Novel nomogram for predicting survival in advanced non-small cell lung cancer receiving anti-PD-1 plus chemotherapy with or without antiangiogenic therapy.

Background: This study aimed to develop and validate a novel nomogram to predict survival in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receiving programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) inhibitor plus chemotherapy with or without antiangiogenic therapy. Methods: A total of 271 patients with advanced NSCLC who received anti-PD-1 plus chemotherapy with or without antiangiogenic therapy were enrolled in our center and randomized into the training cohort (n = 133) and the internal validation cohort (n = 138). Forty-five patients from another center were included as an independent external validation cohort. The nomogram was created based on the multivariate Cox regression analysis to predict overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The performance of the nomogram was assessed using the concordance index (C-index), the time-dependent area under the receiver operating (ROC) curves (AUCs), calibration curves, and decision curve analysis (DCA). Results: Four factors significantly associated with OS were utilized to create a nomogram to predict OS: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS), programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, chemotherapy cycle, and pretreatment lactate dehydrogenase-albumin ratio (LAR). Six variables significantly associated with PFS were incorporated into the development of a nomogram for predicting PFS: ECOG PS, histology, PD-L1 expression, chemotherapy cycle, pretreatment platelet to lymphocyte (PLR), and pretreatment LAR. The C-indexes of the nomogram for predicting OS and PFS were 0.750 and 0.747, respectively. The AUCs for predicting the 6-month, 12-month, and 18-month OS and PFS were 0.847, 0.791, and 0.776 and 0.810, 0.787, and 0.861, respectively. The calibration curves demonstrated a good agreement between predictions and actual observations. The DCA curves indicated that the nomograms had good net benefits. Furthermore, the nomogram model was well-validated in the internal and external cohorts. Conclusion: The novel nomogram for predicting the prognosis of advanced NSCLC receiving anti-PD-1 plus chemotherapy with or without antiangiogenic therapy may help guide clinical treatment decisions.

Prevalence of Race/Ethnicity Reporting in Light Chain (AL) Amyloidosis Clinical Research in the USA.

Little is known about racial differences in the incidence of light chain (AL) amyloidosis despite the well-documented racial disparities in the epidemiology of other plasma cell disorders. The goal of this study was to examine the extent to which published clinical research in AL amyloidosis report information on patients' race. Clinical research publications in AL amyloidosis between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2020, from the USA were identified. In addition to the reporting of race, study design, funding, cohort size, year of publication, impact factor of publication journal, and first author degree were abstracted. Among papers reporting race, we also assessed whether ethnicity was reported separately. A PubMed search yielded 2,770 papers of which 220 met the pre-specified criteria for analysis. Of those, 37 (16.5%) reported race. Single institution publications, those with physicians as first authors, and those published in journals with impact factor 6 or higher were less likely to report race. On multivariate analysis, only single institution studies were negatively associated with race reporting. Of the 37 papers reporting race, none defined it in methods, 16% stated how race was identified, and 19% discussed its significance. Ethnicity was reported in 6 studies. Our results indicate that race/ethnicity is underreported in USA. AL amyloidosis clinical literature leads to a challenge for identifying potential racial/ethnic disparities. Standards for collecting and reporting racial/ethnic demographics are needed. Clear and consistent reporting of race and ethnicity of clinical populations is a necessary first step in identifying disparities and promoting equitable care.

Hodgkin lymphoma survivor perspectives on their engagement in treatment decision-making and discussion of late effects.

BACKGROUND: Hodgkin lymphoma has a bimodal age distribution with the first peak occurring within young adulthood and the second, among older adults. Although current therapy provides excellent disease control, survivors are at risk of developing treatment-related late effects (LEs). We sought to understand how survivors in active survivorship care perceived their role in treatment decision-making and when they acquired an understanding of LEs. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted until saturation was reached. Themes were identified through direct content analysis and consensus coding by a multidisciplinary team of coders, including hematology/oncology providers, patient navigators, and survivor stakeholders. RESULTS: Seventeen interviews were conducted. Role in initial treatment decision-making fluctuated between passive and active engagement with providers identified as being crucial to this process. Half of interviewees (53%) expressed unmet information needs. Survivors reported having learned about LEs at multiple time points, spanning from before treatment commenced through when a LE was diagnosed. The majority (71%) expressed a desire to have learned about LEs before initial treatment ended. The impact of cancer and fertility discussions were also disclosed. DISCUSSION: Participants highlighted the importance of discussions on LEs early in the care continuum. These preliminary data will be incorporated in a planned treatment decision-making tool that incorporates information on potential LEs. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Patient-centered communication approaches should be embraced to assist in treatment decision-making, while considering long-term health consequences. Survivors must be educated on their risk of LEs and encouraged to disclose their perspectives and preferences with their providers to optimize outcomes.

