Abstract 1501P
Background
The Gender differences in the clinical symptoms presentation (CSP) are known and already studied in many settings of medicine, such as Cardiology and Neurology. However, these differences have been studied less deeply in Oncology and Palliative Care. Our analysis focused on evluating how gender can affect the CSP in an integrated outpatient clinic between Radiotherapy and Palliative Care (RaP).
Methods
This is a monocentric, observational study carried out in the RaP integrated outpatient clinic in a Research Cancer Hospital (IRCCS, IRST - Meldola, Italy). Descriptive statistics were reported for each Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) item, separately by gender. Additionally, a set of linear models were developed to predict ESAS items score. Multivariable linear model incorporated all other symptoms, clinical characteristics (e.g tumor location), and the sex variable to evaluate possible gender effects. All analyses were performed using R statistical software.
Results
212 patients were enrolled in the study between 2016 and 2020. Most of the symptoms showed significant gender differences. Specifically, the symptom "Pain” showed higer values in the male population (mean: M5.1 vs. F 4.4). Conversely, the symptom "Anxiety” showed higer values in the female population (mean. M 2.0 vs F 3.0). Finally, the "total symptom distress score” resulted in higer values in the female population (mean: M 23.0 vs F 25.4). Interestingly, the symptom "malaise” is the only that showed an almost perfect equity for all values (mean M1.9 vs F 2.0). The linear model aimed at assessing, ceteris paribus, report 0.9 additional points than females (p= 0.053). Conversely, keeping constant all other factors, females report 0.95 higer expression of anxiety (p=0.002).
Conclusions
The gender differences in the CSP and their distribution highligheted in our analysis are important in the new subfield of medicine called "Gender Medicine". Especially in palliative care, data relating to patients symptoms is necessary to reach the goal of the best supoportive care. Additional studeis will be necessary to improve our knowledge in this field.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
L. Tontini.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
1554P - Co payments in cancer patients: Analysis and estimating OOP
Presenter: Krishnamani Kalpathi
Session: Poster session 10
1555P - Estimating the social value of immuno-oncology (IO) therapies in Japan
Presenter: Tomoya Ohno
Session: Poster session 10
1556P - Current landscape of drug approvals for genitourinary (GU) cancers in North America and Europe
Presenter: Jose Tapia
Session: Poster session 10
1557P - The use of patient experience in UK NICE decision making in oncology
Presenter: Noemi Muszbek
Session: Poster session 10
1558P - Independent validation of the Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (Gail model) for predicting breast cancer risk in Egyptian population
Presenter: Elaria Yacoub
Session: Poster session 10
1559P - Equity of access and clinical impact of genomic testing in patients with cancer in a UK early phase clinical trials unit
Presenter: Jonathan Poon
Session: Poster session 10
1560P - Optimal age versus real age in breast and gynaecological risk reducing surgery in BRCA1/2 carriers
Presenter: Alberta Ferrari
Session: Poster session 10
1561P - Targeted screening methodologies to select high risk individuals: LungFlag performance in Estonia Lung Cancer Screening Pilot
Presenter: Tanel Laisaar
Session: Poster session 10
1562P - The feasibility of polygenic risk score-based population screening for breast cancer: The experience from the BRIGHT study in Estonia
Presenter: Anni Lepland
Session: Poster session 10
1563P - Increasing the earlier detection of lung cancer: A toolbox for change
Presenter: Helena Wilcox
Session: Poster session 10