Critical care of patients with cancer

Answer questions and earn CME/CNE The increasing prevalence of patients living with cancer in conjunction with the rapid progress in cancer therapy will lead to a growing number of patients with cancer who will require intensive care treatment. Fortunately, the development of more effective oncologic therapies, advances in critical care, and improvements in patient selection have led to an increased survival of critically ill patients with cancer. As a consequence, critical care has become an important cornerstone in the continuum of modern cancer care. Although, in many aspects, critical care for patients with cancer does not differ from intensive care for other seriously ill patients, there are several challenging issues that are unique to this patient population and require special knowledge and skills. The optimal management of critically ill patients with cancer necessitates expertise in oncology, critical care, and palliative medicine. Cancer specialists therefore have to be familiar with key principles of intensive care for critically ill patients with cancer. This review provides an overview of the state‐of‐the‐art in the individualized management of critically ill patients with cancer. CA Cancer J Clin 2016;66:496–517. © 2016 American Cancer Society .     

Evaluating the quality of psychosocial care in outpatient medical oncology settings using performance indicators

Objective: An American Psychosocial Oncology Society workgroup has developed indicators of the quality of psychosocial care that can be measured through review of medical records. The present report describes the first large‐scale use of these indicators to evaluate psychosocial care in outpatient medical oncology settings. Methods: Medical records of 1660 colorectal, breast and non‐small cell cancer patients first seen by a medical oncologist in 2006 at 11 practice sites in Florida were reviewed for performance on indicators of the quality of psychosocial care. Results: Assessment of emotional well‐being was significantly less likely to be documented than assessment of pain (52 vs 87%, p<0.001). A problem with emotional well‐being was documented in 13% of records and evidence of action taken was documented in 58% of these records. Ten of eleven practice sites performed below an 85% threshold on each indicator of psychosocial care. Variability in assessment of emotional‐well being was associated (p<0.02) with practice site and patient gender and age while variability in assessment of pain was associated (p<0.001) with practice site and cancer type. Conclusions: Findings illustrate how use of the psychosocial care indicators permits identification of specific practice sites and processes of care that should be targeted for quality improvement efforts. Additionally, findings demonstrate the extent to which routine assessment of emotional well‐being lags behind routine assessment of pain in cancer patients. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Predictors of change in unmet supportive care needs in cancer

Objective: Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) assessments can assist health professionals to tailor their health practices to the individual needs of patients and improve patient care over time. The present study assessed prospective predictors of unmet supportive care needs in cancer patients over a six‐month period. Methods: Participants were recruited from a regional cancer treatment centre in Australia and completed the Supportive Care Needs Survey (SCNS) at recruitment (n=439; 61.4% response rate) and six months follow‐up (n=396). Hierarchical logistic regression was used to identify predictors of change in unmet needs across each supportive care domain. Predictor variables were socio‐demographic, treatment and psychosocial factors including depression, anxiety, social support, and patient satisfaction. Results: Unmet needs were reported by approximately two‐thirds of patients at baseline and half of patients at six months follow‐up. Having unmet needs at baseline was the strongest predictor of unmet needs at six months. Longer time since diagnosis was a consistent predictor of greater unmet needs, associated with change in physical/daily living, psychological and health system and information unmet needs over time. By contrast, a complex relationship was found in that patient satisfaction, psychosocial and treatment characteristics predicted higher needs in some domains and lower needs in others. Conclusions: Unmet supportive care needs persist over time and psychological needs may emerge later in the illness continuum. Interventions to meet the needs of longer term cancer survivors are needed and should closely articulate with reported supportive care needs. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Evidence for integration of palliative care into surgical oncology practice and education

High-quality data support multiple clinical benefits of integrating palliative care into routine oncology care. Though these data come largely from the medical oncology literature, data from surgical oncology populations support similar associations between palliative care integration and improved clinical outcomes, all without compromise in survival. This paper will review data supporting palliative care integration into oncology care, with a focus on surgical populations and recommendations for incorporating palliative care into surgical oncology.     

