Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Medicinas Complementárias
Métodos Terapéuticos y Terapias MTCI
Bases de datos
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Natl Compr Canc Netw ; 20(13)2022 02 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35130491

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Physical activity (PA) and psychosocial interventions are recommended management strategies for cancer-related fatigue (CRF). Randomized trials support the use of mind-body techniques, whereas no data show benefit for homeopathy or naturopathy. METHODS: We used data from CANTO (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01993498), a multicenter, prospective study of stage I-III breast cancer (BC). CRF, evaluated after primary treatment completion using the EORTC QLQ-C30 (global CRF) and QLQ-FA12 (physical, emotional, and cognitive dimensions), served as the independent variable (severe [score of ≥40/100] vs nonsevere). Outcomes of interest were adherence to PA recommendations (≥10 metabolic equivalent of task [MET] h/week [GPAQ-16]) and participation in consultations with a psychologist, psychiatrist, acupuncturist, or other complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) practitioner (homeopath and/or naturopath) after CRF assessment. Multivariable logistic regression examined associations between CRF and outcomes, adjusting for sociodemographic, psychologic, tumor, and treatment characteristics. RESULTS: Among 7,902 women diagnosed from 2012 through 2017, 36.4% reported severe global CRF, and 35.8%, 22.6%, and 14.1% reported severe physical, emotional, and cognitive CRF, respectively. Patients reporting severe global CRF were less likely to adhere to PA recommendations (60.4% vs 66.7%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71-0.94; P=.004), and slightly more likely to see a psychologist (13.8% vs 7.5%; aOR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.05-1.58; P=.014), psychiatrist (10.4% vs 5.0%; aOR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.10-1.76; P=.0064), acupuncturist (9.8% vs 6.5%; aOR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.17-1.82; P=.0008), or CAM practitioner (12.5% vs 8.2%; aOR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.23-1.82; P<.0001). There were differences in recommendation uptake by CRF dimension, including that severe physical CRF was associated with lower adherence to PA (aOR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.63-0.86; P=.0001) and severe emotional CRF was associated with higher likelihood of psychologic consultations (aOR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.06-1.79; P=.017). CONCLUSIONS: Uptake of recommendations to improve CRF, including adequate PA and use of psychosocial services, seemed suboptimal among patients with early-stage BC, whereas there was a nonnegligible interest in homeopathy and naturopathy. Findings of this large study indicate the need to implement recommendations for managing CRF in clinical practice.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Supervivientes de Cáncer , Humanos , Femenino , Neoplasias de la Mama/terapia , Neoplasias de la Mama/tratamiento farmacológico , Estudios Prospectivos , Sobrevivientes , Fatiga/etiología , Fatiga/terapia , Calidad de Vida
2.
Am J Gastroenterol ; 102(11): 2557-63, 2007 Nov.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17680847

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of baseline nutritional status on treatment response and survival in nonmetastatic patients with a locally advanced esophageal cancer (LAEC) treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT). METHODS: One hundred five patients with LAEC treated by definitive CRT were retrospectively included. The CRT regimen was based on an external radiotherapy (RT) delivered concomitantly to a cisplatin-based chemotherapy (CT). Patients were considered to have a complete response (CR) to CRT when no residual tumor was detected on CT scan and esophagoscopy performed 2 months after the end of CRT. Multivariate analysis of predictive factors of response to CRT and survival were performed using a logistic regression and a Cox model, respectively. RESULTS: Mean value of baseline nutritional parameters was significantly different between nonresponder (N = 42) and responder (N = 63) patients to CRT (weight loss 10%vs 5.8%, P= 0.0047; serum albumin level 35 g/L vs 38.7 g/L, P= 0.0004; BMI 22.8 kg/m2vs 25.2 kg/m2, P= 0.01). In multivariate analysis, serum albumin level > 35 g/L was the only independent predictive factor of CR to CRT (P= 0.009). Independent prognostic factors of survival were BMI > 18 kg/m2 (P= 0.003), dysphagia Atkinson score <2 (P= 0.008), dose of RT > 50 Grays (Gy) (P < 0.0001) and CR to CRT (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Survival was influenced by baseline nutritional status as well as dysphagia, dose of RT, and CR to CRT. Despite the retrospective design of the study, our results may provide the concept basis for performing a prospective nutritional intervention study in patients treated by definitive CRT for an esophageal cancer.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Esofágicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Esofágicas/radioterapia , Estado Nutricional , Distribución de Chi-Cuadrado , Cisplatino/uso terapéutico , Trastornos de Deglución/complicaciones , Neoplasias Esofágicas/mortalidad , Neoplasias Esofágicas/patología , Femenino , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Dosificación Radioterapéutica , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Estadísticas no Paramétricas , Análisis de Supervivencia , Resultado del Tratamiento
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA