Haematology nurses' perspectives of their patients' places of care and death: A UK qualitative interview study.

PURPOSE: Patients with haematological malignancies are more likely to die in hospital, and less likely to access palliative care than people with other cancers, though the reasons for this are not well understood. The purpose of our study was to explore haematology nurses' perspectives of their patients' places of care and death. METHOD: Qualitative description, based on thematic content analysis. Eight haematology nurses working in secondary and tertiary hospital settings were purposively selected and interviewed. Transcriptions were coded and analysed for themes using a mainly inductive, cross-comparative approach. RESULTS: Five inter-related factors were identified as contributing to the likelihood of patients' receiving end of life care/dying in hospital: the complex nature of haematological diseases and their treatment; close clinician-patient bonds; delays to end of life discussions; lack of integration between haematology and palliative care services; and barriers to death at home. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital death is often determined by the characteristics of the cancer and type of treatment. Prognostication is complex across subtypes and hospital death perceived as unavoidable, and sometimes the preferred option. Earlier, frank conversations that focus on realistic outcomes, closer integration of palliative care and haematology services, better communication across the secondary/primary care interface, and an increase in out-of-hours nursing support could improve end of life care and facilitate death at home or in hospice, when preferred.

Perspectives of bereaved relatives of patients with haematological malignancies concerning preferred place of care and death: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: People with haematological malignancies have different end-of-life care patterns from those with other cancers and are more likely to die in hospital. Little is known about patient and relative preferences at this time and whether these are achieved. AIM: To explore the experiences and reflections of bereaved relatives of patients with leukaemia, lymphoma or myeloma, and examine (1) preferred place of care and death; (2) perceptions of factors influencing attainment of preferences; and (3) changes that could promote achievement of preferences. DESIGN: Qualitative interview study incorporating 'Framework' analysis. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: A total of 10 in-depth interviews with bereaved relatives. RESULTS: Although most people expressed a preference for home death, not all attained this. The influencing factors include disease characteristics (potential for sudden deterioration and death), the occurrence and timing of discussions (treatment cessation, prognosis, place of care/death), family networks (willingness/ability of relatives to provide care, knowledge about services, confidence to advocate) and resource availability (clinical care, hospice beds/policies). Preferences were described as changing over time and some family members retrospectively came to consider hospital as the 'right' place for the patient to have died. Others shared strong preferences with patients for home death and acted to ensure this was achieved. No patients died in a hospice, and relatives identified barriers to death in this setting. CONCLUSION: Preferences were not always achieved due to a series of complex, interrelated factors, some amenable to change and others less so. Death in hospital may be preferred and appropriate, or considered the best option in hindsight.

Palliative care specialists' perceptions concerning referral of haematology patients to their services: findings from a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Haematological malignancies (leukaemias, lymphomas and myeloma) are complex cancers that are relatively common, affect all ages and have divergent outcomes. Although the symptom burden of these diseases is comparable to other cancers, patients do not access specialist palliative care (SPC) services as often as those with other cancers. To determine the reasons for this, we asked SPC practitioners about their perspectives regarding the barriers and facilitators influencing haematology patient referrals. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study, set within the United Kingdom's (UK's) Haematological Malignancy Research Network (HMRN: www.hmrn.org ), a population-based cohort in the North of England. In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 SPC doctors and nurses working in hospital, community and hospice settings between 2012 and 2014. Interviews were digitally audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed for thematic content using the 'Framework' method. RESULTS: Study participants identified a range of barriers and facilitators influencing the referral of patients with haematological malignancies to SPC services. Barriers included: the characteristics and pathways of haematological malignancies; the close patient/haematology team relationship; lack of role clarity; late end of life discussions and SPC referrals; policy issues; and organisational issues. The main facilitators identified were: establishment of inter-disciplinary working patterns (co-working) and enhanced understanding of roles; timely discussions with patients and early SPC referral; access to information platforms able to support information sharing; and use of indicators to 'flag' patients' needs for SPC. Collaboration between haematology and SPC was perceived as beneficial and desirable, and was said to be increasing over time. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first UK study to explore SPC practitioners' perceptions concerning haematology patient referrals. Numerous factors were found to influence the likelihood of referral, some of which related to the organisation and delivery of SPC services, so were amenable to change, and others relating to the complex and unique characteristics and pathways of haematological cancers. Further research is needed to assess the extent to which palliative care is provided by haematology doctors and nurses and other generalists and ways in which clinical uncertainty could be used as a trigger, rather than a barrier, to referral.

Place of death in haematological malignancy: variations by disease sub-type and time from diagnosis to death.

