Introduction:Discussion of bad news and resuscitation in terminal cancer is an important but difficult and often neglected issue in day-to-day oncology practice.Materials and Methods:We interviewed 35 radiation oncologists using an indigenous 15-item questionnaire on their beliefs about breaking bad news and resuscitation to terminal cancer patients.Results:Most responders had an oncology experience of three to seven years (20/35). Thirty-two were comfortable discussing cancer diagnosis, prognosis and life expectancy-related issues. A similar number believed all cancer-related information should be disclosed, while only four believed in imparting all information in one visit. All agreed that disclosing sensitive information did not affect survival. When requested by relatives to withhold truth from patients, 11 said they would not comply, 22 agreed to tell the truth only if asked and two agreed to avoid difficult questions. Twenty responders denied having been adequately trained in breaking bad news and were keen on dedicated classes or sessions in this area of practice. Most (33/35) believed that Indian patients were keen on knowing their diagnosis and prognosis. Although all agreed to the importance of discussing resuscitation, only 17 believed patients should be involved. Majority (20/35) agreed that the issue needs to be discussed while the patient was conscious. Patients with unsalvageable disease were deemed unsuitable for aggressive resuscitation by 30 responders while the rest believed it should be offered to all. Most (21/35) admitted to feeling depressed after breaking bad news though only seven felt disclosure was more stressful than untruthful statements. Only four knew of a law regarding resuscitation in cancer.Conclusion:Observing the widely varied beliefs and practices for disclosing bad news, it is recommended that such training be a regular part of medicine curriculum, especially in the Oncology setting.
CT-guided HDRIBT is a safe and feasible non-surgical treatment option for patients with MLL. It provides effective tumor control and needs to be studied further.
Re-irradiation of second primaries or recurrences of head and neck cancers with moderate radiation doses yields acceptable progression-free survival and morbidity rates.
Background:Phyllodes tumor (PT) of the breast can be categorized into benign, borderline and malignant subgroups depending on various histopathological factors. Although malignant PTs may be indolent and controlled by local excision, they frequently show local and distant relapses. Literature reveals local recurrence to be the predominant pattern of failure and thus emphasizes the importance of adjuvant radiation in these tumors. The role of systemic chemotherapy has remained doubtful.Materials and Methods:We have analyzed details of all patients of PT (n = 33) treated with adjuvant multi-modality approach in our institute since 1994–2009. The demographic data, treatment details, recurrence patterns and salvage treatment options were documented.Results:All patients received adjuvant radiation. Seven patients received adjuvant chemotherapy. The mean survival of the entire cohort was 150.618 months. There was a trend for better overall survival with borderline grade (193.6 vs. 160.2 months; P = 0.08, log rank). The disease free survival (DFS) favored borderline grade (193.6 months vs. 82.9 months for high grade; P = 0.02, log rank). The DFS was significantly better in tumors having negative margins on postoperative histopathological examination (DFS rate at 5 years being 100% vs. 69.2% for positive or close margins; P = 0.015). The mode of surgery did not have any impact on survival.Conclusion:Adjuvant Radiation should be discussed taking into account surgical margins, size and various pathological factors of the primary. Adjuvant radiation may be utilized in high risk patients to enhance loco-regional control. Systemic chemotherapy is an option, worth exploring, in cases of systemic failure.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.