Association of geriatric conditions with survival and health care use in older adults with colon cancer living in long-term care facilities

12045

Background: Older adults with colon cancer residing in nursing homes are at risk for experiencing geriatric conditions such as cognitive decline, limitations in activities of daily living (ADLs), needing pain medications, and incontinence, due to cancer and its treatment. We sought to investigate these factors pre- and post-diagnosis and explored their relationship with health care use and survival. Methods: We identified 483 patients age 65+ with colon cancer from 2011-2015 in SEER-Medicare with linked quarterly nursing home assessments from the Minimum Data Set both pre- and post-cancer diagnosis. We determined the number of geriatric conditions (cognitive functioning, limitation in any ADL, pain medication use, bowel/urinary incontinence) at the pre- and post-cancer diagnosis assessment. We created four groups based on changes in these factors from pre- to post- assessment: improved (n = 105), worsened (n = 25), remained limited (n = 240), never limited (n = 113). Regression models estimated how changes from pre- to post-cancer diagnosis were associated with number of emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalizations, and survival, adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, insurance status, cancer stage, number of pre-cancer comorbidities, urban/rural status, and time from diagnosis. Results: Overall, 55.3% of patients were age > 80 at diagnosis, with 64.8% female; 73.3% non-Hispanic white; and 9.9% Stage IV. Pre- versus post-diagnosis, 20.7% vs. 34.8% of patients were limited in cognitive functioning, and 75.4% vs. 77.8% were limited in ADLs. About a third of patients required pain medication, and about half of patients had urinary incontinence, which did not change pre- and post-diagnosis. Patients who remained limited had higher rates of ED visits (Risk ratio [RR] 1.05, p < .01) compared to those never limited. Those who worsened had higher rate of hospitalization (RR 1.44, p < .01) and ED visits (RR 1.63, p < .01). 12-month and 5-year survival was 46.7% and 6.1%, respectively. Factors associated with worse survival in a multivariable model included: remaining limited at both assessments (OR 1.52, p < .01), worsening from prior (OR 2.00, p = .01), as well as older age and higher cancer stage. Conclusions: Older adults with colon cancer residing in nursing homes have high prevalence of geriatric conditions and differential health care use and survival based on the presence of geriatric conditions, highlighting the need to consider geriatric conditions when providing cancer care to this population.

Medical oncologists’ perceptions of clinical trials for underrepresented populations

e19062

Background: Ethnic/racial minorities and socioeconomically disadvantaged patients remain underrepresented in cancer clinical trials (CCT), challenging the accuracy and generalizability of findings. While oncologists’ recommendations influence trial participation, we know little about their perspectives on recommending CCT to underrepresented patients. Methods: From 9/16-5/19 we conducted a sequential mixed methods study to assess oncologists’ attitudes toward recommending underrepresented patients for CCT. We performed individual interviews with 17 oncologists, developed a survey instrument, and surveyed a randomly selected sample of 98 oncologists (from ASCO, NCORP, MGH; RR = 31.2%). Descriptive statistics summarized attitudes, practices and challenges with trial enrollment of underrepresented patients. Results: Content analysis of interviews (age = 46.9, female = 37.5%, white = 75.0%) revealed overall support for CCT. Indeed, 84.4% of survey respondents (age = 53.3, female = 31.3%, white = 78.6%) considered CCT as central to their professional identity. Yet, 37.5% agreed CCT placed undue burden on oncologists. Oncologists’ concerns around informed consent and perceived lack of clinical/personal equipoise discouraged recommending CCT participation to vulnerable patients. Interviews revealed that nearly all believed that patients with certain vulnerabilities (e.g., literacy, social, financial barriers) had needs that conflicted with CCT demands, increasing the potential for harm. Oncologists were less likely to recommend CCT to patients who do not reliably report side effects (91.2%), demonstrate difficulty comprehending the costs/benefits of CCT (88.7%), lack support (87.6%), live far away (76.3%), or face insurance obstacles (73.2%). Notably, 67.7% affirmed they presented trials with varying enthusiasm based on perceived patient challenges; 32.4% deemed it hard to justify enrolling patients if efficacious standard treatment options exist outside of trials. Oncologists desired navigation support (63.3%) to offset concerns and facilitate trial discussion/enrollment. Conclusions: Findings confirm that oncologists value CCT; however, they experience conflict when considering CCT for patients with pre-existing hardships. Time constraints interfere with oncologists’ ability to adequately address and overcome perceived challenges to participation. Our findings underscore the need for programs that integrate informational support with patient navigation to increase enrollment of underrepresented patients into CCT.

Preliminary analysis of total neoadjuvant therapy for patients with locally advanced gastric (G) and gastroesophageal (GE) adenocarcinoma

393

Background: Nearly half of patients with G/GE cancer do not receive or complete post-operative chemotherapy and/or chemoradiation (CRT). Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) is as an emerging alternate treatment strategy. We have previously reported a 28% pCR with FOLFIRINOX followed by CRT. However, TNT outcomes with FLOT or FOLFOX followed by CRT are lacking. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients after resection of locally advanced G/GE after receiving TNT. Patient received neoadjuvant FOLFOX or FLOT x 8 cycles, CRT (G 45 Gy, GE 50.4 Gy) with concurrent chemotherapy (5FU, carboplatin/paclitaxel). The primary aim was to explore TNT completion rates. Secondary aims included pCR and toxicity. We performed descriptive statistics, t-test, chi-squared, and Fisher’s exact tests as appropriate. Results: From 12/2015 to 8/2019, 57.1% (40/70) completed TNT and resection (15.7% active treatment, 15.7% progressive disease, 11% treated elsewhere). Median age was 66.0 (range:27-79) and 73% male. Tumor locations included 57.5% G, 30.0% GE, and 12.5% overlapping. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy included FLOT 22.5% (n = 9) or FOLFOX 77.5% (n = 31). Overall we found a 25% pCR without significant differences between type of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Conclusions: TNT followed by resection is feasible with acceptable rates of treatment completion and toxicity. Notable limitations include the retrospective analysis, small sample size, and heterogenous treatment. The pCR rate is promising and warrants further prospective study to optimize TNT approaches. [Table: see text]

Noninvasive comprehensive genomic profiling from plasma ctDNA in pancreatic cancer patients

