Fertility preservation in female cancer patients in Brazil: perceptions and attitudes of infertility specialists.

Objective: Fertility preservation is a priority in oncology for female cancer patients. However, there is a lack of communication between infertility specialists and oncologists. This study aimed to evaluate infertility specialists' perceptions and experiences regarding fertility preservation. Methods: Conduct an online survey to profile infertility specialists. Participants were infertility affiliated with the Brazilian Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Associations (FEBRASGO). The specialists received an online survey, which response rate were 30.9%, most of whom were in southern and southeastern. The survey consisted on 14 questions about the infertility specialists' location, techniques in clinical practice, treatment successful rate, patients idea, etc. Results: The average experience in human reproduction were 15.5 ± 10.2 years (mean ± standard deviation, range 1-40). Among reproductive-aged female cancer patients recommended for fertility preservation, 60.3 ± 28.8% (range 10-100%) underwent preservation procedures. Main barriers were cost (41%), oncologists' knowledge or acceptance (35%) and accessibility (9%). Most infertility specialists (58%) considered 40 years the limit for fertility preservation. Leukemia, lymphoma, breast and ovarian cancers were prioritized for fertility preservation, while lung, thyroid, gastric, and brain cancers were less relevant. Conclusion: This is the first Brazilian study about infertility specialists' perceptions on oncology patients access to fertility preservation. These patients primarily receive treatment in the public health system, while infertility specialists mainly work in the private healthcare. This healthcare mode is currently fragmented, but integrating these experts is enhancing patient access to fertility preservation. Studies on this topic are still warranted.

Fertility preservation in female cancer patients in Brazil: perceptions and attitudes of infertility specialists

Objective: Fertility preservation is a priority in oncology for female cancer patients. However, there is a lack of communication between infertility specialists and oncologists. This study aimed to evaluate infertility specialists' perceptions and experiences regarding fertility preservation. Methods: Conduct an online survey to profile infertility specialists. Participants were infertility affiliated with the Brazilian Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Associations (FEBRASGO). The specialists received an online survey, which response rate were 30.9%, most of whom were in southern and southeastern. The survey consisted on 14 questions about the infertility specialists' location, techniques in clinical practice, treatment successful rate, patients idea, etc. Results: The average experience in human reproduction were 15.5 ± 10.2 years (mean ± standard deviation, range 1-40). Among reproductive-aged female cancer patients recommended for fertility preservation, 60.3 ± 28.8% (range 10-100%) underwent preservation procedures. Main barriers were cost (41%), oncologists' knowledge or acceptance (35%) and accessibility (9%). Most infertility specialists (58%) considered 40 years the limit for fertility preservation. Leukemia, lymphoma, breast and ovarian cancers were prioritized for fertility preservation, while lung, thyroid, gastric, and brain cancers were less relevant. Conclusion: This is the first Brazilian study about infertility specialists' perceptions on oncology patients access to fertility preservation. These patients primarily receive treatment in the public health system, while infertility specialists mainly work in the private healthcare. This healthcare mode is currently fragmented, but integrating these experts is enhancing patient access to fertility preservation. Studies on this topic are still warranted.

Attitudes and beliefs of argentinian medical oncologists regarding palliative care referral / Actitudes y creencias de los médicos oncólogos argentinos sobre la derivación a cuidados paliativos

