Assessing Physical Fitness of Athletes in a Confined Environment during Prolonged Self-Isolation: Potential Usefulness of the Test of Maximal Number of Burpees Performed in 3 Minutes.

Due to a prolonged period of quarantine during the COVID-19 pandemic, it is essential to monitor the physical condition of athletes isolated at home with a fitness tool that measures various aspects of physical fitness, which does not require any special equipment, and can be performed within a small space. This study assessed the reliability and validity of the test of performing the maximal number of burpees in 3 min (or 3-MBT) to monitor strength, power, and aerobic endurance in trained athletes. For Part I (reliability of the 3-MBT), 20 (10 male, 10 female) national athletes from various sports performed the 3-MBT on two separate test sessions. Athletes performed as many burpees as possible within 3 min and the primary performance criteria was the number of burpees completed (where a higher number reflected a better performance). The 3-MBT displayed excellent relative reliability in the athletes, with an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and coefficient of variation (CV %) of >0.92, and <3.0%, respectively. For Part II (validity of the 3-MBT), 40 (20 M, 20 F) athletes performed the 3-MBT, and the countermovement jump (CMJ), isometric mid-thigh pull (IMTP), seated medicine ball throw (SMBT), isometric bench (IBP) and maximal aerobic power (VO2max) tests on separate sessions. When data of male and female athletes were pooled, there were significant correlations between relative 3-MBT and relative CMJ height (r = 0.65, large; p < 0.001), relative IMPT peak force (r = 0.50, large; p < 0.001), relative IBP peak force (r = 0.36, moderate, p = 0.02), and relative VO2max (r = 0.50, large; p < 0.001). In conclusion, the 3-MBT is a reliable and reasonably useful test and is a valid assessment of lower body power and strength, upper body strength and aerobic fitness in trained male and female athletes.

A Discrete Choice Experiment to Examine the Preferences of Patients With Cancer and Their Willingness to Pay for Different Types of Health Care Appointments.

BACKGROUND: This study sought to understand the preferences of patients with cancer and the trade-offs between appointment attributes using discrete choice experiment (DCE). METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN: Patients with cancer at 3 hospitals completed a self-administered DCE. Each scenario described 6 attributes: expertise of health care professionals (HCPs), familiarity of doctors with patients' medical history, waiting time, accompaniment by family/friends, travel time, and out-of-pocket costs. Patient preferences were estimated using logistic regression. Willingness to pay (WTP) estimates were derived from regression coefficients. RESULTS: Of 512 patients contacted, 185 returned the questionnaire. The mean age was 61 years, and 60% of respondents were female. The mean time since cancer diagnosis was 34 months, 90% had received treatment; and 61% had early-stage disease. The most important attributes were expertise and familiarity of doctors with patients' medical history; distance traveled was least likely to influence patient preferences. The WTP analysis estimated that patients were willing to pay $680 (95% CI, 470-891) for an appointment with a specialist, $571 (95% CI, 388-754) for doctors familiar with their history, $422 (95% CI, 262-582) for shorter waiting times, $399 (95% CI, 249-549) to be accompanied by family/friends, and $301 (95% CI, 162-441) for shorter traveling times. Male patients had a stronger preference for accompaniment by family/friends. The expertise of HCP was the most important attribute for patients regardless of geographic remoteness. CONCLUSIONS: Our study can assist the development of patient-centered health care models that improve patient access to experienced HCPs, support the role of primary care providers during the cancer journey, and educate patients about the roles of non-oncology HCPs to cope with increasing demand for cancer care.

Primary Tumor Resection and Overall Survival in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Treated With Palliative Intent.

BACKGROUND: The survival impact of primary tumor resection in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated with palliative intent remains uncertain. In the absence of randomized data, the objectives of the present study were to examine the effect of primary tumor resection (PTR) and major prognostic variables on overall survival (OS) of patients with de novo mCRC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients from the Australian 'Treatment of Recurrent and Advanced Colorectal Cancer' registry were examined from June 2009 to March 2015. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were used to identify associations between multiple patient or clinical variables and OS. Patients with metachronous mCRC were excluded from the analyses. RESULTS: A total of 690 patients de novo and 373 metachronous mCRC patients treated with palliative intent were identified. The median follow-up period was 30 months. The median age of de novo patients was 66 years; 57% were male; 77% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 1; and 76% had a colon primary. A total of 216 de novo mCRC patients treated with palliative intent underwent PTR at diagnosis and were more likely to have a colon primary (odds ratio [OR], 15.4), a lower carcinoembryonic antigen level (OR, 2.08), and peritoneal involvement (OR, 2.58; P < .001). On multivariate analysis, PTR at diagnosis in de novo patients was not associated with significantly improved OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.82; 99% confidence interval [CI], 0.62-1.09; P = .068). PTR at diagnosis did not correlate with outcome in de novo patients with a colon primary (HR, 0.74; 99% CI, 0.54-1.01; P = .014) or a rectal primary (HR, 0.81; 99% CI, 0.27-2.44; P = .621). CONCLUSION: For de novo mCRC patients treated with palliative intent, PTR at diagnosis does not significantly improve OS when adjusting for known major prognostic factors. The outcomes of randomized trials examining the survival impact of PTR are awaited.

