RESUMEN
PURPOSE: During the first SARS-CoV-2-infection wave, a deterioration in emotional well-being and increased need for mental health care were observed among patients treated or being treated for breast cancer. In this follow-up study, we assessed patient-reported quality of life (QoL), physical functioning, and psychosocial well-being during the second SARS-CoV-2-infection wave in a large, representative cohort. METHODS: This longitudinal cohort study was conducted within the prospective, multicenter UMBRELLA breast cancer cohort. To assess patient-reported QoL, physical functioning and psychosocial well-being, COVID-19-specific surveys were completed by patients during the first and second SARS-CoV-2-infection waves (April and November 2020, respectively). An identical survey was completed by a comparable reference population during the second SARS-CoV-2-infection waves. All surveys included the validated EORTC-QLQ-C30/BR23, HADS and "De Jong-Gierveld Loneliness" questionnaires. Pre-COVID-19 EORTC-QLQ-C30/BR23 and HADS outcomes were available from UMBRELLA. Response rates were 69.3% (n = 1106/1595) during the first SARS-CoV-2-infection wave and 50.9% (n = 822/1614) during the second wave. A total of 696 patients responded during both SARS-CoV-2-infection waves and were included in the analysis comparing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) during the second SARS-CoV-2-infection wave to PROs during the first wave. Moreover, PROs reported by all patients during the second SARS-CoV-2-infection wave (n = 822) were compared to PROs of a similar non-cancer reference population (n = 241) and to their pre-COVID-19 PROs. RESULTS: Patient-reported QoL, physical functioning, and psychosocial well-being of patients treated or being treated for breast cancer remained stable or improved from the first to the second SARS-CoV-2-infection wave. The proportion of emotional loneliness reduced from 37.6 to 29.9% of patients. Compared to a similar non-cancer reference population, physical, emotional, and cognitive functioning, future perspectives and symptoms of dyspnea and insomnia were worse in patients treated or being treated for breast cancer during the second SARS-CoV-2-infection wave. PROs in the second wave were similar to pre-COVID-19 PROs. CONCLUSION: Although patients scored overall worse than individuals without breast cancer, QoL, physical functioning, and psychosocial well-being did not deteriorate between the first and second wave. During the second wave, PROs were similar to pre-COVID-19 values. Overall, current findings are cautiously reassuring for future mental health of patients treated or being treated for breast cancer.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , COVID-19 , Humanos , Femenino , Neoplasias de la Mama/psicología , Calidad de Vida/psicología , SARS-CoV-2 , Salud Mental , Estudios Longitudinales , Estudios de Seguimiento , COVID-19/epidemiología , Estudios Prospectivos , Sobrevivientes/psicologíaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To evaluate perceived access to health care and preferences for health care provision among patients (being) treated for breast cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Longitudinal study within the prospective, multicenter UMBRELLA cohort of patients (being) treated for breast cancer. All cohort participants enrolled in UMBRELLA between October 2013 and November 2020 were sent a COVID-19-specific survey during the first and second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, i.e., April 2020 and November 2020, respectively. RESULTS: In total, 1106 (69.3%) and 822 (50.9%) cohort participants completed the survey in the first and second wave, respectively. The proportion of patients experiencing that their treatment or follow-up care was affected due to COVID-19 decreased from 28.4% (n = 198) in April 2020 to 14.8% (n = 103) in November 2020. Throughout the pandemic, one or more hospital consultations were postponed in 10.0% (n = 82) of all patients and changed into a teleconsultation in 23.1% (n = 190). The proportion of patients who experienced a higher threshold to contact their general practitioner due to COVID-19 decreased from 29.9% (n = 204) in the first wave to 20.8% (n = 145) in the second wave. In-person consultations remained most preferred in 35.2% (n = 289) of all patients. Nearly half of all patients (48.3%, n = 396) indicated that telehealth would be a useful alternative for in-person consultations in future. CONCLUSION: Perceived access to health care has improved substantially throughout the pandemic. Digital care is well received by patients (being) treated for breast cancer.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , COVID-19 , Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Mama/terapia , Femenino , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud , Humanos , Estudios Longitudinales , Pandemias , Estudios Prospectivos , SARS-CoV-2RESUMEN
