Palliative Care Interventions and End-of-Life Care for Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Multicentre Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to describe the implementation of integrated palliative care (PC) and the intensity of care in the last 3 months before death for patients with metastatic breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a multicentric study of all adult patients with metastatic breast cancer who died over a 4-month period. Complete data were collected and checked from clinical records, including PC interventions and criteria regarding EOL care aggressiveness. RESULTS: A total of 340 decedent patients from 12 comprehensive cancer centres in France were included in the study. Sixty-five percent met the PC team with a median time of 39 days between the first intervention and death. In the last month before death, 11.5% received chemotherapy, the frequency of admission to intensive care unit was 2.4%, and 83% experienced acute hospitalization. The place of death was home for 16.7%, hospitalization for 63.3%, PC unit for 20%. Univariate and multivariate analyses showed factors independently associated with a higher frequency of chemotherapy in the last month before death: having a dependent person at home, meeting for the first time with a PC team < 30 days before death, and time between the first metastasis and death below the median. CONCLUSION: PC team integration was frequent and late for patients with metastatic breast cancer. However, PC intervention > 30 days is associated with less chemotherapy in the last month before death. Further studies are needed to better understand how to implement a more effective mode of PC integration for patients with metastatic breast cancer.

Impact on Health-Related Quality of Life of Parenteral Nutrition for Patients with Advanced Cancer Cachexia: Results from a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Malnutrition worsens health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and the prognosis of patients with advanced cancer. This study aimed to assess the clinical benefits of parenteral nutrition (PN) over oral feeding (OF) for patients with advanced cancer cachexia and without intestinal impairment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this prospective multicentric randomized controlled study, patients with advanced cancer and malnutrition were randomly assigned to optimized nutritional care with or without supplemental PN. Zelen's method was used for randomization to facilitate inclusions. Nutritional and performance status and HRQoL using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C15-PAL questionnaire were evaluated at baseline and monthly until death. Primary endpoint was HRQoL deterioration-free survival (DFS) defined as a definitive deterioration of ≥10 points compared with baseline, or death. RESULTS: Among the 148 randomized patients, 48 patients were in the experimental arm with PN, 63 patients were in the control arm with OF only, and 37 patients were not included because of early withdrawal or refused consent. In an intent to treat analysis, there was no difference in HRQoL DFS between the PN arm or OF arm for the three targeted dimensions: global health (hazard ratio [HR], 1.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88-1.94; p = .18), physical functioning (HR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.06-2.35; p = .024), and fatigue (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.80-1.77; p = .40); there was a negative trend for overall survival among patients in the PN arm. In as treated analysis, serious adverse events (mainly infectious) were more frequent in the PN arm than in the OF arm (p = .01). CONCLUSION: PN improved neither HRQoL nor survival and induced more serious adverse events than OF among patients with advanced cancer and malnutrition. Clinical trial identification number. NCT02151214 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This clinical trial showed that parenteral nutrition improved neither quality of life nor survival and generated more serious adverse events than oral feeding only among patients with advanced cancer cachexia and no intestinal impairment. Parenteral nutrition should not be prescribed for patients with advanced cancer, cachexia, and no intestinal failure when life expectancy is shorter than 3 months. Further studies are needed to assess the useful period with a potential benefit of artificial nutrition for patients with advanced cancer.

Outcomes of duodenal stenting: Experience in a French tertiary center with 220 cases.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic stenting for malignant gastroduodenal outlet obstruction (MGOO) is described as ineffective and not long-lasting despite a few favorable studies. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of a large series of patients in a tertiary center. METHODS: A single-center retrospective study was performed using data collected from all patients who received palliative duodenal self-expandable metal stents between January 2011 and December 2016. The primary endpoints were patient diet after the first duodenal procedure (Gastric Outlet Obstruction Scoring System, GOOSS) and clinical success. The secondary endpoints were the median patency duration (calculated according to the Kaplan-Meier method) and the cumulative incidence of reintervention. RESULTS: Two-hundred twenty patients were included. The increase in the GOOSS score was significant (p < 0.001), and the clinical success rate was 86.3%. The median estimated patency duration was 9.0 months [6.5-29.1]. Patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma had significantly longer patency durations (p = 0.02). The estimated cumulative probability of a second duodenal procedure after 4 months was 13%. CONCLUSIONS: In this large series of patients who underwent duodenal stenting for MGOO, we observed significant changes in GOOSS scores, a relatively long patency duration compared to findings in previous series, and a low probability of subsequent duodenal procedures, primarily due to a low median overall survival time (4 months).

PALLIA-10, a screening tool to identify patients needing palliative care referral in comprehensive cancer centers: A prospective multicentric study (PREPA-10).

