The journal of supportive oncology最新文献

Malignant epidural spinal cord compression is a dreaded complication of malignancy. Fortunately, it does not happen very often. Estimating the prognosis is critical to achieving a balance between effective therapy and the burden of treatment. Treatment can be individualized by reviewing simple prognosis scales. For patients with a poor prognosis, a single fraction of 8 Gy is just as effective as multiple fractions and much more convenient. Surgery and radiation should be considered for patients with a more positive prognosis. For patients not getting surgery, enrollment in clinical trials of single vs. multiple fractions of radiation should be a priority.

Background: Patients with hematologic malignancies are at increased risk of influenza and its complications. Despite current health recommendations and evidence favoring influenza vaccination, vaccination rates remain low in cancer patients.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine which factors influenced vaccination rates.

Methods: During the 2009-2010 pandemic H1N1 and seasonal influenza season, we surveyed patients with hematologic malignancies in a Canadian cancer center. Of the patients participating in our study (n = 129), 66% and 57% received the H1N1 pandemic influenza and seasonal influenza vaccines, respectively.

Results: A number of reasons for vaccination refusal were reported, most relating to general skepticism about the safety and efficacy of vaccination. Physician advice was also a factor influencing vaccination rates in patients. The vaccination rate for seasonal influenza was 39% in patients < 65 years old, significantly lower than the rate of 73% reported for patients aged > or = 65 years (P < 0.0001).

Conclusion: Future education programs should target younger patient populations and health-care workers, focusing on vaccine safety and efficacy in the high-risk cancer population.

Oncologists often manage cancer-associated symptoms including pain. When symptoms are severe, anesthesia-pain medicine (APM) and/or palliative medicine (PM) can effectively treat symptoms. Nevertheless, symptom management may be suboptimal, leading to diminished quality of life (QOL). We assessed the value of PM vs. APM consultation in cancer patients referred for pain management alone. Patients referred to an APM-based Cancer Pain Clinic (CPC) over an 8-month period were evaluated by PM or APM based on the first available appointment. Symptoms and QOL were assessed by the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory and Linear Analog Self-Assessment at baseline and 4-6 weeks after initial encounter. Data were analyzed on an available-case basis. Sixty-two patients (37 PM, 25 APM) completed the initial survey, with 48 patients (31 PM, 17 APM) completing followup. Mean pain score improved from 7.97 to 5.47 in the PM group (P < 0.0001) and from 7.1 to 4.5 (P = 0.29) in the APM group. The PM group demonstrated a clinically significant improvement in 8/19 symptoms vs. 3/19 in the APM group and in 3/5 QOL parameters in the PM group vs. 1/5 in the APM group. Our small sample size weakens our power and ability to detect significant differences between the groups. Only one follow-up symptom-assessment point was obtained. PM consultation is as effective as APM in improving cancer pain but may be more effective with symptom management and improving QOL.

Patients with incurable illness experience considerable physical and psychological distress, which negatively impacts their quality of life. Palliative care clinicians primarily seek to alleviate suffering, enhance coping with symptoms, and enable informed decision making. In this article, we review the efficacy of various palliative care interventions to improve patients' quality of life, physical and psychological symptoms, satisfaction with care, family caregiver outcomes, health-service utilization, and quality of end-of-life care. We have identified 22 randomized studies that evaluate the efficacy of various palliative care interventions. Palliative care research has been hampered by methodological challenges related to attrition and missing data due to progressive illness and death. In addition, interventions to date have varied widely in the focus and extent of services, with only eight studies entailing direct clinical care by palliative care specialists, making comparisons across trials challenging. Despite these limitations, accumulating evidence shows that palliative care interventions do improve patients' quality of life, satisfaction with care, and end-of-life outcomes. Five of seven studies which examined quality of life as a primary outcome reported a statistically significant difference favoring the palliative care intervention. Ten studies examined patient and/or family caregiver satisfaction with care, and seven of these reported greater satisfaction with palliative care intervention. However, data are lacking to support the benefit of palliative interventions for reducing patients' physical and psychological symptoms. We conclude the review by discussing the major obstacles and future directions in evaluating and implementing standardized palliative care interventions.

Hospice programs provide comprehensive, compassionate care to dying patients and their families. However, many patients do not enroll in hospice, and those who do generally receive hospice care only in the last weeks of life. Although patients and families rely on their physicians to discuss hospice, there is often inadequate communication between patients and physicians about end-of-life issues. We describe a Six-Step Roadmap for navigating discussions about hospice adapted from the SPIKES protocol for delivering bad news: setting up the discussion, assessing the patient's perception, inviting a patient to discuss individual goals and needs, sharing knowledge, empathizing with the patient's emotions, and summarizing and strategizing the next steps.