Search

Patients with high-risk acute myeloid leukemia (AML) often experience intensive medical care at the end of life (EOL), including high rates of hospitalizations and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions. Despite this, studies examining code status transitions are lacking. We conducted a mixed-methods study of 200 patients with high-risk AML enrolled in supportive care studies at Massachusetts General Hospital between 2014 and 2021. We defined high-risk AML as relapsed/refractory or diagnosis at age ≥60. We used a consensus-driven medical record review to characterize code status transitions. At diagnosis, 86.0% (172/200) of patients were “full code” (38.5% presumed, 47.5% confirmed) and 8.5% had restrictions on life-sustaining therapies. Overall, 57.0% of patients experienced a transition during the study period. The median time from the last transition to death was 2 days (range, 0-350). Most final transitions (71.1%) were to comfort measures near EOL; only 60.5% of patients participated in these last transitions. We identified 3 conversation types leading to transitions: informative conversations focusing on futility after clinical deterioration (51.0%), anticipatory conversations at the time of acute deterioration (32.2%), and preemptive conversations (15.6%) before deterioration. Younger age (B = 0.04; P = .002) and informative conversations (B = −2.79; P < .001) were associated with shorter time from last transition to death. Over two-thirds of patients were “presumed full code” at diagnosis of high-risk AML, and most experienced code status transitions focused on the futility of continuing life-sustaining therapies near EOL. These results suggest that goals-of-care discussions occur late in the illness course for patients with AML and warrant interventions to increase earlier discussions regarding EOL preferences.

Supplementary Figures

Purpose:ctDNA offers a promising, noninvasive approach to monitor therapeutic efficacy in real-time. We explored whether the quantitative percent change in ctDNA early after therapy initiation can predict treatment response and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal cancer.Experimental Design:A total of 138 patients with metastatic gastrointestinal cancers and tumor profiling by next-generation sequencing had serial blood draws pretreatment and at scheduled intervals during therapy. ctDNA was assessed using individualized droplet digital PCR measuring the mutant allele fraction in plasma of mutations identified in tumor biopsies. ctDNA changes were correlated with tumor markers and radiographic response.Results:A total of 138 patients enrolled. A total of 101 patients were evaluable for ctDNA and 68 for tumor markers at 4 weeks. Percent change of ctDNA by 4 weeks predicted partial response (PR, P < 0.0001) and clinical benefit [CB: PR and stable disease (SD), P < 0.0001]. ctDNA decreased by 98% (median) and >30% for all PR patients. ctDNA change at 8 weeks, but not 2 weeks, also predicted CB (P < 0.0001). Four-week change in tumor markers also predicted response (P = 0.0026) and CB (P = 0.022). However, at a clinically relevant specificity threshold of 90%, 4-week ctDNA change more effectively predicted CB versus tumor markers, with a sensitivity of 60% versus 24%, respectively (P = 0.0109). Patients whose 4-week ctDNA decreased beyond this threshold (≥30% decrease) had a median PFS of 175 days versus 59.5 days (HR, 3.29; 95% CI, 1.55–7.00; P < 0.0001).Conclusions:Serial ctDNA monitoring may provide early indication of response to systemic therapy in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal cancer prior to radiographic assessments and may outperform standard tumor markers, warranting further evaluation.

Supplementary Figures

Purpose:Detection of persistent circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) after curative-intent surgery can identify patients with minimal residual disease (MRD) who will ultimately recur. Most ctDNA MRD assays require tumor sequencing to identify tumor-derived mutations to facilitate ctDNA detection, requiring tumor and blood. We evaluated a plasma-only ctDNA assay integrating genomic and epigenomic cancer signatures to enable tumor-uninformed MRD detection.Experimental Design:A total of 252 prospective serial plasma specimens from 103 patients with colorectal cancer undergoing curative-intent surgery were analyzed and correlated with recurrence.Results:Of 103 patients, 84 [stage I (9.5%), II (23.8%), III (47.6%), IV (19%)] had evaluable plasma drawn after completion of definitive therapy, defined as surgery only (n = 39) or completion of adjuvant therapy (n = 45). In “landmark” plasma drawn 1-month (median, 31.5 days) after definitive therapy and >1 year follow-up, 15 patients had detectable ctDNA, and all 15 recurred [positive predictive value (PPV), 100%; HR, 11.28 (P < 0.0001)]. Of 49 patients without detectable ctDNA at the landmark timepoint, 12 (24.5%) recurred. Landmark recurrence sensitivity and specificity were 55.6% and 100%. Incorporating serial longitudinal and surveillance (drawn within 4 months of recurrence) samples, sensitivity improved to 69% and 91%. Integrating epigenomic signatures increased sensitivity by 25%–36% versus genomic alterations alone. Notably, standard serum carcinoembryonic antigen levels did not predict recurrence [HR, 1.84 (P = 0.18); PPV = 53.9%].Conclusions:Plasma-only MRD detection demonstrated favorable sensitivity and specificity for recurrence, comparable with tumor-informed approaches. Integrating analysis of epigenomic and genomic alterations enhanced sensitivity. These findings support the potential clinical utility of plasma-only ctDNA MRD detection.See related commentary by Bent and Kopetz, p. 5449

Supplementary Table S2

Supplementary Methods

Supplementary Tables

PURPOSE: To identify early-phase clinical trial (EP-CT) participants at risk for experiencing worse clinical outcomes and describe receipt of supportive care services. METHODS: A retrospective review of the electronic health records of consecutive patients enrolled in EP-CTs from 2017 to 2019 examined baseline characteristics, clinical outcomes, and receipt of supportive care services. The validated Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH) prognosis score was calculated using data at the time of EP-CT enrollment (scores range from 0 to 3; scores ≥ 2 indicate poor prognosis). Differences in patient characteristics, clinical outcomes, and receipt of supportive care services were compared on the basis of RMH scores. RESULTS: Among 350 patients (median age = 63.2 years [range, 23.0-84.3 years], 57.1% female, 98.0% metastatic cancer), 31.7% had an RMH score indicating a poor prognosis. Those with poor prognosis RMH scores had worse overall survival (hazard ratio [HR], 2.00; P < .001), shorter time on trial (HR, 1.53; P < .001), and lower likelihood of completing the dose-limiting toxicity period (odds ratio, 0.42; P = .006) versus those with good prognosis scores. Patients with poor prognosis scores had greater risk of emergency room visits (HR, 1.66; P = .037) and hospitalizations (HR, 1.69; P = .016) while on trial, and earlier hospice enrollment (HR, 2.22; P = .006). Patients with poor prognosis scores were significantly more likely to receive palliative care consultation (46.8% v 27.6%; P < .001), but not other supportive care services. CONCLUSION: This study found that RMH prognosis score could identify patients at risk for decreased survival, shorter time on trial, and greater use of health care services. The findings underscore the need to develop supportive care interventions targeting EP-CT participants' distinct needs.

