Optimizing Inpatient Care for Lung Cancer Patients with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor- Related Pneumonitis Using a Clinical Care Pathway Algorithm.

Purpose: Immune checkpoint inhibitor-related pneumonitis (ICI-P) is a condition associated with high mortality, necessitating prompt recognition and treatment initiation. This study aimed to assess the impact of implementing a clinical care pathway algorithm on reducing the time to treatment for ICI-P. Methods: Patients with lung cancer and suspected ICI-P were enrolled, and a multi-modal intervention promoting algorithm use was implemented in two phases. Pre- and post-intervention analyses were conducted to evaluate the primary outcome of time from ICI-P diagnosis to treatment initiation. Results: Of the 82 patients admitted with suspected ICI-P, 73.17% were confirmed to have ICI-P, predominantly associated with non-small cell lung cancer (91.67%) and stage IV disease (95%). Pembrolizumab was the most commonly used immune checkpoint inhibitor (55%). The mean times to treatment were 2.37 days in the pre-intervention phase and, 3.07 days (p=0.46), and 1.27 days (p=0.40) in the post-intervention phases 1 and 2, respectively. Utilization of the immunotoxicity order set significantly increased from 0% to 27.27% (p = 0.04) after phase 2. While there were no significant changes in ICU admissions or inpatient mortality, outpatient pulmonology follow-ups increased statistically significantly, demonstrating enhanced continuity of care. The overall mortality for patients with ICI-P was 22%, underscoring the urgency of optimizing management strategies. Notably, all patients discharged on high-dose corticosteroids received appropriate gastrointestinal prophylaxis and prophylaxis against Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia infections at the end of phase 2. Conclusion: Implementing a clinical care pathway algorithm for ICI-P management standardizes care practices and enhances patient outcomes, underscoring the importance of structured approaches.

Treatment patterns and outcomes of high-grade immune checkpoint inhibitor-related pneumonitis in an oncology hospitalist service.

PURPOSE: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have become standard of care for some types of lung cancer. Along with expanding usage comes the emergence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs), including ICI-related pneumonitis (ICI-P). Treatment guidelines for managing irAEs have been developed; however, how clinicians manage irAEs in the real-world setting is less well known. We aimed to describe the outcomes and care patterns of grade ≥ 3 ICI-P in an onco-hospitalist service. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We included patients with lung cancer treated with ICI who were admitted to an oncology hospitalist service with a suspicion of ICI-P. We described the hospitalization characteristics, treatment patterns, discharge practices, and clinical outcomes of patients with confirmed ICI-P. The primary outcome was time to start treatment for ICI-P. RESULTS: Among 49 patients admitted with a suspicion of ICI-P, 31 patients were confirmed to have ICI-P and subsequently received ICI-P directed treatment. Pulmonology was consulted in 97% of patients. Median time to start treatment for ICI-P was 1 day (IQR 0-3.5 days). All 31 patients received corticosteroids. Inpatient mortality was 32%. Majority of patients discharged with steroids were prescribed prophylaxis for gastritis and opportunistic infections. Thirty-eight percent of patients were seen by pulmonology and 86% were seen by the oncology team post-discharge. CONCLUSION: Our study confirms prior findings of high mortality among patients with high-grade ICI-P. Early diagnosis and treatment are key to improving clinical outcomes. Understanding the care patterns and adherence to treatment guidelines of clinicians caring for this patient population may help identify ways to further standardize management practices and improve patient outcomes.

Catheter-related thrombosis (CRT) in patients with solid tumors: a narrative review and clinical guidance for daily care.

Central venous access devices (CVADs) including central venous catheters and peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are essential in the treatment of cancer. Catheter-related thrombosis (CRT) is the most frequent non-infectious complication associated with the use of central lines. The development of CRT may cause to delays in oncologic treatment and increase morbidity leading to potentially life-threatening complications. Several local and systemic risk factors are associated with the development of CRT and should be taken into account to prevent CRT by standardizing appropriate catheter placement and maintenance. The use of primary pharmacological thromboprophylaxis in order to avoid CRT is not routinely recommended, although it can be considered in selected cases. Recommendations for the management of established CRT are based on the extrapolation of anticoagulation for lower limb venous thrombosis. The present review summarizes the current evidence and recommendations for the prevention and management of CRT and identifies areas that require further research.

Complexity and clinical significance of drug-drug interactions (DDIs) in oncology: challenging issues in the care of patients regarding cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT).

