Effectiveness of antipsychotics for managing agitated delirium in patients with advanced cancer: a secondary analysis of a multicenter prospective observational study in Japan (Phase-R).

PURPOSE: Delirium is a common and serious comorbidity in patients with advanced cancer, necessitating effective management. Nonetheless, effective drugs for managing agitated delirium in patients with advanced cancer remain unclear in real-world settings. Thus, the present study aimed to explore an effective pharmacotherapy for this condition. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of a multicenter prospective observational study in Japan. The analysis included patients with advanced cancer who presented with agitated delirium and received pharmacotherapy. Agitation was defined as a score of the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale for palliative care (RASS-PAL) of ≥ 1. The outcome was defined as -2 ≤ RASS-PAL ≤ 0 at 72 h after the initiation of pharmacotherapy. Multiple propensity scores were quantified using a multinomial logistic regression model, and adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for haloperidol, chlorpromazine, olanzapine, quetiapine, and risperidone. RESULTS: The analysis included 271 patients with agitated delirium, and 87 (32%) showed -2 ≤ RASS-PAL ≤ 0 on day 3. The propensity score-adjusted OR of olanzapine was statistically significant (OR, 2.91; 95% confidence interval, 1.12 to 7.80; P = 0.030). CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that olanzapine may effectively improve delirium agitation in patients with advanced cancer.

Malignancy-related ascites in palliative care units: prognostic factor analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The prognostic factors in patients with malignancy-related ascites (MA) have been poorly investigated. This study aimed to evaluate both the prognostic impact of MA on terminally ill patients with cancer and the prognostic factors in those with MA. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of a multicentre, prospective cohort study. Patients with advanced cancer admitted to palliative care units at 23 institutions and aged≥18 years were enrolled between January and December 2017. Overall survival (OS) was compared according to MA. A multivariate analysis was conducted to explore prognostic factors in patients with MA. RESULTS: Of 1896 eligible patients, gastrointestinal and hepatobiliary pancreatic cancers accounted for 42.5%. 568 (30.0%) of the total had MA. Patients with MA had significantly shorter OS than those without MA (median, 14 vs 22 days, respectively; HR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.39 to 1.72; p<0.01). A multivariate analysis showed that MA was a poor prognostic factor (HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.13 to 1.50; p<0.01) and that among patients with MA, significant poor prognostic factors were liver metastasis, moderately to severely reduced oral intake, delirium, oedema, gastric cancer, high serum creatinine, high serum C reactive protein, high serum total bilirubin, dyspnoea and fatigue, while significant good prognostic factors were female sex, good performance status, high serum albumin and colorectal cancer. CONCLUSIONS: MA had a negative impact on survival in terminally ill patients with cancer. A multivariate analysis revealed several prognostic factors in patients with terminal cancer and MA.

How different are accuracies of clinicians' prediction of survival by assessment methods?

BACKGROUND: No standardized method has been established for evaluating the accuracy of a clinicians' prediction of survival (CPS). Till now, no study has compared the accuracy of CPS according to the evaluation methods using the same dataset. We aimed to examine the accuracy of CPS by different statistical approaches in patients with far-advanced cancer. METHODS: The current study was a secondary analysis of an international multicenter prospective cohort study. Newly admitted patients with advanced cancer were enrolled in palliative care units (PCUs) in Japan, Korea, and Taiwan. We obtained the temporal CPS at enrollment. The patients were classified into groups of days (≤7 days) and weeks (≤30 days) based on CPS and actual survival (AS). We evaluated the accuracy of CPS by the distribution, area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROCs), and an estimate ±33% of AS. RESULTS: A total of 2,571 patients were assessed and admitted in 37 PCUs between January 2017 and September 2018. As for the "days" category, the distribution of AS is larger than that of CPS, however, the results are reversed in the "weeks" category. The AUROCs showed over 80% discrimination for both the "days" and "weeks" categories. Accurate CPS within ±33% of AS was approximately 30% in both "days" and "weeks" categories. CONCLUSIONS: We showed a discrepancy of approximately 30-80% in the accuracy of CPS among three different analysis methods: distribution, AUROC, and AS comparison. Considering the low accuracy of AS comparisons, clinicians should provide a wide range of survival time. CPS was able to effectively discriminate and may be useful for risk stratification.

