End-of-Life Care in Patients with Metastatic Lung Cancer Harboring Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Mutations

Prognostic communication about lung cancer in the precision oncology era: A multiple-perspective qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Although most patients with cancer prefer to know their prognosis, prognostic communication between oncologists and patients is often insufficient. Targeted therapies for lung cancer improve survival yet are not curative and produce variable responses. This study sought to describe how oncologists communicate about prognosis with patients receiving targeted therapies for lung cancer.

METHODS

This qualitative study included 39 patients with advanced lung cancer with targetable mutations, 14 caregivers, and 10 oncologists. Semistructured interviews with patients and caregivers and focus groups or interviews with oncologists were conducted to explore their experiences with prognostic communication. One oncology follow-up visit was audio-recorded per patient. A framework approach was used to analyze interview transcripts, and a content analysis of patient-oncologist dialogue was conducted. Themes were identified within each source and then integrated across sources to create a multidimensional description of prognostic communication.

RESULTS

Six themes in prognostic communication were identified: Patients with targetable mutations develop a distinct identity in the lung cancer community that affects their information-seeking and self-advocacy; oncologists set high expectations for targeted therapy; the uncertain availability of new therapies complicates prognostic discussions; patients and caregivers have variable information preferences; patients raise questions about progression by asking about physical symptoms or scan results; and patients' expectations of targeted therapy influence their medical decision-making.

CONCLUSIONS

Optimistic patient-oncologist communication shapes the expectations of patients receiving targeted therapy for lung cancer and affects their decision-making. Further research and clinical guidance are needed to help oncologists to communicate uncertain outcomes effectively.

Palliative Systemic Therapy Given near the End of Life for Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Background: The use of chemotherapy near end of life (EOL) for various cancers is increasing and has been shown to be associated with delayed access to palliative care (PC) and increased aggressiveness in EOL care, without any benefit on survival. Methods: This retrospective study included 90 patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who received at least one line of palliative systemic anticancer therapy (SACT) and died between 1 November 2014, and 31 October 2016, at Institut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec (IUCPQ). Our primary objective was to evaluate the proportion of patients with NSCLC receiving SACT within 30 days of death. Secondary outcomes were to determine the mean and median delays between the administration of the last treatment and death, and to evaluate if there were differences in characteristics and outcomes (including overall survival (OS)) between patients treated or not within 30 days of death. Results: In our cohort, 22% of patients received SACT within 30 days of death. For the entire cohort, the mean delay between the last treatment and death was 94 days, and the median was 57 days. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of baseline characteristics. Use of SACT near EOL was associated with decreased access to PC, higher rates of in hospital death, decreased use of medical aid in dying (MAiD), and a shorter median OS (4.0 vs. 9.0 months). Conclusions: In this retrospective cohort of patients with metastatic NSCLC, 22% of patients received SACT within 30 days of death, with a negative impact on access to PC, higher rates of in hospital death, decreased use of MAiD and palliative sedation, and a shorter median OS.

Patient-Centered Palliative Care for Patients With Advanced Lung Cancer

The evidence base demonstrating the benefits of an early focus on palliative care for patients with serious cancers, including advanced lung cancer, is substantial. Early involvement of specialty-trained palliative care clinicians in the care of patients with advanced lung cancer improves patient-reported outcomes, such as quality of life, and health care delivery, including hospice utilization. Since the time that many of these palliative care trials were conducted, the paradigm of cancer care for many cancers, including lung cancer, has changed dramatically. The majority of patients with advanced lung cancer are now treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors or targeted therapies, both of which have had a significant impact on patient's experience and outcomes. With this changing landscape of lung cancer therapeutics, patients are facing new and different challenges, including dealing with novel side effect profiles and coping with greater uncertainty regarding their prognosis. Patients who are living longer with their advanced cancer also struggle with how to address survivorship issues, such as sexual health and exercise, and decision making about end-of-life care. Although palliative care clinicians remain well-suited to address these care needs, they may need to learn new skills to support patients treated with novel therapies. Additionally, as the experience of patients with advanced lung cancer is becoming more varied and individualized, palliative care research interventions and clinical programs should also be delivered in a patient-centered manner to best meet patient's needs and improve their outcomes. Tailored and technology-based palliative care interventions are promising strategies for delivering patient-centered palliative care.

