Considerations for pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis following inpatient brachytherapy for gynecologic malignancies.

PURPOSE: Brachytherapy irradiation carries risks of both bleeding and venous thromboembolism (VTE). No screening or management recommendations for VTE in this setting have been developed. Our study aims to understand the incidence of VTE, compile published anticoagulation guidelines, and call for future guidelines to address thromboprophylaxis in this population. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A retrospective, single institution study of patients undergoing brachytherapy irradiation between 2012 and 2022 was undertaken. We analyzed 2 cohorts: 87 patients undergoing brachytherapy with an inpatient admission, and 66 patients assessed for risk of VTE or bleeding after discharge from an inpatient admission for brachytherapy. Caprini risk scores were calculated for each patient, and statistical analyses were performed. RESULTS: Eighty-seven patients were included, and 25% had a VTE diagnosis. Forty-seven (54%) of patients included underwent brachytherapy as definitive treatment of cervical cancer, and 16 (18%) received brachytherapy irradiation to treat recurrent endometrial cancer. In the cohort of 66 patients assessed for risk of VTE or bleeding after brachytherapy discharge, 23 (34.8%) were discharged with thromboprophylaxis, and 43 (65.2%) were discharged without thromboprophylaxis. None of the patients discharged on thromboprophylaxis were diagnosed with a VTE within 90 days of discharge after brachytherapy, whereas 3 of 43 (7%) discharged without thromboprophylaxis were diagnosed with a VTE, OR and 95% CI: 0.25 (0.01-5.29), p = 0.37. Of the 23 patients discharged on thromboprophylaxis, 1 was readmitted for bleeding OR and 95% CI: 5.8 (0.22-155.18), p = 0.29. The median Caprini score was 11. CONCLUSIONS: VTE is a common occurrence in patients undergoing brachytherapy. Patients undergoing brachytherapy irradiation who require inpatient admission represent a unique population, and specialty organizations should develop consensus recommendations to address these clinical challenges.

Models of determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in non-pregnant and pregnant population: Review of current literature".

Vaccination has proven to be the most effective tool in controlling the COVID-19 pandemic. While pregnant individuals are considered to be a high-risk population and are more likely to experience adverse effects from COVID-19, vaccination rates among pregnant individuals are significantly lower than in the general population. The Health Belief Model (HBM), Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), 3C model, 5C model, and 5A model have been used to assess vaccination hesitancy behaviors. In this paper, we review the use of each of these models to address vaccine hesitancy, with a focus on the pregnant population and the COVID-19 vaccine. The HBM, TPB, 3C model, and 5C model have demonstrated great versatility in their ability to evaluate, explain, and modify vaccine hesitancy and behavior. Up to date, the HBM and 3C models appear to be the most effective models to study and address vaccination hesitancy within the pregnant persons.

Guideline-Recommended Symptom Management Strategies That Cross Over Two or More Cancer Symptoms.

PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION: Patients with cancer experience multiple symptoms, but current practice is driven by guidelines that address single symptoms. Identifying symptom management strategies recommended across two or more symptoms could relieve multiple symptoms and reduce patient burden. LITERATURE SEARCH: The Oncology Nursing Society, National Comprehensive Cancer Network, and American Society of Clinical Oncology websites were searched to identify management guidelines for 15 symptoms. DATA EVALUATION: The authors extracted symptom management strategies and recommendations. Recommendations were synthesized by symptom across the guidelines, and recommended strategies were compared across symptoms. SYNTHESIS: Among 32 guidelines reviewed, a total of 88 symptom management strategies (41 pharmacologic, 47 nonpharmacologic) were recommended across two or more symptoms. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Findings support the potential for coordinated selection of symptom management strategies that cross over multiple symptoms in a patient. Investigators should test these symptom management strategies in the context of co-occurring symptoms and develop guidelines that address multiple symptoms.

The Role of Inflammation in the Pain, Fatigue, and Sleep Disturbance Symptom Cluster in Advanced Cancer.

CONTEXT: Symptom researchers have proposed a model of inflammatory cytokine activity and dysregulation in cancer to explain co-occurring symptoms including pain, fatigue, and sleep disturbance. OBJECTIVES: We tested the hypothesis that psychological stress accentuates inflammation and that stress and inflammation contribute to one's experience of the pain, fatigue, and sleep disturbance symptom cluster (symptom cluster severity, symptom cluster distress) and its impact (symptom cluster interference with daily life, quality of life). METHODS: We used baseline data from a symptom cluster management trial. Adult participants (N = 158) receiving chemotherapy for advanced cancer reported pain, fatigue, and sleep disturbance on enrollment. Before intervention, participants completed measures of demographics, perceived stress, symptom cluster severity, symptom cluster distress, symptom cluster interference with daily life, and quality of life and provided a blood sample for four inflammatory biomarkers (interleukin-1ß, interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor-α, and C-reactive protein). RESULTS: Stress was not directly related to any inflammatory biomarker. Stress and tumor necrosis factor-α were positively related to symptom cluster distress, although not symptom cluster severity. Tumor necrosis factor-α was indirectly related to symptom cluster interference with daily life, through its effect on symptom cluster distress. Stress was positively associated with symptom cluster interference with daily life and inversely with quality of life. Stress also had indirect effects on symptom cluster interference with daily life, through its effect on symptom cluster distress. CONCLUSION: The proposed inflammatory model of symptoms was partially supported. Investigators should test interventions that target stress as a contributing factor in co-occurring pain, fatigue, and sleep disturbance and explore other factors that may influence inflammatory biomarker levels within the context of an advanced cancer diagnosis and treatment.