Hybrid Tomo-Helical and Tomo-Direct radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: The aim of the study is to present a new planning approach to provide better planning target volume (PTV) coverage and reduce bladder and rectum dose with hybrid Tomo-Helical (TH)/Tomo-Direct (TD) radiotherapy (RT) for localized prostate cancer (LPC). METHODS: Twenty-five LPC patients were included in this retrospective study. TH plans, TD plans, and hybrid TH/TD plans were created. Lateral beams were used for the hybrid TD plan and the prescribed dose was 70 Gy in 28 fractions (hybrid plans were combined 45 Gy/ 18 fxs for TH and 25 Gy/10 fxs for TD). Doses of PTV (D2%, D98%, D50%, homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), coverage) and organs at risk (OARs) (V50%, V35%, V25%, V5%, and V95%) were analyzed. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to analyze the difference in dosimetric parameters. p-Value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: TH plans showed better CI, and target coverage (p < 0.01) than TD and hybrid plans in all patient plan evaluations. However, TD plans D2%, D98%, and D50% doses were better than TH and hybrid plans. The HI values were similar between the three plans. Significant reductions in bladder and rectum V50%, V35%, and V25% doses (p < 0.001) were observed with hybrid plans compared to TH and TD. Penile bulb V95% and bowel V5% doses were better in the hybrid plans. Left and right femoral head V5% doses were higher in the hybrid plan compared to others (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Concurrently hybrid TH/TD RT plan can be a good option to reduce the doses of the rectum and bladder in the RT of LPC.

Body image and social appearance anxiety in patients with cancer undergoing radiotherapy: Across-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The body image of patients with cancer can be negatively affected due to treatment toxicities. Changes in body image may cause patients to experience social appearance anxiety. This study aimed to evaluate the body image and social appearance anxiety of patients with cancer undergoing radiotherapy. METHODS: The cross-sectional study was conducted with 153 patients with cancer undergoing radiotherapy in a university hospital. The data were collected with a Patient Information Form, the Body Image Scale, and the Social Appearance Anxiety Scale and the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Skin Toxicity Criteria. RESULTS: Patients' mean body image score was 15.18 ± 8.26 (min = 0, max = 30), mean social appearance anxiety score was 45.29 ± 14.50 (min = 16, max = 80). Patients with low education levels and low-income levels had higher body image and social appearance anxiety scores (p < 0.01). Body image and social appearance anxiety scores were found to be higher in patients with advanced cancer, grade III-IV skin toxicity, pain, fatigue, and constipation (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Radiotherapy may negatively affect body image and social appearance anxiety. Assessments of body image and social appearance anxiety regularly before, during, and after treatment are essential. Psychosocial support should be provided to patients to reduce body image and social appearance anxiety and increase their well-being. Patients with cancer especially those who have low income and education levels, advanced cancer stage and skin toxicity, and suffer from pain, fatigue, constipation, etc. should be supported by methods such as counseling and social support groups.

A Prospective Study of Nurse-Led Oral Mucositis Management: Impact on Health Outcomes of Patients Receiving Radiotherapy for Head and Neck Cancer and Lung Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to evaluate the impact of nurse-led mucositis management on the health outcomes of patients receiving radiotherapy for head and neck cancer and lung cancer. The study adopted a holistic approach that involved the patient in the care process by screening, providing education and counseling about mucositis management and integrating it into daily life by the radiotherapy nurse. DATA SOURCES: In this prospective, longitudinal cohort study, 27 patients were assessed and monitored through use of the WHO Oral Toxicity Scale and Oral Mucositis Follow-up Form and educated on mucositis during their radiotherapy through use of the Mucositis Prevention and Care Guide. At the end of radiotherapy, an evaluation of the radiotherapy process was performed. In this study, each patient was followed for 6 weeks from the start of radiotherapy. CONCLUSION: The worst clinical data for oral mucositis and its variables emerged at week 6 of treatment. While the Nutrition Risk Screening score increased over time, weight decreased was observed to decrease. The mean stress level was 4.74 ± 0.33 in the first week and 5.77 ± 0.35 in the last week. It was observed that 88.9% of the patients showed good compliance with the treatment. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: Nurse-led mucositis management contributes to better patient outcomes during the radiotherapy process. Such an approach improves oral care management in patients receiving radiotherapy for head and neck and lung cancer, demonstrating its positive impact on additional patient-focused outcomes.