Voicing their choices: Advance care planning with adolescents and young adults with cancer and other serious conditions.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether engaging in advance care planning (ACP) using a formal tool, Voicing My CHOiCES (VMC), would alleviate adolescent and young adults (AYAs) anxiety surrounding ACP and increase social support and communication about end-of-life care preferences with family members and health care providers (HCPs). METHODS: A total of 149 AYAs aged 18-39 years receiving cancer-directed therapy or treatment for another chronic medical illness were enrolled at seven US sites. Baseline data included prior ACP communication with family members and HCPs and measures of generalized anxiety, ACP anxiety, and social support. Participants critically reviewed each page of VMC and then completed three pages of the document. ACP anxiety was measured again immediately after the completion of VMC pages. One month later, participants repeated anxiety and social support measures and were asked if they shared what they had completed in VMC with a family member or HCP. RESULTS: At baseline, 50.3% of participants reported that they previously had a conversation about EoL preferences with a family member; 19.5% with an HCP. One month later, 65.1% had subsequently shared what they wrote in VMC with a family member; 8.9% shared with an HCP. Most (88.6%) reported they would not have had this conversation if not participating in the study. No significant changes occurred in social support. There was an immediate drop in anxiety about EoL planning after reviewing VMC which persisted at 1 month. Generalized anxiety was also significantly lower 1 month after reviewing VMC. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Having a document specifically created for AYAs to guide ACP planning can decrease anxiety and increase communication with family members but not necessarily with HCPs. Future research should examine ways ACP can be introduced more consistently to this young population to allow their preferences for care to be heard, respected, and honored, particularly by their healthcare providers.

Feasibility and Acceptability of a Mobile Phone App Intervention for Coping With Cancer as a Young Adult: Pilot Trial and Thematic Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Many young adult patients do not receive adequate psychosocial services to help them cope with cancer. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a smartphone app (iaya) intervention that was designed to create an engaged community of young adult patients and help them learn emotional coping skills. METHODS: For this single-group pilot trial, 25 young adult patients aged 18-39 years who were receiving active cancer treatment were asked to use the iaya app for 12 weeks. To collect app use data, we used Mixpanel, an analytics platform for apps. Feasibility was assessed through rates of app sessions and the number of coping exercises engaged, and intervention acceptability was evaluated by using an app usability questionnaire and through qualitative interviews at study completion. We collected patient-reported outcome data at baseline and at week 12 to explore self-efficacy for coping with cancer, self-efficacy for managing emotions, perceived emotional support, and quality of life. RESULTS: Baseline patient-reported outcome data indicated that participants scored relatively low on perceived emotional support but reasonably high on self-efficacy for coping with cancer and managing emotions as well as quality of life. Participants had a mean of 13 app sessions (SD 14) and 2 coping exercises (SD 3.83) in 12 weeks. Only 9% (2/23) of participants met our combined feasibility definition of ≥10 app sessions and ≥3 coping skills from different categories. The participants' mean usability score was 73.7% (SD 10.84), which exceeded our predefined threshold of ≥70%, and qualitative feedback was generally positive. CONCLUSIONS: Although perceived acceptable by patients, the iaya smartphone app did not meet the a priori feasibility criteria as a stand-alone app intervention. Future studies should screen participants for unmet coping needs and consider integrating the app as part of psychosocial care for young adult patients.

