Telehealth vs In-Person Early Palliative Care for Patients With Advanced Lung Cancer: A Multisite Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Numerous studies show that early palliative care improves quality of life and other key outcomes in patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers, although most lack access to this evidence-based model of care. Objective: To evaluate whether delivering early palliative care via secure video vs in-person visits has an equivalent effect on quality of life in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized, multisite, comparative effectiveness trial from June 14, 2018, to May 4, 2023, at 22 US cancer centers among 1250 patients within 12 weeks of diagnosis of advanced NSCLC and 548 caregivers. Intervention: Participants were randomized to meet with a specialty-trained palliative care clinician every 4 weeks either via video visit or in person in the outpatient clinic from the time of enrollment and throughout the course of disease. The video visit group had an initial in-person visit to establish rapport, followed by subsequent virtual visits. Main Outcomes and Measures: Equivalence of the effect of video visit vs in-person early palliative care on quality of life at week 24 per the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung questionnaire (equivalence margin of ±4 points; score range: 0-136, with higher scores indicating better quality of life). Participants completed study questionnaires at enrollment and at weeks 12, 24, 36, and 48. Results: By 24 weeks, participants (mean age, 65.5 years; 54.0% women; 82.7% White) had a mean of 4.7 (video) and 4.9 (in-person) early palliative care encounters. Patient-reported quality-of-life scores were equivalent between groups (video mean, 99.7 vs in-person mean, 97.7; difference, 2.0 [90% CI, 0.1-3.9]; P = .04 for equivalence). Rate of caregiver participation in visits was lower for video vs in-person early palliative care (36.6% vs 49.7%; P < .001). Study groups did not differ in caregiver quality of life, patient coping, or patient and caregiver satisfaction with care, mood symptoms, or prognostic perceptions. Conclusions and Relevance: The delivery of early palliative care virtually vs in person demonstrated equivalent effects on quality of life in patients with advanced NSCLC, underscoring the considerable potential for improving access to this evidence-based care model through telehealth delivery. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03375489.

Palliative Care for Patients With Cancer: ASCO Guideline Update.

PURPOSE: To provide evidence-based guidance to oncology clinicians, patients, nonprofessional caregivers, and palliative care clinicians to update the 2016 ASCO guideline on the integration of palliative care into standard oncology for all patients diagnosed with cancer. METHODS: ASCO convened an Expert Panel of medical, radiation, hematology-oncology, oncology nursing, palliative care, social work, ethics, advocacy, and psycho-oncology experts. The Panel conducted a literature search, including systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials published from 2015-2023. Outcomes of interest included quality of life (QOL), patient satisfaction, physical and psychological symptoms, survival, and caregiver burden. Expert Panel members used available evidence and informal consensus to develop evidence-based guideline recommendations. RESULTS: The literature search identified 52 relevant studies to inform the evidence base for this guideline. RECOMMENDATIONS: Evidence-based recommendations address the integration of palliative care in oncology. Oncology clinicians should refer patients with advanced solid tumors and hematologic malignancies to specialized interdisciplinary palliative care teams that provide outpatient and inpatient care beginning early in the course of the disease, alongside active treatment of their cancer. For patients with cancer with unaddressed physical, psychosocial, or spiritual distress, cancer care programs should provide dedicated specialist palliative care services complementing existing or emerging supportive care interventions. Oncology clinicians from across the interdisciplinary cancer care team may refer the caregivers (eg, family, chosen family, and friends) of patients with cancer to palliative care teams for additional support. The Expert Panel suggests early palliative care involvement, especially for patients with uncontrolled symptoms and QOL concerns. Clinicians caring for patients with solid tumors on phase I cancer trials may also refer them to specialist palliative care.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.

Examining Moderation of Dignity Therapy Effects by Symptom Burden or Religious/Spiritual Struggles.

