BACKGROUND: @entity3325 ( @entity3325 ) is a non-invasive commonly used complementary therapy. @entity3325 is based on the use of hand movements and detection of energy field congestion to correct imbalances. Improvement in subjective symptoms in a variety of clinical trials has been seen with @entity3325 . The effect of @entity3325 during radiotherapy for @entity0 is unknown. METHODS: @entity1 undergoing adjuvant radiation for @entity0 post conservative surgery were recruited for this cohort study. @entity3325 treatments were administered three times per week following radiation therapy. Feasibility was defined as an a priori threshold of 15 of 17 @entity1 completing all @entity3325 treatments. The preventive effectiveness of @entity3325 was evaluated by documenting the 'time to develop' and the 'worst grade of radiation' @entity1909 . @entity137 was assessed using NCIC CTC V3 @entity1909 scale. Cosmetic rating was performed using the EORTC Breast Cosmetic Rating. The quality of life, mood and energy, and @entity1295 were assessed by EORTC QLQ C30, POMS, and BFI, respectively. The parameters were assessed at baseline, and serially during treatment. RESULTS: A total of 49 @entity1 entered the study (17 in the @entity3325 Cohort and 32 in the Control Cohort). Median age in @entity3325 arm was 63 years and in control arm was 59 years. @entity3325 was considered feasible as all 17 @entity1 screened completed @entity3325 treatment. There were no side effects observed with the @entity3325 treatments. In the @entity3325 Cohort, the worst grade of @entity20787 was grade II in nine @entity1 (53%). Median time to develop the worst grade was 22 days. In the Control Cohort, the worst grade of @entity20787 was grade III in 1 @entity1 . However, the most common @entity137 grade was II in 15 @entity1 (47%). Three @entity1 did not develop any @entity1909 . Median time to develop the worst grade in the control group was 31 days. There was no difference between cohorts for the overall EORTC cosmetic score and there was no significant difference in before and after study levels in quality of life, mood and @entity1295 . CONCLUSION: This study is the first evaluation of @entity3325 in @entity1 with @entity0 using objective measures. Although @entity3325 is feasible for the management of radiation induced @entity1909 , we were not able to detect a significant benefit of @entity3325 on NCIC @entity137 grade or time to develop the worst grade for @entity20787 . In addition, @entity3325 did not improve quality of life, mood, @entity1295 and overall cosmetic outcome.

A case-control, mono-center, open-label, pilot study to evaluate the feasibility of therapeutic touch in preventing XXXX in @entity1 with @entity0 receiving adjuvant radiation therapy.

@entity1 :: ('9606', 'Species') :: ['patients', 'Women', 'patient'] @entity3325 :: ('MESH:D020886', 'Disease') :: ['Therapeutic touch', 'TT'] @entity137 :: ('MESH:D064420', 'Disease') :: ['toxicity', 'Toxicity'] @entity0 :: ('MESH:D001943', 'Disease') :: ['breast cancer', 'Stage I/II breast cancer'] @entity1295 :: ('MESH:D005221', 'Disease') :: ['fatigue'] @entity20787 :: ('MESH:D011855', 'Disease') :: ['radiation dermatitis'] @entity1909 :: ('MESH:D003872', 'Disease') :: ['dermatitis']
@entity20787 :: (MESH:D011855,Disease) :: ['radiation dermatitis']
