The Impact of Isolated Versus Multiple Osteochondromas: Analysis of the CoULD Registry.

PURPOSE: The burden of upper extremity (UE) osteochondromas on function and self-perception among pediatric patients is unclear. The purpose of our study was to study the impact of osteochondromas in comparison to population norms and to evaluate solitary versus multiple osteochondromas on subjective UE function as measured by patient rated outcomes. METHODS: We utilized the CoULD (Congenital Upper Limb Differences) Registry to review all pediatric patients presenting with osteochondromas between January 2014 and February 2021. Demographic information was collected and patients were classified as having either single or multiple osteochondromas. Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) and Pediatric Outcomes Data Collection Instrument (PODCI) tools were utilized for assessment. Scores for PODCI subscales of UE function, Pain/comfort, and Happiness and PROMIS domains of UE Function, Pain, Depression, Anxiety, and Peer Relations were reviewed. Differences between groups were analyzed using the Student t test. RESULTS: Ninety-nine patients met inclusion criteria for the study with an average age of presentation of 9.3 years and 61 patients (62%) were male. Overall, patients demonstrated worse UE Function as well as greater Anxiety and Depression in comparison to the population normals on PROMIS assessment. Patients also demonstrated worse patient and parent reported PODCI UE, Sports and Physical Functioning, Pain/Comfort and Global Functioning scores compared with population norms but demonstrated better than average happiness scores. Patients with multiple osteochondromas demonstrated greater PROMIS pain interference and more disability in PODCI Sports and Physical Functioning, Pain/Comfort and Global Functioning compared with those with solitary osteochondromas. CONCLUSION: Patients with UE osteochondromas have worse overall function in comparison to population norms, exceeding established minimally clinically important difference values. In addition, patients with multiple osteochondromas reported more pain and poorer physical function than those with solitary osteochondromas. Physicians should be alert to the physical and psychosocial burden of this disease. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II-prognostic.

Immediate family support is important to discharge home for cancer patient with bone metastasis after rehabilitation: A retrospective study.

ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study is to investigate the predictive factors of home discharge for rehabilitation patients with cancer bone metastasis.Cancer patients with bone metastasis who underwent rehabilitation between April 2014 and March 2017 were retrospectively enrolled. Data on discharge destination were collected from medical records as outcomes. Multiple regression analyses were carried out to investigate the predictive factors of home discharge.Ninety-eight patients (mean age: 68.6 years, 42 females and 56 males) were included. Fifty patients were discharged home, 38 patients were discharged to other facilities, and 10 patients died. There were no skeletal-related events among these patients during their hospital stay. The receiver-operating curve for the predictive factors for home discharge of the Barthel Index at admission, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status at admission, and number of immediate family members living at home were 60 points (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.74, sensitivity = 0.6400, 1-specificity = 0.2766), 2 score (AUC = 0.65, sensitivity = 0.5400, 1-specificity = 0.2222), and 1 family member (AUC = 0.65, sensitivity = 0.9592, 1-specificity = 0.7222), respectively.In order to plan for cancer patients with bone metastasis to be discharged home, it is important to take into consideration the patients' Barthel Index and Performance Status at the time of hospital admission and the number of immediate family members living at home.

A qualitative research study in Japan investigating patients' experience with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: from diagnosis to decision for Ra-223 treatment.

Aim: This qualitative study aimed to reveal symptoms and impacts among bone metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (or mCRPC) Japanese patients, prior to Radium-223 (Ra-223) treatment. Materials & Methods: Twenty-three mCRPC patients designated to receive Ra-223 and three treating physicians (Ra-223 prescribers) in Japan, were interviewed. All interview data were assessed for concept frequency, themes and saturation. Results: Forty-five percent of the patients (mean age: 75.8 years) were symptomatic at the time of enrollment. Interviews with all patients revealed 47 mCRPC symptoms, including back pain and bone-specific pain, and 45 life impacts, including worry about disease progression and the impact on daily, physical activities. Conclusion: The symptoms and impacts of living with mCRPC and the associated burden of bone metastasis and skeletal-related symptoms are varied and are important considerations for treatment.