CONTEXT: Dignity therapy (DT) is a well-researched psychotherapeutic intervention but it remains unclear whether symptom burden or religious/spiritual (R/S) struggles moderate DT outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To explore the effects of symptom burden and R/S struggles on DT outcomes. METHODS: This analysis was the secondary aim of a randomized controlled trial that employed a stepped-wedge design and included 579 participants with cancer, recruited from six sites across the United States. Participants were ages 55 years and older, 59% female, 22% race other than White, and receiving outpatient specialty palliative care. Outcome measures included the seven-item dignity impact scale (DIS), and QUAL-E subscales (preparation for death; life completion); distress measures were the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS-r) (symptom burden), and the Religious Spiritual Struggle Scale (RSS-14; R/S). RESULTS: DT effects on DIS were significant for patients with both low (P = 0.03) and moderate/high symptom burden (P = 0.001). They were significant for patients with low (P = 0.004) but not high R/S struggle (P = 0.10). Moderation effects of symptom burden (P = 0.054) and R/S struggle (P = 0.52) on DIS were not significant. DT effects on preparation and completion were not significant, neither were the moderation effects of the two distress measures. CONCLUSION: Neither baseline symptom burden nor R/S struggle significantly moderated the effect of DT on DIS in this sample. Further study is warranted including exploration of other moderation models and development of measures sensitive to effects of DT and other end-of-life psychotherapeutic interventions.

Engaging Mortality: Effective Implementation of Dignity Therapy.

Background: Patients consider the life review intervention, Dignity Therapy (DT), beneficial to themselves and their families. However, DT has inconsistent effects on symptoms and lacks evidence of effects on spiritual/existential outcomes. Objective: To compare usual outpatient palliative care and chaplain-led or nurse-led DT for effects on a quality-of-life outcome, dignity impact. Design/Setting/Subjects: In a stepped-wedge trial, six sites in the United States transitioned from usual care to either chaplain-led or nurse-led DT in a random order. Of 638 eligible cancer patients (age ≥55 years), 579 (59% female, mean age 66.4 ± 7.4 years, 78% White, 61% stage 4 cancer) provided data for analysis. Methods: Over six weeks, patients completed pretest/posttest measures, including the Dignity Impact Scale (DIS, ranges 7-35, low-high impact) and engaged in DT+usual care or usual care. They completed procedures in person (steps 1-3) or via Zoom (step 4 during pandemic). We used multiple imputation and regression analysis adjusting for pretest DIS, study site, and step. Results: At pretest, mean DIS scores were 24.3 ± 4.3 and 25.9 ± 4.3 for the DT (n = 317) and usual care (n = 262) groups, respectively. Adjusting for pretest DIS scores, site, and step, the chaplain-led (ß = 1.7, p = 0.02) and nurse-led (ß = 2.1, p = 0.005) groups reported significantly higher posttest DIS scores than usual care. Adjusting for age, sex, race, education, and income, the effect on DIS scores remained significant for both DT groups. Conclusion: Whether led by chaplains or nurses, DT improved dignity for outpatient palliative care patients with cancer. This rigorous trial of DT is a milestone in palliative care and spiritual health services research. clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03209440.

Clinician Perceptions of Barriers and Facilitators for Delivering Early Integrated Palliative Care via Telehealth.

Early integrated palliative care (EIPC) significantly improves clinical outcomes for patients with advanced cancer. Telehealth may be a useful tool to deliver EIPC sustainably and equitably. Palliative care clinicians completed a survey regarding their perceptions of the barriers, facilitators, and benefits of using telehealth video visits for delivering EIPC for patients with advanced lung cancer. Forty-eight clinicians across 22 cancer centers completed the survey between May and July 2022. Most (91.7%) agreed that telehealth increases access to EIPC and simplifies the process for patients to receive EIPC (79.2%). Clinicians noted that the elderly, those in rural areas, and those with less-resourced backgrounds have greater difficulty using telehealth. Perceived barriers were largely patient-based factors, including technological literacy, internet and device availability, and patient preferences. Clinicians agreed that several organizational factors facilitated telehealth EIPC delivery, including technological infrastructure (85.4%), training (83.3%), and support from study coordinators (81.3%). Other barriers included systems-based factors, such as insurance reimbursement and out-of-state coverage restrictions. Patient-, organization-, and systems-based factors are all important to providing and improving access to telehealth EIPC services. Further research is needed to investigate the efficacy of telehealth EIPC and how policies and interventions may improve access to and dissemination of this care modality.

