Care Patterns and Barriers to Outpatient Care for Adults With AML Following Intensive Chemotherapy at NCCN Member Institutions.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Prolonged hospitalization following intensive (re)induction chemotherapy for acute myeloid leukemia (AML), while standard, is costly and resource intense, limits inpatient bed capacity, and negatively impacts quality of life. Early hospital discharge (EHD) following completion of chemotherapy has proven safe as an alternative at select institutions, but is not widely implemented. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From February 2023 through May 2023, the NCCN Best Practices Committee conducted a survey evaluating AML hospitalization patterns, care models, and barriers to EHD at its 33 member institutions. RESULTS: A total of 30 (91%) institutions completed the survey; two-thirds treat >100 patients with AML annually and 45% treat more than half of these with intensive chemotherapy. In the (re)induction setting, 80% of institutions keep patients hospitalized until blood count recovery, whereas 20% aim to discharge patients after completion of chemotherapy if medically stable and logistically feasible. The predominant reasons for the perceived need for ongoing hospitalization were high risk of infection, treatment toxicities, and lack of nearby/accessible housing. There was no significant association between ability to practice EHD and annual AML volume or treatment intensity patterns (P=.60 and P=.11, respectively). In contrast, in the postremission setting, 87% of centers support patients following chemotherapy in the outpatient setting unless toxicities arise requiring readmission. Survey responses showed that 80% of centers were interested in exploring EHD after (re)induction but noted significant barriers, including accessible housing (71%), transportation (50%), high toxicity/infection rate (50%), high transfusion burden (50%), and limited bed availability for rehospitalization (50%). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalization and care patterns following intensive AML therapy vary widely across major US cancer institutions. Although only 20% of surveyed centers practice EHD following intensive (re)induction chemotherapy, 87% do so following postremission therapy. Given the interest in exploring the EHD approach given potential advantages of EHD for both patients and health care systems, strategies to address identified medical and logistical barriers should be explored.