Variations in Oncologist Recommendations for Chemotherapy for Stage IV Lung Cancer: What Is the Role of Performance Status?

The Influence of Performance Status, Inflammation, and Nutrition on the Impact of SGLT2 Inhibitors on Cancer Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Sodium-glucose-linked transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) may have antitumor effects. Previous studies analyzing their role in mortality and progression did not account for potential confounders, including cancer treatment, performance status, inflammatory markers, and nutritional status. This study aims to evaluate the impact of SGLT2i treatment on mortality and progression while considering these potential confounders.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted. A total of 526 patients with cancer (302 women, mean age 64 years, range 40-79 years) were divided into two cohorts based on whether they were taking SGLT2i at the time of their cancer diagnosis and followed for 1 year or until death. All patients on SGLT2i were taking these drugs at standard clinical doses. Additional data collected included basic demographic variables, metabolic and lifestyle characteristics, cancer treatment received, performance status, inflammatory markers, and nutritional status. The primary endpoints were mortality and progression.

RESULTS

Patients taking SGLT2i at the time of cancer diagnosis (n = 41) were more likely to have type 2 diabetes, to be male, to be ever-smokers, and to be older than patients not taking SGLT2i. In univariate analyses, SGLT2i treatment at the time of cancer diagnosis was not associated with mortality or cancer progression. Instead, mortality and cancer progression were positively associated with a diagnosis of T2D, male sex, older age, heavy alcohol drinking, ever-smoker status, poor performance status, increased inflammation, malnutrition, tumor site, cancer stage, and lack of cancer treatment. After adjusting for these potential confounders, SGLT2i treatment was not significantly associated with mortality or cancer progression.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that the impact of SGLT2i treatment on cancer outcomes is limited under standard clinical dosing conditions.

Oncologists' role in end-of-life chemotherapy and patient-centered care

George et al. show that patients have a 4‐ to 8‐fold variation in whether they receive systemic therapy at the end of life that is attributable to their oncologist. This editorial discusses how interventions around goals of care and nudging oncologists’ behavior may ensure care is centered around patient preferences.

Estimating oncologist variability in prescribing systemic cancer therapies to patients in the last 30 days of life

INTRODUCTION

Clinical guidelines and quality improvement initiatives have identified reducing the use of end-of-life cancer therapies as an opportunity to improve care. We examined the extent to which oncologists differed in prescribing systemic therapies in the last 30 days of life.

METHODS

Using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data, we identified patients who died of cancer from 2012 to 2017 (N = 17,609), their treating oncologists (N = 960), and the corresponding physician practice (N = 388). We used multilevel models to estimate oncologists' rates of providing cancer therapy for patients in their last 30 days of life, adjusted for patient characteristics and practice variation.

RESULTS

Patients' median age at the time of death was 74 years (interquartile range, 69-79); patients had lung (62%), colorectal (17%), breast (13%), and prostate (8%) cancers. We observed substantial variation across oncologists in their adjusted rate of treating patients in the last 30 days of life: oncologists in the 95th percentile exhibited a 45% adjusted rate of treatment, versus 17% among the 5th percentile. A patient treated by an oncologist with a high end-of-life prescribing behavior (top quartile), compared to an oncologist with a low prescribing behavior (bottom quartile), had more than four times greater odds of receiving end-of-life cancer therapy (OR, 4.42; 95% CI, 4.00-4.89).

CONCLUSIONS

Oncologists show substantial variation in end-of-life prescribing behavior. Future research should examine why some oncologists more often continue systemic therapy at the end of life than others, the consequences of this for patient and care outcomes, and whether interventions shaping oncologist decision-making can reduce overuse of end-of-life cancer therapies.

