Importance of Breast Sensation After Mastectomy: Evidence from Three Sources.

Background: Every year, more than 90,000 U.S. women undergo mastectomy. More than 40% have reconstruction. Following reconstruction, most women experience persistent partial or complete numbness of the reconstructed breasts, and many experience pain. Yet, breast reconstruction procedures focus largely on esthetic outcomes with mixed impact on sensory outcomes and little attention to pain. This study examines whether and how breast sensation is important to women. Materials and Methods: Conventional content analysis of extant qualitative data from a clinical registry (29 women with prior breast surgery for cancer, 2008-2022), a volunteer community sample (qualitative interviews with 6 women with and 5 without breast cancer, 2019), and from a Twitter social media survey (N = 32, 2022). Results: Functions of the breast identified by women with and without cancer include breastfeeding, sexual function, and femininity. Five interrelated themes on the importance of breast sensation emerged among women with breast cancer history: sexual function, experience of partnered sex or relationship with one's sexual partner, breast embodiment, effect of breast pain on sexual function, and importance to psychological wellbeing. Women, advocates, and clinicians described a lack of patient-physician communication in this domain that exacerbates the negative impact of breast sensation loss on health and wellbeing. Conclusions: Breast sensation is important to women following mastectomy, yet a gap exists in patient-physician communication about the impact of mastectomy and reconstruction on breast sensory function. Lessons for physicians, scientists, and skeptics are conveyed about why the basic integrity of women's bodies matters for practice and science.

Development of a psychosocial oncology core curriculum for multidisciplinary education and training: Initial content validation using the modified Delphi Method.

OBJECTIVE: Despite its four decade history, the multidisciplinary specialty of psychosocial oncology (PSO) has no official consensus on core content. In 2014, the American Psychosocial Oncology Society (APOS) Board charged the APOS Professional Education Committee with outlining curricular content needed for core competence. METHODS: Content validation was completed using a four-phase modified Delphi Method. During Phase I, a Professional Education Committee subgroup proposed domains and items, which were rated by the APOS Fellows and Board via online survey. During Phase II, Fellows completed a second, revised survey. Phase III incorporated early career members. Developmental and diversity items were integrated into each domain. In Phase IV, a larger group of subject matter experts were surveyed, with feedback incorporated. Validation across phases involved average rating thresholds, intraclass correlations, and final percent agreement. RESULTS: The Delphi Method supported 12 content domains: Cancer Basics, Psychosocial Oncology, Professional Development, Ethics, Emotional/Psychological Concerns, Sexuality and Relationship Concerns, Spiritual/Religious Concerns, Healthcare Communication and Decision Making, Social/Practical Problems, Caregiver Concerns, Cognitive Concerns, Physical Symptoms and Psychosocial Assessment/Treatment. High levels of agreement were achieved across domains (86%-100%) and items, with no significant rating differences by discipline. CONCLUSIONS: This proposed core content can enhance and standardize education and training in PSO including APOS' Virtual Psychosocial Oncology Core Curriculum, focused on broadly expanding the PSO workforce, particularly in underserved areas. Next steps include development of core competencies and establishment of online training modules based on this content validation.

Physical examination of the female cancer patient with sexual concerns: What oncologists and patients should expect from consultation with a specialist.

Answer questions and earn CME/CNE Sexual concerns are prevalent in women with cancer or cancer history and are a factor in patient decision making about cancer treatment and risk-reduction options. Physical examination of the female cancer patient with sexual concerns, regardless of the type or site of her cancer, is an essential and early component of a comprehensive evaluation and effective treatment plan. Specialized practices are emerging that focus specifically on evaluation and treatment of women with cancer and sexual function problems. As part of a specialized evaluation, oncologists and their patients should expect a thorough physical examination to identify or rule out physical causes of sexual problems or dysfunction. This review provides oncology professionals with a description of the physical examination of the female cancer patient with sexual function concerns. This description aims to inform anticipatory guidance for the patient and to assist in interpreting specialists' findings and recommendations. In centers or regions where specialized care is not yet available, this review can also be used by oncology practices to educate and support health care providers interested in expanding their practices to treat women with cancer and sexual function concerns. CA Cancer J Clin 2016;66:241-263. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Self-Reported Sexual Function Measures Administered to Female Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review, 2008-2014.

A systematic review was conducted to identify and characterize self-reported sexual function (SF) measures administered to women with a history of cancer. Using 2009 PRISMA guidelines, we searched electronic bibliographic databases for quantitative studies published January 2008-September 2014 that used a self-reported measure of SF, or a quality of life (QOL) measure that contained at least 1 item pertaining to SF. Of 1,487 articles initially identified, 171 were retained. The studies originated in 36 different countries with 23% from US-based authors. Most studies focused on women treated for breast, gynecologic, or colorectal cancer. About 70% of the articles examined SF as the primary focus; the remaining examined QOL, menopausal symptoms, or compared treatment modalities. We identified 37 measures that assessed at least one domain of SF, eight of which were dedicated SF measures developed with cancer patients. Almost one third of the studies used EORTC QLQ modules to assess SF, and another third used the Female Sexual Function Inventory. There were few commonalities among studies, though nearly all demonstrated worse SF after cancer treatment or compared to healthy controls. QOL measures are better suited to screening while dedicated SF questionnaires provide data for more in depth assessment. This systematic review will assist oncology clinicians and researchers in their selection of measures of SF and encourage integration of this quality of life domain in patient care.

