RESUMEN
CONTEXT: Patients with advanced cancer are at increased risk for multiple hospitalizations and often have considerable needs post-discharge. Interventions to address patients' needs after transitioning home are lacking. OBJECTIVES: We sought to demonstrate the feasibility and acceptability of a post-discharge intervention for this population. METHODS: We conducted a single-arm pilot trial (n=54) of a post-discharge intervention, consisting of a video visit with an oncology nurse practitioner (NP) within three days of discharge to address symptoms, medications, hospitalization-related issues, and care coordination. We enrolled English-speaking adults with advanced breast, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, or thoracic cancers experiencing an unplanned hospitalization and preparing for discharge home. The intervention was deemed feasible if ≥70% of approached patients enrolled and ≥70% of enrolled patients completed the intervention within three days of discharge. Two weeks after discharge, patients rated the ease and usefulness of the video technology on a 0-10 scale (higher scores indicate greater ease of use). NPs completed post-intervention surveys to assess protocol adherence. RESULTS: We enrolled 54 of 75 approached patients (77.3%). Of enrolled patients (median age=65.0 years), 83.3% participated in the intervention within three days of discharge. The median ease of participating in the intervention was 9.0 (IQR: 6.0-10.0) and the median usefulness of the intervention was 7.0 (IQR: 4.5-8.0). The majority of visits focused on symptom management (85.7%), followed by post-hospital medical issues (69.0%). CONCLUSION: An oncology NP-delivered intervention immediately after hospital discharge is a feasible and acceptable approach to providing post-discharge care for hospitalized patients with advanced cancer.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: Little is known about serious illness conversations (SIC) conducted during telemedicine visits and their impact on end-of-life (EOL) outcomes for patients with advanced cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis telemedicine visits for patients with metastatic lung cancer conducted during the first surge of the COVID-19 pandemic (October 3, 2020-October 6, 2020). We used natural language processing (NLP) to characterize documentation of SIC domains (ie, goals of care [GOC], limitation of life-sustaining treatment [LLST], prognostic awareness [PA], palliative care [PC], and hospice). We used unadjusted logistic regression to evaluate factors associated with SIC documentation and the relationship between SIC documentation and EOL outcomes. RESULTS: The study included 634 telemedicine visits across 360 patients. Documentation of at least one SIC domain was present in 188 (29.7%) visits with GOC and PA being the most discussed domains. Family presence (odds ratio [OR], 1.66; Pâ =â .004), progressive or newly diagnosed disease (OR, 5.42; Pâ <â .000), ageâ ≥â 70 (OR, 1.80; Pâ =â .009), and male sex (OR, 2.23; Pâ <â .000) were associated with a greater likelihood of discussingâ ≥â 1 SIC domain. Of the 61 patients who died within 12 months of the study period, havingâ ≥â 1 SIC domain discussed was associated with a lower likelihood of hospitalization in the last 30 days of life (OR, 0.27; Pâ =â .020). CONCLUSION: In this study of telehealth visits, we identified important factors associated with an increased likelihood of having documentation of an SIC and demonstrated that SIC documentation correlated with lower likelihood of hospitalization at EOL.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized cancer care, with increasing data demonstrating improved survival outcomes using ICIs among patients with advanced gastroesophageal cancer (GEC). ICIs are also associated with a lower incidence of grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs) compared to chemotherapy, suggesting that ICIs may have favorable effects on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This meta-analysis sought to evaluate the effects of ICIs on the HRQoL of patients with advanced GEC. METHODS: We conducted an online bibliographic search on Medline via PubMed using MeSH-based terms to retrieve randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects of ICIs on HRQoL in patients with advanced GEC (we searched for all studies between 2018 and 2021). We included RCTs that incorporated ICIs as part of the intervention arm either as monotherapy (first or second line) or as a combination therapy (first-line) with another ICI or chemotherapy. We combined the HRQoL measures into a meta-analysis using standard random effects models, from which estimates of the average mean difference (MD) were obtained with 95% confidence intervals. We assessed the heterogeneity of the study outcomes using the Q and I2 statistics. RESULTS: We identified 11 phase 3 RCTs that met the inclusion criteria, with a mean enrollment of 820 patients. Eight RCTs used an ICI plus chemotherapy combination in the intervention arm, three had ICIs as monotherapy, and one had doublet ICI therapy in the intervention arm. All RCTs used chemotherapy for the control arm. Collectively, the trials reported 37 HRQoL measures using five different HRQoL tools. The pooled analysis favored the intervention over the