NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Palliative Care, Version 2.2021.

Palliative care has evolved to be an integral part of comprehensive cancer care with the goal of early intervention to improve quality of life and patient outcomes. The NCCN Guidelines for Palliative Care provide recommendations to help the primary oncology team promote the best quality of life possible throughout the illness trajectory for each patient with cancer. The NCCN Palliative Care Panel meets annually to evaluate and update recommendations based on panel members' clinical expertise and emerging scientific data. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel's recent discussions and highlights updates on the importance of fostering adaptive coping strategies for patients and families, and on the role of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions to optimize symptom management.

Patient-reported outcomes regarding radiation therapy in patients with multiple myeloma.

Background: Radiation therapy (RT) has been widely used for palliation in multiple myeloma. However, no data exist on symptom assessment and patient-reported outcomes regarding the efficacy of RT in this disease process. This study aims to demonstrate the impact of palliative RT on patient-reported symptoms in patients with multiple myeloma.Materials and Methods: Our Radiation Oncology and Supportive Care Medicine clinics established the use of a modified Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) in 2015 assessing 12 symptom domains. All had ESAS data available from each encounter. Demographic and clinical data were retrospectively collected from an institutional data warehouse. We examined total and component survey scores for correlated data of patients during radiation treatment and patients not treated with radiation.Results: Clinic records of 30 patients with multiple myeloma seen in the Radiation Oncology and Supportive Care clinics from 2015 to 2018 were retrieved. A total of 91 discrete surveys were collected (1183 data points). Twenty of these were collected from weekly visits from 12 patients receiving RT; the remainder were from new patient or follow up encounters. Odds ratios were lower with radiation therapy for total scores (OR 4.86, p = .007), as well as several component scores.Conclusions: The use of palliative RT was associated with 5 times lower total symptom scores compared with nonuse. Similar beneficial results were found for several component scores. These patient-reported outcomes strongly suggest that providers should consider palliative radiation for symptomatic multiple myeloma patients. These data should be prospectively validated in a larger cohort of myeloma patients.

Patient-reported outcomes: using ESAS to screen for anemia.

PURPOSE: Patient perspectives of their symptom burden provide valuable data to clinicians. We have investigated the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) extensively in our radiation oncology and supportive care clinics. We were interested in examining whether ESAS data could correlate with anemia. METHODS: Our clinics have used a modified ESAS since 2015; patients now input data directly into the electronic medical record using a tablet interface. Of 9813 patients providing ESAS reports, we retrieved hemoglobin (Hb) data from 8304. Of these, 1351 patients had both performed on the same day. Anemia existed if Hb was < 13.0 g/L (man) or < 12 g/L (woman). RESULTS: When self-reported scores for both tiredness and shortness of breath were 7 and above, the positive predictive value (PPV) for anemia was 80%, and specificity was 97.6%. Corresponding sensitivity was 8.2% and accuracy was 48.9%. This 2-item model could be a valuable screening tool for lack of anemia in cancer patients in the outpatient setting: if patients rate both these ESAS items < 7, there exists < 3% false positive risk. An expanded 5-item model adding lack of appetite, pain, and bone marrow primary site increased sensitivity and accuracy at the expense of specificity and PPV. We consider this less clinically functional than the two-item screen. CONCLUSION: This is one of the first reports of PRO data screening for a clinical sign, in this case, anemia. Predicting freedom from anemia is feasible using 2 ESAS survey questions: tiredness and shortness of breath.

Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale and Clinical Characteristics Associated With Cannabinoid Use in Oncology Supportive Care Outpatients.

