-
Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and... Oct 2023In cancer cachexia trials, measures of physical function are commonly used as endpoints. For drug trials to obtain regulatory approval, efficacy in physical function...
In cancer cachexia trials, measures of physical function are commonly used as endpoints. For drug trials to obtain regulatory approval, efficacy in physical function endpoints may be needed alongside other measures. However, it is not clear which physical function endpoints should be used. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the frequency and diversity of physical function endpoints in cancer cachexia trials. Following a comprehensive electronic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane (1990-2021), records were retrieved. Eligible trials met the following criteria: adults (≥18 years), controlled design, more than 40 participants, use of a cachexia intervention for more than 14 days and use of a physical function endpoint. Physical function measures were classified as an objective measure (hand grip strength [HGS], stair climb power [SCP], timed up and go [TUG] test, 6-min walking test [6MWT] and short physical performance battery [SPPB]), clinician assessment of function (Karnofsky Performance Status [KPS] or Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-Performance Status [ECOG-PS]) or patient-reported outcomes (physical function subscale of the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaires [EORTC QLQ-C30 or C15]). Data extraction was performed using Covidence and followed PRISMA guidance (PROSPERO registration: CRD42022276710). A total of 5975 potential studies were examined and 71 were eligible. Pharmacological interventions were assessed in 38 trials (54%). Of these, 11 (29%, n = 1184) examined megestrol and 5 (13%, n = 1928) examined anamorelin; nutritional interventions were assessed in 21 trials (30%); and exercise-based interventions were assessed in 6 trials (8%). The remaining six trials (8%) assessed multimodal interventions. Among the objective measures of physical function (assessed as primary or secondary endpoints), HGS was most commonly examined (33 trials, n = 5081) and demonstrated a statistically significant finding in 12 (36%) trials (n = 2091). The 6MWT was assessed in 12 trials (n = 1074) and was statistically significant in 4 (33%) trials (n = 403), whereas SCP, TUG and SPPB were each assessed in 3 trials. KPS was more commonly assessed than the newer ECOG-PS (16 vs. 9 trials), and patient-reported EORTC QLQ-C30 physical function was reported in 25 trials. HGS is the most commonly used physical function endpoint in cancer cachexia clinical trials. However, heterogeneity in study design, populations, intervention and endpoint selection make it difficult to comment on the optimal endpoint and how to measure this. We offer several recommendations/considerations to improve the design of future clinical trials in cancer cachexia.
Topics: Humans; Cachexia; Hand Strength; Neoplasms; Quality of Life; Research Design
PubMed: 37671529
DOI: 10.1002/jcsm.13321 -
Health Expectations : An International... Oct 2023Liver disease is a growing health concern and a major cause of death. It causes multiple symptoms, including financial, psychological and social issues. To address these... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Liver disease is a growing health concern and a major cause of death. It causes multiple symptoms, including financial, psychological and social issues. To address these challenges, palliative care can support people alongside active treatment, and towards the end of life, but little is known about the care experiences of individuals with liver disease in the United Kingdom. This review aimed to explore the palliative and end-of-life care experiences of people with liver disease in the United Kingdom.
METHOD
A systematic review was conducted using a five-stage process and following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses guidelines. Searches were across Web of Science, Scopus, EBSCO and grey literature until 10 May 2023. The review was registered through International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). NVivo 12.5 was used to facilitate data analysis (systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42022382649).
RESULTS
Of 6035 papers (excluding duplicates) found from searches, five met the inclusion criteria of primary research related to adults with liver disease receiving palliative and/or end-of-life care in the United Kingdom, published in English. Reflexive thematic analysis of the data was conducted. The themes identified were the experiences of people with liver disease of relating to healthcare professionals, using services, receiving support, and experiences of information and communication. These were connected by an overarching concept of disempowerment versus empowerment, with the notion of person-centred care as an important feature.
