Jamie H. Von Roenn

American Society of Clinical Oncology Provisional Clinical Opinion: The Integration of Palliative Care Into Standard Oncology Care

PURPOSE An American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) provisional clinical opinion (PCO) offers timely clinical direction to ASCOs membership following publication or presentation of potentially practice-changing data from major studies. This PCO addresses the integration of palliative care services into standard oncology practice at the time a person is diagnosed with metastatic or advanced cancer. CLINICAL CONTEXT Palliative care is frequently misconstrued as synonymous with end-of-life care. Palliative care is focused on the relief of suffering, in all of its dimensions, throughout the course of a patients illness. Although the use of hospice and other palliative care services at the end of life has increased, many patients are enrolled in hospice less than 3 weeks before their death, which limits the benefit they may gain from these services. By potentially improving quality of life (QOL), cost of care, and even survival in patients with metastatic cancer, palliative care has increasing relevance for the care of patients with cancer. Until recently, data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) demonstrating the benefits of palliative care in patients with metastatic cancer who are also receiving standard oncology care have not been available. RECENT DATA Seven published RCTs form the basis of this PCO. PROVISIONAL CLINICAL OPINION Based on strong evidence from a phase III RCT, patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer should be offered concurrent palliative care and standard oncologic care at initial diagnosis. While a survival benefit from early involvement of palliative care has not yet been demonstrated in other oncology settings, substantial evidence demonstrates that palliative care-when combined with standard cancer care or as the main focus of care-leads to better patient and caregiver outcomes. These include improvement in symptoms, QOL, and patient satisfaction, with reduced caregiver burden. Earlier involvement of palliative care also leads to more appropriate referral to and use of hospice, and reduced use of futile intensive care. While evidence clarifying optimal delivery of palliative care to improve patient outcomes is evolving, no trials to date have demonstrated harm to patients and caregivers, or excessive costs, from early involvement of palliative care. Therefore, it is the Panels expert consensus that combined standard oncology care and palliative care should be considered early in the course of illness for any patient with metastatic cancer and/or high symptom burden. Strategies to optimize concurrent palliative care and standard oncology care, with evaluation of its impact on important patient and caregiver outcomes (eg, QOL, survival, health care services utilization, and costs) and on society, should be an area of intense research. NOTE ASCOs provisional clinical opinions (PCOs) reflect expert consensus based on clinical evidence and literature available at the time they are written and are intended to assist physicians in clinical decision making and identify questions and settings for further research. Because of the rapid flow of scientific information in oncology, new evidence may have emerged since the time a PCO was submitted for publication. PCOs are not continually updated and may not reflect the most recent evidence. PCOs cannot account for individual variation among patients and cannot be considered inclusive of all proper methods of care or exclusive of other treatments. It is the responsibility of the treating physician or other health care provider, relying on independent experience and knowledge of the patient, to determine the best course of treatment for the patient. Accordingly, adherence to any PCO is voluntary, with the ultimate determination regarding its application to be made by the physician in light of each patients individual circumstances. ASCO PCOs describe the use of procedures and therapies in clinical trials and cannot be assumed to apply to the use of these interventions in the context of clinical practice. ASCO assumes no responsibility for any injury or damage to persons or property arising out of or related to any use of ASCOs PCOs, or for any errors or omissions.

Low-dose compared with standard-dose m-BACOD chemotherapy for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma associated with human immunodeficiency virus infection

BACKGROUND Reduced doses of cytotoxic chemotherapy or standard-dose therapy plus a myeloid colony-stimulating factor decreases hematologic toxicity and its complications in patients with non-Hodgkins lymphoma associated with infection with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). However, the effect of reducing the doses of cytotoxic chemotherapeutic agents on clinical outcome is not known. METHODS We randomly assigned 198 HIV-seropositive patients with previously untreated, aggressive non-Hodgkins lymphoma to receive standard-dose therapy with methotrexate, bleomycin, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and dexamethasone (m-BACOD) along with granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF; n=94) or reduced-dose m-BACOD with GM-CSF administered only as indicated (n=98). RESULTS A complete response was achieved in 39 of the 94 assessable patients assigned to low-dose therapy (41 percent) and in 42 of the 81 assessable patients assigned to standard-dose therapy (52 percent, P= 0.56). There were no significant differences in overall or disease-free survival; median survival times were 35 weeks for patients receiving low-dose therapy and 31 weeks for those receiving standard-dose therapy (risk ratio for death in the standard-dose group=1.17; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.84 to 1.63; P=0.25). Toxic effects of chemotherapy rated grade 3 or higher occurred in 66 of 94 patients assigned to standard-dose therapy (70 percent) and 50 of 98 patients assigned to low-dose treatment (51 percent, P=0.008). Hematologic toxicity accounted for the difference. CONCLUSIONS As compared with treatment with standard doses of cytotoxic chemotherapy (m-BACOD), reduced doses caused significantly fewer hematologic toxic effects yet had similar efficacy in patients with HIV-related lymphoma. Dose-modified chemotherapy should be considered for most HIV-infected patients with lymphoma.

