Recognizing Gynecological Cancer in Primary Care: Risk Factors,Red Flags,and Referrals

Early diagnosis of symptomatic gynecological cancer is likely to improve patient outcomes, including survival. The primary care practitioner has a key role to play in this—they must recognize the symptoms and signs of gynecological cancer and make prompt evidence-based decisions regarding further investigation and referral. However, this is often difficult as many of the symptoms of gynecological cancers are nonspecific and are more likely to be caused by benign rather than malignant disease. As primary care is generally the first point of patient contact, those working in this setting usually encounter cancer patients at an earlier, and possibly less symptomatic, stage than practitioners in secondary care. Despite these challenges, research has improved our understanding of the symptoms patients present to primary care with, and a range of tests and referral pathways now exist in the UK and other countries to aid early diagnosis. Primary care practitioners can also play a key role in gynecological cancer prevention. A significant proportion of gynecological cancer is preventable either through lifestyle changes such as weight loss, or, for cervical cancer, vaccination and/or engagement with screening programs. Primary care provides an excellent opportunity to discuss cancer risk with patients and to promote risk reduction strategies and lifestyle change. In this article, the first in a series discussing cancer detection in primary care, we concentrate on gynecological cancer and focus on the three most common forms that a primary care practitioner is likely to encounter: ovarian, endometrial, and cervical cancer. We outline key risk factors, briefly discuss prevention and screening strategies, and offer practical guidance on the recognition of symptoms and signs and the investigation and referral of women with suspected cancer. While this article is written from a UK primary care perspective, much of what is discussed will be of relevance to those working in other healthcare systems.     

Congruence Between Latent Class and K-Modes Analyses in the Identification of Oncology Patients With Distinct Symptom Experiences

Context

Risk profiling of oncology patients based on their symptom experience assists clinicians to provide more personalized symptom management interventions. Recent findings suggest that oncology patients with distinct symptom profiles can be identified using a variety of analytic methods.

Distinct Neuropsychological Mechanisms May Explain Delayed- Versus Rapid-Onset Antidepressant Efficacy

The biochemical targets for antidepressants are relatively well established, but we lack a clear understanding of how actions at these proteins translate to clinical benefits. This study used a novel rodent assay to investigate how different antidepressant drugs act to modify affective biases that have been implicated in depression. In this bowl-digging task, rats encounter two equal value learning experiences on separate days (one during an affective manipulation and the other during control conditions). This induces an affective bias that is quantified using a preference test in which both digging substrates are presented together and the individual rats’ choices recorded. The assay can be used to measure affective biases associated with learning (when the treatment is given at the time of the experience) or examine the modification of previously acquired biases (when the treatment is administered before the preference test). The rapid-onset antidepressant ketamine, but not the delayed-onset antidepressant, venlafaxine, attenuated the previously acquired FG7142-induced negative bias following systemic administration. Venlafaxine but not ketamine induced a positive bias when administered before learning. We then used local drug infusions and excitotoxic lesions to localize the effects of ketamine to the medial prefrontal cortex and venlafaxine to the amygdala. Using a modified protocol we also showed that positive and negative biases amplified further when the numbers of substrate–reinforcer associations are increased. We propose that this pattern of results could explain the delayed onset of action of venlafaxine and the rapid onset of action but lack of long-term efficacy seen with ketamine.     

Addressing Sexuality Among People Living With Chronic Disease and Disability: A Systematic Mixed Methods Review of Knowledge,Attitudes, and Practices of Health Care Professionals

ObjectiveTo systematically review health care professionals’ practices and attitudes toward addressing sexuality with people who are living with chronic disease and disability.Data SourcesScopus, PubMed, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, and MEDLINE were searched to August 2020 for English language publications. Reference lists of relevant publications were also searched.Study SelectionEligible studies reported on knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of health care professionals about addressing sexuality in the context of chronic disease and disability. The search yielded 2492 records; 187 full texts were assessed for eligibility and 114 documents were included (103 unique studies). Study quality was rated using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.Data ExtractionCharacteristics of included studies were recorded independently by 2 authors. Differences were resolved through discussion or by a third author.Data SynthesisA sequential, exploratory mixed studies approach was used for synthesis. Pooled analysis showed that 14.2% (95% CI, 10.6-18.9 [I²=94.8%, P<.001]) of health professionals report routinely asking questions or providing information about sexuality. Professionals reported limited confidence, competence, and/or comfort when initiating conversations about sexuality or responding to patient questions. Sexual rehabilitation typically focused on the effect of disease, disability, and medication on sexual function. Broader dimensions of sexuality were rarely addressed.ConclusionDespite recognizing the value of sexuality to health and well-being, most health professionals regardless of clinical context fail to routinely include assessment of sexuality in their practice. Professionals have limited knowledge and confidence when addressing sexuality and experience significant discomfort when raising this topic with people living with chronic disease and disability. Multicomponent implementation programs are needed to improve health professionals’ knowledge, competence, and comfort when addressing sexuality for people living with chronic disease and disability.