Transferring care to enhance access to early-phase cancer clinical trials: Protocol to evaluate a novel program.

Involving diverse populations in early-phase (phase I and II) cancer clinical trials is critical to informed therapeutic development. However, given the growing costs and complexities of early-phase trials, trial activation and enrollment barriers may be greatest for these studies at healthcare facilities that provide care to the most diverse patient groups, including those in historically underserved communities (e.g., safety-net healthcare systems). To promote diverse and equitable access to early-phase cancer clinical trials, we are implementing a novel program for the transfer of care to enhance access to early-phase cancer clinical trials. We will then perform a mixed-methods study to determine perceptions and impact of the program. Specifically, we will screen, recruit, and enroll diverse patients from an urban, integrated safety-net healthcare system to open and active early-phase clinical trials being conducted in a university-based cancer center. To evaluate this novel program, we will: (1) determine program impact and efficiency; and (2) determine stakeholder experience with and perceptions of the program. To achieve these goals, we will conduct preliminary cost analyses of the program. We will also conduct surveys and interviews with patients and caregivers to elucidate program impact, challenges, and areas for improvement. We hypothesize that broadening access to early-phase cancer trials conducted at experienced centers may improve equity and diversity. In turn, such efforts may enhance the efficiency and generalizability of cancer clinical research.

Comparative study of dexamethasone premedication regimens with docetaxel chemotherapy in early HER-2 positive breast cancer: A safety net hospital experience.

INTRODUCTION: Docetaxel can cause fluid retention reactions (FRRs) and hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs). The manufacturer recommends a multi-day oral dexamethasone premedication to prevent these toxicities, but steroid related side effects and regimen compliance remain a concern. This study aimed to determine if modified dexamethasone premedication regimens resulted in differences in HSRs or FRRs to docetaxel. We also examined side effects of dexamethasone and delays in chemotherapy. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted on 82 early breast cancer patients treated with docetaxel. Three steroid regimens were examined: IV 20 mg single-dose dexamethasone, or IV 12 mg dexamethasone with either dexamethasone 8 mg BID for three days starting the day before chemotherapy or dexamethasone 4 mg BID for three days following chemotherapy. Adverse effects, delays in chemotherapy, and reasons for delays in chemotherapy were recorded. RESULTS: The incidence and severity of FRRs and HSRs was low, with less than 10% incidence of HSRs or FRRs in any group. Delays were most common in the group receiving dexamethasone 8 mg BID for 3 days starting the day before chemotherapy (63.3%) (p < 0.05) and were most commonly due to patient noncompliance (26%). CONCLUSION: A single dose of intravenous dexamethasone alone or followed by lower doses of oral dexamethasone may improve patient compliance and avoid delays in chemotherapy, without an increase in docetaxel toxicity.

Physician Disruptive Behavior Compromising Safe Care Delivery.

The negative impact and management of disruptive behavior are discussed in the article by Monika Kumar, et al.

Factors influencing implementation of a care coordination intervention for cancer survivors with multiple comorbidities in a safety-net system: an application of the Implementation Research Logic Model.

