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

Profiling Synaptic Proteins Identifies Regulators of Insulin Secretion and Lifespan

Cells are organized into distinct compartments to perform specific tasks with spatial precision. In neurons, presynaptic specializations are biochemically complex subcellular structures dedicated to neurotransmitter secretion. Activity-dependent changes in the abundance of presynaptic proteins are thought to endow synapses with different functional states; however, relatively little is known about the rules that govern changes in the composition of presynaptic terminals. We describe a genetic strategy to systematically analyze protein localization at Caenorhabditis elegans presynaptic specializations. Nine presynaptic proteins were GFP-tagged, allowing visualization of multiple presynaptic structures. Changes in the distribution and abundance of these proteins were quantified in 25 mutants that alter different aspects of neurotransmission. Global analysis of these data identified novel relationships between particular presynaptic components and provides a new method to compare gene functions by identifying shared protein localization phenotypes. Using this strategy, we identified several genes that regulate secretion of insulin-like growth factors (IGFs) and influence lifespan in a manner dependent on insulin/IGF signaling

Public health and economic impact of vaccination with 7-valent pneumococcal vaccine (PCV7) in the context of the annual influenza epidemic and a severe influenza pandemic

Background: Influenza pandemic outbreaks occurred in the US in 1918, 1957, and 1968. Historical evidence suggests that the majority of influenza-related deaths during the 1918 US pandemic were attributable to bacterial pneumococcal infections. The 2009 novel influenza A (H1N1) outbreak highlights the importance of interventions that may mitigate the impact of a pandemic. Methods: A decision-analytic model was constructed to evaluate the impact of 7-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV7) on pneumococcal disease incidence and mortality during a typical influenza season (13/100) and a severe influenza pandemic (30/100). Outcomes were compared for current PCV7 vaccination practices vs. no vaccination. The model was estimated using published sources and includes indirect (herd) protection of non-vaccinated persons. Results: The model predicts that PCV7 vaccination in the US is cost saving for a normal influenza season, reducing pneumococcal-related costs by $1.6 billion. In a severe influenza pandemic, vaccination would save$7.3 billion in costs and prevent 512,000 cases of IPD, 719,000 cases of pneumonia, 62,000 IPD deaths, and 47,000 pneumonia deaths; 84% of deaths are prevented due to indirect (herd) protection in the unvaccinated. Conclusions: PCV7 vaccination is highly effective and cost saving in both normal and severe pandemic influenza seasons. Current infant vaccination practices may prevent >1 million pneumococcal-related deaths in a severe influenza pandemic, primarily due to herd protection

Consensus guidelines for the assessments of individuals who stutter across the lifespan

Purpose This project sought to develop consensus guidelines for clinically meaningful, comprehensive assessment procedures for people who stutter across the lifespan. Method Twelve expert clinicians and researchers who have written extensively about stuttering provided detailed descriptions of the type of data that they routinely collect during diagnostic evaluations of preschool children, school-age children, adolescents, and adults who stutter. Iterative content analysis, with repeated input from the respondents, was used to identify core areas that reflect common domains that these experts judge to be important for evaluating stuttering for varying age groups. Results Six core areas were identified as common components of a comprehensive evaluation of stuttering and people who stutter. These areas should be included to varying degrees depending upon the age and needs of the client or family. The core areas include the following: (a) stuttering-related background information; (b) speech, language, and temperament development (especially for younger clients); (c) speech fluency and stuttering behaviors; (d) reactions to stuttering by the speaker; (e) reactions to stuttering by people in the speaker's environment; and (f) adverse impact caused by stuttering. Discussion These consensus recommendations can help speech-language pathologists who are uncertain about appropriate stuttering assessment procedures to design and conduct more thorough evaluations, so that they will be better prepared to provide individualized and comprehensive treatment for people who stutter across the lifespan