Characteristics of Participants Enrolled onto a Randomized Controlled Trial of Palliative Care for Patients on Phase I Studies

Optimizing care in early phase cancer trials: The role of palliative care

Advancements in cancer treatment have led to improved survival rates, with early phase clinical trials (EPCTs) serving as important initial steps in evaluating novel therapies. Recent studies have shown that response rates in these trials have doubled in the last twenty years. Patients who enroll on EPCTs have advanced cancer and heightened symptomatology yet maintain a robust performance status that qualifies them for clinical trial participation. It is well established that many of these patients have needs that can be addressed by palliative care, including symptom management, value assessments, advance care planning, and psychosocial and spiritual support. Several small studies have aimed to identify the most beneficial palliative care intervention for this cohort of patients, ranging from formal clinic-based multidisciplinary palliative care interventions to home-based interventions. While outcomes have trended towards benefit for patients, especially pertaining to psychological well-being, most studies were not powered to detect additional benefits for improved physical symptom management, reduction in care utilization or increased length of time on trial. In this review, we discuss the unique palliative care needs of this population and what we can learn from results of past interventional studies. We advocate for a tailored palliative care approach that acknowledges the time toxicity experienced by patients enrolled in EPCTs and address challenges posed by shortages within the palliative care workforce.

Palliative Care for Patients With Cancer: ASCO Guideline Update

PURPOSE

To provide evidence-based guidance to oncology clinicians, patients, nonprofessional caregivers, and palliative care clinicians to update the 2016 ASCO guideline on the integration of palliative care into standard oncology for all patients diagnosed with cancer.

METHODS

ASCO convened an Expert Panel of medical, radiation, hematology-oncology, oncology nursing, palliative care, social work, ethics, advocacy, and psycho-oncology experts. The Panel conducted a literature search, including systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials published from 2015-2023. Outcomes of interest included quality of life (QOL), patient satisfaction, physical and psychological symptoms, survival, and caregiver burden. Expert Panel members used available evidence and informal consensus to develop evidence-based guideline recommendations.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 52 relevant studies to inform the evidence base for this guideline.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Evidence-based recommendations address the integration of palliative care in oncology. Oncology clinicians should refer patients with advanced solid tumors and hematologic malignancies to specialized interdisciplinary palliative care teams that provide outpatient and inpatient care beginning early in the course of the disease, alongside active treatment of their cancer. For patients with cancer with unaddressed physical, psychosocial, or spiritual distress, cancer care programs should provide dedicated specialist palliative care services complementing existing or emerging supportive care interventions. Oncology clinicians from across the interdisciplinary cancer care team may refer the caregivers (eg, family, chosen family, and friends) of patients with cancer to palliative care teams for additional support. The Expert Panel suggests early palliative care involvement, especially for patients with uncontrolled symptoms and QOL concerns. Clinicians caring for patients with solid tumors on phase I cancer trials may also refer them to specialist palliative care.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.

Palliative Care Interventions Effects on Psychological Distress: A Systematic Review & Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Managing psychological distress is an objective of palliative care. No meta-analysis has evaluated whether palliative care reduces psychological distress.

OBJECTIVES

Examine the effects of palliative care on depression, anxiety, and general psychological distress for adults with life-limiting illnesses and their caregivers.

DESIGN

We searched PubMed, PsycInfo, Embase, and CINAHL for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of palliative care interventions. RCTs were included if they enrolled adults with life-limiting illnesses or their caregivers, reported data on psychological distress at 3 months after study intake, and if authors had described the intervention as "palliative care."

RESULTS

We identified 38 RCTs meeting our inclusion criteria. Many (14/38) included studies excluded participants with common mental health conditions. There were no statistically significant improvements in patient or caregiver anxiety (patient SMD: -0.008, P = 0.96; caregiver SMD: -0.21, P = 0.79), depression (patient SMD: -0.13, P = 0.25; caregiver SMD -0.27, P = 0.08), or psychological distress (patient SMD: 0.26, P = 0.59; caregiver SMD: 0.04, P = 0.78).

