Evolution of Complexity of Palliative Care Needs and Patient Profiles According to the PALCOM Scale (Part Two): Pooled Analysis of the Cohorts for the Development and Validation of the PALCOM Scale in Advanced Cancer Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Identifying the complexity of palliative care needs is a key aspect of referral to specialized multidisciplinary early palliative care (EPC) teams. The PALCOM scale is an instrument consisting of five multidimensional assessment domains developed in 2018 and validated in 2023 to identify the level of complexity in patients with advanced cancer. (1) Objectives: The main objective of this study was to determine the degree of instability (likelihood of level change or death), health resource consumption and the survival of patients according to the level of palliative complexity assigned at the baseline visit during a 6-month follow-up. (2) Method: An observational, prospective, multicenter study was conducted using pooled data from the development and validation cohort of the PALCOM scale. The main outcome variables were as follows: (a) instability ratio (IR), defined as the probability of level change or death; (b) emergency department visits; (c) days of hospitalization; (d) hospital death; (e) survival. All the variables were analyzed monthly according to the level of complexity assigned at the baseline visit. (3) Results: A total of 607 patients with advanced cancer were enrolled. According to the PALCOM scale, 20% of patients were classified as low complexity, 50% as medium and 30% as high complexity. The overall IR was 45% in the low complexity group, 68% in the medium complexity group and 78% in the high complexity group (p < 0.001). No significant differences in mean monthly emergency department visits (0.2 visits/ patient/month) were observed between the different levels of complexity. The mean number of days spent in hospital per month was 1.5 in the low complexity group, 1.8 in the medium complexity group and 3.2 in the high complexity group (p < 0.001). The likelihood of in-hospital death was significantly higher in the high complexity group (29%) compared to the medium (16%) and low (8%) complexity groups (p < 0.001). Six-month survival was significantly lower in the high complexity group (24%) compared to the medium (37%) and low (57%) complexity groups (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: According to the PALCOM scale, more complex cases are associated with greater instability and use of hospital resources and lower survival. The data also confirm that the PALCOM scale is a consistent and useful tool for describing complexity profiles, targeting referrals to the EPC and managing the intensity of shared care.

Validation Study of the PALCOM Scale of Complexity of Palliative Care Needs: A Cohort Study in Advanced Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND: In a patient-centred model of care, referral to early palliative care (EPC) depends on both the prognosis and the complexity of care needs. The PALCOM scale is a 5-domain multidimensional assessment tool developed to identify the level of complexity of palliative care needs of cancer patients. The aim of this study was to validate the PALCOM scale. PATIENT AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study of cancer patients to compare the PALCOM scale and expert empirical assessment (EA) of the complexity of palliative care needs. The EA had to categorise patients according to their complexity, considering that medium to high levels required priority attention from specialist EPC teams, while those with low levels could be managed by non-specialist teams. Systematically collected multidimensional variables were recorded in an electronic report form and stratified by level of complexity and rating system (PALCOM scale versus EA). The correlation rank (Kendall's tau test) and accuracy test (F1-score) between the two rating systems were analysed. ROC curve analysis was used to determine the predictive power of the PALCOM scale. RESULTS: A total of 283 advanced cancer patients were included. There were no significant differences in the frequency of the levels of complexity between the EA and the PALCOM scale (low 22.3-23.7%; medium 57.2-59.0%; high 20.5-17.3%). The prevalence of high symptom burden, severe pain, functional impairment, socio-familial risk, existential/spiritual problems, 6-month mortality and in-hospital death was significantly higher (p < 0.001) at the high complexity levels in both scoring systems. Comparative analysis showed a high correlation rank and accuracy between the two scoring systems (Kendall's tau test 0.81, F1 score 0.84). The predictive ability of the PALCOM scale was confirmed by an area under the curve in the ROC analysis of 0.907 for high and 0.902 for low complexity. CONCLUSIONS: In a patient-centred care model, the identification of complexity is a key point to appropriate referral and management of shared care with EPC teams. The PALCOM scale is a high precision tool for determining the level of complexity of palliative care needs.

Phase II randomised trial of autologous tumour lysate dendritic cell plus best supportive care compared with best supportive care in pre-treated advanced colorectal cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Autologous tumour lysate dendritic cell vaccine (ADC) has T-cell stimulatory capacity and, therefore, potential antitumour activity. We designed a phase II randomised trial of ADC + best supportive care (BSC) (experimental arm [EA]) compared with BSC (control arm [CA]), in pre-treated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with progressive mCRC, at least to two chemotherapy regimens and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) 0-2, were randomised to EA versus CA. Stratification criteria: ECOG PS (0-1 versus 2) and lactate dehydrogenase (ULN). EA was administered subcutaneously till progressive disease. Primary end-point was progression-free survival (PFS) at 4 months. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients were included (28 EA/24 CA). An interim analysis recommended early termination for futility. No objective radiological response was observed in EA. Median PFS in EA was 2.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.3-3.2 months) versus 2.3 months (95% CI, 2.1-2.5 months) in CA (p = 0.628). Median overall survival (OS) was 6.2 months (95% CI, 4.4-7.9 months) in EA versus 4.7 months (95% CI, 2.3-7 months) in CA (p = 0.41). No ADC-related adverse events were reported. Immunization induces tumour-specific T-cell response in 21 of 25 (84%) patients. Responder patients have an OS of 7.3 months (95% CI, 5.2-9.4 months) versus 3.8 months (95% CI, 0.6-6.9 months) in non-responders; p = 0.026). CONCLUSION: Our randomised clinical trial comparing ADC + BSC versus BSC in mCRC demonstrates that ADC generates a tumour-specific immune response but not benefit on PFS and OS. Our results do not support the use of ADC alone, in a phase III trial.

