-
The Oncologist Sep 2021Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) is a novel approach for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), which attempts to deliver both systemic chemotherapy and neoadjuvant... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) is a novel approach for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), which attempts to deliver both systemic chemotherapy and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy prior to surgery. However, its efficacy and safety remain controversial in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We conducted this meta-analysis to assess such concerns.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Head-to-head phase II/III RCTs were searched in Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library, as well as other sources. The primary endpoint was pathologic complete response (pCR). Secondary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), local recurrence-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, and the R0 resection rate.
RESULTS
Eight phase II/III RCTs involving 2,196 patients with LARC were assessed. The primary analysis demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in the pCR rate for TNT treatment (odds ratio, 1.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.28-2.45; p = .0005). TNT treatment also showed improvements in DFS and OS outcomes compared with standard chemoradiotherapy (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 95% CI, 0.72-0.96; p = .03 and HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.74-1.05; p = .15). In addition, TNT treatment showed significant efficacy in reducing the risk of distant metastasis (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.68-0.95; p = .012).
CONCLUSION
The overall pCR rate may be improved with TNT compared with standard treatment. The TNT strategy may also improve DFS and OS and reduce the risk of distant metastasis.
IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE
Locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is a relatively common disease, with a poor prognosis because of its high metastatic potential. The role of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) has always been controversial. This meta-analysis found that TNT in LARC is associated with a significant improvement in overall pathologic complete response rate, disease-free survival, overall survival, and distant metastasis-free survival compared with standard treatment. TNT is a promising strategy for LARC, especially for patients who have little desire for surgery.
Topics: Chemoradiotherapy; Disease-Free Survival; Humans; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Rectal Neoplasms; Rectum; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33987952
DOI: 10.1002/onco.13824 -
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases Oct 2023Haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) and macrophage activation syndrome (MAS) are life-threatening systemic hyperinflammatory syndromes that can develop in most...
The 2022 EULAR/ACR points to consider at the early stages of diagnosis and management of suspected haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis/macrophage activation syndrome (HLH/MAS).
OBJECTIVE
Haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) and macrophage activation syndrome (MAS) are life-threatening systemic hyperinflammatory syndromes that can develop in most inflammatory contexts. They can progress rapidly, and early identification and management are critical for preventing organ failure and mortality. This effort aimed to develop evidence-based and consensus-based points to consider to assist clinicians in optimising decision-making in the of diagnosis, treatment and monitoring of HLH/MAS.
METHODS
A multinational, multidisciplinary task force of physician experts, including adult and paediatric rheumatologists, haematologist/oncologists, immunologists, infectious disease specialists, intensivists, allied healthcare professionals and patients/parents, formulated relevant research questions and conducted a systematic literature review (SLR). Delphi methodology, informed by SLR results and questionnaires of experts, was used to generate statements aimed at assisting early decision-making and optimising the initial care of patients with HLH/MAS.
RESULTS
The task force developed 6 overarching statements and 24 specific points to consider relevant to early recognition of HLH/MAS, diagnostic approaches, initial management and monitoring of HLH/MAS. Major themes included the simultaneous need for prompt syndrome recognition, systematic evaluation of underlying contributors, early intervention targeting both hyperinflammation and likely contributors, careful monitoring for progression/complications and expert multidisciplinary assistance.
CONCLUSION
These 2022 EULAR/American College of Rheumatology points to consider provide up-to-date guidance, based on the best available published data and expert opinion. They are meant to help guide the initial evaluation, management and monitoring of patients with HLH/MAS in order to halt disease progression and prevent life-threatening immunopathology.
Topics: Child; Adult; Humans; United States; Lymphohistiocytosis, Hemophagocytic; Macrophage Activation Syndrome; Rheumatology; Consensus
PubMed: 37487610
DOI: 10.1136/ard-2023-224123 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2022This article is based on recommendations from the 12 WALT Congress, Nice, October 3-6, 2018, and a follow-up review of the existing data and the clinical observations of...
DISCLAIMER
This article is based on recommendations from the 12 WALT Congress, Nice, October 3-6, 2018, and a follow-up review of the existing data and the clinical observations of an international multidisciplinary panel of clinicians and researchers with expertise in the area of supportive care in cancer and/or PBM clinical application and dosimetry. This article is informational in nature. As with all clinical materials, this paper should be used with a clear understanding that continued research and practice could result in new insights and recommendations. The review reflects the collective opinion and, as such, does not necessarily represent the opinion of any individual author. In no event shall the authors be liable for any decision made or action taken in reliance on the proposed protocols.
