Disclosure of cancer diagnosis and quality of life in cancer patients: should it be the same everywhere?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Evidence suggests that truth telling and honest disclosure of cancer diagnosis could lead to improved outcomes in cancer patients. To examine such findings in Iran, this trial aimed to study the various dimensions of quality of life in patients with gastrointestinal cancer and to compare these variables among those who knew their diagnosis and those who did not.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A consecutive sample of patients with gastrointestinal cancer being treated in Cancer Institute in Tehran, Iran was prospectively evaluated. A psychologist interviewed patients using the Iranian version of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30). Patients were categorized into two groups: those who knew their diagnosis and those who did not. Independent sample t-test was used for group comparisons.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In all 142 patients were interviewed. A significant proportion (52%) of patients did not know their cancer diagnosis and 48% of patients were aware that they had cancer. They were quite similar in most characteristics. The comparison of quality of life between two groups indicated that those knew their diagnosis showed a significant lower degree of physical (P = 0.001), emotional (P = 0.01) and social functioning (P < 0.001), whereas the global quality of life and other functional scales including role functioning and cognitive functioning did not show significant result. There were no statistically significant differences between symptoms scores between two groups, except for fatigue suggesting a higher score in patients who knew their diagnosis (P = 0.01). The financial difficulties were also significantly higher in patients who knew their cancer diagnosis (P = 0.005). Performing analysis of variance while controlling for age, educational status, cancer site, and knowledge of cancer diagnosis, the results showed that the knowledge of cancer diagnosis independently still contributed to the significant differences observed between two groups.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Contrary to expectation the findings indicated that patients who did not know their cancer diagnosis had a better physical, social and emotional quality of life. It seems that due to cultural differences between countries cancer disclosure guidelines perhaps should be differing.</p

Multicentre phase II study of gemcitabine and cisplatin in malignant pleural mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma is a notoriously chemoresistant tumour. However, a recent single institution study showed an impressive activity of gemcitabine and cisplatin. Our aim is to investigate the efficacy and toxicity of a gemcitabine and cisplatin combination in selected and chemo-naive patients with histologically proven malignant pleural mesothelioma. Method: Gemcitabine 1250 mg m−2 was administered on day 1 and day 8 and cisplatin 80 mg m−2 was administered on day 1 in a 3-week cycle with a maximum of six cycles. Response and toxicity evaluations were performed according to WHO and NCIC-CTC criteria. Pathology and radiology were centrally reviewed. Results show that in 25 evaluable patients, four PR were observed (ORR 16%, 95% CI 1–31%). Responses of seven patients were unevaluable. No unexpected toxicity occurred. Time to progression was 6 months (5–7 months) with a median survival from registration of 9.6 months (95% CI 8–12 months). In conclusion this trial excludes with 90% power a response rate of greater than 30% in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma using a combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin at the proposed dose and schedule

A multicentre phase II study of cisplatin and gemcitabine for malignant mesothelioma

Our previous phase II study of cisplatin and gemcitabine in malignant mesothelioma showed a 47.6% (95% CI 26.2–69.0%) response rate with symptom improvement in responding patients. Here we confirm these findings in a multicentre setting, and assess the effect of this treatment on quality of life and pulmonary function. Fifty-three patients with pleural malignant mesothelioma received cisplatin 100 mg m−2 i.v. day 1 and gemcitabine 1000 mg m−2 i.v. days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28 day cycle for a maximum of six cycles. Quality of life and pulmonary function were assessed at each cycle. The best response achieved in 52 assessable patients was: partial response, 17 (33%, 95% CI 20–46%); stable disease, 31 (60%); and progressive disease, four (8%). The median time to disease progression was 6.4 months, median survival from start of treatment 11.2 months, and median survival from diagnosis 17.3 months. Vital capacity and global quality of life remained stable in all patients and improved significantly in responding patients. Major toxicities were haematological, limiting the mean relative dose intensity of gemcitabine to 75%. This schedule of cisplatin and gemcitabine is active in malignant mesothelioma in a multicentre setting. Investigation of alternative scheduling is needed to decrease haematological toxicity and increase the relative dose intensity of gemcitabine whilst maintaining response rate and quality of life

Effectiveness of computer-navigated minimally invasive total hip surgery compared to conventional total hip arthroplasty: design of a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Moderate to severe osteoarthrosis is the most common indication for Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA). Minimally Invasive Total Hip Surgery (MIS) and computer-navigated surgery were introduced several years ago. However, the literature lacks well-designed studies that provide evidence of superiority of computer-navigated MIS over a conventional THA technique. Hence, the purpose of this study is to compare (cost)effectiveness of computer-navigated MIS with a conventional technique for THA. It is our hypothesis that computer-navigated MIS will lead to a quicker recovery during the early postoperative period (3 months), and to an outcome at least as good 6 months postoperatively. We also hypothesize that computer-navigated MIS leads to fewer perioperative complications and better prosthesis positioning. Furthermore, cost advantages of computer-navigated MIS over conventional THA technique are expected. METHODS/DESIGN: A cluster randomized controlled trial will be executed. Patients between the ages of 18 and 75 admitted for primary cementless unilateral THA will be included. Patients will be stratified using the Charnley classification. They will be randomly allocated to have computer-navigated MIS or conventional THA technique. Measurements take place preoperatively, perioperatively, and 6 weeks and 3 and 6 months postoperatively. Degree of limping (gait analysis), self-reported functional status and health-related quality of life (questionnaires) will be assessed preoperatively as well as postoperatively. Perioperative complications will be registered. Radiographic evaluation of prosthesis positioning will take place 6 weeks postoperatively. An evaluation of costs within and outside the healthcare sector will focus on differences in costs between computer-navigated MIS and conventional THA technique. DISCUSSION: Based on studies performed so far, few objective data quantifying the risks and benefits of computer-navigated MIS are available. Therefore, this study has been designed to compare (cost) effectiveness of computer-navigated MIS with a conventional technique for THA. The results of this trial will be presented as soon as they become available

