Physician factors associated with discussions about end‐of‐life care

BACKGROUND:

Guidelines recommend advanced care planning for terminally ill patients with <1 year to live. Few data are available regarding when physicians and their terminally ill patients typically discuss end‐of‐life issues.

METHODS:

A national survey was conducted of physicians caring for cancer patients about timing of discussions regarding prognosis, do not resuscitate (DNR) status, hospice, and preferred site of death with their terminally ill patients. Logistic regression was used to identify physician and practice characteristics associated with earlier discussions.

RESULTS:

Among 4074 respondents, 65% would discuss prognosis “now” (defined as patient has 4 months to 6 months to live, asymptomatic). Fewer would discuss DNR status (44%), hospice (26%), or preferred site of death (21%) immediately, with most physicians waiting for patient symptoms or until there are no more treatments to offer. In multivariate analyses, younger physicians more often discussed prognosis, DNR status, hospice, and site of death “now” (all P < .05). Surgeons and oncologists were more likely than noncancer specialists to discuss prognosis “now” (P = .008), but noncancer specialists were more likely than cancer specialists to discuss DNR status, hospice, and preferred site of death “now” (all P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS:

Most physicians report they would not discuss end‐of‐life options with terminally ill patients who are feeling well, instead waiting for symptoms or until there are no more treatments to offer. More research is needed to understand physicians' reasons for timing of discussions and how their propensity to aggressively treat metastatic disease influences timing, as well as how the timing of discussions influences patient and family experiences at the end of life. Cancer 2010. © 2010 American Cancer Society.     

Palliative care physicians’ experiences of end‐of‐life communication: A focus group study

The aim of this study was to explore palliative home care physicians’ experiences regarding end‐of‐life breakpoint communication (BPC). This is a qualitative study where focus group interviews were conducted and analysed using qualitative content analysis. The results show that the participants saw themselves as being responsible for accomplishing BPC, and they were convinced that it should be regarded as a process of communication initiated at an early stage, i.e. proactively. However, BPC was often conducted as a reaction to the patient's sudden deterioration or sometimes not at all. The barriers to achieving proactive BPC included physicians’ uncertainty regarding the timing of BPC, primarily due to difficulties in prognostication in terms of time of death, and uncertainty as to what BPC should include and how it should best be approached. Furthermore, there was insufficient documentation regarding previous BPC, which impeded proactive BPC. Although our study shows that physicians are ambitious when it comes to the communication of information to patients and families, there is a need for further training in how to conduct BPC and when to initiate the BPC process. Furthermore, there should be documentation that different professionals can access as this would appear to facilitate a proactive BPC process.     

Intensity of integrated cancer palliative care plans and end‐of‐life acute medical hospitalisation among cancer patient in Northern Italy

A high hospital utilisation at the end of life (EOL) is an indicator of suboptimal quality of health care. We evaluated the impact of the intensity of different Integrated Cancer Palliative Care (ICPC) plans on EOL acute medical hospitalisation among cancer decedents. Decedents of cancer aged 18–84 years, who were residents in two Italian regions, were investigated through integrated administrative data. Outcomes considered were prolonged hospital stay for medical reasons, 2+ hospitalisations during the last month of life and hospital death. The ICPC plans instituted 90 to 31 days before death represented the main exposure of interest. Other variables considered were gender, age class at death, marital status, recent hospitalisation and primary cancer site. Among 6,698 patients included in ICPC plans, 44.3% presented at least one critical outcome indicator; among these, 76.5% died in hospital, 60.3% had a prolonged (12+ days) medical hospitalisation, 19.1% had 2+ hospitalisations at the EOL. These outcomes showed a strong dose–response effect with the intensity of the ICPC plans, which is already evident at levels of moderate intensity. A well‐ICPC approach can be very effective—beginning at low levels of intensity of care—in reducing the percentage of patients spending many days or dying in hospital.     

Developing quality indicators for cancer end‐of‐life care

Quality indicators applicable to cancer end‐of‐life care exist, but have not been widely implemented. To advance this field, the authors worked with the Agency for Health Care Research and Quality and the National Cancer Institute to organize a national symposium to discuss key issues and future goals, based on a conceptual framework. Discussions focused on 8 key domains in end‐of‐life cancer care: pain; dyspnea; communication, care planning, and decision making; psychosocial care; communication about chemotherapy; depression; continuity, coordination, and care transitions; and spirituality and closure. Key themes included the need for clarity on definitions and key aspects of care within domains, the need to start implementing indicators in more developed domains, and the importance of high‐quality symptom assessment and documentation of key processes. Key areas for future work include development of more outcome indicators, methods to better incorporate indicators and patient‐reported outcomes into clinical processes of care, and coordination across domains and settings. Measuring the quality of end‐of‐life cancer care is essential to understanding how best to improve patient outcomes and care. Cancer 2009. © 2009 American Cancer Society.     

