Fernanda Capella Rugno1, Bianca Sakamoto Ribeiro Paiva2, Carlos Eduardo Paiva3. 1. Palliative Care Unit, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Pio XII Foundation, Barretos, SP, Brazil; Health-Related Quality of Life Research Group (GPQual), Barretos Cancer Hospital, Pio XII Foundation, Barretos, SP, Brazil. 2. Health-Related Quality of Life Research Group (GPQual), Barretos Cancer Hospital, Pio XII Foundation, Barretos, SP, Brazil; Center for Research Support, NAP, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Pio XII Foundation, Barretos, SP, Brazil. 3. Health-Related Quality of Life Research Group (GPQual), Barretos Cancer Hospital, Pio XII Foundation, Barretos, SP, Brazil; Center for Research Support, NAP, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Pio XII Foundation, Barretos, SP, Brazil; Department of Clinical Oncology, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Pio XII Foundation, Barretos, SP, Brazil. Electronic address: caredupai@gmail.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate some health indicators in women with advanced breast or gynecological cancers (ABGCs) after discontinuation of active cancer treatment in function of the model of care received. METHODS: This prospective study included patients who were discontinuing anticancer treatment to be followed up only with palliative care (PC). Patients who had been evaluated at least once in PC were categorized as the integrated care model (ICM); those who had not been consulted by the PC team before, as the traditional care model (TCM). Data were analyzed using chi-square, Mann-Whitney, Kaplan-Meier, and Cox regression model. RESULTS: Among the 87 patients included in the study, 37 (42.5%) had been previously evaluated by the PC team (ICM). Patients who were followed up under an ICM exhibited better QoL (global health, p=0.02; emotional functioning, p=0.03; social functioning, p=0.01; insomnia, p=0.02) and less depression (p=0.01). The communication process had no issues in 73% of cases from the ICM group compared with 42% of cases from the TCM group (p=0.004). Patients who were not previously evaluated in PC received more chemotherapy in the last 6weeks of life compared to those who had already been evaluated (40% versus 5.9%, p=0.001). Early evaluation in PC was one of the independent prognostic factors of overall survival. CONCLUSION: When followed up concurrently by a PC and clinical oncology team, patients reported better QoL and less depression, received less chemotherapy within the last 6weeks of life and survived longer than those followed up under a TCM.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate some health indicators in women with advanced breast or gynecological cancers (ABGCs) after discontinuation of active cancer treatment in function of the model of care received. METHODS: This prospective study included patients who were discontinuing anticancer treatment to be followed up only with palliative care (PC). Patients who had been evaluated at least once in PC were categorized as the integrated care model (ICM); those who had not been consulted by the PC team before, as the traditional care model (TCM). Data were analyzed using chi-square, Mann-Whitney, Kaplan-Meier, and Cox regression model. RESULTS: Among the 87 patients included in the study, 37 (42.5%) had been previously evaluated by the PC team (ICM). Patients who were followed up under an ICM exhibited better QoL (global health, p=0.02; emotional functioning, p=0.03; social functioning, p=0.01; insomnia, p=0.02) and less depression (p=0.01). The communication process had no issues in 73% of cases from the ICM group compared with 42% of cases from the TCM group (p=0.004). Patients who were not previously evaluated in PC received more chemotherapy in the last 6weeks of life compared to those who had already been evaluated (40% versus 5.9%, p=0.001). Early evaluation in PC was one of the independent prognostic factors of overall survival. CONCLUSION: When followed up concurrently by a PC and clinical oncology team, patients reported better QoL and less depression, received less chemotherapy within the last 6weeks of life and survived longer than those followed up under a TCM.
Authors: Casey M Hay; Carolyn Lefkowits; Megan Crowley-Matoka; Marie A Bakitas; Leslie H Clark; Linda R Duska; Renata R Urban; Lee-May Chen; Stephanie L Creasy; Yael Schenker Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2017-03 Impact factor: 3.437
Authors: Mitra Tewes; Teresa Rettler; Nathalie Wolf; Jörg Hense; Martin Schuler; Martin Teufel; Mingo Beckmann Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2018-05-05 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Martina Preisler; Silke Heuse; Manuel Riemer; Friederike Kendel; Anne Letsch Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-10-04 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Jeannette Vogt; Franziska Beyer; Jochen Sistermanns; Jonas Kuon; Christoph Kahl; Bernd Alt-Epping; Susanne Stevens; Miriam Ahlborn; Christian George; Andrea Heider; Maria Tienken; Carmen Loquai; Kerstin Stahlhut; Anne Ruellan; Thomas Kubin; Andreas Dietz; Karin Oechsle; Anja Mehnert-Theuerkauf; Birgitt van Oorschot; Michael Thomas; Olaf Ortmann; Christoph Engel; Florian Lordick Journal: Oncologist Date: 2021-03-30
Authors: Jessica Y Islam; Veeral Saraiya; Rebecca A Previs; Tomi Akinyemiju Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-06-04 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Casey M Hay; Carolyn Lefkowits; Megan Crowley-Matoka; Marie A Bakitas; Leslie H Clark; Linda R Duska; Renata R Urban; Stephanie L Creasy; Yael Schenker Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 3.714