Embedded Specialist Palliative Care in Cystic Fibrosis: Results of a Randomized Feasibility Clinical Trial

Background: Cystic fibrosis (CF) is a progressive genetic disease characterized by multisystem symptom burden. Specialist palliative care (PC), as a model of care, has been shown to be effective in improving quality of life and reducing symptom burden in other conditions, but has not been tested in CF. Objectives: To develop and test the feasibility and acceptability of a specialist PC intervention embedded within an outpatient CF clinic. Design: Single-site, equal-allocation randomized pilot study comparing usual care with addition of four protocolized quarterly visits with a PC nurse practitioner. Participants: Adults with CF age ≥18 years with any of the following: FEV1% predicted ≤50, ≥2 CF-related hospitalizations in the past 12 months, supplemental oxygen use, or noninvasive mechanical ventilation use, and moderate-or-greater severity of any symptoms on the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale. Measurements: Randomization rate, intervention visit completion, data completements, participant ratings of intervention acceptability and benefit, and intervention delivery fidelity. Results: We randomized 50 adults with CF of 65 approached (77% randomization rate) to intervention (n = 25) or usual care (n = 25), mean age 38, baseline mean FEV1% predicted 41.8 (usual care), and 41.2 (intervention). No participants withdrew, five were lost to follow-up, and two died (88% retention). In the intervention group, 23 of 25 completed all study visits; 94% stated the intervention was not burdensome, and 97.6% would recommend the intervention to others with CF. More than 90% of study visits addressed topics prescribed by intervention manual. Conclusions: Adding specialist PC to standard clinic visits for adults with CF is feasible and acceptable.

Abstract PS9-14: Feasibility of monitoring symptoms during endocrine therapy with patient reported outcomes collected via smart phone app

Background: Despite known benefits in reducing breast cancer (BC) recurrence and death, up to 50% of patients discontinue endocrine therapy (ET) early. Symptoms are often cited as a reason for early ET discontinuation (DC). The symptom burden during ET captured by patient reported outcomes (PRO) exceeds that captured by clinicians. Methods: We initiated a single arm pilot trial evaluating symptom monitoring during ET with PRO collected via smart phone app. Eligible patients are women starting ET for stage 0-III BC. Participants receive text message reminders to complete surveys at baseline (BL), 1, 3, 6 and 12 months (mo). Participants who do not complete 2 sequential surveys may opt out of further surveys. Surveys include PROMIS measures for anxiety, depression, fatigue and the vaginal discomfort domain of sexual function plus PRO-CTCAE measures for concentration, memory, hot flashes, joint pain and vaginal dryness. PROMIS measures are scored by T-score look up tables. PRO-CTCAE responses are reported on a 5 point scale (0-4). Severe or worsening scores trigger email alerts to clinicians as follows: T-scores ≥70 or ≥5 points worse than BL for anxiety, depression, and fatigue; T-score ≥65 or ≥5 points worse than BL for sexual function; scores ≥3 or ≥2 points worse than BL on PRO-CTCAE measures. Recommended management pathways are provided to clinicians upon alert acknowledgement. The primary endpoint is feasibility, with success defined as ≥65% of participants completing the BL survey and ≥65% of participants completing ≥1 follow-up (FU) survey during the first 6 mo of ET. Secondary endpoints include patient-reported symptoms and pathway-concordant symptom management based on chart review. We report here descriptive statistics of the observed data to date and multivariate logistic regression analysis of factors associated with BL survey completion. Results: From Feb 2019 to May 2020, 213 of 250 planned participants enrolled. Median FU is 5.7 mo. Mean age is 58.3 years (SD 11.7). 154 (72.3%) participants are white (W) and 32 (15%) are black (B). 189 (88.7%) participants have stage I-II BC. Prior to initiating ET, 82 (39%) had mastectomy, 75 (35.2%) had chemotherapy and 135 (63.4%) had radiation. 138 (64.8%) initiated an aromatase inhibitor and 72 (33.8%) initiated tamoxifen. BL survey completion rate is 73.7% (95% confidence interval (CI) 67.3-79.5%). To date, 69.3% (95% CI 60.5-77.2%) of participants completed ≥1 FU survey during the first 6 mo of ET. 25.2% of participants opted out of participation within 6 mo. On multivariate analysis, race was associated with BL survey completion. By race, BL survey completion rate was: 77.9% (W) and 62.5% (B). Mean scores on PROMIS depression, anxiety, fatigue, and sexual function measures at BL, 1 mo, and 3 mo were +/- 0.5 SD of population means. Compared to BL, mean PRO-CTCAE scores for joint pain severity and hot flash frequency worsened at 1 and 3 mo and mean PRO-CTCAE score for vaginal dryness severity worsened at 3 mo (p<0.05). 28% of participants had alerts at BL. Most common BL alerts were joint pain and hot flashes. To date, 79.7% of participants had ≥1 alert on a FU survey. Most common FU alerts were joint pain, hot flashes and fatigue. Median number of alerts per participant per FU survey is 1 (range 0-5). To date, clinicians acknowledged 29.8% of alerts within 7 days and made pathway-concordant management recommendations within 30 days for 39.4% of alerts. Conclusion: Monitoring symptoms during ET using PRO collected via smart phone app is feasible. Symptoms are common during ET. Updated data, including factors associated with survey completion, clinician response to alerts and the association between PRO scores and early ET DC, will be reported at the conference. These data will be used to design a randomized trial to evaluate symptom monitoring via smart phone app to reduce early ET DC.

