scholarly journals Palliative Care and COVID-19 Pandemic: Retrospective Study of Factors Associated With Infection and Death at an Oncological Palliative Care Reference Center

2021 ◽  
pp. 104990912098696
Author(s):  
Livia Costa de Oliveira ◽  
Karla Santos da Costa Rosa ◽  
Ana Luísa Durante ◽  
Luciana de Oliveira Ramadas Rodrigues ◽  
Daianny Arrais de Oliveira da Cunha ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
Palliative Care ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Karnofsky Performance Status ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Tumor Type ◽  
Advanced Cancer Patients ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Reactive Protein

Background: Advanced cancer patients are part of a group likely to be more susceptible to COVID-19. Aims: To describe the profile of advanced cancer inpatients to an exclusive Palliative Care Unit (PCU) with the diagnosis of COVID-19, and to evaluate the factors associated with death in these cases. Design: Retrospective cohort study with data from advanced cancer inpatients to an exclusive PCU, from March to July 2020, with severe acute respiratory syndrome. Diagnostic of COVID-19 and death were the dependent variables. Logistic regression analyses were performed, with the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: One hundred fifty-five patients were selected. The mean age was 60.9 (±13.4) years old and the most prevalent tumor type was breast (30.3%). Eighty-three (53.5%) patients had a diagnostic confirmation of COVID-19. Having diabetes mellitus (OR: 2.2; 95% CI: 1.1-6.6) and having received chemotherapy in less than 30 days before admission (OR: 3.8; 95% CI: 1.2-12.2) were associated factors to diagnosis of COVID-19. Among those infected, 81.9% died and, patients with Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) < 30% (OR: 14.8; 95% CI 2.7-21.6) and C-reactive protein (CRP) >21.6mg/L (OR: 9.3; 95% CI 1.1-27.8), had a greater chance of achieving this outcome. Conclusion: Advanced cancer patients who underwent chemotherapy in less than 30 days before admission and who had diabetes mellitus were more likely to develop Coronavirus 2019 disease. Among the confirmed cases, those hospitalized with worse KPS and bigger CRP were more likely to die.

Use of parenteral nutrition in patients with advanced cancer

2008 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 102-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isaac Soo ◽  
Leah Gramlich
Keyword(s):  
Parenteral Nutrition ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Bowel Obstruction ◽  
Karnofsky Performance Status ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Intestinal Failure ◽  
Advanced Cancer Patients ◽  
End Stage ◽  
Northern Alberta

The purpose of this study is to describe patient-related variables in a cohort of advanced cancer patients (ACPs) enrolled in a home parenteral nutrition (HPN) program. This study reviewed the cohort of ACPs enrolled in the Northern Alberta Home Total Parenteral Nutrition Program (NAHTPNP). Thirty-eight ACPs received HPN during the study period, 24% of all patients admitted for PN. Of these, 27 (71%) were female. Mean age was 48.76 y (SD 13.8 y). Bowel obstruction was the most common indication for initiating HPN (84%, 32) and ovarian cancer was the most common malignancy (34%, 13). Patients who began HPN with a Karnofsky performance status (KPS) of greater than 50 (median of 70) were found to have a longer duration of life (median: 6 months) compared with patients who began HPN with a KPS of 50 or below (median = 50; median 3 months; p = 0.01; two-tailed). There was no difference in survival between malignancy type (p = NS). Advanced cancer is the fastest growing indication for enrollment in the HPN program. ACP demonstrated a 3% average annual increase proportionate to all indications for HPN starts, accounting for 7%–48% of HPN starts from 1999–2006. HPN is an increasingly used therapy for patients with advanced cancer, most commonly for intestinal failure in the setting of bowel obstruction. Initiation of HPN at a higher KPS was associated with a longer duration of life. Further studies are needed to validate the use of TPN in end-stage cancer patients.