PURPOSE: To evaluate symptoms of late radiation toxicity, side effects, and quality of life in breast cancer patients treated with hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT). METHODS: For this cohort study breast cancer patients treated with HBOT in 5 Dutch facilities were eligible for inclusion. Breast cancer patients with late radiation toxicity treated with ≥ 20 HBOT sessions from 2015 to 2019 were included. Breast and arm symptoms, pain, and quality of life were assessed by means of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and -BR23 before, immediately after, and 3 months after HBOT on a scale of 0-100. Determinants associated with persistent breast pain after HBOT were assessed. RESULTS: 1005/1280 patients were included for analysis. Pain scores decreased significantly from 43.4 before HBOT to 29.7 after 3 months (p < 0.001). Breast symptoms decreased significantly from 44.6 at baseline to 28.9 at 3 months follow-up (p < 0.001) and arm symptoms decreased significantly from 38.2 at baseline to 27.4 at 3 months follow-up (p < 0.001). All quality of life domains improved at the end of HBOT and after 3 months follow-up in comparison to baseline scores. Most prevalent side effects of HBOT were myopia (any grade, n = 576, 57.3%) and mild barotrauma (n = 179, 17.8%). Moderate/severe side effects were reported in 3.2% (n = 32) of the patients. Active smoking during HBOT and shorter time (i.e., median 17.5 vs. 22.0 months) since radiotherapy were associated with persistent breast pain after HBOT. CONCLUSION: Breast cancer patients with late radiation toxicity reported reduced pain, breast and arm symptoms, and improved quality of life following treatment with HBOT.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Oxigenoterapia Hiperbárica , Traumatismos por Radiación , Neoplasias de la Mama/radioterapia , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Humanos , Calidad de Vida , Traumatismos por Radiación/epidemiología , Traumatismos por Radiación/etiología , Traumatismos por Radiación/terapiaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To identify factors associated with (perceived) access to health care among (ex-)breast cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Cross-sectional study within a large prospective, multicenter cohort of (ex-)breast cancer patients, i.e., UMBRELLA. All participants enrolled in the UMBRELLA cohort between October 2013 and April 2020 were sent a COVID-19-specific survey, including the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) questionnaire. RESULTS: In total, 1051 (66.0%) participants completed the survey. During COVID-19, 284 (27.0%) participants reported clinically relevant increased levels of anxiety and/or depression, i.e., total HADS score ≥ 12. Participants with anxiety and/or depression reported statistically significant higher barriers to contact their general practitioner (47.5% vs. 25.0%, resp.) and breast cancer physicians (26.8% vs. 11.2%, resp.) compared to participants without these symptoms. In addition, a higher proportion of participants with anxiety and/or depression reported that their current treatment or (after)care was affected by COVID-19 compared to those without these symptoms (32.7% vs. 20.5%, resp.). Factors independently associated with symptoms of anxiety and/or depression during COVID-19 were pre-existent anxiety (OR 6.1, 95% CI 4.1-9.2) or depression (OR 6.0, 95% CI 3.5-10.2). CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, (ex-)breast cancer patients with symptoms of anxiety and/or depression experience higher barriers to contact health care providers. Also, they more often report that their health care was affected by COVID-19. Risk factors for anxiety and/or depression during COVID-19 are pre-existent symptoms of anxiety or depression. Extra attention-including mental health support-is needed for this group.
