RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Distress among gynecologic oncology patients correlates with poor clinical outcomes and decreased quality of life. The purpose of this study was to determine risk factors for elevated NCCN Distress Thermometer (DT) results among postoperative gynecologic oncology patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of all postoperative visits over a 5-year period. NCCN DT results were analyzed as both discretized values (DT ≤3 = low distress; DT 4-8 = moderate distress; DT ≥9 = high distress) and continuous variables. Patients with a DT score ≥4 were referred to social work. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed to compare NCCN DT results with clinical and sociodemographic variables. Statistical significance was P<.05. RESULTS: In total, 1,795 NCCN DT results were included, with uterine (37.72%) being the most common disease site. Benign pathology was known prior to completion of the NCCN DT in 13.15% of patients. Most patients (71.75%) endorsed low levels of distress. Moderate/High levels of distress were reported by 28.25% of patients. Increasing levels of distress were significantly associated with younger age (P=.006), history of depression (P≤.001), status as a current smoker (P=.028), and history of asthma (P=.041). Knowledge of benign pathology was associated with low levels of distress (P=.002). Procedure type and disease site were not associated with distress. CONCLUSIONS: More than one-fourth of postoperative patients in a gynecologic oncology practice reported moderate or high distress. Distress was highest among those with malignancy regardless of disease site or surgical intervention. Benign pathology correlated with decreased distress. Identified associations with distress provide opportunities for prevention, early intervention, and tailored counseling.
Assuntos
Neoplasias dos Genitais Femininos , Neoplasias , Humanos , Feminino , Neoplasias dos Genitais Femininos/cirurgia , Neoplasias dos Genitais Femininos/complicações , Estudos Retrospectivos , Qualidade de Vida , Estresse Psicológico/epidemiologia , Estresse Psicológico/etiologia , Estresse Psicológico/psicologia , Neoplasias/complicações , Fatores de Risco , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosRESUMO
OPINION STATEMENT: In our clinical practice, we have shifted away from the use of adjuvant normothermic intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy, particularly following the publication of GOG 252. Our decision is rooted in the accumulating evidence indicating a lack of demonstrable superiority, alongside the recognized toxicities and logistical challenges associated with its administration. This strategic departure is also influenced by the rising utilization of maintenance therapies such as bevacizumab and PARP inhibitors, which present viable alternatives for improving patient outcomes. Our utilization of hyperthermic IP chemotherapy (HIPEC) is currently reserved for a specific cohort of patients, mirroring the patient population studied in the OVHIPEC-1 trial. Specifically, our HIPEC protocol applies to patients presenting with newly diagnosed stage IIIC high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer who are deemed ineligible for primary debulking surgery. Patients must exhibit at least stable disease with neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy, maintain a favorable performance status (ECOG score 0-1), possess good nutritional reserves (with no evidence of protein-calorie malnutrition and an albumin level exceeding 3.5), and not have chronic kidney disease. When HIPEC is planned, it is administered at the time of interval debulking surgery, contingent upon the attainment of optimal surgical outcomes (< 1 cm of residual disease). Our HIPEC protocol adheres to the original OVHIPEC-1 trial guidelines, employing cisplatin at a dosage of 100 mg/m2. We administer at least two antiemetics, antihistamines, and sodium thiosulfate to mitigate known side effects. Postoperatively, patients are admitted to the general surgical floor, reserving the intensive care unit for those in critical condition. We follow Enhanced Recovery After Surgery principles, incorporating early ambulation and feeding into our postoperative care strategy. We have encountered encouraging results with this approach, with most patients having largely uncomplicated postoperative courses and resuming adjuvant chemotherapy within 3 to 4 weeks of surgery.