CONCLUSIONS

Psychological distress is not likely to be reduced in the context of a typical palliative care intervention. The systemic exclusion of patients with common mental health conditions in more than 1/3 of the studies raises ethical questions about the goals of palliative care RCTS and could perpetuate inequalities.

Motivations and experiences of patients with advanced cancer participating in Phase 1 clinical trials: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Persons with advanced cancer may participate in Phase 1 clinical trials - first-in-human trials that are conducted with the main objectives of safety and dosing. The motivations for participation are not well understood and may include hope for cure.

AIM

To explore the perspectives of persons with advanced cancer in order to understand the motivations for participating in Phase 1 clinical trials, experiences while being on trial and views on palliative care provision.

DESIGN

Qualitative study with a constructivist stance, using thematic analysis based upon the grounded theory approach.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

20 persons with advanced cancer who were participating in a Phase 1 clinical trial.

RESULTS

Many participants described how Phase 1 clinical trial participation was their last hope, as they were cognisant of their advanced disease. Information-seeking needs differed - some needed comprehensive information while others relied on the doctor's recommendation. Participants experienced varied negative and positive physical and psycho-emotional concerns, and needed to draw on multiple sources of support such as family, friends and healthcare professionals. Some could list potential benefits of palliative care but felt they did not require it yet. The overarching theme was hope and positive thinking as a way of coping.

CONCLUSIONS

The concepts of hope as a way of coping and the supportive presence of healthcare professionals could be weaved into a future model of palliative care to improve the illness journey for patients considering Phase 1 clinical trial participation and other persons with advanced cancer.

Cancer patients in Palliative Care: occurrences related to venipuncture and hypodermoclysis

OBJECTIVE

to identify the occurrences related to peripheral venipuncture and hypodermoclysis among patients hospitalized in a general hospital and in an exclusive hospital institution for the care of patients in palliative cancer care.

METHOD

an observational, descriptive and multicenter study. The consecutive and non-probabilistic sample consisted of 160 cancer patients hospitalized in Palliative Care. The outcome variable corresponded to the occurrences and complications related to each type of puncture. A questionnaire containing the sociodemographic and clinical variables and a structured script for monitoring and daily evaluation of the puncture were used. Descriptive statistics were employed for data analysis.

RESULTS

the occurrences related to venipuncture at a general hospital were blood soiling at catheter insertion (17.4%) and expired use period (15.8%), while at a specific service for the care of patients under palliative care they were expired use period (32%) followed by infiltration (18.9%). As for hypodermoclysis, there were two subcutaneous punctures with phlogistic signs (1.0%) at the general hospital and a hematoma at the catheter insertion site (0.5%). At the specific service for the care of patients under palliative care there were three subcutaneous punctures with phlogistic signs (5.7%).

CONCLUSION

the number of occurrences related to peripheral venipuncture was higher than those related to hypodermoclysis.

Cancer patients in Palliative Care: occurrences related to venipuncture and hypodermoclysis

Objective:

to identify the occurrences related to peripheral venipuncture and hypodermoclysis among patients hospitalized in a general hospital and in an exclusive hospital institution for the care of patients in palliative cancer care.

Method:

an observational, descriptive and multicenter study. The consecutive and non-probabilistic sample consisted of 160 cancer patients hospitalized in Palliative Care. The outcome variable corresponded to the occurrences and complications related to each type of puncture. A questionnaire containing the sociodemographic and clinical variables and a structured script for monitoring and daily evaluation of the puncture were used. Descriptive statistics were employed for data analysis.

