User login
AVAHO
div[contains(@class, 'header__large-screen')]
div[contains(@class, 'read-next-article')]
div[contains(@class, 'nav-primary')]
nav[contains(@class, 'nav-primary')]
section[contains(@class, 'footer-nav-section-wrapper')]
footer[@id='footer']
div[contains(@class, 'main-prefix')]
section[contains(@class, 'nav-hidden')]
div[contains(@class, 'ce-card-content')]
nav[contains(@class, 'nav-ce-stack')]
Immunosuppression often triggers skin side effects
LAKE TAHOE, CALIF. – , and side effects of vemurafenib treatment.
In a presentation on the cutaneous sequelae of different immunosuppressive regimens at the annual meeting of the Society for Pediatric Dermatology, Carrie C. Coughlin, MD, opened with a discussion of AD triggered by the tumor necrosis factor (TNF) blocker infliximab, especially in the setting of therapy for Crohn’s disease. “In this patient population you often think of psoriasis as a consequence of infliximab and other TNF therapies,” said Dr. Coughlin, a pediatric dermatologist at Washington University, St. Louis. “But you can also get true atopic dermatitis with infliximab as well. Who’s more at risk for this? Patients with Crohn’s disease seem to be. Most of the literature is in adults, but there are a few series of children. In a series of children looking at cutaneous sequelae of infliximab therapy, about 20% of cutaneous eruptions were atopic dermatitis. I think it’s a great opportunity for us in dermatology to do a more research in this area.”
Some researchers have proposed that atopic disease could be a marker of over-suppression of TNF-alpha in young Crohn’s disease patients on infliximab (Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2014; 20[8]:1309-15). “One question you could ask is, could these patients actually tolerate a dose reduction?” Dr. Coughlin said. She promoted the role of dermatologists in working at managing side effects to keep patients on medications helping their GI disease, but acknowledged this is not always possible.
Atopic disease can also occur after a solid organ transplant. In fact, the incidence of new-onset food allergies after a liver transplant is 6%-30% of cases, mainly in young patients (Pediatr Transplant. 2009;13[1]:63-9, Pediatr Transplant 2013;17[3]:251-5). “There are some mechanisms, including liver presentation of antigens, that spread through portal veins that could potentially put people at risk who have liver dysfunction,” Dr. Coughlin explained. “They could potentially have a higher risk for food allergies and AD. There is also some thought that tacrolimus potentially predisposes patients to having atopic dermatitis and atopy after their transplant. When you look at the mechanism of action of tacrolimus, you see increased levels of IL-5, IL-13, and skewing of IgE levels.”
Dr. Coughlin also discussed the possibilities of development of AD after transplant being a delayed presentation of an allergic sensitization that patients already had. Younger patients are at higher risk for AD post transplant. The renal transplant population, meanwhile, generally receives the transplant at a later age, “so they may not have that delay in terms of presentation; they may have already had their allergies and grown out of them by the time they’re getting their transplant,” she said. “I think there’s more for us to investigate.”
Solid organ transplant recipients also face an increased risk of skin cancer as a long-term side effect of immunosuppressive therapy. Risk factors include fair skin, sun exposure, and remote time from transplant. “Time from transplant is a risk factor,” Dr. Coughlin said. “Longer time on immunosuppression could predispose you to a risk for skin cancer. Our patients are living longer post transplant than they used to, so they have more potential years to develop their skin cancers.” She focused on the importance of educating transplant recipients and families early about photoprotection. “It’s interesting to think about how we can continue to intervene early on to continue to decrease risk.”
Young patients exposed to voriconazole also face an increased risk for skin cancer. “We know that longer-term dosing and higher cumulative dosing puts you at higher risk,” she said. Lung transplant recipients, who are often more likely to be treated with voriconazole, are thus at higher risk.
Dr. Coughlin ended her presentation by noting that side effects of the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib (Zelboraf) used to treat advanced melanoma in children are similar to, but not the same as, those in adults. “We see BRAF mutations in multiple different tumor types: Langerhans cell histiocytosis, gliomas, and melanoma,” she said. “Trials of vemurafenib and dabrafenib are under way in the pediatric population. Vemurafenib can cause keratosis pilaris, panniculitis, alopecia, and granulomatous dermatitis.” In her experience, she has seen more alopecia in the older teenage population, but younger patients may not be asked about this side effect as frequently.
She counsels patients to expect keratosis pilaris–like eruptions and to take sun protection seriously. “It’s important to emphasize that each time they come in,” Dr. Coughlin said. She also discussed the potential for changing nevi and treatment options for vemurafenib-associated panniculitis.
Dr. Coughlin disclosed that she is the recipient of active pilot grants from the Pediatric Dermatology Research Alliance and the SPD.
LAKE TAHOE, CALIF. – , and side effects of vemurafenib treatment.
In a presentation on the cutaneous sequelae of different immunosuppressive regimens at the annual meeting of the Society for Pediatric Dermatology, Carrie C. Coughlin, MD, opened with a discussion of AD triggered by the tumor necrosis factor (TNF) blocker infliximab, especially in the setting of therapy for Crohn’s disease. “In this patient population you often think of psoriasis as a consequence of infliximab and other TNF therapies,” said Dr. Coughlin, a pediatric dermatologist at Washington University, St. Louis. “But you can also get true atopic dermatitis with infliximab as well. Who’s more at risk for this? Patients with Crohn’s disease seem to be. Most of the literature is in adults, but there are a few series of children. In a series of children looking at cutaneous sequelae of infliximab therapy, about 20% of cutaneous eruptions were atopic dermatitis. I think it’s a great opportunity for us in dermatology to do a more research in this area.”
Some researchers have proposed that atopic disease could be a marker of over-suppression of TNF-alpha in young Crohn’s disease patients on infliximab (Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2014; 20[8]:1309-15). “One question you could ask is, could these patients actually tolerate a dose reduction?” Dr. Coughlin said. She promoted the role of dermatologists in working at managing side effects to keep patients on medications helping their GI disease, but acknowledged this is not always possible.
