C-reactive protein, symptoms and activity of daily living in patients with advanced cancer receiving palliative care.

BACKGROUND: The association between C-reactive protein (CRP) level, symptoms, and activities of daily living (ADL) in advanced cancer patients is unclear. METHODS: Secondary data analysis of a multicenter prospective cohort study consisted of 2426 advanced cancer patients referred to palliative care settings was conducted to examine the cross-sectional relationships between CRP level, symptoms, and ADL disabilities. Laboratory data, symptoms, ADL, and manual muscle testing (MMT) results were obtained at baseline. Participants were divided into four groups: low (CRP < 1 mg/dl), moderate (1 = < CRP <5 mg/dl), high (5 = < CRP < 10 mg/dl), and very high CRP (10 mg/dl = < CRP). The proportions of eight symptoms, five ADL disabilities, and three categories of MMT according to the CRP groups were tested by chi-square tests. Multiple-adjusted odd ratios (ORs) were calculated by using ordinal logistic regression after adjustment for age, gender, site of primary cancer, metastatic disease, performance status, chemotherapy, and setting of care. RESULTS: A total of 1702 patients were analysed. Positive rates of symptoms and ADL disabilities increased with increasing CRP level. In the very high-CRP group, rates of positivity for anorexia, fatigue, and weight loss were 89.8%, 81.0%, and 79.2%, respectively, and over 70% of patients received assistance for bathing, dressing, going to the toilet, and transfer. The grade of MMT also deteriorated with increasing CRP level. Adjusted ORs for the accumulated symptoms significantly increased with increasing CRP level in the moderate-CRP, high-CRP, and very high-CRP groups [1.6 (95% confidence interval 1.2-2.0), P < 0.001; 2.5 (1.9-3.2), P < 0.001; 3.5 (2.7-4.6), P < 0.001, respectively]. Adjusted ORs for the accumulated ADL disabilities significantly increased in the very high-CRP groups [2.1 (1.5-2.9), P < 0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: Associations between CRP level, symptoms, and ADL were observed in advanced cancer patients receiving palliative care.

Adding items that assess changes in activities of daily living does not improve the predictive accuracy of the Palliative Prognostic Index.

BACKGROUND: Changes in activities of daily living in cancer patients may predict their survival. The Palliative Prognostic Index is a useful tool to evaluate cancer patients, and adding an item about activities of daily living changes might improve its predictive value. AIM: To clarify whether adding an item about activities of daily living changes improves the accuracy of Palliative Prognostic Index. DESIGN: Multicenter prospective cohort study. SETTING: A total of 58 palliative care services in Japan. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged >20 years diagnosed with locally extensive or metastatic cancer (including hematological neoplasms) who had been admitted to palliative care units, were receiving care by hospital-based palliative care teams, or were receiving home-based palliative care. Palliative care physicians recorded clinical variables at the first assessment and followed up patients 6 months later. RESULTS: A total of 2425 subjects were recruited and 2343 of these had analyzable data. The C-statistic of the original Palliative Prognostic Index was 0.801, and those of modified Palliative Prognostic Indices ranged from 0.793 to 0.805 at 3 weeks. For 6-week survival predictions, the C-statistic of the original Palliative Prognostic Index was 0.802, and those of modified Palliative Prognostic Indices ranged from 0.791 to 0.799. The weighted kappa of the original Palliative Prognostic Index was 0.510, and those of modified Palliative Prognostic Indices ranged from 0.484 to 0.508. CONCLUSION: Adding items about activities of daily living changes to the Palliative Prognostic Index did not improve prognostic value in advanced cancer patients.

Multicenter cohort study on the survival time of cancer patients dying at home or in a hospital: Does place matter?

BACKGROUND: Although the place of death has a great influence on the quality of death and dying for cancer patients, whether the survival time differs according to the place of death is unclear. The primary aim of this study was to explore potential differences in the survival time of cancer patients dying at home or in a hospital. METHODS: This multicenter, prospective cohort study was conducted in Japan from September 2012 through April 2014 and involved 58 specialist palliative care services. RESULTS: Among the 2426 patients recruited, 2069 patients were analyzed for this study: 1582 receiving hospital-based palliative care and 487 receiving home-based palliative care. A total of 1607 patients actually died in a hospital, and 462 patients died at home. The survival of patients who died at home was significantly longer than the survival of patients who died in a hospital in the days' prognosis group (estimated median survival time, 13 days [95% confidence interval (CI), 10.3-15.7 days] vs 9 days [95% CI, 8.0-10.0 days]; P = .006) and in the weeks' prognosis group (36 days [95% CI, 29.9-42.1 days] vs 29 days [95% CI, 26.5-31.5 days]; P = .007) as defined by Prognosis in Palliative Care Study predictor model A. No significant difference was identified in the months' prognosis group. Cox proportional hazards analysis revealed that the place of death had a significant influence on the survival time in both unadjusted (hazard ratio [HR], 0.86; 95% CI, 0.78-0.96; P < .01) and adjusted models (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.77-0.97; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: In comparison with cancer patients who died in a hospital, cancer patients who died at home had similar or longer survival. Cancer 2016;122:1453-1460. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

The Accuracy of Physicians' Clinical Predictions of Survival in Patients With Advanced Cancer.

