An Interdisciplinary Care Approach for Integration of Palliative Care in Lung Cancer

PurposeQuality of Life (QOL) and symptom concerns are common in lung cancer. This article presents findings from 2 separate pilot studies that utilize an educational model to reduce barriers to pain and fatigue management (“barriers study”) and an interdisciplinary palliative care approach to manage QOL concerns for patients with lung cancer (“QOL pilot”).Patients and MethodsIn the barriers study, a total of 46 patients with lung cancer with a self-reported pain and/or fatigue rating of ≥ 4 were accrued, with 18 patients in the usual care group and 28 in the experimental group, using a quasi-experimental design. This study involved a 4-part educational intervention delivered by a nurse to address pain and fatigue. In the QOL study, the pilot intervention included 10 patients with lung cancer. This pilot included use of QOL assessment completed by a nurse followed by an interdisciplinary case conference intended to initiate supportive care to address QOL and symptom concerns. Patient-reported outcomes such as barriers to pain and fatigue management, fatigue intensity, other symptoms, and overall QOL were analyzed through tabulation of standard summary statistics and multivariate analysis methods. All eligible patients were recruited from the ambulatory clinic of one National Cancer Institute–designated Comprehensive Cancer Center.ResultsFor the barriers study, patients with lung cancer in the experimental group had a statistically significant decrease in patient-related barriers for both pain and fatigue. Findings from the QOL pilot revealed that patients with lung cancer have multiple QOL concerns and that an interdisciplinary palliative care approach was feasible to address these complex, multidimensional patient needs.ConclusionAttention to barriers of symptom management, early referral to supportive care services, and coordination of interdisciplinary care are essential to supporting the QOL of patients with lung cancer. The next phase of this research will test QOL/symptom interventions for patients with lung cancer.     

Telemedicine and Palliative Care: an Increasing Role in Supportive Oncology

With the emergence of telemedicine as a routine form of care in various venues, the opportunities to use technology to care for the most vulnerable, most ill cancer patients are extremely appealing. Increasingly, evidence supports early integration of palliative care with standard oncologic care, supported by recent NCCN guidelines to increase and improve access to palliative care. This review looks at the use of telemedicine to expand access to palliative care as well as provide better care for patients and families where travel is difficult, if not impossible. When telemedicine has been used, often in Europe, for palliative care, the results show improvements in symptom management, comfort with care as well as patient and family satisfaction. One barrier to use of telemedicine is the concerns with technology and technology-related complications in population that is often elderly, frail and not always comfortable with non-face-to-face physician care. There remain significant opportunities to explore this intersection of supportive care and telemedicine.     

Early integration of palliative care services with standard oncology care for patients with advanced cancer

Answer questions and earn CME/CNE Scientific advances in novel cancer therapeutics have led to remarkable changes in oncology practice and longer lives for patients diagnosed with incurable malignancies. However, the myriad options for treatment have established a culture of cancer care that has not been matched with a similar availability of efficacious supportive care interventions aimed at relieving debilitating symptoms due to progressive disease and treatment side effects. Accumulating data show that the introduction of palliative care services at the time of diagnosis of advanced cancer leads to meaningful improvement in the experiences of patients and family caregivers by emphasizing symptom management, quality of life, and treatment planning. In this review article, the rationale and evidence base for this model of early palliative care services integrated into standard oncology care are presented. In addition, the implications and limitations of the existing data to 1) elucidate the mechanisms by which early palliative care benefits patients and families; 2) guide the dissemination and application of this model in outpatient settings; and 3) inform health care policy regarding the delivery of high‐quality, cost‐effective, and comprehensive cancer care are discussed. CA Cancer J Clin 2013;63:349‐363. ^© 2013 American Cancer Society, Inc.     

