Decision making in head and neck cancer care

Laryngeal Cancer and the End of Life (As We Know It)

Patients with laryngeal cancer undergo life-changing interventions that impact their individual and social well-being. There remains to be an in-depth characterization of the multidimensional symptom burden faced by patients with laryngeal cancer at the end of life. Care at end of life must attend to symptoms that manifest earlier in the course of illness. This article characterizes the suffering experienced by patients with laryngeal cancer, including societal shame, poor mental health, and inequitable outcomes. For patients with advanced laryngeal cancer, surgical palliative care provides a necessary and helpful paradigm for caregiver support, goals-of-care conversations, and treatment counseling.

Concordant palliative care delivery in advanced head and neck cancer

OBJECTIVES

To describe the palliative care consultation practices in an academic head and neck surgery practice.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of a palliative care database and the health record for all palliative care consultations of patients suffering from advanced stage head and neck cancer within a 21-month period.

RESULTS

Ten head and neck cancer patients received palliative care consults while on the otolaryngology service. One consultation occurred preoperatively; nine occurred postoperatively, on a median of hospital day 9. At the time of referral, seven patients were in the ICU and three were on a surgical floor. Code status de-escalation occurred in six patients and psycho-socio-spiritual suffering was supported in all consultations. Nine patients died within six months, with a median post-consultation survival of 35 days. Of these, two died in an ICU, five were discharged to hospice, one to a SNF, and one to a LTACH.

CONCLUSION

Palliative care consultation in this advanced head and neck cancer cohort was commonly late, however, significant suffering was mitigated following most consults. Palliative care specialists are experts at eliciting patient values, determining acceptable tradeoffs and suffering limitations by employing a shared decision-making process that ends with a patient-centered value-congruent treatment recommendation. Oftentimes, this embraces curative-intent or palliative surgery, along with contingency plans for unacceptable value-incongruent postoperative outcomes. Enhanced awareness of the benefits of embracing concordant palliative care in advanced head and neck cancer patients may help overcome the significant barriers to involving palliative care experts earlier.

Management of catastrophic haemorrhage in palliative head and neck cancer: creation of a new protocol using simulation

Catastrophic haemorrhage or carotid blowout a rare but devastating consequence of head and neck cancer. In most cases, this represents a terminal event, and the patient is prescribed pre-emptive analgesia and anxiolytics. There is anecdotal evidence that due to the time taken to prepare the medications that patients do not receive these drugs prior to death. We aimed to identify the drug to patient time using simulated catastrophic haemorrhage simulations. We used the current protocol for this and also proposed a new grab-bag with preprepared anxiolytic and anagelsic medications. Each scenario was repeated 16 times. The mean time for drug administration using the current policy was 124 s compared with 48 s when the grab-bag was used (p<0.01). The new protocol also reduced the variability in the drug to patient time. We aim to implement this new protocol on the head and neck ward.

Patient and Provider Perspectives Regarding Enrollment in Head and Neck Cancer Research

OBJECTIVE

The advent of precision oncology complicates how clinicians and participants understand how clinical care and research interface. Here we examine how key stakeholders perceive the utility of, and evaluate the decision to participate in, genomic sequencing head and neck cancer research. The goal of this study was to highlight unique considerations for our community as this type of research proliferates across the country.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective multimethod qualitative and quantitative embedded ethics protocol.

SETTING

Single-institution National Cancer Institute-designated academic cancer center.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Multimethod study using paired surveys and semistructured interviews among patients and providers involved in a prospective precision head and neck oncology sequencing protocol (116 survey patient-participants, response rate 82%) with 18 interviewees.

RESULTS

Participants were generally enthusiastic about enrollment in research, both to help future patients and as a way of giving back to the community. They described reliance on information from and trust in their cancer doctor regarding the decision to participate in research, but paradoxically there was discordance in how doctors and patients reported their respective influence in the decision-making process. Clinicians also stressed the importance in separating clinical and research-informed consent processes, although patients did not describe this tension.