OBJECTIVE
This position paper reviews the potential prophylactic and therapeutic effects of photobiomodulation (PBM) on side effects of cancer therapy, including chemotherapy (CT), radiation therapy (RT), and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT).
BACKGROUND
There is a considerable body of evidence supporting the efficacy of PBM for preventing oral mucositis (OM) in patients undergoing RT for head and neck cancer (HNC), CT, or HSCT. This could enhance patients' quality of life, adherence to the prescribed cancer therapy, and treatment outcomes while reducing the cost of cancer care.
METHODS
A literature review on PBM effectiveness and dosimetry considerations for managing certain complications of cancer therapy were conducted. A systematic review was conducted when numerous randomized controlled trials were available. Results were presented and discussed at an international consensus meeting at the World Association of photobiomoduLation Therapy (WALT) meeting in 2018 that included world expert oncologists, radiation oncologists, oral oncologists, and oral medicine professionals, physicists, engineers, and oncology researchers. The potential mechanism of action of PBM and evidence of PBM efficacy through reported outcomes for individual indications were assessed.
RESULTS
There is a large body of evidence demonstrating the efficacy of PBM for preventing OM in certain cancer patient populations, as recently outlined by the Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO). Building on these, the WALT group outlines evidence and prescribed PBM treatment parameters for prophylactic and therapeutic use in supportive care for radiodermatitis, dysphagia, xerostomia, dysgeusia, trismus, mucosal and bone necrosis, lymphedema, hand-foot syndrome, alopecia, oral and dermatologic chronic graft-versus-host disease, voice/speech alterations, peripheral neuropathy, and late fibrosis amongst cancer survivors.
CONCLUSIONS
There is robust evidence for using PBM to prevent and treat a broad range of complications in cancer care. Specific clinical practice guidelines or evidence-based expert consensus recommendations are provided. These recommendations are aimed at improving the clinical utilization of PBM therapy in supportive cancer care and promoting research in this field. It is anticipated these guidelines will be revised periodically.
PubMed: 36110957
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.927685 -
Arthritis & Rheumatology (Hoboken, N.J.) Oct 2023Haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) and macrophage activation syndrome (MAS) are life-threatening systemic hyperinflammatory syndromes that can develop in most...
The 2022 EULAR/ACR Points to Consider at the Early Stages of Diagnosis and Management of Suspected Haemophagocytic Lymphohistiocytosis/Macrophage Activation Syndrome (HLH/MAS).
OBJECTIVE
Haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) and macrophage activation syndrome (MAS) are life-threatening systemic hyperinflammatory syndromes that can develop in most inflammatory contexts. They can progress rapidly, and early identification and management are critical for preventing organ failure and mortality. This effort aimed to develop evidence-based and consensus-based points to consider to assist clinicians in optimising decision-making in the early stages of diagnosis, treatment and monitoring of HLH/MAS.
METHODS
A multinational, multidisciplinary task force of physician experts, including adult and paediatric rheumatologists, haematologist/oncologists, immunologists, infectious disease specialists, intensivists, allied healthcare professionals and patients/parents, formulated relevant research questions and conducted a systematic literature review (SLR). Delphi methodology, informed by SLR results and questionnaires of experts, was used to generate statements aimed at assisting early decision-making and optimising the initial care of patients with HLH/MAS.
RESULTS
The task force developed 6 overarching statements and 24 specific points to consider relevant to early recognition of HLH/MAS, diagnostic approaches, initial management and monitoring of HLH/MAS. Major themes included the simultaneous need for prompt syndrome recognition, systematic evaluation of underlying contributors, early intervention targeting both hyperinflammation and likely contributors, careful monitoring for progression/complications and expert multidisciplinary assistance.
CONCLUSION
These 2022 EULAR/American College of Rheumatology points to consider provide up-to-date guidance, based on the best available published data and expert opinion. They are meant to help guide the initial evaluation, management and monitoring of patients with HLH/MAS in order to halt disease progression and prevent life-threatening immunopathology.
Topics: Adult; Child; Humans; Lymphohistiocytosis, Hemophagocytic; Macrophage Activation Syndrome; Consensus; Physicians; Advisory Committees
PubMed: 37486733
DOI: 10.1002/art.42636 -
The Oncologist Feb 2020The loss of muscle mass, known as sarcopenia, is a natural process of aging that is associated with adverse health outcomes regardless of age. Because cancer is a... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The loss of muscle mass, known as sarcopenia, is a natural process of aging that is associated with adverse health outcomes regardless of age. Because cancer is a disease of aging, interest in sarcopenia and its potential impact in multiple cancer populations has increased significantly. Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is a guideline-accepted method for sarcopenia detection. This systematic review assesses the literature pertaining to BIA use in the detection of sarcopenia in adults with cancer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
In this systematic review, a search of the literature for randomized controlled trials and observational studies was conducted using MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and EMBASE, through July 15, 2019. The study is registered at Prospero (CRD 42019130707). For study inclusion, patients had to be aged 18 years or older and diagnosed with solid or hematological neoplasia, and BIA had to be used to detect sarcopenia.
