24 research outputs found
Oral administration of antineoplastic agents: the challenges for healthcare professionals
Recent progress in cancer treatmen
From presentation to paper: gender disparities in oncological research
Gender disparities in scientific publications have been identified in oncological research. Oral research presentations at major conferences enhance visibility of presenters. The share of women presenting at such podia is unknown. We aim to identify gender-based differences in contributions to presentations at two major oncological conferences. Abstracts presented at plenary sessions of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meetings and European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Congresses were collected. Trend analyses were used to analyze female contribution over time. The association between presenter's sex, study outcome (positive/negative) and journals' impact factors (IFs) of subsequently published papers was assessed using Chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests. Of 166 consecutive abstracts presented at ASCO in 2011-2018 (n = 34) and ESMO in 2008-2018 (n = 132), 21% had female presenters, all originating from Northern America (n = 17) or Europe (n = 18). The distribution of presenter's sex was similar over time (p = 0.70). Of 2,425 contributing authors to these presented abstracts, 28% were women. The proportion of female abstract authors increased over time (p <0.05) and was higher in abstracts with female (34%) compared to male presenters (26%; p <0.01). Presenter's sex was not associated with study outcome (p = 0.82). Median journals' IFs were lower in papers with a female first author (p <0.05). In conclusion, there is a clear gender disparity in research presentations at two major oncological conferences, with 28% of authors and 21% of presenters of these studies being female. Lack of visibility of female presenters could impair acknowledgement for their research, opportunities in their academic career and even hamper heterogeneity in research
Cancer burden in adolescents and young adults in Europe
Background
Cancer epidemiology is unique in adolescents and young adults (AYAs; aged 15-39 years). The European Society for Medical Oncology/European Society for Paediatric Oncology (ESMO/SIOPE) AYA Working Group aims to describe the burden of cancers in AYAs in Europe and across European Union (EU) countries.
Patients and methods
We used data available on the Global Cancer Observatory. We retrieved crude and age-standardised (World Standard Population) incidence and mortality rates. We reported about AYA cancer burden in Europe and between 28 EU member states. We described incidence and mortality for all cancers and for the 13 cancers most relevant to the AYA population.
Results
Incidence and mortality varied widely between countries with the highest mortality observed in Eastern EU countries. Cancers of the female breast, thyroid and male testis were the most common cancers across countries followed by melanoma of skin and cancers of the cervix. Variations in cancer incidence rates across different populations may reflect different distribution of risk factors, variations in the implementation or uptake of screening as well as overdiagnosis. AYA cancer mortality disparities may be due to variation in early-stage diagnoses, different public education and awareness of cancer symptoms, different degrees of access or availability of treatment.
Conclusions
Our results highlight the future health care needs and requirements for AYA-specialised services to ensure a homogeneous treatment across different countries as well as the urgency for preventive initiatives that can mitigate the increasing burden
Knowledge, Practice, and Attitudes of Physicians in Low- and Middle-Income Countries on Fertility and Pregnancy-Related Issues in Young Women With Breast Cancer
PURPOSE
Fertility and pregnancy-related issues are highly relevant for young (≤ 40 years) patients with breast cancer. Limited evidence exists on knowledge, practice, and attitudes of physicians from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) regarding these issues.
METHODS
A 19-item questionnaire adapted from an international survey exploring issues about fertility preservation and pregnancy after breast cancer was sent by e-mail between November 2019 and January 2020 to physicians from LMICs involved in breast cancer care. Descriptive analyses were performed.
RESULTS
A total of 288 physicians from Asia, Africa, America, and Europe completed the survey. Median age was 38 years. Responders were mainly medical oncologists (44.4%) working in an academic setting (46.9%). Among responders, 40.2% and 53.8% reported having never consulted the available international guidelines on fertility preservation and pregnancy after breast cancer, respectively. 25.0%, 19.1%, and 24.3% of responders answered to be not at all knowledgeable about embryo, oocyte, or ovarian tissue cryopreservation, respectively; 29.2%, 23.6%, and 31.3% declared that embryo, oocyte, and ovarian tissue cryopreservation were not available in their countries, respectively. 57.6% of responders disagreed or were neutral on the statement that controlled ovarian stimulation can be considered safe in patients with breast cancer. 49.7% and 58.6% of responders agreed or were neutral on the statement that pregnancy in breast cancer survivors may increase the risk of recurrence overall or only in those with hormone receptor–positive disease, respectively.
