Case Report: Intraoperative radiotherapy as the new standard of care for breast cancer patients with disabling health conditions or impairments.

In selected patients, intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) offers an alternative to standard external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) while providing equivalent breast cancer control outcomes. After IORT, most patients do not require external beam radiotherapy and thus avoid the need to travel to and from a radiotherapy centre in the weeks after surgery. EBRT is associated with an increased risk of non-breast cancer mortality and poorer cosmetic outcomes while increasing patient travel time, emissions associated with travel and time spent in the hospital. Consequently, EBRT is associated with an overall reduction in quality of life compared to IORT. Patients with other on-going health conditions or clinical impairments are likely to be affected by the daily radiotherapy requirement. Should these patients be consulted during their pre-operative assessment as to options to undergo IORT? This paper describes a case of IORT and follow up in a functionally blind patient. Quality of life effects are elucidated and further support the use of IORT in selected breast cancer patients with health conditions or impairments.

Electronic cigarettes as a smoking cessation aid for patients with cancer: beliefs and behaviours of clinicians in the UK.

OBJECTIVES: To explore UK clinicians' beliefs and behaviours around recommending e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation aid for patients with cancer. DESIGN: Cross-sectional online survey. SETTING: England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. PARTICIPANTS: Clinicians involved in the care of patients with cancer. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: Behavioural Change Wheel capability, opportunity and motivation to perform a behaviour, knowledge, beliefs, current practice around e-cigarettes and other smoking cessation practices. METHOD: Clinicians (n=506) completed an online survey to assess beliefs and behaviours around e-cigarettes and other smoking cessation practices for patients with cancer. Behavioural factors associated with recommending e-cigarettes in practice were assessed. RESULTS: 29% of clinicians would not recommend e-cigarettes to patients with cancer who continue to smoke. Factors associated with recommendation include smoking cessation knowledge (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.44) and e-cigarette knowledge (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.55), engagement with patients regarding smoking cessation (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.12 to 4.03), belief in the effectiveness of e-cigarettes (OR 2.36 95% CI 1.61 to 3.47) and belief in sufficient evidence on e-cigarettes (OR 2.08 95% CI 1.10 to 4.00) and how comfortable they felt discussing e-cigarettes with patients (OR 1.57 95% CI 1.04 to 2.36). CONCLUSION: Many clinicians providing cancer care to patients who smoke do not recommend e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation aid and were unaware of national guidance supporting recommendation of e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation aid.