Wearable activity monitors to assess performance status and predict clinical outcomes in advanced cancer patients.

An objective evaluation of patient performance status (PS) is difficult because patients spend the majority of their time outside of the clinic, self-report to providers, and undergo dynamic changes throughout their treatment experience. Real-time, objective activity data may allow for a more accurate assessment of PS and physical function, while reducing the subjectivity and bias associated with current assessments. Consenting patients with advanced cancer wore a wearble activity monitor for three consecutive visits in a prospective, single-cohort clinical trial. Provider-assessed PS (ECOG/Karnofsky) and NIH PROMIS® patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were assessed at each visit. Associations between wearable activity monitor metrics (steps, distance, stairs) and PS, clinical outcomes (adverse events, hospitalizations, survival), and PROs were assessed using correlation statistics and in multivariable logistic regression models. Thirty-seven patients were evaluated (54% male, median 62 years). Patients averaged 3700 steps, 1.7 miles, and 3 flights of stairs per day. Highest correlations were observed between average daily steps and ECOG-PS and KPS (r = 0.63 and r = 0.69, respectively p < 0.01). Each 1000 steps/day increase was associated with reduced odds for adverse events (OR: 0.34, 95% CI 0.13, 0.94), hospitalizations (OR: 0.21 95% CI 0.56, 0.79), and hazard for death (HR: 0.48 95% CI 0.28-0.83). Significant correlations were also observed between activity metrics and PROs. Our trial demonstrates the feasibility of using wearable activity monitors to assess PS in advanced cancer patients and suggests their potential use to predict clinical and patient-reported outcomes. These findings should be validated in larger, randomized trials.

Wearable activity monitors in oncology trials: Current use of an emerging technology.

BACKGROUND: Physical activity is an important outcome in oncology trials. Physical activity is commonly assessed using self-reported questionnaires, which are limited by recall and response biases. Recent advancements in wearable technology have provided oncologists with new opportunities to obtain real-time, objective physical activity data. The purpose of this review was to describe current uses of wearable activity monitors in oncology trials. METHODS: We searched Pubmed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for oncology trials involving wearable activity monitors published between 2005 and 2016. We extracted details on study design, types of activity monitors used, and purpose for their use. We summarized activity monitor metrics including step counts, sleep and sedentary time, and time spent in moderate-to-vigorous activity. RESULTS: We identified 41 trials of which 26 (63%) involved cancer survivors (post-treatment) and 15 trials (37%) involved patients with active cancer. Most trials (65%) involved breast cancer patients. Wearable activity monitors were commonly used in exercise (54%) or behavioral (29%) trials. Cancer survivors take between 4660 and 11,000 steps/day and those undergoing treatment take 2885 to 8300steps/day. CONCLUSION: Wearable activity monitors are increasingly being used to obtain objective measures of physical activity in oncology trials. There is potential for their use to expand to evaluate and predict clinical outcomes such as survival, quality of life, and treatment tolerance in future studies. Currently, there remains a lack of standardization in the types of monitors being used and how their data are being collected, analyzed, and interpreted. PRECIS: Recent advancements in wearable activity monitor technology have provided oncologists with new opportunities to monitor their patients' daily activity in real-world settings. The integration of wearable activity monitors into cancer care will help increase our understanding of the associations between physical activity and the prevention and management of the disease, in addition to other important cancer outcomes.

Palliative Care in Lung Cancer.

Lung cancer is the most common cancer worldwide and is the leading cause of cancer death for both men and women in the USA. Symptom burden in patients with advanced lung cancer is very high and has a negative impact on their quality of life (QOL). Palliative care with its focus on the management of symptoms and addressing physical, psychosocial, spiritual, and existential suffering, as well as medically appropriate goal setting and open communication with patients and families, significantly adds to the quality of care received by advanced lung cancer patients. The Provisional Clinical Opinion (PCO) of American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) as well as the National Cancer Care Network's (NCCN) clinical practice guidelines recommends early integration of palliative care into routine cancer care. In this chapter, we will provide an overview of palliative care in lung cancer and will examine the evidence and recommendations with regard to a comprehensive and interdisciplinary approach to symptom management, as well as discussions of goals of care, advance care planning, and care preferences.

Pathologic complete response rates in triple-negative, HER2-positive, and hormone receptor-positive breast cancers after anthracycline-free neoadjuvant chemotherapy with carboplatin and paclitaxel with or without trastuzumab.

BACKGROUND: Pathologic complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) is considered a surrogate for improved survival. Platinum-containing NCT, particularly in patients with HER2+ and triple-negative breast cancers (TNBC) may increase pCR rates. METHODS: Tumor characteristics, pCR rates (no invasive disease in breast and lymph nodes), toxicities, and survival in patients who received carboplatin, a taxane, and trastuzumab (HER2+ disease) between April 2009 and December 2011, were reviewed. RESULTS: Thirty eight patients (39 tumors) completed a median of 4 cycles of NCT. Eighteen of 39 (46%) tumors were HER2+, 8/18 (44%) responded with pCR; 13/18 HER2+ tumors were HR+ (72%) and 4/13 (31%) had a pCR. Ten of 39 (26%) tumors were TNBC; 6/10 (60%) had a pCR. At a median of 25-months no recurrences were observed in patients with pCR. CONCLUSIONS: Prospective studies of anthracycline-free platinum-containing NCT are warranted in LABC patients with HER2+ and TNBC.

Pilot study of palliative care consultation in patients with advanced heart failure referred for cardiac transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF) in its chronic form is an irreversible and progressive disease. Palliative care (PC) interventions have traditionally been focused on patients with advanced cancer. We performed a pilot study to assess the feasibility of implementing the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines for early PC intervention in patients with advanced HF who were seeking or received potentially curative therapies. METHODS: Twenty consecutive patients with advanced HF referred to PC from the heart transplant service with stage D, New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III-IV symptoms were analyzed retrospectively in a tertiary care setting. Data were reviewed to assess the clinical impact of PC intervention. Feedback was obtained to assess satisfaction of the patients, their families, and the health care professionals. An independent assessment of the impact of the PC service in the care of each patient was performed by a cardiologist and PC physician by use of a scoring system. RESULTS: Twenty consecutive patients with HF were analyzed. PC consult was obtained for a variety of reasons. All patients complained of a high symptom burden. PC consultation resulted in a decrease in the use of opioids and increased patient satisfaction. Patients and their family members generally reported improved holistic care, continuity of care, more focused goals of care, and improved planning of treatment courses. The nonstandardized scoring system used to determine the impact of the PC service showed an average of moderate to significant impact when assessed by both a cardiologist and a PC physician. CONCLUSION: PC consultation appears to be beneficial in the treatment and quality of life of advanced HF patients, independent of their prognosis. This pilot study demonstrated feasibility and sufficient evidence of clinical benefit to warrant a larger randomized clinical trial assessing the benefit of standard involvement by PC in patients with advanced HF, independent of the patient's prognosis or treatment goals.