A virtual-hybrid approach to launching a cardio-oncology clinic during a pandemic.

BACKGROUND: As cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of death in cancer survivors, the new subspecialty of Cardio-Oncology has emerged to address prevention, monitoring, and management of cardiovascular toxicities to cancer therapies. During the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, we developed a Virtual-Hybrid Approach to build a de novo Cardio-Oncology Clinic. METHODS: We conceptualized a Virtual-Hybrid Approach including three arms: information seeking in locations with existing Cardio-Oncology clinics, information gathering at the location for a new clinic, and information sharing to report clinic-building outcomes. A retrospective review of outcomes included collection and synthesis of data from our first 3 months (at pandemic peak) on types of appointments, cancers, drugs, and cardiotoxicities. Data were presented using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: A de-novo Cardio-Oncology clinic was developed structured from the ground up to integrate virtual and in-person care in a hybrid and innovative model, using the three arms of the Virtual-Hybrid Approach. First, we garnered in-person and virtual preparation through hands-on experiences, training, and discussions in existing Cardio-Oncology Clinics and conferences. Next, we gleaned information through virtual inquiry and niche-building. With partners throughout the institution, a virtual referral process was established for outpatient referrals and inpatient e-consult referrals to actualize a hybrid care spectrum for our patients administered by a multidisciplinary hybrid care team of clinicians, ancillary support staff, and clinical pharmacists. Among the multi-subspecialty clinic sessions, approximately 50% were in Cardio-Oncology, 20% in Preventive Cardiology, and 30% in General Cardiology. In the hybrid model, the Heart & Vascular Center had started to re-open, allowing for 65% of our visits to be in person. In additional analyses, the most frequent cardiovascular diagnosis was cardiomyopathy (34%), the most common cancer drug leading to referral was trastuzumab (29%), and the most prevalent cancer type was breast cancer (42%). CONCLUSION: This Virtual-Hybrid Approach and retrospective review provides guidance and information regarding initiating a brand-new Cardio-Oncology Clinic during the pandemic for cancer patients/survivors. This report also furnishes virtual resources for patients, virtual tools for oncologists, cardiologists, and administrators tasked with starting new clinics during the pandemic, and innovative future directions for this digital pandemic to post-pandemic era.

Enhancing patients' understanding of and adherence to oral anticancer medication: Results of a longitudinal pilot intervention.

BACKGROUND: Oral anticancer medications (OAM) make administration more convenient for patients, but shifts the responsibility of care from clinical providers to the patients themselves. Following an institutional pilot study showing inadequate understanding and adherence among vulnerable patients taking OAM, a longitudinal intervention was developed using an oncology specialty pharmacist and medication navigators to enhance OAM understanding and adherence. METHODS: Patients initiating OAM were approached for four formalized teaching and check-in sessions, supplemented with medication information sheets and individualized calendars. At each session, participants were assessed on their OAM understanding and adherence using teach-back and validated measures. A study evaluation elicited feedback from participants on the usefulness of the intervention. RESULTS: Of 80 eligible patients, 58 (72.5%) received formal OAM teaching from the specialty pharmacist. Of those, 54 (93.1%) enrolled in the study with 39 (72%) completing the intervention for final analysis. At study completion, all participants adequately understood OAM taking, but 41.0% had inadequate understanding of OAM handling. Throughout the study, participants reported issues that were addressed by the intervention team (28.2% to 31.6%) as well as those requiring additional assistance from the treatment team (26.3% to 38.5%), Most participants found the intervention to be very beneficial (initial evaluation, 86.5%; final evaluation, 76.9%). CONCLUSIONS: This pilot intervention addressed gaps identified by our institutional assessment through formalized OAM teaching and follow-up. Improved understanding of taking and handling OAM through this subsequent study illustrated the enhanced effect of a multidisciplinary and multicomponent intervention to better educate and support patients on OAM.

