Identification and Characterization of Avoidable Hospital Admissions in Patients With Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: More than 50% of patients with lung cancer are admitted to the hospital while receiving treatment, which is a burden to patients and the healthcare system. This study characterizes the risk factors and outcomes of patients with lung cancer who were admitted to the hospital. METHODS: A multidisciplinary oncology care team conducted a retrospective medical record review of patients with lung cancer admitted in 2018. Demographics, disease and admission characteristics, and end-of-life care utilization were recorded. Following a multidisciplinary consensus review process, admissions were determined to be either "avoidable" or "unavoidable." Generalized estimating equation logistic regression models assessed risks and outcomes associated with avoidable admissions. RESULTS: In all, 319 admissions for 188 patients with a median age of 66 years (IQR, 59-74 years) were included. Cancer-related symptoms accounted for 65% of hospitalizations. Common causes of unavoidable hospitalizations were unexpected disease progression causing symptoms, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation, and infection. Of the 47 hospitalizations identified as avoidable (15%), the median overall survival was 1.6 months compared with 9.7 months (hazard ratio, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.34-3.19; P<.001) for unavoidable hospitalizations. Significant reasons for avoidable admissions included cancer-related pain (P=.02), hypervolemia (P=.03), patient desire to initiate hospice services (P=.01), and errors in medication reconciliation or distribution (P<.001). Errors in medication management caused 26% of the avoidable hospitalizations. Of admissions in patients receiving immunotherapy (n=102) or targeted therapy (n=44), 9% were due to adverse effects of treatment. Patients receiving immunotherapy and targeted therapy were at similar risk of avoidable hospitalizations compared with patients not receiving treatment (P=.3 and P=.1, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: We found that 15% of hospitalizations among patients with lung cancer were potentially avoidable. Uncontrolled symptoms, delayed implementation of end-of-life care, and errors in medication reconciliation were associated with avoidable inpatient admissions. Symptom management tools, palliative care integration, and medication reconciliations may mitigate hospitalization risk.

Response to Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors in Real-World Patients With Chronic Myeloid Leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are the front-line therapy for chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), where phase 3 clinical trials have demonstrated their safety and efficacy. However, trial patients may not be representative of real-world patients (RWPs). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate RWP clinical factors associated with effectiveness and safety in CML patients treated with TKIs. METHODS: Patients with CML treated with at least 30 days of imatinib, dasatinib, nilotinib, or bosutinib between 2014 and 2018 were included. Patients were stratified into categories based on the number of factors that would have precluded enrollment into pivotal TKI phase 3 trials (0, 1, ≥2). End points included complete hematologic response (CHR), early molecular response (EMR), major molecular response (MMR), adverse event (AE)-induced dose decreases, treatment interruptions, and treatment discontinuations. RESULTS: Final analyses included 174 patients. Patients with ≥2 factors had a higher risk of dose decreases (relative risk = 1.54; 95% CI = 1.02-2.34; P = 0.02) and a shorter time to dose decrease (hazard ratio = 2.43; 95% CI = 1.23-4.97; P = 0.006) compared with patients with 0 factors. Significant differences were observed in CHR at 1 month and MMR at 3 months between patients with 0 and ≥2 factors (P = 0.03 and P = 0.04, respectively). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Approximately 60% of our RWPs would have been excluded from the pivotal phase 3 TKI trials. These data suggest that RWPs require more precise dosing to achieve CML clinical milestones and to mitigate AEs, but findings should be validated prospectively.

Infusion reactions following administration of intravenous rolapitant at an academic medical center.

In 2017, due to a fluid shortage secondary to Hurricane Maria's devastation of Puerto Rico, hospitals and health-systems began to substitute rolapitant for fosaprepitant as part of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting prevention and treatment strategies. However, despite advantageous pharmacologic and formulation (e.g. long half-life, quicker time to onset, and lack of first-pass hepatic metabolism) profiles, there seems to be significant risk of infusion-related hypersensitivity reactions associated with the administration of intravenous rolapitant. In January 2018, the U.S. FDA issued a Health Care Provider Letter stating that anaphylaxis, anaphylactic shock, and other serious hypersensitivity reactions have been reported in the postmarketing setting. Importantly, these reactions were observed at a higher rate than initially reported in the phase 1 bioequivalence study that led to FDA approval of intravenous rolapitant (2.8%), with many resulting in hospitalizations. At our institution, rolapitant-induced infusion-related reactions also occurred in more patients than expected (8.7%). Described herein are six cases of infusion-related hypersensitivity reactions with intravenous rolapitant at the North Carolina Cancer Hospital. Due to the quick onset of the infusion-related hypersensitivity reactions with intravenous rolapitant, interpatient differences in pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamics are unlikely to be the cause. An objective assessment utilizing the Naranjo Causality Scale rates these infusion-related hypersensitivity reactions as definite adverse drug reactions.