753

Background: The use of comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) is increasing in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) as knowledge improves regarding molecular drivers of tumorigenesis and effective targeted therapies emerge. However, adequate tissue sampling is often limited. Plasma-based CGP offers a non-invasive approach to assess biomarkers that may impact treatment decisions. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated genomic and clinical data from 97 PDAC patients with circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) testing from 9/2016-8/2019 (Guardant Health, Inc.). ctDNA analysis included single nucleotide variants (SNV), fusions, indels and copy number variations (CNV) of up to 74 genes. ctDNA results were assessed across clinical variables. We evaluated for actionable alterations. Results: A total of 114 samples were obtained from 97 patients for ctDNA testing. ctDNA alterations were detected in 82% (93/114) of all samples, including 90% (18/20) at diagnosis, 88% (59/67) at progression, and 56% (10/18) while on stable therapy. ctDNA alterations were found at each stage of PDAC: in 25% (1/4) of samples with resectable disease, 75% (3/4) with borderline resectable disease, 82% (9/11) with locally advanced disease, and 85% (81/95) with metastatic disease. One or more KRAS alterations were detected in 55% (51/93) of patients with alterations present. The median maximum mutant allele frequency was similar between the cohort of patients with KRAS detected (0.55%) versus not detected (0.70%). 8% (8/97) of patients had potentially actionable alterations (2 activating BRAF SNVs, 1 ERBB2 CNV, 1 ERBB2 activating SNV, 1 KRAS G12C, and 3 indels in Homologous Recombination Deficiency genes). Median turnaround time was 8 days. 51% (49/97) of patients had both plasma-based CGP and tissue-based CGP. Of these patients, tissue-based CGP showed ≥ 1 alterations detected in 82% (40/49), test failure in 14% (7/49), and no alterations detected in 4% (2/49). Conclusions: Plasma-based CGP detected ctDNA alterations in 90% of samples tested at diagnosis and 82% of all samples. Potentially actionable mutations were found in 8% of patients, with prompt processing time allowing for rapid decision making.

The role of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), tumor markers (TMs), and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in predicting treatment response in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal (GI) cancer

833

Background: Changes in ctDNA and serum TMs (CEA and CA19-9) can serve as predictors of response to systemic therapy in GI cancer patients (pts). Similarly, PROs correlate with survival and treatment response. We present a preliminary analysis of ctDNA, TMs, and PROs in predicting treatment response. Methods: We are enrolling 200 pts in a prospective study with metastatic pancreatic (PDAC), colorectal (CRC), gastroesophageal (GE), and biliary cancers. We are collecting ctDNA, TMs (CEA for all tumor types; CA19-9 for PDAC, GE, biliary), and PROs (FACT-G for QOL [higher scores indicate better QOL]; ESAS-r and PRO-CTCAE for symptoms; and PHQ-4 [consists of GAD-2 and PHQ-2 for anxiety and depression]; higher ESAS-r, PRO-CTCAE, and PHQ-4 scores reflect greater symptom burden) at baseline and 4 weeks. ctDNA is benchmarked against somatic tissue alterations, and serially assessed by digital droplet PCR. We correlated median percent change from baseline to 4 weeks for ctDNA, TMs, and PROs with treatment response (clinical benefit [CB], progressive disease [PD]). Results: From April to August 2019, we have enrolled 38/45 (84.4%) eligible pts (median age = 64 years; 36.8% female). Among these 38 pts, tumor types are PDAC (36.8%), CRC (31.6%), GE (28.9%), and biliary (2.6%). 18/38 pts were evaluable for ctDNA. Change in ctDNA was -94.5% in pts with CB (n = 10) and -19.5% in pts with PD (n = 8; p = 0.025). No correlation was observed between CEA and treatment response (p = 0.367). Change in CA19-9 was -1.5% for pts with CB and +47% for pts with PD (p = 0.019). Changes in PRO-CTCAE (p = 0.345), GAD-2 (p = 0.697), and ESAS scores (p = 0.743) did not differ between pts with CB and PD. However, changes in PHQ-2 (CB 0% v. PD +22.5%; p < 0.001), PHQ-4 (CB -8.5% v. PD +5%; p = 0.015), and FACT-G (CB +30% v. PD +5%; p = 0.049) were significant. Conclusions: Preliminary analysis suggests that ctDNA and PROs demonstrate promising utility for early prediction of treatment response, with favorable performance relative to standard TMs. Further analyses of larger pt numbers in this ongoing study may clarify the use and integration of these measures to better predict pt outcomes.

Performance status, survival, and end-of-life care in adults with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with immunotherapy

49

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) improve survival for adults with metastatic NSCLC. Despite limited data on ICI efficacy in adults with poor performance status (PS), oncologists often elect to treat this population with ICI given their relatively favorable toxicity profile and potential for durable response. We aimed to describe the timing of ICI and patients’ survival based on PS, and explore the effect of late ICI use on end-of-life (EOL) care. Methods: Retrospective study of 235 adults with metastatic NSCLC at a single academic center who initiated ICI from 2015-2017. We compared overall survival (OS) among adults with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) PS ≥ 2 at ICI start to those with ECOG PS < 2, using the log-rank test and Cox regression, adjusted for age, sex, comorbidity, time from diagnosis and line of therapy. We used logistic regression to analyze the association between ICI in the last 30 days of life and EOL care. Results: The median age at ICI start was 67 (range 37-91), and 83/235 (35%) had ECOG PS ≥ 2. Patients received ICI as first- (19%), second-line (56%) or later (25%) therapy. Median OS was 4.0 months in adults with ECOG PS ≥ 2 and 14.3 months in ECOG PS < 2 (p < 0.0001; HR = 2.5 [95% CI 1.8–3.5]). Among adults who died (n = 165), 17% of those with ECOG PS ≥ 2 started ICI in last 30 days of life and 24% started or continued ICI in their last 30 days, compared to 4% and 7% of ECOG PS < 2 (p = 0.005, p = 0.001, respectively). Receipt of ICI in last 30 days of life was associated with decreased hospice referral (OR 0.29, p = 0.006), decreased odds of hospice stay > 7 days (OR 0.15, p < 0.001), and increased in-hospital death (OR 6.8, p = 0.001). Conclusions: Adults with metastatic NSCLC and ECOG PS ≥ 2 experience significantly shorter survival than those with ECOG PS < 2 and more often receive ICI near the end of life, and late ICI use is associated with decreased hospice use and increased in-hospital death. Clinicians should thus use caution in extrapolating data from clinical trials, which are limited to ECOG PS < 2, to inform the care of adults with ECOG PS ≥ 2. Further, these results highlight potential tradeoffs of ICI and underscore the need for efforts to improve communication about ICI risks and benefits.

