Assessment of Health-Related Quality of Life in Chronic Kidney Disease Patients: A Hospital-Based Cross-Sectional Study.

Background: Health-related quality of life is rapidly becoming recognized as an important indicator of how a disease affects patient lives and for evaluating the quality of care, especially for chronic conditions such as chronic kidney disease (CKD). Objectives: This study is an attempt to assess the quality of life in patients with chronic kidney disease at MMIMSR and also identify characteristics that may be associated with their worsening quality of life. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional investigation was conducted at the in-patient department (IPD) of the MMIMSR hospital. This study included 105 CKD patients and used a systematic random sampling method for quantitative analysis. This study utilized a 36-item short-form SF-36 (v1.3) questionnaire to assess HRQoL in CKD patients. Descriptive statistics were employed at the baseline. Chi square and ANOVA were used to draw comparisons between two groups or more than two groups, respectively. Logistic regression analysis was utilized to identify the potential QoL determinants. A p value of 0.05 or lower was used to determine statistical significance. Results: Among a total of 105 participants, the mean (±standard deviation) age was found to be 54.53 ± 13.47 years; 48 were male patients, and 57 were female patients. Diabetes Mellitus (61.9%), hypertension (56.2%), chronic glomerulonephritis (7.6%), chronic pyelonephritis (6.7%), and polycystic kidney disease (5.7%) were identified to be the most frequent disorders associated with CKD. The current study also demonstrated that the HRQoL score domains such as symptom problem list, the effect of kidney disease, and the burden of kidney disease decline significantly and progressively as the patient advances into higher stages of CKD (p = 0.005). A similar pattern was observed in work status, sleep, and general health (p < 0.005). Additionally, a statistically significant difference was noted for cognitive function, quality of social interaction, overall health, dialysis staff encouragement, patient satisfaction, social support, physical functioning, role of physical health, pain, emotional well-being, role of emotional health, social functioning, and energy fatigue (p < 0.005). The mean difference for PCS and MCS based on CKD stages was found to be statistically significant (p < 0.005). The PCS and MCS showed a positive correlation with GFR (r = 0.521), and Hb (r = 0.378), GFR (r = 0.836), and Hb (r = 0.488), respectively. Conclusions: The findings of this study demonstrated that a significant decrease in HRQoL was observed among CKD patients, with a progressive deterioration of HRQoL dimensions as the patient advances to end-stage renal disease. This study also revealed that CKD imposes various restrictions on patients' day-to-day lives, particularly in terms of their physical and mental functioning, even in the initial stages of the disease.

Reaching Across the Aisle: Cardio-Oncology Advocacy and Program Building.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This study aims to assess the current state of cardio-oncology in reference to advocacy efforts, access to care, and perspective of stakeholders in their ability to provide patient care as well as development of "across the aisle" synergy among cardiologists and oncologists and academic and non-academic centers in various worldwide locations. RECENT FINDINGS: During the last decade, there has been a significant and diverse growth in cardio-oncology. We reviewed the experience from cardiologists and oncologists across different healthcare systems, the global trends, the role of collaborative networks, and the importance of advocacy efforts. Cardio-oncology will continue to grow, but there is an unmet need to increase awareness, improve education, and expand access to care to larger segments of the cancer population in order to have a more significant impact on their health. The growing collaboration through professional societies and collaborative networks provides an opportunity to advance the cardiovascular care of cancer patients to meet the projected needs in a growing and more diverse population.

Optimizing Cardiovascular Health in Patients With Cancer: A Practical Review of Risk Assessment, Monitoring, and Prevention of Cancer Treatment-Related Cardiovascular Toxicity.

Advances in cancer screening and improved treatment approaches have led to an increase in survivorship and, consequently, recognition of an association between cancer treatments and the development of cardiovascular complications. In addition, as the population becomes proportionally older, comorbid cardiovascular risk factors are more prevalent in the population and compound the risk of developing cancer treatment-related cardiovascular toxicity. Cardio-oncology has emerged as a new subspecialty of medicine that provides a multidisciplinary approach, bringing together oncologists, cardiologists, and allied health care providers who are tasked with optimizing the cardiovascular health of patients exposed to potentially cardiotoxic cancer therapy. Using a case-based approach, practical advice on how to identify, monitor, and treat patients with cancer who are at risk for developing cancer treatment-related cardiovascular dysfunction is discussed. Cardiovascular risk factors (e.g., age, hypertension, diabetes) and cancer therapies (chemotherapy, targeted therapy, radiation) associated with cardiovascular toxicity are presented. Current cardiac monitoring strategies such as two- and three-dimensional echocardiography, cardiac MRI, and biomarkers (troponin and brain natriuretic peptide [BNP]) are discussed. Last, the current literature on pharmacologic (e.g., angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, ß-blockers, statins) and lifestyle (diet and exercise) strategies to mitigate cardiovascular toxicity during and following completion of cancer therapy are reviewed.

Overall and progression-free survival in metastatic melanoma: analysis of a single-institution database.

BACKGROUND: Many new agents are currently in trial in melanoma. It remains unclear, however, what the benefit of a given therapy may be since information on progression-free and overall survival of untreated patients is limited. Since few trials in melanoma have had a non-treated cohort, it remains unclear what survival can be expected in patients who are not treated with chemotherapy. METHODS: To help develop parameters for future trials, we analyzed treatment history and survival in 212 patients with metastatic melanoma seen at our institution between January 1998 and September 2003. A retrospective analysis was done using a database created for melanoma patients at our center. Patient survival information was determined from this database, tumor registry, Social Security index, and direct patient calls. Patient staging information was determined according to the 2001 guidelines. Non-chemotherapy-treated patients with M1c disease were used as "controls." RESULTS: The median survival of stage M1c melanoma was 6.0 months. Survival was longer for stage M1a and M1b and shorter in older patients. No significant differences were found in survival based on gender. Among chemotherapy-treated patients, those with progressive disease on treatment or with increased lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) fared worse than those with a clinical response or normal LDH, respectively. Patients treated with either biochemotherapy or temozolomide and thalidomide survived longer than those who received no chemotherapy treatment. Dacarbazine (DTIC) treatment did not prolong survival. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective review of patients treated at a single institution, those treated with multiagent chemotherapy but not with single-agent DTIC appeared to have had a survival benefit.