Search

Background Radiation-induced chest wall pain (cwp) and rib fracture (rf) are late adverse effects after stereotactic body radiation therapy (sbrt) for stage i non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc); however, the literature about their incidence and risk factors shows variability. We performed a systematic review to determine the pooled incidence of cwp and rf in the relevant population. Methods A literature search using the prisma (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines considered English publications in medline and embase from January 1996 to August 2017. Abstracts were screened, followed by full-text review and data extraction. Results The database searches identified 547 records. Twenty-eight publications comprising 3892 patients met the inclusion criteria. Median reported ages and follow-up durations fell into the ranges 67-82 years and 12-84 months. Prescriptions fell into the range of 40-70 Gy in 3-10 fractions. Despite study heterogeneity, the pooled incidences of cwp and rf were estimated to be 8.94% and 5.27% respectively. Nineteen studies reported cwp grade: 58 of 308 patients (18.8%) experienced grades 3-4 cwp (no grade 5 events reported). Thirteen studies reported rf grade: grades 3-4 rf were observed in 9 of 113 patients (7.96%). A high chest wall V30 was an important predictor of cwp and rf. Conclusions In patients with stage i nsclc, rates of cwp and rf after sbrt are low; however, tumour location, accurate toxicity reporting, and dose--fractionation schemes might alter those rates. Prospective correlation with dosimetry and quality of life assessment will further improve the understanding of cwp and rf after sbrt. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Rapid ethical access to personal health information (PHI) to support research is extremely important during pandemics, yet little is known regarding patient preferences for consent during such crises. This follow-up study sought to ascertain whether there were differences in consent preferences between pre-pandemic times compared to during Wave 1 of the COVID-19 global pandemic, and to better understand the reasons behind these preferences., Methods: A total of 183 patients in the pandemic cohort completed the survey via email, and responses were compared to the distinct pre-pandemic cohort (n = 222); all were patients of a large Canadian cancer center. The survey covered (a) broad versus study-specific consent; (b) opt-in versus opt-out contact approach; (c) levels of comfort sharing with different recipients; (d) perceptions of commercialization; and (e) options to track use of information and be notified of results. Four focus groups (n = 12) were subsequently conducted to elucidate reasons motivating dominant preferences., Results: Patients in the pandemic cohort were significantly more comfortable with sharing all information and biological samples (90% vs. 79%, p = 0.009), sharing information with the health care institution (97% vs. 83%, p < 0.001), sharing information with researchers at other hospitals (85% vs. 70%, p < 0.001), sharing PHI provincially (69% vs. 53%, p < 0.002), nationally (65% vs. 53%, p = 0.022) and internationally (48% vs. 39%, p = 0.024) compared to the pre-pandemic cohort. Discomfort with sharing information with commercial companies remained unchanged between the two cohorts (50% vs. 51% uncomfortable, p = 0.58). Significantly more pandemic cohort patients expressed a wish to track use of PHI (75% vs. 61%, p = 0.007), and to be notified of results (83% vs. 70%, p = 0.012). Thematic analysis uncovered that transparency was strongly desired on outside PHI use, particularly when commercialization was involved., Conclusions: In pandemic times, patients were more comfortable sharing information with all parties, except with commercial entities, where levels of discomfort (~ 50%) remained unchanged. Focus groups identified that the ability to track and receive results of studies using one's PHI is an important way to reduce discomfort and increase trust. These findings meaningfully inform wider discussions on the use of personal health information for research during global crises., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Immense volumes of personal health information (PHI) are required to realize the anticipated benefits of artificial intelligence in clinical medicine. To maintain public trust in medical research, consent policies must evolve to reflect contemporary patient preferences., Methods: Patients were invited to complete a 27-item survey focusing on: (a) broad versus specific consent; (b) opt-in versus opt-out approaches; (c) comfort level sharing with different recipients; (d) attitudes towards commercialization; and (e) options to track PHI use and study results., Results: 222 participants were included in the analysis; 83% were comfortable sharing PHI with researchers at their own hospital, although younger patients (≤ 49 years) were more uncomfortable than older patients (50 + years; 13% versus 2% uncomfortable, p < 0.05). While 56% of patients preferred broad consent, 38% preferred specific consent; 6% preferred not sharing at all. The majority of patients (63%) preferred to be asked for permission before entry into a contact pool. Again, this trend was more pronounced for younger patients (≤ 49 years: 76%). Approximately half of patients were uncomfortable sharing PHI with commercial enterprises (51% uncomfortable, 27% comfortable, 22% neutral). Most patients preferred to track PHI usage (61%), with the highest proportion once again reported by the youngest patients (≤ 49 years: 71%). A majority of patients also wished to be notified regarding study results (70%)., Conclusions: While most patients were willing to share their PHI with researchers within their own institution, many preferred a transparent and reciprocal consent process. These data also suggest a generational shift, wherein younger patients preferred more specific consent options. Modernizing consent policies to reflect increased autonomy is crucial in fostering sustained public engagement with medical research.

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) drugs - ranibizumab, aflibercept, and off-label bevacizumab - are vital to the treatment of common retinal diseases, including exudative age-related macular degeneration (AMD), diabetic macular edema (DME), and macular edema (ME) associated with retinal vein occlusion (RVO). Given the high prevalence of AMD and retinal vascular diseases, anti-VEGF agents represent a large cost burden to the United States (US) healthcare system. Although ranibizumab and aflibercept are 30-fold more expensive per injection than bevacizumab, the two more costly medications are commonly used in the US, even though all three have been shown to be effective and safe for treatment of these retinal diseases. We investigated the availability and content of professional ophthalmic guidelines on cost consideration in the selection of anti-VEGF agents. We found that current professional guidelines were limited in availability and lacked specific guidance on cost-based anti-VEGF drug selection. This represents a missed opportunity to encourage the practice of value-based medicine. [Full article available at http://rimed.org/rimedicaljournal-2016-05.asp, free with no login].

We report two Canadian families in which there are four carriers of a novel (G)gamma((A)gammadeltabeta)(0)-thalassemia deletion. The patients all have mild microcytosis and hypochromia, and elevated levels of Hb F ranging from 9.7 to 17.3%. The precise endpoints of the deletion have been identified and are unique relative to other forms of (G)gamma((A)gammadeltabeta)(0)-thal reported in the literature. The deletion encompasses approximately 55.1 kb, beginning approximately 1.6 kb downstream of the (G)gamma-globin gene and extending approximately 29.0 kb downstream of the beta-globin gene.