Search

During the COVID-19 pandemic recommendations were made to adapt cancer care. This population-based study aimed to investigate possible differences between the treatment of patients with metastatic cancer before and during the pandemic by comparing the initial treatments in five COVID-19 periods (weeks 1–12 2020: pre-COVID-19, weeks 12–20 2020: 1st peak, weeks 21–41 2020: recovery, weeks 42–53 2020: 2nd peak, weeks 1–20 2021: prolonged 2nd peak) with reference data from 2017 to 2019. The proportion of patients receiving different treatment modalities (chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, immunotherapy or targeted therapy, radiotherapy primary tumor, resection primary tumor, resection metastases) within 6 weeks of diagnosis and the time between diagnosis and first treatment were compared by period. In total, 74,208 patients were included. Overall, patients were more likely to receive treatments in the COVID-19 periods than in previous years. This mainly holds for hormone therapy, immunotherapy or targeted therapy and resection of metastases. Lower odds were observed for resection of the primary tumor during the recovery period (OR 0.87; 95% CI 0.77–0.99) and for radiotherapy on the primary tumor during the prolonged 2nd peak (OR 0.84; 95% CI 0.72–0.98). The time from diagnosis to the start of first treatment was shorter, mainly during the 1st peak (average 5 days, p <.001). These findings show that during the first 1.5 years of the COVID-19 pandemic, there were only minor changes in the initial treatment of metastatic cancer. Remarkably, time from diagnosis to first treatment was shorter. Overall, the results suggest continuity of care for patients with metastatic cancer during the pandemic.

Objectives The care needs of patients with advanced cancer and their relatives change throughout the disease trajectory. This study focused on the care-related problems and needs of patients with advanced cancer and their relatives. This was done from the perspective of centres for information and support. Methods This cross-sectional study used data from the eQuiPe study: an observational cohort study in which 40 Dutch hospitals participated. All adult patients with a diagnosis of a metastasised tumour and their relatives were eligible. Measures included information on the patients’ and relatives’ care problems and needs, assessed by the short version of the Problems and Needs in Palliative Care questionnaire. Socioeconomic demographics were also collected. Results 1103 patients with advanced cancer and 831 relatives were included. Both patients (M=60.3, SD=29.0) and relatives (M=59.2, SD=26.6) experienced most problems in the domain of ‘psychological issues’. Both patients (M=14.0, SD=24.2) and relatives (M=17.7, SD=25.7) most frequently reported unmet needs within this domain. The most often reported unmet need by patients was ‘worrying about the future of my loved ones’ (22.0%); for relatives this was ‘fear for physical suffering of the patient’ (32.8%). There was no clear relationship between socioeconomic demographics and the experienced unmet needs. Conclusions The most often mentioned unmet needs consisted of fears and worries, followed by a broad range of topics within multiple domains. Centres for information and support may play a role in reducing the unmet needs of (potential) visitors as these centres provide support on a broad range of topics.

Purpose We aimed to investigate measurement invariance (MI) in the European Organisation for research and treatment of cancer quality of life questionnaire core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) in a heterogeneous sample of patients with cancer. Methods Data from 12 studies within the PROFILES registry were used for secondary analyses (n = 7007). We tested MI by successive restrictions on thresholds, loadings, and intercepts across subgroups based on primary cancer sites, age, sex, time since diagnosis, and life stage, using multigroup confirmatory factor analysis (MGCFA) for ordered categorical measures. We also evaluated the impact of potentially miss-specified parameter equality across groups on latent factor means by releasing threshold and loading equality constraints for each item at a time. Results Results showed that the highest level of MI (invariance of thresholds, loadings, and intercepts) was found across groups based on time since diagnosis and life stage and to a lesser extent across groups based on sex, age, and primary tumor site. On item level, however, changes in the item's associated factor means were relatively small and in most cases canceled each other out to some extent. Conclusions Given only a few instances of non-invariance in our study, there is reason to be confident that valid conclusions can be drawn from between-group comparisons of QLQ-C30 latent means as operationalized in our study. Nonetheless, further research into MI between other subgroups for the QLQ-C30 (i.e., treatment effects and ethnicity) is warranted. We stress the importance of including MI evaluations in the development and validation of measurement instruments.

Purpose Advance Care Planning (ACP) is positively associated with the quality of care, but its impact on emotional functioning is ambiguous. This study investigated the association between perceptions of ACP involvement and emotional functioning in patients with advanced cancer. Methods This study analyzed baseline data of 1,001 patients of the eQuiPe study, a prospective, longitudinal, multicenter, observational study on quality of care and quality of life in patients with advanced cancer in the Netherlands. Patients with metastatic solid cancer were asked to participate between November 2017 and January 2020. Patients’ perceptions of ACP involvement were measured by three self-administered statements. Emotional functioning was measured by the EORTC-QLQ-C30. A linear multivariable regression analysis was performed while taking gender, age, migrant background, education, marital status, and symptom burden into account. Results The majority of patients (87%) reported that they were as much involved as they wanted to be in decisions about their future medical treatment and care. Most patients felt that their relatives (81%) and physicians (75%) were familiar with their preferences for future medical treatment and care. A positive association was found between patients’ perceptions of ACP involvement and their emotional functioning (b=0.162, p<0.001, 95%CI[0.095;0.229]) while controlling for relevant confounders. Conclusions Perceptions of involvement in ACP are positively associated with emotional functioning in patients with advanced cancer. Future studies are needed to further investigate the effect of ACP on emotional functioning. Trial registration number NTR6584 Date of registration: 30 June 2017 Implications for Cancer Survivors Patients’ emotional functioning might improve from routine discussions regarding goals of future care. Therefore, integration of ACP into palliative might be promisi

