Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
ANZ J Surg ; 88(1-2): 62-65, 2018 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28982208

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) has been the standard radiation sensitizer in patients undergoing preoperative long-course chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for locally advanced rectal cancer in Australia. Capecitabine (Xeloda) is an oral 5-FU prodrug of comparable pharmacodynamic activity, currently preferred in place of 5-FU infusion, its established counterpart in neoadjuvant CRT for rectal cancer. The few studies quantifying pathological complete response (pCR) of Xeloda versus 5-FU have produced inconsistent results. We reviewed our own data to determine if the rates of pCR of oral capecitabine were non-inferior to intravenous 5-FU in patients undergoing neoadjuvant CRT for rectal cancer. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed from a prospectively kept database. Four hundred and fifty-two patients received preoperative CRT from January 2006 to January 2016. Pelvic radiotherapy was delivered concurrently with capecitabine (n = 42) or infusional 5-FU (n = 341). The remaining received different chemotherapy regimens. Surgery was performed 6-12 weeks of CRT completion. Pathological responses were assessed using Dworak regression grading score (0-4). Clinical outcomes were evaluated in terms of local control and recurrence-free survival. RESULTS: The proportion of patients who had a tumour regression score of 4 (pCR) after CRT was 4/42 (9.5%) in the capecitabine group and 71/341 (20%) in the infusional 5-FU group (P = 0.082). pCR was an independent predictor for survival in this group of patients (hazard ratio: 0.002, P = 0.0001, 95% confidence interval: 0.0001-0.027). CONCLUSION: The use of capecitabine as neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with rectal cancer was associated with a reduced rate of pCR. However this difference did not achieve statistical significance.


Subject(s)
Antimetabolites, Antineoplastic/administration & dosage , Capecitabine/administration & dosage , Carcinoma/therapy , Fluorouracil/administration & dosage , Rectal Neoplasms/therapy , Administration, Oral , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Carcinoma/mortality , Carcinoma/pathology , Chemoradiotherapy, Adjuvant , Disease-Free Survival , Female , Humans , Infusions, Parenteral , Male , Middle Aged , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Rectal Neoplasms/mortality , Rectal Neoplasms/pathology , Retrospective Studies
2.
BMC Public Health ; 12: 307, 2012 Apr 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22537252

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Prior to the availability of the specific pandemic vaccine, strategies to mitigate the impact of the disease typically involved antiviral treatment and "non-pharmaceutical" community interventions. However, compliance with these strategies is linked to risk perceptions, perceived severity and perceived effectiveness of the strategies. In 2010, we undertook a study to examine the knowledge, attitudes, risk perceptions, practices and barriers towards influenza and infection control strategies amongst domestic and international university students. METHODS: A study using qualitative methods that incorporated 20 semi-structured interviews was undertaken with domestic and international undergraduate and postgraduate university students based at one university in Sydney, Australia. Participants were invited to discuss their perceptions of influenza (seasonal vs. pandemic) in terms of perceived severity and impact, and attitudes towards infection control measures including hand-washing and the use of social distancing, isolation or cough etiquette. RESULTS: While participants were generally knowledgeable about influenza transmission, they were unable to accurately define what 'pandemic influenza' meant. While avian flu or SARS were mistaken as examples of past pandemics, almost all participants were able to associate the recent "swine flu" situation as an example of a pandemic event. Not surprisingly, it was uncommon for participants to identify university students as being at risk of catching pandemic influenza. Amongst those interviewed, it was felt that 'students' were capable of fighting off any illness. The participant's nominated hand washing as the most feasible and acceptable compared with social distancing and mask use. CONCLUSIONS: Given the high levels of interaction that occurs in a university setting, it is really important that students are informed about disease transmission and about risk of infection. It may be necessary to emphasize that pandemic influenza could pose a real threat to them, that it is important to protect oneself from infection and that infection control measures can be effective.


Subject(s)
Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Influenza A Virus, H1N1 Subtype , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Internationality , Pandemics/prevention & control , Students/psychology , Adult , Australia/epidemiology , Humans , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Qualitative Research , Seasons , Students/statistics & numerical data , Universities , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...