Search

Background and Objectives: Trifluridine/tipiracil, registered for the treatment of patients with metastatic gastric and colorectal cancer, is a substrate and inhibitor for the organic cation transporter 2 (OCT2) and the multidrug and toxin extrusion protein 1 (MATE1), which raises the potential for drug–drug interactions with other OCT2/MATE1 modulators. Therefore, we prospectively examined the effect of an OCT2/MATE1 inhibitor (cimetidine) and substrate (metformin) on the pharmacokinetics of trifluridine. Methods: In this three-phase crossover study, patients with metastatic colorectal or gastric cancer were sequentially treated with trifluridine/tipiracil alone (phase A), trifluridine/tipiracil concomitant with metformin (phase B) and trifluridine/tipiracil concomitant with cimetidine (phase C). The primary endpoint was the relative difference in exposure of trifluridine assessed by the area under the curve from timepoint zero to infinity. A > 30% change in exposure was considered clinically relevant. A p-value of < 0.025 was considered significant because of a Bonferroni correction. Results: Eighteen patients were included in the analysis. Metformin did not significantly alter the exposure to trifluridine (− 12.6%; 97.5% confidence interval − 25.0, 1.8; p = 0.045). Cimetidine did alter the exposure to trifluridine significantly (+ 18.0%; 97.5% confidence interval 4.5, 33.3; p = 0.004), but this increase did not meet our threshold for clinical relevance. Metformin trough concentrations were not influenced by trifluridine/tipiracil. Conclusions: Our result suggests that the OCT2/MATE1 modulators cimetidine and metformin can be co-administered with trifluridine/tipiracil without clinically relevant effects on drug exposure. Clinical Trial Registration: NL8067 (registered 04-10-2019).

Palliative care aims to improve the quality of life of patients and their families dealing with the problems associated with an incurable disease, such as advanced cancer1. Palliative care includes shared decision making (SDM) and advance care planning (ACP), to facilitate the alignment of care to the current and future needs and preferences of patients. Timely integration of palliative care into oncology care is important, to be able to discuss, fulfill and coordinate patients' care needs and preferences in a timely manner before a person loses capacity. The surprise question is often recommended as a tool to identify patients who may be in the final stage of life and thus might benefit from tailored palliative care. A multidisciplinary team approach combined with the use of standardised care pathways has been considered an essential part of such integration. Because oncology and palliative care are increasingly provided in the outpatient setting, various health care professionals, including hospital staff, general practitioners and district nurses, need to collaborate and exchange information. Nevertheless, hospital admissions in the last phase of life are frequent and a substantial number of patients die in the hospital, although most people prefer dying out of hospital. In the Netherlands, palliative care is mostly provided by non-specialised healthcare professionals, who should have basic knowledge and skills in palliative care. When required, they can seek support from a palliative care specialist. In the Maasstad Hospital, a multidisciplinary group developed a digital standardised 'Palliative Care Pathway' (PCP) for patients with advanced, incurable cancer, to support healthcare professionals in the hospital with the timely initiation and provision of palliative care alongside tumour-specific care. Indications to start the PCP are: a negative answer to the surprise question (“Would you be surprised if this patient died within the next 12 months?”)

Background: Despite histological and molecular differences between invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) and invasive carcinoma of no special type, according to national treatment guidelines no distinction is made regarding the use of (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy. Studies on the long-term outcome of chemotherapy in patients with ILC are scarce and show inconclusive results. Methods:All patients with estrogen receptor (ER)–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)–negative ILC with an indication for chemotherapy treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy were selected from the Erasmus Medical Center Breast Cancer database. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the effect of chemotherapy on recurrence-free survival (RFS), breast cancer–specific survival (BCSS), and overall survival (OS). Results: A total of 520 patients were selected, of whom 379 were treated with chemotherapy and 141 were not. Patients in the chemotherapy group were younger (51 vs. 61 years old; p <.001), had a higher T status (T3+, 33% vs. 14%; p <.001), and more often had lymph node involvement (80% vs. 49%; p <.001) in comparison to the no-chemotherapy group. After adjusting for confounders, chemotherapy treatment was not associated with better RFS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63–2.31), BCSS (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.60–2.58), or OS (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.56–1.66). This was also reflected by adjusted Cox survival curves in the chemotherapy versus no-chemotherapy group for RFS (75% vs. 79%), BCSS (80% vs. 84%), and OS (72% vs. 71%). Conclusions:Chemotherapy is not associated with improved RFS, BCSS, or OS for patients with ER+/HER2− ILC treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy and with an indication for chemotherapy.

