Patient-oncologist alliance as protection against suicidal ideation in young adults with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: Young adults with cancer are at an increased risk of suicidal ideation. To the authors' knowledge, the impact of the patient-oncologist alliance on suicidal ideation has not been examined to date. The current study examined the relationship between the patient-oncologist therapeutic alliance and suicidal ideation in young adults with advanced cancer. METHODS: A total of 93 young adult patients (aged 20 years-40 years) with incurable, recurrent, or metastatic cancer were evaluated by trained interviewers. Suicidal ideation was assessed with the Yale Evaluation of Suicidality scale, dichotomized into a positive and negative score. Predictors included diagnoses of major depressive disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder, physical quality of life, social support, and use of mental health and supportive care services. The Human Connection Scale, dichotomized into a strong (upper third) and weak (lower two-thirds) therapeutic alliance, assessed the strength of the patients' perceived oncologist alliance. RESULTS: Approximately 22.6% of patients screened positive for suicidal ideation. Patients with a strong therapeutic alliance were found to be at reduced risk of suicidal ideation after controlling for confounding influences of cancer diagnosis, Karnofsky performance status, number of physical symptoms, physical quality of life, major depressive disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, and social support. A strong therapeutic alliance was also associated with a reduced risk of suicidal ideation after controlling for mental health discussions with health care providers and use of mental health interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The patient-oncologist alliance was found to be a robust predictor of suicidal ideation and provided better protection against suicidal ideation than mental health interventions, including psychotropic medications. Oncologists may significantly influence patients' mental health and may benefit from training and guidance in building strong alliances with their young adult patients.

Peace, Equanimity, and Acceptance in the Cancer Experience (PEACE): validation of a scale to assess acceptance and struggle with terminal illness.

BACKGROUND: The role of emotional acceptance of a terminal illness in end-of-life (EOL) care is not known. The authors developed a measure of peaceful acceptance at the EOL, and evaluated the role of peaceful acceptance in EOL decision-making and care. METHODS: The authors developed the Peace, Equanimity, and Acceptance in the Cancer Experience (PEACE) questionnaire to measure the extent to which patients with advanced cancer have a sense of peaceful acceptance of their terminal illness. The scale was administered to 160 patients with advanced cancer along with measures of other attributes that hypothetically are related to acceptance, including cognitive acceptance of terminal illness. EOL outcomes in 56 patients who died during the study also were examined. RESULTS: The 12-item PEACE questionnaire had 2 subscales: a 7-item Struggle With Illness subscale (Cronbach alpha = .81) and a 5-item Peaceful Acceptance subscale (alpha = .78). Both subscales were associated with patients' self-reported peacefulness (correlation coefficient [r] = 0.66 for acceptance [P <.0001]; r = -0.37 for struggle [P < .0001]). Struggle With Illness scores were associated with cognitive terminal illness acknowledgment (mean scores, 14.9 vs 12.4 for patients who were not aware that their illness was terminal; P = .001) and with some aspects of advance care planning (living will or healthcare proxy: mean scores, 13.9 vs 11.5; P = .02). In addition, among patients who had died, the use of a feeding tube at the EOL was associated inversely with Peaceful Acceptance (P = .015). CONCLUSIONS: The current study indicated that the PEACE questionnaire is a valid and reliable measure of peaceful acceptance and struggle with illness. Scores were associated with some choices for EOL care among patients with advanced cancer.

Peaceful awareness in patients with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that prognostic awareness may be harmful to mental health yet beneficial for end of life care planning. The effects of prognostic awareness coupled with a sense of inner peace are unknown. METHODS: In the multisite, longitudinal Coping with Cancer Study, 280 patients with advanced cancer were interviewed at baseline. Patients defining themselves as "terminally ill" and/or "at peace" most days were paired with others on sociodemographic, mental health and advance care planning. Primary caregivers of deceased patients were interviewed 6 months postloss and compared on their physical and mental health and their perceptions of patients' end-of-life care and death. RESULTS: Overall, 17.5% of patients reported being both peaceful and aware. Peacefully aware patients had lower rates of psychological distress and higher rates of advance care planning (e.g., completing do-not-resuscitate [DNR] orders, advance care planning discussions with physicians) than those who were not peacefully aware. Additionally, peacefully aware patients had the highest overall quality of death as reported by their caretakers in a postmortem evaluation. Surviving caregivers of peacefully aware patients were more physically and mentally healthy 6 months postloss than caregivers of patients who were "aware" but not peaceful. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with advanced cancer who are peacefully aware have better mental health and quality of death outcomes, and their surviving caregivers have better bereavement outcomes. Peaceful awareness is associated with modifiable aspects of medical care (e.g., discussions about terminal treatment preferences).