Background and purpose - Autologous conditioned serum (ACS) is a disease-modifying drug for treatment of knee osteoarthritis, and modest superiority over placebo was reported in an earlier randomized controlled trial (RCT). We hypothesized that when given the opportunity, placebo-treated patients from that RCT would now opt for ACS treatment, which would result in a greater clinical improvement than placebo. Methods - Of 74 patients treated with placebo in the previous trial, 20 opted for ACS treatment. Patients who did not choose further treatment were interviewed about their reasons. Clinical improvement of the 20 ACS-treated patients was measured using knee-specific clinical scores, as was "response shift" at 3 and 12 months. Results - In the 20 patients who did opt for ACS, the visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain improved; but after 12 months, clinical results were similar to those after placebo treatment. Response shift measurement demonstrated that the 20 patients had adapted to their disabilities during treatment. Interpretation - Placebo-treated patients from an earlier trial were reluctant to undergo ACS treatment, in part due to the laborious nature of the therapy. In a subset of patients who opted for treatment, ACS treatment after placebo did not result in greater clinical improvement than placebo treatment only. However, due to the limited power of the current study and possible selection bias, definite advice on using or refraining from ACS cannot be given.

Background: end-of-life decision making is an important aspect of end-of-life care that can have a significant impact on the process of dying and patients' comfort in the last days of life. Aim: the aim of our study was to identify issues and considerations in end-of-life decision making, and needs for more evidence among palliative care experts, across countries and professions. Participants: 90 palliative care experts from nine countries participated in a modified Delphi study. Participants were asked to identify important issues and considerations in end-of-life decision making and to rate the need for more evidence. Results: experts mentioned 219 issues in end-of-life decision making related to the medical domain, 122 issues related to the patient wishes and 92 related to relatives' wishes, regardless of profession or country (p > 0.05). In accordance, more than 90% of the experts rated the comfort and wishes of the patient and the potential futility of treatment as important considerations in end-of-life decision making, although some variation was present. When asked about issues that are in need of more evidence, 87% mentioned appropriate indications for using sedatives and effects of artificial hydration at the end of life. A total of 83% mentioned adequate communication approaches. Conclusions: palliative care experts from different professions in different countries encounter similar issues in end-of-life decision making. Adequate communication about these issues is universally experienced as a challenge, which might benefit from increased knowledge. This shared experience enables and emphasizes the need for more international research.

Background: end-of-life decision making is an important aspect of end-of-life care that can have a significant impact on the process of dying and patients' comfort in the last days of life. Aim: the aim of our study was to identify issues and considerations in end-of-life decision making, and needs for more evidence among palliative care experts, across countries and professions. Participants: 90 palliative care experts from nine countries participated in a modified Delphi study. Participants were asked to identify important issues and considerations in end-of-life decision making and to rate the need for more evidence. Results: experts mentioned 219 issues in end-of-life decision making related to the medical domain, 122 issues related to the patient wishes and 92 related to relatives' wishes, regardless of profession or country (p > 0.05). In accordance, more than 90% of the experts rated the comfort and wishes of the patient and the potential futility of treatment as important considerations in end-of-life decision making, although some variation was present. When asked about issues that are in need of more evidence, 87% mentioned appropriate indications for using sedatives and effects of artificial hydration at the end of life. A total of 83% mentioned adequate communication approaches. Conclusions: palliative care experts from different professions in different countries encounter similar issues in end-of-life decision making. Adequate communication about these issues is universally experienced as a challenge, which might benefit from increased knowledge. This shared experience enables and emphasizes the need for more international research.

Background: end-of-life decision making is an important aspect of end-of-life care that can have a significant impact on the process of dying and patients' comfort in the last days of life. Aim: the aim of our study was to identify issues and considerations in end-of-life decision making, and needs for more evidence among palliative care experts, across countries and professions. Participants: 90 palliative care experts from nine countries participated in a modified Delphi study. Participants were asked to identify important issues and considerations in end-of-life decision making and to rate the need for more evidence. Results: experts mentioned 219 issues in end-of-life decision making related to the medical domain, 122 issues related to the patient wishes and 92 related to relatives' wishes, regardless of profession or country (p > 0.05). In accordance, more than 90% of the experts rated the comfort and wishes of the patient and the potential futility of treatment as important considerations in end-of-life decision making, although some variation was present. When asked about issues that are in need of more evidence, 87% mentioned appropriate indications for using sedatives and effects of artificial hydration at the end of life. A total of 83% mentioned adequate communication approaches. Conclusions: palliative care experts from different professions in different countries encounter similar issues in end-of-life decision making. Adequate communication about these issues is universally experienced as a challenge, which might benefit from increased knowledge. This shared experience enables and emphasizes the need for more international research.