Virtual Care in Patients with Cancer: A Systematic Review

Virtual care in cancer care existed in a limited fashion globally before the COVID-19 pandemic, mostly driven by geographic constraints. The pandemic has required dramatic shifts in health care delivery, including cancer care. We conducted a systematic review of comparative studies evaluating virtual versus in-person care in patients with cancer. Embase, APA PsycInfo, Ovid MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for literature from January 2015 to 6 August 2020. We adhered to PRISMA guidelines and used the modified GRADE approach to evaluate the data. We included 34 full-text publications of 10 randomized controlled trials, 13 non-randomized comparative studies, and 5 ongoing randomized controlled trials. Evidence was divided into studies that provide psychosocial or genetic counselling and those that provide or assess medical and supportive care. The limited data in this review support that in the general field of psychological counselling, virtual or remote counselling can be equivalent to in-person counselling. In the area of genetic counselling, telephone counselling was more convenient and noninferior to usual care for all outcomes (knowledge, decision conflict, cancer distress, perceived stress, genetic counseling satisfaction). There are few data for clinical outcomes and supportive care. Future research should assess the role of virtual care in these areas. Protocol registration: PROSPERO CRD42020202871.     

American Society of Clinical Oncology provisional clinical opinion: the integration of palliative care into standard oncology care

PURPOSE: An American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) provisional clinical opinion (PCO) offers timely clinical direction to ASCO's membership following publication or presentation of potentially practice-changing data from major studies. This PCO addresses the integration of palliative care services into standard oncology practice at the time a person is diagnosed with metastatic or advanced cancer. CLINICAL CONTEXT: Palliative care is frequently misconstrued as synonymous with end-of-life care. Palliative care is focused on the relief of suffering, in all of its dimensions, throughout the course of a patient's illness. Although the use of hospice and other palliative care services at the end of life has increased, many patients are enrolled in hospice less than 3 weeks before their death, which limits the benefit they may gain from these services. By potentially improving quality of life (QOL), cost of care, and even survival in patients with metastatic cancer, palliative care has increasing relevance for the care of patients with cancer. Until recently, data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) demonstrating the benefits of palliative care in patients with metastatic cancer who are also receiving standard oncology care have not been available. RECENT DATA: Seven published RCTs form the basis of this PCO. PROVISIONAL CLINICAL OPINION: Based on strong evidence from a phase III RCT, patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer should be offered concurrent palliative care and standard oncologic care at initial diagnosis. While a survival benefit from early involvement of palliative care has not yet been demonstrated in other oncology settings, substantial evidence demonstrates that palliative care-when combined with standard cancer care or as the main focus of care-leads to better patient and caregiver outcomes. These include improvement in symptoms, QOL, and patient satisfaction, with reduced caregiver burden. Earlier involvement of palliative care also leads to more appropriate referral to and use of hospice, and reduced use of futile intensive care. While evidence clarifying optimal delivery of palliative care to improve patient outcomes is evolving, no trials to date have demonstrated harm to patients and caregivers, or excessive costs, from early involvement of palliative care. Therefore, it is the Panel's expert consensus that combined standard oncology care and palliative care should be considered early in the course of illness for any patient with metastatic cancer and/or high symptom burden. Strategies to optimize concurrent palliative care and standard oncology care, with evaluation of its impact on important patient and caregiver outcomes (eg, QOL, survival, health care services utilization, and costs) and on society, should be an area of intense research. NOTE: ASCO's provisional clinical opinions (PCOs) reflect expert consensus based on clinical evidence and literature available at the time they are written and are intended to assist physicians in clinical decision making and identify questions and settings for further research. Because of the rapid flow of scientific information in oncology, new evidence may have emerged since the time a PCO was submitted for publication. PCOs are not continually updated and may not reflect the most recent evidence. PCOs cannot account for individual variation among patients and cannot be considered inclusive of all proper methods of care or exclusive of other treatments. It is the responsibility of the treating physician or other health care provider, relying on independent experience and knowledge of the patient, to determine the best course of treatment for the patient. Accordingly, adherence to any PCO is voluntary, with the ultimate determination regarding its application to be made by the physician in light of each patient's individual circumstances. ASCO PCOs describe the use of procedures and therapies in clinical trials and cannot be assumed to apply to the use of these interventions in the context of clinical practice. ASCO assumes no responsibility for any injury or damage to persons or property arising out of or related to any use of ASCO's PCOs, or for any errors or omissions.     

Geriatric oncology and palliative medicine

People age 65 years and older are the fastest growing segment of the US population. Cancer is one of the leading causes of death in the elderly. Geriatric oncology has developed since most cancer cases are diagnosed in elderly patients and the majority of cancer deaths occur in elderly patients. Little is known on how to best treat elderly patients with cancer and deal with treatment side effects and palliative care. Most recommendations have focused on the need for clinical trials specifically for the elderly with cancer, and a short, easy tool to predict chemotherapy toxicity. The focus of geriatric oncologists has been to integrate geriatric assessment into the care of the elderly cancer patient and find new assessment tools to predict chemotherapy tolerance, toxicity, and outcomes. Understanding the importance of supportive management during antineoplastic treatment and developing an intentional approach to palliative care issues (which are an important part of treating elderly patients with cancer) will help patients complete a full treatment course and maintain quality of life.     