Results:

the occurrences related to venipuncture at a general hospital were blood soiling at catheter insertion (17.4%) and expired use period (15.8%), while at a specific service for the care of patients under palliative care they were expired use period (32%) followed by infiltration (18.9%). As for hypodermoclysis, there were two subcutaneous punctures with phlogistic signs (1.0%) at the general hospital and a hematoma at the catheter insertion site (0.5%). At the specific service for the care of patients under palliative care there were three subcutaneous punctures with phlogistic signs (5.7%).

Conclusion:

the number of occurrences related to peripheral venipuncture was higher than those related to hypodermoclysis.

Pacientes con cáncer en cuidados paliativos: eventos relacionados con la venopunción y la hipodermoclisis

Resumen Objetivo: identificar los eventos relacionados con la venopunción periférica y la hipodermoclisis en pacientes hospitalizados en un hospital general y en un hospital que atiende exclusivamente a pacientes en cuidados paliativos oncológicos. Método: estudio observacional, descriptivo y multicéntrico. La muestra consecutiva y no probabilística estuvo compuesta por 160 pacientes oncológicos hospitalizados que reciben cuidados paliativos. La variable resultado correspondió a los eventos y complicaciones relacionados con cada tipo de punción. Se utilizó un cuestionario con variables sociodemográficas y clínicas y una guía estructurada para el seguimiento diario y la evaluación de la punción. Se utilizó estadística descriptiva para el análisis de datos. Resultados: los eventos relacionados con la venopunción en un hospital general fueron contaminación de sangre en la inserción del catéter (17,4%) y catéter vencido (15,8%), mientras que en un hospital específico que atiende exclusivamente a pacientes en cuidados paliativos oncológicos fueron catéter vencido (32%) seguido de infiltración (18,9%). En cuanto a la hipodermoclisis, hubo dos punciones subcutáneas con signos flogísticos (1,0%) en hospital general y un hematoma en el lugar de inserción del catéter (0,5%). En el hospital en un hospital que atiende exclusivamente a pacientes en cuidados paliativos oncológicos hubo tres punciones subcutáneas con signos flogísticos (5,7%). Conclusión: los eventos relacionados con la venopunción periférica fueron mayores que los relacionados con la hipodermoclisis.

A randomized controlled trial of structured palliative care versus standard supportive care for patients enrolled in phase 1 clinical trials

Purpose

Patients enrolled in Phase 1 clinical trials have typically exhausted standard therapies and often are choosing between a clinical trial and hospice care. Significant symptom burden can result in early trial discontinuation and confound trial outcomes. This study aimed to examine differences in study duration, symptom burden, adverse events (AE), and quality of life (QOL) between those receiving structured palliative care versus usual supportive care.

Patients and methods

Sixty‐eight patients enrolled in phase 1 clinical trials and 39 of their CGs were randomly assigned to receive structured palliative care or usual supportive care. Patient QOL was measured monthly using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy and Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale. The Quality of Life in Life‐Threatening Illness–Family Care Version and Caregiver Reaction Assessment were used for CGs. AEs and use of palliative care resources were compared between arms.

Results

Mean duration of the phase 1 study was 142 days in the palliative care arm versus 116 days in the usual care arm (p = 0.55). Although not statistically significant, patients in the palliative care arm experienced fewer AEs and better QOL, as did their CGs, compared to those receiving usual care.

Conclusions

Phase 1 patients and their CGs have physical and psychosocial needs warranting palliative care services. Results suggest that structured palliative care is associated with the increased duration of the study and improved patient and CG QOL.

Phase 1 patients and their caregivers have physical and psychosocial needs warranting palliative care services. Providing structured palliative care servies to this population was associated with increased duration on phase 1 study and improved patient and caregiver QOL.

Using Patient-Reported Outcomes to Describe the Patient Experience on Phase I Clinical Trials

Background

Symptoms are common among patients enrolled in phase I trials. We assessed the validity of Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) items in relation to previously validated assessments of quality of life and psychological distress. We used data from a randomized trial testing a palliative care support intervention for patients enrolled on phase I trials.