Health insurance literacy, status, and financial toxicity in women receiving treatment for metastatic breast cancer

96

Background: Though uninsurance rates declined after the Affordable Care Act, the number of underinsured, or individuals who spend > 10% of their income on out-of-pocket (OOP) medical costs, continues to rise. In patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC), underinsurance may lead to financial toxicity (FT), or patient-level financial burden and distress, since diagnosis and treatment is extremely costly. This study explores health insurance literacy and the association between FT and health insurance status in women receiving treatment for MBC. Methods: This cross-sectional study utilized survey data collected from 2017-2019 in women age ≥18 receiving treatment for MBC at two academic medical centers in Alabama. FT was measured by the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) tool (11-item scale from 0-44, with lower scores indicating worse FT). Health insurance status and OOP costs were self-reported. Effect sizes were calculated using Cohen’s d or Cramer’s V. Mixed and generalized linear models clustered by site and treating medical oncologist estimated the association between FT and health insurance status. Results: In 81 women with MBC, median COST score was 24 (interquartile range [IQR] 17-30), 44% had private insurance, 40% Medicare, and 16% Medicaid. Though 25% and 33% of surveyed patients did not know their health insurance premium or deductible cost, respectively, privately insured patients more often knew the cost of their premiums (97%; V = 0.58) and deductibles (81%; V = 0.33) compared to publicly insured patients. In adjusted models, FT levels did not differ significantly based on health insurance type (private insurance COST 21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 18-25; Medicaid COST 23, 95% CI 17-29; Medicare COST 24, 95% CI 20-27). However, risk of severe FT (COST ≤13) was 147% higher for privately insured patients versus Medicare beneficiaries (risk ratio 2.47, 95% CI 1.44-4.21). Conclusions: Despite higher levels of health insurance literacy, privately insured patients receiving treatment for MBC may be at increased risk of severe FT. Further research is needed to understand causes of underinsurance in patients with MBC, which could lead to cancer-related FT.

Impact of a student pharmacist-directed pilot intervention on influenza vaccination documentation and administration rates in older adults receiving parenteral anticancer therapy

71

Background: Annual influenza vaccination is recommended for individuals 6 months and older. Older adults are at high-risk of developing influenza and complications associated with the virus. However, < 50% of patients with cancer receive the influenza vaccine annually. In previous work at our institution, a quality improvement project identified that only 40% of adult patients initiating parenteral anticancer therapy between September and December 2017 were documented to have received the influenza vaccine. Therefore, a multidisciplinary student pharmacist-directed pilot intervention was developed to improve influenza vaccine documentation and administration rates, and we sought to investigate the impact of this intervention. Methods: All adult patients (≥65 years old) scheduled for parenteral anticancer therapy during November 2018 were screened for influenza vaccination documentation. Patients were identified by reviewing infusion center schedule. Under supervision of board-certified oncology pharmacists, two student pharmacists evaluated influenza vaccination documentation in the institution/network electronic medical record (EMR) and outside records. Patients with unknown vaccination history were identified for interview by pharmacy students. The student pharmacists collaborated with oncology nurses and clinicians to order and administer influenza vaccine to patients who agreed to vaccination. Influenza vaccination status was updated in the EMR following record reviews/interviews. Results: Student pharmacists screened 617 patient EMRs and interviewed 124 patients to verify vaccination status. Furthermore, 33 patients received influenza vaccination as a direct result of student pharmacist intervention. Overall, rate of influenza vaccination status documentation was 60.5%. Conclusions: Compared with historic data, we found promising results for a student pharmacist-directed pilot intervention, which demonstrated the potential to improve influenza vaccination status documentation and administration among older adults receiving parenteral anticancer therapy.

Emergency department (ED) utilization among patients with cancer receiving intravenous (IV) chemotherapy

22

Background: ED utilization among patients with cancer is often cited as a potential metric to improve the quality of oncology care. However, efforts to understand emergency department (ED) utilization among patients with cancer receiving IV chemotherapy are lacking. We sought to describe sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with ED utilization and explore predictors of ED arrival time. Methods: We conducted a quality improvement assessment of patients who visited the ED within 30-days of receiving IV chemotherapy at Massachusetts General Hospital from October 2017 to January 2018. We used descriptive statistics to describe the sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with ED visits. We used multivariable regression models to explore predictors of the following outcomes: (1) ED visit occurring during normal clinic hours; and (2) ED visit occurring during the weekend. Results: Of the approximately 2,600 patients receiving IV chemotherapy during the assessment period, we identified 500 ED visits (~19.2%). For these ED visits, median patient age was 65 years (range: 22-93), and 49.6% were female. The majority were white race (84.8%), married (63.6%), diagnosed with metastatic disease (70.4%), and 8+ days since receiving most recent chemotherapy (71.4%). The most common cancer types were gastrointestinal (24.2%), lung (13.2%), and lymphomas (11.0%). The most common reason for ED visits included pain (20.4%), fever/cold symptoms (18.0%), and fatigue (11.0%). Over half (50.4%) of ED visits occurred during normal clinic hours and over one-fourth (28.2%) occurred during the weekend. We found that ED visits were less likely to occur during normal clinic hours for patients with lymphomas (OR = 0.44, P = 0.013) compared with other cancer types. ED visits were less likely to occur during the weekend for patients of older age (OR = 0.98, P = 0.020). Conclusions: We identified a substantial number of ED visits among patients with cancer within 30-days of receiving IV chemotherapy, often occurring during normal clinic hours and most commonly for pain, fever/cold symptoms, and fatigue. These findings highlight issues to address when seeking to reduce ED utilization and enhance cancer care quality.