Abstract Introduction: Local evidence suggests insufficient access to palliative care (PC) for advanced cancer patients. The objective was to investigate the attitudes and beliefs of Argentinian medical oncologists regarding PC referral of their patients. Methods: All medical oncologists listed in the main national Clinical Oncology Associations (N = 831) were invited to participate in a telephone survey. Results: Fifty nine percent (N = 489) completed the survey. Most reported being informed about the scopes of PC (83%) and having accessible PC service/specialists (71%). However, 53% did not work collaboratively, and 55% exceptionally or never referred their patients. Oncologists who usually referred their patients did so mainly due to uncontrolled pain (67%) or absence of curative treatment (48%). Only 19% supported early-referral criteria. Those who exception ally referred their patients argued that PC was not meaningful/beneficial/a priority (78%) or that they preferred to handle the patient's problems by themselves (55%). End-of-life care (33%) and improvement in quality of life (32%) were stated as primary benefits of PC for cancer patients. Addressing psychological aspects was consid ered the least important item (2%). Having an accessible PC service (P = 0.002) and being well informed about PC (P = 0.008) were associated with frequent referral. Having ≤10 years or >30 years from graduation were associated with exceptional or no referral (P = 0.012 and 0.001, respectively). Discussion: Oncologists report awareness of the potential advantages of PC and have accessible PC services, but rarely refer patients. They mainly use late-referral criteria. Younger and older age are negatively associated with referral. More research is needed to improve the referral rate and timing of cancer patients to PC.

Resumen Introducción: La evidencia local sugiere un acceso insuficiente a los cuidados paliativos (CP) para los pacien tes con cáncer avanzado. El objetivo fue investigar las actitudes y creencias de médicos oncólogos argentinos respecto de la derivación de sus pacientes a CP. Métodos: Todos los médicos oncólogos registrados en las principales Asociaciones Nacionales de Oncología Clínica (N = 831) fueron invitados a participar en una encuesta telefónica. Resultados: El 59% (N = 489) completó la encuesta. La mayoría informó estar informado sobre los alcances de CP (83%) y tener especialistas/servicios de CP acce sibles (71%). Sin embargo, el 53% no trabajaba de forma colaborativa y el 55% excepcionalmente o nunca derivaba a sus pacientes. Los oncólogos que habi tualmente derivan a sus pacientes lo hacen principalmente por dolor no controlado (67%) o ausencia de trata miento curativo (48%). Solo el 19% mencionó criterios de derivación temprana. Aquellos que excepcionalmente derivan a sus pacientes argumentaron que los CP no era significativos, beneficiosos o prioritarios (78%) o que preferían manejar los problemas del paciente por sí mismos (55%). La atención al final de la vida (33 %) y la mejora de la calidad de vida (32 %) se señalaron como los principales beneficios de los CP para los pacientes con cáncer. El abordaje de los aspectos psicológicos fue el ítem menos señalado (2%). Tener un servicio de CP accesible (P= 0,002) y estar bien informado sobre CP (P = 0,008) se asociaron con la derivación frecuente. Tener ≤10 años o >30 años desde la graduación se asoció con una derivación excepcional o nula (P = 0,012 y 0,001, respectivamente). Discusión: Los oncólogos refieren conocer las ventajas potenciales de los CP y tienen servicios de CP accesibles, pero rara vez derivan pacientes. Utilizan principalmente criterios de derivación tardía. Las edades más jóvenes y mayores se asocian negativamente con la derivación. Se necesita más investigación para mejorar la tasa y momento de derivación de los pacientes con cáncer a CP.

Attitudes and beliefs of Argentinian medical oncologists regarding palliative care referral.

INTRODUCTION: Local evidence suggests insufficient access to palliative care (PC) for advanced cancer patients. The objective was to investigate the attitudes and beliefs of Argentinian medical oncologists regarding PC referral of their patients. METHODS: All medical oncologists listed in the main national Clinical Oncology Associations (N = 831) were invited to participate in a telephone survey. RESULTS: Fifty nine percent (N = 489) completed the survey. Most reported being informed about the scopes of PC (83%) and having accessible PC service/specialists (71%). However, 53% did not work collaboratively, and 55% exceptionally or never referred their patients. Oncologists who usually referred their patients did so mainly due to uncontrolled pain (67%) or absence of curative treatment (48%). Only 19% supported early-referral criteria. Those who exceptionally referred their patients argued that PC was not meaningful/beneficial/a priority (78%) or that they preferred to handle the patient's problems by themselves (55%). End-of-life care (33%) and improvement in quality of life (32%) were stated as primary benefits of PC for cancer patients. Addressing psychological aspects was considered the least important item (2%). Having an accessible PC service (P = 0.002) and being well informed about PC (P = 0.008) were associated with frequent referral. Having =10 years or >30 years from graduation were associated with exceptional or no referral (P = 0.012 and 0.001, respectively). DISCUSSION: Oncologists report awareness of the potential advantages of PC and have accessible PC services, but rarely refer patients. They mainly use late-referral criteria. Younger and older age are negatively associated with referral. More research is needed to improve the referral rate and timing of cancer patients to PC.