BACKGROUND: Under- and uninsured cancer survivors have significant medical, social, and economic complexity. For these survivors, effective care coordination between oncology and primary care teams is critical for high-quality, comprehensive care. While evidence-based interventions exist to improve coordination between healthcare teams, testing implementation of these interventions for cancer survivors seen in real-world safety-net settings has been limited. This study aimed to (1) identify factors influencing implementation of a multicomponent care coordination intervention (nurse coordinator plus patient registry) focused on cancer survivors with multiple comorbidities in an integrated safety-net system and (2) identify mechanisms through which the factors impacted implementation outcomes. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews (patients, providers, and system leaders), structured observations of primary care and oncology operations, and document analysis during intervention implementation between 2016 and 2020. The practice change model (PCM) guided data collection to identify barriers and facilitators of implementation; the PCM, Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, and Implementation Research Logic Model guided four immersion/crystallization data analysis and synthesis cycles to identify mechanisms and assess outcomes. Implementation outcomes included appropriateness, acceptability, adoption, and penetration. RESULTS: The intervention was appropriate and acceptable to primary care and oncology teams based on reported patient needs and resources and the strength of the evidence supporting intervention components. Active and sustained partnership with system leaders facilitated these outcomes. There was limited adoption and penetration early in implementation because the study was narrowly focused on just breast and colorectal cancer patients. This created barriers to real-world practice where patients with all cancer types receive care. Over time, flexibility intentionally designed into intervention implementation facilitated adoption and penetration. Regular feedback from system partners and rapid cycles of implementation and evaluation led to real-time adaptations increasing adoption and penetration. DISCUSSION: Evidence-based interventions to coordinate care for underserved cancer survivors across oncology and primary care teams can be implemented successfully when system leaders are actively engaged and with flexibility in implementation embedded intentionally to continuously facilitate adoption and penetration across the health system.

Characteristics of self-triaged emergency department visits by adults with cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Adults with a new diagnosis of cancer frequently visit emergency departments (EDs) for disease- and treatment-related issues, although not exclusively. Many cancer care providers have 24/7 clinician phone triage available, but initial recorded phone messages tend to advise patients to go to the nearest ED if they are "experiencing a medical emergency." It is unclear how well patients triage themselves to the optimal site of care. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study of tumor registry records (university patients diagnosed 2008-2018 and safety-net patients diagnosed 2012-2018) identifiably linked to electronic health records and a regional health information exchange. METHODS: We geoprocessed addresses to calculate driving time distance from the patient's home to the ED. We used mixed-effects regression to predict the diagnosis code-based severity for ED visits within 6 months of diagnosis, clustering visits within patients and hospitals. RESULTS: A total of 39,498 adults made 38,944 ED visits to 67 different hospitals. Patients self-referred for 85.5% of visits and bypassed a median (IQR) of 13 (4-33) closer EDs. Visits closer to home were not significantly more clinically severe; visits were significantly less severe if the patient self-referred (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.89; 95% CI, 0.81-0.97) or they were on weekends (AOR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.87-0.99). Reanalyzing within each individual health system also showed similar findings. CONCLUSIONS: Adults with cancer infrequently use available clinician advice before visiting the ED and may use factors other than clinical severity to determine their need for emergency care. Future work should explore the challenges that patients face navigating unplanned acute care, including reasons for underusing existing resources.

Importance of primary care for underserved cancer patients with multiple chronic conditions.

PURPOSE: To understand the impact of pre-existing conditions on healthcare utilization among under- and uninsured patients in the transition from cancer treatment to post-treatment survivorship. METHODS: Using electronic health record data, we constructed a cohort of patients seen in an integrated county health system between 1/1/2010 and 12/31/2016. Six hundred thirty-one adult patients diagnosed with non-metastatic breast or colorectal cancer during this period (cases) were matched 1:1 on sex and Charlson comorbidity index to non-cancer patients who had at least two chronic conditions and with at least one visit to the health system during the study period (controls). Conditional fixed effects Poisson regression models compared number of primary care and emergency department (ED) visits and completed [vs. no show or missed] appointments between cancer and non-cancer patients. RESULTS: Cancer patients had significantly lower number of visits compared with non-cancer patients (N = 46,965 vs. 85,038). Cancer patients were less likely to have primary care (IRR = 0.25; 95% CI: 0.24, 0.27) and ED visits (IRR = 0.57; 95% CI: 0.50, 0.64) but more likely to complete a scheduled appointment (AOR = 4.83; 95% CI: 4.32, 5.39) compared with non-cancer patients. Cancer patients seen in primary care at a higher rate were more likely to visit the ED (IRR = 2.06; 95% CI: 1.52, 2.80) than those seen in primary care at a lower rate. CONCLUSION: Health systems need to find innovative, effective solutions to increase primary care utilization among cancer patients with chronic care conditions to ensure optimal management of both chronic conditions and cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Maintaining regular connections with primary care providers during active cancer treatment should be promoted.

