Perceived control and hot flashes in treatment-seeking breast cancer survivors and menopausal women

Correlations among Core Outcomes in Menopause-recommended vasomotor symptom outcomes in MsFLASH trials

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to advance understanding of vasomotor symptom (VMS) outcomes measurement using pooled data from three Menopause Strategies Finding Lasting Answers to Symptoms and Health (MsFLASH) trials.

METHODS

Participants self-reported VMS frequency, severity, and bother using daily diaries; completed standardized measures of VMS interference, insomnia severity, and sleep quality/disturbance; and completed four treatment satisfaction items. Analyses included descriptive statistics, Pearson correlations (baseline pooled sample, posttreatment pooled sample, posttreatment placebo only), t tests, and analysis of variance.

RESULTS

Participants were mostly postmenopausal (82.9%) and a mean of 54.5 years old. VMS frequency was fairly correlated with severity, bother, and interference for pooled baseline and placebo posttreatment samples ( r values = 0.21-0.39, P values < 0.001) and moderately correlated with severity, bother, and interference for pooled posttreatment ( r values = 0.40-0.44, P values < 0.001). VMS severity, bother, and interference were moderately correlated ( r values = 0.37-0.48, P values < 0.001), with one exception. VMS severity and bother were strongly correlated ( r values = 0.90-0.92, P values < 0.001). VMS interference was moderately correlated with insomnia ( r values = 0.45-0.54, P values < 0.001) and fairly to moderately correlated with sleep quality/disturbance ( r values = 0.31-0.44, P values < 0.001). Other VMS outcomes were weakly to fairly correlated with insomnia ( r values = 0.07-0.33, P values < 0.001 to < 0.05) and sleep quality/disturbance ( r values = 0.06-0.26, P values < 0.001 to > 0.05). Greater improvement in VMS and sleep over time was associated with higher treatment satisfaction ( P values < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This pooled analysis advances understanding of VMS outcomes measurement and has implications for selecting measures and creating future research.

Thermoregulation is not impaired in breast cancer survivors during moderate-intensity exercise performed in warm and hot environments

This study aimed to assess how female breast cancer survivors (BCS) respond physiologically, hematologically, and perceptually to exercise under heat stress compared to females with no history of breast cancer (CON). Twenty-one females (9 BCS and 12 CON [age; 54 ± 7 years, stature; 167 ± 6 cm, body mass; 68.1 ± 7.62 kg, and body fat; 30.9 ± 3.8%]) completed a warm (25℃, 50% relative humidity, RH) and hot (35℃, 50%RH) trial in a repeated-measures crossover design. Trials consisted of 30 min of rest, 30 min of walking at 4 metabolic equivalents, and a 6-minute walk test (6MWT). Physiological measurements (core temperature (Tre ), skin temperature (Tskin ), heart rate (HR), and sweat analysis) and perceptual rating scales (ratings of perceived exertion, thermal sensation [whole body and localized], and thermal comfort) were taken at 5- and 10-min intervals throughout, respectively. Venous blood samples were taken before and after to assess; IL-6, IL-10, CRP, IFN-γ, and TGF-β1 . All physiological markers were higher during the 35 versus 25℃ trial; Tre (~0.25℃, p = 0.002), Tskin (~3.8℃, p < 0.001), HR (~12 beats·min-1 , p = 0.023), and whole-body sweat rate (~0.4 L·hr-1 , p < 0.001), with no difference observed between groups in either condition (p > 0.05). Both groups covered a greater 6MWT distance in 25 versus 35℃ (by ~200 m; p = 0.003). Nevertheless, the control group covered more distance than BCS, regardless of environmental temperature (by ~400 m, p = 0.03). Thermoregulation was not disadvantaged in BCS compared to controls during moderate-intensity exercise under heat stress. However, self-paced exercise performance was reduced for BCS regardless of environmental temperature.

Hot flashes severity, complementary and alternative medicine use, and self-rated health in women with breast cancer

CONTEXT

Hot flashes (HF) are a common distressing symptom in women with breast cancer (BC). Current pharmacologic options are moderately effective and are associated with bothersome side effects. Complementary and alternative medicine is commonly used by cancer patients. However, information on the association of hot flashes severity with such use and self-rated health is lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the hot flashes severity in women with breast cancer and its association with complementary and alternative medicine use and self-rated health (SRH).

DESIGN

Longitudinal multicenter study to assess information needs of cancer outpatients.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with a diagnosis of breast cancer who were scheduled to undergo chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Hot flashes severity (0 = not present and 10 = as bad as you can imagine), use of complementary and alternative medicine (yes/no), and self-rating of health (SRH) status post-treatment and six-months thereafter (1-5, higher score = better SRH).

RESULTS

The majority of women with HF (mean age = 54.4 years) were Caucasian and married, with higher education, and 93% had received surgical treatment for BC. At the end of treatment, 79% women reported experiencing HF [mean severity = 5.87, standard deviation (SD) = 2.9]; significantly more severe HF were reported by younger women with poor SRH, poor performance status, and those reporting doing spiritual practices. At follow-up, 73% had HF (mean severity = 4.86, SD = 3.0), and more severe HF were reported by younger women with poor self-rated health who had undergone chemotherapy plus radiotherapy, used vitamins, and did not exercise.

