Search

Abstract Background The number of advanced heart failure patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) is increasing. Despite guideline-recommendations, little is known about specialist palliative care involvement in LVAD-patients, especially in Europe. This study aims to investigate timing and setting of specialist palliative care in LVAD-patients. Methods We conducted a retrospective multicenter study in 2022. Specialist palliative care services in German LVAD-centers were identified and invited to participate. Forty adult LVAD-patients (mean age 65 years (SD 7.9), 90% male) from seven centers that received a specialist palliative care consultation during hospitalization were included. Results In 37 (67.3%) of the 55 LVAD-centers, specialist palliative care was available. The median duration between LVAD-implantation and first specialist palliative care contact was 17 months (IQR 6.3–50.3 months). Median duration between consultation and death was seven days (IQR 3–28 days). 65% of consults took place in an intensive/intermediate care unit with half of the patients having a Do-Not-Resuscitate order. Care planning significantly increased during involvement (advance directives before: n = 15, after: n = 19, p

Abstract Background Shared decision-making (SDM) is preferred by many patients in cancer care. However, despite scientific evidence and promotion by health policy makers, SDM implementation in routine health care lags behind. This study aimed to evaluate an empirically and theoretically grounded implementation program for SDM in cancer care. Methods In a stepped wedge design, three departments of a comprehensive cancer center sequentially received the implementation program in a randomized order. It included six components: training for health care professionals (HCPs), individual coaching for physicians, patient activation intervention, patient information material/decision aids, revision of quality management documents, and reflection on multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs). Outcome evaluation comprised four measurement waves. The primary endpoint was patient-reported SDM uptake using the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire. Several secondary implementation outcomes were assessed. A mixed-methods process evaluation was conducted to evaluate reach and fidelity. Data were analyzed using mixed linear models, qualitative content analysis, and descriptive statistics. Results A total of 2,128 patient questionnaires, 559 questionnaires from 408 HCPs, 132 audio recordings of clinical encounters, and 842 case discussions from 66 MDTMs were evaluated. There was no statistically significant improvement in the primary endpoint SDM uptake. Patients in the intervention condition were more likely to experience shared or patient-lead decision-making than in the control condition (d=0.24). HCPs in the intervention condition reported more knowledge about SDM than in the control condition (d = 0.50). In MDTMs the quality of psycho-social information was lower in the intervention than in the control condition (d = − 0.48). Further secondary outcomes did not differ statistically significantly between conditions. All components were implemented in all departments, but reach was limited (e.g., training of 44% of eligible HCPs) and several adaptations occurred (e.g., reduced dose of coaching). Conclusions The process evaluation provides possible explanations for the lack of statistically significant effects in the primary and most of the secondary outcomes. Low reach and adaptations, particularly in dose, may explain the results. Other or more intensive approaches are needed for successful department-wide implementation of SDM in routine cancer care. Further research is needed to understand factors influencing implementation of SDM in cancer care. Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03393351 , registered 8 January 2018.

Abstract Background Symptom assessment is essential in palliative care, but holds challenges concerning implementation and relevance. This study aims to evaluate patients’ main symptoms and problems at admission to a specialist inpatient palliative care (SIPC) ward using physician proxy- and patient self-assessment, and aims to identify their prognostic impact as well as the agreement between both assessments. Methods Within 12 h after admission, palliative care specialists completed the Symptom and Problem Checklist of the German Hospice and Palliative Care Evaluation (HOPE-SP-CL). Patients either used the new version of the minimal documentation system for patients in palliative care (MIDOS) or the Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale (IPOS) plus the Distress Thermometer (DT). Results Between 01.01.2016–30.09.2018, 1206 patients were included (HOPE-SP-CL 98%; MIDOS 21%, IPOS 34%, DT 27%) whereof 59% died on the ward. Proxy-assessment showed a mean HOPE-SP-CL Total Score of 24.6 ± 5.9 of 45. Most frequent symptoms/problems of at least moderate intensity were weakness (95%), needs of assistance with activities of daily living (88%), overburdening of family caregivers (83%), and tiredness (75%). Factor analysis identified four symptom clusters (SCs): (1) Deteriorated Physical Condition/Decompensation of Home Care, (2) Emotional Problems, (3) Gastrointestinal Symptoms and (4) Other Symptoms. Self-assessment showed a mean MIDOS Total Score of 11.3 ± 5.3 of 30, a mean IPOS Total Score of 32.0 ± 9.0 of 68, and a mean distress of 6.6 ± 2.5 of 10. Agreement of self- and proxy-assessment was moderate for pain (ƙ = 0.438) and dyspnea (ƙ = 0.503), fair for other physical (ƙ = 0.297 to 0.394) and poor for psychological symptoms (ƙ = 0.101 to 0.202). Multivariate regression analyses for single symptoms and SCs revealed that predictors for dying on the SIPC ward included impaired ECOG performance status, moderate/severe dyspnea, appetite loss, tiredness, disorientation/confusion, and the SC Deteriorated Physical Condition/Decompensation of Home Care. Conclusion Admissions to a SIPC ward are mainly caused by problems impairing mobility and autonomy. Results demonstrate that implementation of self- and reliability of proxy- and self-assessment is challenging, especially concerning non-physical symptoms/problems. We identified, specific symptoms and problems that might provide information needed for treatment discussions regarding the medical prognosis.

