Trial of Optimal Personalised Care After Treatment for Gynaecological cancer (TOPCAT-G): a study protocol for a randomised feasibility trial

Background: Gynaecological cancers are diagnosed in over 1000 women in Wales every year. We estimate that this is costing the National Health Service (NHS) in excess of £1 million per annum for routine follow-up appointments alone. Follow-up care is not evidence-based, and there are no definitive guidelines from The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) for the type of follow-up that should be delivered. Standard care is to provide a regular medical review of the patient in a hospital-based outpatient clinic for a minimum of 5 years. This study is to evaluate the feasibility of a proposed alternative where the patients are delivered a specialist nurse-led telephone intervention known as Optimal Personalised Care After Treatment for Gynaecological cancer (OPCAT-G), which comprised of a protocol-based patient education, patient empowerment and structured needs assessment. Methods: The study will recruit female patients who have completed treatment for cervical, endometrial, epithelial ovarian or vulval cancer within the previous 3 months in Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board (BCUHB) in North Wales. Following recruitment, participants will be randomised to one of two arms in the trial (standard care or OPCAT-G intervention). The primary outcomes for the trial are patient recruitment and attrition rates, and the secondary outcomes are quality of life, health status and capability, using the EORTC QLQ-C30, EQ- 5D-3L and ICECAP-A measures. Additionally, a client service receipt inventory (CSRI) will be collected in order to pilot an economic evaluation. Discussion: The results from this feasibility study will be used to inform a fully powered randomised controlled trial to evaluate the difference between standard care and the OPCAT-G intervention. Trial registration: ISRCTN45565436

Baseline characteristics influencing quality of life in women undergoing gynecologic oncology surgery

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Quality of life (QoL) measurements are important in evaluating cancer treatment outcomes. Factors other than cancer and its treatment may have significant effects on QoL and affect assessment of treatments. Baseline data from longitudinal studies of women with endometrial or ovarian cancer or adnexal mass determined at surgery to be benign were analyzed to determine the degree to which QoL is affected by baseline differences in demographic variables and health.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This study examined the effect of independent variables on domains of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT-G) pre-operatively in gynecologic oncology patients undergoing surgery for pelvic mass suspected to be malignant or endometrial cancer. Patients also completed the Short Form Medical Outcomes Survey (SF-36) questionnaire (a generic health questionnaire that measures physical and mental health). Independent variables were surgical diagnosis (ovarian or endometrial cancer, benign mass), age, body mass index (BMI), educational level, marital status, smoking status, physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) summary scores of the SF-36. Multiple regression analysis was used to determine the influence of these variables on FACT-G domain scores (physical, functional, social and emotional well-being).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Data were collected on 157 women at their pre-operative visit (33 ovarian cancer, 45 endometrial cancer, 79 determined at surgery to be benign). Mean scores on the FACT-G subscales and SF-36 summary scores did not differ as a function of surgical diagnosis. PCS, MCS, age, and educational level were positively correlated with physical well-being, while increasing BMI was negatively correlated. Functional well-being was positively correlated with PCS and MCS and negatively correlated with BMI. Social well-being was positively correlated with MCS and negatively correlated with BMI and educational level. PCS, MCS and age were positively correlated with emotional well-being. Models that included PCS and MCS accounted for 30 to 44% of the variability in baseline physical, emotional, and functional well-being on the FACT-G.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>At the time of diagnosis and treatment, patients' QoL is affected by inherent characteristics. Assessment of treatment outcome should take into account the effect of these independent variables. As treatment options become more complex, these variables are likely to be of increasing importance in evaluating treatment effects on QoL.</p

The future for follow-up of gynaecological cancer in Europe. Summary of available data and overview of ongoing trials

After completing treatment, most patients follow a pre-determined schedule of regular hospital outpatient appointments, which includes clinical examinations, consultations and routine tests. After several years of surveillance, patients are transferred back to primary care. However, there is limited evidence to support the effectiveness and efficiency of this approach. This paper examines the current rationale and evidence base for hospital-based follow-up after treatment for gynaecological cancer. We investigate what alternative models of care have been formally evaluated and what research is currently in progress in Europe, in order to make tentative recommendations for a model of follow-up. The evidence base for traditional hospital based follow-up is limited. Alternative models have been reported for other cancer types but there are few evaluations of alternative approaches for gynaecological cancers. We identified five ongoing European studies; four were focused on endometrial cancer patients and one feasibility study included all gynaecological cancers. Only one study had reached the reporting stage. Alternative models included nurse-led telephone follow-up and comparisons of more intensive versus less intensive regimes. Outcomes included survival, quality of life, psychological morbidity, patient satisfaction and cost effectiveness of service. More work is needed on alternative strategies for all gynaecological cancer types. New models will be likely to include risk stratification with early discharge from secondary care for early stage disease with fast track access to specialist services for suspected cancer recurrence or other problems

Safety, feasibility and effects of an individualised walking intervention for women undergoing chemotherapy for ovarian cancer: a pilot study

Background: Exercise interventions during adjuvant cancer therapy have been shown to increase functional capacity, relieve fatigue and distress and may assist rates of chemotherapy completion. These studies have been limited to breast, gastric and mixed cancer groups and it is not yet known if a similar intervention is even feasible among women with ovarian cancer. We aimed to assess safety, feasibility and potential effect of a walking intervention in women undergoing chemotherapy for ovarian cancer

[(18)F]FDG-PET/CT metabolic parameters as useful prognostic factors in cervical cancer patients treated with chemo-radiotherapy.