Lay abstract Aim: This study looked at symptoms and impacts among patients with a type of prostate cancer called metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. This cancer has spread to other parts of the body including patients' bones. Patients' prostate-specific antigen levels continue to rise despite surgical or medical treatment and their doctors decided the next best treatment is Radium-223 (Ra-223), a radiopharmaceutical therapy. Materials & methods: Twenty-three metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients designated to receive Ra-223 and three treating physicians (Ra-223 prescribers) in Japan, were interviewed. All interview data were assessed for the number of times some words or themes are mentioned by the patients. Results: Ten of the 23 patients (average age of 76 years) had symptoms when the study started. Interviewed patients talked about symptoms including back pain and pain in their bones, and how their cancer caused them to worry about their physical activities and disease progression. Conclusion: The symptoms impact on patients' daily living and the burden of bone metastasis and bone-related symptoms are varied and are important considerations for treatment.

OLIE, ITCC-082: a Phase II trial of lenvatinib plus ifosfamide and etoposide in relapsed/refractory osteosarcoma.

While survival rates for patients with relapsed/refractory osteosarcoma are low, kinase inhibitors have shown efficacy in its treatment. The multikinase inhibitor lenvatinib, plus ifosfamide and etoposide, showed antitumor activity in a Phase II study in patients with relapsed/refractory osteosarcoma. This Phase II randomized controlled trial (OLIE) will assess whether the combination of lenvatinib + ifosfamide + etoposide is superior to ifosfamide + etoposide alone in children, adolescents and young adults with relapsed/refractory osteosarcoma. The primary end point is progression-free survival; secondary and exploratory end points include, but are not limited to, overall survival, objective response rate, safety and tolerability, pharmacokinetic characterization of lenvatinib in the combination treatment, quality of life and quantification of baseline unresectable lesions that are converted to resectable.

Lay abstract Traditional treatment for osteosarcoma (bone cancer) includes drugs that cause cell damage, such as ifosfamide and etoposide. The study in this article looked at adding lenvatinib, a drug that works to block development of blood vessels, to traditional chemotherapy to see whether it worked better. 'OLIE' is a Phase II clinical study comparing lenvatinib + chemotherapy (ifosfamide + etoposide) to the chemotherapy alone (ifosfamide + etoposide). An earlier study indicated that this drug combination may be successful. The study includes children, adolescents and young adults with osteosarcoma that has come back after, or did not respond to, previous treatment. OLIE will look at the antitumor activity and the side effects of this drug combination. The OLIE study is currently enrolling patients worldwide. Clinical trial registration number: NCT04154189 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Safety and Feasibility Analysis of a Prospective Trial on Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Solitary Bone Plasmacytoma.

BACKGROUND: There have been reports on the use of hypofractionated stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for bone plasmacytomas, but no prospective data are available. We present the initial analysis of an ongoing prospective protocol on SBRT addressing the feasibility and safety of this treatment for solitary bone plasmacytomas. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective cohort of SBRT for solitary bone plasmacytoma was developed. Patients could receive different doses depending on the index bone, from single fraction for skull base lesions, 24 Gy in 3 fractions for spine lesions, and 30 Gy in 5 fractions for other bones. Overall survival, bone events, local control, and progression to multiple myeloma (MM) were measured and compared to our retrospective cohort of patients treated with conformal standard-dose radiotherapy. Quality of life was assessed via the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire, and toxicities were assessed by the CTCAE v5.0 criteria. After 1 year or the inclusion of 5-10 patients, a feasibility and safety analysis was programmed. RESULTS: Between April 2018 and April 2019, 5 patients were included. All were male, with a median age of 53.1 years. The median follow-up was 21.8 months. No patient had local progression, bone event, or died. Two patients had progressions to MM. The mean survival free of progression to MM was 18.6 months, compared to 19 months in the retrospective cohort; median values were not reached. There were no grade 3 toxicities. CONCLUSION: SBRT for plasmacytoma is safe and feasible. More robust data are awaited.

Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Turkish version of the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society scoring system in patients with musculoskeletal tumors.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to translate and cross-culturally adapt the musculoskeletal tumor society (MSTS) scoring system into Turkish and to determine the reliability and validity of the translated version for the functional evaluation of patients with musculoskeletal tumors. METHODS: A total of 36 patients (16 women, 20 men; mean age=36.6; age range=13-75 years) who underwent limb-salvage surgery owing to benign aggressive or malignant musculoskeletal tumors were included in the study. Translation and back translations of the MSTS were performed according to the published guidelines. Short form (SF) 36 physical component, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH), and range of motion scale (ROMS) that were previously analyzed for Turkish validation were used for validity. Reliability of MSTS Turkish version was evaluated by calculating test-retest reliability and internal consistency. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to evaluate the inter-observer consistency and test-retest reliability. Alpha coefficient (Cronbach's alpha) was used to evaluate the internal consistency. RESULTS: It was observed that total MSTS score has a strong negative correlation with DASH (r=-0.689; p<0.001) and WOMAC scores (r=-0.634; p<0.001) and moderate correlation with the ROMS score (r=0.521; p<0.001). Total MSTS score also had a statistically significant strong correlation with SF-36 scores (r values ranging from 0.425 to 0.609, p<0.001). Inter and intra-observer reliability of the MSTS scale was found to be excellent (Cronbach's α=0.97 p<0.001; ICC: 0.97 (0.96-0.99; p<0.001). Unlike other subscales, statistical correlation between dexterity and hand-positioning subscales of MSTS with DASH scores was found to be insignificant (r=-0.533, p =0.061 and r=-0.336, p=0.261, respectively). CONCLUSION: The Turkish version of the MSTS scoring system seems to be a valid and reliable scale that measures the correct and desired values in the evaluation of health-related quality of life in orthopedic oncology. Reliability coefficients of the Turkish version of MSTS were determined to be strong. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, Diagnostic Study.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on quality of life and emotional wellbeing in patients with bone metastases treated with radiotherapy: a prospective cohort study.

Implementation of COVID-19 measures may have induced concerns about access and quality of health care for cancer patients with bone metastases, and it may have affected their quality of life. In this study, we evaluated the effect of the first COVID-19 lockdown on quality of life and emotional functioning of patients with stage IV cancer treated for painful bone metastases in the UMC Utrecht, the Netherlands. A COVID-19 specific questionnaire was sent to active participants in the Prospective Evaluation of interventional StudiEs on boNe meTastases (PRESENT) cohort, consisting of patients irradiated for metastatic bone disease. Patient reported outcomes (PROs) were compared with the last two PROs collected within the PRESENT cohort before the COVID-19 lockdown in the Netherlands on the 16th of March. For the 169 (53%) responders, median age at start of lockdown was 68 years (range 38-92) and 62% were male. Patients reported a statistically significant decrease in emotional functioning (83.6 to 79.2, P = 0.004) and in general quality of life score during the COVID-19 lockdown (72.4 to 68.7, P = 0.007). A steep increase in feeling isolated was reported (18% before and 67% during lockdown). This study has shown a strong increase in the experience of isolation and a decrease of emotional functioning and general quality of life during the COVID-19 lockdown in cancer patients with bone metastases. Due to the nature of the treatment of this patient population, efforts should be made to minimize these changes during future lockdowns.

Future Directions in the Treatment of Osteosarcoma.

Osteosarcoma is the most common primary bone sarcoma and is often diagnosed in the 2nd-3rd decades of life. Response to the aggressive and highly toxic neoadjuvant methotrexate-doxorubicin-cisplatin (MAP) chemotherapy schedule is strongly predictive of outcome. Outcomes for patients with osteosarcoma have not significantly changed for over thirty years. There is a need for more effective treatment for patients with high risk features but also reduced treatment-related toxicity for all patients. Predictive biomarkers are needed to help inform clinicians to de-escalate or add therapy, including immune therapies, and to contribute to future clinical trial designs. Here, we review a variety of approaches to improve outcomes and quality of life for patients with osteosarcoma with a focus on incorporating toxicity reduction, immune therapy and molecular analysis to provide the most effective and least toxic osteosarcoma therapy.

Do Cohabitants Reliably Complete Questionnaires for Patients in a Terminal Cancer Stage when Assessing Quality of Life, Pain, Depression, and Anxiety?

