The development of a nursing assessment and symptom management clinic

Clinician's guide: expert insights on the use of CDK4/6 inhibitors in patients with early breast cancer

The introduction of the cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors abemaciclib and ribociclib to the adjuvant setting marks a significant advancement in the treatment of hormone-receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative early breast cancer (HR+, HER2- EBC). Despite significant strides in early detection and treatment, many patients continue to face the risk of disease recurrence, highlighting the need for more effective adjuvant therapies. These CDK4/6 inhibitors, combined with adjuvant endocrine therapy, have shown promising efficacy in reducing recurrence rates while maintaining a manageable safety profile, as evidenced by the monarchE and NATALEE trials. This paper explores the integration of adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibitors into clinical practice, focusing on disease-free survival and safety outcomes. Key considerations in selecting between abemaciclib and ribociclib are discussed, including patient risk profiles, efficacy and safety profiles, treatment duration, and individual patient preferences. In addition, we discuss managing adverse events to prevent premature discontinuation, with strategies that include dose holds, dose reductions, proactive symptom management, and patient education. The paper also highlights strategies to enhance patient medication adherence and the involvement of multidisciplinary care teams to support treatment delivery. As research continues to evolve, additional follow-ups of the monarchE and NATALEE trials and future trials will further refine patient selection and treatment sequencing, ultimately improving outcomes and enhancing the quality of life for patients with HR+, HER2- EBC.

Stakeholder Perceptions of Key Aspects of High-Quality Cancer Care to Assess with Patient Reported Outcome Measures: A Systematic Review

Simple Summary

We conducted a review to identify important symptoms reported by patients on questionnaires (e.g., pain) that can be used to compare cancer centers on how well they provide care. For example, cancer centers could be compared on the percentage of patients with controlled pain after adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics. Standard review methods were used to identify studies through August 2020. Searches generated 1813 articles and 1779 were coded as not relevant. The remaining 34 studies showed that patients, caregivers, clinicians, and healthcare administrators identify psychosocial care (e.g., distress) and symptom management as critical parts of high-quality care. Patients and caregivers also perceive that maintaining physical function and daily activities are important. Clinicians and healthcare administrators perceive control of specific symptoms to be important (e.g., pain, poor sleep, diarrhea). Results were used to inform testing of symptom questionnaires to compare the quality of care provided by six cancer centers.

Abstract

Performance measurement is the process of collecting, analyzing, and reporting standardized measures of clinical performance that can be compared across practices to evaluate how well care was provided. We conducted a systematic review to identify stakeholder perceptions of key symptoms and health domains to test as patient-reported performance measures in oncology. Stakeholders included cancer patients, caregivers, clinicians, and healthcare administrators. Standard review methodology was used, consistent with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses). MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify relevant studies through August 2020. Four coders independently reviewed entries and conflicts were resolved by a fifth coder. Efficacy and effectiveness studies, and studies focused exclusively on patient experiences of care (e.g., communication skills of providers) were excluded. Searches generated 1813 articles and 1779 were coded as not relevant, leaving 34 international articles for extraction. Patients, caregivers, clinicians, and healthcare administrators prioritize psychosocial care (e.g., distress) and symptom management for patient-reported performance measures. Patients and caregivers also perceive that maintaining physical function and daily activities are critical. Clinicians and administrators perceive control of specific symptoms to be critical (gastrointestinal symptoms, pain, poor sleep). Results were used to inform testing at six US cancer centers.

Screening, evaluation, and management of cancer-related fatigue: Ready for implementation to practice?

Answer questions and earn CME/CNE Evidence regarding cancer-related fatigue (fatigue) has accumulated sufficiently such that recommendations for screening, evaluation, and/or management have been released recently by 4 leading cancer organizations. These evidence-based fatigue recommendations are available for clinicians, and some have patient versions; but barriers at the patient, clinician, and system levels hinder dissemination and implementation into practice. The underlying biologic mechanisms for this debilitating symptom have not been elucidated completely, hindering the development of mechanistically driven interventions. However, significant progress has been made toward methods for screening and comprehensively evaluating fatigue and other common symptoms using reliable and valid self-report measures. Limited data exist to support the use of any pharmacologic agent; however, several nonpharmacologic interventions have been shown to be effective in reducing fatigue in adults. Never before have evidence-based recommendations for fatigue management been disseminated by 4 premier cancer organizations (the National Comprehensive Cancer, the Oncology Nursing Society, the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer/Canadian Association of Psychosocial Oncology, and the American Society of Clinical Oncology). Clinicians may ask: Are we ready for implementation into practice? The reply: A variety of approaches to screening, evaluation, and management are ready for implementation. To reduce fatigue severity and distress and its impact on functioning, intensified collaborations and close partnerships between clinicians and researchers are needed, with an emphasis on system-wide efforts to disseminate and implement these evidence-based recommendations.