Palliative care in the context of immune and targeted therapies: A qualitative study of bereaved carers' experiences in metastatic melanoma

Communication About Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell (CAR-T) Therapy

Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy has revolutionized the treatment of patients with hematologic malignancies, yet treatment may coincide with the potential for life-threatening toxicities. Currently, no studies have investigated how oncologists communicate with patients about CAR-T therapy or what patients and their caregivers want to know prior to consenting for CAR-T therapy. This study characterizes the content of oncologist communication with patients and caregivers about the risks and benefits of CAR-T therapy and explore the information preferences of patients and their caregivers about CAR-T therapy. We conducted a multimethod study of 20 patients with hematologic malignancies referred for CAR-T therapy at the Massachusetts General Hospital and 10 caregivers. We audio recorded the initial outpatient visit with the oncologist to review and sign consent for CAR-T therapy. We subsequently surveyed patients and caregivers about information gaps that remained after consent. We then interviewed patients and caregiver about their perceptions of oncologist communication and information preferences after the consent visit, 1 month, and 3 months post-CAR-T therapy treatment. Qualitative data analysis was conducted using the framework approach. Six major themes regarding communication about CAR-T therapy were identified: (1) oncologists create a narrative of power and innovation about CAR-T therapy, (2) oncologists set clear expectations regarding CAR-T therapy, (3) oncologists preferentially discuss positive treatment outcomes and less frequently address treatment failures or uncertainties, (4) oncologists couple their discussion about risks of CAR-T therapy with assurances about risk mitigation strategies, (5) oncologists engage in empathetic communication throughout the consent visit, (6) patients and caregivers vary in their preferences regarding communication about CAR-T therapy but largely favor a positive discourse during the consent visit and (7) patients who completed CAR-T therapy and their caregivers report significant knowledge gaps during and after treatment. Overall, patients and caregivers felt well informed about CAR T-therapy yet identified communication gaps regarding, advanced care planning, treatment failure and treatment toxicities. A predominantly positive discourse between patients, caregivers, and oncologists around CAR-T therapy leaves patients and caregivers with significant knowledge gaps about negative outcomes. Further research is needed to help oncologists communicate about treatment uncertainties and help patients and their caregivers prepare for negative outcomes of CAR-T therapy.

A qualitative service evaluation of patient and caregiver experiences of CAR-T therapy: Recommendations for service development and implications for palliative care teams

BACKGROUND

Chimeric Antigen-Receptor-T-cell (CAR-T) therapy is a potentially life-saving treatment for refractory haematological malignancies. Internationally, CAR-T services are undergoing rapid development. Despite this, research on the lived experiences of patients receiving novel immunotherapies is limited. Little is known about their supportive care needs. Consequently, dedicated palliative and supportive care services may not be considered.

AIM

To explore the patient and caregiver experience of CAR-T therapy and identify unmet needs to inform service development.

DESIGN

A qualitative longitudinal service evaluation. Sixteen interviews were conducted between December 2020 and March 2021 with patients (n = 10) and family caregivers (n = 4). Thematic analysis was underpinned by a constructivist approach.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

All patients and caregivers attending one UK centre for CAR-T therapy were eligible. Semi-structured interviews were conducted at specific time points: prior to infusion, one month after infusion and follow-up post-treatment (5-18 months).

RESULTS

Identified themes described the unique challenges of CAR-T therapy. From the point of referral patients had a wide range of supportive care needs. Initially, this was attributed to prior receipt of multiple failed treatments. Subsequently, CAR-T side-effects impacted on quality-of-life and physical function. Significant psychological morbidity from prognostic uncertainty was described throughout. Patients and caregivers reported that a dedicated nurse specialist - an expert, consistent point of contact - was essential.

CONCLUSION

Patients and caregivers would benefit from early and ongoing support from palliative care, allied-health professionals and psychology. As indications for CAR-T therapy expand, there is an urgent need for multi-centre studies incorporating patient-reported outcome data to ensure patient-centred service delivery.

