Randomized, controlled trial investigating short-term health-related quality of life with doxorubicin and paclitaxel versus doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide as first-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Breast Cancer Group, Investigational Drug Branch for Breast Cancer and the New Drug Development Group Study.

PURPOSE: To compare health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with metastatic breast cancer receiving the combination of doxorubicin and paclitaxel (AT) or doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) as first-line chemotherapy treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients (n = 275) with anthracycline-naive measurable metastatic breast cancer were randomly assigned to AT (doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2) as an intravenous bolus plus paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) as a 3-hour infusion) or AC (doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2) plus cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2)) every 3 weeks for a maximum of six cycles. Dose escalation of paclitaxel (200 mg/m(2)) and cyclophosphamide (750 mg/m(2)) was planned at cycle 2 to reach equivalent myelosuppression in the two groups. HRQOL was assessed with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 and the EORTC Breast Module at baseline and the start of cycles 2, 4, and 6, and 3 months after the last cycle. RESULTS: Seventy-nine percent of the patients (n = 219) completed a baseline measure. However, there were no statistically significant differences in HRQOL between the two treatment groups. In both groups, selected aspects of HRQOL were impaired over time, with increased fatigue, although some clinically significant improvements in emotional functioning were seen, as well as a reduction in pain over time. Overall, global quality of life was maintained in both treatment groups. CONCLUSION: This information is important when advising women patients of the expected HRQOL consequences of treatment regimens and should help clinicians and their patients make informed treatment decisions.

We want to touch IT. Are hybrid laptops just new fancy gadgets or a new revolution?

While the number of traditional laptops and computers sold has dipped slightly year over year, manufacturers have developed new hybrid laptops with touch screens to build on the tactile trend. This market is moving quickly to make touch the rule rather than the exception and the sales of these devices have tripled since the launch of Windows 8 in 2012, to reach more than sixty million units sold in 2015. Unlike tablets, that benefit from easy-to-use applications specially designed for tactile interactions, hybrid laptops are intended to be used with regular user-interfaces. Hence, one could ask whether tactile interactions are suited for every task and activity performed with such interfaces. Since hybrid laptops are increasingly used in educational situations, this study focuses on information search tasks which are commonly performed for learning purposes. It is hypothesized that tasks that require complex and/or less common gestures will increase user's cognitive load and impair task performance in terms of efficacy and efficiency. A study was carried out in a usability laboratory with 30 participants for whom prior experience with tactile devices has been controlled. They were asked to perform information search tasks on an online encyclopaedia by using only the touch screen of and hybrid laptop. Tasks were selected with respect to their level of cognitive demand (amount of information that had to be maintained in working memory) and the complexity of gestures needed (left and/or right clicks, zoom, text selection and/or input.), and grouped into 4 sets accordingly. Task performance was measured by the number of tasks succeeded (efficacy) and time spent on each task (efficiency). Perceived cognitive load was assessed thanks to a questionnaire given after each set of tasks. An eye tracking device was used to monitor users' attention allocation and to provide objective cognitive load measures based on pupil dilation and the Index of Cognitive Activity. Each experimental run took approximately one hour. The results of this within-subjects design indicate that tasks involving complex gestures led to a lower efficacy, especially when the tasks were cognitively demanding. Regarding efficacy, there is no significant differences between sets of tasks excepted for tasks with low cognitive demand and complex gestures that required more time to be achieved. Surprisingly, users that declared the biggest experience with tactile devices spent more time than less frequent users. Cognitive load measures indicate that participants reported having devoted more mental effort in the interaction when they had to use complex gestures.