Health-Related Quality of Life and Depression Symptoms in a Cross Section of Patients with Advanced Lung Cancer before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background: Adults with advanced lung cancer experience reduced health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and psychological symptoms at diagnosis. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate whether the COVID-19 pandemic worsened HRQOL among patients recently diagnosed with cancer. Design: We analyzed baseline data from two randomized controlled trials of early palliative care to compare HRQOL and depression symptoms among those enrolled during the pandemic (January 2020 to January 2021) versus prepandemic (March 2018 to January 2019). Setting/Subjects: This cohort included patients recently diagnosed with advanced lung cancer in two multisite studies. Measurements: We used analysis of covariance to calculate adjusted mean differences between groups with the timeframe as an independent variable and HRQOL (using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General) and depression symptoms (using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9) as dependent variables, adjusting for age, gender, relationship status, performance status, symptoms, and time since diagnosis. We tested for an interaction between the COVID-19 timeframe and relationship status. Results: Neither HRQOL (adjusted mean difference -1.78; p = 0.137) nor depression symptoms (0.06; p = 0.889) differed between patients enrolled pre-COVID-19 (n = 665) relative to those enrolled during COVID-19 (n = 191) in adjusted analyses. Relationship status moderated the effect of the COVID-19 timeframe on HRQOL; unmarried patients experienced worse HRQOL during COVID-19 (adjusted mean difference: -5.25; p = 0.011). Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic did not further reduce HRQOL or increase depression symptoms among patients recently diagnosed with lung cancer, but did worsen HRQOL for unmarried patients in moderation analysis. Psychosocial evaluation and supportive care are important for all patients, particularly those with limited social support. Clinical trial registration numbers: NCT03337399 and NCT03375489.

Enasidenib as maintenance following allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for IDH2-mutated myeloid malignancies.

IDH2 (isocitrate dehydrogenase 2) mutations occur in approximately 15% of patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). The IDH2 inhibitor enasidenib was recently approved for IDH2-mutated relapsed or refractory AML. We conducted a multi-center, phase I trial of maintenance enasidenib following allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) in patients with IDH2-mutated myeloid malignancies. Two dose levels, 50mg and 100mg daily were studied in a 3 × 3 dose-escalation design, with 10 additional patients treated at the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). Enasidenib was initiated between days 30 and 90 following HCT and continued for twelve 28-day cycles. Twenty-three patients were enrolled, of whom 19 initiated post-HCT maintenance. Two had myelodysplastic syndrome, and 17 had AML. All but 3 were in first complete remission. No dose limiting toxicities were observed, and the RP2D was established at 100mg daily. Attributable grade ≥3 toxicities were rare, with the most common being cytopenias. Eight patients stopped maintenance before completing 12 cycles, due to adverse events (n=3), pursuing treatment for graft-vs-host disease (GVHD) (n=2), clinician choice (n=1), relapse (n=1), and COVID infection (n=1). No cases of grade ≥3 acute GVHD were seen, and 12-month cumulative incidence of moderate/severe chronic GVHD was 42% (20-63%). Cumulative incidence of relapse was 16% (95% CI: 3.7-36%); 1 subject relapsed while receiving maintenance. Two-year progression-free and overall survival were 69% (95% CI: 39-86%) and 74% (95% CI, 44-90%), respectively. Enasidenib is safe, well-tolerated, with preliminary activity as maintenance therapy following HCT, and merits additional study. The study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (#NCT03515512).

Video and In-Person Palliative Care Delivery Challenges before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

CONTEXT: Palliative care (PC) clinicians faced many challenges delivering outpatient care during the coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) pandemic. OBJECTIVES: We described trends for in-person and video visit PC delivery challenges before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in the U.S. METHODS: We performed a secondary data analysis of patient characteristics and PC clinician surveys from a multisite randomized controlled trial at 20 academic cancer centers. Patients newly diagnosed with advanced lung cancer (N = 653) were randomly assigned to receive either early in-person or telehealth PC and had at least monthly PC clinician visits. PC clinicians completed surveys documenting PC delivery challenges after each encounter. We categorized patients into 3 subgroups according to their PC visit dates relative to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in the U.S.-pre-COVID-19 (all visits before March 1, 2020), pre/post-COVID-19 (≥1 visit before and after March 1, 2020), and post-COVID-19 (all visits after March 1, 2020). We performed Pearson's chi-squared, Fisher's exact, and Kruskal-Wallis tests to examine associations. RESULTS: We analyzed 2329 surveys for video visits and 2176 surveys for in-person visits. For video visits, the pre-COVID-19 subgroup (25.8% [46/178]) had the most technical difficulties followed by the pre/post-COVID-19 subgroup (17.2% [307/1784]) and then the post-COVID-19 subgroup (11.4% [42/367]) (P = 0.0001). For in-person visits, challenges related to absent patients' family members occurred most often in the post-COVID-19 subgroup (6.2% [16/259]) followed by the pre/post-COVID-19 subgroup (3.6% [50/1374]) and then the pre-COVID-19 subgroup (2.2% [12/543]) (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Technical difficulties related to PC video visits improved, whereas in-person visit challenges related to absent patients' family members worsened during the pandemic.

