Scalp Cooling for Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Alopecia for Women and Men with Various Cancer Entities: A Two-Year Survey of an Outpatient Cancer Center in Germany.
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION
The aim of this survey was to assess the efficacy and the feasibility of scalp cooling (SC) in an outpatient hematological and oncological center in a real-world setting.
METHODS
We prospectively monitored cancer patients from August 2017 to October 2019 receiving oncological treatments with SC, using the sensor-controlled system "DigniCap." Effectiveness was defined by a self-estimated hair loss < Grad 2 (<50%) according to the Common terminology Criteria for adverse events V4.0 or not requiring a wig. Withdrawal from SC on patient's demand was considered as failure. Tolerability and safety were also evaluated.
RESULTS
Ninety-four patients with chemotherapy for their primary (52%) or metastatic (48%) disease had a total of 634 SC sessions. SC was well accepted with increasing experience of the nurses (withdrawal for any reason 29/94). Among the female population (N = 85) 54% received a (neo-)adjuvant chemotherapy. Forty-eight percentages received a taxane-based therapy, 35% anthracycline-based, 17% platin compounds, and others. The overall success rate in the female sample was 72%. In the male group (N = 9), the majority had a metastatic disease (6/9) and received a taxane-based therapy (5/9). The rate of withdrawal by discomfort and pain was high, and the success rate was 44%.
CONCLUSION
Our study confirms the satisfaction of patients with SC to prevent chemotherapy-induced alopecia. SC increases acceptance of the recommendation and administration of chemotherapy and decreases the degree of distress of patients and their treating physicians. Reimbursement remains a major issue in the out patient setting.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.