Characteristics associated with hospitalization for patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy who present to the emergency department (ED)

23

Background: Patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy often present to the ED and require hospitalization to manage acute issues. However, little work has sought to understand characteristics associated with hospitalizations for patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy who present to the ED. Methods: As part of a quality improvement initiative, we reviewed ED visits within 30-days of patients receiving intravenous chemotherapy at Massachusetts General Hospital from October 2017-January 2018. We used descriptive statistics to compare sociodemographic and clinical factors for hospitalized and non-hospitalized patients. We used logistic regression to explore variables independently associated with being hospitalized. We also compared death rates within 6 months between groups. Results: We identified 500 ED visits during our study period, which resulted in 350 (70.0%) hospitalizations. Hospitalized and non-hospitalized patients did not differ by age (mean 64.1 vs 63.4, P = 0.61), sex (48.9% vs 51.3% female, P = 0.61), or presence of metastatic disease (71.1% vs 68.7%, P = 0.59). Hospitalized patients were more likely to have gastrointestinal (25.7% vs 20.7%) and lung (14.0% vs 11.3%) cancer; less likely to have breast cancer (7.4% vs 16.7%, P < 0.01). Hospitalized patients were more likely to come to the ED on a Thursday (15.7% vs 6.7%); less likely to come on a Wednesday (10.3% vs 19.3%, P < 0.01). On logistic regression, factors associated with higher likelihood of being hospitalized included white race (OR = 1.84, P = 0.03), and presenting with fever/cold symptoms (OR = 2.64, P < 0.01), fatigue (OR = 2.15, P = 0.04), or dyspnea (OR = 2.29, P = 0.04). Death rates within 6 months were higher for the hospitalized patients (50.0% vs 18.7%, P < 0.01). Conclusions: Patients with cancer who visited the ED within 30-days of receiving intravenous chemotherapy often require hospitalization. We identified factors associated with higher likelihood of hospitalization, including patient characteristics, presenting symptoms, and the day of the week. Our findings should inform future efforts to enhance care delivery and outcomes for patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy.

Relationship between perceptions of treatment goals and psychological distress in patients with advanced cancer

11621

Background: Several studies have demonstrated discordance between how patients perceive their goal of treatment versus how they perceive their oncologist’s goal. Studies evaluating the extent and risk factors of this discordance are lacking. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 559 patients with incurable lung, gastrointestinal, breast, and brain cancers. We used the Perception of Treatment and Prognosis Questionnaire to assess patients’ perceptions of both their treatment goal and their oncologist’s goal and categorized responses: 1) patients who reported that both their goal and their oncologist’s goal was concordant (either to cure or not to cure); and 2) patients who reported discordant perceptions of their goal versus their oncologist’s goal. We assessed patients’ psychological distress using the Hospital-Anxiety-and-Depression-Scale and used linear regression to assess the relationship between patients’ perceptions of their treatment goal and psychological outcomes. Results: 61.7% of patients reported that both their goal and their oncologist’s goal was non-curative; 19.3% reported that both their goal and their oncologist’s goal was to cure their cancer; and 19.0% reported discordance between their goal and their perception of the oncologist’s goal. Older age (OR = 0.98, P = 0.01), non-Hispanic ethnicity (OR = 0.31, P = 0.049), and higher education (OR = 0.62, P = 0.042) were associated with lower likelihood of reporting discordant goals. Patients with discordant perceptions of their goal and their oncologist’s goal reported higher anxiety (B = 1.56, P = 0.003) compared to those who reported that both their goal and their oncologist’s goal was curative. Patients who reported both their goal and the oncologist’s goal was non-curative had higher depression symptoms (B = 1.06, P = 0.013) compared to those who reported that both their goal and the oncologists’ goal was curative. Conclusions: One-fifth of patients with advanced cancer report discrepancies between their perceptions of their own and their oncologists’ treatment goal which is associated with psychological distress. Tools are needed to identify patients at risk of cognitive dissonance about their prognosis.

Pilot randomized trial of a transdisciplinary geriatric intervention for older adults with cancer

11549

Background: Oncologists often struggle with managing the unique care needs of older adults with cancer. We sought to determine the feasibility of delivering a transdisciplinary geriatric intervention designed to address the geriatric (physical function & comorbidity) and palliative care (symptoms & prognostic understanding) needs of older adults with cancer. Methods: We randomly assigned patients age ≥65 with newly diagnosed incurable gastrointestinal (GI) or lung cancer to receive a transdisciplinary geriatric intervention or usual care. Intervention patients received two visits with a geriatrician who was trained to address patients’ palliative care needs in addition to conducting a geriatric assessment. We defined the intervention as feasible if > 70% of patients enrolled in the study and > 75% completed study visits and surveys. At baseline and week 12, we assessed patients’ quality of life (QOL, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy General), symptoms (Edmonton Symptom Assessment System), and communication confidence (Perceived Efficacy in Patient Physician Interactions). As this was a pilot study, we calculated mean change scores in outcomes and estimated intervention effect sizes (ES). Results: From 2/2017-6/2018, we randomized 62 patients (55.9% enrollment rate [most common reason for refusal was feeling too ill]; median age = 72.3 [range 65.2-91.8]; 45.2% female; cancer types: 56.5% GI, 43.5% lung). Among intervention patients, 82.1% attended the first visit and 76.2% attended both. Overall, 77.8% completed all study surveys. Compared to usual care, intervention patients had less decrement in QOL scores (-0.77 vs -3.84, ES = .21), greater reduction in the number of moderate/severe symptoms (-0.69 vs +1.04, ES = .58), and more improvement in communication confidence (+1.06 vs -0.80, ES = .38). Conclusions: In this trial of older adults with advanced cancer, more than half enrolled in the study and over 75% of those who enrolled completed all study visits and surveys. Our effect size estimates suggest that a transdisciplinary intervention targeting patients’ geriatric and palliative care needs may be a promising approach to improve patients’ QOL, symptom burden, and communication confidence. Clinical trial information: NCT02868112.

Aggressiveness of care and overall survival in young metastatic colorectal cancer patients

3563

Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence in patients younger than 50 years of age is steadily rising by 2% annually. Early-onset CRC usually presents with more aggressive features; however, data on prognosis are widely conflicting. Clinicians may hold an age-related bias in treating younger patients, but this proclivity and its effects have not been quantified. Methods: Patients with a history of metastatic CRC who consented to a departmental chart review protocol were collected between 2014 and 2018 at Massachusetts General Hospital. The cohort was divided into two groups based on age at initial diagnosis: < 50 and ≥50. Data were gathered on treatments and clinicopathological features. A log-rank test compared survival from the diagnosis of metastatic disease between age groups. The distributions of clinicopathological features were compared using Wilcoxon rank sum tests. Results: 464 metastatic CRC patients were identified. 155 patients (33%) were < 50 (median age 43, 49% female) and 309 patients (67%) were ≥50 (median age 61, 45% female). Sex did not significantly differ between the two groups (p = 0.45). Patients < 50 received more lines of therapy after metastatic diagnosis than patients ≥50 (mean 2.7 v. 2.2; p = 0.002). Younger patients also received more resections of distant metastases (mean 0.62 v. 0.48; p = 0.01). A higher rate of enrollment in clinical trials for patients < 50 approached significance (p = 0.06). Even so, patients < 50 did not see a significant survival benefit over older patients (2/5-year survival from metastatic diagnosis 77%/47% v. 73%/38%, p = 0.23). Patients < 50 had a lower proportion of right-sided tumors (p = 0.0002) and BRAF mutations (p = 0.0009). There was no difference in MSI status (p = 0.28), RAS mutational status (p = 0.40), mucinous features (p = 0.53), or signet ring features (p = 0.26). Conclusions: Overall survival in patients < 50 is similar to patients ≥50, despite patients < 50 receiving more aggressive therapy. Further study is warranted to better understand these differences. Potential areas of interest include performance status, age-related treatment bias, and biological factors.

