Advance Care Planning in Serious Illness: A Narrative Review.

CONTEXT: Advance care planning (ACP) intends to support person-centered medical decision-making by eliciting patient preferences. Research has not identified significant associations between ACP and goal-concordant end-of-life care, leading to justified scientific debate regarding ACP utility. OBJECTIVE: To delineate ACP's potential benefits and missed opportunities and identify an evidence-informed, clinically relevant path ahead for ACP in serious illness. METHODS: We conducted a narrative review merging the best available ACP empirical data, grey literature, and emergent scholarly discourse using a snowball search of PubMed, Medline, and Google Scholar (2000-2022). Findings were informed by our team's interprofessional clinical and research expertise in serious illness care. RESULTS: Early ACP practices were largely tied to mandated document completion, potentially failing to capture the holistic preferences of patients and surrogates. ACP models focused on serious illness communication rather than documentation show promising patient and clinician results. Ideally, ACP would lead to goal-concordant care even amid the unpredictability of serious illness trajectories. But ACP might also provide a false sense of security that patients' wishes will be honored and revisited at end-of-life. An iterative, 'building block' framework to integrate ACP throughout serious illness is provided alongside clinical practice, research, and policy recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: We advocate a balanced approach to ACP, recognizing empirical deficits while acknowledging potential benefits and ethical imperatives (e.g., fostering clinician-patient trust and shared decision-making). We support prioritizing patient/surrogate-centered outcomes with more robust measures to account for interpersonal clinician-patient variables that likely inform ACP efficacy and may better evaluate information gleaned during serious illness encounters.

The relationship between emotional well-being and understanding of prognosis in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

PURPOSE: Adults with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) face considerable distress and often have a poor prognosis. However, little is known about these patients' perceptions of prognosis and how this relates to emotional well-being (EWB). METHODS: We conducted a prospective, observational study of 50 adult patients with AML initiating chemotherapy, and surveyed them longitudinally for 6 months about their prognosis, treatment goals, quality of life, and EWB (by FACT-G). We derived a prognostic estimate for each patient based on data from published trials summarized in National Comprehensive Care Network Guidelines. We used descriptive statistics and longitudinal modeling to test the hypothesis that more accurate prognostic awareness is associated with worse EWB. RESULTS: Most patients (n = 43; 86%) had an objectively poor prognosis attributable to relapsed disease, complex karyotype, or FLT3 mutation. Yet, 74% of patients reported expecting a 50% or greater chance of cure. Patients with a poor prognosis more often had discordant prognostic estimates, compared to those with favorable risk AML (OR = 7.25, 95% CI 1.21, 43.37). Patient-reported prognostic estimates did not vary significantly over time. At baseline, patients who better understood their prognosis had worse EWB and overall quality-of-life scores (EWB 12 vs. 19.5; p = 0.01; FACT-G 65 vs. 75.5; p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Patients with AML overestimate their prognosis, and awareness of a poor prognosis is associated with worse emotional well-being. Efforts are needed to improve patients' understanding of their prognosis, and to provide more psychosocial support and attention to well-being as part of high-quality leukemia care.

The patient experience of ABVD treatment in Hodgkin lymphoma: a retrospective cohort study of patient-reported distress.

PURPOSE: Psychological distress is prevalent in Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). Many patients, regardless of prognosis, receive ABVD chemotherapy as first-line treatment, but few studies have specifically examined the nature of distress during this shared treatment experience. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of patient-reported distress in HL patients receiving ABVD treatment at a single tertiary care facility. Distress was measured using the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Distress Thermometer and Problem List (PL). We used descriptive statistics and generalized estimating equations to assess the prevalence of distress and specific problem items during treatment and associations with patient- and disease-related factors. RESULTS: We collected data from 50 patients comprising 467 unique encounters, with 369/467 (79.0%) reporting a distress thermometer score. Median distress score was 2 (IQR: 0-5), but actionable distress (distress thermometer ≥4) was noted for 118/369 (32.0%) encounters. Actionable distress was only related to having a prior cancer, which conferred lower odds of actionable distress (OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.07-0.74, p=0.01) Physical and emotional problems were reported for 287/369 (77.8%) and 125/369 (33.9%) visits, respectively. Female patients had greater odds of both physical (OR 3.17, 95% CI 1.32-7.66, p=0.01) and emotional (OR 3.31, 95% CI 1.25-8.73, p=0.02) problems. CONCLUSION: ABVD treatment is associated with a high frequency of actionable distress, with physical and emotional problems acting as primary drivers. Female patients may be particularly vulnerable, while cancer survivors may be uniquely resilient. These findings demonstrate the need to thoroughly screen for and appropriately tailor distress management strategies for HL patients during treatment with ABVD.

Impact of Addition of Carboplatin AUC ≥ 4 to Antiemetic Guidelines for Triple Antiemetic Prophylaxis: A Gap in Quality of Care, Guideline Adoption, and Avoiding Acute Care.

