Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
1.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys ; 115(5): 1181-1191, 2023 04 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36402357

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Our purpose was to assess the prevalence of patient-reported symptoms of local late toxicity in patients with irradiated breast cancer and determine the association between late toxicity and quality of life. METHODS: Within the prospective Utrecht cohort for Multiple BReast cancer intErvention studies and Long-term evaluation cohort, a survey on self-reported late toxicity was sent to all patients with breast cancer with ≥12 months interval since radiation therapy treated with curative intent. Patients were treated with hypofractionated radiation therapy of 40 Gy/15 fractions or 42.5 Gy/16 fractions, with or without a simultaneous integrated boost. Symptoms of late toxicity were evaluated on a 4-point Likert scale. Late toxicity was defined as moderate-severe breast or chest wall pain combined with at least 1 other mild-severe late toxicity symptom, that is, breast or arm/hand lymphedema, firmness of the breast, or impaired arm movement. Physical, role, and social functioning were measured before, during, and after the late toxicity survey using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core questionnaire-C30 and compared with a Dutch normative population. RESULTS: In the study, 1613/2248 patients (72%) were included. Of those, 16% (n = 265) reported late toxicity. The median time interval between radiation therapy and survey was 38 months (interquartile range, 21-55). Moderate/severe firmness of the breast, chest wall pain, and breast pain were reported by, respectively, 18% (n = 295), 14% (n = 225), and 10% (n = 140) of all patients. Physical, role, and social functioning were below the clinical threshold (ie, clinically relevant impairment) in 13% to 52% of patients with late toxicity and 2% to 26% of patients without late toxicity. Patients with late toxicity significantly more often received analgesics, physiotherapy, and lymphedema therapy compared with patients without late toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: This study provided insight into the prevalence of patient-reported late toxicity after hypofractionated radiation therapy and the influence of late toxicity on quality of life after breast cancer. These results may help health care professionals to inform their patients about long-term effects of breast cancer treatment including hypofractionated radiation therapy.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Lymphedema , Humans , Female , Breast Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Prospective Studies , Quality of Life , Pain , Patient Reported Outcome Measures
2.
Breast J ; 2022: 6745954, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35711897

ABSTRACT

Purpose: To assess determinants associated with late local radiation toxicity in patients treated for breast cancer. Methods: A systematic review was performed. All studies reporting ≥2 variables associated with late local radiation toxicity after treatment with postoperative whole breast irradiation were included. Cohort studies, randomized controlled trials, and cross-sectional studies were eligible designs. Study characteristics and definitions of determinants and outcome measures were extracted. If possible, the measure of association was extracted. Results: Twenty-one studies were included in this review. Six out of seven studies focused on the association between radiotherapy (boost) dose or irradiated breast volume and late radiation toxicity found significant results. Tumor bed boost was associated with late radiation toxicity, fibrosis, and/or edema in six out of twelve studies. Lower age was associated with late breast toxicity in one study, while in another study, higher age was significantly associated with breast fibrosis. Also, no association between age and late radiation toxicity was found in eight out of twelve studies. Similar inconsistent results were found in the association between late radiation toxicity and other patient-related factors (i.e., breast size, diabetes mellitus) and surgical and systemic treatment-related factors (i.e., complications after surgery, chemotherapy, and time between surgery and radiotherapy). Conclusion: In modern 3D radiotherapy, radiotherapy (boost) dose and volume are-like in 2D radiotherapy-associated with late local radiation toxicity, such as breast fibrosis and edema. Treatment de-escalation, for example, partial breast irradiation in selected patients might be important to decrease late local toxicity without compromising locoregional control and survival.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Radiation Injuries , Breast/pathology , Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Breast Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Fibrosis , Humans , Mastectomy, Segmental/adverse effects , Radiation Injuries/etiology , Radiation Injuries/surgery
3.
JPRAS Open ; 30: 74-83, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34485663

