ABSTRACT
Encouraging men to open-up about their feelings is a new cultural directive, yet little is known about how this works in practice, including to promote mental health. Ideals of hegemonic masculinity may be increasingly tolerating expressions of vulnerability in some areas of social life. However, the expression of vulnerability in paid work and/or career situations is regulated by organisational ideals and circumstances that may also produce distress. To address uncertainty in the literature, we investigated the experiences of men in traditionally male dominated professions, namely first responders (police, paramedics, and firefighters/rescue). Twenty-one UK based men of diverse ranks and experience currently working within first responder services participated in semi-structured telephone interviews. Distress was positioned as an inevitable part of the work. Yet, striking differences in institutionalised ways of expressing vulnerabilities differentiated the experiences of frontline workers, contributing to a wide spectrum of men's silence right through to relative openness about vulnerability, both in the workplace and domestic spheres. The findings provide importanat insights into how vulnerability is institutionally regulated, illuminating and contrasting how the possibilities for male vulnerabilities are socially produced.
Subject(s)
Emergency Responders , Masculinity , Emotions , Humans , Male , WorkplaceABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To assess the benefit of breast surgery for inflammatory breast cancer (IBC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: This retrospective series was based on 232 patients treated for IBC. All patients received primary chemotherapy followed by either exclusive radiotherapy (118 patients; 51%) or surgery with or without radiotherapy (114 patients; 49%). The median follow-up was 11 years. RESULTS: The two groups were comparable apart from fewer tumors <70 mm (43% vs. 33%, p = 0.003), a higher rate of clinical stage N2 (15% vs. 5%, p = 0.04), and fewer histopathologic Grade 3 tumors (46% vs. 61%, p <0.05) in the no-surgery group. The addition of surgery was associated with a significant improvement in locoregional disease control (p = 0.04) at 10 years locoregional free interval 78% vs. 59% but with no significant difference in overall survival rates or disease-free intervals. Late toxicities were not significantly different between the two treatment groups except for a higher rate of fibrosis in the no-surgery group (p <0.0001) and more lymphedema in the surgery group (p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Our data suggest an improvement in locoregional control in patients treated by surgery, in conjunction with chemotherapy and radiotherapy, for IBC. Efforts must be made to improve overall survival.
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Breast Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Inflammatory Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Inflammatory Breast Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Adult , Aged , Analysis of Variance , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Cyclophosphamide/administration & dosage , Disease-Free Survival , Drug Administration Schedule , Female , Fluorouracil/administration & dosage , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Inflammatory Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Inflammatory Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Middle Aged , Neoadjuvant Therapy/methods , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/pathology , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/surgery , Neoplasm Staging , Retrospective Studies , Survival Rate , Vinblastine/administration & dosage , Vinblastine/analogs & derivatives , Vindesine/administration & dosage , VinorelbineABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To determine whether the exclusive use of radiotherapy (ERT) could be a treatment option after complete clinical response (cCR) to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) for early breast cancer (EBC). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 1985 and 1999, 1,477 patients received NCT for EBC considered too large for primary conservative surgery. Of 165 patients with cCR, 65 patients were treated with breast surgery (with radiotherapy) and 100 patients were treated with ERT. RESULTS: The two groups were comparable in terms of baseline characteristics, except for larger initial tumor sizes in the ERT group. There were no significant differences in overall, disease-free and metastasis-free survival rates. Five-year and 10-year overall survival rates were 91% and 77% in the no-surgery group and 82% and 79% in the surgery group, respectively (p = 0.9). However, a nonsignificant trend toward higher locoregional recurrence rates (LRR) was observed in the no-surgery group (31% vs. 17% at 10 years; p = 0.06). In patients with complete responses on mammography and/or ultrasound, LRR were not significantly different (p = 0.45, 10-year LRR: 21% in surgery vs. 26% in ERT). No significant differences were observed in terms of the rate of cutaneous, cardiac, or pulmonary toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: Surgery is a key component of locoregional treatment for breast cancers that achieved cCR to NCT.
