Phase II Trial of Symptom Screening With Targeted Early Palliative Care for Patients With Advanced Cancer

Feasibility Study of Using Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes to Screen Patients with Advanced Solid Cancers for Palliative Care Needs

Background: Palliative care delivery in oncology is challenging and referral practices vary widely. Standardized, needs-based screening and triage systems are essential to more effectively address patients' palliative care needs. Objective: Assess the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness among patients with advanced solid cancers of using electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) to screen for palliative care needs. Design: We developed a 13-item ePRO palliative care survey to assess multidimensional palliative care needs and conducted a pilot study (n = 25) of a palliative care screening intervention using ePRO monitoring and presentation of ePRO reports to a multidisciplinary care team. Feasibility was assessed through enrollment, retention, and ePRO adherence rates. Acceptability and appropriateness were evaluated through exit surveys of all participants and semistructured interviews of a subset of participants (n = 10). Results: From May 2022 to April 2023, 68% (25/37) of eligible patients consented and enrolled on the ePRO platform. Overall, 96% (22/23; 2 censored for death/hospice) of participants completed the study and 96% of participants met predefined ePRO adherence thresholds. Overall, 84% (21/25) of patients reported a severe response during the study period, of whom 95% (20/21) received supportive services during the study period. Patients found the ePRO palliative survey acceptable and appropriate. Qualitative interviews found patient-identified barriers to the intervention and areas for improvement. Conclusions: Screening patients for unmet palliative needs using ePRO monitoring is feasible, acceptable, and appropriate among patients, but more work is needed to understand the perspectives of diverse patients and how to integrate ePRO palliative care screening into clinical workflows.

Top Ten Tips Palliative Care Clinicians Should Know About Designing a Clinical Trial in Palliative Care

The palliative care field is experiencing substantive growth in clinical trial-based research. Randomized controlled trials provide the necessary rigor and conditions for assessing a treatment's efficacy in a controlled population. It is therefore important that a trial is meticulously designed from the outset to ensure the integrity of the ultimate results. In this article, our team discusses ten tips on clinical trial design drawn from collective experiences in the field. These ten tips cover a range of topics that can prove challenging in trial design, from developing initial methodologies to planning sample size and powering the trial, as well as collaboratively navigating the ethical issues of trial initiation and implementation as a cohesive team. We aim to help new researchers design sound trials and continue to grow the evidence base for our specialty. The guidance provided here can be used independently or in addition to the ten tips provided by this team in a separate article focused on what palliative care clinicians should know about interpreting a clinical trial.

Early Specialist Palliative Care in Patients with Metastatic Cancer: A Population-Based Cohort Study

CONTEXT

Although early integration of specialist palliative care (PC) is recommended for patients with advanced cancer, how frequently these guidelines are followed is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To examine use of early PC in real-world settings.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of patients with a first diagnosis of metastatic cancer who received care in U.S. hospitals with PC programs that participated in the National Palliative Care Registry in 2018-2019. The primary outcome was the proportion of early specialist PC initiation (within eight weeks of a first metastatic cancer diagnosis) overall and after stratification by cancer type. Patient, hospital and PC program characteristics were compared between patients who received early PC, late PC, and no PC.

RESULTS

Of 171,224 patients, 14.1% received PC during the study period. Only 8.0% of patients received early PC. Proportions of early PC were highest for patients with lung cancer, and lowest for patients with breast cancer (12.0% vs. 4.3%). Patients who received early PC had more comorbidities, diagnoses for symptoms or psychiatric conditions, and complications of cancer, and were more likely to have had a serious hospitalization in the prior 12 months. Hospital and program characteristics were not substantially different between patients who did and did not receive early specialist PC.

CONCLUSION

A low proportion of patients with metastatic cancer received early specialist PC, demonstrating a significant gap in guideline-concordant delivery of specialist PC. Patients who received early PC were substantially different from those who did not, suggesting that its use is targeted to patients with specific characteristics.

