A randomized controlled trial of directive and nondirective smoking cessation coaching through an employee quitline.

BACKGROUND: Telephone quitlines can help employees quit smoking. Quitlines typically use directive coaching, but nondirective, flexible coaching is an alternative. Call-2-Quit used a worksite-sponsored quitline to compare directive and nondirective coaching modes, and evaluated employee race and income as potential moderators. METHODS: An unblinded randomized controlled trial compared directive and nondirective telephone coaching by trained laypersons. Participants were smoking employees and spouses recruited through workplace smoking cessation campaigns in a hospital system and affiliated medical school. Coaches were four non-medical women trained to use both coaching modes. Participants were randomized by family to coaching mode. Participants received up to 7 calls from coaches who used computer assisted telephone interview software to track topics and time. Outcomes were reported smoking abstinence for 7 days at last contact, 6 or 12 months after coaching began. Both worksites implemented new tobacco control policies during the study. RESULTS: Most participants responded to an insurance incentive introduced at the hospital. Call-2-Quit coached 518 participants: 22 % were African-American; 45 % had incomes below $30,000. Income, race, and intervention did not affect coaching completion rates. Cessation rates were comparable with directive and nondirective coaching (26 % versus 30 % quit, NS). A full factorial logistic regression model identified above median income (odds ratio = 1.8, p = 0.02), especially among African Americans (p = 0.04), and recent quit attempts (OR = 1.6, p = 0.03) as predictors of cessation. Nondirective coaching was associated with high cessation rates among subgroups of smokers reporting income above the median, recent quit attempts, or use of alternative therapies. Waiting up to 4 weeks to start coaching did not affect cessation. Of 41 highly addicted or depressed smokers who had never quit more than 30 days, none quit. CONCLUSION: Nondirective coaching improved cessation rates for selected smoking employees, but less expensive directive coaching helped most smokers equally well, regardless of enrollment incentives and delays in receiving coaching. Some subgroups had very low cessation rates with either mode of quitline support. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02730260 , Registered March 31, 2016.

Clinical Trial Participants With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Differ From Patients Treated in Real-World Practice.

PURPOSE: Although narrow eligibility criteria improve the internal validity of clinical trials, they may result in differences between study populations and real-world patients, threatening generalizability. Therefore, we evaluated whether patients treated for metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC) in routine clinical practice are similar to those enrolled onto clinical trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this cohort study, we compared baseline characteristics of patients with mRCC in phase III clinical trials of new targeted therapies and those in a retrospective registry composed of academic (Duke) and community (ACORN Network) practices. RESULTS: A total of 438 registry patients received sunitinib, sorafenib, temsirolimus, or pazopanib (most commonly used agents) in first-line treatment. Registry patients receiving tyrosine kinase inhibitors (sunitinib, sorafenib, or pazopanib) were more likely to have poor-risk disease by Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center criteria (poor, 7.4% v 2.9%; P < .001; favorable, 30.1% v 43.8%; P < .001) and to have impaired performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group > 1, 11.1% v 0.6%; P < .001). However, registry patients receiving temsirolimus were less likely to have poor-risk disease (poor, 10.2% v 69.4%; P < .001; favorable, 16.9% v 0%; P < .001). Thus, 39.0% of registry patients would have been excluded from the phase III clinical trial testing the drug they received. CONCLUSION: Patients with mRCC treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors in real-world clinical practice are sicker than those enrolled onto pivotal clinical trials, and more than one third are trial ineligible. Application of clinical trial findings to dissimilar populations may result in patient harm. Clinical research with more inclusive eligibility criteria is needed to appropriately guide real-world practice.

"Real world" treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma in a joint community-academic cohort: progression-free survival over three lines of therapy.