Symptoms and Prognoses of Patients With Breast Cancer and Malignant Wounds in Palliative Care Units: The Multicenter, Prospective, Observational EASED Study.

BACKGROUND: This study sought to investigate the symptoms and prognoses of patients with breast cancer and malignant wounds in the palliative care unit setting. METHODS: This study was a sub-group analysis of a multicenter, prospective, observational study. Patients admitted to 23 palliative care units in Japan between January and December 2017 were enrolled. Data of patients with breast cancer were extracted. We compared demographic characteristics, symptoms, and prognoses by breast cancer malignant wound status. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes included Palliative Prognostic Index (PPI) score, malignant wound characteristics, and symptom burden. RESULTS: Of 1896 patients, 131 (6.9%) had breast cancer. In this cohort, 44 (33.6%) patients had malignant wounds. Most malignant wounds (88%) were on the back and chest. Malignant wounds were associated with skin redness, erosion, necrosis, or fistula. Symptoms included bleeding, exudate, odor, and pain. Twenty-eight patients (63.6%) needed dressing changes and 14 (31.8%) patients experienced bleeding. None died due to bleeding. In the malignant wounds group, 32 (72.8%) patients had used an opioid dose equivalent to 38 mg of oral morphine daily, compared to 25 mg by 57 (65.5%) patients in the non-malignant wounds group (P = .26). Median PPI scores at hospital admission were 4.5 vs 6.5 (P = .08). Median survival was 23 vs 21 days (P = .48). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with malignant wounds had a distinct symptom burden profile and tended to use a higher dose of opioids. The effect of malignant wounds on survival was unclear.

Low serum creatinine as a prognostic marker in advanced cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether low serum creatinine levels are associated with poor outcomes in patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study. Patients were divided into three groups according to their baseline serum creatinine levels. We performed time-to-event analyses using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank tests, and by conducting univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: 809 males were divided: male-low group (n=192), male-normal group (n=403) and male-high group (n=214). 808 females were divided: female-low group (n=239), female-normal group (n=389) and female-high group (n=180). Significant differences were observed in survival rates between the high and normal groups in the males and females (both log-rank p<0.001). Significantly higher risks of mortality were observed in the Cox proportional hazard model for the high group than for the normal group in both sexes (adjusted HR 1.292, 95% CI 1.082 to 1.542; adjusted HR 1.316, 95% CI 1.094 to 1.583, respectively). High serum creatinine was associated with shorter survival than normal creatinine, while low serum creatinine was not. CONCLUSIONS: Low serum creatinine levels did not have prognostic abilities in this population.

Prediction of Survival in Patients with Advanced Cancer: A Narrative Review and Future Research Priorities.

This paper aimed to summarize the current situation of prognostication for patients with an expected survival of weeks or months, and to clarify future research priorities. Prognostic information is essential for patients, their families, and medical professionals to make end-of-life decisions. The clinician's prediction of survival is often used, but this may be inaccurate and optimistic. Many prognostic tools, such as the Palliative Performance Scale, Palliative Prognostic Index, Palliative Prognostic Score, and Prognosis in Palliative Care Study, have been developed and validated to reduce the inaccuracy of the clinician's prediction of survival. To date, there is no consensus on the most appropriate method of comparing tools that use different formats to predict survival. Therefore, the feasibility of using prognostic scales in clinical practice and the information wanted by the end users can determine the appropriate prognostic tool to use. We propose four major themes for further prognostication research: (1) functional prognosis, (2) outcomes of prognostic communication, (3) artificial intelligence, and (4) education for clinicians.

Continuous Deep Sedation for Psycho-Existential Suffering: A Multicenter Nationwide Study.