PURPOSE: The identification and referral of patients in need of palliative care should be improved. The French society for palliative support and care recommended to use the PALLIA-10 questionnaire and its score greater than 3 to refer patients to palliative care. We explored the use of the PALLIA-10 questionnaire and its related score in a population of advanced cancer patients. METHODS: This prospective multicentric study is to be conducted in authorized French comprehensive cancer centers on hospitalized patients on a given day. We aimed to use the PALLIA-10 score to determine the proportion of palliative patients with a score >3. Main secondary endpoints were to determine the proportion of patients already managed by palliative care teams at the study date or referred to palliative care in six following months, the prevalence of patients with a score greater than 5, and the overall survival using the predefined thresholds of 3 and 5. RESULTS: In 2015, eighteen French cancer centers enrolled 840 patients, including 687 (82%) palliative patients. 479 (69.5%) patients had a score >3, 230 (33.5%) had a score >5, 216 (31.4%) patients were already followed-up by a palliative care team, 152 patients were finally referred to PC in the six subsequent months. The PALLIA-10 score appeared as a reliable predictive (adjusted ORRef≤3 : 1.9 [1.17-3.16] and 3.59 [2.18-5.91]) and prognostic (adjusted HRRef≤3  = 1.58 [95%CI 1.20-2.08] and 2.18 [95%CI 1.63-2.92]) factor for patients scored 4-5 and >5, respectively. CONCLUSION: The PALLIA-10 questionnaire is an easy-to-use tool to refer cancer inpatients to palliative care in current practice. However a score greater than 5 using the PALLIA-10 questionnaire would be more appropriate for advanced cancer patients hospitalized in comprehensive cancer center.

Understanding the Barriers to Introducing Early Palliative Care for Patients with Advanced Cancer: A Qualitative Study.

Background: Palliative care is often underutilized or initiated late in the course of life-threatening illness. Randomized clinical Early Palliative Care (EPC) trials provide an opportunity for changing oncologists' perceptions of palliative care and their attitudes to referring patients to palliative care services. Aim: To describe French oncologists' perceptions of EPC and their effects on referral practices before a clinical EPC trial was launched. Design: A qualitative study involving semistructured face-to-face interviews. The data were analyzed using the Grounded Theory coding method. Setting/Participants: Thirteen oncologists and 19 palliative care specialists (PCSs) working at 10 hospitals all over France were interviewed. Most of them were involved in clinical EPC trials. Results: The findings suggest that referral to PCSs shortly after the diagnosis of advanced cancer increases the terminological barriers, induces avoidance patterns, and makes early disclosure of poor prognosis harder for oncologists. This situation is attributable to the widespread idea that palliative care means terminal care. In addition, the fact that the EPC concept is poorly understood increases the confusion between EPC and supportive care. Conclusion: Defining the EPC concept more clearly and explaining to health professionals and patients what EPC consists of and what role it is intended to play, and the potential benefits of palliative care services could help to overcome the wording barriers rooted in the traditional picture of palliative care. In addition, training French oncologists how to disclose "bad news" could help them cope with the emotional issues involved in referring patients to specialized palliative care.

[The surrogate: Partner in the shared decision-making]. / Personne de confiance : un partenaire dans la décision partagée.

UNLABELLED: The legislative process of the surrogate appears to be unclear to health professionals and to patients and next of kin. To better adapt this process to the clinical practice our objective was here to document how the persons designated as surrogate perceived their role and how they described the difficulties encountered in oncology. METHODS: Qualitative survey with an ethnographic approach carried out in 2014-2015, fieldwork, face-to-face interviews (n=26 including 20 surrogates and 6 patients) in a mobile palliative care unit located at a Regional Comprehensive Cancer Centre. RESULTS: Close relationship, psychological and cognitive competences were the main attribute to designate a surrogate. Perceived roles included the fact to be involved in decisions, to protect the patient, to be present, and to be a messenger. This process gives the next of kin the feeling to be part of the patient management. In the context of divorced families, it sometimes allows to rehabilitate and to reinforce the affective links. Our data highlight the confusion between the designation of the 'person to call' and 'the surrogate'. DISCUSSION: Our results highlight the 'surrogate' protective role of the patient, and the positive sides of the process, in particular in the context of divorced/rebuilt families. We recommend splitting the process to designate the 'person to call' and the 'surrogate', as administrative and medical duties, respectively.

[Supportive care in pancreatic cancer]. / Soins de support dans les adénocarcinomes du pancreas.

Pancreatic cancer is one of the most aggressive malignancy with an expected overall survival of less than one year in metastatic canes. Many refmactory symptoms may be present at diagnosis and must be adequaty managed to improve quality of life (and survival ?) of these patients This includes dedicated supportive care but also an early introduction of palliative care methods. The current manuscript details the mast common and problematic maaifestatiaas of pancreatic cancer including weight loss, anorexia, cachexia syndrome, pain management, venous thromboembolism, malignant biliary and gastric outlet obstruction.