Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Front Cardiovasc Med ; 9: 784409, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35498020

ABSTRACT

Background: Most breast cancer patients die of non-cancer causes. The risk of death from heart disease, a leading cause of death, is unknown. The aim of this study is to characterize the long-term risk of fatal heart disease in breast cancer patients. Methods: This retrospective study used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Standard mortality ratios (SMR) were calculated for breast cancer patients diagnosed from 1992 to 2014. Patients were stratified by receipt of radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy, disease laterality, and diagnosis era. Hazard ratios (HRs) and odds ratios (ORs) were calculated to compare the risk of death from heart disease among other breast cancer patients. Results: There were 1,059,048 patients diagnosed with breast cancer from 1992 to 2014, of which 47,872 (4.6%) died from heart disease. The SMR for death from heart disease at 10+ years for patients who received only radiotherapy was 2.92 (95% CI 2.81-3.04, p < 0.001) and in patients who received only chemotherapy was 5.05 (95% CI 4.57-5.55, p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in SMR for death from heart disease for left-sided vs. right-sided disease. At 10+ years, heart disease made up 28% of deaths from non-primary cancer. HRs and ORs showed that the risk of death from heart disease was highest in patients older than 70 years of age and with longer follow-up. Conclusion: The risk of fatal heart disease was highest in older breast cancer patients with longer follow-up (i.e., >5-10 years) and who received chemotherapy. These patients should be referred to cardio-oncology clinics to mitigate this risk.

2.
Ecancermedicalscience ; 15: 1169, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33680083

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The human embryo or foetus is susceptible to harmful effects of radiation, which include growth delay, malformations, impaired cognitive function, cancer and foetal demise. The purpose of this study is to describe pregnancy screening practices in radiation oncology, so that potential health effects may be avoided and areas of prevention may be identified. METHODS: An electronic survey was delivered to 6,304 members of the American Society for Radiation Oncology. The survey subjects were radiation oncologists who are currently practicing in the world. Chi-square tests and a multiple logistic regression model were used to analyse the data. All tests were two-sided and the statistical significance level used was 0.05. This study (STUDY00009765) was approved by an Institutional Review Board. RESULTS: A total of 434 responses from practicing radiation oncologists were received. Of these respondents, 69.1% were practicing in the United States. Of all respondents, 19.8% reported treating paediatric patients and 93.6% reported treating premenopausal patients. Despite 84.8% of radiation oncologists saying they would 'strongly agree' or 'agree' that one should screen for pregnancy prior to radiation therapy, 29.7% of respondents reported their department has no screening policy and 7.1% of respondents reported they do not screen for pregnancy. Having a departmental policy was associated with screening for pregnancy (p-value = 0.0005).Of all respondents, 93 reported treating a known pregnant patient. Of these 93 respondents, 76 reported intentionally treating and 17 reported accidentally treating a pregnant patient. Respondents who did not screen at time of simulation were significantly more likely to treat a pregnant patient than those who screened at time of simulation (p-value = 0.0459). CONCLUSIONS: Heterogeneity exists among practicing radiation oncologists regarding pregnancy screening. Institutional policies should be clear and consistent. All members of the radiation oncology team should make every effort to minimise unintended radiation exposure to the embryo or foetus.

3.
Toxicol Sci ; 175(1): 19-23, 2020 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32053201

ABSTRACT

Pancreatic cancer is a highly fatal malignancy for which surgery is currently considered to be the only curative treatment. However, less than a quarter of patients have disease amenable to definitive surgical resection. Local treatment with radiation therapy is a promising alternative to surgery for those patients with unresectable disease. However, conventional radiation techniques with computed tomography (CT)-guided therapy have yielded disappointing results due to the inability to deliver ablative doses of ionizing radiation, while sparing the radiosensitive adjacent organs at risk. Magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) has emerged as an alternative to CT-guided radiation treatment which allows for the delivery of higher doses of radiation with low toxicity to surrounding structures. Further study into the use of MRgRT and dose escalation for locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer is needed.


Subject(s)
Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Pancreatic Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Radiation Injuries/prevention & control , Radiotherapy, Image-Guided , Animals , Humans , Organs at Risk/radiation effects , Pancreatic Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Pancreatic Neoplasms/pathology , Patient Safety , Protective Factors , Radiation Dosage , Radiotherapy, Image-Guided/adverse effects , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...