BACKGROUND: Information about the frequency of cannabinoid use and the clinical characteristics of its users in oncology supportive care is limited. This study explored associations between cannabinoid use and cancer-related clinical characteristics in a cancer population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective review included 332 patients who had a urine drug test (UDT) for tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) together with completion of an Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) and cannabinoid history questionnaire on the same day that urine was obtained during 1 year in the supportive care clinic. RESULTS: The frequency of positive results for THC in a UDT was 22.9% (n=76). Significant statistical differences were seen between THC-positive and THC-negative patients for age (median of 52 [lower quartile, 44; upper quartile, 56] vs 58 [48; 67] years; P<.001), male sex (53.9% vs 39.5%; P=.034), and past or current cannabinoid use (65.8% vs 26.2%; P<.001). Statistical significance was observed in ESAS items between the THC-positive and THC-negative groups for pain (7 [lower quartile, 5; upper quartile; 8] vs 5 [3; 7]; P=.001), nausea (1 [0; 3] vs 0 [0; 3]; P=.049), appetite (4 [2; 7] vs 3 [0; 5.75]; P=.015), overall well-being (5.5 [4; 7] vs 5 [3; 6]; P=.002), spiritual well-being (5 [2; 6] vs 3 [1; 3]; P=.015), insomnia (7 [5; 9] vs 4 [2; 7]; P<.001), and total ESAS (52 [34; 66] vs 44 [29; 54]; P=.001). Among patients who reported current or past cannabinoid use, THC-positive patients had higher total scores and scores for pain, appetite, overall well-being, spiritual well-being, and insomnia than THC-negative patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with cancer receiving outpatient supportive care who had positive UDT results for THC had higher symptom severity scores for pain, nausea, appetite, overall and spiritual well-being, and insomnia compared with their THC-negative counterparts. These results highlight potential opportunities to improve palliative care.

Congruence of multiple patient-related outcomes within a single day.

OBJECTIVE: Clinic-based collection of patient-reported outcome (PRO) quantifying symptom burden provide crucial information for effective care. We have pioneered point-of-care electronic assessment using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) with direct linkage to the electronic medical record (EMR) which has been readily adopted by our oncology patients. As some patients may complete more than one ESAS per day in different clinics, the goal of the current analyses was to compare the within-patient congruence of ESAS assessments completed on the same day. METHODS: A total of 9621 ESAS records from 4021 patients of the Supportive Care Medicine and Radiation Oncology clinics between February and November 2017 were retrieved from the EMR. Patients completed the ESAS-r-CSS, which added sleep disturbance, constipation, and spiritual well-being domains to the standard ESAS-r. RESULTS: A total of 65 patients provided more than one ESAS report within the same day. The data were curated, removing those sporadic missing data and those with obvious technical error. This process left 130 samples for analysis. There was no statistical difference among different ESAS collection intervals for domains of tiredness, nausea, appetite, overall well-being, spiritual well-being, constipation, and difficulty sleeping, but there was a significant difference for pain, drowsiness, shortness of breath, depression, and anxiety. Repeat tests that occurred within 1 h of one another demonstrated higher congruence than those completed over longer periods. CONCLUSION: Patients reported significant worsening of several symptoms over the course of the day, with greatest concordance observed within smaller time periods.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Palliative Care, Version 2.2017.

The NCCN Guidelines for Palliative Care provide interdisciplinary recommendations on palliative care for patients with cancer. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize and provide context for the updated guidelines recommendations regarding hospice and end-of-life (EOL) care. Updates for 2017 include revisions to and restructuring of the algorithms that address important EOL concerns. These recommendations were revised to provide clearer guidance for oncologists as they care for patients with cancer who are approaching the transition to EOL care. Recommendations for interventions and reassessment based on estimated life expectancy were streamlined and reprioritized to promote hospice referrals and improved EOL care.

The Current State of Palliative Care for Patients Cared for at Leading US Cancer Centers: The 2015 NCCN Palliative Care Survey.