PURPOSE: Preoperative therapy for pancreatic cancer represents a new treatment option with the potential to improve outcomes for patients, yet with complex risks. By not discussing the potential risks and benefits of new treatment options, clinicians may hinder patients from making informed decisions. METHODS: From 2017 to 2019, we conducted a mixed-methods study. First, we elicited clinicians' (n = 13 medical, radiation, and surgery clinicians), patients' (n = 18), and caregivers' (n = 14) perceptions of information needed for decision making regarding preoperative therapy and generated a list of key elements. Next, we audio-recorded patients' (n = 20) initial multidisciplinary oncology visits and used qualitative content analyses to describe how clinicians discussed this information and surveyed patients to ask if they heard each key element. RESULTS: We identified 13 key elements of information patients need when making decisions regarding preoperative therapy, including treatment complications, alternatives, logistics, and potential outcomes. Patients reported hearing infrequently about complications (eg, hospitalizations [n = 3 of 20]) and alternatives (n = 8 of 20) but frequently recalled logistics and potential outcomes (eg, likelihood of surgery [n = 19 of 20]). Clinicians infrequently discussed complications (eg, hospitalizations [n = 7 of 20]), but frequently discussed alternatives, logistics, and potential outcomes (eg, likelihood of surgery [n = 20 of 20]). No overarching differences in clinician discussion content emerged to explain why patients did or did not hear about each key element. CONCLUSION: We identified key elements of information patients with pancreatic cancer need when considering preoperative therapy. Patients infrequently heard about treatment complications and alternatives, while frequently hearing about logistics and potential outcomes, underscoring areas for improvement in educating patients about new treatment options in oncology.

PURPOSE: The financial toxicity of anticancer drugs is well-documented, but little is known about the costs of drugs used to manage cancer-associated symptoms. METHODS: We reviewed relevant guidelines and compiled drugs used to manage seven cancer-associated symptoms (anorexia and cachexia, chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, constipation, diarrhea, exocrine pancreatic insufficiency, cancer-associated fatigue, and chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting). Using GoodRx website, we identified the retail price (cash price at retail pharmacies) and lowest price (discounted, best-case scenario of out-of-pocket costs) for patients without insurance for each drug or formulation for a typical fill. We describe lowest prices here. RESULTS: For anorexia and cachexia, costs ranged from $5 US dollars (USD; generic olanzapine or mirtazapine tablets) to $1,156 USD (brand-name dronabinol solution) and varied widely by formulation of the same drug or dosage: for olanzapine 5 mg, $5 USD (generic tablet) to $239 USD (brand-name orally disintegrating tablet). For chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, costs of duloxetine varied from $12 USD (generic) to $529 USD (brand-name). For constipation, the cost of sennosides or polyethylene glycol was CONCLUSION: We highlight the high costs of many symptom control drugs and the wide variation in the costs of these drugs. These findings can guide patient-clinician discussions about cost-effectively managing symptoms, while promoting the use of less expensive formulations when possible.

Background: Older adults account for 70% of cancer-related deaths, but previous studies have shown that they are underrepresented in cancer clinical trials. We sought to analyze the representation and outcomes of older adults in trials conducted in the era of novel targeted therapy and immunotherapy. Methods: We searched the 2020 NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology and retrieved trials from the past 10 years leading to category 1 recommendations in the first-line metastatic setting for the 5 most common causes of cancer death. We categorized trials by cancer type, single-agent versus multiagent approach, and therapeutic class. We described the percentage of older adults (according to each trial’s definition) and used a Mantel-Haenszel random-effects meta-analysis model to compare overall and progression-free survival by age. Results: We identified 30 trials consisting of 24,416 patients. Across all trials, 44% of enrolled patients were older adults. Representation of older adults by cancer type within trials was 49% prostate cancer, 38% pancreatic cancer, 37% breast cancer, and 34% non–small cell lung cancer. Representation of older adults also varied by therapeutic class: 20% received immunotherapy, 44% received cytotoxic chemotherapy, 54% received targeted/hormonal therapy, and 34% received combination therapy (PConclusions: We found that >40% of patients in practice-changing trials are older adults. Although they remain underrepresented in clinical trials compared with the general population, older adults in practice-changing trials seem to be better represented than in previously reported analyses of cooperative group trials.

PURPOSE: Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence in patients younger than 50 years of age, commonly defined as early-onset (EO-CRC), is rising. EO-CRC often presents with distinct clinicopathologic features. However, data on prognosis are conflicting and outcomes with modern treatment approaches for metastatic disease are still limited. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We prospectively enrolled patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC) to a biobanking and clinical data collection protocol from 2014 to 2018. We grouped the cohort based on age at initial diagnosis: < 40 years, 40-49 years, and ≥ 50 years. We used regression models to examine associations among age at initial diagnosis, treatments, clinicopathologic features, and survival. RESULTS: We identified 466 patients with mCRC (45 [10%] age < 40 years, 109 [23%] age 40-49 years, and 312 [67%] age ≥ 50 years). Patients < 40 years of age were more likely to have received multiple metastatic resections (odds ratio [OR], 3.533; P = .0066) than their older counterparts. Patients with EO-CRC were more likely to receive triplet therapy than patients > 50 years of age (age < 40 years: OR, 6.738; P = .0002; age 40-49 years: OR, 2.949; P = .0166). Patients 40-49 years of age were more likely to have received anti-EGFR therapy (OR, 2.633; P = .0016). Despite differences in care patterns, age did not predict overall survival. CONCLUSION: Despite patients with EO-CRC receiving more intensive treatments, survival was similar to the older counterpart. However, EO-CRC had clinical and molecular features associated with worse prognoses. Improved biologic understanding is needed to optimize clinical management of EO-CRC. The cost-benefit ratio of exposing patients with EO-CRC to more intensive treatments has to be carefully evaluated.

