Search

(1) Background: This observational cohort study describes the frequency, content, and satisfaction with advance care planning (ACP) conversations with healthcare providers (HCPs), as reported by patients with advanced colorectal cancer. (2) Methods: The patients were recruited from two tertiary cancer centers in Alberta, Canada. Using the My Conversations survey with previously validated questions, the patients were asked about specific ACP elements discussed, with which HCPs these elements were discussed, their satisfaction with these conversations, and whether they had a goals of care designation (GCD) order. We surveyed and analyzed data from the following four time points: enrollment, months 1, 2, and 3. (3) Results: In total, 131 patients were recruited. At enrollment, 24% of patients reported discussing at least one ACP topic. From enrollment to month 3, patients reported a high frequency of discussions (80.2% discussed fears, 71.0% discussed prognosis, 54.2% discussed treatment preferences at least once); however, only 44.3% of patients reported discussing what is important to them in considering health care preferences. Patients reported having ACP conversations most often with their oncologists (84.7%) and cancer clinic nurses (61.8%). Patients reported a high level of satisfaction with their ACP conversations, with over 80% of patients reported feeling heard and understood. From enrollment to month 3, there was an increase in the number of patients with a GCD order from 53% to 74%. (4) Conclusions: Patients reported more frequent conversations compared to the literature and clinical documentation. While the satisfaction with these conversations is high, there is room for quality improvement, particularly in eliciting patients' personal goals for their treatment.

Background: The incidence of early-onset (<50) colorectal cancer (eoCRC) has been increasing in Canada. Little is known about treatment patterns and outcomes among this patient population in Canada., Patients and Methods: We conducted a retrospective population-based cohort study of CRC patients in Alberta (2010-2018) using electronic medical records and administrative claims data. Treatment patterns and CRC-specific mortality were compared between early-onset age groups (<40 and 40-49) and average age-at-onset (60-70) (aoCRC) patients with multivariable logistic regression and cox proportional hazard models., Results: There were 334 and 935 patients in the early-onset groups and 4606 in the aoCRC group. Compared with aoCRC, patients <40 were more likely to receive chemotherapy in stage II colon (OR 3.41, CI 1.75-6.47) and stage III rectal (OR 3.01, CI 1.18-10.21), and to receive systemic therapy (OR 2.40, CI 1.46-4.12) and radiation in stage IV CRC (OR 2.70, CI 1.48-4.92). The 40-49 age group was more likely to receive chemotherapy in stage II colon (OR 2.13, CI 1.25-3.56), and chemoradiation in stage II rectal (OR 2.16, CI 1.25-3.80) and stage III rectal (OR 1.63, CI 1.13-2.40), as well as systemic therapy in stage IV CRC (OR 2.46, CI 1.75-3.52). Survival did not differ between <40 and 60-70 age groups. Survival was significantly higher for the 40-49 age group, but only in stage IV (HR 0.79, CI 0.67-0.94)., Conclusions: EoCRC patients tended to receive more therapy than average age CRC patients with minimal survival gains. Additional research to identify optimal treatment strategies for eoCRC patients is required., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: In resected colonic liver metastasis (CLM), randomized studies of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy have demonstrated improvements in disease-free survival (DFS), but not overall survival (OS). Additionally, oxaliplatin regimens have not been compared to non-oxaliplatin chemotherapy. Despite limited evidence, perioperative chemotherapy is often used in the management of CLM. The primary aim of this study was to assess the impact of oxaliplatin chemotherapy regimens on OS in patients who have undergone resection of CLM in a real-world setting., Patients and Methods: Patients who underwent resection of CLM in the provinces of Alberta and British Columbia, Canada, were identified from 1996 to 2016. Perioperative (pre- and/or post-) systemic therapy was categorized as oxaliplatin or non-oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy or no chemotherapy. The primary and secondary outcomes were OS and DFS, respectively., Results: We identified 511 patients who underwent R0 resection of CLM. A significant difference in median OS was identified among the oxaliplatin, non-oxaliplatin, and no-chemotherapy groups of 100, 60, and 59 months, respectively (P = .009). In multivariate analysis, patients who received oxaliplatin regimens had a lower risk of death (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-0.92; P = .012), whereas the non-oxaliplatin chemotherapy group did not (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.65-1.20; P = .422) compared with no chemotherapy., Conclusions: In this multicenter, retrospective, population-based study, perioperative oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy was associated with improved OS in conjunction with R0 resection of CLM. Further studies should evaluate the optimal duration and sequencing of perioperative chemotherapy in relation to curative-intent surgical resection of CLM., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Despite the known benefits, healthcare systems struggle to provide early, integrated palliative care (PC) for advanced cancer patients. Understanding the barriers to providing PC from the perspective of oncology clinicians is an important first step in improving care. A 33-item online survey was emailed to all oncology clinicians working with all cancer types in Alberta, Canada, from November 2017 to January 2018. Questions were informed by Michie's Theoretical Domains Framework and Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) and queried (a) PC provision in oncology clinics, (b) specialist PC consultation referrals, and (c) working with PC consultants and home care. Respondents ( n = 263) were nurses (41%), physicians (25%), and allied healthcare professionals (18%). Barriers most frequently identified were "clinicians' limited time/competing priorities" (64%), "patients' negative perceptions of PC" (63%), and clinicians' capability to manage patients' social issues (63%). These factors mapped to all three BCW domains: motivation, opportunity, and capability. In contrast, the least frequently identified barriers were clinician motivation and perceived PC benefits. Oncology clinicians' perceptions of barriers to early PC were comparable across tumour types and specialties but varied by professional role. The main challenges to early integrated PC include all three BCW domains. Notably, motivation is not a barrier for oncology clinicians; however, opportunity and capability barriers were identified. Multifaceted interventions using these findings have been developed, such as tip sheets to enhance capability, reframing PC with patients, and earlier specialist PC nursing access, to enhance clinicians' use of and patients' benefits from an early PC approach.