Background: There is ongoing debate on whether continuous deep sedation (CDS) for psycho-existential suffering is appropriate. Objective: We aimed to (1) clarify clinical practice of CDS for psycho-existential suffering and (2) assess its impact on patients' survival. Methods: Advanced cancer patients admitted to 23 palliative care units in 2017 were consecutively enrolled. We compared patients' characteristics, CDS practices, and survival between those receiving CDS for psycho-existential suffering ± physical symptoms and only for physical symptoms. Results: Of 164 patients analyzed, 14 (8.5%) received CDS for psycho-existential suffering ± physical symptoms and only one of them (0.6%) solely for psycho-existential suffering. Patients receiving CDS for psycho-existential suffering, compared with those only for physical symptoms, were likely to have no specific religion (p = 0.025), and desired (78.6% vs. 22.0%, respectively; p < 0.001) and requested a hastened death more frequently (57.1% vs. 10.0%, respectively; p < 0.001). All of them had a poor physical condition with limited estimated survival, and mostly (71%) received intermittent sedation before CDS. CDS for psycho-existential suffering caused greater physicians' discomfort (p = 0.037), and lasted for longer (p = 0.029). Dependency, loss of autonomy, and hopelessness were common reasons for psycho-existential suffering that required CDS. The survival time after CDS initiation was longer in patients receiving it for psycho-existential suffering (log-rank, p = 0.021). Conclusion: CDS was applied to patients who suffered from psycho-existential suffering, which often associated with desire or request for a hastened death. Further studies and debate are warranted to develop feasible treatment strategies for psycho-existential suffering.

Comparison of Symptom Severity and Progression in Advanced Cancer Patients Among Different Care Settings: A Secondary Analysis.

Background: Most people in Japan wish to spend their final days at home, but the majority fail to do so; earlier studies indicated a more pronounced worsening of symptoms if treated at home. Objectives: This study compared the prevalence of symptom worsening and explored associated factors between patients with advanced cancer receiving palliative care in palliative care units (PCUs) and at home. Design: We conducted a secondary analysis of two multicenter, prospective cohort studies involving patients with advanced cancer receiving palliative care in PCUs or at home. Setting/Subjects: One study was conducted at 23 PCUs (January to December 2017) and the other on 45 palliative home care services (July to December 2017) in Japan. Measurements: Symptom changes were categorized as stable, improved, or worse. Results: Of the 2998 registered patients, 2877 were analyzed. Among them, 1890 patients received palliative care in PCUs, and 987 at home. Patients receiving palliative care at home were more likely to have worsening of pain (17.1% vs. 3.8%; p < 0.001) and drowsiness (32.6% vs. 22.2%; p < 0.001) than those in PCUs. By multivariate logistic regression analysis, palliative care at home was significantly associated with worsening of the Palliative Prognostic Index dyspnea subscale in the unadjusted model (odds ratio, 1.42 [95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.88]; p = 0.014) but not for any symptoms in the adjusted model. Conclusions: After adjusting for patient background, the prevalence of symptom worsening was not different between patients with advanced cancer receiving palliative care at home and in PCUs.

Comparison of survival times of advanced cancer patients with palliative care at home and in hospital.

OBJECTIVES: One primary concern about receiving care at home is that survival might be shortened because the quality and quantity of treatment provided at home will be inferior to that given in the hospital. Although our previous study demonstrated a longer survival of those with home-based palliative care (PC), it lacked adjustment for some potential confounders including symptoms and treatments during the stay. We aimed to compare the survival times among advanced cancer patients receiving home-based and hospital-based PC with adjusting for symptoms and treatments. METHOD: We compared survival time of participants who enrolled two multicenter, prospective cohort studies of advanced cancer patients at 45-home-based PC services between July 2017 and December 2017, and at 23-hospital-based PC services between January 2017 and December 2017. We analyzed with stratification by the estimated survival of Days, Weeks, and Months, which were defined by modified Prognosis in Palliative care Study predictor models-A. We conducted a Cox regression analysis with adjusting for potential confounders including symptoms and treatments during the stay. RESULTS: A total of 2,998 patients were enrolled in both studies and 2,878 patients were analyzed; 988 patients receiving home-based PC and 1,890 receiving hospital-based PC. The survival time of patients receiving home-based PC was significantly longer than that of patients receiving hospital-based PC for the Days Prognosis (estimated median survival time: 10 days [95% CI 8.1-11.8] vs. 9 days [95% CI 8.3-10.4], p = 0.157), the Weeks prognosis (32 days [95% CI 28.9-35.4] vs. 22 days [95% CI 20.3-22.9], p < 0.001), and the Months Prognosis, (65 days [95% CI 58.2-73.2] vs. 32 days [95% CI 28.9-35.4], p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In this cohort of advanced cancer patients with a Weeks or Months prognosis, those receiving home-based PC survived longer than those receiving hospital-based PC after adjusting for symptoms and treatments.