Abstract Background Inpatient palliative care consultation (IPCC) teams have been established to improve care for patients with specialist palliative care (PC) needs throughout all hospital departments. The objective is to explore physicians’ perceptions on the impact of IPCC, its triggers, challenges and limits, and their suggestions for future service improvements. Methods A Qualitative study drawing on semi-structured interviews with 10 PC specialists of an IPCC team and nine IPCC requesting physicians from oncology and non-oncological departments of a university hospital. Analysis was performed using qualitative content analysis. Results PC specialists and IPCC requesting physicians likewise considered organization of further care and symptom-burden as main reasons for IPCC requests. The main impact however was identified from both as improvement of patients’ (and their caregivers’) coping strategies and relief of the treating team. Mostly, PC specialists emphasized a reduction of symptom burden, and improvement of further care. Challenges in implementing IPCC were lack of time for both. PC specialists addressed requesting physicians’ skepticism towards PC. Barriers for realization of IPCC included structural aspects for both: limited time, staff capacities and setting. PC specialists saw problems in implementing recommendations like disagreement towards their suggestions. All interviewees considered education in PC a sensible approach for improvement. Conclusions IPCC show various positive effects in supporting physicians and patients, but are also limited due to structural problems, lack of knowledge, insecurity, and skepticism by the requesting physicians. To overcome some of these challenges implementation of PC education programs for all physicians would be beneficial.

Abstract Background Shared decision-making (SDM) has become increasingly important in health care. However, despite scientific evidence, effective implementation strategies, and a prominent position on the health policy agenda, SDM is not widely implemented in routine practice so far. Therefore, we developed a program for routine implementation of SDM in oncology by conducting an analysis of the current state and a needs assessment in a pilot study based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Based on these results, the main aim of our current study is to evaluate the process and outcome of this theoretically and empirically grounded multicomponent implementation program designed to foster SDM in routine cancer care. Methods We use a stepped wedge design, a variant of the cluster randomized controlled trial. The intervention to be implemented is SDM. Three participating clinics of one comprehensive cancer center will be randomized and receive the multicomponent SDM implementation program in a time-delayed sequence. The program consists of the following strategies: (a) SDM training for health care professionals, (b) individual coaching for physicians, (c) patient activation strategy, (d) provision of patient information material and decision aids, (e) revision of the clinics’ quality management documents, and (f) critical reflection of current organization of multidisciplinary team meetings. We will conduct a mixed methods outcome and process evaluation. The outcome evaluation will consist of four measurement points. The primary outcome is adoption of SDM, measured by the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire. A range of other implementation outcomes will be assessed (i.e., acceptability, readiness for implementing change, appropriateness, penetration). The implementation process will be evaluated using stakeholder interviews and field notes. This will allow adapting interventions if necessary. Discussion This study is the first large study on routine implementation of SDM conducted in German cancer care. We expect to foster implementation of SDM at the enrolled clinics. Insights gained from this study, using a theoretically and empirically grounded approach, can inform other SDM implementation studies and health policy developments, both nationally and internationally. Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03393351. Registered 8 January 2018.

Immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) of the PD-1/PD-L1 axis shows durable responses in a subset of patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC). However, PD-L1 expression in tumor biopsies does not necessarily correlate with response to PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors. Thus, a reliable predictive biomarker is urgently needed. Here, the expression of PD-L1 on circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in blood from patients with advanced UC was analyzed. For this purpose, an assay to test PD-L1 expression on CTCs using the CellSearch® system was established using cells of five UC cell lines spiked into blood samples from healthy donors and applied to a heterogeneous cohort of UC patients. Enumeration of CTCs was performed in blood samples from 49 patients with advanced UC. PD-L1 expression in ≥1 CTC was found in 10 of 16 CTC-positive samples (63%). Both intra- and inter-patient heterogeneity regarding PD-L1 expression of CTCs were observed. Furthermore, vimentin-expressing CTCs were detected in 4 of 15 CTC-positive samples (27%), independently of PD-L1 analysis. Both CTC detection and presence of CTCs with moderate or strong PD-L1 expression correlated with worse overall survival. Analyses during disease course of three individual patients receiving ICI suggest that apart from CTC numbers also PD-L1 expression on CTCs might potentially indicate disease progression. This is the first study demonstrating the feasibility to detect CTC-PD-L1 expression in patients with advanced UC using the CellSearch® system. This assay is readily available for clinical application and could be implemented in future clinical trials to evaluate its relevance for predicting and monitoring response to ICI.

Epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG) possesses significant antitumor activity and binds to laminin receptors, overexpressed on cancer cells, with high affinity. Gold nanoparticles (GNPs) serve as excellent drug carriers and protect the conjugated drug from enzymatic metabolization. Citrate-gold nanoparticles (C-GNPs) and EGCG-gold nanoparticles (E-GNPs) were synthesized by reduction methods and characterized with UV-visible spectroscopy, transmission electron microscopy (TEM), and dynamic light scattering (DLS). Cytotoxicity of citrate, EGCG, C-GNPs, and E-GNPs was evaluated by the water-soluble tetrazolium salt (WST-1) assay. Nanoparticle cellular uptake studies were performed by TEM and atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS). Dialysis method was employed to assess drug release. Cell viability studies showed greater growth inhibition by E-GNPs compared to EGCG or C-GNPs. Cellular uptake studies revealed that, unlike C-GNPs, E-GNPs were taken up more efficiently by cancerous cells than noncancerous cells. We found that E-GNP nanoformulation releases EGCG in a sustained fashion. Furthermore, data showed that E-GNPs induced more apoptosis in cancer cells compared to EGCG and C-GNPs. From the mechanistic standpoint, we observed that E-GNPs inhibited the nuclear translocation and transcriptional activity of nuclear factor-kappaB (NF-κB) with greater potency than EGCG, whereas C-GNPs were only minimally effective. Altogether, our data suggest that E-GNPs can serve as potent tumor-selective chemotoxic agents.