American Cancer Society's report on the status of cancer disparities in the United States, 2023.

In 2021, the American Cancer Society published its first biennial report on the status of cancer disparities in the United States. In this second report, the authors provide updated data on racial, ethnic, socioeconomic (educational attainment as a marker), and geographic (metropolitan status) disparities in cancer occurrence and outcomes and contributing factors to these disparities in the country. The authors also review programs that have reduced cancer disparities and provide policy recommendations to further mitigate these inequalities. There are substantial variations in risk factors, stage at diagnosis, receipt of care, survival, and mortality for many cancers by race/ethnicity, educational attainment, and metropolitan status. During 2016 through 2020, Black and American Indian/Alaska Native people continued to bear a disproportionately higher burden of cancer deaths, both overall and from major cancers. By educational attainment, overall cancer mortality rates were about 1.6-2.8 times higher in individuals with ≤12 years of education than in those with ≥16 years of education among Black and White men and women. These disparities by educational attainment within each race were considerably larger than the Black-White disparities in overall cancer mortality within each educational attainment, ranging from 1.03 to 1.5 times higher among Black people, suggesting a major role for socioeconomic status disparities in racial disparities in cancer mortality given the disproportionally larger representation of Black people in lower socioeconomic status groups. Of note, the largest Black-White disparities in overall cancer mortality were among those who had ≥16 years of education. By area of residence, mortality from all cancer and from leading causes of cancer death were substantially higher in nonmetropolitan areas than in large metropolitan areas. For colorectal cancer, for example, mortality rates in nonmetropolitan areas versus large metropolitan areas were 23% higher among males and 21% higher among females. By age group, the racial and geographic disparities in cancer mortality were greater among individuals younger than 65 years than among those aged 65 years and older. Many of the observed racial, socioeconomic, and geographic disparities in cancer mortality align with disparities in exposure to risk factors and access to cancer prevention, early detection, and treatment, which are largely rooted in fundamental inequities in social determinants of health. Equitable policies at all levels of government, broad interdisciplinary engagement to address these inequities, and equitable implementation of evidence-based interventions, such as increasing health insurance coverage, are needed to reduce cancer disparities.

Stepped Palliative Care for Patients With Advanced Lung Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Despite the evidence for early palliative care improving outcomes, it has not been widely implemented in part due to palliative care workforce limitations. Objective: To evaluate a stepped-care model to deliver less resource-intensive and more patient-centered palliative care for patients with advanced cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized, nonblinded, noninferiority trial of stepped vs early palliative care conducted between February 12, 2018, and December 15, 2022, at 3 academic medical centers in Boston, Massachusetts, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and Durham, North Carolina, among 507 patients who had been diagnosed with advanced lung cancer within the past 12 weeks. Intervention: Step 1 of the intervention was an initial palliative care visit within 4 weeks of enrollment and subsequent visits only at the time of a change in cancer treatment or after a hospitalization. During step 1, patients completed a measure of quality of life (QOL; Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung [FACT-L]; range, 0-136, with higher scores indicating better QOL) every 6 weeks, and those with a 10-point or greater decrease from baseline were stepped up to meet with the palliative care clinician every 4 weeks (intervention step 2). Patients assigned to early palliative care had palliative care visits every 4 weeks after enrollment. Main Outcomes and Measures: Noninferiority (margin = -4.5) of the effect of stepped vs early palliative care on patient-reported QOL on the FACT-L at week 24. Results: The sample (n = 507) mostly included patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (78.3%; mean age, 66.5 years; 51.4% female; 84.6% White). The mean number of palliative care visits by week 24 was 2.4 for stepped palliative care and 4.7 for early palliative care (adjusted mean difference, -2.3; P < .001). FACT-L scores at week 24 for the stepped palliative care group were noninferior to scores among those receiving early palliative care (adjusted FACT-L mean score, 100.6 vs 97.8, respectively; difference, 2.9; lower 1-sided 95% confidence limit, -0.1; P < .001 for noninferiority). Although the rate of end-of-life care communication was also noninferior between groups, noninferiority was not demonstrated for days in hospice (adjusted mean, 19.5 with stepped palliative care vs 34.6 with early palliative care; P = .91). Conclusions and Relevance: A stepped-care model, with palliative care visits occurring only at key points in patients' cancer trajectories and using a decrement in QOL to trigger more intensive palliative care exposure, resulted in fewer palliative care visits without diminishing the benefits for patients' QOL. While stepped palliative care was associated with fewer days in hospice, it is a more scalable way to deliver early palliative care to enhance patient-reported outcomes. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03337399.

