Practical tools for implementing early palliative care in advanced lung cancer

Effects of early palliative care on patients with incurable cancer: A meta-analysis and systematic review

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis aims to compare the effects of early palliative care on patients with incurable cancer with those of standard oncologic care or on-demand palliative care.

METHODS

Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) were searched for relevant randomised controlled trials. We also screened reference lists of included studies for additional qualified studies. We used Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool to evaluate quality of included studies. DerSimonian and Laird's random effects meta-analysis was used to synthesise the effects.

RESULTS

Sixteen in 1376 studies were included. The pooled data suggested that patients receiving early palliative care had better quality of life (SMD = 0.737, 95% CI: 0.240-1.234), fewer symptoms (SMD = 0.304, 95% CI: 0.097-0.510), better mood (SMD = -0.443, 95% CI: -0.605 to -0.282), better survival (hazard ratio [HR] of death: HR = 1.521, 95% CI: 1.521-1.923; 1-year overall survival probability: HR = 1.238, 95% CI: 1.031-1.486) and higher probability of dying at home (HR = 1.153, 95% CI: 1.027-1.295) than patients in the control group. And there is no difference between resource use.

CONCLUSION

Early palliative care improves lives of patients with incurable cancer, but the evidence level is low because of high heterogeneity of quality of life and small numbers of included studies for other results.

Recruiting general practitioners for palliative care research in primary care: real-life barriers explained

Background

The implementation of early palliative care within a primary care setting is a recent academic topic. Recruiting General Practitioners (GPs) to participate in a palliative care study can be challenging. The pro-Spinoza project implemented a Care Pathway for Primary Palliative Care in 5 areas in Belgium. During this project, the feasibility of the recruitment of GPs and palliative care patients was evaluated.

Methods

The recruitment process was recorded in detail via an electronic logbook combining quantitative and qualitative data. Quantitative recordings included the contact types and the number of contacts with eligible GPs and were analysed descriptively. Qualitative recordings included field notes with feedback from the GPs and other stakeholders and were thematically analysed starting from the Grol and Wensing framework for professional behaviour change.

Results

Of 4065 eligible GPs working in 5 areas under research, 787 GPs (19%) were contacted individually, 398 GPs (9,8%) were contacted face-to-face and most of these 398 GPs showed high interest in the topic. 112 GPs (2,8%) signed the collaboration agreement, but finally only 65 GPs (1,6%) delivered at least a completed baseline-questionnaire. Despite the initial interest in participating, the unpredictable and busy daily workloads of the GPs, as well as inexperience with research protocols, impeded the ability of the GPs to fully engage in the study. This resulted in the high dropout rate. Participating GPs reported that they had underestimated the effort required to effectively participate in the project.

Conclusions

Recruitment of GPs to palliative care research is challenging. Primary care is a vital service to engage in palliative care research however the practical limitations reduce the ability of the service to effectively engage in the research. More research is needed to determine how GPs might be better supported in research.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02266069, Registered 16th October 2014, retrospectively registered.

Prognostic Understanding and Quality of Life in Patients With Advanced Lung Cancer: A Multicenter Study

INTRODUCTION

Communication about the palliative setting remains a barrier for many physicians because they are afraid to harm the patient by giving bad news. We sought to determine whether this a valid concern; the influence of prognostic understanding on patients' quality of life (QoL); and which factors influence this relationship.

METHODS

The present multicenter, cross-sectional study used a questionnaire to measure patients' prognostic understanding, QoL, mood, and coping strategy.

RESULTS

We surveyed 125 patients with advanced lung cancer. Prognostic understanding correlated significantly with emotional well-being (r = -0.20; P = .01) and pain (r = 0.43; P = .00) but not with anxiety (r = 0.12, P = .12) or depression (r = 0.05; P = .29). Patients with anxiety (r = -0.23; P = .01) and patients with depressive feelings (r = -0.63; P = .00) experienced poorer QoL. Four in 10 patients reported feelings of anxiety and/or depression. Positive reframing as a coping strategy was associated with a better QoL (r = 0.25; P = .00).

