JCO oncology practice最新文献

Purpose: Historically, patients with hematologic malignancies are referred to palliative care less often and later in the disease trajectory than those with solid tumors. Recent evidence demonstrates the benefit of early, integrated inpatient palliative care (PC) for patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) receiving chemotherapy at academic centers. The current study evaluated the feasibility of implementing standardized early palliative care services (PCS) during hospitalization for AML treatment in a community setting.

Methods: Starting June 2018, automated consultations for PCS were incorporated into clinical pathways to encourage early, integrated services for patients receiving chemotherapy for AML with an expected hospital stay of 4-6 weeks. Expectations were established that consultations would be performed within 72 hours of request; patients would have two visits per week by a palliative care clinician and at least one visit by a member of the interdisciplinary team. To measure the feasibility of this intervention, data on number of patients who received palliative care consultation and time to palliative care consultation were compared with institutional historical controls.

Results: On the basis of retrospective chart review, the postintervention group (n = 21) had greater PCS compared with historical controls (n = 28; 95% v 36%). The average number of PC team member visits per patient was significantly greater after the intervention: PC clinicians (1.04-8.05, P < .001), chaplains (1.3-3.3, P = .0085), and social workers (1.0-4.3, P < .001). Of those patients who received PCS, 74% had their initial palliative medicine consultation within 3 days of a clinician's order and 100% within 4 days.

Conclusion: We have demonstrated the feasibility of implementing standardized integration of PCS for patients with AML hospitalized for treatment in a community setting.

Purpose: Clear prognostic communication is associated with improvements in quality of life and suffering for children with advanced illness. Yet recent evidence demonstrates that pediatric oncologists often avoid, defer, or soften prognostic disclosure. We aimed to describe pediatric cancer shareholder perspectives on quality prognostic communication to inform design of an intervention to improve prognostic disclosure in advanced childhood cancer.

Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposeful sample of pediatric patients with cancer (n = 20), parents (n = 20), and oncologists (n = 20) representing six institutions across five states. Rapid analysis was performed using the National Cancer Institute core communication functions to organize domains of inquiry.

Results: Three main themes were endorsed by participants regarding the ideal timing of prognostic disclosure: early, ongoing, individualized. Although each group emphasized the need for an individualized approach, oncologists rarely elicited patient/parent preferences for prognostic communication and more commonly inferred what a patient/family wanted to hear. Participants described five key pillars for how to facilitate quality prognostic disclosure: conversation leadership, overall attendance, patient inclusion, location, and atmosphere. They also identified four themes around ideal prognostic content: range of information, use of numbers, population-level versus patient-specific information, and tone/delivery. Discordant recommendations between patients/parents and oncologists emerged for how much and what information to share.

Conclusion: Pediatric cancer shareholders advocated for diverse, and sometimes conflicting, approaches for prognostic disclosure. Although nearly all participants endorsed the importance of individualized prognostic disclosure, specific strategies to encourage or facilitate person-centered prognostic conversation are lacking. Future research will focus on collaboration with pediatric patients, parents, and oncologists to codesign a clinical intervention to improve prognostic communication for children with advanced cancer and their families.

To break the cycle of "rehabbed to death" in oncology, we must focus on improving communication and care coordination.

Purpose: A shortage of essential intravenous (IV) etoposide lasted from 2018 until 2020 in Ontario, Canada, allowing for a natural experiment in which external factors (IV etoposide availability) dictated patients' treatment assignment. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of this IV etoposide shortage (IVES) on patient care outcomes.

Methods: Individuals with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) treated during a pre-IVES (November 2017-October 2018) and IVES (November 2018-October 2019) time intervals were retrospectively reviewed at the Verspeeten Family Cancer Centre. We investigated the association of the shortage on health care utilization and survival using a time-to-event analysis, Cox proportional hazards and logistic regression modeling.

