A randomised controlled trial of a cognitive behavioural intervention for men who have hot flushes following prostate cancer treatment (MANCAN):trial protocol

Background:- This randomised controlled trial (RCT) aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a guided self-help cognitive behavioural intervention to alleviate problematic hot flushes (HF) and night sweats (NS) in men who are undergoing prostate cancer treatment. The trial and the self-help materials have been adapted from a previous RCT, which showed that a cognitive behavioural intervention reduced the self-reported problem-rating of hot flushes in women with menopausal symptoms, and in women undergoing breast cancer treatment. We hypothesize that guided self-help will be more effective than usual care in reducing HF/NS problem-rating at post treatment assessment. Methods/Design:- Seventy men who are undergoing treatment for prostate cancer and who have been experiencing more than ten HF/NS weekly for over a month are recruited into the trial from urology clinics in London. They are randomly allocated to either a four-week self-help cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) treatment or to their usual care (control group). The treatment includes information and discussion about hot flushes and night sweats in the context of prostate cancer, monitoring and modifying precipitants, relaxation and paced respiration, stress management, cognitive therapy for unhelpful thoughts and beliefs, managing sleep and night sweats, and advice on maintaining these changes.Prior to randomisation, men attend a clinical interview, undergo 24-48-hour sternal skin conductance monitoring, and complete pre-treatment questionnaires (e.g., problem-rating and frequency of hot flushes and night sweats; quality of life; mood; hot flush beliefs and behaviours). Post-treatment measures (sternal skin conductance and the above questionnaires) are collected four-six weeks later, and again at a six-month follow-up. Discussion:- MANCAN is the first randomised controlled trial of cognitive behavioural therapy for HF/NS for men that measures both self-reported and physiologically indexed symptoms. The results will inform future clinical practice by evaluating an evidence-based, non-medical treatment, which can be delivered by trained health professionals. Trial registration:- UK Clinical Research Network UKCRN10904

A systematic review of quality of life in adults with muscle disease

We reviewed the literature on how muscle disease affects quality of life compared to healthy controls, and the factors that influence the effects of muscle disease on quality of life. We also wanted to know whether quality of life differed between muscle diseases. We searched online databases and identified 26 relevant studies. The quality of each study was assessed, results sections analysed and a database of factors associated with quality of life developed. We graded the level of evidence supporting the association between each factor and quality of life as inconclusive, moderate or high. Compared to controls, muscle disease compromised quality of life in all areas of functioning. There was little evidence to suggest that quality of life differed significantly between muscle diseases. There was a high level of evidence suggesting that disease severity, pain, fatigue, and mood significantly affect quality of life. There was a moderate level of evidence suggesting that illness perceptions, coping strategies, age and gender affect quality of life. Several factors had an inconsistent level of evidence

Multigene Expression Profile Testing in Breast Cancer: Is There a Role for Family Physicians?

Background: Family physicians (fps) play a role in aspects of personalized medicine in cancer, including assessment of increased risk because of family history. Little is known about the potential role of fps in supporting cancer patients who undergo tumour gene expression profile (gep) testing. Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods study with qualitative and quantitative components. Qualitative data from focus groups and interviews with fps and cancer specialists about the role of fps in breast cancer gep testing were obtained during studies conducted within the pan-Canadian canimpact research program. We determined the number of visits by breast cancer patients to a fp between the first medical oncology visit and the start of chemotherapy, a period when patients might be considering results of gep testing. Results: The fps and cancer specialists felt that ordering gep tests and explaining the results was the role of the oncologist. A new fp role was identified relating to the fp–patient relationship: supporting patients in making adjuvant therapy decisions informed by gep tests by considering the patient’s comorbid conditions, social situation, and preferences. Lack of fp knowledge and resources, and challenges in fp–oncologist communication were seen as significant barriers to that role. Between 28% and 38% of patients visited a fp between the first oncology visit and the start of chemotherapy. Conclusions: Our findings suggest an emerging role for fps in supporting patients who are making adjuvant treatment decisions after receiving the results of gep testing. For success in this new role, education and point-of-care tools, together with more effective communication strategies between fps and oncologists, are needed