Implementation of early palliative care in an oncologic outpatient clinic - an observational study of the first year.

BACKGROUND: As earlier studies found that early onset specialized palliative care (ESPC) results in better quality of life (QoL), less hospitalization and chemotherapy toward end-of life, we implemented ESPC in our oncology outpatient clinic. The aim of this study was to describe reasons for referral, interventions performed and the satisfaction among the oncologic staff. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The outpatient ESPC clinic was established in the department of oncology. Prespecified selected data was obtained from the patients records. All patients were asked to fill in a questionnaire concerning their symptoms and QOL. A survey among the oncologic personnel concerning their perception of the clinic was conducted. All data were consecutively collected in a share point database. RESULTS: We included 134 patients. The primary referral symptoms were pain (69%) or psychological/existential challenges (23%). 55% of patients filled in an EORTC questionnaire and rated a median (QoL) of 3.4. Interventions initiated were on based on the following symptoms: pain (70%), constipation (53%), nausea (15%), dyspnea (10%) and depression (7%). Median waiting time was 13 days. Of the 134 patients referred to the ESPC clinic 101 was admitted. Symptoms and problems were resolved in the ESPC clinic for 81 of the 101 admitted patients (80%), i.e., after one consultation for 25 patients and after a follow up course in the clinic for 56 patients. A survey among the staff at the Department of Oncology demonstrated a high degree of satisfaction with the ESPC clinic. CONCLUSIONS: We report experiences from implementation of ESPC in our outpatient oncologic clinic, where 81 (80%) of the admitted patients could be finished after one or a few follow up contacts, as their symptoms had been resolved. There was a high degree of satisfaction with the clinic among the oncologic staff.

S-1 (Teysuno) and gemcitabine in Caucasian patients with unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: Gemcitabine has been standard of care in advanced pancreatic adenocarcinomas (PC) for almost two decades. Randomized, primarily Japanese, studies have shown promising efficacy when combined with S-1 (GemS-1); however, no data are published in Caucasian patients. We report the first study with a combination of GemS-1 in an unselected cohort of Caucasian PC patients. METHODS: In this observational cohort study, we analyzed efficacy and toxicity prospectively. RESULTS: From July 2012 to July 2014, 64 patients received at least one cycle of GemS-1. 16 patients started therapy with gemcitabine and capecitabine (GemCap) but switched to GemS-1 after median 3 cycles of GemCap due to toxicity (hand-foot syndrome). 48 patients received GemS-1 as initial therapy. For the complete cohort, median age was 68 years (range 44-80); 22 patients (34%) had locally advanced PC; 42 patients (66%) had metastatic disease. Five patients had received prior adjuvant therapy with gemcitabine and 9 pts had received prior first-line therapy. The most common adverse event was fatigue (86%), however, only grade 3 in 3%. Five patients (8%) developed febrile neutropenia. Median PFS was 8.1 (95% CI 6.9-9.0) months and median OS was 11.7 (95% CI 10.7-13.1) months in the whole GemS-1 population. In the 48 patients starting with GemS-1, median PFS was 7.7 (95% CI 6.7-8.9) months and median OS was 11.5 (95% CI 9.7-12.3) months. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of gemcitabine and S-1 is safe and associated with promising efficacy in a Caucasian population; however, this needs to be confirmed in prospective clinical trials.