BACKGROUND: Patients with bone metastases often are unable to complete quality of life (QoL) questionnaires, and cohabitants (such as spouses, domestic partners, offspring older than 18 years, or other people who live with the patient) could be a reliable alternative. However, the extent of reliability in this complicated patient population remains undefined, and the influence of the cohabitant's condition on their assessment of the patient's QoL is unknown. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Do QoL scores, measured by the 5-level EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D-5L) version and the Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) version 1.0 in three domains (anxiety, pain interference, and depression), reported by patients differ markedly from scores as assessed by their cohabitants? (2) Do cohabitants' PROMIS-Depression scores correlate with differences in measured QoL results? METHODS: This cross-sectional study included patients and cohabitants older than 18 years of age. Patients included those with presence of histologically confirmed bone metastases (including lymphoma and multiple myeloma), and cohabitants must have been present at the clinic visit. Patients were eligible for inclusion in the study regardless of comorbidities, prognosis, prior surgery, or current treatment. Between June 1, 2016 and March 1, 2017 and between October 1, 2017 and February 26, 2018, all 96 eligible patients were approached, of whom 49% (47) met the selection criteria and were willing to participate. The included 47 patient-cohabitant pairs independently completed the EQ-5D-5L and the eight-item PROMIS for three domains (anxiety, pain, and depression) with respect to the patients' symptoms. The cohabitants also completed the four-item PROMIS-Depression survey with respect to their own symptoms. RESULTS: There were no clinically important differences between the scores of patients and their cohabitants for all questionnaires, and the agreement between patient and cohabitant scores was moderate to strong (Spearman correlation coefficients ranging from 0.52 to 0.72 on the four questionnaires; all p values < 0.05). However, despite the good agreement in QoL scores, an increased cohabitant's depression score was correlated with an overestimation of the patient's symptom burden for the anxiety and depression domains (weak Spearman correlation coefficient of 0.33 [95% confidence interval 0.08 to 0.58]; p = 0.01 and moderate Spearman correlation coefficient of 0.52 [95% CI 0.29 to 0.74]; p < 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSION: The present findings support that cohabitants might be reliable raters of the QoL of patients with bone metastases. However, if a patient's cohabitant has depression, the cohabitant may overestimate a patient's symptoms in emotional domains such as anxiety and depression, warranting further research that includes cohabitants with and without depression to elucidate the effect of depression on the level of agreement. For now, clinicians may want to reconsider using the cohabitant's judgement if depression is suspected. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: These findings suggest that a cohabitant's impressions of a patient's quality of life are, in most instances, accurate; this is potentially helpful in situations where the patient cannot weigh in. Future studies should employ longitudinal designs to see how or whether our findings change over time and with disease progression, and how specific interventions-like different chemotherapeutic regimens or surgery-may factor in.

Assessment and management of metastatic bone cancer in emergency departments.

A cancer diagnosis in emergency departments (EDs) is often associated with advanced or metastatic cancer. Patients with bone metastases have a complex range of physical and psychological needs. Meeting the needs of patients with cancer is an important part of the role of emergency nurses, but evidence suggests that they often do not feel adequately prepared to provide effective care for this patient group. This article uses a case study of a patient who presented to an ED with metastatic cancer in his right lower limb, to provide an overview of bone metastases, including the relevant anatomy, pain management and psychological support. The article also outlines the signs and symptoms of bone metastases and discusses patient assessment, symptom management and available treatments.

The efficacy of three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy on pain and quality of life in patients with painful bone metastases: a prospective study.

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of radiation therapy in alleviating pain and improving the quality of life (QoL) with validated questionnaires in patients with painful bone metastases (BoM). METHODS: This prospective, observational study recruited 167 patients with painful BoM who were treated with palliative radiotherapy (PRT) from February 2015 to February 2018. After the first clinical assessment, the patients filled out specific questionnaires and underwent a fast radiotherapy treatment within 48 hours. The patients were followed up for eight weeks. RESULTS: The median age was 66.30 years. The most common primary cancer was lung cancer (31.1%). The most often prescribed scheme was 8 Gy in one fraction (70%). The patients experienced significant pain response and improved QoL compared with baseline, especially in the first two weeks after radiation. Overall, reduced pain and drug score were reported at two weeks of PRT in 68 (51.5%) and 37 (28%) of patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: PRT is an effective treatment option for patients with painful BoM.

What Are the Minimum Clinically Important Differences in SF-36 Scores in Patients with Orthopaedic Oncologic Conditions?