Methods

Patients (n = 479) were accrued to the parent study prior to initiating a phase I clinical trial with data collected at baseline, 4, and 12 weeks. We determined the correlation of PRO-CTCAE with distress level, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General (FACT-G) total, and subscale domain scores.

Results

Patients were predominantly female (56.8%) and older than age 60 years, and 30.7% were from minority populations. The correlation coefficient for distress level for all PRO-CTCAE items was small to moderate (Pearson r = 0.33-0.46). Pearson correlation coefficient for FACT-G total was moderate (r = -0.45 to -0.69). Stronger associations were noted for mood items of the PRO-CTCAE only (with distress level, r = 0.55-0.6; with FACT-G, r = -0.54 to -0.6). PRO-CTCAE symptom interference scores had the strongest correlation with distress level (Pearson r = 0.46) and FACT-G total (Pearson r = -0.69). Correlations between PRO-CTCAE items and corresponding FACT-G (total and subscales) and distress levels reached statistical significance for all items (P <.001).

Conclusion

Evidence demonstrates validity of PRO-CTCAE in a heterogeneous US sample of patients undergoing cancer treatment on phase I trials, with small to moderate correlations with distress level for all PRO-CTCAE items and moderate correlations with quality of life as measured by FACT-G total.

A Palliative Care Intervention for Patients on Phase 1 Studies

Background: Phase 1 clinical trials remain vital for oncology care. Patients on these trials require supportive care for quality-of-life (QOL) concerns. Objective: To test a Palliative Care Intervention (PCI) for patients with solid tumors enrolled in Phase I therapeutic trials with a priori hypothesis that psychological distress, QOL, satisfaction, symptoms, and resource utilization would be improved in the PCI group. Design: This unblinded randomized trial compared the PCI with usual care in patients accrued to Phase I Clinical Trials. Subjects (n = 479) were followed for 24 weeks, with 12 weeks as the primary outcome. Setting: Two Comprehensive Cancer Centers in the United States. Subjects: A consecutive sample, 21 years or older, English fluency, with solid tumors initiating a Phase 1 trial. Measurements: Psychological Distress (Distress Thermometer), QOL total and subscales (FACT-G), satisfaction (FAM-CARE), survival, and resource utilization (chart audit). Results: PCI subjects showed improved Psychological Distress (-0.47, p = 0.015) and Emotional Well-Being (0.81, p = 0.045), with differences on variables of QOL and distress between sites. High rates of symptom-management admissions (41.3%) and low rates of Advance Directive completion (39.0%), and hospice enrollment (30.7%), despite a median survival in both groups of 10.1 months from initiating a Phase 1 study. Conclusions: A nurse-delivered PCI can improve some QOL outcomes and distress for patients participating in Phase 1 trials. Greater integration of PC is needed to provide quality care to these patients and to support transitions from treatment to supportive care, especially at the end of life. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01612598.

Integrating Palliative Care for Patients on Clinical Trials: Opportunities for Oncology Nurses

The purpose of this article is to describe the lessons learned in the course of a 5-year research study on a palliative care intervention for persons on a Phase 1 clinical trial. Patients who are participating in Phase 1 trials and the families who care for them may be especially vulnerable and require special attention. The patients are generally experiencing the effects of advanced disease, and they also may soon experience unknown side effects, intense treatment regimens, and the emotional stress of an uncertain future as a result of clinical trial participation. Oncology nurses in all roles including clinical trials/research nurses, clinicians, educators, and advanced practice registered nurses play a critical role in addressing the quality-of-life concerns in this population. Palliative care can provide better symptom control and information on treatment options and facilitate a better understanding of patient/family goals. Attending to these factors can ultimately mean improved survival for the advanced cancer patient, and support for these patients can assist in advancing the field of oncology as these investigational therapies hold the promise for enhancing survival.