CONCLUSION
This survey showed suboptimal knowledge, practice, and attitudes of physicians from LMICs on fertility preservation and pregnancy after treatment completion in young women with breast cancer. Increasing awareness and education on these aspects are needed to improve adherence to available guidelines and to promote patients' oncofertility counseling.Supported in part by the Italian Ministry of Health—5x1000 funds 2017 (no grant number) and the Italian Association for Cancer Research (AIRC; MFAG 2020 ID 24698)
Knowledge, Practice, and Attitudes of Physicians in Low- and Middle-Income Countries on Fertility and Pregnancy-Related Issues in Young Women With Breast Cancer
PURPOSE: Fertility and pregnancy-related issues are highly relevant for young ( 64 40 years) patients with breast cancer. Limited evidence exists on knowledge, practice, and attitudes of physicians from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) regarding these issues. METHODS: A 19-item questionnaire adapted from an international survey exploring issues about fertility preservation and pregnancy after breast cancer was sent by e-mail between November 2019 and January 2020 to physicians from LMICs involved in breast cancer care. Descriptive analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 288 physicians from Asia, Africa, America, and Europe completed the survey. Median age was 38 years. Responders were mainly medical oncologists (44.4%) working in an academic setting (46.9%). Among responders, 40.2% and 53.8% reported having never consulted the available international guidelines on fertility preservation and pregnancy after breast cancer, respectively. 25.0%, 19.1%, and 24.3% of responders answered to be not at all knowledgeable about embryo, oocyte, or ovarian tissue cryopreservation, respectively; 29.2%, 23.6%, and 31.3% declared that embryo, oocyte, and ovarian tissue cryopreservation were not available in their countries, respectively. 57.6% of responders disagreed or were neutral on the statement that controlled ovarian stimulation can be considered safe in patients with breast cancer. 49.7% and 58.6% of responders agreed or were neutral on the statement that pregnancy in breast cancer survivors may increase the risk of recurrence overall or only in those with hormone receptor-positive disease, respectively. CONCLUSION: This survey showed suboptimal knowledge, practice, and attitudes of physicians from LMICs on fertility preservation and pregnancy after treatment completion in young women with breast cancer. Increasing awareness and education on these aspects are needed to improve adherence to available guidelines and to promote patients' oncofertility counseling
Do we follow the guidelines: first systemic therapy choice for metastatic hormone receptor-positive breast cancer patients treated at the Institute for Oncology and Radiology in Serbia
P208 Pathological complete response (PCR) rates after sequential CT in locally advanced BC
PO34 Clinico-pathologic features of young breast cancer patients treated at the Institute for Oncology and Radiology of Serbia
From presentation to paper: Gender disparities in oncological research.
Gender disparities in scientific publications have been identified in oncological research. Oral research presentations at major conferences enhance visibility of presenters. The share of women presenting at such podia is unknown. We aim to identify gender-based differences in contributions to presentations at two major oncological conferences. Abstracts presented at plenary sessions of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meetings and European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Congresses were collected. Trend analyses were used to analyze female contribution over time. The association between presenter's sex, study outcome (positive/negative) and journals' impact factors (IFs) of subsequently published papers was assessed using Chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests. Of 166 consecutive abstracts presented at ASCO in 2011-2018 (n = 34) and ESMO in 2008-2018 (n = 132), 21% had female presenters, all originating from Northern America (n = 17) or Europe (n = 18). The distribution of presenter's sex was similar over time (p = 0.70). Of 2,425 contributing authors to these presented abstracts, 28% were women. The proportion of female abstract authors increased over time (p < 0.05) and was higher in abstracts with female (34%) compared to male presenters (26%; p < 0.01). Presenter's sex was not associated with study outcome (p = 0.82). Median journals' IFs were lower in papers with a female first author (p < 0.05). In conclusion, there is a clear gender disparity in research presentations at two major oncological conferences, with 28% of authors and 21% of presenters of these studies being female. Lack of visibility of female presenters could impair acknowledgement for their research, opportunities in their academic career and even hamper heterogeneity in research