CONCLUSIONS

A high percentage of women experienced hot flashes at the end of treatment and at six-month follow-up. A significant association of hot flashes severity with spiritual practice, increased vitamin use, and reduced exercise emphasize the need for future studies to confirm the results. This can facilitate safe use of complementary and alternative medicine and favorable outcomes while managing cancer-related hot flashes.

Testing the differential effects of symptom management interventions in cancer

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to test for moderating effects of patient characteristics on self-management interventions developed to address symptoms during cancer treatment. Patient's age, education, and depressive symptomatology were considered as potential moderators.

METHODS

A secondary analysis of data of 782 patients from two randomized clinical trials was performed. Both trials enrolled patients with solid tumors undergoing chemotherapy. After completing baseline interviews, patients were randomized to a nurse-delivered intervention versus intervention delivered by a 'coach' in trial I and to a nurse-delivered intervention versus an intervention delivered by an automated voice response system in trial II. In each of the two trials, following a six-contact 8-week intervention, patients were interviewed at week 10 to assess the primary outcome of symptom severity.

RESULTS

Although nurse-delivered intervention proved no better than the coach or automated system in lowering symptom severity, important differences in the intervention by age were found in both trials. Patients aged ≤45 years responded better to the coach or automated system, whereas those aged ≥75 years favored the nurse. Education and depressive symptomatology did not modify the intervention effects in either of the two trials. Depressive symptomatology had a significant main effect on symptom severity at week 10 in both trials (p = 0.03 and p < 0.01, respectively). Education was not associated with symptom severity over and above age and depressive symptomatology.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians need to carefully consider the age of the population when using or testing interventions to manage symptoms among cancer patients.

Medication use in breast cancer survivors compared to midlife women

PURPOSE

Many breast cancer survivors (BCS) take multiple medications for health problems associated with the treated cancer and other noncancer comorbidities. However, there is no published, large-scale descriptive evaluation of medication use in BCS compared to midlife women. The purpose of this study was (1) to compare the number and types of prescription medications and over-the-counter medications between BCS and midlife women without cancer and (2) to assess possible drug-drug interactions by evaluating the cytochrome P450 isoform properties of medications (inductors and inhibitors) in both groups.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, descriptive, comparative design was used. Baseline data from 98 BCS and 138 midlife women without cancer was analyzed from a behavioral intervention trial for menopausal symptoms.

RESULTS

BCS were taking significantly more prescription medications and a larger variety of different types of medication classifications (p < 0.05) after controlling for group differences (race, noncancer comorbid conditions, marital status, income, and smoking) in demographics. Twenty-four women were taking at least one medication considered to be a cytochrome P450 isoforms (CYP) inhibitor or inducer capable of clinical drug-drug interactions with no differences in CYP inhibitors or inducers found between groups.

CONCLUSION

BCS are taking a vast array of medications during survivorship. It is unclear if prescription medications are managed by a single healthcare provider or several providers. Clinical implications are to monitor for possible interactions among the various prescription medications, over-the-counter medications, and supplements. Implications for behavioral and biomedical research are that clinical studies need to carefully assess and account for multiple medication uses. RELEVANCE OF THE STUDY: The findings of this study are relevant to research and practice for both oncology and general practitioners. The importance of assessing medication information provides information about symptom management in individuals surviving cancer. In addition, the potential interaction of drugs impacts efficacy of various treatments and impacts compliance by patients.

Designing cost-efficient randomized trials by using flexible recruitment strategies

Background

Sample size planning for clinical trials is usually based on detecting a target effect size of an intervention or treatment. Explicit incorporation of costs into such planning is considered in this article in the situation where effects of an intervention or treatment may depend on (interact with) baseline severity of the targeted symptom or disease. Because much larger sample sizes are usually required to establish such an interaction effect, investigators frequently conduct studies to establish a marginal effect of the intervention for individuals with a certain level of baseline severity.

Methods

We conduct a rigorous investigation on how to determine optimum baseline symptom or disease severity inclusion criteria so that the most cost-efficient design can be used. By using a regression model with an interaction term of treatment by symptom severity, power functions were derived for various levels of baseline symptom severity. Computer algorithms and mathematical optimization were used to determine the most cost-efficient research designs assuming either single- or dual-stage screening procedures.

Results

In the scenarios we considered, impressive cost savings can be achieved by informed selection of baseline symptom severity via the inclusion criteria. Further cost-savings can be achieved if a two stage screening procedure is used and there are some known, relatively inexpensively collected, pre-screening information. The amount of total cost savings are shown to depend on the ratio of the screening and intervention costs. In our investigation, we assumed that: 1) the cost of approaching available subjects for screening is constant, and 2) all variables are normally distributed. There is a need to carry out further investigations with more relaxed assumptions (e.g., skewed data distribution).

Conclusions

As cost becomes a more and more prominent issue in modern clinical trials, cost-saving strategies will become more and more important. Strategies, such as the ones we propose here, can help to minimize costs while maximizing knowledge generation.