Pazopanib and depot octreotide in advanced, well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumours: a multicentre, single-group, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Treatment options for advanced, well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) remain scarce. Pazopanib is an orally bioavailable, small molecule, multitargeted kinase inhibitor that inhibits VEGF receptors 1, 2, and 3. We did a study of the efficacy of pazopanib with depot octreotide in patients with advanced NETs. METHODS: We did a parallel cohort study of patients with metastatic or locally advanced grade 1-2 carcinoid tumours or pancreatic NETs, by use of a single-group, two-stage design. Patients received pazopanib 800 mg orally once per day and octreotide at their preprotocol dosage. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving an objective response, as assessed by investigators, by intention-to-treat analysis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT00454363, and was completed in March, 2014. FINDINGS: Between April 12, 2007, and July 2, 2009, we enrolled 52 patients, including 32 individuals with pancreatic NETs and 20 individuals with carcinoid tumours. Seven (21·9%, 95% CI 11·0-38·8) of 32 patients with pancreatic NETs achieved an objective response. We detected no responses in the first stage of the cohort with carcinoid tumours, and we terminated accrual at 20 patients. Toxic effects included one patient with grade 4 hypertriglyceridaemia and one with grade 4 thrombosis, with the most common grade three events being aminotransferase increases and neutropenia, each of which happened in 3 patients. In all 52 patients, the most frequently observed toxic effects were fatigue (39 [75%]), nausea (33 [63%]), diarrhoea (33 [63%]), and hypertension (28 [54%]). INTERPRETATION: Treatment with pazopanib is associated with tumour response for patients with pancreatic NETs, but not for carcinoid tumours; a randomised controlled phase 3 study to assess pazopanib in advanced pancreatic NETs is warranted. FUNDING: US National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health.

The Development of a Bereavement Support Group Curriculum for Bereaved Parents of Young Adult Children: Bridging the Gap.

Purpose: There is limited research addressing the bereavement needs of parents whose young adult (YA) children have died from cancer. Research within oncology about the impact of child loss has tended to focus on parents of pediatric aged children. We adapted a general bereavement support group curriculum used with adults to address the unique needs of bereaved parents of YAs. Methods: Using a quality improvement framework, 25 bereaved parents of YA children participated in one of three 6-session bereavement support group programs during 2020 and 2021. Due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the programs were offered virtually. The participants provided feedback and completed an evaluation. Results: Nineteen mothers and six fathers participated with 20 (80%) completing the evaluation. The median time since the death of their child was 6 months. The participants evaluated the program highly, reporting that they felt less isolated (4.25/5 on a 5-point Likert scale); that their concerns were similar to others (4.45/5); and the discussion topics were relevant (4.20/5). Other topics that were identified included the impact on the family of losing a YA child, and how other relationships change. Forty-five percent of participants expressed a preference for a hybrid delivery model, incorporating in-person and virtual sessions. The majority also wished to continue meeting monthly, given they had little contact with other bereaved parents of YAs. Conclusion: The general bereavement support group curriculum was readily adapted for use with bereaved parents of YA children who died from cancer. A hybrid delivery model was the preferred method for future groups.

Adolescent and Young Adult Initiated Discussions of Advance Care Planning: Family Member, Friend and Health Care Provider Perspectives.

Background and Aims: End-of-life (EoL) discussions can be difficult for seriously ill adolescents and young adults (AYAs). Researchers aimed to determine whether completing Voicing My CHOiCES (VMC)-a research-informed advance care planning (ACP) guide-increased communication with family, friends, or health care providers (HCPs), and to evaluate the experience of those with whom VMC was shared. Methods: Family, friends, or HCPs who the AYAs had shared their completed VMC with were administered structured interviews to assess their perception of the ACP discussion, changes in their relationship, conversation quality, and whether the discussion prompted changes in care. Open-ended responses underwent thematic analysis. Results: One-month post-completion, 65.1% of AYA had shared VMC completion with a family member, 22.6% with a friend, and 8.9% with an HCP. Among a sample of respondents, family (47%) and friends (33%) reported a positive change in their relationship with the AYA. Participant descriptions of the experience fell into five themes: positive experience (47%), difficult experience (44%), appreciated a guide to facilitate discussion (35%), provided relief (21%), and created worry/anxiety (9%). Only 1 HCP noted a treatment change. Family (76%), friends (67%), and HCP (50%) did not think the AYA would have discussed EoL preferences without completing VMC. Conclusions: VMC has potential to enhance communication about ACP between AYA and their family and friends, though less frequently with HCPs. Participants reported a positive change in their relationship with the AYA after discussing VMC, and described experiencing the conversation as favorable, even when also emotionally difficult.

Taking a "Snapshot": Evaluation of a Conversation Aid for Identifying Psychosocial Needs in Young Adults with Cancer.