Standards, options and recommendations: nutritional support in palliative or terminal care of adult patients with progressive cancer]

CONTEXT: The "Standards, Options and Recommendations" (SOR) project, started in 1993, is a collaboration between the National Federation of Comprehensive Cancer Centres (FNCLCC), the 20 French Cancer Centers and specialists from French Public Universities, General Hospitals and Private Clinics. The main objective is the development of clinical practice guidelines to improve the quality of health care and outcome for cancer patients. The methodology is based on literature review and critical appraisal by a multidisciplinary group of experts, with feedback from specialists in cancer care delivery. OBJECTIVES: To develop clinical practice guidelines according to the definitions of the Standards, Options and Recommendations project for nutritional support in adult patients with advanced or terminal cancer. METHODS: Data were identified by searching Medline, web sites and using the personal reference lists of members of the expert groups. Once the guidelines were defined, the document was submitted for review to 95 independent reviewers. RESULTS: The main recommendations for nutritional support in adult patients with advanced or terminal cancer are: 1) Palliative care has been defined in a consensual way and is governed by the law (standard). Nutritional support is a palliative care which aim is to maintain and restore the "well-being" of the patient (standard). 2) Digestive symptoms and nutritional troubles are frequently noted in patients with advanced or terminal cancer (standard, level of evidence B2). Karnofsky index (KPS) and performance status (PS) are functional scores with a prognostic value and have to be used (standard, level of evidence B2). 3) Anorexia has a bad predictive value in patients with advanced or terminal cancer (standard, level of evidence B2). 4) In France, patients with advanced or terminal cancer are referred to medical institutions, palliative care units or remained at home (standard). Patients need a multidisciplinary follow-up (standard). An active participation of patients and/or their family circle is very important and physicians have to pay attention for their opinions (standard). 5) Dietetic counseling can help patients to improve their alimentation and its drawbacks (standard). 6) Palliative nutritional care often includes medicinal treatments (standard). 7) Artificial nutrition can slow down nutritional degradation, avoid dehydration and improve quality of life in patients with advanced stage cancer (especially head and neck cancer for enteral nutrition and digestive occlusions for parenteral nutrition) and unable to eat adapted meals (standard, level of evidence C). 8) When life expectancy is below 3 months with a KPS 3/4 50% (or PS > 2), artificial nutrition is not recommended (recommendation, expert agreement). 9) The assessment of nutritional care in patients with advanced or terminal cancer has to include functional scores measurement, quality of life and satisfaction degree of the patient and/or their family (standard, expert agreement).     

Implementing guidelines for cancer pain management: results of a randomized controlled clinical trial.

PURPOSE: Pain and symptom management is an integral part of the clinical practice of oncology. A number of guidelines have been developed to assist the clinician in optimizing comfort care. We implemented clinical guidelines for cancer pain management in the community setting and evaluated whether these guidelines improved care. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eighty-one cancer patients, aged 37 to 76 years, were enrolled onto a prospective, longitudinal, randomized controlled study from the outpatient clinic settings of 26 western Washington-area medical oncologists. A multilevel treatment algorithm based on the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research Guidelines for Cancer Pain Management was compared with standard-practice (control) pain and symptom management therapies used by community oncologists. The primary outcome of interest was pain (Brief Pain Inventory); secondary outcomes of interest were all other symptoms (Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale) and quality of life (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Scale). RESULTS: Patients randomized to the pain algorithm group achieved a statistically significant reduction in usual pain intensity, measured as slope scores, when compared with standard community practice (P < .02). Concurrent chemotherapy and patient adherence to treatment were significant mediators of worst pain. There were no significant differences in other symptoms or quality of life between the two treatment groups. CONCLUSION: This guideline implementation study supports the use of algorithmic decision making in the management of cancer pain. These findings suggest that comprehensive pain assessment and evidence-based analgesic decision-making processes do enhance usual pain outcomes.     

