Treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism in patients under palliative care

Many patients with cancer require palliative care at some stage and the vast majority of people followed in palliative care are cancer patients. Patients with cancer are at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), and this is particularly true during the advanced palliative phase when mobility is limited or absent. Patients with cancer in palliative cancer are at higher bleeding risk compared to non-cancer patients. Decisions to treat VTE or withhold anticoagulation for these patients have proven to be difficult and depend largely on an individual clinician's judgment. For this reason, we have developed a consensus proposal for appropriate management of cancer-associated thromboembolism (CAT) in patients in palliative care, which is presented in this article. The proposal was informed by the recent scientific literature retrieved through a systematic literature review. In cancer patients in advanced palliative care, the benefit-risk ratio of anticoagulation seems unfavourable with a higher haemorrhagic risk than the benefit associated with prevention of CAT recurrence and, above all, in the absence of any benefit on quality of life. For this reason, we recommend that patients should be prescribed anticoagulants on a case-by-case basis. The choice of whether to treat, and with which type of treatment, should take into account anticipated life expectancy and patient preferences, as well as clinical factors such as the estimated bleeding risk, the type of VTE experienced and the time since the VTE event.

A review of the utility of prognostic tools in predicting 6-month mortality in cancer patients, conducted in the context of voluntary assisted dying

BACKGROUND

Eligibility to access the Victorian voluntary assisted dying (VAD) legislation requires that people have a prognosis of 6 months or less (or 12 months or less in the setting of a neurodegenerative diagnosis). Yet prognostic determination is frequently inaccurate and prompts clinician discomfort. Based on functional capacity and clinical and biochemical markers, prognostic tools have been developed to increase the accuracy of life expectancy predictions.

AIMS

This review of prognostic tools explores their accuracy to determine 6-month mortality in adults when treated under palliative care with a primary diagnosis of cancer (the diagnosis of a large proportion of people who are requesting VAD).

METHODS

A systematic search of the literature was performed on electronic databases Medline, Embase and Cinahl.

RESULTS

Limitations of prognostication identified include the following: (i) prognostic tools still provide uncertain prognoses; (ii) prognostic tools have greater accuracy predicting shorter prognoses, such as weeks to months, rather than 6 months; and (iii) functionality was often weighted significantly when calculating prognoses. Challenges of prognostication identified include the following: (i) the area under the curve (a value that represents how well a model can distinguish between two outcomes) cannot be directly interpreted clinically and (ii) difficulties exist related to determining appropriate thresholds of accuracy in this context.

CONCLUSIONS

Prognostication is a significant aspect of VAD, and the utility of the currently available prognostic tools appears limited but may prompt discussions about prognosis and alternative means (other than prognostic estimates) to identify those eligible for VAD.

Prognostic evaluation in patients with advanced cancer in the last months of life: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline

•This ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline provides key recommendations for using prognostic estimates in advanced cancer. •The guideline covers recommendations for patients with cancer and an expected survival of months or less. •An algorithm for use of clinical predictions, prognostic factors and multivariable risk prediction models is presented. •The author group encompasses a multidisciplinary group of experts from different institutions in Europe, USA and Asia. •Recommendations are based on available scientific data and the authors’ collective expert opinion.

Evolution of parenteral nutrition practices in a comprehensive cancer center: Comparative audits

INTRODUCTION

Malnutrition affects 20% to 70% of oncology patients depending on the patient's age, type and stage of cancer. Two audits were carried out in 2016 and 2019 to evaluate the practice of Parenteral Nutrition (PN).

METHODS

Records of adult medical inpatients who received PN between January 1, 2018 and April 30, 2019 were retrospectively analysed. Twenty criteria were defined. We conducted a statistical analysis to compare the two audit data.

RESULTS

Between January 1, 2018 and April 30, 2019, 86 hospitalizations with a PN prescription were analysed. Of the 69 patients, 66% were female, the mean and median age was 60 years. These were most often medical oncology patients in palliative care. Gynecological and digestive tumors were the two main tumor localization. Bowel obstruction and palliative care management were the two main reasons for hospitalization. Nutritional assessment, amount of energy prescribed, monitoring, and duration of PN remain with poor results.

CONCLUSION

Our study seems to show improvements in the relevance of PN indications, the prescription, and monitoring in patients due to the computerization of prescription and training of professionals. PN remains often prescribed in exclusive palliative situations. We need to continue our improvements, particularly for the initial clinical and biological assessment, and the monitoring. It requires a referral team to improve management of patients treated with PN.

