Living with hope: developing a psychosocial supportive program for rural women caregivers of persons with advanced cancer

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Hope is defined by caregivers as the inner strength to achieve future good and to continue care giving. Pilot test findings of a Living with Hope Program (LWHP) suggested it is an acceptable and feasible intervention for use by family caregivers. Although it shows promise in potentially increasing hope and quality of life, further testing and development is needed. Questions remain as to: a) what are the mechanisms through which the LWHP affects outcomes and b) how long it is effective? <it>The overall purpose of this time series mixed method study is the further development and testing of the LWHP by</it>:</p> <p indent="1">a. Determining the mechanisms of the LWHP by testing a LWHP conceptual model in which self-efficacy, and loss/grief are hypothesized intermediary variables for changes in hope, and subsequently quality of life among rural women caring for persons with advanced cancer, and;</p> <p indent="1">b. Exploring the longitudinal effects of the LWHP on hope, quality of life and health services utilization among rural women caring for persons with advanced cancer.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>Using a time-series embedded mixed method design, data will be collected from 200 rural women caregivers. Following the collection of baseline and outcome variables, the intervention (LWHP) is applied to all subjects. Subjects are followed over time with repeated measures of outcome variables (1 wk, 2 wk, 3, 6 and 12 months). The journals that are completed as part of the LWHP comprise the qualitative data. Health services utilization data will be collected from the Saskatchewan Health Administrative Database for all subjects one year prior and one year after study enrolment.</p> <p>Path analysis will be used to test the model post LWHP, at 1 and 2 weeks. Two-factor ANCOVA will determine patterns over time and Cortazzi's narrative analysis will be used to analyze subjects journals completed as part of the LWHP.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Data Collection began January 2009 and is expected to be completed within 2 years time. Monthly meetings with data collectors and site collaborators have been instrumental in revisions to the original study protocol such as identifying and adding additional study sites.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>Trial Registration; Clinical Trials.Gov. NCT01081301</p

Hypothyroidism related to tyrosine kinase inhibitors: an emerging toxic effect of targeted therapy

Despite their inherent selectivity, targeted therapies such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) can cause unusual adverse effects. Sunitinib and sorafenib are multitargeted TKIs that have been demonstrated to induce hypothyroidism and thyroid dysfunction. Retrospective studies indicate that sunitinib can induce hypothyroidism in 53-85% of patients, and in prospective studies this complication has been reported in 36-71% of patients. Sorafenib has been reported to be responsible for hypothyroidism in 18% of patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma. Furthermore, imatinib and sunitinib seem to increase the requirement of levothyroxine in hypothyroid patients. The management of thyroid dysfunction and possible related symptoms, such as fatigue, represents a challenge to oncologists. We propose a diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm for the management of TKI-related hypothyroidism. Prospective trials are needed to define the incidence of overt and subclinical hypothyroidism and thyroid dysfunction during therapy with sunitinib, sorafenib and potentially other TKIs. The safety and efficacy, and optimal dosing and timing of starting replacement therapy in patients affected by TKI-related hypothyroidism need accurate appraisal and should be evaluated prospectively in appropriately designed trials

Quality of life after surgery for rectal cancer

Patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is now considered a relevant clinical outcome. This study systematically reviewed articles published in the last 5 years, focusing on the impact of rectal cancer treatment on patients' HRQoL. Of the 477 articles retrieved, 56 met the inclusion criteria. The most frequently reported comparisons were between surgical procedures (21 articles), especially between sphincter-preserving and non-sphincter preserving surgery or between stoma and stoma-free patients (13 articles), and between multimodality therapies (11 articles). Additionally, twelve articles compared patients' and healthy controls' HRQoL as primary or secondary aim. The majority of the studies were observational (84 %), controlled (66 %), cross-sectional (54 %), prospective (100 %), with a sample of more than 100 patients (59 %), and with more than 60 % of patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy (50 %). The most frequently used instruments were the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30), its colorectal cancer specific module QLQ-CR38, and the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form 36 items questionnaire. Findings from the included articles are summarised and commented, with a special focus on the comparison between surgical treatments, between irradiated and not-irradiated patients, and between patients and the general population