BACKGROUND: The SF-36 is widely used to evaluate the health-related quality of life of patients with musculoskeletal tumors. The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) is useful for interpreting changes in functional scores because it defines the smallest change each patient may perceive. Since the MCID is influenced by the population characteristics, MCIDs of the SF-36 should be defined to reflect the specific conditions of orthopaedic oncology patients. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What is the MCID of SF-36 physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS) scores in patients with orthopaedic oncologic conditions when calculated with distribution-based methods? (2) What is the MCID of SF-36 PCS and MCS scores in patients with orthopaedic oncologic conditions when calculated by anchor-based methods? METHODS: Of all 960 patients who underwent surgery from 1999 to 2005, 32% (310) of patients who underwent musculoskeletal oncologic surgery and completed two surveys during postoperative follow-up were reviewed. We evaluated a dataset that ended in 2005, completing follow-up of data accrued as part of the cooperative effort between the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and the Council of Musculoskeletal Specialty Societies to create patient reported quality of life instruments for lower extremity conditions. This effort, started in 1994 was validated and widely accepted by its publication in 2004. We believe the findings from this period are still relevant today because (1) this critical information has never been available for clinicians and researchers to distinguish real differences in outcome among orthopaedic oncology patients, (2) the SF-36 continues to be the best validated and widely used instrument to assess health-related quality of life, and unfortunately (3) there has been no significant change in outcome for oncology patients over the intervening years. SF-36 PCS and MCS are aggregates of the eight scale scores specific to physical and mental dimension (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores representing better health). Their responsiveness has been shown postoperatively for several surgical procedures (such as, colorectal surgery). Two different methods were used to calculate the MCID: the distribution-based method, which was based on half the SD of the change in score and standard error of the measurement at baseline, and anchor-based, in which a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed. The anchor-based method uses a plain-language question to ask patients how their individual conditions changed when compared with the previous survey. Answer choices were "much better," "somewhat better," "about the same," "somewhat worse," or "much worse." The ROC curve-derived MCIDs were defined as the change in scores from baseline, with sensitivity and specificity to detect differences in patients who stated their outcome was, about the same and those who stated their status was somewhat better or somewhat worse. This approach is based on each patient's perception. It considers that the definition of MCID is the minimal difference each patient can perceive as meaningful. RESULTS: Using the distribution-based method, we found that the MCIDs of the PCS and MCS were 5 and 5 by half the SD, and 6 and 5 by standard error of the measurement. In the anchor-based method, the MCIDs of the PCS and MCS for improvement/deterioration were 4 (area under the curve, 0.82)/-2 (area under the curve, 0.79) and 4 (area under the curve, 0.72)/ (area under the curve, 0.68), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Since both anchor-based and distribution-based MCID estimates of the SF-36 in patients with musculoskeletal tumors were so similar, we have confidence in the estimates we made, which were about 5 points for both the PCS and the MCS subscales of the SF-36. This suggests that interventions improving SF-36 by less than that amount are unlikely to be perceived by patients as clinically important. Therefore, those interventions may not justify exposing patients to risk, cost, or inconvenience. When applying new interventions to orthopaedic oncology patients going forward, it will be important to consider these MCIDs for evaluation purposes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, diagnostic study.

Parents Demand and Teenager Refuses Epidural Anesthesia.

A 15-year-old girl is scheduled to undergo an upper lobectomy to debulk metastatic Ewing sarcoma. The anesthesiologist recommended placement of a thoracic epidural catheter to provide postoperative analgesia. The patient did not want a needle to be placed near her spine. She was terrified that the procedure would be painful and that it might paralyze her. Although the anesthesiologist reassured her that sedation and local anesthesia would make the procedure comfortable, she remained vehemently opposed to the epidural procedure. The parents spoke privately to the anesthesiologist and asked for placement of the epidural after she was asleep. They firmly believed that this would provide optimal postoperative analgesia and thus would be in her best interest. Experts discuss the pros and cons of siding with the patient or parents.

Patients' quality of life: Validation of the functional assessment of cancer therapy-bone marrow transplant (FACT-BMT) instrument for the Mexican population.

OBJECTIVE: The functional assessment of cancer therapy-bone marrow transplant (FACT-BMT) is a widely used instrument to assess quality of life (QOL) in hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) patients, but there is little evidence of its validity in Latin American populations. This study evaluated the psychometric properties of the Spanish language version of the FACT-BMT in Mexican patients. METHOD: First, the original version was piloted with 15 HSCT patients to obtain an adequate cultural version, resulting in the adaptation of one item. After that, the new version was completed by 139 HSCT patients. RESULTS: The results showed a FACT factor structure that explains 70.84% of the total variance, a factor structure similar to the original FACT structure, and with a high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.867). For the BMT subscale, the best factor structure included 17 items which explain 61.65% of the total variance with an adequate internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.696). SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESULTS: The FACT-BMT was found to be a valid and reliable instrument to evaluate QOL in Mexican patients. Our results constitute new FACT-BMT empirical evidence that supports its clinical and research uses.

