RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To describe the Quality of Life (QOL) of breast-cancer patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and analyse its evolution, compare the QOL of these patients according to the COVID-19 wave in which they were diagnosed, and examine the clinical and demographic determinants of QOL. METHODS: A total of 260 patients with breast cancer (90.8% I-III stages) and COVID-19 (85% light/moderate) were included (February-September 2021) in this study. Most patients were receiving anticancer treatment (mainly hormonotherapy). Patients were grouped according to the date of COVID-19 diagnosis: first wave (March-May 2020, 85 patients), second wave (June-December 2020, 107 patients) and third wave (January-September 2021, 68 patients). Quality of Life was assessed 10 months, 7 months, and 2 weeks after these dates, respectively. Patients completed QLQ-C30, QLQ-BR45, and Oslo COVID-19 QLQ-PW80 twice over four months. Patients ≥65 also completed QLQ-ELD14. The QOL of each group and changes in QOL for the whole sample were compared (non-parametric tests). Multivariate logistic regression identified patient characteristics related to (1) low global QOL and (2) changes in Global QOL between assessments. RESULTS: Moderate limitations (>30 points) appeared in the first assessment in Global QOL, sexual scales, three QLQ-ELD14 scales, and 13 symptoms and emotional COVID-19 areas. Differences between the COVID-19 groups appeared in two QLQ-C30 areas and four QLQ-BR45 areas. Quality of Life improvements between assessments appeared in six QLQ-C30, four QLQ-BR45 and 18 COVID-19 questionnaire areas. The best multivariate model to explain global QOL combined emotional functioning, fatigue, endocrine treatment, gastrointestinal symptoms, and targeted therapy (R2 = 0.393). The best model to explain changes in global QOL combined physical and emotional functioning, malaise, and sore eyes (R2 = 0.575). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with breast cancer and COVID-19 adapted well to illness. The few differences between wave-based groups (differences in follow-up notwithstanding) may have arisen because the second and third waves saw fewer COVID restrictions, more positive COVID information, and more vaccinated patients.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , COVID-19 , Humanos , Femenino , Calidad de Vida/psicología , COVID-19/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Mama/terapia , Neoplasias de la Mama/tratamiento farmacológico , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Modelos LogísticosRESUMEN
AIM: To evaluate the radiopotentiation of enzalutamide in human prostate cancer cells. BACKGROUND: While radiotherapy is the first line of treatment for prostate cancer, androgen blockade therapies are demonstrating significant survival benefit as monotherapies. As androgen blockade can cause cell death by apoptosis, it is likely that androgen blockade will potentiate the cytotoxic activities of radiotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Here, we tested the potential synergistic effects of these two treatments over two human metastatic prostate cancer cells by real-time cell analysis (RTCA), androgen-sensitive LNCaP cells (Lymph Node Carcinoma of the Prostate) and androgen-independent PC-3. Both cell lines were highly resistant to high doses of radiotherapy. RESULTS: A pre-treatment of LNCaP cells with IC50 concentrations of enzalutamide significantly sensitized them to radiotherapy through enhanced apoptosis. In contrast, enzalutamide resistant PC-3 cells were not sensitized to radiotherapy by androgen blockade. CONCLUSIONS: These results provide evidence that the enzalutamide/radiotherapy combination could maximize therapeutic responses in patients with enzalutamide-sensitive prostate cancer.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: In this article, the quality of life (QOL) of Spanish postmenopausal early-stage breast cancer patients who have finished endocrine therapy (ET), QOL changes after endocrine therapy cessation, and the differences between two endocrine therapy modalities (tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitor [AI]) are studied. More QOL information after endocrine therapy cessation is needed. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was performed. Participating in the study were 158 postmenopausal patients who had received tamoxifen or AI for 5 years. In some cases, endocrine therapy may have changed during those 5 years.Patients completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR45 questionnaires at baseline, after 6 months, and after 1 year of follow-up. Patients older than 65 years also completed the QLQ-ELD14. Linear mixed-effect models were used to evaluate longitudinal changes in QOL and differences in QOL between endocrine therapy modalities. RESULTS: QOL scores for the whole sample throughout follow-up were high (>80/100 points) in most QOL areas. Moderate limitations (>30 points) occurred in the QLQ-BR45 in sexual functioning and sexual enjoyment, future perspective, and joint symptoms. Moderate limitations also occurred in the QLQ-ELD14 in worries about others, maintaining purpose, joint stiffness, future worries, and family support. In those who had finished endocrine therapy, pain was reduced in all three assessments conducted during the 1-year follow-up period in both groups. Tamoxifen patients showed better QOL in functioning (role functioning, global QOL, financial impact), symptoms (pain), and emotional areas (future perspective and worries about others) than AI patients but worse QOL in skin mucosis symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study show that postmenopausal early-stage breast cancer patients adapted well to their disease and endocrine therapy treatment. QOL improvements in the 1-year follow-up period appeared in one key area: pain. Differences between endocrine therapy modalities suggested QOL was better in the tamoxifen group than in the AI group.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Tamoxifeno , Femenino , Humanos , Neoplasias de la Mama/terapia , Dolor , Posmenopausia , Estudios Prospectivos , Calidad de Vida , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Tamoxifeno/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To assess the value of a common clinical language in a multidisciplinary tumour board for spinal metastasis, using both the Rades score and the Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) for multidisciplinary decision-making. METHODS: Retrospective study of 60 consecutive patients treated surgically for MSCC. The indication for surgery was done in a multidisciplinary board, basically according to SINS and RADES scores. Three prognostic groups were defined according to the Rades score: poor (Rades 1: 20-30 points), intermediate (Rades 2: 31-35), and good (Rades 3: 36-45). RESULTS: The 2-year overall survival (OS) rate was 50%, with median survival of 19 months. By Rades prognostic group (1, 2, 3), median OS was 6 months, 15 months, and not reached, respectively. OS rates at 6 months (Rades 1, 2, 3) were 51, 69, and 74.1%, respectively. Within the Rades 1 group, 6-month survival in patients with new-onset cancer was 68 vs. 40% in those with a known primary. The overall complication rate ≥ grade 3 was 23.3% (n = 14). In patients who underwent urgent surgery (< 48 h), the complication rate was 45.5% (5/11) versus 18.3% (9/49) in the planned surgeries. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings supports the utility of using a common language in multidisciplinary tumour board for spinal metastasis. The 2-year OS rate in this series was 50%, which is the highest OS reported to date in this population. In the poor prognosis subgroup (Rades 1), OS at 6 months was higher in patients with new-onset cancer versus those with a known primary (68 vs. 40%). These findings suggest that surgery should be the first treatment option in patients with MSCC as first symptom of cancer although a predicted poor prognosis.
Asunto(s)
Compresión de la Médula Espinal , Neoplasias de la Columna Vertebral , Humanos , Lenguaje , Pronóstico , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: Radiation therapy (RT) is an effective method of palliating painful bone metastases and improves the quality of life (QoL) of these patients. The purpose of this trial is 2-fold: to quantify the impact of RT in the QoL of patients with bone metastasis and to compare the QoL results between the most used schemes of RT at our Centre. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A consecutive sample of patients with bone metastasis treated with RT in the Complejo Hospitalario de Navarra, Spain, was addressed between January 2011 and November 2012. The QoL was measured with the Quality of Life Questionnaire-C15-Palliative questionnaire, a short version of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Quality of Life Questionnaire-C30 for palliative care. Two assessments were proposed for each patient: one on the first day of the treatment and the other one a month after the end of the radiotherapy sessions. One hundred and sixteen patients completed the first questionnaire and 75 completed the second one (65%). RESULTS: Significant differences appeared in 9 domains, with better QoL in the second assessment. Five areas (physical functioning, global, fatigue, nausea, dyspnea, and constipation) showed little change (between 5 and 9 points), 3 (emotional functioning, insomnia, and appetite loss) showed moderate change (10 to 20 points), and 1 (pain) showed a very positive change (>30 points).When we compare the QoL scores between the 2 most used schemes of RT (30 Gy/10 fractions vs. 20 Gy/4 to 5 fractions), there are no significant differences in any QoL areas (and in 2 areas P was near 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Palliative RT is a very active treatment for patients with bone metastasis regardless of age, location, primary tumor, or RT scheme. RT significantly improves the QoL, fundamentally by controlling pain and reducing analgesic use. Shorter schemes of RT produce at least-if not better-the same effect on QL than longer schemes (30 Gy).
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Óseas/radioterapia , Neoplasias Óseas/secundario , Manejo del Dolor/métodos , Calidad de Vida , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Centros Médicos Académicos , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Neoplasias Óseas/psicología , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Dimensión del Dolor , Cuidados Paliativos/métodos , Estudios Prospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , España , Estadísticas no Paramétricas , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Worldwide, breast cancer is the most common invasive cancer in women. Breast cancer constitutes about 23% of invasive cancers in women. The management of breast cancer depends on various factors, including the cancer stage and patient age. Breast cancer is usually treated with surgery, which can be followed by chemotherapy or radiation therapy, or both. Until recently, the standard procedure for axillary study was axillary dissection. Sentinel lymph node biopsy has been validated as a less-aggressive axillary treatment without an impact on survival. In the present report, we review the current management of the axillary lymph nodes, especially from the viewpoint of an oncology radiotherapist.