Sebastia Sabater1, Rafael Leon2, Cesar Esteban2, Jose Luis Añon2, Meritxell Arenas2. 1. Dpt of Radiation Oncology, Complejo Hospitalario Universitario de Albacete (CHUA), C/Hnos Falcó 37, Albacete 02006, Spain. 2. Dpt of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitari Sant Joan de Reus, Av. del Dr. Josep Laporte, 2, Reus 43204, Spain.
Abstract
AIM: To investigate the feasibility of including patients' reports on the cosmetic properties of topical formulations for acute radiation dermatitis (ARD). BACKGROUND: No topical agent tested for acute radiation dermatitis (ARD) has proven to be better than any other, all achieving similar objective outcomes. No clear guidelines have therefore been established in clinics. Because the vehicle for such creams has shown to be an important factor in patient adherence to treatments in other dermatological diseases, patients' opinions are evaluated. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Seventy breast cancer patients referred for postoperative radiotherapy after conservative surgery were enrolled. Patients were assigned to use one of the 7 topical agents that are most-commonly used in the prevention of ARD. Patients' reports were assessed using continuous visual analogue scales (VAS), objective signs and symptoms produced by ARD, and were rated using the RTOG and RISRAS scales. RESULTS: The creams tested differed in their cosmetic properties significantly (p = 0.044). The performance of the agent, their absorption and any residue left over were also significantly different (p = 0.022, 0.014 and 0.02, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Topical agents for preventive ARD are reported by patients to show different cosmetic properties. Cosmetic properties are important when choosing topical agents for ARD prevention. Recommending those with better cosmetic profiles would improve patient adherence to treatments.
AIM: To investigate the feasibility of including patients' reports on the cosmetic properties of topical formulations for acute radiation dermatitis (ARD). BACKGROUND: No topical agent tested for acute radiation dermatitis (ARD) has proven to be better than any other, all achieving similar objective outcomes. No clear guidelines have therefore been established in clinics. Because the vehicle for such creams has shown to be an important factor in patient adherence to treatments in other dermatological diseases, patients' opinions are evaluated. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Seventy breast cancer patients referred for postoperative radiotherapy after conservative surgery were enrolled. Patients were assigned to use one of the 7 topical agents that are most-commonly used in the prevention of ARD. Patients' reports were assessed using continuous visual analogue scales (VAS), objective signs and symptoms produced by ARD, and were rated using the RTOG and RISRAS scales. RESULTS: The creams tested differed in their cosmetic properties significantly (p = 0.044). The performance of the agent, their absorption and any residue left over were also significantly different (p = 0.022, 0.014 and 0.02, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Topical agents for preventive ARD are reported by patients to show different cosmetic properties. Cosmetic properties are important when choosing topical agents for ARD prevention. Recommending those with better cosmetic profiles would improve patient adherence to treatments.
Authors: M Arenas; S Sabater; V Hernández; I Henríquez; A Ameijide; Ll Anglada; E Mur; M Artigues; A Lafuerza; J Borras Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Sheila K MacBride; Mary E Wells; Carole Hornsby; Lena Sharp; Kristina Finnila; Lynn Downie Journal: Cancer Nurs Date: 2008 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.592
Authors: J Stefoski Mikeljevic; R Haward; C Johnston; A Crellin; D Dodwell; A Jones; P Pisani; D Forman Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2004-04-05 Impact factor: 7.640