Objective Advanced cancer has a major impact on both patients and their relatives. To allow for personalized support, it is important to recognize which relatives will experience a decline in emotional functioning during the patient's last year of life, when this decline will occur, and what factors are associated with it. This study aimed to examine the trajectory of emotional functioning of relatives during that time and the characteristics associated with changes in this trajectory. Methods A prospective, longitudinal, multicenter, observational study in patients with advanced cancer and their relatives was conducted (eQuiPe). We analyzed relatives' changes in emotional functioning in the patient's last year using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and assessed associations with sociodemographic and care characteristics using multivariable mixed-effects analysis. Results 409 relatives completed >= 1 questionnaires during the patient's last year of life. Mean age was 64 years, 61% were female and 75% were the patient's partner. During this year, mean emotional functioning declined significantly over time from 73.9 to 64.6 (p = 0.023, effect size = 0.43). The type of relationship between relatives and patients (p = 0.002), patient' sleep problems (p = 0.033), and continuity of care (p = 0.002) were significantly associated with changes in emotional functioning. Conclusions Relatives' emotional functioning declined during the patient's last year of life. Support for them, especially partners and relatives of patients with sleep problems, is important. Relatives who experienced more continuity of care had a less steep decline in emotional functioning.

INTRODUCTION: In addition to clinical trials, real-world data is needed to verify the effectiveness of the CDK 4/6 inhibitor palbociclib. The primary aim was to examine real-world variation in treatment modification strategies for neutropenia and its relation to progression-free survival (PFS). The secondary aim was to assess if there is a gap between real-world and clinical trial outcomes.MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this multicenter, retrospective observational cohort study 229 patients were analyzed who started palbociclib and fulvestrant as second- or later-line therapy for HR-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer in the Santeon hospital group in the Netherlands between September 2016 and December 2019. Data were manually retrieved from patients' electronic medical records. PFS was examined using the Kaplan-Meier method to compare neutropenia-related treatment modification strategies within the first three months after neutropenia grade 3 - 4 occurred, as well as patients' eligibility to have participated in the PALOMA-3 clinical trial or not.RESULTS: Even though treatment modification strategies differed from those in PALOMA-3 (dose interruptions: 26 vs 54%, cycle delays: 54 vs 36%, and dose reductions: 39 vs 34%), these did not influence PFS. Patients who were PALOMA-3 ineligible experienced a shorter median PFS than those who were eligible (10.2 vs. 14.1 months; HR 1.52; 95% CI 1.12 - 2.07). An overall longer median PFS was found compared to PALOMA-3 (11.6 vs. 9.5 months; HR 0.70; 95% CI 0.54 - 0.90).CONCLUSION: This study suggests no impact of neutropenia-related treatment modifications on PFS and confirms inferior outcomes outside clinical trial eligibility.