European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Program for the Integration of Oncology and Palliative Care: a 5-year review of the Designated Centers’ incentive program

BackgroundIn 1999, the National Representatives of European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) created a Palliative Care Working Group to improve the delivery of supportive and palliative care (S + PC) by oncologists, oncology departments and cancer centers. They have addressed this task through initiatives in policy, education, research and incentives. As an incentive program for oncology departments and centers, ESMO developed a program of Designated Centers (DCs) for programs meeting predetermined targets of service development and delivery of a high level of S + PC.MethodThe history, accreditation criteria and implementation of the DC incentive program is described.ResultsSince 2004, 75 centers have applied for designation and 48 have been accredited including 34 comprehensive cancer centers (CCCs) in general hospitals and seven freestanding CCCs. Perceived benefits accrued from the accreditation included the following: improved status and role identification of the center, positive impact on daily work, positive impact on business activity and positive impact on funding for projects.ConclusionsThe accreditation of DCs has been a central to the ESMO initiative to improve the palliative care provided by oncologists and oncology centers. It is likely that many other oncology departments and cancer centers already meet the criteria and ESMO strongly encourages them to apply for accreditation.     

Ethical considerations in researching user views

Researching user views has become a central plank of UK cancer and palliative care policy, not least because it is recognized that current systems for treatment reflect inadequately the experiences and concerns of cancer patients. This paper examines the process of accessing user views about cancer and palliative care from an ethical perspective, drawing by way of example on a study of outcomes associated with Macmillan nursing. A moral theory framework is used to discuss some of the issues involved in trying to achieve ethically sound practice and some essentially political issues that frame the process of accessing users' views are highlighted. The paper recommends that models of research be developed for accessing user views that are congruent with the values and philosophies of supportive and palliative care. This requires striking a fine balance between the ethical duties of providing care and support, nurturing independence and autonomy, and achieving research outcomes that are rigorous while also being accessible and meaningful to users. It also requires developing an understanding of the social, political and economic context of research enquiry with users.     

Impact of early access to a palliative/supportive care intervention on pain management in patients with cancer

BackgroundNo study has so far addressed whether differences do exist in the management of cancer pain between patients receiving usual care by primary specialists and those receiving early palliative/supportive intervention.Patients and methodsA multicentre cross-sectional study in 32 Italian Hospitals has included 1450 patients, receiving analgesic therapy for cancer pain: 602 with access to primary specialist alone (standard care, SC) and 848 with early access to a palliative/supportive care (ePSC) team, concomitant with primary oncology care.ResultsStatistically significant differences in the analgesic drug administration according to care model have been evident: non-opioids were more frequently used in SC (9.5 % versus 2 % ; P < 0.001), while strong opioids in ePSC group (80 % versus 63 % ; P < 0.001). The number of patients with severe pain was lower in ePSC compared with SC group (31 % versus 17 % ; P < 0.001). Results of multivariate analysis have shown that ePSC integrated with primary oncologic care (relative risk 0.69; 95 % confidence interval 0.48–0.99; P = 0.045) was an independent factor associated with a 31 % reduced risk of suffering from severe pain.ConclusionsAn ePSC team provides the most effective standard of analgesic therapy for cancer pain. A randomized clinical trial is needed to confirm these findings.     

Metastatic pancreatic cancer: emerging strategies in chemotherapy and palliative care

This update is devoted to discussion of optimal supportive and palliative care of patients with pancreatic cancer. Approximately 33,000 new cases of pancreatic cancer are predicted for the U.S. in 2002. Because diagnosis and intervention occur late in the course of this disease, the vast majority of patients already have metastatic disease at the time of diagnosis. These tumors are relatively resistant to systemic chemotherapy, making pancreatic cancer the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death in the U.S. and the Western world. For these reasons, efforts at identifying and treating disease-related symptomatology are priorities. This update overviews symptom management, supportive care strategies, and both standard and emerging palliative chemotherapy options. The incorporation of molecularly targeted therapies into treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer is reviewed as well. These strategies are of relevance to internists, gastroenterologists, oncologists, and other specialists who care for patients with pancreatic cancer.     