Atopic disease can also occur after a solid organ transplant. In fact, the incidence of new-onset food allergies after a liver transplant is 6%-30% of cases, mainly in young patients (Pediatr Transplant. 2009;13[1]:63-9, Pediatr Transplant 2013;17[3]:251-5). “There are some mechanisms, including liver presentation of antigens, that spread through portal veins that could potentially put people at risk who have liver dysfunction,” Dr. Coughlin explained. “They could potentially have a higher risk for food allergies and AD. There is also some thought that tacrolimus potentially predisposes patients to having atopic dermatitis and atopy after their transplant. When you look at the mechanism of action of tacrolimus, you see increased levels of IL-5, IL-13, and skewing of IgE levels.”
Dr. Coughlin also discussed the possibilities of development of AD after transplant being a delayed presentation of an allergic sensitization that patients already had. Younger patients are at higher risk for AD post transplant. The renal transplant population, meanwhile, generally receives the transplant at a later age, “so they may not have that delay in terms of presentation; they may have already had their allergies and grown out of them by the time they’re getting their transplant,” she said. “I think there’s more for us to investigate.”
Solid organ transplant recipients also face an increased risk of skin cancer as a long-term side effect of immunosuppressive therapy. Risk factors include fair skin, sun exposure, and remote time from transplant. “Time from transplant is a risk factor,” Dr. Coughlin said. “Longer time on immunosuppression could predispose you to a risk for skin cancer. Our patients are living longer post transplant than they used to, so they have more potential years to develop their skin cancers.” She focused on the importance of educating transplant recipients and families early about photoprotection. “It’s interesting to think about how we can continue to intervene early on to continue to decrease risk.”
Young patients exposed to voriconazole also face an increased risk for skin cancer. “We know that longer-term dosing and higher cumulative dosing puts you at higher risk,” she said. Lung transplant recipients, who are often more likely to be treated with voriconazole, are thus at higher risk.
Dr. Coughlin ended her presentation by noting that side effects of the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib (Zelboraf) used to treat advanced melanoma in children are similar to, but not the same as, those in adults. “We see BRAF mutations in multiple different tumor types: Langerhans cell histiocytosis, gliomas, and melanoma,” she said. “Trials of vemurafenib and dabrafenib are under way in the pediatric population. Vemurafenib can cause keratosis pilaris, panniculitis, alopecia, and granulomatous dermatitis.” In her experience, she has seen more alopecia in the older teenage population, but younger patients may not be asked about this side effect as frequently.
She counsels patients to expect keratosis pilaris–like eruptions and to take sun protection seriously. “It’s important to emphasize that each time they come in,” Dr. Coughlin said. She also discussed the potential for changing nevi and treatment options for vemurafenib-associated panniculitis.
Dr. Coughlin disclosed that she is the recipient of active pilot grants from the Pediatric Dermatology Research Alliance and the SPD.
LAKE TAHOE, CALIF. – , and side effects of vemurafenib treatment.
In a presentation on the cutaneous sequelae of different immunosuppressive regimens at the annual meeting of the Society for Pediatric Dermatology, Carrie C. Coughlin, MD, opened with a discussion of AD triggered by the tumor necrosis factor (TNF) blocker infliximab, especially in the setting of therapy for Crohn’s disease. “In this patient population you often think of psoriasis as a consequence of infliximab and other TNF therapies,” said Dr. Coughlin, a pediatric dermatologist at Washington University, St. Louis. “But you can also get true atopic dermatitis with infliximab as well. Who’s more at risk for this? Patients with Crohn’s disease seem to be. Most of the literature is in adults, but there are a few series of children. In a series of children looking at cutaneous sequelae of infliximab therapy, about 20% of cutaneous eruptions were atopic dermatitis. I think it’s a great opportunity for us in dermatology to do a more research in this area.”
Some researchers have proposed that atopic disease could be a marker of over-suppression of TNF-alpha in young Crohn’s disease patients on infliximab (Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2014; 20[8]:1309-15). “One question you could ask is, could these patients actually tolerate a dose reduction?” Dr. Coughlin said. She promoted the role of dermatologists in working at managing side effects to keep patients on medications helping their GI disease, but acknowledged this is not always possible.
Atopic disease can also occur after a solid organ transplant. In fact, the incidence of new-onset food allergies after a liver transplant is 6%-30% of cases, mainly in young patients (Pediatr Transplant. 2009;13[1]:63-9, Pediatr Transplant 2013;17[3]:251-5). “There are some mechanisms, including liver presentation of antigens, that spread through portal veins that could potentially put people at risk who have liver dysfunction,” Dr. Coughlin explained. “They could potentially have a higher risk for food allergies and AD. There is also some thought that tacrolimus potentially predisposes patients to having atopic dermatitis and atopy after their transplant. When you look at the mechanism of action of tacrolimus, you see increased levels of IL-5, IL-13, and skewing of IgE levels.”
Dr. Coughlin also discussed the possibilities of development of AD after transplant being a delayed presentation of an allergic sensitization that patients already had. Younger patients are at higher risk for AD post transplant. The renal transplant population, meanwhile, generally receives the transplant at a later age, “so they may not have that delay in terms of presentation; they may have already had their allergies and grown out of them by the time they’re getting their transplant,” she said. “I think there’s more for us to investigate.”
Solid organ transplant recipients also face an increased risk of skin cancer as a long-term side effect of immunosuppressive therapy. Risk factors include fair skin, sun exposure, and remote time from transplant. “Time from transplant is a risk factor,” Dr. Coughlin said. “Longer time on immunosuppression could predispose you to a risk for skin cancer. Our patients are living longer post transplant than they used to, so they have more potential years to develop their skin cancers.” She focused on the importance of educating transplant recipients and families early about photoprotection. “It’s interesting to think about how we can continue to intervene early on to continue to decrease risk.”