Comorbidity and survival in cancer patients receiving palliative care

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9066-9066
Author(s):  
V. T. Chang ◽  
N. Sambamoorthi ◽  
B. Zhou ◽  
H. Yan ◽  
M. L. Gonzalez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Karnofsky Performance Status ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Survival Analyses ◽  
Comorbidity Index

9066 Background: Comorbidity has received increasing attention in the assessment of patients with early stage cancer, or at diagnosis. We studied whether three indices of comorbidity, the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CMI), the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS), and the Kaplan Feinstein Index (KFI) add prognostic information for cancer patients receiving palliative care. Methods: In an IRB approved protocol, 103 patients with advanced cancer were seen at the time they were starting palliative care. They had a Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) determination, and were followed longitudinally. Comorbidity scores were coded from the medical record. At this time, all patients had died and survival analyses were performed. Results: The median age was 69 years (range 41–87), median Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) was 70% (range 20–90); primary sites were lung 41 pts (40%), prostate 23pts (22%), colorectal 10 pts (10%), other cancers 29 pts (28%). Median survival was 111 days (range 4–1,145 days). Median CMI was 10 (range 4–14), CIRS15 4 (2–5), CIRS16 9 (4–12), CIRS17 2.3 (1.5–3.33), CIRS18 1 (0–3), KFI 2 (0–3). In univariate survival analyses, when bisected by median values, the KPS, age, CMI, and subscales of the CIRS (CIRS 16, CIRS 17, CIRS18) were significantly related to survival, but not the KFI. In multivariate Cox regression analyses that included KPS (p<0.0001) and age (p<0.003) and a comorbidity index, the CMI (p<0.0001), and certain subscales of the CIRS were independently predictive of survival, specifically the CIRS 15 (p<0.0001), CIRS16 (p<0.0001), CIRS 17 (p<0.0001), and CIRS18 (p<0.0001). The primary site was not an independent survival predictor. Conclusion: In patients with advanced cancer receiving palliative care, measures of comorbidity may contribute to refining estimates of prognosis and ultimately to health care resource utilization. The optimal comorbidity measure remains to be determined. These results will be confirmed in larger populations. Supported in part by the Soros Open Society Institute Project Death in America and VA HSRD IIR 02–103 No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Differences in performance status assessments between palliative care specialists, nurses, and oncologists.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (31_suppl) ◽  
pp. 19-19
Author(s):  
YuJung Kim ◽  
Yi Zhang ◽  
Ji Chan Park ◽  
David Hui ◽  
Gary B. Chisholm ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Advanced Cancer Patients ◽  
Care Clinic ◽  
Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale ◽  
Ecog Ps

19 Background: The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) is one of the most commonly used assessment tools among oncologists and palliative care specialists caring advanced cancer patients. However, the inter-observer difference between the oncologist and palliative care specialist has never been reported. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of all patients who were first referred to an outpatient palliative care clinic in 2013 and identified 278 eligible patients. The ECOG PS assessments by palliative care specialists, nurses, and oncologists, and the symptom burden measured by Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) were analyzed. Results: According to the pairwise comparisons using Sign tests, palliative care specialists rated the ECOG PS grade significantly higher than oncologists (median 0.5 grade, P<0.0001) and nurses also rated significantly higher (median 1.0 grade, P<0.0001). The assessments of palliative care specialists and nurses were not significantly different (P=0.10). Weighted kappa values for inter-observer agreement were 0.26 between palliative care specialists and oncologists, and 0.61 between palliative care specialists and nurses. Palliative care specialists’ assessments showed a moderate correlation with fatigue, dyspnea, anorexia, feeling of well-being, and symptom distress score measured by ESAS. The ECOG PS assessments by all three groups were significantly associated with survival (P<0.001), but the assessments by oncologists could not distinguish survival of patients with PS 2 from 3. Independent predictors of discordance in PS assessments between palliative care specialists and oncologists were the presence of an effective treatment option (odds ratio [OR] 2.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09-5.23) and poor feeling of well-being (≥4) by ESAS (OR 2.38, 95% CI 1.34-4.21). Conclusions: ECOG PS assessments by the palliative care specialists and nurses were significantly different from the oncologists. Systematic efforts to increase regular interdisciplinary meetings and communications might be crucial to bridge the gap and establish a best care plan for each advanced cancer patients.