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The adage is to use the largest anastomotic coupler device (coupler) size possible, since smaller an anastomosis might be more susceptible to thrombosis. It is unclear if this wisdom is supported by data. This study tests the hypothesis that there is no difference in the reported literature in thrombosis rate between different coupler sizes. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. After screening 235 studies, we included 11 retrospective case-series. According to the criteria of Newcastle-Ottowa Scale, quality score ranged from 2 to 4 (out of 5) and funnel plots indicated publication bias. We included a total of 5930 coupled anastomoses. We calculated thrombosis rate per coupler diameter with exact confidence intervals (CIs). We regard non-overlapping CIs as a significant difference. RESULTS: Nine studies reported no difference in thrombosis rate based on coupler size. Two studies report a potentially greater thrombosis rates in smaller sizes: (1) 2.0 mm 27% (95% CI 17%-40%, 17/62 cases) vs. 3.0 mm 6.3% (95% CI 2.8%-12%, 8/126 cases) and (2) 1.5 mm 6.9% (95% CI 2.8%-14%, 7/101 cases) vs. 3.0 mm group 1.2% (95% CI 0.64%-2.1%, 13/1079). CONCLUSION: There is some evidence that suggests that smaller coupler sizes are associated with greater thrombosis rate, but the current available evidence has limitations. Performing a second anastomosis, in case, the first anastomosis is performed with a coupler size of 1.0, 1.5, or even 2.0 mm, can potentially reduce this rate, however, this remains to be determined.

4.
Trials ; 21(1): 980, 2020 Nov 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33246494

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer treatment with radiotherapy can induce late radiation toxicity, characterized by pain, fibrosis, edema, impaired arm mobility, and poor cosmetic outcome. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) has been proposed as treatment for late radiation toxicity; however, high-level evidence of effectiveness is lacking. As HBOT is standard treatment and reimbursed by insurers, performing classic randomized controlled trials is difficult. The "Hyperbaric OxygeN therapy on brEast cancer patients with late radiation toxicity" (HONEY) trial aims to evaluate the effectiveness of HBOT on late radiation toxicity in breast cancer patients using the trial within cohorts (TwiCs) design. METHODS: The HONEY trial will be conducted within the Utrecht cohort for Multiple BREast cancer intervention studies and Long-term evaluation (UMBRELLA). Within UMBRELLA, breast cancer patients referred for radiotherapy to the University Medical Centre Utrecht are eligible for inclusion. Patients consent to collection of clinical data and patient-reported outcomes and provide broad consent for randomization into future intervention studies. Patients who meet the HONEY in- and exclusion criteria (participation ≥ 12 months in UMBRELLA, moderate/severe breast or chest wall pain, completed primary breast cancer treatment except hormonal treatment, no prior treatment with HBOT, no contraindications for HBOT, no clinical signs of metastatic or recurrent disease) will be randomized to HBOT or control group on a 2:1 ratio (n = 120). Patients in the control group will not be informed about participation in the trial. Patients in the intervention arm will undergo 30-40 HBOT treatment sessions in a high pressure chamber (2.4 atmospheres absolute) where they inhale 100% oxygen through a mask. Cohort outcome measures (i.e., physical outcomes, quality of life, fatigue, and cosmetic satisfaction) of the HBOT group will be compared to the control group at 3 months follow-up. DISCUSSION: This pragmatic trial within the UMBELLA cohort was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of HBOT on late radiation toxicity in breast cancer patients using the TwiCs design. Use of the TwiCs design is expected to address issues encountered in classic randomized controlled trials, such as contamination (i.e., HBOT in the control group) and disappointment bias, and generate information about acceptability of HBOT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov. NCT04193722 . Registered on 10 December 2019.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Honey , Hyperbaric Oxygenation , Radiation Injuries , Breast Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Female , Humans , Quality of Life , Radiation Injuries/diagnosis , Radiation Injuries/etiology , Radiation Injuries/therapy
5.
Breast Cancer ; 27(3): 435-444, 2020 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31858435

