The results of this research confirmed the importance of designing programs to support cancer survivors in an integrative manner from initial diagnosis into the period of long-term survivorship. Specific attention should be placed on the concerns related to fear of recurrence, fatigue, financial burden, and the long-term effects of cancer treatment.

Purpose Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN), a common side effect of chemotherapy, needs better effective treatments. Preliminary data support the use of Scrambler therapy, a device which treats pain via noninvasive cutaneous electrostimulation, for the treatment of CIPN. The current manuscript reports data from a pilot trial, performed to investigate the effect of Scrambler therapy for the treatment of established CIPN. Methods Eligible patients had CIPN symptoms of ≥1 month duration with tingling and/or pain ≥4/10 during the prior week. Patients were treated with Scrambler therapy to the affected area(s) for up to ten daily 30-min sessions. Symptoms were monitored using a neuropathy questionnaire consisting of numerical analog scales ranging from 0 to 10, daily before therapy as well as weekly for 10 weeks after therapy. Descriptive summary statistics formed the basis of data analysis. Results Thirty-seven patients were enrolled. Twenty-five patients were treated primarily on their lower extremities while 12 were treated primarily on their upper extremities. There was a 53 % reduction in pain score from baseline to day 10; a 44%reduction in tingling; and a 37%reduction in numbness. Benefit appeared to last throughout 10 weeks of follow-up. There were no substantial adverse events. Conclusion Preliminary data support that Scrambler therapy may be effective for the treatment of CIPN: a prospective placebo-controlled clinical trial should be performed.

No abstract

Purpose Adherence to guideline-consistent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) prophylaxis is suboptimal. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the magnitude of compliance to institutional guideline-directed antiemetic prophylaxis using a computerized physician order entry system at a single tertiary care institution. A nurse survey was also performed to evaluate how oncology practices, within a cooperative group, managed clinician orders for the prevention of CINV. Methods The electronic medical records of 100 consecutive patients were evaluated. The primary endpoint was the incidence of compliance to provide all aspects of scheduled institutional guideline-directed antiemetic prophylaxis for acute (day 1) and delayed (days 2–4) CINV. A descriptive analysis was performed on the convenience sample. Logistic regression was completed to determine the predictors of noncompliance. Results The incidence of compliance on days 1–4 was 94 %. Half of the noncompliant events (three of six, 50 %) occurred on day 1 alone and involved patients receiving low-emetogenic chemotherapy. There was a high degree of compliance to institutional guidelines for the treatment of delayed CINV (97 %). Patients receiving minimally emetogenic and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (N =70) were observed to be 100 % compliant. Patients receiving doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide were numerically less likely to receive institutional guidelines, compared to patients receiving other chemotherapy regimens (OR, 0.24 (0.04, 1.36), p value, 0.05). The nurse survey suggested significant variability amongst the involved institutions with regards to antiemetic prescribing practices. Conclusions Computerized physician order entry is associated with impressive adherence to clinician-prescribing practices, according to institutional guidelines, for acute and delayed CINV.

No abstract