Patterns of follow-up care in adult blood cancer survivors-Prospective evaluation of health-related outcomes, resource use, and quality of life

Strategies, Challenges, and Prospects of Nanoparticles in Gynecological Malignancies

Gynecologic cancers are a significant health issue for women globally. Early detection and successful treatment of these tumors are crucial for the survival of female patients. Conventional therapies are often ineffective and harsh, particularly in advanced stages, necessitating the exploration of new therapy options. Nanotechnology offers a novel approach to biomedicine. A novel biosensor utilizing bionanotechnology can be employed for early tumor identification and therapy due to the distinctive physical and chemical characteristics of nanoparticles. Nanoparticles have been rapidly applied in the field of gynecologic malignancies, leading to significant advancements in recent years. This study highlights the significance of nanoparticles in treating gynecological cancers. It focuses on using nanoparticles for precise diagnosis and continuous monitoring of the disease, innovative imaging, and analytic methods, as well as multifunctional drug delivery systems and targeted therapies. This review examines several nanocarrier systems, such as dendrimers, liposomes, nanocapsules, and nanomicelles, for gynecological malignancies. The review also examines the enhanced therapeutic potential and targeted delivery of ligand-functionalized nanoformulations for gynecological cancers compared to nonfunctionalized anoformulations. In conclusion, the text also discusses the constraints and future exploration prospects of nanoparticles in chemotherapeutics. Nanotechnology will offer precise methods for diagnosing and treating gynecological cancers.

Patterns of follow-up care in adult blood cancer survivors-Prospective evaluation of health-related outcomes, resource use, and quality of life

BACKGROUND

Information about follow-up care in blood cancer survivors is limited. The questionnaire-based "Aftercare in Blood Cancer Survivors" (ABC) study aimed to identify patterns of follow-up care in Germany and compare different types of follow-up institutions.

METHODS

The study's 18-month prospective part compared the follow-up institutions identified in the preceding retrospective part (academic oncologists, community oncologists, primary care physicians). The questionnaires were completed by the follow-up physicians.

RESULTS

Of 1070 physicians named by 1479 blood-cancer survivors, 478 (44.7%) consented to participate. For provision of care, most oncologists relied on published guidelines, while most primary care physicians depended on information from other physicians. Survivors with a history of allogeneic transplantation or indolent lymphoma were mainly seen by academic oncologists, whereas survivors with monoclonal gammopathy, multiple myeloma, or myeloproliferative disorders were often seen by community oncologists, and survivors with a history of aggressive lymphoma or acute leukemia by primary care physicians. Detection of relapse and secondary diseases was consistently viewed as the most important follow-up goal. Follow-up visits were most extensively documented by academic oncologists (574 of 1045 survivors cared for, 54.9%), followed by community oncologists (90/231, 39.0%) and primary care physicians (51/203, 25.1%). Relapse and secondary disease detection rates and the patients' quality of life were similar at the three institutions. Laboratory tests were most often ordered by academic oncologists, and imaging by primary care physicians. Psychosocial issues and preventive care were more often addressed by primary care physicians than by oncologists.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients at high risk of relapse or late complications were preferentially treated by academic oncologists, while patients in stable condition requiring continuous monitoring were also seen by community oncologists, and patients with curable diseases in long-term remission by primary care physicians. For the latter, transfer of follow-up care from oncologists to well-informed primary care providers appears feasible.