Influence of dosing pattern of antipsychotics on treatment outcome of delirium in patients with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines recommend antipsychotics for the treatment of delirium; however, there has been no confirmed recommendation regarding their administrating patterns. This study aims to investigate whether different dosing patterns of antipsychotics (single or multiple administrations) influence the outcomes of delirium treatment. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of a prospective observational study involving patients with advanced cancer and delirium receiving antipsychotics. The Delirium Rating Scale Revised-98 was administered at baseline and after 72 h of starting pharmacotherapy. Patients were classified into single administration group (received a single dosage within 24 h before the assessment) and multiple administration group (received more than one dosage). RESULTS: A total of 555 patients (single administration 492 (88.6%); multiple administration 63 (11.4%)) were subjected to analyses. The patients in the multiple administration group were more likely to be male, in psycho-oncology consulting settings, with lower performance status, with hyperactive delirium and with severer delirium symptoms. In the multivariate analysis, single administration was significantly associated with better improvement of delirium (p < 0.01, 95% confidence interval: 1.83-5.87) even after controlling covariates. There were no significant differences in the mean dosages of antipsychotics per day in chlorpromazine equivalent (single administration 116.8 mg/day, multiple administration 123.5 mg/day) and the incidence of adverse events between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this observational study sample, Delirium Rating Scale severity score improvement in single administration was higher than that seen in multiple administration. There was no difference in adverse events between the two groups.

Prognostic awareness in Japanese patients with advanced cancer: a follow-up cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced cancer have been reported to be more likely to receive goal-concordant care if they have accurate prognostic awareness. However, many patients do not have this awareness. This study aimed to examine the prognostic awareness among Japanese patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: This single-center, follow-up cohort study included Japanese patients with advanced cancer who received chemotherapy at Tohoku University Hospital between January 2015 and January 2016. Patients were surveyed at enrollment and followed up for clinical events for 5 years thereafter. We compared (i) the patients' prognostic awareness with both actual survival time and physician's prediction of survival and (ii) physician's prediction of survival time with actual survival. Factors associated with accurate prognostic awareness were identified by univariate analysis. RESULTS: Of the 133 patients eligible for the study, 57 patients were analyzed. Only 10 (17.5%) patients had accurate prognostic awareness. Forty-three patients (75.4%) were optimistic about their prognosis; >80% of patients were more optimistic than their physicians about their prognosis. The physicians' predictions were accurate in for patients (37.5%). Accurate prognostic awareness was associated with physician's explanation of the prognosis and patients' perception of a good death. CONCLUSIONS: A majority of the patients with advanced cancer in this study had prognostic awareness that was more optimistic in comparison with their actual survival, and most were more optimistic than their physicians about their prognosis. Further research is needed to develop programs to facilitate the discussion of life expectancy with patients in a manner that is consistent with their preferences.

Visualizing How to Use Antipsychotics for Agitated Delirium in the Last Days of Life.

