Survival prediction in terminally ill cancer patients by clinical estimates, laboratory and psychometric tests

8578 Background: To improve general survival estimates in advanced cancer pat. we studied physicians’ clinical estimates, the impact of emotional disorders (anxiety and depression), and laboratory tests in palliative patients. Methods: From 12/03 to 7/04 patients with advanced cancer referred to radiation oncology for palliative treatment were invited to participate in this prospective cohort study. Pat. with adjuvant or curative treatment intent were not considered. The life span was independently estimated by two physicians and the institutional tumor board according to 3 categories (<1, 1–6, and >6 months). Agreement of survival predictions was analyzed with contingency tables and kappa statistics. Primary tumor, metastatic spread, performance status, pain, dyspnoea, weight loss, nausea, fatigue, serum enzymes (AP, LDH), function parameters (creatinine, bilirubin, CRP), and blood count (WBC, RBC) were also studied. Emotional disorders were measured using a validated psychometric self-assessment scale (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, HADS). Life table analysis with log-rank test and stepwise Cox regression analysis with univariate significant variables were performed. Results: 216 pat. were enrolled and followed for at least 6 months. 580 prognoses were obtained. 94% (204) had complete blood tests. HADS questionnaires were completed by 71% (154). Survival was <1 mo in 15% (33), 1–6 mo in 36% (78), and >6 mo in 49% (105).Survival prediction was poor (kappa= 0.33) and consistently too optimistic (test of symmetry, p<0.0001). In life table analysis primary tumor (hazard ratio 2.0), brain metastases, performance status (HR 1.9), dyspnoea (HR 2.0), nausea (HR 2.0), LDH (HR 1.9), WBC (HR 2.1), fatigue, anxiety and depression (HADS) were highly significant (p< 0.0002). Conclusions: Physicians generally overestimated survival of advanced cancer patients emphasizing the need of objective prognostic models. Even short-term survival estimates (< 1 mo.) were unreliable. Combined objective variables may improve survival prediction. Psychometric tests are promising candidates to be incorporated in more accurate prognostic models. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Download Full-text

Survival Prediction in Terminally Ill Cancer Patients by Clinical Estimates, Laboratory Tests, and Self-Rated Anxiety and Depression

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2006.10.5411 ◽

2007 ◽

Vol 25 (22) ◽

pp. 3313-3320 ◽

Cited By ~ 186

Author(s):

Stephan Gripp ◽

Sibylle Moeller ◽

Edwin Bölke ◽

Gerd Schmitt ◽

Christiane Matuschek ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Brain Metastases ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Emotional Distress ◽

Laboratory Tests ◽

Performance Status ◽

Univariate Analysis ◽

Depression Scale ◽

Tumor Board ◽

Anxiety And Depression ◽

Survival Prediction

Purpose To study how survival of palliative cancer patients relates to subjective prediction of survival, objective prognostic factors (PFs), and individual psychological coping. Patients and Methods Survival was estimated according to three categories (< 1 month, 1 to 6 months, and > 6 months) by two physicians (A and B) and the institutional tumor board (C) for 216 patients recently referred for palliative radiotherapy. After 6 months, the accuracy of these estimates was assessed. The prognostic relevance of clinical symptoms, performance status, laboratory tests, and self-reported emotional distress (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) was investigated. Results In 61%, 55%, and 63% of the patients, prognoses were correctly estimated by A, B, and C, respectively. κ statistic showed fair agreement of the estimates, which proved to be overly optimistic. Accuracy of the three estimates did not improve with increasing professional experience. In particular, the survival of 96%, 71%, and 87% of patients who died in less than 1 month was overestimated by A, B, and C, respectively. On univariate analysis, 11 of 27 parameters significantly affected survival, namely performance status, primary cancer, fatigue, dyspnea, use of strong analgesics, brain metastases, leukocytosis, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), depression, and anxiety. On multivariate analysis, colorectal and breast cancer had a favorable prognosis, whereas brain metastases, Karnofsky performance status less than 50%, strong analgesics, dyspnea, LDH, and leukocytosis were associated with a poor prognosis. Conclusion This study revealed that physicians' survival estimates were unreliable, especially in the case of patients near death. Self-reported emotional distress and objective PFs may improve the accuracy of survival estimates.