Validation of the Mexican–Spanish version of the EORTC QLQ‐C15‐PAL questionnaire for the evaluation of health‐related quality of life in patients on palliative care

Background: Health‐related quality of life (HRQL) is an important outcome in oncology, particularly in the palliative care setting. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ‐C15‐PAL questionnaire is a brief version of QLQ‐C30. Our aim is to validate the Mexican–Spanish version of the QLQ‐C15‐PAL questionnaire to measure HRQL in patients with terminal cancer. Methods: Consecutive patients with biopsy proven cancer were included in the study. All were treated in a cancer center in Mexico and were referred for palliative care because of far‐advanced, recurrent or metastatic cancer. QLQ‐C15‐PAL questionnaire was applied in the first visit to the Unit and palliative care was offered to all patients depending on their specific necessities. Results: Eighty‐three patients were enrolled in this study (mean age, 61.2 years). Compliance rates were high; all patients completed to the questionnaire in <20 min and the instrument was well‐received. Five missing values in five different items were found. QLQ‐C15 scales distinguished between other clinically distinct groups of patients. Multi‐trait scaling analysis demonstrated good convergent and discriminant validity. Cronbach's α coefficients were >0.7 in three of four multi‐item scales (0.67 in the fourth). Test–retest scores were consistent in some scales, while improve or worsen in others. Better Global health, Dyspnea, Insomnia, Fatigue and Appetite scales were associated with longer survival. Conclusion: The Mexican–Spanish version of the EORTC QLQ‐C15‐PAL questionnaire is reliable and valid for HRQL measurement in patients with terminal cancer, and is appropriate for use in clinical trials of Mexican patients. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Influence of patients' preferences and treatment site on cancer patients' end‐of‐life care

BACKGROUND:

Research suggests that patients' end‐of‐life (EOL) care is determined primarily by the medical resources available, and not by patient preferences. The authors examined whether patients' desire for life‐extending therapy was associated with their EOL care.

METHODS:

Coping with Cancer is a multisite, prospective, longitudinal study of patients with advanced cancer. Three hundred one patients were interviewed at baseline and followed until death, a median of 4.5 months later. Multivariate analyses examined the influence of patients' preferences and treatment site on whether patients received intensive care or hospice services in the final week of life.

RESULTS:

Eighty‐three of 301 patients (27.6%) with advanced cancer wanted life‐extending therapy at baseline. Patients who understood that their disease was terminal or who reported having EOL discussions with their physicians were less likely to want life‐extending care compared with others (23.4% vs 42.6% and 20.7% vs 44.4%, respectively; P ≤ .003). Patients who were treated at Yale Cancer Center received more intensive care (odds ratio [OR], 3.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16‐8.47) and less hospice services (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.29‐0.92) compared with patients who were treated at Parkland Hospital. However, in multivariate analyses that controlled for confounding influences, patients who preferred life‐extending care were more likely to receive intensive care (adjusted OR [AOR], 2.91; 95% CI, 1.09‐7.72) and were less likely to receive hospice services (AOR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.26‐0.78). Treatment site was not identified as a significant predictor of EOL care.

CONCLUSIONS:

The treatment preferences of patients with advanced cancer may play a more important role in determining the intensity of medical care received at the EOL than previously recognized. Future research is needed to determine the mechanisms by which patients' preferences for care and treatment site interact to influence EOL care. Cancer 2010. © 2010 American Cancer Society.     

Prognostic utility of six mutated genes for older patients with acute myeloid leukemia

Approximately 50% of older patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) do not obtain chromosomal abnormalities as an effective risk‐stratification, and present cytogenetically normal AML (CN‐AML). To develop a reliable prediction model for stratifying the risk of these elderly patients, we conducted a study with a discovery and validation design. As a result, we found the top 6 mutated genes in the discovery cohort of 26 case by the whole exome sequencing, and verified as recurrent mutations in the large cohort of 329 patients by Sanger sequencing. The top 6 genes were NPM1, FLT3‐ITD, DNMT3A, CEBPA double allele, IDH1 and IDH2 mutations, and the frequency of each gene in the combining cohort was 36.8%, 19.8%, 20.1%, 5.8%, 14.9% and 22.5%, respectively. In addition, clinical variables such as age, white blood cell counts, genes of IDH1 and DNMT3A mutations, European LeukemiaNet genotype (NPM1 mutations and lacking FLT3‐ITD or CEBPA double allele mutations) and treatment protocols were independent factors for predicting the probabilities of overall and event‐free survival. The prediction nomograms based on these significant factors showed accurate discrimination. In conclusion, we developed a reliable prediction model for stratifying the risk of elderly patients with CN‐AML.     

Treatment outcome in older patients with childhood acute myeloid leukemia

BACKGROUND.

Older age has historically been an adverse prognostic factor in pediatric acute myeloid leukemia (AML). To the authors' knowledge, the impact of age relative to that of other prognostic factors on the outcome of patients treated in recent trials is unknown.

METHODS.

Clinical outcome and causes of treatment failure of 351 patients enrolled on 3 consecutive protocols for childhood AML between 1991 and 2008 were analyzed according to age and protocol.

RESULTS.

The more recent protocol (AML02) produced improved outcomes for patients aged 10 years to 21 years compared with 2 earlier studies (AML91 and AML97), with 3‐year rates of event‐free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS), and cumulative incidence of refractory leukemia or recurrence (CIR) for this group being similar to those of patients aged birth to 9 years: EFS: 58.3% ± 5.4% versus 66.6% ± 4.9% (P = .20); OS: 68.9% ± 5.1% versus 75.1% ± 4.5% (P = .36); and CIR: 21.9% ± 4.4% versus 25.3% ± 4.2% (P = .59). The EFS and OS estimates for patients aged 10 to 15 years overlapped those for patients aged 16 to 21 years. However, the cumulative incidence of toxic death was significantly higher for patients aged 10 to 21 years compared with younger patients (13.2% ± 3.6% vs 4.5% ± 2.0%; P = .028).

CONCLUSIONS.

The survival rate for older children with AML has improved on the results of a recent trial and is now similar to that of younger patients. However, deaths from toxicity remain a significant problem for patients in the older age group. Future trials should focus on improving supportive care while striving to develop more effective antileukemic therapy. Cancer 2012. © 2012 American Cancer Society.