Palliative Cancer Care a Decade Later: Accomplishments, the Need, Next Steps--From the American Society of Clinical Oncology

PURPOSE In 1998, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) published a special article regarding palliative care and companion recommendations. Herein we summarize the major accomplishments of ASCO regarding palliative cancer and highlight current needs and make recommendations to realize the Societys vision of comprehensive cancer care by 2020. METHODS ASCO convened a task force of palliative care experts to assess the state of palliative cancer care in the Societys programs. We reviewed accomplishments, assessed current needs, and developed a definition of palliative cancer. Senior ASCO members and the Board of Directors reviewed and endorsed this article for submission to Journal of Clinical Oncology. RESULTS Palliative cancer care is the integration into cancer care of therapies that address the multiple issues that cause suffering for patients and their families and impact their life quality. Effective provision of palliative cancer care requires an interdisciplinary team that can provide care in all patient settings, including outpatient clinics, acute and long-term care facilities, and private homes. Changes in current policy, drug availability, and education are necessary for the integration of palliative care throughout the experience of cancer, for the achievement of quality improvement initiatives, and for effective palliative cancer care research. CONCLUSION The need for palliative cancer care is greater than ever notwithstanding the strides made over the last decade. Further efforts are needed to realize the integration of palliative care in the model and vision of comprehensive cancer care by 2020.

American Society of Clinical Oncology Executive Summary of the Clinical Practice Guideline Update on the Role of Bone-Modifying Agents in Metastatic Breast Cancer

PURPOSE To update the recommendations on the role of bone-modifying agents in the prevention and treatment of skeletal-related events (SREs) for patients with metastatic breast cancer with bone metastases. METHODS A literature search using MEDLINE and the Cochrane Collaboration Library identified relevant studies published between January 2003 and November 2010. The primary outcomes of interest were SREs and time to SRE. Secondary outcomes included adverse events and pain. An Update Committee reviewed the literature and re-evaluated previous recommendations. RESULTS Recommendations were modified to include a new agent. A recommendation regarding osteonecrosis of the jaw was added. RECOMMENDATIONS Bone-modifying agent therapy is only recommended for patients with breast cancer with evidence of bone metastases; denosumab 120 mg subcutaneously every 4 weeks, intravenous pamidronate 90 mg over no less than 2 hours, or zoledronic acid 4 mg over no less than 15 minutes every 3 to 4 weeks is recommended. There is insufficient evidence to demonstrate greater efficacy of one bone-modifying agent over another. In patients with a calculated serum creatinine clearance of more than 60 mg/min, no change in dosage, infusion time, or interval of bisphosphonate administration is required. Serum creatinine should be monitored before each dose. All patients should receive a dental examination and appropriate preventive dentistry before bone-modifying agent therapy and maintain optimal oral health. Current standards of care for cancer bone pain management should be applied at the onset of pain, in concert with the initiation of bone-modifying agent therapy. The use of biochemical markers to monitor bone-modifying agent use is not recommended.

Rituximab plus concurrent infusional EPOCH chemotherapy is highly effective in HIV-associated B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma

Rituximab plus intravenous bolus chemotherapy is a standard treatment for immunocompetent patients with B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Some studies have suggested that rituximab is associated with excessive toxicity in HIV-associated NHL, and that infusional chemotherapy may be more effective. We performed a randomized phase 2 trial of rituximab (375 mg/m(2)) given either concurrently before each infusional etoposide, vincristine, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and prednisone (EPOCH) chemotherapy cycle or sequentially (weekly for 6 weeks) after completion of all chemotherapy in HIV-associated NHL. EPOCH consisted of a 96-hour intravenous infusion of etoposide, doxorubicin, and vincristine plus oral prednisone followed by intravenous bolus cyclophosphamide given every 21 days for 4 to 6 cycles. In the concurrent arm, 35 of 48 evaluable patients (73%; 95% confidence interval, 58%-85%) had a complete response. In the sequential arm, 29 of 53 evaluable patients (55%; 95% confidence interval, 41%-68%) had a complete response. The primary efficacy endpoint was met for the concurrent arm only. Toxicity was comparable in the 2 arms, although patients with a baseline CD4 count less than 50/microL had a high infectious death rate in the concurrent arm. We conclude that concurrent rituximab plus infusional EPOCH is an effective regimen for HIV-associated lymphoma.