A multidisciplinary approach to the work up and management of pulmonary carcinoid tumors and DIPNECH: a narrative review.

Background and Objective: Low and intermediate grade neuroendocrine tumors of the lung are uncommon malignancies representing 2% of all lung cancers. These are termed typical and atypical pulmonary carcinoid tumors. These can arise in the setting of diffuse idiopathic pulmonary neuroendocrine cell hyperplasia (DIPNECH). The presentation, workup, management and outcomes of patients with these tumors can overlap with more common lung cancers but differ in that many of these patients have a prolonged clinical course. The objective of this narrative review is to summarize the literature and provide evidence and expert-based algorithms for work up and treatment of pulmonary carcinoids and DIPNECH. Methods: A search of PubMed and Web of Science databases ending April 15, 2022, with the following keywords "lung carcinoid", "DIPNECH", "lung neuroendocrine," and "bronchopulmonary carcinoid". Key Content and Findings: Pulmonary carcinoid tumors benefit from a multidisciplinary approach. Pre-treatment imaging with contrast-enhanced computed tomography, and DOTATATE positron emission tomography is required. Surgical resection is the gold standard for curative intent, and possibly including sublobar resections. Patients can recur or develop new primaries thus emphasizing the importance of surveillance; national guidelines recommend at least a 10-year follow up. A growing body of literature support the use of endobronchial therapy, with long responses documented. Systemic therapy consists of everolimus, somatostatin analogs, peptide receptor radionuclide therapy, and chemotherapy. Diffuse idiopathic pulmonary neuroendocrine tumor cell hyperplasia is rare, but series suggest somatostatin analogs may confer clinical benefit. Conclusions: Pulmonary carcinoid tumors and DIPNECH are rare. Despite lack of regulatory approvals for advanced disease, multiple options are available but should be sequenced according to the clinical status and disease biology. Each patient should be discussed in a multidisciplinary setting and clinical trials should be considered if available.

Current Landscape of Personalized Therapy.

Almost a half of patients diagnosed with nonesmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) present with incurable disease, and a significant number of patients who are treated with curative intent for early-stage disease will eventually recur. Systemic therapy is selected based on tumor histology, squamous versus nonsquamous NSCLC, molecular testing, and PD-L1 score. Depending on PD-L1 score, patients are eligible for immunotherapy alone or in combination with chemotherapy in the first-line setting. Oncogenic driver mutations can be detected in approximately 50% of patients with nonsquamous NSCLC of which several can be targeted therapeutically with small molecular inhibitors. Continued research is needed for more specific agents with less toxicity and better central nervous system penetration, and agents to treat patients who develop resistance against targeted treatments and immunotherapy.

Analysis of Opioid Use Following Curative Cancer Treatment at a Large Urban Safety-net Hospital.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined the pattern of use and factors predicting prolonged prescription opioid medications among cancer patients following treatment with curative intent. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients diagnosed with cancer over a 3-year period at a large urban safety-net hospital were included. Univariate and multivariate analyses was used to identify factors associated with continued opioid use. RESULTS: Of the 199 patients included in the study, 38% continued to receive an opioid prescription well beyond the acute diagnosis and treatment phase. Mean age was 60.3 years, with a female preponderance (63%). Surgical resection only (31.6%) and the combination of surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation (19.7%) were the commonest treatment modalities. Pain-related comorbidities predating cancer diagnosis were reported in 53.3% of the patients, and about 33% were also on pain-modifying medications (odds ratio [OR], 3.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.92-6.77; Fisher exact test P<0.001). Average number of prescriptions received per patient was 4.8 (range, 1 to 31), over an average of 9.5 months (range, 1.2 to 28.1 mo). Mean morphine milligram equivalents prescribed per prescription was 319 mg (range, 48 to 2475 mg). According to multivariate model, patients who received chemotherapy (OR, 7.25; 95% CI, 2.09-25.17; P=0.0018), or pain-modifying medications (OR, 4.61; 95% CI, 2.25-9.44; P<0.0001) were significantly more likely to continue to receive prescriptions for opioids. DISCUSSION: Treatment with chemotherapy, pain-modifying medications, cancer stage, and interval between diagnosis and treatment are the best predictors for continuous opioid use. The current epidemic of opioid misuse and abuse makes examination current practices and identifification of areas of improvement imperative.