Oncology Medical Home: ASCO and COA Standards.

PURPOSE: To provide Standards on the basis of evidence and expert consensus for a pilot of the Oncology Medical Home (OMH) certification program. The OMH model is a system of care delivery that features coordinated, efficient, accessible, and evidence-based care and includes a process for measurement of outcomes to facilitate continuous quality improvement. The OMH pilot is intended to inform further refinement of Standards for OMH model implementation. METHODS: An Expert Panel was formed, and a systematic review of the literature on the topics of OMH, clinical pathways, and survivorship care plans was performed using PubMed and Google Scholar. Using this evidence base and an informal consensus process, the Expert Panel developed a set of OMH Standards. Public comments were solicited and considered in preparation of the final manuscript. RESULTS: Three comparative peer-reviewed studies of OMH met the inclusion criteria. In addition, the results from 16 studies of clinical pathways and one systematic review of survivorship care plans informed the evidence review. Limitations of the evidence base included the small number of studies of OMH and lack of longer-term outcomes data. More data were available to inform the specific Standards for pathways and survivorship care; however, outcomes were mixed for the latter intervention. The Expert Panel concluded that in the future, practices should be encouraged to publish the results of OMH interventions in peer-reviewed journals to improve the evidence base. STANDARDS: Standards are provided for OMH in the areas of patient engagement, availability and access to care, evidence-based medicine, equitable and comprehensive team-based care, quality improvement, goals of care, palliative and end-of-life care discussions, and chemotherapy safety. Additional information, including a Standards implementation manual, is available at www.asco.org/standards.

Management of a rhegmatogenous retinal detachment in a pregnant patient.

PURPOSE: To describe the management of a rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) in a pregnant patient. OBSERVATIONS: A 30-year-old, 26-week pregnant female presented with curtain vision loss in the left eye. Exam findings were significant in the left eye for an inferior fovea-sparing RRD. Care was coordinated and discussed with anesthesia and OB/GYN. The patient underwent surgery with monitored anesthesia care and a 41 scleral buckle, cryotherapy and C3F8 gas. The retina remained attached at 4 months post-operatively. A healthy girl was delivered via spontaneous vaginal delivery at 39 weeks. CONCLUSION: Safe and successful treatment of RRD in pregnant patients can be achieved with careful coordination between ophthalmology, anesthesia, and obstetrics. An understanding of pregnancy specific considerations is important in order to optimize patient outcomes.

Defining current gaps in quality measures for cancer immunotherapy: consensus report from the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) 2019 Quality Summit.

BACKGROUND: Quality measures are important because they can help improve and standardize the delivery of cancer care among healthcare providers and across tumor types. In an environment characterized by a rapidly shifting immunotherapeutic landscape and lack of associated long-term outcome data, defining quality measures for cancer immunotherapy is a high priority yet fraught with many challenges. METHODS: Thus, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer convened a multistakeholder expert panel to, first, identify the current gaps in measures of quality cancer care delivery as it relates to immunotherapy and to, second, advance priority concepts surrounding quality measures that could be developed and broadly adopted by the field. RESULTS: After reviewing the existing quality measure landscape employed for immunotherapeutic-based cancer care, the expert panel identified four relevant National Quality Strategy domains (patient safety, person and family-centered care, care coordination and communication, appropriate treatment selection) with significant gaps in immunotherapy-based quality cancer care delivery. Furthermore, these domains offer opportunities for the development of quality measures as they relate to cancer immunotherapy. These four quality measure concepts are presented in this consensus statement. CONCLUSIONS: This work represents a first step toward defining and standardizing quality delivery of cancer immunotherapy in order to realize its optimal application and benefit for patients.

Youth Depression Alleviation with Anti-inflammatory Agents (YoDA-A): a randomised clinical trial of rosuvastatin and aspirin.