CONCLUSION
This review has found variations in the care experiences of people with advanced liver disease towards the end of life and an overall lack of access to specialist palliative care services. Where services are designed to be person-centred, experiences are more empowering. Further research is needed but with recognition that it is often unclear when care for people with liver disease is palliative or end-of-life.
PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION
An online public involvement workshop was held on 18 April 2023 through Voice (2023). This included four people with liver disease and four carers to discuss the review findings and to design a qualitative research study to further explore the topic.
PubMed: 37855242
DOI: 10.1111/hex.13893 -
Journal of the American Medical... Dec 2023Discussions between health professionals and nursing home (NH) residents or their families about the current or future goals of health care may be associated with better... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
Discussions between health professionals and nursing home (NH) residents or their families about the current or future goals of health care may be associated with better outcomes at the end of life (EOL), such as avoidance of unwanted interventions or death in hospital. The timing of these discussions varies, and it is possible that their influence on EOL outcomes depends on their timing. This study synthesized current evidence concerning the timing of goals of care (GOC) discussions in NHs and its impact on EOL outcomes.
DESIGN
Systematic review.
SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS
Adult populations in NH settings.
METHODS
This systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses guidelines. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health from January 2000 to September 2022. We included studies that examined timing of GOC discussions in NHs, were peer-reviewed, and published in English. Quality of the studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.
RESULTS
Screening of 1930 abstracts yielded 149 papers that were evaluated for eligibility. Of the 18 articles, representing 16 distinct studies that met review criteria, 12 evaluated the timing of advance directives. There was variation in the timing of GOC discussions and compared with discussions that occurred within a month of death, earlier discussions (eg, at the time of facility admission) were associated with lower rates of hospitalization at the EOL and lower health care costs.
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
The timing of GOC discussions in NHs varies and evidence suggests that late discussions are associated with poorer EOL outcomes. The benefits of goal-concordant care may be enhanced by earlier and more frequent discussions. Future studies should examine the optimal timing for GOC discussions in the NH population.
Topics: Humans; Nursing Homes; Advance Directives; Hospitalization; Patient Care Planning; Terminal Care
PubMed: 37918815
DOI: 10.1016/j.jamda.2023.09.024 -
Supportive Care in Cancer : Official... Dec 2023This review aimed to synthesize the available evidence on the effectiveness of expressive writing (EW) on health outcomes of patients with cancer. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
This review aimed to synthesize the available evidence on the effectiveness of expressive writing (EW) on health outcomes of patients with cancer.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Six databases were searched from 1986 to 9 July 2022. The searches were updated on 3 October 2023. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and ROBINS-I tool for non-RCTs Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Narrative synthesis of outcomes was performed where meta-analysis was not appropriate.
RESULTS
Thirty-four studies with 4316 participants were identified, including 31 RCTs and three non-RCTs. Twenty-one studies focused on women with breast cancer; the remainder recruited people with various cancer types. There was a significant improvement in fatigue (SMD = - 0.3, 95% CI - 0.55 to - 0.66, P = .002), passive mood (MD = - 3.26, 95% CI = - 5.83 to - 0.69, P = 0.001), and the physical dimension of quality of life (MD = 3.21, 95% CI 0.18 to 6.25, P = 0.04) but not for anxiety, depression, and global quality of life among patients who participated in EW when compared with control groups.
CONCLUSION
Findings showed some benefits of EW for people with cancer, but not necessarily in anxiety or depression. Heterogeneity in the delivery of interventions and their content, and shortcomings in the methodologies used highlight the need for stronger evidence in the field through high-quality trials and consistencies in the protocol, focusing on outcomes that this review highlighted as potential outcome targets.
Topics: Female; Humans; Anxiety; Breast Neoplasms; Disclosure; Palliative Care; Quality of Life; Writing
PubMed: 38157056
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-023-08255-8 -
BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care Feb 2024Negative perceptions about palliative care (PC), held by patients with cancer and their families, are a barrier to early referral and the associated benefits. This...
