The primary health care physician and the cancer patient: tips and strategies for managing sexual health

There is a large and growing population of long-term cancer survivors. Primary care physicians (PCPs) are playing an increasingly greater role in the care of these patients across the continuum of cancer survivorship. In this role, PCPs are faced with the responsibility of managing a range of medical and psychosocial late effects of cancer treatment. In particular, the sexual side effects of treatment which are common and have significant impact on quality of life for the cancer survivor, often go unaddressed. This is an area of clinical care and research that has received increasing attention, highlighted by the presentation of this special issue on Cancer and Sexual Health. The aims of this review are 3-fold. First, we seek to overview common presentations of sexual dysfunction related to major cancer diagnoses in order to give the PCP a sense of the medical issues that the survivor may present with. Barriers to communication about sexual health issues between patient/PCPs in order are also described in order to emphasize the importance of PCPs initiating this important conversation. Next, we provide strategies and resources to help guide the PCP in the management of sexual dysfunction in cancer survivors. Finally, we discuss case examples of survivorship sexual health issues and highlight the role that a PCP can play in each of these case examples.     

A Novel Nomogram to Identify Candidates for Extended Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection Among Patients with Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer Diagnosed with Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted and Systematic Biopsies

Background

Available models for predicting lymph node invasion (LNI) in prostate cancer (PCa) patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) might not be applicable to men diagnosed via magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsies.

Dorsal fracture of the hamate: distinctive radiographic appearance

Six patients who injured their wrists had radiographs documenting a dorsal, 5- to 10-mm oblong fragment of bone immediately proximal to the base of the fourth and/or fifth metacarpal bones. The fragment was seen on the pronation oblique and/or lateral projections, but not on the posteroanterior projection. The radiographic appearance of the fragment was remarkably similar in all cases. In the one patient in which it was performed, pluridirectional tomography demonstrated that the fragment originated from the dorsal surface of the hamate. Five of the six patients also had associated posterior dislocation of the fourth and/or fifth metacarpals. We conclude that this fragment represents a coronal fracture through the body of the hamate resulting from posterior dislocation or subluxation of the fourth and/or fifth metacarpal.     

The influence of protein solubilisation, conformation and size on the burst release from poly(lactide-co-glycolide) microspheres.

Encapsulation of proteins in poly(lactide-co-glycolide) microspheres via emulsion is known to cause insoluble protein aggregates. Following protein emulsification and encapsulation in PLGA microspheres, we used circular dichroism to show that the recoverable soluble protein fraction also suffers subtle conformational changes. For a panel of proteins selected on the basis of molecular size and structural class, conformational stability measured by chemical denaturation was not indicative of stability during emulsion-encapsulation. Partial loss of structure was observed for alpha-helical proteins released from freeze-dried microspheres in aqueous buffer, with dramatic loss of structure for a beta-sandwich protein. The addition of sucrose (a lyoprotectant) did not prevent the loss of protein conformation upon encapsulation. Therefore, the conformational changes seen for the released soluble protein fraction originates during emulsification rather than microsphere freeze-drying. Analysis of the burst release for all proteins in buffer containing denaturant or surfactant showed that the degree of protein solubilisation was the dominant factor in determining the initial rate and extent of release. Our data for protein release into increasing concentrations of denaturing buffer suggest that the emulsion-denatured protein fraction remains insoluble; this fraction may represent the protein loss encountered upon comparison of protein encapsulated versus protein released.