Malignant Hematologic Oncology Referrals to an Outpatient Palliative Care Clinic at a Tertiary Cancer Center

CONTEXT

Hematological malignancies represent a heterogeneous group of diseases with variable and often unpredictable illness trajectories. Comparisons between hematological and solid tumor malignancy referrals to an outpatient palliative care clinic have not been explored.

OBJECTIVES

This study compared characteristics, referral trends, and time from first palliative care clinic visit to death between patients with hematological and solid tumor malignancies.

METHODS

A retrospective review of palliative care clinic referrals at a tertiary cancer center from January 1st, 2018 to December 31st, 2022 was conducted. Clinical and demographic data, symptom burden, performance status, and time from first palliative care clinic visit to death were compared.

RESULTS

Of 5230 outpatients, 283 (5.4%) had a hematological malignancy (107 [38%] leukemia, 98 [35%] lymphoma, and 78 [28%] multiple myeloma). Patients with leukemia and lymphoma had similar symptom burden to solid tumor malignancies; patients with multiple myeloma had significantly more pain (P < 0.0001) and constipation (P = 0.005). Patients with hematological malignancies had worse performance status compared with solid tumor malignancies (ECOG ≥3 for 37.9% leukemia, 35.0% lymphoma, and 31.6% multiple myeloma vs. 19.6% solid tumor malignancies, P < 0.0001). At 12-months from first palliative care clinic visit, survival probabilities were 27.6% for leukemia, 42.2% lymphoma, and 69.5% multiple myeloma vs. 39.5% solid tumor malignancies.

CONCLUSION

Patients with hematological malignancies experience at least similar symptom burden to those with solid tumor malignancies referred to a palliative care clinic, and worse performance status, factors that should be considered when designing palliative care clinic interventions for patients with hematological malignancies.

Proactive symptom monitoring to initiate timely palliative care for patients with advanced cancer: a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

To deliver timely palliative care in response to supportive and palliative care needs as they arise, we developed a model called "Supportive and Palliative care Review Kit in Locations Everywhere" (SPARKLE), which comprises regular remote symptom monitoring using the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale (IPOS); early identification and prompt treatment of palliative care symptoms and concerns identified; and referral to specialist palliative care if follow-up is required.

METHODS

A prospective randomized controlled trial of SPARKLE versus usual care was conducted among patients with advanced cancers. The primary endpoint was Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) scores at 16 weeks post randomization.

RESULTS

A total of 239 patients were randomized-119 patients to usual care and 120 patients to SPARKLE intervention. There was no significant difference in total FACT-G score (baseline-adjusted difference 0.8, 95% CI - 3.5 to 5.1, p = 0.73). Physical well-being was better in the SPARKLE intervention group compared to the usual care group (baseline-adjusted difference 1.9, 95%CI 0.4 to 3.4, p = 0.01). There were no significant differences in the other domain scores. There were no differences in palliative care referrals, occurrence of emergency department visits, or hospital admissions.

CONCLUSION

Although there was no significant difference in overall quality of life, better physical symptom control could have been achieved through proactive identification and treatment of symptoms and concerns by the SPARKLE nurse. Further studies are warranted to evaluate how various components of palliative care service models impact clinical outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04242251. Date of registration: 23 January 2020.

What Is the Value of Palliative Care for Inpatients With Cancer?

@ramsedhom and colleagues highlight the opportunity of palliative care to bend the cost (and value) curve in cancer. Enhanced, early, and expanded access to PC offers benefits to inpatients with cancer and cost savings to health systems and payors.

Prospective assessment of end-of-life symptoms and quality of life in patients with high-grade glioma

Background

Glioblastoma and high-grade glioma (HGG) remain non-curable diseases. Symptoms and Quality-of-life (QoL) in the end-of-life (EoL) phase have not been prospectively studied with validated instruments. Therefore, we prospectively assessed symptom progression, symptom management, and hospice utilization in patients with treatment-refractory progressive HGG.

Methods

Patients failing bevacizumab and presenting with a Karnofsky performance score of ≤60, and their caregivers, were eligible. Symptoms, medication, and clinical management were tracked with serial telephone calls every 2 weeks until death utilizing clinical evaluations and the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory Brain Tumor Module (MDASI-BT). The MDASI-BT rates symptoms on a scale from 0 (no symptoms) to 10 (worst).