control arm in terms of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Esophageal (FACT-E) scores [MD 2.7 (95% CI 0.1 to 5.3), p < 0.041]. In a subgroup analysis of eight RCTs comparing combination therapy with ICIs plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone, the effect estimates favored the ICI arm regarding the FACT-E [MD 2.7 (95% CI 0.1 to 5.3), p < 0.041] and the EORTC QLQ-OES18 pain scale [MD -2.2 (95% CI -4.3 to -0.2), p < 0.030]. Likewise, the effect estimates favored the ICI monotherapy arm over the chemotherapy arm regarding the QLQ-STO22 hair loss subscale [MD -23.2 (95% CI -29.7 to -16.7), p < 0.001], QLQ-STO22 dysphagia subscale [MD 6.7 (95% CI 1.7 to 11.7), p = 0.009], EQ-5D pain scale [MD 6.9 (95% CI 2.9 to 10.9), p < 0.001], and QLQ-OES18 saliva subscale [MD 5.8 (95% CI 0.1 to 11.6), p = 0.046]. CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis, we found that the inclusion of ICIs as a first-line treatment for advanced GEC yielded better HRQoL outcomes than chemotherapy alone. Further research on the impact of ICIs on HRQoL is needed, with increasing evidence that ICIs improve the survival outcomes in patients with advanced GEC.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Individuals with cancer and other medical conditions often experience financial concerns from high costs-of-care and may utilize copay assistance programs (CAP). We sought to describe CAP recipients' experiences/preferences for cost discussions with clinicians. METHODS: We conducted a national, cross-sectional electronic-survey from 10/2022 to 11/2022 of CAP recipients with cancer or autoimmune conditions to assess patient perspectives on cost discussions. We used multivariable logistic regression models to explore associations of patient perspectives on cost discussions with patient characteristics and patient-reported outcomes (eg, financial toxicity, depression/anxiety, and health literacy). RESULTS: Among 1,566 participants, 71% had cancer and 29% had autoimmune conditions. Although 62% of respondents desired cost discussions, only 32% reported discussions took place. Additionally, 52% of respondents wanted their doctor to consider out-of-pocket costs when deciding the best treatment, and 61% of respondents felt doctors should ensure patients can afford treatment prescribed. Participants with depression symptoms were more likely to want doctors to consider out-of-pocket costs (ORâ =â 1.54, Pâ =â .005) and to believe doctors should ensure patients can afford treatment (ORâ =â 1.60, Pâ =â .005). Those with severe financial toxicity were more likely to desire cost discussions (ORâ =â 1.65, Pâ <â .001) and want doctors to consider out-of-pocket costs (ORâ =â 1.52, Pâ =â .001). Participants with marginal/inadequate health literacy were more likely to desire cost discussions (ORâ =â 1.37, Pâ =â .01) and believe doctors should ensure patients can afford treatment (ORâ =â 1.30, Pâ =â .036). CONCLUSIONS: In this large sample of CAP recipients with cancer and autoimmune conditions, most reported a desire for cost discussions, but under one-third reported such discussions took place.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: Early-phase clinical trials (EP-CTs) are designed to determine optimal dosing, tolerability, and preliminary activity of novel cancer therapeutics. Little is known about the time that patients spend interacting with the health care system (eg, time toxicity) while participating in these studies. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the electronic health records of consecutive patients enrolled in EP-CTs from 2017 to 2019 to obtain baseline characteristics and number of health care-associated days, defined as all inpatient and outpatient visits while on trial. We used univariable and multivariable analyses to identify predictors of increased time toxicity, defined as the proportion of health care-associated days among total days on trial. For ease of interpretation, we created a dichotomous variable, with high time toxicity defined as ≥20% health care-associated days during time on trial and used regression models to evaluate relationships between time toxicity and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Among 408 EP-CT participants (mean age, 60.5 years [standard deviation, SD, 12.6]; 56.5% female; 88.2% White; 96.0% non-Hispanic), patients had an average of 22.5% health care-associated days while on trial (SD, 13.8%). Those with GI (B = 0.07; P = .002), head/neck (B = 0.09; P = .004), and breast (B = 0.06; P = .015) cancers and those with worse performance status (B = 0.04; P = .017) and those receiving targeted therapies (B = 0.04; P = .014) experienced higher time toxicity. High time toxicity was associated with decreased disease response rates (odds ratio, 0.07; P < .001), progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 2.10; P < .001), and overall survival (HR, 2.16; P < .001). CONCLUSION: In this cohort of EP-CT participants, patients spent more than one-fifth of days on trial with health care contact. We identified characteristics associated with higher time toxicity and found that high toxicity correlated with worse clinical outcomes. These data could help inform patient-clinician discussions about EP-CTs, guide future trial design, and identify at-risk patients.
