RESUMO
Introduction: Palliative care (PC) has been classically synonymous with end-of-life care offered to patients with advanced incurable cancers with an aim to improve their quality-of-life (QoL). However, there is growing evidence to suggest that early integration of PC (EIPC) along with cancer-directed management improves patient-reported outcomes. In this study, we aim to evaluate the impact of EIPC on QoL of cervical cancer patients treated with curative intent. Material and Methods: Patients with locally advanced cervical cancer (stage IB2 to IIIB) having eastern cooperative oncology group (ECOG) performance score 0-2 were randomized into EIPC arm and standard of care arm of concurrent chemoradiation by a computer-generated table of random numbers. QoL was assessed by functional assessment of cancer therapy - general (FACT-G) questionnaire twice in both arms. The first assessment was done prior to starting treatment and second assessment at three months after treatment completion. The mean scores on physical, mental, emotional, social, and functional well-being subscales of FACT-G scale were calculated in both arms, and Wilcoxon test was used to evaluate differences in QoL scores within and in between the arms. This trial was registered with Clinical Trials Registry of India (CTRI) vide CTRI/2017/05/008704. Results: Fifty patients were enrolled in each arm. However, only 42 and 45 patients in EPIC and standard oncological care arm were evaluated in the final analysis. Comparing QoL scores between the two time points in each arm, the mean pre-treatment scores in EIPC arm was significantly higher than post-treatment scores in the domains of physical and emotional well-being, whereas social and functional well-being scores improved significantly after treatment as compared with that as baseline. However, when compared between two arms, the difference of mean scores pre- and post-treatment were almost similar for physical and functional well-being but statistically significant differences were found only in social and emotional well-being scales. Conclusions: Our study is a feasibility study done in an attempt to test the validity of EIPC in cervical cancers. The results are inspiring to conduct robust studies in the future to explore this new domain of integration of palliative services in curable cancers.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: The entire world is currently facing a devastating crisis due to growing coronavirus pandemic, which was declared as a public health emergency by the World Health Organization on March 11, 2020. Management of cancer patients at this time is an overwhelming task. This study highlights our experience in the management of patients of gynecological malignancies over a period of 2 months during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Patients of confirmed gynecological malignancies who visited our outpatient clinic and those who received radiotherapy/chemotherapy in March and April 2020 were included for analysis. Guidelines issued by the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence, National Health Service, MD Anderson Cancer Centre and those by young oncologists in Italy were followed with minor modifications while managing the logistics and health worker safety. RESULTS: A total of 160 patients were treated in our department during this time period. In total, 44.4% of patients on treatment had associated comorbidities that imposed an additional risk. One hundred twenty-three patients continued treatment with their initial plan of radiotherapy or chemotherapy. New patients were prioritized based on the severity of clinical symptoms and whether the expected outcome would significantly affect their survival and quality of life. Patients were monitored for the development of treatment-related toxicities and COVID-19-related symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: All oncology personnel need to identify the correct balance between risks and benefit and then proceed with further management. Thus, it is essential to cautiously select patients for treatment, minimizing the risk of exposure but adequately addressing the underlying disease.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Cervical cancer is a major health problem among the female population worldwide. Its incidence among the elderly group of patients seems to be increasing. Sociodemographic along with clinical profile of patients is the first step in planning preventive and curative measures; we thus conducted a retrospective analysis of demographic and clinical profile of elderly patients suffering from cervical cancer visiting at our institute. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Records of 88 elderly patients (age> =65 years) suffering from cervical cancer from the year 2011 to 2014 were analyzed for a sociodemographic profile, symptoms, histology, and staging. Fisher's exact test was applied using R software (version 3.5.2) for statistical analysis. RESULTS: The median age of the cohort was 74 years. The majority of patients were from a rural background and were nonsmokers. All patients were multiparous. The most common presenting symptoms were discharge, bleeding from vagina and pain in the abdomen; present in 45 (51.13%), 25 (28.40%) and 18 (20.45%) patients, respectively. 78 (88.63%) patients' had advanced stage (II, III, IV) at the time of presentation while the number of cases diagnosed at early stage were only 10 (11.36%). 69% had associated comorbidities. Prolonged duration of symptoms was also found to be associated with higher stage (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The study brings forth the background profile of the elderly patients suffering from cervical cancer. Since the majority of patients present in an advanced stage of disease appropriate preventive steps and also the possibility of initiating screening measures should be sought among an elderly group of cervical cancer patients.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Carcinoma cervix is amongst the leading causes of mortality and morbidity in women population worldwide. High-dose-rate intracavitary brachytherapy (HDR-ICBT) post external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) is the standard of care in managing locally advanced stage cervical cancer patients. HDR-ICBT is generally performed under general anaesthesia (GA) in operation theatre (OT), but due to logistic reasons, sometimes, it becomes difficult to accommodate all patients under GA. Since prolonged overall treatment time (OTT) makes the results inferior, taking patients in day care setup under procedural sedation (PS) can be an effective alternative. In this audit, we tried to retrospectively analyse the dosimetric difference, if any, in patients who underwent ICBT at our centre, under either GA in OT or PS in day care. RESULTS: Thirty five patients were analysed 16/35 (45.71%) patients underwent HDR-ICBT under GA while 19/35 (54.28%) patients under PS. In both groups, a statistically significant difference was observed between the dose received by 0.1 cc as well as 2 cc of rectum (p < 0.05), while the bladder and sigmoid colon had comparable dosages. CONCLUSION: Though our dosimetric analysis highlighted better rectal sparing in patients undergoing HDR-ICBT under GA when compared to patients under PS, PS can still be considered an effective alternative, especially in centres dealing with significant patient load. Further studies are required for firm conclusion.