Young patients exposed to voriconazole also face an increased risk for skin cancer. “We know that longer-term dosing and higher cumulative dosing puts you at higher risk,” she said. Lung transplant recipients, who are often more likely to be treated with voriconazole, are thus at higher risk.
Dr. Coughlin ended her presentation by noting that side effects of the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib (Zelboraf) used to treat advanced melanoma in children are similar to, but not the same as, those in adults. “We see BRAF mutations in multiple different tumor types: Langerhans cell histiocytosis, gliomas, and melanoma,” she said. “Trials of vemurafenib and dabrafenib are under way in the pediatric population. Vemurafenib can cause keratosis pilaris, panniculitis, alopecia, and granulomatous dermatitis.” In her experience, she has seen more alopecia in the older teenage population, but younger patients may not be asked about this side effect as frequently.
She counsels patients to expect keratosis pilaris–like eruptions and to take sun protection seriously. “It’s important to emphasize that each time they come in,” Dr. Coughlin said. She also discussed the potential for changing nevi and treatment options for vemurafenib-associated panniculitis.
Dr. Coughlin disclosed that she is the recipient of active pilot grants from the Pediatric Dermatology Research Alliance and the SPD.
REPORTING FROM SPD 2018
Open Clinical Trials for Patients With Renal Cell Carcinoma (FULL)
Providing access to clinical trials for veteran and active-duty military patients can be a challenge, but a significant number of trials are now recruiting from those populations. Many trials explicitly recruit patients from the VA, the military, and IHS. The VA Office of Research and Development alone sponsors more than 430 research initiatives, and many more are sponsored by Walter Reed National Medical Center and other major defense and VA facilities. The clinical trials listed below are all open as of July 24, 2017; have at least 1 VA, DoD, or IHS location recruiting patients; and are focused on treatment for kidney cancer/renal cell carninoma. For additional information and full inclusion/exclusion criteria, please consult clinicaltrials.gov.
NCI-MATCH: Targeted Therapy Directed by Genetic Testing in Treating Patients With Advanced Refractory Solid Tumors, Lymphomas, or Multiple Myeloma
This phase II trial studies how well treatment that is directed by genetic testing works in patients with solid tumors or lymphomas that have progressed following at least 1 line of standard treatment or for which no agreed upon treatment approach exists. Genetic tests look at the unique genetic material (genes) of patients’ tumor cells. Patients with genetic abnormalities (such as mutations, amplifications, or translocations) may benefit more from treatment that targets their tumor’s particular genetic abnormality. Identifying these genetic abnormalities first may help doctors plan better treatment for patients with solid tumors, lymphomas, or multiple myeloma.
ID: NCT02465060
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
Locations (contact): Naval Medical Center-San Diego, California (Preston S. Gable); VA Connecticut Healthcare System-West Haven Campus (Herta H. Chao); Durham VAMC, North Carolina (Michael J. Kelley); Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland (Jeremy G. Perkins)
Bevacizumab, Sorafenib Tosylate, and Temsirolimus in Treating Patients With Metastatic Kidney Cancer
This randomized phase II trial studies different combinations of bevacizumab, temsirolimus, and sorafenib tosylate to see how well they work compared with bevacizumab alone in treating patients with kidney cancer that has spread to other places in the body. Monoclonal antibodies, such as bevacizumab, may interfere with the ability of tumor cells to grow and spread. Bevacizumab and sorafenib tosylate may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking blood flow to the tumor. Temsirolimus and sorafenib tosylate may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth. Giving different combinations of bevacizumab, sorafenib tosylate, and temsirolimus may be more effective than bevacizumab alone in treating metastatic kidney cancer.
ID: NCT00378703
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
Locations: VA San Diego Medical Center, California; Jesse Brown VAMC, Chicago, Illinois; Richard L. Roudebush VAMC, Indianapolis, Indiana; VA New Jersey Health Care System East Orange; Dayton VAMC, Ohio; Michael E. DeBakey VAMC, Houston, Texas
Everolimus in Treating Patients With Kidney Cancer Who Have Undergone Surgery (S0931)
Everolimus may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth or by blocking blood flow to the tumor. This phase III trial is studying everolimus to see how well it works in treating patients with kidney cancer who have undergone surgery.
ID: NCT01120249
Sponsor: Southwest Oncology Group
Locations: Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System, Little Rock; Denver VAMC, Colorado; Hines VA Hospital, Illinois; Richard L. Roudebush VAMC Indianapolis, Indiana; VAMC Baltimore, Maryland; Minneapolis VeteransMedical Center, Minnesota; VA New Jersey Health Care System, East Orange; VA New York Harbor Healthcare System-Brooklyn Campus; Wright-Patterson, Medical Center, Ohio; Michael E.DeBakey VAMC, Houston, Texas; Audie L. Murphy VA Hospital, San Antonio, Texas
Cabozantinib-s-malate or Sunitinib Malate in Treating Patients With Previously Untreated Locally Advanced or Metastatic Kidney Cancer
This randomized phase II trial studies how well cabozantinib-s-malate works compared to sunitinib malate in treating patients with previously untreated kidney cancer that has spread from where it started to nearby tissue or lymph nodes or to other places in the body. Cabozantinib-s-malate and sunitinib malate may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth. It is not yet known whether cabozantinib-s-malate is more effective than sunitinib malate in treating patients with kidney cancer.
ID: NCT01835158
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
Locations: VA San Diego Medical Center, California; Minneapolis Veterans Medical Center, Minnesota; VAMC Columbia, Missouri; VA Western New York Health Care System, Buffalo
Everolimus With or Without Bevacizumab in Treating Patients With Advanced Kidney Cancer That Progressed After First-Line Therapy
This randomized phase III trial studies giving everolimus together with bevacizumab to see how well it works compared to everolimus alone in treating patients with advanced kidney cancer that progressed after first-line therapy. Everolimus may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth. Monoclonal antibodies, such as bevacizumab, can interfere with tumor growth by blocking the ability of tumor cells to grow and spread. Everolimus and bevacizumab may also stop the growth of kidney cancer by blocking blood flow to the tumor. It is not yet known whether giving everolimus together with bevacizumab is better than everolimus alone in treating patients with advanced kidney cancer that has progressed after first-line therapy.
