Estudio observacional, prospectivo y multicéntrico sobre el uso de citrato de fentanilo transmucosa en la práctica clínica habitual para el control de las crisis de dolor irruptivo en pacientes oncológicos / Observational, prospective and multicenter study on the use of transmucosal fentanyl citrate in regular clinical practice for the control of breakthrough pain crises in cancer patients

Objetivo: Evaluar el grado de satisfacción de los pacientes y/o cuidadores con el tratamiento de citrato de fentanilo transmucosa en la gestión de las crisis de dolor irruptivo oncológico en términos de facilidad de uso. Métodos: Se realizó un estudio observacional, prospectivo y multicéntrico con 48 pacientes sometidos a tratamiento de mantenimiento con opioides para el dolor crónico basal provocado por el cáncer y que, además, sufrían crisis de dolor irruptivo para las que estaban recibiendo tratamiento con citrato de fentanilo. La variable principal del estudio fue el grado de satisfacción de los pacientes y/o sus cuidadores con el citrato de fentanilo en el manejo de las crisis de dolor irruptivo oncológico, evaluadas mediante cuestionarios Escala Visual Analógica (EVA). Resultados: El 90,6 % de los pacientes/cuidadores muestran un elevado grado de satisfacción con el empleo de citrato de fentanilo en términos de facilidad de uso (valor medio EVA de 8,2). Por su parte, tanto la valoración general por parte de los pacientes/cuidadores como por parte de los sanitarios ha sido muy positiva (valor medio EVA 7,7). Conclusiones: El citrato de fentanilo es una terapia fácil de usar y eficaz para el tratamiento de las crisis de dolor irruptivo oncológico, con amplia aceptación tanto por parte de pacientes y cuidadores como de los profesionales sanitarios.(AU)

Objective: To assess the degree of satisfaction of patients and/or caregivers with transmucosal fentanyl citrate treatment in the management of breakthrough cancer pain crises in terms of ease of use. Methods: An observational, prospective and multicenter study was carried out with 48 patients undergoing maintenance treatment with opioids for baseline chronic cancer pain and who, in addition, suffered breakthrough pain crises for those who were receiving treatment with fentanyl citrate. The main variable of the study was the degree of satisfaction of the patients and/or their caregivers with fentanyl citrate in the management of breakthrough cancer pain crises, evaluatedby means of Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) questionnaires. Results: 90.6 % of patients/caregivers show a high degree of satisfaction with the use of fentanyl citrate in terms of ease of use (mean VAS value of 8.2). For its part, both the general assessment by the patients/caregivers and by the healthcare professionals has been very positive (mean VAS value 7.7). Conclusions: Fentanyl citrate is an easy-to-use and effective therapy for the treatment of breakthrough cancer pain crises, widely accepted by both patients and caregivers as well as health professionals.(AU)

Evaluation of waiting times for breast cancer diagnosis and surgical treatment

Purpose: To analyse any delays in breast cancer diagnosis and surgical treatment, influence of clinical and biological factors and influence of delays on survival. Methods/patients: A descriptive, observational, and retrospective study was conducted between 2006 and 2016 on stages I-III breast cancer patients. This is a retrospective review of health records to collect data on delays, patients’ clinical data, biological features of the tumour and information on treatment. Mortality data from the National Death Index. Results: In 493 evaluable patients, the median of days from the first symptom to mammography, biopsy, and surgery was 41, 57, and 92, respectively. The median of days from screening mammography to biopsy and surgery was 10 and 51, respectively. From biopsy to surgery, the median was 34 days in every case. Over the last 5 years, an increase in biopsy-surgery delay has been observed (p = 0.0001). Tumour stages I and II vs. stage III (RR 1.74. 95% CI 1.08-2.80, p = 0.027), diagnosis in screening (RR 0.66. 95% CI 0.45-0.96, p = 0.030), and use of magnetic resonance imaging (RR 2.08. 95 CI 1.21-3.56, p = 0.008) condition a greater biopsy-surgery delay. No influence of delays on survival has been identified. Conclusions: Delays in diagnosis and surgery in the case of women diagnosed on the basis of symptoms may be improved. There is a temporary tendency to a greater delay in surgery. Some clinical and biological factors must be taken into account to optimise delays. Survival results are not adversely affected by delays

No disponible

Evaluation of waiting times for breast cancer diagnosis and surgical treatment.

PURPOSE: To analyse any delays in breast cancer diagnosis and surgical treatment, influence of clinical and biological factors and influence of delays on survival. METHODS/PATIENTS: A descriptive, observational, and retrospective study was conducted between 2006 and 2016 on stages I-III breast cancer patients. This is a retrospective review of health records to collect data on delays, patients' clinical data, biological features of the tumour and information on treatment. Mortality data from the National Death Index. RESULTS: In 493 evaluable patients, the median of days from the first symptom to mammography, biopsy, and surgery was 41, 57, and 92, respectively. The median of days from screening mammography to biopsy and surgery was 10 and 51, respectively. From biopsy to surgery, the median was 34 days in every case. Over the last 5 years, an increase in biopsy-surgery delay has been observed (p = 0.0001). Tumour stages I and II vs. stage III (RR 1.74. 95% CI 1.08-2.80, p = 0.027), diagnosis in screening (RR 0.66. 95% CI 0.45-0.96, p = 0.030), and use of magnetic resonance imaging (RR 2.08. 95 CI 1.21-3.56, p = 0.008) condition a greater biopsy-surgery delay. No influence of delays on survival has been identified. CONCLUSIONS: Delays in diagnosis and surgery in the case of women diagnosed on the basis of symptoms may be improved. There is a temporary tendency to a greater delay in surgery. Some clinical and biological factors must be taken into account to optimise delays. Survival results are not adversely affected by delays.