Unscheduled hospitalization in advanced cancer patients: Time to rethink about the illness.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e23007-e23007
Author(s):  
Lorena Ostios-García ◽  
Jesus Miranda Poma ◽  
Darío Sánchez Cabrero ◽  
Laura Gutiérrez Sainz ◽  
Julia Villamayor Sánchez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Median Survival ◽  
Gynecological Cancer ◽  
Prognostic Score ◽  
Prognostic Scores ◽  
Birth Date ◽  
Tumor Type ◽  
Advanced Cancer Patients

e23007 Background: The aim of our study was to determine if an unscheduled hospitalization in advanced cancer patients is a good time for palliative care referrals, and if this indicator could be improved with some other prognostic score. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study, which included all patients with unscheduled hospitalization in the medical oncology service from January 2011 to December 2013. In order to improve the accuracy of the analysis we considered only first admissions of each patient. We excluded patients with scheduled and unindicated hospitalization. The main variable was survival after an unscheduled hospitalization. We collected the following variables: demographic (age, sex, date of birth, date of death and place of death), tumor type, clinical variables (reason for admission, date of hospitalization, assessment by the palliative care unit during hospitalization, date of last chemotherapy and ECOG), analytical variables (albumin, lymphocytes and lactate dehydrogenase) and a prognostic nomogram developed by our team. Results: Inclusion criteria were met by 1,180 patients. Table summarizes the main sociodemographic characteristics, the type of tumor, and the functional status of patients according to the ECOG scale. After two years of follow-up, 816 (69%) patients had died. The median overall survival was 188 days (161-214). Patients with breast and gynecological cancer had the longest survival, while patients with melanoma, gastric cancer, lung cancer, and pancreatic cancer had the poorest survival. 676 patients (58%) were readmitted during the following year. Readmissions meant a significant decrease of survival. The stage of the oncological disease and performance status measured by ECOG had a clear relationship with survival time. Prognostic nomogram showed high accuracy to predict the probability of survival. Median survival for different quartile was respectively: 348, 139, 68 and 31 days (p < 0´000). Conclusions: The median survival of patients after an unscheduled hospitalization was around 6 months. Been admitted seems a good indicator to introduce specific palliative care. The use of other prognostic scores, as a prognostic nomogram, could help to select patient’ groups with poorer survivals. [Table: see text]

Symptom Prevalence and Place of Death Preference in Advanced Cancer Patients: Factors Associated With the Achievement of Home Death

2021 ◽  
pp. 104990912110487
Author(s):  
Julia Fee Voon Ho ◽  
Nur Syafiqah Marzuki ◽  
Nur Syuhadah Monica Meseng ◽  
Viknaswary Kaneisan ◽  
Yin Khek Lum ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Symptom Burden ◽  
Place Of Death ◽  
Hospital Death ◽  
Advanced Cancer Patients ◽  
Home Death ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Symptom Prevalence

Objectives: Achievement of patients’ preferred place of death is recognized as a component of a good death. This study aimed to investigate the symptom burden in advanced cancer patients, achievement of their place of death preferences and factors associated with home death. Methods: In this retrospective review of 287 patient deaths, we examined patients’ symptom prevalence, preferred and actual place of death and achievement of their place of death preferences using descriptive statistics. Associations between patient factors, home death preference and actual home death were further analyzed using multivariate logistic regression. Results: The most prevalent symptoms were weakness, pain and poor appetite, with a mean of 5.77(SD: 2.37) symptoms per patient. The median interval from palliative care referral to death was 21 (IQR: 74) days. Of the 253 patients with documented place of death preference, 132 (52.1%) preferred home death, 111(43.9%) preferred hospital death, 1 (0.4%) preferred to die at a temple and 9(3.6%) expressed no preference. Overall, 221 of 241(91.7%) patients with known actual place of death achieved their preference. Older patients were more likely to prefer home death (OR 1.021; 95% CI 1.004-1.039, p = 0.018) and die at home (OR 1.023; 95% CI 1.005-1.041, p = 0.014). Gender, marital status, cancer diagnosis and symptoms were not associated with preference for or actual home death. Conclusion: Despite a high symptom burden, most patients preferred and achieved a home death. Late palliative care referral and difficult symptom management contributed to failure to fulfill home death preference. Preference for home death should be considered when managing terminally ill geriatric patients.

