Long-Term Effects of Cancer Treatment

Author(s):  
Gill Levitt ◽  
Debra Eshelman
Author(s):  
van den Berg MH ◽  
Overbeek A ◽  
Lambalk CB ◽  
Kaspers GJL ◽  
Bresters D ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 205435811769033 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly R. McMahon ◽  
Shahrad Rod Rassekh ◽  
Kirk R. Schultz ◽  
Maury Pinsk ◽  
Tom Blydt-Hansen ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e20567-e20567
Author(s):  
Rutika Mehta ◽  
Rohit Jain ◽  
Lori Rhodes ◽  
Joseph Abraham ◽  
Kenneth David Miller

e20567 Background: Long-term cancer survivors require comprehensive care. The purpose of this study was to describe how survivorship care fits into oncologists’ clinical time, and characterize long-term cancer survivors’ problems and oncology follow-up care. Methods: We abstracted 18,882 medical records of unique cancer patient visits during 2010 at a major NCI-designated cancer center and then evaluated survivor care for one week in April, 2010 to characterize how oncologists spend their clinical time. Finally, we selected three subgroups from the survivor population (n≈100 each) of survivors at 1-5 years, 6-10 years, and >10 years after diagnosis. We collected demographic data, purpose of visit, cancer-specific information, late and long-term effects, and type of care delivered, including surveillance for recurrence, intervention, prevention, and coordination of care. Results: In the larger group of 18,882, only 14% of survivors were more than 10 years post-diagnosis. Approximately two-thirds of the survivors were women. Breast cancer survivors comprised 38%, and survivors of hematologic malignancies accounted for 21% of the population. During the one week studied, the majority of oncologists' patients (74%) were actively receiving treatment; only 5% of their patients were 5 or more years post-diagnosis. Second or secondary malignancies were noted in 8% of patients. Late and long-term effects were uncommon. Approximately 25% of survivors beyond five years were observed to have late effects due to cancer treatment, most common being fatigue, neurological endocrine, and cardiac. Of the 300 selected survivors, sixty-two percent received only surveillance care during their visit. Only 3% of these patients received an entire array of survivorship care that included surveillance, intervention, co-ordination and prevention. Conclusions: A small proportion of oncologists’ visits were with long-term cancer survivors (5-14%) of whom only 25% had late or long-term effects of cancer treatment so overall very few of office visits were with long-term survivors who had late and long-term complications. All visits involved surveillance for cancer recurrence but there was little focus on prevention, intervention, and coordination of care for cancer survivors.


2012 ◽  
Vol 327 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 134-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Vera-Ramirez ◽  
MCarmen Ramirez-Tortosa ◽  
Patricia Perez-Lopez ◽  
Sergio Granados-Principal ◽  
Maurizio Battino ◽  
...  

1993 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 826-830 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles L.M. Olweny ◽  
Christopher A. Juttner ◽  
Peter Rofe ◽  
Graham Barrow ◽  
Adrian Esterman ◽  
...  

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (21) ◽  
pp. 5264
Author(s):  
Juliette Stolze ◽  
Kim C. E. Vlaanderen ◽  
Frederique C. E. D. Holtbach ◽  
Jop C. Teepen ◽  
Leontien C. M. Kremer ◽  
...  

Objectives: The aim of this study was to identify the prevalence of and independent risk factors for long-term effects of childhood cancer treatment on the dentition and oral health in childhood cancer survivors (CCSs). Methods: This cross-sectional study is part of the Dutch Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (DCCSS) LATER 2. CCSs were diagnosed with cancer between 1963 and 2001. This study focuses on survey data of 154 CCSs on whom information about their oral health was received from their dentists (71.3%). Descriptive statistics and univariable and multivariable Poisson regression analyses were performed to determine the association between treatment characteristics and oral health data. Results: Of the study group, 36.3% had at least one DDD. The most prevalent DDDs were short-root anomaly (14.6%), agenesis (14.3%), and microdontia (13.6%). Risk factors for at least one DDD were younger age at diagnosis (<3 years) and dose-dependent alkylating agent therapy. Conclusions: This study provides more insight into risk factors for oral health problems in Dutch CCSs. This information is essential in order to improve early detection, prevention, dental care, and quality of life. Further studies are needed in order to better define dose-related radiotherapy exposure of the developing teeth in correlation with oral health problems.


2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (8) ◽  
pp. 1474-1488 ◽  
Author(s):  
M H van den Berg ◽  
A Overbeek ◽  
C B Lambalk ◽  
G J L Kaspers ◽  
D Bresters ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document