Correlation of radiation treatment interruptions with psychiatric disease and performance status in head and neck cancer patients

PURPOSE: To determine, pretreatment, how head and neck cancer (HNC) patients prioritize potential treatment effects in relationship to each other and to survival and to ascertain whether patients’ preferences are related to demographic or disease characteristics, performance status, or quality of life (QOL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred thirty-one patients were assessed pretreatment using standardized measures of QOL (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head and Neck) and performance (Performance Status Scale for Head and Neck Cancer). Patients were also asked to rank a series of 12 potential HNC treatment effects. RESULTS: Being cured was ranked top priority by 75% of patients; another 18% ranked it second or third. Living as long as possible and having no pain were placed in the top three by 56% and 35% of patients, respectively. Items that were ranked in the top three by 10% to 24% of patients included those related to energy, swallowing, voice, and appearance. Items related to chewing, being understood, tasting, and dry mouth were placed in the top three by less than 10% of patients. Excluding the top three rankings, there was considerable variability in ratings. Rankings were generally unrelated to patient or disease characteristics, with the exception that cure and living were of slightly lower priority and pain of higher priority to older patients compared with younger patients. CONCLUSION: The data suggest that, at least pretreatment, survival is of primary importance to patients, supporting the development of aggressive treatment strategies. In addition, results highlight individual variability and warn against making assumptions about patients’ attitudes vis-à-vis potential outcomes. Whether patients’ priorities will change as they experience late effects is currently under investigation.

Download Full-text

Cine MRI-based Analysis of Intrafractional Motion in Radiation Treatment Planning of Head and Neck Cancer Patients

International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics ◽

10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.06.378 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 105 (1) ◽

pp. S253

Author(s):

Y. Weiss ◽

L. Chin ◽

A. Lau ◽

Z.A. Husain ◽

K. Higgins ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Head And Neck Cancer ◽

Head And Neck ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Treatment Planning ◽

Neck Cancer ◽

Radiation Treatment ◽

Cine Mri ◽

Radiation Treatment Planning ◽

Intrafractional Motion

Download Full-text

Adult Co-morbidity Evaluation 27 scores of head and neck cancer patients using touch-screen technology: patient satisfaction and clinical verification

The Journal of Laryngology & Otology ◽

10.1017/s0022215116009397 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 131 (5) ◽

pp. 442-446 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

C Brammer ◽

D Dawson ◽

M Joseph ◽

J Tipper ◽

T Jemmet ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Head And Neck Cancer ◽

Patient Satisfaction ◽

Head And Neck ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Neck Cancer ◽

Performance Status ◽

Touch Screen ◽

Morbidity Score ◽

Co Morbidity ◽

Touch Screen Computer

AbstractObjectives:This study aimed to assess head and neck cancer patient satisfaction with the use of a touch-screen computer patient-completed questionnaire for assessing Adult Co-morbidity Evaluation 27 co-morbidity scores prior to treatment, along with its clinical reliability.Methods:A total of 96 head and neck cancer patients were included in the audit. An accurate Adult Co-morbidity Evaluation 27 co-morbidity score was achieved via patient-completed questionnaire assessment for 97 per cent of participants.Results:In all, 96 per cent of patients found the use of a touch-screen computer acceptable and would be willing to use one again, and 62 per cent would be willing to do so without help. Patients were more likely to be willing to use the computer again without help if they were aged 65 years or younger (χ2test;p= 0.0054) or had a performance status of 0 or 1 (χ2test;p= 0.00034).Conclusion:Use of a touch-screen computer is an acceptable approach for assessing Adult Co-morbidity Evaluation 27 scores at pre-treatment assessment in a multidisciplinary joint surgical–oncology clinic.

Download Full-text