Integrating patient reported measures as predictive parameters into decisionmaking about palliative chemotherapy: a pilot study

Exploring the role of health-related quality of life measures in predictive modelling for oncology: a systematic review

Health related quality of life (HRQoL) is increasingly assessed in oncology research and routine care, which has led to the inclusion of HRQoL in prediction models. This review aims to describe the current state of oncological prediction models incorporating HRQoL. A systematic literature search for the inclusion of HRQoL in prediction models in oncology was conducted. Selection criteria were a longitudinal study design and inclusion of HRQoL data in prediction models as predictor, outcome, or both. Risk of bias was assessed using the PROBAST tool and quality of reporting was scored with an adapted TRIPOD reporting guideline. From 4747 abstracts, 98 records were included in this review. High risk of bias was found in 71% of the publications. HRQoL was mainly incorporated as predictor (78% (55% predictor only, 23% both predictor and outcome)), with physical functioning and symptom domains selected most frequently as predictor. Few models (23%) predicted HRQoL domains by other or baseline HRQoL domains. HRQoL was used as outcome in 21% of the publications, with a focus on predicting symptoms. There were no difference between AI-based (16%) and classical methods (84%) in model type selection or model performance when using HRQoL data. This review highlights the role of HRQoL as a tool in predicting disease outcomes. Prediction of and with HRQoL is still in its infancy as most of the models are not fully developed. Current models focus mostly on the physical aspects of HRQoL to predict clinical outcomes, and few utilize AI-based methods.

The impact of remission status on patients' experiences with acute myeloid leukemia (AML): an exploratory analysis of longitudinal patient-reported outcomes data

PURPOSE

Shared decision-making in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) requires understanding patients' longitudinal experiences of illness, but little is known about the impact of remission status on patient-reported outcomes (PROs). We aimed to explore the association between remission status and PROs 6-12 months following induction chemotherapy.

METHODS

Forty-two patients completed three validated instruments characterizing symptom burden (Patient Care Monitor v2.0), distress (NCCN Distress Thermometer), and QOL (FACT-Leu), as part of a longitudinal observational study. We used regression models to explore the relationship between remission status and PROs, and explore differences by initial disease type (de novo versus secondary/relapsed AML).

RESULTS

Those with secondary or relapsed AML at study onset had marked impairments in all measures compared to de novo AML patients. After 6 months, their mean distress score was 4.8 (> 4.0 warrants intervention), they reported a mean of 14.1 moderate/severe symptoms and had a mean QOL score of 113.6, compared to 1.0, 1.7, and 155.2, respectively, for those with de novo AML (p < .0001). Similarly, patients in relapse had a mean distress score of 5.3, a mean of 12.8 moderate/severe symptoms, and a mean QOL score of 113.4, compared to 1.8, 5.7, and 143.8, respectively, among those in remission (p < .005). These patterns persisted after adjusting for baseline differences (p < .0001).

CONCLUSION

Remission is associated with markedly better patient well-being in AML. Patients with secondary or relapsed AML face more severe symptom burden, distress, and QOL issues after induction. Interventions are needed to improve AML patients' experiences of illness.

Changes in medication use in a cohort of patients with advanced cancer: The international multicentre prospective European Palliative Care Cancer Symptom study

BACKGROUND

Information on medication use in the last months of life is limited.

AIM

To describe which medications are prescribed and deprescribed in advanced cancer patients receiving palliative care in relation to time before death and to explore associations with demographic variables.

DESIGN

Prospective study, using case report forms for monthly data collection. Medication included cancer treatment and 19 therapeutic groups, grouped into four categories for: (1) cancer therapy, (2) specific cancer-related symptom relief, (3) other symptom relief and (4) long-term prevention. Data were analysed retrospectively using death as the index date. We compared medication use at 5, 4, 3, 2 and 1 month(s) before death by constructing five cross-sectional subsamples with medication use during that month. Paired analyses were done on a subsample of patients with at least two assessments before death.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

We studied the medication use of 720 patients (mean age 67, 56% male) in 30 cancer centres representing 12 countries.

RESULTS

From 5 to 1 month(s) before death, cancer therapy decreased (55%-24%), most medications for symptom relief increased, for example, opioids (62%-81%) and sedatives (35%-46%), but medication for long-term prevention decreased (38%-27%). The prevalence of chemotherapy was 15.5% in the last month of life, with 9% of new courses started in the last 2 months. With higher age, chemotherapy and opioid use decreased.

CONCLUSION

Medications for symptom relief increased in almost all medication groups. Deprescribing was found in heart medication/anti-hypertensives and cancer therapy, although use of the latter remained relatively high.

National Institutes of Health Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation Late Effects Initiative: The Patient-Centered Outcomes Working Group Report

In 2015, the National Institutes of Health convened six working groups to address the research needs and best practices for late effects of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation survivors. The Patient-Centered Outcomes Working Group, charged with summarizing the HRQOL evidence base, used a scoping review approach to efficiently survey the large body of literature in adult and pediatric HCT survivors over 1 year after transplantation. The goals of this paper are to (1) summarize the current literature describing patient-centered outcomes in survivors, including the various dimensions of health-related quality of life affected by HCT, and describe interventions tested to improve these outcomes; (2) highlight areas with sufficient evidence allowing for integration into standard practice; (3) address methodological issues that restrict progress in this field; (4) identify major gaps to guide future research; and (5) specify priority research recommendations. Patient-centered outcomes were summarized within physical, psychological, social, and environmental domains, as well as for adherence to treatment, and health behaviors. Interventions to improve outcomes were evaluated for evidence of efficacy, although few interventions have been tested in long-term HCT survivors. Methodologic issues defined included lack of consistency in the selection of patient-centered outcome measures, along with the absence of a standard for timing, frequency, and mode of administration. Recommendations for HCT survivorship care included integration of annual screening of patient-centered outcomes, use of evidence-based practice guidelines, and provision of treatment summaries and survivorship care plans after HCT. Three priority research recommendations included the following: (1) design and test risk-targeted interventions with dose-intensity modulation matching the needs of HCT survivors with priority domains, including sexual dysfunction, fatigue, sleep disruption, nonadherence to medications and recommended health care, health behaviors including physical inactivity and healthy eating, and psychological dysfunction, with particular consideration of novel technologies to reach HCT survivors distant from their transplantation centers; (2) design a consensus-based methodologic framework for outcomes evaluation; and (3) evaluate and compare existing practices for integrating patient-centered outcome screening and interventions across HCT survivorship programs.

Palliative chemotherapy: oxymoron or misunderstanding?

Oncologists routinely prescribe chemotherapy for patients with advanced cancer. This practice is sometimes misunderstood by palliative care clinicians, yet data clearly show that chemotherapy can be a powerful palliative intervention when applied appropriately. Clarity regarding the term “palliative chemotherapy” is needed: it is chemotherapy given in the non-curative setting to optimize symptom control, improve quality of life, and sometimes to improve survival. Unfortunately, oncologists lack adequate tools to predict which patients will benefit. In a study recently published in BMC Palliative Care, Creutzfeldt et al. presented an innovative approach to advancing the science in this area: using patient reported outcomes to predict responses to palliative chemotherapy. With further research, investigators may be able to develop predictive models for use at the bedside to inform clinical decision-making about the risks and benefits of treatment. In the meantime, oncologists and palliative care clinicians must work together to reduce the use of “end-of-life chemotherapy”—chemotherapy given close to death, which does not improve longevity or symptom control—while optimizing the use of chemotherapy that has true palliative benefits for patients.