Introducción: La evidencia local sugiere un acceso insuficiente a los cuidados paliativos (CP) para los pacientes con cáncer avanzado. El objetivo fue investigar las actitudes y creencias de médicos oncólogos argentinos respecto de la derivación de sus pacientes a CP. Métodos: Todos los médicos oncólogos registrados en las principales Asociaciones Nacionales de Oncología Clínica (N = 831) fueron invitados a participar en una encuesta telefónica. Resultados: El 59% (N = 489) completó la encuesta. La mayoría informó estar informado sobre los alcances de CP (83%) y tener especialistas/servicios de CP acce sibles (71%). Sin embargo, el 53% no trabajaba de forma colaborativa y el 55% excepcionalmente o nunca derivaba a sus pacientes. Los oncólogos que habitualmente derivan a sus pacientes lo hacen principalmente por dolor no controlado (67%) o ausencia de tratamiento curativo (48%). Solo el 19% mencionó criterios de derivación temprana. Aquellos que excepcionalmente derivan a sus pacientes argumentaron que los CP no era significativos, beneficiosos o prioritarios (78%) o que preferían manejar los problemas del paciente por sí mismos (55%). La atención al final de la vida (33 %) y la mejora de la calidad de vida (32 %) se señalaron como los principales beneficios de los CP para los pacientes con cáncer. El abordaje de los aspectos psicológicos fue el ítem menos señalado (2%). Tener un servicio de CP accesible (P= 0,002) y estar bien informado sobre CP (P = 0,008) se asociaron con la derivación frecuente. Tener =10 años o >30 años desde la graduación se asoció con una derivación excepcional o nula (P = 0,012 y 0,001, respectivamente). Discusión: Los oncólogos refieren conocer las ventajas potenciales de los CP y tienen servicios de CP accesibles, pero rara vez derivan pacientes. Utilizan principalmente criterios de derivación tardía. Las edades más jóvenes y mayores se asocian negativamente con la derivación. Se necesita más investigación para mejorar la tasa y momento de derivación de los pacientes con cáncer a CP.

Communication Challenges Among Oncologists in Mexico.

Communication challenges related to the delivery of bad news are present in oncologists' daily practice. Hence, communication skills are essential for clinicians to handle these situations as appropriately and compassionately as possible. The aim of this study was to identify Mexican oncologists' perceptions on the most important and hardest issues to discuss with patients and their families, as well as the challenges they most commonly encounter when communicating bad news. Physicians from various oncology centers were invited to anonymously complete an electronical survey designed by our multidisciplinary oncology team. Statistical analysis was performed with the SPSS software v25; descriptive statistics were used for the analysis of the survey's answers. In total, 115 physicians were included; most were medical oncologists. Treatment objectives and prognosis were the topics most of them considered relevant to address; while end-of-life care and treatment objectives were the hardest ones to discuss. The most difficult challenges they faced when breaking bad news were being honest without taking away hope and dealing with patients' emotions. Remarkably, we detected a lack of training in delivering bad news to patients among our participants, as a minority of them had formal training in the matter. However, most desired to receive communication skills training and believed a session of 2-5 h would be sufficient. Mexican oncologists face diverse communication challenges when disclosing bad news to patients. Our findings reveal an opportunity to develop formal training programs tailored for Mexican oncologists and to ultimately improve outcomes and patient-centered care.

Associations of Uncertainty With Psychological Health and Quality of Life in Older Adults With Advanced Cancer.