Overcoming intrinsic resistance to immune checkpoint blockade for microsatellite stable (MSS) colorectal cancer (CRC) and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains challenging. We conducted a single-arm, non-randomized, phase II trial (NCT03104439) combining radiation, ipilimumab and nivolumab to treat patients with metastatic MSS CRC (n = 40) and PDAC (n = 25) with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1. The primary endpoint was disease control rate (DCR) by intention to treat. DCRs were 25% for CRC (ten of 40; 95% confidence interval (CI), 13–41%) and 20% for PDAC (five of 25; 95% CI, 7–41%). In the per-protocol analysis, defined as receipt of radiation, DCR was 37% (ten of 27; 95% CI, 19–58%) in CRC and 29% (five of 17; 95% CI, 10–56%) in PDAC. Pretreatment biopsies revealed low tumor mutational burden for all samples but higher numbers of natural killer (NK) cells and expression of the HERVK repeat RNA in patients with disease control. This study provides proof of concept of combining radiation with immune checkpoint blockade in immunotherapy-resistant cancers. Ting and colleagues report the safety and efficacy of combined radiation and immunotherapy in a phase II trial on patients with MSS colorectal or pancreatic cancer and observe that disease control correlates with higher repetitive RNA transcription.

Background Skeletal muscle metrics on computed tomography (CT) correlate with clinical and patient‐reported outcomes. We hypothesize that aggregating skeletal muscle measurements from multiple vertebral levels and skeletal muscle gauge (SMG) better predict outcomes than skeletal muscle radioattenuation (SMRA) or ‐index (SMI) at a single vertebral level. Methods We performed a secondary analysis of prospectively collected clinical (overall survival, hospital readmission, time to unplanned hospital readmission or death, and readmission or death within 90 days) and patient‐reported outcomes (physical and psychological symptom burden captured as Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale and Patient Health Questionnaire) of patients with advanced cancer who experienced an unplanned admission to Massachusetts General Hospital from 2014 to 2016. First, we assessed the correlation of skeletal muscle cross‐sectional area, SMRA, SMI, and SMG at one or more of the following thoracic (T) or lumbar (L) vertebral levels: T5, T8, T10, and L3 on CT scans obtained ≤50 days before index assessment. Second, we aggregated measurements across all available vertebral levels using percentile‐based averaging (PBA) to create the average percentile. Third, we constructed one regression model adjusted for age, sex, sociodemographic factors, cancer type, body mass index, and intravenous contrast for each combination of (i) vertebral level and average percentile, (ii) muscle metrics (SMRA, SMI, & SMG), and (iii) clinical and patient‐reported outcomes. Fourth, we compared the performance of vertebral levels and muscle metrics by ranking otherwise identical models by concordance statistic, number of included patients, coefficient of determination, and significance of muscle metric. Results We included 846 patients (mean age: 63.5 ± 12.9 years, 50.5% males) with advanced cancer [predominantly gastrointestinal (32.9%) or lung (18.9%)]. The correlation of muscle measurements between vertebral levels ranged from 0.71 to 0.84 for SMRA and 0.67 to 0.81 for SMI. The correlation of individual levels with the average percentile was 0.90–0.93 for SMRA and 0.86–0.92 for SMI. The intrapatient correlation of SMRA with SMI was 0.21–0.40. PBA allowed for inclusion of 8–47% more patients than any single‐level analysis. PBA outperformed single‐level analyses across all comparisons with average ranks 2.6, 2.9, and 1.6 for concordance statistic, coefficient of determination, and significance (range 1–5, μ = 3), respectively. On average, SMG outperformed SMRA and SMI across outcomes and vertebral levels: the average rank of SMG was 1.4, 1.4, and 1.4 for concordance statistic, coefficient of determination, and significance (range 1–3, μ = 2), respectively. Conclusions Multivertebral level skeletal muscle analyses using PBA and SMG independently and additively outperform analyses using individual levels and SMRA or SMI.

Background The Pancreatic Cancer Action Network (PanCAN) Patient Registry is an online, pancreatic cancer‐specific, global registry enabling patients to self‐report sociodemographics, disease/management characteristics, and patient‐reported outcomes (PROs). We sought to describe the creation, user experience, and research potential of the PanCAN Registry. Methods We obtained data to describe (1) the creation of the Registry (questionnaire development, marketing efforts, and regulatory considerations); (2) the user experience (user characteristics and interactions with the registry following inception); and (3) the research potential of the registry (comparing PROs and treatment patterns by age [±65 years] and treatment site [community or academic] for users with de novo metastatic disease). Results The Registry was conceived as part of PanCAN’s strategic plan for a personalized therapy initiative. PanCAN staff and disease expert consultants developed questionnaires hosted on an electronic PRO platform. Users had the option to include their data in research efforts, and the Registry platform received institutional review board approval. From 7/2015 to 12/2020, 2187 patients visited the registry and 1697 (77.6%) completed at least one survey (median age = 64 years [range: 24–90], 47.9% women, 88.7% White, 34.0% metastatic disease). Among patients with metastatic disease (N = 567), 46.0% were ≥65 years old and 67.5% received treatment at community sites. Patients ≥65 years reported feeling less hopeful about the treatment plan (12.4% vs. 24.3%, p = 0.003), and patients treated at community sites reported more frequent treatment breaks of >2 weeks (58.2% vs. 28.1%, p, The Pancreatic Cancer Action Network (PanCAN) Patient Registry is a voluntary, global, pancreatic cancer‐specific registry enabling patients to self‐report sociodemographics, disease/ management characteristics, and patient‐reported outcomes. In this manuscript, based on over 2000 patients visiting the PanCAN Registry over a 5‐year period, we describe its creation, user experience, and research potential, which can guide future registry building efforts (including standardized patient‐reported outcomes collection).

The coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 pandemic has affected graduate medical education training programs, including hematology-oncology fellowship programs, both across the United States and abroad. Within the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Mass General Brigham hematology-oncology fellowship program, fellowship leadership had to quickly reorganize the program's clinical, educational, and research structure to minimize the risk of COVID-19 spread to our patients and staff, allow fellows to assist in the care of patients with COVID-19, maintain formal didactics despite physical distancing, and ensure the mental and physical well-being of fellows. Following the first wave of patients with COVID-19, we anonymously surveyed the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Mass General Brigham first-year fellows to explore their perceptions regarding what the program did well and what could have been improved in the COVID-19 response. In this article, we present the feedback from our fellows and the lessons we learned as a program from this feedback. To our knowledge, this represents the first effort in the hematology-oncology literature to directly assess a hematology-oncology program's overall response to COVID-19 through direct feedback from fellows.

Background Although balancing treatment efficacy with risks of complications is critical for older adults with aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), few studies have described these patients’ clinical outcomes, rates of toxicities, and health care utilization. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of adults ≥65 years diagnosed with aggressive NHL and receiving systemic therapy at Massachusetts General Hospital from April 2000 to July 2020. We abstracted patient characteristics, clinical outcomes, treatment toxicity, unplanned hospitalizations, and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions within 6 months of treatment initiation from the medical record. Using multivariable logistic regression, we examined factors associated with rates of grade 3+ nonhematologic toxicity and unplanned hospitalization. Results Among 295 patients (median age, 73 years; 39.0% female), 5-year overall survival (OS) was 74.2%. Five-year OS by age group (65–69, 70–74, 75–79, and 80+ years) was 82.2%, 72.0%, 73.6%, and 66.4%, respectively. Overall, 42.4% experienced grade 3+ toxicity, with 8.1% experiencing grades 4–5. The rates of unplanned hospitalization and ICU admission were 41.0% and 6.1%, respectively. In multivariable analysis, hypoalbuminemia (odds ratio [OR], 4.29; p Conclusions The majority of older adults receiving upfront therapy for aggressive NHL survive beyond 5 years, yet nearly half experience substantial treatment toxicities and unplanned hospitalizations. Our findings underscore the need for supportive care interventions to enhance the care experience of this population. Implications for Practice The results of this study highlight the potential benefits of intensive chemoimmunotherapy for the majority of older adults with aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma, even at advanced ages. Nearly half of older adults experienced substantial treatment toxicities and unplanned hospitalizations, emphasizing the unmet need for supportive care interventions in this population. The present study also identified hypoalbuminemia and patient comorbidity score as factors associated with grade 3+ nonhematologic toxicity and unplanned hospitalization. These findings may guide the development and implementation of targeted supportive care interventions in high-risk older adults with aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

Background Phase 1 trials are increasingly important in the molecularly driven era of oncology, but few studies have examined phase 1 participation disparities. The authors of this study investigated factors associated with phase 1 versus phase 2/3 trial enrollment. Methods They authors conducted a cross-sectional study using serial samples of patients age ≥18 years enrolling on cancer trials from October 2011 to November 2014 at an academic cancer center. They used univariable and multivariable logistic regression models to analyze sociodemographic and clinical associations with phase 1 versus phase 2/3 trial enrollment. Results Among 3103 patients enrolled in cancer trials, 2657 unique patients participated in phase 1/2/3 trials. For patients enrolled in phase 1 (n = 1401) versus phase 2/3 (n = 1256) trials, we found no significant differences by age, insurance status, marital status, and income. Overall, 1216 (93%) White, 72 (6%) Asian, and 21 (2%) Black patients enrolled on phase 1 trials, whereas 1068 (93%) White, 40 (3%) Asian, and 43 (4%) Black patients enrolled on phase 2/3 trials. Adjusting for age, sex, race, ethnicity, insurance status, marital status, income, cancer type, disease status, travel distance, and trial year, compared with White patients, Black patients had lower phase 1 enrollment (odds ratio [OR], 0.46; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.25-0.82), as did Hispanic/Latino (OR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.08-0.79) and male patients (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62-0.94). Asian patients had higher phase 1 enrollment (OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 0.88-2.16). Conclusions Disparities in phase 1 versus phase 2/3 cancer clinical trial enrollment underscore the urgent need for interventions addressing inequities in early-phase trial participation. Lay summary Phase 1 trials are of increasing importance in oncology. The authors of the study analyzed all patients enrolling on cancer clinical trials at a large academic cancer center from October 2011 to November 2014. Among the 2657 trial participants, when age, sex, race, ethnicity, insurance status, marital status, income, cancer type, disease status, travel distance, and trial year were taken into account, Black, Hispanic/Latino, and male patients were less likely to enroll on phase 1 trials versus phase 2/3 trials. These findings suggest a need for targeted interventions to improve access to and education about phase 1 trials for Black and Hispanic/Latino patients.

PURPOSE: We sought to determine the feasibility of delivering a Supportive Oncology Care at Home intervention among patients with pancreatic cancer. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled patients with pancreatic cancer from a parent trial of neoadjuvant fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRINOX). The intervention entailed (1) remote monitoring of patient-reported symptoms, vital signs, and body weight; (2) a hospital-at-home care model; and (3) structured communication with the oncology team. We defined the intervention as feasible if ≥ 60% of patients enrolled in the study and ≥ 60% completed the daily assessments within the first 2-weeks of enrollment. We determined rates of treatment delays, urgent clinic visits, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations among those who did (n = 20) and did not (n = 24) receive Supportive Oncology Care at Home from the parent trial. RESULTS: From January 2019 to September 2020, we enrolled 80.8% (21/26) of potentially eligible patients. One patient became ineligible following consent because of moving out of state, resulting in 20 participants (median age = 67 years). In the first 2 weeks of enrollment, 65.0% of participants completed all daily assessments. Overall, patients reported 96.1% of daily symptoms, 96.1% of daily vital signs, and 92.5% of weekly body weights. Patients receiving the intervention had lower rates of treatment delays (55.0% v 75.0%), urgent clinic visits (10.0% v 25.0%), and emergency department visits/hospitalizations (45.0% v 62.5%) compared with those not receiving the intervention from the same parent trial. CONCLUSION: Findings demonstrate the feasibility and acceptability of a Supportive Oncology Care at Home intervention. Future work will investigate the efficacy of this intervention for decreasing health care use and improving patient outcomes.