TMPRSS2-ERG in Blood and Docetaxel Resistance in Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer.

TMPRSS2-ERG rearrangement is a genetic alteration exclusive to prostate cancer, associated with taxane resistance in preclinical models. Its detection in blood samples of metastatic resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients may indicate the presence of circulating tumour cells with this genetic alteration and may predict taxane resistance. To test this hypothesis, we evaluated TMPRSS2-ERG expression using quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction in peripheral blood mononuclear cells and tumour tissue from mCPRC patients treated with taxanes. We examined peripheral blood mononuclear cells from 24 healthy controls, 50 patients treated with docetaxel, and 22 with cabazitaxel. TMPRSS2-ERG was detected in 0%, 16%, and 22.7% of them, respectively. In docetaxel-treated patients TMPRSS2-ERG detection correlated with lower prostatic-specific antigen (PSA) response rate (12.5% vs 68.3%, p=0.005), PSA-progression-free survival (PFS; 3.1 mo vs 7.5 mo, p<0.001), clinical/radiological-PFS (3.1 mo vs 8.2 mo, p<0.001), and it was independently associated with PSA-PFS (hazard ratio 3.7; p=0.009) and clinical/radiological-PFS (hazard ratio 6.3; p<0.001). Moreover, TMPRSS2-ERG also predicted low PSA-PFS to cabazitaxel. At progression, a switch from negative to positive TMPRSS2-ERG was observed in 41% of patients with undetected TMPRSS2-ERG at the baseline sample. Tissue TMPRSS2-ERG expression correlated with lower PSA-PFS (p=0.02) to docetaxel. Our findings support the potential role of TMPRSS2-ERG detection as a biomarker to tailor treatment strategies. PATIENT SUMMARY: Taxanes are the most active chemotherapy agents in metastatic resistant prostate cancer. However, not all patients respond to this therapy. In the present study we show that the detection of TMPRSS2-ERG in blood from metastatic resistant prostate cancer patients predicts resistance to docetaxel and it may be useful to select treatment and to avoid possible toxicities in refractory patients.

Molecular profiling of peripheral blood is associated with circulating tumor cells content and poor survival in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

The enumeration of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in peripheral blood correlates with clinical outcome in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). We analyzed the molecular profiling of peripheral blood from 43 metastatic CRPC patients with known CTC content in order to identify genes that may be related to prostate cancer progression. Global gene expression analysis identified the differential expression of 282 genes between samples with ≥5 CTCs vs <5 CTCs, 58.6% of which were previously described as over-expressed in prostate cancer (18.9% in primary tumors and 56.1% in metastasis). Those genes were involved in survival functions such as metabolism, signal transduction, gene expression, cell growth, death, and movement. The expression of selected genes was evaluated by quantitative RT-PCR. This analysis revealed a two-gene model (SELENBP1 and MMP9) with a high significant prognostic ability (HR 6; 95% CI 2.61 - 13.79; P<0.0001). The combination of the two-gene signature plus the CTCs count showed a higher prognostic ability than CTCs enumeration or gene expression alone (P<0.05). This study shows a gene expression profile in PBMNC associated with CTCs count and clinical outcome in metastatic CRPC, describing genes and pathways potentially associated with CRPC progression.

Design and endpoints of clinical and translational trials in advanced colorectal cancer. a proposal from GROUP Español Multidisciplinar en Cancer Digestivo (GEMCAD).

Meta-analytic reviews of Randomized Clinical Trials (RCT) have reached contradictory conclusions regarding the benefit of medical interventions in Advanced Colorectal Cancer (ACRC). Surrogate markers of survival benefit, such as response rate (RR) and progression free-survival (PFS) often show contradictory and highly variable correlations. These contradictions can be due to differences in 1) the studies analysed (sources), 2) the quality of clinical trials (intrinsic bias in the design, biased data analysis, heterogeneous PFS definitions) and 3) the second-line strategies between arms. PFS is a more vulnerable target than overall survival (OS), but the latter can also be affected by different biases and additional medical interventions such as secondary resection of metastases or second-line therapies. Therefore the correlation between PFS and survival must be clearly stated if PFS is to be considered as a primary endpoint. Of the differences between studies, only the quality of clinical trials can be improved by a deeper knowledge of both the area of study (i.e. colorectal cancer) and the methodology needed (i.e., clinical and translational trials). The aim of this manuscript is to offer the basic resources to develop experimental trials in ACRC. To this end, techniques for diagnosis and for response assessment are discussed, prognostic factors and treatment standards are critically exposed, and notes about how to design useful translational studies are provided.