Download Full-text

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

American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine® ◽

10.1177/1049909120986962 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Home Artificial Nutrition in Advanced Cancer

Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine ◽

10.1177/014107689709001103 ◽

1997 ◽

Vol 90 (11) ◽

pp. 597-603 ◽

Cited By ~ 30

Author(s):

Loris Pironi ◽

Enrico Ruggeri ◽

Stephan Tanneberger ◽

Stefano Giordani ◽

Franco Pannuti ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Enteral Nutrition ◽

Parenteral Nutrition ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Advanced Cancer ◽

Performance Status ◽

Artificial Nutrition ◽

Utilization Rate ◽

Karnofsky Performance Score ◽

Advanced Cancer Patients ◽

At Home

Attitudes to home artificial nutrition (HAN) in cancer vary greatly from country to country. A 6-year prospective survey of the practice of HAN in advanced cancer patients applied by a hospital-at-home programme in an Italian health district was performed to estimate the utilization rate, to evaluate efficacy in preventing death from cachexia, maintaining patients at home without burdens and distress and improving patients' performance status, and to obtain information about costs. Patients were eligible for HAN when all the following were present: hypophagia; life expectancy 6 weeks or more, suitable patient and family circumstances; and verbal informed consent. From July 1990 to June 1996, 587 patients were evaluated; 164 were selected for HAN (135 enteral and 29 parenteral) and were followed until 31 December 1996. The incidence of HAN per million inhabitants was 18.4 in the first year of activity and 33.2–36.9 in subsequent years, being 4–10 times greater than rates reported by the Italian HAN registers. On 31 December 1996, 158 patients had died because of the disease and 6 were on treatment. Mean survival was 17.2 weeks for those on enteral nutrition and 12.2 weeks for those on parenteral nutrition. Prediction of survival was 72% accurate. 95 patients had undergone 155 readmissions to hospital, where they spent 15–23% of their survival time. Burdens due to HAN were well accepted by 124 patients, an annoyance or scarcely tolerable in the remainder. The frequency of major complications of parenteral nutrition was 0.67 per year for catheter sepsis and 0.16 per year for deep vein thrombosis. Karnofsky performance score increased in only 13 patients and body weight increased in 43. The fixed direct costs per patient-day (in European Currency Units) were 14.2 for the nutrition team, 18.2 for enteral nutrition and 61 for parenteral nutrition. The results indicate that definite entry criteria and local surveys are required for the correct use of HAN in advanced cancer patients, that HAN can be applied without causing additional burdens and distress, and that its costs are not higher than hospital costs.

Download Full-text

The Importance of a Home Care Program for Patients with Advanced Cancer Pain

Tumori Journal ◽

10.1177/030089168507100506 ◽

1985 ◽

Vol 71 (5) ◽

pp. 449-454 ◽

Cited By ~ 30

Author(s):

Vittorio Ventafridda ◽

Marcello Tamburini ◽

Silvana Selmi ◽

Luigi Valera ◽

Franco De Conno

Keyword(s):

Home Care ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Advanced Cancer ◽

Performance Status ◽

Care Program ◽

Pain Clinic ◽

Advanced Cancer Patients ◽

Sample Group ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Quality Of Life Index

At the Pain Clinic of the National Cancer Institute of Milan, a special Home Care Program has been set up to assist advanced cancer patients with pain and their families during their remaining survival. The Home Care Unit comprises a team of physicians, nurse clinicians, psychologists and many volunteers who are active both in the hospital and at the patient's home. This entire operation provides a continuous relationship between the family, the patient and the Home Care Unit. This Home Care Program, which is one of a kind with other forms of treatment for advanced cancer patients (i.e. hospices), has produced interesting results. Out of a sample group of 50 patients, 33 were monitored at home by the Home Care Unit while 17 had their families to do the monitoring. Over a six-week period the following results were reported: a) Improvement of psycho-emotional factors such as anxiety, weakness and mood for both patients and their families who entered the Home Care Program. b) The Quality of Life Index remained unchanged for the sample group that entered the Home Care Program whereas it deteriorated for patients monitored by their families. c) A decrease in the Integrated Pain Score for both groups; however, results showed a statistically significant difference in favor of patients on the Home Care Program. d) The Performance Status decreased by very little over the study period, and there was little difference between the two groups. These results confirm the need for a Home Care Program which must go hand in hand with the Pain Clinic as an effective way to control Total Pain.

Download Full-text

Does chemotherapy reduce stress?