This cohort study investigates clinicopathologic and prognostic associations of hypercalcemia in patients with intrahepatic or extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

Background Medical financial burden includes material, behavioral, and psychological hardship and has been underinvestigated among adult survivors of childhood cancer. Methods A survey from 698 survivors and 210 siblings from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study was analyzed. The intensity of financial hardship was estimated across 3 domains: 1) material, including conditions that arise from medical expenses; 2) behavioral, including coping behaviors to manage medical expenses; and 3) psychological hardship resulting from worries about medical expenses and insurance, as measured by the number of instances of each type of financial hardship (0, 1-2, and ≥3 instances). Multivariable logistic regressions were conducted to examine the clinical and sociodemographic predictors of experiencing financial hardship (0-2 vs ≥3 instances). Results The intensity of financial hardship did not significantly differ between survivors and siblings. Survivors reported more instances of material hardship than siblings (1-2 instances: 27.2% of survivors vs 22.6% of siblings; ≥3 instances: 15.9% of survivors vs 11.4% siblings; overall P = .03). In multivariable regressions, insurance was protective against all domains of financial hardship (behavioral odds ratio [OR], 0.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.06-0.22; material OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.19-0.71; psychological OR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.05-0.21). Survivors who were older at diagnosis, female, and with chronic health conditions generally had higher levels of hardship. Brain radiation and alkylating agents were associated with higher levels of hardship. Conclusions Material, behavioral, and psychological financial burden among survivors of childhood cancer is common.

Purpose: Detection of persistent circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) after curative-intent surgery can identify patients with minimal residual disease (MRD) who will ultimately recur. Most ctDNA MRD assays require tumor sequencing to identify tumor-derived mutations to facilitate ctDNA detection, requiring tumor and blood. We evaluated a plasma-only ctDNA assay integrating genomic and epigenomic cancer signatures to enable tumor-uninformed MRD detection. Experimental Design: A total of 252 prospective serial plasma specimens from 103 patients with colorectal cancer undergoing curative-intent surgery were analyzed and correlated with recurrence. Results: Of 103 patients, 84 [stage I (9.5%), II (23.8%), III (47.6%), IV (19%)] had evaluable plasma drawn after completion of definitive therapy, defined as surgery only (n = 39) or completion of adjuvant therapy (n = 45). In “landmark” plasma drawn 1-month (median, 31.5 days) after definitive therapy and >1 year follow-up, 15 patients had detectable ctDNA, and all 15 recurred [positive predictive value (PPV), 100%; HR, 11.28 (P < 0.0001)]. Of 49 patients without detectable ctDNA at the landmark timepoint, 12 (24.5%) recurred. Landmark recurrence sensitivity and specificity were 55.6% and 100%. Incorporating serial longitudinal and surveillance (drawn within 4 months of recurrence) samples, sensitivity improved to 69% and 91%. Integrating epigenomic signatures increased sensitivity by 25%–36% versus genomic alterations alone. Notably, standard serum carcinoembryonic antigen levels did not predict recurrence [HR, 1.84 (P = 0.18); PPV = 53.9%]. Conclusions: Plasma-only MRD detection demonstrated favorable sensitivity and specificity for recurrence, comparable with tumor-informed approaches. Integrating analysis of epigenomic and genomic alterations enhanced sensitivity. These findings support the potential clinical utility of plasma-only ctDNA MRD detection. See related commentary by Bent and Kopetz, p. 5449

Background: Low muscle mass (quantity) is common in patients with advanced cancer, but little is known about muscle radiodensity (quality). We sought to describe the associations of muscle mass and radiodensity with symptom burden, healthcare use, and survival in hospitalized patients with advanced cancer. Methods: We prospectively enrolled hospitalized patients with advanced cancer from September 2014 through May 2016. Upon admission, patients reported their physical (Edmonton Symptom Assessment System [ESAS]) and psychological (Patient Health Questionnaire-4 [PHQ-4]) symptoms. We used CT scans performed per routine care within 45 days before enrollment to evaluate muscle mass and radiodensity. We used regression models to examine associations of muscle mass and radiodensity with patients’ symptom burden, healthcare use (hospital length of stay and readmissions), and survival. Results: Of 1,121 patients enrolled, 677 had evaluable muscle data on CT (mean age, 62.86 ± 12.95 years; 51.1% female). Older age and female sex were associated with lower muscle mass (age: B, –0.16; PPPP=.014), and higher BMI was associated with higher muscle mass (B, 0.58; PPPP=.016), ESAS-Total (B, –0.29; P=.002), PHQ-4-Depression (B, –0.03; P=.006), and PHQ-4-Anxiety (B, –0.03; P=.008) symptoms, as well as decreased hospital length of stay (B, –0.07; P=.005), risk of readmission or death in 90 days (odds ratio, 0.97; PPConclusions: Although muscle mass (quantity) only correlated with survival, we found that muscle radiodensity (quality) was associated with patients’ symptoms, healthcare use, and survival. These findings underscore the added importance of assessing muscle quality when seeking to address adverse muscle changes in oncology.