Assuntos
Hipertermia Induzida , Neoplasias Ovarianas , Humanos , Feminino , Quimioterapia Intraperitoneal Hipertérmica , Hipertermia Induzida/métodos , Neoplasias Ovarianas/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias Ovarianas/cirurgia , Cisplatino/uso terapêutico , Carcinoma Epitelial do Ovário/tratamento farmacológico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos de Citorredução , Terapia CombinadaRESUMO
Long-acting lipoglycopeptides (LGPs), such as dalbavancin and oritavancin, are semisynthetic antibiotics known for their strong effectiveness against a wide array of Gram-positive bacteria. This includes Staphylococcus aureus, both methicillin-sensitive (MSSA) and methicillin-resistant (MRSA) strains, coagulase-negative Staphylococci (CoNS), streptococci, and vancomycin-sensitive Enterococcus faecalis. A literature search was conducted on PubMed and on ClinicalTrials.gov to identify articles published until July 2023 investigating the use of oritavancin and dalbavancin in clinical practice. The review included case reports, case series, observational studies, and clinical studies. Although more consistent data are needed, LGPs seem to be a good alternative that may provide a quicker hospital discharge and reduce long-term intravenous access and therapy. This is attributed to their unique pharmacologic and pharmacokinetic characteristics. More quality data (i.e., number of patients treated with clinical success) are needed before clinicians may use these therapies more widely.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Scant data are available on the link between armed conflicts and the development and spread of antimicrobial resistance. OBJECTIVES: We performed a systematic review with the aim to summarize the available data on the prevalence and features of antibiotic resistance and the causes of antibiotic resistance development during armed conflicts in the 21st century. METHODS: Data sources: PubMed and SCOPUS databases were searched from 1 January 2000 to 30 November 2023. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Original articles reporting data on armed conflicts and antimicrobial resistance were included in this systematic review. No attempt was made to obtain information from unpublished studies. No language restriction was applied. Methods of data synthesis: Both quantitative and qualitative information were summarized by means of textual descriptions. PARTICIPANTS: Patients or soldiers deployed in armed conflict zones. TESTS: culture-dependent antibiotic sensitivity testing or molecular detection of the genetic determinants of antibiotic resistance after a confirmed diagnosis of bacterial infection. Assessment of risk of bias: To evaluate the quality of the included studies, we adapted the tool recommended by the Joanna Briggs Institute. RESULTS: Thirty-four studies were identified, published between November 2004 and November 2023. The quality of included studies was high and medium in 47% and 53% of the studies, respectively. The included studies reported high infection and colonization rates of multidrug-resistant bacteria. Studies performed during the Eastern Ukraine conflict reported high rates of New Delhi metallo-ß-lactamase producers. DISCUSSION: Our findings confirm that wars lead to a large pool of multidrug-resistant infections that could potentially spread. Infection control in healthcare facilities in conflict zones and proper antimicrobial stewardship are crucial.
Assuntos
Antibacterianos , Conflitos Armados , Humanos , Antibacterianos/farmacologia , Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Farmacorresistência Bacteriana , Infecções Bacterianas/microbiologia , Infecções Bacterianas/epidemiologia , Infecções Bacterianas/tratamento farmacológico , Testes de Sensibilidade Microbiana , Saúde Global , Prevalência , Bactérias/efeitos dos fármacos , Bactérias/genética , Bactérias/isolamento & purificaçãoRESUMO
Aim: Social isolation in cancer patients is correlated with prognosis and is a potential mediator of treatment completion. Black women with endometrial cancer (EC) are at increased risk for social isolation when compared with White patients. We developed the Social Interventions for Support during Treatment for Endometrial Cancer and Recurrence (SISTER) study to compare and evaluate interventions to address social isolation among Black women with high-risk EC in USA. The primary objective of the SISTER study is to determine whether virtual support interventions improve treatment completion compared with Enhanced Usual Care. Secondary objectives include comparing effectiveness virtual evidence-based interventions and evaluating barriers and facilitators to social support delivery. Patients & methods: This is a multi-site prospective, open-label, community-engaged randomized controlled trial, consisting of three intervention arms: enhanced usual care, facilitated support group and one-to-one peer support. Primary outcome will be measured using relative dose. Qualitative semi-structured interviews will be conducted with a subset of participants to contextualize the relative degree or lack thereof of social isolation, over time. Data analysis: Primary analysis will be based on an intent-to-treat analysis. Multivariable analysis will be performed to determine the effect of the intervention on the primary and secondary outcomes of interest, relative dose and social isolation score. Semi-structured interviews will be qualitatively analyzed using inductive and deductive approaches of content analysis. Discussion/conclusion: Endometrial cancer mortality disproportionately affects Black women, and social isolation contributes to this disparity. The SISTER study aims to identify whether and to what extent differing social support vehicles improve key outcomes for Black women in the United States with high-risk EC. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04930159 (ClinicalTrials.gov).