11th Biennial Ovarian Cancer Research Symposium
Friday, July 29, 2016
Registration/Notice: 11th Biennial Ovarian Cancer Research Symposium (free for patient/survivors)
11th Biennial Ovarian Cancer Research Symposium
Interval Debulking Surgery Is Less Invasive Than Upfront Debulking Surgery for Stage III/IV Cancers (ovarian/PP/FT)
medical news
TAKE-HOME MESSAGE
-
In a phase III trial, the standard treatment (primary debulking
surgery) was compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (including interval
debulking surgery) for patients with stage III/IV ovarian, tubal, and
peritoneal cancers. Neoadjuvant therapy led to fewer surgeries, reduced
operation time, less organ resection, less blood loss, fewer albumin
transfusions, and fewer high-grade adverse events following surgery.
- Neoadjuvant therapy is less invasive than the standard treatment for advanced ovarian cancer and may become the new standard if noninferiority is confirmed.
What Do Ovarian Cancer Patients Expect From Treatment? open access
open access (click on link then pdf)
July 23, 2016
Author Affiliations: PatientsLikeMe, Cambridge, Massachusetts; AstraZeneca, Mo¨lndal, Sweden
Study Design
A Web-based survey was administered tomembers of PLM with
ovarian cancer between January 9, 2014, and March 17, 2014.
PatientsLikeMe uses a secure, internal survey software tool to administer
research surveys to patients. Using a series of open ended questions, the
objective of this survey was to understand patient experiences, hopes, and expectations from their ovarian cancer treatment.
Ovarian Cancer Experience Survey
The data presented are a subset of the Ovarian Cancer Experience
Questionnaire, a larger questionnaire about ovarian cancer patient
experiences. The survey was based on a study by McCarrier
and colleagues17 with patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia.
The survey was adapted for use in ovarian cancer through
literature review and consultation with several clinical experts.
The original survey contained 74 items covering a range of topics
aimed at capturing the clinical background, treatment, impact
on quality of life, and hopes and expectations before and after
each treatment episode for patients with ovarian cancer......
Patient Knowledge at Diagnosis
Two-thirds (n = 20) of participants reported knowing little to
nothing about ovarian cancer at diagnosis. Those with some
knowledge described knowing only that ovarian cancer has a
high likelihood of a fatal outcome. Along with a general lack of
information and a sense that ovarian cancer was deadly, participants
expressed a number of worries about their future, the most
frequent of which were about death (n = 10), general worry and
fear (n = 7), and impact on loved ones (n = 4).
Is It Time for Medicine to Retire These Five Practices? eg. Pelvic Exams
medscape
Pelvic Exams During Routine Ob/Gyn Visits
What does the evidence say?The USPSTF did their first-ever evidence review on routine pelvic exams and found no studies evaluating the benefit of pelvic exam screening on all-cause mortality, disease-specific morbidity or mortality, or quality of life.The task force concluded that there isn't enough evidence to recommend screening pelvic exams in asymptomatic women for conditions other than cervical cancer screening, gonorrhea, and chlamydia. And last year, the American College of Physicians (ACP) and the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) both released guidelines advising against screening pelvic exams in asymptomatic, nonpregnant adult women. According to the ACP, routine pelvic exams aren't useful in screening for malignancies other than cervical cancer, may generate unnecessary evaluation and surgery, and can cause discomfort in women, leading them to forego gynecologic care.[1,2]
Who defends this practice?
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) recommends annual pelvic examinations for patients 21 years of age or older. However, in a recent statement, ACOG president Thomas Gellhaus, MD, said that the society is reviewing the USPSTF recommendations and that the "limitations of the internal pelvic examination for screening should be recognized."[3] According to the statement, the women most likely to benefit from pelvic exams are those with possible genital tract problems, menstrual disorders, vaginal discharge, incontinence, infertility, or pelvic pain.
What's actually being practiced?
Most ob/gyns (98.4%) and general practitioners (89.5%) said they perform pelvic examinations during well-woman visits, according to a 2011 survey.[4]
Is there a middle ground?
Medscape expert commentator Andrew M. Kaunitz, MD, explained that while pelvic exams are not a good way to detect ovarian cancer, they are effective for picking up other irregularities, like pelvic prolapse and cervical polyps. He recently said that he continues to offer them to patients during well-woman visits, but for symptom-free patients in their 20s, he only performs pelvic examinations when indicated for cervical cancer screening.
Do you believe that pelvic exams should continue to be done routinely in asymptomatic patients?
Do you believe that pelvic exams should continue to be done routinely in asymptomatic patients? (see link for up to date survey responses)
Subscribe to:
Comments
(
Atom
)
Number two: the second implication is for the patient’s family. There is a 50% risk that germline mutations of this site might be passed on to offspring. In women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations, in particular, there is a very high risk of breast and ovarian cancer accompanying these gene defects. It turns out that the risk of pancreatic cancer, which is difficult to screen for, is also increased.