Feasibility of Symptom Monitoring During the First Year of Endocrine Therapy for Early Breast Cancer Using Patient-Reported Outcomes Collected via Smartphone App.

PURPOSE: Treatment-associated symptoms drive early discontinuation of adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) for breast cancer. We hypothesized that symptom monitoring with electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) during adjuvant ET will enhance symptom detection, symptom management, and persistence. METHODS: Eligible patients were initiating ET for stage 0-III breast cancer. Participants completed ePRO surveys via smartphone at baseline and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. Measures included Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Anxiety, Depression, Fatigue, and Vaginal Discomfort; plus Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events items assessing joint pain, hot flashes, vaginal dryness, concentration problems, and memory problems. Scores surpassing prespecified thresholds triggered alerts, and recommended symptom management pathways were provided to clinicians. The primary objective was to evaluate feasibility, assessed by survey completion rates, with targets of >65% for the baseline survey and ≥1 follow-up survey during the first 6 months. Secondary objectives included 12-month ET discontinuation rate (target: ≤15%), describing symptoms and evaluating pathway implementation. RESULTS: Among 250 participants, 73.2% completed the baseline survey and 69.6% completed ≥1 follow-up survey during the first 6 months. Thirty-one percent of participants had ≥1 symptom alert at baseline and 74% had ≥1 symptom alert during follow-up. The proportions of participants for whom pathway-concordant symptom management was documented at each time point ranged from 12.8% to 36.6%. Twenty-eight participants (11.2%) discontinued ET by 12 months. CONCLUSION: Symptom monitoring with ePROs during adjuvant ET is feasible. Despite infrequent documentation of pathway-concordant symptom management after symptom alerts, ePROs were associated with favorable short-term ET persistence.

Building a Cardiac Palliative Care Program: A Qualitative Study of the Experiences of Ten Program Leaders From Across the United States.

CONTEXT: Palliative care is guideline-recommended for patients with advanced heart failure (HF). However, studies on how cardiac palliative care is provided in the United States are lacking. OBJECTIVES: To study how cardiac palliative care programs provide services, and to identify challenges and facilitators they encountered in program development. METHODS: In this qualitative descriptive study, we used purposive and snowball sampling approaches to identify cardiac palliative care program leaders across the United States, administered a survey and conducted semi-structured interviews. Interview transcripts were coded and evaluated using thematic analysis. RESULTS: While cardiac palliative care programs vary in their organizational setup, they all provide comprehensive interdisciplinary palliative care services, ideally across the care continuum. They predominantly serve HF patients who are evaluated for advanced therapies or have complex needs. The challenges which cardiac palliative care programs face include reaching those cardiac patients who need palliative care the most and collaborating with cardiologists who do not see value added from palliative care for their patients. Facilitators of cardiac palliative care program development include building personal relationships with cardiology providers, proactively assessing local institution needs, and tailoring palliative care services to meet patient and provider needs. CONCLUSION: Cardiac palliative care programs vary in their organizational setup but provide similar services and face similar challenges. The challenges and facilitators we identified can inform the development of future cardiac palliative care programs.

Embedded Specialist Palliative Care in Cystic Fibrosis: Results of a Randomized Feasibility Clinical Trial.

Background: Cystic fibrosis (CF) is a progressive genetic disease characterized by multisystem symptom burden. Specialist palliative care (PC), as a model of care, has been shown to be effective in improving quality of life and reducing symptom burden in other conditions, but has not been tested in CF. Objectives: To develop and test the feasibility and acceptability of a specialist PC intervention embedded within an outpatient CF clinic. Design: Single-site, equal-allocation randomized pilot study comparing usual care with addition of four protocolized quarterly visits with a PC nurse practitioner. Participants: Adults with CF age ≥18 years with any of the following: FEV1% predicted ≤50, ≥2 CF-related hospitalizations in the past 12 months, supplemental oxygen use, or noninvasive mechanical ventilation use, and moderate-or-greater severity of any symptoms on the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale. Measurements: Randomization rate, intervention visit completion, data completements, participant ratings of intervention acceptability and benefit, and intervention delivery fidelity. Results: We randomized 50 adults with CF of 65 approached (77% randomization rate) to intervention (n = 25) or usual care (n = 25), mean age 38, baseline mean FEV1% predicted 41.8 (usual care), and 41.2 (intervention). No participants withdrew, five were lost to follow-up, and two died (88% retention). In the intervention group, 23 of 25 completed all study visits; 94% stated the intervention was not burdensome, and 97.6% would recommend the intervention to others with CF. More than 90% of study visits addressed topics prescribed by intervention manual. Conclusions: Adding specialist PC to standard clinic visits for adults with CF is feasible and acceptable.

A PRO-cision medicine intervention to personalize cancer care using patient-reported outcomes: intervention development and feasibility-testing.

