-
Critical Reviews in Oncology/hematology Aug 2022Examining and addressing unmet care needs is integral to improving the provision and quality of cancer services. This review explored the prevalence of unmet supportive... (Review)
Review
Examining and addressing unmet care needs is integral to improving the provision and quality of cancer services. This review explored the prevalence of unmet supportive care needs, and factors associated with unmet need, in adults with advanced cancers (solid and hematological malignancies) and their caregivers. Electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE) were searched, producing 85 papers representing 81 included studies. People with advanced cancer reported the highest unmet needs in financial, health system and information, psychological, and physical and daily living domains, whereas caregivers reported the highest unmet needs in psychological, and patient care and support domains. Distress, depression, and anxiety were associated with higher unmet needs across all unmet need domains for people with advanced cancer and their caregivers. Substantial heterogeneity in study populations and methods was observed. Findings from this review can inform targeted strategies and interventions to address these unmet needs in people with advanced cancer.
Topics: Adult; Anxiety; Caregivers; Health Services Needs and Demand; Humans; Needs Assessment; Neoplasms; Social Support; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 35662585
DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2022.103728 -
Current Oncology Reports Jan 2020This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthesize the evidence on the effects of psychosocial interventions on pain in advanced cancer patients. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthesize the evidence on the effects of psychosocial interventions on pain in advanced cancer patients.
RECENT FINDINGS
The included studies investigated the effects of relaxation techniques, cognitive-behavioral therapy, music therapy, mindfulness- and acceptance-based interventions, and supportive-expressive group therapy. Overall, we found a small, but significant effect on pain intensity (d = - 0.29, CI = - 0.54 to - 0.05). Effect sizes were highly heterogeneous between studies. We did not find evidence for the superiority of any of the intervention types. However, psychosocial interventions may be more effective if they specifically targeted pain distress as the primary outcome. Although findings were mixed, psychosocial interventions can be recommended to complement comprehensive care to alleviate pain in patients facing an advanced or terminal stage of the disease. Future research should develop innovative interventions tailored specifically for pain relief.
Topics: Cancer Pain; Clinical Trials as Topic; Humans; Neoplasms; Pain Management; Psychosocial Intervention; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31965361
DOI: 10.1007/s11912-020-0870-7 -
Nutrients Jan 2022Cancer survival continues to improve in high-income countries, partly explained by advances in screening and treatment. Previous studies have mainly examined the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Cancer survival continues to improve in high-income countries, partly explained by advances in screening and treatment. Previous studies have mainly examined the relationship between individual dietary components and cancer prognosis in tumours with good therapeutic response (breast, colon and prostate cancers). The aim of this review is to assess qualitatively (and quantitatively where appropriate) the associations of dietary patterns and cancer prognosis from published prospective cohort studies, as well as the effect of diet interventions by means of randomised controlled trials (RCT). A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, and a total of 35 prospective cohort studies and 14 RCT published between 2011 and 2021 were selected. Better overall diet quality was associated with improved survival among breast and colorectal cancer survivors; adherence to the Mediterranean diet was associated to lower risk of mortality in colorectal and prostate cancer survivors. A meta-analysis using a random-effects model showed that higher versus lower diet quality was associated with a 23% reduction in overall mortality in breast cancer survivors. There was evidence that dietary interventions, generally combined with physical activity, improved overall quality of life, though most studies were in breast cancer survivors. Further cohort and intervention studies in other cancers are needed to make more specific recommendations.
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; Cancer Survivors; Colorectal Neoplasms; Diet; Diet, Mediterranean; Feeding Behavior; Female; Guideline Adherence; Humans; Male; Neoplasms; Nutrition Policy; Prognosis; Prospective Studies; Prostatic Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 35057525
DOI: 10.3390/nu14020348 -
Artificial Intelligence in Medicine May 2023Cervical cancer is one of the most common cancers in women with an incidence of around 6.5 % of all the cancer in women worldwide. Early detection and adequate... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Cervical cancer is one of the most common cancers in women with an incidence of around 6.5 % of all the cancer in women worldwide. Early detection and adequate treatment according to staging improve the patient's life expectancy. Outcome prediction models might aid treatment decisions, but a systematic review on prediction models for cervical cancer patients is not available.