CONTEXT: Older adults with advanced cancer face uncertainty related to their disease and treatment. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the associations of uncertainty with psychological health and quality of life (QoL) in older adults with advanced cancer. METHODS: Secondary cross-sectional analysis of baseline data from a national clustered geriatric assessment trial. Patients 70 years and older with advanced cancer considering a new line of chemotherapy were recruited. We measured uncertainty using the modified nine-item Mishel Uncertainty in Illness Scale. Dependent variables included anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7), depression (Generalized Depression Scale-15), distress (distress thermometer), QoL (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General), and emotional well-being (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General subscale). We used multivariate linear regression analyses to evaluate the association of uncertainty with each dependent variable. We conducted a partial least squares analysis with a variable importance in projection (VIP) plot to assess the contribution of individual variables to the model. Variables with a VIP <0.8 were considered less influential. RESULTS: We included 527 patients (median age 76 years; range 70-96). In multivariate analyses, higher levels of uncertainty were significantly associated with greater anxiety (ß = 0.11; SE = 0.04), depression (ß = 0.09; SE = 0.02), distress (ß = 0.12; SE = 0.02), as well as lower QoL (ß = -1.08; SE = 0.11) and emotional well-being (ß = -0.29; SE = 0.03); the effect sizes were considered small. Uncertainty items related to disease and treatment were most strongly associated with psychological health and QoL scores (all VIP >0.8). CONCLUSION: Uncertainty among older patients with advanced cancer is associated with worse psychological health and QoL. Tailored uncertainty management strategies are warranted.

Are there enough radiation oncologists to lead the new Spanish radiotherapy?

AIM: Radiation oncology services in Spain are undergoing a process of technical modernization, but-in a context of increasing demand by an ageing population-it is unclear whether there are enough radiation oncologists to staff the newly equipped units. This study aims to assess the number of specialists working in radiation oncology services in Spain relative to current and future needs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the second half of 2017, the Commission on Infrastructures of the Spanish Society for Radiation Oncology (SEOR) sent a questionnaire on radiation oncology staff to the heads of all 122 public (n = 76, 62%) and private (n = 46, 38%) radiation oncology services in Spain. Data collected were the number of professionals, their position, and their year of birth for specialists and residents in each service. In the descriptive analysis, for continuous variables we calculated means, standard deviations and ranges for each Spanish region and work post. For qualitative variables, we constructed frequency tables. All analyses were performed with R statistical software, version 3.5.1. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 100% among service heads across all 122 centers. The total number of radiation oncologists working in these centers is 721, or 15.4 per million population, with considerable variations between regions. Given the national recommendations to have 20 radiation oncologists per million population, there is currently a deficit of 204 specialists. If the 163 upcoming retirements are also taken into account, there will be 367 fewer radiation oncologists than required to meet the 25% increase in indications for radiotherapy projected for 2025. CONCLUSIONS: The classic model for calculating staff needs based on the number of treatments is outdated, and recommendations should be revised to reflect the current reality. A new model should integrate the most complex technological advances and emerging plans in radiotherapy, without neglecting the other activities carried out in radiation oncology services that are not directly linked to patient care.

Factors influencing oncologists' prescribing hormonal therapy in women with breast cancer: a qualitative study in Córdoba, Argentina.