Results

Fifty-four patient-caregiver dyads were enrolled in the study. Amongst 50 evaluable patients, the most severe symptoms during the last 2 weeks prior to death were drowsiness (9.09 ± 1.44), difficulty with concentration (8.87 ± 2.29), fatigue (8.63 ± 2.03), difficulty speaking (8.44 ± 2.42), weakness (8.27 ± 3.44), and difficulty with understanding (7.71 ± 2.94). All symptoms, except weakness and memory impairment, which were high at baseline, showed statistically significant progression. Seizures were rare and did not progressively worsen near the end of life (1.38 ± 3.02). The decision-making composite score almost doubled during the EoL phase (8.58 ± 1.53).

Conclusions

This is the first prospective study describing symptoms and QoL issues in patients with HGG. Patients suffer from high morbidity in the EoL phase and should be offered early palliative and hospice care to assure proper symptom management and advance care planning.

Routine Symptom Screening to Address Supportive Care Needs

Routine symptom screening may identify unmet needs, but must consider patient engagement and clinician workloads.

Palliative and End of Life Care: An Important Component of Supportive Oncology

Palliative care, an integral component of supportive oncology, enhances the quality of life for patients living with cancer. Whilst palliative care has historically been synonymous with the provision of care at the end of life, it is increasingly playing a role earlier in a patient's cancer journey; frequently in conjunction with administration of anticancer treatment. Although early integration has been shown to improve patient outcomes, service development remains in its infancy and consideration of challenges bears relevance. Addressing issues pertaining to resource allocation in addition to adequate training of staff will aid to ensure the provision of care that aligns with the goals and priorities of patients. This review presents the role of early palliative care within the realm of supportive oncology with respect to the evidence of benefit and ethical, clinical and practical considerations. Relevant papers have been chosen for inclusion on the basis of clinical relevance, timeliness and relevance to cancer patients and clinical teams involved in their care.

Feasibility of Weekly Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale (IPOS) Within a Stepped Care Model

CONTEXT

Patients with advanced cancer may experience symptoms and concerns that are inadequately identified by the healthcare team, leading to calls for patient-reported symptom monitoring.

OBJECTIVES

Assess the feasibility of administering weekly patient-reported online Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale (IPOS) questionnaires within the context of a stepped care model in the outpatient care setting.

METHODS

Analysis of intervention group data in a randomized controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of a stepped care model of palliative care for patients with advanced cancer. Patients in the intervention group were invited to complete the IPOS weekly for 16 weeks through a remotely-administered online questionnaire. At the end of the 16-week period, patients were invited to complete a feedback survey. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess factors associated with more versus less than 70% completion of weekly questionnaires.

RESULTS

Among 111 patients who survived more than 16 weeks, the mean number of questionnaires completed was 9.2/16 (58%). A total of 53 out of the 111 patients (48%) completed more than 70% of the questionnaires. Higher education level was found to be associated with higher completion of the questionnaires. A total of 79 out of 111 (71%) patients responded to the feedback survey, of which 67 (85%) felt comfortable with completing the online questionnaire and 11 (14%) felt it was troublesome to complete it on a weekly basis.

CONCLUSION

In our study, there was suboptimal completion of patient-reported IPOS questionnaire. Further research is needed to improve the uptake of patient-reported outcomes in real-world clinical settings.

Stepped Palliative Care for Patients With Advanced Lung Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Despite the evidence for early palliative care improving outcomes, it has not been widely implemented in part due to palliative care workforce limitations.

Objective

To evaluate a stepped-care model to deliver less resource-intensive and more patient-centered palliative care for patients with advanced cancer.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Randomized, nonblinded, noninferiority trial of stepped vs early palliative care conducted between February 12, 2018, and December 15, 2022, at 3 academic medical centers in Boston, Massachusetts, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and Durham, North Carolina, among 507 patients who had been diagnosed with advanced lung cancer within the past 12 weeks.