Perceptions of medical status and treatment goal in older adults with advanced cancer

e23016

Background: Perceptions of medical status and treatment goal are often used to assess prognostic awareness, but whether these items fully capture patients’ understanding of their prognosis remains unclear. We sought to better understand these measures by investigating their relationship with quality of life (QOL), symptom burden, functional impairment, hospitalizations, and overall survival (OS). Methods: We enrolled patients age ≥70 years within 8 weeks of a diagnosis of incurable gastrointestinal cancer. We surveyed patients to assess perceptions of medical status [terminally ill vs not], treatment goal [curative vs non-curative], QOL (EORTC - Elderly Cancer Patients), symptom burden (Edmonton Symptom Assessment System [ESAS]), and functional impairment (activities of daily living [ADLs]). We used regression models adjusted for age, sex, and education to explore relationships between these items and patients’ QOL, symptom burden, functional impairment, risk of hospitalizations, and OS. Results: Of 132 patients approached, 103 (78.0%) enrolled (mean age 77.62 years, 47.6% female). Half (49.5%) reported a terminally ill medical status and nearly two-thirds (64.0%) reported a non-curative treatment goal, with 42.0% reporting discordant responses to these items. Patient report of a terminally ill status was associated with worse QOL (EORTC illness burden: 53.59 vs 35.26, p = .001), higher symptom burden (ESAS score: 28.15 vs 16.79, p = .002), more functional impairment (number of ADLs: 3.63 vs 5.24, p = .006), greater risk of hospitalizations (HR = 2.41, p = .020), and worse OS (HR = 1.93, p = .010). We found no associations between these outcomes and patient-reported treatment goal. Conclusions: In older adults with advanced cancer, half reported a terminally ill medical status and nearly two-thirds reported a non-curative treatment goal. Patient report of a terminally ill status was associated with worse QOL, symptom burden, functional impairment, risk of hospitalizations, and OS. We did not find associations between these outcomes and patient report of their treatment goal. Our findings suggest that these questions measure different constructs and more nuanced tools for assessing prognostic awareness are needed.

Functional impairment on admission and associated symptom burden and health outcomes among hospitalized patients with advanced cancer

11554

Background: Hospitalized patients with cancer often have impaired function, as measured by activities of daily living (ADLs), related to age, comorbidities, and both cancer and treatment-related morbidity. However, the relationship between functional impairment and patients’ symptom burden and clinical outcomes has not been well described. Methods: We prospectively enrolled patients with advanced cancer with unplanned hospitalizations at an academic medical center. Upon admission, nurses assessed patients’ ADLs (mobility, feeding, bathing, dressing, and grooming). We used the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) and Patient Health Questionnaire-4 to assess physical and psychological symptoms, comparing symptom burden between patients with and without ADL impairment. We used regression models adjusted for age, sex, education, Charlson comorbidity index, months since advanced cancer diagnosis, and cancer type to assess the relationship between any ADL impairment on admission and hospital length of stay, the composite outcome of death or readmission within 90 days of discharge, and survival. Results: Among 932 patients, 40.2% had at least one ADL impairment. Patients with ADL impairment were older (Mean = 67.2 vs 60.8 years, p < 0.001), had higher Charlson comorbidity index (Mean = 1.1 vs 0.7, p < 0.001), and higher physical symptom burden (ESAS Physical Mean = 35.2 vs 30.9, p < 0.001). Those with ADL impairment were more likely to have moderate to severe constipation (46.7% vs. 36.0%, p < 0.01), pain (74.9% vs. 63.1%, p < 0.01), drowsiness (76.6% vs. 68.3%, p < 0.01), as well as symptoms of depression (38.3% vs. 23.6%, p < 0.01) and anxiety (35.9% vs. 22.4%, p < 0.01). In adjusted models, ADL impairment was associated with longer hospital length of stay (B = 1.30, p < 0.01), higher odds of death or readmission within 90 days (odds ratio = 2.26, p < 0.01), and higher mortality (hazard ratio = 1.73, p < 0.01). Conclusions: Hospitalized patients with advanced cancer who have functional impairment experience a significantly higher symptom burden and worse health outcomes compared to those without functional impairment. These findings highlight the need to assess and address functional impairment among this population to enhance their quality of life and care.

A phase II study of ipilimumab and nivolumab with radiation in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma

391

Background: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains a highly lethal cancer. Immunotherapy (IO) has shown minimal activity. In preclinical models, radiation (XRT) increases likelihood of response to IO via an abscopal effect where local tx (treatment) of a tumor leads to an antitumor response distantly, with synergy between XRT and dual checkpoint blockade. In this study, we assessed CTLA-4 and PD-1 blockade with XRT as a strategy to stimulate an immune response for patients (pts) with PDAC. Methods: In this open-label, single arm phase-2 study, we enrolled 25 metastatic PDAC pts in an exploratory cohort. Eligible pts had histologically-confirmed PDAC, ECOG PS 0-1, and progression on at least 1 line of tx. Tx consisted of Ipilimumab (1 mg/kg every 6 wks), Nivolumab (240 mg every 2 wks) and 3 fractions of 8 Gy of XRT at cycle 2. Tx continued until PD, discontinuation or withdrawal. Endpoints include Disease Control Rate (DCR), ORR, PFS, OS and safety. Radiological evaluations were every 3 months. Response was defined as disease control outside of the radiation field. We obtained serial tumor biopsies pre-tx, during checkpoint blockade alone and 2 weeks after XRT. Intention to treat analysis includes all pts receiving at least one dose of study tx. Results: 22 pts were enrolled and evaluable from 6/2017-6/2018, median age 60 years (32-75), 73% male and 100% MSS. DCR was 27% and ORR was 14% with 1 pt having a complete response. All responses were out of the radiation field. Median PFS was 76 days in the entire cohort; 163 days for pts with disease control vs 62.5 days for pts with PD or who came off study prior to initial imaging. 7 pts did not receive XRT due to clinical progression. Treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were reported in 12/22 pts (54.5%). 8/22 pts (36.4%) experienced grade ≥ 3 toxicities. Elevated lipase, lymphopenia, fatigue, hyperglycemia, mucositis and hepatitis were the most common AEs. 1/22 (4.5%) pt had a grade 5 AE possibly related to tx. Conclusions: Dual blockade of CTLA-4 and PD-1 with XRT is feasible and demonstrates promising activity in pts with metastatic PDAC. We will report the updated efficacy and safety data as well as outcomes from the correlative serial biopsies upon completion. Clinical trial information: NCT03104439.