BACKGROUND: New targeted therapeutics approved for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) offer multiple options in each line of therapy; however, there are few prospective data beyond the first-line settings, and overall comparative effectiveness data are limited. In the targeted therapy era, progression-free survival (PFS) has been the most common regulatory end point for demonstrating the benefit of new therapies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Drawing on a joint community-academic retrospective mRCC registry, we analyzed all patients who had undergone at least 1 line of systemic therapy (N = 325) for PFS. Patients were grouped according to treatment choice (sorafenib, sunitinib, temsirolimus, everolimus, and "other") for up to 3 lines of therapy. PFS by treatment choice and line of therapy was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: PFS was longest in patients treated with sunitinib in the first and second lines of therapy. First-line PFS for sorafenib, sunitinib, temsirolimus, everolimus, and "other" was 6.9, 8.9, 4.2, not analyzed (too few patients), and 10.8 months, respectively. Second-line PFS was 4.6, 7.0, 3.2, 3.8, and 4.1 months, respectively. Third-line PFS was 4.5, 4.6, 9.9, 4.2, and 2.9, months, respectively. The risk of progression in patients treated with temsirolimus was about twice that of patients treated with sunitinib in the first and second lines of therapy. CONCLUSION: Patients treated with sunitinib had the longest PFS in the first and second lines of therapy. PFS from practice-based data appear consistent with trial-based expectations; however, practice variation was still evident.

Spirit-guided care: Christian nursing for the whole person.

Healthcare today is challenged to provide care that goes beyond the medical model of meeting physical needs. Despite a strong historical foundation in spiritual whole person care, nurses struggle with holistic caring. We propose that for the Christian nurse, holistic nursing can be described as Spirit-guided care--removing oneself as the moiatiating force and allowing Christ, in the furm of the Holy Spirit, to flow through and guide the nurse in care of patients and families.

Phase II multicenter trial of albumin-bound paclitaxel and capecitabine in first-line treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Capecitabine, a tumor-activated oral fluoropyrimidine, and albumin-bound paclitaxel (ab-paclitaxel) have substantial single-agent activity in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Taxane and antimetabolite doublets have improved efficacy compared with single agents. This phase II open-label trial was designed to test the safety and efficacy of capecitabine and ab-paclitaxel in previously untreated MBC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received capecitabine (825 mg/m(2) orally twice daily, approximately 12 hours apart, on days 1 to 15) and ab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m(2) intravenously on days 1 and 8 of each cycle with no premedication) every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was overall objective response rate (ORR), with evaluation performed after every 2 cycles. Entry criteria included measurable MBC, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) negativity, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0-2, no previous chemotherapy for metastatic disease, and > 6 months since adjuvant fluoropyrimidine or paclitaxel treatment. RESULTS: Fifty patients received at least 1 dose of study drug, with 46 patients evaluable for efficacy evaluation. Three hundred seventy-four cycles of therapy were delivered. Eighty percent of patients completed 8 cycles. The ORR was 61% (complete response [CR], 4%; partial response [PR], 57%), and 7 patients had sustained (≥ 24 weeks) stable disease for a clinical benefit rate of 76.1%. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 10.6 months, and the median overall survival was 19.9 months. The most common adverse events (AEs) that were ≥ grade 3 were pain, hand-foot syndrome, and neutropenia. CONCLUSION: The combination of weekly ab-paclitaxel plus daily capecitabine orally at these doses and scheduling was well tolerated and showed substantial efficacy.

Patient and practice impact of capecitabine compared to taxanes in first-/second-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Oral chemotherapy regimens have emerged as comparably effective to intravenous regimens with the potential for less resource utilization, fewer treatment side effects and a better quality-of-life outcome. The objective of this retrospective chart review was to examine these issues among patients who received single-agent taxane therapy vs. single-agent capecitabine for first- or second-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) METHODS: Data from the medical charts of 61 patients who received single-agent capecitabine, docetaxel, or paclitaxel therapy were supplemented with data from the 38-item Patient Care Monitor (PCM) survey of symptom burden and quality of life, prospectively collected during chemotherapy. The endpoints were PCM index scores, hospitalization during treatment, and the number of clinic visits during treatment. RESULTS: The sample was 75% Caucasian, 16% African-American, with a mean age of 59.4 years. Taxane-treated patients had more clinic visits than capecitabine patients, were more likely to have been hospitalized during treatment, and had worse treatment side effects. Controlling for depression, infusion-treated patients reported greater acute distress at the start of therapy than those on oral medication. CONCLUSION: Capecitabine for MBC was associated with a more favorable outcome regarding treatment side effects and quality of life, with reduced resource burden to patients and providers. Physicians may have differentially selected patients with greater depressive symptoms for capecitabine therapy.