Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 6 de 6
Filtrar
1.
Future Oncol ; 16(32): 2635-2643, 2020 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32976060

RESUMO

Aim: To identify demographic predictors of patients who miss oncology follow-up, considering that missed follow-up has not been well studies in cancer patients. Methods: Patients with solid tumors diagnosed from 2007 to 2016 were analyzed (n = 16,080). Univariate and multivariable logistic regression models were constructed to examine predictors of missed follow-up. Results: Our study revealed that 21.2% of patients missed ≥1 follow-up appointment. African-American race (odds ratio [OR] 1.33; 95% CI: 1.17-1.51), Medicaid insurance (OR 1.59; 1.36-1.87), no insurance (OR 1.66; 1.32-2.10) and rural residence (OR 1.78; 1.49-2.13) were associated with missed follow-up. Conclusion: Many cancer patients miss follow-up, and inadequate follow-up may influence cancer outcomes. Further research is needed on how to address disparities in follow-up care in high-risk patients.


Assuntos
Neoplasias/epidemiologia , Demografia , Feminino , Pesquisas sobre Atenção à Saúde , Disparidades em Assistência à Saúde , Humanos , Masculino , Medicaid , Neoplasias/diagnóstico , Neoplasias/terapia , Grupos Raciais/estatística & dados numéricos , Estados Unidos
2.
Pract Radiat Oncol ; 10(2): e91-e94, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31574319

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Because children cannot reliably remain immobile during radiation therapy (RT) for cancer anatomy targeting requiring millimeter precision, daily anesthesia plays a large role in each RT session. Unfortunately, anesthesia is a source of financial burden for patients' families and is invasive and traumatic. This study attempts to assess the cost-savings benefit of audiovisual-assisted therapeutic ambiance in radiation therapy (AVATAR)-aided omission of pediatric anesthesia in RT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The baseline time of anesthesia during RT was derived from documented anesthesia billing time during RT simulation at our institution and from the published literature. Current Procedural Terminology and relative value unit codes encompassing anesthesia-related charges from radiation oncology and anesthesia were analyzed in concert with this value to calculate the total cost of pediatric anesthesia per RT session. RESULTS: The mean number of RT fractions administered per patient with AVATAR-directed anesthesia omission at our institution was 19.0, similar to the 17.6 previously reported. At a mean anesthesia time exceeding 30 minutes (with mean RT duration of 4 weeks), the cost of pediatric anesthesia per RT fraction in non-AVATAR sessions was $1,904.35, yielding a total RT treatment anesthesia cost of $38,087.00 per patient (including simulation). Patients at our institution were not billed for AVATAR-assisted RT. CONCLUSIONS: The ability of AVATAR to obviate the need for daily anesthesia in pediatric RT provides substantial cost-savings. These findings argue for increased utilization of AVATAR and for analyses of RT targeting the accuracy of AVATAR versus conventional anesthesia-guided treatment of pediatric malignancies.


Assuntos
Recursos Audiovisuais/normas , Custos de Cuidados de Saúde/normas , Neoplasias/economia , Neoplasias/radioterapia , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino
3.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys ; 105(4): 765-772, 2019 11 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31351194

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Dry eye is not typically considered a toxicity of whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT). We analyzed dry eye syndrome as part of a prospective study of patient-reported outcomes after WBRT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients receiving WBRT to 25 to 40 Gy were enrolled on a study with dry mouth as the primary endpoint and dry eye syndrome as a secondary endpoint. Patients received 3-dimensional WBRT using opposed lateral fields. Per standard practice, lacrimal glands were not prospectively delineated. Patients completed the Subjective Evaluation of Symptom of Dryness (SESoD, scored 0-4, with higher scores representing worse dry eye symptoms) at baseline, immediately after WBRT (EndRT), and at 1 month (1M), 3 months, and 6 months. Patients with baseline SESoD ≥3 (moderate dry eye) were excluded. The endpoints analyzed were ≥1-point and ≥2-point increase in SESoD score at 1M. Lacrimal glands were retrospectively delineated with fused magnetic resonance imaging scans. RESULTS: One hundred patients were enrolled, 70 were eligible for analysis, and 54 were evaluable at 1M. Median bilateral lacrimal V20Gy was 79%. At 1M, 17 patients (32%) had a ≥1-point increase in SESoD score, and 13 (24%) a ≥2-point increase. Lacrimal doses appeared to be associated with an increase in SESoD score of both ≥1 point (V10Gy: P = .042, odds ratio [OR] 1.09/%; V20Gy: P = .071, OR 1.03/%) and ≥2 points (V10Gy: P = .038, OR 1.15/%; V20Gy: P = .063, OR 1.04/%). The proportion with increase in dry eye symptoms at 1M for lacrimal V20Gy ≥79% versus <79% was 46% versus 15%, respectively, for ≥1 point SESoD increase (P = .02) and 36% versus 12%, respectively, for ≥2 point SESoD increase (P = .056). CONCLUSIONS: Dry eye appears to be a relatively common, dose/volume-dependent acute toxicity of WBRT. Minimization of lacrimal gland dose may reduce this toxicity, and patients should be counseled regarding the existence of this potential side effect and treatments for dry eye.


