Perceptions of prognosis and end-of-life care outcomes in patients with advanced lung and gastrointestinal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with advanced cancer have misperceptions of their prognosis, which may impact end-of-life decision-making. Data regarding associations between prognostic perceptions over time and end-of-life care outcomes are lacking. AIM: To describe patients' perceptions of their prognosis with advanced cancer and examine associations between these perceptions and end-of-life care outcomes. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of longitudinal data from a randomized controlled trial of a palliative care intervention for patients with newly diagnosed incurable cancer. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Conducted at an outpatient cancer center in the northeastern United States and patients were within 8 weeks of a diagnosis with incurable lung or non-colorectal gastrointestinal cancer. RESULTS: We enrolled 350 patients in the parent trial, of which 80.5% (281/350) died during the study period. Overall, 59.4% (164/276) of patients reported they were terminally ill, and 66.1% (154/233) reported that their cancer was likely curable at the assessment closest to death. Patient acknowledgment of terminal illness was only associated with lower risk of hospitalizations in the last 30 days of life (OR = 0.52, p = 0.025). Patients who reported their cancer as likely curable were less likely to utilize hospice (OR = 0.25, p = 0.002) or die at home (OR = 0.56, p = 0.043), and they were more likely to be hospitalized in the last 30 days of life (OR = 2.28, p = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: Patients' perceptions of their prognosis are associated with important end-of-life care outcomes. Interventions are needed to enhance patients' perceptions of their prognosis and optimize their end-of-life care.

Health-Related Quality of Life and Depression Symptoms in a Cross Section of Patients with Advanced Lung Cancer before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background: Adults with advanced lung cancer experience reduced health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and psychological symptoms at diagnosis. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate whether the COVID-19 pandemic worsened HRQOL among patients recently diagnosed with cancer. Design: We analyzed baseline data from two randomized controlled trials of early palliative care to compare HRQOL and depression symptoms among those enrolled during the pandemic (January 2020 to January 2021) versus prepandemic (March 2018 to January 2019). Setting/Subjects: This cohort included patients recently diagnosed with advanced lung cancer in two multisite studies. Measurements: We used analysis of covariance to calculate adjusted mean differences between groups with the timeframe as an independent variable and HRQOL (using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General) and depression symptoms (using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9) as dependent variables, adjusting for age, gender, relationship status, performance status, symptoms, and time since diagnosis. We tested for an interaction between the COVID-19 timeframe and relationship status. Results: Neither HRQOL (adjusted mean difference -1.78; p = 0.137) nor depression symptoms (0.06; p = 0.889) differed between patients enrolled pre-COVID-19 (n = 665) relative to those enrolled during COVID-19 (n = 191) in adjusted analyses. Relationship status moderated the effect of the COVID-19 timeframe on HRQOL; unmarried patients experienced worse HRQOL during COVID-19 (adjusted mean difference: -5.25; p = 0.011). Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic did not further reduce HRQOL or increase depression symptoms among patients recently diagnosed with lung cancer, but did worsen HRQOL for unmarried patients in moderation analysis. Psychosocial evaluation and supportive care are important for all patients, particularly those with limited social support. Clinical trial registration numbers: NCT03337399 and NCT03375489.

Video and In-Person Palliative Care Delivery Challenges before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