The Patient's Narrative Agenda as an assessment tool: the story of Robert, suffering from osteosarcoma.

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE WORK: To activate the participation of the person in his/her care path, the literature highlight the impact of the professional's ability to show a genuine interest in the problems brought by the patient and to recognize him/her as 'competent'. In these sense the narrative patient's agenda could be a useful relational tool, because is focused on the perception of patient experiences of his/her illness. Thus this study aims to analyze the usefulness of patient's narrative agenda during the assessment phase. METHOD: A semi-structured interview has been adopted to explore the agenda of Robert, 21 years old, suffering from osteosarcoma. A first level analysis identified the four functional areas of the agenda: ideas and beliefs; expectations and desires and context in which he lives and interacts. A second level analysis assessed the main Robert's problems. RESULTS: The narrative agenda has highlighted many central problems of Robert (e.g. therapeutic adherence, quality of life, mood, body image, existential problems related to experiences, hopes and expectations). Of course these results could be integrated with other tools: qualitative, to understanding difficulties and to formulate hypotheses, and quantitative, to measure the level of severity of problems reported. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The narrative agenda has not only proved to be a valid instrument of assessment, allowing an adequate insight on the patient's problems, as we exemplified, but it can be also used for monitoring the dynamic situation of the person's history, lending itself to the re-exploration of its functional areas over time.

Experiences of return to work after treatment for extremital soft tissue or bone sarcoma: Between distraction and leaving the disease behind.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to explore the return to work (RTW) experience of individuals in remission from extremital sarcoma. METHODS: Using a qualitative survey design, we asked sarcoma survivors about their RTW experiences after treatment. Seven men and eight women (n = 15), 43 years old in average, participated. The majority had soft tissue sarcoma (n = 14) and no amputations (n = 14). We analysed data thematically through an inductive approach. RESULTS: Participants' motivation to RTW and their experiences of this transition could be understood under the main theme of "searching for distraction and wanting to leave the disease behind," followed by "problems of the new normal." RTW was the next step after treatment; however, being back at the same workplace/institution was challenging due to the interference of the effects of the disease and treatments and peer perceptions. In other subthemes, we identified that RTW was facilitated by different "signs of readiness," as well as by "motivating factors and the meaning of having an occupation." CONCLUSIONS: Readiness to RTW while primarily an autonomous decision can also be guided by third parties, including treating physicians. RTW can be challenging, since changes in performance as well as comments from peers become a constant reminder of the status prior to the illness. Given that RTW helps distract from the disease, these reminders can be confronting and highlight the role of health professionals and employers in preparing survivors and peers to facilitate the RTW.

Validation process of Toronto Exremity Salvage Score in Italian: A quality of life measure for patients with extremity bone and soft tissue tumors.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Limb salvage surgery remains the standard treatment in bone and soft tissue tumors. Toronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS) is the most used quality of life measure. Our objective was to perform cross-cultural adaptation and validation in Italian, testing test-retest reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness. METHODS: We interviewed patients already treated for content validity. A total of 124 patients completed TESS and other questionnaires presurgery, at 3 months, 3 months + 2 weeks, and 6 months follow-up. We calculated intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for reliability, associations with Pearson's r, and change over time with paired T tests. RESULTS: A new item regarding touch-screen devices was added to the upper extremity (UE) questionnaire. ICC resulted of 0.99 for lower extremity (LE) and 0.98 for UE patients, Pearson's r between TESS and Musculoskeletal Tumor Society was .66 and .64, EuroQol-5D-5L r was .62 and .61, and r between TESS and short form-36 physical function subscale was .76 and .71 for LE and UE groups, respectively. Paired T test results were statistically significant to detect change over time (0.03, 0.04, and 0.04 for LE groups and 0.03, 0.01, and 0.04 for UE groups). CONCLUSION: The Italian version of TESS can be used for the bone and soft tissue sarcoma population in clinical trials in Italy and with Italian speaking patients abroad to ensure patients' perspectives for efficacy and efficiency of treatments.

Body image, self-esteem, and quality of life in patients with primary malignant bone tumors.