CONTEXT: How physicians use antipsychotics for agitated delirium in the last days of life varies markedly, which could hamper the quality of care. OBJECTIVES: To examine adherence to an algorithm-based treatment for terminal agitated delirium, and explore its effectiveness and safety. METHODS: A single-center, prospective, observational study was conducted in a 27-bed palliative care unit in Japan. All adult cancer patients who developed agitated delirium with a modified Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) of +1 or more were included; the palliative care specialists determined that the etiology was irreversible, the estimated survival was three weeks or less, and the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status was three or four. Patients were treated with an algorithm to visualize how to use antipsychotics, with the treatment goal defined as no agitation (RASS≤0) or acceptable agitation for patients and families. We provided all patients nonpharmacological management to alleviate the symptoms of delirium and administered antipsychotic medications when the nonpharmacological approach was insufficient. We measured the adherence rate, RASS, Nursing Delirium Screening Scale items 2, 3, 4 (Nu-DESC), and Agitation Distress Scale item 2 (ADS) on days 0, 1, 3, 7, 14, 21, and 24 hours before death. RESULTS: A total of 164 patients were enrolled. Adherence rates were 99, 94, and 89%, and treatment goals were achieved in 66, 83, and 93% on days one, three, and seven, respectively. The mean RASS decreased from +1.41 to -0.84 on day three; Nu-DESC decreased from 4.19 to 1.83, and ADS decreased from 1.54 to 0.38. There were seven severe adverse events (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) of 3), including aspiration (n = 3), apnea (n = 2), tremor (n = 1), and muscle rigidity (n = 1) on day three. CONCLUSION: The algorithm-based treatment could be feasible, effective, and safe. Visualizing how palliative care specialists provide pharmacological management could be beneficial for nonspecialist clinicians, and clinical, educational, and research implications warrant further empirical testing.

Anticholinergic drugs for death rattle in dying patients with cancer: multicentre prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of anticholinergics (AC) for death rattle in dying patients with cancer. METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study enrolled Terminally ill adult (20 years or older) patients with cancer who developed substantial death rattle (Back score ≥2) from 23 palliative care units in Japan. AC treatment for death rattle was prescribed according to primary physician's decision. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients whose death rattle improved, which was defined as a Back score of ≤1. We compared the proportion of improved cases in patients treated with (AC group) and without (non-AC group) AC, controlling potential confounders by employing propensity score weighting. RESULTS: Of the 1896 patients enrolled, we included 196 who developed a substantial death rattle. Of these, 81 received AC. 56.8% in the AC group and 35.4% in the non-AC group had an improved death rattle at 8 hours after baseline. In the weighted analysis, AC group showed significant improvements in death rattle, with an adjusted OR of 4.47 (95% CI 2.04 to 9.78; p=0.0024). All sensitivity analyses achieved essentially the same results. In the subgroup analysis, ACs were strongly associated with death rattle improvement in men, patients with lung cancer, and type 1 death rattle (adjusted OR 5.81, 8.38 and 9.32, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In this propensity score-weighted analysis, ACs were associated with death rattle improvement in terminally ill patients with cancer who developed substantial death rattle. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN-CTR (UMIN00002545).

Should Neuroleptics Be Used in Patients With Delirium Seen by Palliative Care?

Delirium commonly occurs in the palliative care setting and impacts many aspects of patient care, such as symptom assessment, patient-clinician communication, and medical decision-making. One controversial topic regarding the management of delirium in the palliative care setting is whether neuroleptics should be used. In this "Controversies in Palliative Care" article, 3 expert clinicians independently answer this question. Specifically, each group provides a synopsis of the key studies that inform their thought processes, share practical advice on their clinical approach, and highlight the opportunities for future research. Interestingly, all 3 experts arrived at similar conclusions-they underscored the importance of identification and treatment of any reversible causes of delirium and endorsed a trial of non-pharmacologic measures. They also agreed that neuroleptics should be considered for patients with hyperactive or mixed delirium when the conservative measures fail to control delirium symptoms and for delirious patients with days of life expectancy and thus limited time to try other measures. Risk of adverse effects such as extrapyramidal symptoms and seizures should be considered as part of the treatment decision. There is also a need to conduct high quality research to examine both neuroleptics and neuroleptic-sparing strategies for the management of delirium.

Preference of Japanese cancer patients for being informed about their prognosis.

