Vincent Montheil

Effect of integrated palliative care on the quality of end-of-life care: retrospective analysis of 521 cancer patients

Objective To examine the impact of oncologist awareness of palliative care (PC), the intervention of the PC team (PCT) and multidisciplinary decision-making on three quality indicators of end-of-life (EOL) care. Setting Cochin Academic Hospital, Paris, 2007–2008. Design and participants A 521 decedent case series study nested in a cohort of 735 metastatic cancer patients previously treated with chemotherapy. Indicators were location of death, number of emergency room (ER) visits in last month of life and chemotherapy administration in last 14 days of life. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to estimate associations between indicators and oncologists awareness of PC, PCT intervention and case discussions at weekly onco-palliative meetings (OPMs). Results 58 (11%) patients died at home, 45 (9%) in an intensive care unit or ER, and 253 (49%) in an acute care hospital; 185 (36%) patients visited the ER in last month of life and 75 (14%) received chemotherapy in last 14 days of life. Only the OPM (n=179, 34%) independently decreases the odds of receiving chemotherapy in last 14 days of life (OR 0.5, 95% CI 0.2 to 0.9) and of dying in an acute care setting (0.3, 0.1 to 0.5). PCT intervention (n=300, 58%) did not independently improve any indicators. Among patients seen by the PCT, early PCT intervention had no impact on indicators, whereas the OPM reduced the odds of persistent chemotherapy in the last 14 days of life. Conclusion Multidisciplinary decision-making with oncologists and the PCT is the most critical parameter for improving EOL care.

Vinorelbine and oxaliplatin in stage IV nonsmall cell lung cancer patients unfit for cisplatin: a single-center experience.

Many patients with stage IV nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are unfit for cisplatin-based chemotherapy because of poor performance status, impaired renal function or severe comorbidity. We documented the feasibility of a combination of weekly vinorelbine and biweekly oxaliplatin in a population of stage IV NSCLC patients unable to receive cisplatin. Fifty-five chemo-naive patients (40 males, median age 60 years, range 43–84) were treated on an outpatient basis, and received every 2 weeks: vinorelbine 25 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 and 60 mg/m2 orally on day 8, and oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1. Patients were considered unfit for cisplatin because of performance status ≥2 (30 patients), impaired renal function (17 patients) or severe comorbidities (eight patients). Twenty-two patients (40%) had two or more metastatic sites, and 14 (25%) had central nervous system metastases. A total of 288 cycles were given (median per patient: 4, range 1–11). The planned dose intensity of vinorelbine was administered in 65% of patients. One complete and 13 partial responses were observed, providing an objective response rate of 26% (95% confidence interval: 14.4–37.6). The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 3.5 months and 9.5 months, respectively. The 1-year survival rate was 24% (95% confidence interval: 12.7–35.3). The main grade 3/4 toxicities were: neutropenia (15 patients, 27%), anaemia (12 patients, 22%) and peripheral neuropathy (eight patients, 15%). Three patients (5.5%) experienced febrile neutropenia. In a nonselected NSCLC patient population, the vinorelbine–oxaliplatin doublet had clinical activity in the same range as cisplatin-based combinations. This doublet allows combining a platinum derivative with a sustained dose intensity of vinorelbine in unfit patients.

Suivi d’indicateurs dans le bilan d’activité d’une équipe mobile de soins palliatifs : un levier pour l’amélioration des pratiques

INTRODUCTION Early integrated palliative care is recommended in patients with incurable disease. Despite their development, hospital-based palliative care teams (PCT) are introduced late in the course of standard oncology care. The objective of this study is to describe the activity of an academic hospital-based PCT, using a standard format, which integrates indicators of early introduction and quality of end of life care, thus allowing a systematic analysis of its practice. METHODS The annual activity of the PCT is described from 2007 to 2012. Data are collected for each patient prospectively by the team: reasons for referral and activities of PCT, performance status and chemotherapy at the time of first referral, visit to emergency and admission to ICU. RESULTS The number of patients referred to the PCT increased from 337 patients in 2007 to 539 in 2012, among whom 90% were cancer patients, 84% at metastatic stage. Relief of symptoms was the most frequent reason for referral. In 2012, 280 (64%) patients were receiving chemotherapy and 41% had a PS≤2 at the time of first referral. Half patients died each year (270 in 2012); 17% of these received chemotherapy in their last 14 days of life, 3% visited emergency room twice and 13% were admitted in ICU, once during their last month of life, 48% died in hospice or at home. CONCLUSION The use of a standard format to describe the activity of hospital-based PCTs, the timing of their introduction and the quality of care is feasible. The generalization of this format for monitoring to assess the curative medicine interface/palliative could be a lever for improving the integration of palliative care.

Multidisciplinary risk assessment to reveal cancer treatments in complex cancer patients.

170 Background: Older age is a cause of disparity in cancer treatment decision and treatment guidelines for patients with comorbidities, polypharmacy, denutrition or psycho-social frailty are needed. A pre-therapeutic multidimensional assessment might improve the complex patient management. We developed an experimental program of integrated medicine called ARIANE. We report 18 months activity of this outpatient setting evaluation, its feasibility and impact on treatment decision-making. METHODS Complex patients with predefined cancer treatment strategy entered into the program. A one-day evaluation combined consultations of cardiologist, geriatrician, diabetologist, anesthetist, pharmacist, pain specialist, dietician, psychologist and social worker. Evaluation of performance status, EKG, ejection fraction, ASA score, diabetes, social vulnerability and malnutrition was performed including a geriatric assessment, which focused on items like comorbidity (CIRS-G), dependance (ADL, IADL), fails (Up and Go Test), cognitive impairment (MMSE, Clock Drawing Test) and depression (GDS scale). A pharmacist assessed the risk of drug-drug interactions. RESULTS Eighty-seven pts, median age 81 years (range 25-94), 76% male, 51% PS 0-1, 77% grade 3 or 4 comorbidity were included. Genito-urinary, lung cancers and sarcoma represented 77% of pts. Eighty-two percent of pts were assessed by at least ≥ 7 participants. Identified factors of vulnerability were polypharmacy (n=65; 75%; >3 drugs), social distress or severe malnutrition (both n=21; 24%), depression (n=17; 19.5%) and cognitive impairment (n=13; 15%). We identified drug interaction in 18 pts (27%). The risk assessment resulted in anticancer treatment changes in 47/87 patients (54%): protocol adaptation (n=19/87; 22%), less aggressive treatment (n=15/87; 17.2%), or more intensive therapy (n=13/87; 15%). CONCLUSIONS A one-day multidisciplinary risk assessment is an answer to the complexity of unfit cancer patients and improves the safety of anticancer treatments.