A Harmonic Dual-Frequency Transducer for Acoustic Cluster Therapy.

Acoustic Cluster Therapy (ACT) is a two-component formulation of commercially available microbubbles (Sonazoid; GE Healthcare, Oslo, Norway) and microdroplets (perfluorated oil) currently under development for cancer treatment. The microbubbles and microdroplets have opposite surface charges to form microbubble/microdroplet clusters, which are administered to patients together with a drug. When the clusters and drug reach the target tumour, two ultrasound (US) exposure regimes are used: First, high-frequency (>2.0 MHz) US evaporates the oil and forms ACT bubbles that lodge at the microvascular level. Second, low-frequency (0.5 MHz) US induces stable mechanical oscillations of the ACT bubbles, causing localized micro-streaming, radiation and shear forces that increase the uptake of the drugs to the target tumour. This report describes the design and testing of a dual-frequency transducer and a laboratory setup for pre-clinical in vivo studies of ACT on murine tumour models. The dual-frequency transducer utilizes the 5th harmonic (2.7 MHz) and fundamental (0.5 MHz) of a single piezoceramic disk for the high-frequency and low-frequency regimes, respectively. Two different aperture radii are used to align the high-frequency and low-frequency beam maxima, and the high-frequency -3 dB beam width diameter is 6 mm, corresponding to the largest tumour sizes we expect to treat. The low-frequency -3 dB beam width extends 6 mm. Although unconventional, the 5th harmonic exhibit a 44% efficiency and can therefore be used for transmission of acoustic energy. Moreover, both in vitro and in vivo measurements demonstrate that the 5th harmonic can be used to evaporate the microbubble/microdroplet clusters. For the in vivo measurements, we used the kidneys of non-tumour-bearing mice as tumour surrogates. Based on this, the transducer is deemed suited for pre-clinical in vivo studies of ACT and replaces a cumbersome test setup consisting of two transducers.

Technology-Enhanced Stepped Collaborative Care Targeting Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and Comorbidity After Injury: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and its comorbidities are endemic among injured trauma survivors. Previous collaborative care trials targeting PTSD after injury have been effective, but they have required intensive clinical resources. The present pragmatic clinical trial randomized acutely injured trauma survivors who screened positive on an automated electronic medical record PTSD assessment to collaborative care intervention (n = 60) and usual care control (n = 61) conditions. The stepped measurement-based intervention included care management, psychopharmacology, and psychotherapy elements. Embedded within the intervention were a series of information technology (IT) components. PTSD symptoms were assessed with the PTSD Checklist at baseline prerandomization and again, 1-, 3-, and 6-months postinjury. IT utilization was also assessed. The technology-assisted intervention required a median of 2.25 hours (interquartile range = 1.57 hours) per patient. The intervention was associated with modest symptom reductions, but beyond the margin of statistical significance in the unadjusted model: F(2, 204) = 2.95, p = .055. The covariate adjusted regression was significant: F(2, 204) = 3.06, p = .049. The PTSD intervention effect was greatest at the 3-month (Cohen's effect size d = 0.35, F(1, 204) = 4.11, p = .044) and 6-month (d = 0.38, F(1, 204) = 4.10, p = .044) time points. IT-enhanced collaborative care was associated with modest PTSD symptom reductions and reduced delivery times; the intervention model could potentially facilitate efficient PTSD treatment after injury.

Patient self-appraisal of change and minimal clinically important difference on the European organization for the research and treatment of cancer quality of life questionnaire core 30 before and during cancer therapy.

BACKGROUND: Clinical interpretation of health related quality of life (HRQOL) scores is challenging. The purpose of this analysis was to interpret score changes and identify minimal clinically important differences (MCID) on the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30) before (T1) and during (T2) cancer treatment. METHODS: Patients (N = 627) in stem cell transplant (SCT) and medical (MED) or radiation (RAD) oncology at two comprehensive cancer centers, enrolled in the Electronic Self-Report Assessment-Cancer study and completed the QLQ-C30 at T1 and T2. Perceived changes in five QOL domains, physical (PF), emotional (EF), social (SF), cognitive functioning (CF) and global quality of life (QOL), were reported using the Subject Significance Questionnaire (SSQ) at T2. Anchored on SSQ ratings indicating "improvement", "the same", or "deterioration", means and effect sizes were calculated for QLQ-C30 score changes. MCID was calculated as the mean difference in QLQ-C30 score changes reflecting one category change on SSQ rating, using a two-piece linear regression model. RESULTS: A majority of SCT patients (54%) perceived deteriorating global HRQOL versus improvement (17%), while approximately equal proportions of MED/RAD patients perceived improvement (25%) and deterioration (26%). Global QOL decreased 14.2 (SCT) and 2.0 (MED/RAD) units, respectively, among patients reporting "the same" in the SSQ. The MCID ranged 5.7-11.4 (SCT) and 7.2-11.8 (MED/RAD) units among patients reporting deteriorated HRQOL; ranged 2.7-3.4 units among MED/RAD patients reporting improvement. Excepting for the global QOL (MCID =6.9), no meaningful MCID was identified among SCT patients reporting improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer treatment has greater impact on HRQOL among SCT patients than MED/RAD patients. The MCID for QLQ-C30 score change differed across domains, and differed for perceived improvement and deterioration, suggesting different standards for self-evaluating changes in HRQOL during cancer treatment. Specifically, clinical attention can be focused on patients who report at least a 6 point decrease, and for patients who report at least a 3 point increase on QLQ-C30 domains. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00852852.

Enhancing patient-provider communication with the electronic self-report assessment for cancer: a randomized trial.

PURPOSE: Although patient-reported cancer symptoms and quality-of-life issues (SQLIs) have been promoted as essential to a comprehensive assessment, efficient and efficacious methods have not been widely tested in clinical settings. The purpose of this trial was to determine the effect of the Electronic Self-Report Assessment-Cancer (ESRA-C) on the likelihood of SQLIs discussed between clinicians and patients with cancer in ambulatory clinic visits. Secondary objectives included comparison of visit duration between groups and usefulness of the ESRA-C as reported by clinicians. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This randomized controlled trial was conducted in 660 patients with various cancer diagnoses and stages at two institutions of a comprehensive cancer center. Patient-reported SQLIs were automatically displayed on a graphical summary and provided to the clinical team before an on-treatment visit (n = 327); in the control group, no summary was provided (n = 333). SQLIs were scored for level of severity or distress. One on-treatment clinic visit was audio recorded for each participant and then scored for discussion of each SQLI. We hypothesized that problematic SQLIs would be discussed more often when the intervention was delivered to the clinicians. RESULTS: The likelihood of SQLIs being discussed differed by randomized group and depended on whether an SQLI was first reported as problematic (P = .032). Clinic visits were similar with regard to duration between groups, and clinicians reported the summary as useful. CONCLUSION: The ESRA-C is the first electronic self-report application to increase discussion of SQLIs in a US randomized clinical trial.