To compare the prognostic value of different anatomical and functional metabolic parameters determined using [(18)F]FDG-PET/CT with other clinical and pathological prognostic parameters in cervical cancer (CC). Thirty-eight patients treated with standard curative doses of chemo-radiotherapy (CRT) underwent pre- and post-therapy [(18)F]FDG-PET/CT. [(18)F]FDG-PET/CT parameters including mean tumor standardized uptake values (SUV), metabolic tumor volume (MTV) and tumor glycolytic volume (TGV) were measured before the start of CRT. The post-treatment tumor metabolic response was evaluated. These parameters were compared to other clinical prognostic factors. Survival curves were estimated by using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox regression analysis was performed to determine the independent contribution of each prognostic factor. After 37 months of median follow-up (range, 12-106), overall survival (OS) was 71 % [95 % confidence interval (CI), 54-88], disease-free survival (DFS) 61 % [95 % CI, 44-78] and loco-regional control (LRC) 76 % [95 % CI, 62-90]. In univariate analyses the [(18)F]FDG-PET/CT parameters unfavorably influencing OS, DFS and LRC were pre-treatment TGV-cutoff ≥562 (37 vs. 76 %, p = 0.01; 33 vs. 70 %, p = 0.002; and 55 vs. 83 %, p = 0.005, respectively), mean pre-treatment tumor SUV cutoff ≥5 (57 vs. 86 %, p = 0.03; 36 vs. 88 %, p = 0.004; 65 vs. 88 %, p = 0.04, respectively) and a partial tumor metabolic response after treatment (9 vs. 29 %, p = 0.0008; 0 vs. 83 %, p &lt; 0.0001; 22 vs. 96 %, p &lt; 0.0001, respectively). After multivariate analyses a partial tumor metabolic response after treatment remained as an independent prognostic factor unfavorably influencing DFS and LRC (RR 1:7.7, p &lt; 0.0001, and RR 1:22.6, p = 0.0003, respectively) while the pre-treatment TGV-cutoff ≥562 negatively influenced OS and DFS (RR 1:2, p = 0.03, and RR 1:2.75, p = 0.05). Parameters capturing the pre-treatment glycolytic volume and metabolic activity of [(18)F]FDG-positive disease provide important prognostic information in patients with CC treated with CRT. The post-therapy [(18)F]FDG-PET/CT uptake (partial tumor metabolic response) is predictive of disease outcome

The taxanes: toxicity and quality of life considerations in advanced ovarian cancer

The taxanes paclitaxel and docetaxel show good activity in the management of advanced ovarian cancer when used in conjunction with platinum agents. Accumulating evidence from clinical studies, particularly the latest results from the phase III comparative SCOTROC study, indicates that the two drugs confer similar rates of tumour response and survival in women with this condition. However, it is clear that paclitaxel and docetaxel differ in their tolerability profiles and in other respects, and cannot be regarded as directly equivalent drugs. In particular, paclitaxel is associated with significant neurotoxicity; peripheral neuropathy has also been reported with docetaxel, but to a lesser extent. Neutropenia appears more prevalent with docetaxel than with paclitaxel, although clinical trial data show that this adverse effect is manageable and need not compromise dose delivery. Docetaxel is also associated with potential benefits accruing from shorter infusion times and lack of need for premedication with intravenous histamine H1 and H2 antagonists. Emerging quality of life data are expected to shed further light on the overall benefit of chemotherapy in women with advanced ovarian cancer in general, and on taxane−platinum combinations in particular

Pharmacoeconomic Considerations in Treating Ovarian Cancer

Ovarian cancer is the leading cause of death in women with gynaecological cancers. The most common type of ovarian cancer is epithelial ovarian cancer. Referred to as the `silent' killer, this disease is difficult to detect because of the lack of specific symptoms. The majority of women who have ovarian cancer are diagnosed in the advanced stages. While the exact cause of ovarian cancer remains elusive, it is believed that the events relating to incessant ovulatory function play a major role in the development of this disease. Long term prognosis of women with ovarian cancer remains grim. Although ovarian cancer is highly responsive to chemotherapy, most women will develop persistent or recurrent disease after primary treatment. The standard front-line treatment is paclitaxel in combination with a platinum-based agent; however, toxicities associated with paclitaxel must be weighed against the clinical benefit. The economic issues associated with the treatment of ovarian cancer involve costs of chemotherapy agents and management of supportive care. Patient preferences and quality-of-life issues are also of major importance because of the short survival benefit for most patients. Therefore, quality of life must be maximised alongside efforts to prolong survival. More research is necessary to determine what trade-offs (e.g. adverse effects of treatment) patients are willing to make for modest gains in survival.Antineoplastics, Cost analysis, Ovarian cancer, Pharmacoeconomics, Quality of life, Radiotherapy