A Systematic Approach to Assessing and Addressing Palliative Care Needs in an Outpatient Population.

CONTEXT/OBJECTIVES: A critical frontier for palliative medicine is to develop systems to routinely and equitably address the palliative care (PC) needs of seriously ill populations. METHODS: An automated screen identified Medicare primary care patients who had serious illness based on diagnosis codes and utilization patterns. A stepped-wedge design was used to evaluate a six-month intervention through which a healthcare navigator assessed these seriously ill patients and their care partners for PC needs in the domains of 1) physical symptoms, 2) emotional distress, 3) practical concerns, and 4) advance care planning (ACP) via telephone surveys. Identified needs were addressed with tailored PC interventions. RESULTS: A total of 292/2175 (13.4%) patients screened positive for serious illness. A total of 145 completed an intervention phase; 83 completed a control phase. Severe physical symptoms were identified in 27.6%, emotional distress in 57.2%, practical concerns in 37.2%, and ACP needs in 56.6%. Twenty-five intervention patients (17.2%) were referred to specialty PC compared to six control patients (7.2%). Prevalence of ACP notes increased 45.5%-71.7% (p = 0.001) during the intervention and remained stable during the control phase. Quality of life remained stable during the intervention and declined 7.4/10-6.5/10 (P =0.04) during the control phase. CONCLUSION: Through an innovative program, patients with serious illness were identified from a primary care population, assessed for PC needs, and offered specific services to meet those needs. While some patients were appropriate for specialty PC, even more needs were addressed without specialty PC. The program resulted in increased ACP and preserved quality of life.

Practical considerations when providing palliative care to patients with neuroendocrine tumors in the context of routine disease management or hospice care.

This serves as a white paper by the North American Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (NANETS) on the practical considerations when providing palliative care to patients with neuroendocrine tumors in the context of routine disease management or hospice care. The authors involved in the development of this manuscript represent a multidisciplinary team of patient advocacy, palliative care, and hospice care practitioners, endocrinologist, and oncologists who performed a literature review and provided expert opinion on a series of questions often asked by our patients and patient caregivers affected by this disease. We hope this document serves as a starting point for oncologists, palliative care teams, hospice medical teams, insurers, drug manufacturers, caregivers, and patients to have a frank, well-informed discussion of what a patient needs to maximize the quality of life during a routine, disease-directed care as well as at the end-of-life.

Differential Use of Outpatient Palliative Care by Demographic and Clinical Characteristics.

CONTEXT: Little is known about equity in utilization of outpatient palliative care (PC). OBJECTIVES: To explore whether patient-level factors are associated with completing initial and follow-up visits among patients referred to outpatient PC. METHODS: Using electronic health record data, we generated a cohort of all adults referred to outpatient PC at University of California, San Francisco October 2017-October 2021. We assessed whether demographic and clinical characteristics were associated with completion of 1) an initial PC visit and 2) at least one follow-up visit. RESULTS: Of patients referred to outpatient PC (N = 6,871), 60% completed an initial visit; 66% of those who established care returned for follow-up. In multivariable models, patients who were less likely to complete an initial visit were older (OR per decade 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.89-0.98), Black (OR 0.71; 95% CI 0.56-0.90), Latinx (OR 0.69; 95% CI 0.57-0.83), unpartnered (OR 0.80; 95% CI 0.71-0.90), and had Medicaid (OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.69-0.97). Among patients who completed an initial visit, those less likely to complete a follow-up visit were older (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.82-0.94), male (OR 0.83; 95% CI 0.71-0.96), preferred a language other than English (0.71; 95% CI 0.54-0.95), and had a serious illness other than cancer (OR 0.74; 95% CI 0.61-0.90). CONCLUSION: We found that Black and Latinx patients were less likely to complete an initial visit and those with a preferred language other than English were less likely to complete a follow-up visit. To promote equity in PC, these differences and their impact on outcomes must be explored.

Death Anxiety and Correlates in Cancer Patients Receiving Palliative Care.