Dose intensity of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX (FFX) in borderline and locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC): A comparison to the adjuvant benchmark

392

Background: Optimal timing and duration of FFX for resectable, borderline resectable, and LAPC has not been established. The PRODIGE 24/CCTG PA.6 study used 12 cycles of adjuvant modified FFX (eliminating bolus 5FU, irinotecan at 150mg/m2) demonstrating superior DFS (21.6 mo) over gemcitabine (12.8 mo). However, only 48% of patients (pts) received 70% of intended chemo dosing, and 66.4% of pts completed all doses due to postoperative tolerability. We conducted total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) studies in borderline and LAPC. (LAPC study included Losartan experimentally.) Dose intensity of TNT with FFX is compared to the benchmark adjuvant data. Methods: In this retrospective analysis, chemotherapy data were analyzed from NCT01821729 (LAPC) and NCT01591733 (Borderline). Both studies included 8 cycles of neoadjuvant FFX: b5FU 400mg/m2, CI 5U 1200mg/m2/d x 2d, oxaliplatin 85mg/m2, and irinotecan 180mg/m2. Results: 92 pts were studied: Borderline n = 43, LAPC n = 49. Sixteen of 92 (17.3%) patients discontinued chemotherapy prior to 8 cycles due to: withdrawal of consent (2), chemotherapy toxicity (6), progression (4), and disease-related complications (4). 82.6% of patients completed 8 doses. 61.4% of all bFU was given at the intended dose of 400 mg/m2. The mean relative dose intensity of b5FU (the actual cumulative dose relative to the planned cumulative dose over 8 cycles) was 72%. 65.5% of patients required a reduction in b5FU over eight cycles. Data for all chemotherapy are presented in Table 1. Overall, 71 of 92 patients (77.2%) had > 70% dose of FFX, with mean relative dose intensity of 81.2%. Among surgically resected patients, mPFS was 21.3 months in LAPC (n = 34) and 48.6 months in Borderline (n = 33). Conclusions: Compared to adjuvant therapy, dose intensity was achieved in a higher proportion of participants with TNT, utilizing a FFX regimen that included b5FU and irinotecan at 180mg/m2. PFS among resected patients reflects this highly active treatment. [Table: see text]

Pilot randomized trial of an electronic symptom monitoring intervention for hospitalized patients with cancer

BACKGROUND

Hospitalized patients with cancer experience a high symptom burden, which is associated with poor health outcomes and increased health care utilization. However, studies investigating symptom monitoring interventions in this population are lacking. We conducted a pilot randomized trial to assess the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a symptom monitoring intervention to improve symptom management in hospitalized patients with advanced cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We randomly assigned patients with advanced cancer who were admitted to the inpatient oncology service to a symptom monitoring intervention or usual care. Patients in both arms self-reported their symptoms daily (Edmonton Symptom Assessment System and Patient Health Questionnaire-4). Patients assigned to the intervention had their symptom reports presented graphically with alerts for moderate/severe symptoms during daily team rounds. The primary end point of the study was feasibility. We defined the intervention as feasible if >75% of participants hospitalized >2 days completed >2 symptom reports. We observed daily rounds to determine whether clinicians discussed and developed a plan to address patients' symptoms. We used regression models to assess intervention effects on patients' symptoms throughout their hospitalization, readmission risk, and hospital length of stay (LOS).

RESULTS

Among 150 enrolled patients (81.1% enrollment), 94.2% completed >2 symptom reports. Clinicians discussed 60.4% of the symptom reports and developed a plan to address the symptoms highlighted by the symptom reports 20.8% of the time. Compared with usual care, intervention patients had a greater proportion of days with lower psychological distress (B = 0.12, P = 0.008), but no significant difference in the proportion of days with improved Edmonton Symptom Assessment System-physical symptoms (B = 0.07, P = 0.138). Intervention patients had lower readmission risk (hazard ratio = 0.68, P = 0.224), although this difference was not significant. We found no significant intervention effects on hospital LOS (B = 0.16, P = 0.862).

CONCLUSIONS

This symptom monitoring intervention is feasible and demonstrates encouraging preliminary efficacy for improving patients' symptoms and readmission risk.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02891993.

Inpatient hospitalization costs associated with nausea and vomiting among patients with cancer

112

Background: Reducing hospitalizations for chemotherapy-related toxicities represents an opportunity to improve both the quality and cost of cancer treatment. Nausea and vomiting (NV) account for almost 10% of “avoidable” toxicity-related post-chemotherapy hospitalizations (2016 Medicare data). We sought to evaluate the event cost of NV-related hospitalizations among patients with cancer from a US payer perspective. Methods: From a large US claims database (Truven MarketScan), we identified hospitalizations with NV as the primary diagnosis and cancer as a secondary diagnosis (01/2011-06/2017). This method increases specificity for NV as the principal hospitalization factor, while underreporting the prevalence of NV as a contributory factor. To determine event costs, we evaluated hospital and other reimbursement during the hospitalization. To explore subgroup differences, we stratified results by tumor type, payer type, admission route, receipt of highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC; 2017 definition includes carboplatin AUC ≥4) and antiemetic prophylaxis. We adjusted all costs to 2017 US dollars. Results: Among 918,192 hospitalizations involving cancer, we identified 80,995 with both NV and a cancer diagnosis code. Of these, 5,293 had NV as the primary diagnosis and 62 lacked cost data. Patients (mean age = 57.7±16.2) were 67% female. Median hospital length of stay was 4 days and mean cost per hospitalization was $15,085. Non-Medicare admissions (82%) had a higher mean cost vs. Medicare ($15,737 vs. $12,111, p < 0.01). We found < $1,000 difference between the highest and lowest cost per hospitalization among the 6 most common tumor types. We found the 65% of patients with a chemotherapy claim ≤30 days prior to hospitalization had costs of $13,882 per event. Among the 45% of chemotherapies that were HEC, > 50% lacked an NK1 receptor antagonist as prophylaxis. Conclusions: The average cost of NV-related hospitalizations among patients with cancer exceeds $15,000 per event, highlighting the need to effectively address this symptom. Roughly half the hospitalizations involved HEC, with over half of those patients not receiving guideline-based antiemetic prophylaxis.