RESUMEN
In this editorial accompanying manuscript the by Klatte and colleagues, Drs Singh, and Nipp review the data behind universal germline testing in pancreatic adenocarcinoma, and review possible reasons for and solutions continued inadequate rates of germline testing in our community. Making germline testing for all patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma is critical and will require cross-disciplinary collaboration and innovation.
Asunto(s)
Pruebas Genéticas , Mutación de Línea Germinal , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Humanos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/genética , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/terapia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/diagnóstico , Pruebas Genéticas/métodos , Pruebas Genéticas/normas , Predisposición Genética a la EnfermedadRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To provide evidence-based guidance to oncology clinicians, patients, nonprofessional caregivers, and palliative care clinicians to update the 2016 ASCO guideline on the integration of palliative care into standard oncology for all patients diagnosed with cancer. METHODS: ASCO convened an Expert Panel of medical, radiation, hematology-oncology, oncology nursing, palliative care, social work, ethics, advocacy, and psycho-oncology experts. The Panel conducted a literature search, including systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials published from 2015-2023. Outcomes of interest included quality of life (QOL), patient satisfaction, physical and psychological symptoms, survival, and caregiver burden. Expert Panel members used available evidence and informal consensus to develop evidence-based guideline recommendations. RESULTS: The literature search identified 52 relevant studies to inform the evidence base for this guideline. RECOMMENDATIONS: Evidence-based recommendations address the integration of palliative care in oncology. Oncology clinicians should refer patients with advanced solid tumors and hematologic malignancies to specialized interdisciplinary palliative care teams that provide outpatient and inpatient care beginning early in the course of the disease, alongside active treatment of their cancer. For patients with cancer with unaddressed physical, psychosocial, or spiritual distress, cancer care programs should provide dedicated specialist palliative care services complementing existing or emerging supportive care interventions. Oncology clinicians from across the interdisciplinary cancer care team may refer the caregivers (eg, family, chosen family, and friends) of patients with cancer to palliative care teams for additional support. The Expert Panel suggests early palliative care involvement, especially for patients with uncontrolled symptoms and QOL concerns. Clinicians caring for patients with solid tumors on phase I cancer trials may also refer them to specialist palliative care.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias , Cuidados Paliativos , Humanos , Cuidados Paliativos/normas , Neoplasias/terapia , Calidad de Vida , Oncología Médica/normasRESUMEN
Prescription drug costs within oncology remain a challenge for many patients with cancer. The Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company (MCCPDC) launched in 2022, aiming to provide transparently priced medications at reduced costs. In this study, we sought to describe the potential impact of MCCPDC on Medicare Part-D oncology spending related to cancer-directed (nâ =â 7) and supportive care (nâ =â 26) drugs. We extracted data for drug-specific Part-D claims and spending for 2021. Using 90-count purchases from MCCPDC, we found potential Part-D savings of $857.8 million (91% savings) across the 7 cancer-directed drugs and $28.7 million (67% savings) across 21/26 (5/26 did not demonstrate savings) supportive care drugs. Collectively, our findings support that alternative purchasing models like MCCPDC may promote substantial health care savings.
Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos , Medicare Part D , Neoplasias , Medicamentos bajo Prescripción , Medicamentos bajo Prescripción/economía , Antineoplásicos/economía , Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológico , Ahorro de CostoRESUMEN
Background: Caregiving for the adult benign brain tumor (aBBT) population is unique, as patients' extended period of survivorship poses significant challenges related to the long-term sequelae of the disease and the foreboding possibility of recurrence. In this integrative review, we examined the caregiving experience across the spectrum of the aBBT population. Methods: We searched OVID, CINAHL, and PubMed databases from 2000 to 2022. We included studies primarily focused on caregivers of aBBT and written in English. Results: Among 594 papers identified in the initial review, we included a final list of 7 papers. Among these 7 papers, 5 central themes emerged. First, we identified a theme surrounding psychosocial and emotional needs, which included the social isolation of caregiving. The second theme related to informational care needs, including what is considered to be the normal course of recovery after surgery. The third theme focused on access to services, including specialist neurosurgical care, and the fourth theme related to financial strain and the economic burdens associated with long-term follow-up. Lastly, we found a theme surrounding family role changes, which included the shift from spouse to caregiver. Conclusions: In this review, we identified themes highlighting similarities to the high-grade glioma population. However, we uncovered distinct differences in terms of caregiver characteristics, length of survivorship, and the burden of caregiving over time. Collectively, our findings underscore the incomplete understanding of the caregiving experience across the spectrum of the aBBT population.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The health care industry spends more on lobbying than any other industry, with more than $700 million spent in 2022. However, health care lobbying related to cancer has not been characterized. In this study, we sought to describe overall health sector lobbying spending and oncology-related lobbying spending across patient and clinician organizations. METHODS: We obtained lobbying data from OpenSecrets.org and the Federal Election Commission. Overall health sector lobbying spending was categorized by OpenSecrets into 4 groups: pharmaceuticals/health products, health services/health maintenance organizations (HMOs), hospitals/nursing homes, and health professionals. We then identified and categorized 4 oncology-related lobbying groups: oncology physician professional organizations (OPPOs), prospective payment system (PPS)-exempt cancer hospitals, patient advocacy organizations, and provider networks (eg, US Oncology Network). We described temporal trends in lobbying spending from 2014 to 2022, in both overall dollar value (inflation-adjusted 2023 dollars) and in per-physician spending (using American Association of Medical Colleges [AAMC] data for number of hematologists/oncologists) using a Mann-Kendall trend test. RESULTS: Among the overall health sector lobbying, pharmaceuticals/health products had the greatest increase in lobbying spending, with an increase from $294 million in 2014 to >$376 million in 2022 (P=.0006). In contrast, lobbying spending by health professionals did not change, remaining at $96 million (P=.35). Regarding oncology-related lobbying, OPPOs and PPS-exempt cancer hospitals had a significant increase of 170% (P=.016) and 62% (P=.009), respectively. Per-physician spending also demonstrated an increase from $60 to $134 for OPPOs and from $168 to $226 for PPS-exempt cancer hospitals. Overall, OPPO lobbying increased as a percentage of overall physician lobbying from 1.16% in 2014 to 3.76% in 2022. CONCLUSIONS: Although overall health sector lobbying has increased, physician/health professional lobbying has remained relatively stable in recent years, spending for lobbying by OPPOs has increased. Continued efforts to understand the utility and value of lobbying in health care and across oncology are needed as the costs of care continue to increase.
Asunto(s)
Maniobras Políticas , Oncología Médica , Humanos , Oncología Médica/economía , Oncología Médica/normas , Estados Unidos , Neoplasias/economía , Neoplasias/terapia , Atención a la Salud/economía , Gastos en Salud/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
With limited treatment options, cachexia remains a major challenge for patients with cancer. Characterizing the interplay between tumor cells and the immune microenvironment may help identify potential therapeutic targets for cancer cachexia. Herein, we investigate the critical role of macrophages in potentiating pancreatic cancer induced muscle wasting via promoting TWEAK (TNF-like weak inducer of apoptosis) secretion from the tumor. Specifically, depletion of macrophages reverses muscle degradation induced by tumor cells. Macrophages induce non-autonomous secretion of TWEAK through CCL5/TRAF6/NF-κB pathway. TWEAK promotes muscle atrophy by activating MuRF1 initiated muscle remodeling. Notably, tumor cells recruit and reprogram macrophages via the CCL2/CCR2 axis and disrupting the interplay between macrophages and tumor cells attenuates muscle wasting. Collectively, this study identifies a feedforward loop between pancreatic cancer cells and macrophages, underlying the non-autonomous activation of TWEAK secretion from tumor cells thereby providing promising therapeutic targets for pancreatic cancer cachexia.
