Assessment of Patient Satisfaction Among Cancer Patients Undergoing Radiotherapy.

The patient-provider relationship is a key driver of patient satisfaction as it relates to overall healthcare experience. We surveyed patients undergoing radiation therapy to determine what they consider to be the most valued qualities in their interactions with the healthcare team. An ethics-approved 35-item patient satisfaction survey was developed in-house to gain insights on patients' perception of their relationship with the healthcare team throughout their cancer journey. There were 199 completed survey, median age 68 years, 54% women and 45% men. Almost all (95%) "agreed" or "strongly agreed" that their physicians had been sensitive and compassionate. Over 90% felt that they received adequate explanations about their treatment, and had their questions answered. The vast majority (93%) felt included in the decision-making process. Patients reported the 5 most highly rated qualities among their healthcare providers (HCPs) as knowledge, kindness, honesty, good communication, and a cheerful attitude. Overall satisfaction was high but areas for improvement were identified including being offered future appointments for further discussion, more information about clinical trials, other treatments, and community resources. Patients noted their HCPs tended to focus on the physical and emotional needs of patients, but spiritual and cultural needs were rarely addressed. Patients receiving radiotherapy reported high rates of satisfaction across many aspects of their care. These findings also reinforce the different aspects of holistic care that can be improved, and serve as a reminder to clinicians that patients perceive their role as more than just that of a medical expert.

The most important attribute: stakeholder perspectives on what matters most in a physician.

Background: Most people can think of important attributes that they believe physicians should have. The canmeds framework defines domains of attributes in medical training (Leader, Medical Expert, Scholar, Communicator, Advocate, Collaborator, and Professional). Whether some are more valued by various stakeholders is unknown. Previous research has shown that patients can receive suboptimal care if physician and patient expectations of a health care encounter differ. In the present study, we sought to identify what various stakeholders identified as the single most important attribute for a physician to possess. Methods: A simple survey asked the question "What is the single most important attribute a physician should have?" at a single academic teaching hospital and affiliated medical school. The survey was administered to medical students, doctors, nurses, patients, and caregivers. Age and sex were also collected. Responses were assigned to domains and analyzed to identify trends. The primary outcome is a descriptive analysis of the findings. Results: From 362 individuals who responded, 109 different responses were obtained. The single most common answer was "compassion" (n = 86). Responses were categorized into these 5 domains: Caring, n = 209; Professional or Collaborator, n = 58; Medical Expert, n = 54; Communicator, n = 32; and Other, n = 9. Compared with men, women chose attributes in the Caring domain more frequently (64% vs. 49%), although that domain was the most popular for both sexes. Medical students were less likely to highly value Communicator attributes. Conclusions: All stakeholder group identified attributes in the Caring domain as being most important. Although all canmeds roles are important, our research highlights the priorities of stakeholders.

Analyzing the effect of physician assignment in the survival of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

Background: Non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc) is the most common cause of cancer deaths worldwide, with a 5-year survival of 17%. The low survival rate observed in patients with nsclc is primarily attributable to advanced stage of disease at diagnosis, with more than 50% of cases being stage iv at presentation. For patients with advanced disease, palliative systemic therapy can improve overall survival (os); however, a recent review at our institution of more than 500 consecutive cases of advanced nsclc demonstrated that only 55% of the patients received palliative systemic therapy. What is unknown to date is whether that observed low rate of systemic therapy in our previous study is uniform across oncologists. Methods: With ethics approval, we performed a retrospective analysis of newly diagnosed patients with stage iv nsclc seen as outpatients at our institution between 2009 and 2012 by 4 different oncologists. Demographics, treatment, and survival data were collected and compared for the 4 oncologists. Results: The 4 oncologists saw 528 patients overall, with D seeing 115; L, 158; R, 137; and M, 118. Significant variation was observed in the proportion receiving 1 line or more of chemotherapy: D, 60%; L, 65%; R, 43%; and M, 52%. Physician assignment was not associated with a difference in median os, with D's cohort having a median os of 6.8 months; L, 8.4 months; R, 7.0 months; and M, 7.0 months. Conclusions: Practice size and proportion of patients treated varied between oncologists, but those differences did not translate into significantly different survival outcomes for patients.