BACKGROUND
Negative perceptions about palliative care (PC), held by patients with cancer and their families, are a barrier to early referral and the associated benefits. This review examines the approaches that support the task of introducing PC to patients and families and describes any evaluations of these approaches.
METHODS
A systematic review with a systematic search informed by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines was performed on the online databases MEDLINE, PsychInfo and CINAHL from May 2022 to July 2022. Identified studies were screened by title and abstract, and included if they were empirical studies and described an approach that supported the introduction of PC services for adult patients. A narrative-synthesis approach was used to extract and present the findings.
RESULTS
Searches yielded 1193 unique manuscripts, which, following title and abstract screening, were reduced to 31 papers subject to full-text review, with a final 12 studies meeting eligibility criteria. A diverse range of included studies described approaches used to introduce palliative care, which may be broadly summarised by four categories: education, clinical communication, building trust and rapport and integrative system approaches.
CONCLUSION
While educational approaches were helpful, they were less likely to change behaviours, with focused communication tasks also necessary to facilitate PC introduction. An established relationship and trust between patient and clinician were foundational to effective PC discussions. A framework to assist clinicians in this task is likely to be multidimensional in nature, although more quantitative research is necessary to establish the most effective methods and how they may be incorporated into clinical practice.
PubMed: 38307704
DOI: 10.1136/spcare-2023-004442 -
Palliative Medicine Sep 2023Clinician predicted survival for cancer patients is often inaccurate, and prognostic tools may be helpful, such as the Palliative Prognostic Index (PPI). The PPI... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Clinician predicted survival for cancer patients is often inaccurate, and prognostic tools may be helpful, such as the Palliative Prognostic Index (PPI). The PPI development study reported that when PPI score is greater than 6, it predicted survival of less than 3 weeks with a sensitivity of 83% and specificity of 85%. When PPI score is greater than 4, it predicts survival of less than 6 weeks with a sensitivity of 79% and specificity of 77%. However, subsequent PPI validation studies have evaluated various thresholds and survival durations, and it is unclear which is most appropriate for use in clinical practice. With the development of numerous prognostic tools, it is also unclear which is most accurate and feasible for use in multiple care settings.
AIM
We evaluated PPI model performance in predicting survival of adult cancer patients based on different thresholds and survival durations and compared it to other prognostic tools.
DESIGN
This systematic review and meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022302679). We calculated the pooled sensitivity and specificity of each threshold using bivariate random-effects meta-analysis and pooled diagnostic odds ratio of each survival duration using hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic model. Meta-regression and subgroup analysis were used to compare PPI performance with clinician predicted survival and other prognostic tools. Findings which could not be included in meta-analyses were summarised narratively.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, CINAHL, ProQuest and Google Scholar were searched for articles published from inception till 7 January 2022. Both retrospective and prospective observational studies evaluating PPI performance in predicting survival of adult cancer patients in any setting were included. The Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was used for quality appraisal.
RESULTS
Thirty-nine studies evaluating PPI performance in predicting survival of adult cancer patients were included ( = 19,714 patients). Across meta-analyses of 12 PPI score thresholds and survival durations, we found that PPI was most accurate for predicting survival of <3 weeks and <6 weeks. Survival prediction of <3 weeks was most accurate when PPI score>6 (pooled sensitivity = 0.68, 95% CI 0.60-0.75, specificity = 0.80, 95% CI 0.75-0.85). Survival prediction of <6 weeks was most accurate when PPI score>4 (pooled sensitivity = 0.72, 95% CI 0.65-0.78, specificity = 0.74, 95% CI 0.66-0.80). Comparative meta-analyses found that PPI performed similarly to Delirium-Palliative Prognostic Score and Palliative Prognostic Score in predicting <3-week survival, but less accurately in <30-day survival prediction. However, Delirium-Palliative Prognostic Score and Palliative Prognostic Score only provide <30-day survival probabilities, and it is uncertain how this would be helpful for patients and clinicians. PPI also performed similarly to clinician predicted survival in predicting <30-day survival. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution as limited studies were available for comparative meta-analyses. Risk of bias was high for all studies, mainly due to poor reporting of statistical analyses. while there were low applicability concerns for most (38/39) studies.
