Emergency oncology: development, current position and future direction in the USA and UK

Potentially fatal complications of new systemic anticancer therapies: pearls and pitfalls in their initial management

BACKGROUND

Various types of immunotherapy (i.e. immune checkpoint inhibitors [ICIs], chimeric antigen receptor [CAR] T-cells and bispecific T-cell engagers [BiTEs]) and antibody drug conjugates (ADCs) have been used increasingly to treat solid cancers, lymphomas and leukaemias. Patients with serious complications of these therapies can be presented to physicians of different specialties. In this narrative review we discuss potentially fatal complications of new systemic anticancer therapies and some practical considerations for their diagnosis and initial treatment.

RESULTS

Clinical presentation of toxicities of new anticancer therapies may be unpredictable and nonspecific. They can mimic other more common medical conditions such as infection or stroke. If not recognized and properly treated these toxicities can progress rapidly into life-threatening conditions. ICIs can cause immune-related inflammatory disorders of various organ systems (e.g. pneumonitis or colitis), and a cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) may develop after treatment with CAR T-cells or BiTEs. The cornerstones of management of these hyper-inflammatory disorders are supportive care and systemic immunosuppressive therapy. The latter should start as soon as symptoms are mild-moderate. Similarly, some severe toxicities of ADCs also require immunosuppressive therapy. A multidisciplinary team including an oncologist/haematologist and a corresponding organ-site specialist (e.g. gastroenterologist in the case of colitis) should be involved in the diagnosis and treatment of these toxicities.

CONCLUSIONS

Health professionals should be aware of potential serious complications of new systemic anticancer therapies. Early diagnosis and treatment with adequate supportive care and immunosuppressive therapy are crucial for the optimal outcome of patients with these complications.

Association of patient socioeconomic status with outcomes after palliative treatment for disseminated cancer

BACKGROUND

Palliative treatment has been associated with improved quality of life and survival for a wide variety of metastatic cancers. However, it is unclear whether the benefits of palliative treatment are uniformly experienced across the US cancer population. We evaluated patterns and outcomes of palliative treatment based on socioeconomic, sociodemographic and treating facility characteristics.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed between 2008 and 2019 with Stage IV primary cancer of nine organ sites were analyzed in the National Cancer Database. The association between identified variables, and outcomes concerning the administration of palliative treatment were analyzed with multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

Overall 238,995 (23.6%) of Stage IV patients received palliative treatment, which increased over time for all cancers (from 20.7% in 2008 to 25.6% in 2019). Palliative treatment utilization differed significantly by region (West less than Northeast, OR: 0.55 [0.54-0.56], p < 0.001) and insurance payer status (uninsured greater than private insurance, OR: 1.35 [1.32-1.39], p < 0.001). Black race and Hispanic ethnicity were also associated with lower rates of palliative treatment compared to White and non-Hispanics respectively (OR for Blacks: 0.91 [0.90-0.93], p < 0.001 and OR for Hispanics: 0.79 [0.77-0.81] p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

There are important differences in the utilization of palliative treatment across different populations in the United States. A better understanding of variability in palliative treatment use and outcomes may identify opportunities to improve informed decision making and optimize quality of care at the end-of-life.

Early switch from intravenous to oral antibiotic therapy in patients with cancer who have low-risk neutropenic sepsis: the EASI-SWITCH RCT

Background

Neutropenic sepsis is a common complication of systemic anticancer treatment. There is variation in practice in timing of switch to oral antibiotics after commencement of empirical intravenous antibiotic therapy.

Objectives

To establish the clinical and cost effectiveness of early switch to oral antibiotics in patients with neutropenic sepsis at low risk of infective complications.

Design

A randomised, multicentre, open-label, allocation concealed, non-inferiority trial to establish the clinical and cost effectiveness of early oral switch in comparison to standard care.

Setting

Nineteen UK oncology centres.

Participants

Patients aged 16 years and over receiving systemic anticancer therapy with fever (≥ 38°C), or symptoms and signs of sepsis, and neutropenia (≤ 1.0 × 109/l) within 24 hours of randomisation, with a Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer score of ≥ 21 and receiving intravenous piperacillin/tazobactam or meropenem for < 24 hours were eligible. Patients with acute leukaemia or stem cell transplant were excluded.

Intervention

Early switch to oral ciprofloxacin (750 mg twice daily) and co-amoxiclav (625 mg three times daily) within 12-24 hours of starting intravenous antibiotics to complete 5 days treatment in total. Control was standard care, that is, continuation of intravenous antibiotics for at least 48 hours with ongoing treatment at physician discretion.

Main outcome measures

Treatment failure, a composite measure assessed at day 14 based on the following criteria: fever persistence or recurrence within 72 hours of starting intravenous antibiotics; escalation from protocolised antibiotics; critical care support or death.

