Oncology hospitalist impact on hospice utilization.

BACKGROUND: Unplanned hospitalizations among patients with advanced cancer are often sentinel events prompting goals of care discussions and hospice transitions. Late referrals to hospice, especially those at the end of life, are associated with decreased quality of life and higher total health care costs. Inpatient management of patients with solid tumor malignancies is increasingly shifting from oncologists to oncology hospitalists. However, little is known about the impact of oncology hospitalists on the timing of transition to hospice. OBJECTIVE: To compare hospice discharge rate and time to hospice discharge on an inpatient oncology service led by internal medicine-trained hospitalists and a service led by oncologists. METHODS: At Smilow Cancer Hospital, internal medicine-trained hospitalists were integrated into one of two inpatient medical oncology services allowing comparison between the new, hospitalist-led service (HS) and the traditional, oncologist-led service (TS). Discharges from July 26, 2021, through January 31, 2022, were identified from the electronic medical record. The odds ratio for discharge disposition by team was calculated by logistic regression using a multinomial distribution. Adjusted length of stay before discharge was assessed using multivariable linear regression. RESULTS: The HS discharged 47/400 (11.8%) patients to inpatient hospice, whereas the TS service discharged 18/313 (5.8%), yielding an adjusted odds ratio of 1.94 (95% CI, 1.07-3.51; p = .03). Adjusted average length of stay before inpatient hospice disposition was 6.83 days (95% CI, 4.22-11.06) for the HS and 16.29 days (95% CI, 7.73-34.29) for the TS (p = .003). CONCLUSIONS: Oncology hospitalists improve hospice utilization and time to inpatient hospice referral on an inpatient medical oncology service. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Patients with advanced cancer are often admitted to the hospital near the end of life. These patients generally have a poor chance of long-term survival and may prefer comfort-focused care with hospice. In this study, oncology hospitalists discharged a higher proportion of patients to inpatient hospice with less time spent in the hospital before discharge.

Outcomes on an inpatient oncology service after the introduction of hospitalist comanagement.

BACKGROUND: Smilow Cancer Hospital (SCH) introduced hospitalist comanagement to the inpatient oncology service to address long lengths of stay and oncologist burnout. OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of hospitalists on inpatient quality outcomes and oncologist experience. INTERVENTIONS: Hospitalists were introduced to one of two inpatient oncology services at SCH. Patients were assigned to teams equally based on capacity. Outcomes on the oncologist-led, traditional service (TS) were compared with outcomes on the hospitalist service (HS) 6 months after program implementation. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Outcomes included patient volume, length of stay (LOS), early discharge, discharge time, and 30-day readmission rate. Mixed linear or Poisson models that accounted for multiple admissions during the study duration were used. Oncologist experience was measured by survey. RESULTS: During the study period, there were 713 discharges, 400 from the HS and 313 from the TS (p = .0003). There was no difference in demographics or severity of illness (SOI) between services. Following adjustment for age, sex, race/ethnicity, cancer type, and discharge disposition, the average LOS was 4.71 on the HS and 5.47 on the TS (p = .01). Adjusted early discharge rate was 6.22% on the HS and 2.06% on the TS (p = .01). Adjusted mean discharge time was 3:45 p.m. on HS and 4:16 p.m. on TS (p = .009). There was no difference in readmission rates. Oncologists reported less stress (p = .001) and a better ability to manage competing responsibilities (p < .0001) while working on the HS. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalist comanagement significantly improved LOS, early discharge, time of discharge, and oncologist experience without an increase in 30-day readmissions.

Feasibility of Outpatient Stem Cell Transplantation in Multiple Myeloma and Risk Factors Predictive of Hospital Admission.

High-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) remains the standard of care for multiple myeloma (MM) patients. Although outpatient ASCT has been shown to be safe and feasible, the procedure is overall rare with most patients in the US undergoing inpatient ASCT. Furthermore, hospitalization rates for patients that undergo outpatient ASCT remain high. Adequate markers that predict hospitalization during outpatient ASCT are lacking, yet would be of great clinical value to select patients that are suited to outpatient ASCT. In this study we aimed to elucidate differences between planned outpatient and inpatient ASCT and further evaluated clinical characteristics that are significantly associated with hospitalization during planned outpatient hospitalization. Factors that were significantly associated with a planned inpatient ASCT included an advanced MM disease stage, worse performance status as well as non-Caucasian race, while low albumin levels and female gender were significantly associated with hospitalization during outpatient ASCT. The results of this analysis provide crucial knowledge of factors that are associated with planned inpatient ASCT and hospitalization during outpatient ASCT and could guide the treating physician in decision-making and further facilitate outpatient transplantation.

Salvage Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation in Daratumumab-Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

Daratumumab, a CD38-targeting monoclonal antibody, has significantly improved survival rates in multiple myeloma (MM), yet patients who progress on Daratumumab have dismal clinical outcomes with an overall median of less than 10 months. While emerging novel modalities have shown promising results, the current study explores the use of high-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in heavily pretreated Daratumumab-refractory MM patients. We retrospectively investigated the outcome of 69 consecutive patients who received upfront ASCT. The median progression-free survival (PFS) for the entire patient cohort was 7.2 months with a median overall survival (OS) of 19.3 months. For patients with ≥very good partial response (VGPR), median PFS and OS improved to 9 months and 34 months, respectively. Achievement of MRD negativity in ≥VGPR did not further improve the outcome. A better performance status, younger age, longer time interval from initial MM diagnosis/initial ASCT to salvage ASCT and low-risk GEP70 were all associated with improved PFS and OS after salvage ASCT. Our results suggest a role for salvage ASCT in selected heavily pretreated and Daratumumab-refractory patients.

Predicting risk of progression in relapsed multiple myeloma using traditional risk models, focal lesion assessment with PET-CT and minimal residual disease status.

Not available.