PURPOSE: After ASCO and National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline recommendations for triple antiemetic prophylaxis for carboplatin area under the curve (AUC) ≥ 4, and the publication of studies documenting avoidable acute care after chemotherapy involving nausea and vomiting (NV) and other toxicities, we studied clinician adherence to the guideline change and assessed avoidable acute-care use. METHODS: Using a large electronic health record database, we evaluated antiemetic prophylaxis as recommended in the guidelines and post-chemotherapy avoidable acute-care use (defined as involving any of NV or 8 other toxicities) for patients initiating carboplatin or other chemotherapy from October 2012 to August 2018. RESULTS: We identified 11,554 carboplatin courses. After the guideline change adding neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists (RAs) for carboplatin AUC ≥ 4, its use rose to 20% of courses from the prior average of 16%; virtually all courses also included a 5-HT3 RA plus dexamethasone. We found avoidable acute care in 23% of courses; one quarter of these events were associated with NV. Acute care rates after carboplatin mirrored those after other highly emetogenic chemotherapy or oxaliplatin and exceeded those after other chemotherapy regimens. The > 80% shortfall in adherence may have been caused by low awareness or acceptance of the guideline change and/or by poor awareness of avoidable acute-care use after carboplatin. CONCLUSION: Neurokinin-1 RA prophylaxis for carboplatin AUC ≥ 4 remains low and largely unchanged despite National Comprehensive Cancer Network and ASCO 2017 recommendations for inclusion. NV and avoidable acute care involving NV seen after carboplatin were consistent with other highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Clinician action is required to remediate incomplete prophylaxis and to no longer place patient outcomes, resources for cancer treatment, and clinician reimbursement at risk.

Let's Talk About Those Herbs You Are Taking: Ethical Considerations for Communication With Patients With Cancer About Complementary and Alternative Medicine.

Oncologists face ethical challenges when patients use potentially harmful complementary and alternative medicine in addition to or instead of conventional treatments for their cancer. For example, a patient may forego effective cancer treatment in favor of alternative therapies and suffer significant harm as a result. Similarly, false beliefs about the efficacy of complementary therapies may complicate the process of shared decision making about cancer treatment. In this vignette, we discuss clinicians' obligations and provide recommendations for ethically sound communication practices in this clinical context.

Patient-reported distress in Hodgkin lymphoma across the survivorship continuum.

PURPOSE: Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) survivors face long-term, elevated risk of treatment-related sequelae, including psychosocial distress associated with poor health outcomes. The magnitude and sources of distress are not well described in the routine care of HL outside of clinical trials. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients visiting a tertiary-care center for treatment or long-term follow-up of HL. Patient-reported distress was documented using the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Distress Thermometer (DT) and Problem List. Three survivor groups were compared using descriptive methods: on treatment, surviving < 5 years, and surviving ≥ 5 years since diagnosis. RESULTS: A total of 1524 DT were abstracted for 304 patients (106 on treatment, 77 surviving < 5 years, and 121 surviving ≥ 5 years). Distress was low overall (median DT = 1, inter-quartile range 0-4) and was similar across survivor groups. However, actionable distress (score ≥ 4) was reported at 29.5% of clinical encounters. Patients on treatment more frequently reported actionable distress (32.5% of visits) compared with patients surviving < 5 years (20.4%) and ≥ 5 years (28.7%) (P = 0.065). Distress was associated primarily with physical and emotional problems, especially fatigue, worry, and sleep. We did not observe any associations between distress and clinical prognostic factors. CONCLUSIONS: Distress burden is low in HL, but survivorship is marked by periods of actionable distress, largely related to physical symptoms and emotional issues. This burden may be higher when on treatment and is unrelated to disease-related prognostic factors. Survivorship research typically focuses on the post-therapy period, but our results support testing the efficacy of interventions to address distress in HL during active treatment as well.

Assessing the Impact of a Novel Integrated Palliative Care and Medical Oncology Inpatient Service on Health Care Utilization before Hospice Enrollment.

BACKGROUND: Evidence increasingly supports the integration of specialist palliative care (PC) into routine cancer care. A novel, fully integrated PC and medical oncology inpatient service was developed at Duke University Hospital in 2011. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of PC integration on health care utilization among hospitalized cancer patients before hospice enrollment. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study. Patients in the solid tumor inpatient unit who were discharged to hospice between September 1, 2009, and June 30, 2010 (pre-PC integration), and September 1, 2011, to June 30, 2012 (postintegration). Cohorts were compared on the following outcomes from their final hospitalization before hospice enrollment: intensive care unit days, invasive procedures, subspecialty consultations, radiographic studies, hospital length of stay, and use of chemotherapy or radiation. Cohort differences were examined with descriptive statistics and nonparametric tests. RESULTS: Two hundred ninety-six patients were included in the analysis (133 pre-PC integration; 163 post-PC integration). Patient characteristics were similar between cohorts. Health care utilization was relatively low in both groups, although 26% and 24% were receiving chemotherapy at the time of admission or during hospitalization in the pre- and post-PC integration cohorts, respectively, and 6.8% in each cohort spent time in an intensive care unit. We found no significant differences in utilization between cohorts. DISCUSSION: PC integration into an inpatient solid tumor service may not impact health care utilization during the final hospitalization before discharge to hospice. This likely reflects the greater benefits of integrating PC farther upstream from the terminal hospitalization, if one hopes to meaningfully impact utilization near the end of life.