DESIGN
We performed a systematic review for prediction models in cervical cancer following PRISMA guidelines. Key features that were used for model training and validation, the endpoints were extracted from the article and data were analyzed. Selected articles were grouped based on prediction endpoints i.e. Group1: Overall survival, Group2: progression-free survival; Group3: recurrence or distant metastasis; Group4: treatment response; Group5: toxicity or quality of life. We developed a scoring system to evaluate the manuscript. As per our criteria, studies were divided into four groups based on scores obtained in our scoring system, the Most significant study (Score > 60 %); Significant study (60 % > Score > 50 %); Moderately Significant study (50 % > Score > 40 %); least significant study (score < 40 %). A meta-analysis was performed for all the groups separately.
RESULTS
The first line of search selected 1358 articles and finally 39 articles were selected as eligible for inclusion in the review. As per our assessment criteria, 16, 13 and 10 studies were found to be the most significant, significant and moderately significant respectively. The intra-group pooled correlation coefficient for Group1, Group2, Group3, Group4, and Group5 were 0.76 [0.72, 0.79], 0.80 [0.73, 0.86], 0.87 [0.83, 0.90], 0.85 [0.77, 0.90], 0.88 [0.85, 0.90] respectively. All the models were found to be good (prediction accuracy [c-index/AUC/R] >0.7) in endpoint prediction.
CONCLUSIONS
Prediction models of cervical cancer toxicity, local or distant recurrence and survival prediction show promising results with reasonable prediction accuracy [c-index/AUC/R > 0.7]. These models should also be validated on external data and evaluated in prospective clinical studies.
Topics: Humans; Female; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms; Prospective Studies; Quality of Life; Prognosis
PubMed: 37100501
DOI: 10.1016/j.artmed.2023.102549 -
The Lancet. Oncology Jun 2018Despite the acknowledged sex-related dimorphism in immune system response, little is known about the effect of patients' sex on the efficacy of immune checkpoint... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Despite the acknowledged sex-related dimorphism in immune system response, little is known about the effect of patients' sex on the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors as cancer treatments. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the heterogeneity of immune checkpoint inhibitor efficacy between men and women.
METHODS
We systematically searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus, from database inception to Nov 30, 2017, for randomised controlled trials of immune checkpoint inhibitors (inhibitors of PD-1, CTLA-4, or both) that had available hazard ratios (HRs) for death according to patients' sex. We also reviewed abstracts and presentations from all major conference proceedings. We excluded non-randomised trials and considered only papers published in English. The primary endpoint was to assess the difference in efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors between men and women, measured in terms of the difference in overall survival log(HR) reported in male and female study participants. We calculated the pooled overall survival HR and 95% CI in men and women using a random-effects model, and assessed the heterogeneity between the two estimates using an interaction test.
FINDINGS
Of 7133 studies identified in our search, there were 20 eligible randomised controlled trials of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ipilimumab, tremelimumab, nivolumab, or pembrolizumab) that reported overall survival according to patients' sex. Overall, 11 351 patients with advanced or metastatic cancers (7646 [67%] men and 3705 [33%] women) were included in the analysis; the most common types of cancer were melanoma (3632 [32%]) and non-small-cell lung cancer (3482 [31%]). The pooled overall survival HR was 0·72 (95% CI 0·65-0·79) in male patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors, compared with men treated in control groups. In women treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors, the pooled overall survival HR compared with control groups was 0·86 (95% CI 0·79-0·93). The difference in efficacy between men and women treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors was significant (p=0·0019).
INTERPRETATION
Immune checkpoint inhibitors can improve overall survival for patients with advanced cancers such as melanoma and non-small-cell lung cancer, but the magnitude of benefit is sex-dependent. Future research should guarantee greater inclusion of women in trials and focus on improving the effectiveness of immunotherapies in women, perhaps exploring different immunotherapeutic approaches in men and women.
