Cardiac Related Psychosocial Distress and Traumatic Distress in Individuals with Advanced Heart Failure.

Guided by the Transactional Model of Stress and Coping, this study explored relationships between cardiac related psychosocial distress, traumatic distress, and the number of lifetime traumas in people with advanced heart failure. Utilizing a cross-sectional survey design, a convenience sample of participants with advanced heart failure who received treatment in Washington, DC, completed standardized measures. Bivariate analysis showed a statistically significant difference in mean number of exposures and distress associated with advanced heart failure therapies and linear relationships between exposures and traumatic distress, distress and traumatic distress, and exposures and distress, as well as between the number of exposures and distress and traumatic distress and between the distress and traumatic distress. Multivariate analysis suggested that the higher the number of reported traumatic events, the higher the distress, and the higher the distress, the higher the traumatic distress. Social workers and allied team members should consider how a patient's distress relates to traumatic distress in the advanced stage heart failure population.

Use of a self-reported psychosocial distress screening tool as a predictor of need for psychosocial intervention in a general medical setting.

This study describes the development of a self-reported psychosocial distress screening tool for a general medical population and criteria to predict the need for psychosocial intervention. The objectives were to develop criteria to determine which patients need in-person screening and establish criteria identifying patients who are more likely to require psychosocial interventions. The outcomes have bearing on reducing initial psychosocial screening workload for medical social workers in high volume medical settings. Furthermore, a criterion for scoring the self-reported tool can predict which patients will need further social work intervention. The results suggest criteria are a score on the adapted Distress Thermometer of five or greater, at least two negative emotions, and a lack of health insurance. The optimal criterion identified 36% (446/1228) of patients in need of in-person screening with the remaining 64% (782/1228) screened low risk through the tool, representing a significant workload reduction.

Toward a National Initiative in Cancer Rehabilitation: Recommendations From a Subject Matter Expert Group.

The health care delivery system in the United States is challenged to meet the needs of a growing population of cancer survivors. A pressing need is to optimize overall function and reduce disability in these individuals. Functional impairments and disability affect most patients during and after disease treatment. Rehabilitation health care providers can diagnose and treat patients' physical, psychological, and cognitive impairments in an effort to maintain or restore function, reduce symptom burden, maximize independence and improve quality of life in this medically complex population. However, few care delivery models integrate comprehensive cancer rehabilitation services into the oncology care continuum. The Rehabilitation Medicine Department of the Clinical Center at the National Institutes of Health with support from the National Cancer Institute and the National Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research convened a subject matter expert group to review current literature and practice patterns, identify opportunities and gaps regarding cancer rehabilitation and its support of oncology care, and make recommendations for future efforts that promote quality cancer rehabilitation care. The recommendations suggest stronger efforts toward integrating cancer rehabilitation care models into oncology care from the point of diagnosis, incorporating evidence-based rehabilitation clinical assessment tools, and including rehabilitation professionals in shared decision-making in order to provide comprehensive cancer care and maximize the functional capabilities of cancer survivors. These recommendations aim to enable future collaborations among a variety of stakeholders to improve the delivery of high-quality cancer care.

Treatment With Carfilzomib-Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone With Lenalidomide Extension in Patients With Smoldering or Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma.

IMPORTANCE: Carfilzomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone therapy yields deep responses in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). It is important to gain an understanding of this combination's tolerability and impact on minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity because this end point has been associated with improved survival. OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of carfilzomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone therapy in NDMM and high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Clinical and correlative pilot study at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center. Patients with NDMM or high-risk SMM were enrolled between July 11, 2011, and October 9, 2013. Median follow-up was 17.3 (NDMM) and 15.9 months (SMM). INTERVENTIONS: Eight 28-day cycles were composed of carfilzomib 20/36 mg/m2 on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16; lenalidomide 25 mg on days 1 through 21; and dexamethasone 20/10 mg (cycles 1-4/5-8) on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16, 22, and 23. Patients who achieved at least stable disease subsequently received 24 cycles of lenalidomide extended dosing. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary end points were neuropathy of grade 3 or greater (NDMM) and at least very good partial response rates (SMM). Minimal residual disease was also assessed. RESULTS: Of 45 patients with NDMM, none had neuropathy of grade 3 or greater. Of 12 patients with high-risk SMM, the most common of any-grade adverse events were lymphopenia (12 [100%]) and gastrointestinal disorders (11 [92%]). All patients with SMM achieved at least a very good partial response during the study period. Among the 28 patients with NDMM and the 12 with SMM achieving at least a near-complete response, MRD negativity was found in 28 of 28 (100% [95% CI, 88%-100%]), 11 of 12 (92% [95% CI, 62%-100%]) (multiparametric flow cytometry), 14 of 21 (67% [95% CI, 43%-85%]), and 9 of 12 (75% [95% CI, 43%-94%]) (next-generation sequencing), respectively. In patients with NDMM, 12-month progression-free survival for MRD-negative vs MRD-positive status by flow cytometry and next-generation sequencing was 100% vs 79% (95% CI, 47%-94%; P < .001) and 100% vs 95% (95% CI, 75%-99%; P = .02), respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Carfilzomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone therapy is tolerable and demonstrates high rates of MRD negativity in NDMM, translating into longer progression-free survival in patients achieving MRD negativity. Carfilzomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone therapy also demonstrates efficacy in high-risk SMM.