Transfusion of red cells in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (TRIST): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Insight regarding transfusion practices in Hematopoietic Stem cell Transplantation (HSCT) are lacking and the impact of red cell transfusion in this high risk group on outcomes following HSCT are not well appreciated. Red blood cell transfusion can be life-saving, however, liberal use of transfusion in critically ill patients failed to demonstrate significant clinical benefit. A large number of other observational studies have also demonstrated an association between red blood cell transfusions and increased morbidity such as infections and multi organ failure as well as increased mortality. The role of red cell transfusion on the clinical outcomes observed in patients undergoing HSCT remains poorly understood and a prospective randomized study of transfusion is required to gain insight and knowledge on best transfusion practices in this high risk population.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This report describes the design and methodological issues of a randomized pilot study evaluating red cell transfusion triggers in the setting of Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation. This study has been funded by a peer review grant from the Canadian Blood Services and is registered on Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01237639.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In 3 Canadian centres, 100 patients undergoing Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation will be randomized to either a restrictive (target hemoglobin of 70-90 g/L) or liberal (target hemoglobin of 90-110 g/L) red cell transfusion strategy, based daily hemoglobin values up to 100 days post-transplant. The study will stratify participants by centre and type of transplant. The primary goal is to demonstrate study feasibility and we will collect clinical outcomes on 1) Transfusion Requirements, 2) Transplant Related Mortality, 3) Maximum grade of acute Graft versus Host Disease, 4) Veno-occlusive Disease, 5) Serious Infections, 6) Bearman Toxicity Score, 7) Bleeding, 8) Quality of Life, 9) Number of Hospitalizations and 10) Number of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) Admissions.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Upon completion, this pilot trial will provide preliminary insight into red cell transfusion practice and its influence in hematopoietic stem cell transplant outcomes. The results of this trial will inform the conduct of a larger study.</p

'Being there' for women with metastatic breast cancer: a pan-European patient survey

BACKGROUND: Understanding their experiences of diagnosis is integral to improving the quality of care for women living with advanced/metastatic breast cancer. METHODS: A survey, initiated in March 2011, was conducted in two stages. First, the views of 47 breast cancer-related patient groups in eight European countries were sought on standards of breast cancer care and unmet needs of patients. Findings were used to develop a patient-centric survey to capture personal experiences of advanced breast cancer to determine insights into the ‘trade-off' between extending overall survival and side effects associated with its treatment. The second online survey was open to women with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer, or their carers, and responders were recruited through local patient groups. Data were collected via anonymous local language questionnaires. RESULTS: The online stage II survey received a total of 230 responses from 17 European countries: 94% of respondents had locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer and 6% were adult carers. Although the overall experience of care was generally good/excellent (77%), gaps were still perceived in terms of treatment choice and information provision. Treatment choice for patients was felt to be lacking by 32% of responders. In addition, 68% of those who responded would have liked more information about future medical treatments and research, with 57% wishing to receive this information from their oncologist. Two-thirds (66%) of women with advanced breast cancer, or their carers, believed life-extending treatment to be important so that they can spend more time with family and friends, and 67% said that the treatment was worthwhile, despite potential associated side effects. CONCLUSION: These findings show a continuing need to provide women with advanced breast cancer with better information and emphasise the importance that these patients often place on prolonging survival

Benefit from preoperative radiotherapy in rectal cancer treatment: disease-free patients' and oncologists' preferences

Preoperative radiotherapy (PRT) in resectable rectal cancer improves local control but increases probability of faecal incontinence and sexual dysfunction. Consensus was reached in 2001 in the Netherlands on a guideline advising PRT to new patients. Purpose was to assess at what benefit oncologists and rectal cancer patients prefer PRT followed by surgery to surgery alone, and how oncologists and patients value various treatment outcomes. Sixty-six disease-free patients and 60 oncologists (surgical, radiation, medical) were interviewed. Minimally desired benefit from PRT (local control) was assessed using the Treatment Tradeoff Method. Importance of survival, local control, faecal incontinence, and sexual dysfunction in determining treatment outcome preferences was assessed using Adaptive Conjoint Analysis. The range of required benefit from PRT varied widely within participant groups. Seventeen percent of patients would choose PRT at a 0% benefit; 11% would not choose PRT for the maximum benefit of 11%. Mean minimally desired benefit excluding these two groups was 4%. For oncologists, the required benefit was 5%. Also, how strongly participants valued treatment outcomes varied widely within groups. Of the four outcomes, participants considered incontinence most often as most important. Relative treatment outcome importance differed between specialties. Patients considered sexual functioning more important than oncologists. Large differences in treatment preferences exist between individual patients and oncologists. Oncologists should adequately inform their patients about the risks and benefits of PRT, and elicit patient preferences regarding treatment outcomes

Palliative chemotherapy or best supportive care? A prospective study explaining patients' treatment preference and choice