BACKGROUND: Inflammation contributes to the pathophysiology of major depressive disorder (MDD), and anti-inflammatory strategies might therefore have therapeutic potential. This trial aimed to determine whether adjunctive aspirin or rosuvastatin, compared with placebo, reduced depressive symptoms in young people (15-25 years). METHODS: YoDA-A, Youth Depression Alleviation with Anti-inflammatory Agents, was a 12-week triple-blind, randomised, controlled trial. Participants were young people (aged 15-25 years) with moderate to severe MDD (MADRS mean at baseline 32.5 ± 6.0; N = 130; age 20.2 ± 2.6; 60% female), recruited between June 2013 and June 2017 across six sites in Victoria, Australia. In addition to treatment as usual, participants were randomised to receive aspirin (n = 40), rosuvastatin (n = 48), or placebo (n = 42), with assessments at baseline and weeks 4, 8, 12, and 26. The primary outcome was change in the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) from baseline to week 12. RESULTS: At the a priori primary endpoint of MADRS differential change from baseline at week 12, there was no significant difference between aspirin and placebo (1.9, 95% CI (- 2.8, 6.6), p = 0.433), or rosuvastatin and placebo (- 4.2, 95% CI (- 9.1, 0.6), p = 0.089). For rosuvastatin, secondary outcomes on self-rated depression and global impression, quality of life, functioning, and mania were not significantly different from placebo. Aspirin was inferior to placebo on the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (Q-LES-Q-SF) at week 12. Statins were superior to aspirin on the MADRS, the Clinical Global Impressions Severity Scale (CGI-S), and the Negative Problem Orientation Questionnaire scale (NPOQ) at week 12. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of either aspirin or rosuvastatin did not to confer any beneficial effect over and above routine treatment for depression in young people. Exploratory comparisons of secondary outcomes provide limited support for a potential therapeutic role for adjunctive rosuvastatin, but not for aspirin, in youth depression. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12613000112763. Registered on 30/01/2013.

Sorafenib for relapsed FLT3-ITD-positive acute myeloid leukemia postallogeneic stem cell transplantation presenting as leukemia cutis.

Relapse of FLT3-mutated acute myeloid leukemia (AML) following allogeneic stem cell transplantation is associated with poor survival. The clinical utility of sorafenib monotherapy in this setting is described in a patient presenting as leukemia cutis.

Complementary and alternative medicine use in oncology: a questionnaire survey of patients and health care professionals.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to investigate the prevalence and predictors of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) use among cancer patients and non-cancer volunteers, and to assess the knowledge of and attitudes toward CAM use in oncology among health care professionals. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional questionnaire survey conducted in a single institution in Ireland. Survey was performed in outpatient and inpatient settings involving cancer patients and non-cancer volunteers. Clinicians and allied health care professionals were asked to complete a different questionnaire. RESULTS: In 676 participants including 219 cancer patients; 301 non-cancer volunteers and 156 health care professionals, the overall prevalence of CAM use was 32.5% (29.1%, 30.9% and 39.7% respectively in the three study cohorts). Female gender (p < 0.001), younger age (p = 0.004), higher educational background (p < 0.001), higher annual household income (p = 0.001), private health insurance (p = 0.001) and non-Christian (p < 0.001) were factors associated with more likely CAM use. Multivariate analysis identified female gender (p < 0.001), non-Christian (p = 0.001) and private health insurance (p = 0.015) as independent predictors of CAM use. Most health care professionals thought they did not have adequate knowledge (58.8%) nor were up to date with the best evidence (79.2%) on CAM use in oncology. Health care professionals who used CAM were more likely to recommend it to patients (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates a similarly high prevalence of CAM use among oncology health care professionals, cancer and non cancer patients. Patients are more likely to disclose CAM usage if they are specifically asked. Health care professionals are interested to learn more about various CAM therapies and have poor evidence-based knowledge on specific oncology treatments. There is a need for further training to meet to the escalation of CAM use among patients and to raise awareness of potential benefits and risks associated with these therapies.