Experiencia con un formato simplificado de la herramienta de ayuda en la toma de decisiones Adjuvant Online en pacientes con cáncer de mama / Experience with a simplified format of decision making tool adjuvant Online in breast cancer patients

Fundamento. Adjuvant. Online calcula el riesgo de recidiva y muerte a 10 años y proporciona estimaciones del beneficio del tratamiento adyuvante en pacientes con cáncer de mama. Testamos su aplicabilidad y analizamos únicamente estimaciones de mortalidad. Método. Presentamos las estimaciones de 66 pacientes intervenidas de cáncer de mama unilateral y unicéntrico, sin enfermedad residual ni metástasis. Las variables analizadas fueron edad, comorbilidad, receptores de estrógenos, grado histológico, tamaño tumoral, ganglios metastásicos, tipo de tratamiento hormonal y de quimioterapia. Resultados. La estimación de la mediana de supervivencia fue del 77%, de mortalidad por cáncer fue del 18% y por otras causas fue del 5%. La media de reducción absoluta del riesgo (RAR) de mortalidad con tratamiento hormonal fue del 4%, con quimioterapia fue del 4,5% y con tratamiento combinado fue del 7%. Resultados. Todas las pacientes con algún beneficio decidieron recibir tratamiento hormonal. Cuarenta y tres pacientes (65%) decidieron recibir quimioterapia y 23 pacientes (35%) decidieron no recibirla. La media de reducción del riesgo con quimioterapia fue del 2% en quien decidió no recibir quimioterapia y fue del 8% en quien decidió recibirla. Existe asociación entre la decisión de quimioterapia y la estimación del riesgo de mortalidad por cáncer (p=0,0001), del riesgo de mortalidad por otras causas (p=0,038) y de la RAR (p=0,0001). El 6% de las pacientes con RAR del 1%, el 50% de las que tenían RAR entre el 2–5%, y el 61,8% con RAR entre el 6–10% eligieron la quimioterapia. Conclusiones. Todas las mujeres optan por el tratamiento hormonal independientemente del beneficio. Las razones para elegir la quimioterapia fueron el propio pronóstico vital y la magnitud del beneficio. Algunas pacientes deciden elegir quimioterapia con beneficios mínimos(AU)

Background. Adjuvant. Online estimates 10-year recurrence and mortality outcomes for breast cancer patients and predicts the effect of each type of treatment. Our purpose was to test the applicability by only analysing mortality estimations. Method. We present estimations of 66 women with definitive surgery and axillary staging for unilateral, unicentric, invasive adenocarcinoma, without metastatic or residual disease. Age, co-morbidity, estrogen receptor status, histological grade, tumor size, number of positive nodes, and hormone therapy or chemotherapy option, were the variables required. Results. Median of survival estimations was 77%, cancer mortality 18% and mortality for other reasons 5%. The average of absolute risk reduction (ARR) with hormone therapy was 4%, with chemotherapy 4.5% and with combined treatment 7%. Results. All the patients with some benefit decided to receive hormone therapy. Forty-three patients (65%) decided to receive chemotherapy and 23 (35%) did not. The average risk reduction with chemotherapy was 2% in those who decided not to receive chemotherapy and 8% in those who decided to receive it. There was an association between a chemotherapy decision and the estimation of the risk of breast cancer mortality (P=0.0001), risk of mortality for other reasons (P=0.038), and the ARR (P=0.0001). There were 6% of the patients with an ARR of 1%, 50% between 2–5% and 61.8% between 6–10%, who chose chemotherapy. Conclusions. All women opted for hormone therapy regardless of benefit. The reasons for choosing chemotherapy were the prognosis itself and the magnitude of benefit. Some patients decided to choose chemotherapy even when the benefit was minimal(AU)

[Experience with a simplified format of decision making tool adjuvant! Online in breast cancer patients]. / Experiencia con un formato simplificado de la herramienta de ayuda en la toma de decisiones Adjuvant! Online en pacientes con cáncer de mama.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant! Online estimates 10-year recurrence and mortality outcomes for breast cancer patients and predicts the effect of each type of treatment. Our purpose was to test the applicability by only analysing mortality estimations. METHOD: We present estimations of 66 women with definitive surgery and axillary staging for unilateral, unicentric, invasive adenocarcinoma, without metastatic or residual disease. Age, co-morbidity, estrogen receptor status, histological grade, tumor size, number of positive nodes, and hormone therapy or chemotherapy option, were the variables required. RESULTS: Median of survival estimations was 77%, cancer mortality 18% and mortality for other reasons 5%. The average of absolute risk reduction (ARR) with hormone therapy was 4%, with chemotherapy 4.5% and with combined treatment 7%. All the patients with some benefit decided to receive hormone therapy. Forty-three patients (65%) decided to receive chemotherapy and 23 (35%) did not. The average risk reduction with chemotherapy was 2% in those who decided not to receive chemotherapy and 8% in those who decided to receive it. There was an association between a chemotherapy decision and the estimation of the risk of breast cancer mortality (P=0.0001), risk of mortality for other reasons (P=0.038), and the ARR (P=0.0001). There were 6% of the patients with an ARR of 1%, 50% between 2-5% and 61.8% between 6-10%, who chose chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: All women opted for hormone therapy regardless of benefit. The reasons for choosing chemotherapy were the prognosis itself and the magnitude of benefit. Some patients decided to choose chemotherapy even when the benefit was minimal.