A tripartite approach toward ending cancer as we know it, for everyone: An American Cancer Society perspective.

Gaps in the cancer care continuum are vast, both in the United States and globally. The American Cancer Society orchestrates an integrated, tripartite approach toward improving the lives of cancer patients and their families through research, advocacy, and patient support. With a focus on eradicating cancer disparities, the American Cancer Society aims to scale and deploy best practices worldwide through partnerships, to ensure everyone has an opportunity to prevent, detect, treat, and survive cancer.

Oral Chemotherapy Metric Performance in Quality Oncology Practice Initiative Practices: Updated Trends and Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Oral chemotherapy performance measures were first introduced into ASCO's Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI) in 2013. This study examined performance on these measures among QOPI-participating practices and evaluated whether it differed among practices based on meeting QOPI Certification Program standards. METHODS: A total of 192 QOPI-participating practices (certified, n=50 [26%]; not certified, n=142 [74%]) reported performance on oral chemotherapy measures in 2017 and 2018. Inclusion was limited to practices reporting on ≥3 charts for ≥1 oral chemotherapy measure. Performance was defined as the percentage of charts examined that adhered to the measure. Descriptive analyses were used to characterize performance within and across practices, and mixed-effects logistic regression models were conducted to compare performance based on certification status. RESULTS: Median performance across practices for the 9 oral chemotherapy measures examined ranged from 44% (education before the start of treatment addressing missed doses, toxicities, and clinical contact instructions [composite measure]) to 100% (documented dose, documented plan, and education about toxicities). Certified practices were more likely to provide education about clinic contact instructions than noncertified practices (odds ratio, 4.87; 95% CI, 1.00-24.0). Performance on all other measures was not significantly associated with certification status. CONCLUSIONS: There is wide variability in quality related to performance on oral chemotherapy measures across all QOPI-participating practices, and several areas were identified in which administration of oral chemotherapy could be improved. Our findings highlight the need for the development and implementation of appropriate standards that apply to oral chemotherapy and address the complexities that set it apart from parenteral treatment.

Patient-reported distress as an early warning sign of unmet palliative care needs and increased healthcare utilization in patients with advanced cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer patients' sources of distress are often unaddressed, and patient-reported distress data could be utilized to identify those with unmet and impending care needs. We explored the association between moderate/severe distress and healthcare utilization in a large sample of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and non-colorectal gastrointestinal cancer patients. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Adult patients treated between July 2013 and March 2019. Data from the NCCN Distress Thermometer (DT) and the accompanying "Problem List" were extracted from the EHR. A DT score of ≥ 4 indicates "actionable distress." Statistical analysis was performed using descriptive analysis for patient characteristics, clinical outcomes, and sources of distress. Generalized linear mixed models were fit to determine the relationship between distress and healthcare utilization (hospitalization, emergency department (ED) visit, or both). RESULTS: The ten most frequently reported problems were from the Physical and Emotional domains of the Problem List. Distress was mostly related to physical symptoms (pain, fatigue) and emotional issues (worry, fears, sadness, nervousness). Patients with actionable distress generally reported more problems across all their visits. Actionable distress was associated with higher odds of the composite outcome measure of hospitalization or visiting the ED, within both the next 3 months (OR = 1.37; 95% CI = 1.19, 1.58; p < 0.001) and 6 months (OR = 1.19; 95% CI = 1.03, 1.37; p = 0.019). CONCLUSION: Patients with significant distress had marked utilization of ED and inpatient services. DT scores are a source of untapped data in the EHR that can highlight patients in need of intervention, including palliative care and cancer support services.

Differences between patients with cardiovascular disease and cancer referred for palliative care.

Our analysis from a national registry shows that compared to cancer, cardiovascular disease patients referred to palliative care are a decade older, have worse functional status and clinician-estimated prognosis. Both groups have very high symptom burden, with cardiovascular disease patients experiencing more dyspnea while pain, nausea, and fatigue are more common in cancer.