Investigating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on breast cancer clinicians' communication about sexual health.

PURPOSE: We assessed breast cancer clinicians' perspectives on how the COVID-19 pandemic and increased use of telehealth affected their clinical communication about sexual heath. METHODS: Breast cancer clinicians participating in a sexual health communication intervention study (N = 29; 76% female; 66% oncologists; 34% advanced practice clinicians) completed an online survey. Data analysis consisted of descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. RESULTS: All clinicians were using telehealth, with most (66%) using it for up to half of their clinic appointments. Although only 14% of clinicians reported having shorter clinic visits, 28% reported having less time to discuss sexual health; 69% reported no change; and 3% said they had more time. Forty-one percent reported sexual health was less of a priority; 55% reported no change; and 3% said it was more of a priority. Thirty-five percent reported telehealth was less conducive to discussing sexual health; 59% reported no change; and 7% reported more conducive. Qualitative analysis revealed key issues underlying the perceived impact of the pandemic on discussions of sexual health including heightened clinician discomfort discussing such issues via telehealth, the less personal nature and privacy issues in telehealth visits, increased concerns about risk of COVID-19 infection and other health concerns (e.g., missing recurrence, mental health) taking priority, and clinician-perceived patient factors (e.g., discomfort, decreased priority) in discussing sexual concerns. CONCLUSION: Pandemic-related changes in breast cancer clinicians' practice could be exacerbating challenges to discussing sexual health. Methods for integrating sexual health into cancer care are needed, regardless of the mode of delivery.

Association of an Advance Care Planning Video and Communication Intervention With Documentation of Advance Care Planning Among Older Adults: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.

Importance: COVID-19 has disproportionately killed older adults and racial and ethnic minority individuals, raising questions about the relevance of advance care planning (ACP) in this population. Video decision aids and communication skills training offer scalable delivery models. Objective: To assess whether ACP video decision aids and a clinician communication intervention improved the rate of ACP documentation during an evolving pandemic, with a focus on African American and Hispanic patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Advance Care Planning: Communicating With Outpatients for Vital Informed Decisions trial was a pre-post, open-cohort nonrandomized controlled trial that compared ACP documentation across the baseline pre-COVID-19 period (September 15, 2019, to March 14, 2020), the COVID-19 wave 1 period (March 15, 2020, to September 14, 2020), and an intervention period (December 15, 2020, to June 14, 2021) at a New York metropolitan area ambulatory network of 22 clinics. All patients 65 years or older who had at least 1 clinic or telehealth visit during any of the 3 study periods were included. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was ACP documentation. Results: A total of 14 107 patients (mean [SD] age, 81.0 [8.4] years; 8856 [62.8%] female; and 2248 [15.9%] African American or Hispanic) interacted with clinicians during the pre-COVID-19 period; 12 806 (mean [SD] age, 81.2 [8.5] years; 8047 [62.8%] female; and 1992 [15.6%] African American or Hispanic), during wave 1; and 15 106 (mean [SD] 80.9 [8.3] years; 9543 [63.2%] female; and 2535 [16.8%] African American or Hispanic), during the intervention period. Clinicians documented ACP in 3587 patients (23.8%) during the intervention period compared with 2525 (17.9%) during the pre-COVID-19 period (rate difference [RD], 5.8%; 95% CI, 0.9%-7.9%; P = .01) and 1598 (12.5%) during wave 1 (RD, 11.3%; 95% CI, 6.3%-12.1%; P < .001). Advance care planning was documented in 447 African American patients (30.0%) during the intervention period compared with 233 (18.1%) during the pre-COVID-19 period (RD, 11.9%; 95% CI, 4.1%-15.9%; P < .001) and 130 (11.0%) during wave 1 (RD, 19.1%; 95% CI, 11.7%-21.2%; P < .001). Advance care planning was documented for 222 Hispanic patients (21.2%) during the intervention period compared with 127 (13.2%) during the pre-COVID-19 period (RD, 8.0%; 95% CI, 2.1%-10.9%; P = .004) and 82 (10.2%) during wave 1 (RD, 11.1%; 95% CI, 5.5%-14.5%; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: This intervention, implemented during the evolving COVID-19 pandemic, was associated with higher rates of ACP documentation, especially for African American and Hispanic patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04660422.

Distress in a Pandemic: Association of the Coronavirus Disease-2019 Pandemic with Distress and Quality of Life in Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation.

