Comparison of neoadjuvant treatments followed by radical surgery or chemoradiation on quality of life in patients with stage IB2-IIA cervical cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To compare quality of life (Qol) of patients with stage IB2-IIA cervical cancer treated by neoadjuvant treatments followed by radical surgery (NTS) or standard chemoradiation (CRT). METHODS: Patients with stage IB2-IIA cervical cancer during 2006-2012 were treated with NTS or CRT and were invited to participate. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Cervix (FACT-Cx) Questionnaire was used to assess patient Qol. A multivariable linear regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with Qol. RESULTS: In total, 90 (78.3%) out of 115 eligible patients completed the questionnaires. No significant differences were found in Qol between treatment groups, except that patients after NTS reported higher scores in the social/family well-being (e.g. satisfaction with sexual life, close relationships with partner or friends, and support from friends) than those after CRT, in particular, during 2-3 years after treatment. Results of multivariate analysis indicated that NTS was associated with better social/family functioning, while advanced stage of cervical cancer, lower family income and lower education were associated with impaired Qol in different domains. CONCLUSIONS: Although self-reported Qol after treatment were not significantly different, NTS treated patients reported better social/family functioning than CRT treated patients, such as satisfaction with their sexual life and close relationships with partner or friends, during 2-3 years post treatment. These results were helpful for physicians to make treatment decisions while considering treatment-related Qol, and moreover, for rehabilitation and supportive care of patients after treatment. Further validation of our findings in randomized, controlled clinical trials is warranted.

Socioeconomic status and breast cancer treatment.

PURPOSE: Evidence suggests substantial disparities in breast cancer survival by socioeconomic status (SES). We examine the extent to which receipt of newer, less invasive, or more effective treatments-a plausible source of disparities in survival-varies by SES among elderly women with early-stage breast cancer. METHODS: Multivariate regression analyses applied to 11,368 women (age 66-90 years) identified from SEER-Medicare as having invasive breast cancer diagnosed in 2006-2009. Socioeconomic status was defined based on Medicaid enrollment and level of poverty of the census tract of residence. All analyses controlled for demographic, clinical health status, spatial, and healthcare system characteristics. RESULTS: Poor and near-poor women were less likely than high SES women to receive sentinel lymph node biopsy and radiation after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Poor women were also less likely than near-poor or high SES women to receive any axillary surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. There were no significant differences in use of aromatase inhibitors (AI) between poor and high SES women. However, near-poor women who initiated hormonal therapy were more likely to rely exclusively on tamoxifen, and less likely to use the more expensive but more effective AI when compared to both poor and high SES women. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that SES disparities in the receipt of treatments for incident breast cancer are both pervasive and substantial. These disparities remained despite women's geographic area of residence and extent of disease, suggesting important gaps in access to effective breast cancer care.