Item does not contain fulltextIn palliative cancer treatment, the choice between palliative chemotherapy and best supportive care may be difficult. In the decision-making process, giving information as well as patients' values and preferences become important issues. Patients, however, may have a treatment preference before they even meet their medical oncologist. An insight into the patient's decision-making process can support clinicians having to inform their patients. Patients (n=207) with metastatic cancer, aged 18 years or older, able to speak Dutch, for whom palliative chemotherapy was a treatment option, were eligible for the study. We assessed the following before they consulted their medical oncologist: (1) socio-demographic characteristics, (2) disease-related variables, (3) quality-of-life indices, (4) attitudes and (5) preferences for treatment, information and participation in decision-making. The actual treatment decision, assessed after it had been made, was the main study outcome. Of 207 eligible patients, 140 patients (68%) participated in the study. At baseline, 68% preferred to undergo chemotherapy rather than wait watchfully. Eventually, 78% chose chemotherapy. Treatment preference (odds ratio (OR)=10.3, confidence interval (CI) 2.8-38.0) and a deferring style of decision-making (OR=4.9, CI 1.4-17.2) best predicted the actual treatment choice. Treatment preference (total explained variance=38.2%) was predicted, in turn, by patients' striving for length of life (29.5%), less striving for quality of life (6.1%) and experienced control over the cause of disease (2.6%). Patients' actual treatment choice was most strongly predicted by their preconsultation treatment preference. Since treatment preference is positively explained by striving for length of life, and negatively by striving for quality of life, it is questionable whether the purpose of palliative treatment is made clear. This, paradoxically, emphasises the need for further attention to the process of information giving and shared decision-making

Factors associated with quality of life of outpatients with breast cancer and gynecologic cancers and their family caregivers: a controlled study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Quality of life (QOL) issues are of interest in cancer because effective methods of treatment and detection have led to an increase in the number of long-term survivors. The objectives of the study were: to assess the subjective QOL of stable Sudanese women cancer outpatients and their family caregivers, using the WHO 26-item QOL Instrument; compare with matched general population groups, as well as diabetic and psychiatric patient groups; examine patient-caregiver concordance in ratings; and assess the variables associated with their QOL, with a view to identifying factors that can enhance quality of care.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Responses of oncology outpatients with breast cancer (117), cervical cancer (46) and ovarian cancer (18) (aged 44.6, SD 11.5) were compared with those of their family caregivers and matched general population groups. Data were analyzed by univariate and multivariate statistics.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The cancer groups had similar QOL domain scores, which were significantly lower than those of their caregivers, but higher than the control group as well as those of psychiatric and diabetic patients studied previously. Patients who were married, with higher education, better employment, and with longer duration of illness had higher QOL. Patients on radiotherapy and their caregivers had higher QOL scores. Correlations between patient's ratings and caregiver impression of patient's QOL were high. Caregiver impression was a significant predictor of patient's and caregiver's QOL. Other predictors for the patient were: currently feeling sick and duration of illness; for the caregiver: feeling sick, relationship to patient, and age.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Cancer patients in stable condition and with psychosocial support can hope to enjoy good QOL with treatment. The findings constitute an evidence base for the country's cancer care program, to boost national health education about prognosis in cancer. Families living with women cancer patients are vulnerable and need support if the patient is recently diagnosed, less educated, single, not formally employed; and the caregiver is female, parent, younger, less educated, unemployed and feels sick. Clinicians need to invest in the education and support of family caregivers. The patient-caregiver dyad should be regarded as a unit for treatment in cancer care.</p

Ethical issues in autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in advanced breast cancer: A systematic literature review

BACKGROUND: An effectiveness assessment on ASCT in locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer identified serious ethical issues associated with this intervention. Our objective was to systematically review these aspects by means of a literature analysis. METHODS: We chose the reflexive Socratic approach as the review method using Hofmann's question list, conducted a comprehensive literature search in biomedical, psychological and ethics bibliographic databases and screened the resulting hits in a 2-step selection process. Relevant arguments were assembled from the included articles, and were assessed and assigned to the question list. Hofmann's questions were addressed by synthesizing these arguments. RESULTS: Of the identified 879 documents 102 included arguments related to one or more questions from Hofmann's question list. The most important ethical issues were the implementation of ASCT in clinical practice on the basis of phase-II trials in the 1990s and the publication of falsified data in the first randomized controlled trials (Bezwoda fraud), which caused significant negative effects on recruiting patients for further clinical trials and the doctor-patient relationship. Recent meta-analyses report a marginal effect in prolonging disease-free survival, accompanied by severe harms, including death. ASCT in breast cancer remains a stigmatized technology. Reported health-related-quality-of-life data are often at high risk of bias in favor of the survivors. Furthermore little attention has been paid to those patients who were dying. CONCLUSIONS: The questions were addressed in different degrees of completeness. All arguments were assignable to the questions. The central ethical dimensions of ASCT could be discussed by reviewing the published literature