Early Incorporation to Palliative Care (EPC) in Patients With Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: The PACO Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) experience a considerable disease burden, evident in symptomatic and psychological spheres. Advanced cancer represents a complex scenario for patients and the healthcare team. Early palliative care (EPC) has been proven as a clinically meaningful strategy in this context by several randomized trials but not in a resource-limited setting. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of EPC compared with standard oncological care (SOC) in patients with metastatic NSCLC in Mexico. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, randomized clinical trial was conducted at Instituto Nacional de Cancerologia in Mexico. All patients had histologically confirmed metastatic NSCLC without previous treatment. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive SOC or SOC + EPC. The EPC group was introduced to the palliative care team at baseline after randomization, which was integrated by psychologists, bachelor's in nutrition, specialized nurses, and physicians. Patients randomized to this arm had programmed visits to meet with the team at baseline and through the 2nd, 4th-, and 6th cycles thereafter. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); secondary outcomes included quality of life (QoL), anxiety and depression, and symptom intensity. They were assessed using the instruments EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire, Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS), and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) (clinicaltrials.gov [NCT01631565]). Questionnaires were completed at baseline, at 2nd, 4th, and 6th cycles of treatment. RESULTS: Between March 2012 and June 2015, 201 patients were assessed for eligibility and 146 were enrolled and allocated to receive EPC (73) or SOC (73). Median OS for patients in the EPC vs SOC arm was 18.1 months (95% CI, 7.9-28.4) and 10.5 months (95% CI, 4.7-16.2) (P = .029). Having a poor performance status (HR 1.7 [1.2-2.5]; P = .004) and allocation to the control group (HR 1.5 [1.03-2.3]; P = .034) were independently associated with a worse OS. Those patients with a global QoL > 70 at baseline had a better OS if they were In the EPC arm (38.7 months (95% CI, 9.9-67.6) vs SOC 21.4 months (95% CI, 12.4-30.3)). Mean QoL had a numerical improvement in patients allocated to EPC after 6 cycles of follow-up, nonetheless this difference was not statistically significant (55.1 ±â€…23.7 vs 56.9 ±â€…25.3; P = .753). There were no significant differences in anxiety and depression at all study points. CONCLUSIONS: EPC is associated with a significant improvement in OS, although, we observed that the greatest benefit of providing EPC was observed in those with a global QoL > 70 at baseline. This study did not identify significant changes in terms of QoL or symptom burden between the study groups after follow-up. Evidence robustly suggests that EPC should be considered part of the multidisciplinary treatment of metastatic NSCLC patients since diagnosis. According to our study, EPC can be implemented in low- or middle-income countries (LMIC).

Role of palliative care intervention in patients with vulvar cancer: a retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the experience of a Mexican cancer centre in vulvar cancer and the opportunity to incorporate palliative care (PC) during treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective study of clinical and sociodemographic characteristics of women with vulvar cancer referred to the PC service (PCS) between 2010 and 2021 is reported. Frequencies were estimated, as well as medians and IQRs, accordingly. Referral time and overall survival were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: 125 women with vulvar cancer were seen between 2010 and 2021, but only 42% were seen at PCS, mostly polysymptomatic, after several visits to the emergency room. 89% of the patients seen at PCS died at home. CONCLUSIONS: Vulvar cancer is a rare type of cancer, while squamous cell carcinoma is the most frequent type. At the time of referral, almost half of the patients had severe pain, bleeding, malodor, infection and urinary incontinence. Most of these patients lived in poverty, were poorly educated and had multiple surgeries. PC may play an important role in the care of patients with advanced vulvar cancer, relieving the physical and psychological symptoms, avoiding unnecessary hospitalisation and favouring death at home without pain and other symptoms.

Mortality Prognosis Factors in Patients with Active Cancer Under Treatment, and Severe COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is associated with systemic inflammation. This inflammatory response is further deregulated by oncological treatments increasing mortality in this population. However, there is conflicting information regarding the clinical factors that increase mortality in patients with severe COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify prognostic factors associated with mortality during severe COVID-19 in patients with active cancer. In addition, the correlation between oncologic codes and mortality related to severe COVID-19 was evaluated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed a cohort of Mexican patients with active cancer and severe COVID-19 between March 2020 and February 2021. We collected information on patient demographic characteristics, COVID-19 symptoms, clinical and laboratory data, and treatments. Patients were classified according to oncologic code. We defined the oncological code based on clinical stage, treatment intention, performance status before COVID-19, and median overall survival with palliative treatment. A log-rank test was performed to determine survival. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to adjust for potential confounders. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-two patients with severe COVID-19 were analyzed. The red oncologic code was associated with an increased risk of mortality OR 22.8 (CI 95% 5.0-105.1, p <0.001), low oxygen saturation OR 5.4 (CI 95% 1.7-17.4, p = 0.005), chronic corticosteriod use OR 4.3 (CI 95% 1.0-18.1, p = 0.050) and high D-dimer level OR 3.2 (CI 95% 1.2-8.2, p = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: The survival of patients with active cancer and severe COVID-19 was possible to identify, at the time of admission, specific oncological characteristics. Based on this code, decreased oxygen saturation, increased D-dimer levels, and chronic corticosteroid use were the main predictive factors related to mortality.

Nabiximols for opioid-treated cancer patients with poorly-controlled chronic pain: a randomized, placebo-controlled, graded-dose trial.

UNLABELLED: Patients with advanced cancer who have pain that responds poorly to opioid therapy pose a clinical challenge. Nabiximols (Nabiximols is the U.S. Adopted Name [USAN] for Sativex [GW Pharma Ltd, Wiltshire, U.K.], which does not yet have an INN), a novel cannabinoid formulation, is undergoing investigation as add-on therapy for this population. In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, graded-dose study, patients with advanced cancer and opioid-refractory pain received placebo or nabiximols at a low dose (1-4 sprays/day), medium dose (6-10 sprays/day), or high dose (11-16 sprays/day). Average pain, worst pain and sleep disruption were measured daily during 5 weeks of treatment; other questionnaires measured quality of life and mood. A total of 360 patients were randomized; 263 completed. There were no baseline differences across groups. The 30% responder rate primary analysis was not significant for nabiximols versus placebo (overall P = .59). A secondary continuous responder analysis of average daily pain from baseline to end of study demonstrated that the proportion of patients reporting analgesia was greater for nabiximols than placebo overall (P = .035), and specifically in the low-dose (P = .008) and medium-dose (P = .039) groups. In the low-dose group, results were similar for mean average pain (P = .006), mean worst pain (P = .011), and mean sleep disruption (P = .003). Other questionnaires showed no significant group differences. Adverse events were dose-related and only the high-dose group compared unfavorably with placebo. This study supports the efficacy and safety of nabiximols at the 2 lower-dose levels and provides important dose information for future trials. PERSPECTIVE: Nabiximols, a novel cannabinoid formulation, may be a useful add-on analgesic for patients with opioid-refractory cancer pain. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, graded-dose study demonstrated efficacy and safety at low and medium doses.