Asunto(s)
Ansiedad/psicología , Neoplasias de la Mama/psicología , COVID-19/psicología , Supervivientes de Cáncer/psicología , Depresión/psicología , Anciano , Ansiedad/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , COVID-19/epidemiología , Supervivientes de Cáncer/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios Transversales , Depresión/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud/psicología , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Prevalencia , Estudios Prospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , SARS-CoV-2 , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Thoracic radiotherapy may damage the myocardium and arteries, increasing cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Women with a high local breast cancer (BC) recurrence risk may receive an additional radiation boost to the tumor bed. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the CVD risk and specifically ischemic heart disease (IHD) in BC patients treated with a radiation boost, and investigated whether this was modified by age. METHODS: We identified 5260 BC patients receiving radiotherapy between 2005 and 2016 without a history of CVD. Boost data were derived from hospital records and the national cancer registry. Follow-up data on CVD events were obtained from Statistics Netherlands until December 31, 2018. The relation between CVD and boost was evaluated with competing risk survival analysis. RESULTS: 1917 (36.4%) received a boost. Mean follow-up was 80.3 months (SD37.1) and the mean age 57.8 years (SD10.7). Interaction between boost and age was observed for IHD: a boost was significantly associated with IHD incidence in patients younger than 40 years but not in patients over 40 years. The subdistribution hazard ratio (sHR) was calculated for ages from 25 to 75 years, showing a sHR range from 5.1 (95%CI 1.2-22.6) for 25-year old patients to sHR 0.5 (95%CI 0.2-1.02) for 75-year old patients. CONCLUSION: In patients younger than 40, a radiation boost is significantly associated with an increased risk of CVD. In absolute terms, the increased risk was low. In older patients, there was no association between boost and CVD risk, which is likely a reflection of appropriate patient selection.
RESUMEN
Importance: Hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) is proposed as treatment for late local toxic effects after breast irradiation. Strong evidence of effectiveness is lacking. Objective: To assess effectiveness of HBOT for late local toxic effects in women who received adjuvant radiotherapy for breast cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a hospital-based, pragmatic, 2-arm, randomized clinical trial nested within the prospective UMBRELLA cohort following the trials within cohorts design in the Netherlands. Participants included 189 women with patient-reported moderate or severe breast, chest wall, and/or shoulder pain in combination with mild, moderate, or severe edema, fibrosis, or movement restriction 12 months or longer after breast irradiation. Data analysis was performed from May to September 2023. Intervention: Receipt of 30 to 40 HBOT sessions over a period of 6 to 8 consecutive weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: Breast, chest wall, and/or shoulder pain 6 months postrandomization measured by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-BR23 questionnaire. Secondary end points were patient-reported fibrosis, edema, movement restriction, and overall quality of life. Data were analyzed according to intention-to-treat (ITT) and complier average causal effect (CACE) principles. Results: Between November 2019 and August 2022, 125 women (median [range] age at randomization, 56 [37-85] years) with late local toxic effects were offered to undergo HBOT (intervention arm), and 61 women (median [range] age at randomization, 60 [36-80] years) were randomized to the control arm. Of those offered HBOT, 31 (25%) accepted and completed treatment. The most common reason for not accepting HBOT was high treatment intensity. In ITT, moderate or severe pain at follow-up was reported by 58 of 115 women (50%) in the intervention arm and 32 of 52 women (62%) in the control arm (odds ratio [OR], 0.63; 95% CI, 0.32-1.23; P = .18). In CACE, the proportion of women reporting moderate or severe pain at follow-up was 32% (10 of 31) among those completing HBOT and 75% (9.7 of 12.9) among control participants expected to complete HBOT if offered (adjusted OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.15-0.80; P = .01). In ITT, moderate or severe fibrosis was reported by 35 of 107 (33%) in the intervention arm and 25 of 49 (51%) in the control arm (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.15-0.81; P = .02). There were no significant differences in breast edema, movement restriction, and quality of life between groups in ITT and CACE. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, offering HBOT to women with late local toxic effects was not effective for reducing pain, but was effective for reducing fibrosis. In the subgroup of women who completed HBOT, a significant reduction in pain and fibrosis was observed. A smaller than anticipated proportion of women with late local toxic effects was prepared to undergo HBOT. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04193722.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Miel , Oxigenoterapia Hiperbárica , Traumatismos por Radiación , Humanos , Femenino , Neoplasias de la Mama/radioterapia , Calidad de Vida , Dolor de Hombro/terapia , Estudios Prospectivos , Fibrosis , EdemaRESUMEN