CONCLUSION

As we enter an era of increasing personalized medicine and targeted therapies, the relationship between clinicians, scientists, and patients plays a larger role in how we individualize and contextualize cancer research. Our data are another step toward the ultimate goal of respecting and protecting patients as participants in head and neck translational oncology.

Quality Assessment in Supportive Care in Head and Neck Cancer

Quality assessment is a key issue in every clinical intervention, to be periodically performed so to measure the adherence to standard and to possibly implement strategies to improve its performance. This topic is rarely discussed for what concerns supportive care; however, it is necessary to verify the quality of the supportive measures; “supportive care makes excellent cancer care possible,” as stated by the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC). In this regard, the quality of supportive care in head and neck cancer patients is a crucial topic, both to allow administration of treatments according to planned dose intensity or surgical indications and to maintain or improve patients' quality of life. This paper aims to provide insight on state of the art supportive care and its future developments for locally advanced and recurrent/metastatic head and neck cancer, with a focus on quality assessment in relation to surgery, radiotherapy, and systemic therapy.

Paradigm shift in head and neck oncology patient management

Objective

This article describes a paradigm shift in what is considered to be good care for patients living with and after (head and neck) cancer. HNO patients often experience severe and difficult physical and psychosocial problems due to the nature and location of the disease. Many disciplines are involved in their treatment, so their voice is only one amongst many others in the decision making process. For this patient group it seems complicated to put the concept of Shared Decision Making into practice. As a step in this direction, patient reported outcomes which ask patients to select the disconcerting issues and symptoms can be used as a basis for referral, supportive care and treatment decision making. We need to provide more tailored and personalized information that is specific to individual circumstances, preferences and concerns and focuses more on the impact of treatment and access to help and support. Follow up of these patients should be concentrated on both medical and emotional aspects.

Practice implications

A shift in the way caregivers provide their information contributes to a more profound involvement of patients in treatment decisions.

Patient Reflections on Decision Making for Laryngeal Cancer Treatment

Objective To describe the reflections of patients treated for laryngeal cancer with regard to treatment-related decision making. Study Design Cross-sectional survey-based pilot study. Setting Single-institution tertiary care cancer center. Subjects/Methods Adults with laryngeal carcinoma were eligible to participate (N = 57; 46% treated surgically, 54% nonsurgically). Validated surveys measuring decisional conflict and regret explored patients' reflections on their preferences and priorities regarding treatment-related decision making for laryngeal cancer and how patient-reported functional outcomes, professional referral patterns, and desired provider input influenced these reflections. Results When considering the level of involvement of surgeons, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists in their care, patients were more likely to believe that the specialist whom they saw first was the most important factor in deciding how to treat their cancer (Fisher's exact, ~χ² = 16.2, df = 6, P = .02). Patients who were treated for laryngeal cancer who reported worse voice-related quality of life recalled more decisional conflict ( P = .01) and experienced more decisional regret ( P < .001). Of the patients for whom speech was a top priority prior to treatment, better voice-related quality of life overall scores were correlated with less decision regret about treatment decisions ( P < .02). Of the patients for whom eating and drinking were top priorities prior to treatment, better MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory global scores were correlated with less decision regret about treatment decisions ( P < .002). Conclusion Patient priorities and attitudes, coupled with functional outcomes and professional referral patterns, influence how patients reflect on their choices regarding management of laryngeal cancer. Better understanding of these variables may assist in ensuring that patients' voices are integrated into individualized laryngeal cancer treatment planning.

Factors Influencing Head and Neck Surgical Oncologists' Transition from Curative to Palliative Treatment Goals