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
ID: NCT01198158
Locations: Jesse Brown VAMC, Chicago, Illinois; Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland; VA Western New York Health Care System, Buffalo
Tivantinib With or Without Erlotinib Hydrochloride in Treating Patients With Metastatic or Locally Advanced Kidney Cancer That Cannot Be Removed by Surgery
This randomized phase II trial studies how well tivantinib with or without erlotinib hydrochloride works in treating patients with metastatic or locally advanced kidney cancer that cannot be removed by surgery. Tivantinib and erlotinib hydrochloride may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth.
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute (NCI)
ID: NCT01688973
Locations: Hines VA Hospital, Illinois; VA New Jersey Health Care System, East Orange; Audie L. Murphy VA Hospital, San Antonio, Texas
Bioequivalence & Food Effect Study in Patients With Solid Tumor or Hematologic Malignancies
This study will enroll approximately 60 subjects in stage I and 60 subjects in stage II with hematologic or solid tumor malignancies, excluding gastrointestinal tumors and tumors that have originated or metastasized to the liver for which no standard treatment exists or have progressed or recurred following prior therapy. Subjects must not be eligible for therapy of higher curative potential where an alternative treatment has been shown to prolong survival in an analogous population. Approximately 23 sites in the U.S. and 2 in Canada will participate in this study.
Sponsor: Celgene
ID: NCT02223052
Location: VAMC Kansas City, Missouri
Gemcitabine Hydrochloride and Cisplatin With or Without Bevacizumab in Treating Patients With Advanced Urinary Tract Cancer
This randomized phase III trial studies gemcitabine hydrochloride, cisplatin, and bevacizumab to see how well they work compared with gemcitabine hydrochloride and cisplatin in treating patients with urinary tract cancer that has spread to other places in the body. Drugs used in chemotherapy, such as gemcitabine hydrochloride and cisplatin, work in different ways to stop the growth of tumor cells, either by killing the cells, by stopping them from dividing, or by stopping them from spreading. Monoclonal antibodies, such as bevacizumab, may interfere with the ability of tumor cells to grow and spread. It is not yet known whether gemcitabine hydrochloride and cisplatin are more effective when given with or without bevacizumab in treating patients with urinary tract cancer.
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
ID: NCT00942331
Locations: Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System, Little Rock; Denver VAMC, Colorado; Baltimore VAMC, Maryland; Columbia VA, Missouri; VA New Jersey Health Care System, East Orange; VA New York Harbor Healthcare System-Brooklyn Campus; VA Western New York Health Care System, Buffalo; Dayton VAMC, Ohio
Eribulin Mesylate in Treating Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Cancer of the Urothelium and Kidney Dysfunction
This phase I/II trial studies the side effects and best dose of eribulin mesylate and to see how well it works in treating patients with cancer of the urothelium that has spread to nearby tissue or to other places in the body and kidney dysfunction. Drugs used in chemotherapy, such as eribulin mesylate, work in different ways to stop the growth of tumor cells, either by killing the cells, by stopping them from dividing, or by stopping them from spreading. Chemotherapy drugs may have different effects in patients who have changes in their kidney function.
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
ID: NCT00365157
Location: VA Hospital-Martinez, California
Click here to read the digital edition.
Providing access to clinical trials for veteran and active-duty military patients can be a challenge, but a significant number of trials are now recruiting from those populations. Many trials explicitly recruit patients from the VA, the military, and IHS. The VA Office of Research and Development alone sponsors more than 430 research initiatives, and many more are sponsored by Walter Reed National Medical Center and other major defense and VA facilities. The clinical trials listed below are all open as of July 24, 2017; have at least 1 VA, DoD, or IHS location recruiting patients; and are focused on treatment for kidney cancer/renal cell carninoma. For additional information and full inclusion/exclusion criteria, please consult clinicaltrials.gov.
NCI-MATCH: Targeted Therapy Directed by Genetic Testing in Treating Patients With Advanced Refractory Solid Tumors, Lymphomas, or Multiple Myeloma
This phase II trial studies how well treatment that is directed by genetic testing works in patients with solid tumors or lymphomas that have progressed following at least 1 line of standard treatment or for which no agreed upon treatment approach exists. Genetic tests look at the unique genetic material (genes) of patients’ tumor cells. Patients with genetic abnormalities (such as mutations, amplifications, or translocations) may benefit more from treatment that targets their tumor’s particular genetic abnormality. Identifying these genetic abnormalities first may help doctors plan better treatment for patients with solid tumors, lymphomas, or multiple myeloma.
ID: NCT02465060
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
Locations (contact): Naval Medical Center-San Diego, California (Preston S. Gable); VA Connecticut Healthcare System-West Haven Campus (Herta H. Chao); Durham VAMC, North Carolina (Michael J. Kelley); Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland (Jeremy G. Perkins)
Bevacizumab, Sorafenib Tosylate, and Temsirolimus in Treating Patients With Metastatic Kidney Cancer
This randomized phase II trial studies different combinations of bevacizumab, temsirolimus, and sorafenib tosylate to see how well they work compared with bevacizumab alone in treating patients with kidney cancer that has spread to other places in the body. Monoclonal antibodies, such as bevacizumab, may interfere with the ability of tumor cells to grow and spread. Bevacizumab and sorafenib tosylate may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking blood flow to the tumor. Temsirolimus and sorafenib tosylate may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth. Giving different combinations of bevacizumab, sorafenib tosylate, and temsirolimus may be more effective than bevacizumab alone in treating metastatic kidney cancer.
