Radiation Therapy in the Last Month of Life: Association With Aggressive Care at the End of Life.

CONTEXT: Half of the patients with cancer who undergo radiation therapy do so with palliative intent. OBJECTIVES: To determine the proportion of undergoing radiation in the last month of life, patient characteristics, cancer course, the type and duration of radiation, whether palliative care was involved, and the of radiation with aggressive cancer care metrics. METHODS: One thousand seven hundred twenty-seven patients who died of cancer between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2019, were included. Demographics, cancer stage, palliative care referral, advance directives, use of home health care, radiation timing, and survival were collected. Type of radiation, course, and intent were reviewed. Chi-square analysis was utilized for categorical variables, and Kruskal-Wallis tests for continuous variables. A stepwise selection was used to build a Cox proportional hazard model. RESULTS: Two hundred thirty-three patients underwent radiation in the last month of life. Younger patients underwent radiation 67.3 years (SD 11.52) versus 69.2 years (SD 11.96). 42.6% had radiation within two weeks of death. The average fraction number was 5.5. Individuals undergoing radiation were more likely to start chemotherapy within the last 30 days of life, continue chemotherapy within two weeks of death, be admitted to the ICU, and have two or more hospitalizations or emergency room visits. Survival measured from the date of diagnosis was shorter for those undergoing radiation, 122 days (IQR 58-462) versus 474 days (IQR 225-1150). Palliative care consultations occurred later in those undergoing radiation therapy. CONCLUSION: Radiation therapy in the last month of life occurs in younger patients with rapidly progressive cancer, who are subject to more aggressive cancer care, and have late palliative care consults.

Likelihood Ratios: An Important Concept for Palliative Physicians to Understand.

Palliative care has several tools and questionnaires which are commonly used for patient-related outcomes and prognosis. As an example, the Surprise Question (I would or would not be surprised that this person would have died in a year) has been used as a screen for palliative care referral but also used as a prognostic tool. Diagnostic tests, prognostic tools, and tools for gauging outcomes have certain sensitivity and specificity in predicting a diagnosis or outcome. Clinicians often use positive and negative predictive values in judging the merits of a diagnostic tool or questionnaire. However positive and negative predictive values are highly dependent on the prevalence of disease or outcome in a population and thus are not portable across studies. Likelihood ratios are both portable across populations but also provide the strength of the diagnostic or predictive measure of a test or questionnaire. In this article, we review the value and limitations of likelihood ratios and illustrate the value of using likelihood ratios using 3 studies centered on the Surprise Question published in 2022.

The Financial Impact of Palliative Care and Aggressive Cancer Care on End-of-Life Health Care Costs.

BACKGROUND: Medicare cancer expenditures in the last month of life have increased. Aggressive cancer care at the end-of-life (ACEOL) is considered poor quality care. We used Geisinger Health Plan (GHP) last month's costs for cancer patients who died in 2018 and 2019 to determine the costs of and influence of Palliative Care (PC) on ACEOL. METHOD: Patients with GHP ages 18-99 who died in 2018 and 2019 were included. Demographic, clinical characteristics, and Charlson Comorbid Index were compared across care groups defined as no ACEOL indicator, 1 or more than 1 indicator. Differences between groups were compared with Kruskal-Wallis tests and one-way ANOVA for 3 groups. Median two-sample tests and independent t-tests compared groups of 2. A P-value 1. There were incremental cost increases with each additional ACEOL indicator (p = < .0001). Palliative Care <90 days before death was associated with increased costs while consultations >90 days before death lowered cost (P < .0001) due to reduced chemotherapy in the last month. Completed ADs reduced cost by $4000. DISCUSSION: ACEOL indicators multiply costs during the last month of life. Palliative care instituted >90 days before death reduces chemotherapy in the last month of life and AD reduces health care costs. CONCLUSION: Cancer health care costs increase with indicators of ACEOL. Palliative care consultations >90 days before death; ADs reduce cancer health care costs.