Phase II Trial of Infusional Cyclophosphamide, Doxorubicin, and Etoposide in Patients With HIV-Associated Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma: An Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Trial (E1494)

PURPOSE To determine the effectiveness of an infusional chemotherapy regimen in patients with HIV-associated lymphoma treated before and after the use of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) in routine clinical practice. PATIENTS AND METHODS Ninety-eight assessable patients with HIV-associated intermediate- or high-grade non-Hodgkins lymphoma received cyclophosphamide 200 mg/m(2)/d, doxorubicin 12.5 mg/m(2)/d, and etoposide 60 mg/m(2)/d (CDE) given by continuous intravenous infusion for 4 days (96 hours) every 4 weeks plus filgrastim. Concurrent antiretroviral treatment consisted of the nucleoside analog didanosine in the first 43 patients enrolled before December 1996 (pre-HAART group), or HAART in the remaining 55 patients enrolled after that time (HAART group). RESULTS Complete response occurred in 44 patients (45%; 95% CI, 35% to 55%). Failure-free survival and overall survival (OS) at 2 years was 36% (95% CI, 26% to 46%) and 43% (95% CI, 33% to 53%), respectively. At the time of the analysis, 30% in the pre-HAART group were alive compared with 47% in the HAART group; when adjusted for varying length of follow-up, patients in the HAART group had improved OS (P =.039). Patients in the HAART group experienced less grade 4 nonhematologic toxicity (22% v 42%; P =.037), thrombocytopenia (31% v 52%; P =.033), and anemia (9% v 27%; P =.021), and had fewer treatment-associated deaths (0% v 10%; P =.013). CONCLUSION Infusional CDE is an effective and potentially curative regimen for patients with HIV-associated lymphoma. Patients treated in the HAART era have less chemotherapy-associated toxicity and improved survival.

Hematology/oncology fellows' training in palliative care: results of a national survey.

Palliative care is recognized as integral to the practice of oncology, yet many oncologists report inadequate training in critical palliative care domains, such as symptom management, psychosocial care, and communication skills. The authors of this report sought to assess the quantity and quality of palliative care education within oncology fellowships.

Randomized trial of paclitaxel versus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin for advanced human immunodeficiency virus-associated Kaposi sarcoma: evidence of symptom palliation from chemotherapy.

Paclitaxel and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) are active cytotoxic agents for the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)‐associated Kaposi sarcoma (KS). A randomized trial comparing the efficacy and toxicity of paclitaxel and PLD was performed, and the effects of therapy on symptom palliation and quality of life were determined.

Efficacy of Low-Dose Interferon with Antiretroviral Therapy in Kaposi' s Sarcoma: A Randomized Phase II AIDS Clinical Trials Group Study

We wished to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a low and an intermediate daily dose of interferon-alpha2b (IFN-alpha2b) with didanosine in patients with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS)-associated Kaposis sarcoma (KS). HIV-seropositive subjects with biopsy-confirmed cutaneous KS were randomized to receive either a low (1 million IU) or an intermediate (10 million IU) dose of IFN-alpha2b once daily with twice daily doses of didanosine. Treatment assignment was stratified by CD4 count. Response, toxicity, changes in CD4 counts, and survival were evaluated. Sixty-eight eligible subjects were accrued, 35 to low-dose and 33 to intermediate-dose IFN-alpha2b. The response rate was 40% in the low-dose group (95% CI, 24-58) and 55% in the intermediate-dose group (95% CI, 36-72) (p = 0.338). The median response duration was approximately 110 weeks in both groups. Intermediate-dose IFN induced grade 3/4 neutropenia more often (21% vs. 3%, p = 0.048) and grade 3/4 toxicity faster (p = 0.0231) and necessitated treatment discontinuation earlier for drug-related toxicities (p = 0.0416) than low-dose IFN. There were no significant differences in survival between the treatment groups. Baseline CD4 count was the only significant factor predicting response. Once-daily low-dose and intermediate-dose IFN-alpha2b induced similar response rates, which were achieved without optimal antiretroviral therapy. The slightly higher response rate in the intermediate-dose group was offset by its significantly poorer tolerance. These findings justify the use of lower, well-tolerated IFN doses for treatment of KS with currently used antiretroviral regimens.

A phase II study of single agent bortezomib in patients with metastatic breast cancer: a single institution experience.

PS-341, now known as bortezomib (Velcade[Millenium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cambridge, MA; and Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development, LLC, Spring house, PA]), is a proteasome inhibitor approved for the treatment of refractory multiple myeloma. Preclinical and early clinical studies showed PS-341 to be effective in solid tumors, one of which was breast cancer. We conducted a single institution, phase II study using PS-341 in the treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer. The primary objective of this study was to determine the objective tumor response in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) receiving PS-341. The secondary objectives were to estimate progression-free survival of patients receiving single-agent PS-341 and to evaluate toxicity related to PS-341. In all 12 patients who met criteria for enrollment, there were no observed objective responses. Further, all 12 patients progressed while receiving therapy with PS-341. This study was terminated after the first stage due to the lack of any objective response.