Beyond very early systemic sclerosis: deciphering pre­scleroderma and its trajectories to open new avenues for preventive medicine.

The identification of individuals with systemic sclerosis in an oligosymptomatic phase preceding the very early manifestations of the disease represents a challenge in the search for a new window of opportunity in systemic sclerosis. This phase could be identified in a clinical scenario as the pre-scleroderma phase, in which the disease would still be far from systemic sclerosis-related fibrotic or irreversible manifestations in skin or organs. In this Personal View, we discuss parameters and candidate definitions for a conceptual framework of pre-scleroderma, from the identification of populations at risk to autoantibodies and their potential functional activities. We discuss how this new paradigm of pre-scleroderma could represent a game-changing approach in the management of systemic sclerosis, allowing the treatment of patients at high risk of organ involvement or skin fibrosis before such events occur.

Management of systemic sclerosis: British Society for Rheumatology guideline scope.

This guideline will provide a practical roadmap for management of SSc that builds upon the previous treatment guideline to incorporate advances in evidence-based treatment and increased knowledge about assessment, classification and management. General approaches to management as well as treatment of specific complications will be covered, including lung, cardiac, renal and gastrointestinal tract disease, as well as RP, digital vasculopathy, skin manifestations, calcinosis and impact on quality of life. It will include guidance related to emerging approved therapies for interstitial lung disease and account for National Health Service England prescribing policies and national guidance relevant to SSc. The guideline will be developed using the methods and processes outlined in Creating Clinical Guidelines: Our Protocol. This development process to produce guidance, advice and recommendations for practice has National Institute for Health and Care Excellence accreditation.

Considerations for a combined index for limited cutaneous systemic sclerosis to support drug development and improve outcomes.

Systemic sclerosis (SSc; systemic scleroderma) is characterized by a heterogeneous range of clinical manifestations. SSc is classified into limited cutaneous SSc (lcSSc) and diffuse cutaneous subgroups (dcSSc) based on the extent of skin involvement. Randomized controlled trials in scleroderma have mainly focused on dcSSc partly because the measurement of skin involvement, critical for evaluating a therapeutic intervention is more dynamic in this subset. Nonetheless, lcSSc, the most common cutaneous subset (about 2/3), is also associated with significant morbidity and detrimental impact on health-related quality of life. The lack of interventional studies in lcSSc is partly due to a lack of relevant outcome measures to evaluate this subgroup. Combining several clinically meaningful outcomes selected specifically for lcSSc may improve representativeness in clinical trials and responsiveness of outcomes measured in randomized controlled trials. A composite index dedicated to lcSSc combining such relevant outcomes could advance clinical trial development for lcSSc by providing the opportunity to test and select among candidate drugs that could act as disease-modifying treatments for this neglected subgroup of SSc. This proposed index would include items selected by expert physicians and patients with lcSSc across domains grounded in the lived experience of lcSSc. This article reviews the reasons behind the relative neglect of lcSSc, discusses the current state of outcome measures for lcSSc, identifies challenges, and proposes a roadmap for a combined lcSSc-specific treatment response index.

A comprehensive framework for navigating patient care in systemic sclerosis: A global response to the need for improving the practice of diagnostic and preventive strategies in SSc.

Systemic sclerosis (SSc), the most lethal of rheumatologic conditions, is the cause of death in >50% of SSc cases, led by pulmonary fibrosis followed by pulmonary hypertension and then scleroderma renal crisis (SRC). Multiple other preventable and treatable SSc-related vascular, cardiac, gastrointestinal, nutritional and musculoskeletal complications can lead to disability and death. Vascular injury with subsequent inflammation transforming to irreversible fibrosis and permanent damage characterizes SSc. Organ involvement is often present early in the disease course of SSc, but requires careful history-taking and vigilance in screening to detect. Inflammation is potentially reversible provided that treatment intensity quells inflammation and other immune mechanisms. In any SSc phenotype, opportunities for early treatment are prone to be under-utilized, especially in slowly progressive phenotypes that, in contrast to severe progressive ILD, indolently accrue irreversible organ damage resulting in later-stage life-limiting complications such as pulmonary hypertension, cardiac involvement, and malnutrition. A single SSc patient visit often requires much more physician and staff time, organization, vigilance, and direct management for multiple organ systems compared to other rheumatic or pulmonary diseases. Efficiency and efficacy of comprehensive SSc care enlists trending of symptoms and bio-data. Financial sustainability of SSc care benefits from understanding insurance reimbursement and health system allocation policies for complex patients. Sharing care between recognised SSc centers and local cardiology/pulmonary/rheumatology/gastroenterology colleagues may prevent complications and poor outcomes, while providing support to local specialists. As scleroderma specialists, we offer a practical framework with tools to facilitate an optimal, comprehensive and sustainable approach to SSc care. Improved health outcomes in SSc relies upon recogntion, management and, to the extent possible, prevention of SSc and treatment-related complications.

Does Continuous Hospice Care Help Patients Remain at Home?