A Canadian cancer trials group phase IB study of durvalumab (anti-PD-L1) plus tremelimumab (anti-CTLA-4) given concurrently or sequentially in patients with advanced, incurable solid malignancies.

Background The IND.226 study was a phase Ib study to determine the recommended phase II dose of durvalumab + tremelimumab in combination with standard platinum-doublet chemotherapy. Sequential administration of multiple agents increases total chair time adding costs overall and inconvenience for patients. This cohort of the IND.226 study evaluated the safety and tolerability of durvalumab + tremelimumab given either sequentially (SEQ) or concurrently (CON). Methods Patients with advanced solid tumours were enrolled and randomised to either SEQ tremelimumab 75 mg IV over 1 h followed by durvalumab 1500 mg IV over 1 h q4wks on the same day, or CON administration over 1 h. The serum pharmacokinetic profile of SEQ versus CON of durvalumab and tremelimumab administration was also evaluated. Results 14 patients either received SEQ (n = 7pts) or CON (n = 7 pts). There were no infusion related reactions. Drug related adverse events (AEs) were mainly low grade and manageable, and comparable in frequency between SEQ/CON- fatigue (43%/57%), rash (43%/43%), pruritus (43%/29%) and nausea (14%/29%). One patient in each cohort discontinued treatment due to toxicity. The PK profiles of durvalumab and tremelimumab were similar between CON and SEQ, and to historical reference data. Conclusions Concurrent administration of durvalumab and tremelimumab over 1 h is safe with a comparable PK profile to sequential administration.

Are clinical trial eligibility criteria an accurate reflection of a real-world population of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients?

Background: Advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc) represents a major health issue globally. Systemic treatment decisions are informed by clinical trials, which, over years, have improved the survival of patients with advanced nsclc. The applicability of clinical trial results to the broad lung cancer population is unclear because strict eligibility criteria in trials generally select for optimal patients. Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review of all consecutive patients with advanced nsclc seen in outpatient consultation at our academic institution between September 2009 and September 2012, collecting data about patient demographics and cancer characteristics, treatment, and survival from hospital and pharmacy records. Two sets of arbitrary trial eligibility criteria were applied to the cohort. Scenario A stipulated Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ecog ps) 0-1, no brain metastasis, creatinine less than 120 µmol/L, and no second malignancy. Less-strict scenario B stipulated ecog ps 0-2 and creatinine less than 120 µmol/L. We then used the two scenarios to analyze treatment and survival of patients by trial eligibility status. Results: The 528 included patients had a median age of 67 years, with 55% being men and 58% having adenocarcinoma. Of those 528 patients, 291 received at least 1 line of palliative systemic therapy. Using the scenario A eligibility criteria, 73% were trial-ineligible. However, 46% of "ineligible" patients actually received therapy and experienced survival similar to that of the "eligible" treated patients (10.2 months vs. 11.6 months, p = 0.10). Using the scenario B criteria, only 35% were ineligible, but again, the survival of treated patients was similar in the ineligible and eligible groups (10.1 months vs. 10.9 months, p = 0.57). Conclusions: Current trial eligibility criteria are often strict and limit the enrolment of patients in clinical trials. Our results suggest that, depending on the chosen drug, its toxicities and tolerability, eligibility criteria could be carefully reviewed and relaxed.

Regional process redesign of lung cancer care: a learning health system pilot project.