RESULTS
Through our search strategy, 5,045 articles were identified, of which 24 studies were selected for inclusion in the review (total number of 3,607 patients). In five studies, BIA was rated comparable to axial computed tomography (CT) scan, calf circumference, or grip strength for sarcopenia screening. In 14 studies, BIA-identified sarcopenia was associated with adverse clinical outcomes.
CONCLUSION
BIA is an accurate method for detecting sarcopenia in adults with cancer prior to treatment and is a viable alternative to CT, dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, and magnetic resonance imaging in oncology clinical practice.
IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE
Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is an attractive method for identifying sarcopenic patients in clinical practice because it provides an affordable, noninvasive test that can be completed within a few minutes during a clinic visit. BIA does not require highly skilled personnel, and results are immediately available. This systematic review summarizes the literature pertaining to BIA assessment of sarcopenia in adults with cancer, with a focus on its use in diverse cancer populations.
Topics: Absorptiometry, Photon; Adult; Body Composition; Electric Impedance; Humans; Neoplasms; Sarcopenia
PubMed: 32043785
DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2019-0600 -
Human Reproduction (Oxford, England) May 2022Is it safe to perform controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) for fertility preservation before starting anticancer therapies or ART after treatments in young breast cancer... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
STUDY QUESTION
Is it safe to perform controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) for fertility preservation before starting anticancer therapies or ART after treatments in young breast cancer patients?
SUMMARY ANSWER
Performing COS before, or ART following anticancer treatment in young women with breast cancer does not seem to be associated with detrimental prognostic effect in terms of breast cancer recurrence, mortality or event-free survival (EFS).
WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY
COS for oocyte/embryo cryopreservation before starting chemotherapy is standard of care for young women with breast cancer wishing to preserve fertility. However, some oncologists remain concerned on the safety of COS, particularly in patients with hormone-sensitive tumors, even when associated with aromatase inhibitors. Moreover, limited evidence exists on the safety of ART in breast cancer survivors for achieving pregnancy after the completion of anticancer treatments.
STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION
The present systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out by three blinded investigators using the keywords 'breast cancer' and 'fertility preservation'; keywords were combined with Boolean operators. Eligible studies were identified by a systematic literature search of Medline, Web of Science, Embase and Cochrane library with no language or date restriction up to 30 June 2021.
PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS
To be included in this meta-analysis, eligible studies had to be case-control or cohort studies comparing survival outcomes of women who underwent COS or ART before or after breast cancer treatments compared to breast cancer patients not exposed to these strategies. Survival outcomes of interest were cancer recurrence rate, relapse rate, overall survival and number of deaths. Adjusted relative risk (RR) and hazard ratio (HR) with 95% CI were extracted. When the number of events for each group were available but the above measures were not reported, HRs were estimated using the Watkins and Bennett method. We excluded case reports or case series with <10 patients and studies without a control group of breast cancer patients who did not pursue COS or ART. Quality of data and risk of bias were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Assessment Scale.
MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE
A total of 1835 records were retrieved. After excluding ineligible publications, 15 studies were finally included in the present meta-analysis (n = 4643). Among them, 11 reported the outcomes of breast cancer patients who underwent COS for fertility preservation before starting chemotherapy, and 4 the safety of ART following anticancer treatment completion. Compared to women who did not receive fertility preservation at diagnosis (n = 2386), those who underwent COS (n = 1594) had reduced risk of recurrence (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.46-0.73) and mortality (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.38-0.76). No detrimental effect of COS on EFS was observed (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.55-1.06). A similar trend of better outcomes in terms of EFS was observed in women with hormone-receptor-positive disease who underwent COS (HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.20-0.65). A reduced risk of recurrence was also observed in patients undergoing COS before neoadjuvant chemotherapy (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.06-0.80). Compared to women not exposed to ART following completion of anticancer treatments (n = 540), those exposed to ART (n = 123) showed a tendency for better outcomes in terms of recurrence ratio (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.17-0.70) and EFS (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.17-1.11).
LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION
This meta-analysis is based on abstracted data and most of the studies included are retrospective cohort studies. Not all studies had matching criteria between the study population and the controls, and these criteria often differed between the studies. Moreover, rate of recurrence is reported as a punctual event and it is not possible to establish when recurrences occurred and whether follow-up, which was shorter than 5 years in some of the included studies, is adequate to capture late recurrences.
WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS
Our results demonstrate that performing COS at diagnosis or ART following treatment completion does not seem to be associated with detrimental prognostic effect in young women with breast cancer, including among patients with hormone receptor-positive disease and those receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)
Partially supported by the Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro (AIRC; grant number MFAG 2020 ID 24698) and the Italian Ministry of Health-5 × 1000 funds 2017 (no grant number). M.L. acted as consultant for Roche, Pfizer, Novartis, Lilly, AstraZeneca, MSD, Exact Sciences, Gilead, Seagen and received speaker honoraria from Roche, Pfizer, Novartis, Lilly, Ipsen, Takeda, Libbs, Knight, Sandoz outside the submitted work. F.S. acted as consultant for Novartis, MSD, Sun Pharma, Philogen and Pierre Fabre and received speaker honoraria from Roche, Novartis, BMS, MSD, Merck, Sun Pharma, Sanofi and Pierre Fabre outside the submitted work. I.D. has acted as a consultant for Roche, has received research grants from Roche and Ferring, has received reagents for academic clinical trial from Roche diagnostics, speaker's fees from Novartis, and support for congresses from Theramex and Ferring outside the submitted work. L.D.M. reported honoraria from Roche, Novartis, Eli Lilly, MSD, Pfizer, Ipsen, Novartis and had an advisory role for Roche, Eli Lilly, Novartis, MSD, Genomic Health, Pierre Fabre, Daiichi Sankyo, Seagen, AstraZeneca, Eisai outside the submitted work. The other authors declare no conflict of interest. The funding organizations had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
REGISTRATION NUMBER
N/A.
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; Cancer Survivors; Female; Fertility Preservation; Humans; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Pregnancy; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 35220429
DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deac035 -
The Oncologist Dec 2021The development of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) represents a paradigm shift in the treatment of cancers. Despite showing remarkable efficacy, these agents can be...
BACKGROUND
The development of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) represents a paradigm shift in the treatment of cancers. Despite showing remarkable efficacy, these agents can be associated with life-threatening immune-related adverse events. In recent years, several cases of myocarditis with myositis and/or myasthenia gravis overlap syndrome (IM3OS) have been reported. However, given the rarity, the clinical features and outcomes of these cases remain poorly understood. We, therefore, attempted to systematically review and summarize all cases of IM3OS reported in the literature.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Studies reporting IM3OS were identified in Embase and MEDLINE. Only case reports and case series published in journals or presented at conferences were included. We conducted a systematic review according to the PRISMA Harms guidelines.
RESULTS
A total of 60 cases were eligible. The patients' median age was 71 years, and the majority (67%) were males; melanoma was the most common indication for ICIs (38%). The most-reported symptoms were fatigue (80%) and muscle weakness (78%). The median number of doses to the development of IM3OS was one. The average creatine kinase level was 9,645 IU/L. Cardiac arrhythmias occurred in 67% of patients, and 18% had depressed ejection fraction. Initial treatment consisted of immunosuppression with high-dose steroids and supportive therapies. Sixty percent of the patients died in hospital because of acute complications.
CONCLUSION
IM3OS can be associated with significant mortality and morbidity. Prospective studies are needed to understand the optimal approach to diagnose and manage these patients and to develop biomarkers to predict the occurrence and severity of this rare but serious condition.
IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE
Clinicians should suspect coexisting myositis and/or myasthenia gravis in all patients with immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced myocarditis, given their propensity to occur together. Early recognition and prompt treatment with the help of a multidisciplinary team might help improve the outcomes of this life-threatening condition.
Topics: Aged; Humans; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Myasthenia Gravis; Myocarditis; Myositis
PubMed: 34378270
DOI: 10.1002/onco.13931 -
BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care Jun 2022Prognostic disclosure is essential to informed decision making in oncology, yet many oncologists are unsure how to successfully facilitate this discussion. This scoping... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Prognostic disclosure is essential to informed decision making in oncology, yet many oncologists are unsure how to successfully facilitate this discussion. This scoping review determines what prognostic communication models exist, compares and contrasts these models, and explores the supporting evidence.
METHOD
A protocol was created for this study using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Protocols extension for Scoping Reviews. Comprehensive literature searches of electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and Cochrane CENTRAL were executed to identify relevant publications between 1971 and 2020.
