The lung cancer patient, the pneumologist and palliative care: a developing alliance

European Respiratory Society guideline on various aspects of quality in lung cancer care

This European Respiratory Society guideline is dedicated to the provision of good quality recommendations in lung cancer care. All the clinical recommendations contained were based on a comprehensive systematic review and evidence syntheses based on eight PICO (Patients, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes) questions. The evidence was appraised in compliance with the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. Evidence profiles and the GRADE Evidence to Decision frameworks were used to summarise results and to make the decision-making process transparent. A multidisciplinary Task Force panel of lung cancer experts formulated and consented the clinical recommendations following thorough discussions of the systematic review results. In particular, we have made recommendations relating to the following quality improvement measures deemed applicable to routine lung cancer care: 1) avoidance of delay in the diagnostic and therapeutic period, 2) integration of multidisciplinary teams and multidisciplinary consultations, 3) implementation of and adherence to lung cancer guidelines, 4) benefit of higher institutional/individual volume and advanced specialisation in lung cancer surgery and other procedures, 5) need for pathological confirmation of lesions in patients with pulmonary lesions and suspected lung cancer, and histological subtyping and molecular characterisation for actionable targets or response to treatment of confirmed lung cancers, 6) added value of early integration of palliative care teams or specialists, 7) advantage of integrating specific quality improvement measures, and 8) benefit of using patient decision tools. These recommendations should be reconsidered and updated, as appropriate, as new evidence becomes available.

Symptom Assessment Following Surgery for Lung Cancer: A Canadian Population-based Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a population-level analysis of temporal trends and risk factors for high symptom burden in patients receiving surgery for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

BACKGROUND

A population-level overview of symptoms after curative intent surgery is necessary to inform decision making and supportive care for patients with lung cancer.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of patients receiving surgery for stages I to III NSCLC between January 2007 and September 2018. Prospectively collection Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) scores, linked to provincial administrative data, were used to describe the prevalence, trajectory, and predictors of moderate-to-severe symptoms in the year following surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 5350 patients, with 28,490 unique ESAS assessments, were included in the analysis. Moderate-to-severe tiredness (68%), poor wellbeing (63%), and shortness of breath (60%) were the most common symptoms reported. The rise and fall in the proportion of patients experiencing moderate-to-severe symptoms after surgery coincided with the median time to first (58 days, interquartile range: 47-72) and last cycle of chemotherapy (140 days, interquartile range: 118-168), respectively. There was eventual stabilization, albeit above the preoperative baseline, within 6 to 7 months after surgery. Female sex (relative risk [RR] 1.09- 1.26), lower income (RR 1.08-1.23), stage III disease (RR 1.15-1.43), adjuvant therapy (RR 1.09-1.42), chemotherapy within 2 weeks of an ESAS assessment (RR 1.14-1.73), and pneumonectomy (RR 1.05-1.15) were associated with moderate-to-severe symptoms following surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Knowledge of population-level prevalence, trajectory, and predictors of moderate-to-severe symptoms after surgery for NSCLC can be used to facilitate shared decision making and improve symptom management throughout the course of illness.

Comparing functional decline and distress from symptoms in people with thoracic life-limiting illnesses: lung cancers and non-malignant end-stage respiratory diseases

BACKGROUND

Malignant and non-malignant respiratory diseases account for >4.6 million deaths annually worldwide. Despite similar symptom burdens, serious inequities in access to palliative care persists for people with non-malignant respiratory diseases.

AIM

To compare functional decline and symptom distress in advanced malignant and non-malignant lung diseases using consecutive, routinely collected, point-of-care national data.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

The Australian national Palliative Care Outcomes Collaboration collects functional status (Australia-modified Karnofsky Performance Status (AKPS)) and symptom distress (patient-reported 0-10 numerical rating scale) in inpatient and community settings. Five years of data used Joinpoint and weighted scatterplot smoothing.

RESULTS

In lung cancers (89 904 observations; 18 586 patients) and non-malignant end-stage respiratory diseases (14 827 observations; 4279 patients), age at death was significantly lower in people with lung cancer (73 years; IQR 65-81) than non-malignant end-stage respiratory diseases (81 years; IQR 73-87 years; p<0.001). Four months before death, median AKPS was 40 in lung cancers and 30 in non-malignant end-stage respiratory diseases (p<0.001). Functional decline was similar in the two groups and accelerated in the last month of life. People with non-malignant diseases accessed palliative care later.Pain-related distress was greater with cancer and breathing-related distress with non-malignant disease. Breathing-related distress increased towards death in malignant, but decreased in non-malignant disease. Distress from fatigue and poor sleep were similar for both.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large dataset unlike previous datasets, the pattern of functional decline was similar as was overall symptom burden. Timely access to palliative care should be based on needs not diagnoses.

Palliative care needs and utilisation of different specialist services in the last days of life for people with lung cancer

OBJECTIVES

To (a) compare palliative care needs of lung cancer patients on their final admission to community-based and inpatient palliative care services; and (b) explore whether and how these care needs affect their utilisation of different palliative care services in the last days of life.

METHODS

Descriptive study involving 17,816 lung cancer patients who received the last episode of palliative care from specialist services and died between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2018.

RESULTS

Both groups of patients admitted to community-based and inpatient palliative care services generally experienced relatively low levels of symptom distress, but high levels of functional impairment and dependency. "Unstable" versus "stable" palliative care phase (Odds ratio = 11.66; 95% Confidence Interval: 9.55-14.24), poorer functional outcomes and severe levels of distress from many symptoms predicted greater likelihood of use of inpatient versus community-based palliative care.

CONCLUSIONS

Most inpatient palliative care admissions are not associated with high levels of symptom severity. To extend the period of home care and rate of home death for people with lung cancer, additional investment is required to improve their access to sufficiently skilled palliative care staff, multi-disciplinary teams and 24-hour home support in community settings.

ERS statement on harmonised standards for lung cancer registration and lung cancer services in Europe

The European Respiratory Society (ERS) task force for harmonised standards for lung cancer registration and lung cancer services in Europe recognised the need to create a single dataset for use in pan-European data collection and a manual of standards for European lung cancer services.

The multidisciplinary task force considered evidence from two different sources, reviewing existing national and international datasets alongside the results of a survey of clinical data collection on lung cancer in 35 European countries. A similar process was followed for the manual of lung cancer services, with the task force using existing guidelines and national or international recommendations for lung cancer services to develop a manual of standards for services in Europe.

The task force developed essential and minimum datasets for lung cancer registration to enable all countries to collect the same essential data and some to collect data with greater detail. The task force also developed a manual specifying standards for lung cancer services in Europe.

Despite the wide variation in the sociopolitical landscape across Europe, the ERS is determined to encourage the delivery of high-quality lung cancer care. Both the manual of lung cancer services and the minimum dataset for lung cancer registration will support this aspiration.

Integrating early palliative care (EPC) in the management of lung cancer: The role of the thoracic oncologist

Early introduction of palliative care in the management of patients with metastatic lung cancer is recommended since it improves quality of life and improves survival rates. In many hospitals the focus of palliative teams is often on terminal care due to limited resources. How is Early palliative care (EPC) in this setting implemented in daily oncologic care? It seems obvious that thoracic oncologists will have to become involved in EPC for lung cancer patients. In this review we want to determine the assignments for the thoracic oncologist in EPC and to give some practical tools how we started EPC in collaboration with the palliative team.