BACKGROUND: Hormonal therapy is an integral component for breast cancer treatment in women with oestrogen receptor positive tumours in early-stage and advanced cases of the disease. Little is known about what factors influence oncologists' prescribing practices, especially non-biological factors, although this information may have important implications for understanding inequalities in health care quality and outcomes. This paper presents findings from research on factors influencing oncologists' prescribing hormonal therapy for women with early and advanced cases of breast cancer in the city of Córdoba, Argentina. METHODS: A qualitative study using in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 16 oncologists was conducted. A stratified purposive sampling was used to recruit female and male participants and working at 3 health subsystems (private, social security, public). Data was analysed using the Framework approach. RESULTS: According to the respondents, factors influencing prescribing practices of hormonal therapy are varied. Women's socio-economic status (poverty and wealth) and their level of health literacy can affect oncologists' prescribing practices. Overall, in comparison to male, female oncologists reported more awareness of patients' needs, more involvement in communicating drug side-effects, and in offering treatment options in private health settings. The 3 health subsystems provided a differential access to drugs and lines of hormonal treatment, which ranged from a limited availability in the public sector, to administrative restrictions imposed by the social security system, and to a lesser extent, the private sector. This happened in the backdrop of national legislation covering oncological treatments and drugs free of charge. CONCLUSIONS: Addressing prescribing practices for hormonal therapy as a distinct type of breast cancer treatment (chronic care) is fundamental in the understanding of breast cancer care and can shed light on inequalities in treatments. Identifying the underlying care gaps in the prescription of hormonal therapy can help in the design of tailored interventions.

Multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer: a national survey of patterns of practice among radiation oncologists in Spain.

PURPOSE: To investigate patterns of practice among Spanish radiation oncologists in the use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) for the treatment of prostate cancer (PCa). We evaluated (1) access to mpMRI, (2) current clinical practices, and (3) physician expectations of mpMRI. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey of 118 radiation oncologists at 75 Radiation Oncology (RO) departments in Spain. RESULTS: A total of 55 radiation oncologists from 52 RO departments (52/75; 69%) completed the survey. Prostate mpMRI is performed at 94.5% of the centres that provided data. The most common indications for mpMRI in routine clinical practice were: (1) detection/localization of the tumour prior to second biopsy (82.7%), (2) cancer staging (80.8%), and (3) detection of recurrence after definitive treatment (80.8%). Most respondents (72.7%) reported modifying the primary radiotherapy treatment when mpMRI findings indicate a more advanced T stage with a resultant change in the risk group. Most respondents (90.5%) treat macroscopic local recurrence after prostatectomy with high doses, ranging from 71 to 83 Gy; in 37.7% of cases, the full dose is delivered to the entire prostate bed. In pelvic nodal recurrence, more than half (59.3%) of the respondents reported performing elective pelvic radiotherapy, including the prostate bed, with a boost to the involved nodes. CONCLUSIONS: This survey shows that prostate mpMRI is routinely used by radiation oncologists in Spain in a wide range of clinical scenarios. The findings reported here underscore the need to standardize treatment protocols for definitive and salvage radiotherapy in patients evaluated with mpMRI.

This is a call to oncologists for action.

Cancer cases are growing in an exponential way, likewise the prices of new cancer drugs. Continuing in this way, in the near future, it will be impossible to provide optimum care for all cancer patients. Therefore, it is important to establish mechanisms that enable the National Health Systems to provide the best options of treatment, either through the elaboration of decision-binding frameworks or through other initiatives that guarantee the best quality care for all oncology patients to overcome, in the best possible way, this difficult illness. Here, we review current proposals that have been established by different cancer organizations worldwide, their similarities, their differences and whether they are helpful in a real clinical setting. Facing present reality and despite these organizations' huge efforts, these proposals are not being implemented at all and it does not seem feasible that they will in the short run. In the same way, we support and argue why oncologists should have a crucial and a preponderant role to establish the best way of guaranteeing an equal access to the latest oncology care.

Global Acceptance of Biosimilars: Importance of Regulatory Consistency, Education, and Trust.