BACKGROUND: Prognostic information, which consists of life expectancy, functional prognosis, and uncertainty, of cancer patients is essential. However, the evidence regarding the prognostic preferences of cancer patients is limited. To clarify the prognostic preferences of cancer patients and whether cancer patients want to be informed about their prognosis. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional web-based anonymous survey through a private survey company in January 2022. We assessed whether patients would prefer to be informed about their life expectancy and functional prognosis, and explored correlations between patients' backgrounds. RESULTS: A total of 132 patients responded to the survey. The mean age was 63.1±9.3, and 67 (50.8%) were male. The most frequent primary tumor was gastrointestinal/hepatobiliary and pancreatic (n=43, 32.6%). Among the patients, 26.6% answered "Strongly agree" or "Agree" to wanting to be informed about their life expectancy, and 33.6-46.9%. wanted to be informed of their functional prognosis. Experience of a family member that had died from cancer had a significant correlation with the preference to be informed about "Life expectancy" (rs=0.344, P<0.001), "Moving freely" (rs=0.210, P=0.016), and "Proper communication" (rs=0.344, P=0.038). CONCLUSIONS: More cancer patients wanted to be informed about their functional prognosis than their life expectancy. In addition, the experience of a family member that had died of cancer had a significant correlation with the preference for wanting to be informed about their life expectancy and functional prognosis.

Symptoms, performance status and phase of illness in advanced cancer: multicentre cross-sectional study of palliative care unit admissions.

OBJECTIVES: To clarify the relationship between Phase of Illness at the time of admission to palliative care units and symptoms of patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: This study was a secondary analysis of the East Asian collaborative cross-cultural Study to Elucidate the Dying process. Palliative physicians recorded data, including Phase of Illness, physical function and the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale. We used multinomial logistic regression to analyse ORs for factors associated with Phase of Illness. Twenty-three palliative care units in Japan participated from January 2017 to September 2018. RESULTS: In total, 1894 patients were analysed-50.9% were male, mean age was 72.4 (SD±12.3) years, and Phase of Illness at the time of admission to the palliative care unit comprised 177 (8.9%) stable, 579 (29.2%) unstable, 921 (46.4%) deteriorating and 217 (10.9%) terminal phases. Symptoms were most distressing in the terminal phase for all items, followed by deteriorating, unstable and stable (p<0.001). The stable phase had lower association with shortness of breath (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.94) and felt at peace (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.90) than the unstable phase. In the deteriorating phase, weakness or lack of energy (OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.40) were higher, while drowsiness (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.97) and felt at peace (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.94) were significantly lower. CONCLUSION: Our study is reflective of the situation in palliative care units in Japan. Future studies should consider the differences in patients' medical conditions and routinely investigate patients' Phase of Illness and symptoms. TRIAL REGISTRARION NUMBER: UMIN000025457.

Factors associated with good death of patients with advanced cancer: a prospective study in Japan.

PURPOSE: It is important for palliative care providers to identify what factors are associated with a "good death" for patients with advanced cancer. We aimed to identify factors associated with a "good death" evaluated by the Good Death Scale (GDS) score among inpatients with advanced cancer in palliative care units (PCUs) in Japan. METHODS: The study is a sub-analysis of a multicenter prospective cohort study conducted in Japan. All variables were recorded on a structured data collecting sheet designed for the study. We classified each patient into better GDS group or worse GDS group, and examined factors associated with better GDS using multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Between January and December 2017, 1896 patients were enrolled across 22 PCUs in Japan. Among them, a total of 1157 patients were evaluated. Five variables were significantly associated with a better GDS score in multivariate analysis: preferred place of death at PCU (odds ratio [OR] 2.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.72-4.71; p < 0.01), longer survival time (OR 1.02; 95% CI 1.00-1.03; p < 0.01), not sudden death (OR 1.96; 95% CI 1.27-3.04; p < 0.01), better spiritual well-being in the last 3 days in life (OR 0.53; 95% CI 0.42-0.68; p < 0.01), and better communication between patient and family (OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.66-0.98; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: We identified factors associated with a "good death" using GDS among advanced cancer patients in Japanese PCUs. Recognition of factors associated with GDS could help to improve the quality of end-of-life care.

Psychological Distress among Caregivers for Patients Who Die of Cancer: A Preliminary Study in Japan.