CONCLUSION

Prognostic understanding was related to poorer emotional well-being and more pain but does not affect mood. Four in 10 patients reported feelings of anxiety and/or depression, which were associated with a poorer QoL. A holistic approach seems necessary when physicians communicate about the palliative setting.

Early palliative care for adults with advanced cancer

BACKGROUND

Incurable cancer, which often constitutes an enormous challenge for patients, their families, and medical professionals, profoundly affects the patient's physical and psychosocial well-being. In standard cancer care, palliative measures generally are initiated when it is evident that disease-modifying treatments have been unsuccessful, no treatments can be offered, or death is anticipated. In contrast, early palliative care is initiated much earlier in the disease trajectory and closer to the diagnosis of incurable cancer.

OBJECTIVES

To compare effects of early palliative care interventions versus treatment as usual/standard cancer care on health-related quality of life, depression, symptom intensity, and survival among adults with a diagnosis of advanced cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycINFO, OpenGrey (a database for grey literature), and three clinical trial registers to October 2016. We checked reference lists, searched citations, and contacted study authors to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-randomised controlled trials (cRCTs) on professional palliative care services that provided or co-ordinated comprehensive care for adults at early advanced stages of cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane. We assessed risk of bias, extracted data, and collected information on adverse events. For quantitative synthesis, we combined respective results on our primary outcomes of health-related quality of life, survival (death hazard ratio), depression, and symptom intensity across studies in meta-analyses using an inverse variance random-effects model. We expressed pooled effects as standardised mean differences (SMDs, or Hedges' adjusted g). We assessed certainty of evidence at the outcome level using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) and created a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven randomised and cluster-randomised controlled trials that together recruited 1614 participants. Four studies evaluated interventions delivered by specialised palliative care teams, and the remaining studies assessed models of co-ordinated care. Overall, risk of bias at the study level was mostly low, apart from possible selection bias in three studies and attrition bias in one study, along with insufficient information on blinding of participants and outcome assessment in six studies.Compared with usual/standard cancer care alone, early palliative care significantly improved health-related quality of life at a small effect size (SMD 0.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 0.38; participants analysed at post treatment = 1028; evidence of low certainty). As re-expressed in natural units (absolute change in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) score), health-related quality of life scores increased on average by 4.59 (95% CI 2.55 to 6.46) points more among participants given early palliative care than among control participants. Data on survival, available from four studies enrolling a total of 800 participants, did not indicate differences in efficacy (death hazard ratio 0.85, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.28; evidence of very low certainty). Levels of depressive symptoms among those receiving early palliative care did not differ significantly from levels among those receiving usual/standard cancer care (five studies; SMD -0.11, 95% CI -0.26 to 0.03; participants analysed at post treatment = 762; evidence of very low certainty). Results from seven studies that analysed 1054 participants post treatment suggest a small effect for significantly lower symptom intensity in early palliative care compared with the control condition (SMD -0.23, 95% CI -0.35 to -0.10; evidence of low certainty). The type of model used to provide early palliative care did not affect study results. One RCT reported potential adverse events of early palliative care, such as a higher percentage of participants with severe scores for pain and poor appetite; the remaining six studies did not report adverse events in study publications. For these six studies, principal investigators stated upon request that they had not observed any adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review of a small number of trials indicates that early palliative care interventions may have more beneficial effects on quality of life and symptom intensity among patients with advanced cancer than among those given usual/standard cancer care alone. Although we found only small effect sizes, these may be clinically relevant at an advanced disease stage with limited prognosis, at which time further decline in quality of life is very common. At this point, effects on mortality and depression are uncertain. We have to interpret current results with caution owing to very low to low certainty of current evidence and between-study differences regarding participant populations, interventions, and methods. Additional research now under way will present a clearer picture of the effect and specific indication of early palliative care. Upcoming results from several ongoing studies (N = 20) and studies awaiting assessment (N = 10) may increase the certainty of study results and may lead to improved decision making. In perspective, early palliative care is a newly emerging field, and well-conducted studies are needed to explicitly describe the components of early palliative care and control treatments, after blinding of participants and outcome assessors, and to report on possible adverse events.