4.7 Article

QUALITY OF LIFE OF ORAL CANCER PATIENTS AFTER LOW-DOSE-RATE INTERSTITIAL BRACHYTHERAPY

Journal

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.05.001

Keywords

Low-dose-rate interstitial brachytherapy; Oral cancer; Quality of life; QLQ-C30; QLQ-H&N35

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To assess the quality of life (QOL) of oral cancer patients treated with low-dose-rate interstitial brachytherapy (LDR-BT) alone. Methods and Materials: Between June 2005 and July 2006, a total of 56 patients with oral cancer were enrolled in this prospective study. QOL was assessed by means of the core questionnaire and head and neck questionnaire module of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 [QLQ-C30] and QLQ Head and Neck 35 [H&N35]). The questionnaires were distributed to the patients before the start of treatment and 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after the start of LDR-BT. Results: It was possible to analyze the results for 20 of the initial 56 patients because they did not experience metastasis or recurrence during this study. No functions or symptoms asked about in the QLQ-C30 deteriorated during the first year. The emotional function score steadily and significantly increased. No symptoms in the QLQ-H&N35 significantly deteriorated. The scores for pain, trouble with social eating, and weight loss on the QLQ-H&N35 steadily and significantly decreased. Age, gender, and LDR-BT source had no effect on the change in QOL during the first year, but T-stage significantly affected the change in global health status, tumor site affected the changes in swallowing, sensory problems, sticky saliva, and complications affected the changes in pain, swallowing, and mouth opening. Conclusions: QOL of oral cancer patients treated with LDR-BT is high. However, tumor stage, tumor site, and complications affected the changes in a few functions and symptoms during the first year. (c) 2009 Elsevier Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available