BACKGROUND: In Japan, little is known of the severity of and factors associated with psychological distress among caregivers of patients with advanced or recurrent cancer who die. METHODS: This prospective cohort study of cancer patients at the National Cancer Center Hospital East, Japan, and their caregivers followed the participants from the initial palliative care consultation (T1) to 6 months (T2) and 13 months (T3) after the patient's death. At T1, patients and caregivers were interviewed separately. After T1, telephone interviews were conducted periodically, and a mail survey was distributed at T2 and T3. The Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) was used to assess depression, and the Distress and Impact Thermometer (DIT) was used to screen for psychological distress. Items on end-of-life attitudes, including awareness, discussion, and willingness of cancer care and death, were developed. RESULTS: Thirty-one of 86 eligible pairs participated in this study. The participation rate was low (36%) and enrollment was thus halted. Data were collected up to T3 for 22 pairs (completion rate 71%). PHQ-9 scores at T2 and T3 were higher than at T1, but the difference was not significant (p = 0.07). PHQ-9 score at T3 was significantly associated with caregiver PHQ-9 and distress at T1, with patient distress and impact at T1, and with caregiver health problems at T2. CONCLUSIONS: Caregiver depression persisted up to 13 months after the patient's death, which suggests that pre-bereavement screening with the DIT might be useful. The present paired enrollment process requires improvement.

Are Prognostic Scores Better Than Clinician Judgment? A Prospective Study Using Three Models.

CONTEXT: Several prognostic models such as the Palliative Performance Scale (PPS), Palliative Prognostic Index (PPI), Palliative Prognostic Score (PaP) have been developed to complement clinician's prediction of survival (CPS). However, few studies with large scales have been conducted to show which prognostic tool had better performance than CPS in patients with weeks of survival. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare the prognostic performance of the PPS, PPI, PaP, and CPS in inpatients admitted to palliative care units (PCUs). METHODS: This study was part of a multi-center prospective observational study involving patients admitted to PCUs in Japan. We computed their prognostic performance using the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC) and calibration plots for seven, 14-, 30- and 60-day survival. RESULTS: We included 1896 patients with a median overall survival of 19 days. The AUROC was 73% to 84% for 60-day and 30-day survival, 75% to 84% for 14-day survival, and 80% to 87% for seven-day survival. The calibration plot demonstrated satisfactory agreement between the observational and predictive probability for the four indices in all timeframes. Therefore, all four prognostic indices showed good performance. CPS and PaP consistently had significantly better performance than the PPS and PPI from one-week to two-month timeframes. CONCLUSION: The PPS, PPI, PaP, and CPS had relatively good performance in patients admitted to PCUs with weeks of survival. CPS and PaP had significantly better performance than the PPS and PPI. CPS may be sufficient for experienced clinicians while PPS may help to improve prognostic confidence for inexperienced clinicians.

A decision tree prediction model for a short-term outcome of delirium in patients with advanced cancer receiving pharmacological interventions: A secondary analysis of a multicenter and prospective observational study (Phase-R).

OBJECTIVE: There is no widely used prognostic model for delirium in patients with advanced cancer. The present study aimed to develop a decision tree prediction model for a short-term outcome. METHOD: This is a secondary analysis of a multicenter and prospective observational study conducted at 9 psycho-oncology consultation services and 14 inpatient palliative care units in Japan. We used records of patients with advanced cancer receiving pharmacological interventions with a baseline Delirium Rating Scale Revised-98 (DRS-R98) severity score of ≥10. A DRS-R98 severity score of <10 on day 3 was defined as the study outcome. The dataset was randomly split into the training and test dataset. A decision tree model was developed using the training dataset and potential predictors. The area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic curve was measured both in 5-fold cross-validation and in the independent test dataset. Finally, the model was visualized using the whole dataset. RESULTS: Altogether, 668 records were included, of which 141 had a DRS-R98 severity score of <10 on day 3. The model achieved an average AUC of 0.698 in 5-fold cross-validation and 0.718 (95% confidence interval, 0.627-0.810) in the test dataset. The baseline DRS-R98 severity score (cutoff of 15), hypoxia, and dehydration were the important predictors, in this order. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: We developed an easy-to-use prediction model for the short-term outcome of delirium in patients with advanced cancer receiving pharmacological interventions. The baseline severity of delirium and precipitating factors of delirium were important for prediction.