Globally, biosimilars are expected to have a key role in improving patient access to biological therapies and addressing concerns regarding the escalating cost of health care. Indeed, in Europe, increased use of biologics and reduced drug prices have been observed after the introduction of biosimilars. Recently, several monoclonal antibody biosimilars of anticancer therapies have been approved, and numerous others are in various stages of clinical development. Biosimilars are authorized via a regulatory pathway separate from that used for generic drugs; they are also regulated separately from novel biologics. Biosimilar approval pathways in many major regulatory regions worldwide are, to a broad degree, scientifically aligned. However, owing to regional differences in health care priorities, policies, and resources, some important regulatory inconsistencies are evident. Acceptance of biosimilars by health care systems, health care professionals, and patients will be a key factor in the uptake of these therapies, and such regulatory variations could contribute to confusion and diminished confidence regarding the quality, efficacy, and reliability of these agents. Furthermore, the need for manufacturers to account for regulatory inconsistencies introduces inefficiencies and delays into biosimilar development programs. These issues should be addressed if biosimilars are to attain their maximal global potential. This review summarizes the evolution of the global biosimilar landscape and provides examples of inconsistencies between regulatory requirements in different regions. In addition, we review ongoing efforts to improve regulatory alignment and highlight the importance of education as a crucial factor in generating trust in, and acceptance of, biosimilars on a worldwide scale. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Biosimilars of monoclonal antibody anticancer therapies are beginning to emerge, and more are likely to become available for clinical use in the near future. The extent to which biosimilars can contribute to cancer care will depend on their level of acceptance by health care systems, health care professionals, and patients. A better understanding of the regulatory basis for the approval of biosimilars may enhance confidence and trust in these agents. In order to have informed discussions about treatment choices with their patients, oncologists should familiarize themselves with the biosimilar paradigm.

Current situation in gynecological oncology training in Spain: where we are and where we want to go.

BACKGROUND: It is important to know what a young gynecologic oncologist perceives as a need to achieve a good training in gynecologic oncology. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the level of training in gynecologic oncology in Spain. METHODS: A Web-based anonymous questionnaire was sent via e-mail to Spanish trainees listed in European Network of Young Gynecological Oncology (ENYGO). The survey was developed in four sections: (1) general training in gynecologic oncology, (2) distribution of current clinical activity, (3) surgical training, and (4) perspective future gynecologic oncology. It contained 51 questions, with multiple-choice answers that had to be answered by the ENYGO members. RESULTS: The questionnaire was sent to 64 people listed in the ENYGO database. Of these, 37 members responded (response rate of 58%). Overall, more training in surgery is necessary, to perform radical oncological surgeries. It is claimed a sub-specialty recognition, to ensure an equalitarian and homogeneous training.

Oncologist's knowledge and implementation of guidelines for breakthrough cancer pain in Spain: CONOCE study.

PURPOSE: Breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP) has been shown to be a prevalent and poor prognostic factor for oncologic patients, which remain under diagnosed and undertreated. In 2012, the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) published a clinical practice guideline (CPG) for the treatment of cancer pain which specifically addressed the management of BTcP. METHODS: Fundación ECO designed a qualitative study using an Internet-based survey to investigate the attitudes toward, compliance with, and use of SEOM Guideline. RESULTS: A total of 83 oncologists with a mean experience of 13 years responded. Overall, 82% were aware of different guidelines to manage BTcP. Notably, attitudes toward guidelines were highly positive and there was nearly unanimous agreement that CPG provided the best scientific evidence available (99%), on the minimum information to be gathered for the medical history (100%), on the need for a specific treatment for BTcP (100%), and fentanyl as the first-choice drug (99%). Interestingly, there were discrepancies between what oncologists agreed with and what they do in clinical practice. In fact, 87.6% declare full compliance with SEOM guideline, although adherence to registration of BTcP data in medical records ranged from 30.1 to 91.6% (mean 64.5%); therapeutic management compliance was higher ranging from 75.9 to 91.6%. Main barriers identified were time pressure together with vague statements and limited dissemination of the guidelines. CONCLUSION: Despite oncologist's clinical practice is increasingly guided by GPC, it suffers from limited compliance, at least in part due to suboptimal statements. Improved dissemination and education are needed to enhance guideline implementation.