[Examining the use of palliative systemic treatments near end-of-life for patients with metastatic cancer at a French cancer institute]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Appropriate use of palliative systemic treatments near end-of-life is crucial to reduce aggressiveness of cancer care. The study's objective is to evaluate cancer quality-of-care near end-of-life in our cancer institute.

METHODS

From a retrospective cohort, we included all adults with metastatic solid cancers who died in 2019. The use of palliative systemic treatments close to death was measured from quality-of-care indicators described by Earle and al. The integration of supportive care into standard oncology care was also evaluated. All the information were collected from electronic records.

RESULTS

Of the 452 patients, 6.2% received systemic treatment in the last 14 days of life and 8.4% started a new systemic treatment in the last 30 days of life. Eighty six percent met a supportive care physician. This intervention was significantly less frequent in the TS_≤14 group than in the TS_>30 group (71.4 % vs 89.5 % p=0.021). The main reasons for first contact were pain (35 %), early palliative care (29 %) and then exclusive palliative care (17.5 %).

CONCLUSION

Our institute offers a good quality of end-of-life care for patients with metastatic solid cancers. However, improvements should be done regarding prognostic estimation and integration of palliative care.

HAprog: A New Prognostic Application to Assist Oncologists in Routine Care

CONTEXT

More patients are seeing palliative care (PC) earlier in the disease trajectory. The Barretos Prognostic Nomogram (BPN) was designed to fill the gap of survival prognostication for patients with advanced cancer and months of life expectancy. However, its routine use is limited by the common need for a ruler and calculator. Additionally, the BPN requires blood tests.

OBJECTIVES

The aim is to refine the BPN and to create a prognostic application (App) for use on smartphones.

METHODS

This is a reanalysis of the two cohorts of advanced cancer patients (development, n=215 and validation, n=276). The variable 'metastasis' was revised (volume-site combinations) and 'KPS' replaced by 'ECOG-PS'. Prognostic variables were selected for multivariable Cox and Log-logistic parametric regression analyses; the most accurate final models were identified by backward variable elimination. Calibration and discrimination properties were evaluated in the validation sample.

RESULTS

The 'full version' model is composed of 6 parameters: sex, locoregional disease, sites of metastasis, ECOG-PS, WBC and albumin. In the 'clinical version' model (5 variables), the variable 'antineoplastic treatment' was included and the laboratory variables were excluded. At validation, both models were well calibrated and presented adequate c-Index values (0.778 and 0.739). HAprog is a freely downloadable offline App that is used by clinicians to calculate prognosis in less than 1 minute.

CONCLUSION

The new models that integrate HAprog are refined prognostic tools with adequate calibration and discrimination properties. It has potential practical impact for the oncologist dealing with outpatients with advanced cancer during the decision-making process.

Reasons for acceptance and refusal of early palliative care in patients included in early-phase clinical trials in a regional comprehensive cancer centre in France: protocol for a qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

A few studies have highlighted the potential synergy between early palliative care and inclusion in an early-phase clinical trial that may improve quality of life, reduce symptoms of exhaustion related to the side effects of treatment and allow patients to complete their treatment protocol. The primary objective of this qualitative study is to evaluate the reasons for acceptance or refusal of early palliative care in patients included in early-phase clinical trials.

METHOD AND ANALYSIS

All patients from the Centre Léon Bérard (Comprehensive Cancer Centre in Lyon, France) who consent to one of the early-phase clinical trials proposed at the centre will be invited to participate in this study. The cohort will consist of a subgroup (n=20) of patients who accept palliative care together with their clinical trial, and a second subgroup (n=20) of patients who decline it. Patients will be interviewed in exploratory interviews conducted by a psychology researcher before the start of their clinical trial. The interviews will be audio-recorded. Patients will also be asked to complete quality of life and anxiety/depression questionnaires both before the beginning of the treatment and at the end of their clinical trial. The content of the interviews will be analysed thematically. Descriptive and comparative statistical analysis of both cohorts will also be conducted.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Personal data will be collected and processed in accordance with the laws and regulations in force. All patients will give informed consent to participate. This study complies with reference methodology MR004 of the Commission Nationale de l'Informatique et des Libertés. The protocol has received the validation of an ethics committee (Groupe de Réflexion Ethique du CLB, number: 2020-006). The results will be disseminated through conference presentations and peer-reviewed publications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04717440.

