The role of nursing in the management of patients with renal and hepatic cancers: A systematic literature review

The Role of Nurses in the Management of Adverse Events in Patients Receiving First-Line Axitinib Plus Immuno-Oncology Agents for Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

The recent approval of first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitor plus immuno-oncology agent combination therapy for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma offers substantially improved response rates and survival compared with the previous standard of care. This expansion of treatment options has also led to a greater range and complexity of potential treatment-related adverse events related to overlapping toxicities. The aim of this article is to discuss the management of common treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) associated with axitinib plus immuno-oncology therapy, highlight the specific roles of oncology nurses in managing these events, and provide AE management resources to aid oncology nurses in their care of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma.

DATA SOURCES

Author experience, journal articles, and treatment guidelines were used.

CONCLUSION

The use of oncology nurses and nurse-led innovations to monitor and assess treatments can have a positive impact on the management of AEs in cancer patients by identifying those who are most at risk, providing regular assessment, appropriate patient education, and supporting the monitoring of patient safety.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Skilled oncology nurses should be a key part of a team that addresses the supportive care needs and management of AEs that are associated with novel cancer treatments. Early and ongoing communication between the patient and oncology nurses regarding the development of adverse events is a critical component of maximizing treatment outcomes and quality of life.

A Delphi Study of Core Patient-Reported Outcomes for Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma and Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

There is little research to help health care professionals understand what patient outcomes are considered a priority in advanced liver or kidney cancer. Knowing what is important to patients can help promote person-centered approaches to treatment and disease management. The aim of this study was to identify those patient-reported outcomes (PROs) that patients, carers, and health care professionals consider as "core" when providing care to those with advanced liver or kidney cancer.

DATA SOURCES

A three-round Delphi study was undertaken to ask experts by profession or experience to rank PROs identified from a previous literature review. Fifty-four experts, including people living with advanced liver or kidney cancer (44.4%), family members and caregivers (9.3%), and health care professionals (46.8%), reached consensus on 49 PROs including 12 new items (eg, palpitations, hopefulness, or social isolation). Items with the highest rate of consensus included quality of life, pain, mental health, and capacity to do daily activities.

CONCLUSION

People living with advanced liver or kidney cancer experience complex health care needs. Some important outcomes were not actually captured in practice in this population and were suggested as part of this study. There are discrepancies between the views of health care professionals, patients, and family in what is important, highlighting the need of using measures to facilitate communication.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Identification of priority PROs reported here will be key to facilitate more focused patient assessments. The actual use of measures in cancer nursing practice to allow monitoring of PROs must be tested for feasibility and usability.

Rare disease education in Europe and beyond: time to act

People living with rare diseases (PLWRD) still face huge unmet needs, in part due to the fact that care systems are not sufficiently aligned with their needs and healthcare workforce (HWF) along their care pathways lacks competencies to efficiently tackle rare disease-specific challenges. Level of rare disease knowledge and awareness among the current and future HWF is insufficient. In recent years, many educational resources on rare diseases have been developed, however, awareness of these resources is still limited and rare disease education is still not sufficiently taken into account by some crucial stakeholders as academia and professional organizations. Therefore, there is a need to fundamentally rethink rare disease education and HWF development across the whole spectrum from students to generalists, specialists and experts, to engage and empower PLWRD, their families and advocates, and to work towards a common coherent and complementary strategy on rare disease education and training in Europe and beyond. Special consideration should be also given to the role of nurse coordinators in care coordination, interprofessional training for integrated multidisciplinary care, patient and family-centered education, opportunities given by digital learning and fostering of social accountability to enforce the focus on socially-vulnerable groups such as PLWRD. The strategy has to be developed and implemented by multiple rare disease education and training providers: universities, medical and nursing schools and their associations, professional organizations, European Reference Networks, patient organizations, other organizations and institutions dedicated to rare diseases and rare cancers, authorities and policy bodies.

A rapid review of patient-reported outcomes investigated in the context of advanced renal cell cancer or advanced hepatocellular cancer

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are key indicators of health status and functioning, coming directly from the patient. Comprehensive monitoring of PROs enables implementation of person-centred care. Currently, the PROs that patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) or hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) consider of greatest importance remains unknown.

METHODS

A rapid literature review was carried out to identify PROs commonly reported in clinical studies of patients with advanced RCC/HCC. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL & PsycInfo for relevant peer-reviewed publications in the period from 2000 to 2021. Pre-specified selection criteria were applied to all retrieved records. Findings were integrated into a narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

Eighty-one studies met our selection criteria and were retained. Most research was on advanced RCC (n = 64, 79%); 46 studies (57%) were drug trials. Only twenty-six studies (32%) employed PROs as their primary endpoint. Most PROs concerned physical symptoms (45% RCC, 54% HCC) and emotional wellbeing (19% RCC, 16% HCC). The most common outcome measured was quality of life (65% of the total), followed by fatigue (62%) and pain (54%). Whether selection of these PROs was patient-driven was not reported.

CONCLUSIONS

A wide range of PROs were assessed. Deficits in PROs often cause patients to seek out help; however, which PROs matter the most to people with advanced RCC/HCC must be further clarified. Targeting, monitoring, and responding to the 'right' PROs can enhance provision of person-centred care in advanced RCC/HCC and augment the clinical efficacy of established and emerging targeted therapies.