The global coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has drastically disrupted cancer care, potentially exacerbating patients' distress levels. Patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) may be especially vulnerable to this pandemic stress. However, the associations of the COVID-19 pandemic with distress, fatigue, and quality of life (QoL) are not well understood in this population. In a cross-sectional analysis of data from 205 patients undergoing HSCT enrolled in a supportive care trial, we compared baseline pre-HSCT distress symptoms (depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress disorder [PTSD]), fatigue, and QoL between enrollees before (ie, March 2019-January 2020) and during (ie, March 2020-January 2021) the COVID-19 pandemic. We used linear regression models adjusting for sociodemographics and cancer diagnosis to examine the associations between enrollment period and patient-reported outcomes. We used semistructured qualitative interviews in 20 allogeneic HSCT recipients who were ≥3-months post-HSCT to understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their recovery post-HSCT. One hundred twenty-four participants enrolled before COVID-19, and 81 participants enrolled during the pandemic. The 2 cohorts had similar baseline demographics and disease risk factors. In multivariate regression models, enrollment during COVID-19 was not associated with pre-HSCT symptoms of depression, anxiety, PTSD, fatigue, or QoL impairment. COVID-19-era participants reported themes of negative (eg, increased isolation) and positive (eg, engagement with meaningful activities) implications of the pandemic on HSCT recovery. We found no differences in pre-HSCT distress, fatigue, or QoL in patients undergoing HSCT before or during the COVID-19 pandemic; however, patients in early recovery post-HSCT report both negative and positive implications of the COVID-19 pandemic in their lives.

Clinical Outcomes of Patients Hospitalized with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Boston.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 have been described in health systems overwhelmed with a surge of cases. However, studies examining outcomes of patients admitted to hospitals not in crisis are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To describe clinical characteristic and outcomes of all patients with COVID-19 who are admitted to hospitals not in crisis, and factors associated with mortality in this population. DESIGN: A retrospective analysis PARTICIPANTS: In total, 470 consecutive patients with COVID-19 requiring hospitalization in one health system in Boston from January 1, 2020 to April 15, 2020. MAIN MEASURES: We collected clinical outcomes during hospitalization including intensive care unit (ICU) admission, receipt of mechanical ventilation, and vasopressors. We utilized multivariable logistic regression models to examine factors associated with mortality. KEY RESULTS: A total of 470 patients (median age 66 [range 23-98], 54.0% male) were included. The most common comorbidities were diabetes (38.5%, 181/470) and obesity (41.3%, 194/470). On admission, 41.9% (197/470) of patients were febrile and 60.6% (285/470) required supplemental oxygen. During hospitalization, 37.9% (178/470) were admitted to the ICU, 33.6% (158/470) received mechanical ventilation, 29.4% (138/470) received vasopressors, 16.4% (77/470) reported limitations on their desire for life-sustaining therapies such as intubation and cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and 25.1% (118/470) died. Among those admitted to the ICU (N=178), the median number of days on the ventilator was 10 days (IQR 1-29), and 58.4% (104/178) were discharged alive. Older age (OR=1.04, P<0.001), male sex (OR=2.14, P=0.007), higher comorbidities (OR=1.20, P=0.001), higher lactate dehydrogenase on admission (2nd tertile: OR=4.07, P<0.001; 3rd tertile: OR=8.04, P<0.001), and the need for supplemental oxygen on admission (OR=2.17, P=0.014) were all associated with higher mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and those who received mechanical ventilation survived. These data highlight the need to examine public health and system factors that contribute to improved outcomes for this population.

Advance Care Planning: Promoting Effective and Aligned Communication in the Elderly (ACP-PEACE): the study protocol for a pragmatic stepped-wedge trial of older patients with cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Advance care planning (ACP) is associated with improved health outcomes for patients with cancer, and its absence is associated with unfavourable outcomes for patients and their caregivers. However, older adults do not complete ACP at expected rates due to patient and clinician barriers. We present the original design, methods and rationale for a trial aimed at improving ACP for older patients with advanced cancer and the modified protocol in response to changes brought by the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Advance Care Planning: Promoting Effective and Aligned Communication in the Elderly study is a pragmatic, stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial examining a Comprehensive ACP Program. The programme combines two complementary evidence-based interventions: clinician communication skills training (VitalTalk) and patient video decision aids (ACP Decisions). We will implement the programme at 36 oncology clinics across three unique US health systems. Our primary outcome is the proportion of eligible patients with ACP documentation completed in the electronic health record. Our secondary outcomes include resuscitation preferences, palliative care consultations, death, hospice use and final cancer-directed therapy. From a subset of our patient population, we will collect surveys and video-based declarations of goals and preferences. We estimate 11 000 patients from the three sites will be enrolled in the study. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Regulatory and ethical aspects of this trial include Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval via single IRB of record mechanism at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Data Use Agreements among partners and a Data Safety and Monitoring Board. We plan to present findings at national meetings and publish the results. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03609177; Pre-results.