Adolescent- and adult-onset neuroblastic tumor: A retrospective multicenter observational study of patients diagnosed in France between 2000 and 2020.

BACKGROUND: Adult- and adolescent-onset neuroblastomas are rare, with no established therapy. In addition, rare pheochromocytomas may harbor neuroblastic components. This study was designed to collect epidemiological, diagnostic and therapeutic data in order to better define the characteristics of malignant peripheral neuroblastic tumors (MPNT) and composite pheochromocytomas (CP) with MPNT. PROCEDURE: Fifty-nine adults and adolescents (aged over 15 years) diagnosed with a peripheral or composite neuroblastic tumor, who were treated in one of 17 institutions between 2000 and 2020, were retrospectively studied. RESULTS: Eighteen patients with neuroblastoma (NB) or ganglioneuroblastoma (GNB) had locoregional disease, and 28 patients had metastatic stage 4 NB. Among the 13 patients with CP, 12 had locoregional disease. Fifty-eight percent of the population were adolescents and young adults under 24 years of age. The probability of 5-year event-free survival (EFS) was 40% (confidence interval: 27%-53%). CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes were better for patients with localized tumor than for patients with metastases. For patients with localized tumor, in terms of survival, surgical treatment was the best therapeutic option. Multimodal treatment with chemotherapy, surgery, radiotherapy, and immunotherapy-based maintenance allowed long-term survival for some patients. Adolescent- and adult-onset neuroblastoma appeared to have specific characteristics associated with poorer outcomes compared to pediatric neuroblastoma. Nevertheless, complete disease control improved survival. The presence of a neuroblastic component in pheochromocytoma should be considered when making therapeutic management decisions. The development of specific tools/resources (Tumor Referral Board, Registry, biology, and trials with new agents or strategies) may help to improve outcomes for patients.

Duration of palliative care involvement and immunotherapy treatment near the end of life among patients with cancer who died in-hospital.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionised cancer treatment, but their use near the end of life in patients with advanced cancer is poorly documented. This study investigated the association between administration of ICI therapy in the last month of life and the duration of involvement of the palliative care (PC) team, among patients with advanced cancer who died in-hospital. METHODS: In a retrospective, multicentre study, we included all patients who died in 2018 of melanoma, head and neck carcinoma, non-small cell lung cancer or urothelial or renal cancer, in 2 teaching hospitals and one community hospital in France. The primary outcome was the association between ICI therapy in the last month of life and duration of involvement of the PC team in patient management. RESULTS: Among 350 patients included, 133 (38%) received anti-cancer treatment in the last month of life, including 71/133 (53%) who received ICIs. A total of 207 patients (59%) received palliative care, only 127 (36%) 30 days before death. There was a significant association between ongoing ICI therapy in the last month of life and shorter duration of PC management (p = 0.04). Receiving ICI therapy in the last month of life was associated with an increased risk of late PC initiation by multivariate regression analysis (hazard ratio 1.668; 95% CI 1.022-2.722). CONCLUSION: ICI therapy is frequently used close to the end of life in patients with advanced cancer. Innovative new anti-cancer treatments should not delay PC referral. Improved collaboration between PC and oncological teams is needed to address this issue.

Knowledge and use of prognostic scales by oncologists and palliative care physicians in adult patients with advanced cancer: A national survey (ONCOPRONO study).

BACKGROUND: Prognostic scales exist to estimate patient survival in advanced cancer. However, there are no studies evaluating their use and practice. The objective of this study was to evaluate in a nationwide study the proportion of oncologists and palliative care physicians who had knowledge of these scales. METHODS: A descriptive, national, cross-sectional study was conducted via an online questionnaire to oncologists and palliative care physicians across France. RESULTS: Palliative care physicians had better knowledge of the scales than oncologists (42.3% (n = 74) vs. 27.8% (n = 33), p = 0.015). The Palliative Performance Status (PPS) and Pronopall Scale were the best-known (51.4% (n = 55) and 65.4% (n = 70), respectively) and the most widely used (35% (n = 28) and 60% (n = 48), respectively). Improved training in the use of these scales was requested by 85.4% (n = 251) of participants, while 72.8% (n = 214) reported that they did not use them at all. Limited training and lack of consensus on which scale to use were cited as the main obstacles to use. CONCLUSION: This is the first national study on the use of prognostic scales in advanced cancer. Our findings highlight a need to improve training in these scales and to reach a consensus on scale selection.

[Prevalence of pain in radiotherapy and improvement of its management]. / Prévalence de la douleur en radiothérapie et amélioration de sa prise en charge.

PURPOSE: To assess pain prevalence, its features and its management in a radiotherapy department of a French public general hospital. To highlight strategies to improve pain screening and treatment. METHODS: Designed in conjunction with pain management specialists, a cross-sectional study on pain was carried out. All patients treated in the department being interviewed with a standardised questionnaire during 2 days. RESULTS: Among 91 patients, 63.7% reported pain in daily life. They respectively represented 100%, 85.7% and 83.3% all of the patients treated for brain tumours, for bone metastasis and for head and neck cancers. Only 7.7% of patients reported pain during radiotherapy sessions. Among patients reporting pain, 70.7% received pain relief treatment and 60.8% of them thought this was adequate. While 51.6% of patients knew there was a specialist pain unit in the hospital, only 5.5% were offered a consultation with it. This unit provides non-pharmacological pain management techniques. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the importance, the underestimation and undertreatment, of pain management in radiotherapy departments. We recommend using a standardised questionnaire to identify patients at highest risk of pain, and the use of specialised pain relief teams when needed. A radiation therapist could act as a referrer to the pain relief team. Pain management remains teamwork, with links to specialised units.