Liver enzymes elevation after HAART in HIV-HCV co-infection

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) co-infection is common among human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) patients. The incidence and risk factors associated with hepatotoxicity in this population after high active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) is initiated are still not well-understood. We argued to evaluate the incidence and risk factors associated with liver enzyme elevation (LEE) and their clinical significance. A retrospective chart review of patients who started HAART and had follow up at our centre for at least 1 year was undertaken. The frequency and severity of alanine aminotransferase (ALT)/aspartate aminotransferase (AST) elevation after treatment initiation were investigated and searched for clinical manifestations. Between January 1996 and March 2002, 85 HIV-HCV co-infected patients began HAART and continued follow up for at least 1 year. The incidence of severe toxicity [grades 3 + 4 LEE: >5 and >10 times the upper limit of normal (ULN) of ALT or AST] was calculated at 4% per person-years. There were no clinical manifestations of liver toxicity, and patients continued their treatment with a trend towards a decrease of their enzymes. No statistical differences in opportunistic infections or mortality were evident. The variables associated with severe hepatotoxicity were a higher baseline AST, higher international normalized ratio (INR) and lower albumin. A baseline AST < 2.1 ULN had a negative predictive value of 92% of leading to severe hepatotoxicity. In HIV-HCV co-infected patients therefore, the group at a higher risk of developing higher transaminase elevations is the one with a higher baseline AST, higher INR and lower albumin.

Cancer patients as 'experts' in defining quality of life domains. A multicentre survey by the Italian Group for the Evaluation of Outcomes in Oncology (IGEO)

Although the subjective nature of quality of life is generally accepted, less attention has been paid to the procedure of selecting domains to be explored with questionnaires. To explore what contributes to cancer patients' quality of life, a survey was conducted with the aim of identifying contents of quality of life using cancer patients as 'experts'. A questionnaire with open-ended items aimed at exploring the meaning of quality of life and at determining the contents of health and not health related quality of life, was submitted to a sample of cancer patients stratified by residence, cancer site and stage of disease. The 248 questionnaires received were transcribed and broken down into phrases to allow coding. A content analysis was performed, using as a conceptual framework, the domains identified by the Italian Society of Psycho-Oncology. Overall, 43 domains and a list of symptoms were identified. The two most frequently reported symptoms were pain (21.4% patients) and fatigue (14.1% patients). Social relationships and psychological domains were heavily represented. Twenty sub-domains related to the domain 'psychological well-being'. This study suggests that information on the content of quality of life questionnaires to be submitted to people affected by a specific disease, should be derived by studying people suffering the specific disease. These results reinforce the criticism that available quality of life instruments are more likely to reflect the perspective of health professionals than patients.

Illness awareness in cancer patients: a conceptual framework and a preliminary classification hypothesis

The study describes the initial phases of research aimed at developing a methodology for assessing awareness in cancer patients. A first sample of cancer patients (n = 36) was interviewed about their knowledge of the diagnosis and their perception of treatment goals and outcomes. Thirteen domains which refer both to cognitive and emotional areas were identified, and considered as content valid by a panel of six experts. A second sample of patients (n = 54) participated in a semi-structured interview developed to explore awareness by means of the domains identified. Seven patterns of awareness were identified, ranging from 'completely aware patient' to 'completely unaware patient'. Twenty of the 54 patients (37.0%) were completely aware, 19 (35.2%) were partially aware with defence mechanisms and 15 (27.8%) were not aware of their diagnosis. Patients from the National Cancer Institute were more frequently aware (54.3%) compared with the patients interviewed in the community hospitals (5.3%) (p < 0.001). A computerized content analysis allowed the identification of two main groups of patients on the basis of the content of the recorded interviews. This independent classification agreed with the classification of the patients performed by the psychologists, suggesting the validity of the procedure of awareness evaluation proposed in this study.

[Evaluation of quality of life in oncology. Rationale and objectives of the first phase of the Quality of Life in Oncology project]

Although the subjective nature of quality of life perception is generally accepted, less attention has been paid to the procedure of selecting domains to be explored with questionnaires. In most cases domains are selected by panel of experts. It is not known whether these domains are relevant for the patients. Moreover, questionnaires developed in 'foreign' countries may not be culturally sound or relevant for patients living in different cultural background. In order to explore what really contributes to quality of life of Italian patients, a survey was conducted with the aim of identifying any dimension of quality of life, positively or negatively impacted on from the illness and therapies. A sample of two hundred and eighty eight cancer patients with previously specified characteristics (primary tumor, stage of disease and place of residence) were identified. After consenting to partecipate to the study, a staff member (a physician, a nurse or a psychologist) asked the patient to complete an open-ended questionnaire in the out-patient clinic or at home. This questionnaire, partially derived from a study by Padilla et al. made up of 5 questions: 'What does the term quality of life mean to you?', 'What contributes to a good quality of life?', 'What contributes to a poor or bad quality of life?', 'Which either physical or psychological symptom interferes with your quality of life?', 'State any positive or negative change in your quality of life, due to illness or treatments'. The first question was asked to explore the meaning of quality of life for the patient; the second and third question were asked to determine the contents of quality of life not health related; the fourth question and the diary provided information about quality of life contents related to his own experience of disease. Two hundred and forty eight questionnaires (86.1%) were obtained from 7 Cancer Centres participating to the study (Genova, Milano, Roma, Perugia, Napoli, Cagliari, Palermo). All the questionnaires were transcribed and subsequently broken down in phrases on a form that allowed coding. Three raters (a research nurse, an oncologist and a clinical psychologist) made the content analysis using as conceptual framework the list of domains identified by the Italian Society of Psycho-Oncology. The present study shows the possibility to define the content domain of quality of life attributes for cancer patients, using patients as experts.