ID: NCT00378703
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
Locations: VA San Diego Medical Center, California; Jesse Brown VAMC, Chicago, Illinois; Richard L. Roudebush VAMC, Indianapolis, Indiana; VA New Jersey Health Care System East Orange; Dayton VAMC, Ohio; Michael E. DeBakey VAMC, Houston, Texas
Everolimus in Treating Patients With Kidney Cancer Who Have Undergone Surgery (S0931)
Everolimus may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth or by blocking blood flow to the tumor. This phase III trial is studying everolimus to see how well it works in treating patients with kidney cancer who have undergone surgery.
ID: NCT01120249
Sponsor: Southwest Oncology Group
Locations: Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System, Little Rock; Denver VAMC, Colorado; Hines VA Hospital, Illinois; Richard L. Roudebush VAMC Indianapolis, Indiana; VAMC Baltimore, Maryland; Minneapolis VeteransMedical Center, Minnesota; VA New Jersey Health Care System, East Orange; VA New York Harbor Healthcare System-Brooklyn Campus; Wright-Patterson, Medical Center, Ohio; Michael E.DeBakey VAMC, Houston, Texas; Audie L. Murphy VA Hospital, San Antonio, Texas
Cabozantinib-s-malate or Sunitinib Malate in Treating Patients With Previously Untreated Locally Advanced or Metastatic Kidney Cancer
This randomized phase II trial studies how well cabozantinib-s-malate works compared to sunitinib malate in treating patients with previously untreated kidney cancer that has spread from where it started to nearby tissue or lymph nodes or to other places in the body. Cabozantinib-s-malate and sunitinib malate may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth. It is not yet known whether cabozantinib-s-malate is more effective than sunitinib malate in treating patients with kidney cancer.
ID: NCT01835158
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
Locations: VA San Diego Medical Center, California; Minneapolis Veterans Medical Center, Minnesota; VAMC Columbia, Missouri; VA Western New York Health Care System, Buffalo
Everolimus With or Without Bevacizumab in Treating Patients With Advanced Kidney Cancer That Progressed After First-Line Therapy
This randomized phase III trial studies giving everolimus together with bevacizumab to see how well it works compared to everolimus alone in treating patients with advanced kidney cancer that progressed after first-line therapy. Everolimus may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth. Monoclonal antibodies, such as bevacizumab, can interfere with tumor growth by blocking the ability of tumor cells to grow and spread. Everolimus and bevacizumab may also stop the growth of kidney cancer by blocking blood flow to the tumor. It is not yet known whether giving everolimus together with bevacizumab is better than everolimus alone in treating patients with advanced kidney cancer that has progressed after first-line therapy.
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
ID: NCT01198158
Locations: Jesse Brown VAMC, Chicago, Illinois; Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland; VA Western New York Health Care System, Buffalo
Tivantinib With or Without Erlotinib Hydrochloride in Treating Patients With Metastatic or Locally Advanced Kidney Cancer That Cannot Be Removed by Surgery
This randomized phase II trial studies how well tivantinib with or without erlotinib hydrochloride works in treating patients with metastatic or locally advanced kidney cancer that cannot be removed by surgery. Tivantinib and erlotinib hydrochloride may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth.
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute (NCI)
ID: NCT01688973
Locations: Hines VA Hospital, Illinois; VA New Jersey Health Care System, East Orange; Audie L. Murphy VA Hospital, San Antonio, Texas
Bioequivalence & Food Effect Study in Patients With Solid Tumor or Hematologic Malignancies
This study will enroll approximately 60 subjects in stage I and 60 subjects in stage II with hematologic or solid tumor malignancies, excluding gastrointestinal tumors and tumors that have originated or metastasized to the liver for which no standard treatment exists or have progressed or recurred following prior therapy. Subjects must not be eligible for therapy of higher curative potential where an alternative treatment has been shown to prolong survival in an analogous population. Approximately 23 sites in the U.S. and 2 in Canada will participate in this study.
Sponsor: Celgene
ID: NCT02223052
Location: VAMC Kansas City, Missouri
Gemcitabine Hydrochloride and Cisplatin With or Without Bevacizumab in Treating Patients With Advanced Urinary Tract Cancer
This randomized phase III trial studies gemcitabine hydrochloride, cisplatin, and bevacizumab to see how well they work compared with gemcitabine hydrochloride and cisplatin in treating patients with urinary tract cancer that has spread to other places in the body. Drugs used in chemotherapy, such as gemcitabine hydrochloride and cisplatin, work in different ways to stop the growth of tumor cells, either by killing the cells, by stopping them from dividing, or by stopping them from spreading. Monoclonal antibodies, such as bevacizumab, may interfere with the ability of tumor cells to grow and spread. It is not yet known whether gemcitabine hydrochloride and cisplatin are more effective when given with or without bevacizumab in treating patients with urinary tract cancer.
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
ID: NCT00942331
Locations: Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System, Little Rock; Denver VAMC, Colorado; Baltimore VAMC, Maryland; Columbia VA, Missouri; VA New Jersey Health Care System, East Orange; VA New York Harbor Healthcare System-Brooklyn Campus; VA Western New York Health Care System, Buffalo; Dayton VAMC, Ohio
Eribulin Mesylate in Treating Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Cancer of the Urothelium and Kidney Dysfunction
This phase I/II trial studies the side effects and best dose of eribulin mesylate and to see how well it works in treating patients with cancer of the urothelium that has spread to nearby tissue or to other places in the body and kidney dysfunction. Drugs used in chemotherapy, such as eribulin mesylate, work in different ways to stop the growth of tumor cells, either by killing the cells, by stopping them from dividing, or by stopping them from spreading. Chemotherapy drugs may have different effects in patients who have changes in their kidney function.
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
ID: NCT00365157
Location: VA Hospital-Martinez, California
Click here to read the digital edition.