Male breast cancer (MBC) is a rare disease. Due to its rarity, treatment is still directed by data mainly extrapolated from female breast cancer (FBC) treatment, despite the fact that it has recently become clear that MBC has its own molecular characteristics. DDX3 is a RNA helicase with tumor suppressor and oncogenic potential that was described as a prognosticator in FBC and can be targeted by small molecule inhibitors of DDX3. The aim of this study was to evaluate if DDX3 is a useful prognosticator for MBC patients. Nuclear as well as cytoplasmic DDX3 expression was studied by immunohistochemistry in a Dutch retrospective cohort of 106 MBC patients. Differences in 10-year survival by DDX3 expression were analyzed using log-rank test. The association between clinicopathologic variables, DDX3 expression, and survival was tested in uni- and multivariate Cox-regression analysis. High cytoplasmic DDX3 was associated with high androgen receptor (AR) expression while low nuclear DDX3 was associated with negative lymph node status. Nuclear and cytoplasmic DDX3 were not associated with each other. In a univariate analysis, high cytoplasmic DDX3 (p = 0.045) was significantly associated with better 10-year overall survival. In multivariate analyses, cytoplasmic DDX3 had independent prognostic value (p = 0.017). In conclusion, cytoplasmic DDX3 expression seems to be a useful prognosticator in MBC, as high cytoplasmic DDX3 indicated better 10-year survival.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama Masculina/genética , Neoplasias de la Mama Masculina/metabolismo , ARN Helicasas DEAD-box/metabolismo , Adulto , Anciano , Neoplasias de la Mama/genética , Neoplasias de la Mama Masculina/fisiopatología , Núcleo Celular/metabolismo , Estudios de Cohortes , Citoplasma/metabolismo , ARN Helicasas DEAD-box/análisis , ARN Helicasas DEAD-box/genética , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Expresión Génica/genética , Regulación Neoplásica de la Expresión Génica/genética , Humanos , Inmunohistoquímica/métodos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Países Bajos , Oncogenes/genética , Pronóstico , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Receptores Androgénicos/metabolismo , Estudios Retrospectivos , Transcriptoma/genéticaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic (officially declared on the March 11, 2020), and the resulting measures, are impacting daily life and medical management of breast cancer patients and survivors. We evaluated to what extent these changes have affected quality of life, physical, and psychosocial well-being of patients previously or currently being treated for breast cancer. METHODS: This study was conducted within a prospective, multicenter cohort of breast cancer patients and survivors (Utrecht cohort for Multiple BREast cancer intervention studies and Long-term evaLuAtion). Shortly after the implementation of COVID-19 measures, an extra survey was sent to 1595 participants, including the validated European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) core (C30) and breast cancer-specific (BR23) Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30/BR23) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) questionnaire. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were compared with the most recent PROs collected within UMBRELLA pre-COVID-19. The impact of COVID-19 on PROs was assessed using mixed model analysis, adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: 1051 patients and survivors (65.9%) completed the survey; 31.1% (n = 327) reported a higher threshold to contact their general practitioner amid the COVID-19 pandemic. A statistically significant deterioration in emotional functioning was observed (mean = 82.6 [SD = 18.7] to 77.9 [SD = 17.3]; P < .001), and 505 (48.0%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 45.0% to 51.1%) patients and survivors reported moderate to severe loneliness. Small improvements were observed in quality of life and physical, social, and role functioning. In the subgroup of 51 patients under active treatment, social functioning strongly deteriorated (77.3 [95% CI = 69.4 to 85.2] to 61.3 [95% CI = 52.6 to 70.1]; P = .002). CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, breast cancer patients and survivors were less likely to contact physicians and experienced a deterioration in their emotional functioning. Patients undergoing active treatment reported a substantial drop in social functioning. One in 2 reported loneliness that was moderate or severe. Online interventions supporting mental health and social interaction are needed during times of social distancing and lockdowns.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/terapia , COVID-19/prevención & control , Supervivientes de Cáncer/estadística & datos numéricos , Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente , Calidad de Vida , Anciano , Ansiedad/psicología , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Mama/psicología , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/virología , Supervivientes de Cáncer/psicología , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Depresión/psicología , Femenino , Humanos , Soledad/psicología , Salud Mental/normas , Salud Mental/estadística & datos numéricos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pandemias/prevención & control , Estudios Prospectivos , SARS-CoV-2/fisiología , Factores de TiempoRESUMEN