Duration of palliative care involvement and immunotherapy treatment near the end of life among patients with cancer who died in-hospital

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionised cancer treatment, but their use near the end of life in patients with advanced cancer is poorly documented. This study investigated the association between administration of ICI therapy in the last month of life and the duration of involvement of the palliative care (PC) team, among patients with advanced cancer who died in-hospital.

METHODS

In a retrospective, multicentre study, we included all patients who died in 2018 of melanoma, head and neck carcinoma, non-small cell lung cancer or urothelial or renal cancer, in 2 teaching hospitals and one community hospital in France. The primary outcome was the association between ICI therapy in the last month of life and duration of involvement of the PC team in patient management.

RESULTS

Among 350 patients included, 133 (38%) received anti-cancer treatment in the last month of life, including 71/133 (53%) who received ICIs. A total of 207 patients (59%) received palliative care, only 127 (36%) 30 days before death. There was a significant association between ongoing ICI therapy in the last month of life and shorter duration of PC management (p = 0.04). Receiving ICI therapy in the last month of life was associated with an increased risk of late PC initiation by multivariate regression analysis (hazard ratio 1.668; 95% CI 1.022-2.722).

CONCLUSION

ICI therapy is frequently used close to the end of life in patients with advanced cancer. Innovative new anti-cancer treatments should not delay PC referral. Improved collaboration between PC and oncological teams is needed to address this issue.

[Re-visiting the Pronopall score ten years later: A multicenter retrospective study]

INTRODUCTION

The Pronopall score, which distinguishes 3 prognostic groups in patients with advanced cancer, was initially proposed in 2008 and validated in a study published in 2018 but including patients between 2009 and 2010. Since the last decade, cancer management and therapeutic options have progressed. The objective of this study was to confirm the value of this score in patients with digestive and thoracic cancer.

METHODS

From July 2019 to November 2020, this retrospective multi-center study included patients with digestive or thoracic cancers who fulfilled the same inclusion criteria as those used in the initial study, and in whom the Pronopall score could be calculated using its four variables (albumin serum level, LDH level, ECOG score, number of metastatic sites). Survival curves were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

One hundred patients were included. According to the Pronopall score, patients were separated into group A (score 8-10, 7 patients), group B (score 4-7, 41 patients) and group C (score 0-3, 52 patients). Median overall survival was 73 days, CI [17-129], 228 days, CI [128-328] and 575 days, CI [432-718] for groups A, B and C, respectively. Survival at 2 months was 28 % for population A, 61 % for population B, and 94 % for population C.

CONCLUSION

This study confirms that the Pronopall score still allows clinically relevant discrimination of patients, score C being associated with a good prognosis compared to scores A and B.

Knowledge and use of prognostic scales by oncologists and palliative care physicians in adult patients with advanced cancer: A national survey (ONCOPRONO study)

BACKGROUND

Prognostic scales exist to estimate patient survival in advanced cancer. However, there are no studies evaluating their use and practice. The objective of this study was to evaluate in a nationwide study the proportion of oncologists and palliative care physicians who had knowledge of these scales.

METHODS

A descriptive, national, cross-sectional study was conducted via an online questionnaire to oncologists and palliative care physicians across France.

RESULTS

Palliative care physicians had better knowledge of the scales than oncologists (42.3% (n = 74) vs. 27.8% (n = 33), p = 0.015). The Palliative Performance Status (PPS) and Pronopall Scale were the best-known (51.4% (n = 55) and 65.4% (n = 70), respectively) and the most widely used (35% (n = 28) and 60% (n = 48), respectively). Improved training in the use of these scales was requested by 85.4% (n = 251) of participants, while 72.8% (n = 214) reported that they did not use them at all. Limited training and lack of consensus on which scale to use were cited as the main obstacles to use.

CONCLUSION

This is the first national study on the use of prognostic scales in advanced cancer. Our findings highlight a need to improve training in these scales and to reach a consensus on scale selection.

Chemotherapy use in end-of-life digestive cancer patients: a retrospective AGEO observational study

BACKGROUND

The use of chemotherapy (CT) near the end-of-life (EOL) is an important issue in oncology since it could degrade quality of life. CT near EOL is still poorly studied, with no dedicated study in gastrointestinal (GI) cancer patients.

AIM

To analyze in GI cancer patients the factors associated with the use of CT within 3- and 1-month before patients' death.