Oncology Clinicians’ Challenges to Providing Palliative Cancer Care—A Theoretical Domains Framework,Pan-Cancer System Survey

Despite the known benefits, healthcare systems struggle to provide early, integrated palliative care (PC) for advanced cancer patients. Understanding the barriers to providing PC from the perspective of oncology clinicians is an important first step in improving care. A 33-item online survey was emailed to all oncology clinicians working with all cancer types in Alberta, Canada, from November 2017 to January 2018. Questions were informed by Michie’s Theoretical Domains Framework and Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) and queried (a) PC provision in oncology clinics, (b) specialist PC consultation referrals, and (c) working with PC consultants and home care. Respondents (n = 263) were nurses (41%), physicians (25%), and allied healthcare professionals (18%). Barriers most frequently identified were “clinicians’ limited time/competing priorities” (64%), “patients’ negative perceptions of PC” (63%), and clinicians’ capability to manage patients’ social issues (63%). These factors mapped to all three BCW domains: motivation, opportunity, and capability. In contrast, the least frequently identified barriers were clinician motivation and perceived PC benefits. Oncology clinicians’ perceptions of barriers to early PC were comparable across tumour types and specialties but varied by professional role. The main challenges to early integrated PC include all three BCW domains. Notably, motivation is not a barrier for oncology clinicians; however, opportunity and capability barriers were identified. Multifaceted interventions using these findings have been developed, such as tip sheets to enhance capability, reframing PC with patients, and earlier specialist PC nursing access, to enhance clinicians’ use of and patients’ benefits from an early PC approach.     

Predictors of Urgent Cancer Care Clinic and Emergency Department Visits for Individuals Diagnosed with Cancer

In 2013, CancerCare Manitoba (CCMB) launched an urgent cancer care clinic (UCC) to meet the needs of individuals diagnosed with cancer experiencing acute complications of cancer or its treatment. This retrospective cohort study compared the characteristics of individuals diagnosed with cancer that visited the UCC to those who visited an emergency department (ED) and determined predictors of use. Multivariable logistic mixed models were run to predict an individual’s likelihood of visiting the UCC or an ED. Scaled Brier scores were calculated to determine how greatly each predictor impacted UCC or ED use. We found that UCC visits increased up to 4 months after eligibility to visit and then decreased. ED visits were highest immediately after eligibility and then decreased. The median number of hours between triage and discharge was 2 h for UCC visits and 9 h for ED visits. Chemotherapy had the strongest association with UCC visits, whereas ED visits prior to diagnosis had the strongest association with ED visits. Variables related to socioeconomic status were less strongly associated with UCC or ED visits. Future studies would be beneficial to planning service delivery and improving clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction.     

Capacity to Provide Geriatric Specialty Care for Older Adults in Community Oncology Practices

BackgroundAmerican Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines recommend that patients ≥65 years of age starting chemotherapy undergo a geriatric assessment (GA) to inform and guide management; however, little is known about resources available in community oncology practices to implement these guidelines and to facilitate geriatric oncology research.Materials and MethodsOncology practices within the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) were electronically surveyed in 2017 regarding the availability of specialty providers, supportive services, and practice characteristics, as part of a larger survey of cancer care delivery research capacity.ResultsOf the 943 NCORP practices, 504 (54%) responded to the survey, representing 210 practice groups. The median new cancer cases per year ≥65 years of age was 457 (interquartile range 227–939). Of respondents, only 2.0% of practices had a fellowship‐trained geriatric oncologist on staff. Geriatricians were available for consultation or comanagement at 37% of sites, and of those, only 13% had availability within the oncology clinic (5% of overall). Practice size of ≥1,000 new adult cancer cases (ages ≥18) per year was associated with higher odds (1.81, confidence interval 1.02–3.23) of geriatrician availability. Other multidisciplinary care professionals that could support GA were variably available onsite: social worker (84%), nurse navigator (81%), pharmacist (77%), dietician (71%), rehabilitative medicine (57%), psychologist (42%), and psychiatrist (37%).ConclusionOnly a third of community oncology practices have access to a geriatrician within their group and only 5% of community sites have access within the oncology clinic. Use of primarily self‐administered GA tools that direct referrals to available services may be an effective implementation strategy for guideline‐based care.Implications for PracticeOnly a minority of community oncology practices in the U.S. have access to geriatric specialty care. Developing models of care that use patient‐reported measures and/or other geriatric screening tools to assess and guide interventions in older adults, rather than geriatric consultations, are likely the most practical methods to improve the care of this vulnerable population.     