CONTEXT: In the U. S., hospices sometimes provide high-intensity "continuous care" in patients' homes. However, little is known about the way that continuous care is used or what impact continuous care has on patient outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To describe patients who receive continuous care and determine whether continuous care reduces the likelihood that patients will die in an inpatient unit or hospital. METHODS: Data from 147,137 patients admitted to 11 U.S. hospices between 2008 and 2012 were extracted from the electronic medical records. The hospices are part of a research-focused collaboration. The study used a propensity score-matched cohort design. RESULTS: A total of 99,687 (67.8%) patients were in a private home or nursing home on the day before death, and of these, 10,140 (10.2%) received continuous care on the day before death. A propensity score-matched sample (n = 24,658) included 8524 patients who received continuous care and 16,134 patients who received routine care on the day before death. Using the two matched groups, patients who received continuous care on the day before death were significantly less likely to die in an inpatient hospice setting (350/8524 vs. 2030/16,134; 4.1% vs. 12.6%) (odds ratio [OR] 0.29; 95% CI 0.27-0.34; P < 0.001). When patients were cared for by a spouse, the use of continuous care was associated with a larger decrease in inpatient deaths (OR 0.12; 95% CI 0.09-0.16; P < 0.001) compared with those patients cared for by other family members (OR 0.37; 95% CI 0.32-0.42; P < 0.001). It is possible that unmeasured covariates were not included in the propensity score match. CONCLUSION: Use of continuous care on the day before death is associated with a significant reduction in the use of inpatient care on the last day of life, particularly when patients are cared for by a spouse.

Patterns of functional decline in hospice: what can individuals and their families expect?

OBJECTIVES: To describe the trajectory of functional decline after an individual is referred to hospice. DESIGN: Electronic health record-based retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Three hospice programs in the U.S. southeast, northeast, and midwest. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals in hospice. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Palliative Performance Scale (PPS) scores measured at intervals between hospice enrollment and death, on a scale from 10 to 100. RESULTS: In 8,669 decedents, there was an average 13.8-point decline in PPS score. After adjusting for baseline PPS score and length of stay in hospice, three distinct trajectories were identified, each of which consisted of two diagnoses whose rates of decline had 95% confidence intervals (CIs) that overlapped. The most rapid decline was observed for individuals with cancer (adjusted decline 8.44 points/wk; 95% CI = 8.03-8.82) and stroke (adjusted decline 7.67 points/wk, 95% CI = 7.08-8.29). A significantly slower decline was observed in individuals with pulmonary disease (adjusted decline 5.02 points/wk, 95% CI = 4.24-5.75) and cardiac disease (adjusted decline 4.53 points/wk, 95% CI = 4.05-5.05). Individuals with debility (adjusted decline 1.86 points/wk, 95% CI = 0.95-2.78) and dementia (adjusted decline 1.98 points/wk, 95% CI = 1.01-2.89) had the slowest decline. In an inverse probability-weighted sample of individuals who had a PPS score recorded in the last day of life (n = 1,959, 22.6%), 35.9% had a PPS score of at least 40, indicating some oral intake, variable mental status, limited self-care, and an ability to get out of bed for at least part of the day. CONCLUSION: Although functional status generally declines in individuals in hospice, this decline is heterogeneous. Some individuals retain some physical and cognitive function until the last day of life.

The art versus science of predicting prognosis: can a prognostic index predict short-term mortality better than experienced nurses do?

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a prognostic index could predict one-week mortality more accurately than hospice nurses can. METHOD: An electronic health record-based retrospective cohort study of 21,074 hospice patients was conducted in three hospice programs in the Southeast, Northeast, and Midwest United States. Model development used logistic regression with bootstrapped confidence intervals and multiple imputation to account for missing data. The main outcome measure was mortality within 7 days of hospice enrollment. RESULTS: A total of 21,074 patients were admitted to hospice between October 1, 2008 and May 31, 2011, and 5562 (26.4%) died within 7 days. An optimal predictive model included the Palliative Performance Scale (PPS) score, admission from a hospital, and gender. The model had a c-statistic of 0.86 in the training sample and 0.84 in the validation sample, which was greater than that of nurses' predictions (0.72). The index's performance was best for patients with pulmonary disease (0.89) and worst for patients with cancer and dementia (both 0.80). The index's predictions of mortality rates in each index category were within 5.0% of actual rates, whereas nurses underestimated mortality by up to 18.9%. Using the optimal index threshold (<3), the index's predictions had a better c-statistic (0.78 versus 0.72) and higher sensitivity (74.4% versus 47.8%) than did nurses' predictions but a lower specificity (80.6% versus 95.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Although nurses can often identify patients who will die within 7 days, a simple model based on available clinical information offers improved accuracy and could help to identify those patients who are at high risk for short-term mortality.

Which hospice patients with cancer are able to die in the setting of their choice? Results of a retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: To determine which hospice patients with cancer prefer to die at home and to define factors associated with an increased likelihood of dying at home. METHODS: An electronic health record-based retrospective cohort study was conducted in three hospice programs in Florida, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Main measures included preferred versus actual site of death. RESULTS: Of 7,391 patients, preferences regarding place of death were determined at admission for 5,837 (79%). After adjusting for other characteristics, patients who preferred to die at home were more likely to die at home (adjusted proportions, 56.5% v 37.0%; odds ratio [OR], 2.21; 95% CI, 1.77 to 2.76). Among those patients (n = 3,152) who preferred to die at home, in a multivariable logistic regression model, patients were more likely to die at home if they had at least one visit per day in the first 4 days of hospice care (adjusted proportions, 61% v 54%; OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.41), if they were married (63% v 54%; OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.44), and if they had an advance directive (65% v 50%; OR, 2.11; 95% CI, 1.54 to 2.65). Patients with moderate or severe pain were less likely to die at home (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.64), as were patients with better functional status (higher Palliative Performance Scale score: < 40, 64.8%; 40 to 70, 50.2%; OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.93; > 70, 40.5%; OR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.82). CONCLUSION: Increased hospice visit frequency may increase the likelihood of patients being able to die in the setting of their choice.