Cancer patients desperately require supports from their partners or family members for survival. Various forms of supports either explicitly or implicitly are anxiously needed by them, especially in terms of communication supports to reduce the implications of negative selfstigma faced by them. This article aims to discuss the classification of appropriate communication patterns practiced by spouses and family members of these patients. Researchers suggest that there are four classifications of communication patterns that can be implemented to communicate with breast cancer patients, such as primary communication pattern, secondary communication pattern, linear communication pattern and circular communication pattern. Researchers discovered that these four communication patterns can be practiced by spouses and families of cancer patients to help them control and cope with emotions during treatment.

Apart from the assistance from medical technology, the process and treatment for breast cancer patients are also closely related to the information perceived by the patients themselves. By stating this, consideration towards communication issues should then be taken into account. This article focuses on the most notable issue discussed in Malaysia in which the communication between breast cancer patients with family members, particularly the communication with the patient's partner effects the process and the treatment that they receive. The study in this article is needed to address the communication issues thus finding solutions which will help to reduce the stigma of breast cancer in Malaysia.

type of evidence (in vitro, in vivo, clinical trial, etc.). Subsequently, a clinical trial database (clinicaltrials.gov and WHO-ICTRP) search was performed to generate a list of registered trials in cervical cancer with drugs from our databases. Result(s)* We queried 534 drugs from our drug databases. Of these, 169 drugs had at least one relevant abstract or registered trial in cervical cancer. Ninety-three drugs had at least human data available with 52 drugs evaluated in registered trials. Forty-two drugs had at most in vitro data.All 169 drugs were assessed for strength of scientific rationale, feasibility for integration in cervical cancer standard of care, evidence of radiosensitisation and an assessment of the availability of the drug for clinical trials. Out of these 169 drugs, we present 5 examples, i.e. nelfinavir, plerixafor, valproate with hydralazine, sonidegib and cetuximab (table 1) of potential candidates out of 39 that have been prioritised for further investigation. Conclusion* This study has identified potential candidates that are worth evaluating in cervical cancer. Although many drugs warrant additional preclinical and clinical investigation, we are exploring the possibility of conducting international collaborative multi-arm trials with one or several of these drugs.