Background: Lymphedema of the breast/chest wall after breast cancer treatment is often associated with pain and reduced quality of life. We conducted a pilot study to evaluate whether the use of a compression vest reduced symptoms of breast/chest wall edema in breast cancer patients. Methods and Results: This single-center study included patients (n = 25) with symptomatic breast/chest wall edema with a pain score of ≥3 on the Numerical Rating Scales (range 1-10). The patients were instructed to wear a compression vest (Lymphatrex, Class II) for 6 months. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to compare differences in patient-reported pain intensity/severity. Analyses included all patients with available data. In total, 17 (68%) continued to wear their vests for 6 months, whereas the other 8 withdrew prematurely. At baseline, median pain severity (4.9, interquartile range [IQR] 3.6-6.0) and pain interference (4.3, IQR 2.1-5.9) scores were significantly higher compared with pain scores after wearing the compression vest for 6 months (1.8 IQR 1.0-4.8 and 1.4 IQR 0.9-4.4, resp.). Patient-reported breast/chest wall swelling decreased from 92% (n = 22) at baseline to 71% (n = 12) at 6 months. The prevalence of moderate/severe patient-reported breast/chest wall pain declined from 63% (n = 15) at baseline to 18% (n = 3) at 6 months. Physical, emotional, and social functioning improved over time and was comparable to scores of the Dutch reference population. Conclusion: The results of this pilot study suggest that a compression vest could be an acceptable and effective treatment option for patients with painful breast/chest wall edema. In compliant patients, swelling and pain was significantly reduced.
Asunto(s)
Linfedema del Cáncer de Mama/terapia , Neoplasias de la Mama/psicología , Vendajes de Compresión , Edema/terapia , Dolor/prevención & control , Calidad de Vida/psicología , Linfedema del Cáncer de Mama/etiología , Linfedema del Cáncer de Mama/patología , Linfedema del Cáncer de Mama/psicología , Neoplasias de la Mama/complicaciones , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Neoplasias de la Mama/cirugía , Edema/etiología , Edema/patología , Edema/psicología , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Dolor/etiología , Dolor/patología , Dolor/psicología , Dimensión del Dolor , Proyectos Piloto , Presión , Índice de Severidad de la EnfermedadRESUMEN
Importance: Postoperative pancreatic fistula is a potentially life-threatening complication after pancreatoduodenectomy. Evidence for best management is lacking. Objective: To evaluate the clinical outcome of patients undergoing catheter drainage compared with relaparotomy as primary treatment for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy. Design, Setting, and Participants: A multicenter, retrospective, propensity-matched cohort study was conducted in 9 centers of the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group from January 1, 2005, to September 30, 2013. From a cohort of 2196 consecutive patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy, 309 patients with severe pancreatic fistula were included. Propensity score matching (based on sex, age, comorbidity, disease severity, and previous reinterventions) was used to minimize selection bias. Data analysis was performed from January to July 2016. Exposures: First intervention for pancreatic fistula: catheter drainage or relaparotomy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary end point was in-hospital mortality; secondary end points included new-onset organ failure. Results: Of the 309 patients included in the analysis, 209 (67.6%) were men, and mean (SD) age was 64.6 (10.1) years. Overall in-hospital mortality was 17.8% (55 patients): 227 patients (73.5%) underwent primary catheter drainage and 82 patients (26.5%) underwent primary relaparotomy. Primary catheter drainage was successful (ie, survival without relaparotomy) in 175 patients (77.1%). With propensity score matching, 64 patients undergoing primary relaparotomy were matched to 64 patients undergoing primary catheter drainage. Mortality was lower after catheter drainage (14.1% vs 35.9%; P = .007; risk ratio, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.20-0.76). The rate of new-onset single-organ failure (4.7% vs 20.3%; P = .007; risk ratio, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.03-0.60) and new-onset multiple-organ failure (15.6% vs 39.1%; P = .008; risk ratio, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.20-0.77) were also lower after primary catheter drainage. Conclusions and Relevance: In this propensity-matched cohort, catheter drainage as first intervention for severe pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with a better clinical outcome, including lower mortality, compared with primary relaparotomy.