Predictors and trajectory of performance status in patients with advanced cancer: A secondary data analysis of the international European Palliative Care Cancer Symptom study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Boland JW
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6350180 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Predictors and trajectory of performance status in patients with advanced cancer: A secondary data analysis of the international European Palliative Care Cancer Symptom study.
Boland Jason W JW Allgar Victoria V Boland Elaine G EG Kaasa Stein S Hjermstad Marianne J MJ Johnson Miriam J MJ
Palliative medicine 20181108 2
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundPeople with advanced cancer experience multiple symptoms during their illness trajectory, which can fluctuate in intensity.AimTo describe the course of self-reported quality of life, emotional functioning, physical functioning and symptom intensity over time in cancer patients receiving palliative care.DesignLongitudinal study with monthly assessments, using the EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL. Data were analysed (1) prospectively, from baseline to ≥8-month follow-up; and (2) retrospectively, by taking death as index date and comparing results from three cross-sectional subsamples at different stages of illness (time to death ≥6, 5-3 and 2-0 months). Linear mixed models were calculated.Setting/participantsA total of 1739 patients (mean age 66, 50% male) from 30 palliative care centers in 12 countries were included.ResultsIn prospective analyses, quality of life, functioning and symptoms-except nausea/vomiting-remained generally stable over time. In retrospective analyses, patients 2-0 months before death reported significantly lower quality of life and physical functioning scores than those 5-3 months before death, who in turn scored lower than those ≥6 months before death, suggesting progressive decline. Emotional functioning remained initially unchanged, but decreased in the last months. Pain, fatigue and appetite loss showed a stable increase in intensity towards death. Dyspnea, insomnia and constipation increased from 5-3 to 2-0 months before death. Nausea/vomiting only increased when comparing those ≥6 months before death with those 2-0 months before death.ConclusionWhile the prospective approach showed predominantly stable patterns for quality of life, functioning and symptom severity throughout study duration, retrospective analyses indicated that deterioration was already apparent before the terminal phase and accelerated close to death. Our findings support the importance of early symptom identification and treatment in this population, and highlight the need for further studies to explore what characterizes those with either lower or higher symptom burden at different time points towards death.
| S-EPMC6784977 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEarly palliative care (EPC) improves the quality of life but may not be feasible for all patients with advanced cancer. Symptom screening has been suggested to triage patients for EPC, but scant evidence exists for this practice.MethodsWe conducted a subgroup analysis of a cluster-randomized controlled trial of EPC vs. standard oncology care according to patients' baseline symptom scores (high [>23] vs. low [≤23] Edmonton Symptom Assessment System Distress Score [ESAS SDS]). A linear mixed-effects model was used to account for correlation within clusters, adjusting for the baseline outcome score and all covariates in the original trial.ResultsAmong the 461 participants, baseline symptom scores were high in 229 patients (127 intervention, 102 control) and low in 232 (101 intervention and 131 control). Among those with high baseline symptoms, there was improved quality of life in the EPC arm compared to controls at 4 months (adjusted difference in primary outcome of FACIT-Sp change score [95% CI], 8.7 [2.8 to 14.5], p = 0.01; adjusted difference in QUAL-E, 4.2 [0.9-7.5], p = 0.02); there was also improved satisfaction with care (6.9 [3.8-9.9], p = 0.001) and clinician-patient interactions (-1.7 [-3.4 to -0.1], p = 0.04), but no significant difference in ESAS SDS (-5.6 [-12.7 to 1.4], p = 0.11). In the low baseline symptom group, there were no significant differences between arms for any outcomes.ConclusionEPC improved quality of life, satisfaction with care, and clinician-patient interactions only in those with high baseline symptoms. Symptom severity may be an appropriate criterion to trigger early referrals to palliative care.
