A simple and inexpensive method to routinely produce customized neck supports for patient immobilization during radiotherapy

Comparison of Patient Self-Reported Quality of Life and Health Care Professional-Assessed Symptoms in Terminally ill Patients With Cancer

BACKGROUND

Few studies evaluated whether health care professionals accurately assess several symptoms for patients with cancer in palliative care units. We determined the agreement level for several symptoms related to quality of life (QOL) between patient-reported QOL assessment and health care professional-assessed symptoms based on the Support Team Assessment Schedule (STAS).

METHOD

An observational study was performed with terminally ill patients with cancer hospitalized in the palliative care unit between June 2018 and December 2019. Patients and health care professionals independently assessed 7 symptoms at the time of hospitalization and after 1 week. Patients completed the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL). In examining the proportions of exact agreement, "exact agreement" referred to the pairs of the scores (QLQ-C15-PAL vs STAS) being (1 vs 0), (2 vs 1), (3 vs 2 or 3), or (4 vs 4). The relationships of physical functioning between QLQ-C15-PAL and Palliative Performance Scale (PPS) were examined.

RESULTS

Of 130 patients, approximately 60% had PPS scores from 40 to 60. The highest mean score on QLQ-C15-PAL was for fatigue (63.8). The exact agreement on symptoms between patients and health care professionals ranged from 15.4% (fatigue) to 57.7% (nausea and vomiting). The mean of the transformed QLQ-C15-PAL and proportions of exact agreement were negatively correlated (R ² = 0.949, P < .05). The physical function scores in QLQ-C15-PAL for each PPS group showed no differences.

CONCLUSION

We expect patient-reported outcomes including QLQ-C15-PAL to be added to health care professionals' assessment of serious symptoms such as fatigue in terminally ill patients with cancer.

Assessment of set-up errors in the radiotherapy of patients with head and neck cancer: standard vs. individual head support

Background

The aim of the study was to (a) compare the accuracy of two different immobilization strategies for patients with head and neck tumors, and (b) compare the set-up errors on treatment units with different portal imaging systems.

Patients and methods

Variations in the position of the isocenter (IC) relative to the reference point determined on the computed tomography simulator were measured in a vertical (anterior-posterior), longitudinal (superior-inferior), and lateral (medial-lateral) direction in 120 head and neck cancer patients irradiated with curative intent. Depending on the treatment unit (unit A - 2D/2D image previews; unit B- 2D image previews) and the time of irradiation, patients were divided into 6 groups of 20 patients. In patients irradiated in 2014, standard head supports were used (groups 1 and 2), whereas in those treated in 2015 and 2017 (groups 3–6) individual head supports were employed. The clinical-to-planning target volume safety margin was calculated according to the formula proposed by Van Herk.

Results

In total, 2,454 portal images and 3,681 set-up errors were analysed. Implementation of individual head supports in 2015 resulted in a statistically significant reduction in the average inter-fraction displacement in the vertical direction and in decreased number of IC displacements in the vertical and longitudinal direction (applies to both treatment units). The largest reduction of the safety margin was calculated in the longitudinal direction and the safety margins were larger for unit B than for unit A.

Conclusions

The use of individual head supports and a more advanced imaging system were found to increase set-up precision.

Appetite Assessment of Hospitalized Cancer Patients in Brazil - A Validation Study

OBJECTIVES

Appetite loss, a common symptom in cancer patients, contributes to worsened nutritional status. A validated specific tool to assess appetite is clinically useful for diagnosing and identifying symptoms and signs that could be reversed with nutritional and pharmacological therapies. The aim of this study is to produce a Brazilian Portuguese version of the Hill and Blundell visual analog scale (VAS) for appetite and investigate its validity among hospitalized cancer patients.

METHODS

The original English VAS version was translated into Brazilian Portuguese in full accordance with the guidelines in the literature and adapted to the Brazilian context by conducting interviews and meetings with an expert committee until the final version was reached. Afterwards, the version was validated in hospitalized cancer patients in a cross-sectional study at São Paulo Cancer Institute (ICESP), where the relationships between breakfast intake (rest-ingestion index) and VAS were compared. The Spearman test was used to verify the correlation between the rest-ingestion index and the VAS ratings.

RESULTS

Sixty-four patients with a mean age of 56.1 (±12.3) years answered the Portuguese VAS version, and their breakfast intake was evaluated. The mean rest-ingestion index was 18.8%. The correlations between the rest-ingestion index (food acceptance) and three questions of the Portuguese visual analog scale version were inverse and significant: first question (ρ -0.3028 p=0.0046), second question (ρ -0.2317 p=0.0319) and third question (ρ -0.3049 p=0.0043).

CONCLUSION

The "Appetite Assessment Scale of Brazilian Oncology Patients" is a valid instrument to assess appetite in hospitalized cancer patients in Brazil.

The influence of a six degrees of freedom couch and an individual head support in patient positioning in radiotherapy of head and neck cancer

Reproducible patient positioning is important in radiotherapy (RT) of head-and-neck cancer. We therefore compared set-up errors in head-and-neck RT resulting from three different patient positioning systems. Patients were either treated with a standard head support (SHS) and conventional treatment couch (SHS-3, n = 10), a SHS and rotational couch (SHS-6, n = 10), or an individual head support (IHS) and rotational couch (IHS-6, n = 10). Interfraction mean translation vector lenghts were significantly lower for IHS-6 compared to SHS-3 (0.8 ± 0.3 mm vs. 1.4 ± 0.7 mm, P = 0.001). Intrafraction displacement was comparable among cohorts. This study showed that the use of a six degrees of freedom couch combined with an IHS in head-and-neck RT resulted in better interfraction reproducibility.