Citation Format: Karen L Smith, Chenguang Wang, David Lim, Amanda Montanari, Raquel Nunes, Mary J. Wilkinson, Jennifer Y. Sheng, Rima Couzi, John Fetting, Carol Riley, Antonio C. Wolff, Cesar A. Santa-Maria, Katie Papathakis, Lauren Collins-Chase, Christie Hilton, Claire Snyder, Elissa Thorner, Dara Z. Ikejiani, Molly Steimer, Vered Stearns. Feasibility of monitoring symptoms during endocrine therapy with patient reported outcomes collected via smart phone app [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PS9-14.

"I'd Have to Basically Be on My Deathbed": Heart Failure Patients' Perceptions of and Preferences for Palliative Care

Objectives: To identify patient perceptions of how and when palliative care (PC) could complement usual heart failure (HF) management. Background: Despite guidelines calling for the integration of PC into the management of HF, PC services remain underutilized by this population. Patient preferences regarding delivery of and triggers for PC are unknown. Setting/subjects: Individuals with New York Heart Association Class II-IV disease were recruited from inpatient and outpatient settings at an academic quaternary care hospital. Measurements: Participants completed semistructured interviews discussing perceptions, knowledge, and preferences regarding PC. They also addressed barriers and facilitators to PC delivery. Two investigators independently analyzed data using template analysis. Results: We interviewed 27 adults with HF (mean age 63, 85% white, 63% male, 30% Class II, 48% Class III, and 22% Class IV). Participants frequently conflated PC with hospice; once corrected, they expressed variable preferences for primary versus specialist services. Proponents of primary PC cited continuity in care, HF-specific expertise, convenience, and cost, whereas advocates for specialist care highlighted expertise in symptom management and caregiver support, reduced time constraints, and a comprehensive approach to care. Triggers for specialist PC focused on late-stage manifestations of disease such as loss of independence and absence of disease-directed therapies. Conclusions: Patients with HF demonstrated variable conceptions of PC and its relevance to their disease management. Although preferences for delivery model were based on a variety of logistical and relational factors, triggers for initiation remained focused on late-stage disease, suggesting that patients with HF may misconceive PC is an option of last resort.

Abstract 262: Preferences for Primary versus Specialty Palliative Care Among Patients With Heart Failure

Background: More than 5 million people in the USA suffer from heart failure (HF). Palliative care (PC) is both a clinical subspecialty and overall approach to care that focuses on promoting seriously ill patients and their family’s quality of life. PC takes several forms, including consultation by a PC specialist, or attention to palliative domains by a non-PC specialist (aka “primary” PC). Despite guidelines calling for the integration of PC in HF, specialty PC remains underutilized. Patient preferences regarding primary vs specialty PC are unknown.

Objective: To identify patient knowledge and perceptions regarding how primary and specialty PC could complement usual HF management, as well as barriers preventing PC utilization.

Methods: We recruited individuals with NYHA class II-IV HF from general medicine wards and an outpatient advanced HF clinic, both at an academic quaternary care hospital. We conducted semi-structured interviews addressing: (1) patient-perceived physical, emotional, social, and decision-making needs; (2) perception, knowledge, and preferences regarding PC; (3) barriers and facilitators to PC. To understand patient preferences regarding primary vs specialty PC, in the interview guide, we conceptualized PC into 5 domains: physical, emotional, spiritual and social aspects of care, and advance care planning. For each domain, participants discussed unmet needs, and preferences about whether the needs would be best met by their existing cardiology team or a PC specialist. Two investigators independently analyzed data using template analysis, an inductive/deductive qualitative technique.