Enhancing access to and diversity in cancer clinical trials through a financial reimbursement program: Protocol to evaluate a novel program.

As clinical trials have become more complex, with increasing numbers of required procedures and clinic visits, gaining access to promising new treatments has become even more challenging for many individuals. To address these barriers, we implemented a financial reimbursement and outreach program designed to increase the number and diversity of participants in cancer clinical trials at centers in Dallas, Houston, and Philadelphia. As endorsed by U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Texas and Pennsylvania State Legislatures, the program provides financial reimbursement for non-clinical costs (e.g., travel, lodging) to patients on cancer clinical trials with household income up to 700% the Federal poverty rate. The research study described here, centered at the Dallas site, evaluates program impact by assessing (1) numbers and diversity of patients enrolled to cancer clinical trials before and after program implementation; (2) characteristics of patients offered participation in the program who do versus do not enroll; (3) characteristics of patients enrolled in the program who do versus do not complete the reimbursement process. To evaluate perceived barriers and facilitators of program participation, we will conduct semi-structured interviews and administer the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity Patient Reported Outcome Measure (COST PROM) and the Short Assessment of Health Literacy (SAHL). This program will examine how reimbursement of non-clinical costs can improve access to cancer clinical trials, with the eventual goal of increasing trial enrollment, diversity, representativeness, and generalizability.

The Utility of Breast Cancer Index (BCI) Over Clinical Prognostic Tools for Predicting the Need for Extended Endocrine Therapy: A Safety Net Hospital Experience.

INTRODUCTION: Extended endocrine therapy (EET) benefits select patients with early-stage hormone-receptor positive (HR+) breast cancer (BC) but also incurs side effects and cost. The Clinical Treatment Score at Five Years (CTS5) is a free tool that estimates risks of late relapse in estrogen-receptor positive (ER+) BC using clinicopathologic factors. The Breast Cancer Index (BCI) incorporates 2 genomic assays to estimate late relapse risk and likelihood of benefit from EET. This retrospective study assesses the utility of BCI in selecting EET candidates in a safety net hospital. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review on 69 women with early-stage HR+, HER2- BC diagnosed at our institution from December 2009 to February 2016 on whom BCI was submitted. The CTS5 score was also calculated to assess clinical risk of late relapse. RESULTS: Median age was 53 years. All patients included in our analysis had early ER+ HER2-negative BC. Roughly half of the patients (55%) were postmenopausal and 61% were of Hispanic origin. A total of 34 patients (49%) were deemed high-risk (>5%) for late relapse by CTS5, compared to 42 (61%) by BCI. BCI identified 31 (45%) patients that would benefit from EET and of those, 74%% were advised EET. 16 (47%) clinical high-risk patients were advised against EET due to low benefit predicted by BCI. In the clinical low risk group, 9 (26%) were recommended EET based on high benefit predicted by BCI. CONCLUSION: BCI is reasonable to consider in early-stage HR+ BC and offered clinically relevant information over clinical pathologic information alone.

Patient Experiences, Trust, and Preferences for Health Data Sharing.

PURPOSE: Scholars have examined patients' attitudes toward secondary use of routinely collected clinical data for research and quality improvement. Evidence suggests that trust in health care organizations and physicians is critical. Less is known about experiences that shape trust and how they influence data sharing preferences. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To explore learning health care system (LHS) ethics, democratic deliberations were hosted from June 2017 to May 2018. A total of 217 patients with cancer participated in facilitated group discussion. Transcripts were coded independently. Finalized codes were organized into themes using interpretive description and thematic analysis. Two previous analyses reported on patient preferences for consent and data use; this final analysis focuses on the influence of personal lived experiences of the health care system, including interactions with providers and insurers, on trust and preferences for data sharing. RESULTS: Qualitative analysis identified four domains of patients' lived experiences raised in the context of the policy discussions: (1) the quality of care received, (2) the impact of health care costs, (3) the transparency and communication displayed by a provider or an insurer to the patient, and (4) the extent to which care coordination was hindered or facilitated by the interchange between a provider and an insurer. Patients discussed their trust in health care decision makers and their opinions about LHS data sharing. CONCLUSION: Additional resources, infrastructure, regulations, and practice innovations are needed to improve patients' experiences with and trust in the health care system. Those who seek to build LHSs may also need to consider improvement in other aspects of care delivery.