Palliative & Supportive Care ◽

10.1017/s1478951510000337 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 8 (4) ◽

pp. 455-460 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Francisco Gil ◽

G. Costa ◽

F.J. Pérez

Keyword(s):

Cancer Patients ◽

Performance Status ◽

Adjustment Disorder ◽

Clinical Interview ◽

Screening Tools ◽

Anxiety And Depression ◽

Chemotherapy Treatment ◽

Psychological Care ◽

Care Needs ◽

Low Performance

AbstractObjective:The purpose of this study was to assess the psychological care needs of cancer patients throughout the healthcare process: after diagnosis, after medical treatment (surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy) and during follow-up.Method:A total of 703 ambulatory cancer patients were assessed in this study. The inclusion period was from April 1, 2005 to April 30, 2007. The first psychological scales used were the 14-item Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scales (HADS), which has two sub-scales for anxiety (7 items) and for depression (7 items). All patients with a score ≥14 were assessed through the Structured Clinical Interview for Psychiatric Disorder (SCID-I) of the DSM-IV. All data were compared with sociodemographic and medical characteristics.Results:Of the 703 cancer patients in the study, 349 were men and 354 women, with a mean age of 53 years. The median time between the cancer diagnosis and our clinical interview was 6 months (range, 12 days to 190 months). Overall, the screening tools indicated that one in four patients needed psychological care. The most common psychiatric diagnosis was adjustment disorder (129 cases), whereas 10 patients were diagnosed with major depression. Using a HADS cut-off score of >7 for anxiety and depression, 28% and 17% of patients, respectively, were classified as “possible clinical cases.” Risk factors for distress included age <65 years, asthenia, constipation, and a low performance status. However, chemotherapy treatment was found to be a protector against distress in cancer patients.Significance of Results:Chemotherapy treatment is interpreted by the patients as a protector against cancer, thereby reducing distress levels.

Download Full-text

Use of parenteral nutrition in patients with advanced cancer

Applied Physiology Nutrition and Metabolism ◽

10.1139/h07-152 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 33 (1) ◽

pp. 102-106 ◽

Cited By ~ 31

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.

Download Full-text

Comorbidity and survival in cancer patients receiving palliative care

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2007.25.18_suppl.9066 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

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

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2014.32.31_suppl.19 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Digitally captured step counts for evaluating performance status in advanced cancer patients: A single cohort, prospective trial (Digi-STEPS).

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2019.37.15_suppl.tps6651 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽

pp. TPS6651-TPS6651

Author(s):

Gillian Gresham ◽

Andrew Eugene Hendifar ◽

Jun Gong ◽

Arash Asher ◽

Christine S. Walsh ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Adverse Events ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Advanced Cancer ◽

Performance Status ◽

Advanced Cancer Patients ◽

Step Counts ◽

Wide Range ◽

Ecog Ps ◽

Single Cohort

TPS6651 Background: Advanced cancer patients undergo dynamic changes in their functionality and physical activity over the course of their treatment. Monitoring patient function is important because it can inform treatment decisions and allow for timely and appropriate intervention. Current scales that assess patient function, such as the ECOG Performance Status (PS), are limited in their ability to capture the wide range in activity that cancer patients can experience on a daily basis outside of the clinic setting. Given recent technological advances in wearable activity monitors, we can collect real-time, objective information about a patient’s daily activity including steps, stairs, heart rate, sleep, and activity intensity. Thus, the primary objective of this study is to determine whether longitudinal changes in objectively-assessed activity are associated with change in physician-rated ECOG PS. Methods: This is a prospective, single cohort trial being conducted at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center. Stage 3/4 cancer patients who are English or Spanish-speaking, ambulatory (assistive walking devices are allowed) and expected to be seen for treatment or follow-up with their oncologist at least every 8 weeks are eligible for study. Consenting patients will be asked to wear a Fitbit Charge HR continuously for 8 weeks during the study period and for one week prior to the 6 month and 1 year follow-up visits. Primary outcomes are change in average daily step counts and ECOG PS at 8 weeks from baseline. Secondary outcomes include: 1) Change in NIH PROMIS patient-reported outcomes (physical function, pain, sleep, emotional distress, and fatigue), 2) Change in frailty status at 8 weeks, 3) Occurrence of adverse events, and 4) 6-month and 1-year survival outcomes. Baseline assessments include a physical exam, medical history, and frailty assessment. The attending oncologist will rate the patient's ECOG PS at baseline and at the end-of-study visit. Weekly NIH PROMIS questionnaires will be administered online over the 8-week study and again at 6 months and 1 year follow-up. The occurrence of serious cancer-related adverse events, chemotherapy-associated toxicities, and hospitalizations will be documented up to 12 weeks from baseline. Survival will be assessed at 6 months and 1 year. Accrual is ongoing with 20 patients currently enrolled of a target sample size of 60 patients. Clinical trial information: NCT03757182.

Download Full-text