Implementing a Tailored Psychosocial Distress Screening Protocol in a Head and Neck Cancer Program.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Psychosocial distress is common among patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) and is associated with poorer quality of life and clinical outcomes. Despite these risks, distress screening is not widely implemented in HNC care. In this study, we investigated the prevalence of psychosocial distress and its related factors in routine care of patients with HNC. METHODS: Data from medical records between September 2017 and March 2020 were analyzed. Psychosocial distress was measured by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network's Distress Thermometer (DT), and a modified HNC-specific problem list; depression and anxiety were assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-4. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression were conducted to report prevalence of distress, depression and anxiety, and factors associated with clinical distress. Implementation outcomes, including rates of referrals and follow-up for distressed patients, are also reported. RESULTS: Two hundred and eighty seven HNC patients completed the questionnaire (age 64.3 ± 14.9 years), with a mean distress score of 4.51 ± 3.35. Of those, 57% (n = 163) reported clinical distress (DT ≥ 4). Pain (odds ratio [OR] = 3.31, 95% CI = 1.75-6.26), fatigue (OR = 2.43, 95% CI = 1.1.7-5.05), anxiety (OR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.30-2.05), and depression (OR = 1.51, 95% CI = 1.04-2.18) were significantly associated with clinical distress (P < .05). Of patients identified as distressed, 79% received same-day psychosocial evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical distress was identified in 57% of patients who completed the questionnaire, suggesting that an ultra-brief psychosocial screening protocol can be implemented in routine ambulatory oncology care, and identifies patients whose distress might otherwise go unrecognized. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 132:1600-1608, 2022.

Non-small cell lung cancer clinical trials requiring biopsies with biomarker-specific results for enrollment provide unique challenges.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials in lung cancer increasingly require patients to provide fresh tumor tissue as a prerequisite to enrollment. The effects of this requirement on enrollment rates, enrollment durations, and patient selection have not been fully elucidated. METHODS: The authors retrospectively reviewed data generated by patients who consented to 1 or more interventional lung cancer clinical trials at the University of California-Los Angeles Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center between January 2013 and December 2014. Trials were considered to require a biopsy when enrollment was conditional on the procurement of tissue without intervening therapy between procurement and enrollment. RESULTS: In total, 311 patients underwent 368 screening incidents for 1 or more of 19 trials. Trials that required a new biopsy had a longer median screening duration (34 vs 14 days) than trials that did not require a biopsy (P < .001). Trials that required a biopsy had a greater screen failure rate (49.1% vs 26.5%; P < .001), which was largely driven by patients who did not undergo the required biopsy or lacked the required biomarker. Worsening performance status led to the majority of screen failures (56.5%) among biomarker-eligible patients. CONCLUSIONS: Although the scientific benefits of obtaining a new biopsy and requiring specific results for trial enrollment are clear, these requirements lead to a lengthening of the screening period, which, in some patients, is associated with clinical decline before enrollment. Implications for the interpretation of data from studies of this design should be explored. Cancer 2017;123:4800-7. © 2017 American Cancer Society.