Impact of early palliative care on additional line of chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer patients: results from the randomized study OSS

PURPOSE

The most appropriate criteria and timing for palliative care referral remain a critical issue, especially in patients with metastatic breast cancer for whom long-term chemosensibility and survival are observed. We aimed to compare the impact of early palliative care including formal concertation with oncologists on decision for an additional line of chemotherapy compared with usual oncology care.

METHODS

This randomized prospective study enrolled adult women with metastatic breast cancer and visceral metastases with a 3rd- or 4th-line chemotherapy (CT). Patients received usual oncology care with a palliative care consultation only upon patient or oncologist request (standard group, S) or were referred to systematic palliative care consultation including a regular concertation between palliative care team and oncologists (early palliative care group, EPC). The primary endpoint was the rate of an additional CT (4th or 5th line) decision. Quality of life, symptoms, social support and satisfaction were self-evaluated at 6 and 12 months, at treatment discontinuation or 3 months after discontinuation.

RESULTS

From January 2009 to November 2012, two authorized cancer centers included 98 women (EPC: 50; S: 48). Thirty-seven (77.1%, 95%CI 62.7-88%) patients in the EPC group had a subsequent chemotherapy prescribed and 36 (72.0%, 95%CI 57.5-83.8%) in the S group (p = 0.646). No differences in symptom control and global quality of life were observed, but less deterioration in physical functioning was reported in EPC (EPC: 0 [- 53-40]; S: - 6; 7 [- 60 to - 20]; p = 0.027). Information exchange and communication were significant improved in EPC (exchange, EPC: - 8.3 [- 30 to + 7]; S: 0.0 [- 17 to + 23]; p = 0.024; communication, EPC: 12.5 [- 8 to - 37]; S: 0.0 [- 21 to + 17]; p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

EPC in metastatic breast cancer patients did not impact the prescription rate of additional chemotherapy in patients a 3rd- or 4th-line chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer; however, EPC may contribute to alleviate deterioration in physical functioning, while facilitating communication.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrial.gov identifier: NCT00905281, May 20, 2009.

Retrospective review of outcomes associated with metastatic melanoma patients treated with 1st-line BRAF-targeted therapy

BRAF-mutant melanoma patients can theoretically access both immunotherapy and BRAF-targeted therapy as treatment for metastatic disease. BRAF-targeted therapy is increasingly used 1st line for poorer prognostic patients, so we wanted to assess realistic expectations of these patients accessing 2nd-line immunotherapy. We conducted a retrospective review of clinical outcomes in 25 patients treated over the last 3 years with 1st-line BRAF-targeted therapy in a real-world clinical setting at a UK-based tertiary centre. Compared with the registration trials, our patients receiving 1st-line BRAF-targeted therapy had poorer performance status, higher disease burden, shorter median progression-free survival (5.05 months, 95% CI: 3.96-8.88) and shorter median overall survival (11.5 months, 95% CI: 6.24 - not reached). Overall response rate was similar, at 64%. On disease progression, median survival was 2.34 months (95% CI: 1.62 - not reached). Only five patients went on to receive 2nd-line immunotherapy. Metastatic melanoma patients treated with 1st-line BRAF-targeted therapy now have different demographics compared with those recruited to registration trials conducted over the last 10 years. In a modern-day, real-world setting, these patients should be counselled that only 1 in 5 are likely to receive 2nd-line immunotherapy and their survival times are expected to be short.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and Palliative Care at the End of Life: An Irish Multicentre Retrospective Study

Background and Objectives: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have less toxicity than standard chemotherapy and are now standard of care for many patients with advanced cancer. A manageable side effect profile and potential for durable responses may lead to aggressive care of the palliative patient. We sought to evaluate palliative care input and ICI use at the end of life at two Irish cancer centres. Methods: We identified deceased patients who received at least one dose of an ICI between first of January 2013 to 31st of December 2018. A retrospective electronic chart review was performed. Results: The electronic records of 102 patients were analysed. Fifty eight percent were male and the median age of diagnosis of advanced disease was 60 years (range 17-78). Median time from last dose of ICI to death was 57 days (range 8-574) and 20% of patients died within 30 days of last dose of ICI. Most patients, 92%, were referred to palliative care. The median time from palliative care referral to death was 64 days (range 1- 1010). In the last 30 days of life, 39% of patients attended the emergency department (ED) and 46% had at least one hospital admission. Late palliative care referrals, ≤3 months before death, were associated with hospitalisations in the last month of life (64% vs. 36%, P = .02). Timing of palliative care referral did not affect ICI prescribing at the end of life (P = 0.38). ICI use in the last 30 days of life was not associated with increased ED presentations or hospitalisations at the end of life. Patients who received ICI in the last month had a higher likelihood of in-hospital death (43% vs. 16%, P = 0.02). Conclusions: ICI within 30 days of death was associated with dying in hospital but did not lead to more hospitalisations and emergency department presentations. Early palliative care did not affect ICI use but reduced hospitalisations at the end of life.