BACKGROUND: The Ottawa Hospital (toh) defined delay to timely lung cancer care as a system design problem. Recognizing the patient need for an integrated journey and the need for dynamic alignment of providers, toh used a learning health system (lhs) vision to redesign regional diagnostic processes. A lhs is driven by feedback utilizing operational and clinical information to drive system optimization and innovation. An essential component of a lhs is a collaborative platform that provides connectivity across silos, organizations, and professions. METHODS: To operationalize a lhs, we developed the Ottawa Health Transformation Model (ohtm) as a consensus approach that addresses process barriers, resistance to change, and conflicting priorities. A regional Community of Practice (cop) was established to engage stakeholders, and a dedicated transformation team supported process improvements and implementation. RESULTS: The project operationalized the lung cancer diagnostic pathway and optimized patient flow from referral to initiation of treatment. Twelve major processes in referral, review, diagnostics, assessment, triage, and consult were redesigned. The Ottawa Hospital now provides a diagnosis to 80% of referrals within the provincial target of 28 days. The median patient journey from referral to initial treatment decreased by 48% from 92 to 47 days. CONCLUSIONS: The initiative optimized regional integration from referral to initial treatment. Use of a lhs lens enabled the creation of a system that is standardized to best practice and open to ongoing innovation. Continued transformation initiatives across the continuum of care are needed to incorporate best practice and optimize delivery systems for regional populations.

Standardizing biomarker testing for Canadian patients with advanced lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: The development and approval of both targeted and immune therapies for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (nsclc) has significantly improved patient survival rates and quality of life. Biomarker testing for patients newly diagnosed with nsclc, as well as for patients progressing after treatment with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors, is the standard of care in Canada and many parts of the world. METHODS: A group of thoracic oncology experts in the field of thoracic oncology met to describe the standard for biomarker testing for lung cancer in the Canadian context, focusing on evidence-based recommendations for standard-of-care testing for EGFR, anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK), ROS1, BRAF V600 and programmed death-ligand (PD-L1) at the time of diagnosis of advanced disease and EGFR T790M upon progression. As well, additional exploratory molecules and targets are likely to impact future patient care, including MET exon 14 skipping mutations and whole gene amplification, RET translocations, HER2 (ERBB2) mutations, NTRK, RAS (KRAS and NRAS), as well as TP53. RESULTS: The standard of care must include the incorporation of testing for novel biomarkers as they become available, as it will be difficult for national guidelines to keep pace with technological advances in this area. CONCLUSIONS: Canadian patients with nsclc should be treated equally; the minimum standard of care is defined in this paper.

Significance of baseline and change in quality of life scores in predicting clinical outcomes in an international phase III trial of advanced pancreatic cancer: NCIC CTG PA.3.

BACKGROUND: There is insufficient information regarding the prognostic significance of baseline and change in quality of life (QoL) scores on overall survival (OS) in advanced pancreatic cancer. METHODS: QoL was assessed prospectively using the EORTC QLQ-C30 as part of the PA.3 trial of gemcitabine + erlotinib (G + E) vs. gemcitabine + placebo (G + P). Relevant variables and QoL scores at baseline and change at 8 weeks were analyzed by Cox stepwise regression to determine predictors of OS. RESULTS: 222 of 285 patients (pts) treated with G + E and 220 of 284 pts treated with G + P completed baseline QoL assessments. In a multivariable Cox analysis combining all pts, better QoL physical functioning (PF) score independently predicted longer OS (HR 0.86; CI: 0.80-0.93), as did non-white race (HR 0.64; CI: 0.44-0.95), PS 0-1 (HR 0.65; CI: 0.50-0.85), locally advanced disease (HR 0.55; CI: 0.43-0.71) and G + E (HR 0.78; CI: 0.64-0.96). Improvement in physical function at week 8 also predicted for improved survival (HR 0.89; CI: 0.81-0.97 for 10 point increase in score, p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: In addition to clinical variables, patient reported QoL scores at baseline and change from baseline to week 8 added incremental predictive information regarding survival for advanced pancreatic cancer patients.