Cancer patients have an increased risk of developing venous thromboembolic events. Anticoagulation management includes prophylactic or therapeutic doses of low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs) or direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). However, the management of thrombosis in patients with cancer is complex due to various individual and disease-related factors, including drug-drug interactions (DDIs). Furthermore, DDIs may impact both, cancer and venous thrombosis, treatment effectiveness and safety; their relevance is highlighted by the advances in cancer therapeutics. Given that these new oncology drugs are extensively used, more attention should be given to monitoring potential DDIs to minimize risks. Recognition of DDIs is of utmost importance in an era of rapid developments in cancer treatments and introduction of novel treatments and protocols. When managing cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT), the concomitant use of a DOAC and a moderate or strong modulator (inhibitor or inducer) of CYP3A4 or a P-glycoprotein (P-gp) is most likely to be associated with significant DDIs. Therefore, LMWHs remain the first-line option for the long-term management of CAT under these circumstances and physicians must consider utilizing LMWHs as first line. This review describes the risk of DDIs and their potential impact and outcomes in patients with cancer associated thrombosis (CAT) receiving anticoagulation.

Risks, diagnosis, and management of recurrent cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT): a narrative review.

This paper aims to provide a narrative review of the risks, diagnosis, and management of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) in cancer patients. There is an established association between cancer and VTE, with cancer being a major risk factor for VTE. A history of VTE, short duration of oral anticoagulation, and a proximal DVT are all associated with increased risk for recurrent VTE. Studies have shown that certain cancers (e.g., metastatic genitourinary, lung, and colorectal cancers) are associated with recurrent VTE. Published literature shows that cancer is prothrombotic, and various mechanisms have been postulated as pathways for increased thrombogenesis and hence recurrent VTE in cancer. The symptoms, signs, laboratory information, and imaging results for the diagnosis of recurrent VTE are similar to those of an initial VTE. Management of recurrent VTE involves using low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC). Vitamin K antagonists (VKA) or inferior vena cava (IVC) filters are less commonly used.

Thrombosis, cancer, and COVID-19.

Cancer and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have unusual similarities: they both result in a markedly elevated risk of thrombosis, exceptionally high D-dimer levels, and the failure of anticoagulation therapy in some cases. Cancer patients are more vulnerable to COVID-19 infection and have a higher mortality rate. Science has uncovered much about SARS-CoV-2, and made extraordinary and unprecedented progress on the development of various treatment strategies and COVID-19 vaccines. In this review, we discuss known data on cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT), SARS-CoV-2 infection, and COVID-19 vaccines and discuss considerations for managing CAT in patients with COVID-19. Cancer patients should be given priority for COVID-19 vaccination; however, they may demonstrate a weaker immune response to COVID-19 vaccines than the general population. Currently, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends an additional dose and booster shot of the COVID-19 vaccine after the primary series in patients undergoing active cancer treatment for solid tumors or hematological cancers, recipients of stem cell transplant within the last 2 years, those taking immunosuppressive medications, and those undergoing active treatment with high-dose corticosteroids or other drugs that suppress the immune response. The mainstay of thrombosis treatment in patients with cancer and COVID-19 is anticoagulation therapy.

Thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA) in adult patients with solid tumors: a challenging complication in the era of emerging anticancer therapies.

Thrombotic microangiopathy (TMA) is a syndrome that encompasses a group of disorders defined by the presence of endothelial damage leading to abnormal activation of coagulation, microangiopathic hemolytic anemia and thrombocytopenia, occlusive (micro)vascular dysfunction, and organ damage. TMA may occur in patients with malignancy as a manifestation of cancer-related coagulopathy itself or tumor-induced TMA (Ti-TMA) as a paraneoplastic uncommon manifestation of Trousseau syndrome. TMA can also be triggered by other overlapping conditions such as infections or more frequently as an adverse effect of anticancer drugs (drug-induced TMA or Di-TMA) due to direct dose-dependent toxicity or a drug-dependent antibody reaction. The clinical spectrum of TMA may vary widely from asymptomatic abnormal laboratory tests to acute severe potentially life-threatening forms due to massive microvascular occlusion. While TMA is a rare condition, its incidence may progressively increase within the context of the great development of anticancer drugs and the emerging scenarios in supportive care in cancer. The objective of the present narrative review is to provide a general perspective of the main causes, the key work-up clues that allow clinicians to diagnose and manage TMA in patients with solid tumors who develop anemia and thrombocytopenia due to frequent overlapping causes.

Systematic review of antimicrobials, mucosal coating agents, anesthetics, and analgesics for the management of oral mucositis in cancer patients and clinical practice guidelines.