Intervention

Step 1 of the intervention was an initial palliative care visit within 4 weeks of enrollment and subsequent visits only at the time of a change in cancer treatment or after a hospitalization. During step 1, patients completed a measure of quality of life (QOL; Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung [FACT-L]; range, 0-136, with higher scores indicating better QOL) every 6 weeks, and those with a 10-point or greater decrease from baseline were stepped up to meet with the palliative care clinician every 4 weeks (intervention step 2). Patients assigned to early palliative care had palliative care visits every 4 weeks after enrollment.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Noninferiority (margin = -4.5) of the effect of stepped vs early palliative care on patient-reported QOL on the FACT-L at week 24.

Results

The sample (n = 507) mostly included patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (78.3%; mean age, 66.5 years; 51.4% female; 84.6% White). The mean number of palliative care visits by week 24 was 2.4 for stepped palliative care and 4.7 for early palliative care (adjusted mean difference, -2.3; P < .001). FACT-L scores at week 24 for the stepped palliative care group were noninferior to scores among those receiving early palliative care (adjusted FACT-L mean score, 100.6 vs 97.8, respectively; difference, 2.9; lower 1-sided 95% confidence limit, -0.1; P < .001 for noninferiority). Although the rate of end-of-life care communication was also noninferior between groups, noninferiority was not demonstrated for days in hospice (adjusted mean, 19.5 with stepped palliative care vs 34.6 with early palliative care; P = .91).

Conclusions and Relevance

A stepped-care model, with palliative care visits occurring only at key points in patients' cancer trajectories and using a decrement in QOL to trigger more intensive palliative care exposure, resulted in fewer palliative care visits without diminishing the benefits for patients' QOL. While stepped palliative care was associated with fewer days in hospice, it is a more scalable way to deliver early palliative care to enhance patient-reported outcomes.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03337399.

The Use of Person-Centered Outcome Measures to Support Integrated Palliative Care for Older People: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to synthesize evidence on the use of person-centered outcome measures to facilitate integrated palliative care for older people and build a logic model depicting the mechanisms through which person-centered outcome measures support integrated care.

DESIGN

Mixed methods systematic review using a data-based convergent synthesis design.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Older people aged ≥60 years who are approaching the end of their lives in multiple settings.

METHODS

The study was underpinned by a conceptual framework of integrated palliative care, which informed the search strategy, data extraction, analysis, and synthesis. A hybrid search strategy was implemented, with database searches (PsycINFO, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and ASSIA) complemented by snowball searches. Qualitative and quantitative data were analyzed by narrative synthesis to summarize and explain the findings. The findings informed a logic model depicting the mechanisms of using person-centered outcome measures to support integrated palliative care.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies were included. Three mixed methods studies, 2 qualitative studies, and 21 quantitative studies were included. There was evidence that person-centered outcome measures could support integrated palliative care through informing palliative care policy development (n = 4), facilitating joint working across settings (n = 5), enabling close collaboration of multidisciplinary teams (n = 14), promoting joint education (n = 1), facilitating timing and specialist referral (n = 6), and enhancing patient-centered care (n = 3).

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

This review makes an important, novel, and theoretically informed contribution to the delivery of scalable and sustainable integrated palliative care into the care of older people using person-centered outcome measures. The constructed logic model provides a conceptual framework and practical approach to how person-centered outcome measures support multilevel integration. A future area of research is the development of person-centered outcome measure interventions informed by the logic model to meet clinical needs.

Care Coordination Between Family Physicians and Palliative Care Physicians for Patients With Cancer: Results of a Quality Improvement Initiative

PURPOSE

At our institution's cancer palliative care (PC) clinic, new referrals from oncologists were scheduled for consultation and ongoing follow-up by PC physicians without input from the patients' family physicians (FPs). FPs reported that they felt out of the loop. We implemented a quality improvement (QI) initiative aimed at systematically facilitating care coordination between FPs and PC physicians.

METHODS

A coordination toolkit was sent from the PC physician to the FP whenever the PC physician received a consultation request from an oncologist. The toolkit included an introduction to the PC physician team; an opportunity for the FP to choose how best to collaborate with PC physicians to meet the patient's PC needs; and contact information for access to 24/7 PC physician support. Responses from FPs regarding their preferred level of engagement with PC determined further care planning in the clinic. We measured feasibility, response rate, and qualitative surveys of FPs about the usefulness of the intervention.