Assuntos
Neoplasias Encefálicas/radioterapia , Irradiação Craniana/efeitos adversos , Síndromes do Olho Seco/etiologia , Aparelho Lacrimal/efeitos da radiação , Medidas de Resultados Relatados pelo Paciente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Irradiação Craniana/métodos , Síndromes do Olho Seco/prevenção & controle , Feminino , Humanos , Aparelho Lacrimal/diagnóstico por imagem , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , Dosagem Radioterapêutica , Xerostomia/etiologia , Adulto Jovem
4.
JAMA Oncol ; 5(2): 221-228, 2019 02 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30489607

RESUMO

Importance: Whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT) delivers a substantial radiation dose to the parotid glands, but the parotid glands are not delineated for avoidance and xerostomia has never been reported as an adverse effect. Minimizing the toxic effects in patients receiving palliative treatments, such as WBRT, is crucial. Objective: To assess whether xerostomia is a toxic effect of WBRT. Design, Setting, and Participants: This observational cohort study enrolled patients from November 2, 2015, to March 20, 2018, at 1 academic center (University of North Carolina Hospitals) and 2 affiliated community hospitals (High Point Regional Hospital and University of North Carolina Rex Hospital). Adult patients (n = 100) receiving WBRT for the treatment or prophylaxis of brain metastases were enrolled. Patients who had substantial baseline xerostomia or did not complete WBRT or at least 1 postbaseline questionnaire were prospectively excluded from analysis and follow-up. Patients received 3-dimensional WBRT using opposed lateral fields covering the skull and the C1 or C2 vertebra. Per standard practice, the parotid glands were not prospectively delineated. Main Outcomes and Measures: Patients completed the University of Michigan Xerostomia Questionnaire and a 4-point bother score at baseline, immediately after WBRT, at 1 month, at 3 months, and at 6 months. The primary end point was the 1-month xerostomia score, with a hypothesized worsening score of 10 points from baseline. Results: Of the 100 patients enrolled, 73 (73%) were eligible for analysis and 55 (55%) were evaluable at 1 month. The 73 patients included 43 women (59%) and 30 men (41%) with a median (range) age of 61 (23-88) years. The median volume of parotid receiving at least 20 Gy (V20Gy) was 47%. The mean xerostomia score was 7 points at baseline and was statistically significantly higher at each assessment period, including 21 points immediately after WBRT (95% CI, 16-26; P < .001), 23 points (95% CI, 16-30; P < .001) at 1 month, 21 points (95% CI, 13-28; P < .001) at 3 months, and 14 points (95% CI, 7-21; P = .03) at 6 months. At 1 month, the xerostomia score increased by 20 points or more in 19 patients (35%). The xerostomia score at 1 month was associated with parotid dose as a continuous variable and was 35 points in patients with parotid V20Gy of 47% or greater, compared with only 9 points in patients with parotid V20Gy less than 47% (P < .001). The proportion of patients who self-reported to be bothered quite a bit or bothered very much by xerostomia at 1 month was 50% in those with parotid V20Gy of 47% or greater, compared with only 4% in those with parotid V20Gy less than 47% (P < .001). At 3 months, this difference was 50% vs 0% (P = .001). Xerostomia was not associated with medication use. Conclusions and Relevance: Clinically significant xerostomia occurred by the end of WBRT, appeared to be persistent, and appeared to be associated with parotid dose. The findings from this study suggest that the parotid glands should be delineated for avoidance to minimize these toxic effects in patients who undergo WBRT and often do not survive long enough for salivary recovery.


