Jonathan Sussman

Evaluating Survivorship Care Plans: Results of a Randomized, Clinical Trial of Patients With Breast Cancer

PURPOSE An Institute of Medicine report recommends that patients with cancer receive a survivorship care plan (SCP). The trial objective was to determine if an SCP for breast cancer survivors improves patient-reported outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS Women with early-stage breast cancer who completed primary treatment at least 3 months previously were eligible. Consenting patients were allocated within two strata: less than 24 months and ≥ 24 months since diagnosis. All patients were transferred to their own primary care physician (PCP) for follow-up. In addition to a discharge visit, the intervention group received an SCP, which was reviewed during a 30-minute educational session with a nurse, and their PCP received the SCP and guideline on follow-up. The primary outcome was cancer-related distress at 12 months, assessed by the Impact of Event Scale (IES). Secondary outcomes included quality of life, patient satisfaction, continuity/coordination of care, and health service measures. RESULTS Overall, 408 survivors were enrolled through nine tertiary cancer centers. There were no differences between groups on cancer-related distress or on any of the patient-reported secondary outcomes, and there were no differences when the two strata were analyzed separately. More patients in the intervention than control group correctly identify their PCP as primarily responsible for follow-up (98.7% v 89.1%; difference, 9.6%; 95% CI, 3.9 to 15.9; P = .005). CONCLUSION The results do not support the hypothesis that SCPs are beneficial for improving patient-reported outcomes. Transferring follow-up to PCPs is considered an important strategy to meet the demand for scarce oncology resources. SCPs were no better than a standard discharge visit with the oncologist to facilitate transfer.

Symptom burden and performance status in a population‐based cohort of ambulatory cancer patients

For ambulatory cancer patients, Ontario has standardized symptom and performance status assessment population‐wide, using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) and Palliative Performance Scale (PPS). In a broad cross‐section of cancer outpatients, the authors describe the ESAS and PPS scores and their relation to patient characteristics.

The expanding role of primary care in cancer control

The nature of cancer control is changing, with an increasing emphasis, fuelled by public and political demand, on prevention, early diagnosis, and patient experience during and after treatment. At the same time, primary care is increasingly promoted, by governments and health funders worldwide, as the preferred setting for most health care for reasons of increasing need, to stabilise health-care costs, and to accommodate patient preference for care close to home. It is timely, then, to consider how this expanding role for primary care can work for cancer control, which has long been dominated by highly technical interventions centred on treatment, and in which the contribution of primary care has been largely perceived as marginal. In this Commission, expert opinion from primary care and public health professionals with academic and clinical cancer expertise—from epidemiologists, psychologists, policy makers, and cancer specialists—has contributed to a detailed consideration of the evidence for cancer control provided in primary care and community care settings. Ranging from primary prevention to end-of-life care, the scope for new models of care is explored, and the actions needed to effect change are outlined. The strengths of primary care—its continuous, coordinated, and comprehensive care for individuals and families—are particularly evident in prevention and diagnosis, in shared follow-up and survivorship care, and in end-of-life care. A strong theme of integration of care runs throughout, and its elements (clinical, vertical, and functional) and the tools needed for integrated working are described in detail. All of this change, as it evolves, will need to be underpinned by new research and by continuing and shared multiprofessional development.

A randomized phase 3 trial of thalidomide and prednisone as maintenance therapy after ASCT in patients with MM with a quality-of-life assessment: the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinicals Trials Group Myeloma 10 Trial

We conducted a randomized, controlled trial comparing thalidomide-prednisone as maintenance therapy with observation in 332 patients who had undergone autologous stem cell transplantation with melphalan 200 mg/m2. The primary end point was overall survival (OS); secondary end points were myeloma-specific progression-free survival,progression-free survival, incidence of venous thromboembolism, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). With a median follow-up of 4.1 years, no differences in OS between thalidomide-prednisone and observation were detected (respective 4-year estimates of 68% vs 60%, respectively; hazard ratio = 0.77; P = .18); thalidomide-prednisone was associated with superior myeloma-specific progression-free survival and progression-free survival (for both outcomes, the 4-year estimates were 32% vs 14%; hazard ratio = 0.56; P < .0001) and more frequent venous thromboembolism (7.3% vs none; P = .0004). Median survival after first disease recurrence was 27.7 months with thalidomide-prednisone and 34.1 months in the observation group. Nine second malignancies were observed with thalidomide-prednisone versus 6 in the observation group. Those allocated to thalidomide-prednisone reported worse HRQoL with respect to cognitive function, dyspnea, constipation, thirst, leg swelling, numbness, dry mouth, and balance problems. We conclude that maintenance therapy with thalidomide-prednisone after autologous stem cell transplantation improves the duration of disease control, but is associated with worsening of patient-reported HRQoL and no detectable OS benefit.