RESULTS

Two hundred fourteen new consultations were eligible for a standardized letter over the 6-month implementation period. Feasibility for sending the toolkit was 90.0% and response rate for collaborative care preference from FPs was 86.0%, with median response time of 3-4 days. 78.9% of FPs indicated they would prefer ongoing consultative care by the PC physician, while 18.6% indicated that PC physician consultation was not needed, or that the FP would provide primary PC after a one-time PC physician consultation.

CONCLUSION

We successfully implemented a QI initiative to improve care coordination between FPs and PC physicians for patients with cancer. The coordination toolkit can protect the patient-FP primary PC relationship and optimize specialist PC resource utilization for complex patients.

Why and How to Integrate Early Palliative Care Into Cutting-Edge Personalized Cancer Care

Early palliative care, palliative care integrated with oncology care early in the course of illness, has myriad benefits for patients and their caregivers, including improved quality of life, reduced physical and psychological symptom burden, enhanced prognostic awareness, and reduced health care utilization at the end of life. Although ASCO and others recommend early palliative care for all patients with advanced cancer, widespread implementation of early palliative care has not been realized because of barriers such as insufficient reimbursement and a palliative care workforce shortage. Investigators have recently tested several implementation strategies to overcome these barriers, including triggers for palliative care consultations, telehealth delivery, navigator-delivered interventions, and primary palliative care interventions. More research is needed to identify mechanisms to distribute palliative care optimally and equitably. Simultaneously, the transformation of the oncology treatment landscape has led to shifts in the supportive care needs of patients and caregivers, who may experience longer, uncertain trajectories of cancer. Now, palliative care also plays a clear role in the care of patients with hematologic malignancies and may be beneficial for patients undergoing phase I clinical trials and their caregivers. Further research and clinical guidance regarding how to balance the risks and benefits of opioid therapy and safely manage cancer-related pain across this wide range of settings are urgently needed. The strengths of early palliative care in supporting patients' and caregivers' coping and centering decisions on their goals and values remain valuable in the care of patients receiving cutting-edge personalized cancer care.

Palliative surgery: state of the science and future directions

Palliative surgical procedures are operations that aim to alleviate symptoms in a patient with serious, life-limiting illness. They are common, particularly within the field of surgical oncology. However, few high-quality studies have attempted to measure the durability of improvements in symptoms and quality of life after palliative surgery. Furthermore, many of the studies that do exist are outdated and employ highly inconsistent definitions of palliative surgery. Consequently, the paucity of robust and reliable evidence on the benefits, risks, and trade-offs of palliative surgery hampers clinical decision-making for patients and their surgeons. The evidence for palliative surgery suggests that, with effective communication about goals of care and careful patient selection, palliative surgery can provide symptomatic relief and reduce healthcare burdens for certain seriously ill patients.

Palliative sedation and time to death in home palliative care: retrospective analysis

OBJECTIVES

We described time to death and rates of palliative sedation during home palliative care leveraging a retrospective cohort of patients with advanced cancer.

METHODS

The cohort consists of 143 patients with solid or haematological malignancies admitted to home palliative care in the Tuscany region in central Italy. Only patients for whom a date of death was available were included. The outcome measures were time from admission to home palliative care to death and receipt of palliative sedation.

RESULTS

143 patients were included in this report. Lower Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) scores were significantly associated with anticancer treatment at admission, as was younger age. Increasing ECOG PS scores were associated with lower survival time. Women and patients on anticancer treatment had longer survival time. Thirty-eight per cent of patients underwent palliative sedation at home; palliative sedation was more frequent among younger patients and among patients with brain or lung cancer. The most common reasons for palliative sedation were delirium and dyspnoea.

CONCLUSIONS

ECOG PS, sex and anticancer treatment had a significant impact on survival time. Thirty-eight per cent of patients in our cohort underwent home palliative sedation for refractory symptoms, most often delirium and dyspnoea.