BACKGROUND: ASCO and IOM recommend palliative care (PC) across health care settings for patients with serious illnesses, including cancer. This study provides an overview of the current availability, structure, and basic quality of PC services within NCCN Member Institutions. METHODS: A PC survey was developed by NCCN staff and a working group of PC experts from 11 NCCN Member Institutions under the auspices of the NCCN Best Practices Committee. The survey was piloted and refined by 3 working group members and sent electronically to all 26 NCCN Member Institutions. NCCN staff and working group leaders analyzed the survey data. RESULTS: A total of 22 of 26 institutions responded (85%). All respondents (100%) reported an inpatient PC consult service (staffed by an average of 6.8 full-time equivalents [FTEs], seeing 1,031 consults/year with an average length of stay [LOS] of 10 days). A total of 91% of respondents had clinic-based PC (with an average of 469 consults/year, staffed by an average of 6.8 FTEs, and a 17-day wait time). For clinics, a comanagement care delivery model was more common than strict consultation. Home-based PC (23%) and inpatient PC units (32%) were less prevalent. Notably, 80% of institutions reported insufficient PC capacity compared with demand. Across PC settings, referrals for patients with solid tumors were more common than for hematologic malignancies. Automatic or "triggered" referrals were rare. The most common services provided were symptom management (100%) and advance care planning (96%). Most programs were funded through fee-for-service billing and institutional support. Partnerships with accountable care organizations and bundled payment arrangements were infrequent. PC program data collection and institutional funding for PC research were variable across institutions. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the prevalence of PC inpatient and clinic services among participating NCCN Member Institutions, PC demand still exceeds capacity. Opportunities exist for expansion of home-based PC and inpatient PC units, optimizing referrals, research, and payer collaborations.

Palliative Care Version 1.2016.

The NCCN Guidelines for Palliative Care provide interdisciplinary recommendations on palliative care for patients with cancer. The NCCN Guidelines are intended to provide guidance to the primary oncology team on the integration of palliative care into oncology. The NCCN Palliative Care Panel's recommendations seek to ensure that each patient experiences the best quality of life possible throughout the illness trajectory. Accordingly, the NCCN Guidelines outline best practices for screening, assessment, palliative care interventions, reassessment, and after-death care.

Implementation of NCCN Palliative Care Guidelines by member institutions.

Increasingly, evidence suggests the integration of palliative care (PC) with standard oncologic care can yield substantial benefits. As part of an effort to improve the PC of cancer patients, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) has developed clinical practice guidelines for PC that promote access to quality, evidence-based PC. This study sought to characterize current implementation of the guidelines by NCCN member institutions. Institutional representatives appointed to the NCCN Palliative Care Guidelines Panel were asked to complete an online survey in the spring of 2014. The survey focused on availability of PC services, screening and referral practices for PC, PC education, and quality improvement programs. The survey was completed by representatives from 21 of 25 NCCN member institutions (84 %). A majority routinely provides PC services via interdisciplinary teams; 52 % routinely inform patients of the availability, elements, and benefits of PC. The guidelines are most often used to guide clinical practice; only 10 % reported using the guidelines to formally screen for PC needs and/or make referrals to PC specialists. Among the 62 % of institutions that screen any patients using any available criteria, when a patient screens positive for PC needs, a referral to a PC specialist is made less than half the time. Implementation of PC Guidelines is incomplete and various aspects of the guidelines, such as the recommendation to screen all patients for PC needs, are applied inconsistently. Despite this, most institutions provide PC services in a manner consistent with the guidelines. Greater implementation of the guidelines' recommendations is needed.

CYP2D6-guided opioid therapy for adults with cancer pain: A randomized implementation clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: The CYP2D6 enzyme metabolizes opioids commonly prescribed for cancer-related pain, and CYP2D6 polymorphisms may contribute to variability in opioid response. We evaluated the feasibility of implementing CYP2D6-guided opioid prescribing for patients with cancer and reported pilot outcome data. METHODS: Adult patients from two cancer centers were prospectively enrolled into a hybrid implementation-effectiveness clinical trial and randomized to CYP2D6-genotype-guided opioid selection, with clinical recommendations, or usual care. Implementation metrics, including provider response, medication changes consistent with recommendations, and patient-reported pain and symptom scores at baseline and up to 8 weeks, were assessed. RESULTS: Most (87/114, 76%) patients approached for the study agreed to participate. Of 85 patients randomized, 71% were prescribed oxycodone at baseline. The median (range) time to receive CYP2D6 test results was 10 (3-37) days; 24% of patients had physicians acknowledge genotype results in a clinic note. Among patients with CYP2D6-genotype-guided recommendations to change therapy (n = 11), 18% had a change congruent with recommendations. Among patients who completed baseline and follow-up questionnaires (n = 48), there was no difference in change in mean composite pain score (-1.01 ± 2.1 vs. -0.41 ± 2.5; p = 0.19) or symptom severity at last follow-up (3.96 ± 2.18 vs. 3.47 ± 1.78; p = 0.63) between the usual care arm (n = 26) and genotype-guided arm (n = 22), respectively. CONCLUSION: Our study revealed high acceptance of pharmacogenetic testing as part of a clinical trial among patients with cancer pain. However, provider response to genotype-guided recommendations was low, impacting assessment of pain-related outcomes. Addressing barriers to utility of pharmacogenetics results and clinical recommendations will be critical for implementation success.