Objective The factors influencing head and neck surgical oncologists' goals of care and decisions to initiate conversations about transitioning to palliative-intent treatment for patients with limited curative treatment options are incompletely understood. Lack of guidance for physicians on this topic can lead to inconsistent utilization of palliative services, as well as confusing, upsetting experiences for patients and families. We review the literature investigating the clinical factors, inter- and intrapersonal factors, and financial and health care system considerations that head and neck cancer physicians weigh during this decision-making process. Data Sources PubMed. Review Methods Selected literature on head and neck surgical oncologists' decision making in end-of-life care and palliative therapy was reviewed and analyzed thematically. Conclusions Physicians taking into account patients' clinical trajectories often overestimate the negative impact of head and neck cancer symptoms on their quality of life, suggesting that patients' expectations of quality of life should be discussed early, before communication barriers arise. How head and neck clinicians perceive and are influenced by patients' desired degree of autonomy, which varies greatly depending on the severity of illness, is still unclear. Patients' financial and insurance status affects decision making about hospice care. Finally, physician demographics (eg, age, subspecialization, practice setting), emotions, and philosophical background may exert unconscious biases that have not been fully determined for head and neck surgical oncologists. Implications for Practice A more comprehensive understanding of the head and neck surgical oncologist's approach toward considering a transition to therapy with palliative intent may help guide advancements in this complex counseling process, leading to improvements in patient care, quality of life, and outcomes.

From an illusion of certainty into a reality of uncertainty: A longitudinal qualitative study of how people affected by laryngeal cancer use information over time

PURPOSE

Patients diagnosed with laryngeal cancer and their families face unique challenges. Providing information is an essential component of care. However little is known about the way in which they use information. This study aims to explore the different types of information used by laryngeal cancer patients and their carers from diagnosis into the follow up phase.

METHOD

The study adopted an interpretive longitudinal design using qualitative interviews at two specific time points. Twenty laryngeal cancer patients and 17 carers were interviewed. Data were analysed using Framework Analysis.

RESULT

Two main categories of information: professional and experiential, were found to be used, drawn from a range of sources. The information received at diagnosis appeared to contribute to an 'illusion of certainty' that life would return to normal at the end of treatment. However, as patients progressed into follow-up, many were propelled into a 'reality of uncertainty' due to the "disconnect" between the expectations both patient and carer developed from information received over the cancer trajectory.

CONCLUSION

The findings from this longitudinal study suggest that people affected by laryngeal cancer use two broad categories of information derived from a range of different sources and influenced by their own experiences. Health professionals need to situate information in the context of the individual's understanding and prior knowledge of health and illness to help generate more realistic expectations of treatment outcomes. The level of uncertainty experienced by both patients and their carers after treatment suggests a clear need for continued supportive care.

Noncompliance to guidelines in head and neck cancer treatment; associated factors for both patient and physician

BACKGROUND

Decisions on head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) treatment are widely recognized as being difficult, due to high morbidity, often involving vital functions. Some patients may therefore decline standard, curative treatment. In addition doctors may propose alternative, nonstandard treatments. Little attention is devoted, both in literature and in daily practice, to understanding why and when HNSCC patients or their physicians decline standard, curative treatment modalities. Our objective is to determine factors associated with noncompliance in head and neck cancer treatment for both patients and physicians and to assess the influence of patient compliance on prognosis.

METHODS

We did a retrospective study based on the medical records of 829 patients with primary HNSCC, who were eligible for curative treatment and referred to our hospital between 2010 and 2012. We analyzed treatment choice and reasons for nonstandard treatment decisions, survival, age, gender, social network, tumor site, cTNM classification, and comorbidity (ACE27). Multivariate analysis using logistic regression methods was performed to determine predictive factors associated with non-standard treatment following physician or patient decision. To gain insight in survival of the different groups of patients, we applied a Cox regression analysis. After checking the proportional hazards assumption for each variable, we adjusted the survival analysis for gender, age, tumor site, tumor stage, comorbidity and a history of having a prior tumor.

RESULTS

17 % of all patients with a primary HNSCC did not receive standard curative treatment, either due to nonstandard treatment advice (10 %) or due to the patient choosing an alternative (7 %). A further 3 % of all patients refused any type of therapy, even though they were considered eligible for curative treatment. Elderliness, single marital status, female gender, high tumor stage and severe comorbidity are predictive factors. Patients declining standard treatment have a lower overall 3-year survival (34 % vs. 70 %).

CONCLUSIONS

Predictive factors for nonstandard treatment decisions in head and neck cancer treatment differed between the treating physician and the patient. Patients who received nonstandard treatment had a lower overall 3-year survival. These findings should be taken into account when counselling patients in whom nonstandard treatment is considered.