PURPOSE: Young adults (YAs) aged 18-35 years with cancer often experience unmet psychosocial needs. We aimed to evaluate a conversation aid ("Snapshot") that offered a framework for discussing YA-specific psychosocial concerns between patients and clinicians. METHODS: We developed and implemented Snapshot between 2014 and 2016 as part of a quality improvement initiative at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. We extracted pre- and postimplementation data from chart documentation of psychosocial concerns. YAs and social workers provided qualitative feedback on the use of Snapshot in clinical care. RESULTS: Postintervention chart reviews revealed a significant increase in the median number of topics documented in charts after implementation of Snapshot (preintervention median = 9 [range: 1-15] vs. postintervention median = 11 [range 6-15]; p = 0.003). Overall, YAs and social workers reported that using Snapshot improved communication and consistency of psychosocial care, with documented improvement in the following domains: understanding illness (p < 0.001), sexuality and intimacy (p = 0.03), symptom burden (p = 0.003), care planning (p < 0.001), support for caregivers and children (p = 0.02), and social, work, and home changes (p = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Snapshot improved the quality of psychosocial needs assessment among YAs with cancer. Implementation was successful in reducing variability identified in the preintervention cohort and increasing the number of YA-specific psychosocial topics discussed. A standardized conversation aid has the potential to improve quality of care for YAs by enabling early identification and intervention of psychosocial issues for all patients.

Phase I study of sorafenib in combination with everolimus (RAD001) in patients with advanced neuroendocrine tumors.

PURPOSE: Sorafenib and everolimus are both active against neuroendocrine tumors (NET). Because of potential synergy between VEGF pathway and mTOR inhibitors, we performed a phase I study to evaluate the safety and feasibility of combining sorafenib and everolimus in patients with advanced NET. METHODS: Patients were treated with everolimus 10 mg daily in combination with sorafenib (dose level 1: 200 mg twice daily; dose level 2: 200 mg per morning, 400 mg per evening) using standard phase I dose escalation design. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined within the first cycle (28 days) of therapy. Treatment was continued until tumor progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. Twelve additional patients were treated at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) level to further characterize safety and a preliminary assessment of activity. RESULTS: One patient in Cohort 1 experienced DLT (grade 3 skin rash); the cohort was expanded to 6 patients with no further DLTs. All 3 patients in Cohort 2 experienced DLT, consisting of thrombocytopenia, hand-foot skin reaction, and rash/allergic reaction. Sorafenib 200 mg twice daily in combination with everolimus 10 mg daily was established as the MTD. Independently reviewed best objective responses revealed that 62 % of patients had some degree of tumor shrinkage. By RECIST, we observed partial response in 1 patient, stable disease in 13 patients, and progressive disease in 3 patients. CONCLUSION: Sorafenib 200 mg twice daily with everolimus 10 mg daily represents the MTD of this combination in patients with advanced NET. While the combination is active, toxicity concerns may preclude more widespread use.

Phase I study of pasireotide (SOM 230) and everolimus (RAD001) in advanced neuroendocrine tumors.

Octreotide and everolimus have demonstrated efficacy in neuroendocrine tumors. Pasireotide is a somatostatin analog with binding affinity to a broader range of somatostatin receptor subtypes than octreotide. We performed a phase I study to evaluate the safety and feasibility of combining pasireotide with everolimus in patients with advanced neuroendocrine tumors. Cohorts of patients with advanced neuroendocrine tumors were treated with escalating doses of pasireotide (600-1200  µg s.c. b.i.d., followed by pasireotide LAR 40-60  mg i.m. monthly) and everolimus (5-10  mg daily). Twenty-one patients were treated. Dose-limiting toxicities consisting of grade 3 rash and grade 3 diarrhea were observed. Twelve patients were safely treated at the maximum protocol-defined dose level of pasireotide LAR 60  mg i.m. monthly and everolimus 10  mg daily. Hyperglycemia was common; other observed toxicities were consistent with the known toxicities of either agent alone. Partial tumor response was observed in one patient; 17 (81%) patients experienced at least some tumor regression as their best response to therapy. In conclusion, pasireotide LAR 60  mg i.m. monthly in combination with everolimus 10  mg daily is feasible and associated with preliminary evidence of antitumor activity in patients with advanced neuroendocrine tumors. Further studies evaluating this combination are warranted.