A noticeable absence

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) restrictions on visitation policies have created barriers for cancer caregivers and patients. Awareness of the critical role that cancer caregivers play should lead to better integration of the caregiver into clinical care and research after the pandemic ends.     

Integrative Oncology Education: An Emerging Competency for Oncology Providers

A growing number of cancer patients use complementary and alternative therapies during and after conventional cancer treatment. Patients are often reluctant to discuss these therapies with their oncologist, and oncologists may have limited knowledge and confidence on how to advise patients on the appropriate use. Integrative oncology is a patient-centered, evidence-informed field that utilizes mind–body practices, lifestyle modifications and/or natural products interwoven with conventional cancer treatment. It prioritizes safety and best available evidence to offer appropriate interventions alongside conventional care. There are few opportunities for oncologists to learn about integrative oncology. In this commentary, we highlight the Integrative Oncology Scholars (IOS) program as a means to increase competency in this growing field. We provide an overview of several integrative oncology modalities that are taught through this program, including lifestyle modifications, physical activity, and mind–body interventions. We conclude that as more evidence is generated in this field, it will be essential that oncology healthcare providers are aware of the prevalent use of these modalities by their patients and cancer centers include Integrative Oncology trained physicians and other healthcare professionals in their team to discuss and recommend evidence-based integrative oncology therapies alongside conventional cancer treatments to their patients.     

Responding to Acute Care Needs of Patients With Cancer: Recent Trends Across Continents

Remarkable progress has been made over the past decade in cancer medicine. Personalized medicine, driven by biomarker predictive factors, novel biotherapy, novel imaging, and molecular targeted therapeutics, has improved outcomes. Cancer is becoming a chronic disease rather than a fatal disease for many patients. However, despite this progress, there is much work to do if patients are to receive continuous high-quality care in the appropriate place, at the appropriate time, and with the right specialized expert oversight. Unfortunately, the rapid expansion of therapeutic options has also generated an ever-increasing burden of emergency care and encroaches into end-of-life palliative care. Emergency presentation is a common consequence of cancer and of cancer treatment complications. It represents an important proportion of new presentations of previously undiagnosed malignancy. In the U.K. alone, 20%–25% of new cancer diagnoses are made following an initial presentation to the hospital emergency department, with a greater proportion in patients older than 70 years. This late presentation accounts for poor survival outcomes and is often associated with poor patient experience and poorly coordinated care. The recent development of acute oncology services in the U.K. aims to improve patient safety, quality of care, and the coordination of care for all patients with cancer who require emergency access to care, irrespective of the place of care and admission route. Furthermore, prompt management coordinated by expert teams and access to protocol-driven pathways have the potential to improve patient experience and drive efficiency when services are fully established. The challenge to leaders of acute oncology services is to develop bespoke models of care, appropriate to local services, but with an opportunity for acute oncology teams to engage cancer care strategies and influence cancer care and delivery in the future. This will aid the integration of highly specialized cancer treatment with high-quality care close to home and help avoid hospital admission.

Implications for Practice:

Emergency presentations of cancer patients to health care services can be associated with high risks and poor outcomes. Systematic approaches are described to create best practice for these patients based on expert teams and careful organization of services in all hospitals. These approaches, called “acute oncology” in the U.K., may improve care and avoid unnecessary deaths.     

Clarifying the term 'palliative' in clinical oncology

The objective of this study was to clarify the term 'palliative' in clinical oncology. A qualitative study design with in-depth interviews was applied. The study sample included 30 cancer patients and 16 physicians. In clinical oncology, the use of the term 'palliative' to describe both anticancer treatments and palliative care may cause confusion and misunderstanding. Different aspects of palliative care, as expressed by the WHO definition, are not so easily recognizable with regard to palliative oncological treatments. Furthermore, the fact that the same anticancer treatments can be given to patients with palliative or curative intention is confusing. The distinction between curative and palliative oncological treatments is of crucial importance for the treatment decision-making process. Close consideration of the use of the term 'palliative' will help to clarify the various goals of treatment and care in oncological practice.