Background: Death anxiety is powerful, potentially contributes to suffering, and yet has to date not been extensively studied in the context of palliative care. Availability of a validated Death Anxiety and Distress Scale (DADDS) opens the opportunity to better assess and redress death anxiety in serious illness. Objective: We explored death anxiety/distress for associations with physical and psychosocial factors. Design: Ancillary to a randomized clinical trial (RCT) of Dignity Therapy (DT), we enrolled a convenience sample of 167 older adults in the United States with cancer and receiving outpatient palliative care (mean age 65.9 [7.3] years, 62% female, 84% White, 62% stage 4 cancer). They completed the DADDS and several measures for the stepped-wedged RCT, including demographic factors, religious struggle, dignity-related distress, existential quality of life (QoL), and terminal illness awareness (TIA). Results: DADDS scores were generally unrelated to demographic factors (including religious affiliation, intrinsic religiousness, and frequency of prayer). DADDS scores were positively correlated with religious struggle (p < 0.001) and dignity-related distress (p < 0.001) and negatively correlated with existential QoL (p < 0.001). TIA was significantly nonlinearly associated with both the total DADDS (p = 0.007) and its Finitude subscale (p ≤ 0.001) scores. There was a statistically significant decrease in Finitude subscale scores for a subset of participants who completed a post-DT DADDS (p = 0.04). Conclusions: Findings, if replicable, suggest that further research on death anxiety and prognostic awareness in the context of palliative medicine is in order. Findings also raise questions about the optimal nature and timing of spiritual and psychosocial interventions, something that might entail evaluation or screening for death anxiety and prognostic awareness for maximizing the effectiveness of care.

Should Outpatient Palliative Care Clinics in Cancer Centers be Stand Alone or Embedded?

Outpatient palliative care facilitates timely symptom management, psychosocial care and care planning. A growing number of cancer centers have either stand-alone or embedded outpatient palliative care clinics. In this "Controversies in Palliative Care" article, three groups of thought leaders independently answer this question. Specifically, each group provides a synopsis of the key studies that inform their thought processes, share practical advice on their clinical approach, and highlight the opportunities for future research. One group advocates for stand-alone clinics, another for embedded, and the third group tries to find a balance. In the absence of evidence that directly compares the two models, factors such as cancer center size, palliative care team composition, clinic space availability, and financial considerations may drive the decision-making process at each institution. Stand-alone clinics may be more appropriate for larger academic cancer centers or palliative care programs with a more comprehensive interdisciplinary team, while embedded clinics may be more suited for smaller palliative care programs or community oncology programs to stimulate referrals. As outpatient clinic models continue to evolve, investigators need to document the referral and patient outcomes to inform practice.

Poetry as a Healing Modality in Medicine: Current State and Common Structures for Implementation and Research.

In healthcare institutions across the country, the role of poetry continues to emerge within the liminal spaces between the medical humanities and clinical care. While the field of narrative medicine is well-developed generally, formal review of the state of poetry as a healing modality is limited. Poetry in the medical humanities literature has often been described by its indefinability as much as by its impact on healing. The power of poetry in healthcare is thought to be multi-faceted and deserves to be explored further. Poetry can be medicine for both patient and clinician. "Poetic Medicine" is a modality that has been utilized for the healing of grief, loss, wounds of the psyche and spirit, and as a process for expanding resiliency in healthcare-applications that are particularly relevant to the practice of hospice and palliative medicine-for patient and clinician alike. While numerous approaches share common themes, current programs bringing poetry into healthcare have been operating largely in isolation from each other-with a lack of national consensus on definitions or structures of interventions. Such isolation is a major restriction to the study and growth of Poetic Medicine. While it is not known with certitude, the number of Poetic Medicine programs in healthcare in the United States appears to be growing. In this paper, we propose an initial framework to define the role and impact of poetry in healthcare and then describe two different, well-established Poetic Medicine programs in the United States.

Palliative care and imaging utilisation for patients with cancer.