Thematic Analysis of Challenges of Care Coordination for Underinsured and Uninsured Cancer Survivors With Chronic Conditions.

Importance: Although a majority of underinsured and uninsured patients with cancer have multiple comorbidities, many lack consistent connections with a primary care team to manage chronic conditions during and after cancer treatment. This presents a major challenge to delivering high-quality comprehensive and coordinated care. Objective: To describe challenges and opportunities for coordinating care in an integrated safety-net system for patients with both cancer and other chronic conditions. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multimodal qualitative study was conducted from May 2016 to July 2019 at a county-funded, vertically integrated safety-net health system including ambulatory oncology, urgent care, primary care, and specialty care. Participants were 93 health system stakeholders (clinicians, leaders, clinical, and administrative staff) strategically and snowball sampled for semistructured interviews and observation during meetings and daily processes of care. Data collection and analysis were conducted iteratively using a grounded theory approach, followed by systematic thematic analysis to organize data, review, and interpret comprehensive findings. Data were analyzed from March 2019 to March 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Multilevel factors associated with experiences of coordinating care for patients with cancer and chronic conditions among oncology and primary care stakeholders. Results: Among interviews and observation of 93 health system stakeholders, system-level factors identified as being associated with care coordination included challenges to accessing primary care, lack of communication between oncology and primary care clinicians, and leadership awareness of care coordination challenges. Clinician-level factors included unclear role delineation and lack of clinician knowledge and preparedness to manage the effects of cancer and chronic conditions. Conclusions and Relevance: Primary care may play a critical role in delivering coordinated care for patients with cancer and chronic diseases. This study's findings suggest a need for care delivery strategies that bridge oncology and primary care by enhancing communication, better delineating roles and responsibilities across care teams, and improving clinician knowledge and preparedness to care for patients with cancer and chronic conditions. Expanding timely access to primary care is also key, albeit challenging in resource-limited safety-net settings.

Prior Frequent Emergency Department Use as a Predictor of Emergency Department Visits After a New Cancer Diagnosis.

PURPOSE: To determine whether emergency department (ED) visit history prior to cancer diagnosis is associated with ED visit volume after cancer diagnosis. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of adults (≥ 18 years) with an incident cancer diagnosis (excluding nonmelanoma skin cancers or leukemia) at an academic medical center between 2008 and 2018 and a safety-net hospital between 2012 and 2016. Our primary outcome was the number of ED visits in the first 6 months after cancer diagnosis, modeled using a multivariable negative binomial regression accounting for ED visit history in the 6-12 months preceding cancer diagnosis, electronic health record proxy social determinants of health, and clinical cancer-related characteristics. RESULTS: Among 35,090 patients with cancer (49% female and 50% non-White), 57% had ≥ 1 ED visit in the 6 months immediately following cancer diagnosis and 20% had ≥ 1 ED visit in the 6-12 months prior to cancer diagnosis. The strongest predictor of postdiagnosis ED visits was frequent (≥ 4) prediagnosis ED visits (adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR]: 3.68; 95% CI, 3.36 to 4.02). Other covariates associated with greater postdiagnosis ED use included having 1-3 prediagnosis ED visits (aIRR: 1.32; 95% CI, 1.28 to 1.36), Hispanic (aIRR: 1.12; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.17) and Black (aIRR: 1.21; 95% CI, 1.17 to 1.25) race, homelessness (aIRR: 1.95; 95% CI, 1.73 to 2.20), advanced-stage cancer (aIRR: 1.30; 95% CI, 1.26 to 1.35), and treatment regimens including chemotherapy (aIRR: 1.44; 95% CI, 1.40 to 1.48). CONCLUSION: The strongest independent predictor for ED use after a new cancer diagnosis was frequent ED visits before cancer diagnosis. Efforts to reduce potentially avoidable ED visits among patients with cancer should consider educational initiatives that target heavy prior ED users and offer them alternative ways to seek urgent medical care.