METHODS AND PARTICIPANTS

All consecutive patients who died from a GI cancer in 10 French tertiary care hospitals during 2014 were included in this retrospective study. Clinical, demographical and biological data were collected and compared between patients receiving or not CT within 3- and 1-month before death. Variables associated with overall survival (OS) was also determined using of univariate and multivariate analyses with a Cox model.

RESULTS

Four hundred and thirty-seven patients with a metastatic GI cancer were included in this study. Among them, 293 pts (67.0%) received CT within 3-months before death, and 121 pts (27.7%) received CT within 1-month before death. Patients receiving CT within 3-months before death were significantly younger (median age: 65.5 vs 72.8 years, p < 0.0001), with a better PS (PS 0 or 1: 53.9 vs 29.3%, p < 0.0001) and a higher albumin level (median: 32.8 vs 31.0 g/L, p = 0.048). Similar results were found for CT within 1 month before death. Palliative care team intervention was less frequent in patients who received CT in their last month of life (39.7% vs 51.3%, p = 0.02). In multivariate analysis, median OS from diagnosis was shorter in the group receiving CT within 1-month before death (HR = 0.59; 95% CI [0.48-0.74]).

CONCLUSION

In GI-cancer patients, CT is administered within 3- and 1-month before death, in two and one third of patients, respectively. Patients receiving CT within 1-month before death, had more aggressive disease with poor OS. Palliative care team intervention was associated with less administration of CT in the last month of life. These results highlight the need to better anticipate the time to stop CT treatment in the end-of-life and the importance of an active collaboration between oncology and palliative care teams.

A Prognostic Model to Facilitate Palliative Care Referral in Oncology Outpatients

Purpose

We aimed to develop a prognostic model to assist palliative care referral at least 3 months before death in advanced cancer patients treated at an outpatient medical oncology clinic.

Materials and Methods

In this prospective cohort study, a total of 200 patients were enrolled at a tertiary cancer center in South Korea. The major eligibility criterion was an expected survival of less than a year as estimated by their oncologists. We analyzed the influences of known prognostic factors along with chemotherapy status, mid-arm circumference, and triceps skinfold thickness on survival time.

Results

The mean age of the patients was 64.5 years, 36% were female, and the median survival time was 7.6 months. In the multivariate analysis, we found six significant factors related to poor survival: a poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (≥ 2), not undergoing chemotherapy, anorexia, a low lymphocyte level (< 12%), a high lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level (≥ 300 IU/L), and a low mid-arm circumference (< 23 cm). We developed a prognostic model (score, 0–8.0) to predict 3-month survival based on the multivariate analysis. Patients who scored ≥ 4.0 points had a short survival of less than 3 months (p < 0.001). The discriminating ability of the prognostic model using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.88.

Conclusion

The prognostic model using ECOG performance status, chemotherapy status, anorexia, lymphocytes, LDH, and mid-arm circumference can predict 3-month survival in medical oncology outpatients. It can alert oncologists to refer patients to palliative care specialists before it is too late.

Development and evaluation of a proxy for baseline ECOG PS in advanced non-small cell lung cancer, bladder cancer, and melanoma: An electronic health record study

PURPOSE

Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) is an important predictor for receipt of treatment and overall survival (OS) but is often unreported in routine care. We developed a proxy for baseline ECOG PS using electronic health records (EHRs).

METHODS

We analyzed patients who were diagnosed with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC), advanced bladder cancer (aBCa), and advanced melanoma (aMEL) between 2011 and 2018 and had a baseline (reported between diagnosis and treatment) ECOG PS in a real-world database. We used stepwise multivariable logistic regression to model associations between baseline ECOG PS good (<2) versus poor (≥2) and sociodemographic, clinical, and laboratory measures in each cancer type. Predictive accuracy of classifying ECOG PS was assessed. We tested the association between OS and observed and predicted ECOG PS.

RESULTS

In total, 20 697 aNSCLC patients, 2627 aBCa patients, and 2558 aMEL patients constituted the study population. Percentage of patients with poor ECOG PS ranged from 15.3% (aMEL) to 28.5% (aNSCLC). Poor ECOG PS was associated with more comorbid conditions, older age, lower body mass index, metastases, and abnormal laboratory indicators. Overall prediction accuracy using a 0.50 cutpoint was 73.3% for NSCLC, 73.8% for aBCa, and 85.4% for aMEL. The association of OS with ECOG PS was consistent between the observed and proxy measures.