Implementing a nurse-led screening clinic for symptom distress with community-based referral for cancer survivors: A feasibility study

INTRODUCTION

This prospective, single-arm, pragmatic implementation study evaluated the feasibility of a nurse-led symptom-screening program embedded in routine oncology post-treatment outpatient clinics by assessing (1) the acceptance rate for symptom distress screening (SDS), (2) the prevalence of SDS cases, (3) the acceptance rate for community-based psychosocial support services, and (4) the effect of referred psychosocial support services on reducing symptom distress.

METHODS

Using the modified Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS-r), we screened patients who recently completed cancer treatment. Patients screening positive for moderate-to-severe symptom distress were referred to a nurse-led community-based symptom-management program involving stepped-care symptom/psychosocial management interventions using a pre-defined triage system. Reassessments were conducted at 3-months and 9-months thereafter. The primary outcomes included SDS acceptance rate, SDS case prevalence, intervention acceptance rate, and ESAS-r score change over time.

RESULTS

Overall, 2988/3742(80%) eligible patients consented to SDS, with 970(32%) reporting ≥1 ESAS-r symptom as moderate-to-severe (caseness). All cases received psychoeducational material, 673/970(69%) accepted psychosocial support service referrals. Among 328 patients completing both reassessments, ESAS-r scores improved significantly over time (p < 0.0001); 101(30.8%) of patients remained ESAS cases throughout the study, 112(34.1%) recovered at 3-month post-baseline, an additional 72(22%) recovered at 9-month post-baseline, while 43(12.2%) had resumed ESAS caseness at 9-month post-baseline.

CONCLUSION

Nurse-led SDS programs with well-structured referral pathways to community-based services and continued monitoring are feasible and acceptable in cancer patients and may help in reducing symptom distress. We intend next to develop optimal strategies for SDS implementation and referral within routine cancer care services.

What is an "early palliative care" intervention? A scoping review of controlled studies in oncology

INTRODUCTION

Early palliative care (EPC) has been advocated to improve cancer patients' health. However, EPC differs with regard to its elements and target groups. It is not known which parts of EPC contribute to effectiveness for which patient group. This scoping review provides a structured analysis of EPC interventions and outcome measures.

DESIGN

We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and CENTRAL up to February 2022. We included randomized controlled trials (RCT), nonrandomized trials, cohort studies (CS), and controlled before-after studies of EPC in adult patients in English, Dutch, and German language. Interventions had to be self-labeled as EPC. Screening and data extraction were performed by two raters. A structured analysis incorporating the TIDieR checklist was performed to describe the elements of the interventions.

RESULTS

We screened 2651 articles, resulting in 40 articles being included: 34 studies were RCT and six studies were CS with a mean sample size of 208 patients. Patients with pancreatic (n = 10) and lung cancer (n = 9) were most often included. Studies reported different reference points for the onset of EPC such as time after diagnosis of incurable cancer (n = 18) or prognosis (n = 9). Thirteen studies provided information about elements of EPC and eight studies about the control intervention. Most frequent elements of EPC were symptom management (n = 28), case management (n = 16), and advance care planning (ACP; n = 15). Most frequently reported outcome measures were health-related quality of life (n = 26), symptom intensity (n = 6), resource use, and the patient's mood (n = 4 each).

CONCLUSION

The elicited heterogeneity of ECP in combination with deficits of reporting are considerable barriers that should be addressed to further develop effective EPC interventions for different groups of cancer patients.

Nursing Support for Nausea and Vomiting in Patients With Cancer: A Scoping Review