Palliative chemotherapy in advanced colorectal cancer patients 80 years of age and older.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (crc) has a median diagnostic age of 68 years. Despite significant progress in chemotherapy (ctx) options, few data on outcomes or toxicity from ctx in patients 80 years of age and older are available. We investigated ctx in such patients with metastatic crc (mcrc), hypothesizing high rates of hospitalization and toxicity. METHODS: A retrospective chart review identified patients 80 years of age and older with mcrc who initiated ctx between 2005-2010 at our institution. Patient demographics and ctx data were collected. Endpoints included rates of hospitalization, ctx discontinuation because of toxicity, and overall survival. RESULTS: In 60 patients, ctx was initiated on 88 occasions. Median age in the cohort was 83 years; 52% were men; 72% lived with family; 53% had a modified Charlson comorbidity index of 2 or greater; and 31% were taking 6 or more prescription medications at baseline. At baseline, 33% of the patients were anemic (hemoglobin < 100 g/L), 36% had leukocytosis (white blood cells > 11×10(9)/L), and 48% had renal impairment (estimated glomerular filtration rate < 60 mL/min/1.73 m(2)). In 53%, ctx was given as first-line treatment. The initial ctx dose was adjusted in 67%, and capecitabine was the most common chemotherapeutic agent (45%). In 19 instances (22%), the patient was hospitalized during or within 30 days of ctx; in 26 instances (30%), the ctx was discontinued because of toxicity, and in 48 instances (55%), the patient required at least 1 dose reduction, omission, or delay. Median overall survival was 17.8 months (95% confidence interval: 14.3 to 20.8 months). CONCLUSIONS: In the population 80 years of age and older, ctx for mcrc is feasible; however, most recipients will require dose adjustments, and a significant proportion will be hospitalized or stop ctx because of toxicity. Prospective research incorporating geriatric assessment tools is required to better select these older patients for ctx.

Chemotherapy in recurrent advanced non-small-cell lung cancer after adjuvant chemotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: Despite adjuvant systemic therapy in patients with completely resected non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc), many will subsequently relapse. We investigated treatment choices at relapse and assessed the effect of palliative platinum doublet systemic therapy in this population. METHODS: With research ethics board approval, we performed a retrospective chart review of all patients with resected nsclc who received adjuvant systemic therapy from January 2002 until December 2008 at our institution. The primary outcome was the response rate to first-line palliative systemic therapy among patients who relapsed. RESULTS: We identified 176 patients who received adjuvant platinum doublet systemic therapy (82% received cisplatin-vinorelbine). In the 85 patients who relapsed (48%), median time to relapse was 18.5 months (95% confidence interval: 15 months to 21.3 months). Palliative systemic therapy was given in 43 patients. Of those 43 patients, 25 (58%) were re-challenged with platinum doublet systemic therapy, with a response rate of 29% compared with 18% in 18 patients who received other systemic therapy (p = 0.48). We observed a trend toward an increased clinical benefit rate (complete response + partial response + stable disease) in patients who were treated with a platinum doublet (67% vs. 41%, p = 0.12). Median overall survival (os) from relapse was 15.3 months in patients receiving palliative systemic therapy and 7.8 months in those receiving best supportive care alone. Compared with patients treated with non-platinum regimens, the platinum-treated group experienced longer survival after relapse (18.4 months vs. 9.7 months, p = 0.041). CONCLUSIONS: In patients previously treated with adjuvant systemic therapy, re-treatment with platinum doublet chemotherapy upon relapse is feasible. Moreover, compared with patients receiving other first-line systemic therapy, patients receiving platinum doublets experienced higher response rates and significantly longer survival.