Trastuzumab and vinorelbine as first-line therapy for HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer: multicenter phase II trial with clinical outcomes, analysis of serum tumor markers as predictive factors, and cardiac surveillance algorithm.

PURPOSE: Trastuzumab-based therapy improves survival for women with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive advanced breast cancer. We conducted a multicenter phase II study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of trastuzumab combined with vinorelbine, and to assess cardiac surveillance algorithms and tumor markers as prognostic tools. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with HER2-positive (immunohistochemistry [IHC] 3+-positive or fluorescence in situ hybridization [FISH]-positive) metastatic breast cancer received first-line chemotherapy with trastuzumab and vinorelbine to determine response rate. Eligibility criteria were measurable disease and baseline ejection fraction >or= 50%. Serial testing for HER2 extracellular domain (ECD) was performed. RESULTS: Fifty-four women from 17 participating centers were entered onto the study. The overall response rate was 68% (95% confidence interval, 54% to 80%). Response rates were not affected by method of HER2 status determination (FISH v IHC) or by prior adjuvant chemotherapy. Median time to treatment failure was 5.6 months; 38% of patients were progression free after 1 year. Concurrent therapy was quite feasible with maintained dose-intensity. Patients received both chemotherapy and trastuzumab on 90% of scheduled treatment dates. Two patients experienced cardiotoxicity in excess of grade 1; one patient experienced symptomatic heart failure. A surveillance algorithm of screening left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) at 16 weeks successfully identified women at risk for experiencing cardiotoxicity. Other acute and chronic side effects were tolerable. Lack of decline in HER2 ECD during cycle 1 predicted tumor progression. CONCLUSION: Trastuzumab and vinorelbine constitute effective and well-tolerated first-line treatment for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. Patients with normal LVEF can be observed with surveillance of LVEF at 16 weeks to identify those at risk for cardiotoxicity.

Mental health, treatment preferences, advance care planning, location, and quality of death in advanced cancer patients with dependent children.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians observe that advanced cancer patients with dependent children agonize over the impact their death will have on their children. The objective of this study was to determine empirically whether advanced cancer patients with and without dependent children differ in treatment preferences, mental health, and end-of-life (EOL) outcomes. METHODS: Coping with Cancer is a National Cancer Institute/National Institute of Mental Health-funded, multi-institutional, prospective cohort study of 668 patients with advanced cancer. Patients with and without dependent children were compared on rates of psychiatric disorders, advance care planning (ACP), EOL care, quality of their last week of life, and location of death. RESULTS: In adjusted analyses, patients with advanced cancer who had dependent children were more likely to meet panic disorder criteria (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 5.41; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 2.13-13.69), more likely to be worried (mean difference in standard deviations [delta], 0.09; P=.006), and more likely to prefer aggressive treatment over palliative care (AOR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.07-2.93). Patients with dependent children were less likely to engage in ACP (eg, do not resuscitate orders: AOR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.26-0.75) and had a worse quality of life in the last week of life (delta, 0.15; P=.007). Among spousal caregivers, those with dependent children were more likely to meet criteria for major depressive disorder (AOR, 4.53; 95% CI, 1.47-14) and generalized anxiety disorder (AOR, 3.95; 95% CI, 1.29-12.16). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with dependent children were more anxious, were less likely to engage in ACP, and were more likely to have a worse quality of life in their last week of life. Advanced cancer patients and spousal caregivers with dependent children represent a particularly distressed group that warrants further clinical attention, research, and support.