Results: We interviewed 28 patients; 82% were white, 61% were >60 years, and 64% were male. 43% of participants had ejection fractions <30%, and 64% were of NYHA classes III or IV. Symptom burden was high and a source of dissatisfaction; yet, few believed that their disease management was suboptimal, often citing a sense of resignation that symptoms are inevitable in HF. We heard mixed and often incorrect understandings of PC (and its distinction from hospice). Once misperceptions of PC were corrected, respondents expressed variable preferences for specialty vs. primary PC. Proponents of primary PC cited trust and rapport in their existing clinicians, HF-specific expertise, convenience, and cost. Alternatively, participants preferring specialty PC involvement cited expertise in symptom management, addressing caregiver concerns, reduced time constraints, and a comprehensive non-HF-exclusive approach to care.

Conclusion: We frequently identified limited and often incorrect understanding of PC. Though once corrected, patients articulated variable preferences for primary vs. specialty PC integration into their existing HF care. Research is needed to identify means of increasing primary and specialty PC delivery in HF in a manner that reflects patient preferences.

Palliative Care in Heart Failure: Rationale, Evidence, and Future Priorities

Patients with heart failure (HF) and their families experience stress and suffering from a variety of sources over the course of the HF experience. Palliative care is an interdisciplinary service and an overall approach to care that improves quality of life and alleviates suffering for those living with serious illness, regardless of prognosis. In this review, we synthesize the evidence from randomized clinical trials of palliative care interventions in HF. While the evidence base for palliative care in HF is promising, it is still in its infancy and requires additional high-quality, methodologically sound studies to clearly elucidate the role of palliative care for patients and families living with the burdens of HF. Yet, an increase in attention to primary palliative care (e.g., basic physical and emotional symptom management, advance care planning), provided by primary care and cardiology clinicians, may be a vehicle to address unmet palliative needs earlier and throughout the illness course.

Association Between Palliative Care and Patient and Caregiver Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

The use of palliative care programs and the number of trials assessing their effectiveness have increased.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the association of palliative care with quality of life (QOL), symptom burden, survival, and other outcomes for people with life-limiting illness and for their caregivers.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane CENTRAL to July 2016.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials of palliative care interventions in adults with life-limiting illness.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers independently extracted data. Narrative synthesis was conducted for all trials. Quality of life, symptom burden, and survival were analyzed using random-effects meta-analysis, with estimates of QOL translated to units of the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-palliative care scale (FACIT-Pal) instrument (range, 0-184 [worst-best]; minimal clinically important difference [MCID], 9 points); and symptom burden translated to the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) (range, 0-90 [best-worst]; MCID, 5.7 points).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Quality of life, symptom burden, survival, mood, advance care planning, site of death, health care satisfaction, resource utilization, and health care expenditures.

RESULTS

Forty-three RCTs provided data on 12 731 patients (mean age, 67 years) and 2479 caregivers. Thirty-five trials used usual care as the control, and 14 took place in the ambulatory setting. In the meta-analysis, palliative care was associated with statistically and clinically significant improvements in patient QOL at the 1- to 3-month follow-up (standardized mean difference, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.83; FACIT-Pal mean difference, 11.36] and symptom burden at the 1- to 3-month follow-up (standardized mean difference, -0.66; 95% CI, -1.25 to -0.07; ESAS mean difference, -10.30). When analyses were limited to trials at low risk of bias (n = 5), the association between palliative care and QOL was attenuated but remained statistically significant (standardized mean difference, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.34; FACIT-Pal mean difference, 4.94), whereas the association with symptom burden was not statistically significant (standardized mean difference, -0.21; 95% CI, -0.42 to 0.00; ESAS mean difference, -3.28). There was no association between palliative care and survival (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.17). Palliative care was associated consistently with improvements in advance care planning, patient and caregiver satisfaction, and lower health care utilization. Evidence of associations with other outcomes was mixed.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this meta-analysis, palliative care interventions were associated with improvements in patient QOL and symptom burden. Findings for caregiver outcomes were inconsistent. However, many associations were no longer significant when limited to trials at low risk of bias, and there was no significant association between palliative care and survival.