Introduction Oncologists have increasingly been proponents of shared decision making (SDM) to enhance patient outcomes and reduce unnecessary health care spending. However, its effect on patient out-of-pocket costs is unknown. This study investigated the relationship between patient preferences for SDM and financial toxicity (FT) in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Patients and Methods This cross-sectional study utilized surveys of women aged ≥ 18 with MBC who received care at two academic hospitals in Alabama from 2017 to 2019. Patients self-reported their SDM preference (Control Preferences Scale) and FT (Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity [COST] tool; 11-item scale, with lower scores indicating worse FT). Effect sizes were calculated using the proportion of variance explained (R2) or Cramer’s V. Differences in FT by SDM preference were estimated using mixed models clustered by site and treating medical oncologist. Results In 95 women with MBC, 44% preferred SDM, 29% preferred provider-driven decision making, and 27% preferred patient-driven decision making. Patients preferring SDM were more often college educated (53% vs. 39%; V = 0.12) with an income greater than $40,000/y (55% vs. 43%; V = 0.18). Overall median COST was 22 (interquartile range, 16-29). After adjusting for patient demographic and clinical characteristics, patients preferring patient-driven decision making trended toward worse FT (COST 17: 95% confidence interval, 12-22) compared to those preferring SDM (COST 19: 95% confidence interval, 15-23) and those preferring provider-driven decision making (COST 22: 95% confidence interval, 17-27). Conclusion Patients preferring more patient-driven decision making reported worse FT, although differences did not reach statistical significance. Further research is needed to understand this relationship.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare policies have focused on centralizing care to high-volume centers in an effort to optimize patient outcomes. However, little is known about patients’ and caregivers’ considerations and selection process when selecting hospitals for care. We aim to explore how patients and caregivers select hospitals for complex cancer care and to develop a taxonomy for their selection considerations. METHODS: Qualitative study in which data were gathered from in-depth interviews conducted from March to November 2019 among patients with hepatopancreatobiliary cancers who were scheduled to undergo a pancreatectomy (n=20) at a metropolitan, urban regional or suburban medical center and their caregivers (n=10). RESULTS: The interviews revealed 6 broad domains that characterized hospital selection considerations: hospital factors, team characteristics, travel distance to hospital, referral or recommendation, continuity of care, and insurance considerations. The identified domains were similar between participants seen at the metropolitan center and urban/suburban medical centers with the following exceptions: participants receiving care specifically at the metropolitan center noted operative volume and access to specific services like clinical trials in their hospital selection; participants receiving care at urban/suburban centers noted health insurance considerations and having access to existing medical records in their hospital selection. CONCLUSIONS: This study delineates the many considerations of patients and caregivers when selecting hospitals for complex cancer care. These identified domains should be incorporated into the development and implementation of centralization policies to help increase patient access to high quality cancer care that is consistent with their priorities and needs.

Background In patients with pancreas adenocarcinoma (PDAC), performing endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fiducial placement at the time of initial EUS-guided biopsies may obviate a second procedure, streamline care, and improve resource utilization. However, the safety of this combined approach is understudied. Methods We retrospectively identified and reviewed cases at a single institution in which patients with PDAC underwent EUS-guided biopsy and same session fiducial placement. Patient and procedural characteristics were abstracted. Intraprocedural and postprocedural adverse events were classified according to the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Lexicon for Adverse Events. The percentage of "definite" and "probable" adverse events occurring within 14 days of the procedure was calculated. Results Thirty-three patients were included in this series (median age 64, 42% male). The median numbers of biopsies performed and fiducials placed were 3 (range 2-7) and 4 (range 1-4), respectively, per patient. A 22-gauge needle was used for the majority of biopsies (81.8%) and all fiducial placements (100%). No definite and one probable adverse event of mild postprocedural pain was noted (3.0%, 1/33). There were no episodes of significant bleeding, pancreatitis or infection. Fiducials were successfully used in the administration of radiation to all patients. Conclusion We report a low risk of adverse events in the setting of combined EUS-guided biopsy and fiducial placement. In the appropriate setting, this approach may streamline care for patients with PDAC while avoiding time, cost, and risks associated with an additional procedure or impacting radiation therapy. Larger, controlled studies are needed to validate the safety and efficacy of this combined approach.

Purpose Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) contributes to avoidable acute care, a metric now tracked in Medicare's oncology outcome measure. CINV is preventable, yet guidelines are often not followed. We sought to quantify acute care involving CINV and other avoidable toxicities after highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) to identify excess risk and assess clinician adherence to antiemesis guidelines for HEC. Materials and Methods We retrospectively evaluated U.S. electronic health records (2012-2018) using Medicare's OP-35 outcome measure to identify avoidable acute care involving any of 10 toxicities, including CINV, after HEC regimens relative to non-HEC. Antiemetic guideline adherence was defined as use ofneurokinin-1 (NKl) receptor antagonists Q5 (RAs) plus 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 RA+ dexamethasone at HEC initiation. Results Among 17,609 patients receiving HEC, acute care rates associated with HEC chemotherapy included 32% cisplatin, 31% carboplatin, and 21% anthracycline/cyclosphospharnide (AC), with 76% meeting the criteria as avoidable events. Oxaliplatin rates were 29%. Avoidable acute care occurred 1.83 times (95% confidence interval, 1.76-1.91, p < .0001) as often after HEC versus non-HEC excluding oxaliplatin; CINV-related acute care occurred 2.29 times as often. Nonadherence to antiemesis guidelines occurred in 34% and 24% of cisplatin and AC courses, respectively, because of omission of a NKl RA. Conclusions Patients treated with HEC regimens experienced high avoidable acute care use, 1.8 times the risk seen for other chemotherapy. Nonadherence to guideline-directed antiemetic prophylaxis highlights the need to ensure adherence to antiemetic guidelines, including the use of NKl RA in HEC. Implications for Practice After survival, perhaps the most important goal in oncology is limiting avoidable acute care, a goal now used by Medicare to impact cancer reimbursement. This study found that patients treated with highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) regimens had high rates of avoidable acute care use, 1.8 times the risk seen for other chemotherapy. A substantial proportion of the avoidable acute care involved chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Results showed that incomplete adherence to national antiemetic guidelines for HEC regimens primarily driven by omission of upfront neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist use, suggesting that improved adherence can meaningfully resolve this gap in quality and cost of care.