| S-EPMC9041071 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionEarly integration of palliative care (PC) with oncological care is associated with improved outcomes in patients with advanced cancer. Limited information exists on the frequency, timing, and predictors of PC consultation in patients receiving oncological care. The Cross Cancer Institute (CCI) is the sole tertiary cancer center serving the northern half of the Canadian province of Alberta, located in the city of Edmonton. The objectives of this study were to estimate the proportion of patients with advanced cancer at the CCI who received consultation by the CCI PC program and the comprehensive integrated PC program in Edmonton, and to determine the timing and predictors of consultation.Materials and methodsIn this secondary analysis of routinely collected health data, adult patients who died between April 2013 and March 2014, and had advanced disease while under the care of a CCI oncologist, were eligible. Data from the Alberta Cancer Registry, electronic medical records, and Edmonton PC program database were linked.ResultsOf 2,253 eligible patients, 810 (36%) received CCI PC consultation. Median time between consultation and death was 2 months (range, 1.1-5.4). In multivariable logistic regression analysis, age, residence, income, cancer type, and interval from advanced cancer diagnosis to death influenced odds of receiving consultation. Among 1,439 patients residing in Edmonton, 1,121 (78%) were referred to the Edmonton PC program.ConclusionA minority of patients with advanced cancer received PC consultation at the tertiary cancer center, occurring late in the disease trajectory. Frequency and timing of PC consultation varied significantly, according to multiple factors.Implications for practiceClinical and demographic factors are associated with variations in frequency and timing of palliative care consultation at a cancer center and may, in some cases, reflect barriers to access that warrant attention.
| S-EPMC7418362 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivePalliative thoracic radiotherapy is a key treatment option for symptom management in advanced lung cancer. Continuous symptom monitoring is critical to ensuring optimal therapeutic outcomes and preserving patients' well-being. This systematic review aimed to explore patients' symptom experiences during palliative thoracic radiotherapy for advanced lung cancer.MethodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane, and PsycINFO from database inception through August 31, 2023. Eligible studies included those examining the prevalence and severity of symptoms and side effects experienced by adult patients undergoing palliative thoracic radiotherapy for advanced lung cancer, regardless of treatment duration or dosage. Methodological quality was assessed using the standardized QualSyst tool, and data were synthesized narratively.ResultsA total of 8 studies met the inclusion criteria. Thirteen symptoms were reported prior to radiotherapy, with cough being the most common (62%). Symptom severity ranged from mild to severe, with dyspnoea recording the highest average score. Distress was not measured during this phase. Post-radiotherapy, fatigue was the most prevalent symptom (69%), followed by cough (64%) and dyspnoea (50%). Symptom severity varied across studies, with improvements noted in cough, dyspnoea, chest pain, and haemoptysis. Moderating factors influencing symptom prevalence and variation included performance status, weight loss, cancer stage, objective tumour response, and radiation-induced pulmonary changes.ConclusionsSymptom control through palliative thoracic radiotherapy demonstrates variability in both frequency and severity of symptoms. Systematic monitoring is essential for identifying persistent symptoms and determining the need for more targeted supportive care interventions.
| S-EPMC11466633 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPalliative sedation is a commonly accepted medical practice. This study aims to clarify how palliative sedation is regulated in various countries and whether this may impact its practice.MethodsAn online survey requesting regulations on palliative sedation was conducted in Belgium, Germany, Hungary, Italy, The Netherlands, Spain, Romania and the UK. Purposive sampling strategy was used to identify clinicians from different medical fields and legal experts for each country. Regulations were analyzed using the principles of the European Association for Palliative Care Framework on palliative sedation. Country reports describing how palliative sedation is regulated were elaborated.ResultsOne hundred and thirty-nine out of 223 (62%) participants identified 31 laws and other regulations affecting palliative sedation. In Spain, 12 regional laws recognize palliative sedation as a right of the patient at the end of life when there are refractory symptoms. In Italy, the law of informed consent and advance directives specifically recognizes the doctor can use deep sedation when there are refractory symptoms. There are also general medical laws that, while not explicitly referring to palliative sedation, regulate sedation-related principles: the obligation of doctors to honour advance directives, informed consent, the decision-making process and the obligation to document the whole process. In Germany, the Netherlands and the UK, palliative sedation is also regulated through professional guidelines that are binding as good practice with legal significance.ConclusionsPalliative sedation is considered in the general law of medical practice, in laws regarding the patient's autonomy, and through professional guidelines.
