In order to survey the side effects after cancer treatment, quality of life data were collected from females in clinical remission, Materials and Methods: The study was cross-sectional, every patient that visited the outpatient clinic during a period of thr ee months was asked to anonymously complete the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire and five additional specific questions related to gynaecological cancel: Results: In total, 235 patients (90%) returned the questionnaire In general, both the levels of functioning and symptomatology were time-dependent. Patients with short treatment-free intervals reported more problems than the others. When wing treatment modality as an independent variable in the statistical calculations, a treatment-related effect on functioning and symptomatology was demonstrated (p < 0.05 to p < 0.001). Patients previously treated with chemotherapy had poorer role- and cognitive functioning and mole problems with fatigue, nausea, vomiting, dyspnoea, constipation and financial problems, compared with those not treated with chemotherapy (p < 0.05 to p < 0.01). Those patients who had been treated with external radiotherapy and/or brachytherapy had significantly more problems with flatulence and diarrhoea (p < 0.05 to p < 0.001). In conclusion, patients who underwent treatment for gl gynaecological cancer reported long-term side effects also many years after finishing treatment. The problems where related to treatment modality which should be considered, especially when planning adjuvant treatment.

Four hundred and thirty-one cancer patients were assessed with the ESAS and a VAS-QoL at admission to Hospital-based home care (HBHC) and subsequently. Results: Pain and nausea were well-controlled (mean 2.5 and 1.8) whereas patients were less satisfied with appetite, activity and sense of well-being. Dyspnoea and anxiety (lung cancer, p<0.001 and p<0.01) and pain (prostate cancer, p<0.01), were related to diagnosis while activity, drowsiness, appetite and well-being to survival (p<0.05 to p<0.001). The correlations between individual symptoms and well-being were low (0.2-0.5), whereas the correlation between well-being and the Symptom Distress Score (SDS) was 0.76. "Well-being" was a better word to use than QoL. Discussion: ESAS is useful in HBHC and data show that symptoms other than merely pain and nausea are of importance. As the global measurement (one VAS) of well-being has a high correlation with SDS, this single measurement may be clinically adequate for quality assurance of symptom control in dying cancer patients.

Purpose: To make a review of the literature of 89strontium-chloride and a retrospective study of time to palliative intended external irradiation number of portals and overall-survival after 89strontium-chloride therapy. Results: In total 93 patients were treated 116 times with 89strontium. The patients with prostatic carcinoma received 91% of all 89strontium therapies. Median over-all survival was 10 months after injection. In those cases when 89strontium was given before palliative radiotherapy, the average of total number of local fields was significantly lower (1.1 versus 4.1) compared to those cases where local fields preceded 89strontium therapy. However, time to 89new external irradiation after 89strontium injection was equal between these groups (3.8 versus 2.9 months). Conclusion:A review of literature conclude that 89strontium is effective for the reduction of pain originating from osteoblastic metastases. It also reduce the need for external radiotherapy and therefore is cost-effective. However, 89strontium is more effective in an early phase of the metastatic disease and preferably as an adjuvance to external radiotherapy.