Retrospective analysis of cancer survival across South-Western Victoria in Australia.

OBJECTIVE: This paper aims to describe cancer survival and examine association between survival and socio-demographic characteristics across Barwon South-Western region (BSWR) in Victoria, Australia. DESIGN: This study is based on the retrospective cohort database of patients accessing oncology services across BSWR. SETTING: Six rural and three urban hospital settings across the BSWR. PARTICIPANTS: The participants were patients who were diagnosed with cancer in 2009. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall survival (OS) of participants was the main outcome measure. RESULTS: Total of 1778 eligible patients had four-year OS for all cancers combined of 59.7% (95% CI, 57.4-62.0). Improved OS was observed for patients in the upper socio-economic tertile (64.2%; 95% CI, 60.9-67.5) compared to the middle (59.3%; 95% CI, 55.5-63.1) and lowest tertiles (49.6%; 95% CI, 44.2-54.9) (P < 0.01). On multivariate analyses, higher socio-economic status remained a significant predictor of OS adjusting for gender, remoteness and age (HR [hazard ratio] 0.81; 95% CI 0.74-0.89; P < 0.01). Remoteness was significantly associated with improved OS after adjusting for age, gender and socio-economic status (HR 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77-0.97; P = 0.01). Older age ≥70 years compared to <70 years conferred inferior OS (HR 3.08; 95% CI, 2.64-3.59; P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirmed improved survival outcomes for patients of higher socio-economic status and younger age. Future research to explain the unexpected survival benefit in patients who lived in more remote areas should examine factors including the correlation between geographical residence and eventual treatment facility as well as compare the BSWR care model to other regions' approaches.

A protocol for a discrete choice experiment: understanding preferences of patients with cancer towards their cancer care across metropolitan and rural regions in Australia.

INTRODUCTION: Medical decision-making in oncology is a complicated process and to date there are few studies examining how patients with cancer make choices with respect to different features of their care. It is also unknown whether patient choices vary by geographical location and how location could account for observed rural and metropolitan cancer differences. This paper describes an ongoing study that aims to (1) examine patient and healthcare-related factors that influence choices of patients with cancer; (2) measure and quantify preferences of patients with cancer towards cancer care using a discrete choice experiment (DCE) and (3) explore preference heterogeneity between metropolitan and rural locations. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A DCE is being conducted to understand how patients with cancer choose between two clinical scenarios accounting for different patient and healthcare-related factors (and levels). Preliminary qualitative research was undertaken to guide the development of an appropriate DCE design including characteristics that are important and relevant to patients with cancer. A fractional factorial design using the D-efficiency criteria was used to estimate interactions among attributes. Multinomial logistic regression will be used for the primary DCE analysis and to control for sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Barwon Health Human Research Ethics Committee approved the study. Findings from the study will be presented in national/international conferences and peer-reviewed journals. Our results will form the basis of a feasibility study to inform the development of a larger scale study into preferences of patients with cancer and their association with cancer outcomes.

Paraneoplastic leukocytoclastic vasculitis as an initial presentation of malignant pleural mesothelioma: a case report.

INTRODUCTION: Vasculitis has been associated with malignancies, more commonly hematological rather than solid malignancies. Due to the rarity of these conditions and the lack of a temporal association, the relationship between vasculitis and malignancy remains unclear. Paraneoplastic vasculitis as a phenomenon of lung cancer has been described in the literature. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first case report of leukocytoclastic vasculitis being an initial presentation of malignant pleural mesothelioma. CASE PRESENTATION: We report the case of an 84-year old Greek man who presented to our facility with an erythematous, pruritic and purpuric rash affecting his limbs. This was biopsy-proven to be leukocytoclastic vasculitis and treated conservatively with topical corticosteroids as well as oral prednisolone, with good results. Six months later, he was diagnosed as having malignant pleural mesothelioma. As he remained asymptomatic from his malignancy, no systemic chemotherapy was instituted. He had a recurrence of biopsy-proven leukocytoclastic vasculitis two months after he was diagnosed as having mesothelioma, which again settled with conservative measures. CONCLUSIONS: It is important to remain vigilant with regard to the association between leukocytoclastic vasculitis and malignancies. A diagnosis of vasculitis requires a search for malignancies as well as other possible etiologies. This is particularly of relevance when the vasculitis becomes chronic, recurrent or treatment is no longer effective. Should our patient have experienced refractory vasculitis, we would have instituted systemic chemotherapy to treat the underlying malignancy.