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To improve shared decision making, clinical- and patient-reported outcomes between immediate implant-based and autologous breast reconstruction followed by postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) were compared. METHODS: All women with in situ and/or invasive breast cancer who underwent skin sparing mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) (autologous- or implant based, one- or two staged) followed by PMRT in the Utrecht region between 2012 and 2016 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry, of which 112 (59%) agreed to participate. The primary outcome was reconstruction failure after the start of radiotherapy, and secondary outcomes were patient-reported outcomes measured with BREAST-Q. RESULTS: 109 patients underwent skin-sparing mastectomy, of which 29 (27%) underwent immediate autologous reconstruction and 80 (73%) received immediate implant-based reconstruction. After PMRT, reconstruction failure occurred in 17 patients (21%) with implant-based reconstruction, while no failure was seen in the autologous group (p = 0.04). Mean patient-reported 'Satisfaction with Breasts' (50.9 vs. 63.7, p = 0.001) and 'Sexual Well-being' (46.0 vs. 55.5, p = 0.037) were lower after implant-based reconstruction compared to autologous reconstruction. Thirteen patients with autologous flaps underwent surgical cosmetic corrections compared to ten patients in the implant group (45 vs. 13%, p = 0.001). IBR and PMRT in this study resulted in a high rate of severe capsular contraction in implant-based reconstruction (16.9%) and fibrosis in autologous reconstruction (13.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with PMRT and one or two stage immediate implant-based reconstruction were at greater risk of developing reconstruction failure and were less satisfied when compared to one or two stage immediate autologous reconstruction. Since fairly high complication rates in both reconstruction methods after PMRT are observed, it raises the question whether immediate breast reconstruction should be considered at all when PMRT is indicated. Patients considering or potential candidates for IBR should be informed about the consequences of PMRT and especially when opting for autologous reconstruction one should possibly perform reconstruction in a secondary setting.


Subject(s)
Breast Implantation/adverse effects , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Mammaplasty/adverse effects , Mastectomy/adverse effects , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Middle Aged , Patient Satisfaction , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Prognosis , Prospective Studies , Quality of Life , Radiotherapy, Adjuvant
6.
Breast Cancer Res Treat ; 179(2): 479-489, 2020 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31650347

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To evaluate patient-reported cosmetic satisfaction in women treated with radiation therapy for breast cancer and to determine the association between dissatisfaction and quality of life (QoL) and depression. METHODS: Within the prospective UMBRELLA breast cancer cohort, all patients ≥ 1 year after breast conserving treatment or mastectomy with immediate reconstruction were selected. Self-reported cosmetic satisfaction was measured on a 5-point Likert scale. QoL, social functioning, and emotional functioning were measured using EORTC QLQ-C30 and BR23 at 1, 2, and 3 years after inclusion. Mixed model analysis was performed to assess the difference in different domains of QoL between patients with good versus poor self-reported cosmetic satisfaction over time after adjustment for potential confounders. Depression scores were collected by means of the HADS-NL questionnaire. Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test was used to assess the difference in proportions of HADS score ≥ 8, indicating increased depression risk, between satisfied and dissatisfied patients. RESULTS: 808 patients were selected for analysis. Respectively one, two, and three years after surgery, 8% (63/808), 7% (45/626), and 8% (31/409) of patients were dissatisfied with their cosmetic outcome. Poor patient-reported cosmetic satisfaction was independently associated with impaired QoL, body image, and lower emotional and social functioning. Scores ≥ 8 on the HADS depression subscale were significantly more common in dissatisfied patients. CONCLUSIONS: Dissatisfaction with cosmetic outcome was low after breast cancer surgery followed by radiation therapy during 3 years follow-up. Knowing the association between dissatisfaction with cosmetic outcome and QoL and depression could help to improve the preoperative counseling of breast cancer patients.


Subject(s)
Body Image , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Personal Satisfaction , Quality of Life , Aged , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Combined Modality Therapy , Emotions , Female , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Grading , Neoplasm Staging , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Patient Satisfaction , Surveys and Questionnaires
7.
Prenat Diagn ; 35(7): 652-5, 2015 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25721357

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of prenatal transabdominal ultrasound in determining the oral cleft type. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed on all consecutive cases of orofacial cleft diagnosed by prenatal ultrasound examination in the Wilhelmina Children's Hospital, a tertiary referral hospital, between January 2002 and December 2012. Prenatal findings were compared with postnatal diagnoses. RESULTS: A total of 134 patients were included. The mean gestational age at ultrasound examination was 24 weeks + 5 days. Prenatal diagnosis was in accordance with postnatal findings in 76.9% of the cases (103/134) with regard to the cleft type. Underestimation of the cleft occurred in 19.4% (26/134), whereas in 3.7% (5/134), the extent was overestimated. In distinguishing bilateral from unilateral clefts, no errors were made. CONCLUSION: Prenatal ultrasound is accurate in assessing the types of orofacial clefts in a large majority of the cases and is completely accurate in distinguishing between unilateral and bilateral clefts. This study indicates that it is a reliable technique to assess the cleft type, which is important for counseling future parents. Although, the clinician should be aware of the fact that a cleft palate is easily missed, and subsequently, underestimation of cleft extend is frequent.