Results

The study was closed early due to under-recruitment with 129 patients recruited; hence, a definitive conclusion regarding non-inferiority cannot be made. Sixty-five patients were randomised to the early switch arm and 64 to the standard care arm with subsequent intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses including 125 (intervention n = 61 and control n = 64) and 113 (intervention n = 53 and control n = 60) patients, respectively. In the intention-to-treat population the treatment failure rates were 14.1% in the control group and 24.6% in the intervention group, difference = 10.5% (95% confidence interval 0.11 to 0.22). In the per-protocol population the treatment failure rates were 13.3% and 17.7% in control and intervention groups, respectively; difference = 3.7% (95% confidence interval 0.04 to 0.148). Treatment failure predominantly consisted of persistence or recurrence of fever and/or physician-directed escalation from protocolised antibiotics with no critical care admissions or deaths. The median length of stay was shorter in the intervention group and adverse events reported were similar in both groups. Patients, particularly those with care-giving responsibilities, expressed a preference for early switch. However, differences in health-related quality of life and health resource use were small and not statistically significant.

Conclusions

Non-inferiority for early oral switch could not be proven due to trial under-recruitment. The findings suggest this may be an acceptable treatment strategy for some patients who can adhere to such a treatment regimen and would prefer a potentially reduced duration of hospitalisation while accepting increased risk of treatment failure resulting in re-admission. Further research should explore tools for patient stratification for low-risk de-escalation or ambulatory pathways including use of biomarkers and/or point-of-care rapid microbiological testing as an adjunct to clinical decision-making tools. This could include application to shorter-duration antimicrobial therapy in line with other antimicrobial stewardship studies.

Trial registration

This trial is registered as ISRCTN84288963.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 13/140/05) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 14. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Provision of acute oncology services in the UK: data from the Society for Acute Medicine Benchmarking Audit 2022 (SAMBA22)

Acute oncology services (AOS) manage acute cancer-related presentations alongside acute medical teams. This study assessed AOS provision against national peer review measures and the burden of acute cancer-related admissions. The 2022 Society for Acute Medicine Benchmarking Audit surveyed UK hospitals, collecting hospital-level and patient-level data for all medical admissions over a 24-h period. Logistic regression models were constructed to identify differences in patient outcomes for cancer-related admissions. Most hospitals (n=120 or 91.6%) reported having an AOS. There was heterogeneity in AOS provision, with many failing to meet peer-review measures. Of the 7,116 patients, 542 (7.6%) were cancer-related admissions. Cancer-related admissions had greater clinical acuity (p<0.05), length of stay (p<0.001) and 14-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio (OR)=3.54, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.41-5.22, p<0.001) compared with other medical admissions. Increasing availability of AOS with integration of ambulatory pathways are vital next steps to improving care for acute cancer-related admissions.

A qualitative analysis of cancer-related patient care in the emergency department

OBJECTIVES

Due to an increasing incidence of new cancer diagnoses in the United States and longer survivorship, a growing number of patients with cancer receive care in emergency departments (EDs). This trend places an increasing burden on already crowded EDs, and experts are concerned these patients do not receive optimal care. The purpose of this study was to describe the experiences of ED physicians and nurses who care for patients with cancer. This information can inform strategies to improve oncology care for patients in ED settings.

METHODS

We used a qualitative descriptive design to summarize to the experiences of ED physicians and nurses (n = 23) caring for patients with cancer. We conducted individual, semistructured interviews to query participants about their perspectives on care for oncology patients in the ED.

RESULTS

Physician and nurse participants identified 11 challenges and suggested three potential strategies to improve care. The challenges included the following: risk of infection, poor communication between ED staff and other providers, poor communication between oncology or primary care providers and patients, poor communication between ED providers and patients, difficult disposition decisions, new cancer diagnoses, complex pain management, allocation of limited resources, lack of cancer-specific skills among providers, poor care coordination, and evolving end-of-life decisions. The solutions included the following: patient education, education for ED providers, and improved care coordination.

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians and nurses experience challenges stemming from three overarching types of factors: illness factors, communication factors, and system-level factors. Solutions for the challenges of providing oncology care in the ED call for new strategies at the levels of the patient, provider, institution, and health care system.

Recognizing the emergency department’s role in oncologic care: a review of the literature on unplanned acute care

Background

The global prevalence of cancer is rapidly increasing and will increase the acute care needs of patients with cancer, including emergency department (ED) care. Patients with cancer present to the ED across the cancer care continuum from diagnosis through treatment, survivorship, and end-of-life. This article describes the characteristics and determinants of ED visits, as well as challenges in the effort to define preventable ED visits in this population.

Findings

The most recent population-based estimates suggest 4% of all ED visits are cancer-related and roughly two thirds of these ED visits result in hospitalization—a 4-fold higher ED hospitalization rate than the general population. Approximately 44% of cancer patients visit the ED within 1 year of diagnosis, and more often have repeat ED visits within a short time frame, though there is substantial variability across cancer types. Similar patterns of cancer-related ED use are observed internationally across a range of different national payment and health system settings. ED use for patients with cancer likely reflects a complex interaction of individual and contextual factors—including provider behavior, health system characteristics, and health policies—that warrants greater attention in the literature.

Conclusions

Given the amount and complexity of cancer care delivered in the emergency setting, future research is recommended to examine specific symptoms associated with cancer-related ED visits, the contextual determinants of ED use, and definitions of preventable ED use specific to patients with cancer.