CONCLUSIONS

In the EHR-derived data, clinical, sociodemographic, and laboratory information were used to assign ECOG PS and enhance the use of real-world data in outcome studies.

Phase II study of apatinib in combination with oral vinorelbine in heavily pretreated HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer and clinical implications of monitoring ctDNA

OBJECTIVE

Apatinib is an oral TKI targeting VEGFR-2. Single-agent apatinib treatment has been shown to produce an objective response in patients with pretreated mBC. Oral vinorelbine also holds promise as a treatment of choice in patients with mBC. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of the oral vinorelbine-apatinib combination in patients with pretreated mBC. In addition, we detected gene variants in ctDNA to explore the therapeutic implications.

METHODS

This study enrolled patients with HER2-negative mBC who were pretreated with anthracycline/taxanes. Patients were treated with apatinib at 500 mg/425 mg daily plus oral vinorelbine 60 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 of every cycle (3 weeks). The primary endpoint was PFS. The secondary endpoints were ORR, CBR, OS, and safety. Patients eligible for ctDNA detection were evaluated before and during treatment.

RESULTS

Forty patients were enrolled. The median PFS was 5.2 months (95% CI, 3.4-7.0 months), and the median OS was 17.4 months (95% CI, 8.0-27.0 months). The ORR was 17.1% (6/35), and the CBR was 45.7% (16/35). The most common AEs included gastrointestinal reaction, myelosuppression, and hypertension. In 20 patients, ctDNA was detected at baseline and during treatment. A significant difference was found in PFS for undetected vs. detected baseline ctDNA (13.9 months vs. 3.6 months, P = 0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

All-oral therapy with apatinib plus vinorelbine displayed objective efficacy in patients with heavily pretreated HER2-negative mBC, with acceptable and manageable toxicity profiles. Patients with no gene variant detected and lower variant allele frequencies in ctDNA at baseline showed longer PFS.

Efficacy and safety of panitumumab in a cohort of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer in France: PANI OUEST, a post-EMA-approval descriptive study with a geriatric oncology focus

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The Bretagne-Pays de la Loire cancer observatory, an oncology network created by the French Ministry of Health, is specifically dedicated to assess the use of new targeted anticancer therapies in routine practice. In line with the French National Cancer III program, our cancer network set up a real-life cohort, which is independent of the pharmaceutical industry, for patients with colorectal cancer to monitor patient safety and quality of care and promote pharmacovigilance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Panitumumab monotherapy was assessed in 243 patients with wild-type Kirsten rat sarcoma who were treated for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) between July 2008 and December 2010 after prior chemotherapy using oxaliplatine and irinotecan. This was a post-European medicine agency marketing (EMA-M) study Results: This study shed light on the best practices, strategic adaptations, clinical results (treatment objective responses, 13%; progression free survival, 2.99 months [2.73-3.15]; and overall survival, 6.8 months [5.49-8.38]) as well as expected or unexpected (grade 3 or 4: 11.5%) secondary effects in the phase IV panitumumab treatment of mCRC.

CONCLUSION

Our results are similar to those by Amado whose phase III study led to obtaining EMA-M for panitumumab and tend to confirm the antitumor activity of this antiepidermal growth factor receptor antibody in the treatment of mCRC. In addition, our results opened avenues to further assessment of panitumumab use as monotherapy as well as its benefit-risk ratio while taking into account the patients' general and clinical characteristics. In 2012, the French National Authority for Health appended these data to the panitumumab transparency committee report.

Dealing with prognostic uncertainty: the role of prognostic models and websites for patients with advanced cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an updated overview of prognostic models in advanced cancer and highlight the role of prognostic calculators.

RECENT FINDINGS

In the advanced cancer setting, many important healthcare decisions are driven by a patient's prognosis. However, there is much uncertainty in formulating prognosis, particularly in the era of novel cancer therapeutics. Multiple prognostic models have been validated for patients seen by palliative care and have a life expectancy of a few months or less, such as the Palliative Performance Scale, Palliative Prognostic Score, Palliative Prognostic Index, Objective Prognostic Score, and Prognosis in Palliative Care Study Predictor. However, these models are seldom used in clinical practice because of challenges related to limited accuracy when applied individually and difficulties with model selection, computation, and interpretation. Online prognostic calculators emerge as tools to facilitate knowledge translation by overcoming the above challenges. For example, www.predictsurvival.com provides the output for seven prognostic indexes simultaneously based on 11 variables.