CONTEXT: Accurate prognoses are needed for patients with advanced cancer. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the accuracy of physicians' clinical predictions of survival (CPS) and assess the relationship between CPS and actual survival (AS) in patients with advanced cancer in palliative care units, hospital palliative care teams, and home palliative care services, as well as those receiving chemotherapy. METHODS: This was a multicenter prospective cohort study conducted in 58 palliative care service centers in Japan. The palliative care physicians evaluated patients on the first day of admission and followed up all patients to their death or six months after enrollment. We evaluated the accuracy of CPS and assessed the relationship between CPS and AS in the four groups. RESULTS: We obtained a total of 2036 patients: 470, 764, 404, and 398 in hospital palliative care teams, palliative care units, home palliative care services, and chemotherapy, respectively. The proportion of accurate CPS (0.67-1.33 times AS) was 35% (95% CI 33-37%) in the total sample and ranged from 32% to 39% in each setting. While the proportion of patients living longer than CPS (pessimistic CPS) was 20% (95% CI 18-22%) in the total sample, ranging from 15% to 23% in each setting, the proportion of patients living shorter than CPS (optimistic CPS) was 45% (95% CI 43-47%) in the total sample, ranging from 43% to 49% in each setting. CONCLUSION: Physicians tend to overestimate when predicting survival in all palliative care patients, including those receiving chemotherapy.

Independent validation of the modified prognosis palliative care study predictor models in three palliative care settings.

CONTEXT: Accurate prognostic information in palliative care settings is needed for patients to make decisions and set goals and priorities. The Prognosis Palliative Care Study (PiPS) predictor models were presented in 2011, but have not yet been fully validated by other research teams. OBJECTIVES: The primary aim of this study is to examine the accuracy and to validate the modified PiPS (using physician-proxy ratings of mental status instead of patient interviews) in three palliative care settings, namely palliative care units, hospital-based palliative care teams, and home-based palliative care services. METHODS: This multicenter prospective cohort study was conducted in 58 palliative care services including 16 palliative care units, 19 hospital-based palliative care teams, and 23 home-based palliative care services in Japan from September 2012 through April 2014. RESULTS: A total of 2426 subjects were recruited. For reasons including lack of followup and missing variables (primarily blood examination data), we obtained analyzable data from 2212 and 1257 patients for the modified PiPS-A and PiPS-B, respectively. In all palliative care settings, both the modified PiPS-A and PiPS-B identified three risk groups with different survival rates (P<0.001). The absolute agreement ranged from 56% to 60% in the PiPS-A model and 60% to 62% in the PiPS-B model. CONCLUSION: The modified PiPS was successfully validated and can be useful in palliative care units, hospital-based palliative care teams, and home-based palliative care services.

[The influence of family willingness to home palliative care].

In the current state of medical treatment, cancer patients discharged from hospital to home have been increasing. For enforcement of home palliative care, we think that family willingness to care for the patient is very important. We examined how much the willingness of a family to care for the patient influences the enforcement of home palliative care and the factors that influence the willingness of care given by the family. When the family willingness to care for the patient was low, there were significantly lower patient deaths at home. Meanwhile, the length of home care was also significantly short. In fact, there was a tendency to influence the outcome of home palliative care by increasing the willingness to care for the patient by the family when the number of caregivers was high, additional medical treatment given to the patient and a good QOL at the time of discharge. Based on the STAS evaluation result, the willingness to care for the patient by the family was significantly higher when anxiety between the patient and his family is low, understanding of the state of the disease is good and communication between the patient and the family is good. We thought that the willingness to care for the patient provided by the family influences greatly in order to enforce home palliative care to be successful. We also thought that it is important to provide appropriate information to the patient and his family, and to resolve individual patients' problems as well.

[Necessity of discharge planning of patients with malignant tumors].

Patients with malignant tumors and their families have to worry about many things when they leave the hospital including future changes of their medical conditions, home care, and the pros and cons of re-hospitalization. We examined the effects of discharge planning for 148 patients with malignant tumors who had been treated by our clinic as a part of discharge support in terms of anxiety relief and the length of home care. An adequate discharge planning reduced anxieties of patients as well as their families, and it also extended the period of home care significantly. Although discharge planning was effective, the early commencement of support and the involvement of medical social workers and nurses are necessary to perform it adequately. Therefore, it is necessary to train ward-nursing staffs for selecting patients who need discharge planning, and to create a department consisting of medical social workers and nurses who specialize in discharge planning.