PURPOSE: PRO-cision medicine refers to personalizing care using patient-reported outcomes (PROs). We developed and feasibility-tested a PRO-cision Medicine remote PRO monitoring intervention designed to identify symptoms and reduce the frequency of routine in-person visits. METHODS: We conducted focus groups and one-on-one interviews with metastatic breast (n = 15) and prostate (n = 15) cancer patients and clinicians (n = 10) to elicit their perspectives on a PRO-cision Medicine intervention's design, value, and concerns. We then feasibility-tested the intervention in 24 patients with metastatic breast cancer over 6-months. We obtained feedback via end-of-study surveys (patients) and interviews (clinicians). RESULTS: Focus group and interview participants reported that remote PRO symptom reporting could alert clinicians to issues and avoid unneeded/unwanted visits. However, some patients did not perceive avoiding visits as beneficial. Clinicians were concerned about workflow. In the feasibility-test, 24/236 screened patients (10%) enrolled. Many patients were already being seen less frequently than monthly (n = 97) or clinicians did not feel comfortable seeing them less frequently than monthly (n = 31). Over the 6-month study, there were 75 total alerts from 392 PRO symptom assessments (average 0.19 alert/assessment). Patients had an average of 4 in-person visits (vs. expected 6.5 without the intervention). Patients (n = 19/24) reported high support on the end-of-study survey, with more than 80% agreeing with positive statements about the intervention. Clinician end-of-study interviews (n = 11/14) suggested that PRO symptom monitoring be added to clinic visits, rather than replacing them, and noted the increasing role of telemedicine. CONCLUSIONS: Future research should explore combining remote PRO symptom monitoring with telemedicine and in-person visits.

"I'd Have to Basically Be on My Deathbed": Heart Failure Patients' Perceptions of and Preferences for Palliative Care.

Objectives: To identify patient perceptions of how and when palliative care (PC) could complement usual heart failure (HF) management. Background: Despite guidelines calling for the integration of PC into the management of HF, PC services remain underutilized by this population. Patient preferences regarding delivery of and triggers for PC are unknown. Setting/subjects: Individuals with New York Heart Association Class II-IV disease were recruited from inpatient and outpatient settings at an academic quaternary care hospital. Measurements: Participants completed semistructured interviews discussing perceptions, knowledge, and preferences regarding PC. They also addressed barriers and facilitators to PC delivery. Two investigators independently analyzed data using template analysis. Results: We interviewed 27 adults with HF (mean age 63, 85% white, 63% male, 30% Class II, 48% Class III, and 22% Class IV). Participants frequently conflated PC with hospice; once corrected, they expressed variable preferences for primary versus specialist services. Proponents of primary PC cited continuity in care, HF-specific expertise, convenience, and cost, whereas advocates for specialist care highlighted expertise in symptom management and caregiver support, reduced time constraints, and a comprehensive approach to care. Triggers for specialist PC focused on late-stage manifestations of disease such as loss of independence and absence of disease-directed therapies. Conclusions: Patients with HF demonstrated variable conceptions of PC and its relevance to their disease management. Although preferences for delivery model were based on a variety of logistical and relational factors, triggers for initiation remained focused on late-stage disease, suggesting that patients with HF may misconceive PC is an option of last resort.

Palliative Care in Heart Failure: Rationale, Evidence, and Future Priorities.

Patients with heart failure (HF) and their families experience stress and suffering from a variety of sources over the course of the HF experience. Palliative care is an interdisciplinary service and an overall approach to care that improves quality of life and alleviates suffering for those living with serious illness, regardless of prognosis. In this review, we synthesize the evidence from randomized clinical trials of palliative care interventions in HF. While the evidence base for palliative care in HF is promising, it is still in its infancy and requires additional high-quality, methodologically sound studies to clearly elucidate the role of palliative care for patients and families living with the burdens of HF. Yet, an increase in attention to primary palliative care (e.g., basic physical and emotional symptom management, advance care planning), provided by primary care and cardiology clinicians, may be a vehicle to address unmet palliative needs earlier and throughout the illness course.

Association Between Palliative Care and Patient and Caregiver Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: The use of palliative care programs and the number of trials assessing their effectiveness have increased. Objective: To determine the association of palliative care with quality of life (QOL), symptom burden, survival, and other outcomes for people with life-limiting illness and for their caregivers. Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane CENTRAL to July 2016. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials of palliative care interventions in adults with life-limiting illness. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two reviewers independently extracted data. Narrative synthesis was conducted for all trials. Quality of life, symptom burden, and survival were analyzed using random-effects meta-analysis, with estimates of QOL translated to units of the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-palliative care scale (FACIT-Pal) instrument (range, 0-184 [worst-best]; minimal clinically important difference [MCID], 9 points); and symptom burden translated to the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) (range, 0-90 [best-worst]; MCID, 5.7 points). Main Outcomes and Measures: Quality of life, symptom burden, survival, mood, advance care planning, site of death, health care satisfaction, resource utilization, and health care expenditures. Results: Forty-three RCTs provided data on 12 731 patients (mean age, 67 years) and 2479 caregivers. Thirty-five trials used usual care as the control, and 14 took place in the ambulatory setting. In the meta-analysis, palliative care was associated with statistically and clinically significant improvements in patient QOL at the 1- to 3-month follow-up (standardized mean difference, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.83; FACIT-Pal mean difference, 11.36] and symptom burden at the 1- to 3-month follow-up (standardized mean difference, -0.66; 95% CI, -1.25 to -0.07; ESAS mean difference, -10.30). When analyses were limited to trials at low risk of bias (n = 5), the association between palliative care and QOL was attenuated but remained statistically significant (standardized mean difference, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.34; FACIT-Pal mean difference, 4.94), whereas the association with symptom burden was not statistically significant (standardized mean difference, -0.21; 95% CI, -0.42 to 0.00; ESAS mean difference, -3.28). There was no association between palliative care and survival (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.17). Palliative care was associated consistently with improvements in advance care planning, patient and caregiver satisfaction, and lower health care utilization. Evidence of associations with other outcomes was mixed. Conclusions and Relevance: In this meta-analysis, palliative care interventions were associated with improvements in patient QOL and symptom burden. Findings for caregiver outcomes were inconsistent. However, many associations were no longer significant when limited to trials at low risk of bias, and there was no significant association between palliative care and survival.