Providing access to clinical trials for veteran and active-duty military patients can be a challenge, but a significant number of trials are now recruiting from those populations. Many trials explicitly recruit patients from the VA, the military, and IHS. The VA Office of Research and Development alone sponsors more than 430 research initiatives, and many more are sponsored by Walter Reed National Medical Center and other major defense and VA facilities. The clinical trials listed below are all open as of July 24, 2017; have at least 1 VA, DoD, or IHS location recruiting patients; and are focused on treatment for kidney cancer/renal cell carninoma. For additional information and full inclusion/exclusion criteria, please consult clinicaltrials.gov.
NCI-MATCH: Targeted Therapy Directed by Genetic Testing in Treating Patients With Advanced Refractory Solid Tumors, Lymphomas, or Multiple Myeloma
This phase II trial studies how well treatment that is directed by genetic testing works in patients with solid tumors or lymphomas that have progressed following at least 1 line of standard treatment or for which no agreed upon treatment approach exists. Genetic tests look at the unique genetic material (genes) of patients’ tumor cells. Patients with genetic abnormalities (such as mutations, amplifications, or translocations) may benefit more from treatment that targets their tumor’s particular genetic abnormality. Identifying these genetic abnormalities first may help doctors plan better treatment for patients with solid tumors, lymphomas, or multiple myeloma.
ID: NCT02465060
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
Locations (contact): Naval Medical Center-San Diego, California (Preston S. Gable); VA Connecticut Healthcare System-West Haven Campus (Herta H. Chao); Durham VAMC, North Carolina (Michael J. Kelley); Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland (Jeremy G. Perkins)
Bevacizumab, Sorafenib Tosylate, and Temsirolimus in Treating Patients With Metastatic Kidney Cancer
This randomized phase II trial studies different combinations of bevacizumab, temsirolimus, and sorafenib tosylate to see how well they work compared with bevacizumab alone in treating patients with kidney cancer that has spread to other places in the body. Monoclonal antibodies, such as bevacizumab, may interfere with the ability of tumor cells to grow and spread. Bevacizumab and sorafenib tosylate may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking blood flow to the tumor. Temsirolimus and sorafenib tosylate may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth. Giving different combinations of bevacizumab, sorafenib tosylate, and temsirolimus may be more effective than bevacizumab alone in treating metastatic kidney cancer.
ID: NCT00378703
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
Locations: VA San Diego Medical Center, California; Jesse Brown VAMC, Chicago, Illinois; Richard L. Roudebush VAMC, Indianapolis, Indiana; VA New Jersey Health Care System East Orange; Dayton VAMC, Ohio; Michael E. DeBakey VAMC, Houston, Texas
Everolimus in Treating Patients With Kidney Cancer Who Have Undergone Surgery (S0931)
Everolimus may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth or by blocking blood flow to the tumor. This phase III trial is studying everolimus to see how well it works in treating patients with kidney cancer who have undergone surgery.
ID: NCT01120249
Sponsor: Southwest Oncology Group
Locations: Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System, Little Rock; Denver VAMC, Colorado; Hines VA Hospital, Illinois; Richard L. Roudebush VAMC Indianapolis, Indiana; VAMC Baltimore, Maryland; Minneapolis VeteransMedical Center, Minnesota; VA New Jersey Health Care System, East Orange; VA New York Harbor Healthcare System-Brooklyn Campus; Wright-Patterson, Medical Center, Ohio; Michael E.DeBakey VAMC, Houston, Texas; Audie L. Murphy VA Hospital, San Antonio, Texas
Cabozantinib-s-malate or Sunitinib Malate in Treating Patients With Previously Untreated Locally Advanced or Metastatic Kidney Cancer
This randomized phase II trial studies how well cabozantinib-s-malate works compared to sunitinib malate in treating patients with previously untreated kidney cancer that has spread from where it started to nearby tissue or lymph nodes or to other places in the body. Cabozantinib-s-malate and sunitinib malate may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth. It is not yet known whether cabozantinib-s-malate is more effective than sunitinib malate in treating patients with kidney cancer.
ID: NCT01835158
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
Locations: VA San Diego Medical Center, California; Minneapolis Veterans Medical Center, Minnesota; VAMC Columbia, Missouri; VA Western New York Health Care System, Buffalo
Everolimus With or Without Bevacizumab in Treating Patients With Advanced Kidney Cancer That Progressed After First-Line Therapy
This randomized phase III trial studies giving everolimus together with bevacizumab to see how well it works compared to everolimus alone in treating patients with advanced kidney cancer that progressed after first-line therapy. Everolimus may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth. Monoclonal antibodies, such as bevacizumab, can interfere with tumor growth by blocking the ability of tumor cells to grow and spread. Everolimus and bevacizumab may also stop the growth of kidney cancer by blocking blood flow to the tumor. It is not yet known whether giving everolimus together with bevacizumab is better than everolimus alone in treating patients with advanced kidney cancer that has progressed after first-line therapy.
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
ID: NCT01198158
Locations: Jesse Brown VAMC, Chicago, Illinois; Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland; VA Western New York Health Care System, Buffalo
Tivantinib With or Without Erlotinib Hydrochloride in Treating Patients With Metastatic or Locally Advanced Kidney Cancer That Cannot Be Removed by Surgery
This randomized phase II trial studies how well tivantinib with or without erlotinib hydrochloride works in treating patients with metastatic or locally advanced kidney cancer that cannot be removed by surgery. Tivantinib and erlotinib hydrochloride may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth.
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute (NCI)
ID: NCT01688973
Locations: Hines VA Hospital, Illinois; VA New Jersey Health Care System, East Orange; Audie L. Murphy VA Hospital, San Antonio, Texas
Bioequivalence & Food Effect Study in Patients With Solid Tumor or Hematologic Malignancies
This study will enroll approximately 60 subjects in stage I and 60 subjects in stage II with hematologic or solid tumor malignancies, excluding gastrointestinal tumors and tumors that have originated or metastasized to the liver for which no standard treatment exists or have progressed or recurred following prior therapy. Subjects must not be eligible for therapy of higher curative potential where an alternative treatment has been shown to prolong survival in an analogous population. Approximately 23 sites in the U.S. and 2 in Canada will participate in this study.