Improving supportive care for women with breast cancer in Australia: the challenge of modifying health systems

Although the benefits of many psychosocial support strategies in improving well being in women with breast cancer have been demonstrated, few women receive these programs as part of routine care. This paper provides some recommendations, based on experience in Australia, about how access to evidence-based supportive care strategies might be improved through modification of health systems. It demonstrates the paucity of research about the costs and health service implications of psychosocial support strategies, which is vital to health planning and service delivery change. It outlines the systematic approach taken in Australia to improving psychosocial support nationally by: the development of research reviews; preparation of guidelines about supportive care; implementation of programs to foster the adoption of guidelines through modification of policy, health service delivery and clinician training; and monitoring programs. Coalitions of government, health care professionals and consumers are key to effective lobbying for change. If all women with breast cancer are to receive better supportive care, there is a need for approaches which: refocus the research effort in psycho-oncology; develop more strategic approaches to generating change in health systems and health policy and foster partnerships to advocate for improved resources.     

Advancing a comprehensive cancer care agenda for children and their families: Institute of Medicine Workshop highlights and next steps

This article highlights key findings from the “Comprehensive Cancer Care for Children and Their Families” March 2015 joint workshop by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) and the American Cancer Society. This initiative convened more than 100 family members, clinician investigators, advocates, and members of the public to discuss emerging evidence and care models and to determine the next steps for optimizing quality‐of‐life outcomes and well‐being for children and families during pediatric cancer treatment, after treatment completion, and across the life spectrum. Participants affirmed the triple aim of pediatric oncology that strives for every child with cancer to be cured; provides high‐quality palliative and psychosocial supportive, restorative, and rehabilitative care to children and families throughout the illness course and survivorship; and assures receipt of high‐quality end‐of‐life care for patients with advancing disease. Workshop outcomes emphasized the need for new pediatric cancer drug development and identified critical opportunities to prioritize palliative care and psychosocial support as an integral part of pediatric cancer research and treatment, including the necessity for adequately resourcing these supportive services to minimize suffering and distress, effectively address quality‐of‐life needs for children and families at all stages of illness, and mitigate the long‐term health risks associated with childhood cancer and its treatment. Next steps include dismantling existing silos and enhancing collaboration between clinical investigators, disease‐directed specialists, and supportive care services; expanding the use of patient‐reported and parent‐reported outcomes; effectively integrating palliative and psychosocial care; and clinical communication skills development. CA Cancer J Clin 2016;66:398–407. © 2016 American Cancer Society.     

Methodological challenges in supportive and palliative care cancer research

As a growing medical field, palliative and supportive care should incorporate evidence-based medical practice. The gold standard research method continues to be the randomized clinical trial. This has been pursued with regard to cancer trials focused on cure. It has specific operational and methodological challenges in advanced disease. There are numerous reasons why effective research in palliative and supportive care is difficult. A consensus on the best research strategies and design is lacking. We will discuss the principles of palliative and supportive care research, examine the inherent challenges particularly in randomized controlled trials, and offer some suggestions to overcome them.     

Recommendations for Palliative and Hospice Care in NCCN Guidelines for Treatment of Cancer

BackgroundIntegration of specialist palliative care into routine oncologic care improves patients’ quality of life and survival. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) cancer treatment guidelines are instrumental in standardizing cancer care, yet it is unclear how palliative and hospice care are integrated in these guidelines. In this study, we examined the frequency of occurrence of “palliative care” and “hospice care” in NCCN guidelines and compared between solid tumor and hematologic malignancy guidelines.Materials and MethodsWe reviewed all 53 updated NCCN Guidelines for Treatment of Cancer. We documented the frequency of occurrence of “palliative care” and “hospice care,” the definitions for these terms if available, and the recommended timing for these services.ResultsWe identified a total of 37 solid tumor and 16 hematologic malignancy guidelines. Palliative care was mentioned in 30 (57%) guidelines (24 solid tumor, 6 hematologic). Palliative care was mentioned more frequently in solid tumor than hematologic guidelines (median, 2 vs. 0; p = .04). Among the guidelines that included palliative care in the treatment recommendation, 25 (83%) only referred to NCCN palliative care guideline. Specialist palliative care referral was specifically mentioned in 5 of 30 (17%) guidelines. Only 14 of 24 (58%) solid tumor guidelines and 2 of 6 (33%) hematologic guidelines recommended palliative care in the front line setting for advanced malignancy. Few guidelines (n = 3/53, 6%) mentioned hospice care.Conclusion“Palliative care” was absent in almost half of NCCN cancer treatment guidelines and was rarely discussed in guidelines for hematologic malignancies. Our findings underscored opportunities to standardize timely palliative care access across NCCN guidelines.Implications for PracticeIntegration of specialist palliative care into routine oncologic care is associated with improved patient outcomes. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology have an important role to standardize palliative care involvement for cancer patients. It is unclear how often palliative care referral is recommended in these guidelines. In this study involving 53 NCCN Guidelines for Treatment of Cancer, the researchers found that palliative care was not mentioned in over 40% of NCCN guidelines and was rarely discussed in guidelines for hematologic malignancies. These findings underscored opportunities to standardize timely palliative care access across NCCN guidelines.     

