A systematic review of the assessment of the clinical utility of genomic sequencing: Implications of the lack of standard definitions and measures of clinical utility.

PURPOSE: Exome sequencing (ES) and genome sequencing (GS) are diagnostic tests for rare genetic diseases. Studies report clinical utility of ES/GS. The goal of this systematic review is to establish how clinical utility is defined and measured in studies evaluating the impacts of ES/GS results for pediatric patients. METHODS: Relevant articles were identified in PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Web of Science. Eligible studies assessed clinical utility of ES/GS for pediatric patients published before 2021. Other relevant articles were added based on articles' references. Articles were coded to assess definitions and measures of clinical utility. RESULTS: Of 1346 articles, 83 articles met eligibility criteria. Clinical utility was not clearly defined in 19% of studies and 92% did not use an explicit measure of clinical utility. When present, definitions of clinical utility diverged from recommended definitions and varied greatly, from narrow (diagnostic yield of ES/GS) to broad (including decisions about withdrawal of care/palliative care and/or impacts on other family members). CONCLUSION: Clinical utility is used to guide policy and practice decisions about test use. The lack of a standard definition of clinical utility of ES/GS may lead to under- or overestimations of clinical utility, complicating policymaking and raising ethical issues.

Pediatric palliative care in Canada.

Pediatric palliative care (PPC) emerged during the late 20th century in Canada. It has steadily expanded and there are now programs in every province. Programs adhere to recognized standards of practice at both federal and provincial levels. PPC is recognized by government regulatory bodies and professional associations, including the Canadian Paediatric Society.

Morphine versus hydromorphone in pediatrics: a narrative review of latest indications and optimal use in neonates and children.

The management of pain in pediatrics is multimodal and includes non-pharmacologic and pharmacologic approaches. Opioids, and particularly morphine and hydromorphone, are frequently used to treat moderate-to-severe pain. The goals of this review are to describe the pharmacological characteristics of both drugs, to cover the latest evidence of their respective indications, and to promote their safe use in pediatrics. Morphine is the most studied opioid in children and is known to be safe and effective. Morphine and hydromorphone can be used to manage acute pain and are usually avoided when treating chronic non-cancer pain. Current evidence suggests that both opioids have a similar efficacy and adverse effect profile. Hydromorphone has not been studied in neonates but in some centers, it has been used instead of morphine for certain patients. In palliative care, the use of opioids is often indicated and their benefits extend beyond analgesia; indications include treatment of central neuropathic pain in children with severe neurologic impairment and treatment of respiratory distress in the imminently dying patients. The longstanding belief that the use of well-titrated opioids hastens death should be abandoned as robust evidence has shown the opposite. With the current opioid crisis, a responsible use of opioids should be promoted, including limiting the opioid prescription to the patient's anticipated needs, optimizing a multimodal analgesic plan including the use of non-pharmacological measures and non-opioid medications, and providing information on safe storage and disposal to patients and families. More data is needed to better guide the use of morphine and hydromorphone in children.

Quality of life in childhood advanced cancer: from conceptualization to assessment with the Advance QoL tool.

BACKGROUND: Advanced childhood cancer, a condition with no available cancer-focused treatment options, greatly impacts Quality of Life (QoL). We need appropriate assessment strategies to select adapted treatment targets, improve care and optimize communication. Our first goal was to identify the domains of patients' QoL by combining for the first time the perspectives of patients and parents with previously collected reports in professionals. Our second goal was to develop a simple QoL assessment tool and optimize its format and content for use in the childhood advanced cancer population. METHODS: To identify QoL domains, we conducted qualitative interviews with 7 young patients (4 girls, 3 boys, aged 13 ± 4 yrs) and 9 parents (7 mothers, 2 fathers) from our treatment centre. We used inductive thematic content analysis to code and categorize respondents' viewpoints. The first version of the tool (Advance QoL) was then drafted, and structured feedback was collected through interviews and a survey with 15 experts. We computed content validity indices. RESULTS: Apart from the physical, psychological, and social domains, participants insisted on four original themes: autonomy, pleasure, the pursuit of achievement, and the sense of feeling heard. This was in line with the categories found in a preliminary study involving professionals (PMID: 28137343). Experts evaluated the tool as clear, relevant, acceptable, and usable. They formulated recommendations on instructions, timeframe, and item formulations, which we implemented in the refined version. CONCLUSIONS: Advance QoL is an innovative tool targeting key life domains in childhood advanced cancer. It is focused on preserved abilities and targets of care. The refined version is appropriate for adult respondents within families and professionals. Future studies will develop versions for young ages to collect the experience of patients themselves. This will open on future reliability, validity, sensitivity, and implementation studies.

Clinical Use of an Order Protocol for Distress in Pediatric Palliative Care.

Several children receiving palliative care experience dyspnea and pain. An order protocol for distress (OPD) is available at Sainte-Justine Hospital, aimed at alleviating respiratory distress, pain and anxiety in pediatric palliative care patients. This study evaluates the clinical use of the OPD at Sainte-Justine Hospital, through a retrospective chart review of all patients for whom the OPD was prescribed between September 2009 and September 2012. Effectiveness of the OPD was assessed using chart documentation of the patient's symptoms, or the modified Borg scale. Safety of the OPD was evaluated by measuring the time between administration of the first medication and the patient's death, and clinical evolution of the patient as recorded in the chart. One hundred and four (104) patients were included in the study. The OPD was administered at least once to 78 (75%) patients. A total of 350 episodes of administration occurred, mainly for respiratory distress (89%). Relief was provided in 90% of cases. The interval between administration of the first protocol and death was 17 h; the interval was longer in children with cancer compared to other illnesses (p = 0.02). Data from this study support the effectiveness and safety of using an OPD for children receiving palliative care.