CACHEXIO: Evaluation of body composition changes and immunotherapy in patients with metastatic cancer

209

Background: Given body composition predicts toxicity for patients receiving cytotoxic chemotherapy, we explored changes in body composition and biomarkers as predictors of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and health care utilization. Methods: We conducted a longitudinal study of patients with metastatic solid tumor receiving immunotherapy (07/2014-10/2017). Eligible patients had a computed tomography (CT) scan prior to first-line immunotherapy with at least two additional CT scans at three, six or nine months after immunotherapy initiation. We analyzed body composition using cross-sectional CT scans at the third lumbar vertebra. We utilized mixed effect linear regression models to assess longitudinal changes in body composition (weight, skeletal muscle, total adipose). We examined associations of baseline body composition and biomarkers (albumin, neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR)) with the incidence of irAEs and healthcare utilization (hospitalizations/ED visits) using logistic regression. Results: Of 140 patients treated with immunotherapy, 61 met inclusion criteria. The majority (80%) received prior chemotherapy and the most common malignancies included lung (26%), head and neck (20%), and melanoma (20%). We found that one-third (n=19) experienced an irAE and colitis (53%) was the most common irAE. Patients experienced substantial weight loss over time (B= -1.88, p<0.001) with a decrease both in skeletal muscle (B= -3.08, p=0.001) and total adipose tissue (B =-50.44, p<0.001). We found greater skeletal muscle at baseline was associated with lower risk of health care utilization (OR 0.98, 95% CI: 0.965-0.998, p=0.03). We observed no association with biomarkers and/or body composition variables with irAEs or health care utilization. Conclusions: Patients with metastatic cancer receiving immunotherapy lose weight including skeletal muscle and adipose tissue. Aside from higher baseline skeletal muscle predicting less health care utilization, we did not observe any other associations between body composition changes and irAEs or health care utilization.

What the HEC? Physician variation and attainable compliance targets in antiemetic prophylaxis

74

Background: U.S. National Antiemetic Guidelines recommend upfront triple prophylaxis (NK1 receptor antagonist (RA) + 5HT3 RA + dexamethasone) for patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC), including carboplatin AUC ≥ 4 per 2017 guidelines. While existing data show gaps in guideline compliance, variation between individual physicians is less studied, and a realistic target compliance rate remains unknown. Methods: In a large electronic health record database (IBM Explorys), we identified HEC courses of therapy initiated from 2012 to 2017. Guideline compliance was defined as triple prophylaxis at chemotherapy initiation. Patient courses for ≥ 7 day cycles of cisplatin or anthracycline + cyclophosphamide (AC), or carboplatin (≥ 14 day cycles as a proxy for AUC ≥ 4) were ascribed to oncologists based on encounter frequency. We then ranked physicians treating ≥ 5 HEC courses and evaluated guideline compliance and individual physician variation. Results: In total, 10,074 HEC courses were identified and attributed to 451 unique physicians. Overall antiemetic guideline compliance with cisplatin and AC averaged 68% and 81% respectively. When ranked by compliance, the top 20% of physicians were 2.5 - 1.5 times as compliant as the bottom 20% (cisplatin 100% vs 40%; AC 100% vs 67%). For cisplatin, 32% of physicians had > 90% compliance; the remaining 68% were evenly distributed from 0 - 90%. For AC, 56% of physicians had > 90% compliance, and another 14% had 80 - 90%; the remaining 30% were evenly distributed. For carboplatin, 62% of physicians had ≤ 10% compliance, and another 17% had 11 - 20%; however, the majority of these data preceded guideline inclusion of carboplatin AUC ≥ 4 as HEC. Rates were independent of course volume per physician. Conclusions: Considerable physician-level variation exists in triple antiemetic prophylaxis guideline adherence for HEC. Hundreds of physicians had > 90% compliance with guidelines, suggesting 90% is a realistic target. However, the majority exhibited substantial gaps in NK1 RA use in HEC, placing patients unnecessarily at risk for CINV. Interventions are needed to bolster triple antiemetic prophylaxis in HEC, perhaps especially for carboplatin.

FIT: Functional and imaging testing for patients with metastatic cancer

208

Background: Despite multiple cancer cachexia (CC) trials evaluating novel agents, the FDA has not approved a single drug to date. One key challenge in CC trials is selection of endpoints. The aim of this study was to explore changes in body composition and associations with functional and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) to clarify CC trial endpoint selection. Methods: We identified metastatic solid tumor cancer patients receiving cancer-directed therapies at a single cancer center (2016-2018). Patients completed all assessments at study enrollment and 3 months from enrollment. We analyzed body composition utilizing cross-sectional computed tomography (CT) scans at the third lumbar vertebra. Functional assessments included the 6-minute walk test (6MWT), Timed Up-and-Go (TUG) test, and Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB). PROs included the Functional Assessment of Anorexia/Cachexia Therapy (FAACT) and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Fatigue (FACT-F). We examined changes in body composition and functional assessments from enrollment to 3 months using paired t-tests. We utilized linear regression models to assess the relationship between changes in body composition and changes in functional assessment adjusting for age and sex. Results: A total of 57 patients completed baseline assessments; 19 patients did not complete 3-month assessments (5 died, 1 hospice, 13 withdrew). Of the 38 patients with complete data (mean age 61.8 years, 47% female, 71% GI malignancy), 50% received chemotherapy, 16% immunotherapy, and 34% combination therapy. From enrollment to 3 months, we observed an increase in total adipose tissue (16.9±52.4 cm2, 95% CI -33.79-0.63; p = 0.059), but not weight or skeletal muscle. Greater losses in skeletal muscle were associated with greater declines in 6MWT (B = 0.036, p = 0.014) and SBBP (B = 2.444, p = 0.002), but not the TUG. We observed no association with change in weight with all functional outcomes or PROs. Moreover, we found no association with body composition and PROs from enrollment to 3 months. Conclusions: In future CC trials, changes in longitudinal body composition rather than weight should be utilized. Furthermore, changes in skeletal muscle and the 6MWT and/or SBBP may be preferred endpoints.