Governance of a Learning Health Care System for Oncology: Patient Recommendations.

PURPOSE: The learning health care system (LHS) was designed to enable real-time learning and research by harnessing data generated during patients' clinical encounters. This novel approach begets ethical questions regarding the oversight of users and uses of patient data. Understanding patients' perspectives is vitally important. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted democratic deliberation sessions focused on CancerLinQ, a real-world LHS. Experts presented educational content, and then small group discussions were held to elicit viewpoints. The deliberations centered around whether policies should permit or deny certain users and uses of secondary data. De-identified transcripts of the discussions were examined by using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Analysis identified two thematic clusters: expectations and concerns, which seemed to inform LHS governance recommendations. Participants expected to benefit from the LHS through the advancement of medical knowledge, which they hoped would improve treatments and the quality of their care. They were concerned that profit-driven users might manipulate the data in ways that could burden or exploit patients, hinder medical decisions, or compromise patient-provider communication. It was recommended that restricted access, user fees, and penalties should be imposed to prevent users, especially for-profit entities, from misusing data. Another suggestion was that patients should be notified of potential ethical issues and included on diverse, unbiased governing boards. CONCLUSION: If patients are to trust and support LHS endeavors, their concerns about for-profit users must be addressed. The ethical implementation of such systems should consist of patient representation on governing boards, transparency, and strict oversight of for-profit users.

Clinicopathological Features and Outcomes in Individuals with Breast Cancer and ATM, CHEK2, or PALB2 Mutations.

INTRODUCTION: The moderate-penetrance germline mutations ATM, CHEK2, and PALB2 are implicated in an increased risk of the development of breast cancer. Whether these mutations provide clinical utility to guide treatment strategies and prognosis remains unknown. METHODS: A retrospective case-control study from a tertiary institution compared patients with stage 0-III breast cancer, and positive for ATM, CHEK2, or PALB2 mutations, with a matched cohort selected by randomization and negative for mutations. Data acquisition included demographics, histopathologic, treatment, and clinical outcome variables. RESULTS: A total of 145 patients with breast cancer (144 female and 1 male) were analyzed-74 mutation-positive patients (24 ATM, 26 CHEK2, 24 PALB2) and 71 mutation-negative patients. Mutation-positive patients compared with mutation-negative patients had increased family history of breast cancer (79.7 vs. 52.9%, p < 0.001) and tumor size > 2.0 cm (63.1% vs. 42.3%, p = 0.015). Patients with prior knowledge of mutational status were more likely to proceed with total mastectomy and prophylactic mastectomy (74.5% vs. 25.5%, p < 0.02; and 65.5% vs. 34.5%, p < 0.001, respectively). The unadjusted recurrence rate was higher in mutation-positive patients compared with mutation-negative patients (24.3 vs. 8.5%, p = 0.01), although mutation status was not predictive for recurrence in Cox regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Patients positive for ATM, CHEK2, or PALB2 mutations had increased tumor size and were more likely to undergo extensive surgeries. Mutation status was not predictive of recurrence, although this lack of effect may have been mitigated by lower rates of recurrence in those who pursued total mastectomy. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings.

The impact of intimate partner violence on breast and cervical cancer survivors in an integrated, safety-net setting.