Asunto(s)
Caquexia , Citocina TWEAK , Macrófagos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Caquexia/metabolismo , Caquexia/etiología , Caquexia/patología , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/metabolismo , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patología , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/complicaciones , Citocina TWEAK/metabolismo , Animales , Humanos , Macrófagos/metabolismo , Ratones , FN-kappa B/metabolismo , Línea Celular Tumoral , Microambiente Tumoral , Atrofia Muscular/metabolismo , Atrofia Muscular/etiología , Atrofia Muscular/patología , Quimiocina CCL5/metabolismo , Transducción de Señal , Factor 6 Asociado a Receptor de TNF/metabolismo , Factores de Necrosis Tumoral/metabolismo , Receptores CCR2/metabolismo , Quimiocina CCL2/metabolismo , Ratones Endogámicos C57BLRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemoradiation and chemotherapy are recommended for the treatment of nonmetastatic esophageal cancer. The benefit of neoadjuvant treatment is mostly limited to patients who exhibit pathologic complete response (pCR). Existing estimates of pCR rates among patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy have not been synthesized and lack precision. METHODS: We conducted an independently funded systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO CRD42023397402) of pCR rates among patients diagnosed with esophageal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemo(radiation). Studies were identified from Medline, EMBASE, and CENTRAL database searches. Eligible studies included trials published from 1992 to 2022 that focused on nonmetastatic esophageal cancer, including the gastroesophageal junction. Histology-specific pooled pCR prevalence was determined using the Freeman-Tukey transformation and a random effects model. RESULTS: After eligibility assessment, 84 studies with 6451 patients were included. The pooled prevalence of pCR after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in squamous cell carcinomas was 9% (95% CI: 6%-14%), ranging from 0% to 32%. The pooled prevalence of pCR after neoadjuvant chemoradiation in squamous cell carcinomas was 32% (95% CI: 26%-39%), ranging from 8% to 66%. For adenocarcinoma, the pooled prevalence of pCR was 6% (95% CI: 1%-12%) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and 22% (18%-26%) after neoadjuvant chemoradiation. CONCLUSIONS: Under one-third of patients with esophageal cancer who receive neoadjuvant chemo(radiation) experience pCR. Patients diagnosed with squamous cell carcinomas had higher rates of pCR than those with adenocarcinomas. As pCR represents an increasingly utilized endpoint in neoadjuvant trials, these estimates of pooled pCR rates may serve as an important benchmark for future trial design.
Asunto(s)
Adenocarcinoma , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas , Neoplasias Esofágicas , Humanos , Terapia Neoadyuvante , Respuesta Patológica Completa , Quimioradioterapia , Neoplasias Esofágicas/patología , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/patología , Adenocarcinoma/patologíaRESUMEN
The financial impact of liver transplantation has been underexplored. We aimed to identify associations between high financial burden (≥10% annual income spent on out-of-pocket medical costs) and work productivity, financial distress (coping behaviors in response to the financial burden), and financial toxicity (health-related quality of life, HRQOL) among adult recipients of liver transplant. Between June 2021 and May 2022, we surveyed 207 adult recipients of liver transplant across 5 US transplant centers. Financial burden and distress were measured by 25 items adapted from national surveys of cancer survivors. Participants also completed the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment and EQ-5D-5L HRQOL questionnaires. In total, 23% of recipients reported high financial burden which was significantly associated with higher daily activity impairment (32.9% vs. 23.3%, p =0.048). In adjusted analyses, the high financial burden was significantly and independently associated with delayed or foregone medical care (adjusted odds ratio, 3.95; 95% CI, 1.85-8.42) and being unable to afford basic necessities (adjusted odds ratio, 5.12; 95% CI: 1.61-16.37). Recipients experiencing high financial burden had significantly lower self-reported HRQOL as measured by the EQ-5D-5L compared to recipients with low financial burden (67.8 vs. 76.1, p =0.008) and an age-matched and sex-matched US general population (67.8 vs. 79.1, p <0.001). In this multicenter cohort study, nearly 1 in 4 adult recipients of liver transplant experienced a high financial burden, which was significantly associated with delayed or foregone medical care and lower self-reported HRQOL. These findings underscore the need to evaluate and address the financial burden in this population before and after transplantation.
