The financial burden of cancer patients: time to stop averting our eyes

Sleep quality with WHO Step III opioid use for cancer pain

OBJECTIVE

Sleep is often disturbed in patients with advanced cancer. There is limited knowledge about sleep in patients with cancer treated with strong opioids. This study examines sleep quality in patients with advanced cancer who are treated with a WHO Step III opioid for pain.

METHODS

An international, multicentre, cross-sectional study with 604 adult patients with cancer pain using WHO Step III opioids. Sleep quality was assessed by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) global score (range; 0-21; score >5 indicates poor sleep). PSQI includes sleep quality, sleep latency, sleep duration, sleep efficiency, sleep disturbances, use of sleep medications and daytime dysfunction. Pain and quality of life were assessed by Brief Pain Inventory and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core30.

RESULTS

The median age was 62 years, 42% were female, mean Karnofsky performance score (KPS) was 62.5 (±14.2) and mean oral daily morphine equivalent dose was 303 mg/24 hours (±543.8 mg). The mean PSQI global score was 8.8 (±4.2) (range 0-20). Seventy-eight per cent were poor sleepers. All PSQI components were affected, and 44% reported trouble sleeping caused by pain. In the multiple regression model, predictors of PSQI global scores were pain intensity, emotional function, constipation, financial difficulties and KPS (adjusted R²=0.21).

CONCLUSION

The majority (78%) of these patients with cancer treated with Step III opioids experienced poor sleep quality. Pain intensity, emotional function, constipation, financial difficulties and KPS predicted poor PSQI global scores. The clinical implication is that healthcare personnel should routinely assess and treat sleep disturbance in patients with advanced cancer disease.

Patient-reported outcome measures of the impact of cancer on patients' everyday lives: a systematic review

Purpose

Patients with advanced disease are living longer and commonly used patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) may miss relevant elements of the quality of extended survival. This systematic review examines the measures used to capture aspects of the quality of survival including impact on patients’ everyday lives such as finances, work and family roles.

Methods

Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO restricted to English language articles. Information on study characteristics, instruments and outcomes was systematically extracted and synthesised. A predefined set of criteria was used to rate the quality of studies.

Results

From 2761 potentially relevant articles, 22 met all inclusion criteria, including 10 concerning financial distress, 3 on roles and responsibilities and 9 on multiple aspects of social well-being. Generally, studies were not of high quality; many lacked bias free participant selection, had confounding factors and had not accounted for all participants. High levels of financial distress were reported and were associated with multiple demographic factors such as age and income. There were few reports concerned with impacts on patients’ roles/responsibilities in everyday life although practical and emotional struggles with parenting were identified. Social difficulties were common and associated with multiple factors including being a caregiver. Many studies were single time-point surveys and used non-validated measures. Exceptions were employment of the COST and Social Difficulties Inventory (SDI), validated measures of financial and social distress respectively.

Conclusions

Impact on some important parts of patients’ everyday lives is insufficiently and inconsistently captured. Further PROM development focussing on roles and responsibilities, including work and caring for dependents, is warranted.

Implications for Cancer Survivors

Factors such as finances, employment and responsibility for caring for dependants (e.g. children and elderly relatives) can affect the well-being of cancer survivors. There is a need to ensure that any instruments used to assess patients’ social well-being are broad enough to include these areas so that any difficulties arising can be better understood and appropriately supported.

Next-generation sequencing in patients with advanced cancer: are we ready for widespread clinical use? A single institute's experience

The next-generation sequencing (NGS) assay targeting cancer-relevant genes has been adopted widely for use in patients with advanced cancer. The primary aim of this study was to assess the clinical utility of commercially available NGS. We retrospectively collected demographic and clinicopathologic data, recommended therapy, and clinical outcomes of 30 patients with a variety of advanced solid tumors referred to Foundation Medicine NGS. The initial pathologic examination was performed at the pathology department of the referring hospital. The comprehensive clinical NSG assay was performed on paraffin-embedded tumor samples using the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-certified FoundationOne platform. The median number of genomic alterations was 3 (0-19). The median number of therapies with potential benefit was 2 (0-8). In 12 cases, a comprehensive clinical NGS assay did not indicate any therapy with potential benefit according to the genomic profile. Ten of the 30 patients received treatments recommended by genomic profile results. In six of the 10 cases, disease progressed within 2 months and four patients died within 3 months of treatment initiation. Three of the 30 patients benefited from a comprehensive clinical NGS assay and the subsequent recommended therapy. The median PFS was 12 weeks (95% confidence interval 10-57) in patients treated with molecularly targeted agents chosen on the basis of tumor genomic profiling versus 48 weeks (95% confidence interval 8-38) in the control group treated with physician choice therapy (P=0.12). Our study suggests that NGS can detect additional treatment targets in individual patients, but prospective medical research and appropriate clinical guidelines for proper clinical use are vital.