PURPOSE: Characterize prevalence of intimate partner violence (IPV) among breast and cervical survivors receiving care in an urban safety-net healthcare system; Examine the relationship between IPV and clinical characteristics, receipt of cancer treatment, and guideline-recommended survivorship care. METHODS: From 2010 to 2017, breast and cervical cancer survivors were identified and recruited from a large, integrated, safety-net hospital system. Electronic health records (EHR; to measure survivorship care), cancer registry (to measure clinical characteristics), and patient telephone surveys (to measure IPV) were triangulated among 312 survivors. Bivariate and multivariable models assessed the relationship between victimization and clinical characteristics, cancer treatment, and guideline-recommended survivorship care. RESULTS: Among the 312 participants, 54% identified as IPV+. Among breast cancer, IPV+ cancer participants were twice more likely to develop estrogen receptor negative ER- and/or progesterone receptor negative PR- tumor receptors compared with IPV- cancer participants (AOR = 2.31; 95% CI, 1.20, 4.44). IPV+ breast cancer participants were less likely to have surgery and less likely to have hormone therapy as a first course of treatment compared with IPV- participants. There was no relationship between IPV and adherence to guideline-recommended cancer survivorship care. CONCLUSIONS: This study expands our current knowledge on how victimization, and specifically IPV, impact health among specialty care. Future research should determine the feasibility of implementing Trauma-Informed Care in oncology practices to better optimize care. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: At integrated hospital systems, IPV+ cancer participants should utilize social workers, within their oncology clinics, to connect to victim services.

Patient Preferences Regarding Informed Consent Models for Participation in a Learning Health Care System for Oncology.

PURPOSE: The expansion of learning health care systems (LHSs) promises to bolster research and quality improvement endeavors. Stewards of patient data have a duty to respect the preferences of the patients from whom, and for whom, these data are being collected and consolidated. METHODS: We conducted democratic deliberations with a diverse sample of 217 patients treated at 4 sites to assess views about LHSs, using the example of CancerLinQ, a real-world LHS, to stimulate discussion. In small group discussions, participants deliberated about different policies for how to provide information and to seek consent regarding the inclusion of patient data. These discussions were recorded, transcribed, and de-identified for thematic analysis. RESULTS: Of participants, 67% were female, 61% were non-Hispanic Whites, and the mean age was 60 years. Patients' opinions about sharing their data illuminated 2 spectra: trust/distrust and individualism/collectivism. Positions on these spectra influenced the weight placed on 3 priorities: promoting societal altruism, ensuring respect for persons, and protecting themselves. In turn, consideration of these priorities seemed to inform preferences regarding patient choices and system transparency. Most advocated for a policy whereby patients would receive notification and have the opportunity to opt out of including their medical records in the LHS. Participants reasoned that such a policy would balance personal protections and societal welfare. CONCLUSION: System transparency and patient choice are vital if patients are to feel respected and to trust LHS endeavors. Those responsible for LHS implementation should ensure that all patients receive an explanation of their options, together with standardized, understandable, comprehensive materials.

Effect of Public Deliberation on Patient Attitudes Regarding Consent and Data Use in a Learning Health Care System for Oncology.

PURPOSE: We sought to generate informed and considered opinions regarding acceptable secondary uses of deidentified health information and consent models for oncology learning health care systems. METHODS: Day-long democratic deliberation sessions included 217 patients with cancer at four geographically and sociodemographically diverse sites. Patients completed three surveys (at baseline, immediately after deliberation, and 1-month follow-up). RESULTS: Participants were 67.3% female, 21.7% black, and 6.0% Hispanic. The most notable changes in perceptions after deliberation related to use of deidentified medical-record data by insurance companies. After discussion, 72.3% of participants felt comfortable if the purpose was to make sure patients receive recommended care (v 79.5% at baseline; P = .03); 24.9% felt comfortable if the purpose was to determine eligibility for coverage or reimbursement (v 50.9% at baseline; P < .001). The most notable change about secondary research use related to believing it was important that doctors ask patients at least once whether researchers can use deidentified medical-records data for future research. The proportion endorsing high importance decreased from baseline (82.2%) to 68.7% immediately after discussion (P < .001), and remained decreased at 73.1% (P = .01) at follow-up. At follow-up, non-Hispanic whites were more likely to consider it highly important to be able to conduct medical research with deidentified electronic health records (96.8% v 87.7%; P = .01) and less likely to consider it highly important for doctors to get a patient's permission each time deidentified medical record information is used for research (23.2% v 51.6%; P < .001). CONCLUSION: This research confirms that most patients wish to be asked before deidentified medical records are used for research. Policies designed to realize the potential benefits of learning health care systems can, and should be, grounded in informed and considered public opinion.