The Recent Trends of Systemic Treatments and Locoregional Therapies for Cholangiocarcinoma

Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is a hepatic malignancy that has a rapidly increasing incidence. CCA is anatomically classified into intrahepatic (iCCA) and extrahepatic (eCCA), which is further divided into perihilar (pCCA) and distal (dCCA) subtypes, with higher incidence rates in Asia. Despite its rarity, CCA has a low 5-year survival rate and remains the leading cause of primary liver tumor-related death over the past 10-20 years. The systemic therapy section discusses gemcitabine-based regimens as primary treatments, along with oxaliplatin-based options. Second-line therapy is limited but may include short-term infusional fluorouracil (FU) plus leucovorin (LV) and oxaliplatin. The adjuvant therapy section discusses approaches to improve overall survival (OS) post-surgery. However, only a minority of CCA patients qualify for surgical resection. In comparison to adjuvant therapies, neoadjuvant therapy for unresectable cases shows promise. Gemcitabine and cisplatin indicate potential benefits for patients awaiting liver transplantation. The addition of immunotherapies to chemotherapy in combination is discussed. Nivolumab and innovative approaches like CAR-T cells, TRBAs, and oncolytic viruses are explored. We aim in this review to provide a comprehensive report on the systemic and locoregional therapies for CCA.

Geriatric assessment and the variance of treatment recommendations in geriatric patients with gastrointestinal cancer-a study in AIO oncologists

BACKGROUND

Geriatric assessment (GA) is recommended to detect vulnerabilities for elderly cancer patients. To assess whether results of GA actually influence the treatment recommendations, we conducted a case vignette-based study in medical oncologists.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seventy oncologists gave their medical treatment recommendations for a maximum of 4 out of 10 gastrointestinal cancer patients in three steps: (i) based on tumor findings alone to simulate the guideline recommendation for a '50-year-old standard patient without comorbidities'; (ii) for the same situation in elderly patients (median age 77.5 years) according to the comorbidities, laboratory values and a short video simulating the clinical consultation; and (iii) after the results of a full GA including interpretation aid [Barthel Index, Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS), Geriatric 8 (G8), Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS), Mini Mental Status Examination (MMSE), Mini-Nutritional Assessment (MNA), Timed Get Up and Go (TGUG), European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), stair climb test].

RESULTS

Data on 164 treatment recommendations were analyzed. The recommendations had a significantly higher variance for elderly patients than for 'standard' patients (944 versus 602, P < 0.0001) indicating a lower agreement between oncologists. Knowledge on GA had marginal influence on the treatment recommendation or its variance (944 versus 940, P = 0.92). There was no statistically significant influence of the working place or the years of experience in oncology on the variance of recommendations. The geriatric tools were rated approximately two times higher as being 'meaningful' (53%) and 'useful for the presented cases' (49%) than they were 'used in clinical practice' (19%). The most commonly used geriatric tool in patient care was the MNA (30%).

CONCLUSIONS

The higher variance of treatment recommendations indicates that it is less likely for elderly patients to get the optimal recommendation. Although the proposed therapeutic regimen varied higher in elderly patients and the oncologists rated the GA results as 'useful', the GA results did not influence the individual recommendations or its variance. Continuing education on GA and research on implementation into clinical practice are needed.

Chemotherapy Toxicity in Older Adults Optimized by Geriatric Assessment and Intervention: A Non-Comparative Analysis

The Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) is recommended to guide treatment choices in older patients with cancer. Patients ≥ 70 years referred to our oncology service with a new cancer diagnosis are screened using the G-8. Patients with a score of ≤14 are eligible to attend the Geriatric Oncology and Liaison (GOAL) Clinic in our institution, with referral based on physician discretion. Referred patients undergo multidimensional assessments at baseline. CGA domains assessed include mobility, nutritional, cognitive, and psychological status. Chemotherapy toxicity risk is estimated using the Cancer Aging and Research Group (CARG) calculator. We undertook a retrospective analysis of patients attending the GOAL clinic over a 30-month period to April 2021. The objective was to determine rates of treatment dose modifications, delays, discontinuation, and unscheduled hospitalizations as surrogates for cytotoxic therapy toxicity in these patients. These data were collected retrospectively. Ninety-four patients received chemotherapy; the median age was 76 (70-87) and 45 were female (48%). Seventy-five (80%) had an ECOG PS of 0-1. Seventy-two (77%) had gastrointestinal cancer, and most had stage III (47%) or IV (40%) disease. Chemotherapy with curative intent was received by 51% (n = 48) and 51% received monotherapy. From the CGA, the median Timed Up and Go was 11 s (7.79-31.6), and 90% reported no falls in the prior 6 months. The median BMI was 26.93 (15.43-39.25), with 70% at risk or frankly malnourished by the Mini Nutritional Assessment. Twenty-seven (29%) patients had impaired cognitive function. Forty-three (46%) had a high risk of toxicity based on the baseline CARG toxicity calculator. Twenty-six (28%) required dose reduction, 55% (n = 52) required a dose delay, and 36% (n = 34) had a hospitalization due to toxicity. Thirty-nine patients (42%) discontinued treatment due to toxicity. Despite intensive assessment, clinical optimization and personalized treatment decisions, older adults with cancer remain at high risk of chemotherapy toxicity.

