BackgroundBreast cancer is the most common cancer in women, representing 16% of all female cancers. According to the American Cancer Society, long-term cancer survival is defined as more than five years of survivorship since diagnosis, with approximately 2.5 million breast cancer survivors (BCS) in 2006. The long-term effects from breast cancer and its treatment have been shown to have positive and negative effects on both recovery and survivors' quality of life (QoL). The purpose of the study was to identify QoL instruments that have been validated in long-term BCS and to review the studies that have used the QoL instruments in this population.MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted from January 1990 to October 2010 using electronic databases. Instruments validated and used in BCS were included in the review. In addition, QoL studies in long-term BCS using the validated instruments were reviewed. The search was limited to studies in English language. Studies of BCS of less than five years after initial diagnosis, any clinical or review studies were excluded.ResultsThe review identified a total of 12 instruments (10 disease-specific, 2 condition-specific) validated in long-term BCS. According to the QoL framework proposed by Ferrell and colleagues, three instruments (Quality of Life-Cancer Survivors, Quality of Life in Adult Cancer Survivors Scale, and Quality of Life Index-Cancer Version) evaluated all four domains (physical, psychological, social, and spiritual) of QoL. A review of the psychometric evaluation showed that Quality of Life in Adult Cancer Survivors Scale has acceptable reliability, validity, and responsiveness in long-term BCS compared to other disease-specific instruments. The review also yielded 19 studies that used these QoL instruments. The study results indicated that age-group, ethnicity, and type of treatment influenced different aspects of QoL.ConclusionsThere is a significant impact of breast cancer on QoL in long-term BCS. The review can help researchers and clinicians select the most appropriate instruments to assess the changes in QoL in BCS.

No abstract

Background:Repository corticotropin injection (RCI) has regulatory approval for many indications, including symptomatic sarcoidosis. This large case series of patients with advanced symptomatic sarcoidosis treated with RCI describes patient characteristics, RCI utilization patterns, concomitant therapies, and physicians’ assessments of treatment response.Methods:Patients ⩾18 years with symptomatic sarcoidosis, treated with RCI in the previous 36 months, who had completed a course of RCI or received RCI for ⩾6 months at the time of data collection were included.Results:The study included 302 patients (mean age, 51 years; 52%, women) with a mean 4.8 years since initial diagnosis of sarcoidosis. Most patients (76%) had extrapulmonary involvement, primarily in the skin (28%), joints (25%), heart (22%), and eyes (22%); 34% had multiple (⩾2) organ involvement. The mean duration of RCI treatment was 32.5 weeks, with 61.6% of patients continuing RCI therapy for ⩾6 months. The RCI utilization pattern indicated an individualized approach to therapy, with a higher starting dose associated with a shorter duration of therapy compared with a lower starting dose. The percentage of patients who used corticosteroids decreased from 61.3% during the 3 months before initiation of RCI to 12.9% 3 months after RCI therapy; the mean daily dose of corticosteroid decreased from 18.2 mg to 9.9 mg. The proportion of patients given <10 mg/day of prednisone increased from 21% before RCI use to 47% 3 months after RCI use. According to physicians’ assessments of change in patients’ health status after RCI therapy, overall status improved in 95% of patients, overall symptoms in 73%, lung function in 38%, and inflammation in 33%.Conclusions:The findings suggest that RCI is a viable treatment option for patients with advanced symptomatic sarcoidosis and provide insights on patient characteristics and practice patterns to help clinicians determine appropriate use. The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.

