e19048 Background: The improvement in the quality of cancer treatment is key to increasing survival. However, the functional well-being of these patients is equally important. This study aimed to assess the degree of psychological distress, social function and financial burden in patients undergoing cancer treatment in our center. Methods: A cross-sectional study was designed to prospectively recruit patients in our teaching hospital between December 2019 to February 2020. Those with cancer, aged 18 years and above, who had surgery, chemotherapy and (or) radiotherapy for treatment were included while those who had not commenced cancer treatment were excluded. Information on their clinicopathologic characteristics was obtained. The degree of psychological distress was assessed using a distress thermometer (DT) based on an 11-point scale. Social function was assessed using validated SCARF social functioning index (SSFI) (Cronbach's alpha = 0.818) which has 4-domains, each with scores ranging from 0 (very poor) to 4 (very good). Financial burden (FB) was assessed on a 5-point Likert scale. SPSS was used for data analysis with p < 0.05 considered significant. Results: Seventy-two patients were analyzed with a mean age of 50.3 ± 13.7 years and male to female ratio of 0.8:1.0. The median time from diagnosis was 6.0 (2.5 – 16.0) months and 51 (70.8%) were on palliative treatment. The median psychological distress score was 6.0 (4.0 – 8.0) while the mean SSFI score was 12.0 ± 3.3. Relationship with immediate family (3.4 ± 0.7) had a significantly higher sub-score than two other domains (occupational role: 2.3 ± 1.4, p < 0.001; self-concern/care: 3.0 ± 1.0, p < 0.001). Fifty patients (69.4%) had heavy or extreme financial burden with 34 (47.2%) admitting to income reduction since onset of therapy. Female sex (p < 0.001, 95% CI: 1.246 – 3.597), higher ECOG score (p = 0.033, 95% CI: 0.061 – 1.383) and palliative treatment (p = 0.038, 95% CI: 0.084 – 2.768) were independent predictors of psychological distress. Conclusions: Despite the marked psychological distress and huge financial burden in patients receiving cancer treatment in this setting, they still maintained a relatively normal status in most of the social function domains.

ObjectiveOvarian cancer in Black women is common in many West African countries but is relatively rare in North America. Black women have worse survival outcomes when compared to White women. Ovarian cancer histotype, diagnosis, and age at presentation are known prognostic factors for outcome. We sought to conduct a preliminary comparative assessment of these factors across the African diaspora.MethodsPatients diagnosed with ovarian cancer (all histologies) between June 2016-December 2019 in Departments of Pathology at 25 participating sites in Nigeria were identified. Comparative population-based data, inclusive of Caribbean-born Blacks (CBB) and US-born Blacks (USB), were additionally captured from the International Agency for Research on Cancer and Florida Cancer Data Systems. Histology, country of birth, and age at diagnosis data were collected and evaluated across the three subgroups: USB, CBB and Nigerians. Statistical analyses were done using chi-square and student’s t-test with significance set at p&lt;0.05.ResultsNigerians had the highest proportion of germ cell tumor (GCT, 11.5%) and sex-cord stromal (SCST, 16.2%) ovarian cancers relative to CBB and USB (p=0.001). CBB (79.4%) and USB (77.3%) women were diagnosed with a larger proportion of serous ovarian cancer than Nigerians (60.4%) (p&lt;0.0001). Nigerians were diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancers at the youngest age (51.7± 12.8 years) relative to USB (58.9 ± 15.0) and CBB (59.0± 13.0,p&lt;0.001). Black women [CBB (25.2 ± 15.0), Nigerians (29.5 ± 15.1), and USB (33.9 ± 17.9)] were diagnosed with GCT younger than White women (35.4 ± 20.5, p=0.011). Black women [Nigerians (47.5 ± 15.9), USB (50.9 ± 18.3) and CBB (50.9 ± 18.3)] were also diagnosed with SCST younger than White women (55.6 ± 16.5, p&lt;0.01).ConclusionThere is significant variation in age of diagnosis and distribution of ovarian cancer histotype/diagnosis across the African diaspora. The etiology of these findings requires further investigation.

Ovarian endometrioma is quite common among women of reproductive age but rarely exceed 6 cm in diameter. Ovarian endometrioma exceeding 10 cm in dimension, often referred to as giant endometrioma, is rare and can pose a diagnostic dilemma to clinicians. We present a 33-year-old single nullipara referred to our facility with a 3-year history of recurrent abdominal pain, abdominal swelling, and difficulty in breathing. The challenges in making diagnosis of a huge ovarian endometrioma are highlighted and the literature on huge ovarian endometrioma reviewed.

No abstract