BACKGROUND Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) assessing quality of life (QOL) and symptom burden correlate with clinical outcomes in patients with cancer. However, to the authors' knowledge, data regarding associations between PROs and treatment response are lacking. METHODS The authors prospectively approached consecutive patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancer who were initiating a new treatment. Prior to treatment, patients reported their QOL (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General [FACT-G], 4 subscales: Functional, Physical, Emotional, Social; higher scores indicate better QOL) and symptom burden (Edmonton Symptom Assessment System [ESAS], Patient Health Questionnaire-4 [PHQ-4]; higher scores represent greater symptoms). Regression models were used to examine associations of baseline PROs with treatment response (clinical benefit or progressive disease [PD] at time of first scan), healthcare utilization, and survival. RESULTS From May 2019 to April 2020, a total of 112 patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancer were enrolled. For treatment response, 64.3% had CB and 35.7% had PD. Higher baseline ESAS-Physical (odds ratio, 1.04; P = .027) and lower FACT-G Functional (odds ratio, 0.92; P = .038) scores were associated with PD. Higher ESAS-Physical (hazard ratio [HR], 1.03; P = .044) and lower FACT-G Total (HR, 0.96; P = .005), FACT-G Physical (HR, 0.89; P < .001), and FACT-G Functional (HR, 0.87; P < .001) scores were associated with a greater hospitalization risk. Lower FACT-G Total (HR, 0.96; P = .009) and FACT-G Emotional (HR, 0.86; P = .012) scores as well as higher ESAS-Total (HR, 1.03; P = .014) and ESAS-Physical (HR, 1.04; P = .032) scores were associated with worse survival. CONCLUSIONS Baseline PROs are associated with treatment response in patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancer, namely physical symptoms and functional QOL, in addition to health care use and survival. The findings of the current study support the association between PROs and important clinical outcomes, including the novel finding of treatment response.

Background Data examining associations among social support, survival, and healthcare utilization are lacking in patients with advanced cancer. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional secondary analysis using data from a prospective longitudinal cohort study of 966 hospitalized patients with advanced cancer at Massachusetts General Hospital from 2014 through 2017. We used NLP to identify extent of patients’ social support (limited versus adequate as defined by NLP-aided review of the Electronic Health Record (EHR)). Two independent coders achieved a Kappa of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.84-1.00) using NLP. Using multivariable regression models, we examined associations of social support with: 1) OS; 2) death or readmission within 90 days of hospital discharge; 3) time to readmission within 90 days; and 4) hospital length of stay (LOS). Results Patients’ median age was 65 (range: 21-92) years, and a plurality had gastrointestinal (GI) cancer (34.3%) followed by lung cancer (19.5%). 6.2% (60/966) of patients had limited social support. In multivariable analyses, limited social support was not significantly associated with OS (HR = 1.13, P = 0.390), death or readmission (OR = 1.18, P = 0.578), time to readmission (HR = 0.92, P = 0.698), or LOS (β = −0.22, P = 0.726). We identified a potential interaction suggesting cancer type (GI cancer versus other) may be an effect modifier of the relationship between social support and OS (interaction term P = 0.053). In separate unadjusted analyses, limited social support was associated with lower OS (HR = 2.10, P = 0.008) in patients with GI cancer but not other cancer types (HR = 1.00, P = 0.991). Conclusion We used NLP to assess the extent of social support in patients with advanced cancer. We did not identify significant associations of social support with OS or healthcare utilization but found cancer type may be an effect modifier of the relationship between social support and OS. These findings underscore the potential utility of NLP for evaluating social support in patients with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: Older adults with gastrointestinal cancers undergoing surgery often experience poor outcomes, such as prolonged postoperative hospital length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit (ICU) use, hospital readmissions, and complications. Involvement of geriatricians in the care of older adults with cancer can improve outcomes. We conducted a randomized trial of a perioperative geriatric intervention (PERI-OP) in older patients with gastrointestinal cancer undergoing surgery. METHODS: From 9/2016-4/2019, we randomly assigned patients age ≥65 with gastrointestinal cancer planning to undergo surgical resection to receive PERI-OP or usual care. Patients assigned to PERI-OP met with a geriatrician preoperatively in the outpatient setting and postoperatively as an inpatient consultant. The primary outcome was postoperative hospital LOS. Secondary outcomes included postoperative ICU use, 90-day hospital readmission rates, and complication rates. We conducted intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analyses. RESULTS: ITT analyses included 137/160 patients who underwent surgery (usual care=68/78, intervention=69/82). PP analyses included the 68 usual care patients and the 30/69 intervention patients who received the preoperative and postoperative intervention components. ITT analyses demonstrated no significant differences between intervention and usual care in postoperative hospital LOS (7.23 vs 8.21 days, P=0.374), ICU use (23.2% vs 32.4%, P=0.257), 90-day hospital readmission rates (21.7% vs 25.0%, P=0.690), and complication rates (17.4% vs 20.6%, P=0.668). In PP analyses, intervention patients had shorter postoperative hospital LOS (5.90 vs 8.21 days, P=0.024), but differences in ICU use (13.3% vs 32.4%, P=0.081), 90-day hospital readmission rates (16.7% vs 25.0%, P=0.439), and complication rates (6.7% vs 20.6%, P=0.137) remained non-significant. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized trial, PERI-OP did not have a significant impact on postoperative hospital LOS, ICU use, hospital readmissions, or complications. However, the subgroup who received PERI-OP as planned experienced encouraging results. Future studies of PERI-OP should include efforts, such as telehealth, to ensure the intervention is delivered as planned.

Selecting study endpoints in prospective cancer cachexia trials remains poorly defined. The aim of this study was to further evaluate associations in changes in weight, body composition, functional outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with metastatic cancer. We completed a 2-year (2016–2018) observational study in patients with metastatic solid cancer and ECOG performance status 0 to 2 while receiving chemotherapy and/or immunotherapy. We completed assessments at study enrollment and 3 months from enrollment. We analyzed longitudinal changes in weight and body composition using validated methods. Functional assessments included the 6-Min Walk Test, Timed Up and Go Test, and Short Physical Performance Battery. PROs included the Functional Assessment of Anorexia/Cachexia Therapy and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Fatigue. We analyzed changes in body composition and functional assessment using paired t tests. Additionally, we utilized linear regression models to assess relationships between changes in body composition and function outcomes and PROs, adjusting for age and sex. A total of 57 patients completed baseline assessments, but 19 patients did not complete 3-month assessments (5 died, 1 hospice, 13 withdrew). Of the 38 patients with complete data, the mean age was 61.8 years and 47% were female. Metastatic cancer types included 71% gastrointestinal, 13% lung, and 8% gynecologic. Half received chemotherapy, 16% immunotherapy, and 34% a combination. From enrollment to 3 months, we did not observe a change in weight or skeletal muscle but did find an increase in total adipose tissue (16.9 ± 52.4 cm2, 95% CI − 33.79–0.63; p = 0.059; ~ 1.5 pounds). We did not observe any association with changes in weight with any functional outcomes or PROs. However, greater losses in skeletal muscle were associated with greater declines in physical function (6-Min Walk Test [B = 0.04, p = 0.01], Short Physical Performance Battery [B = 2.44, p