Application of Topical Lidocaine for Pain Relief in the Setting of Targeted Therapy-Induced Onycholysis: A Case Report.

Selective pan fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors have been linked to severe onycholysis, the uncomfortable separation of the nail plate from the nail bed. Recommendations to assist with FGFR inhibitor onycholysis vary based on the severity. We hypothesized that the application of topical lidocaine to mimic a digital nerve block would be beneficial in addition to traditional supportive care interventions and subsequently report its immediate and continued efficacy for targeted therapy-induced onycholysis.

Cannabis consumption in young adults with cancer: descriptive study.

OBJECTIVE: In the USA, the increase in state-sanctioned medical and recreational cannabis consumption means more young adults (YA) with cancer are using cannabis. Data and information are needed to characterise this use and frame much needed discussions about the role of cannabis in cancer care. To that end, this study's objective was to describe consumption of cannabis in YA with cancer. METHODS: Four hundred seventy-six patients with cancer ages 18-39 years at a large comprehensive cancer centre responded to a survey about their cannabis consumption. The survey was administered online between July 2019 and June 2020, and respondents were anonymous. RESULTS: Fifty-two per cent (n=247) of respondents endorsed use within the last year; of these, half reported using cannabis prior to their diagnosis. Consumption was about equally distributed between smoking/inhalation and eating/drinking cannabis products. Seventy-five per cent of consumers used cannabis at least weekly. Top five primary reasons for use were pain, anxiety, nausea, sleep and recreation. More frequent consumption was associated with greater perceived improvement in certain symptoms. Cannabis products tended to be sourced from friends and family and information from non-medical sources. Most YA reported being comfortable discussing their consumption with providers. CONCLUSIONS: Many YA are using cannabis frequently to manage their cancer-related and treatment-related symptoms. Findings support the need for providers to consider cannabis use in treatment planning and symptom management with YA. Findings should help frame patient and provider discussions and herald much needed research on the effect of cannabis consumption on patient outcomes.

Rate of cannabis use in older adults with cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Older adults with cancer are increasingly inquiring about and using cannabis. Despite this, few studies have examined cannabis use in patients with cancer aged 65 years and older as a separate group and identified characteristics associated with use. The current study sought to determine the rate of cannabis use in older adult patients with cancer and to identify demographic and clinical correlates of use. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of patients with cancer referred for specialised symptom management between January 2014 and May 2017 who underwent routine urine drug testing for tetrahydrocannabinol as part of their initial clinic visit. RESULTS: Approximately 8% (n=24) of patients with cancer aged 65 years and older tested positive for tetrahydrocannabinol compared with 30% (n=51) of young adults and 21% (n=154) of adults. At the univariate level, more cannabis users had lower performance status than non-users (p=0.02, Fisher's exact test). There were no other demographic and clinical characteristics significantly associated with cannabis use in older adults. CONCLUSIONS: Older adult patients made up nearly 25% (n=301) of the total sample and had a rate of cannabis use of 8%. As one of the first studies to assess cannabis use via objective testing rather than self-report, this study adds significantly to the emerging literature on cannabis use in people aged 65 years and older. Findings suggest the rate of use in older adults living with cancer is higher than that among older adults in the general population.

