-
CA: a Cancer Journal For Clinicians May 2017Answer questions and earn CME/CNE Patients with breast cancer commonly use complementary and integrative therapies as supportive care during cancer treatment and to... (Review)
Review
Answer questions and earn CME/CNE Patients with breast cancer commonly use complementary and integrative therapies as supportive care during cancer treatment and to manage treatment-related side effects. However, evidence supporting the use of such therapies in the oncology setting is limited. This report provides updated clinical practice guidelines from the Society for Integrative Oncology on the use of integrative therapies for specific clinical indications during and after breast cancer treatment, including anxiety/stress, depression/mood disorders, fatigue, quality of life/physical functioning, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, lymphedema, chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, pain, and sleep disturbance. Clinical practice guidelines are based on a systematic literature review from 1990 through 2015. Music therapy, meditation, stress management, and yoga are recommended for anxiety/stress reduction. Meditation, relaxation, yoga, massage, and music therapy are recommended for depression/mood disorders. Meditation and yoga are recommended to improve quality of life. Acupressure and acupuncture are recommended for reducing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Acetyl-L-carnitine is not recommended to prevent chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy due to a possibility of harm. No strong evidence supports the use of ingested dietary supplements to manage breast cancer treatment-related side effects. In summary, there is a growing body of evidence supporting the use of integrative therapies, especially mind-body therapies, as effective supportive care strategies during breast cancer treatment. Many integrative practices, however, remain understudied, with insufficient evidence to be definitively recommended or avoided. CA Cancer J Clin 2017;67:194-232. © 2017 American Cancer Society.
Topics: Anxiety; Breast Neoplasms; Complementary Therapies; Depression; Fatigue; Female; Humans; Lymphedema; Mood Disorders; Nausea; Peripheral Nervous System Diseases; Quality of Life; Sleep Wake Disorders; Stress, Psychological; Vomiting
PubMed: 28436999
DOI: 10.3322/caac.21397 -
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 -
Journal of Thoracic Oncology : Official... Feb 2011Adenocarcinoma is the most common histologic type of lung cancer. To address advances in oncology, molecular biology, pathology, radiology, and surgery of lung... (Review)
Review
International association for the study of lung cancer/american thoracic society/european respiratory society international multidisciplinary classification of lung adenocarcinoma.
INTRODUCTION
Adenocarcinoma is the most common histologic type of lung cancer. To address advances in oncology, molecular biology, pathology, radiology, and surgery of lung adenocarcinoma, an international multidisciplinary classification was sponsored by the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, American Thoracic Society, and European Respiratory Society. This new adenocarcinoma classification is needed to provide uniform terminology and diagnostic criteria, especially for bronchioloalveolar carcinoma (BAC), the overall approach to small nonresection cancer specimens, and for multidisciplinary strategic management of tissue for molecular and immunohistochemical studies.
METHODS
An international core panel of experts representing all three societies was formed with oncologists/pulmonologists, pathologists, radiologists, molecular biologists, and thoracic surgeons. A systematic review was performed under the guidance of the American Thoracic Society Documents Development and Implementation Committee. The search strategy identified 11,368 citations of which 312 articles met specified eligibility criteria and were retrieved for full text review. A series of meetings were held to discuss the development of the new classification, to develop the recommendations, and to write the current document. Recommendations for key questions were graded by strength and quality of the evidence according to the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.