Background Burdens related to time spent receiving cancer care may be substantial for patients with incurable, life‐limiting cancers such as metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Estimates of time spent on health care are needed to inform treatment‐related decision‐making. Methods Estimates of time spent receiving cancer‐related health care in the initial 3 months of treatment for patients with MBC were calculated using the following data sources: (a) direct observations from a time‐in‐motion quality improvement evaluation (process mapping); (b) cross‐sectional patient surveys; and (c) administrative claims. Average ambulatory, inpatient, and total health care time were calculated for specific treatments which differed by antineoplastic type and administration method, including fulvestrant (injection, hormonal), letrozole (oral, hormonal), capecitabine (oral, chemotherapy), and paclitaxel (infusion, chemotherapy). Results Average total time spent on health care ranged from 7% to 10% of all days included within the initial 3 months of treatment, depending on treatment. The greatest time contributions were time spent traveling for care and on inpatient services. Time with providers contributed modestly to total care time. Patients receiving infusion/injection treatments, compared with those receiving oral therapy, spent more time in ambulatory care. Health care time was higher for patients receiving chemotherapeutic agents compared to those receiving hormonal agents. Conclusion Time spent traveling and receiving inpatient care represented a substantial burden to patients with MBC, with variation in time by treatment type and administration method., In patients with metastatic breast cancer, time spent on health care ranged from 7% to 10% of all days included within the initial 3 months of treatment, depending on type of treatment received and its administration method. The greatest time contributions were time spent traveling for care and on inpatient services, and health care time was higher for patients receiving chemotherapeutic agents compared to those receiving hormonal agents.

Background Patient-reported medical status and treatment goal are measures of prognostic understanding with demonstrated relationships to important clinical and patient-reported outcomes in the general cancer population. Among older adults, relationships between these measures and other patient-reported (quality of life [QOL], symptoms, functional impairment) and clinical (hospitalization risk, survival) outcomes remains unclear. Methods We enrolled patients ≥70 with advanced gastrointestinal cancers, collecting patient-reported medical status (terminally ill vs not), treatment goal (curative vs non-curative), QOL (EORTC-Elderly Cancer Patients), symptoms (Edmonton Symptom Assessment System [ESAS]), and functional impairment (activities of daily living [ADLs]). We also obtained information about hospitalizations and survival. To explore relationships between patient-reported medical status, treatment goal, QOL, symptoms, functional impairment, hospitalizations, and survival, we used regression models adjusted for age, sex, and education. Results Of 103 patients, 49.5% reported terminally ill status and 64.0% a non-curative treatment goal. Terminally ill status was associated with worse QOL (EORTC illness burden: 53.59 vs 35.26, p = 0.001), higher symptom burden (ESAS: 28.15 vs 16.79, p = 0.002), more functional impairment (ADLs: 3.63 vs 5.24, p = 0.006), greater hospitalization risk (HR = 2.41, p = 0.020), and worse survival (HR = 1.93, p = 0.010). We did not find associations between patient-reported treatment goal and these outcomes. Conclusions In older adults with advanced cancer, report of terminally ill status was associated with other important patient-reported and clinical outcomes, suggesting disease severity may inform illness perceptions. We did not find similar associations for patient-reported treatment goal, indicating that questions related to medical status and treatment goal measure different constructs and more nuanced measures are needed.

Background: Studies have shown gaps in prognostic understanding among patients with cancer. However, few studies have explored patients’ perceptions of their treatment goals versus how they perceive their oncologist’s goals, and the association of these views with their psychological distress. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 559 patients with incurable lung, gastrointestinal, breast, and brain cancers. The Prognosis and Treatment Perception Questionnaire was used to assess patients’ reports of their treatment goal and their oncologist’s treatment goal, and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale was used to assess patients’ psychological symptoms. Results: We found that 61.7% of patients reported that both their treatment goal and their oncologist’s treatment goal were noncurative, whereas 19.3% reported that both their goal and their oncologist’s goal were to cure their cancer, 13.9% reported that their goal was to cure their cancer whereas their oncologist’s goal was noncurative, and 5% reported that their goal was noncurative whereas their oncologist’s goal was curative. Patients who reported both their goal and their oncologist’s goal as noncurative had higher levels of depression (B=0.99; P=.021) and anxiety symptoms (B=1.01; P=.015) compared with those who reported that both their goal and their oncologist’s goal was curative. Patients with discordant perceptions of their goal and their oncologist’s goal reported higher anxiety symptoms (B=1.47; P=.004) compared with those who reported that both their goal and their oncologist’s goal were curative. Conclusions: One-fifth of patients with incurable cancer reported that both their treatment goal and their oncologist’s goal were to cure their cancer. Patients who acknowledged the noncurative intent of their treatment and those who perceived that their treatment goal was discordant from that of their oncologist reported greater psychological distress.

BACKGROUND Patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers have substantial misperceptions regarding hospice, which contributes to its underuse. METHODS The authors conducted a single-site randomized trial of a video educational tool versus a verbal description of hospice in 150 hospitalized patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers. Patients without a caregiver were eligible. Intervention participants (75 patients and 18 caregivers) viewed a 6-minute video depicting hospice. Control participants (75 patients and 26 caregivers) received a verbal description identical to the video narrative. The primary outcome was patient preference for hospice. Secondary outcomes included patient and/or caregiver knowledge and perceptions of hospice, and hospice use. RESULTS Between February 2017 and January 2019, approximately 55.7% of eligible patients (150 of 269 eligible patients) and 44 caregivers were enrolled. After the intervention, there was no difference noted with regard to patients' preferences for hospice (86.7% vs 82.7%; P = .651). Patients in the video group reported greater knowledge regarding hospice (9.0 vs 8.4; P = .049) and were less likely to endorse that hospice is only about death (6.7% vs 21.6%; P = .010). Among deceased patients, those assigned to the intervention were more likely to have used hospice (85.2% vs 63.6%; P = .01) and to have had a longer hospice length of stay (median, 12 days vs 3 days; P