Clinical manifestation and survival of patients with small-cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical manifestation, diagnostic investigation, treatment, and survival of patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). DESIGN: Retrospective study. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Patients with histologically and/or cytologically proven SCLC, adequate medical record for clinical history, and survival between January 1, 1999 and December 31, 2003, were reviewed. The stage of disease at presentation was based on the Veterans' Administration Lung Cancer Study Group (VALSG) staging system of limited-stage and extensive-stage disease. RESULTS: One hundred and sixteen evaluative SCLC patients were enrolled in the present study. SCLC was common in elderly men who smoked. Major symptoms were cough 81%, weight loss 72%, and dyspnea 67%. Hoarseness and superior vena cava syndrome (SVC syndrome) were present in 18% and 17% respectively. Forty-nine patients (42%) presented with limited-stage disease and 67 (58%) with extensive-stage disease. Thirty patients (26%) received chemotherapy alone, 23 patients (20%) received radiotherapy alone, 33 patients (28%) received combined chemoradiotherapy, and 30 patients (26%) received supportive treatment. A chemotherapy regimen of cisplatin combined with etoposide was used in 61 of 63 patients (97%). The overall response to chemotherapy was complete remission in 12 cases (19%), and partial response in 20 cases (32%). The median survival of limited-stage disease was significantly better than those with extensive-stage disease (44 weeks vs. 22 weeks). Patients with chemotherapy treatment had significantly improved median survival in both limited-stage and extensive-stage disease. CONCLUSION: More than half of the SCLC patients presented in extensive-stage disease. The majority of the patients were treated with systemic chemotherapy. Patients with limited-stage disease had better response to chemotherapy and better survival than those with extensive-stage disease.

Survey of asthma control in Thailand.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to determine whether asthma management in Thailand is succeeding in achieving the levels of control, specified in national and international asthma guidelines. METHODOLOGY: Adults with asthma in Bangkok, Chiang Mai, Songkhla, and Khon Kaen were interviewed, and we have reported on their asthma severity, morbidity, control, perception of asthma, and healthcare use. RESULTS: A total of 466 asthma sufferers were interviewed. The burden of asthma was high, with 14.8% of respondents being hospitalized for their asthma in the past year. One-quarter of those surveyed had lost workdays as a result of their asthma, and most patients felt that their lifestyle was limited. The majority of respondents had intermittent asthma (62.9%), 10.5% had mild persistent asthma, 17.6% had moderate persistent asthma, and 9.0% had severe persistent asthma; increasing severity was significantly associated with increased emergency healthcare use (P < 0.00001). Asthma sufferers greatly underestimated the severity of their condition. Only 36.0% used reliever medication, and use of inhaled corticosteroids was low at 6.7%. Understanding of the inflammatory basis of asthma was poor. Few patients underwent lung function tests or took peak flow meter readings. CONCLUSIONS: The burden of asthma is high in Thailand, and guidelines are not being followed. Encouraging greater use of inhaled corticosteroids will be an important step towards improving asthma control.