Survival among Breast Cancer Patients: Comparison of the U.S. Military Health System with the Surveillance,Epidemiology and End Results Program

IntroductionAccessibility to health care is important to cancer survival. The U.S. military health system (MHS) provides universal health care access. However, whether the universal care has been translated into improved cancer survival is unknown. We compared survival of patients with breast cancer in the MHS with that in the U.S. general population and assessed the differences in cancer stage at diagnosis and treatment receipt between the two populations.MethodsThe MHS patients (n = 31,548) were identified from the Department of Defense's (DoD) Automated Central Tumor Registry (ACTUR). Patients in the U.S. general population (n = 63,096) were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program. The two populations were matched on age, race, and diagnosis year. Multivariable Cox regression hazard modeling was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) comparing ACTUR with SEER. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) comparing stage and treatment receipt.ResultsACTUR patients exhibited a 24% lower overall mortality than the SEER patients (HR = 0.76, 95% CI, 0.71-0.80). They were less likely to present with later stage compared to the SEER patients (OR = 0.61, 95% CI, 0.55-0.67 for stage IV tumors). The ACTUR patients with stages I-III tumors were more likely to receive surgery (OR = 1.35, 95% CI, 1.20-1.52) but less likely to receive radiation (OR = 0.91, 95% CI, 0.88-0.94). The survival advantage of ACTUR patients remained regardless of surgery or radiation receipt.ConclusionsBreast cancer patients with universal health care access had improved survival compared to patients in the general population.     

Nutritional assessment and risk factors associated to malnutrition in patients with esophageal cancer

Introduction: Esophageal cancer is the fourth most common cause of cancer death in China. Patients with esophageal cancer are more likely to suffer from malnutrition. The purpose of this study is to assess nutritional status of patients with esophageal cancer from multiple perspectives and analyze the risk factors. Methods: A total of 1482 esophageal cancer patients were enrolled in the study. We investigated the Scored Patient Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) scores, NRS-2002 scores, Karnofsky performance status scores, anthropometric, and laboratory indicators of patients. Unconditional logistic regression analysis was applied to identify the risk factors of nutritional status. Results: PG-SGA (≥4) and NRS-2002 (≥3) showed the incidence of malnutrition were 76% and 50%, respectively. In the patients with PG-SGA score ≥4, the proportion of patients who did not receive any nutritional support was 60%. The incidence of malnutrition in females was significantly higher than that in males. Besides, abnormality rates of Red blood cell (P < 0.001), MAC (P = 0.037), and MAMC (P < 0.001) in males was significantly higher than that in females, while abnormality rates of TSF (P < 0.001) was lower than that in females. After adjusted with the other potential risk factors listed, unconditional logistic regression analysis indicated smoking (odds ratio: 2.868, 95% confidence interval: 1.660-4.954), drinking (OR: 1.726, 95% CI: 1.099-2.712), family history (OR: 1.840, 95% CI: 1.132-2.992), radiotherapy or chemotherapy (OR: 1.594, 95% CI: 1.065-2.387), and pathological stage (OR: 2.263, 95% CI: 1.084-4.726) might be the risk factors of nutritional status, while nutritional support can reduce the risk of malnutrition. Conclusion: Effective nutritional risk assessment methods and nutritional intervention measures can be adopted according to the research data to improve quality of life of esophageal cancer patients.     

Low DNA repair is a risk factor in skin carcinogenesis: a study of basal cell carcinoma in psoriasis patients

We have studied DNA repair in patients with psoriasis aiming at investigating the importance of repair in chemically induced cancer. An increased risk of non-melanoma skin cancer has been observed in psoriasis patients extensively treated with tar, methotrexate and photochemotherapy (psoralen+UVA). We measured the DNA repair capacity (DRC) by a host cell reactivation (HCR) assay in lymphocytes from psoriasis patients with and without basal cell cancer and non-psoriatic persons with and without basal cell cancer (4×20 study persons). Among psoriasis patients we observed a significant lower DRC in patients with skin cancer compared to patients without skin cancer (P=0.015; Mann–Whitney, one-sided). Using the median of the healthy control group (group 4) as a cutoff value to divide the psoriasis patients into groups of high and low repair, we found that individuals who had a low repair capacity had a 6.4-fold increased skin cancer risk compared to individuals with high repair (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.44–28.5). The level of DNA repair was correlated with the age at which the psoriasis patients got their first skin cancer. The lower the level of DNA repair, the earlier the psoriasis patients had their first skin tumor (P=0.070 Spearman; one-sided). Psoriasis patients without BCC had marginally higher repair than healthy controls (P=0.11, Mann–Whitney, two-sided). We found no difference between BCC patients without psoriasis and healthy controls. In conclusion, these findings suggest a protective role of DNA repair in a predominantly chemically induced cancer.     

Localized Prostate Cancer in Norway,the United States,and Spain: Between-Country Differences of Variables Before Treatment Among Patients Eligible for Curative Treatment

BackgroundIn men with PCa, large variations of PROs after RP or high-dose RAD might be related to between-country differences of medical and sociodemographic variables, and differences in PROs before treatment in the sexual and urinary domains.Patients and MethodsIn 1908 patients with localized PCa from Norway, the United States, or Spain, the relation between medical (prostate-specific antigen, Gleason score, cT-category) and sociodemographic variables (age, education, marital status) before treatment was investigated. Using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite questionnaire, PROs before treatment within the sexual and urinary domains were also considered.ResultsCompared with the European patients, American patients were younger, fewer had comorbid conditions, and more had a high education level. Fifty-three percent of the US men eligible for RP had low-risk tumors compared with 42% and 31% among the Norwegian and the Spanish patients, respectively. Among the Spanish RAD patients, 54% had had low-risk tumors compared with 34% of the American and 21% of the Norwegian men planned for RAD, respectively. Compared with the European patients, significantly fewer US patients reported moderate or severe sexual dysfunction and related problems. In most subgroups, the number of patients with sexual or urinary dysfunction exceeded that of patients with bother related to the reported dysfunction.ConclusionStatistically significant between-country differences were observed in medical and sociodemographic variables, and in PROs before treatment within the sexual and urinary domains. Large differences between reported dysfunction and related problems within the sexual and urinary domains indicate that dysfunction and bother should be reported separately in addition to calculation of summary scores. The documented differences, not at least regarding PROs, might in part explain the large variation of side effects after treatment evident in the medical literature.