Nausea and vomiting are symptoms commonly experienced by patients with advanced cancer and have a wide range of causes, including pharmacological interventions. Additionally, multiple factors often simultaneously cause nausea and vomiting. These highly distressing symptoms may be directly or indirectly related to the disease and can significantly impact both the physical and psychological well-being of patients. This study aims to identify the nursing support provided to reduce nausea and vomiting experienced by patients with cancer. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews checklist and Arksey and O'Malley's framework. We searched the PubMed, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in the Cochrane Library, and the Ichushi-Web of the Japan Medical Abstract Society databases for all content published from the inception of each database through July 31, 2023. A total of 4,625 scientific articles were identified after literature screening. In total, 58 articles were included for full-text review, and 10 articles were finally selected for review. The types of study designs comprised six randomized controlled trials, three prospective observational studies, and one before-after study with no controls. The types of cancers included in the articles were colorectal, breast, lung, pancreatic, gynecological, stomach, and sarcoma. The total sample size of the study population was 793 patients (range = 12-281) for intervention studies and 4,333 patients (range = 20-4,197) for observational studies. Nursing support, extracted from the 10 articles, was classified into the following six types: massage therapy, acupressure, early palliative care, psychosocial support, self-symptom monitoring, and coordinated care. The review yielded six classifications of nursing support for nausea and vomiting in cancer patients. Future research should examine the feasibility of providing nursing support for nausea and vomiting in cancer patients.

Integrating palliative care into the evolving landscape of oncology

Patients with cancer have many palliative care needs. Robust evidence supports the early integration of palliative care into the care of patients with advanced cancer. International organizations, such as the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), have recommended early, longitudinal integration of palliative care into oncology care throughout the cancer trajectory. In this review, we pose a series of clinical questions related to the current state of early palliative care integration into oncology. We review the evidence to address each of these questions and highlight areas for further investigation. As cancer care continues to evolve, incorporating new treatment modalities and improving patient outcomes, we reflect on how to apply the existing evidence supporting early palliative care-oncology integration into this ever-changing therapeutic landscape and how specialty palliative care might adapt to meet the evolving needs of patients, caregivers, and the multidisciplinary oncology team.

Palliative Care Physicians' Perceptions of Conditions Required to Provide Early Palliative Care

CONTEXT

Early palliative care (EPC) is widely recommended but its implementation may be challenging.

OBJECTIVES

We conducted a qualitative analysis of Canadian palliative care physicians' opinions about conditions necessary to provide EPC.

METHODS

A survey assessing attitudes and opinions regarding EPC was distributed to physicians providing primary or specialized palliative care, as identified by the Canadian Society of Palliative Care Physicians. The survey included an optional final section for respondents' general comments; we screened these for relevance to our study aims and conducted a thematic analysis of relevant comments.

RESULTS

Of 531 completed surveys, 129 (24%) respondents provided written comments, of whom 104 mentioned conditions they felt to be necessary to provide EPC. Four key themes were identified: 1) Clear delineation of roles of primary and specialized palliative care physicians-all physicians should be empowered to provide primary palliative care, with specialists providing additional support; 2) Shared care with needs-dependent referral-primary and specialized palliative care physicians should work collaboratively, with referral to specialized palliative care based on need rather than on prognosis; 3) Adequate resources to support primary palliative care-education, financial incentives, and collaboration with interdisciplinary team members such as nurses and specialized providers were specifically mentioned; 4) Addressing the misconception that palliative care equals end-of-life care-there was particular emphasis on education of both healthcare providers and the public.

CONCLUSION

Changes are necessary at the level of palliative care referral systems, providers, resources, and policy to enable implementation of EPC.

Symptom screening with Targeted Early Palliative care (STEP) versus usual care for patients with advanced cancer: a mixed methods study

PURPOSE

Although early palliative care is recommended, resource limitations prevent its routine implementation. We report on the preliminary findings of a mixed methods study involving a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of Symptom screening with Targeted Early Palliative care (STEP) and qualitative interviews.

METHODS

Adults with advanced solid tumors and an oncologist-estimated prognosis of 6-36 months were randomized to STEP or symptom screening alone. STEP involved symptom screening at each outpatient oncology visit; moderate to severe scores triggered an email to a palliative care nurse, who offered referral to in-person outpatient palliative care. Patient-reported outcomes of quality of life (FACT-G7; primary outcome), depression (PHQ-9), symptom control (ESAS-r-CS), and satisfaction with care (FAMCARE P-16) were measured at baseline and 2, 4, and 6 months. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a subset of participants.