RESULTS
The classification addresses both resection specimens, and small biopsies and cytology. The terms BAC and mixed subtype adenocarcinoma are no longer used. For resection specimens, new concepts are introduced such as adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) and minimally invasive adenocarcinoma (MIA) for small solitary adenocarcinomas with either pure lepidic growth (AIS) or predominant lepidic growth with ≤ 5 mm invasion (MIA) to define patients who, if they undergo complete resection, will have 100% or near 100% disease-specific survival, respectively. AIS and MIA are usually nonmucinous but rarely may be mucinous. Invasive adenocarcinomas are classified by predominant pattern after using comprehensive histologic subtyping with lepidic (formerly most mixed subtype tumors with nonmucinous BAC), acinar, papillary, and solid patterns; micropapillary is added as a new histologic subtype. Variants include invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma (formerly mucinous BAC), colloid, fetal, and enteric adenocarcinoma. This classification provides guidance for small biopsies and cytology specimens, as approximately 70% of lung cancers are diagnosed in such samples. Non-small cell lung carcinomas (NSCLCs), in patients with advanced-stage disease, are to be classified into more specific types such as adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma, whenever possible for several reasons: (1) adenocarcinoma or NSCLC not otherwise specified should be tested for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations as the presence of these mutations is predictive of responsiveness to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors, (2) adenocarcinoma histology is a strong predictor for improved outcome with pemetrexed therapy compared with squamous cell carcinoma, and (3) potential life-threatening hemorrhage may occur in patients with squamous cell carcinoma who receive bevacizumab. If the tumor cannot be classified based on light microscopy alone, special studies such as immunohistochemistry and/or mucin stains should be applied to classify the tumor further. Use of the term NSCLC not otherwise specified should be minimized.
CONCLUSIONS
This new classification strategy is based on a multidisciplinary approach to diagnosis of lung adenocarcinoma that incorporates clinical, molecular, radiologic, and surgical issues, but it is primarily based on histology. This classification is intended to support clinical practice, and research investigation and clinical trials. As EGFR mutation is a validated predictive marker for response and progression-free survival with EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors in advanced lung adenocarcinoma, we recommend that patients with advanced adenocarcinomas be tested for EGFR mutation. This has implications for strategic management of tissue, particularly for small biopsies and cytology samples, to maximize high-quality tissue available for molecular studies. Potential impact for tumor, node, and metastasis staging include adjustment of the size T factor according to only the invasive component (1) pathologically in invasive tumors with lepidic areas or (2) radiologically by measuring the solid component of part-solid nodules.
Topics: Adenocarcinoma; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Neoplasm Staging; Societies, Medical
PubMed: 21252716
DOI: 10.1097/JTO.0b013e318206a221 -
CA: a Cancer Journal For Clinicians May 2016Answer questions and earn CME/CNE The American Cancer Society Head and Neck Cancer Survivorship Care Guideline was developed to assist primary care clinicians and other... (Review)
Review
Answer questions and earn CME/CNE The American Cancer Society Head and Neck Cancer Survivorship Care Guideline was developed to assist primary care clinicians and other health practitioners with the care of head and neck cancer survivors, including monitoring for recurrence, screening for second primary cancers, assessment and management of long-term and late effects, health promotion, and care coordination. A systematic review of the literature was conducted using PubMed through April 2015, and a multidisciplinary expert workgroup with expertise in primary care, dentistry, surgical oncology, medical oncology, radiation oncology, clinical psychology, speech-language pathology, physical medicine and rehabilitation, the patient perspective, and nursing was assembled. While the guideline is based on a systematic review of the current literature, most evidence is not sufficient to warrant a strong recommendation. Therefore, recommendations should be viewed as consensus-based management strategies for assisting patients with physical and psychosocial effects of head and neck cancer and its treatment. CA Cancer J Clin 2016;66:203-239. © 2016 American Cancer Society.
Topics: Accessory Nerve Diseases; Aftercare; American Cancer Society; Anxiety; Bursitis; Deglutition Disorders; Dental Care; Dental Caries; Depression; Disease Management; Dystonia; Fatigue; Gastroesophageal Reflux; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Health Promotion; Humans; Hypothyroidism; Lymphedema; Neck Muscles; Osteonecrosis; Periodontitis; Peripheral Nervous System Diseases; Respiratory Aspiration; Sleep Apnea Syndromes; Sleep Wake Disorders; Stress, Psychological; Survivors; Taste Disorders; Trismus; Vestibular Neuronitis; Voice Disorders; Xerostomia
PubMed: 27002678
DOI: 10.3322/caac.21343 -
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 -
The Oncologist May 2017Cisplatin, a platinum-based antineoplastic agent, is the cornerstone for the treatment of many malignancies. Nephrotoxicity is the primary dose-limiting toxicity, and... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Cisplatin, a platinum-based antineoplastic agent, is the cornerstone for the treatment of many malignancies. Nephrotoxicity is the primary dose-limiting toxicity, and various hydration regimens and supplementation strategies are used to prevent cisplatin-induced kidney injury. However, evidence-based recommendations on specific hydration regimens are limited. A systematic review was performed to evaluate clinical studies that have examined hydration and supplementation strategies to prevent cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
PubMed and Excerpta Medica databases were searched from 1966 through October 2015 for clinical trials and other studies focused on hydration regimens to prevent nephrotoxicity in cancer patients treated with cisplatin. The University of Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine criteria were used to grade level of evidence.