Assessing psychological distress in cancer patients: validation of a self-administered questionnaire

BACKGROUND

Screening for psychological distress in cancer patients is important, considering the high prevalence of psychiatric disorders responsive to treatment. The aim of this study is to test the psychometric properties of the Psychological Distress Inventory (PDI), a 13-item self-administered questionnaire developed to measure psychological distress in cancer patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The PDI was tested in three samples of 434 cancer patients. In the first sample (n = 102) it was administered with the State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) and with the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ). Its validity as a screening method for psychiatric disorders was evaluated through a clinical interview in the second sample (n = 107). The third sample (n = 225) provided information on the ability of the PDI to discriminate among patients in different clinical phases of disease and allowed an estimate of the prevalence of psychiatric disorders in these groups of patients.

RESULTS

A 0.88 alpha coefficient was obtained in the whole study sample. The correlations with the STAI scales were > 0.70. A positive correlation with neuroticism (r = 0.59) and a negative correlation with extroversion (r = -0.34) was observed. In the second sample, 67 patients (62.6%) received a psychiatric diagnosis according to the ICD-X criteria. The mean PDI scores were significantly lower for the 40 patients with no psychiatric diagnosis (mean 24.5) as compared with the 49 patients with adjustment disorders (mean 36.4) and with the 12 patients with depressive disorders (mean 40.8). The area under curve, estimated through a Receiver-Operating Characteristics analysis, was 0.88. A cut-off of 29 was associated with a 75% sensitivity and a 85% specificity. In the third sample, the lowest PDI scores were in patients with no evidence of disease (mean 24.7, 95% CL 23.0-26.4) as compared to patients undergoing antineoplastic treatment (mean 30.9, 95% CL 28.9-32.9) and to patients under palliative therapy (mean 36.0, 95% CL 34.0-37.9). The estimated prevalence of patients with psychiatric disorders in these three groups were respectively 5.0, 56.6 and 98.8%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that the PDI is a reliable and valid tool for measuring psychological distress in cancer patients and to detect psychiatric disorders through a screening procedure.

Psychological evaluation of patients undergoing breast reconstruction using two different methods: autologous tissues versus prostheses

Breast reconstruction has become an available option for most patients undergoing mastectomy. In fact, many authors agree that breast reconstruction does not interfere with possible therapies and improves the women's quality of life. The aim of this study was to evaluate the psychological adjustment of patients who had immediate or delayed reconstruction using two different methods: implants and autologous tissues. Specifically, it was explored whether the different methods of breast reconstruction have caused significant changes in psychological functioning. The study population (102 patients) was derived from patients who underwent breast reconstruction in the period January 1988 to December 1991 at the Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery of the National Institute for Cancer Research in Genoa, Italy. Fifty-two patients underwent breast reconstruction using implants and 50 using the transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap. Demographic information was gathered from each patient. The psychological instruments consisted of three standardized self-administered questionnaires: Psychological Distress Inventory, State Trait Anxiety Inventory, Form Y, and the Eysenck Personality Inventory. To better assess the changes in body image after breast reconstruction, three more specific questions about sexual desire, physical image, and social relationships were added. The 102 patients assessed in this study indicated a low incidence of psychological distress. Impairment was reported regarding body image by patients who underwent delayed reconstruction; these patients also showed higher distress scores. The type of breast reconstruction also seems to influence body image, showing in the patients with TRAM flap reconstruction more relevant psychological discomfort.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

[Psychological assessment of patients who have ++undergone breast reconstruction using 2 different technics: autologous tissue versus prosthesis]

Breast reconstruction has become an available option for most patients undergoing mastectomy: in fact many authors agree that breast reconstruction does not interfere with possible therapies and improves the quality of life of women. The aim of the study was to evaluate the psychological adjustment of patients who had immediate or delayed reconstruction using 2 different methods: implants and autologous tissues. The study population (115 patients) was derived from patients who underwent breast reconstruction in the period January 1988-December 1991, in follow-up at the Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery; no patient was undergoing psychological therapy. 58 patients underwent breast reconstruction using implants and 57 using Transverse Rectus Abdominis Myocutaneous Flap (TRAMF). Informations were gathered, including the patient's age, the number of offspring, the marital status, the scholastic education, the job and the relapse between mastectomy and reconstruction. The psychological instruments consisted in three standardized self-administered questionnaires: Psychological Distress Inventory (PDI), State Trait Anxiety Inventory form Y (STAI), Eysenk Personality Inventory (EPQ-R). These tests were chosen to gauge the psychological distress, such anxiety, anger, depression and psychosocial maladjustment. To better perform the changes of body image after breast reconstruction, women were requested to answer three more specific questions about the sexual desire, physical image and social relationships. The 102 patients assessed in this study indicate low incidence of psychological distress and adaptive coping strategies. Impairment was reported, regarding body image, by patients undergoing delayed reconstruction; in these patients higher scores in distress tests were observed.