RESUMEN
Introduction: The utilization of advanced practice providers (APPs) in oncology has been growing over the last decade; however, there is no standard method for assessing an APP's contributions to oncology care. Methods: The NCCN Best Practices Committee (BPC) created an APP Workgroup to develop recommendations to support the roles of APPs at NCCN Member Institutions. The Workgroup conducted surveys to understand how NCCN centers measure productivity. This article will review the survey results and provide recommendations for measuring APP productivity. Results: Although 54% of responding centers indicated they utilize relative value units (RVU) targets for independent APP visits, 88% of APPs are either unsure or do not believe RVUs are an effective measurement of overall productivity. Relative value units do not reflect non-billable hours, and APPs perform a significant number of non-billable tasks that are important to oncology practices. Sixty-six percent of APPs believe that measuring disease-based team productivity is a more reasonable assessment of APP productivity than measuring productivity at the individual level. Conclusion: Our recommendation for cancer centers is to focus on the value that APPs provide to overall care delivery. Advanced practice provider productivity metrics should consider not only the number of patients seen by APPs, but also the high quality and thorough care delivered that contributes to the overall care of the patient and practice. Advanced practice providers can help improve access to care, deliver improved outcomes, and increase patient and provider satisfaction. Reducing the focus on RVUs, accounting for important non-RVU-generating activities, and incorporating quality and team metrics will provide a better overall picture of APP productivity.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Best Practices Committee created an Advanced Practice Provider (APP) Workgroup to develop recommendations to support APP roles at NCCN Member Institutions. METHODS: The Workgroup conducted three surveys to understand APP program structure, staffing models, and professional development opportunities at NCCN Member Institutions. RESULTS: The total number of new and follow-up visits a 1.0 APP full-time equivalent conducts per week in shared and independent visits ranged from 11 to 97, with an average of 40 visits per week (n = 39). The type of visits APPs conduct include follow-up shared (47.2%), follow-up independent (46%), new shared (6.5%), and new independent visits (0.5%). Seventy-two percent of respondents utilize a mixed model visit type, with 15% utilizing only independent visits and 13% utilizing only shared visits (n = 39). Of the 95% of centers with APP leads, 100% indicated that leads carry administrative and clinical responsibilities (n = 20); however, results varied with respect to how this time is allocated. Professional development opportunities offered included posters, papers, and presentations (84%), leadership development (57%), research opportunities (52%), writing book chapters (19%), and other professional development activities (12%; n = 422). Twenty percent of APPs indicated that protected time to engage in development opportunities should be offered. CONCLUSION: As evidenced by the variability of the survey results, the field would benefit from developing standards for APPs. There is a lack of information regarding leadership structures to help support APPs, and additional research is needed. Additionally, centers should continuously assess the career-long opportunities needed to maximize the value of oncology APPs.
RESUMEN
Burkitt lymphoma (BL) and Burkitt-like lymphomas (BLL) are clinically and biologically aggressive B-cell malignancies. Brief-duration, high intensity multidrug regimens with central nervous system (CNS) prophylaxis have proven to be effective, with published series of adult patients documenting complete response (CR) rates of 80 to 100 percent and 2-year event-free survival (EFS) rates ranging from 60 to 90 percent. Based upon the known sensitivity of BL to cyclophosphamide and favorable results reported from the Dana Farber Cancer Center using high-dose CHOP in diffuse aggressive lymphomas, we tested a regimen designed to maximize the administered dose of cyclophosphamide while eliminating other agents commonly used in BL protocols. Eleven patients with Burkitt or Burkitt-like lymphoma were treated with 4 cycles of a 5-drug regimen, called high-dose CHOP, which contains a cyclophosphamide dose of 4 gm/m2 with each cycle. Intrathecal methotrexate and midcycle high-dose methotrexate were added as CNS prophylaxis. Ten patients achieved a complete response (91 percent) and with a median follow up of 38 months, the 3-year EFS is 64 percent and the 3-year overall survival (OS) is 72 percent. Three patients recurred after the achievement of a CR. Treatment-related toxicities included myelosuppression, neutropenic fevers/infections, and tumor lysis syndrome requiring hemodialysis in 2 patients. There were no treatment-related deaths and none of the patients had to discontinue therapy secondary to toxicity. In conclusion, the high-dose CHOP with midcycle methotrexate regimen produces response rates and EFS rates comparable to other regimens, with an acceptable toxicity profile. Utilization of high dose cyclophosphamide may eliminate the need for several other agents in Burkitt lymphoma regimens.