BACKGROUND: The reasons patients with haematological malignancies die in hospital more often than those with other cancers is the subject of much speculation. We examined variations in place of death by disease sub-type and time from diagnosis to death, to identify groups of 'at-risk' patients. METHODS: The study is based in the United Kingdom within the infrastructure of the Haematological Malignancy Research Network (HMRN), a large on-going population-based cohort including all patients newly diagnosed with haematological malignancies in the north of England. Diagnostic, demographic, prognostic, treatment and outcome data are collected for each patient and individuals are 'flagged' for death. This study includes all adults (≥18 years) diagnosed 1st September 2004 to 31st August 2010 (n = 10,325), focussing on those who died on/before 31st August 2012 (n = 4829). RESULTS: Most deaths occurred in hospital (65.9%), followed by home (15.6%), nursing home (11%) and hospice (7.5%) and there was little variation by diagnostic sub-type overall. Differences in place of death were, however, observed by time from diagnosis to death, and this was closely related to sub-type; 87.7% of deaths within a month of diagnosis happened in hospital and these largely occurred in patients with acute myeloid leukaemia, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and myeloma. Patients surviving longer, and particularly beyond 1 year, were less likely to die in hospital and this corresponded with an increase in the proportion of home deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Time from diagnosis to death was clearly a major determinant of place of death and many patients that died within three months of diagnosis did so in hospital. This was closely related to disease sub-type, with early deaths occurring most notable in the more aggressive diseases. This is likely to be due to a combination of factors including acute presentation, rapid disease progression without transition to a palliative approach to care and complications of treatment. Nonetheless, hospital deaths also occurred frequently in indolent diseases, suggesting that other factors were likely to contribute to the large proportion of hospital deaths overall. More evidence is needed to fully understand these complex cancers.

Results of a randomized trial of chlorambucil versus fludarabine for patients with untreated Waldenström macroglobulinemia, marginal zone lymphoma, or lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma.

PURPOSE: Treatment options for patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) and closely related disorders include alkylating agents, purine analogs, and monoclonal antibodies. No large randomized studies have yet been reported comparing any of these approaches. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The randomized WM1 study (Trial Comparing Chlorambucil to Fludarabine in Patients With Advanced Waldenström Macroglobulinemia) was undertaken in 101 centers in five countries enrolling 414 eligible patients (339 with WM, 37 with non-mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue marginal zone lymphoma, and 38 with lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma) who were randomly assigned to receive chlorambucil or fludarabine. The primary end point was the overall response rate (ORR). RESULTS: On the basis of intent-to-treat analysis, the ORR was 47.8% (95% CI, 40.9% to 54.8%) in the fludarabine arm versus 38.6% (95% CI, 32.0% to 45.7%) in the chlorambucil arm (P = .07). With a median follow-up of 36 months (interquartile range, 18 to 58 months), median progression-free survival (PFS), and duration of response (DR) were significantly improved in the fludarabine arm compared with the chlorambucil arm: PFS, 36.3 versus 27.1 months (P = .012) and DR, 38.3 versus 19.9 months (P < .001). In patients with WM, median overall survival (OS) was not reached in the fludarabine arm versus 69.8 months in the chlorambucil arm (95% CI, 61.6 to 79.8 months; P = .014). Grade 3 to 4 neutropenia was significantly higher among patients treated with fludarabine (36%) compared with patients treated with chlorambucil (17.8%; P < .001). Second malignancies were significantly more frequent in the chlorambucil arm with 6-year cumulative incidence rate of 20.6% versus 3.7% in the fludarabine arm (P = .001). CONCLUSION: In the complete intent-to-treat study population, fludarabine significantly improved PFS compared with chlorambucil, and in patients with WM, it improved OS.

Germinal center phenotype and bcl-2 expression combined with the International Prognostic Index improves patient risk stratification in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

The International Prognostic Index (IPI) identifies poor- and good-risk patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL); however, the majority of patients have an intermediate IPI, with an uncertain prognosis. To determine whether cellular factors can be combined with the IPI to more accurately predict outcome, we have analyzed 177 presentation nodal DLBCLs for the expression of bcl-2 and a germinal center (GC) phenotype (defined by expression of bcl-6 and CD10). P53 gene band shifts were detected using single-stranded conformational polymorphism polymerase chain reaction analysis of exons 5-9 and were correlated with protein expression. In a Cox regression analysis, IPI (R = 0.22, P <.0001) and bcl-2 (R = 0.14, P =.0001) were independent poor prognostic factors and a GC phenotype predicted a favorable outcome (R = -0.025, P =.02). Neither p53 expression nor band shifts had a significant effect on survival. Using the IPI alone, 8% of patients were identified as high risk. Expression of bcl-2 in the intermediate IPI group identified a further 28% of patients with an overall survival comparable to the high IPI group. In the intermediate IPI, bcl-2(-) group, the presence of a GC phenotype improved overall survival to levels approaching the IPI low group. Following this analysis only 15% of patients failed to be assigned to a favorable- or poor-risk group. Sequential addition of bcl-2 expression and GC phenotype into the IPI significantly improves risk stratification in DLBCL. For the 36% of high-risk patients with a 2-year overall survival of 19%, alternative treatment strategies should be considered in future trials.