Do We Have Structure, Process and Outcomes to Support Cannabis as Supportive Therapy in Cancer?

Cannabis is becoming more popular and more available in the United States. It has been approved for use by multiple states for various conditions and several states now allow recreational cannabis. We explore the structure of cannabis distribution, the process of acquisition, outcomes, and the safety of cannabis in the United States.

Telemedicine family meetings in palliative care: etiquette.

The use of telemedicine in healthcare settings has continued to increase over the last few years. This has led to new communication-based concerns in palliative care settings. To date, there are no specific guidelines on telemedicine etiqettes relating to conducting online family meetings. This case report discusses some etiquette-failures in a telemedicine family meeting, and offers suggestions to improve communication etiqettes or 'webside manners' in these settings.

Characteristics of Patients with Cancer Readmitted Within 30 Days to an Acute Palliative Care Unit.

OBJECTIVE(S): For patients with cancer, the emergence of acute palliative care units (APCU) may hold promise in curtailing hospital readmissions. The study aims to describe the characteristics of patients readmitted to an APCU. METHODS: This retrospective study examined patients with cancer readmitted within 30 days to an APCU. Readmissions were further classified as either potentially preventable or non-preventable. RESULTS: Out of 734 discharges from July 1, 2014 to July 1, 2015, 69 (9%) readmissions were identified and analyzed. For index admissions, median length of stay was five days, and one (1%) was discharged home with hospice care. For readmissions, median time from index admission to readmission was nine days, median length of stay was six days, three (4%) patients died, and 20 (30%) went home with hospice. Ten (14.5%) readmissions were deemed potentially preventable (95% CI 7.2-25.0%). Race/ethnicity-White/Black/Hispanic/Others-was 60%, 10%, 20% and 10%, respectively, among potentially preventable readmissions and 76%, 22%, 2% and 0%, respectively, among potentially non-preventable readmissions (P = .012). Potentially preventable readmissions were more likely to have venous thromboembolism (40% vs. 12%, P = .046) and more reasons for readmission (median 2 vs. 1, P = .019). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with cancer readmitted to an APCU, one out of seven was potentially preventable and a far larger proportion was discharged with hospice care compared to the index admission. Recognition of disease course, meaningful goals of care discussions and timely transition to hospice care may reduce rehospitalization in this population.

Top Ten Tips Palliative Care Clinicians Should Know About Buprenorphine.

Pain management in palliative care (PC) is becoming more complex as patients survive longer with life-limiting illnesses and population-wide trends involving opioid misuse become more common in serious illness. Buprenorphine, a generally safe partial mu-opioid receptor agonist, has been shown to be effective for both pain management and opioid use disorder. It is critical that PC clinicians become comfortable with indications for its use, strategies for initiation while understanding risks and benefits. This article, written by a team of PC and addiction-trained specialists, including physicians, nurse practitioners, social workers, and a pharmacist, offers 10 tips to demystify buprenorphine use in serious illness.

When does early palliative care influence aggressive care at the end of life?