BACKGROUND: Patients with primary malignant bone tumors are facing different challenges in their everyday lives due to improved treatment and prolonged survival. This raises the question whether and to what extent their quality of life, body image, and self-esteem is affected by their disease. The aim of this retrospective study was to analyze the quality of life, body image and self-esteem of patients with primary malignant bone tumors compared to a healthy control group. METHODS: A total of 56 patients (39 male, 17 female; average age 33.8 [± 14.29] years) who were treated with either osteosarcoma or Ewing-Sarcoma at the authors' institution between Jan 1989 and May 2015 were included into the study (mean follow-up: 9.1 ± 6.6] years). The control group consisted of 58 (average age 24.4 [± 3.1] years, 31 male, 27 female) healthy medical students. Standardized questionnaires were used to assess quality of life (SF-36), body image (MBSRQ) and self-esteem (RSE-scale). Student's t test were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Quality of life (SF-36) (in physical categories) and body image (MBSRQ) was significantly lower in patients with primary malignant bone tumors compared to healthy cohort (p < 0.001). Self-esteem was not affected i n patients and did not show any difference compared to control group (23.96 vs. 24.00). DISCUSSION: Physical categories of quality of life and body image sensation of patients with primary malignant bone tumors are worse compared healthy controls. However, self-esteem does not seem to be affected by the condition and its management. Patients can be encouraged about this at the time of diagnosis of a primary malignant bone tumor.

Decision-making in Orthopaedic Oncology: Does Cognitive Bias Affect a Virtual Patient's Choice Between Limb Salvage and Amputation?

BACKGROUND: The local treatment of extremity sarcomas usually is predicated on a decision between limb salvage and amputation. The manner in which surgical options are presented in the context of shared decision-making may influence this decision. In a population of "simulated" patients-survey respondents presented with a mock clinical vignette and then asked to choose between treatments-we assessed cognitive bias by deliberate alteration of the subjective presentation of the same objective information. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Will the manner in which information is presented to a simulated patient, in the setting of treatment for a bone sarcoma, bias their decision regarding pursuing amputation versus limb salvage? (2) At the time of decision-making, will a simulated patient's personal background, demographics, or mood affect their ultimate decision? METHODS: Survey respondents (Amazon MTurk platform) were presented with mock clinical vignettes simulating a sarcoma diagnosis and were asked to choose between amputation and limb salvage. Specific iterations were designed to assess several described types of cognitive bias. These scenarios were distributed, using anonymous online surveys, to potential participants aged 18 years or older. Recruitment was geographically restricted to individuals in the United States. Overall, 404 respondents completed the survey. The average age of respondents was 33 years (SD 1.2 years), 60% were male and 40% were female. In all, 12% of respondents worked in healthcare. Each respondent also completed questions regarding his or her demographics and his or her current mood. Associations between the type of bias presented and the respondent's choice of limb salvage versus amputation were examined. Independent sample t-tests were used to compare means. Statistical significance was defined as p < 0.05. RESULTS: When amputation was presented as an option to mitigate functional loss (framing bias), more patients chose it than when limb salvage was presented as means for increased functional gains (23% [23 of 100] versus 10% [12 of 118], odds ratio [OR], 2.26; p = 0.010). Older simulated patients were more likely to choose limb salvage when exposed to framing bias versus younger patients (mean age 33 years versus 30 years, p = 0.02). Respondents who were employed in healthcare more commonly chose amputation versus limb salvage when exposed to framing bias (24% [eight of 35] versus 9% [17 of 183]; OR, 2.46; p = 0.02). Those who chose amputation were more likely to score higher on scales that measured depression or negative affect. CONCLUSIONS: Shared decision-making in orthopaedic oncology represents a unique circumstance in which several variables may influence a patient's decision between limb salvage and amputation. Invoking cognitive bias in simulated patients appeared to affect treatment decisions. We cannot be sure that these findings translate to the experience of actual sarcoma patients; however, we can conclude that important treatment decisions may be affected by cognitive bias and that patient characteristics (in this study, age, healthcare profession, and mood) may be associated with an individual's susceptibility to cognitive bias. We hope these observations will assist providers in the thoughtful delivery of highly charged information to patients facing difficult decisions, and promote further study of this important concept. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, economic and decision analyses.

A conversation with my personal oncologist.

This article describes a conversation between a father diagnosed with cancer and his son, who is an oncologist. The father has turned to his son for medical advice and the son subsequently becomes his father's "personal oncologist." (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).