Subject(s)
Cleft Lip/diagnostic imaging , Cleft Palate/diagnostic imaging , Diagnostic Errors/statistics & numerical data , Ultrasonography, Prenatal , Diagnosis, Differential , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Gestational Age , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Male , Pregnancy , Retrospective Studies
8.
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol ; 38(4): 434-9, 2011 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21113916

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound for detecting prenatal facial clefts in low-risk and high-risk populations. METHODS: This study prospectively followed up a non-selected population, namely all pregnant women who underwent routine second-trimester prenatal ultrasound screening in the Utrecht region during the 2-year period from January 2007 to December 2008. RESULTS: A total of 35 924 low-risk and 2836 high-risk pregnant women underwent ultrasound screening. Orofacial clefts were present in 62 cases, an incidence of 1:624. The distribution of clefts was as follows: 18 (29%) cleft lip, 25 (40%) cleft lip with cleft palate, 17 (27%) cleft palate only, one median cleft and one atypical cleft. Of these, 38 (61%) were unilateral and 23 (37%) were bilateral. Thirty-nine per cent (24/62) had associated anomalies, with most chromosomal defects found in the cleft lip with cleft palate and cleft palate only groups. Cleft lip with or without cleft palate was detected prenatally in 38/43 cases, a sensitivity of 88%. No case of cleft palate only was detected prenatally. There were three false-positive cases, of which two were fetuses with multiple congenital deformities. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound screening has a high sensitivity for the detection of cleft lip with and without cleft palate in high-risk and low-risk pregnancies in our region, where well-trained sonographers carry out primary screening. The key to a high sensitivity of prenatal ultrasound is likely to be a combination of excellent training of sonographers, referral to specialized centers when a cleft is suspected, routine visualization of the fetal face and advances in ultrasound techniques.


Subject(s)
Cleft Lip/diagnostic imaging , Cleft Palate/diagnostic imaging , Face/diagnostic imaging , Ultrasonography, Prenatal , Cleft Lip/embryology , Cleft Lip/epidemiology , Cleft Palate/embryology , Cleft Palate/epidemiology , Face/abnormalities , Face/embryology , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Male , Netherlands/epidemiology , Predictive Value of Tests , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Outcome , Prenatal Diagnosis , Prospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Sensitivity and Specificity
9.
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol ; 35(4): 495-502, 2010 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20235140

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To systematically review the diagnostic accuracy of second-trimester transabdominal ultrasound in detecting orofacial clefts in low- and high-risk populations and to compare two-dimensional (2D) with three-dimensional (3D) ultrasound techniques. METHODS: MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for articles published in English, Dutch, French or German using the keywords 'cleft' and 'ultrasound' or 'screening' or 'sonogram' and 'prenatal' or 'antenatal' or 'fetus' to identify cohort studies and randomized trials in order to assess the detection rate by prenatal ultrasound of cleft lip and palate in high-risk and low-risk pregnant women. RESULTS: Of 451 citations identified, 27 met the criteria for the systematic review, 21 involving unselected low-risk populations and six involving high-risk populations. In the selected studies there was diversity in the gestational age at which the ultrasound examination was performed and there was considerable variety in the diagnostic accuracy of 2D ultrasound in the low-risk women, with prenatal detection rates ranging from 9% to 100% for cleft lip with or without cleft palate, 0% to 22% for cleft palate only and 0% to 73% for all types of cleft. 3D ultrasound in high-risk women resulted in a detection rate of 100% for cleft lip, 86% to 90% for cleft lip with palate and 0% to 89% for cleft palate only. CONCLUSIONS: 2D ultrasound screening for cleft lip and palate in a low-risk population has a relatively low detection rate but is associated with few false-positive results. 3D ultrasound can achieve a reliable diagnosis, but not of cleft palate only.


Subject(s)
Cleft Lip/diagnostic imaging , Cleft Palate/diagnostic imaging , Ultrasonography, Prenatal/methods , Cleft Lip/embryology , Cleft Palate/embryology , Female , Gestational Age , Humans , Pregnancy
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...