Implementing a standardized pharmacist assessment and evaluating the role of a pharmacist in a multidisciplinary supportive oncology clinic

Supportive care, or palliative care, in oncology patients has been a shifting paradigm in the last few years. Patients with advanced cancer experience significant symptom burden and psychosocial distress from the onset of their diagnosis and throughout treatment. The focus on cancer treatment often defers the integration of palliative care to a more "reactive" vs "proactive" approach, which can hinder symptom management. Many cancer centers are integrating palliative care programs in their practice; however, the scope of services and degree of intervention varies widely, especially with regard to the pharmacist's role. The purpose of this article is to describe the operational aspects of a multidisciplinary supportive oncology clinic at St. Luke's Mountain States Tumor Institute (MSTI). The MSTI supportive oncology clinic is a half-day clinic where complex patients are seen by a multidisciplinary team led by a nurse practitioner. The team also includes a nurse, a pharmacist, a dietitian, and a social worker. The pharmacist is responsible for medication reconciliation, which includes assessment for drug interactions, adverse effects, duplications in therapy, lack of efficacy, and untreated conditions. Within the first year of the supportive oncology clinic's operation, we saw a total of 75 patients. Use of a standardized pharmacy assessment helped to elucidate and address medication issues such as duplicate therapies (46.7% of patients), drug interactions (44%), side effects (74.7%), lack of efficacy (94.7%), and untreated conditions (73.3%). Pharmacists are uniquely trained in medication therapy management, and a thorough medication therapy review has been shown to assist other disciplines in their own assessments.     

日本胰腺协会《胰腺癌临床实践指南(2019)》更新解读

日本胰腺协会《胰腺癌临床实践指南》2019年版,为该指南第5次修订更新.日语版于2019年7月发布,2020年3月该指南英文版以大纲模式在"Pancreas"杂志线上发表.指南基于诊断和治疗两大方面,整合为6个板块进行详述,分别为胰腺癌的诊断、可切除性胰腺癌的治疗、交界可切除胰腺癌的治疗、局部进展期胰腺癌的治疗、胰腺癌...     

Integrative oncology: Addressing the global challenges of cancer prevention and treatment

The increase in cancer incidence and mortality is challenging current cancer care delivery globally, disproportionally affecting low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) when it comes to receiving evidence-based cancer prevention, treatment, and palliative and survivorship care. Patients in LMICs often rely on traditional, complementary, and integrative medicine (TCIM) that is more familiar, less costly, and widely available. However, spheres of influence and tensions between conventional medicine and TCIM can further disrupt efforts in evidence-based cancer care. Integrative oncology provides a framework to research and integrate safe, effective TCIM alongside conventional cancer treatment and can help bridge health care gaps in delivering evidence-informed, patient-centered care. This growing field uses lifestyle modifications, mind and body therapies (eg, acupuncture, massage, meditation, and yoga), and natural products to improve symptom management and quality of life among patients with cancer. On the basis of this review of the global challenges of cancer control and the current status of integrative oncology, the authors recommend: 1) educating and integrating TCIM providers into the cancer control workforce to promote risk reduction and culturally salient healthy life styles; 2) developing and testing TCIM interventions to address cancer symptoms or treatment-related adverse effects (eg, pain, insomnia, fatigue); and 3) disseminating and implementing evidence-based TCIM interventions as part of comprehensive palliative and survivorship care so patients from all cultures can live with or beyond cancer with respect, dignity, and vitality. With conventional medicine and TCIM united under a cohesive framework, integrative oncology may provide citizens of the world with access to safe, effective, evidence-informed, and culturally sensitive cancer care.