Using Unidirectional Rotations to Improve Vestibular System Asymmetry in Patients with Vestibular Dysfunction.

The vestibular system provides information about head movement and mediates reflexes that contribute to balance control and gaze stabilization during daily activities. Vestibular sensors are located in the inner ear on both sides of the head and project to the vestibular nuclei in the brainstem. Vestibular dysfunction is often due to an asymmetry between input from the two sides. This results in asymmetrical neural inputs from the two ears, which can produce an illusion of rotation, manifested as vertigo. The vestibular system has an impressive capacity for compensation, which serves to rebalance how asymmetrical information from the sensory end organs on both sides is processed at the central level. To promote compensation, various rehabilitation programs are used in the clinic; however, they primarily use exercises that improve multisensory integration. Recently, visual-vestibular training has also been used to improve the vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR) in animals with compensated unilateral lesions. Here, a new method is introduced for rebalancing the vestibular activity on both sides in human subjects. This method consists of five unidirectional rotations in the dark (peak velocity of 320°/s) toward the weaker side. The efficacy of this method was shown in a sequential, double-blinded clinical trial in 16 patients with VOR asymmetry (measured by the directional preponderance in response to sinusoidal rotations). In most cases, VOR asymmetry decreased after a single session, reached normal values within the first two sessions in one week, and the effects lasted up to 6 weeks. The rebalancing effect is due to both an increase in VOR response from the weaker side and a decrease in response from the stronger side. The findings suggest that unidirectional rotation can be used as a supervised rehabilitation method to reduce VOR asymmetry in patients with longstanding vestibular dysfunction.

Reducing Hospitalizations: Institution of Outpatient Infusional EPOCH-Based Chemotherapy at a Safety Net Hospital.

PURPOSE: EPOCH (etoposide, prednisone, vincristine, cyclophosphamide, and doxorubicin) -based chemotherapy is traditionally administered inpatient because of its complex 96-hour protocol and number of involved medications. These routine admissions are costly, disruptive, and isolating to patients. Here, we describe our experience transitioning from inpatient to outpatient ambulatory EPOCH-based chemotherapy in a safety-net hospital, associated cost savings, and patient perceptions. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Guidelines for chemotherapy administration and educational materials were developed by a multidisciplinary team of physicians, nurses, and pharmacists. Data were collected via chart review and costs via the finance department. Patient satisfaction with chemotherapy at home compared with hospitalization was measured on a Likert-type scale via direct-to-patient survey. RESULTS: From January 30, 2017, through January 30, 2018, 87 cycles of EPOCH-based chemotherapy were administered to 23 patients. Sixty-one ambulatory cycles (70%) were administered to 18 patients. Of 26 cycles administered in the hospital, 18 (69%) were the first cycle of treatment. Rates of inappropriate prophylactic antimicrobial prescription and laboratory testing were lower in the outpatient setting. Eight of nine patients surveyed preferred home chemotherapy to inpatient chemotherapy. Per-cycle drug costs were 57.6% lower in outpatients as a result of differences in the acquisition cost in the outpatient setting. In total, the transition to ambulatory EPOCH-based chemotherapy yielded 1-year savings of $502,030 and an estimated 336 days of avoided hospital confinement. CONCLUSION: Multiday ambulatory EPOCH-based regimens were successfully and safely administered in our safety-net hospital. Outpatient therapy was associated with significant savings through avoided hospitalizations and reductions in drug acquisition cost and improved patient satisfaction.