Search

Objective: Because of observed clinical variance and the discretion of referring physicians and radiologists in patient follow-up, the purpose of this study was to conduct a survey to explore whether broad discrepancy exists in imaging protocols used for postsurgical surveillance., Subjects and Methods: An online survey was created to assess radiologists' use of diagnostic versus screening mammography for women with a personal history of breast cancer and determine whether the choice of protocol was associated with practice characteristics (setting, region, and reader type)., Results: Of 8170 surveys sent, 849 (10%) completed responses were returned. Seventy-nine percent of respondents recommended initial diagnostic mammography after lumpectomy (65% at 6 months, 14% at 12 months); 49% recommended diagnostic surveillance for up to 2 years before a return to screening mammography; and 33% continued diagnostic surveillance for 2-5 years before returning to screening. For imaging after mastectomy, 57% of respondents recommended diagnostic mammography of the unaffected breast. Among the 57%, however, 37% recommended diagnostic screening for only the first postmastectomy follow-up evaluation, and the other 20% permanently designated patients for diagnostic mammography after mastectomy., Conclusion: The optimal surveillance mammography regimen must be better defined. This preliminary study showed variability in diagnostic versus screening surveillance mammography for women with a history of breast cancer. Future studies should evaluate why these variations occur and how to standardize recommendations to tailor personalized imaging.

Aim: This case-control study examined the impact of diabetes mellitus (DM) on survival in lung cancer patients and lung cancer on glycemic control in DM., Materials & Methods: Patients with a new lung cancer diagnosis and DM (n = 124) were matched to 124 lung cancer patients without DM. Laboratory results and DM and cancer therapies were obtained from electronic records., Results: Five-year overall survival for lung cancer patients with and without DM was 20 versus 29% (p = .12). Glycemic control among DM patients did not change significantly with time., Conclusion: DM does not cause adverse impact on lung cancer survival. Lung cancer does not affect glycemic control., Competing Interests: Financial & competing interests disclosure The authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties. No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.

Objective: To investigate how diabetes mellitus (DM) impacts short-term overall survival (OS) for patients with prostate cancer and to examine how prostate cancer impacts glycemic control in DM., Methods: Patients with DM and prostate cancer newly diagnosed from 2007 to 2014 were identified from the institutional cancer registry and matched to patients with prostate cancer but no DM according to age and year of prostate cancer diagnosis., Results: The study included 276 cases and 276 controls; the mean age was 72 years, most (93%) were white, the most common Gleason score (52%) was 7, and the majority (56%) were tumor stage II. Patients with DM had a higher mean body mass index (P = .03). Alcohol use and performance status differed by group (P<.001), but the 2 groups otherwise were not significantly different. Among those with DM, the mean hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) was 6.7%. In Kaplan-Meier survival analysis (median follow-up time, 43.7 months), the 5-year OS rates were estimated at 88% and 93% for patients with and without DM, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-3.46; P = .20). Mean glucose among patients with DM was significantly higher (P<.001) compared with non-DM patients, but mean HbA1c and glucose values did not change significantly over 1 year (P≥.13)., Conclusion: DM did not adversely impact survival in patients with prostate cancer. In addition, prostate cancer and its treatment did not affect glycemic control. Patients and their providers can be reassured that the concurrent diagnoses do not adversely interact to worsen short-term outcomes., Abbreviations: DM = diabetes mellitus; HbA1c = hemoglobin A1c; OS = overall survival.