Treatment patterns and survival in patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: a Canadian retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Crizotinib was the first agent approved for the treatment of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive (+) non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc), followed by ceritinib. However, patients eventually progress or develop resistance to crizotinib. With limited real-world data available, the objective of the present work was to evaluate treatment patterns and survival after crizotinib in patients with locally advanced or metastatic ALK+ nsclc in Canada. METHODS: In this retrospective study at 6 oncology centres across Canada, medical records of patients with locally advanced or metastatic ALK+ nsclc were reviewed. Demographic and clinical characteristics, treatments, and outcomes data were abstracted. Analyses focused on patients who discontinued crizotinib treatment. RESULTS: Of the 97 patients included, 9 were crizotinib-naïve, and 39 were still receiving crizotinib at study end. The 49 patients who discontinued crizotinib treatment were included in the analysis. Of those 49 patients, 43% received ceritinib at any time, 20% subsequently received systemic chemotherapy only (but never ceritinib), and 37% received no further treatment or died before receiving additional treatment. Median overall survival from crizotinib discontinuation was shorter in patients who did not receive ceritinib than in those who received ceritinib (1.7 months vs. 20.4 months, p < 0.001). In a multivariable analysis, factors associated with poorer survival included lack of additional therapies (particularly ceritinib), male sex, and younger age, but not smoking status; patients of Asian ethnicity showed a nonsignificant trend toward improved survival. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of patients with ALK+ nsclc received no further treatment or died before receiving additional treatment after crizotinib. Treatment with systemic agents was associated with improved survival, with ceritinib use being associated with the longest survival.

The role of palliative chemotherapy in hospitalized patients.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalized patients with advanced cancer often have a poor performance status, which is considered a relative contraindication to cytotoxic chemotherapy. We investigated outcomes in hospitalized solid tumour oncology patients who received palliative chemotherapy (pct). METHODS: With ethics approval, we performed a single-institution chart review of all patients hospitalized on our oncology unit who received pct between April 2008 and January 2010. Patient demographics, reasons for admission, cancer type, prior therapy, and administered chemotherapy were recorded. The primary endpoint was median survival from date of inpatient chemotherapy until death or last known follow up. We also investigated place of discharge and whether patients received additional therapy. RESULTS: During the study period, 199 inpatients received pct. Median age was 61 years; 59% of the patients were women. Most had been admitted with dyspnea (31%) or pain (29%) as the dominant symptom. Common cancers represented were breast (23%), small-cell lung cancer (sclc, 22%), non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc, 16%), and colorectal cancer (9%). Most patients (67%) were receiving first-line chemotherapy. Median overall survival duration was 4.5 months, and the 6-month survival rate was 41%. The longest and shortest survivals were seen in the sclc and nsclc groups (7.3 and 2.5 months respectively). Factors significantly associated with shorter survival were baseline hypoalbuminemia and therapy beyond the first line. In this cohort, 77% of patients were discharged home, and 72% received further chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a short median survival, many patients are well enough to be discharged home and to receive further chemotherapy. The development of risk models to predict a higher chance of efficacy will have practical clinical utility.

Prospective validation of risk prediction indexes for acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.

