Search

Purpose: ASCO introduced the Quality Training Program (QTP) in 2013 with the aim to train oncology professionals to design, implement, and lead successful quality improvement (QI) activities and assume leadership positions to champion culture change in their practices., Methods: The QTP is a formal 6-month program taught by QI faculty and mentored by QI coaches over 5 days of in-person learning across 3 sessions and hands-on learning at the participants' practices. Sessions include seminars, case examples, and small-group exercises. Participants attend in multidisciplinary teams and focus on a problem they wish to solve in their practice. Scheduled conference calls with QI coaches are held between sessions. Participants complete pre- and post-QTP surveys (10-point Likert scale, with 1 = no knowledge/competence and 10 = complete knowledge/competence) and provide direct written feedback., Results: Since its inception, QTP has had 15 courses (10 domestic and 5 international) with 120 teams and 544 total participants. QTP is led by an 8-member steering group with 16 faculty and coaches. All postsurvey items showed an increase in knowledge and competence. Each item's score was calculated as the mean difference between before and after scores. Participants stated an increase of 46%-84% (overall mean increase: knowledge, 38%; competence, 37%). The greatest increases were in methodology and practical tools to make changes in practice (writing an aim statement, implementing rapid improvement, using process analysis tools, flowcharting the process). The most common suggestion for improvement was allowing more time for the project. Participants are encouraged to write articles and present work in poster and plenary sessions. QTP courses have led to 7 manuscripts and 21 abstract presentations to national meetings. Six QTP alumni are now QI coaches and faculty., Conclusion: The QTP is a successful QI course for oncology professionals who need to measure performance, investigate quality and safety issues, and implement change. It is the only oncology-focused QI training, as all faculty and coaches are providers and QI specialists with oncology experience, which makes this a unique opportunity. The success will provide further momentum to offer QTP domestically and around the world.

Oncology clinicians face a monumentally difficult task: to guide patients on what may be the scariest and most unpleasant journey of their lives. They must preserve their patients' hope while at the same time giving them accurate information. And patients with cancer face a monumentally difficult task: navigating a path while confronting an often-terrifying disease. Communication between patients with cancer, their loved ones, and the treating clinicians presents many challenges. We must become better at communicating with each other; patients need easier access to information about their medical condition and their health care; and we must establish relationships that are stronger and more respectful, trusting, and empathic. If we are to deliver patient-centered or whole-person care, we must know who our patients are, what is important to them, and how they derive meaning in their lives. In this review, we discuss ASCO's first Patient-Clinician Communication guideline, the importance and value of patients having direct access to their medical record, and how to address spirituality and/or religion with patients with cancer.

Purpose To provide guidance to oncology clinicians on how to use effective communication to optimize the patient-clinician relationship, patient and clinician well-being, and family well-being. Methods ASCO convened a multidisciplinary panel of medical oncology, psychiatry, nursing, hospice and palliative medicine, communication skills, health disparities, and advocacy experts to produce recommendations. Guideline development involved a systematic review of the literature and a formal consensus process. The systematic review focused on guidelines, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials published from 2006 through October 1, 2016. Results The systematic review included 47 publications. With the exception of clinician training in communication skills, evidence for many of the clinical questions was limited. Draft recommendations underwent two rounds of consensus voting before being finalized. Recommendations In addition to providing guidance regarding core communication skills and tasks that apply across the continuum of cancer care, recommendations address specific topics, such as discussion of goals of care and prognosis, treatment selection, end-of-life care, facilitating family involvement in care, and clinician training in communication skills. Recommendations are accompanied by suggested strategies for implementation. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki .

Purpose Sunitinib is a standard initial therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), but chronic dosing requires balancing toxicity with clinical benefit. The feasibility and clinical outcome with intermittent sunitinib dosing in patients with mRCC was explored. Patients and Methods Patients with treatment-naïve, clear cell mRCC were treated with four cycles of sunitinib (50 mg once per day, 4 weeks of receiving treatment followed by 2 weeks of no treatment). Patients with a ≥ 10% reduction in tumor burden (TB) after four cycles had sunitinib held, with restaging scans performed every two cycles. Sunitinib was reinitiated for two cycles in those patients with an increase in TB by ≥ 10%, and again held with ≥ 10% TB reduction. This intermittent sunitinib dosing continued until Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors-defined disease progression while receiving sunitinib, or unacceptable toxicity occurred. The primary objective was feasibility, defined as the proportion of eligible patients who underwent intermittent therapy. Results Of 37 patients enrolled, 20 were eligible for intermittent therapy and all patients (100%) entered the intermittent phase. Patients were not eligible for intermittent sunitinib because of progressive disease (n = 13), toxicity (n = 1), or consent withdrawal (n = 3) before the end of cycle 4. The objective response rate was 46% after the first four cycles of therapy. The median increase in TB during the periods off sunitinib was 1.6 cm (range, -2.9 to 3.4 cm) compared with the TB immediately before stopping sunitinib. Most patients exhibited a stable sawtooth pattern of TB reduction while receiving sunitinib and TB increase while not receiving sunitinib. Median progression-free survival to date is 22.4 months (95% CI, 5.4 to 37.6 months) and median overall survival is 34.8 months (95% CI, 14.8 months to not applicable). Conclusion Periodic extended sunitinib treatment breaks are feasible and clinical efficacy does not seem to be compromised.