End-of-life intravenous chemotherapy administration patterns in the treatment of Queensland lung and pancreas cancer patients: a 10-year retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

End-of-life (EOL) chemotherapy administration rates for solid tumours are 12-20% and are associated with a reduced quality of life, increased hospitalisation and incidence of death within an acute care facility.

AIM

We sought to determine the rate of EOL chemotherapy in government and private hospitals and determine the impact on hospitalisations and location of death in lung and pancreatic cancer patients.

METHODS

Data were obtained from the Queensland Oncology Repository between 2005 and 2014. Lung (n = 16 501) and pancreatic cancer (n = 4144) deaths were analysed. EOL chemotherapy was determined to be within 30 days of death. Demographics, location of treatment and death are reported.

RESULTS

Chemotherapy was administered to 6518 (40%) lung cancer and 1694 (41%) pancreatic cancer patients. A total of 1474 (9%) and 477 (12%) patients, respectively, received EOL chemotherapy. EOL chemotherapy was more common in males and those with distant metastatic disease, while less likely in the elderly and those with a lower socioeconomic status. EOL chemotherapy was more prevalent in large hospitals and was more common in private compared with government hospitals for pancreatic cancer (30 vs 26%; P < 0.001), while it was similar for lung cancer (24 vs 22%; P = 0.115). Death after EOL chemotherapy compared with all cancer deaths was more common in an acute care facility (lung cancer: 60 vs 37%; P < 0.001; pancreatic cancer: 53 vs 36%; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

EOL chemotherapy rates were similar to Australian yet marginally lower than international rates, with variation dependent on the size and type of facility and increased the rate of deaths within an acute care facility.

Association Among End-Of-Life Discussions, Cancer Patients' Quality of Life at End of Life, and Bereaved Families' Mental Health

End-of-life discussions are essential for patients with advanced cancer, but there is little evidence about whether these discussions affect general ward patients and family outcomes. We investigated the status of end-of-life discussions and associated factors and their effects on patients' quality of death and their families' mental health. Participants in this retrospective cross-sectional observational study were 119 bereaved family members. Data were collected through a survey that included questions on the timing of end-of-life discussions, quality of palliative care, quality of patient death, and depression and grief felt by the families. Approximately 64% of the bereaved family members participated in end-of-life discussions between the patient and the attending physician, and 55% of these discussions took place within a month before death. End-of-life discussions were associated with the patients' prognostic perception as "incurable, though there is hope for a cure" and "patients' experience with end-of-life discussions with family before cancer." There was a small decrease in depression and grief for families of patients who had end-of-life discussions. Those who did not have end-of-life discussions reported lower quality of end-of-life care.

Care Patterns and Overall Survival in Patients With Early-Onset Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

PURPOSE

Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence in patients younger than 50 years of age, commonly defined as early-onset (EO-CRC), is rising. EO-CRC often presents with distinct clinicopathologic features. However, data on prognosis are conflicting and outcomes with modern treatment approaches for metastatic disease are still limited.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We prospectively enrolled patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC) to a biobanking and clinical data collection protocol from 2014 to 2018. We grouped the cohort based on age at initial diagnosis: < 40 years, 40-49 years, and ≥ 50 years. We used regression models to examine associations among age at initial diagnosis, treatments, clinicopathologic features, and survival.

