Simulated bone metastases: a case study of two patients with breast cancer

Patient Education vs. Patient Experiences of Self-advocacy: Changing the Discourse to Support Cancer Survivors

A growing emphasis on patient self-advocacy has emerged in the public discourse on cancer survivorship. This discourse shapes patients' conceptualizations about self-advocacy and in turn influences their health care attitudes and behaviors. The purpose of this discourse analysis is to explore the language of self-advocacy by comparing a published self-advocacy guide with the lived experiences of women with ovarian cancer. Data sources include (1) a self-advocacy patient education guide published by the National Coalition for Cancer Survivorship and (2) transcripts of focus groups conducted with ovarian cancer survivors. Discourse analysis techniques were used to take a close look at the language used by both to uncover the meaning each group ascribed to self-advocacy. Challenges and inconsistencies were noted between the patient education guide and transcripts including viewing self-advocacy as a skill set to assert one's needs as opposed to a means by which to preserve a positive attitude and maintain a trusting relationship with health care providers, respectively. Some women saw themselves as self-advocates yet struggled to locate relevant health information and hesitated to upset their relationship with their health care providers. This analysis highlights tensions between the discourses and points to ways in which patient education materials can be adjusted to support cancer survivors in advocating for their needs according to their unique situations and preferences.

99mTc depreotide scan compared with 99mTc-MDP bone scintigraphy for the detection of bone metastases and prediction of response to hormonal treatment in patients with breast cancer

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to determine the potential role of Tc depreotide scintigraphy for the evaluation of bone metastases compared with Tc methylenediphosphonate (MDP) bone scintigraphy and for the prediction of treatment response in breast cancer patients in whom first- or second-line hormonal therapy was to be initiated.

METHODS

Twelve patients with a diagnosis of advanced breast cancer were included. All patients underwent both a bone scan and a depreotide scan and at least one other conventional imaging procedure, including plain film radiography (n=11), computed tomography (n=6) or magnetic resonance imaging (n=5), for confirmation of metastatic disease. The mean time interval between the bone scan and the depreotide scan was 30.6 days. Follow-up data were retrieved from routine clinical evaluation by means of physical examination, imaging and blood analysis.

RESULTS

On a patient basis we found a sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of, respectively 100%, 50% and 83.3% for the bone scan and 62.5%, 100% and 75% for the depreotide scan in the diagnosis of bone metastasis. In eight patients with available follow-up data two with a positive depreotide scan remained stable and five of six patients with a negative depreotide scan had progressive disease.

CONCLUSION

In this small series of breast cancer patients Tc depreotide scintigraphy proves less sensitive but more specific as compared to Tc-MDP bone scintigraphy in measuring the extent of bone metastasis. On the other hand Tc depreotide scintigraphy elucidates, non-invasively, tumour characteristics and may be indicative for prognosis and response to hormonal treatment.