Trajectories of performance status decline in advanced cancer.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (31_suppl) ◽  
pp. 100-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Ritchie ◽  
Amy Pickar Abernethy ◽  
Jean Kutner ◽  
Cari Levy ◽  
Sean O'Mahony ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Mixed Model ◽  
Karnofsky Performance Status ◽  
Piecewise Linear ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Functional Decline ◽  
Pragmatic Trial ◽  
Advanced Cancer Patients ◽  
Palliative Care Setting

100 Background: Historically, functional decline is considered to occur steadily and inexorably in the last months of life, with a relatively steep trajectory compared to non-cancer patients (pts). As part of a trial evaluating the safety and clinical impact of discontinuing statin medications for patients in the palliative care setting, we recorded the performance status (PS) in 186 cancer patients regularly during their time on study and compared changes among those with differing baseline PS levels and between those with and without cancer. Methods: This was a multi-center, parallel-group, unblinded pragmatic trial. Eligibility included: age > 18; life expectancy between 1 month and 1 year, on a statin for ≥ 3 months for primary or secondary prevention, recent deterioration in PS and no recent active cardiovascular disease. Participants, randomized to either discontinue or continue statins, were followed monthly for up to 1 year. Outcomes included survival, cardiovascular events, and PS. PS was measured using the Australia-modified Karnofsky Performance Status (AKPS) scale and grouped into 4 categories: AKPS=70, 60; 50 and 0-40. The trajectory of PS decline for each group was modeled using a piecewise-linear function allowing for knots at 4, 8, and 12 weeks and separated out between those participants who died and did not die during their time on study. A mixed model was used allowing for a random intercept for each participant. Results: Among the 186 subjects whose primary diagnosis was cancer, 111 died; among 195 without cancer, 75 died. Those who did not die maintained a relatively flat trajectory of AKPS across 20 weeks; for those who did die, AKPS scores declined somewhat over 20 weeks but this decline was most remarkable among those with a starting AKPS of 0-40. Compared to noncancer patients who died during the study period, PS levels were higher at baseline and had initially greater rates of decline. Conclusions: For advanced cancer patients, PS declines are less dramatic than previous estimates have suggested except for those with AKPS 0-40, suggesting precipitous declines at the very end of life for those with higher initial AKPS. Compared to noncancer patients, PS decline is slightly steeper among cancer pts.

Perception of curability in an international cohort of advanced cancer patients receiving palliative care.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (26_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5-5
Author(s):  
Sriram Yennu ◽  
Omar M. Shamieh ◽  
Luis Fernando Rodrigues ◽  
Columbe Tricou ◽  
Marilène Filbet ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Logistic Regression ◽  
Regression Analysis ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Logistic Regression Analysis ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Advanced Cancer Patients ◽  
Education Performance ◽  
Understanding Of Illness

5 Background: There is limited data on the illness understanding and perception of cure among advanced cancer patients (ACP) receiving palliative care around the world. The aim of the study was to determine the frequency and factors associated with perception of curability in countries in North and South Americas , Europe, Asia and Africa. Methods: Secondary analysis of a study to determine the decisional control preferences in different countries. ACP receiving palliative care were surveyed to assess the patients’ Understanding of Illness using a Understanding Of Illness questionnaire. Descriptive statistics and Logistic regression analysis were performed. Results: A total 1390 ACPs were evaluated. The median age was 58, 55% were female, 59% were married, 47% were catholic, 36.2% were educated college or higher degree. 681/1390 (49%) reported that their cancer is curable, 60% felt perceived that the goals of therapy was “to get rid of their cancer,” 79% perceived that the goals of the therapy was to “make them feel better.” 62 % perceived they were relatively healthy. Logistic regression analysis (Table 1) shows that better Karnosfsky performance status (OR 1.009, P = 0.04), higher education (OR 0.52, P = 0.0001), ACP's belonging to Brazil, France and S. Africa were less likely and ACPs from Philippines, Jordan were more likely to have a perception of curability. Age, gender, marital status, religion and passive decision control preferences were not significantly associated with perception of curability. Conclusions: The perception of curability in ACP's is 49% and significantly differs by education, performance status, and country of origin. Integration of Palliative Care can be more complex in these patients. Further studies are needed to develop strategies to reduce this misperception so as to have early integration of palliative care. [Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document