Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
JMIR Cancer ; 7(4): e27073, 2021 Nov 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34726611

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Management of patients with cancer in the current era of the COVID-19 pandemic poses a significant challenge to health care systems. Breast cancer is the most common cancer internationally. Breast cancer is a disease that involves surgery, chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, targeted therapy, radiotherapy, and, more recently, immunotherapy in its management plan. The immune system requires months to recover from these medications, and this condition is even worse in patients with metastatic breast cancer who need ongoing treatment with these drugs. Some of these drugs, such as inhibitors of cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6, can cause rare but life-threating lung inflammation. Patients with breast cancer who have metastatic disease to the lungs can experience deterioration of disease symptoms with COVID-19 infection. Oncologists treating patients with breast cancer are facing a difficult situation regarding treatment choice. The impact that COVID-19 has had on breast cancer care is unknown, including how to provide the best care possible without compromising patient and community safety. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore the views of oncologists regarding the management of patients with breast cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A web-based SurveyMonkey questionnaire was submitted to licensed oncologists involved in breast cancer management in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and United Arab Emirates. The survey focused on characteristics of the participants, infection risk among patients with cancer, and possible treatment modifications related to different types of breast cancer. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 82 participants. For early hormone receptor (HR)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer, 61 of the 82 participants (74%) supported using neoadjuvant hormonal therapy in selected patients, and 58% (48/82) preferred giving 6 over 8 cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy when indicated. Only 43% (35/82) preferred inhibitors of cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 with hormonal therapy as the first-line treatment in all patients with metastatic HR-positive disease. A total of 55 of the 82 participants (67%) supported using adjuvant trastuzumab for 6 instead of 12 months in selected patients with HER2-positive breast cancer. For metastatic HER2-positive, HR-positive breast cancer, 80% of participants (66/82) supported the use of hormonal therapy with dual anti-HER2 blockade in selected patients. The preferred choice of first-line treatment in metastatic triple negative patients with BRCA mutation and programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 (PD-L1) <1% was poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitor according to 41% (34/82) of the participants, and atezolizumab with nab-paclitaxel was preferred for PD-L1 >1% according to 71% (58/82) of the participants. CONCLUSIONS: Several modifications in breast cancer management were supported by the survey participants. These modifications need to be discussed on a local basis, taking into account the local infrastructure and available resources.

2.
Patient Prefer Adherence ; 14: 1205-1212, 2020.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32764893

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: During curfew, patients are self-isolated at home and worried. Patient-doctor interactions may be disrupted and therefore need to be replaced by alternative effective communication methods. PURPOSE: To describe the preferences of cancer patients with respect to communication methods and the use of patient-accessible electronic health records (PAEHRs). To record the impact on cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic and the knowledge and attitude of the patients towards it. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We created a self-administered electronic survey that was piloted and evaluated for its clinical relevance. Using convenient sampling methods, we surveyed the cancer patients in our Oncology Center. RESULTS: We received 385 responses between April 15 and April 30, 2020. The preferred method for communication was a phone call with a 92% response rate followed by the electronic patient portal, mobile application, telemedicine and text message in 75%, 76%, 73%, and 72%, respectively. The majority (97%) preferred the use of PAEHRs for appointments, 95% for drug delivery and to view laboratory tests, and 92% in requesting medical reports. In our survey, 22% of patients with cancer reported that their medical cancer care had not been affected by COVID-19. They reported that trusted sources of information during COVID-19 included the Ministry of Health with 98% and doctors with 94%. Sixty-one percent know that they are more susceptible to COVID-19 infection and 91% of respondents supported the notion of digital transformation in the caring of cancer patients. CONCLUSION: Our study revealed a general acceptance of patients to telecommunication as substitute to in-person interaction with their physicians. Interaction between cancer patients and health care providers should not be disrupted but should be augmented with more effective platforms to improve health care outcomes.