Caregivers' Death-Preparedness States Impact Caregiving Outcomes and Patients' End-of-Life Care

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Preparing family caregivers, cognitively, emotionally, and behaviorally, for their relative's death is an actionable component of high-quality end-of-life care. We aimed to examine the never-before-examined associations of conjoint cognitive prognostic awareness and emotional preparedness for death with caregiving outcomes and end-of-life care received by cancer patients.

DESIGN/SETTING/PARTICIPANTS/MAIN MEASURES

For this longitudinal study, associations of death-preparedness states (no-death-preparedness, cognitive-death-preparedness-only, emotional-death-preparedness-only, and sufficient-death-preparedness states) with subjective caregiving burden, depressive symptoms, and quality of life (QOL) and patients' end-of-life care (chemotherapy and/or immunotherapy, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, intensive care unit care, intubation, mechanical ventilation support, vasopressors, nasogastric tube feeding, and hospice care) were evaluated using multivariate hierarchical linear and logistic regression modeling, respectively, for 377 caregivers in cancer patients' last 6 months and 1 month, respectively.

KEY RESULTS

Caregivers in the cognitive-death-preparedness-only state experienced a higher level of subjective caregiving burden than those in the sufficient-death-preparedness state. Caregivers in the no-death-preparedness and cognitive-death-preparedness-only states reported significantly more depressive symptoms and worse QOL than those in the sufficient-death-preparedness state. Cancer patients with caregivers in the sufficient-death-preparedness state were less likely to receive chemotherapy and/or immunotherapy, intubation, mechanical ventilation, and nasogastric tube feeding than patients with caregivers in other death-preparedness states. However, patients' receipt of hospice care was not associated with their caregivers' death-preparedness states.

CONCLUSION

Family caregivers' death-preparedness states were associated with caregiving outcomes and their relative's end-of-life care. Cultivating caregivers' accurate prognostic awareness and improving their emotional preparedness for their relative's death may facilitate more favorable end-of-life-caregiving outcomes and may limit potentially nonbeneficial end-of-life care.

Should I Have Adjuvant Immunotherapy? An Interview Study Among Adults with Resected Stage 3 Melanoma and Their Partners

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant immunotherapy is a new treatment paradigm for adults with resected stage 3 melanoma. However, therapy can lead to long-term adverse health impacts, making immunotherapy decisions difficult. This study aimed to explore patients and their partners' views when considering whether to commence adjuvant immunotherapy.

METHODS

Focus groups and in-depth interviews were conducted among adults with resected stage 3 melanoma and their partners between August 2019 and April 2020. Factors important to adjuvant immunotherapy decision making were explored. Recruitment continued until data saturation, with thematic analysis performed.

RESULTS

Thirty-six participants were recruited across two cohorts, including 24 patients (mean age 65 years, 71% male), and 12 partners (mean age 69 years, 75% female). Twenty-two patients (92%) received adjuvant immunotherapy, two (8%) declined. Five patients (21%) ceased treatment early because of toxicity. Five themes about adjuvant immunotherapy were common to all participants: (1) life and death; (2) perceived risks and benefits; (3) seeking information; (4) healthcare team relationship; and (5) immunotherapy treatment considerations. Prolonging life was the primary consideration, with secondary concerns about treatment burden, timing, costs and efficacy.

CONCLUSIONS

This information can be used by clinicians to support melanoma treatment decision making.