Assessment of Secondary Sarcomas Among Patients With Cancer of the Abdomen or Pelvis Who Received Combinations of Surgery, Radiation, and Chemotherapy vs Surgery Alone.

Importance: The association of radiation and chemotherapy with the development of secondary sarcoma is known, but the contemporary risk has not been well characterized for patients with cancers of the abdomen and pelvis. Objective: To compare the risk of secondary sarcoma among patients treated with combinations of surgery, radiation, or chemotherapy with patients treated with surgery alone and the general population. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study included 173 580 patients in Ontario, Canada, with nonmetastatic cancer of the prostate, bladder, colon, rectum or anus, cervix, uterus, or testis. Patients were enrolled from January 1, 2002, to January 31, 2017. Data analysis was conducted from March 1, 2019, to January 31, 2020. Exposures: Treatment combinations of radiation, chemotherapy, and surgery. Main Outcome and Measures: Diagnosis of sarcoma based on histologic codes from the Ontario Cancer Registry. Time to sarcoma was compared using a cause-specific proportional hazard model. Results: Of 173 580 patients, most were men (125 080 [72.1%]), and the largest group was aged between 60 and 69 years (58 346 [33.6%]). Most patients had genitourinary cancer (86 235 [51.4%]) or colorectal cancer (69 241 [39.9%]). Overall, 64 301 (37.1%) received surgery alone, 51 220 (29.5%) received radiation alone, 15 624 (9.0%) were treated with radiation and chemotherapy, 15 252 (8.8%) received radiation with surgery, and 11 822 (6.8%) received all 3 treatments. A total of 332 patients (0.2%) had sarcomas develop during a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 5.7 (2.2-8.9) years. The incidence of sarcoma was 0.3% among those who underwent radiation alone (138 of 51 220) and radiation with chemotherapy (40 of 15 624), 0.2% among those who received radiation and surgery (36 of 15 252) and all 3 modalities (25 of 11 822), and 0.1% among those who received surgery with chemotherapy (13 of 14 861) and surgery alone (80 of 64 801). Compared with a reference group of patients who had surgery alone, the greatest risk of sarcoma was found among patients who underwent a combination of radiation and chemotherapy (cause-specific relative hazard [csRH], 4.07; 95% CI, 2.75-6.01; P < .001), followed by patients who had radiation alone (csRH, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.77-3.12; P < .001), radiation with surgery (csRH, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.57-3.46; P < .001), and all 3 modalities (csRH, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.44-3.58; P < .001). In the general population, 7987 events occurred during 46 554 803 person-years (17.2 events per 100 000 person-years). The standardized incidence ratio for sarcoma among patients treated with radiation compared with the general population was 2.41 (95% CI, 1.57-3.69; 41.3 events per 100 000 person-years). The annual number of cases of sarcoma increased from 2009 (15 per 100 000 persons) to 2016 (32 per 100 000 persons), but the annual rate did not change during the study period. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, patients treated with radiation or chemotherapy for abdominopelvic cancers had an increased rate of sarcoma. Although the absolute rate is low, patients and physicians should be aware of this increased risk of developing sarcoma.

Preference-based utility scores for adverse events associated with the treatment of gynecologic cancers.

OBJECTIVE: Our goals were to (1) define a set of descriptive health states related to adverse events (AEs) associated with gynecologic cancer treatment with radical surgery and chemoradiation and (2) derive a set of quality of life-related utility scores corresponding to these health states. METHODS: We developed a list of health states for grade 3/4 AEs related to gynecologic cancer treatment. Using the visual analog scale score and time trade-off (TTO) methods, valuation of each health state was obtained through interviews of 60 volunteers (15 cervical cancer survivors treated with surgery and/or chemoradiation and 45 women without a cancer diagnosis). Health states were ranked by mean/median TTO scores. Wilcoxon rank sum test was used to compare central tendencies related to patient and volunteer characteristics. RESULTS: Patients and volunteers agreed on their preference rankings, with highest preference given to infection (median TTO = 1.0) and thrombosis (median TTO = 0.97). Lowest preference was assigned to radiation proctitis (median TTO = 0.87) and gastrointestinal fistula formation (median TTO = 0.83). Utility scores for the majority of health states were not significantly associated with age, race, parity, patient or volunteer status, history of abnormal Pap smear, stage of cervical cancer diagnosis, or personal experience of a serious treatment-related AE. CONCLUSIONS: This study helps establish preferences and quality-of-life utility scores for health states related to toxicities from surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy for gynecologic cancer treatment. Such information can be used to inform medical decision making/counseling and may be applied to future comparative effectiveness models in which radical surgery and/or chemoradiation are considered.

Assessment of treatment-induced female sexual morbidity in oncology: is this a part of routine medical follow-up after radical pelvic radiotherapy?

BACKGROUND: Oncology follow-up has traditionally prioritised disease surveillance and the assessment and management of symptoms associated with cancer and its treatment. Over the past decade, the focus on late effects of treatment has increased, particularly those that have an adverse effect on long-term function and quality of life. The aim of this research was to explore factors that influence the identification of treatment-induced female sexual difficulties in routine oncology follow-up after radical pelvic radiotherapy. METHODS: A structured observation schedule was used to systematically record topics discussed in 69 radiotherapy follow-up consultations observed over a 5-month period. RESULTS: Analysis suggests that physical toxicity assessment focused on bowel (81%) and bladder (70%) symptoms. Vaginal toxicity was discussed less frequently (42%) and sexual issues were explored in only 25% of consultations. Formal recording of radiation toxicity through assessment questionnaires was limited to patients participating in clinical trials. Surveillance activity and the management of active physical symptoms predominated and psychosocial issues were addressed in only 42% of consultations. INTERPRETATION: Female sexual morbidity after pelvic radiotherapy remains a neglected aspect of routine follow-up and cancer survivorship. Developments in both individual practice and service provision are necessary if the identification and management of treatment-induced female sexual difficulties is to be improved.

Paradoxical blood flow responses in the diabetic neuropathic foot: an assessment of the contribution of vascular denervation and microangiopathy.

Blood flow is abnormal in the diabetic neuropathic foot, and this may be of importance in the pathogenesis of complications. Arteriovenous shunting is increased, and blood flow through these channels may paradoxically decrease in response to local heating. Peak skin blood flow is also reduced in these patients. It is not known whether these blood flow abnormalities may reflect diabetic microangiopathy, or whether they simply reflect vascular denervation. The skin blood flow response to a local thermal stimulus was studied in four non-diabetic patients with a unilateral traumatic neuropathy and foot ulceration. All showed a decrease in skin blood flow (to 68% of basal) at the great toe during local heating in the neuropathic limb, in contrast to the normal limb, in which blood flow increased to 180% of basal. Peak skin blood flow was also greatly reduced in the neuropathic limb, being only 29% of the normal limb. Neuropathy alone can be responsible for abnormal skin blood flow responses in the neuropathic foot.