3.
J Med Internet Res ; 22(6): e19691, 2020 06 24.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32501807

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: During the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, patients with cancer in rural settings and distant geographical areas will be affected the most by curfews. Virtual management (telemedicine) has been shown to reduce health costs and improve access to care. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this survey is to understand oncologists' awareness of and views on virtual management, challenges, and preferences, as well as their priorities regarding the prescribing of anticancer treatments during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We created a self-administrated electronic survey about the virtual management of patients with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated its clinical sensibility and pilot tested the instrument. We surveyed practicing oncologists in Gulf and Arab countries using snowball sampling via emails and social media networks. Reminders were sent 1 and 2 weeks later using SurveyMonkey. RESULTS: We received 222 responses from validated oncologists from April 2-22, 2020. An awareness of virtual clinics, virtual multidisciplinary teams, and virtual prescriptions was reported by 182 (82%), 175 (79%), and 166 (75%) respondents, respectively. Reported challenges associated with virtual management were the lack of physical exam (n=134, 60%), patients' awareness and access (n=131, 59%), the lack of physical attendance of patients (n=93, 42%), information technology (IT) support (n=82, 37%), and the safety of virtual management (n=78, 35%). Overall, 111 (50%) and 107 (48%) oncologists did not prefer the virtual prescription of chemotherapy and novel immunotherapy, respectively. However, 188 (85%), 165 (74%), and 127 (57%) oncologists preferred the virtual prescription of hormonal therapy, bone modifying agents, and targeted therapy, respectively. In total, 184 (83%), 183 (83%), and 176 (80%) oncologists preferred to continue neoadjuvant, adjuvant, and perioperative treatments, respectively. Overall, 118 (53%) respondents preferred to continue first-line palliative treatment, in contrast to 68 (30%) and 47 (21%) respondents indicating a preference to interrupt second- and third-line palliative treatment, respectively. For administration of virtual prescriptions, all respondents preferred the oral route and 118 (53%) preferred the subcutaneous route. In contrast, 193 (87%) did not prefer the intravenous route for virtual prescriptions. Overall, 102 (46%) oncologists responded that they would "definitely" prefer to manage patients with cancer virtually. CONCLUSIONS: Oncologists have a high level of awareness of virtual management. Although their survey responses indicated that second- and third-line palliative treatments should be interrupted, they stated that neoadjuvant, adjuvant, perioperative, and first-line palliative treatments should continue. Our results confirm that oncologists' views on the priority of anticancer treatments are consistent with the evolving literature during the COVID-19 pandemic. Challenges to virtual management should be addressed to improve the care of patients with cancer.


Asunto(s)
Infecciones por Coronavirus/epidemiología , Encuestas de Atención de la Salud , Neoplasias/terapia , Oncólogos , Neumonía Viral/epidemiología , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Telemedicina/métodos , COVID-19 , Femenino , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Humanos , Internet , Masculino , Neoplasias/economía , Pandemias , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/economía , Telemedicina/economía
4.
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev ; 21(5): 1327-1332, 2020 May 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32458640

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The role of combined modality in the adjuvant treatment of Endometrial Cancer has not been established. This study aims to assess the benefits of Sequential Chemoradiotherapy (SCRT) compared to Radiotherapy (RT) alone in the treatment of patients with Endometrial Cancer. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patients with Endometrial Cancer stage I to stage III C at King Abdullah Medical city, Makkah. Each group of patients was assigned to receive External pelvic RT, brachytherapy or both. While a second group received SCRT consisting of six cycles of Carboplatin (AUC 5) and Paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 followed by radiotherapy. RESULTS: Fifty-six women were treated of which 26 received SCRT and 30 received RT. The two groups had a median age of 58 years old ranging from 34 - 84 years old with no other statistically significant difference. Patients who received SCRT had poorer prognostic tumor characteris-tics. Median follow-up was 29.6 months (95% CI: 19.6-39.5 months). All deaths (n=5) were exclusively in the RT group. The 2 and 4-year OS rates were 100% and 100% in SCRT group versus 87.3% and 64.9% in RT group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.018 [95% CI: 0-24.4; p= 0.038); The 2- and 4-year DFS were 100% and 100% in SCRT group versus 78.1% and 43.9% in RT group (HR 0.102 [95% CI: 0.103-0.805; p= 0.008). CONCLUSION: Adjuvant chemotherapy given before radiotherapy for Endometrial Cancer may lessen the effect of high-risk features on the DFS and OS. Randomized clinical trials are needed to determine the benefits of early Systemic Therapy.


Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Quimioradioterapia Adyuvante/mortalidad , Neoplasias Endometriales/terapia , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/terapia , Radioterapia Adyuvante/mortalidad , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Carboplatino/administración & dosificación , Cisplatino/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias Endometriales/patología , Neoplasias Endometriales/radioterapia , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/patología , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/radioterapia , Paclitaxel/administración & dosificación , Pronóstico , Estudios Retrospectivos , Tasa de Supervivencia
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...