Sponsor: Celgene
ID: NCT02223052
Location: VAMC Kansas City, Missouri
Gemcitabine Hydrochloride and Cisplatin With or Without Bevacizumab in Treating Patients With Advanced Urinary Tract Cancer
This randomized phase III trial studies gemcitabine hydrochloride, cisplatin, and bevacizumab to see how well they work compared with gemcitabine hydrochloride and cisplatin in treating patients with urinary tract cancer that has spread to other places in the body. Drugs used in chemotherapy, such as gemcitabine hydrochloride and cisplatin, work in different ways to stop the growth of tumor cells, either by killing the cells, by stopping them from dividing, or by stopping them from spreading. Monoclonal antibodies, such as bevacizumab, may interfere with the ability of tumor cells to grow and spread. It is not yet known whether gemcitabine hydrochloride and cisplatin are more effective when given with or without bevacizumab in treating patients with urinary tract cancer.
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
ID: NCT00942331
Locations: Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System, Little Rock; Denver VAMC, Colorado; Baltimore VAMC, Maryland; Columbia VA, Missouri; VA New Jersey Health Care System, East Orange; VA New York Harbor Healthcare System-Brooklyn Campus; VA Western New York Health Care System, Buffalo; Dayton VAMC, Ohio
Eribulin Mesylate in Treating Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Cancer of the Urothelium and Kidney Dysfunction
This phase I/II trial studies the side effects and best dose of eribulin mesylate and to see how well it works in treating patients with cancer of the urothelium that has spread to nearby tissue or to other places in the body and kidney dysfunction. Drugs used in chemotherapy, such as eribulin mesylate, work in different ways to stop the growth of tumor cells, either by killing the cells, by stopping them from dividing, or by stopping them from spreading. Chemotherapy drugs may have different effects in patients who have changes in their kidney function.
Sponsor: National Cancer Institute
ID: NCT00365157
Location: VA Hospital-Martinez, California
Click here to read the digital edition.
Depression Screening and Treatment: A Missed Opportunity in Lung Cancer Care (FULL)
About Research in Context
In this article, the authors of recent scholarship have been asked to discuss the implications of their research on federal health care providers and specifically the veteran and active-duty service member patient populations. Because the article does not include new research and cannot be blinded, it has undergone an abbreviated peer review process. The original article can be found at Sullivan DR, Forsberg CW, Ganzini L, et al. Longitudinal changes in depression symptoms and survival among patients with lung cancer: a national cohort assessment. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(33):3984-3991.
Although depression is common among patients with cancer, patients with lung cancer are at particularly high risk. The prevalence of major depressive disorder (MDD) among patients with cancer can be as high as 13%, whereas up to 44% of patients with lung cancer experience depression symptoms at some point following their cancer diagnosis.1-3 These estimates are consistently higher than those of other types of cancer, possibly related to the stigma of the disease and the associated morbidity and mortality that are its hallmarks.4-8 This potentially life-threatening cancer diagnosis often evokes psychological distress; however, additional stressors contribute to the development of depression, including the effects of chemotherapeutic agents, surgical procedures, radiotherapy, and the consequences of physical symptoms and paraneoplastic syndromes.
In addition to the crippling effects of comorbid depression on patients’ quality of life (QOL), severe and persistent depression among patients with cancer is associated with prolonged hospital stays, worse treatment adherence, physical distress and pain, and increased desire for hastened death.9-11 During treatment, depression can amplify physical symptoms and interfere with effective coping.12,13
Depression also is likely a significant factor for the risk of suicide, which is 4 times higher in patients with lung cancer than that of the general population.14 Most important, as our recent study demonstrated, depression that develops at cancer diagnosis or during cancer treatment may contribute to worse survival. This effect was strongest among patients with early stage disease, in other words, the patients who are most likely to achieve cure.3 This association with early stage disease also has been observed in a strictly veteran population from the northwest U.S.15
Another key finding of our study was the similar survival among patients who experienced a remission of their depression and those who were never depressed. This finding reinforces the importance of effective depression treatment, which has the potential to reduce depression-related mortality; however, depression treatment was not fully captured and could not be directly compared in our study. Unfortunately, comorbid depression often goes undiagnosed and untreated in cancer patients as they report unmet emotional needs and a desire for psychological support during and after completion of cancer treatment.16,17
Given the general lack of depression treatment that occurs in patients with cancer, the negative consequences of depression can be sustained well into survivorship—defined clinically as someone who is free of any sign of cancer for 5 years. Cancer survivors frequently report fatigue, mood disturbance, sleep disruption, pain, and cognitive limitations that significantly impact QOL and are associated with disability and increased health care use.18 These symptoms likely are intertwined with and contribute to the development and persistence of depression. The ramifications of untreated depression on long-term cancer survivor outcomes are not completely understood, as few high-quality studies of depression in cancer survivors exist. However, in a mixed group of patients with cancer, there was a 2-fold risk of mortality in survivors with depression symptoms when these patients were assessed from 1 to 10 years into survivorship.19 The impact of depression on cancer survivorship is an important aspect of cancer care that deserves significantly more attention from both a research and clinical perspective.