What are the roles involved in establishing and maintaining informational continuity of care within family practice? A systematic review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Central to establishing continuity of care is the development of a relationship between doctor and patient/caregiver. Transfer of information between these parties facilitates the development of continuity in general; and specifically informational continuity of care. We conducted a systematic review of published literature to gain a better understanding of the roles that different parties – specifically doctors, patients, family caregivers, and technology – play in establishing and maintaining informational continuity of care within family practice.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Relevant published articles were sought from five databases. Accepted articles were reviewed and appraised in a consistent way. Fifty-six articles were retained following title and abstract reviews. Of these, 28 were accepted for this review.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>No articles focused explicitly on the roles involved in establishing or maintaining informational continuity of care within family practice. Most informational continuity of care literature focused on the transfer of information between settings and not at the first point of contact. Numerous roles were, however, were interpreted using the data extracted from reviewed articles. Doctors are responsible for record keeping, knowing patients' histories, recalling accumulated knowledge, and maintaining confidentiality. Patients are responsible for disclosing personal and health details, transferring information to other practitioners (including new family doctors), and establishing trust. Both are responsible for developing a relationship of trust. Technology is an important tool of informational continuity of care through holding important information, providing search functions, and providing a space for recorded information. There is a significant gap in our knowledge about the roles that family caregivers play.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The number of roles identified and the interrelationships between them indicates that establishing and maintaining informational continuity of care within family practice is a complex and multifaceted process. This synthesis of roles provided serves as an important resource for continuity of care researchers in general, for the development of continuity of care quality indicators, and for the practice of family medicine.</p

Single blind randomized Phase III trial to investigate the benefit of a focal lesion ablative microboost in prostate cancer (FLAME-trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background: The treatment results of external beam radiotherapy for intermediate and high risk prostate cancer patients are insufficient with five-year biochemical relapse rates of approximately 35%. Several randomized trials have shown that dose escalation to the entire prostate improves biochemical disease free survival. However, further dose escalation to the whole gland is limited due to an unacceptable high risk of acute and late toxicity. Moreover, local recurrences often originate at the location of the macroscopic tumor, so boosting the radiation dose at the macroscopic tumor within the prostate might increase local control. A reduction of distant metastases and improved survival can be expected by reducing local failure. The aim of this study is to investigate the benefit of an ablative microboost to the macroscopic tumor within the prostate in patients treated with external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer.Methods/Design: The FLAME-trial (Focal Lesion Ablative Microboost in prostatE cancer) is a single blind randomized controlled phase III trial. We aim to include 566 patients (283 per treatment arm) with intermediate or high risk adenocarcinoma of the prostate who are scheduled for external beam radiotherapy using fiducial markers for position verification. With this number of patients, the expected increase in five-year freedom from biochemical failure rate of 10% can be detected with a power of 80%. Patients allocated to the standard arm receive a dose of 77 Gy in 35 fractions to the entire prostate and patients in the experimental arm receive 77 Gy to the entire prostate and an additional integrated microboost to the macroscopic tumor of 95 Gy in 35 fractions. The secondary outcome measures include treatment-related toxicity, quality of life and disease-specific survival. Furthermore, by localizing the recurrent tumors within the prostate during follow-up and correlating this with the delivered dose, we can obtain accurate dose-effect information for both the macroscopic tumor and subclinical disease in prostate cancer. The rationale, study design and the first 50 patients included are described.Biological, physical and clinical aspects of cancer treatment with ionising radiatio

Allergic rhinitis: evidence for impact on asthma

BACKGROUND: This paper reviews the current evidence indicating that comorbid allergic rhinitis may have clinically relevant effects on asthma. DISCUSSION: Allergic rhinitis is very common in patients with asthma, with a reported prevalence of up to 100% in those with allergic asthma. While the temporal relation of allergic rhinitis and asthma diagnoses can be variable, the diagnosis of allergic rhinitis often precedes that of asthma. Rhinitis is an independent risk factor for the subsequent development of asthma in both atopic and nonatopic individuals. Controlled studies have provided conflicting results regarding the benefits for asthma symptoms of treating comorbid allergic rhinitis with intranasal corticosteroids. Effects of other treatments for comorbid allergic rhinitis, including antihistamines, allergen immunotherapy, systemic anti-IgE therapy, and antileukotriene agents, have been examined in a limited number of studies; anti-IgE therapy and antileukotriene agents such as the leukotriene receptor antagonists have benefits for treating both allergic rhinitis and asthma. Results of observational studies indicate that treating comorbid allergic rhinitis results in a lowered risk of asthma-related hospitalizations and emergency visits. Results of several retrospective database studies in the United States and in Europe indicate that, for patients with asthma, the presence of comorbid allergic rhinitis is associated with higher total annual medical costs, greater prescribing frequency of asthma-related medications, as well as increased likelihood of asthma-related hospital admissions and emergency visits. There is therefore evidence suggesting that comorbid allergic rhinitis is a marker for more difficult to control asthma and worsened asthma outcomes. CONCLUSION: These findings highlight the potential for improving asthma outcomes by following a combined therapeutic approach to comorbid allergic rhinitis and asthma rather than targeting each condition separately