Search

Background: Delays and limitations of palliative care in patients with liver transplantation- ineligible end-stage hepatocellular carcinoma according to Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer staging system may be explained by different perceptions between hepatologists and palliative care physicians in the absence of shared guidelines., Aim: To assess physicians' attitudes toward palliative care in end-stage hepatocellular carcinoma and to understand what the obstacles are to more effective management and co-shared between palliative care physicians and hepatologists., Design: Members of the Italian Association for the Study of Liver Disease and the Italian Society of Palliative Care were invited to a web-based survey to investigate practical management attitude for patients with liver transplant- ineligible end-stage hepatocellular carcinoma., Participants: Physician members of the of the two associations, representing several hospitals and services in the country., Results: Ninety-seven hepatologists and 70 palliative care physicians completed the survey: >80% regularly follow 1-19 patients; 58% of hepatologists collaborate with palliative care physicians in the management of patients, 55% of palliative care physicians take care of patients without the aid of hepatologists. Management of cirrhosis differed significantly between the two groups in terms of prescription of albumin, esophagogastroduodenoscopy, anti-viral treatment, anticoagulation, indication to paracentesis and management of encephalopathy. Full-dose acetaminophen is widely used among hepatologists, while opioids are commonly used by both categories, at full dosage, regardless of liver function., Conclusions: This survey highlights significant differences in the approach to patients with liver transplantation- ineligible end-stage hepatocellular carcinoma, reinforcing the need for shared guidelines and further studies on palliative care in the setting., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: M. Iavarone: Advisory Board/Speaker Bureau for Bayer, Gilead Sciences, BMS, Janssen, Ipsen, MSD, BTG-Boston Scientific, AbbVie, Guerbet, EISAI, Roche, Astra-Zeneca; A. Aghemo: Advisory Board/Speaker Bureau for GILEAD SCIENCES, ABBVIE, MSD, MYLAN, ALFASIGMA, SOBI, INTERCEPT; P. Lampertico: Advisory Board/Speaker Bureau for BMS, ROCHE, GILEAD SCIENCES, GSK, ABBVIE, MSD, ARROWHEAD, ALNYLAM, JANSSEN, SBRING BANK, MYR, EIGER, ALIGOS, ANTIOS, VIR.

Background: In western countries, the increasing life expectancy and the growing number of individuals with advanced chronic conditions have resulted in a greater demand for palliative care. Specifically, Italy has witnessed substantial growth in the palliative care field, marked by the establishment of Palliative Care Networks and an academic fellowship program in 2022. To further enhance this field, it is crucial to conduct high-quality scientific research that produces results applicable in clinical practice., Aim: This article explores challenges and potential solutions in conducting effective palliative care research, considering sample definition, research settings, outcomes, and ethical concerns. While focusing on the Italian context, the presented research framework can be applied to other contexts and regions., Results: Palliative care research is complex and challenging due to its holistic approach, which encompasses various vital dimensions of patients and their families, including physical, emotional, and social needs. The Italian and worldwide experience provides insights into managing these challenges and enhancing the methodological rigor of studies and the practical application of research findings., Conclusions: This article emphasizes the importance of developing protocols tailored to palliative care's unique characteristics, and the necessity of dedicated funding for palliative care research, calling for increased support and recognition. The article advocates for improvement of the quality and relevance of palliative care studies, promoting better patient outcomes and enhanced caregiving.

The so-called artificial intelligence tools applied to palliative care (machine learning, natural language processing) have great potential to support clinicians in improving decision-making processes and in identifying those who are at high risk of mortality or at greater risk of inappropriate treatment and/or non-positive outcomes. The improvement of prognostic abilities may help to avoid that some choices of patients with serious diseases are taken only in the last days of life, in the face of treatment options not previously discussed in an adequate and shared way. These tools can facilitate some essential aspects in the practice of palliative care, for example the activation of interviews that have as their objective the advance care planning and the definition of treatments consistent with the needs and desires of patients, especially in final stages of life. The development, also in our country, of projects for the application of artificial intelligence in palliative care requires particular attention to the possible organizational repercussions and to some ethical and relational aspects. It will be necessary to reflect on the most appropriate organizational models and on the specialized resources necessary in relation to the foreseeable increase in the number and variability of patients with early identified palliative care needs. These tools must not interfere in fundamental elements of the relationship between patient and doctor, that is the ability to communicate a poor prognosis in an individualized and ethically appropriate way.