BACKGROUND: Early palliative care improves patient quality of life and influences cancer care. The time frame of early has not been established. Eight quality measures reflect aggressive care at the end of life. We retrospectively reviewed patients who died with cancer between January 1, 2018, through December 31, 2019, and compared the timing of palliative care consultation, advance directives (AD), and home palliative care with aggressive care at the end of life (ACEOL). METHODS: Patients without ACEOL indicators were compared to patients with one or more than one indicator of ACEOL. The proportion of patients who received palliative care, completed AD, and the timing of palliative care and AD (less than 30 days, 30-90 days, and greater than 90 days prior to death) was compared for patients who had ACEOL versus those who did not. Chi-square analysis was used for categorical data, one-way ANOVA for continuous variables, and odds ratio (OR) with confidence intervals (CI) was reported as a measure of effect size. A p value ≤ 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: 1727 patients died, 46% were female, and the mean age was 69 (SD 11.91). Seventy-one percent had a palliative care consult, 26% completed AD, and 888 (51.4%) had at least one indicator of ACEOL. The most common indicator of ACEOL was new chemotherapy within 30 days of death, in 571 of 888 (64%) of patients experiencing ACEOL. ADs completed at any time reduced ACEOL (OR 0.80, 95%CI 0.64-0.99). Palliative care initiated at 30 days was associated with a greater risk of ACEOL (OR 5.32, 95% CI 3.94-7.18) and initiated between 30 and 90 days (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.07-1.80) compared to no palliative care but was associated with reduced chemotherapy as an indicator of ACEOL when > 90 days (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.38-0.57) before death. DISCUSSION: Completed ADs were associated with reduced chemotherapy in the last 30 days of life and reduced ICU admissions. This may reflect goals of care and end-of-life discussions and transition of care to comfort measures. Palliative care paradoxically when initiated within 90 days before death was associated with greater ACEOL compared to no palliative care. This may be due to consultation late in the course of illness with a focus on crisis management in patients frequently utilizing the health care system. There is an associated reduction in the use of chemotherapy in the last 30 days of life if palliative care is consulted 90 days prior to death. CONCLUSIONS: An initial palliative care consult greater than 90 days before death and ADs completed at any time during the disease trajectory was associated only with reduced chemotherapy in the last 30 days of life compared with no palliative care among the 7 ACEOL indicators. ADs were associated with reduced ICU admissions. Most palliative care consults occurred within 90 days of death and a palliative care consult within 90 days of death is not an optimal utilization of services.

The Influence of Palliative Care in Hospital Length of Stay and the Timing of Consultation.

BACKGROUND: Inpatient palliative care may reduce length-of-stay, costs, mortality, and prevent readmissions. Timing of consultation may influence outcomes. The aim of this study was to explore the timing of consultation and its influences patient outcomes. METHOD: This retrospective study of hospital consultations between July 1, 2019 and December 31, 2019 compared patients seen within 72 hours of admission with those seen after 72 hours. Outcomes length of stay and mortality. Chi-square analyses for categorical variables and independent t-tests for continuous normally distributed variables were done. For nonparametrically distributed outcome variables, Wilcoxon rank sum test was used. For mortality, a time-to-event analysis was used. 30-day readmissions were assessed using the Fine-Gray sub-distribution hazard model. Multiple regression models were used, controlling for other variables. RESULTS: 696 patients were seen, 424 within 72 hours of admission. The average age was 73 and 50.6% were female. Consultation within 72 hours was not associated with a shorter stay for cancer but was for patients with non-cancer illnesses. Inpatient mortality and 30-days mortality were reduced but there was a higher 30-day readmission rate. DISCUSSION: Palliative consultations within 72 hours of admission was associated with lower hospital stays and inpatient mortality but increased the risk of readmission. Benefits were largely observed in patients followed in continuity. CONCLUSION: Early inpatient palliative care consultation was associated with reduced hospital mortality, 30-day mortality and length of stay particularly if patients were seen by palliative care prior to hospitalization.

Treating Chronic Pain with Buprenorphine-The Practical Guide.

OPINION STATEMENT: Buprenorphine has unique and favorable pharmacological properties that make it useful in a variety of clinical scenarios. It has been recommended to consider buprenorphine first-line opioid for chronic pain, especially in the elderly as it may be associated with less cognitive impairment, falls, sexual dysfunction, and sarcopenia when compared with schedule II opioids. It may be useful in patients with comorbid substance use disorder or non-medical opioid use, as there is less risk of misuse, euphoria and it may improve mood. When used to treat opioid use disorder, the training and waiver was recently waived for licensed practitioners with a DEA and any provider may prescribe buprenorphine. For many reasons outlined in this article, the popularity of using buprenorphine for analgesia continues to grow and a practitioner should consider this as an excellent and safe option for chronic pain.