Effect of COVID-19 Pandemic on Cannabis Use in Cancer Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Medical and other cannabis use by cancer patients continues to increase. Reasons for use include management of psychosocial stressors, physical and psychological symptoms. We explored the effect of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on on patients' cannabis use, hypothesizing that users would be increasing their use due to heightened stress and increased uncertainty. METHODS: Participants were part of an anonymous online survey of cannabis use in cancer. Items specific to COVID-19 were administered between April and June 2020. RESULTS: Thirty-one percent of respondents (n = 26) confirmed they used cannabis during COVID-19. The top 5 reasons for use were sleep, anxiety, nausea, pain, and appetite. Ninety-two percent denied they were using cannabis for new or different symptoms. Eighty-one percent were using about the same amount as before, 11.5% were using less, and 8% more. Only 12% reported that product cost affected their use and that they had changed the way in which they used cannabis. Eight percent were stockpiling product so that they did not run out during the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: The percentages of those reporting a change in cannabis use were modest. Increased use may reflect efforts to relieve stress. Decreased use may reflect barriers to securing unregulated products and perceived vulnerability to the effects of infection on the respiratory system. As the pandemic continues to evolve, it will be important to monitor its effects on cancer patients as it relates to psychosocial stressors, psychological symptoms, and cannabis use.

Virtual Teaming: Leveraging Team Science Sense-Making During COVID-19.

Individuals with cancer anorexia cachexia syndrome (CACS) experience multifaceted distress. To address CACS patient concerns regarding their experience of care, our cancer center established a specialized CACS clinic in 2016. We applied the team science principle of the team mental model (TMM) to support development of an effective interprofessional collaborative CACS care team. In 2020, cessation of CACS clinic in-person visits during coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) threatened the viability of the entrenched TMM and once again jeopardized the patient experience of care. We present a case-based vignette as a representative composite of patient experiences to illustrate the challenges. A 48-year-old female was referred to our CACS clinic for pancreatic cancer-associated appetite and weight loss during COVID-19. To reduce risk of infection, in-person clinic visits were curtailed. When informed about the resulting need to defer the CACS assessment, the patient and her spouse expressed concern that postponement would adversely affect her ability to undergo anticancer treatments or achieve beneficial outcomes. To minimize delays in CACS treatment and optimize the patient experience of care, we applied the team science principle of sense-making to help the team rapidly reformulate the TMM to provide interprofessional collaborative CACS care via telemedicine. The sense-making initiative highlights opportunities to examine sense-making within health care teams more broadly during and after the pandemic. The application of sense-making within interprofessional cancer care teams has not been described previously.

Cannabis Use in Young Adult Cancer Patients.

Background: The use of cannabis by young adult (YA) cancer patients is likely to increase as medical cannabis becomes more available. Clinically relevant data on cannabis use are needed to establish benchmarks for use, to identify patients who are more likely to use cannabis, and to assess outcomes associated with use. Objective: The current study sought to determine the rate of cannabis use in YA cancer patients ages 18 to 39, identify demographic and clinical correlates of use, and examine differences in moderate-to-severe symptoms between users and nonusers. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of objectively measured tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), self-reported cannabis use, and cancer-related symptomatology in YA cancer patients in active treatment referred for comprehensive supportive care. Results: Approximately 30% of YA cancer patients tested positive for THC on urine drug testing. At the univariate level, cannabis users were more likely to be male, to have a lifetime history of smoking at least 100 cigarettes, and to be more recently diagnosed. Cannabis use was associated with moderate-to-severe symptomatology, including pain, nausea, lack of appetite, constipation, difficulty sleeping, and poorer overall well-being. Conclusions: YAs referred for comprehensive supportive care may be managing their cancer-related symptoms with cannabis. Further research is needed to better understand patients' perceptions of cannabis's therapeutic and adverse effects, in patients who used cannabis before diagnosis, and in patients who commenced use in response to a cancer diagnosis.