OBJECTIVE: This observational study explores the association between palliative care (PC) involvement and high-cost imaging utilisation for patients with cancer patients during the last 3 months of life. METHODS: Adult patients with cancer who died between 1 January 2012 and 31 May 2015 were identified. Referral to PC, intensity of PC service use, and non-emergent oncological imaging utilisation were determined. Associations between PC utilisation and proportion of patients imaged and mean number of studies per patient (mean imaging intensity (MII)) were assessed for the last 3 months and the last month of life. Similar analyses were performed for randomly matched case-control pairs (n = 197). Finally, the association between intensity of PC involvement and imaging utilisation was assessed. RESULTS: 3784 patients were included, with 3523 (93%) never referred to PC and 261 (7%) seen by PC, largely before the last month of life (61%). Similar proportions of patients with and without PC referral were imaged during the last 3 months, while a greater proportion of patients with PC referral were imaged in the last month of life. PC involvement was not associated with significantly different MII during either time frame. In the matched-pairs analysis, a greater proportion of patients previously referred to PC received imaging in the period between the first PC encounter and death, and in the last month of life. MII remained similar between PC and non-PC groups. Finally, intensity of PC services was similar for imaged and non-imaged patients in the final 3 months and 1 month of life. During these time periods, increased PC intensity was not associated with decreased MII. CONCLUSIONS: PC involvement in end-of-life oncological care was not associated with decreased use of non-emergent, high-cost imaging. The role of advanced imaging in the PC setting requires further investigation.

Association of mental health diagnosis with race and all-cause mortality after a cancer diagnosis: Large-scale analysis of electronic health record data.

BACKGROUND: Disparity in mental health care among cancer patients remains understudied. METHODS: A large, retrospective, single tertiary-care institution cohort study was conducted based on deidentified electronic health record data of 54,852 adult cancer patients without prior mental health diagnosis (MHD) diagnosed at the University of California, San Francisco between January 2012 and September 2019. The exposure of interest was early-onset MHD with or without psychotropic medication (PM) within 12 months of cancer diagnosis and primary outcome was all-cause mortality. RESULTS: There were 8.2% of patients who received a new MHD at a median of 197 days (interquartile range, 61-553) after incident cancer diagnosis; 31.0% received a PM prescription; and 3.7% a mental health-related visit (MHRV). There were 62.6% of patients who were non-Hispanic White (NHW), 10.8% were Asian, 9.8% were Hispanic, and 3.8% were Black. Compared with NHWs, minority cancer patients had reduced adjusted odds of MHDs, PM prescriptions, and MHRVs, particularly for generalized anxiety (Asian odds ratio [OR], 0.66, 95% CI, 0.55-0.78; Black OR, 0.60, 95% CI, 0.45-0.79; Hispanic OR, 0.72, 95% CI, 0.61-0.85) and selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitors (Asian OR, 0.43, 95% CI, 0.37-0.50; Black OR, 0.51, 95% CI, 0.40-0.61; Hispanic OR, 0.79, 95% CI, 0.70-0.89). New early MHD with PM was associated with elevated all-cause mortality (12-24 months: hazard ratio [HR], 1.43, 95% CI, 1.25-1.64) that waned by 24 to 36 months (HR, 1.18, 95% CI, 0.95-1.45). CONCLUSIONS: New mental health diagnosis with PM was a marker of early mortality among cancer patients. Minority cancer patients were less likely to receive documentation of MHDs or treatment, which may represent missed opportunities to identify and treat cancer-related mental health conditions.

Epilogue: Reflections from International Mentors of the Quality Improvement Training Programme in India.

The article collates the narratives of experiences of the international faculty who mentored the quality improvement teams from India since 2017.

A multidisciplinary team-based approach with lifestyle modification and symptom management to address the impact of androgen deprivation therapy in prostate cancer: A randomized phase II study.

