Impact of an Interdisciplinary Goals-of-Care Program Among Medical Inpatients at a Comprehensive Cancer Center During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Propensity Score Analysis.

PURPOSE: Many hospitals have established goals-of-care programs in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic; however, few have reported their outcomes. We examined the impact of a multicomponent interdisciplinary goals-of-care program on intensive care unit (ICU) mortality and hospital outcomes for medical inpatients with cancer. METHODS: This single-center study with a quasi-experimental design included consecutive adult patients with cancer admitted to medical units at the MD Anderson Cancer Center, TX, during the 8-month preimplementation (May 1, 2019-December 31, 2019) and postimplementation period (May 1, 2020-December 31, 2020). The primary outcome was ICU mortality. Secondary outcomes included ICU length of stay, hospital mortality, and proportion/timing of care plan documentation. Propensity score weighting was used to adjust for differences in potential covariates, including age, sex, cancer diagnosis, race/ethnicity, and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score. RESULTS: This study involved 12,941 hospitalized patients with cancer (pre n = 6,977; post n = 5,964) including 1,365 ICU admissions (pre n = 727; post n = 638). After multicomponent goals-of-care program initiation, we observed a significant reduction in ICU mortality (28.2% v 21.9%; change -6.3%, 95% CI, -9.6 to -3.1; P = .0001). We also observed significant decreases in length of ICU stay (mean change -1.4 days, 95% CI, -2.0 to -0.7; P < .0001) and in-hospital mortality (7% v 6.1%, mean change -0.9%, 95% CI, -1.5 to -0.3; P = .004). The proportion of hospitalized patients with an in-hospital do-not-resuscitate order increased significantly from 14.7% to 19.6% after implementation (odds ratio, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.3 to 1.5; P < .0001), and do-not-resuscitate order was established earlier (mean difference -3.0 days, 95% CI, -3.9 to -2.1; P < .0001). CONCLUSION: This study showed improvement in hospital outcomes and care plan documentation after implementation of a system-wide, multicomponent goals-of-care intervention.

Recommendations for Palliative and Hospice Care in NCCN Guidelines for Treatment of Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Integration of specialist palliative care into routine oncologic care improves patients' quality of life and survival. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) cancer treatment guidelines are instrumental in standardizing cancer care, yet it is unclear how palliative and hospice care are integrated in these guidelines. In this study, we examined the frequency of occurrence of "palliative care" and "hospice care" in NCCN guidelines and compared between solid tumor and hematologic malignancy guidelines. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed all 53 updated NCCN Guidelines for Treatment of Cancer. We documented the frequency of occurrence of "palliative care" and "hospice care," the definitions for these terms if available, and the recommended timing for these services. RESULTS: We identified a total of 37 solid tumor and 16 hematologic malignancy guidelines. Palliative care was mentioned in 30 (57%) guidelines (24 solid tumor, 6 hematologic). Palliative care was mentioned more frequently in solid tumor than hematologic guidelines (median, 2 vs. 0; p = .04). Among the guidelines that included palliative care in the treatment recommendation, 25 (83%) only referred to NCCN palliative care guideline. Specialist palliative care referral was specifically mentioned in 5 of 30 (17%) guidelines. Only 14 of 24 (58%) solid tumor guidelines and 2 of 6 (33%) hematologic guidelines recommended palliative care in the front line setting for advanced malignancy. Few guidelines (n = 3/53, 6%) mentioned hospice care. CONCLUSION: "Palliative care" was absent in almost half of NCCN cancer treatment guidelines and was rarely discussed in guidelines for hematologic malignancies. Our findings underscored opportunities to standardize timely palliative care access across NCCN guidelines. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Integration of specialist palliative care into routine oncologic care is associated with improved patient outcomes. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology have an important role to standardize palliative care involvement for cancer patients. It is unclear how often palliative care referral is recommended in these guidelines. In this study involving 53 NCCN Guidelines for Treatment of Cancer, the researchers found that palliative care was not mentioned in over 40% of NCCN guidelines and was rarely discussed in guidelines for hematologic malignancies. These findings underscored opportunities to standardize timely palliative care access across NCCN guidelines.

Predicting treatment Response based on Dual assessment of magnetic resonance Imaging kinetics and Circulating Tumor cells in patients with Head and Neck cancer (PREDICT-HN): matching 'liquid biopsy' and quantitative tumor modeling.

BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has improved capacity to visualize tumor and soft tissue involvement in head and neck cancers. Using advanced MRI, we can interrogate cell density using diffusion weighted imaging, a quantitative imaging that can be used during radiotherapy, when diffuse inflammatory reaction precludes PET imaging, and can assist with target delineation as well. Correlation of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) measurements with 3D quantitative tumor characterization could potentially allow selective, patient-specific response-adapted escalation or de-escalation of local therapy, and improve the therapeutic ratio, curing the greatest number of patients with the least toxicity. METHODS: The proposed study is designed as a prospective observational study and will collect pretreatment CT, MRI and PET/CT images, weekly serial MR imaging during RT and post treatment CT, MRI and PET/CT images. In addition, blood sample will be collected for biomarker analysis at those time intervals. CTC assessments will be performed on the CellSave tube using the FDA-approved CellSearch® Circulating Tumor Cell Kit (Janssen Diagnostics), and plasma from the EDTA blood samples will be collected, labeled with a de-identifying number, and stored at - 80 °C for future analyses. DISCUSSION: The primary objective of the study is to evaluate the prognostic value and correlation of weekly tumor response kinetics (gross tumor volume and MR signal changes) and circulating tumor cells of mucosal head and neck cancers during radiation therapy using MRI in predicting treatment response and clinical outcomes. This study will provide landmark information as to the utility of CTCs ('liquid biopsy) and tumor-specific functional quantitative imaging changes during treatment to guide personalization of treatment for future patients. Combining the biological information from CTCs and the structural information from MRI may provide more information than either modality alone. In addition, this study could potentially allow us to determine the optimal time to obtain MR imaging and/ or CTCs during radiotherapy to assess tumor response and provide guidance for patient selection and stratification for future dose escalation or de-escalation strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT03491176 ). Date of registration: 9th April 2018. (retrospectively registered). Date of enrolment of the first participant: 30th May 2017.

Nurse and patient characteristics predict communication about complementary and alternative medicine.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to identify nurse factors (eg, knowledge, practices, and clinical habits regarding complementary and alternative medicine [CAM] as well as demographic factors) and patient characteristics (eg, age, sex, and treatment status) associated with nurses' CAM inquiry and referral patterns. METHODS: Baseline data were collected with nurse/patient questionnaires about CAM use and knowledge as part of a multicenter CAM educational clinical trial. Frequencies and nested regression models were used to assess predictors of nurses' inquiries about and referral to CAM therapies. RESULTS: Six hundred ninety-nine patients participated in the study. For patients, female sex (odds ratio [OR], 1.50; P = .019) and cancer recurrence (OR, 1.45; P = .05) were predictive of nurses' inquiries about and referral to CAM therapies. A total of 175 nurses with a mean age of 45 years and a mean experience of 20 years participated; 79% were staff nurses, and 11% were nurse practitioners. Fifty-three percent asked at least 1 of their last 5 patients about CAM use; 42% referred patients to CAM therapy. Nurses who reported being "somewhat comfortable" (OR, 2.70; P = .0001) or "very comfortable" (OR, 3.88; P < .0001) about discussing CAM, self-reported use of massage (OR, 2.20; P < .0001), and had formal CAM education (OR, 4.14; P = .0001) were more likely to ask about CAM use. Nurses who reported being "somewhat comfortable" (OR, 2.54; 95% confidence interval, 1.47-4.41; P = .0008) or "very comfortable" (OR, 7.46; P < .00001) and had formal CAM education (OR, 2.96; P < .0001) were also more likely to refer patients to CAM therapies. CONCLUSIONS: Both patient and nurse characteristics were associated with discussions about CAM. Oncology institutions that prioritize evidence-based medicine should consider introducing CAM education to their nursing staff. Cancer 2016;122:1552-9. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Evaluating women with ovarian cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations: missed opportunities.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the incidence of genetic counseling referral for ovarian cancer patients who are at substantial risk for a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. METHODS: An analysis was performed of new ovarian cancer patients who were seen at a comprehensive cancer center from January 1, 1999, through December 31, 2007. Patients at substantial (more than 20-25%) risk for a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation were identified and records reviewed for referral to genetic counseling. Time to referral was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: A total of 3,765 epithelial ovarian cancer patients were seen during the 9-year period. On average, 23.8% of patients met substantial-risk criteria for BRCA mutations. In 1999, only 12% of patients at substantial-risk were referred. Referral improved over time with 48% referred in 2007 (P<.001). Newly diagnosed patients were more often referred for genetic counseling than new patients with recurrent disease or those seen as second opinions. African-American women meeting substantial-risk criteria were less likely to be referred than were white or Hispanic women (P=.009). CONCLUSION: Although dictated family history was accurate, interpretation of risk for BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and subsequent referral to genetic counseling was poor. Although there was significant improvement over time, 50% of substantial-risk patients still were missed. Systematic efforts to identify those ovarian cancer patients at substantial risk for a BRCA1 or BRCA2 are necessary.

Timing of BRCA1/BRCA2 genetic testing in women with ovarian cancer.

PURPOSE: To determine when, in reference to the course of their treatment, women with ovarian cancer are seen for genetic counseling, as well as to determine what factors influence this timing. METHODS: : Single institution retrospective chart review of patients with ovarian cancer who underwent BRCA1/BRCA2 genetic testing. RESULTS: Thirty-three percent of our sample (n = 100) were seen for genetic counseling after ovarian cancer recurrence. In four cases, genetic test results were disclosed to next of kin. Thirty percent of women seen for genetic counseling after recurrence received their initial treatment elsewhere. Women with a history of breast cancer were significantly more likely to be seen for genetic counseling at an earlier phase of their treatment than women with no history of breast cancer. CONCLUSION: We found that one third of patients with ovarian cancer who underwent genetic testing were seen for initial genetic counseling after disease recurrence. In some cases, genetic counseling took place during the end of life care, with genetic test results disclosed to next of kin. Given the poor prognosis of women with recurrent ovarian cancer, we advocate providing genetic counseling at the time of initial ovarian cancer treatment both in comprehensive cancer centers and in community oncology settings.