ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To analyse a new technique for prostate brachytherapy with permanent Iodine implants characterized by the use of a seed projector after a 3D dosimetric peroperative treatment planning (FIRST technique). PATIENTS AND METHOD: 395 patients have been treated in France with this technique in six radiotherapy centres between November 2002 and December 2005 for a localized prostate cancer. RESULTS: Thirteen patients (3.3%) developped a urinary retention, and respectively 7.8 and 26.5% an acute RTOG grade 3 and 2 toxicity. The 6-weeks IPSS score was equal or lower to 15 in 73% with a 11 median IPSS value. A failure of the loading with the seed-projector, leading to a manual loading of the seeds, occurred in 9 patients (2.3%) in two centres, directly related to the loading procedure with the seed-projector in 5 cases. The median duration of the procedure was reduced by 30 minutes for the patients treated in 2005. CONCLUSIONS: This multicenter study establishes the feasibility of the routine use of a seed projector for permanent iodine 125 prostate implants with an initial tolerance similar to the best results published for other implants techniques.
Subject(s)
Brachytherapy/adverse effects , Brachytherapy/methods , Iodine Radioisotopes/administration & dosage , Prostatic Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Feasibility Studies , Follow-Up Studies , France , Humans , Imaging, Three-Dimensional , Male , Neoplasm Staging , Prostate/pathology , Prostate-Specific Antigen/blood , Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted , Time Factors , Urinary Retention/etiologyABSTRACT
AIMS: Several publications have reported age-related differences in the management of people with cancer. Most data have been derived retrospectively from hospital or cancer-centre databases. The aim of the present study was to identify major decisional factors observed in general practitioner (GP) practices, outside the hospital setting, regarding the clinical management of patients with prostate and breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: During three national GP meetings in Belgium, questionnaires presenting two simulated patient cases were presented to GPs who were asked two questions: one regarding further staging and referral of the case and the second regarding the treatment of the case. A total of 678 questionnaires were distributed. GPs received two randomly selected cases each: a breast cancer history and a prostate cancer history. Three variables were assessed simultaneously: age, performance status and medical history (comorbidity). RESULTS: The analysis indicated that elderly patients were more likely to be referred for non-curative treatment (OR 13.71; 95% CI 5.67-33.12; P < 0.0001 for prostate cancer and OR 17.67; 95% CI 4.04-77.31; P < 0.0001 for breast cancer). The other variables (performance status and medical history) did not affect treatment orientation. However, GPs were prepared to seek assistance from oncologists in both cases, irrespective of the patient's age. CONCLUSION: Age seems to be more important among GPs in deciding how to manage cancer patients than performance status and comorbidity. This is a very common prejudice. They are, nevertheless, inclined to refer people with cancer to oncologists independently of the patient's age.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/therapy , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Physicians, Family/statistics & numerical data , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Prostatic Neoplasms/therapy , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Belgium , Comorbidity , Female , Health Care Surveys , Health Status , Humans , Male , Middle AgedABSTRACT
This paper reports the patient care experience during the course of the radiotherapy. Plights are multiple. Patients are confronted with a complex and unknown distressing space, an irrelavant information, a banalization of side effects, an isolation with a frequent inadequate support of their family or the caregivers team, with the fear of a definitive abandonment at the end of the treatment without comforting follow-up. It is imperative to state a real policy in order to improve the patient support. Sensibilization and training of the caregivers, in spite of a frequent overbooking technical work, is required in a pluridisciplinary approach to provide a relevant reception with the collaboration of psychologists, social workers and self care groups and associations. The personal implication of the physicians and technologists is also essential. The simple smile is the intangible proof of the reliable emotional support.
