Search

Purpose: The aim of this study was to explore how family resilience and individual resilience reduce perceived stress and psychological distress in young female breast cancer survivors with fertility intention. Methods: From June 2020 to June 2021, female breast cancer survivors were selected from the cancer centers of 10 tertiary Level A general hospitals in five cities of Sichuan Province. The survivors completed the Chinese versions of the Family Resilience Assessment Scale, Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, Perceived Stress Scale, and a self-report distress thermometer. A multiple mediation effects test and structural equation modeling were used to explore the relationships among family resilience, individual resilience, perceived stress, and psychological distress. Results: The direct effect of family resilience on perceived stress was β = -0.320 (95% confidence interval -0.365, -0.271, P < 0.01). The direct effect of family resilience on psychological distress was β = -0.263 (95% confidence interval -0.363, -0.153, P < 0.001). The direct effect of family resilience on individual resilience was β = 0.593 (95% confidence interval 0.542–0.640, P < 0.001). The indirect effect of family resilience on psychological distress was β = -0.322 (95% confidence interval -0.373, -0.274, P < 0.001). Both perceived stress and individual resilience mediated the relationship between family resilience and psychological distress. Furthermore, a partial mediating effect of perceived stress and individual resilience on family resilience and psychological distress was observed. Conclusion: Young female breast cancer survivors in China experience moderate levels of psychological distress. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This study investigated the influence of plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1) gene polymorphisms and other contributing clinical factors on peripherally inserted central catheter–related venous thrombosis (PICC-RVT) in Chinese patients with lung cancer. Methods: We conducted a prospective study of 237 participants. Blood samples were collected to detect the PAI-1 4G/5G genotype. Venous thromboembolism risk was calculated by the Caprini risk assessment model. Color Doppler ultrasonography was performed every 7 days for 3 weeks to confirm PICC-RVT. Results: The rate of PICC-RVT was 13.50% (32/237). The 5G/5G, 4G/5G, and 4G/4G genotypes were found in 12.50% vs 17.56%, 59.38% vs 49.27%, and 28.12% vs 34.17% in the thrombus group and the non-thrombus group of the participants. No difference was observed in the distribution frequency of the three genotypes between the thrombus and non-thrombus groups. A higher fibrinogen level (OR 1.194, 95% CI 1.004–1.420, P = 0.045) and a higher Caprini score (OR 1.698, 95% CI 1.103–2.614, P = 0.016) were statistically significant risk factors for PICC-RVT. Compared with patients who underwent a pemetrexed/cisplatin regimen, those who were administered paclitaxel/cisplatin (OR 18.332, 95% CI 2.890–116.278, P = 0.002) or gemcitabine/cisplatin (OR 6.617, 95% CI 1.210–36.180, P = 0.029) were at increased risk of PICC-RVT. Conclusion: Our finding suggested that there is no statistically significant influence of the PAI-1 4G/5G gene variant on PICC-RVT in Chinese patients with lung cancer. However, patients with higher Caprini scores and higher fibrinogen levels are at increased risk for PICC-RVT, as are patients receiving chemotherapy. Clinical staff should carefully perform a risk assessment for patients with PICC. Those with the above risk factors should pay close attention and take timely and effective preventive measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: There was no optimal risk assessment tool to stratify the risk of peripherally inserted central catheter-related venous thromboembolism (PICC-RVT) in cancer patients. We currently use the Caprini risk assessment model for thrombotic risk assessment, but no evidence exists on the effectiveness of Caprini in such patients. This study was to assess the validity of the Caprini in Chinese cancer patients with PICCs. Methods: We conducted a prospective study of 468 participants. Following calculating the Caprini score, color Doppler ultrasonography was performed every 7 days for 3 weeks to confirm PICC-RVT. Results: There was a correlation between PICC-RVT and the Caprini score. Compared with scores of 5, the risk was 2.089-fold greater (95% CI 1.165–3.743, P = 0.012) in patients with a score of 6 and 7, and 7.156-fold greater (95% CI 3.157–16.217, P < 0.001) in patients with scores ≥8. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve was 0.636 (95% CI 0.590–0.680; P < 0.001). 6 was the best cutoff point for Caprini, with a sensitivity of 0.76 and a specificity of 0.44. Conclusions: The Caprini can be used for high-risk screening of the PICC-RVT in cancer patients, and classification of the highest risk level using a score of 6 can be more clinically significant compared to 5 as recommended. The results provide evidence for the practitioner's early use of the Caprini to assess the thrombotic risk in patients with PICCs and take timely prevention measures. But pharmacological prevention should be considered seriously for its low specificity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]