The Management of Nausea and Vomiting Not Related to Anticancer Therapy in Patients with Cancer.

OPINION STATEMENT: In cancer patients, the management of nausea and vomiting that is not directly related to treatment is challenging. Much current practice is based on expert opinion and anecdote. Fortunately, over recent years, a number of quality trials have been undertaken to strengthen the evidence base that guides the care of our patients with these distressing symptoms. Much is still unknown however. In this article, we present the latest literature that addresses some of the outstanding issues.

Pain or fatigue: which correlates more with suffering in hospitalized cancer patients?

BACKGROUND: The association of pain and suffering seems intuitive, but evidence substantiating this association is lacking. In studies of cancer patients, fatigue, rather than pain, is the most prevalent and debilitating symptom. This study aimed to compare the correlation of pain and fatigue to suffering, and identify other potential sources of suffering in cancer patients treated in a palliative care unit. METHODS: One hundred fifty cancer patients were surveyed. Fifteen variables were measured on a 0- to 10-point scale: suffering, pain, level of acceptable pain, effect of pain on quality of life, fatigue, level of acceptable fatigue, effect of fatigue on quality of life, and specific types of suffering. Univariable associations with suffering were made with Pearson correlation (continuous variables) or t test (binary predictors). Multivariable associations with suffering were assessed with linear regression analysis and bootstrapping. RESULTS: In multivariable analysis, highest pain (parameter estimate 0.38) had a greater impact on suffering than highest fatigue (parameter estimate 0.21). When other variables were assessed, 38% of the variability in suffering was accounted for by pain "now", fatigue in the past 24 hours, and age. CONCLUSION: The most important predictors of greater suffering in hospitalized cancer patients are pain, younger age, and fatigue. Despite their significant effect on suffering, other underlying contributors to suffering have yet to be identified. Designing interventions to reduce fatigue, in addition to pain management, may help in alleviating overall suffering.

Trends in Published Palliative Care Research: A 15-Year Review.

BACKGROUND: There has been a call for palliative care (PC) published research to support the impact and need for more specialty PC services. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to characterize research in PC over a 15-year period in 3 PC journals published in the United States. DESIGN: The authors reviewed every issue of the Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, Journal of Palliative Medicine, and American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine from 2004 through 2018. Studies included were original articles and brief reports. Study type (qualitative, quantitative), author (first and last), gender, and professional degree of the author (first and last) were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 4881 articles were included in this study. The proportion of quantitative papers significantly increased across 3 time points from 63% to 67% to 78%. The proportion of women first authors increased across all 3 time points (54%, 2004-2008; 57%, 2009-2013; 60%, 2014-2018), and the proportion of women last authors increased across all time points (38%, 2004-2008; 44%, 2009-2013; 46%, 2014-2018). More than 40% of authors were physicians. CONCLUSIONS: Published PC studies are increasingly quantitative in design. Gender authorship is female dominant for the first authors and increasingly equal across genders for the last authors.

The Benefits of Olanzapine in Palliating Symptoms.

OPINION STATEMENT: Olanzapine has become a major drug in the management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting as a prophylactic agent. In addition, a recent randomized trial has demonstrated its benefits in treating nausea and vomiting associated with advanced cancer. The added benefit to olanzapine is that it also stimulates appetite. As a result, since it treats multiple symptoms associated with advanced cancer, it is likely to become the antiemetic of choice in palliative care at least in the USA. The added benefit of treating insomnia and the avoidance of benzodiazepines should place olanzapine in at the top of the list of drugs to use for patients who do complain of insomnia. There is no good evidence that it potentiates the respiratory depression of opioids unlike benzodiazepines. The evidence is weak that olanzapine in as an adjuvant analgesic. Hopefully, future trials will explore this in greater depth. The benefits of adding olanzapine to potent opioids are that it may reduce craving, drug cues, and opioid misuse. Other symptoms like anxiety and depression may be addressed by the addition of olanzapine to standard antidepressants.