RESULTS

From Aug/2019 to Mar/2020 (trial halted due to COVID-19 pandemic), 69 participants were randomized to STEP (n = 33) or usual care (n = 36). At 6 months, 45% of STEP arm patients and 17% of screening alone participants had received palliative care (p = 0.009). Nonsignificant differences for all outcomes favored STEP: difference in change scores for FACT-G7 = 1.67 (95% CI: -1.43, 4.77); ESAS-r-CS = -5.51 (-14.29, 3.27); FAMCARE P-16 = 4.10 (-0.31, 8.51); PHQ-9 = -2.41 (-5.02, 0.20). Sixteen patients completed qualitative interviews, describing symptom screening as helpful to initiate communication; triggered referral as initially jarring but ultimately beneficial; and referral to palliative care as timely.

CONCLUSION

Despite lack of power for this halted trial, preliminary results favored STEP and qualitative results demonstrated acceptability. Findings will inform an RCT of combined in-person and virtual STEP.

Identifying Nursing Home Residents with Unmet Palliative Care Needs: A Systematic Review of Screening Tool Measurement Properties

OBJECTIVES

Despite common use of palliative care screening tools in other settings, the performance of these tools in the nursing home has not been well established; therefore, the purpose of this review is to (1) identify palliative care screening tools validated for nursing home residents and (2) critically appraise, compare, and summarize the quality of measurement properties.

DESIGN

Systematic review of measurement properties consistent with Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines.

SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS

Embase (Ovid), MEDLINE (PubMed), CINAHL (EBSCO), and PsycINFO (Ovid) were searched from inception to May 2022. Studies that (1) reported the development or evaluation of a palliative care screening tool and (2) sampled older adults living in a nursing home were included.

METHODS

Two reviewers independently screened, selected, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias.

RESULTS

We identified only 1 palliative care screening tool meeting COSMIN criteria, the NECesidades Paliativas (NEC-PAL, equivalent to palliative needs in English), but evidence for use with nursing home residents was of low quality. The NEC-PAL lacked robust testing of measurement properties such as reliability, sensitivity, and specificity in the nursing home setting. Construct validity through hypothesis testing was adequate but only reported in 1 study. Consequently, there is insufficient evidence to guide practice. Broadening the criteria further, this review reports on 3 additional palliative care screening tools identified during the search and screening process but which were excluded during full-text review for various reasons.

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS

Given the unique care environment of nursing homes, we recommend future studies to validate available tools and develop new instruments specifically designed for nursing home use. In the meantime, we recommend that clinicians consider the evidence presented here and choose a screening instrument that best meets their needs.

Should Outpatient Palliative Care Clinics in Cancer Centers be Stand Alone or Embedded?

Outpatient palliative care facilitates timely symptom management, psychosocial care and care planning. A growing number of cancer centers have either stand-alone or embedded outpatient palliative care clinics. In this "Controversies in Palliative Care" article, three groups of thought leaders independently answer this question. Specifically, each group provides a synopsis of the key studies that inform their thought processes, share practical advice on their clinical approach, and highlight the opportunities for future research. One group advocates for stand-alone clinics, another for embedded, and the third group tries to find a balance. In the absence of evidence that directly compares the two models, factors such as cancer center size, palliative care team composition, clinic space availability, and financial considerations may drive the decision-making process at each institution. Stand-alone clinics may be more appropriate for larger academic cancer centers or palliative care programs with a more comprehensive interdisciplinary team, while embedded clinics may be more suited for smaller palliative care programs or community oncology programs to stimulate referrals. As outpatient clinic models continue to evolve, investigators need to document the referral and patient outcomes to inform practice.

Early integration of palliative care for patients with haematological malignancies

Early palliative care (EPC) significantly improves quality of life, symptoms, and satisfaction with care for patients with advanced cancer. International organizations have recognized and promoted the role of palliative care as a distinct specialty, advocating its involvement throughout the cancer trajectory. Although patients with haematologic malignancies (HMs) have a comparable symptom burden to patients with solid tumours, they face multiple barriers to EPC integration. In this review, we discuss these barriers, present updated evidence from clinical trials of EPC in HMs and propose models to support EPC integration into care for patients with HMs.