The effect of cancer stage and treatment modality on quality of life in oropharyngeal cancer

Objectives/Hypothesis To examine changes in health-related quality of life among oropharyngeal cancer patients by stages and across treatment types among advanced cancer patients. Study Design Individual prospective cohort study. Methods All newly diagnosed patients with oropharyngeal cancer treated with curative intent were routinely assessed. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) both the Main Module quality-of-life questionnaire (QLQ-C30) and the Head and Neck Cancer (HNC) Module (QLQ-H&N35) were administered at diagnosis and 3, 6, and 12 months thereafter. Complete case analysis was used following assessment of missing data. The proportion of patients with clinically significant deterioration (changes of ≥10 points) from baseline were calculated for each follow-up time point and compared by stage (I/II vs. III/IV) and then treatment type (chemotherapy and radiotherapy [CRT] vs. surgery and postoperative radiotherapy [S&PORT]). Results Deterioration in most domains was most frequent for stage III/IV patients at 3 months (both modules), whereas stage I/II patients experienced this at 6 months (QLQ-C30) and 12 months (H&N35). Among stage III/IV patients, this happened at all time points for S&PORT patients (QLQ-C30) versus 12 months for CRT patients (H&N35). The number of patients reporting deterioration was lower for most domains at 12 months compared to earlier periods, although dry mouth remained a problem for most patients (60%-85% across treatment/stage groups). Conclusions Our preliminary findings suggest that general and disease-specific deterioration is of most concern for stage I/II patients at 6 and 12 months and at 3 months for advanced cancer patients. For stage III/IV patients receiving S&PORT, general deterioration remains a problem after diagnosis, whereas for CRT patients, disease-specific deterioration is of most concern at 12 months. Level of Evidence 4. Laryngoscope, 124:151-158, 201

Strategies for Piloting a Breast Health Promotion Program in the Chinese-Australian Population

In Australia, women from non–English-speaking backgrounds participate less frequently in breast cancer screening than English-speaking women, and Chinese immigrant women are 50% less likely to participate in breast examinations than Australian-born women. Chinese-born Australians comprise 10% of the overseas-born Australian population, and the immigrant Chinese population in Australia is rapidly increasing. We report on the strategies used in a pilot breast health promotion program, Living with Healthy Breasts, aimed at Cantonese-speaking adult immigrant women in Sydney, Australia. The program consisted of a 1-day education session and a 2-hour follow-up session. We used 5 types of strategies commonly used for cultural targeting (peripheral, evidential, sociocultural, linguistic, and constituent-involving) in a framework of traditional Chinese philosophies (Confucianism, Taoism, and Buddhism) to deliver breast health messages to Chinese-Australian immigrant women. Creating the program's content and materials required careful consideration of color (pink to indicate femininity and love), symbols (peach blossoms to imply longevity), word choice (avoidance of the word death), location and timing (held in a Chinese restaurant a few months after the Chinese New Year), communication patterns (the use of metaphors and cartoons for discussing health-related matters), and concern for modesty (emphasizing that all presenters and team members were female) to maximize cultural relevance. Using these strategies may be beneficial for designing and implementing breast cancer prevention programs in Cantonese-speaking Chinese immigrant communities

Chinese-Australian women's knowledge, facilitators and barriers related to cervical cancer screening : a qualitative study

Understanding the different facilitators and barriers to screening within cultural and ethnic groups is important for developing appropriate education and outreach programs to underserved groups. Qualitative methods were employed to gain a rich understanding of participant views. In-depth interviews were conducted with 18 Chinese Australian women in their native languages and analysed using content analysis. Knowledge of cervical cancer was low, and few participants understood the benefits and purpose of screening. Having a doctor's recommendation was a strong motivator, and returning for screening was encouraged by having a female Chinese doctor perform the exam, receiving a reminder letter and the absence of cost for screening participation. However, participation was inhibited by logistical barriers, cultural beliefs and previous painful screening experiences. A range of multifaceted facilitators and barriers must be considered when developing interventions to increase the rates of cervical screening in this population

