Immersive virtual reality and neurofeedback for the management of cancer symptoms during treatment.

Millions of people are diagnosed with cancer each year in the USA and are living on systemic therapies designed to prolong their life. While these therapies are intended to treat the disease, most exacerbate cancer symptoms such as pain and anxiety. Oncologists and other healthcare providers are now challenged to deliver adjunctive therapies designed to improve quality of life of patients while they undergo cancer treatment, including minimizing already disruptive symptoms such as cancer pain and anxiety. Complementary and alternative medicines such as immersive virtual reality (VR) and neurofeedback (NF) are novel approaches to the management of cancer symptoms. While the evidence for combining VR and NF, specifically for management of cancer pain, while patients undergo systemic therapies, is still emerging; our preliminary findings suggest this treatment modality might offer relief of cancer symptoms. This paper briefly highlights the clinical need for supportive therapies such as VR and NF in the oncological setting and summarizes innovative research in this area.

Real-World Outcomes of Latinx Versus Non-Latinx Patients Treated With First-Line Immunotherapy for Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data regarding the impact of ethnicity among patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors. We evaluated real-world outcomes between Latinx and non-Latinx patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with first-line nivolumab/ipilimumab within 2 different healthcare settings. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with mRCC who received nivolumab/ipilimumab within the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services (LAC-DHS), a safety-net healthcare system, and the City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center (COH), a tertiary oncology center, between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2021. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were determined using the Kaplan-Meier method and covariates were adjusted using multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: Of 94 patients, 40 patients (43%) were Latinx while the remainder were non-Latinx (44 pts [46%] White, 7 pts [7%] Asian, and 3 pts [3%] Other). Fifty (53%) and 44 (47%) patients received their care at COH and LAC-DHS, respectively. Most Latinx patients (95%) were treated at LAC-DHS, and most non-Latinx patients (89%) were treated at COH. Pooled analysis by ethnicity demonstrated significantly shorter PFS in Latinx versus non-Latinx patients (10.1 vs. 25.2 months, hazard ratios [HR] 3.61, 95% CI 1.96-6.66, P ≤ .01). Multivariate analysis revealed a HR of 3.41 (95% CI 1.31-8.84; P = .01). At a median follow-up of 11.0 months, the median OS was not reached in either arm at the time of data cutoff. CONCLUSION: Latinx patients with mRCC had a shorter PFS treated with frontline nivolumab/ipilimumab compared to their non-Latinx counterparts. No difference was observed in OS although these data were immature. Larger studies are needed to further interrogate the social and economic determinants of ethnicity on clinical outcomes in mRCC.

Integrative Oncology and the Clinical Care Network: Challenges and Opportunities.

Integrative oncology is a new and growing field of cancer care. Integrative oncology is a patient-centered, evidence-based field of comprehensive cancer care that utilizes integrative therapies such as mind-body practices, acupuncture, massage, music therapy, nutrition, and exercise in collaboration with conventional cancer treatments. Patient interest and utilization has been growing over the past two decades. Clinical research has shown the benefits of these approaches to improving symptom management and quality of life, and is now being incorporated into national guidelines from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and American Society for Clinical Oncology (ASCO). The availability of these services at cancer centers is growing, although the structure and implementation of integrative oncology remains highly variable. This article discusses the benefits of integrative oncology and provides an overview of the current state of integrative oncology programs nationwide. Current challenges and opportunities for cancer centers to provide integrative services is reviewed in the areas of programmatic structure, clinical service, education, and research.