Asunto(s)
Costo de Enfermedad , Gastos en Salud , Trasplante de Hígado , Calidad de Vida , Humanos , Trasplante de Hígado/economía , Trasplante de Hígado/efectos adversos , Trasplante de Hígado/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto , Gastos en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Encuestas y Cuestionarios/estadística & datos numéricos , Estrés Financiero/economía , Estrés Financiero/epidemiología , Anciano , Adaptación Psicológica , Enfermedad Hepática en Estado Terminal/cirugía , Enfermedad Hepática en Estado Terminal/economía , Enfermedad Hepática en Estado Terminal/diagnóstico , EficienciaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: We described participant demographics for National Cancer Institute (NCI) clinical trials at the clinical center (NCI-CC participants) of the National Institutes of Health to identify enrollment disparities. METHODS: We analyzed NCI-CC data from 2005 to 2020, calculated enrollment fractions, compared with the US cancer population represented by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer incidence data (2018) and the Cancer in North America database (2018), and compared further with clinical trial disparities data from the NCI Community Oncology Research Program and National Clinical Trials Network (2005-2019), and from ClinicalTrials.gov (2003-2016). RESULTS: NCI-CC (38â531 participants) had higher enrollment fractions for older adults (8.5%), male (5.6%), non-Hispanic (5.1%), and Black or African American (5.3%) participants; lower women proportion across race and ethnicity; and fewer female sex-specific cancer (6.8%) than male sex-specific cancer (11.7%) participants. NCI-CC had lower median age than Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (54.0 vs 65.4); more Black or African American participants (12.0% vs 11.1%); and fewer women (41.7% vs 49.5%), White (76.1% vs 80.5%), Asian or Pacific Islander (4.6% vs 6.0%), American Indian or Alaska Native (0.3% vs 0.5%), and Hispanic participants (7.1% vs 13%). NCI-CC had more Black or African American and Asian or Pacific Islander participants; fewer Hispanic participants than the NCI Community Oncology Research Program and National Clinical Trials Network; more Black or African American and Hispanic participants; fewer Asian or Pacific Islander participants than ClinicalTrials.gov data. Improvement was noted for NCI-CC (older adults, Black or African American, Asian or Pacific Islander, Hispanic participants). CONCLUSION: We found lower representation of older adults, women, Asian or Pacific Islander, American Indian or Alaska Native, and Hispanic participants vs the US cancer population and higher representation of Black or African American vs US cancer population and oncology clinical trials. Multifaceted efforts are underway to reduce disparities in cancer clinical trials at the NCI-CC.
Asunto(s)
Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , National Cancer Institute (U.S.) , Neoplasias , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Femenino , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Neoplasias/epidemiología , Neoplasias/etnología , Neoplasias/terapia , Adulto , Etnicidad/estadística & datos numéricos , Programa de VERF/estadística & datos numéricos , Selección de Paciente , Demografía , Adulto Joven , Anciano de 80 o más AñosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Preoperative knowledge of surgical risks can improve perioperative care and patient outcomes. However, assessments requiring clinician examination of patients or manual chart review can be too burdensome for routine use. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre retrospective study of 243 479 adult noncardiac surgical patients at four hospitals within the Mass General Brigham (MGB) system in the USA. We developed a machine learning method using routinely collected coding and patient characteristics data from the electronic health record which predicts 30-day mortality, 30-day readmission, discharge to long-term care, and hospital length of stay. RESULTS: Our method, the Flexible Surgical Set Embedding (FLEX) score, achieved state-of-the-art performance to identify comorbidities that significantly contribute to the risk of each adverse outcome. The contributions of comorbidities are weighted based on patient-specific context, yielding personalised risk predictions. Understanding the significant drivers of risk of adverse outcomes for each patient can inform clinicians of potential targets for intervention. CONCLUSIONS: FLEX utilises information from a wider range of medical diagnostic and procedural codes than previously possible and can adapt to different coding practices to accurately predict adverse postoperative outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Current Procedural Terminology , Clasificación Internacional de Enfermedades , Adulto , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Readmisión del Paciente , Atención PerioperativaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Sarcopenia, an age-related decline in muscle mass and physical function, is associated with increased toxicity and worse outcomes in women with breast cancer (BC). Sarcopenia may contribute to toxicity-related early discontinuation of adjuvant endocrine therapy (aET) in women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) BC but remains poorly characterized. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This multicenter, retrospective cohort study included consecutive women with stage 0-II HR+ BC who received breast conserving therapy (lumpectomy and radiation therapy) and aET from 2011 to 2017 with a 5-year follow-up. Skeletal muscle index (SMI, cm2/m2) was analyzed using a deep learning model on routine cross-sectional radiation simulation imaging; sarcopenia was dichotomized according to previously validated reports. The primary endpoint was toxicity-related aET discontinuation; logistic regression analysis evaluated associations between SMI/sarcopenia and aET discontinuation. Cox regression analysis evaluated associations with time to aET toxicity, ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR), and disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: A total of 305 women (median follow-up, 89 months) were included with a median age of 67 years and early-stage BC (12% stage 0, 65% stage I). A total of 60 (20%) women experienced toxicity-related aET discontinuation. Sarcopenia was associated with toxicity-related early discontinuation of aET (odds ratio, 2.18; P = .036) and shorter time to aET toxicity (hazard ratio [HR], 1.62; P = .031). SMI or sarcopenia were not independently associated with IBTR or DFS; toxicity-related aET discontinuation was associated with worse IBTR (HR, 9.47; P = .002) and worse DFS (HR, 4.53; P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: Among women with early-stage HR+ BC who receive adjuvant radiation therapy and hormone therapy, sarcopenia is associated with toxicity-related early discontinuation of aET. Further studies should validate these findings in women who did not receive adjuvant radiation therapy. These high-risk patients may be candidates for aggressive symptom management and/or alternative treatment strategies to improve outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Sarcopenia , Femenino , Humanos , Anciano , Neoplasias de la Mama/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias de la Mama/radioterapia , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Sarcopenia/tratamiento farmacológico , Estudios Transversales , Quimioterapia Adyuvante/métodos , Antineoplásicos Hormonales/efectos adversos , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
Importance: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as quality of life (QOL) and symptoms, are often associated with clinical outcomes in patients with cancer. In practice, oncologists use serum tumor markers (TMs) (ie, carcinoembryonic antigen [CEA] and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 [CA 19-9]) and imaging to monitor clinical outcomes in patients with gastrointestinal cancer. Objective: To examine associations of 1-month changes in PROs and TMs with treatment response and survival among patients with gastrointestinal cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study enrolled patients at Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center with at least 1 month follow-up from May 2019 to December 2020. Included patients were beginning first-line systemic therapy, aged 18 years or older, and had been diagnosed with metastatic pancreaticobiliary, colorectal, or gastroesophageal cancer. Data analyses took place from January 2021 to January 2022. Intervention: PROs were collected, including QOL (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy General [FACT-G]), physical symptoms (Edmonton Symptom Assessment System [ESAS]), and psychological symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-4 [PHQ4] total, PHQ4-depression, and PHQ4-anxiety), as well as TMs (CEA and CA 19-9), at the time of chemotherapy initiation and 1 month later. Main Outcomes and Measures: Associations of 1-month changes in PROs and TMs with treatment response (clinical benefit vs disease progression) at first scan, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS), adjusted for baseline values using regression models. Results: This study included 159 patients, with 134 patients (84.3%) evaluable for analysis. Patients had a median (range) age of 64.0 (28.0-84.0) years and 86 (64.2%) were male. One-month PRO changes (FACT-G: OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.03-1.11; P = .001; ESAS-total: OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.94-1.00; P = .02; ESAS-physical: OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.92-1.00; P = .03; PHQ4-depression: OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.49-0.92; P = .01) were significantly associated with treatment response, but PHQ4-total or TMs were not. Changes in FACT-G (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.95-0.99; P = .003), ESAS-total (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.05; P = .004), ESAS-physical (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.00-1.05; P = .02), PHQ4-depression (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.01-1.48; P = .04), and CEA (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 1.001-1.004; P = .001) were associated with PFS, but changes in PHQ4-total or TMs were not. Changes in ESAS-total (HR, 1.03, 95% CI, 1.01-1.06; P = .006) and ESAS-physical (HR, 1.04, 95% CI, 1.01-1.06; P = .015) were associated with OS, but changes in TMs were not associated with OS. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that 1-month changes in PROs can be associated with treatment response and survival in patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancer. Notably, 1-month changes in TMs were not consistently associated with these outcomes. These findings highlight the potential for monitoring early changes in PROs to associate with clinical outcomes while underscoring the need to address the QOL and symptom concerns of patients with advanced cancer.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Gastrointestinales , Calidad de Vida , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Antígeno Carcinoembrionario , Biomarcadores de Tumor , Estudios de Cohortes , Neoplasias Gastrointestinales/terapia , Medición de Resultados Informados por el PacienteRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence in adults younger than 50 years is steadily increasing in the USA, and treatment for CRC can impact future fertility. However, fertility decision-making in female patients with CRC can be complex, with fertility preservation (FP) counseling occurring inconsistently. PURPOSE: The goal of this scoping review was to assess the literature regarding the frequency and quality of fertility preservation (FP) discussions taking place among oncology clinicians and their reproductive-age female patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) in order to identify existing gaps in care and inform future research, interventions, or potential changes in practice. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using the Ovid Medline, PsycInfo, and Scopus databases in order to identify studies pertaining to FP counseling in reproductive-age female patients with CRC. We used Covidence to screen studies for relevance and to extract data. Findings of interest included rate of fertility and/or FP discussions, patient characteristics associated with fertility discussions, initiators of discussions, rate of referrals to fertility specialists, patient utilization of FP services, and unmet fertility needs. We performed both quantitative and qualitative data synthesis. RESULTS: We identified five studies that met our inclusion criteria, all published between 2007 and 2022. Frequency of fertility counseling discussions was low across studies, with a range of 15 to 52.5% of female patients with CRC receiving counseling. Patient characteristics which may be associated with likelihood of fertility discussion included age, parity, number of children, cancer location and stage, treatment type, and quality of life. The literature suggested that fertility discussions were initiated by clinicians about two-thirds of the time, and medical oncologists were the clinicians most likely to initiate. Studies did capture unmet fertility-related patient needs; participants who did not receive counseling often expressed desire for these discussions and regret that they did not occur. CONCLUSION: Despite increasing incidence of CRC in patients at younger ages, this scoping review found a dearth of research conducted on young female CRC patients' experiences with fertility counseling and referrals. Notably, the existing research reveals that relatively few of these patients are receiving appropriate counseling. Additional research is needed to clarify current FP counseling practices, patient and clinician perceptions about FP, and ways to improve the quantity and quality of FP counseling in this patient population.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , Preservación de la Fertilidad , Neoplasias , Adulto , Niño , Embarazo , Humanos , Femenino , Preservación de la Fertilidad/psicología , Calidad de Vida , Neoplasias/terapia , Consejo , Reproducción , Neoplasias Colorrectales/terapia , Neoplasias Colorrectales/complicacionesRESUMEN
Underreporting of patient symptoms by clinicians is a common and well-documented phenomenon that has led to integrating patient-reported outcomes (PROs) as endpoints into clinical trials. While PROs are often used to measure disease symptoms, cancer therapy toxicities, and quality of life, they can also assess patients' general experiences and preferences. With the increasing use of electronic medical records and the digital health revolution in oncology, conversion from paper to electronic PROs (ePROs) has also facilitated the integration of PROs into routine care. Evidence from clinical trials is rapidly emerging to support ePROs as a care delivery innovation, given the potential for ePROs to improve patient outcomes through timely evaluation and response to patient needs. Meanwhile, work is ongoing to understand and address ePRO use and challenges to equitable integration, including technical and language barriers for patients, clinicians, and health systems. Nonetheless, the health system and regulatory bodies continue to develop stipulations to promote the use of ePROs. Herein, we review the evolution of PROs from an endpoint to an intervention in prospective clinical trials in oncology.
Asunto(s)
Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Neoplasias , Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente , Humanos , Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Neoplasias/terapia , Estudios Prospectivos , Calidad de VidaRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Cancer clinical trials represent the "gold standard" for advancing novel cancer therapies. Optimizing trial participation is critical to ensuring the generalizability of findings across patients, yet trial enrollment rates, particularly among minority and socioeconomically disadvantaged populations, remain suboptimal. METHODS: We conducted in-depth interviews with oncologists at a large academic medical center to explore their (1) attitudes and perceived barriers to offering clinical trials to minority and socioeconomically disadvantaged patients, and (2) recommendations for improving the enrollment of minority and socioeconomically disadvantaged patients in cancer clinical trials. RESULTS: Of 23 medical oncologists approached, 17 enrolled (74% response rate; mean age = 47; female = 42%; White = 67%). Content analysis revealed several barriers to enrollment: (1) ethical dilemmas; (2) ambivalence about trial risks and benefits; and (3) concern about patient well-being. Concerns about the legitimacy of informed consent, perceived lack of equipoise, and fear of personal bias influenced clinicians' decisions to recommend trials during treatment discussions. Concerns about creating an imbalance between trial risks and benefits among patients with high-level needs, including patients with literacy, psychiatric, and other socioeconomic vulnerabilities, impacted clinicians' enthusiasm to engage in trial discussions. Clinicians identified patient, provider, and system-level solutions to address challenges, including increasing patient and clinician support as well as involving external personnel to support trial enrollment. CONCLUSION: Findings reveal multi-level barriers to offering cancer clinical trials to underrepresented patients. Targeted solutions, including system level changes to support clinicians, patient financial support, and implementation of clinical trial navigation programs were recommended to help reduce access barriers and increase enrollment of underrepresented patients into cancer clinical trials.