Importance of quality-of-life priorities and preferences surrounding treatment decision making in patients with cancer and oncology clinicians.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making (SDM) occurs when a patient partners with their oncologist to integrate personal preferences and values into treatment decisions. A key component of SDM is the elicitation of patient preferences and values, yet little is known about how and when these are elicited, communicated, prioritized, and documented within clinical encounters. METHODS: This cross-sectional study evaluated nationwide data collected by CancerCare to better understand current patterns of SDM between patients and their oncology clinicians. Patient surveys included questions about the importance of quality-of-life preferences and discussions regarding quality-of-life priorities with their clinicians. Clinician surveys included questions about the discussion of quality-of-life priorities and preferences with patients, the effect of quality-of-life priorities on treatment recommendations, and quality-of-life priority documentation in practice. RESULTS: Patient survey completers (n = 320; 33% response rate) were predominantly women (95%), had a diagnosis of breast cancer (59%), or were receiving active cancer treatment (59%). Clinician survey completers (n = 112; 5% response rate) predominately identified as hematologists or oncologists (66%). Although 67% of clinicians reported knowing their patients' personal quality-of-life priorities and preferences before finalizing treatment plans, only 37% of patients reported that these discussions occurred before treatment initiation. Most patients (95%) considered out-of-pocket expenses important during treatment planning, yet only 59% reported discussing out-of-pocket expenses with their clinician before finalizing treatment plans. A majority of clinicians (52%) considered clinic questionnaires as feasible to document quality-of-life priorities and preferences. CONCLUSIONS: Patients and clinicians reported that preferences related to quality-of-life should be considered in treatment decision making, yet barriers to SDM, preference elicitation, and documentation remain.

A feasible and acceptable multicultural psychosocial intervention targeting symptom management in the context of advanced breast cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Advanced breast cancer patients around the world experience high symptom burden (ie, distress, pain, and fatigue) and are in need of psychosocial interventions that target symptom management. This study examined the feasibility, acceptability, and engagement of a psychosocial intervention that uses cognitive-behavioral strategies along with mindfulness and values-based activity to enhance patients' ability to manage symptoms of advanced disease in a cross-cultural setting (United States and Singapore). Pre-treatment to post-treatment outcomes for distress, pain, and fatigue were compared between intervention recipients and waitlisted controls. METHODS: A pilot randomized controlled trial included women with advanced breast cancer (N = 85) that were recruited in the United States and Singapore. Participants either received the four session intervention or be put on waitlist. Descriptive statistics and effect size of symptom change were calculated. RESULTS: The psychosocial intervention was found to be feasible as indicated through successful trial accrual, low study attrition (15% ), and high intervention adherence (77% completed all sessions). Acceptability (ie, program satisfaction and cultural sensitivity) and engagement to the study intervention (ie, practice of skills taught) were also high. Anxiety, depression, and fatigue scores remained stable or improved among intervention participants while the same symptoms worsened in the control group. In general, effect sizes are larger in the US sample compared with the Singapore sample. CONCLUSIONS: The cognitive-behavioral, mindfulness, and values-based intervention is feasible, acceptable, and engaging for advanced breast cancer patients in a cross-cultural setting and has potential for efficacy. Further larger-scaled study of intervention efficacy is warranted.

Enhancing meaning in the face of advanced cancer and pain: Qualitative evaluation of a meaning-centered psychosocial pain management intervention.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to obtain patient evaluations of the content, structure, and delivery modality of Meaning-Centered Pain Coping Skills Training (MCPC), a novel psychosocial intervention for patients with advanced cancer and pain. MCPC aims to help patients connect with valued sources of meaning in their lives (e.g., family relationships), while providing training in evidence-based cognitive and behavioral skills (e.g., guided imagery) to reduce pain. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 patients with stage IV solid tumor cancers and persistent pain. Transcripts were analyzed using methods from applied thematic analysis. RESULTS: When evaluating MCPC's educational information and skills training descriptions, participants described ways in which this content resonated with their experience. Many coped with their pain and poor prognosis by relying on frameworks that provided them with a sense of meaning, often involving their personally held religious or spiritual beliefs. They also expressed a need for learning ways to cope with pain in addition to taking medication. A few participants offered helpful suggestions for refining MCPC's content, such as addressing common co-occurring symptoms of sleep disturbance and fatigue. Concerning MCPC's structure and delivery modality, most participants preferred that sessions include their family caregiver and described remote delivery (i.e., telephone or videoconference) as being more feasible than attending in-person sessions. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Participants were interested in an intervention that concurrently focuses on learning pain coping skills and enhancing a sense of meaning. Using remote delivery modalities may reduce access barriers (e.g., travel) that would otherwise prevent many patients from utilizing psychosocial services.

Adult Cancer Pain, Version 3.2019, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

In recent years, the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Adult Cancer Pain have undergone substantial revisions focusing on the appropriate and safe prescription of opioid analgesics, optimization of nonopioid analgesics and adjuvant medications, and integration of nonpharmacologic methods of cancer pain management. This selection highlights some of these changes, covering topics on management of adult cancer pain including pharmacologic interventions, nonpharmacologic interventions, and treatment of specific cancer pain syndromes. The complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Adult Cancer Pain addresses additional aspects of this topic, including pathophysiologic classification of cancer pain syndromes, comprehensive pain assessment, management of pain crisis, ongoing care for cancer pain, pain in cancer survivors, and specialty consultations.