Risk stratification for clinical severity of pulmonary embolism in patients with cancer: a narrative review and MASCC clinical guidance for daily care

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer. The clinical presentation and outcomes of PE range from an acute life-threatening condition requiring intensive care to a mild symptomatic condition associated with favorable outcomes and potentially candidate for early hospital discharge. The wide clinical spectrum of PE has led to the development of risk stratification models aimed at the triage of patients in emergency care departments and optimizing the utilization of health care resources. Incidental or unsuspected PE (UPE), detected during routine staging computed tomography scans, make up a significant proportion of this cohort among the oncology population. The present narrative review is aimed at examining the currently available PE risk assessment models developed for the general population and for patients with cancer including UPE. We include general recommendations for the daily care of patients with cancer-related PE and hypothesize on the factors that would potentially favor hospitalization with early discharge or ambulatory management in this setting.

Supportive care for new cancer therapies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The past decade has witnessed unprecedented delivery to the clinical arena of a range of novel, innovative, and effective targeted anticancer therapies. These include immunotherapies, most prominently immune checkpoint inhibitors, as well as agents that target growth factors and cancer-related mutations. Many of these new cancer therapies are, however, associated with an array of toxicities, necessitating insight and vigilance on the part of attending physicians to achieve high-quality supportive care alongside toxicity management. In this review, we consider some of the key supportive care issues in toxicity management.

RECENT FINDINGS

Although both supportive care and targeted therapies have brought significant benefits to cancer care, the management of novel cancer therapy toxicities is nevertheless often complex. This is due in large part to the fact that target organs differ widely, particularly in the case of checkpoint inhibitors, with minor dermatological disorders being most common, while others, such as pneumonitis, are more severe and potentially life threatening. Accordingly, efficient management of these immune-related adverse events requires collaboration between multiple medical specialists.

SUMMARY

Supportive care is a key component in the management of new cancer therapy toxicities and needs to be incorporated into treatment pathways.

Types of cancer and outcomes in patients with cancer requiring admission from the emergency department: A nationwide, population-based study, 2016-2017

BACKGROUND

Emergency department (ED) utilization and emergency admissions by patients with cancer have increased. The authors aimed to evaluate the characteristics of patients with cancer admitted through the ED and determine whether cancer types are related to in-hospital mortality.

METHODS

The National Emergency Department Information System database of patients visiting EDs in South Korea between 2016 and 2017 was analyzed. Among 6,179,088 adult patients who presented to an ED with nontraumatic medical illness, patients with cancer were identified. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

Patients with cancer accounted for 6.8% of ED visits, and 239,630 patients (57.0%) were admitted to the hospital (intensive care unit [ICU], 9.5%; others, 90.5%). The prevalent cancers requiring hospitalization were lung cancer (15.7%), liver cancer (14.2%), and colon cancer (11.6%). The commonest reasons for admission other than cancer-related medical problems (41.4%) were pneumonia (4.8%) and hepatobiliary infection (2.8%). Overall in-hospital mortality was 16.1% (ICU, 28.3%; general wards, 14.8%); lung cancer (22.9%), liver cancer (19.7%), and leukemia/multiple myeloma (17.8%) showed the highest mortality rates. The highest odds for mortality were for lung cancer (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 2.227; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.124-2.335; P < .001) and liver cancer (adjusted OR, 1.839; 95% CI, 1.751-1.930; P < .001), which were referenced to genitourinary cancer by multivariable logistic regression analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

More than half of the patients with cancer visiting EDs were admitted to the hospital with a mortality rate of 16.1%. Physicians treating patients with cancer and policymakers and planners designing health systems should understand the different prevalences and outcomes of oncological emergencies by cancer type to improve patient care.

Treatment of infections in cancer patients: an update from the neutropenia, infection and myelosuppression study group of the Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC)

INTRODUCTION

Patients with hematological and advanced solid malignancies have acquired immune dysfunction, often exacerbated by treatment, posing a significant risk for the development of infections. This review evaluates the utility of current clinical and treatment guidelines, in the setting of management of infections in cancer patients.

AREAS COVERED

These include causes of infection in cancer patients, management of patients with high-risk and low-risk febrile neutropenia, management of low-risk patients in an outpatient setting, the role of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in the prevention and treatment of neutropenia-related infections, management of lung infections in various clinical settings, and emerging challenges surrounding the risk of infection in cancer patients treated with novel treatments. The literature search was performed by accessing PubMed and other databases, focusing on published clinical trials of relevant anti-cancer agents and diseases, primarily covering the recent past, but also including several key studies published during the last decade and, somewhat earlier in a few cases.

EXPERT REVIEW

Notwithstanding the promise of gene therapy/gene editing in hematological malignancies and some types of solid cancers, innovations introduced in clinical practice include more discerning clinical management such as the generalized use of biosimilar formulations of G-CSF and the implementation of novel, innovative immunotherapies.