Results: A total of 119 patients with ES-SCLC were assessed, 49 in the pre-IVES interval and 70 in the IVES interval. The median age was 68 (IQR, 62-74) years, 48% (n = 57) were male, 33% (n = 39) had CNS metastases, and 69% (n = 82) received first-line systemic therapy. Alternate regimens used for IVES cohort included IV platinum-oral (PO) etoposide, IV platinum-IV irinotecan, and PO etoposide monotherapy. An adjusted multivariable model demonstrated a significant increase in hospitalization (odds ratio, 2.30 [95% CI, 1.01 to 5.24]; P = .047) and shorter progression-free survival (PFS; hazard ratio, 1.79 [95% CI, 1.19 to 2.68]; P = .005) during the IVES.

Conclusion: This study demonstrated increased hospitalization, and decreased PFS, among patients with ES-SCLC treated with alternate chemotherapy regimens during an IVES. The impact of cancer drug shortages can be harmful, and optimizing a more secure drug supply with mitigation strategies is warranted.

Purpose: Premedication, including a histamine-1 receptor (H₁) antagonist, is recommended to all patients treated with paclitaxel chemotherapy to reduce the incidence of hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs). However, the scientific basis for this premedication is not robust, which provides opportunities for optimization. Substitution of intravenously administered first-generation H₁ antagonist for orally administered second-generation H₁ antagonist could reduce side effects, and improve efficiency and sustainability. This study investigates the efficacy and safety of substituting intravenous clemastine for oral cetirizine as prophylaxis for paclitaxel-induced HSRs.

Methods: This single-center, prospective, noninferiority study compares a historic cohort receiving a premedication regimen with intravenous clemastine to a prospective cohort receiving oral cetirizine. Primary end point of the study is HSR grade ≥3. The difference in incidence was calculated together with the 90% CI. We determined that the two-sided 90% CI of HSR grade ≥3 incidence in the oral cetirizine cohort should not be more than 4% higher (ie, the noninferiority margin) compared with the intravenous clemastine cohort.

Results: Two hundred and twelve patients were included in the oral cetirizine cohort (June 2022 and May 2023) and 183 in the intravenous clemastine cohort. HSR grade ≥3 incidence was 1.6% (n = 3) in the intravenous clemastine cohort and 0.5% (n = 1) in the oral cetirizine cohort, resulting in a difference of -1.2% (90% CI, -3.4 to 1.1).

Conclusion: Premedication containing oral cetirizine is as safe as premedication containing intravenous clemastine in preventing paclitaxel-induced HSR grade ≥3. These findings could contribute to optimization of care for patients and improve efficiency and sustainability.

Purpose: Routine collection of sexual orientation (SO) and gender identity (GI; collectively SOGI) in cancer clinics advances cancer care equity.

Methods: In 2022, NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) practice groups were asked about routine collection of SOGI data in the electronic health record. The proportions of practice groups reporting collection of SO and/or GI data were calculated, and practice group characteristics were assessed for associations.

Results: Of 271 practice groups nationwide, 42% (n = 112) collect SO data, 58% (n = 157) collect GI data, and 35% (n = 96) collect both. In multivariate analyses, SO data collection was associated with practice groups having minority outreach staff (odds ratio [OR], 2.07 [95% CI, 1.12 to 3.81]; P = .02); GI data collection was associated with practice groups located in the Northeastern United States (OR, 2.08 [95% CI, 0.73 to 5.91]; P = .045), and those with a higher proportion of new patients who were White (OR, 1.02 [95% CI, 1.01 to 1.04]; P < .001). Practice groups in the South were least likely to collect SOGI data (OR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.26 to 0.94]; P = .004). There were no statistically significant differences in SO and/or GI collection on the basis of the practice group's proportion of Medicaid/Medicare patients, number of new patients with cancer per year, or practice ownership.

Conclusion: Slightly over one third of NCORP practice groups report routinely collecting SOGI data. There are regional differences in data collection, underscoring the need to craft targeted, region-specific interventions focused on boosting the capture and recording of SOGI data in an affirming manner.