RESULTS

We identified 466 patients with mCRC (45 [10%] age < 40 years, 109 [23%] age 40-49 years, and 312 [67%] age ≥ 50 years). Patients < 40 years of age were more likely to have received multiple metastatic resections (odds ratio [OR], 3.533; P = .0066) than their older counterparts. Patients with EO-CRC were more likely to receive triplet therapy than patients > 50 years of age (age < 40 years: OR, 6.738; P = .0002; age 40-49 years: OR, 2.949; P = .0166). Patients 40-49 years of age were more likely to have received anti-EGFR therapy (OR, 2.633; P = .0016). Despite differences in care patterns, age did not predict overall survival.

CONCLUSION

Despite patients with EO-CRC receiving more intensive treatments, survival was similar to the older counterpart. However, EO-CRC had clinical and molecular features associated with worse prognoses. Improved biologic understanding is needed to optimize clinical management of EO-CRC. The cost-benefit ratio of exposing patients with EO-CRC to more intensive treatments has to be carefully evaluated.

Beyond Performance Status

Oncologists should recognise the need to move beyond the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) score. ECOG PS is a longstanding and ubiquitous feature of oncology. It was evolved 40 years ago as an adaption of the 70-year-old Karnofsky performance score. It is short, easily understood and part of the global language of oncology. The wide prevalence of the ECOG PS attests to its proven utility and worth to help triage patient treatment. The ECOG PS is problematic. It is a unidimensional functional score. It is mostly physician assessed, subjective and therefore open to bias. It fails to account for multimorbidity, frailty or cognition. Too often the PS is recorded only once in wilful ignorance of a patient's changing physical state. As modern oncology offers an ever-widening array of therapies that are ‘personalised’ to tumour genotype, modern oncologists must strive to better define patient phenotype. Using a wider range of scoring and assessment tools, oncologists can identify deficits that may be reversed or steps taken to mitigate detrimental effects of treatment. These tools can function well to identify those patients who would benefit from comprehensive assessment. This overview identifies the strengths of ECOG PS but highlights the weaknesses and where these are supported by other measures. A strong recommendation is made here to move to routine use of the Clinical Frailty Score to start to triage patients and most appropriately design treatments and rehabilitation interventions.

Association between physician US News & World Report medical school ranking and patient outcomes and costs of care: observational study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether the US News & World Report (USNWR) ranking of the medical school a physician attended is associated with patient outcomes and healthcare spending.

DESIGN

Observational study.

SETTING

Medicare, 2011-15.

PARTICIPANTS

20% random sample of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 65 years or older (n=996 212), who were admitted as an emergency to hospital with a medical condition and treated by general internists.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Association between the USNWR ranking of the medical school a physician attended and the physician's patient outcomes (30 day mortality and 30 day readmission rates) and Medicare Part B spending, adjusted for patient and physician characteristics and hospital fixed effects (which effectively compared physicians practicing within the same hospital). A sensitivity analysis employed a natural experiment by focusing on patients treated by hospitalists, because patients are plausibly randomly assigned to hospitalists based on their specific work schedules. Alternative rankings of medical schools based on social mission score or National Institute of Health (NIH) funding were also investigated.

RESULTS

996 212 admissions treated by 30 322 physicians were examined for the analysis of mortality. When using USNWR primary care rankings, physicians who graduated from higher ranked schools had slightly lower 30 day readmission rates (adjusted rate 15.7% for top 10 schools v 16.1% for schools ranked ≥50; adjusted risk difference 0.4%, 95% confidence interval 0.1% to 0.8%; P for trend=0.005) and lower spending (adjusted Part B spending $1029 (£790; €881) v $1066; adjusted difference $36, 95% confidence interval $20 to $52; P for trend <0.001) compared with graduates of lower ranked schools, but no difference in 30 day mortality. When using USNWR research rankings, physicians graduating from higher ranked schools had slightly lower healthcare spending than graduates from lower ranked schools, but no differences in patient mortality or readmissions. A sensitivity analysis restricted to patients treated by hospitalists yielded similar findings. Little or no relation was found between alternative rankings (based on social mission score or NIH funding) and patient outcomes or costs of care.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, little or no relation was found between the USNWR ranking of the medical school from which a physician graduated and subsequent patient mortality or readmission rates. Physicians who graduated from highly ranked medical schools had slightly lower spending than graduates of lower ranked schools.