Short and Long-Term Mortality Trends for Cancer Patients with Septic Shock Stratified by Cancer Type from 2009 to 2017: A Population-Based Cohort Study

Simple Summary

This study aimed to assess short and long-term mortality trends in cancer patients with septic shock from 2009 to 2017. Among 43,466 adult cancer patients with septic shock (90% solid and 10% hematologic cancer cases) who presented at an emergency department (ED) in Korea between 2009 and 2017, the 30-day and 1-year mortality rates were 52.1% and 81.3%, respectively. The overall 30-day mortality decreased by 4.8% annually from 2013 to 2017, whereas the 1-year mortality only showed a 1.9% annual decrease over this same period. Pancreatic cancer cases showed the most significant improvement in the 30-day mortality since 2014, and lung and stomach cancer showed a sustained decrease in this metric during the whole study period. The outcomes of cancer patients with septic shock have improved in recent years across most cancer types. Physicians should have expectations of improved prognoses in cancer patients admitted to the ED with septic shock.

Abstract

There have been recent advances in both cancer and sepsis management. This study aimed to assess short and long-term mortality trends in cancer patients with septic shock from 2009 to 2017 by cancer type. This nationwide population-based cohort study using data from the National Health Insurance Service of Korea included adult cancer patients who presented to an emergency department (ED) with septic shock from 2009 to 2017. Among 43,466 adult cancer patients with septic shock (90% solid and 10% hematologic cancer cases), the 30-day and 1-year mortality rates were 52.1% and 81.3%, respectively. The overall 30-day mortality showed a marked decrease of 4.8% annually from 2013 to 2017, but the annual decrease in the 1-year mortality over the same period was only 1.9%. Pancreatic cancer cases showed the most significant improvement in 30-day mortality between 2014 and 2019 (11.0% decrease/year). Lung and stomach cancers showed a sustained decrease in 30-day mortality during the whole study period (1.7% and 2.0% decrease/year, respectively). The outcomes of cancer patients with septic shock have improved in recent years across most cancer types. Physicians should have expectations of an improved prognosis in cancer patients admitted to the ED with septic shock.

Supportive Care: An Indispensable Component of Modern Oncology

The advent of new cancer therapies, alongside expected growth and ageing of the population, better survival rates and associated costs of care, is uncovering a need to more clearly define and integrate supportive care services across the whole spectrum of the disease. The current focus of cancer care is on initial diagnosis and treatment, and end of life care. The Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer defines supportive care as 'the prevention and management of the adverse effects of cancer and its treatment'. This encompasses the entire cancer journey, and necessitates involvement and integration of most clinical specialties. Optimal supportive care can assist in accurate diagnosis and management, and ultimately improve outcomes. A national strategy to implement supportive care is needed to acknowledge evolving oncology practice, changing disease patterns and the changing patient demographic.

Checklists for Complications During Systemic Cancer Treatment Shared by Patients, Friends, and Health Care Professionals: Prospective Interventional Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Advances in cancer management have been associated with an increased incidence of emergency presentations with disease- or treatment-related complications.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to measure the ability of patients and members of their social network to complete checklists for complications of systemic treatment for cancer and examine the impact on patient-centered and health-economic outcomes.

METHODS

A prospective interventional cohort study was performed to assess the impact of a smartphone app used by patients undergoing systemic cancer therapy and members of their network to monitor for common complications. The app was used by patients, a nominated "safety buddy," and acute oncology services. The control group was made up of patients from the same institution. Measures were based on process (completion of checklists over 60 days), patient experience outcomes (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and the General version of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy at baseline, 1 month, and 2 months) and health-economic outcomes (usage of appointments in primary care and elective and unscheduled hospital admissions).

RESULTS

At the conclusion of the study, 50 patients had completed 2882 checklists, and their 50 "safety buddies" had completed 318 checklists. Near daily usage was maintained over the 60-day study period. When compared to a cohort of 50 patients with matching disease profiles from the same institution, patients in the intervention group had comparable changes in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and General version of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy. Patients in the Intervention Group required a third (32 vs 97 nights) of the hospital days with overnight stay compared to patients in the Control Group, though the difference was not significant. The question, "I feel safer with the checklist," received a mean score of 4.27 (SD 0.87) on a Likert scale (1-5) for patients and 4.55 (SD 0.65) for family and friends.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing treatment for cancer and their close contacts can complete checklists for common complications of systemic treatments and take an active role in systems supporting their own safety. A larger sample size will be needed to assess the impact on clinical outcomes and health economics.

Management of oncology-related emergencies at the emergency department: A long-term undertaking

Background:

The emergency department at the Singapore General Hospital is an emergency department with an annual census of 140,000 and oncology-related attendances of about 4000 (2.8%). These patients are often admitted for further care. Palliative care in the emergency department for these patients is often minimal. The aim of this study was to determine the state of current management of oncology-related emergencies at the Singapore General Hospital’s emergency department, hence identifying specific areas for intervention.

Methods:

We carried out a retrospective data review of all Singapore General Hospital’s emergency department patients who had either cancer-related diagnoses or were admitted to the Medical Oncology Department in October 2018. Simple statistical analysis was then performed using IBM SPSS version 21.

Results:

Of 308 identified patients, there was approximately equal distribution by sex. The women were generally younger than the men (61.33 ± 13.63 years vs 67.36 ± 12.02 years, p = 0.063, confidence interval −8.94 to −3.13). Seventy-two (23.4%) of the patients arrived at emergency department by ambulance. The mean emergency department length of stay was 4.25 h. About half of the patients had either lung, colorectal, or breast as their primary site of cancer. There was no correlation between clinical severity according to the National Early Warning Scores and triage complaint-type or emergency clinical diagnosis. More than 90% were admitted, with about 32.6% dying during their inpatient stay. High National Early Warning Scores were significantly associated with mortality.

Conclusion:

There is large potential for interventions to improve patient well-being in the pre-hospital setting and emergency department. Given the sizable number of patients with poor outcomes, palliative care is also of paramount importance.

Emergency management of immune-related toxicity

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Emergency presentations in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are a clinical challenge. Clinicians need to be vigilant in diagnosing and treating immune-mediated toxicities. In this review, we consider the approach to managing an acutely unwell patient being treated with ICIs presenting as an emergency.

RECENT FINDINGS

A minority of acutely unwell patients treated with ICIs will have an immune-mediated toxicity. Early recognition and intervention in those with immune-mediated toxicity can reduce the duration and severity of the complications. The use of early immunosuppressive agents along corticosteroid therapy may improve outcomes in patients with life-threatening immune-mediated toxicity.

SUMMARY

Individualized management of immune-mediated toxicities is a key challenge for emergency oncology services; this has become part of routine cancer care.

Emergency ambulatory outpatient management of immune-mediated hypophysitis

PURPOSE

Immune-mediated hypophysitis is an important toxicity related to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Optimal management is associated with improved outcomes. It represents a wide spectrum of clinical presentations, and a proportion may be suitable for emergency ambulatory management.

METHODS

Emergency ambulatory management of patients presenting with clinical features and findings consistent with ICI-induced hypophysitis was considered at a tertiary cancer/endocrinology hospital. Suitable patients were initially investigated and treated in accordance with the UK emergency management guidelines for ICI induced hypophysitis. After an initial observation period of 4 h, patients were discharged with oral hydrocortisone (20, 10, 10 mg).

RESULTS

An initial cohort of 4 patients with emergency presentations of ICI-induced hypophysitis has been managed in an ambulatory fashion in the first 3 months. There were no 30-day readmissions.

CONCLUSION

Carefully selected emergency presentations with immune-mediated hypophysitis may be suitable for ambulatory management.

Ambulatory emergency oncology: A key tenet of future emergency oncology care

Ambulatory emergency oncology The challenges of emergency oncology alongside its increasing financial burden have led to an interest in developing optimal care models for meeting patients' needs. Ambulatory care is recognised as a key tenet in ensuring the safety and sustainability of acute care services. Increased access to ambulatory care has successfully reduced ED utilisation and improved clinical outcomes in high-risk non-oncological populations. Individualised management of acute cancer presentations is a key challenge for emergency oncology services so that it can mirror routine cancer care. There are an increasing number of acute cancer presentations, such as low-risk febrile neutropenia and incidental pulmonary embolism, that can be risk assessed for care in an emergency ambulatory setting. Modelling of ambulatory emergency oncology services will be dependent on local service deliveries and pathways, but are key for providing high quality, personalised and sustainable emergency oncology care. These services will also be at the forefront of much needed emergency oncology to define the optimal management of ambulatory-sensitive presentations.

Emergency Ambulatory Management of Low-Risk Febrile Neutropenia: Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer Fits-Real-World Experience From a UK Cancer Center

BACKGROUND

Emergency patient presentations with febrile neutropenia are a heterogeneous group. A small minority of these patients proceed to develop significant medical complications. Risk stratification using scores, such as the Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer score, have been advocated to identify patients who are at low risk of adverse outcome suitable for treatment on an ambulatory care pathway.

OBJECTIVES

We sought to report the experience of 100 patients presenting acutely with neutropenic fever managed in an emergency ambulatory fashion.

METHODS

Patients presenting as an emergency with low-risk febrile neutropenia managed in an ambulatory setting between January 2017 and February 2019 at a tertiary cancer hospital in England were prospectively studied. Patients with a fever >38.0°C and an absolute neutrophil count <1.0 × 10⁹/L were included. All patients with a Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer score ≥21 and a National Early Warning Score ≤3 were potentially eligible for the pathway. Complications were classified as serious if the patient developed persistent hypotension, respiratory failure, intensive care unit admission, altered mental status, disseminated intravascular coagulation, renal failure requiring renal replacement therapy, electrocardiogram changes requiring antidysrhythmic treatment, and 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

One hundred patients with low-risk febrile neutropenia consecutively managed in an emergency ambulatory fashion were prospectively analyzed. Eighty-one patients were female and the median age was 51 y (range 17-79 y). No patients developed serious complications. Eight (8% [95% confidence interval 4.1-15.0%]) patients had a 7-day readmission.

CONCLUSION

Outpatient ambulatory care for emergency patients with low-risk febrile neutropenia can be delivered in a safe and effective fashion. Collaboration between acute care physicians and oncologists is required to develop local models based on national guidelines to facilitate individualised care for emergency oncology patients.

Do mHealth applications improve clinical outcomes of patients with cancer? A critical appraisal of the peer-reviewed literature

Purpose

Patients undergoing systemic anti-cancer treatment experience distressing side effects, and these symptoms are often experienced outside the hospital setting. The impact of usage of cancer-related mobile health (mHealth) applications on patient-related outcomes requires investigation.

Methods

A critical appraisal of the literature was performed for the following question: ‘In patients with cancer have mHealth applications been compared with usual care to examine impact on commonly used clinical outcomes’. Literature searches were undertaken with the help of a research librarian and included Medline, Cochrane Collaboration, clinical trial databases and grey searches.

Results

Seventeen studies including between 12 and 2352 patients were identified and reviewed. Smartphone applications or internet portals collected data on symptoms or patient activity. Several studies showed statistically significant differences in patient-reported outcomes when symptom monitoring using mobile health application was compared to usual care. Change in mobility was the only outcome that was related directly to toxicity. Only limited data on mortality, cancer-related morbidity including complications of care, health-economic outcomes or long-term outcomes were reported.

Conclusions

Studies on mHealth applications might improve aspects of symptom control in patients with cancer, but there is currently little evidence for impact on other outcomes. This requires future research in interventional studies.

An integrated understanding of the complex drivers of emergency presentations and admissions in cancer patients: Qualitative modelling of secondary-care health professionals' experiences and views

The number of cancer-related emergency presentations and admissions has been steadily increasing in the UK. Drivers of this phenomenon are complex, multifactorial and interlinked. The main objective of this study was to understand the complexity of emergency hospital use in cancer patients. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 42 senior clinicians (20 doctors, 22 nurses) with diverse expertise and experience in caring for acutely ill cancer patients in the secondary care setting. Data analysis included thematic analysis and purposive text analysis to develop Causal Loop Diagrams. Our Causal Loop Diagrams represent an integrated understanding of the complex factors (13) influencing emergency hospital use in cancer patients. Eight factors formed five reinforcing feedback loops and therefore were high-leverage influences: Ability of patients and carers to self-care and cope; Effective and timely management of ambulatory care sensitive conditions by primary and community care; Sufficient and effective social care for patients and carers; Avoidable emergency hospital use; Bed capacity; Patients accessing timely appropriate specialist inpatient or ambulatory care; Prompt and effective management and prevention of acute episode; Timely and safe discharge with appropriate support. The loops show that reduction of avoidable hospital use helps relieve hospital bed pressure; improved bed capacity then has a decisive, positive influence on patient pathway and thus outcome and experience in the hospital; in turn, better in-hospital care and discharge help patients and carers self-care and cope better back home with better support from community-based health and social care services, which then reduces their future emergency hospital use. To optimise acute and emergency cancer care, it is also essential that patients, carers and other clinicians caring for cancer patients have prompt access to senior cancer specialists for advice, assessment, clinical decision and other support. The findings provide a useful framework and focus for service planners aiming to optimise care.

Long length of stay at the emergency department is mostly caused by organisational factors outside the influence of the emergency department: A root cause analysis

Background

Emergency department (ED) crowding is common and associated with increased costs and negative patient outcomes. The aim of this study was to conduct an in-depth analysis to identify the root causes of an ED length of stay (ED-LOS) of more than six hours.

Methods

An observational retrospective record review study was conducted to analyse the causes for ED-LOS of more than six hours during a one-week period in an academic hospital in the Netherlands. Basic administrative data were collected for all visiting patients. A root cause analysis was conducted using the PRISMA-method for patients with an ED-LOS > 6 hours, excluding children and critical care room presentations.

Results

568 patients visited the ED during the selected week (January 2017). Eighty-four patients (15%) had an ED-LOS > 6 hours and a PRISMA-analysis was performed in 74 (88%) of these patients. 269 root causes were identified, 216 (76%) of which were organisational and 53 (22%) patient or disease related. 207 (94%) of the organisational factors were outside the influence of the ED. Descriptive statistics showed a mean number of 2,5 consultations, 59% hospital admissions or transfers and a mean age of 57 years in the ED-LOS > 6 hours group. For the total group, there was a mean number of 1,9 consultations, 29% hospital admissions or transfers and a mean age of 43 years.

Conclusions

This study showed that the root causes for an increased ED-LOS were mostly organisational and beyond the control of the ED. These results confirm that interventions addressing the complete acute care chain are needed in order to reduce ED-LOS and crowding in ED’s.

Characteristics and outcome of patients with newly diagnosed advanced or metastatic lung cancer admitted to intensive care units (ICUs)

Background

Although patients with advanced or metastatic lung cancer have poor prognosis, admission to the ICU for management of life-threatening complications has increased over the years. Patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer appear as good candidates for ICU admission, but more robust information to assist decisions is lacking. The aim of our study was to evaluate the prognosis of newly diagnosed unresectable lung cancer patients.

Methods

A retrospective multicentric study analyzed the outcome of patients admitted to the ICU with a newly diagnosed lung cancer (diagnosis within the month) between 2010 and 2013.

Results

Out of the 100 patients, 30 had small cell lung cancer (SCLC) and 70 had non-small cell lung cancer. (Thirty patients had already been treated with oncologic treatments.) Mechanical ventilation (MV) was performed for 81 patients. Seventeen patients received emergency chemotherapy during their ICU stay. ICU, hospital, 3- and 6-month mortality were, respectively, 47, 60, 67 and 71%. Hospital mortality was 60% when invasive MV was used alone, 71% when MV and vasopressors were needed and 83% when MV, vasopressors and hemodialysis were required. In multivariate analysis, hospital mortality was associated with metastatic disease (OR 4.22 [1.4–12.4]; p = 0.008), need for invasive MV (OR 4.20 [1.11–16.2]; p = 0.030), while chemotherapy in ICU was associated with survival (OR 0.23, [0.07–0.81]; p = 0.020).

Conclusion

This study shows that ICU management can be appropriate for selected newly diagnosed patients with advanced lung cancer, and chemotherapy might improve outcome for patients with SCLC admitted for cancer-related complications. Nevertheless, tumors’ characteristics, numbers and types of organ dysfunction should be taken into account in the decisional process before admitting these patients in ICU.

Validation of the EPIPHANY index for predicting risk of serious complications in cancer patients with incidental pulmonary embolism

PURPOSE

The EPIPHANY index was developed to classify cancer associated pulmonary embolism (PE) into different risk categories using decision tree modeling. In this study, we tried to externally validate this index in a distinct group of patients solely composed of incidental PE (IPE).

METHODS

A retrospective study of patients diagnosed with IPE in two Emergency Departments in the USA and South Korea from 2013 to 2014 was performed. The primary outcome was the occurrence of a serious medical complication within 15 days of presentation to ED. Thirty-day complication was the secondary outcome. Cumulative hazard curves for each prognostic category were drawn to show the change in hazards over time.

RESULTS

A total of 258 patients with IPE were included (193 from MD Anderson Cancer Center and 65 from Asan Medical Center). Serious complication within 15 days occurred in 23 (8.9%) patients. The risk of overall 15-day and 30-day serious complications increased with each category (low, intermediate, and high risk: 3.4, 8.9, and 23.8%, P = 0.033; 6.9, 9.5, and 33.3%, P = 0.011). Cumulative hazard curves for each prognostic category were drawn and the survival functions factored by prognostic categories were significantly different over 15 days (P = 0.015) and 30 days (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests the EPIPHANY index could be a useful adjunct tool in risk stratification of cancer patients with IPE.

A novel approach to improving ambulatory outpatient management of low risk febrile neutropenia: an Enhanced Supportive Care (ESC) clinic

PURPOSE

Outpatient management of low risk febrile neutropenia patients (LRFN) identified by the MASCC score is a safe and effective strategy. Early supportive care has been shown to improve outcomes in patients with care. We developed an innovative ambulatory outpatient "enhanced supportive care" (ESC) clinic combining emergency oncology and supportive care through which we incorporated the management of patients with LRFN.

METHODS

An ESC clinic was started in January 2017 at a tertiary cancer hospital in the North West of England. An integral part of the clinic was an ambulatory pathway for patients presenting with LRFN. Patients with a MASCC score ≥ 21 and an Early Warning Score ≤ 3 were potentially eligible for the pathway. Suitable patients were managed with oral amoxicillin/clavulanic acid (500/125 mg TDS) and ciprofloxacin (500 mg BD) or moxifloxacin 400 mg OD if penicillin allergic. All patients had one dose of intravenous meropenem on arrival.

RESULTS

In its first year, 68 patients with LRFN were managed through the clinic. Table 1 shows the demographic data of the patients. Six (8.8%) patients had a 7-day readmission. There were no serious complications in the cohort.

CONCLUSION

The ESC clinic maybe an effective method for delivering outpatient ambulatory management of patients with LRFN.

Retrospective analysis of cancer patients admitted to a tertiary centre with suspected neutropenic sepsis: Are C-reactive protein and neutrophil count useful prognostic biomarkers?

Historically, neutropenic sepsis has been associated with high mortality rates. However, there has been limited research into cancer patients admitted with suspected sepsis who are found to be non-neutropenic. C-reactive protein has been shown to be raised in cancer patients for reasons other than infection and there have been limited studies to look as its utility as a prognostic biomarker in suspected sepsis in this population. This study looked at 749 patients admitted to a tertiary cancer centre between January 2015 and February 2016 with suspected sepsis. The neutrophil count and C-reactive protein level was taken in all these patients on admission and at 72 h and compared to the primary outcome of 30-day all-cause mortality rates and hospital length of stay. There were 49 patients who died within 30 days (6.5%). Patients who died were found to have both higher neutrophil counts and C-reactive protein level on admission and at 72 h compared to survivors. Prolonged grade 4 neutropenia was shown to have higher mortality rates. There was only weak correlation between either neutrophil counts or C-reactive protein level and length of hospital stay. This study suggests that higher C-reactive protein level and neutrophil counts and prolonged grade 4 neutropenia are associated with higher mortality rates in cancer patients admitted with suspected sepsis and have utility as prognostic biomarkers in this population.

Comparison of the MASCC and CISNE scores for identifying low-risk neutropenic fever patients: analysis of data from three emergency departments of cancer centers in three continents

PURPOSE

Patients with febrile neutropenia are a heterogeneous group with a minority developing serious medical complications. Outpatient management of low-risk febrile neutropenia has been shown to be safe and cost-effective. Scoring systems, such as the Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) score and Clinical Index of Stable Febrile Neutropenia (CISNE), have been developed and validated to identify low-risk patients. We aimed to compare the performance of these two scores in identifying low-risk febrile neutropenic patients.

METHODS

We performed a pooled analysis of patients presenting with febrile neutropenia to three tertiary cancer emergency centers in the USA, UK, and South Korea in 2015. The primary outcome measures were the occurrence of serious complications. Admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) and 30-day mortality were secondary outcomes. The predictive performance of each score was analyzed.

RESULTS

Five hundred seventy-one patients presented with febrile neutropenia. With MASCC risk index, 508 (89.1%) were classified as low-risk febrile neutropenia, compared to 60 (10.5%) with CISNE classification. Overall, the MASCC score had a greater discriminatory power in the detection of low-risk patients than the CISNE score (AUC 0.772, 95% CI 0.726-0.819 vs. 0.681, 95% CI 0.626-0.737, p = 0.0024).

CONCLUSION

Both MASCC and CISNE scores have reasonable discriminatory value in predicting patients with low-risk febrile neutropenia. Risk scores should be used in conjunction with clinical judgment for the identification of patients suitable for outpatient management of neutropenic fever. Developing more accurate scores, validated in prospective settings, will be useful in facilitating more patients being managed in an outpatient setting.

Acute Oncology Care: A narrative review of the acute management of neutropenic sepsis and immune-related toxicities of checkpoint inhibitors

Cancer care has become increasingly specialized and advances in therapy have resulted in a larger number of patients receiving care. There has been a significant increase in the number of patients presenting with cancer related emergencies including treatment toxicities and those directly related to the malignancy. Suspected neutropenic sepsis is an acute medical emergency and empirical antibiotic therapy should be administered immediately. The goal of empirical therapy is to cover the most likely pathogens that will cause life-threatening infections in neutropenic patients. Patients with febrile neutropenia are a heterogeneous group with only a minority of treated patients developing significant medical complications. Outpatient management of low risk febrile neutropenia patients identified by the MASCC score is a safe and effective strategy. Immunotherapy with "checkpoint inhibitors" has significantly improved outcomes for patients with metastatic melanoma and evidence of benefit in a wide range of malignancies is developing. Despite these clinical benefits a number of immune related adverse events have been recognised which can affect virtually all organ systems and are potentially fatal. The timing of the onset of the adverse events is dependent on the organ system affected and unlike anti-neoplastic therapy can be delayed significantly after initiation or completion of therapy. The field of Acute Oncology is changing rapidly. Alongside, the traditional challenge of neutropenic sepsis there are many emerging toxicities. Further research into the optimal management, strategies and pathways of acutely unwell patients with cancer is required.

Acute medical and specialty support at a tertiary cancer centre: a collaboration to achieve high-quality care for acutely unwell patients with cancer

There is increasing recognition of the need for collaboration between oncologists, acute physicians and specialists to improve the quality of care and outcomes of acutely unwell patients with cancer. At The Christie, a tertiary oncology hospital, a model has been developed to deliver acute medical and specialty support services. This delivers, among many things, a consultant-led acute medical ward round on weekdays. There has been a significant increase in the number of patients admitted to the oncology assessment unit (OAU) since its introduction, in part due to an increased number of direct discharges from the unit. Collaborative working between oncologists and acute physicians with a shared vision for high-quality care for patients has ensured that this change has been implemented smoothly. This has included development of patient flow models to optimise bed usage, so that a higher number of patients can access these specialist services.

Effects of an interactive mHealth innovation for early detection of patient-reported symptom distress with focus on participatory care: protocol for a study based on prospective, randomised, controlled trials in patients with prostate and breast cancer

Background

Cancer patients are predominantly treated as out-patients and as they often experience difficult symptoms and side effects it is important to facilitate and improve patient-clinician communication to support symptom management and self-care. Although the number of projects within supportive cancer care evaluating mobile health is increasing, few evidence-based interventions are described in the literature and thus there is a need for good quality clinical studies with a randomised design and sufficient power to guide future implementations. An interactive information and communications technology platform, including a smartphone/computer tablet app for reporting symptoms during cancer treatment was created in collaboration with a company specialising in health care management. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the effects of using the platform for patients with breast cancer during neo adjuvant chemotherapy treatment and patients with locally advanced prostate cancer during curative radiotherapy treatment. The main hypothesis is that the use of the platform will improve clinical management, reduce costs, and promote safe and participatory care.

Method

The study is a prospective, randomised, controlled trial for each patient group and it is based on repeated measurements. Patients are consecutively included and randomised. The intervention groups report symptoms via the app daily, during treatment and up to three weeks after end of treatment, as a complement to standard care. Patients in the control groups receive standard care alone. Outcomes targeted are symptom burden, quality of life, health literacy (capacity to understand and communicate health needs and promote healthy behaviours), disease progress and health care costs. Data will be collected before and after treatment by questionnaires, registers, medical records and biomarkers. Lastly, participants will be interviewed about participatory and meaningful care.

Discussion

Results will generate knowledge to enhance understanding about how to develop person-centred care using mobile technology. Supporting patients’ involvement in their care to identify problems early, promotes more timely initiation of necessary treatment. This can benefit patients treated outside the hospital setting in regard to maintaining their safety.

Clinical trial registration

June 12 2015 NCT02477137 (Prostate cancer) and June 12 2015 NCT02479607 (Breast cancer).