Ethnic variation in localized prostate cancer: a pilot study of preferences, optimism, and quality of life among black and white veterans.

Ethnic variations that may influence the preferences and outcomes associated with prostate cancer treatment are not well delineated. Our objective was to evaluate prospectively preferences, optimism, involvement in care, and quality of life (QOL) in black and white veterans newly diagnosed with localized prostate cancer. A total of 95 men who identified themselves as black/African-American or white who had newly diagnosed, localized prostate cancer completed a "time trade-off" task to assess utilities for current health and mild, moderate, and severe functional impairment; importance rankings for attributes associated with prostate cancer (eg, urinary function); and baseline and follow-up measures of optimism, involvement in care, and QOL. Interviews were scheduled before treatment, and at 3 and 12 months after treatment. At baseline, both blacks and whites ranked pain, bowel, and bladder function as their most important concerns. Optimism, involvement in care, and QOL were similar. Utilities for mild impairment were lower for blacks than whites, but were similar for moderate and severe problems. Decline in QOL at 3 and 12 months compared to baseline occurred for both groups. However, even with adjustment for marital status, education level, and treatment, blacks had less increase in nausea and vomiting and more increase in difficulty with sexual interest and weight gain compared with whites. Black and white veterans entered localized prostate cancer treatment with similar priorities, optimism, and involvement in care. Quality-of-life declines were common to both groups during the first year after diagnosis, but ethnic variation occurred with respect to nausea and vomiting, sexual interest, and weight gain.

Agreement between prostate cancer patients and their clinicians about utilities and attribute importance.

PURPOSE: To examine the agreement between prostate cancer patients' utilities for selected health states and their rankings of the importance of six attributes of the health states and the clinicians' judgements of what would be in the patients' best interests. METHOD: Patients with newly diagnosed localized prostate cancer individually completed a time trade-off utility assessment shortly after being diagnosed. The health states evaluated were constructed from a multi-attribute utility model that incorporated six aspects of living with the disease and outcomes of treatment. Each patient assessed his current health state and three hypothetical states that might occur in the future, and provided rankings of the importance of the six attributes. The clinicians caring for each patient independently provided their views of what utilities and importance rankings would be in the patient's best interest. RESULTS: The across-participant correlations between patients' and clinicians' utilities were very low and not statistically significant. Across-participant correlations between patient and clinician importance rankings for the six attributes were also low. Across-health state and across-attribute correlations between utilities or importance rankings were highly variable across patient-clinician pairs. CONCLUSION: In the clinical settings studied, there is not a strong relationship between valuations of current and possible future health states by patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer and their clinicians. Implications of these results for substituted judgement, when clinicians advise their patients or recommend a treatment strategy, are discussed.

Quality of life after a diagnosis of prostate cancer among men of lower socioeconomic status: results from the Veterans Affairs Cancer of the Prostate Outcomes Study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate prospectively the health-related and disease-specific quality of life (QOL) at diagnosis and during the first year thereafter for patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer who received care at Veterans Affairs Medical Centers. METHODS: Interviewers administered the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer-QOL Questionnaire, a valid and reliable measure of health status, to 140 patients with prostate cancer at baseline (at diagnosis, before the initiation of treatment) and at 3 and 12 months thereafter at five Veterans Affairs Medical Centers. The mean changes from baseline values were analyzed statistically for patients with localized disease stratified by treatment group and separately for patients with metastatic disease. RESULTS: Among the 98 men with localized prostate cancer, significant disease-specific QOL changes noted at 3 and 12 months included worsening of urinary and sexual function among men treated with radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy and worsening of urinary function among those who opted for watchful waiting (each P <0.05). Among the 42 men with metastatic prostate cancer, significant decrements in role and social and sexual function were noted at 3 months, but had resolved on average by 12 months of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: At 12 months, disease-specific QOL decrements persisted for patients with localized disease, but for patients with metastatic disease, disease-specific QOL appeared to return to near baseline (at diagnosis, before treatment initiation) function. Our study, among the first to assess the QOL at baseline before treatment, provides meaningful information on general treatment effects, which are directly relevant to clinicians when discussing treatment options with patients.

Pilot study of a utilities-based treatment decision intervention for prostate cancer patients.

This pilot study evaluates a shared decision-making approach to individual decision making in localized prostate cancer care. The approach is based on a decision analytic model that incorporates patient utilities, ie, patient preferences among possible health states that might occur with prostate cancer treatments. Data on comorbidities, histologic grade of the biopsy, and age were obtained for 13 patients with newly diagnosed localized prostate cancer who received care in a Veterans Administration medical center. Using a standard gamble technique, interviewers obtained patient utilities for 5 distinct health states related to prostate cancer treatment. Utilities and patient clinical and pathologic characteristics were incorporated into the decision analytic model, and the derived quality-adjusted life expectancies were shared with the treating urologist before the first patient-physician discussion about treatment options. The results of the pilot study raised 2 major concerns. First, 4 patients had utility scores of 1.0 for all of the possible health states, and 7 patients had inconsistent utilities in which they rated both impotence and incontinence as a better health state than having just one of these problems. Second, the model recommended radiation therapy to individuals with a broad range of clinical characteristics, pathologic findings, and utility scores. Many of the patients who were recommended radiation therapy by the model received discordant recommendations from the treating urologist. Future refinements of both the utility assessment exercise and decision analytic model may be needed before the feasibility of the model in the clinical setting can be determined.