Assuntos
Neoplasias Encefálicas/radioterapia , Irradiação Craniana/efeitos adversos , Órgãos em Risco , Glândula Parótida/efeitos da radiação , Doses de Radiação , Lesões por Radiação/etiologia , Radioterapia Conformacional/efeitos adversos , Salivação/efeitos dos fármacos , Xerostomia/etiologia , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Neoplasias Encefálicas/secundário , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , North Carolina , Glândula Parótida/fisiopatologia , Estudos Prospectivos , Lesões por Radiação/diagnóstico , Lesões por Radiação/fisiopatologia , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Fatores de Tempo , Xerostomia/diagnóstico , Xerostomia/fisiopatologia , Adulto Jovem
5.
JAMA ; 307(15): 1611-20, 2012 Apr 18.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22511689

RESUMO

CONTEXT: There has been rapid adoption of newer radiation treatments such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and proton therapy despite greater cost and limited demonstrated benefit compared with previous technologies. OBJECTIVE: To determine the comparative morbidity and disease control of IMRT, proton therapy, and conformal radiation therapy for primary prostate cancer treatment. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Population-based study using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare-linked data from 2000 through 2009 for patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of gastrointestinal and urinary morbidity, erectile dysfunction, hip fractures, and additional cancer therapy. RESULTS: Use of IMRT vs conformal radiation therapy increased from 0.15% in 2000 to 95.9% in 2008. In propensity score-adjusted analyses (N = 12,976), men who received IMRT vs conformal radiation therapy were less likely to receive a diagnosis of gastrointestinal morbidities (absolute risk, 13.4 vs 14.7 per 100 person-years; relative risk [RR], 0.91; 95% CI, 0.86-0.96) and hip fractures (absolute risk, 0.8 vs 1.0 per 100 person-years; RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.65-0.93) but more likely to receive a diagnosis of erectile dysfunction (absolute risk, 5.9 vs 5.3 per 100 person-years; RR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.03-1.20). Intensity-modulated radiation therapy patients were less likely to receive additional cancer therapy (absolute risk, 2.5 vs 3.1 per 100 person-years; RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.73-0.89). In a propensity score-matched comparison between IMRT and proton therapy (n = 1368), IMRT patients had a lower rate of gastrointestinal morbidity (absolute risk, 12.2 vs 17.8 per 100 person-years; RR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.55-0.79). There were no significant differences in rates of other morbidities or additional therapies between IMRT and proton therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer, the use of IMRT compared with conformal radiation therapy was associated with less gastrointestinal morbidity and fewer hip fractures but more erectile dysfunction; IMRT compared with proton therapy was associated with less gastrointestinal morbidity.


Assuntos
Neoplasias da Próstata/radioterapia , Lesões por Radiação , Radioterapia de Intensidade Modulada/efeitos adversos , Idoso , Estudos de Coortes , Coleta de Dados , Disfunção Erétil/etiologia , Gastroenteropatias/etiologia , Fraturas do Quadril/etiologia , Humanos , Masculino , Medicare/estatística & dados numéricos , Morbidade , Pontuação de Propensão , Terapia com Prótons , Prótons/efeitos adversos , Radioterapia Conformacional/efeitos adversos , Radioterapia Conformacional/métodos , Radioterapia de Intensidade Modulada/métodos , Risco , Programa de SEER/estatística & dados numéricos , Resultado do Tratamento , Estados Unidos
6.
J Urol ; 187(3): 883-8, 2012 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22248516

RESUMO

PURPOSE: We examined whether an increased distance to a urologist is associated with a delayed diagnosis of prostate cancer among black and white patients, as manifested by higher risk disease at diagnosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: North Carolina Central Cancer Registry data were linked to Medicare claims for patients with incident prostate cancer diagnosed in 2004 to 2005. Straight-line distances were calculated from the patient home to the nearest urologist. Race stratified multivariate ordinal logistic regression was used to examine the association between distance to a urologist and prostate cancer risk group (low, intermediate, high or very high/metastasis) at diagnosis for black and white patients while accounting for age, comorbidity, marital status and diagnosis year. An overall model was then used to examine the distance × race interaction effect. RESULTS: Included in analysis were 1,720 white and 531 black men. In the overall cohort the high risk cancer rate increased monotonically with distance to a urologist, including 40% for 0 to 10, 45% for 11 to 20 and 57% for greater than 20 miles. Correspondingly the low risk cancer rate decreased with longer distance. On race stratified multivariate analysis longer distance was associated with higher risk prostate cancer for white and black patients (p = 0.04 and <0.01, respectively) but the effect was larger in the latter group. The distance × race interaction term was significant in the overall model (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Longer distance to a urologist may disproportionally impact black patients. Decreasing modifiable barriers to health care access, such as distance to care, may decrease racial disparities in prostate cancer.


Assuntos
População Negra/estatística & dados numéricos , Acessibilidade aos Serviços de Saúde , Disparidades em Assistência à Saúde , Neoplasias da Próstata/diagnóstico , Neoplasias da Próstata/etnologia , Viagem , População Branca/estatística & dados numéricos , Idoso , Diagnóstico Precoce , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Medicare , North Carolina , Sistema de Registros , Risco , Estados Unidos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA