Thomas W. LeBlanc

Safety and benefit of discontinuing statin therapy in the setting of advanced, life-limiting illness: a randomized clinical trial.

IMPORTANCE For patients with limited prognosis, some medication risks may outweigh the benefits, particularly when benefits take years to accrue; statins are one example. Data are lacking regarding the risks and benefits of discontinuing statin therapy for patients with limited life expectancy. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the safety, clinical, and cost impact of discontinuing statin medications for patients in the palliative care setting. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This was a multicenter, parallel-group, unblinded, pragmatic clinical trial. Eligibility included adults with an estimated life expectancy of between 1 month and 1 year, statin therapy for 3 months or more for primary or secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease, recent deterioration in functional status, and no recent active cardiovascular disease. Participants were randomized to either discontinue or continue statin therapy and were monitored monthly for up to 1 year. The study was conducted from June 3, 2011, to May 2, 2013. All analyses were performed using an intent-to-treat approach. INTERVENTIONS Statin therapy was withdrawn from eligible patients who were randomized to the discontinuation group. Patients in the continuation group continued to receive statins. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Outcomes included death within 60 days (primary outcome), survival, cardiovascular events, performance status, quality of life (QOL), symptoms, number of nonstatin medications, and cost savings. RESULTS A total of 381 patients were enrolled; 189 of these were randomized to discontinue statins, and 192 were randomized to continue therapy. Mean (SD) age was 74.1 (11.6) years, 22.0% of the participants were cognitively impaired, and 48.8% had cancer. The proportion of participants in the discontinuation vs continuation groups who died within 60 days was not significantly different (23.8% vs 20.3%; 90% CI, -3.5% to 10.5%; P=.36) and did not meet the noninferiority end point. Total QOL was better for the group discontinuing statin therapy (mean McGill QOL score, 7.11 vs 6.85; P=.04). Few participants experienced cardiovascular events (13 in the discontinuation group vs 11 in the continuation group). Mean cost savings were

Acute Eosinophilic Pneumonia Secondary to Daptomycin: A Report of Three Cases

3.37 per day and

Effect of Inpatient Palliative Care on Quality of Life 2 Weeks After Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

716 per patient. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This pragmatic trial suggests that stopping statin medication therapy is safe and may be associated with benefits including improved QOL, use of fewer nonstatin medications, and a corresponding reduction in medication costs. Thoughtful patient-provider discussions regarding the uncertain benefit and potential decrement in QOL associated with statin continuation in this setting are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01415934.

Perceptions of Palliative Care Among Hematologic Malignancy Specialists: A Mixed-Methods Study

We describe 3 cases of daptomycin-induced pulmonary toxic effects that are consistent with drug-induced acute eosinophilic pneumonia. Patients presented similarly with dyspnea, cough, hypoxia, and diffuse ground-glass opacities at chest computed tomography. Clinical suspicion for this adverse drug event and cessation of daptomycin until definitive diagnosis can be made is crucial.

Polypharmacy in patients with advanced cancer and the role of medication discontinuation.

Importance During hospitalization for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT), patients receive high-dose chemotherapy before transplantation and experience significant physical and psychological symptoms and poor quality of life (QOL). Objective To assess the effect of inpatient palliative care on patient- and caregiver-reported outcomes during hospitalization for HCT and 3 months after transplantation. Design, Setting, and Participants Nonblinded randomized clinical trial among 160 adults with hematologic malignancies undergoing autologous/allogeneic HCT and their caregivers (n = 94). The study was conducted from August 2014 to January 2016 in a Boston hospital; follow-up was completed in May 2016. Interventions Patients assigned to the intervention (n=81) were seen by palliative care clinicians at least twice a week during HCT hospitalization; the palliative intervention was focused on management of physical and psychological symptoms. Patients assigned to standard transplant care (n=79) could be seen by palliative care clinicians on request. Main Outcomes and Measures Primary: change in patient QOL from baseline to week 2; secondary: patient-assessed mood, fatigue, and symptom burden scores at baseline, 2 weeks, and 3 months after HCT and caregiver-assessed QOL and mood at baseline and 2 weeks after HCT. Results Among 160 enrolled patients (mean age, 60 [SD, 13.3] years; 91 women [56.9%]; median hospital stay, 21 days) and 94 caregivers, 157 (98.1%) and 89 (94.7%), respectively, completed 2-week follow-up, and 149 patients (93.1%) completed 3-month follow-up. Patients in the intervention group reported a smaller decrease in QOL from baseline to week 2 (mean baseline score, 110.26; week 2 score, 95.46; mean change, -14.72) compared with patients in the control group (mean baseline score, 106.83; week 2 score, 85.42; mean change, -21.54; difference between groups, -6.82; 95% CI, -13.48 to -0.16; P = .045). Among the secondary outcomes, from baseline to week 2, patients in the intervention group vs those in the control group had less increase in depression (mean, 2.43 vs 3.94; mean difference, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.23-2.81; P = .02), lower anxiety (mean, -0.80 vs 1.12; mean difference, 1.92; 95% CI, 0.83-3.01; P < .001), no difference in fatigue (mean, -10.30 vs -13.65; mean difference, -3.34; 95% CI, -7.25 to 0.56; P = .09), and less increase in symptom burden (mean, 17.35 vs 23.14; mean difference, 5.80; 95% CI, 0.49-11.10; P = .03). At 3 months after HCT, intervention patients vs control patients had higher QOL scores (mean, 112.00 vs 106.66; mean difference, 5.34; 95% CI, 0.04-10.65; P = .048) and less depression symptoms (mean, 3.49 vs 5.19; mean difference, -1.70; 95% CI, -2.75 to -0.65; P = .002) but no significant differences in anxiety, fatigue, or symptom burden. From baseline to week 2 after HCT, caregivers of patients in the intervention group vs caregivers of patients in the control group reported no significant differences in QOL or anxiety but had a smaller increase in depression (mean, 0.25 vs 1.80; mean difference, 1.55; 95% CI, 0.14-2.96; P = .03). Conclusions and Relevance Among adults at a single institution undergoing HCT for hematologic malignancy, the use of inpatient palliative care compared with standard transplant care resulted in a smaller decrease in QOL 2 weeks after transplantation. Further research is needed for replication and to assess longer-term outcomes and cost implications. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02207322.

Longitudinal Patient-Reported Performance Status Assessment in the Cancer Clinic Is Feasible and Prognostic

PURPOSE Patients with hematologic malignancies are less likely to receive specialist palliative care services than patients with solid tumors. Reasons for this difference are poorly understood. METHODS This was a multisite, mixed-methods study to understand and contrast perceptions of palliative care among hematologic and solid tumor oncologists using surveys assessing referral practices and in-depth semistructured interviews exploring views of palliative care. We compared referral patterns using standard statistical methods. We analyzed qualitative interview data using constant comparative methods to explore reasons for observed differences. RESULTS Among 66 interviewees, 23 oncologists cared exclusively for patients with hematologic malignancies; 43 treated only patients with solid tumors. Seven (30%) of 23 hematologic oncologists reported never referring to palliative care; all solid tumor oncologists had previously referred. In qualitative analyses, most hematologic oncologists viewed palliative care as end-of-life care, whereas most solid tumor oncologists viewed palliative care as a subspecialty that could assist with complex patient cases. Solid tumor oncologists emphasized practical barriers to palliative care referral, such as appointment availability and reimbursement issues. Hematologic oncologists emphasized philosophic concerns about palliative care referrals, including different treatment goals, responsiveness to chemotherapy, and preference for controlling even palliative aspects of patient care. CONCLUSION Most hematologic oncologists view palliative care as end-of-life care, whereas solid tumor oncologists more often view palliative care as a subspecialty for comanaging patients with complex cases. Efforts to integrate palliative care into hematologic malignancy practices will require solutions that address unique barriers to palliative care referral experienced by hematologic malignancy specialists.

What Is Different About Patients With Hematologic Malignancies? A Retrospective Cohort Study of Cancer Patients Referred to a Hospice Research Network

Polypharmacy is a well known problem in elderly patients in general, but its prevalence and effects in patients with cancer are less clear, particularly in end-of-life settings. This Review examines the existing literature on polypharmacy in advanced cancer and end-of-life settings by reviewing evidence-based approaches to reduce polypharmacy, and outlining the potential benefits of decreasing the number of drugs that patients with cancer can take, with emphasis on the need for thoughtful discontinuation initiatives in the context of life-limiting malignant disease. In view of the apparent burden of polypharmacy in patients with advanced cancer, we expect that greater attention to polypharmacy could lead to improvements in adverse drug events, cost, and possibly quality of life. However, few data for specific interventions in the advanced cancer population are available, and thus more research is warranted.

Health care utilization and end‐of‐life care for older patients with acute myeloid leukemia

PURPOSE Performance status is prognostic in oncology and palliative care settings. Traditionally clinician rated, it is often inconsistently collected, recorded, and measured, thereby limiting its utility. Patient-reported strategies are increasingly used for routine symptom and quality of life assessment in the clinic, and may be useful for tracking performance status. METHODS Tablet personal computers were used to collect patient-reported reviews of systems via the Patient Care Monitor (PCM) v2.0 for 86 patients with advanced lung cancer. Relevant subscales included the PCM Impaired Performance and Impaired Ambulation scales. Trained nurse clinicians measured performance status using traditional Karnofsky and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) instruments. Correlation coefficients were used to compare performance status scales, and survival analysis was performed by Cox proportional hazards modeling. RESULTS All four performance status scales demonstrated excellent internal consistency and convergent validity. Initial KPS and ECOG scores were statistically correlated with survival, whereas PCM scores showed a nonsignificant trend in this direction. Change in PCM Impaired Performance over time was statistically correlated with survival (hazard ratio = 1.62, P = .046), whereas the other three performance status measures were not statistically prognostic. CONCLUSION Patient-reported performance status as measured by PCM v2.0 is at least as reliable as KPS or ECOG. The enhanced resolution provided by this patient-reported method allows for the detection of clinically meaningful changes in trajectory over time, potentially serving as an early-warning system to trigger clinical interventions. Further study is needed to test these findings on a larger scale.

Palliative Care and Hematologic Malignancies: Old Dog, New Tricks?

CONTEXT Although much is known about solid tumor patients who use hospice, the hematologic malignancies hospice population is inadequately described. OBJECTIVES To compare the characteristics and outcomes of hospice patients with hematologic malignancies to those with solid tumors. METHODS We extracted electronic patient data (2008-2012) from a large hospice network (Coalition of Hospices Organized to Investigate Comparative Effectiveness) and used bivariate analyses to describe between-group differences. RESULTS In total, 48,147 patients with cancer were admitted during the study period; 3518 (7.3%) had a hematologic malignancy. These patients had significantly worse Palliative Performance Scale scores (32% vs. 24% were below 40; P < 0.001) and shorter lengths of stay (median 11 vs. 19 days; P < 0.001). They were more likely to die within 24 hours of hospice enrollment (10.9% vs. 6.8%; odds ratio [OR] 1.66; 95% CI 1.49, 1.86; P < 0.001) or within seven days (36% vs. 25.1%; OR 1.68; 95% CI 1.56, 1.81; P < 0.001) and were more likely to receive hospice services in an inpatient or nursing home setting (OR 1.34; 95% CI 1.16, 1.56 and OR 1.54; 95% CI 1.39, 1.72; both P < 0.001). Among hematologic malignancy patients, those with leukemia had the shortest survival (hazard ratio 1.23; 95% CI 1.13, 1.34; P < 0.001), and 40.3% used hospice for less than seven days (OR 1.31; 95% CI 1.11, 1.56; P = 0.002). CONCLUSION Hospice patients with hematologic malignancies are more seriously ill at the time of admission, with worse functional status and shorter lengths of stay than other cancer patients. Differences in outcomes suggest the need for targeted interventions to optimize hospice services for the hematologic malignancies population, especially those with leukemia.

Validation and real-world assessment of the Functional Assessment of Anorexia-Cachexia Therapy (FAACT) scale in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer and the cancer anorexia-cachexia syndrome (CACS)

Health care utilization in older adults (age ≥60 years) with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) has not been well studied.