BACKGROUND: Despite the use of standardized anti-emetic guidelines, up to 20% of cancer patients suffer from moderate-to-severe chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (cinv)-that is, grade 2 or greater according to the U.S. National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0. We previously developed cycle-based prediction models and associated scoring systems for acute and delayed cinv. As part of the validation process, we prospectively evaluated the ability of the scoring systems to accurately identify patients deemed to be high risk for grade 2 or greater cinv. METHODS: Patients who were receiving any chemotherapy for solid tumours and who consented to participate were provided with symptom diaries. Compliance to the diaries was enhanced by 24-hour and 5-day telephone callbacks after chemotherapy in every cycle. All patients received anti-emetic prophylaxis as prescribed by the treating physician. Before each cycle of chemotherapy, the acute and delayed cinv scoring systems were used to stratify patients into low- and high-risk groups. Logistic regression modelling was then applied to compare the risk for grade 2 or greater cinv between patients considered to be at high and at low risk. The external validity of each system was also assessed using an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (auroc) analysis. RESULTS: We collected cinv outcomes data from 95 patients during 181 cycles of chemotherapy. The incidence of grade 2 or greater acute and delayed cinv was 17.7% and 18.2% respectively. As previously identified, major predictors for grade 2 or greater cinv included younger patient age, platinum- or anthracycline-based chemotherapy, low alcohol consumption, earlier cycles of chemotherapy, previous history of morning sickness, and prior emetic episodes after chemotherapy. The acute and delayed scoring systems both had good predictive accuracy when applied to the external validation sample (acute-auroc: 0.69; 95% confidence interval: 0.59 to 0.79; delayed-auroc: 0.70; 95% confidence interval: 0.60 to 0.80). Patients identified by the scoring systems to be at high risk were 2.8 (p = 0.025) and 3.1 (p = 0.001) times more likely to develop grade 2 or greater acute and delayed cinv. CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrates that our scoring systems are able to accurately identify patients at high risk for acute and delayed cinv. Application and planned continued refinement of the scoring systems will be an important means of patient-specific risk assessment that will allow for optimization of anti-emetic therapy.

The influence of sex and histology on outcomes in non-small-cell lung cancer: a pooled analysis of five randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Some non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) surgical series have indicated that the positive prognostic effect of female sex is limited to patients with adenocarcinoma. We carried out a retrospective analysis to investigate the role of sex and histology on efficacy, toxicity, and dose delivery after chemotherapy. PATIENT AND METHODS: Individual patient data were pooled from five randomized, phase III, advanced NSCLC chemotherapy trials. Primary outcomes were response rate, overall survival (OS), toxicity, and dose delivery. A secondary analysis examined survival by sex in histological subgroups. RESULTS: Of 2349 patients, 34% were women. Women had a higher response rate to chemotherapy (42% versus 40%, P = 0.01) and longer survival than men (median OS 9.6 versus 8.6 months, P = 0.002). The difference in OS remained after adjusting for age, stage, performance status, and histology (hazard ratio 0.83, 95% confidence interval 0.74-0.92, P = 0.0005). Upon further examination, longer survival in women was only seen in patients with adenocarcinoma (test for interaction P = 0.006). There were no differences in hematological toxicity or transfusions. Women experienced more grade 3-4 emesis than men (P < 0.0001) and more dose delays (P = 0.02) or dose reductions (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The positive prognostic effect among women is confirmed in patients receiving platinum-based chemotherapy but appears confined to those with adenocarcinoma histology.

The strength of female sex as a prognostic factor in small-cell lung cancer: a pooled analysis of chemotherapy trials from the Manchester Lung Group and Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies reported that women survive longer than men, but experience greater toxicity, when treated for small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). METHODS: Individual patient data from six randomized phase II/III chemotherapy trials, from the Manchester Lung Group and UK Medical Research Council, were pooled for analysis. End points included overall survival, response rate, toxicity, dose intensity (DI) and transfusion rates. RESULTS: Of 1707 patients analyzed, 44% were women. At baseline, women had poorer performance status (PS) (57% versus 67% Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group PS 0-1/Karnofsky PS 80-100, P = 0.0004) and more were of normal weight or underweight (57% versus 48%, P = 0.003), but fewer were anemic (25% versus 62%, P < 0.0001). Response rates between women and men were similar (77% versus 76%, P = 0.64). In univariate [hazard ratio (HR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-0.96, P = 0.006] and multivariate (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79-0.99, P = 0.04) analyses, female sex predicted for longer survival. Women experienced more grade 3/4 emesis (18% versus 9%, P < 0.0001) and grade 3/4 mucositis (13% versus 8%, P = 0.005) than men. There were no differences in DI, infections, transfusions or treatment-related deaths. CONCLUSION: Data from >1700 patients in randomized SCLC chemotherapy trials confirm that women survive modestly longer than men but may experience greater toxicity.