BACKGROUND: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is associated with numerous toxicities that are potentially modifiable. We sought to evaluate the impact of participation in a multidisciplinary clinic, STAND (Supportive Therapy in Androgen Deprivation) Clinic, designed to provide individualized lifestyle modification and management of ADT-related side effects. METHODS: This phase II study recruited men with prostate cancer who had started ADT <6 months prior to enrollment, and in whom ADT was planned for at least 12 months following enrollment. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either the STAND Clinic or usual care. Patients randomized to the STAND Clinic were provided monthly multidisciplinary assessment and counseling on exercise, nutrition, and symptom management for 12 months on a rotating schedule. Primary outcome was change from baseline to 12 months in percent body fat. Feasibility outcomes were also assessed by measuring percentage of completed visits. Secondary outcomes included change from baseline to 12 months in 3 domains: (1) metabolic impact and bone health, (2) quality of life (QOL), and (3) physical activity. RESULTS: A total of 25 men were randomized to STAND clinic, and 23 were randomized to usual care. The study did not meet its accrual target of 32 men in each arm and was closed early due to lack of financial support. Overall, 91% (295 of 325) of STAND clinic visits were completed. Eighteen out of the 25 patients in STAND clinic arm (72%) completed all 12 months of STAND clinic visits, and 80% (20 of 25) completed the first 6 months. For all primary and secondary outcomes, there were no statistically significant differences between treatment arms. CONCLUSION: Individualized and comprehensive management of ADT toxicities in a multidisciplinary clinic was well attended by patients. However, we did not find any differences in the outcomes assessed between the intervention arm and control.

Palliative Care Education During COVID-19: The MERI Center for Education in Palliative Care at UCSF/Mt. Zion.

In the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic as well as the recognition of systemic racism in our institutions, the symptom management, emotional/psychological support and advance care planning at the core of palliative care-once considered "an extra layer of support" -have been revealed as instrumental to individuals, families, communities, and countries facing the threat of the global pandemic. In this article, we outline the primary palliative care education efforts of one palliative care education center (The MERI Center at UCSF/Mt Zion campus) and detail the critical adjustments necessary and opportunities found in the COVID crisis.

Witnesses and Victims Both: Healthcare Workers and Grief in the Time of COVID-19.

Heathcare Workers (HCWs) recognize their responsibility to support the bereaved loved ones of our patients, but we also must attend to our own professional and personal grief in the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 grief is occurring in the setting of incomplete grief, disenfranchised grief, fractured US governmental leadership, and evidence of great mistrust, systemic racism, and social injustice. In the intensity and pervasiveness of COVID-19, HCW fears for themselves, their colleagues, and their own loved ones are often in conflict with professional commitments. Even at the dawn of promising national and global vaccination programs, significant HCW morbidity and mortality in COVID-19 has already become clear, will continue to grow, and these effects likely will last far into the future. Given the risks of complicated grief for HCWs in the setting of COVID-19 deaths, individual HCWs must put every effort into their own preparation for these deaths as well as into their own healthy grieving. Equally importantly, our healthcare systems have a primary responsibility both to prepare HCWs and to support them in their anticipatory and realized grief. Special attention must be paid to our HCW trainees, who may have not yet developed personal or professional grief management strategies and are coming into healthcare practice during a time of great disruption to both teaching and clinical care.

Interim Analysis of Attrition Rates in Palliative Care Study on Dignity Therapy.

A routine threat to palliative care research is participants not completing studies. The purpose of this analysis was to quantify attrition rates mid-way through a palliative care study on Dignity Therapy and describe the reasons cited for attrition. Enrolled in the study were a total of 365 outpatients with cancer who were receiving outpatient specialty palliative care (mean age 66.7 ± 7.3 years, 56% female, 72% White, 22% Black, 6% other race/ethnicity). These participants completed an initial screening for cognitive status, performance status, physical distress, and spiritual distress. There were 76 eligible participants who did not complete the study (58% female, mean age 67.9 ± 7.3 years, 76% White, 17% Black, and 7% other race). Of those not completing the study, the average scores were 74.5 ± 11.7 on the Palliative Performance Scale and 28.3 ± 1.5 on the Mini-Mental Status Examination, whereas 22% had high spiritual distress scores and 45% had high physical distress scores. The most common reason for attrition was death/decline of health (47%), followed by patient withdrawal from the study (21%), and patient lost to follow-up (21%). The overall attrition rate was 24% and within the a priori projected attrition rate of 20%-30%. Considering the current historical context, this interim analysis is important because it will serve as baseline data on attrition prior to the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Future research will compare these results with attrition throughout the rest of the study, allowing analysis of the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the study attrition.