Assessment of patients' understanding of and adherence to oral anticancer medication (OAM): Results of a cross-sectional institutional pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Although oral anticancer medications (OAM) provide opportunity for treatment at home, challenges include prescription filling, monitoring side effects, safe handling, and adherence. We assessed understanding of and adherence to OAM in vulnerable patients. METHODS: This 2018 pilot study defined vulnerable patients based on Chinese language, older age (≥65 years), and subsidized insurance. All participants had a cancer diagnosis and were taking an OAM filled through the hospital's specialty pharmacy. Participants reported on OAM taking (days per week, times per day, special instructions) and handling (handling, storage, disposal). The specialty pharmacist classified patient-reported responses about OAM taking and handling as adequate or inadequate. OAM regimens were classified by complexity. RESULTS: Of 61 eligible patients, 55 participated. Mean age was 68 years (standard deviation [SD] = 12) and 53% were female. Patient subgroups were: 27% Chinese, 64% ≥65 years, and 9% subsidized insurance. Forty-nine percent were on frontline therapy and median time on OAM was 1 year (Quartile 1 = 0.4, Quartile 3 = 1.7). Adequacy of OAM taking (30%) and handling (15%) were low; 15% had adequacy in both. Adequacy of OAM taking and handling did not vary by patient subgroup or regimen complexity. Mean patient-reported adherence was high (5.4, SD = 1, possible range 1-6) and did not vary by adequacy of OAM taking or handling. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding of OAM taking and handling in this group of vulnerable patients was low and did not align with patient-reported adherence. Future interventions should ensure that patients understand how to safely take and handle OAM, thereby optimizing their therapeutic potential.

Timeliness of Treatment Initiation in Newly Diagnosed Patients With Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based timeliness benchmarks have been established to assess quality of breast cancer care, as delays in treatment are associated with poor clinical outcomes. However, few studies have evaluated how current breast cancer care meets these benchmarks and what factors may delay the timely initiation of treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Demographic and disease characteristics of 377 newly diagnosed patients with breast cancer who initiated treatment at Tufts Medical Center (2009-2015) were extracted from electronic medical records. Time from diagnosis to initial surgery and time from diagnosis to initiation of hormone therapy were estimated with Kaplan-Meier curves. Multivariable regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with treatment delays. Thematic analysis was performed to categorize reasons for delay. RESULTS: Of 319 patients who had surgery recommended as the first treatment, 248 (78%) met the 45-day benchmark (median, 28 days; 25th-75th %, 19-43). After adjusting for potential confounders, multivariable regression analysis revealed that negative hormone receptor status (odds ratio, 3.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.44-8.43) and mastectomy (odds ratio, 4.07; 95% confidence interval, 2.10-8.06) were significantly associated with delays in surgery. Delays were mostly owing to clinical complexity or logistical/financial reasons. Of 241 patients eligible for hormone therapy initiation, 232 (96%) met the 1-year benchmark (median, 147 days; 25th-75th %, 79-217). CONCLUSION: Most patients met timeliness guidelines for surgery and initiation of hormone therapy, although risk factors for delay were identified. Knowledge of reasons for breast cancer treatment delay, including clinical complexity and logistical/financial issues, may allow targeting interventions for patients at greatest risk of care delays.

Promoting High-Quality Cancer Care and Equity Through Disciplinary Diversity in Team Composition.

Disciplinary diversity in team composition is a valuable vehicle for oncology care teams to provide high-quality, person-centered comprehensive care. Such diversity facilitates care that effectively addresses the complex needs (biologic, psychosocial, and spiritual) of the whole person. The concept of professional or disciplinary diversity centers on differences in function, education, and culture, reflecting variety and heterogeneity in the perspectives of team members contributing to care. Thorough understanding of the skills, knowledge, and education related to each team member's professional or lay expertise is critical for members to be able to optimize the team's potential. Furthermore, respect and appreciation for differences and similarities across disciplinary cultures allow team members to create a positive collaboration dynamic that maintains a focus on the care of the person with cancer. We present a case study of one oncology team's provision of care to the patient, a Chinese immigrant woman with breast cancer. The case illuminates the strengths and challenges of disciplinary diversity in team composition in assessing and addressing potential barriers to care. Coordinated sharing of information among the varied team members facilitated understanding and care planning focused on the patient's concerns, needs, and strengths. Importantly, collaboration across the disciplinarily diverse set of team members facilitated high-quality oncology care and promoted equity in access to the full range of care options, including enrollment on a National Cancer Institute-sponsored clinical trial. Further implications of disciplinary diversity in oncology care teams are considered for both clinical practice and research.