Patient-reported distress as an early warning sign of unmet palliative care needs and increased healthcare utilization in patients with advanced cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer patients' sources of distress are often unaddressed, and patient-reported distress data could be utilized to identify those with unmet and impending care needs. We explored the association between moderate/severe distress and healthcare utilization in a large sample of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and non-colorectal gastrointestinal cancer patients. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Adult patients treated between July 2013 and March 2019. Data from the NCCN Distress Thermometer (DT) and the accompanying "Problem List" were extracted from the EHR. A DT score of ≥ 4 indicates "actionable distress." Statistical analysis was performed using descriptive analysis for patient characteristics, clinical outcomes, and sources of distress. Generalized linear mixed models were fit to determine the relationship between distress and healthcare utilization (hospitalization, emergency department (ED) visit, or both). RESULTS: The ten most frequently reported problems were from the Physical and Emotional domains of the Problem List. Distress was mostly related to physical symptoms (pain, fatigue) and emotional issues (worry, fears, sadness, nervousness). Patients with actionable distress generally reported more problems across all their visits. Actionable distress was associated with higher odds of the composite outcome measure of hospitalization or visiting the ED, within both the next 3 months (OR = 1.37; 95% CI = 1.19, 1.58; p < 0.001) and 6 months (OR = 1.19; 95% CI = 1.03, 1.37; p = 0.019). CONCLUSION: Patients with significant distress had marked utilization of ED and inpatient services. DT scores are a source of untapped data in the EHR that can highlight patients in need of intervention, including palliative care and cancer support services.

A single-site pilot feasibility randomized trial of a supportive care mobile application intervention for patients with advanced cancer and caregivers.

PURPOSE: Mobile health interventions can improve patient care. We developed the Digital Supportive Care Awareness and Navigation (D-SCAN) application (app) to facilitate symptom monitoring and use/awareness of cancer supportive care resources. This study tested feasibility, usability/satisfaction, and preliminary efficacy of D-SCAN. METHODS: We randomized 50 patients with advanced cancer to receive the D-SCAN intervention or usual care; 10 caregivers also received D-SCAN. The primary feasibility outcome was determined by weekly symptom survey completion and end of study procedures. We assessed secondary outcomes including usability/satisfaction, awareness/use of supportive care resources, patient activation, and quality of life via various questionnaires including the Net Promoter Score (NPS), Patient Activation Measure (PAM-13), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G), and Caregiver Oncology Quality of Life (CarGOQOL) questionnaire. RESULTS: Seventy-six percent of intervention patients met feasibility criteria, exceeding our pre-determined threshold of 75%. Usability/satisfaction by NPS was high, at 14.3% and 12.5% for patients and caregivers, respectively. Intervention patient and caregiver resource awareness increased by a mean of 3.7 (p = 0.27) and 4.1 items, respectively. Supportive care resource utilization increased by a mean of 0.8 items for intervention patients (p = 0.70) and 0.6 for caregivers. PAM-13 increased by a mean of 1.6 for intervention patients (p = 0.65). FACT-G increased by a mean of 1.1 for intervention patients (p = 0.91), and CarGOQoL increased by a mean of 2.2 (p = 0.41). CONCLUSION: D-SCAN is a feasible, usable, and satisfactory intervention for augmenting patient and caregiver supportive care. Further testing is necessary to formally assess D-SCAN's efficacy and impact on patients and caregivers. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03628794. Registered on August 14th, 2018.

A novel decision aid for acute myeloid leukemia: a feasibility and preliminary efficacy trial.

PURPOSE: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a hematologic malignancy characterized by a poor prognosis but also a paradoxical possibility of cure. This renders decision-making complex and imminent. Unfortunately, many patients with AML misestimate their prognosis and treatment risk. While decision aids can improve illness understanding and reduce decisional conflict, there are no validated decision aids for AML. We developed and tested a novel AML decision aid (NCT03442452). METHODS: Patients (n = 20) were recruited at Duke University from May 2018 to February 2019. Participants completed assessments of AML knowledge and decisional conflict, before and after using the electronic decision aid. The primary endpoint was feasibility (endpoint met if > 80% of study participants completed all study components). Secondary analyses of efficacy were conducted using paired t tests for dependent pre-/post-samples. RESULTS: The primary endpoint of feasibility was met (100% of participants completed all study components). Secondary analyses showed improved knowledge and reduced decisional conflict after using the decision aid. Knowledge scores improved from a mean of 11.8 (out of 18) correct items at baseline to 15.1 correct items after using the decision aid (mean difference 3.35; p < 0.0001). Decisional conflict scores reduced significantly from baseline to post-test as well (mean difference - 6.5; p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that our AML decision aid is a useful tool to improve the patient experience and promote shared decision-making in AML. A randomized efficacy trial is planned.

Knowledge of Palliative Care and Barriers to Access Among Outpatients with Cancer.

CONTEXT: Palliative Care (PC) is poorly understood by laypersons. However, little is known about what ambulatory patients with cancer understand about PC or what barriers to access exist. METHODS: Outpatients undergoing cancer treatment completed a survey evaluating their familiarity and knowledge of PC, Palliative Care Knowledge Scale (PaCKS), feelings towards PC (before and after reading a definition of PC), barriers to PC, and prognostic understanding. We summarized responses descriptively and used logistic regression models to examine variables associated with familiarity and interest. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 32%. Of 151 participants, 58.9% reported familiarity with PC. The average PaCKs score was 11.9 out of 13 (standard deviation, 1.4), with 46.4% receiving a perfect score, indicating high knowledge of PC. Patients diagnosed more than one year ago had significantly increased odds of being familiar with PC (OR 2.93; 95% CI 1.37-6.25). More participants reported future interest in PC compared to current interest (74.2% vs 44.4%, respectively). Patients with stage III or IV cancer had significantly increased odds of having a current interest in receiving PC compared to patients with stage I or II disease (OR 2.66; 95% CI: 1.05, 6.76). Participants reported feeling significantly less anxious and more reassured after reading a standardized definition of PC (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Outpatients with cancer who are being treated at a large academic cancer center exhibit high awareness and knowledge of PC, but anxiety toward PC persists. Factors beyond knowledge may perpetuate the delayed or lack of involvement with PC. KEY MESSAGE: In this cross-sectional study of outpatients with cancer, findings suggest that high knowledge of PC may co-exist with a lingering uneasiness towards the service. Additionally, factors beyond knowledge, such as logistic barriers, anxiety, and oncologists' preference may be perpetuating the delay or lack of involvement in PC.