CONCLUSIONS
PPI score>6 should be used for <3-week survival prediction, and PPI score>4 for <6-week survival. PPI is easily scored and does not require invasive tests, and thus would be easily implemented in multiple care settings. Given the acceptable accuracy of PPI in predicting <3- and <6-week survival and its objective nature, it could be used to cross-check clinician predicted survival especially when clinicians have doubts about their own judgement, or when clinician estimates seem to be less reliable. Future studies should adhere to the reporting guidelines and provide comprehensive analyses of PPI model performance.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Prognosis; Retrospective Studies; Neoplasms; Sensitivity and Specificity; Delirium; Observational Studies as Topic
PubMed: 37310019
DOI: 10.1177/02692163231180657 -
Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) May 2024As a result of demographic change, chronic and oncological diseases are gaining importance in the context of public health. Palliative care plays a crucial role in... (Review)
Review
As a result of demographic change, chronic and oncological diseases are gaining importance in the context of public health. Palliative care plays a crucial role in maintaining the quality of life of those affected. International guidelines demand access to palliative care not only for the elderly but also for younger people who face severe illnesses. It can be assumed that palliative care will become increasingly important for them. In order to develop public health strategies which are able to promote palliative care, it is important to assess the knowledge of, and attitude towards, palliative care as found among members of the general public and its specific target groups. In particular, little is known about young adults' knowledge and perceptions of palliative care. This work aimed to assess the understanding and viewpoints regarding palliative care among the general population and among young adults aged 18 to 24. We therefore conducted a systematic review, which, for this target population, could be seen as a novel approach. Exclusion and inclusion criteria were developed using the PICOS process. Literature was researched within MEDLINE (via PubMed), Google Scholar and Web of Science. A search string was developed and refined for all three databases. Grey literature was included. Duplicates were excluded using Mendeley. The literature was independently screened by two researchers. Narrative synthesis was used to answer the main research question. For the general public, palliative care is still associated with death and dying and comforting sick people towards the end of their lives. Multiple social determinants are linked to better knowledge of palliative care: higher education, higher income, female gender, having relatives that received palliative care, and permanent employment. The population's knowledge of palliative care structures increases, the longer such structures have been established within a country. Young adults are familiar with the term palliative care, yet their understanding lacks nuance. They associate palliative care with death and dying and perceive palliative care to be a medical discipline primarily for the elderly. Nevertheless, young adults demand participation within the planning of interventions to destigmatize palliative care. The general public still lacks a detailed understanding of palliative care. Palliative care faces stigma at multiple levels, which creates barriers for those who set out to implement it. However, addressing young adults as a crucial peer group can help break down barriers and promote access to palliative care.
PubMed: 38786369
DOI: 10.3390/healthcare12100957 -
Aging & Mental Health 2024Hospices are regarded as gold standard providers of end-of-life care. The term hospice, however, is broadly used, and can describe a type of care offered in a variety of... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
Hospices are regarded as gold standard providers of end-of-life care. The term hospice, however, is broadly used, and can describe a type of care offered in a variety of health care services (e.g. nursing homes). It thus becomes complex for families to decide between services. We aimed to review the evidence around the experience of family carers of people with dementia accessing in-patient hospice settings for end-of-life care.
METHOD
We registered the review protocol on PROSPERO. We used PerSPE(C)TiF to systematically organise our search strategy. The evidence was reviewed across six databases: PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, ASSIA, ISI Web, and CINAHL. We used meta-ethnography as per the eMERGe guidance for data interpretation.
RESULTS
Four studies were included. Two third-order constructs were generated through meta-ethnography: expectations of care and barriers to quality of care. We found that carers had expectations of care, and these could change over time. If discussion was not held with hospice staff early on, the carers could experience reduced care quality due to unmatched expectations. Unmatched expectations acted as barriers to care and these were found in terms of carers not feeling adequately supported, and/or having the person discharged from hospice, which would entail increased care responsibility for carers.