Patient-Reported and End-of-Life Outcomes Among Adults With Lung Cancer Receiving Targeted Therapy in a Clinical Trial of Early Integrated Palliative Care: A Secondary Analysis

CONTEXT

Targeted therapy has revolutionized lung cancer treatment and markedly increased survival, though data are lacking on patient-reported and end-of-life (EOL) outcomes among patients receiving targeted therapy.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to compare quality of life (QOL), symptoms, prognostic communication, and EOL care between patients receiving targeted therapy and patients with lung cancer without targetable mutations.

METHODS

In this secondary analysis of a randomized trial of early palliative care in advanced lung cancer (n=154), we compared change in QOL and symptoms (per the Functional Assessment of Cancer Treatment [FACT]-Lung scale) over 24 weeks among patients with lung cancer receiving targeted therapy versus those without targetable mutations using linear mixed effects models, adjusted for receipt of palliative care, age and gender. We also compared prognostic communication and decedents' EOL health care utilization using logistic regression, adjusted for palliative care.

RESULTS

Compared to individuals without targetable mutations, patients receiving targeted therapy (n=35) reported greater improvements in QOL (FACT-General B=0.46; 95% CI=0.19, 0.73) and symptoms (FACT-Lung Cancer Subscale B=0.12; 95% CI=0.03, 0.20) over time, independent of palliative care. Patients receiving targeted therapy were also more likely to report they rarely discussed prognosis with their clinicians (OR=2.59, 95% CI=1.01, 6.63) and were more likely to receive cancer-directed therapy in their last 14 days of life (OR=14.98, 95% CI=4.08, 54.96).

CONCLUSIONS

Relative to patients without targetable mutations, patients with lung cancer who receive targeted therapy experience improved QOL and symptoms, are less likely to discuss prognosis early in their illness course, and more likely to continue treatment until death and die in the hospital.

Duration of palliative care before death in international routine practice: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Early provision of palliative care, at least 3-4 months before death, can improve patient quality of life and reduce burdensome treatments and financial costs. However, there is wide variation in the duration of palliative care received before death reported across the research literature. This study aims to determine the duration of time from initiation of palliative care to death for adults receiving palliative care across the international literature.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis that was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018094718). Six databases were searched for articles published between Jan 1, 2013, and Dec 31, 2018: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Global Health, Web of Science and The Cochrane Library, as well undertaking citation list searches. Following PRISMA guidelines, articles were screened using inclusion (any study design reporting duration from initiation to death in adults palliative care services) and exclusion (paediatric/non-English language studies, trials influencing the timing of palliative care) criteria. Quality appraisal was completed using Hawker's criteria and the main outcome was the duration of palliative care (median/mean days from initiation to death).

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-nine studies from 23 countries were included, involving 11,996,479 patients. Prior to death, the median duration from initiation of palliative care to death was 18.9 days (IQR 0.1), weighted by the number of participants. Significant differences between duration were found by disease type (15 days for cancer vs 6 days for non-cancer conditions), service type (19 days for specialist palliative care unit, 20 days for community/home care, and 6 days for general hospital ward) and development index of countries (18.91 days for very high development vs 34 days for all other levels of development). Forty-three per cent of studies were rated as 'good' quality. Limitations include a preponderance of data from high-income countries, with unclear implications for low- and middle-income countries.

CONCLUSIONS

Duration of palliative care is much shorter than the 3-4 months of input by a multidisciplinary team necessary in order for the full benefits of palliative care to be realised. Furthermore, the findings highlight inequity in access across patient, service and country characteristics. We welcome more consistent terminology and methodology in the assessment of duration of palliative care from all countries, alongside increased reporting from less-developed settings, to inform benchmarking, service evaluation and quality improvement.