FUNDING
None.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological; Female; Health Status Disparities; Healthcare Disparities; Humans; Immunotherapy; Male; Neoplasms; Risk Factors; Sex Characteristics; Sex Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29778737
DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30261-4 -
PM & R : the Journal of Injury,... Sep 2017Evidence supports the benefits of exercise for patients with cancer; however, specific guidance for clinical decision making regarding exercise timing, frequency,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Evidence supports the benefits of exercise for patients with cancer; however, specific guidance for clinical decision making regarding exercise timing, frequency, duration, and intensity is lacking. Efforts are needed to optimize clinical recommendations for exercise in the cancer population.
OBJECTIVES
To aggregate information regarding the benefit of exercise through a systematic review of existing systematic reviews in the cancer exercise literature.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, CINAHL Plus, Scopus, Web of Science, and EMBASE.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the impact of movement-based exercise on the adult cancer population.
METHODS
Two author teams reviewed 302 abstracts for inclusion with 93 selected for full-text review. A total of 53 studies were analyzed. A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) was used as a quality measure of the reviews. Information was extracted using the PICO format (ie, participants, intervention, comparison, outcomes). Descriptive findings are reported.
RESULTS
Mean AMSTAR score = 7.66/11 (±2.04) suggests moderate quality of the systematic reviews. Exercise is beneficial before, during, and after cancer treatment, across all cancer types, and for a variety of cancer-related impairments. Moderate-to-vigorous exercise is the best level of exercise intensity to improve physical function and mitigate cancer-related impairments. Therapeutic exercises are beneficial to manage treatment side effects, may enhance tolerance to cancer treatments, and improve functional outcomes. Supervised exercise yielded superior benefits versus unsupervised. Serious adverse events were not common.
LIMITATIONS
Movement-based exercise intervention outcomes are reported. No analysis of pooled effects was calculated across reviews due to significant heterogeneity within the systematic reviews. Findings do not consider exercise in advanced cancers or pediatric populations.
CONCLUSIONS
Exercise promotes significant improvements in clinical, functional, and in some populations, survival outcomes and can be recommended regardless of the type of cancer. Although generally safe, patients should be screened and appropriate precautions taken. Efforts to strengthen uniformity in clinical trial reporting, develop clinical practice guidelines, and integrate exercise and rehabilitation services into the cancer delivery system are needed.
Topics: Continuity of Patient Care; Disease-Free Survival; Exercise; Exercise Therapy; Female; Humans; Male; Neoplasms; Physical Fitness; Quality of Life; Review Literature as Topic; Risk Assessment; Survival Analysis; Survivors
PubMed: 28942909
DOI: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2017.07.074 -
Theranostics 2023Metabolic reprogramming is one of the most important hallmarks of malignant tumors. Specifically, lipid metabolic reprogramming has marked impacts on cancer progression... (Review)
Review
Metabolic reprogramming is one of the most important hallmarks of malignant tumors. Specifically, lipid metabolic reprogramming has marked impacts on cancer progression and therapeutic response by remodeling the tumor microenvironment (TME). In the past few decades, immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment landscape for advanced cancers. Lipid metabolic reprogramming plays pivotal role in regulating the immune microenvironment and response to cancer immunotherapy. Here, we systematically reviewed the characteristics, mechanism, and role of lipid metabolic reprogramming in tumor and immune cells in the TME, appraised the effects of various cell death modes (specifically ferroptosis) on lipid metabolism, and summarized the antitumor therapies targeting lipid metabolism. Overall, lipid metabolic reprogramming has profound effects on cancer immunotherapy by regulating the immune microenvironment; therefore, targeting lipid metabolic reprogramming may lead to the development of innovative clinical applications including sensitizing immunotherapy.
Topics: Humans; Tumor Microenvironment; Lipid Metabolism; Immunotherapy; Cell Death; Lipids; Neoplasms
PubMed: 37064872
DOI: 10.7150/thno.82920 -
Thyroid : Official Journal of the... Mar 2021Anaplastic thyroid cancer (ATC) is a rare but highly lethal form of thyroid cancer. Since the guidelines for the management of ATC by the American Thyroid Association...