Patient-reported outcomes in cancer care - hearing the patient voice at greater volume.

Recording of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) enables direct measurement of the experiences of patients with cancer. In the past decade, the use of PROs has become a prominent topic in health-care innovation; this trend highlights the role of the patient experience as a key measure of health-care quality. Historically, PROs were used solely in the context of research studies, but a growing body of literature supports the feasibility of electronic collection of PROs, yielding reliable data that are sometimes of better quality than clinician-reported data. The incorporation of electronic PRO (ePRO) assessments into standard health-care settings seems to improve the quality of care delivered to patients with cancer. Such efforts, however, have not been widely adopted, owing to the difficulties of integrating PRO-data collection into clinical workflows and electronic medical-record systems. The collection of ePRO data is expected to enhance the quality of care received by patients with cancer; however, for this approach to become routine practice, uniquely trained people, and appropriate policies and analytical solutions need to be implemented. In this Review, we discuss considerations regarding measurements of PROs, implementation challenges, as well as evidence of outcome improvements associated with the use of PROs, focusing on the centrality of PROs as part of 'big-data' initiatives in learning health-care systems.

Discussing the Evidence for Upstream Palliative Care in Improving Outcomes in Advanced Cancer.

Palliative care has received increasing attention at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting since the publication of its provisional clinical opinion on the topic in 2012. Despite frequent discussion, palliative care remains a source of some controversy and confusion in clinical practice, especially concerning who should provide it, what it encompasses, and when and how it can help patients and their families. In this article, we provide a formal definition of palliative care and review the state of the science of palliative care in oncology. Several randomized controlled trials now show that palliative care improves important outcomes for patients with cancer. Related outcome improvements include a reduction in symptoms, improved quality of life, better prognostic understanding, less depressed mood, less aggressive end-of-life care, reduced resource utilization, and even prolonged survival. As such, ASCO recommends early integration of palliative care into comprehensive cancer care for all patients with advanced disease and/or significant symptom burden. Our aim is that this summary will facilitate greater understanding about palliative care and encourage further integration of palliative care services into cancer care. More research is needed to illuminate the mechanisms of action of palliative care and to improve the specificity of palliative care applications to unique scenarios and populations in oncology.

When and why should patients with hematologic malignancies see a palliative care specialist?

Palliative care is a multidisciplinary approach to symptom management, psychosocial support, and assistance in treatment decision-making for patients with serious illness and their families. It emphasizes well-being at any point along the disease trajectory, regardless of prognosis. The term "palliative care" is often incorrectly used as a synonym for end-of-life care, or "hospice care". However, palliative care does not require a terminal diagnosis or proximity to death, a misconception that we will address in this article. Multiple randomized clinical trials demonstrate the many benefits of early integration of palliative care for patients with cancer, including reductions in symptom burden, improvements in quality-of-life, mood, and overall survival, as well as improved caregiver outcomes. Thus, early concurrent palliative care integrated with cancer-directed care has emerged as a standard-of-care practice for patients with cancer. However, patients with hematologic malignancies rarely utilize palliative care services, despite their many unmet palliative care needs, and are much less likely to use palliative care compared to patients with solid tumors. In this article, we will define "palliative care" and address some common misconceptions regarding its role as part of high-quality care for patients with cancer. We will then review the evidence supporting the integration of palliative care into comprehensive cancer care, discuss perceived barriers to palliative care in hematologic malignancies, and suggest opportunities and triggers for earlier and more frequent palliative care referral in this population.

Building the palliative care evidence base: Lessons from a randomized controlled trial of oxygen vs room air for refractory dyspnea.

Palliative care is increasingly seen as a standard component of high-quality comprehensive cancer care. However, several challenges remain to its widespread integration into clinical oncology practice, including workforce problems, reimbursement concerns, and a fledgling evidence base. This article discusses issues surrounding evidence base development in palliative cancer care, using the example of a recently published randomized controlled trial of oxygen versus room air. The Oxygen Trial randomized patients with refractory dyspnea and adequate Pao2 to oxygen or room air, administered via nasal cannula. Both groups experienced improvements in self-rated dyspnea scores, but no statistical differences were seen between intervention arms. These results suggest that supplementary oxygen is often unnecessary in the palliative setting, and that room air is similarly efficacious. This example highlights the importance and need for ongoing development of the evidence base in palliative medicine. The Palliative Care Research Cooperative (PCRC) is a novel National Institute of Nursing Research-funded research infrastructure that seeks to expand the palliative care evidence base. Its first multisite trial was recently completed, assessing the pragmatic question of whether statin medications can be safely discontinued in end-of-life settings. The PCRC will be a vehicle through which a high-quality evidence base will continue to expand and develop. Such ongoing research efforts are needed to inform and improve palliative care practice.