The effectiveness of glucose in reducing needle-related procedural pain in infants

This systematic review examined the effectiveness of glucose in relieving needle-associated pain in infants. Meta-analysis was not undertaken, and there was variation in dose, administration method, concentration, and outcome measurement. Glucose was more effective than placebo in relieving infant pain as measured by behavioral outcomes, but there were mixed findings for physiological outcomes. Based on these findings, 25%–50% glucose appears effective for infant pain management

Proxy and patient reports of health-related quality of life in a national cancer survey

Background: Proxy respondents are frequently used in surveys, including those assessing health-related quality of life (HRQOL). In cancer, most research involving proxies has been undertaken with paired proxy-patient populations, where proxy responses are compared to patient responses for the same individual. In these populations, proxy-patient differences are small and suggest proxy underestimation of patient HRQOL. In practice, however, proxy responses will only be used when patient responses are not available. The difference between proxy and patient reports of patient HRQOL where patients are not able to report for themselves in cancer is not known. The objective of this study was to evaluate the difference between patient and proxy reports of patient HRQOL in a large national cancer survey, and determine if this difference could be mitigated by adjusting for clinical and sociodemographic information about patients. Methods: Data were from the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance (CanCORS) study. Patients or their proxies were recruited within 3–6 months of diagnosis with lung or colorectal cancer. HRQOL was measured using the SF-12 mental and physical composite scales. Differences of ½ SD (=5 points) were considered clinically significant. The primary independent variable was proxy status. Linear regression models were used to adjust for patient sociodemographic and clinical covariates, including cancer stage, patient age and education, and patient co-morbidities. Results: Of 6471 respondents, 1011 (16%) were proxies. Before adjustment, average proxy-reported scores were lower for both physical (−6.7 points, 95% CI -7.4 to −5.9) and mental (−6 points, 95% CI -6.7 to −5.2) health. Proxy-reported scores remained lower after adjustment (physical: −5.8 points, −6.6 to −5; mental: −5.8 points, −6.6 to 5). Proxy-patient score differences remained clinically and statistically significant, even after adjustment for sociodemographic and clinical variables. Conclusions: Proxy-reported outcome scores for both physical and mental health were clinically and significantly lower than patient-reported scores for these outcomes. The size of the proxy-patient score differences was not affected by the health domain, and adjustment for sociodemographic and clinical variables had minimal impact

Fibrilation auriculaire facteurs pédictifs du maintien du rythme sinusal après cardioversion échoguidée

LE KREMLIN-B.- PARIS 11-BU Méd (940432101) / SudocPARIS-BIUM (751062103) / SudocSudocFranceF

The estimand framework and its application in substance use disorder clinical trials: a case study

Relapse rates among individuals with substance use disorder (SUD) remain high and new treatment approaches are needed, which require evaluation in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Measurement and interpretation challenges for SUD RCT data are often ignored or presented only in statistical analysis plans. Since different analytic approaches may result in different estimates and thus interpretations of the treatment effect, it is important to present this clearly throughout the trial. Inconsistencies between study analyses and objectives present further challenges for interpretation and cross-study comparisons. The recent International Council for Harmonization (ICH) addendum provides standardized language and a common framework for aligning trial objectives, design, conduct, and analysis. The framework focuses on estimands, which describe the treatment effect and link the trial objective with the scientific question and the analytic approach. The use of estimands offers SUD researchers and clinicians the opportunity to explicitly address events that affect measurement and interpretation at the outset of the trial. Furthermore, the use of standard terminology can lead to clearer interpretations of SUD trials and the treatments evaluated in SUD trials. Resources for understanding and applying estimands are needed to optimize the use of this new, helpful framework. This Perspective provides this resource for SUD researchers. Specifically, it highlights the relevance of estimands for SUD trials. Furthermore, it demonstrates how estimands can be used to develop clinically relevant analyses to address challenges in SUD trials. It also shows how a standardized framework can be employed to improve the interpretation and presentation of SUD study findings.the National Institutes of Health12 month embargo; published online: 26 October 2021This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at [email protected]