Background: Reductions in adjuvant chemotherapy dose <85% for historical regimens (ie, cyclophosphamide/methotrexate/fluorouracil) are known to affect breast cancer survival. This threshold, in addition to early versus late dose reductions, are poorly defined for third-generation anthracycline/taxane-based chemotherapy. In patients with breast cancer receiving adjuvant 5-fluorouracil/epirubicin/cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel (FEC-D), we evaluated the impact of chemotherapy total cumulative dose (TCD), and early (FEC) versus late (D only) dose reductions, on survival outcomes., Patients and Methods: Women with stage I-III, hormone receptor-positive/negative, HER2-negative breast cancer treated with adjuvant FEC-D chemotherapy from 2007 through 2014 in Alberta, Canada, were included. TCD for cycles 1 to 6 of <85% or ≥85% was calculated. Average cumulative dose was also calculated for early (cycles 1-3) and late (cycles 4-6) chemotherapy. Survival outcomes (disease-free survival [DFS] and overall survival [OS]) were estimated using Kaplan-Meier and multivariate analysis. Cohorts were evaluated for uniformity., Results: Characteristics were reasonably balanced for all cohorts. Overall, 1,302 patients were evaluated for dose reductions, with 16% being reduced <85% (n=202) relative to ≥85% (n=1,100; 84%). Patients who received TCD ≥85% relative to <85% had superior 5-year DFS (P=.025) and OS (P<.001) according to Kaplan-Meier analysis, which remained significant on univariate and multivariate analyses. In stratified late and early dose reduction cohorts, DFS and OS showed a significant inferior survival trend for dose reduction early in treatment administration in 5-year Kaplan-Meier (P=.002 and P<.001, respectively) and multivariate analyses (hazard ratio [HR], 1.46; P=.073, and HR, 1.77; P=.011, respectively). Dose delays of <14 or ≥14 days and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor use did not affect outcomes., Conclusions: Chemotherapy TCD <85% for adjuvant FEC-D affects breast cancer survival. Late reductions (D only) were not shown to adversely affect DFS or OS. Conversely, early reductions (FEC±D) negatively affected patient outcomes.

Background: To describe patterns of referral, consultation, and treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer patients in a population-based health care system and to evaluate the impact of these factors on outcomes., Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of population-based cancer data from the province of Alberta, Canada. We analyzed patients diagnosed with either locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma from 2009 to 2016 and evaluated their patterns of referral to a cancer center, consultation with oncology, and treatment with active anticancer therapies. Logistic regression models were constructed to determine the factors associated with referral, late oncology assessment, and late receipt of treatment., Results: We identified 1621 pancreatic cancer patients. Median age was 70 years, 50% were men, and 51% had a Charlson index of 2+. Within this cohort, only 884 (54%) patients were referred to one of the provincial cancer centers. Adjusting for confounders in logistic regression models, older age and worse comorbidity scores were associated with nonreferral (both P < 0.01). In multivariable analysis among treated patients, the following factors were associated with improved overall survival, including younger age, earlier stage, and better comorbidity scores (all P < 0.01). Neither referral to consultation times nor consultation to treatment times correlated with outcomes. Importantly, nonreferred patients were more likely to use acute care services, including longer total duration of hospitalizations and more frequent visits with physician specialists., Conclusion: A significant proportion of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer were never referred to a cancer center. Nonreferred patients were more likely to utilize specific health care resources., (© 2018 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)