In the age of telehealth medicine, an individual's facial features may provide the only physical clues signaling the presence of a heritable cancer predisposition syndrome. These syndromes include APC-associated polyposis, Birt-Hogg-Dubé syndrome, CYLD cutaneous syndrome, hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cell cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia, neurofibromatosis type 1, Peutz-Jeghers syndrome, PTEN hamartoma tumor syndrome, and tuberous sclerosis complex 1 and 2, among others. Correctly identifying characteristic features is important for genetic and nongenetic specialists as early detection can enable prompt intervention, improving patient outcomes. Advancements in the availability of genetic testing allow patients and their relatives to have more information about their genetic risk profile than before. These changes in clinical pathways, combined with improvements in screening and risk-reducing treatment, highlight the need to outline the cutaneous and morphologic features of high-risk cancer syndromes for clinicians. In this review, we describe the important facial features of hereditary cancer predisposition, with emphasis on diagnosis, cutaneous and extracutaneous manifestations, and screening.

Purpose: Implementation science endeavors to facilitate the translation of evidence-based research into clinical routine. The clinical pharmacological/pharmaceutical care program evaluated in the randomized AMBORA trial on medication safety with oral antitumor therapeutics (OAT) optimizes care delivery and provides significant benefits for patients, treatment teams, and health care systems. Thus, we aimed to investigate the implementation of this care program within the AMBORA Competence and Consultation Center (AMBORA Center).

Methods: The AMBORA Center within a University Comprehensive Cancer Center offered several services (eg, patient consultations) and was evaluated according to the RE-AIM framework. This multicenter hybrid type III trial focused on implementation outcomes (eg, patient recruitment, referring units, evaluation of services) while concurrently investigating effectiveness (eg, side effects, medication errors). Quantitative and qualitative assessments were combined.

Results: The AMBORA Center conducted over 800 consultations with 420 patients in seven institutions. The primary end point of counseling 70% of patients treated with OAT was not reached. Patients were referred by 15 treatment units compared with 11 units in the AMBORA trial. On the basis of heterogeneous referral rates and characteristics across the institutions, barriers and facilitators of the implementation process were derived. Several survey results (eg, stakeholder interviews, online/paper-based questionnaires) reflected a high appreciation of services by patients and health care professionals. The severity of 60.1% (178 of 296) of detected side effects improved, and 86.3% (297 of 344) of medication errors were resolved.

Conclusion: Despite not reaching the primary implementation outcome, the AMBORA Center included more treatment units and demonstrated patient benefit of the AMBORA care program by meeting all effectiveness outcomes. We outlined quantitative and qualitative implementation characteristics to enhance outreach and foster further dissemination of centers to optimize medication safety with OAT.

Purpose: Investigating the impact of social determinants of health (SDOHs) on cancer care in large populations relies on census estimates. Routine clinic SDOH screening provides timely patient-level information which could inform best practices. This study evaluated the correlation between patient-reported SDOH needs and population-level census tract measures.

Methods: This was a retrospective cross-sectional study of a cohort of adult patients with GI malignancy screened for SDOHs such as financial insecurity, transportation, and food insecurity during initial outpatient evaluation at East Carolina University (formerly Vidant) Health Medical Center in Greenville, NC (November 2020-July 2021). Primary outcomes included number and severity of identified SDOH needs and area deprivation index (ADI) and census tract measures for each patient. Spearman rank correlations were calculated among patient-level needs and between patient-level needs and similar census tract measures.

Results: Of 112 patients screened, 58.9% self-identified as White (n = 66) and 41.1% as Black (n = 46). A total of 50.5% (n = 54) resided in a rural county. The collective median state ADI rank was 7 (IQR, 5-9). The median household income was $38,125 in US dollars (USD) (IQR, $31,436-$48,934 [USD]). Only 12.5% (n = 14) reported a moderate or severe financial need. Among reported needs, financial need moderately correlated with food insecurity (coefficient, 0.46; P < .001) and transportation (coefficient, 0.45; P < .001). Overall, census tract measures and reported needs poorly correlated. Lack of transportation correlated with percentage of households without a vehicle (coefficient, 0.18; P = .03) and limited access to healthy foods (coefficient, 0.18; P = .04).

Conclusion: Given the poor correlation between reported and census needs, population-level measures may not accurately predict patient-reported needs. These findings highlight the importance of SDOH screening in the clinical setting to reduce health disparities and identify opportunities to improve care delivery.