SUMMARY

Prognostic models and prognostic websites are currently available to augment prognostication in the advanced cancer setting. Further studies are needed to examine their impact on prognostic accuracy, confidence, and clinical outcomes.

A retrospective analysis of emergency surgery for cases of acute abdomen during cancer chemotherapy. Case series

Background

Treatment for acute abdomen during chemotherapy is frequently difficult because of the complicated status of the patients, and there have been only a few case series summarizing the outcomes of emergent surgery during chemotherapy. The aim of this study was to clarify the clinical outcomes of emergency surgery for acute abdomen during chemotherapy and identify predictive factors associated with mortality.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the records of patients who underwent emergency surgery for acute abdomen within 30-days after anti-cancer drugs administration between 2009 and 2020.

Results

Thirty patients were identified. The primary malignancies were hematological (n = 7), colorectal (n = 4), lung (n = 4), stomach (n = 2), breast (n = 2), prostate (n = 2) and others (n = 5). Fifteen patients were treated with the regimen, including molecular-targeted anti-cancer drugs (Bevacizumab: 8 cases, Rituximab: 4, Ramucirumab: 2, and Gefitinib: 1). Indications for emergency surgery were perforation of the gastrointestinal tract (n = 24), appendicitis (n = 3), bowel obstruction (n = 2), and gallbladder perforation (n = 1). Severe morbidity (Clavien-Dindo IIIa or more) occurred in 8 cases (27%), and there were 6 in-hospital deaths (20%). Significant factors related to in-hospital death were age >70 years old (P = 0.029), poor performance status (ECOG score 1 or 2) (P = 0.0088), and serum albumin level <2.6 g/dl (P = 0.026). The incidence of acute abdomen (odds ratio 5.31, P = 0.00017) was significantly higher in the patients receiving anti-VEGF drugs than in those without anti-VEGF drugs.

Conclusion

This study identified three predictive factors associated with in-hospital death after emergency surgery during chemotherapy: an older age, poor performance status, and low serum albumin level.

High mortality rate in cancer patients with symptoms of COVID-19 with or without detectable SARS-COV-2 on RT-PCR

Background

Cancer patients presenting with COVID-19 have a high risk of death. In this work, predictive factors for survival in cancer patients with suspected SARS-COV-2 infection were investigated.

Methods

PRE-COVID-19 is a retrospective study of all 302 cancer patients presenting to this institute with a suspicion of COVID-19 from March 1st to April 25th 2020. Data were collected using a web-based tool within electronic patient record approved by the Institutional Review Board. Patient characteristics symptoms and survival were collected and compared in SARS-COV-2 real-time or reverse-transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR)–positive and RT-PCR–negative patients.

Results

Fifty-five of the 302 (18.2%) patients with suspected COVID-19 had detectable SARS-COV-2 with RT-PCR in nasopharyngeal samples. RT-PCR–positive patients were older, had more frequently haematological malignancies, respiratory symptoms and suspected COVID-19 pneumonia of computed tomography (CT) scan. However, respectively, 38% and 20% of SARS-COV-2 RT-PCR–negative patients presented similar respiratory symptoms and CT scan images. Thirty of the 302 (9.9%) patients died during the observation period, including 24 (80%) with advanced disease. At the median follow-up of 25 days after the first symptoms, the death rate in RT-PCR–positive and RT-PCR–negative patients were 21% and 10%, respectively. In both groups, independent risk factors for death were male gender, Karnofsky performance status <60, cancer in relapse and respiratory symptoms. Detection of SARS-COV-2 on RT-PCR was not associated with an increased death rate (p = 0.10). None of the treatment given in the previous month (including cytotoxics, PD1 Ab, anti-CD20, VEGFR2…) correlated with survival. The survival of RT-PCR–positive and –negative patients with respiratory symptoms and/or COVID-19 type pneumonia on CT scan was similar with a 18.4% and 19.7% death rate at day 25. Most (22/30, 73%) cancer patients dying during this period were RT-PCR negative.

Conclusion

The 30-day death rate of cancer patients with or without documented SARS-COV-2 infection is poor, but the majority of deaths occur in RT-PCR–negative patients.