RESULTS
In total, 1532 articles were identified, of which 78 met inclusion criteria and contained 5 communication models. Three of these have been validated in randomised controlled trials (the Serious Illness Conversation Guide, the Four Habits Model and the ADAPT acronym) and have demonstrated improved objective communication measures and patient reported outcomes. All three models emphasise the importance of exploring patients' illness understanding and treatment preferences, communicating prognosis and responding to emotion.
CONCLUSION
Communicating prognostic estimates is a core competency skill in advanced cancer care. This scoping review highlights available communication models and identifies areas in need of further assessment. Such areas include how to maintain learnt communication skills for lifelong practice, how to assess patient and caregiver understanding during and after these conversations, and how to best scale these protocols at the institutional and national levels.
Topics: Caregivers; Communication; Disclosure; Humans; Medical Oncology; Prognosis
PubMed: 35144938
DOI: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2021-003313 -
JCO Precision Oncology Jan 2023With the growing number of available targeted therapeutics and molecular biomarkers, the optimal care of patients with cancer now depends on a comprehensive...
PURPOSE
With the growing number of available targeted therapeutics and molecular biomarkers, the optimal care of patients with cancer now depends on a comprehensive understanding of the rapidly evolving landscape of precision oncology, which can be challenging for oncologists to navigate alone.
METHODS
We developed and implemented a precision oncology decision support system, GI TARGET, (Gastrointestinal Treatment Assistance Regarding Genomic Evaluation of Tumors) within the Gastrointestinal Cancer Center at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. With a multidisciplinary team, we systematically reviewed tumor molecular profiling for GI tumors and provided molecularly informed clinical recommendations, which included identifying appropriate clinical trials aided by the computational matching platform MatchMiner, suggesting targeted therapy options on or off the US Food and Drug Administration-approved label, and consideration of additional or orthogonal molecular testing.
RESULTS
We reviewed genomic data and provided clinical recommendations for 506 patients with GI cancer who underwent tumor molecular profiling between January and June 2019 and determined follow-up using the electronic health record. Summary reports were provided to 19 medical oncologists for patients with colorectal (n = 198, 39%), pancreatic (n = 124, 24%), esophagogastric (n = 67, 13%), biliary (n = 40, 8%), and other GI cancers. We recommended ≥ 1 precision medicine clinical trial for 80% (406 of 506) of patients, leading to 24 enrollments. We recommended on-label and off-label targeted therapies for 6% (28 of 506) and 25% (125 of 506) of patients, respectively. Recommendations for additional or orthogonal testing were made for 42% (211 of 506) of patients.
CONCLUSION
The integration of precision medicine in routine cancer care through a dedicated multidisciplinary molecular tumor board is scalable and sustainable, and implementation of precision oncology recommendations has clinical utility for patients with cancer.
Topics: Humans; Precision Medicine; Medical Oncology; Gastrointestinal Neoplasms; Genomics; Molecular Diagnostic Techniques
PubMed: 36634297
DOI: 10.1200/PO.22.00342 -
Cancer Medicine Jan 2023In recent years, authors have repeatedly reported on the significance of social support in cancer survival. Although overall the studies appear to be convincing, little... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
In recent years, authors have repeatedly reported on the significance of social support in cancer survival. Although overall the studies appear to be convincing, little is known about which types of social support promote better survival rates, and which subgroups of cancer patients are more susceptible to the benefits of it. The aim of this study was to identify, organize, and examine studies reporting on the significance of social support in cancer survival.
METHODS
The PubMed, CINAHL and EBSCO databases were searched using the keywords social support/marital status, cancer, and survival/mortality. Where possible we used a meta-analytical approach, specifically a random effect model, in order to combine the results of the hazard ratios in studies from which this information could be obtained. When interpreting clinical relevance, we used the number needed to treat (NNT).
RESULTS
Better survival was observed in married patients when compared to unmarried (single, never-married, divorced/separated, and widowed) in overall and cancer-specific survival. Gender group differences showed that the association was statistically significant only in cancer-specific survival when comparing divorced/separated male and female cancer patients (p < 0.001), thus confirming results from the previous meta-analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
Being unmarried is associated with significantly worse overall and cancer-specific survival. The most vulnerable group found in our study were divorced/separated men. The results of this review can motivate physicians, oncologists, and other healthcare professionals to be aware of the importance of patients' social support, especially in the identified sub-group.
Topics: Humans; Male; Female; Marital Status; Neoplasms; Divorce; Single Person; Proportional Hazards Models
PubMed: 35789072
DOI: 10.1002/cam4.5003