Frequency, Timing, and Predictors of Palliative Care Consultation in Patients with Advanced Cancer at a Tertiary Cancer Center: Secondary Analysis of Routinely Collected Health Data.

INTRODUCTION: Early integration of palliative care (PC) with oncological care is associated with improved outcomes in patients with advanced cancer. Limited information exists on the frequency, timing, and predictors of PC consultation in patients receiving oncological care. The Cross Cancer Institute (CCI) is the sole tertiary cancer center serving the northern half of the Canadian province of Alberta, located in the city of Edmonton. The objectives of this study were to estimate the proportion of patients with advanced cancer at the CCI who received consultation by the CCI PC program and the comprehensive integrated PC program in Edmonton, and to determine the timing and predictors of consultation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this secondary analysis of routinely collected health data, adult patients who died between April 2013 and March 2014, and had advanced disease while under the care of a CCI oncologist, were eligible. Data from the Alberta Cancer Registry, electronic medical records, and Edmonton PC program database were linked. RESULTS: Of 2,253 eligible patients, 810 (36%) received CCI PC consultation. Median time between consultation and death was 2 months (range, 1.1-5.4). In multivariable logistic regression analysis, age, residence, income, cancer type, and interval from advanced cancer diagnosis to death influenced odds of receiving consultation. Among 1,439 patients residing in Edmonton, 1,121 (78%) were referred to the Edmonton PC program. CONCLUSION: A minority of patients with advanced cancer received PC consultation at the tertiary cancer center, occurring late in the disease trajectory. Frequency and timing of PC consultation varied significantly, according to multiple factors. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Clinical and demographic factors are associated with variations in frequency and timing of palliative care consultation at a cancer center and may, in some cases, reflect barriers to access that warrant attention.

Poor Vitamin Status is Associated with Skeletal Muscle Loss and Mucositis in Head and Neck Cancer Patients.

Mucositis and muscle wasting are two common toxicity effects of cancer treatment in head and neck cancer (HNC). There is limited data evaluating cancer treatment toxicities in relation to vitamin status. This study aimed to assess changes in vitamin status during HNC treatment in relation to body composition, inflammation and mucositis. In this prospective cohort study, dietary intakes (3-day food record), plasma levels of vitamins and C-reactive protein (CRP) were assessed at baseline (at diagnosis) and post-treatment (after 6⁻8 weeks of radiation therapy with or without chemotherapy). Computed tomography images were used to quantify body composition. Mucositis information was collected from health records of patients. Twenty-eight HNC patients (age 60 ± 10 years) completed both study time points. Patients who developed mucositis had significantly lower dietary intake of vitamins and plasma 25-hydroxy vitamin D (25-OHD) and all-trans retinol levels (p < 0.02). Patients lost a considerable amount of muscle mass (3.4 kg) and fat mass (3.6 kg) over the course of treatment. There was a trend toward greater muscle loss in patients with 25-OHD < 50 nmol/L compared to patients with 25-OHD ≥ 50 nmol/L (p = 0.07). A significant negative correlation was found between plasma all-trans retinol and CRP level at the end of treatment (p = 0.03). Poor vitamin status could be a contributing factor in developing treatment-induced toxicities.

The Edmonton symptom assessment system--what do patients think?

GOALS OF WORK: The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) is a tool for self-reporting of symptom intensity, initially developed for advanced cancer patients. It consists of numerical rating scales for nine common symptoms, with the option of adding a tenth. Despite its widespread use in palliative care, few studies have focused on its psychometric properties, with none involving patient perspectives. The purpose of this study was to gather validity evidence for the ESAS, by examining patients' cognitive processes while completing the ESAS, understanding of terminology and numerical ratings, and opinions of the ESAS as a self-reporting tool. MATERIALS AND METHODS: English-speaking advanced cancer patients, referred to a Pain and Symptom Control Consultation Service in a cancer centre, were recruited. Using a qualitative "think aloud" study design, patients completed the ESAS independently while being prompted to verbalize their thoughts. They then answered a structured questionnaire to elicit their opinions of the ESAS. Transcripts of audio-taped sessions were coded and analyzed. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty patients were evaluable. Symptom ratings were influenced by current symptom profiles, temporal changes, symptom experience history and individual perceptions. Symptom interpretation and numerical rating assignments varied. Difficult terminology included tiredness versus drowsiness, depression, anxiety, appetite, and well-being. Most patients agreed with the item order and thought that the ESAS was easy to complete, with a health care professional present. Patients expressed a need to emphasize the timeframe as "now". CONCLUSION: Modification of the tool and administration process may be warranted, but further study in other populations is needed.