乳腺癌随访和药物副作用管理策略的研究进展

乳腺癌是全球女性发病率最高的恶性肿瘤,随着诊断技术及治疗手段的不断提高,乳腺癌患者接受系统治疗后生存期明显延长。乳腺癌患者需要长时间的随访以便及早监测到局部复发和远处转移。此外,激素敏感性乳腺癌患者还需要给予5~10年的内分泌治疗,针对其副作用的全程管理也需要随访,进而提高患者的生活质量,减轻患者疾病负担。本文就近年来乳腺癌随访相关方面进行简要综述。     

A Pre-Protocol/Post-Protocol Quality Improvement Initiative Specific to One Hospital for Security of Pathologic Specimen

ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to reduce errors in a pathologic specimen with the help of a protocol systematizing the pathology specimen management process in the operating room.Materials and methodThis quasi-experimental study was carried out in the operating room unit of a research and training hospital. A protocol systematizing the process of specimen management in secure surgical pathology and prepared in light of the current literature was used as an intervention, and the effectiveness of the protocol was tested.ResultsIt was determined that the rate of adverse events decreased from .3226% (68 of 21,078) to .032% (6 of 18,706) after the protocol systematizing the surgical pathology specimen management process prepared by the researchers, and the protocol was found to be effective by 90% (P = .03).ConclusionBased on the data obtained in this study, we recommend the use of a pathologic specimen management protocol in the operating room.     

Differentiating poor validity from probable impairment on the medical symptom validity test: a cross-validation study

Aims: In neuropsychological evaluations, it is often difficult to ascertain whether poor performance on measures of validity is due to poor effort or malingering, or whether there is genuine cognitive impairment. Dunham and Denney created an algorithm to assess this question using the Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT). We assessed the ability of their algorithm to detect poor validity versus probable impairment, and concordance of failure on the MSVT with other freestanding tests of performance validity.

Methods: Two previously published datasets (n?=?153 and n?=?641, respectively) from outpatient neuropsychological evaluations were used to test Dunham and Denney’s algorithm, and to assess concordance of failure rates with the Test of Memory Malingering and the forced choice measure of the California Verbal Learning Test, two commonly used performance validity tests.

Results: In both datasets, none of the four cutoff scores for failure on the MSVT (70%, 75%, 80%, or 85%) identified a poor validity group with proportionally aligned failure rates on other freestanding measures of performance validity. Additionally, the protocols with probable impairment did not differ from those with poor validity on cognitive measures.

Conclusions: Despite what appeared to be a promising approach to evaluating failure on the easy MSVT subtests when clinical data are unavailable (as recommended in the advanced interpretation program, or advanced interpretation [AI], of the MSVT), the current findings indicate the AI remains the gold standard for doing so. Future research should build on this effort to address shortcomings in measures of effort in neuropsychological evaluations.