| S-EPMC9897985 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC) acknowledges palliative sedation as an important, broadly accepted intervention for patients with life-limiting disease experiencing refractory symptoms. The EAPC therefore developed 2009 a framework on palliative sedation. A revision was needed due to new evidence from literature, ongoing debate and criticism of methodology, terminology and applicability.AimTo provide evidence- and consensus-based guidance on palliative sedation for healthcare professionals involved in end-of-life care, for medical associations and health policy decision-makers.DesignRevision between June 2020 and September 2022 of the 2009 framework using a literature update and a Delphi procedure.SettingEuropean.ParticipantsInternational experts on palliative sedation (identified through literature search and nomination by national palliative care associations) and a European patient organisation.ResultsA framework with 42 statements for which high or very high level of consensus was reached. Terminology is defined more precisely with the terms suffering used to encompass distressing physical and psychological symptoms as well as existential suffering and refractory to describe the untreatable (healthcare professionals) and intolerable (patient) nature of the suffering. The principle of proportionality is introduced in the definition of palliative sedation. No specific period of remaining life expectancy is defined, based on the principles of refractoriness of suffering, proportionality and independent decision-making for hydration. Patient autonomy is emphasised. A stepwise pharmacological approach and a guidance on hydration decision-making are provided.ConclusionsThis is the first framework on palliative sedation using a strict consensus methodology. It should serve as comprehensive and soundly developed information for healthcare professionals.
| S-EPMC10865771 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatients with multiple myeloma (MM) experience disabling symptoms that are difficult to manage and may persist after induction therapy. Monitoring disease-related and induction therapy-induced symptoms and identifying patients at greater risk for high symptom burden are unmet clinical needs. The objective of this study was to examine the trajectories of symptom severity over time and identify predictors of high symptom burden during MM induction therapy.MethodologyEligible patients with MM rated their symptoms by completing the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory MM module repeatedly during 16 weeks of induction therapy. Group-based trajectory modeling identified patient groups with persistently high-severity (versus low-severity) symptom trajectories over time. Quality of life (QOL) and affective and physical functioning status were assessed. Predictors of high symptom burden were examined by regression analysis.ResultsSixty-four MM patients participated. Most patients (89%) received bortezomib-based therapy. The five most-severe symptom trajectory groups were pain (59%), muscle weakness (46%), numbness (42%), disturbed sleep (41%), and fatigue (31%). Patients in the high-severity trajectory group for the five most-severe symptoms (31% of the sample) were more likely to have high-severity cognitive and affective symptoms. Patients in the high-severity trajectory groups for fatigue, muscle weakness, disturbed sleep, and bone aches were more likely to have high pain scores (all p < 0.05). Significant increases over time were observed in scores for pain (estimate: 0.026), numbness (0.051), muscle weakness (0.020), physical items (0.028), and affective items (0.014) (all p < 0.05). A higher baseline composite score of the five most-severe symptoms predicted worse QOL (- 6.24), and poor affective (0.80) and physical (1.10) statuses (all p < 0.01). Female sex predicted higher risk for being in the high-severity trajectory group for muscle weakness.ConclusionAlmost one-third of MM patients suffer from up to 5 moderate to severe symptoms persistently, including pain, muscle weakness, numbness, disturbed sleep, and fatigue. Importantly, these results identify a group of symptoms that should be monitored and managed as part of routine patient care during MM induction therapy and suggest that pre-therapy pain management is necessary for better symptom control.
| S-EPMC11618278 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cancer patients often experience a large number of symptoms together. The aim of this study is to determine the symptom clusters in cancer patients at palliative care clinic.Hundred and seventy consecutive patients were enrolled in the study. Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale was used for symptom assessment of the patients.The most experienced symptoms by the patients during the past week before hospitalization in palliative care clinic were lack of energy (95.4%), weight loss (91.2%), lack of appetite (89.4%), pain (88.2%), dry mouth (87.6%), feeling sad (87.6%), feeling nervous (82.9%), worrying (81.2%), and feeling irritable (80.6%). Five symptom clusters were defined. First cluster: pain, feeling nervous, dry mouth, worrying, feeling irritable, weight loss; second cluster: feeling drowsy, numbness/tingling in hands/feet, difficulty in sleeping, dizziness, constipation, I do not look like myself; third cluster: nausea, vomiting; fourth cluster: shortness of breath, difficulty in swallowing, cough, change in the way food tastes; and fifth cluster: feeling bloated, problems with urination, diarrhea, itching, mouth sores, hair loss, swelling of arm or legs, change in the skin.We encountered various symptom clusters in advanced cancer patients. Identification of symptom clusters and knowledge of cluster composition in oncological population may particularly contribute individualization of the treatment.