Purpose: To endorse the European Association of Urology guideline on muscle-invasive (MIBC) and metastatic bladder cancer. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) has a policy and set of procedures for endorsing clinical practice guidelines that have been developed by other professional organizations., Methods: The guideline on MIBC and metastatic bladder cancer was reviewed for developmental rigor by methodologists. The ASCO Endorsement Panel then reviewed the content and recommendations., Results: The ASCO Endorsement Panel determined that the recommendations from the European Association of Urology guideline on MIBC and metastatic bladder cancer, published online in March 2015, are clear, thorough, and based on the most relevant scientific evidence. ASCO endorses the guideline on MIBC and metastatic bladder cancer and has added qualifying statements, including highlighting the use of chemoradiotherapy for select patients with MIBC and recommending a preference for clinical trials in the treatment of metastatic disease in the second-line setting., Recommendations: Multidisciplinary care for patients with MIBC and metastatic bladder cancer is critical. The standard treatment of MIBC (cT2-T4a N0M0) is neoadjuvant cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy followed by radical cystectomy. In cisplatin-ineligible patients, radical cystectomy alone is recommended. Adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy may be offered to high-risk patients who have not received neoadjuvant therapy. Chemoradiotherapy may be offered as an alternative to cystectomy in appropriately selected patients with MIBC and in some patients for whom cystectomy is not an option. Metastatic disease should be treated with cisplatin-containing combination chemotherapy or with carboplatin combination chemotherapy or single agents in patients ineligible for cisplatin.Additional information is available at http://www.asco.org/endorsements/MIBC and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki., (© 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

The Oncology Grand Rounds series is designed to place original reports published in the Journal into clinical context. A case presentation is followed by a description of diagnostic and management challenges, a review of the relevant literature, and a summary of the authors' suggested management approaches. The goal of this series is to help readers better understand how to apply the results of key studies, including those published in Journal of Clinical Oncology, to patients seen in their own clinical practice.A 32-year-old man with a history of a mixed germ cell tumor of the testis presented with acute-onset, right-sided weakness and numbness. His previous treatment included orchiectomy, which revealed a 5-cm tumor that was 95% yolk sac tumor and 5% embryonal carcinoma, and retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for clinical stage I disease in January 2010, which revealed no nodal metastases. Starting in June 2010, he was treated with four cycles of etoposide and cisplatin for pulmonary and thoracic lymph node metastases and a rising serum alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) level. He subsequently received four cycles of paclitaxel, ifosfamide, and cisplatin for relapse in the lungs and mediastinal nodes with a rising AFP level starting in January 2011. He reported having a 2-week history of intermittent headaches in December 2011, when he presented with acute-onset, right-sided weakness and numbness. Computed tomographs of the head was obtained and demonstrated a left parietal intracranial hemorrhage without midline shift or hydrocephalus. Brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showed a complex, 4.5-cm mass consistent with a hemorrhagic metastasis. His serum AFP level was elevated at 47 ng/mL. The patient became progressively obtunded and underwent emergency surgical decompression and resection of the tumor. Histopathologic evaluation of the resected tissue showed metastatic germ cell tumor predominantly consisting of a yolk sac element (Fig 1). His AFP level declined rapidly after resection, and computed tomography of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis showed no evidence of metastatic disease. However, 2 weeks later, his AFP level rose again, and repeat MRI of the brain showed a 3-cm mass in the left mesial parietal lobe adjacent to the resection site. He started treatment with filgrastim to facilitate collection of circulating hematopoietic stem cells. Several days later, after apheresis, he received his first of two cycles of high-dose carboplatin 700 mg/m(2) on days -5, -4, and -3 and etoposide 750 mg/m(2) on days -5, -4, and -3. The patient had a complete response to high-dose chemotherapy and no major acute complications. His cancer remains in complete remission 3 years later without additional treatment. His three lines of chemotherapy left him with chronic peripheral neuropathy., (© 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: Most cancer quality measures focus on individual cancers, assess specific providers, and evaluate processes of care. Although important, these efforts are not sufficient. A more comprehensive measure set is needed to address gaps in care, focus on patients rather than providers, and assess the cross-cutting aspects of care that are relevant to all patients with cancer throughout the trajectory of their illness., Methods: With the long-term goal of developing a more comprehensive oncology measure set, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) organized a collaborative measure summit that used an iterative consensus approach to identify priorities for the development of new cancer quality measures. The summit, which included professional societies and patient/consumer advocacy organizations, was held during the ASCO Quality Care Symposium in December 2012., Results: This effort, which brought together 12 diverse stakeholders, identified 10 high-priority topics for cancer quality measure development that cross-cut cancer diagnoses and care settings and addressed patient-centered concerns. Topics of particular interest included planning and counseling before therapy, interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary coordinated care, comprehensive symptom assessment, patient experience of care, and use of palliative care and hospice services., Conclusion: This is an important first step in the development of patient-centered, cross-cutting cancer quality measures. Addressing the high-priority topics identified by this effort will help fill the gaps left by existing cancer quality measures, including care coordination and transitions, quality of life, safety, experience of care, and outcomes. More work will be needed to specify, implement, and validate measures based on these topics., (Copyright © 2014 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)