Comparison of Hematologic and Other Prognostic Markers in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Associations of thrombocytosis, neutrophilia, and lymphopenia with prognosis have been confirmed in many cancers. This study aims at comparing various prognostic indices based on blood counts in metastatic colorectal adenocarcinomas.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Records from 152 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who were treated in our center were reviewed. Demographic and disease characteristics and hematologic parameters data were extracted and patients were stratified according to their scores of several hematologic ratios. Hematologic ratios and parameters considered included the platelet-neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (PNLR), the platelet to lymphocyte ratio (PLR), the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR), the Abnormal Hematological Markers Index (AHMI), and the neutrophil-platelet score (NPS). Optimal cutoffs were defined with the aid of an online tool. Baseline parameters of the two groups derived for each tool were evaluated and compared with the χ² test. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional-hazards regression analyses were performed on variables of interest.

RESULTS

Progression-Free Survival (PFS) hazard ratios (HR) between the high-risk and low-risk groups derived from the multivariate analyses for each index were as follows: for PNLR 2.0 (95% CI 1.28-3.13), for PLR 1.74 (95% CI 1.13-2.67), for NLR 1.54 (95% CI 1.04-2.29), for AHMI 1.62 (95% CI 1.06-2.46), and for NPS 1.47 (95% CI 1.1-1.96). Overall Survival (OS) hazard ratios (HR) derived from the multivariate analyses for each index were as follows: for PNLR 2.23 (95% CI 1.36-3.66), for PLR 1.68 (95% CI 1.03-2.75), for NLR 1.62 (95% CI 1.06-2.49), for AHMI 1.7 (95% CI 1.07-2.69), and for NPS 1.53 (95% CI 1.11-2.11). Another prognostic index called PRONOPALL, which is based on ECOG PS (0-1 versus 2-3 versus 4), number of metastatic sites (≤ 1 versus ≥ 2), LDH (< 600 U/L versus ≥ 600 U/L), and albumin (≥ 33 g/L versus < 33 g/L), had HRs of 1.75 and 2.20 for PFS and OS, respectively, with a cutoff of < 4 versus ≥ 4. This score has a range of 0 to 10 and points are attributed for the presence of each of the four prognostic factors.

CONCLUSION

In this analysis of metastatic colorectal cancer patients, several ratios and other prognostic tools had prognostic value for both OS and PFS. While other variables held significance for poorer prognosis, PNLR had the highest HR and the highest significance in multivariate analysis for both PFS and OS. Thus, it represents a valid prognostic tool in metastatic colorectal cancer among the spectrum of hematologic parameter-constructed tools.

PALLIA-10, a screening tool to identify patients needing palliative care referral in comprehensive cancer centers: A prospective multicentric study (PREPA-10)

Purpose

The identification and referral of patients in need of palliative care should be improved. The French society for palliative support and care recommended to use the PALLIA‐10 questionnaire and its score greater than 3 to refer patients to palliative care. We explored the use of the PALLIA‐10 questionnaire and its related score in a population of advanced cancer patients.

Methods

This prospective multicentric study is to be conducted in authorized French comprehensive cancer centers on hospitalized patients on a given day. We aimed to use the PALLIA‐10 score to determine the proportion of palliative patients with a score >3. Main secondary endpoints were to determine the proportion of patients already managed by palliative care teams at the study date or referred to palliative care in six following months, the prevalence of patients with a score greater than 5, and the overall survival using the predefined thresholds of 3 and 5.

Results

In 2015, eighteen French cancer centers enrolled 840 patients, including 687 (82%) palliative patients. 479 (69.5%) patients had a score >3, 230 (33.5%) had a score >5, 216 (31.4%) patients were already followed‐up by a palliative care team, 152 patients were finally referred to PC in the six subsequent months.

The PALLIA‐10 score appeared as a reliable predictive (adjusted OR_Ref≤3: 1.9 [1.17‐3.16] and 3.59 [2.18‐5.91]) and prognostic (adjusted HR_Ref≤3 = 1.58 [95%CI 1.20‐2.08] and 2.18 [95%CI 1.63‐2.92]) factor for patients scored 4‐5 and >5, respectively.

Conclusion

The PALLIA‐10 questionnaire is an easy‐to‐use tool to refer cancer inpatients to palliative care in current practice. However a score greater than 5 using the PALLIA‐10 questionnaire would be more appropriate for advanced cancer patients hospitalized in comprehensive cancer center.