| S-EPMC5473098 | biostudies-other
Project description:BACKGROUND:Many people are dying from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but consensus guidance on palliative care in COVID-19 is lacking. This new life-threatening disease has put healthcare systems under pressure, with the increased need of palliative care provided to many patients by clinicians who have limited prior experience in this field. Therefore, we aimed to make consensus recommendations for palliative care for patients with COVID-19 using the Convergence of Opinion on Recommendations and Evidence (CORE) process. METHODS:We invited 90 international experts to complete an online survey including stating their agreement, or not, with 14 potential recommendations. At least 70% agreement on directionality was needed to provide consensus recommendations. If consensus was not achieved on the first round, a second round was conducted. RESULTS:68 (75.6%) experts responded in the first round. Most participants were experts in palliative care, respiratory medicine or critical care medicine. In the first round, consensus was achieved on 13 recommendations based upon indirect evidence and clinical experience. In the second round, 58 (85.3%) out of 68 of the first-round experts responded, resulting in consensus for the 14th recommendation. CONCLUSION:This multi-national task force provides consensus recommendations for palliative care for patients with COVID-19 concerning: advance care planning; (pharmacological) palliative treatment of breathlessness; clinician-patient communication; remote clinician-family communication; palliative care involvement in patients with serious COVID-19; spiritual care; psychosocial care; and bereavement care. Future studies are needed to generate empirical evidence for these recommendations.
| S-EPMC7366176 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHome-based palliative care (HPC) is considered to moderate the problem of rising healthcare utilization of cancer patients at end-of-life. Reports however suggest a proportion of HPC patients continue to experience high care intensity. Little is known about differential trajectories of healthcare utilization in patients on HPC. Thus, we aimed to uncover the heterogeneity of healthcare utilization trajectories in HPC patients and identify predictors of each utilization pattern.MethodsThis is a cohort study of adult cancer patients referred by Singapore Health Services to HCA Hospice Service who died between 1st January 2018 and 31st March 2020. We used patient-level data to capture predisposing, enabling, and need factors for healthcare utilization. Group-based multi-trajectory modelling was applied to identify trajectories for healthcare utilization based on the composite outcome of emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalization, and outpatient visits.ResultsA total of 1572 cancer patients received HPC (median age, 71 years; interquartile range, 62-80 years; 51.1% female). We found three distinct trajectory groups: group 1 (31.9% of cohort) with persistently low frequencies of healthcare utilization, group 2 (44.1%) with persistently high frequencies, and group 3 (24.0%) that begin with moderate frequencies, which dropped over the next 9 months before increasing in the last 3 months. Predisposing (age, advance care plan completion, and care preferences), enabling (no medical subsidy, primary decision maker), and need factors (cancer type, comorbidity burden and performance status) were significantly associated with group membership. High symptom needs increased ED visits and hospitalizations in all three groups (ED visits, group 1-3: incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.74-6.85; hospitalizations, group 1-3: IRR 1.69-6.60). High home visit intensity reduced outpatient visits in all three groups (group 1-3 IRR 0.54-0.84), while it contributed to reduction of ED visits (IRR 0.40; 95% CI 0.25-0.62) and hospitalizations (IRR 0.37; 95% CI 0.24-0.58) in group 2.ConclusionsThis study on HPC patients highlights three healthcare utilization trajectories with implications for targeted interventions. Future efforts could include improving advance care plan completion, supporting care preferences in the community, proactive interventions among symptomatic high-risk patients, and stratification of home visit intensity.
| S-EPMC9494890 | biostudies-literature