Objective Appropriate communication between healthcare providers and patients and their families is an essential part of good (palliative) care. We investigated whether implementation of a standardised palliative care pathway (PCP) facilitated communication, that is, aspects of shared decision-making (SDM), including advance care planning (ACP) conversations and satisfaction with care as experienced by bereaved relatives of patients with advanced cancer. Methods We conducted a prospective preintervention and postintervention study in a hospital. Questionnaires were sent to relatives of patients who died between February 2014 and February 2015 (pre-PCP period) or between November 2015 and November 2016 (post-PCP period). Relatives’ perceptions on communication and satisfaction with care were assessed using parts of the Views of Informal Carers—Evaluation of Services and IN-PATSAT32 Questionnaires. Results 195 (46%) and 180 (42%) bereaved relatives completed the questionnaire in the pre-PCP and post-PCP period, respectively. The majority of all patients in both the pre-PCP period and the post-PCP period had been told they had an incurable illness (92% and 89%, respectively, p=0.544), mostly in the presence of a relative (88% and 85%, respectively, p=0.865) and had discussed their preferences for end-of-life (EOL) treatment (82% and 76%, respectively, p=0.426). Bereaved relatives were reasonably satisfied with the received hospital care in both groups. Conclusions We found no overall effect of the PCP on the communication process and satisfaction with EOL care of bereaved relatives. Before the use of the PCP bereaved relatives already reported favourably about the EOL care provided.

Exploratory analyses of high-dose alkylating chemotherapy trials have suggested that BRCA1 or BRCA2-pathway altered (BRCA-altered) breast cancer might be particularly sensitive to this type of treatment. In this study, patients with BRCA-altered tumors who had received three initial courses of dose-dense doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (ddAC), were randomized between a fourth ddAC course followed by high-dose carboplatin-thiotepa-cyclophosphamide or conventional chemotherapy (initially ddAC only or ddAC-capecitabine/decetaxel [CD] depending on MRI response, after amendment ddAC-carboplatin/paclitaxel [CP] for everyone). The primary endpoint was the neoadjuvant response index (NRI). Secondary endpoints included recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). In total, 122 patients were randomized. No difference in NRI-score distribution (p = 0.41) was found. A statistically non-significant RFS difference was found (HR 0.54; 95% CI 0.23–1.25; p = 0.15). Exploratory RFS analyses showed benefit in stage III (n = 35; HR 0.16; 95% CI 0.03–0.75), but not stage II (n = 86; HR 1.00; 95% CI 0.30–3.30) patients. For stage III, 4-year RFS was 46% (95% CI 24–87%), 71% (95% CI 48–100%) and 88% (95% CI 74–100%), for ddAC/ddAC-CD, ddAC-CP and high-dose chemotherapy, respectively. No significant differences were found between high-dose and conventional chemotherapy in stage II-III, triple-negative, BRCA-altered breast cancer patients. Further research is needed to establish if there are patients with stage III, triple negative BRCA-altered breast cancer for whom outcomes can be improved with high-dose alkylating chemotherapy or whether the current standard neoadjuvant therapy including carboplatin and an immune checkpoint inhibitor is sufficient. Trial Registration: NCT01057069.

Purpose: Adequate integration of palliative care in oncological care can improve the quality of life in patients with advanced cancer. Whether such integration affects the use of diagnostic procedures and medical interventions has not been studied extensively. We investigated the effect of the implementation of a standardized palliative care pathway in a hospital on the use of diagnostic procedures, anticancer treatment, and other medical interventions in patients with incurable cancer at the end of their life. Methods: In a pre- and post-intervention study, data were collected concerning adult patients with cancer who died between February 2014 and February 2015 (pre-PCP period) or between November 2015 and November 2016 (post-PCP period). We collected information on diagnostic procedures, anticancer treatments, and other medical interventions during the last 3 months of life. Results: We included 424 patients in the pre-PCP period and 426 in the post-PCP period. No differences in percentage of laboratory tests (85% vs 85%, p = 0.795) and radiological procedures (85% vs 82%, p = 0.246) were found between both groups. The percentage of patients who received anticancer treatment or other medical interventions was lower in the post-PCP period (40% vs 22%, p < 0.001; and 42% vs 29%, p < 0.001, respectively). Conclusions: Implementation of a PCP resulted in fewer medical interventions, including anticancer treatments, in the last 3 months of life. Implementation of the PCP may have created awareness among physicians of patients’ impending death, thereby supporting caregivers and patients to make appropriate decisions about medical treatment at the end of life. Trial registration number: Netherlands Trial Register; clinical trial number: NL 4400 (NTR4597); date registrated: 2014–04-27.