RESULTS
Among the 1,407 identified studies, 24 were included in this systematic review. All studies differed on type, volume, and duration of hydration. Among the 24 studies, 5 evaluated short-duration hydration, 4 evaluated low-volume hydration, 4 investigated magnesium supplementation, and 7 reviewed forced diuresis with hydration. Short-duration and lower-volume hydration regimens are effective in preventing cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity. Magnesium supplementation may have a role as a nephroprotectant, and forced diuresis may be appropriate in some patients receiving cisplatin.
CONCLUSION
Hydration is essential for all patients to prevent cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity. Specifically, short-duration, low-volume, outpatient hydration with magnesium supplementation and mannitol forced diuresis (in select patients) represent best practice principles for the safe use of cisplatin. 2017;22:609-619 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The findings contained within this systematic review show that (a) hydration is essential for all patients to prevent cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity, (b) short-duration, low-volume, outpatient hydration regimens appear to be safe and feasible, even in patients receiving intermediate- to high-dose cisplatin, (c) magnesium supplementation (8-16 milliequivalents) may limit cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity, and (d) mannitol may be considered for high-dose cisplatin and/or patients with preexisting hypertension. These findings have broad implications for clinical practice and represent best practice principles for the prevention of cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Cisplatin; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Evidence-Based Medicine; Female; Humans; Kidney; Male; Neoplasms
PubMed: 28438887
DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2016-0319 -
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 -
The Oncologist Jun 2016Platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy has been shown to improve survival outcomes in muscle-invasive bladder cancer patients. We performed a systematic review and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy has been shown to improve survival outcomes in muscle-invasive bladder cancer patients. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to provide updated results of previous findings. We also summarized published data to compare clinical outcomes of methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (MVAC) versus gemcitabine and cisplatin/carboplatin (GC) in the neoadjuvant setting.
METHODS
A meta-analysis of 15 randomized clinical trials was performed to compare neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus local treatment with the same local treatment alone. Because no randomized trials have investigated MVAC versus GC in the neoadjuvant setting, a meta-analysis of 13 retrospective studies was performed to compare MVAC with GC.
RESULTS
A total of 3,285 patients were included in 15 randomized clinical trials. There was a significant overall survival (OS) benefit associated with cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR], 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79-0.96). A total of 1,766 patients were included in 13 retrospective studies. There was no significant difference in pathological complete response between MVAC and GC. However, GC was associated with a significantly reduced overall survival (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.01-1.57). After excluding carboplatin data, GC still seemed to be inferior to MVAC in OS (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.99-1.74), but the difference was no longer statistically significant.
CONCLUSION
These results support the use of cisplatin-based combination neoadjuvant chemotherapy in muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Although GC and MVAC had similar treatment response rates, the different survival outcome observed in this study requires further investigation.
IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE
Platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) has been shown to improve survival outcomes in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) patients, but the optimal neoadjuvant regimen has not been established. Methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (MVAC) and gemcitabine and cisplatin/carboplatin (GC) are two of the most commonly used chemotherapy regimens in modern oncology. In this two-step meta-analysis, an updated and more precise estimate of the survival benefit of cisplatin-based NCT in MIBC is provided. This study also demonstrated that MVAC might have superior overall survival compared with GC (with or without carboplatin data) in the neoadjuvant setting. The findings suggest that NCT should be standard care in MIBC, and MVAC could be the preferred neoadjuvant regimen.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Cisplatin; Humans; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Neoplasm Invasiveness; Urinary Bladder Neoplasms
PubMed: 27053504
DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2015-0440 -
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 Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2018This is the third update of a review that was originally published in the Cochrane Library in 2002, Issue 2. People with cancer, their families and carers have a high... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This is the third update of a review that was originally published in the Cochrane Library in 2002, Issue 2. People with cancer, their families and carers have a high prevalence of psychological stress, which may be minimised by effective communication and support from their attending healthcare professionals (HCPs). Research suggests communication skills do not reliably improve with experience, therefore, considerable effort is dedicated to courses that may improve communication skills for HCPs involved in cancer care. A variety of communication skills training (CST) courses are in practice. We conducted this review to determine whether CST works and which types of CST, if any, are the most effective.
OBJECTIVES
To assess whether communication skills training is effective in changing behaviour of HCPs working in cancer care and in improving HCP well-being, patient health status and satisfaction.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update, we searched the following electronic databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2018, Issue 4), MEDLINE via Ovid, Embase via Ovid, PsycInfo and CINAHL up to May 2018. In addition, we searched the US National Library of Medicine Clinical Trial Registry and handsearched the reference lists of relevant articles and conference proceedings for additional studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
The original review was a narrative review that included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled before-and-after studies. In updated versions, we limited our criteria to RCTs evaluating CST compared with no CST or other CST in HCPs working in cancer care. Primary outcomes were changes in HCP communication skills measured in interactions with real or simulated people with cancer or both, using objective scales. We excluded studies whose focus was communication skills in encounters related to informed consent for research.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trials and extracted data to a pre-designed data collection form. We pooled data using the random-effects method. For continuous data, we used standardised mean differences (SMDs).
MAIN RESULTS
We included 17 RCTs conducted mainly in outpatient settings. Eleven trials compared CST with no CST intervention; three trials compared the effect of a follow-up CST intervention after initial CST training; two trials compared the effect of CST and patient coaching; and one trial compared two types of CST. The types of CST courses evaluated in these trials were diverse. Study participants included oncologists, residents, other doctors, nurses and a mixed team of HCPs. Overall, 1240 HCPs participated (612 doctors including 151 residents, 532 nurses, and 96 mixed HCPs).Ten trials contributed data to the meta-analyses. HCPs in the intervention groups were more likely to use open questions in the post-intervention interviews than the control group (SMD 0.25, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.48; P = 0.03, I² = 62%; 5 studies, 796 participant interviews; very low-certainty evidence); more likely to show empathy towards their patients (SMD 0.18, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.32; P = 0.008, I² = 0%; 6 studies, 844 participant interviews; moderate-certainty evidence), and less likely to give facts only (SMD -0.26, 95% CI -0.51 to -0.01; P = 0.05, I² = 68%; 5 studies, 780 participant interviews; low-certainty evidence). Evidence suggesting no difference between CST and no CST on eliciting patient concerns and providing appropriate information was of a moderate-certainty. There was no evidence of differences in the other HCP communication skills, including clarifying and/or summarising information, and negotiation. Doctors and nurses did not perform differently for any HCP outcomes.There were no differences between the groups with regard to HCP 'burnout' (low-certainty evidence) nor with regard to patient satisfaction or patient perception of the HCPs communication skills (very low-certainty evidence). Out of the 17 included RCTs 15 were considered to be at a low risk of overall bias.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Various CST courses appear to be effective in improving HCP communication skills related to supportive skills and to help HCPs to be less likely to give facts only without individualising their responses to the patient's emotions or offering support. We were unable to determine whether the effects of CST are sustained over time, whether consolidation sessions are necessary, and which types of CST programs are most likely to work. We found no evidence to support a beneficial effect of CST on HCP 'burnout', the mental or physical health and satisfaction of people with cancer.
Topics: Anxiety; Caregivers; Communication; Empathy; Health Personnel; Humans; Medical Oncology; Neoplasms; Oncology Nursing; Professional-Patient Relations; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stress, Psychological
PubMed: 30039853
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003751.pub4