Methods: This was a qualitative study with patients diagnosed with recurrent ovarian cancer and receiving chemotherapy at a hospital gynecologic day-care unit. In-depth individual interviews were conducted with patients to explore how they coped with recurrence of ovarian cancer. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed thematically.
Results: The participants' (n = 10) age range was 52-84 years, the three most common ethnic backgrounds were represented (Malay, Chinese, and Indian), and most of the patients were well educated. All patients were on chemotherapy. Six coping strategies were identified: (1) maintaining a mindset of hopefulness, (2) avoidance of information, (3) accepting their condition, (4) seeking spiritual help, (5) relying on family for support, and (6) coping with financial costs.
Conclusions: Coping strategies employed during ovarian cancer recurrence in this setting were rarely based on the accurate information appraisal, but rather on the individual emotion and personal beliefs.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of centralisation of care for patients with gynaecological cancer.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trials Register, CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2010), MEDLINE, and EMBASE up to November 2010. We also searched registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings, and reference lists of included studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, controlled before-and-after studies, interrupted time series studies, and observational studies that examined centralisation of services for gynaecological cancer, and used multivariable analysis to adjust for baseline case mix.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently extracted data, and two assessed risk of bias. Where possible, we synthesised the data on survival in a meta-analysis.
MAIN RESULTS: Five studies met our inclusion criteria; all were retrospective observational studies and therefore at high risk of bias.Meta-analysis of three studies assessing over 9000 women suggested that institutions with gynaecologic oncologists on site may prolong survival in women with ovarian cancer, compared to community or general hospitals: hazard ratio (HR) of death was 0.90 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 0.99). Similarly, another meta-analysis of three studies assessing over 50,000 women, found that teaching centres or regional cancer centres may prolong survival in women with any gynaecological cancer compared to community or general hospitals (HR 0.91; 95% CI 0.84 to 0.99). The largest of these studies included all gynaecological malignancies and assessed 48,981 women, so the findings extend beyond ovarian cancer. One study compared community hospitals with semi-specialised gynaecologists versus general hospitals and reported non-significantly better disease-specific survival in women with ovarian cancer (HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.78 to 1.01). The findings of included studies were highly consistent. Adverse event data were not reported in any of the studies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found low quality, but consistent evidence to suggest that women with gynaecological cancer who received treatment in specialised centres had longer survival than those managed elsewhere. The evidence was stronger for ovarian cancer than for other gynaecological cancers.Further studies of survival are needed, with more robust designs than retrospective observational studies. Research should also assess the quality of life associated with centralisation of gynaecological cancer care. Most of the available evidence addresses ovarian cancer in developed countries; future studies should be extended to other gynaecological cancers within different healthcare systems.
METHODS: A single-masked randomized trial was conducted in a single tertiary care center from July 2021 to January 2022. Two hundred fourteen participants aged 18 years or older who were scheduled for outpatient Pipelle endometrial sampling were randomized: 107 each to having a full bladder (by oral water intake) or standard process (without delayed sampling and bladder status not taken into account). Women with known cervical stenosis, gynecologic malignancy, uterine anomalies, leiomyoma distorting the uterine cavity, acute cervicitis, urge bladder dysfunction, intense anxiety, need for anesthesia or analgesic before the procedure, positive pregnancy test, or previous failed office endometrial sampling were excluded. The primary outcome was the insertion failure rate of endometrial sampling at first attempt. Secondary outcomes were pain during procedure, satisfaction score, analgesia use, procedure duration, and need for cervical manipulation. Factoring in a baseline insertion failure rate of 30.0%, relative risk of 0.45, α of 0.05, 80.0% power, and a dropout rate of 10.0%, we needed 107 participants in each arm.
RESULTS: The insertion failure rate was significantly lower in the full bladder group compared with standard process: 25 of 107 (23.4%) compared with 45 of 107 (42.1%) (relative risk 0.56, 95% CI, 0.37-0.84; number needed to treat to benefit 6.0, 95% CI, 3.20-15.70). Pain score (median) during the procedure (interquartile range) was 4 (3-6) compared with 5 (3-8) ( P =.004); patient satisfaction score was 8 (7-9) compared with 7 (4-8) ( P
METHODOLOGY: We conducted a longitudinal observational study in gut microbiota profile in a group of paediatric patients diagnosed with ALL using 16 s ribosomal RNA sequencing and compared these patients' microbiota pattern with age and ethnicity-matched healthy children. Temporal changes of gut microbiota in these patients with ALL were also examined at different time-points in relation to chemotherapy.
RESULTS: Prior to commencement of chemotherapy, gut microbiota in children with ALL had larger inter-individual variability compared to healthy controls and was enriched with bacteria belonging to Bacteroidetes phylum and Bacteroides genus. The relative abundance of Bacteroides decreased upon commencement of chemotherapy. Restitution of gut microbiota composition to resemble that of healthy controls occurred after cessation of chemotherapy. However, the microbiota composition (beta diversity) remained distinctive and a few bacteria were different in abundance among the patients with ALL compared to controls despite completion of chemotherapy and presumed restoration of normal health.
CONCLUSION: Our findings in this pilot study is the first to suggest that gut microbiota profile in children with ALL remains marginally different from healthy controls even after cessation of chemotherapy. These persistent microbiota changes may have a role in the long-term wellbeing in childhood cancer survivors but the impact of these changes in subsequent health perturbations in these survivors remain unexplored.
METHODS: We developed a decision analytic model to estimate the lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) accrued through BRCA mutation testing or routine clinical surveillance (RCS) for a hypothetical cohort of 1000 early-stage breast cancer patients aged 40 years. In the model, patients would decide whether to accept testing and to undertake risk-reducing mastectomy, oophorectomy, tamoxifen, combinations or neither. We calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) from the health system perspective. A series of sensitivity analyses were performed.
RESULTS: In the base case, testing generated 11.2 QALYs over the lifetime and cost US$4815 per patient whereas RCS generated 11.1 QALYs and cost US$4574 per patient. The ICER of US$2725/QALY was below the cost-effective thresholds. The ICER was sensitive to the discounting of cost, cost of BRCA mutation testing and utility of being risk-free, but the ICERs remained below the thresholds. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that at a threshold of US$9500/QALY, 99.9% of simulations favoured BRCA mutation testing over RCS.
CONCLUSIONS: Offering BRCA mutation testing to early-stage breast cancer patients identified using a locally-validated risk-assessment tool may be cost effective compared to RCS in Malaysia.
METHODS: In-depth interviews with 28 Malaysian BRCA mutation carriers with a history of breast cancer were conducted in addition to observing their RRSO decision-making consultations in the clinic.
RESULTS: The decision-making considerations among the carriers were centered around the overarching theme of "Negotiating cancer risk and womanhood priorities," with the following themes: (1) risk perception, (2) self-preservation, (3) motherhood obligation, and (4) the preciousness of marriage. Cognitive knowledge of BRCA risk was often conceptualized based on personal and family history of cancer, personal beliefs, and faith. Many women reported fears that RRSO would affect them physically and emotionally, worrying about the post-surgical impact on their motherhood responsibilities. Nevertheless, some reported feeling obliged to choose RRSO for the sake of their children. For some, their husband's support and approval were critical, with emotional well-being and sexuality reportedly perceived as important to sustaining married life. Despite reporting hesitancy toward RRSO, women's decisions about choosing this option evolved as their priorities changed at different stages of life.
CONCLUSIONS: Recognizing during clinic encounters with Malaysian women that RRSO decision-making involves negotiating the likelihood of developing cancer with the societal priorities of being a woman, mother, and wife may serve to support their decision-making.