Surgical operations have been shown to cause a variety of immunological disturbances in man both in vivo and in vitro. With few exceptions the overall picture is one of a generalized state of immunodepression in the postoperative period. The implications of these observations are that host defences may be compromised by surgical procedures, thus providing a 'fertile soil' for bacterial invasion and tumour cell metastasis at the very time when risks from invading pathogens and viable tumour cells are maximal. We have studied the effects of surgical operations on the immune system in 35 patients with benign disease. Surgical procedures were classified as either minor (n = 15) or major (n = 20). A panel of monoclonal antibodies was used to identify peripheral blood lymphocyte subpopulations and analysis was performed using flow cytometry. Simultaneous estimations of plasma alpha-1 proteinase inhibitor (alpha-1-PI), alpha-2-macroglobulin (alpha-2-M), alpha-2-pregnancy-associated glycoprotein (alpha-2-PAG) and plasma suppressive activity (PSA) on stimulated allogeneic lymphocytes were performed before operation and on postoperative days 1, 3, 7, 17 and 21. Circulating numbers of all lymphocyte subpopulations fell significantly following surgery, except for B lymphocytes which did not change. The magnitude, and duration of the reduction in cell numbers and the subpopulation affected was significantly related to the degree of surgical trauma, and returned to pre-operative values by postoperative day 7. Changes in alpha-1-PI, alpha-2-M, alpha-2-PAG and PSA were also significantly related to the degree of surgical trauma, and these plasma changes persisted longer than the cellular disturbances. Surgical operations induce a reversible depression of cellular immunity which precedes plasma suppressive activity in its return to pre-operative levels. Immunostimulating agents such as interferon and the interleukins deserve evaluation as prophylactic agents pre-operatively.

First paragraph: There are approximately 2 million people now living with or beyond cancer in the UK (Maddams et al, 2009) and this number is increasing. Cancer survivors can experience physical, psychological and social consequences as a result of the disease and the treatments received (Jefford et al, 2008; Foster et al, 2009). The effects may be immediate, some of which will resolve and others may persist and become long-term. Late effects can also occur and the interval between the end of treatment and onset can range from a few weeks (e.g. lymphoedema after axillary node removal) to several years (e.g. heart disease following radiotherapy to the chest area). Problems will be individual to each patient due to a unique combination of circumstances including the site and stage of the cancer, the type of treatment(s) given, the age of the patient, genetic factors, concomitant co-morbidities, family and social circumstances, and personality traits

IntroductionDespite evidence of the efficacy of adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) in reducing the risk of recurrence and mortality after treatment for primary breast cancer, adherence to AET is suboptimal. This study aimed to explore factors that influence adherence and nonadherence to AET following breast cancer to inform the development of supportive interventions.MethodsInterviews were conducted with 32 women who had been prescribed AET, 2–4 years following their diagnosis of breast cancer. Both adherers (n=19) and nonadherers (n=13) were recruited. The analysis was conducted using the Framework approach.ResultsFactors associated with adherence were as follows: managing side effects including information and advice on side effects and taking control of side effects, supportive relationships, and personal influences. Factors associated with nonadherence were as follows: burden of side effects, feeling unsupported, concerns about long-term AET use, regaining normality, including valuing the quality of life over length of life, and risk perception.ConclusionProvision of timely information to prepare women for the potential side effects of AET and education on medication management strategies are needed, including provision of timely and accurate information on the efficacy of AET in reducing breast cancer recurrence and on potential side effects and ways to manage these should they arise. Trust in the doctor–patient relationship and clear patient pathways for bothersome side effects and concerns with AET are important. Training and education on AET for GPs should be considered alongside novel care pathways such as primary care nurse cancer care review and community pharmacist follow-up.

Specialists favour a risk adjusted discharge strategy and increased oncology infrastructure in primary care.

Adherence to adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) following breast cancer is known to be suboptimal despite its known efficacy in reducing recurrence and mortality. This study aims to investigate factors associated with non-adherence and inform the development of interventions to support women and promote adherence. A questionnaire survey to measure level of adherence, side effects experienced, beliefs about medicine, support received and socio-demographic details was sent to 292 women 2-4 years post breast cancer diagnosis. Differences between non-adherers and adherers to AET were explored, and factors associated with intentional and unintentional non-adherence are reported. Approximately one quarter of respondents, 46 (22%), were non-adherers, comprising 29 (14%) intentional non-adherers and 17 (8%) unintentional non-adherers. Factors significantly associated with intentional non-adherence were the presence of side effects (p < .03), greater concerns about AET (p < .001) and a lower perceived necessity to take AET (p < .001). Half of the sample (105/211) reported that side effects had a moderate or high impact on their quality of life. Factors associated with unintentional non-adherence were younger age (<65) (p < .001), post-secondary education (p = .046) and paid employment (p = .031). There are distinct differences between intentional non-adherence and unintentional non-adherence. Differentiation between the two types of non-adherence may help tailor support and advice interventions.