Search

Background The early integration of supportive care in oncology improves patient-centered outcomes. However, data are lacking regarding how to achieve this in resource-limited settings. We studied whether patient navigation increased access to multidisciplinary supportive care among Mexican patients with advanced cancer. Materials and Methods This randomized controlled trial was conducted between August 2017 and April 2018 at a public hospital in Mexico City. Patients aged ≥18 years with metastatic tumors ≤6 weeks from diagnosis were randomized (1:1) to a patient navigation intervention or usual care. Patients randomized to patient navigation received personalized supportive care from a navigator and a multidisciplinary team. Patients randomized to usual care obtained supportive care referrals from treating oncologists. The primary outcome was the implementation of supportive care interventions at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes included advance directive completion, supportive care needs, and quality of life. Results One hundred thirty-four patients were randomized: 67 to patient navigation and 67 to usual care. Supportive care interventions were provided to 74% of patients in the patient navigation arm versus 24% in usual care (difference 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.34–0.62; p < .0001). In the patient navigation arm, 48% of eligible patients completed advance directives, compared with 0% in usual care (p < .0001). At 12 weeks, patients randomized to patient navigation had less moderate/severe pain (10% vs. 33%; difference 0.23, 95% CI 0.07–0.38; p = .006), without differences in quality of life between arms. Conclusion Patient navigation improves access to early supportive care, advance care planning, and pain for patients with advanced cancer in resource-limited settings. Implications for Practice The early implementation of supportive care in oncology is recommended by international guidelines, but this might be difficult to achieve in resource-limited settings. This randomized clinical trial including 134 Mexican patients with advanced cancer demonstrates that a multidisciplinary patient navigation intervention can improve the early access to supportive and palliative care interventions, increase advance care planning, and reduce symptoms compared with usual oncologist-guided care alone. These results demonstrate that patient navigation represents a potentially useful solution to achieve the adequate implementation of supportive and palliative care in resource-limited settings globally.

11505 Background: Early integration of SC to the treatment of advanced cancer can improve outcomes, but this may be challenging in developing countries due to a lack of resources and knowledge. In this RCT, we examined whether PN could improve early access to SC among Mexican patients with metastatic solid tumors as recommended by ASCO guidelines. Methods: Adult patients with newly-diagnosed metastatic cancer were randomly assigned to PN or standard oncologic care. At baseline, a navigator assessed the patients’ SC needs (depression, anxiety, fatigue, pain, caregiver burden) using validated questionnaires administered with an electronic tablet. For those in the PN arm, a personalized SC plan was created and implemented by a multidisciplinary team (palliative care, physical therapy, geriatrics, psychology, psychiatry). The primary outcome was access to SC, defined as receipt of SC interventions in the first 3 months (mo) after diagnosis. Secondary outcomes included advanced directive (AD) completion (for patients with expected survival ≤6 mo in accordance to Mexican law), changes in SC needs, and changes in quality of life (assessed using FACT-G). Results: 133 patients (median age 60, range 23-93; 52% male) were randomized (66 PN, 67 control). 61% of patients had gastrointestinal tumors. 94% of patients in the PN arm completed baseline assessments and received recommendations from the navigator. At 3 mo, 37 patients died or were lost to follow-up (16 PN, 21 control; p = 0.45), and 96 completed assessments. SC interventions were provided to 73% of patients in the PN arm and 24% of controls (p < 0.01). In the PN arm, 48% of 29 eligible patients completed AD, compared to 0% of eligible controls (p < 0.01). At 3 mo, patients in the PN arm were significantly less likely to report moderate/severe pain than controls (10 vs 33%, p = 0.006). There were no significant differences in other symptoms or in FACT-G scores (76 vs 76.3, p = 0.46) between PN and control arms at 3 mo. Conclusions: PN can lead to significant improvements in early access to SC, AD completion, and pain control among patients with metastatic cancer treated in a resource-limited setting. Clinical trial information: NCT03293849.

124 Background: Although referral to supportive care (SC) services improves quality of life in patients with cancer, several barriers can hamper access to SC, particularly in developing countries with limited resources. We studied patient-reported barriers for accessing SC in a cancer center in Mexico City, and factors associated with those barriers. Methods: Patients with metastatic cancer enrolled in a randomized clinical trial of patient navigation to improve access to SC in a public cancer center in Mexico City (NCT03293849) were included. At baseline, sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were collected, and patients answered a survey in which they reported barriers to obtain cancer treatment and SC. We analyzed the frequency of reported barriers using descriptive statistics, and explored if sociodemographic factors were associated with a higher likelihood of reporting any barrier. Results: 134 patients were included between 08/17 and 04/18. Median age was 60 years (range 23-93; 51.5% male); 89.5% lived in urban areas; 42.5% had less than high school education; 12% had formal employment; and 27.3% had no insurance coverage. 61% had gastrointestinal, 16 % genitourinary, and 23 % other tumors. Home-to-hospital time was < 2 hours (h) in 60%, 2-6 h in 27%, and ≥6 h in 13%. 47.7% of the patients reported a household income of less than 630 USD/month. The mean number of reported barriers was 1.96 (Standard Deviation 1.77). 78% identified at least one barrier to care, and 35% reported ≥3 barriers (range 1-8). The most commonly reported barriers were: financial burden (47%), beliefs about treatment (28%), lack of transportation (22%), fear (19%), home-to-hospital distance (16%), patient-provider communication (13%), employment (9%), and caregiving for other people (3%). Patients living in rural areas more often reported home-to-hospital distance as a barrier than those living in urban areas (69 vs 11%, p < .01). Conclusions: Most patients with metastatic cancer seen at a cancer center in Mexico identified at least one barrier to cancer care, with some reporting up to 8. Many of the reported barriers are potentially modifiable through patient navigation or SC interventions.

42 Background: Patient awareness regarding diagnosis and prognosis may lead to improved treatment shared decision making and improve satisfaction with treatment choices. We assessed the diagnostic and prognostic awareness among newly diagnosed patients with metastatic solid tumors in a public cancer center in Mexico City. Methods: Patients with metastatic cancer enrolled in a randomized clinical trial of patient navigation to improve access to supportive care in a public cancer center in Mexico City (NCT03293849) were included. At baseline, demographic, social, and clinical characteristics were collected. Patients answered open-ended questions regarding knowledge about their diagnosis and prognosis, as well as on patient-physician communication. We analyzed prognostic and diagnostic awareness using descriptive statistics, and explored if patients reporting worse patient-physician communication were less aware of their diagnosis and prognosis. Results: 125 patients were included between 08/17 and 04/18. Median age was 61 years (range 23-93; 52% male); 88.8% lived in urban areas; 41.6% had less than high school education; and 57.6% were married or partnered. 61% had gastrointestinal, 14% genitourinary, and 25% other tumors. Although all patients had had at least one consultation with an oncologist, 3% did not know what their diagnosis was. 77% of patients considered they had prognostic awareness; however, only 14% considered that their disease had a bad prognosis, and 2% considered they could be cured. 6.5% of the patients believed the information given by their oncologist was insufficient, and 8% felt they had trouble getting information about their disease. We found no statistically significant relationship between perceived barriers to patient-physician communication and diagnostic (p = 0.28) or prognostic (p = 0.18) awareness. Conclusions: Although most patients understood their oncologic diagnosis, a significant proportion were unaware of their prognosis. Communication strategies, tailored to the specific characteristics of each patient population and aimed at improving prognostic awareness, are fundamental for optimal shared decision making.