Anaplastic thyroid cancer (ATC) is a rare but highly lethal form of thyroid cancer. Since the guidelines for the management of ATC by the American Thyroid Association were first published in 2012, significant clinical and scientific advances have occurred in the field. The aim of these guidelines is to inform clinicians, patients, and researchers on published evidence relating to the diagnosis and management of ATC. The specific clinical questions and topics addressed in these guidelines were based on prior versions of the guidelines, stakeholder input, and input of the Task Force members (authors of the guideline). Relevant literature was reviewed, including serial PubMed searches supplemented with additional articles. The American College of Physicians Guideline Grading System was used for critical appraisal of evidence and grading strength of recommendations. The guidelines include the diagnosis, initial evaluation, establishment of treatment goals, approaches to locoregional disease (surgery, radiotherapy, targeted/systemic therapy, supportive care during active therapy), approaches to advanced/metastatic disease, palliative care options, surveillance and long-term monitoring, and ethical issues, including end of life. The guidelines include 31 recommendations and 16 good practice statements. We have developed evidence-based recommendations to inform clinical decision-making in the management of ATC. While all care must be individualized, such recommendations provide, in our opinion, optimal care paradigms for patients with ATC.
Topics: Consensus; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Medical Oncology; Prognosis; Thyroid Carcinoma, Anaplastic; Thyroid Neoplasms
PubMed: 33728999
DOI: 10.1089/thy.2020.0944 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2013A variety of estimates of the benefits and harms of mammographic screening for breast cancer have been published and national policies vary. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
A variety of estimates of the benefits and harms of mammographic screening for breast cancer have been published and national policies vary.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effect of screening for breast cancer with mammography on mortality and morbidity.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched PubMed (22 November 2012) and the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (22 November 2012).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised trials comparing mammographic screening with no mammographic screening.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently extracted data. Study authors were contacted for additional information.
MAIN RESULTS
Eight eligible trials were identified. We excluded a trial because the randomisation had failed to produce comparable groups.The eligible trials included 600,000 women in the analyses in the age range 39 to 74 years. Three trials with adequate randomisation did not show a statistically significant reduction in breast cancer mortality at 13 years (relative risk (RR) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 1.02); four trials with suboptimal randomisation showed a significant reduction in breast cancer mortality with an RR of 0.75 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.83). The RR for all seven trials combined was 0.81 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.87). We found that breast cancer mortality was an unreliable outcome that was biased in favour of screening, mainly because of differential misclassification of cause of death. The trials with adequate randomisation did not find an effect of screening on total cancer mortality, including breast cancer, after 10 years (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.10) or on all-cause mortality after 13 years (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.03).Total numbers of lumpectomies and mastectomies were significantly larger in the screened groups (RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.42), as were number of mastectomies (RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.32). The use of radiotherapy was similarly increased whereas there was no difference in the use of chemotherapy (data available in only two trials).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
If we assume that screening reduces breast cancer mortality by 15% and that overdiagnosis and overtreatment is at 30%, it means that for every 2000 women invited for screening throughout 10 years, one will avoid dying of breast cancer and 10 healthy women, who would not have been diagnosed if there had not been screening, will be treated unnecessarily. Furthermore, more than 200 women will experience important psychological distress including anxiety and uncertainty for years because of false positive findings. To help ensure that the women are fully informed before they decide whether or not to attend screening, we have written an evidence-based leaflet for lay people that is available in several languages on www.cochrane.dk. Because of substantial advances in treatment and greater breast cancer awareness since the trials were carried out, it is likely that the absolute effect of screening today is smaller than in the trials. Recent observational studies show more overdiagnosis than in the trials and very little or no reduction in the incidence of advanced cancers with screening.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Breast Neoplasms; Cause of Death; Diagnostic Errors; Female; Humans; Mammography; Mass Screening; Mastectomy; Middle Aged; Pamphlets; Patient Education as Topic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 23737396
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001877.pub5 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2017Incurable cancer, which often constitutes an enormous challenge for patients, their families, and medical professionals, profoundly affects the patient's physical and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Incurable cancer, which often constitutes an enormous challenge for patients, their families, and medical professionals, profoundly affects the patient's physical and psychosocial well-being. In standard cancer care, palliative measures generally are initiated when it is evident that disease-modifying treatments have been unsuccessful, no treatments can be offered, or death is anticipated. In contrast, early palliative care is initiated much earlier in the disease trajectory and closer to the diagnosis of incurable cancer.