Phase I cancer trials: a qualitative study of specialist palliative care

Objective

In recent years, a simultaneous care model for advanced cancer patients has been recommended meaning that palliative care services are offered throughout their cancer journey. To inform the successful adoption of this model in a phase I trial context, the study aimed to explore patients’ care needs and their perceptions of specialist palliative care.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 advanced cancer patients referred to the Experimental Cancer Medicine team. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed with a framework approach to data organisation.

Results

Despite reporting considerable physical and psychological impacts from cancer and cancer treatment, participants did not recognise a need for specialist palliative care support. Understanding of the role of specialist palliative care was largely limited to end of life care. There was perceived conflict between considering a phase I trial and receiving specialist palliative care. Participants felt specialist palliative care should be introduced earlier and educational resources developed to increase patient acceptability of palliative care services.

Significance of results

Patients with advanced cancer referred for phase I trials are likely to benefit from specialist palliative care. However, this study suggests patients may not recognise a need for support nor accept this support due to misperceptions about the role of palliative care. Developing a specific educational resource about specialist palliative care for this population would help overcome barriers to engaging with a simultaneous care model.

Self-reported quality of life and hope in phase-I trial participants: An observational prospective cohort study

For advanced cancer patients deliberating early clinical trial participation, adequate information about expected effect on quality of life (HRQoL) and hope, may support decision making. The aim was to assess the potential relation of HRQoL to eligibility for phase-I trial participation, and to observe the variations in patient-reported outcomes. Patients completed questionnaires at preconsent (n = 124), baseline (n = 96), and after first evaluation of a phase-I trial (n = 76). The Mann-Whitney U test was used to test differences between eligible and ineligible patients. Univariate logistic regression was performed for eligibility. Factorial repeated-measures ANOVA compared the outcomes of patients continuing vs. stopping participation after first evaluation over time. Eligibility is associated with significant better global health OR = 0.946, 95% CI [0.918, 0.975], p = 0.001, physical functioning OR = 0.959, 95% CI [0.933, 0.985], p = 0.002, role functioning OR = 0.974, 95% CI [0.957, 0.991] and better appetite OR = 1.114 95% CI [1.035, 1.192]. HRQoL outcomes like global health, social functioning and appetite decline in all patients and differ between patients continuing or having to end participation. Over time, hope and tenacity decline in all patients and coping strategies alter in patients stopping participation. Trial participation influences patient-reported outcomes. Global health may predict for eligibility and trial continuation. Informing patients could affect patients' decision making.

Perspectives on Palliative Care in Cancer Clinical Trials: Diverse Meanings from Multidisciplinary Cancer Care Providers

BACKGROUND

Palliative care (PC) is often misunderstood as exclusively pertaining to end-of-life care, which may be consequential for its delivery. There is little research on how PC is operationalized and delivered to cancer patients enrolled in clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to understand the diverse perspectives of multidisciplinary oncology care providers caring for such patients in a teaching hospital.

METHODS

We conducted qualitative semistructured interviews with 19 key informants, including clinical trial principal investigators, oncology fellows, research nurses, inpatient and outpatient nurses, spiritual care providers, and PC fellows. Questions elicited information about the meaning providers assigned to the term "palliative care," as well as their experiences with the delivery of PC in the clinical trial context. Using grounded theory, a team-based coding method was employed to identify major themes.

RESULTS

Four main themes emerged regarding the meaning of PC: (1) the holistic nature of PC, (2) the importance of symptom care, (3) conflict between PC and curative care, and (4) conflation between PC and end-of-life care. Three key themes emerged with regard to the delivery of PC: (1) dynamics among providers, (2) discussing PC with patients and family, and (3) the timing of PC delivery.

CONCLUSION

There was great variability in personal meanings of PC, conflation with hospice/end-of-life care, and appropriateness of PC delivery and timing, particularly within cancer clinical trials. A standard and acceptable model for integrating PC concurrently with treatment in clinical trials is needed.