Genetic counseling and testing for familial cancer is a unique context for the communication of risk information in the family. This study utilized a theoretical framework based on the family systems perspective to understand intra-familial cancer risk communication patterns in the Ashkenazi Jewish population. Individuals (n=120) at an elevated risk for BRCA1/2 mutations were included. Change in communication patterns over time was assessed using McNemar tests. Associations with communication patterns were assessed with multivariable logistic regression. Overall, the proportion of participants encouraged by others significantly (P<0.001) increased from pre- to post-genetic counseling. A higher proportion of participants were encouraged by female family members compared to male family members. Participants who were older, had no personal history of cancer, and had a higher cancer risk perception were more likely to be encouraged by others for genetic testing. Participant’s intent to encourage family members for genetic testing from pre-counseling to post-receipt of genetic test results decreased by 16.7%. Participants who had no personal history of cancer and had informative test results for a BRCA1/2 mutation were more likely to encourage other family members for genetic testing. In addition, qualitative findings suggested that closeness among family members, concern for family, especially future generations, and cognizance about cancer risk facilitates information sharing and encouragement for genetic testing. Our findings indicate that intra-familial cancer risk communication varies with structure of family relationships, where genetic counseling played an important role in improving intra-familial cancer risk communication.

BackgroundAppropriate follow-up care is important for improving health outcomes in breast cancer survivors (BCSs) and requires determination of the optimum intensity of clinical examination and surveillance, assessment of models of follow-up care such as primary care-based follow-up, an understanding of the goals of follow-up care, and unique psychosocial aspects of care for these patients. The objective of this systematic review was to identify studies focusing on follow-up care in BCSs from the patient’s and physician’s perspective or from patterns of care and to integrate primary empirical evidence on the different aspects of follow-up care from these studies.MethodsA comprehensive literature review and evaluation was conducted for all relevant publications in English from January 1, 1990 to December 31, 2013 using electronic databases. Studies were included in the final review if they focused on BCS’s preferences and perceptions, physician’s perceptions, patterns of care, and effectiveness of follow-up care.ResultsA total of 47 studies assessing the different aspects of follow-up care were included in the review, with a majority of studies (n=13) evaluating the pattern of follow-up care in BCSs, followed by studies focusing on BCS’s perceptions (n=9) and preferences (n=9). Most of the studies reported variations in recommended frequency, duration, and intensity of follow-up care as well as frequency of mammogram screening. In addition, variations were noted in patient preferences for type of health care provider (specialist versus non-specialist). Further, BCSs perceived a lack of psychosocial support and information for management of side effects.ConclusionThe studies reviewed, conducted in a range of settings, reflect variations in different aspects of follow-up care. Further, this review also provides useful insight into the unique concerns and needs of BCSs for follow-up care. Thus, clinicians and decision-makers need to understand BCS’s preferences in providing appropriate follow-up care tailored specifically for each patient.

This study examined the association between index hospitalization characteristics and the risk of all-cause 30-day readmission among high-risk Medicaid beneficiaries using multi-level analyses. A retrospective cohort with a baseline and a follow-up period was used. The study population consisted of Medicaid beneficiaries (21-64 years) with selected chronic conditions, continuous fee-for-service enrollment through the observation period, and at least one inpatient encounter during the follow-up period (N=15,806). The outcome of 30-day readmission was measured using inpatient admissions within 30-days from the discharge date of the first observed hospitalization. Key independent variables included length of stay, reason for admission, and month of index hospitalization (seasonality). Multi-level logistic regression that accounted for beneficiaries nested within counties was used to examine this association, after controlling for patient-level and county-level characteristics. In this study population, 16.7% had all-cause 30-day readmissions. Adults with greater lengths of stay during the index hospitalization were more likely to have 30-day readmissions [AOR=1.03, 95% CI 1.02,1.04]. Adults who were hospitalized for cardiovascular conditions [AOR=1.20, 95% CI 1.08,1.33], diabetes [AOR=1.23, 95% CI 1.10,1.39], cancer [AOR=1.55, 95% CI 1.26,1.90], and mental health conditions [AOR=2.17, 95% CI 1.98,2.38] were more likely to have 30-day readmissions compared to those without these conditions.

No abstract

These variations in therapeutic goal attainment in patients with concomitant hypertension and dyslipidemia across different BMI groups suggest that future research is needed to determine the underlying reasons for these disparities.