Barriers to shared decisions in the most serious of cancers: a qualitative study of patients with pancreatic cancer treated in the UK

BACKGROUND

Less than 20% of patients with pancreatic cancer present with localized, potentially curable tumours. Even when potentially curative surgery is possible, mortality is high. Only 20-25% of patients who have had resected ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head survive 5 years. Other treatments include chemotherapy, radiotherapy and palliative care.

AIM

To explore patients' perceptions of barriers to shared decision making in a condition in which shared decision making might be difficult.

METHOD

Thematic analysis of narrative interviews with 32 people diagnosed with pancreatic cancer in the UK; interviews with a social scientist, usually in people's homes.

RESULTS

We found that barriers to shared decisions include the idea that investigations are conducted to determine whether the patient qualifies for surgery, rather than to establish whether surgery is an option to consider; a sense of being pressured to accept treatment, a sense that in a life-threatening situation, there are no 'real options'; and the confusion that can be caused when clinical opinions differ.

CONCLUSION

We need to ask how patients can be expected to engage in an informed, shared decision if they are made to feel that they are one of the 'winners' if they qualify for surgery. When each treatment decision might have serious consequences for a patient's remaining months, we suggest that there is a particularly strong imperative to make sure that the patient is not subject to other people's assumptions about what is best for them and that patients are offered the opportunity to share in decisions.

Critical incidents reveal how patients with head and neck cancer construct their "secure base" as a "helping system"

Most studies of the psychosocial needs of patients with head and neck cancers (HNC) use predefined categories and explicitly ask for specified needs. These studies are important but should be complemented with inductive studies based on patients' own descriptions of experiences. This qualitative study is such a contribution. In repeated interviews positive and negative incidents were collected from 137 patients with HNC, and these experiences were categorized in dimensions expressing needs. A core category--"being included--neglected by a helping system"--emerged from the narrated incidents and was based on the dimensions engagement, competence, and information. The findings are easily related to attachment theory by stressing the significance of establishing trustful relationships with the health care staff, as attachment figures, who respond flexibly and sensitively to the patient's needs. In the constitution of health care as a helping system, all encounters between the patient and health care staff matters. Further research should preferably focus on the creation of guidelines for the constitution of health care as a helping system, that is, how the found factors of a helping system can be operationalized in clinical practice.

Cost Considerations in the Treatment of Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Objectives. To determine the cost of treatment of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OP SCCA) with transoral surgery with concomitant neck dissection (TOS), TOS with adjuvant radiation therapy (TOS + RT), TOS with adjuvant chemoradiation therapy (TOS + CRT), and primary chemoradiation therapy (CRT).

Study Design. Case series.

Setting. Two tertiary care teaching hospitals.

Subjects and Methods. Using the databases of 2 teaching hospitals, patients were identified who had OP SCCA treated with TOS, TOS + RT, TOS + CRT, and primary CRT in 2009 to 2010. Costs were analyzed from an institutional perspective looking at reimbursement. Patients with government payers and patients with private payers in each group were identified, and net revenue data obtained for the 3-month period from diagnosis were calculated and averaged for each group. Cost was defined as the reimbursement for all charges surrounding the 3-month episode of treatment. All revenue associated with inpatient and outpatient care, including pharmacy charges, was included.

Results. The mean cost of TOS (private payers/government payers) was $37,435/$15,664 (range, $22,486-$48,746/$13,325-$16,885). The mean cost of TOS + RT (private payers/government payers) was $74,484/$34,343 (range, $72,400-$84,825/$31,565-$40,810). The mean cost of TOS + CRT (private payers/government payers) was $191,780/$53,245 (range, $145,450-$217,220/$49,400-$58,325). The mean cost of CRT (private payers/government payers) was $198,285/$57,429 (range, $168,216-$298,945/$52,900-$59,545).

Conclusion. An algorithm of transoral surgical treatment of OP SCCA with adjuvant treatment as indicated by pathology is more cost conscious than an algorithm of treatment of all OP SCCA with CRT.