Prognostication in advanced cancer: update and directions for future research

The objective of this review is to provide an update on prognostication in patients with advanced cancer and to discuss future directions for research in this field. Accurate prognostication of survival for patients with advanced cancer is vital, as patient life expectancy informs many important personal and clinical decisions. The most common prognostic approach is clinician prediction of survival (CPS) using temporal, surprise, or probabilistic questions. The surprise and probabilistic questions may be more accurate than the temporal approach, partly by limiting the time frame of prediction. Prognostic models such as the Glasgow Prognostic Score (GPS), Palliative Performance Scale (PPS), Palliative Prognostic Score (PaP), Palliative Prognostic Index (PPI), or Prognosis in Palliative Care Study (PiPS) predictor model may augment CPS. However, care must be taken to select the appropriate tool since prognostic accuracy varies by patient population, setting, and time frame of prediction. In addition to life expectancy, patients and caregivers often desire that expected treatment outcomes and bodily changes be communicated to them in a sensible manner at an appropriate time. We propose the following 10 major themes for future prognostication research: (1) enhancing prognostic accuracy, (2) improving reliability and reproducibility of prognosis, (3) identifying the appropriate prognostic tool for a given setting, (4) predicting the risks and benefits of cancer therapies, (5) predicting survival for pediatric populations, (6) translating prognostic knowledge into practice, (7) understanding the impact of prognostic uncertainty, (8) communicating prognosis, (9) clarifying outcomes associated with delivery of prognostic information, and (10) standardizing prognostic terminology.

Functional status in a geriatric oncology setting: A review

BACKGROUND

Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA), is used in older patients with cancer to identify frailties, which can interfere with specialized treatment, and to help with therapeutic care. Functional Status (FS) is a domain of CGA in which Activities of Daily Living (ADL) and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) are evaluation tools.

OBJECTIVE

Our study reviewed the data available on the most frequently used tools to assess ADL and IADL in a geriatric oncology setting and their predictive values on overall survival (OS), toxicity, treatment feasibility or decision and postoperative complications.

DESIGN

This review was based on a systematic search of the MEDLINE® database for articles published in English and French between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2017. In the final analysis, 40 out of 4061 studies were included.

RESULTS

The most common ADL and IADL scales used are the Katz ADL (KL-ADL) in 25 studies and the Lawton IADL (IADL₈) in 22 studies. FS is predictive of OS in 11 out of 24 studies, chemotoxicity in 2 out of 7 studies, treatment feasibility in 2 out of 5 studies, treatment decisions in 2 out of 3 studies, and postoperative complications in 4 out of 6 studies.

CONCLUSION

FS is of prognostic value in a geriatric oncology setting despite heterogeneous methodology and inclusion criteria, in the studies included. Additional research is needed to explore more precisely the prognostic value of FS in overall survival, toxicity, treatment feasibility or decision and postoperative complications, in older cancer patients.

Development and validation of a prognostic nomogram for ambulatory patients with advanced cancer

Predicting survival of advanced cancer patients (ACPs) is a difficult task. We aimed at developing and testing a new prognostic tool in ACPs when they were first referred to palliative care (PC). A total of 497 patients were analyzed in this study (development sample, n = 221; validation sample, n = 276). From 35 initial putative prognostic variables, 14 of them were selected for multivariable Cox regression analyses; the most accurate final model was identified by backward variable elimination. Parameters were built into a nomogram to estimate the probability of patient survival at 30, 90, and 180 days. Calibration and discrimination properties of the Barretos Prognostic Nomogram (BPN) were evaluated in the validation phase of the study. The BPN was composed of 5 parameters: sex, presence of distant metastasis, Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), white blood cell (WBC) count, and serum albumin concentration. The C-index was 0.71. The values of the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve were 0.84, 0.74, and 0.74 at 30, 90, and 180 days, respectively. There were good calibration results according to the Hosmer-Lemeshow test. The median survival times were 313, 129, and 37 days for the BPN scores <25th percentile (<125), 25th to 75th percentile (125-175), and >75th percentile (>175), respectively (P < .001). The BPN is a new prognostic tool with adequate calibration and discrimination properties. It is now available to assist oncologists and palliative care physicians in estimating the survival of adult patients with advanced solid tumors.

[Ethical issues and limiting of cancer treatments in the advanced stage]

Nurses play a strategic role alongside patients and their families in the process leading to the decision to limit cancer treatments in the advanced phase of the disease. This stage of the patient's care requires support and guidance as part of the palliative approach, which, in addition to the patient and the family, also concerns the oncologist.