Diferencias individuales y burnout en médicos oncólogos venezolanos / Individual Differences and Burnout in Venezuelan Oncologists

El presente estudio explora la influencia de ciertas diferencias individuales como la sensibilidad emocional, los estilos de afrontamiento y los estilos de comunicación sobre el burnout de médicos oncólogos venezolanos. Participaron en el estudio 93 médicos oncólogos de diversos hospitales oncológicos públicos de Caracas (Venezuela), quienes completaron los cuestionarios que evaluaban las variables mencionadas. Los resultados indicaron niveles medios de burnout en los médicos estudiados, una mayor sensibilidad emocional positiva, adopción de funcionales estilos de afrontamiento y estilos de comunicación más centrados en sí mismos. Por su parte, el análisis de regresión reveló que una mayor sensibilidad egocéntrica negativa y una menor sensibilidad interpersonal positiva determinan mayores niveles de burnout en los oncólogos.

The present study explores the influence of certain individual differences such as the emotional sensitivity, the coping styles and the communication styles over the burnout of Venezuelan oncologists. 93 oncologists participated in the study from different public oncological hospitals from Caracas-Venezuela, who completed the questionnaires evaluating the mentioned variables. Results indicated medium levels of burnout for the physicians, a higher positive emotional sensitivity, the use of functional coping styles and communication styles more self centered. On the other side, the regression analysis revealed that a higher negative egocentric sensitivity and a lower positive interpersonal sensitivity determine higher levels of burnout in the oncologists.

Infección por el virus de hepatitis B en el paciente oncológico. Encuesta en la práctica clínica / Hepatitis B infections in oncology patients. A survery of clinical practice

El riesgo de reactivación de la infección por el virus de la hepatitis B en los pacientes que reciben tratamientos de quimioterapia se reconoce cada día más. El presente estudio se hizo con el objetivo de evaluar el grado de conocimiento de este riesgo por parte de los médicos que tratan los pacientes oncológicos en Colombia y examinar las prácticas de tamizaje y profilaxis por parte de los especialistas.Un cuestionario con 7 preguntas fue distribuido entre los asistentes al Congreso nacional de cáncer que se realizo en Cali, en octubre del año 2008. Un total de 134 médicos (60 oncólogos, 31 hemato-oncólogos, 17 hematólogos, 6 pediatras oncólogos y 20 cirujanos oncólogos) respondieron el cuestionario. Un poco más de la mitad de estos especialistas (58%), tiene más de 10 años de experiencia en su práctica clínica. El 23% de los oncólogos nunca solicita pruebas para hepatitis B antes de iniciar una quimioterapia, el 50% algunas veces lo hace, y solo el 27% siempre las solicita. Cuando se eligen las pruebas serológicas para estos pacientes, solo el 23% de los oncólogos pide las pruebas recomendadas.Cuando se trata de elegir un agente para profilaxis de la reactivación del virus de la hepatitis B, la mayoría de los especialistas selecciona el interferón pegilado.Conclusiones. Se deben realizar más foros académicos entre infectólogos, hepatólogos y los especialistas que tratan pacientes oncológicos para generar pautas y recomendaciones propias que puedan aplicarse a todos los pacientes.

The risk of chronic hepatitis B reactivation during chemotherapy treatment is being increasingly recognized. In this study our aims were to evaluate the degree of awareness of the potential risk of reactivation of hepatitis B and to examine the screening, and prevention practices among the hematologists / oncologists in Colombia.Methods. A written questionnaire survey was applied to the physicians convened in Cali for the national congress of cancer in October 2008.Results. A number of 134 specialists in the treatment of the oncology patients were surveyed. Just over half (58%) of them have more than 10 years of clinical practice.Regarding screening, 23% of the oncologists never screened patients for hepatitis B infection prior to initiating chemotherapy, 50% “sometimes” and only 27% of them screened all the patients before chemotherapy. Only 23% of the oncologists selected the specifics serological tests for hepatitis B in persons needing chemotherapy. Regarding selection of a prophylactic agent, most of these specialists prescribed interferon pegilated.Conclusions. More awareness of hepatitis B reactivation during chemotherapy in the oncology community is recommended.