Attitudes, practices and perspectives on imaging strategies in prostate cancer: a national cross-sectional survey involving expert radiation oncologists on behalf of AIRO (Italian association of radiotherapy and clinical oncology) GU group

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Raffaella Lucchini ◽  
Giulio Francolini ◽  
Fabio Matrone ◽  
Giorgia Timon ◽  
Ciro Franzese ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Clinical Oncology ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Italian Association ◽  
Radiation Oncologists

Differences in practice patterns between urologists and radiation oncologists in the management of localized prostate cancer: a cross-sectional survey

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (11) ◽  
pp. 1741-1747 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mehdi Mokhtar Ariane ◽  
Guillaume Ploussard ◽  
Xavier Rebillard ◽  
Bernard Malavaud ◽  
Pascal Rischmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Practice Patterns ◽  
Localized Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Radiation Oncologists

scholarly journals ESTRO vision 2030: the young Italian Association of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology (yAIRO) commitment statement

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesca De Felice ◽  
Luca Boldrini ◽  
Carlo Greco ◽  
Valerio Nardone ◽  
Viola Salvestrini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Oncology ◽  
Action Plan ◽  
Italian Association ◽  
Radiation Oncologists ◽  
Vision 2030 ◽  
Gain Access

AbstractThe aim of this document is to share the action plan from the young Italian Association of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology (yAIRO). We believe it is important to enhance a constructive dialog between societies. The hope is to offer to young radiation oncologists a wealth of opportunities to refine their skills and gain access to the latest developments, according to a shared European vision.

Impact of skeletal related events (SREs) on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and healthcare resource utilization (HRU) in prostate cancer patients with bone metastases (BM).

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e16046-e16046
Author(s):  
Jorge Arellano ◽  
Kristina S Chen ◽  
Carolyn Atchison ◽  
Alex Rider ◽  
Andrew Worsfold ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Underlying Disease ◽  
Cord Compression ◽  
Healthcare Resource Utilization ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Cancer Disease ◽  
The Impact

e16046 Background: Advanced prostate cancer often leads to the development of BM and as a result SREs. Treatment and management of SREs, as well as the underlying disease, influences the patient’s HRQoL and HRU. We evaluated the impact of SREs on HRQoL (FACT-P) and HRU in patients with BM. Methods: Data were extracted from the Adelphi Prostate Cancer Disease-Specific Programme (DSP), a cross-sectional survey of 150 urologists and oncologists and their prostate cancer patients conducted from March to June 2012 in the US. Each specialist completed comprehensive record forms on 12 of their patients being treated for prostate cancer. Patients were invited to complete a questionnaire, which included the FACT-P HRQoL instrument. Patients were stratified by SRE experience to assess the impact of SRE on patients with BM. SRE was defined as an event of bone radiation, bone surgery, fracture, or spinal cord compression. Results: Data were collected from 1,749 prostate cancer patients, of which 941 were identified with BM; SRE status was recorded in 499 BM patients (Table). HRQoL was significantly lower in patients experiencing SREs, while the rate of consultations and likelihood of being hospitalized was significantly higher. Conclusions: SREs result in a significant economic burden on the healthcare system and negative impact on HRQoL in prostate cancer patients with BM. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals Individual prostate cancer screening: Practice survey with general practitioner of Lubumbashi, Democratic Republic of Congo

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-100
Author(s):  
Pitchou Mukaz Mbey ◽  
◽  
Dieudonné Moliwa Moningo ◽  
Augustin Kibonge Mukala ◽  
Patrick Zihalirwa Ciza ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Democratic Republic Of Congo ◽  
Prostate Cancer Screening ◽  
Digital Rectal Examination ◽  
Participation Rate ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Screening Practice ◽  
Psa Testing ◽  
Learned Societies

Objective: To analyze the practices of general practitioners (GPs) in terms of recommendations on individual screening for prostate cancer (PCa). Methods: An anonymous cross-sectional survey using a pre-established questionnaire was conducted among 193 GPs in the city of Lubumbashi from May 1st to July 31st, 2020. The questionnaire included three parts: identity criteria of GPs, screening practice and the opinion of GPs on the recommendations. Results: The participation rate was 79%. Eighty-two-point nine percent of respondents said they offered screening for PCa; 42.5% of them said they offered this screening to all men within a certain age limit, ranging between 50 to 75 years in 38.8% of the cases. Only 12.5% of GPs provided complete prior information to their patients. Thirty-six-point three percent of GPs reported combining digital rectal examination with total PSA testing, but in the presence of an abnormality, 60.6% reported that they referred their patients directly to the urologist without ordering other additional investigations (first or second line). Finally, 32.7% of GPs found that the recommendations disseminated were appropriate for their practice. Conclusion: Individual screening for PCa is widely proposed; but there are differences between the practices reported by GPs and official recommendations of learned societies. Our study highlights the need to popularize the recommendations of learned societies to GPs.

scholarly journals Oncology Guidelines Usage in a Low- and Middle-Income Country

2018 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nofisat Ismaila ◽  
Omolola Salako ◽  
Jimoh Mutiu ◽  
Oladeji Adebayo
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Guidelines ◽  
Guideline Implementation ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Radiation Oncologists ◽  
Local Setting ◽  
American Society ◽  
Low And Middle Income