Palliative Care.

Palliative care prioritizes symptom management and quality of life throughout the course of serious illness. Regardless of whether care is inpatient or outpatient, primary or subspecialty, a solid understanding of the basics of effective communication, symptom management, and end-of-life care is crucial. This article reviews these essentials and provides an overview of current evidence to support patient-centered palliative care.

Place of death for patients with cancer in the United States, 1999 through 2015: Racial, age, and geographic disparities.

BACKGROUND: Place of death is an essential component of high quality cancer care and comprehensive national trends and disparities in place of death are unknown. METHODS: Deidentified death certificate data were obtained via the National Center for Health Statistics. All cancer deaths from 1999 through 2015 were included. Multivariate logistic regression was used to test for disparities in place of death associated with sociodemographic variables. RESULTS: From 1999 through 2015, a total of 9,646,498 cancer deaths occurred. Hospital deaths decreased (from 36.6% to 24.6%), whereas the rate of home deaths (38.4% to 42.6%) and hospice facility deaths (0% to 14.0%) both increased (all P<.001). On multivariate logistic regression, all assessed variables were found to be associated with place of death. Specifically, younger age (age birth-14 years: odds ratio [OR], 2.39; age 25-44 years: OR, 1.62), black (OR, 1.83) or Asian (OR, 1.74) race, and Hispanic ethnicity (OR, 1.41) were associated with hospital death. Being married (OR, 2.17) or widowed (OR, 1.56) was associated with home death whereas increasing educational level (OR, 1.15-1.19) was associated with hospice death (all P<.001). Despite overall improvements, certain disparities were found to increase. For young patients, the likelihood of a hospital death increased from 2.3 times to 3.4 times that of older patients (50.9% for those aged 15-24 years vs 15.0% for those aged ≥85 years in 2015). For black patients, the likelihood of a hospital death increased from 1.29 times to 1.42 times that of white patients (32.8% for black patients vs 23.1% for white patients in 2015). CONCLUSIONS: Hospital cancer deaths decreased by approximately one-third with commensurate increases in home and hospice facility deaths. Many sociodemographic groups experience significant disparities with regard to place of death and may benefit from targeted efforts to improve goal-concordant care.

Practical Strategies for Optimizing and Integrating Palliative Care in Cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Recent reforms in medical payment coupled with a rapidly evolving pharmacotherapeutic armamentarium is creating a transition in the field of oncology. This transition represents a key period for conceptual reevaluation, providing an opportunity for furthered strategic integration of palliative care within the realm of oncology. RECENT FINDINGS: Historically, oncologists have relied upon prognostic assessments to gauge appropriateness for referrals to specialty palliative care. Recent literature has elucidated on the early palliative burdens of cancer, demonstrated the importance of complexity-based palliative referrals, and begun the conversation to define provider-specific roles. Herein, we describe a model that overlaps complexity with oncology capacity, to target specialty services to those who could benefit most. This article will review the role of palliative care as a care philosophy, the enduring and important role of the oncologist in providing palliative care, and the important areas for integration of specialty services when needed.

Predicting 6- and 12-Month Risk of Mortality in Patients With Platinum-Resistant Advanced-Stage Ovarian Cancer: Prognostic Model to Guide Palliative Care Referrals.

OBJECTIVE: Predictive models are increasingly being used in clinical practice. The aim of the study was to develop a predictive model to identify patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer with a prognosis of less than 6 to 12 months who may benefit from immediate referral to hospice care. METHODS: A retrospective chart review identified patients with platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian cancer who were treated at our institution between 2000 and 2011. A predictive model for survival was constructed based on the time from development of platinum resistance to death. Multivariate logistic regression modeling was used to identify significant survival predictors and to develop a predictive model. The following variables were included: time from diagnosis to platinum resistance, initial stage, debulking status, number of relapses, comorbidity score, albumin, hemoglobin, CA-125 levels, liver/lung metastasis, and the presence of a significant clinical event (SCE). An SCE was defined as a malignant bowel obstruction, pleural effusion, or ascites occurring on or before the diagnosis of platinum resistance. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-four patients met inclusion criteria. In the regression analysis, only an SCE and the presence of liver or lung metastasis were associated with poorer short-term survival (P < 0.001). Nine percent of patients with an SCE or liver or lung metastasis survived 6 months or greater and 0% survived 12 months or greater, compared with 85% and 67% of patients without an SCE or liver or lung metastasis, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer who have experienced an SCE or liver or lung metastasis have a high risk of death within 6 months and should be considered for immediate referral to hospice care.