OBJECTIVES
To compare effects of early palliative care interventions versus treatment as usual/standard cancer care on health-related quality of life, depression, symptom intensity, and survival among adults with a diagnosis of advanced cancer.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycINFO, OpenGrey (a database for grey literature), and three clinical trial registers to October 2016. We checked reference lists, searched citations, and contacted study authors to identify additional studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-randomised controlled trials (cRCTs) on professional palliative care services that provided or co-ordinated comprehensive care for adults at early advanced stages of cancer.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane. We assessed risk of bias, extracted data, and collected information on adverse events. For quantitative synthesis, we combined respective results on our primary outcomes of health-related quality of life, survival (death hazard ratio), depression, and symptom intensity across studies in meta-analyses using an inverse variance random-effects model. We expressed pooled effects as standardised mean differences (SMDs, or Hedges' adjusted g). We assessed certainty of evidence at the outcome level using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) and created a 'Summary of findings' table.
MAIN RESULTS
We included seven randomised and cluster-randomised controlled trials that together recruited 1614 participants. Four studies evaluated interventions delivered by specialised palliative care teams, and the remaining studies assessed models of co-ordinated care. Overall, risk of bias at the study level was mostly low, apart from possible selection bias in three studies and attrition bias in one study, along with insufficient information on blinding of participants and outcome assessment in six studies.Compared with usual/standard cancer care alone, early palliative care significantly improved health-related quality of life at a small effect size (SMD 0.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 0.38; participants analysed at post treatment = 1028; evidence of low certainty). As re-expressed in natural units (absolute change in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) score), health-related quality of life scores increased on average by 4.59 (95% CI 2.55 to 6.46) points more among participants given early palliative care than among control participants. Data on survival, available from four studies enrolling a total of 800 participants, did not indicate differences in efficacy (death hazard ratio 0.85, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.28; evidence of very low certainty). Levels of depressive symptoms among those receiving early palliative care did not differ significantly from levels among those receiving usual/standard cancer care (five studies; SMD -0.11, 95% CI -0.26 to 0.03; participants analysed at post treatment = 762; evidence of very low certainty). Results from seven studies that analysed 1054 participants post treatment suggest a small effect for significantly lower symptom intensity in early palliative care compared with the control condition (SMD -0.23, 95% CI -0.35 to -0.10; evidence of low certainty). The type of model used to provide early palliative care did not affect study results. One RCT reported potential adverse events of early palliative care, such as a higher percentage of participants with severe scores for pain and poor appetite; the remaining six studies did not report adverse events in study publications. For these six studies, principal investigators stated upon request that they had not observed any adverse events.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review of a small number of trials indicates that early palliative care interventions may have more beneficial effects on quality of life and symptom intensity among patients with advanced cancer than among those given usual/standard cancer care alone. Although we found only small effect sizes, these may be clinically relevant at an advanced disease stage with limited prognosis, at which time further decline in quality of life is very common. At this point, effects on mortality and depression are uncertain. We have to interpret current results with caution owing to very low to low certainty of current evidence and between-study differences regarding participant populations, interventions, and methods. Additional research now under way will present a clearer picture of the effect and specific indication of early palliative care. Upcoming results from several ongoing studies (N = 20) and studies awaiting assessment (N = 10) may increase the certainty of study results and may lead to improved decision making. In perspective, early palliative care is a newly emerging field, and well-conducted studies are needed to explicitly describe the components of early palliative care and control treatments, after blinding of participants and outcome assessors, and to report on possible adverse events.
Topics: Communication; Humans; Neoplasms; Palliative Care; Physician-Patient Relations; Quality of Life
PubMed: 28603881
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011129.pub2