CONCLUSION
In view of an increase in new dementia cases over time and with hospice services being under pressure, integrating palliative care services within community-based models of care is key to reducing the risk of having inadequate and under resourced services for people with dementia.
Topics: Humans; Caregivers; Hospices; Terminal Care; Anthropology, Cultural; Dementia
PubMed: 37667896
DOI: 10.1080/13607863.2023.2241027 -
Journal of Pain and Symptom Management Apr 2024The provision of person-centered dignity-conserving care is central to palliative care. It is important to reevaluate current methods of assessing dignity as the concept... (Review)
Review
CONTEXT
The provision of person-centered dignity-conserving care is central to palliative care. It is important to reevaluate current methods of assessing dignity as the concept of dignity is multifaceted.
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this study is to understand the tools which are used to assess a patient's dignity and the elements of dignity evaluated in these tools.
METHODS
Two independent and concurrent Systematic Evidence-Based Approach guided systematic scoping reviews (SSR in SEBA) on existing dignity assessment tools and on accounts of assessments of dignity were carried out. The SSR in SEBA on dignity assessment tools involving PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus, and CINAHL databases saw 22 full-text articles included from the 645 articles reviewed. The SSR in SEBA on accounts of assessments of dignity featured in the PubMed database identified 102 full-text articles which saw 46 articles included.
RESULTS
The domains identified were factors affecting patients' definition of dignity; elements of dignity-conserving care; and components of effective tools.
CONCLUSION
Current accounts to assess dignity and assessment tools fail to capture shifting self-concepts of dignity holistically. A portfolio-like appraisal of dignity is proposed to achieve assessments that are timely, longitudinal, and patient-specific. Portfolio-based assessments by members of the multidisciplinary team will better direct timely evaluations of relevant aspects of changing concepts of dignity, without losing the patient's holistic perception of dignity.
Topics: Humans; Palliative Care; Personhood; Respect; Systematic Reviews as Topic; Terminal Care
PubMed: 38092260
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2023.12.008 -
Radiotherapy and Oncology : Journal of... Dec 2023This study aimed to compare SBRT and cEBRT for treating spinal metastases through a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Stereotactic body radiation therapy versus conventional external beam radiotherapy for spinal metastases: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
INTRODUCTION
This study aimed to compare SBRT and cEBRT for treating spinal metastases through a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
METHODS
PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched up to 6 May 2023 for RCTs comparing SBRT and cEBRT for spinal metastases. Overall and complete pain response, local progression, overall survival, quality of life and adverse events were extracted. Data were pooled using random-effects models. Results were reported as risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes, and hazard ratios (HRs) for time-to-event outcomes, along with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was evaluated using the I statistic.
RESULTS
Three RCTs were identified involving 642 patients. No differences were seen in overall pain response comparing SBRT and cEBRT (RR at 3 months: 1.12, 95% CI, 0.74-1.70, p = 0.59; RR at 6 months: 1.29, 95% CI, 0.97-1.72, p = 0.08). Only two of three studies presented complete pain response data. SBRT demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in complete pain response compared to cEBRT (RR at 3 months: 2.52; 95% CI, 1.58-4.01; P < 0.0001; RR at 6 months: 2.48; 95% CI, 1.23-4.99; P = 0.01). There were no significant differences in local progression and overall survival. Adverse events were similar, except for any grade radiation dermatitis, which was significantly lower in SBRT arm (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.03-0.96, P = 0.04).
CONCLUSION
SBRT is a safe treatment option for spine metastases. It may provide better complete pain response compared to cEBRT. Additional trials are needed to determine the potential benefits of SBRT in specific patient subsets.
Topics: Humans; Radiosurgery; Spinal Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Pain
PubMed: 37739318
DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109914