PURPOSE: To update the clinical practice guidelines for the use of antimicrobials, mucosal coating agents, anesthetics, and analgesics for the prevention and/or treatment of oral mucositis (OM). METHODS: A systematic review was conducted by the Mucositis Study Group of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO). The body of evidence for each intervention, in each cancer treatment setting, was assigned an evidence level. The findings were added to the database used to develop the 2014 MASCC/ISOO clinical practice guidelines. Based on the evidence level, the following guidelines were determined: Recommendation, Suggestion, and No Guideline Possible. RESULTS: A total of 9 new papers were identified within the scope of this section, adding to the 62 papers reviewed in this section previously. A new Suggestion was made for topical 0.2% morphine for the treatment of OM-associated pain in head and neck (H&N) cancer patients treated with RT-CT (modification of previous guideline). A previous Recommendation against the use of sucralfate-combined systemic and topical formulation in the prevention of OM in solid cancer treatment with CT was changed from Recommendation Against to No Guideline Possible. Suggestion for doxepin and fentanyl for the treatment of mucositis-associated pain in H&N cancer patients was changed to No Guideline Possible. CONCLUSIONS: Of the agents studied for the management of OM in this paper, the evidence supports a Suggestion in favor of topical morphine 0.2% in H&N cancer patients treated with RT-CT for the treatment of OM-associated pain.

Handoff Tool Enabling Standardized Transitions Between the Emergency Department and the Hospitalist Inpatient Service at a Major Cancer Center.

Communication failures during patient handoff can lead to serious errors. A quality improvement team created a standardized handoff tool/process (DE-PASS: Decisive problem requiring admission, Evaluation time, Patient summary, Acute issues/action list, Situation unfinished/awareness, Signed out to) for admitting patients from the emergency department (ED) to the hospitalist inpatient service of a tertiary cancer center. DE-PASS mirrors the institution's ED workflow, stratifies patients as stable/urgent/emergent, and establishes requirements for verbal and email communications between providers. Comparison of preintervention and postintervention results from the 1-month pilot revealed that within a 24-hour period, DE-PASS reduced the number of intensive care unit transfers by 58% ( P = .393), the number of rapid-response team calls by 39% ( P = .637), and time to inpatient order by 31% ( P = .004). ED physicians' and hospitalists' satisfaction with DE-PASS increased. Reduction in intensive care unit transfers was sustained after the pilot ( P = .029). DE-PASS feasibility was evidenced by 100% uptake. By stratifying patients by risk level, DE-PASS reduced admission-to-evaluation times for unstable patients, potentially improving patient safety.

Opioid and adjuvant analgesics: compared and contrasted.

An adjuvant (or co-analgesic) is a drug that in its pharmacological characteristic is not necessarily primarily identified as an analgesic in nature but that has been found in clinical practice to have either an independent analgesic effect or additive analgesic properties when used with opioids. The therapeutic role of adjuvant analgesics (AAs) is to increase the therapeutic index of opioids by a dose-sparing effect, add a unique analgesic action in opioid-resistant pain, or reduce opioid side effects. A notable difference between opioids and AAs is that unlike opioids some AAs are associated with permanent organ toxicity, for example, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and renal failure. It is impossible to predict in advance in a given individual what opioid dose they may require to control cancer pain. Most AAs have a ceiling effect for their analgesic actions, but often with continued dose-related toxicities and side effects (with the exception of glucocorticoids). The blood levels of opioids (and their metabolites) can be measured with great precision and accuracy. There is sometimes a role for drug blood levels of certain AAs, like tricyclic antidepressants or anticonvulsants when used for neuropathic pain. Age affects metabolism of most opioids. The therapeutic window of opioids is wide, with no ceiling effect. Most AAs (except corticosteroids) have a narrow therapeutic window. Naloxone is a pure opioid antagonist that competes and displaces opioids from their receptor sites. All clinically useful opioids are mu opioid receptor agonists. Not all routes of administration are available to all opioids. Adjuvant analgesics lack the versatility in routes of administration that opioids possess. Dosing flexibility is a major advantage when treating cancer-related pain with opioids. Dose flexibility is much less with AAs than opioids. Unlike opioids, the analgesic response is usually observed within hours to days of attaining an adequate dose with most AAs (1-2 days). Rotation among opioids is a useful therapeutic strategy to improve analgesic response or minimize toxicity. Most AAs are unsuitable for rescue dosing because of their pharmacological characteristics. The mu agonist side effect profile is similar among the different opioid agents, regardless of the route of administration. The appropriate use of AAs will reduce opioid-related side effects. No apparent tolerance to analgesia develops with AAs. Abrupt discontinuation of an opioid after chronic repeated use for more than a few days will cause a withdrawal syndrome of variable severity. Adjuvant analgesics are an essential tool in cancer pain.

Olanzapine as an antiemetic in refractory nausea and vomiting in advanced cancer.

Nausea and vomiting are difficult symptoms to manage in patients with advanced cancer. Several classes of antiemetics are available, including phenothiazines, butyrophenones, substituted benzamides and selective serotonin antagonists, as well as corticosteroids. Most patients will respond to either single agents or combinations that frequently include corticosteroids. A minority of patients will have nausea that fails to respond. The atypical antipsychotic, olanzapine, relieves nausea in some patients failing to respond to the usual antiemetics. Two case reports are presented and the rationale for olanzapine's benefit is discussed.