Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Ann Hematol ; 2024 Sep 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39279019

ABSTRACT

With the increasing prevalence of comorbidity in an ageing population, it is crucial to better understand the impact of comorbidity on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after lymphoma or multiple myeloma (MM) diagnosis. We included 261 newly diagnosed patients (67% response rate) diagnosed with lymphoma or MM between October 2020 and March 2023 in a longitudinal survey. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) questionnaires were used to measure generic and disease-specific HRQoL. Evidence-based guidelines for interpretation of the EORTC questionnaires were used to identify clinical importance. Patients were classified as having 'no comorbidity', 'mild comorbidity' (e.g. arthrosis or rheumatism), or 'moderate-severe comorbidity' (e.g. heart or lung disease), using the adapted self-administered comorbidity questionnaire. At diagnosis, the mean age was 64 years, 63% were male and 38% reported no comorbidity, 33% mild comorbidity, and 29% moderate-severe comorbidity. Patients with mild or moderate-severe comorbidity reported clinically relevant worse HRQoL at diagnosis than patients without comorbidity. One year post-diagnosis most outcomes showed clinically relevant improvement, irrespective of comorbidity. However, outcomes of physical functioning (ß=-7.9, p < 0.05), global health status (ß=-7.6, p < 0.05), bone pain (ß = 8.1 to 9.1, p < 0.05), muscle/joint pain (ß = 14.5 to 18.8, p < 0.01) and muscle weakness (ß = 10.4 to 15.6, p < 0.05) improved less among those with comorbidity, and clinically relevant differences between comorbidity groups persisted over time. With clinically relevant worse HRQoL at diagnosis and less recovery of HRQoL during the first year after diagnosis in patients with comorbidity, consideration of both prognosis and HRQoL is important when making treatment decisions.

2.
Br J Haematol ; 197(5): 590-601, 2022 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35365860

ABSTRACT

Little is known about the long-term health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and persistence of symptoms among patients with indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (iNHL). This large population-based longitudinal study therefore investigated the long-term HRQoL and persistence of symptoms and identified associated sociodemographic, clinical and psychological factors. Patients diagnosed between 1999 and 2014 and four or more months after diagnosis were invited to participate in a longitudinal survey. Sociodemographic and clinical data were obtained from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. The EORTC QLQ-C30 and CLL-16 were completed by 669 patients (74% response rate). Patients completed on average four questionnaires. Primary treatment was active surveillance (52%), systemic therapy (31%) or radiotherapy (13%). Respectively, 36% reported persistent fatigue, 33% persistent neuropathy and 25% persistent role-functioning impairment. This was 2-3 times higher than in the age- and sex-matched normative population. Up to 10 years after diagnosis, scores remained relatively stable without clinically relevant changes. Comorbidities, psychological distress, shorter time since diagnosis, systemic therapy, younger age, education level and having no partner were associated with worse outcomes (all ps < 0.05). Up to a third of patients with iNHL experience long-term persistent symptoms which do not improve over time. Early recognition of symptoms will help in providing tailored supportive care for those in need.


Subject(s)
Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin , Peripheral Nervous System Diseases , Fatigue/epidemiology , Fatigue/etiology , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin/complications , Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin/epidemiology , Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin/therapy , Peripheral Nervous System Diseases/epidemiology , Peripheral Nervous System Diseases/etiology , Quality of Life/psychology , Registries , Surveys and Questionnaires , Survivors/psychology
3.
J Cancer Surviv ; 2024 Sep 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39287915

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To investigate health care utilization among patients with hematologic malignancies and its association with socioeconomic position (SEP) and compare health care utilization with a cancer-free population. METHODS: Patients with aggressive lymphoma, indolent lymphoma, or multiple myeloma (MM), diagnosed between 1999-2010 and 2015-2019, participated in longitudinal patient-reported outcome research, up to 11 years post-diagnosis. Questionnaires assessed health care utilization at the general practitioner (GP), medical specialist, and additional health care. SEP was based on education and income, categorized as low, medium, or high. Sociodemographic and clinical data were obtained from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Mixed models and logistic regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: The study included 2319 patients (71% response rate), who completed on average five measurements. Patients with MM reported the highest health care utilization, both at the GP and medical specialist. Low SEP was associated with higher utilization at the GP (medium education ß = - 0.72, p = 0.01; high education ß = - 1.15, p < 0.001) and lower utilization of additional physical (OR = 1.7, p = 0.01) and psychosocial (OR = 1.5, p < 0.05) care, among all patients. For patients with MM, high SEP was also associated with higher utilization of health care at the medical specialist (high education ß = 2.56, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Hematologic malignancy-related and SEP-related disparities in health care utilization were observed. To ensure equal access to health consumption, attention is needed for patients with a low SEP to provide better guidance in their cancer (survivorship) care. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Improving health literacy and involving informal caregivers and nurse-led patient navigation may help reduce disparities in access to (additional) health care.

4.
Nat Commun ; 12(1): 3189, 2021 05 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34045486

ABSTRACT

In a randomized clinical trial of 86 hospitalized COVID-19 patients comparing standard care to treatment with 300mL convalescent plasma containing high titers of neutralizing SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, no overall clinical benefit was observed. Using a comprehensive translational approach, we unravel the virological and immunological responses following treatment to disentangle which COVID-19 patients may benefit and should be the focus of future studies. Convalescent plasma is safe, does not improve survival, has no effect on the disease course, nor does plasma enhance viral clearance in the respiratory tract, influence SARS-CoV-2 antibody development or serum proinflammatory cytokines levels. Here, we show that the vast majority of patients already had potent neutralizing SARS-CoV-2 antibodies at hospital admission and with comparable titers to carefully selected plasma donors. This resulted in the decision to terminate the trial prematurely. Treatment with convalescent plasma should be studied early in the disease course or at least preceding autologous humoral response development.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/therapy , Cytokines/blood , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Aged , Antibodies, Neutralizing/blood , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Blood Donors , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/virology , Disease Progression , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Male , Middle Aged , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Treatment Outcome , COVID-19 Serotherapy
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL