The Intersection of Oncology Prognosis and Cancer Rehabilitation

Importance of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation in a Patient With Bilateral Lumbosacral Plexopathy Following the Course of Ladiratuzumab Vedotin for Breast Cancer: A Case Report

A 74-year-old female with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer was admitted to the acute care hospital after several ground-level falls and a two-week history of bilateral lower extremity weakness with foot drop, numbness, and tingling. She was on ladiratuzumab vedotin (SGN-LIV1A) and pembrolizumab for four months prior to cancer treatment. Lumbar and sacral imaging studies did not identify neoplastic invasion into the bone or lumbosacral plexus. Electrodiagnostic findings suggested bilateral lumbosacral plexopathy (L3-S1). In the setting of rapid functional decline, medications were reviewed, and SGN-LIV1A was held. On initial evaluation, she required significant assistance with ambulation, transfers, and activities of daily living (ADLs). She remained off SGN-LIV1A and was discharged to acute inpatient rehabilitation. One month following discharge from acute inpatient rehabilitation, she exhibited improvements in right lower extremity strength and foot drop and progressed to modified-independent with ADLs, ambulating with a walker. In a discussion between cancer rehabilitation and oncology with consideration of the timing of presentation, distribution of symptoms, nerve conduction study and electromyography (NCS/EMG) findings, and improvement after SGN-LIV1A discontinuation, the patient was diagnosed with lumbosacral plexopathy from SGN-LIV1A administration. This is the only reported case of lumbosacral plexopathy secondary to SGN-LIV1A and addresses the importance of early consultation with cancer rehabilitation to address sequelae stemming from cancer therapy.

Barriers and facilitators to cancer rehabilitation for patients with head and neck or lung cancer-a scoping review mapping structural and healthcare professionals' perspectives

PURPOSE

Rehabilitation can positively affect quality of life, functional status, and physiological status for patients with head and neck or lung cancer. However, barriers and facilitators regarding access, referral, and participation in rehabilitation have not been outlined in the literature either from a healthcare professional or from a structural perspective. Therefore, the objective of this paper was to identify and map barriers and facilitators from structural and healthcare professionals' perspectives in relation to access, referral, and participation in rehabilitation for patients with head and neck or lung cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two systematic searches were conducted in five databases mapping peer-reviewed research literature.

RESULTS

In total, 17 studies of 3918 potential sources were included. Seven themes were identified. Four themes concerned access: Understanding Patients' Resources; Collaboration Determining Access; Education, Knowledge, and Evidence Impact Access to Rehabilitation; and Resources Affecting Availability to Rehabilitation Services. Two themes concerned referral: Referral Criteria; and Elements Affecting Referral Pathway. One theme concerned participation: Factors Influencing Participation.

CONCLUSION

From structural and healthcare professionals' perspectives, barriers and facilitators impact access, referral and participation in rehabilitation. However, the findings on facilitators were limited; only one theme addressed participation and two findings concerned patients with low socioeconomic status.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONHealthcare professionals should be mindful that a diverse array of barriers and facilitators may impact the rehabilitation pathway for patients with head, neck, and lung cancer.Engagement by healthcare professionals and structural initiatives are needed to ensure comprehensive access to information concerning rehabilitation options.Local guidelines should be developed to prescribe methods for informing and guiding patients towards suitable rehabilitation options.It is important that healthcare professionals take the individual patient's resources into account when navigating aspects of access, referral, and participation in rehabilitation.

Global estimates of rehabilitation needs and disease burden in tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancer from 1990 to 2019 and projections to 2045 based on the global burden of disease study 2019

Background

The global cancer burden is substantial and spiraling. Although rehabilitation specialists could offer assistance, oncologic rehabilitation is still underutilized and not a routine part of clinical oncology guidelines worldwide. Global investigations of disease prevalence and years lived with disability (YLDs) for tracheal, bronchus, and lung (TBL) cancer are valuable for facilitating clinical practice improvement and health resource management. The objective of this study is to report the global estimates of rehabilitation needs and disease burden of TBL cancers from 1990 to 2019 and provide predictions for 2045.

Methods

To estimate the need for rehabilitation, the data used from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019 to calculate the prevalence, YLDs, and the attributable risk factors of TBL cancer. The Bayesian age-period-cohort model and Auto-Regressive Integrated Moving Average model were established to forecast the future health burden. All analyses were done at the global level and then some in the aggregation with the seven World Bank regions. All the data were analyzed by R software (x64 version 4.2.1) and Microsoft Excel (version 2019).

Results

Globally in 2019, 3,212,307 cases of TBL cancer (95% UI 2,937,037-3,488,346) could have benefitted from rehabilitation, contributing to 544,215 (95% UI 396,134-700,099) YLDs. Over the past 30 years, the age-standardized rate (ASR) of prevalence (EAPC = 0.51) and YLDs (EAPC = 0.03) increased. Throughout this period, the global prevalence and YLDs counts were greater in males than females. The ASR of prevalence and YLDs are projected to show a slight downward trend by 2045 on the global scale, the overall prevalence and YLDs due to TBL cancer are likely to increase further, but all indicators show a growing trend in females.

Conclusion

TBL cancer remains one of the major public health issues globally. According to the forecasted results, the burden of YLDs due to TBL cancer will continue to rise, and the increment is higher in females than males. A rising number of patients worldwide will benefit from rehabilitation services in the future to achieve precise control and management throughout the TBL cancer patient lifecycle.

Comparative efficacy of different combinations of acapella, active cycle of breathing technique, and external diaphragmatic pacing in perioperative patients with lung cancer: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Acapella plus active cycle of breathing technique (ACBT), external diaphragm pacemaker (EDP) plus ACBT have been shown to facilitate the recovery of functional capacity and lung function in patients suffering from airway obstruction but the efficacy in perioperative patients with lung cancer has not been proven.

METHODS

We conducted a three-arm, prospective, randomized, assessor-blinded, controlled trial in patients with lung cancer who underwent thoracoscopic lobectomy or segmentectomy in the department of thoracic surgery, China. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive Acapella plus ACBT, EDP plus ACBT, or ACBT group (control group) using SAS software. The primary outcome was functional capacity, measured by the 6-minute walk test (6MWT).

RESULTS

We recruited 363 participants over 17 months: 123 assigned to the Acapella plus ACBT group, 119 to the EDP plus ACBT group, and 121 to the ACBT group. Statistically significant differences were noted for functional capacity between the EDP plus ACBT and control groups at each follow-up time (1-week follow-up: difference = 47.25 m, 95% CI, 31.56-62.93; P < 0.001; and 1-month follow-up: difference = 49.72 m, 95% CI, 34.04-65.41; P < 0.001), between the Acapella plus ACBT and control groups at postoperative week 1 (difference = 35.23 m, 95% CI, 19.30-51.16; P < 0.001) and postoperative month 1 (difference = 34.96 m, 95% CI, 19.03-50.89; P < 0.001), and between the EDP plus ACBT and Acapella plus ACBT groups at 1-month follow-up (difference = 14.76 m, 95% CI, 1.34-28.19; P = 0.0316).

CONCLUSION

EDP plus ACBT and Acapella plus ACBT significantly improved functional capacity and lung function in perioperative patients with lung cancer, compared with single-model ACBT, and the effects of EDP plus ACBT were clearly superior to those of other programs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered in the clinical trial database (clinicaltrials.gov) on June 4, 2021 (No. NCT04914624).

Post-acute Care Needs and Benefits of Inpatient Rehabilitation Care for the Oncology Patient

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This study aims to assess recent literature published on the post-acute care needs of cancer patients, specifically focusing on the acute inpatient rehabilitation setting.

RECENT FINDINGS

The neurologic cancer population appears to be the most studied oncologic population in acute inpatient rehabilitation studies within the past 5 years. This finding is consistent with prior findings from the past several decades. Recent trends in inpatient cancer rehabilitation note a population with lower admission functional status and shorter lengths of stay compared to prior studies. Despite these findings, the percentage discharged to the community remains high. With new treatments yielding improved survival, cancer patients may live longer and risk accumulating more functional impairments. Physicians involved in their care must understand post-acute care needs and work in a multidisciplinary group to best determine post-acute disposition. This decision remains very individualized and should consider both oncologic and functional needs.

Palliative Rehabilitation in Acute Inpatient Rehabilitation: Prognostic Factors and Functional Outcomes in Patients with Cancer

BACKGROUND

Prognosis has a vital role for patients with cancer undergoing palliative rehabilitation in acute inpatient rehabilitation. This study aimed to identify the proportion of patients who survived <2 months after discharge and the associated prognostic factors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a secondary analysis of a retrospective study of 163 consecutive patients admitted to acute inpatient rehabilitation from September 1, 2017, to February 28, 2018 at a cancer center. Baseline demographics, clinical characteristics, and putative prognostic factors, including Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care (AM-PAC) functional scores, were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 163 patients, 27 (17%; 95% CI, 11-23) died within 60 days of discharge. These patients were more likely to be male (OR = 2.83; 95% CI, 1.16-6.92; P = .017); have longer hospital stays (OR = 1.02; 95% CI, 1-1.04; P = .015); receive ≥ weekly packed red blood cell (OR = 5.31; 95% CI, 1.86-15.1; P = .003) or platelet (OR = 4.57; 95% CI, 1.44-14.5; P = .014) transfusions; have lower AM-PAC daily activity scores upon discharge (OR = 0.90; 95% CI, 0.83-0.97; P = .006); and have lower AM-PAC basic mobility scores upon admission (OR = 0.91; 95% CI, 0.85-0.98; P = .018) and discharge (OR = 0.88; 95% CI, 0.82-0.94; P = <.001). Multivariate analysis showed that the male sex (OR = 2.71; 95% CI, 1.03-7.15; P = .037) was independently associated with ≤2 months survival, whereas AM-PAC basic mobility score at admission of >33 (OR = 0.24, 95% CI, 0.07-0.79; P = .022) was less likely.

CONCLUSION

Approximately 1 in 6 patients who completed acute inpatient rehabilitation died within 2 months of discharge, had poorer baseline functional status, and were less likely to regain function than those who lived longer.

Cost-Savings Analysis of an Individualized Exercise Oncology Program in Early-Stage Breast Cancer Survivors: A Randomized Clinical Control Trial

PURPOSE

In an attempt to promote the integration of exercise oncology as a standard part of clinical practice, economic evaluations are warranted. Thus, the purpose of this study was to prospectively analyze cost savings of an individualized exercise oncology program when patients were randomly assigned.

METHODS

For this open-label, randomized, prospective, comparative clinical trial, patients with early-stage breast cancer (stage I-II) were randomly assigned into two groups: the control group (CG, n = 120) and the exercise training group (EX, n = 123). Patients in the exercise intervention group completed 12 weeks of prescribed, individualized exercise that aligned with ACSM exercise guidelines for cancer survivors. The CG received the current standard of care, which includes a resource guide with various options available to the cancer survivor.

RESULTS

In the EX group, all physical fitness measures significantly improved compared with baseline (P < .001), while remaining unchanged for the CG (P > .05). Patients in the CG had the highest total mean health care utilization across all measures (CG: $8,598 US dollars, compared with EX: $6,356 US dollars) for emergency visits, outpatient visits, and office-base visits that were not a part of their treatment plan. At baseline, the mean Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) scores did not significantly differ (P > .05); however, at follow-up, a larger proportion of the EX group had ECOG scores of 0 or 1, compared with the CG (P < .05). Finally, patient-reported outcomes were significantly higher in the exercise group, compared with the CG at the 12-week follow-up (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

A supervised, individualized 12-week exercise intervention led to significant improvements in fitness parameters and ECOG scores, as well as a decrease in unplanned health care utilization among early-stage breast cancer survivors.

Evidence Gaps in Cancer Survivorship Care: A Report from the 2019 National Cancer Institute Cancer Survivorship Workshop

Today, there are more than 16.9 million cancer survivors in the United States; this number is projected to grow to 22.2 million by 2030. While much progress has been made in understanding cancer survivors needs and in improving survivorship care since the seminal 2006 Institute of Medicine report From Cancer Patient to Cancer Survivor: Lost in Transition, there is a need to identify evidence gaps and research priorities pertaining to cancer survivorship. Thus, in April 2019, the National Cancer Institute convened grant-funded extramural cancer survivorship researchers, representatives of professional organizations, cancer survivors, and advocates for a one-day in-person meeting. At this meeting, and in a subsequent webinar aimed at soliciting input from the wider survivorship community, evidence gaps and ideas for next steps in the following six areas, identified from the 2006 Institute of Medicine report, were discussed: surveillance for recurrence and new cancers, management of long-term and late physical effects, management of long-term and late psychosocial effects, health promotion, care coordination, and financial hardship. Identified evidence gaps and next steps across the areas included the need to understand and address disparities among cancer survivors, to conduct longitudinal studies as well as longer-term (>5 years post-diagnosis) follow-up studies, to leverage existing data, and to incorporate implementation science strategies to translate findings into practice. Designing studies to address these broad evidence gaps, as well as those identified in each area, will expand our understanding of cancer survivors' diverse needs, ultimately leading to the development and delivery of more comprehensive evidence-based quality care.

Older patients with active cancer have favorable inpatient rehabilitation outcomes

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the characteristics and rehabilitation outcomes of older patients with active cancer (OPAC) undergoing post-acute inpatient rehabilitation (IR), and to evaluate which clinical factors are associated with poor rehabilitation outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective study of patients aged ≥65 with active cancer undergoing IR following acute hospitalization at our tertiary hospital centre (N = 330). We collected data on patient, malignancy, and hospitalization characteristics, and IR outcomes including function, mobility, discharge destination, and mortality. Multivariate stepwise logistic regression was used to identify independent associations with the composite outcome of death within three months or discharge to long-term care (LTC).

RESULTS

Patient mean age was 80.1 ± 7.2 years. The most common malignancies were colon (30.9%) and hematologic (16.1%). Most patients were hospitalized urgently (64.8%) and underwent surgery (72.4%). From IR admission to discharge, patients ambulating independently increased from 14.0% to 52.0%. Discharge destination was to the community (80.4%), to LTC (7.6%), and transfer to an acute ward (7.2%), while 4.8% died during IR. One-year survival was 62.1%. The composite outcome was met by 24.8% of patients with multivariate logistic regression revealing independent associations (p < 0.05) with high baseline dependency, metastatic disease, low mobility score on IR admission, complications during acute care, and ≥ 75th percentile values for lactate dehydrogenase and alkaline phosphatase.

CONCLUSION

OPAC have favorable IR outcomes including high rate of community discharge, function and mobility gains, and lower mortality rates when compared with previously studied cancer rehabilitation populations. We identified several clinical markers associated with the composite outcome, which can guide post-acute discharge planning in patients with an unclear prognosis.

Clinical questions on rehabilitation in cancer patients with skeletal metastasis: a content analysis of the multidisciplinary tumor board records

PURPOSE

Cancer rehabilitation addresses the functional needs of patients who have various impairments. Disease control is a critical oncological consideration, while physical intervention increased weights of importance in several situations. To identify the clinical status that necessitates active physical intervention in cancer patients with skeletal metastasis, we performed a content analysis in the multidisciplinary tumor board (MDTB) records.

METHODS

From January 2017 to September 2019, the MDTB discussed 168 consecutive patients with skeletal metastasis. We reviewed the MDTB records and asked responsible physicians to frame clinical questions. Based on these data, we identified the predictor valuables with the association to rehabilitation-related clinical questions using univariate and multivariate analyses. Moreover, we investigated a predictor of the change in Barthel index (BI) scores using univariate analyses.

RESULTS

Rehabilitation-related questions arose more frequently in older patients (p = 0.011), in patients with slow-growth vs. rapid-growth tumor (p = 0.002), and in patients with skeletal-related events (p = 0.001) at MDTB. The tumor growth speed was associated with the change in BI scores, as slower-growth tumors had the benefit of BI gains (p = 0.017).

CONCLUSIONS

Regarding rehabilitation in patients with skeletal metastasis, we should pay attention to three parameters: occurrence of skeletal events, patient age, and growth speed of tumors. Rehabilitation-related questions may reflect patients' functional needs that occur more frequently in patients with pathological fractures or neurological symptoms, older patients, and patients with slow-growth tumors.

Impairment-driven cancer rehabilitation in patients with neoplastic spinal cord compression using minimally invasive spine stabilization

BACKGROUND

Neoplastic spinal cord compression is a cause of severe disability in cancer patients. To prevent irreversible paraplegia, a structured strategy is required to address the various impairments present in cancer patients. In this study, we aimed to identify the status where rehabilitation with minimally invasive spine stabilization (MISt) effectively improves ADL.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 27 consecutive patients with neoplastic spinal compression who were treated with MISt. We classified the impairments of patients through our multidisciplinary tumor board based on spine-specific factors, skeletal instability, and tumor growth. The neurological deficits, progress of pathological fracture, incidence of vertebral collapse, and postoperative implant failure were examined. Changes of the Barthel index (BI) scores before and after surgery were investigated throughout the clinical courses.

RESULTS

The average duration to ambulation was 7.19 ± 11 days, and we observed no collapse or progression of paralysis except in four cases of complete motor paraplegia before the surgery. Neurological deficiency was improved to or maintained at Frankel's grade E in 16 patients, remained unchanged in 6 patients (in grades B, C, D), and worsened in 5 patients. BI score comparisons before and after surgery in all patients showed statistically significant increments (p < 0.05). On further analysis, we noted good functional prognosis in patients capable of ambulation within 7 days (p < 0.05) and in patients who could survive longer than 3 months after the surgery (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In various cancer patients with neoplastic spinal cord compression, skeletal instability as the primary impairment is a good indication for MISt, as the patients showed early ambulation with improved BI scores.

Cost Savings Analysis of Individualized Exercise Oncology Programs

Background: The physical and economic toll of cancer make it a high health priority. The rising cost of cancer care is now a primary focus for patients, payers, and providers. Escalating costs of clinical trials and national drug regulations have led the median monthly costs of cancer drugs to rise from less than $100 in 1965 to 1969, to more than $5000 in 2005 to 2009, stressing the importance of finding innovative ways to reduce cost burden. In the present study, we report the economic evaluation of an individualized exercise oncology program beginning early after diagnosis. Methods: An independent research group, ASCEND Innovations, retrospectively analyzed patient records to statistically demonstrate the impact of exercise oncology during cancer treatment. All patients completed 12 weeks of prescribed, individualized exercise that included cardiovascular, strength training, and flexibility components. The 3 primary hospital measures leveraged for statistical comparison before and after supportive care enrollment were number of encounters, number of readmissions, and average total charges, as well as emergency room visits and length of hospital stay (P < .05). Results: The resulting dataset consisted of 1493 total hospital encounters for 147 unique patients. The results statistically demonstrate a positive effect of exercise oncology during cancer care, in terms of reductions in overall cost per patient pre- to post-intervention. Conclusions: Individualized exercise oncology programs should be employed as part of the national standard of care for individuals battling cancer, in order to improve patient outcome and reduce cost burden.

Training and Practice Patterns in Cancer Rehabilitation: A Survey of Physiatrists Specializing in Oncology Care

BACKGROUND

Cancer rehabilitation is an integral part of the continuum of care for survivors. Due to the increasing number of survivors, physiatrists commonly see cancer patients in their general practices. Essential to guiding the field is to understand the current training and practice patterns of cancer rehabilitation physicians.

OBJECTIVES

To assess current trends in training and practice for cancer rehabilitation physicians, including the level of burnout among providers in this field.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional descriptive survey study.

SETTING

Online survey.

PARTICIPANTS

American physicians who are affiliated with the Cancer Rehabilitation Physician Consortium (CRPC) of the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (AAPM&R). The CRPC is a group of cancer rehabilitation providers (both fellowship-trained and not fellowship-trained) with the mission of furthering cancer rehabilitation medicine through education, research, and networking.

METHODS

All CRPC physicians were invited to complete a voluntary and anonymous 43-question online survey. The survey was conceived by a group of eight experts interested in providing additional information to the current literature regarding the training and practice in the cancer rehabilitation field.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Training, practice, opioid prescribing, and professional support.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven of 50 physicians participated (response rate = 74%). Respondents were from various states, the three most common being New York (16%, n = 6), Texas (16%, n = 6), and Massachusetts (11%, n = 4). About 57% (n = 21) of the respondents were employed in an academic medical center and 73% (n = 27) reported their primary departmental affiliation was Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (PM&R). Approximately 78% (n = 29) credited mentorship early in training for their interest in the field. More than half (54%, n = 20) either strongly agreed or agreed that cancer rehabilitation fellowship training is necessary for graduating physiatrists who plan to treat oncology patients/survivors. National PM&R meetings were the primary source of continuing education for 86% (n = 31). Sixty-five percent (n = 24), strongly agreed or agreed that cancer rehabilitation physiatrists should know how to prescribe opioids, and 35% (n = 13) reported prescribing them when appropriate. About 54% (n = 20) rated their level of burnout as low or very low, and more than half (51%, n = 19) believed their burnout level was lower than physiatrists treating other rehabilitation populations.

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer rehabilitation is a growing subspecialty in PM&R, and most physiatrists in general practice will treat many survivors-often for neurologic or musculoskeletal impairments related to cancer or its treatment. Cancer rehabilitation physicians perceive that they have relatively low levels of burnout, and early mentorship and fellowship training is beneficial. Professional conferences and mentorship are a primary source for continuing education.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

The State of Cancer Rehabilitation in the United States

The field of cancer rehabilitation and prehabilitation has grown significantly over the past decade. Advancements in early detection and treatment have resulted in a growing number of cancer survivors in the United States (US), expected to reach 26 million by 2040.1 Health care professional graduate education is trying to catch up with anticipated clinical demand by increasing the number of cancer rehabilitation fellowship training programs and introducing rehabilitation/prehabilitation concepts earlier in training. Numerous national organizations have issued guidelines for cancer rehabilitation research and posttreatment cancer health care. As treatment modalities evolve, so too must research on side-effects and multisystem management over the continuum of care. Current research strategies address different cancer types with a broad focus on timing of interventions, cost effectiveness, efficacy of rehabilitation, and improving screening and assessment tools. A collaborative, interdisciplinary research model is paramount to deepen impact and broaden reach. Policy supports could advance cancer survivorship and rehabilitative care. Funding to advance evidence-based practices for distress screening, psychosocial support, survivorship care planning, and rehabilitation services remains critical. Current social policies and health care access protections must be expanded to best serve the growing number of cancer survivors in the US. Equitable health care access, health care experience and health care outcomes remain a critical area for research and policy supports. The cost of cancer treatment requires significant reform to ensure access to all. Rehabilitation services are elements of standards of care for many neurological, cardiovascular and orthopedic diagnoses, but currently are not standard for actual or potential dysfunctions among cancer survivors. Both the disease process and the variety of therapeutic modalities increase risks of dysfunction, impairments, poor survival, and diminished quality of life. Rehabilitation focuses on optimizing quality of life and maximizing function throughout the continuum of cancer care. Health care professionals are urged to integrate high quality interdisciplinary care to promote collaboration and dissemination of knowledge which will yield better care for cancer survivors. Prehabilitation has the potential to play key roles in reducing or eliminating many cancer-related impairments and disabilities.