurria A. Oncologist. 2014 Oct;19(10):1056-68. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2014-0180. Epub 2014 Sep 3. 3. How to implement a geriatric assessment in your clinical practice. Sattar S1, Alibhai SM1, Wildiers H1, Puts MT 2. 4. Ann Oncol. 2015 Feb;26(2):288-300. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdu210. Epub 2014 Jun 16. 5. Screening tools for multidimensional health problems warranting a geriatric assessment in older cancer patients: an update on SIOG recommendations†. 6. Decoster L1, Van Puyvelde K2, Mohile S3, Wedding U4, Basso U5, Colloca G6, Rostoft S7, Overcash J8, Wildiers H9, Steer C10, Kimmick G11, Kanesvaran R12, Luciani A13, Terret C14, Hurria A15, Kenis C16, Audisio R17, Extermann M18.

WORKSHOP 6: The Art of Journal Writing & Reviewing: Keys to Success

¹Arthur M Michalek, ²John Vetto
¹University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA, ²Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA

Abstract: The focus of this workshop is the Art of journal writing and reviewing. Presentations will be given by editorial staff of the Journal of Cancer Education offering advice on how to author a publishable manuscript as well as tips to reviewers on how to assess manuscripts. Authors not only need to learn the art of writing, but also need be aware of the editorial process. Information and advice will be provided on selecting a publication, author guidelines, submitting a manuscript, peer review, responding to reviewer’s recommendations, and ethical considerations. Prospective authors will learn how to organize and write publishable manuscripts. Prospective reviewers will learn on what areas to focus their reviews and how to offer constructive criticisms that will enable authors to strengthen their work for resubmission. The roles of author and reviewer are symbiotic and their work, if properly performed, may result in a work of value to the public and profession. Presentations/panel discussions will be made to provide an overall introduction and key points on the Journal process, the art of writing, and the art of reviewing. Objectives: 1. As a result of participating in this activity, the participant will be able to understand the process of journal submission, review, and response to reviewers. 2. As a result of participating in this activity, the participant will be able to construct a publishable manuscript. 3. As a result of participating in this activity, the participant will be able to learn what to and not to do. 4. As a result of participating in this activity, the participant will be able to learn what to focus on and how to provide constructive comment.  References: 1. Vetto J: Short and Sweet: a short course on concise medical writing. Journal of Cancer Education. March 2015, Volume 29, Issue 1, pp 194.495. 2. Michalek AM: Down the Rabbit Hole: Advice to Reviewers. Journal of Cancer Education March 2014, Volume 29, Issue 1, pp 4-5.