CONTEXT: Palliative care (PC) clinicians faced many challenges delivering outpatient care during the coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) pandemic. OBJECTIVES: We described trends for in-person and video visit PC delivery challenges before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in the U.S. METHODS: We performed a secondary data analysis of patient characteristics and PC clinician surveys from a multisite randomized controlled trial at 20 academic cancer centers. Patients newly diagnosed with advanced lung cancer (N = 653) were randomly assigned to receive either early in-person or telehealth PC and had at least monthly PC clinician visits. PC clinicians completed surveys documenting PC delivery challenges after each encounter. We categorized patients into 3 subgroups according to their PC visit dates relative to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in the U.S.-pre-COVID-19 (all visits before March 1, 2020), pre/post-COVID-19 (≥1 visit before and after March 1, 2020), and post-COVID-19 (all visits after March 1, 2020). We performed Pearson's chi-squared, Fisher's exact, and Kruskal-Wallis tests to examine associations. RESULTS: We analyzed 2329 surveys for video visits and 2176 surveys for in-person visits. For video visits, the pre-COVID-19 subgroup (25.8% [46/178]) had the most technical difficulties followed by the pre/post-COVID-19 subgroup (17.2% [307/1784]) and then the post-COVID-19 subgroup (11.4% [42/367]) (P = 0.0001). For in-person visits, challenges related to absent patients' family members occurred most often in the post-COVID-19 subgroup (6.2% [16/259]) followed by the pre/post-COVID-19 subgroup (3.6% [50/1374]) and then the pre-COVID-19 subgroup (2.2% [12/543]) (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Technical difficulties related to PC video visits improved, whereas in-person visit challenges related to absent patients' family members worsened during the pandemic.

Study protocol for a randomised trial evaluating the non-inferiority of stepped palliative care versus early integrated palliative care for patients with advanced lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Integrating palliative care (PC) early in the illness course for patients with serious cancers improves their outcomes and is recommended by national organisations such as the American Society of Clinical Oncology. However, monthly visits with PC clinicians from the time of diagnosis can be challenging to implement due to the lack of specialty-trained PC clinicians and resources. Therefore, we developed a stepped care model to triage PC service based on patients' needs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We are conducting a non-blinded, randomised trial to evaluate the non-inferiority of a stepped PC model compared with an early integrated PC model for improving patients' quality of life (QOL) at 24 weeks (primary outcome). Patients assigned to early integrated PC meet with PC every 4 weeks throughout their illness. Patients assigned to stepped PC have PC visits only at clinically significant points in their illness (eg, cancer progression) unless their QOL decreases, at which time they are 'stepped up' and meet with PC every 4 weeks throughout the remainder of their illness. Secondary aims include assessing whether stepped PC is non-inferior to early integrated PC regarding patient-clinician communication about end of life care and length of stay on hospice as well as comparing resource utilisation. Patients are recruited from the Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Boston, Massachusetts; Duke Cancer Center, Durham, North Carolina and University of Pennsylvania Abramson Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The target sample size is 510 patients. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study is funded by the National Cancer Institute, approved by the Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center Institutional Review Board and will be reported in accordance with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement. We will disseminate results through professional society meetings, peer-reviewed publications and presentations to patient organisations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03337399.

Coping strategies in patients with acute myeloid leukemia.

Patients diagnosed with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) face sudden-onset life-threatening disease that requires intensive treatments. Although their early disease trajectory is characterized by significant, toxic side effects, limited data are available describing coping strategies among patients with AML and how these inform patient-reported outcomes. We used cross-sectional secondary data analyses to describe coping in 160 patients with newly diagnosed high-risk AML. The Brief COPE, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist-Civilian Version, and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Leukemia were used at time of AML diagnosis to measure coping strategies, psychological distress, and quality of life (QOL), respectively. The median split method for distribution of coping domains and multivariate regression models were used to assess the relationship between coping and patient-reported outcomes. Participants (median age, 64.4 years) were mostly non-Hispanic White (86.3%), male (60.0%), and married (73.8%). Most (51.9%) had high utilization of approach-oriented coping strategies, whereas 38.8% had high utilization of avoidant coping strategies. At time of diagnosis, use of approach-oriented coping was associated with less psychological distress (anxiety, ß = -0.262, P = .002; depression symptoms, ß = -0.311, P < .001; and posttraumatic distress disorder symptoms, ß = -0.596, P = .006) and better QOL (ß = 1.491, P = .003). Use of avoidant coping was associated with more psychological distress (anxiety, ß = 0.884, P < .001; depression symptoms, ß = 0.697, P < .001; and posttraumatic distress disorder symptoms, ß = 3.048, P < .001) and worse QOL (ß = -5.696, P < .001). Patients with high-risk AML use various approach-oriented and avoidant coping strategies at time of diagnosis. Use of approach-oriented coping strategies was associated with less psychological distress and better QOL, suggesting a possible target for supportive oncology interventions.