Background State-of-the art therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer (ROC) suitable for platinum-based re-treatment includes bevacizumab-containing combinations (eg, carboplatin/paclitaxel, carboplatin/gemcitabine) or the most active non-bevacizumab regimen: carboplatin/pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD). This head-to-head trial compared a standard bevacizumab-containing regimen versus carboplatin/PLD combined with bevacizumab. Methods In this multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial, eligible patients had histologically confirmed epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube carcinoma with first disease recurrence >6 months after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy, and were aged ≥18 years with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2. Patients were stratified by platinum-free interval, residual tumour, prior anti-angiogenic therapy, and study group language, and centrally randomised 1:1 using randomly permuted blocks of size two, four, or six to six intravenous cycles of carboplatin (AUC 4, day 1) plus gemcitabine (1000 mg/m 2 , days 1 and 8) every 3 weeks or six cycles of carboplatin (AUC 5, day 1) plus PLD (30 mg/m 2 , day 1) every 4 weeks, both given with bevacizumab (15 mg/kg every 3 weeks or 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks) until disease progression or toxicity. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Efficacy data were analysed in the intention-to-treat population (all randomised patients). Safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This completed study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT01837251.

Background: In 2009, Germany enacted a new law supporting advance directives that led to heated discussions in the media and the public. 3 years after the law passed, we surveyed patients with malignant diseases with regards to their views on advance directives. Patients and Methods: Between September 2011 and July 2012 an anonymous survey on advance directives was conducted among 617 patients at the hematology and oncology outpatient department of the University Hospital Mannheim, using a standardized questionnaire developed for this investigation. Results: Of the 503 patients who returned the questionnaire, 31% (n = 157) indicated having an advance directive. Of these 157, 54% (n = 85) completed the advance directive after 2009. 56% (282 out of 503) desired more information on advance directives. Of these, 71% (201 out of 282) wanted their general physician and 45% (128 out of 282) their specialist, to provide more information about this issue. Of the 339 patients without an advance directive, 47% (n = 158) stated that they had ‘not worried about that yet'. Conclusion: Although the percentage of patients with advance directives has increased since the legislative amendment, more information is still required by patients. It is recommended that physicians should discuss advance directives more frequently with their patients.

Antibody recognition of specific tumour antigens by patients' sera may be used for evaluating the possible immunogenicity of new antigens; serological tests could be used for tumour monitoring purposes.

Background: Cancer-related pain is highly prevalent among outpatients with metastatic breast cancer affecting their health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This study evaluates potential effects of comprehensive pharmacologic cancer pain therapy (CPT) on HRQoL. Patients and Methods: 52 outpatients with metastatic breast cancer undergoing palliative chemotherapy participated. 28 patients suffering from moderate to severe cancer pain were offered CPT. 13 patients participated (intervention group), and 15 declined participation (control group). HRQoL was assessed with the Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the breast module QLQ-BR23 at baseline and after 3 weeks. Results: At baseline, 83% of the patients experienced cancer-related pain, of whom 35% were not prescribed any pain medication. HRQoL of all patients was reduced compared to reference scores. After CPT, the intervention group reported significantly alleviated pain and improvement in several HRQoL subscales (Global QoL, Emotional Functioning, Physical Functioning, Future Perspective, Sleeplessness). The control group did not change significantly. Conclusion: This study emphasizes the demand for sufficient pain management in palliative breast cancer outpatients. The combination of CPT as a guidance for the pharmacological aspects of cancer pain management and the EORTC QLQ-C30 as an assessment and surveillance tool appears to be a method that warrants further research.

No abstract

Background: Improved cancer treatments have resulted in prolonged survival. Nevertheless, tumor symptoms and side effects still compromise physical activity and quality of life (QoL). Patients and Methods: We conducted an anonymous survey among cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy using standardized questionnaires: the ‘Freiburger Fragebogen zur körperlichen Aktivität' (Freiburg Questionnaire on Physical Activity) and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30. Two main questions were addressed: were there differences (1) in physical activity and QoL between patients who do not believe that sport could improve their QoL and those who believe it could (group A vs. B); and (2) in QoL between patients with a total activity (TA) < 18 metabolic equivalent of task (MET) h/week and those with a TA of ≥ 18 MET h/week (group C vs. D)? Results: 276 of 400 questionnaires were completed. Groups A and B were balanced in terms of baseline characteristics. Group A suffered significantly more from fatigue and pain; group B reported higher levels of global health status (GHS) and TA. Groups C and D differed in gender distribution, age, and educational background. Group D had significantly higher levels of GHS, group C suffered more from fatigue, pain, and appetite loss. Conclusion: Physical activity correlates with a better QoL of cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy.

The present case demonstrates the feasibility of transgastric access. The gastroscope provided excellent optical control and good tissue preparation. Therefore, we expect an increasing role of transgastric procedures for diseases in the pelvic region, particularly if new endoscopic platforms with better means of instrumentation and tissue management become available.

BackgroundTo evaluate whether tumor localization and method of preoperative biopsy affect sentinel lymph node (SLN) detection after periareolar nuclide injection in breast cancer patients.Methods and Findings767 breast cancer patients were retrospectively included. For lymphscintigraphy periareolar nuclide injection was performed and the SLN was located by gamma camera. Patient and tumor characteristics were correlated to the success rate of SLN mapping. SLN marking failed in 9/61 (14.7%) patients with prior vacuum-assisted biopsy and 80/706 (11.3%) patients with prior core needle biopsy. Individually evaluated, biopsy method (p = 0.4) and tumor localization (p = 0.9) did not significantly affect the SLN detection rate. Patients with a vacuum-assisted biopsy of a tumor in the upper outer quadrant had a higher odds ratio of failing in SLN mapping (OR 3.8, p = 0.09) compared to core needle biopsy in the same localization (OR 0.9, p = 0.5).ConclusionsTumor localization and preoperative biopsy method do not significantly impact SLN mapping with periareolar nuclide injection. However, the failure risk tends to rise if vacuum-assisted biopsy of a tumor in the upper outer quadrant is performed.