Purpose There is a paucity of data about current usage of oncology guidelines in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), specifically in terms of the availability and quality of those guidelines. Our objective was to determine usage of oncology guidelines and the barriers and facilitators to their usage among radiation oncologists in LMICs. Methods An online cross-sectional survey was conducted among practicing radiation oncologists in Nigeria via e-mail and the social media database of the Association of Radiation and Clinical Oncologists of Nigeria. In addition, paper questionnaires were administered at regional clinical meetings. Results The survey response rate was 53.4% in a sample of 101 radiation oncologists from the database. Sixty-nine percent of respondents were consultants and 30% were residents. Approximately 43% had < 5 years’ experience. All of the respondents were involved in administering chemotherapy during the treatment of patients with cancer, whereas approximately half were involved in diagnosing cancer. Ninety-three percent reported using guidelines in treating patients, the top two guidelines being those from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (90%) and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (50%). The two major barriers to guideline usage were that facilities were inadequate for proper guideline implementation and that the information in guidelines were too complex to understand. Potential facilitators included providing adequate facilities, developing local guidelines, and increasing awareness of guideline usage. Conclusion Our study shows that clinicians involved in the treatment of patients with cancer in LMICs are aware of cancer treatment guidelines. However, implementation of these guidelines hinders their usage because the facilities are inadequate, guidelines are not applicable to the local setting, and the information in the guidelines is too complex.

scholarly journals Attitudes and Practices of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Chinese Patients With Cancer: A National Cross-Sectional Survey

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luping Zhang ◽  
Jun Wang ◽  
Bicheng Zhang ◽  
Qian Chu ◽  
Chunxia Su ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Clinical Oncology ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Tumor Volume ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Chinese Society ◽  
Expert Committee ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional

Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are revolutionizing the field of immuno-oncology. Side effects and tumor microenvironment currently represent the most significant obstacles to using ICIs. In this study, we conducted an extensive cross-sectional survey to investigate the concept and practices regarding the use of ICIs in cancer patients in China. The results provide real-world data on the adverse events (AEs) of ICIs and the factors influencing the use of ICIs. This survey was developed by the Expert Committee on Immuno-Oncology of the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO-IO) and the Expert Committee on Patient Education of the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO-PE). The surveys were distributed using a web-based platform between November 29, 2019 and December 21, 2019. A total of 1,575 patients were included. High costs (43.9%), uncertainty about drug efficacy (41.2%), and no reimbursement from medical insurance (32.4%) were the factors that prevented the patients from using ICIs. The patients were most concerned about the onset time or effective duration of ICIs (40.3%), followed by the indications of ICIs and pre-use evaluation (33.4%). Moreover, 9.0, 57.1, 21.0, and 12.9% of the patients reported tumor disappearance, tumor volume reduction, no change in tumor volume, and increased tumor volume. Among the patients who received ICIs, 65.7% reported immune-related AEs (irAEs); 96.1% reported mild-to-moderate irAEs. Cancer patients in China had a preliminary understanding of ICIs. Yet, the number of patients treated with ICIs was small.

Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics among men with metastatic prostate cancer: An aged-stratified analysis.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (5_suppl) ◽  
pp. 256-256
Author(s):  
Jamie Forlenza ◽  
Mekre Senbetta ◽  
Amy Smalarz ◽  
Kimberly Riggs
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Clinical Characteristics ◽  
Metastatic Prostate Cancer ◽  
Bone Fractures ◽  
Cord Compression ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Annual Household Income ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Source Of Care ◽  
Time Since Diagnosis

256 Background: Data on age-specific comparisons in metastatic prostate cancer (MPC) is limited. This analysis evaluated socio-demographic and clinical characteristics among men with MPC aged <65 years versus ≥65 years. Methods: Eighty-four US men aged ≥18 years with self-reported MPC completed a cross-sectional survey in January-February 2011 which collected data on socio-demographic and clinical characteristics including treatment history and source of care. Results: Forty-nine men were aged <65 years; 35 men were ≥65 years. There were no differences (all P>0.05) between groups for marital status (80% of those <65 years and 83% of those ≥65 years were married), race/ethnicity (94% of both groups were white), education (88% of those <65 years and 77% of those ≥65 years had attended college), and annual household income (29% of those <65 years and 31% of those ≥65 years had incomes of $35,000-$54,999). Time since diagnosis differed between groups with 12%, 84%, and 4% of those aged <65 years and 3%, 69%, and 29% of those aged ≥65 years having been diagnosed <1, 1-9, and ≥10 year(s) ago, respectively (P<0.001). Respondents aged <65 years and ≥65 years reported similar experience with chemotherapy (37% in both groups had received chemotherapy), no anemia in last 4 weeks (80% and 83%, respectively), no bone fractures or spinal cord compression in last 4 weeks (90% and 94%, respectively), receiving previous radiation therapy (69% and 66%, respectively), receiving previous surgery (63% and 66%, respectively), and utilizing hormonal treatments previously or currently (86% and 90%, respectively) (all P>0.05). In addition, those <65 years versus ≥65 years did not differ regarding their self-reported source of primary care for prostate cancer (51% and 54% reported receiving their care from oncologists, respectively; 47% and 43% from urologists; 2% and 3% from family physicians/internists). Conclusions: In this study of men with MPC, those aged <65 years and those ≥65 years reported similar prostate cancer treatment utilization as well as socio-demographic and clinical characteristics with the exception of a difference in time since diagnosis. Further research in larger populations is warranted.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document