Clinician-patient communication: a systematic review

Goal of WorkThe goal of this work was to identify methods of clinician–patient cancer-related communication that may impact patient outcomes associated with distress at critical points in the course of cancer care.Materials and methodsA systematic review of practice guidelines, systematic reviews, or randomized trials on this topic was conducted. Guidelines for quality was evaluated using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation Instrument, and the contributive value for recommendations was assessed. Systematic reviews and randomized trials were also evaluated for methodological rigor.ResultsFour existing guidelines, eight systematic reviews and nine randomized trials were identified. Two of the guidelines were of high quality, and all systematic reviews reported clear search criteria and support for their conclusions; the randomized trials were of modest or low quality. For all situations and disease stages, guidelines consistently identified open, honest, and timely communication as important; specifically, there was evidence for a reduction in anxiety when discussions of life expectancy and prognosis were included in consultations. Techniques to increase patient participation in decision-making were associated with greater satisfaction but did not necessarily decrease distress. Few studies took cultural and religious diversity into account.ConclusionsThere is little definitive evidence supporting the superiority of one specific method for communicating information compared to another. Evidence regarding the benefit of decision aids or other strategies to facilitate better communication is inconsistent. Since patients vary in their communication preferences and desire for active participation in decision making, there is a need to individualize communication style.

Randomized Comparison of Gemcitabine, Dexamethasone, and Cisplatin Versus Dexamethasone, Cytarabine, and Cisplatin Chemotherapy Before Autologous Stem-Cell Transplantation for Relapsed and Refractory Aggressive Lymphomas: NCIC-CTG LY.12

PURPOSE For patients with relapsed or refractory aggressive lymphoma, we hypothesized that gemcitabine-based therapy before autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) is as effective as and less toxic than standard treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS We randomly assigned 619 patients with relapsed/refractory aggressive lymphoma to treatment with gemcitabine, dexamethasone, and cisplatin (GDP) or to dexamethasone, cytarabine, and cisplatin (DHAP). Patients with B-cell lymphoma also received rituximab. Responding patients proceeded to stem-cell collection and ASCT. Coprimary end points were response rate after two treatment cycles and transplantation rate. The noninferiority margin for the response rate to GDP relative to DHAP was set at 10%. Secondary end points included event-free and overall survival, treatment toxicity, and quality of life. RESULTS For the intention-to-treat population, the response rate with GDP was 45.2%; with DHAP the response rate was 44.0% (95% CI for difference, -9.0% to 6.7%), meeting protocol-defined criteria for noninferiority of GDP (P = .005). Similar results were obtained in a per-protocol analysis. The transplantation rates were 52.1% with GDP and 49.3% with DHAP (P = .44). At a median follow-up of 53 months, no differences were detected in event-free survival (HR, 0.99; stratified log-rank P = .95) or overall survival (HR, 1.03; P = .78) between GDP and DHAP. Treatment with GDP was associated with less toxicity (P < .001) and need for hospitalization (P < .001), and preserved quality of life (P = .04). CONCLUSION For patients with relapsed or refractory aggressive lymphoma, in comparison with DHAP, treatment with GDP is associated with a noninferior response rate, similar transplantation rate, event-free survival, and overall survival, less toxicity and hospitalization, and superior quality of life.

A systematic review of studies evaluating diffusion and dissemination of selected cancer control interventions.

With this review, the authors sought to determine what strategies have been evaluated (including the outcomes assessed) to disseminate cancer control interventions that promote the uptake of behavior change. Five topic areas along the cancer care continuum (smoking cessation, healthy diet, mammography, cervical cancer screening, and control of cancer pain) were selected to be representative. A systematic review was conducted of primary studies evaluating dissemination of a cancer control intervention. Thirty-one studies were identified that evaluated dissemination strategies in the 5 topic areas. No strong evidence currently exists to recommend any one dissemination strategy as effective in promoting the uptake of cancer control interventions. The authors conclude that there is a strong need for more research into dissemination of cancer control interventions. Future research should consider methodological issues such as the most appropriate study design and outcomes to be evaluated.

Impact of community based, specialist palliative care teams on hospitalisations and emergency department visits late in life and hospital deaths: a pooled analysis

Objective To determine the pooled effect of exposure to one of 11 specialist palliative care teams providing services in patients’ homes. Design Pooled analysis of a retrospective cohort study. Setting Ontario, Canada. Participants 3109 patients who received care from specialist palliative care teams in 2009-11 (exposed) matched by propensity score to 3109 patients who received usual care (unexposed). Intervention The palliative care teams studied served different geographies and varied in team composition and size but had the same core team members and role: a core group of palliative care physicians, nurses, and family physicians who provide integrated palliative care to patients in their homes. The teams’ role was to manage symptoms, provide education and care, coordinate services, and be available without interruption regardless of time or day. Main outcome measures Patients (a) being in hospital in the last two weeks of life; (b) having an emergency department visit in the last two weeks of life; or (c) dying in hospital. Results In both exposed and unexposed groups, about 80% had cancer and 78% received end of life homecare services for the same average duration. Across all palliative care teams, 970 (31.2%) of the exposed group were in hospital and 896 (28.9%) had an emergency department visit in the last two weeks of life respectively, compared with 1219 (39.3%) and 1070 (34.5%) of the unexposed group (P<0.001). The pooled relative risks of being in hospital and having an emergency department visit in late life comparing exposed versus unexposed were 0.68 (95% confidence interval 0.61 to 0.76) and 0.77 (0.69 to 0.86) respectively. Fewer exposed than unexposed patients died in hospital (503 (16.2%) v 887 (28.6%), P<0.001), and the pooled relative risk of dying in hospital was 0.46 (0.40 to 0.52). Conclusions Community based specialist palliative care teams, despite variation in team composition and geographies, were effective at reducing acute care use and hospital deaths at the end of life.

Clinical Experience Using Hypofractionated Radiation Schedules in Breast Cancer

Hypofractionation is attractive for whole- or partial-breast irradiation because it permits treatment to be given with fewer fractions in a shorter period of time and at less cost. A number of cohort studies suggest that hypofractionation may be given to the whole breast safely and with good local control. Recent randomized trials have confirmed that hypofractioned whole-breast irradiation is equivalent to more conventional whole-breast irradiation with respect to local recurrence and cosmetic outcome. Recently, there has been a renewed interest in hypofractionation for the delivery of partial-breast irradiation using a number of techniques including high-dose rate brachytherapy, 3-dimensional conformal radiation using external-beam techniques, and intraoperative therapy. Early cohort studies report good local control and acceptable morbidity. Randomized trials are now underway to compare this approach to conventional whole-breast irradiation.

Sleep disturbance in adults with cancer: a systematic review of evidence for best practices in assessment and management for clinical practice

Sleep disturbance is prevalent in cancer with detrimental effects on health outcomes. Sleep problems are seldom identified or addressed in cancer practice. The purpose of this review was to identify the evidence base for the assessment and management of cancer-related sleep disturbance (insomnia and insomnia syndrome) for oncology practice. The search of the health literature included grey literature data sources and empirical databases from June 2004 to June 2012. The evidence was reviewed by a Canadian Sleep Expert Panel, comprised of nurses, psychologists, primary care physicians, oncologists, physicians specialized in sleep disturbances, researchers and guideline methodologists to develop clinical practice recommendations for pan-Canadian use reported in a separate paper. Three clinical practice guidelines and 12 randomized, controlled trials were identified as the main source of evidence. Additional guidelines and systematic reviews were also reviewed for evidence-based recommendations on the assessment and management of insomnia not necessarily in cancer. A need to routinely screen for sleep disturbances was identified and the randomized, controlled trial (RCT) evidence suggests benefits for cognitive behavioural therapy for improving sleep quality in cancer. Sleep disturbance is a prevalent problem in cancer that needs greater recognition in clinical practice and in future research.Sleep disturbance is prevalent in cancer with detrimental effects on health outcomes. Sleep problems are seldom identified or addressed in cancer practice. The purpose of this review was to identify the evidence base for the assessment and management of cancer-related sleep disturbance (insomnia and insomnia syndrome) for oncology practice. The search of the health literature included grey literature data sources and empirical databases from June 2004 to June 2012. The evidence was reviewed by a Canadian Sleep Expert Panel, comprised of nurses, psychologists, primary care physicians, oncologists, physicians specialized in sleep disturbances, researchers and guideline methodologists to develop clinical practice recommendations for pan-Canadian use reported in a separate paper. Three clinical practice guidelines and 12 randomized, controlled trials were identified as the main source of evidence. Additional guidelines and systematic reviews were also reviewed for evidence-based recommendations on the assessment and management of insomnia not necessarily in cancer. A need to routinely screen for sleep disturbances was identified and the randomized, controlled trial (RCT) evidence suggests benefits for cognitive behavioural therapy for improving sleep quality in cancer. Sleep disturbance is a prevalent problem in cancer that needs greater recognition in clinical practice and in future research.