Objective The aim of this study is to examine why patients are hospitalised in the last stage of life. Methods Our study was conducted in a large Dutch teaching hospital. We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients aged >= 18 years who died of cancer either during hospitalisation or after discharge to receive terminal care outside the hospital. We collected data about the characteristics of these hospitalisations and indicators of advance care planning. Results Of the 264 deceased patients, 56% had died in the hospital and 44% after hospital discharge. Of all patients, 80% had been admitted to the hospital because of symptom distress. Dyspnoea (39%) and pain (33%) were the most common symptoms. Most patients underwent diagnostic procedures (laboratory tests [97%] and radiology tests [91%]) and received medical treatment (analgesics [71%] and antibiotics [55%]) during their hospitalisation. A 'Do-Not-Resuscitate' code had been recorded before admission in 42% of the patients and in an additional 52% during admission. Conclusion Our study shows that patients with cancer in the last stage of life were mainly admitted to the hospital because of symptom distress. Some hospitalisations and in-hospitals deaths may be avoided by more timely recognition of patients' impending death and start of advance care planning.

Importance: To optimize palliative care in patients with cancer who are in their last year of life, timely and accurate prognostication is needed. However, available instruments for prognostication, such as the surprise question ("Would I be surprised if this patient died in the next year?") and various prediction models using clinical variables, are not well validated or lack discriminative ability. Objective: To develop and validate a prediction model to calculate the 1-year risk of death among patients with advanced cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter prospective prognostic study was performed in the general oncology inpatient and outpatient clinics of 6 hospitals in the Netherlands. A total of 867 patients were enrolled between June 2 and November 22, 2017, and followed up for 1 year. The primary analyses were performed from October 9 to 25, 2019, with the most recent analyses performed from June 19 to 22, 2022. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was used to develop a prediction model including 3 categories of candidate predictors: clinician responses to the surprise question, patient clinical characteristics, and patient laboratory values. Data on race and ethnicity were not collected because most patients were expected to be of White race and Dutch ethnicity, and race and ethnicity were not considered as prognostic factors. The models' discriminative ability was assessed using internal-external validation by study hospital and measured using the C statistic. Patients 18 years and older with locally advanced or metastatic cancer were eligible. Patients with hematologic cancer were excluded. Main Outcomes and Measures: The risk of death by 1 year. Results: Among 867 patients, the median age was 66 years (IQR, 56-72 years), and 411 individuals (47.4%) were male. The 1-year mortality rate was 41.6% (361 patients). Three prediction models with increasing complexity were developed: (1) a simple model including the surprise questi

Objective: This prospective study aimed to evaluate the performance of the ‘Surprise Question’ (SQ) ‘Would I be surprised if this patient died in the next 12 months?’ in predicting survival of 12, 6, 3 and 1 month(s), respectively, in hospitalised patients with cancer. Methods: In three hospitals, physicians were asked to answer SQs for 12/6/3/1 month(s) for inpatients with cancer. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were calculated. Results: A total of 783 patients were included, of whom 51% died in the 12-month period after inclusion. Sensitivity of the SQ predicting death within 12 months was 0.79, specificity was 0.66, the positive predictive value was 0.71 and the negative predictive value was 0.75. When the SQ concerned a shorter survival period, sensitivities and positive predictive values decreased, whereas specificities and negative predictive values increased. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, the SQ was significantly associated with mortality (OR 3.93, 95% CI 2.70–5.71, p < 0.01). Conclusions: The 12-month SQ predicts death in patients with cancer admitted to the hospital reasonably well. Shortening the timeframe decreases sensitivities and increases specificities. The four surprise questions may help to identify patients for whom palliative care is indicated.

Context: Early integration of oncology and palliative care has been recommended to improve patient outcomes at the end of life. A standardized Palliative Care Pathway, consisting of a structured electronic medical checklist, may support such integration. Objectives: We studied the effect of implementation of a Palliative Care Pathway on patients’ place of death and advance care planning. Methods: We conducted a prospective pre- and postimplementation study of adult patients with cancer from a single hospital who died between February 2014 and February 2015 (pre-implementation period) or between No