Association of impairments in activities of daily living (ADLs) with symptom burden, health care utilization, and survival among hospitalized patients with advanced cancer

203

Background: Hospitalized patients with cancer often have impaired ADLs related to age, comorbidities, and both cancer and treatment-related morbidity. However, the relationship between ADL impairment and patients’ symptom burden and clinical outcomes has not been well described. Methods: We prospectively enrolled patients with advanced cancer with unplanned hospitalizations at an academic medical center. Upon admission, nurses assessed patients’ ADLs (mobility, feeding, bathing, dressing, and grooming). We used the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) and Patient Health Questionnaire-4 to assess physical and psychological symptoms, comparing symptom burden between patients with and without ADL impairment. We used regression models adjusted for age, sex, education, Charlson comorbidity index, months since advanced cancer diagnosis, and cancer type to assess the relationship between any ADL impairment and hospital length of stay, the composite outcome of death or readmission within 90 days of discharge, and survival. Results: Among 932 patients, 40.2% had at least one ADL impairment. Patients with ADL impairment were older (67.2 vs. 60.8 years, p<0.001), had higher Charlson comorbidity index (1.1 vs. 0.7, p<0.001), and higher physical symptom burden (ESAS Physical 35.2 vs. 30.9, p<0.001). Those with ADL impairment were more likely to have moderate to severe constipation (46.7% vs. 36.0%, p<0.01), pain (74.9% vs. 63.1%, p<0.01), drowsiness (76.6% vs. 68.3%, p<0.01), as well as symptoms of depression (38.3% vs. 23.6%, p<0.01) and anxiety (35.9% vs. 22.4%, p<0.01). In adjusted models, ADL impairment was associated with longer hospital length of stay (B=1.30, p<0.01), higher odds of death or readmission within 90 days (odds ratio=2.26, p<0.01), and worse survival (hazard ratio=1.73, p<0.01). Conclusions: Hospitalized patients with advanced cancer who have ADL impairment experience a significantly higher symptom burden and worse health outcomes compared to those without ADL impairment. These findings highlight the need to assess and address ADL impairment among this population to enhance their quality of life and care.

Symptom burden in hospitalized patients with curable and incurable cancers

190

Background: Inpatient supportive care interventions are targeted to patients with advanced solid tumors due to perceived higher symptom burden. Yet, few studies have characterized symptom prevalence in hospitalized patients with curable cancers. We aimed to describe and compare symptom burden and palliative care utilization in hospitalized patients with curable and incurable cancers to determine the allocation of such supportive care resources. Methods: We conducted a single center study of 1549 patients (238 curable hematologic, 239 curable solid, 123 incurable hematologic, 949 incurable solid cancers) who experienced an unplanned hospitalization between 9/14 - 4/17. On admission, we assessed patients’ physical symptoms (Edmonton Symptom Assessment System) and psychological distress (Patient Health Questionnaire - 4 and Primary Care PTSD Screen). Results: The median number of moderate to severe symptoms reported by patients with curable hematologic, curable solid, incurable hematologic, and incurable solid cancers were 5 [3-6], 5 [3-7], 5 [4-6], and 6 [4-7], respectively. Most patients reported moderate to severe fatigue (83.6%, 82.9%, 81.3%, 86.9%). Table 1 depicts rates of psychological distress. In adjusted analyses patients with incurable solid cancers reported higher symptom burden (β = 7.6, p < 0.01), depression (β = 0.4, p = 0.01), and anxiety (β = 0.3, p = 0.03) symptoms, but no difference in PTSD symptoms. Among patients in top quartile of symptom burden, palliative care was consulted in 16.2%, 7.9%, 23.8%, and 49.6% (p < 0.01) of patients with curable hematologic, curable solid, incurable hematologic, and incurable solid cancers, respectively. Conclusions: Hospitalized patients with solid and hematologic cancers experience substantial physical and psychological symptoms regardless of the curability of their illness. Palliative care is rarely consulted for highly symptomatic patients with curable cancers. Inpatient supportive care interventions should target the needs of all highly symptomatic patients with cancer. [Table: see text]

Relationship between perceptions of treatment goals and psychological distress in patients with advanced cancer

44

Background: Several studies have demonstrated discordance between how patients perceive their goal of treatment versus how they perceive their oncologist’s goal. Studies evaluating the extent and risk factors of this discordance are lacking. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 559 patients with incurable lung, gastrointestinal, breast, and brain cancers. We used the Perception of Treatment and Prognosis Questionnaire to assess patients’ perceptions of both their treatment goal and their oncologist’s goal and categorized responses: 1) patients who reported that both their goal and their oncologist’s goal was concordant (either to cure or not to cure); and 2) patients who reported discordant perceptions of their goal versus their oncologist’s goal. We assessed patients’ psychological distress using the Hospital-Anxiety-and-Depression-Scale and used linear regression to assess the relationship between patients’ perceptions of their treatment goal and psychological outcomes. Results: 61.7% of patients reported that both their goal and their oncologist’s goal was non-curative; 19.3% reported that both their goal and their oncologist’s goal was to cure their cancer; and 19.0% reported discordance between their goal and their perception of the oncologist’s goal. Older age (OR = 0.98, P = 0.01), non-Hispanic ethnicity (OR = 0.31, P = 0.049), and higher education (OR = 0.62, P = 0.042) were associated with lower likelihood of reporting discordant goals. Patients with discordant perceptions of their goal and their oncologist’s goal reported higher anxiety (B = 1.56, P = 0.003) compared to those who reported that both their goal and their oncologist’s goal was curative. Patients who reported both their goal and the oncologist’s goal was non-curative had higher depression symptoms (B = 1.06, P = 0.013) compared to those who reported that both their goal and the oncologists’ goal was curative. Conclusions: One-fifth of patients with advanced cancer report discrepancies between their perceptions of their own and their oncologists’ treatment goal which is associated with psychological distress. Tools are needed to identify patients at risk of cognitive dissonance about their prognosis.