Special Considerations for Veterans
There is a higher prevalence of mental health diagnoses in veterans than that in the general population, and depressive disorders are the most common.20-22 According to the VA National Registry for Depression, 11% of veterans aged ≥ 65 years have a diagnosis of MDD, a rate more than twice that in the general population of a similar age.23 However, the actual rate of depression among veterans may be even higher, as studies suggest depression is underdiagnosed in the veteran population.24 In addition to depression, veterans experience other disabling psychological illnesses, such as posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) related to deployment and combat duty or combat-related injuries, such as traumatic brain injuries. The negative consequences of PTSD on cancer outcomes are largely unexplored, but PTSD can contribute to increased health care utilization and costs.25,26 A similar psychological construct, cancer-related posttraumatic stress (PTS), which develops as a result of a cancer diagnosis or treatment, is associated with missed medical appointments and procedures, which could impact survival.27
Depression Screening and Treatment
Given the negative consequences of comorbid mental illness, professional oncology societies have started developing guidelines regarding the assessments and care of patients with cancer who are experiencing symptoms of depression and/or anxiety.11,28,29 Among these, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) has adapted the Pan-Canadian Practice Guideline on Screening, Assessment, and Care of Psychosocial Distress (Depression, Anxiety) in Adults With Cancer.28 Per ASCO, the target audience for these guidelines is health care providers (eg, medical, surgical, and radiation oncologists; psychiatrists; psychologists; primary care providers; nurses; and others involved in the delivery of care for adults with cancer) as well as patients with cancer and their family members and caregivers.28 These guidelines address the optimum screening, assessment, and psychosocial-supportive care interventions for adults with cancer who are identified as experiencing symptoms of depression. Among the most imperative recommendations are periodic assessments across the trajectory of cancer care, including after cure, as well as employing institutional and community resources for depression treatment.
In clinical practice in a VA setting, implementing these guidelines might involve various interventions. First, it is vital for providers to conduct depression screening during periodic health care encounters. Given the high prevalence of depression in patients with lung cancer, we suggest using the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) as an initial screening tool.30 Unlike the abridged 2-item PHQ-2 commonly used in the VA, the PHQ-9 provides an assessment of the full range of depressive symptoms. An elevated PHQ-9 score (≥ 10) is consistent with a major depressive episode and should trigger next steps.30
Once clinically significant depression is identified, initiation of treatment should occur next. The VA is well suited to assist and support non-mental health clinicians—particularly primary care—in treatment initiation and monitoring. This model of partnership is frequently called collaborative care, or integrated care, and it is well positioned to help patients with lung cancer with concomitant depression. In the VA, this model of care is called primary care-mental healthintegration (PC-MHI). One PC-MHI resource is called TIDES (Translating Initiatives for Depression into Effective Solutions), and when a patient is referred, a mental health nurse care manager helps to track the patients’ antidepressant adherence and treatment response while reporting results to primary care clinicians, who are generally responsible for initiating and continuing the antidepressant prescription. For patients preferring nonpharmacologic approaches or for whom an antidepressant may be contraindicated, PC-MHI can provide other assistance. For example, psychologists working in PC-MHI are equipped to provide a brief course of cognitive behavioral therapy sessions, another first-line, evidence-based treatment for clinical depression.
Clinician follow-up to ensure patient adherence, response, and satisfaction, and to adjust treatment as needed is essential. Besides ongoing coordination with PC-MHI services, including mental health clinicians as part of multidisciplinary cancer clinics could offer substantial added value to patients’ comprehensive cancer care. Indeed, the initiation of multicomponent depression care has been shown to improve QOL and role functioning in patients with cancer.31 Besides the established benefits on QOL, patients with lung cancer who achieve depression symptom remission also may enjoy a significant survival benefit over patients whose depression symptoms remain untreated during lung cancer treatment as our study suggests.3
Conclusion
Depression is a common comorbid disease among patients with lung cancer with important negative implications for QOL and survival. When it occurs after a cancer diagnosis, depression is expected to impact all phases of a patient’s life through treatment and survivorshi —ultimately affecting long-term survival. Veterans may be at particularly high risk given the increased prevalence of mental illness, including depression and PTSD in this group compared with that of the general population. Early detection and prompt treatment can promote depression remission, prevent relapse, and reduce the eventual emotional and financial burden of the disease. This approach may ultimately diminish the prevalence and persistence of depression symptoms and decrease the associated negative effects of this disease on patients with lung cancer.
The importance of integrated systems of depression treatment for patients with cancer as part of comprehensive cancer care cannot be overstated. Development and implementation of these systems should be a priority of lung cancer clinicians and treatment centers. The integrated system within the VA is well positioned to be a leader in this area, and VA clinicians who care for patients with lung cancer are encouraged to take advantage of available mental health resources. Additional research is urgently needed to explore optimal implementation of depression screening and subsequent treatment delivery to improve cancer patient outcomes in VA and non-VA health care settings.
Overall, there is minimal evidence that depression treatment can improve lung cancer survival; however, the lack of high-quality studies is a considerable limitation. Given the significant impact of depression on survival among patients with lung cancer, additional funding and resources are urgently needed to combat this debilitating comorbid disease.
Acknowledgments
This project was supported in part by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health under award K07CA190706 to Dr. Sullivan, a Career Development Award from the Veterans Health Administration Health Service Research and Development (CDA 14-428) to Dr. Teo and the HSR&D Center to Improve Veteran Involvement in Care (CIVIC) (CIN 13-404) at the VA Portland Health Care System.
Author disclosures
The authors report no actual or potential conflicts of interest with regard to this article.
Disclaimer
The VA had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; or decision to submit the manuscript for publication. The opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of Federal Practitioner, Frontline Medical Communications Inc., the U.S. Government, or any of its agencies.
Click here to read the digital edition.
1. Derogatis LR, Morrow GR, Fetting J, et al. The prevalence of psychiatric disorders among cancer patients. JAMA. 1983;249(6):751-757.
2. Walker J, Holm Hansen C, Martin P, et al. Prevalence of depression in adults with cancer: a systematic review. Ann Oncol. 2013;24(4):895-900.
3. Sullivan DR, Forsberg CW, Ganzini L, et al. Longitudinal changes in depression symptoms and survival among patients with lung cancer: a national cohort assessment. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(33):3984-3991.
4. Linden W, Vodermaier A, Mackenzie R, Greig D. Anxiety and depression after cancer diagnosis: prevalence rates by cancer type, gender, and age. J Affect Disord. 2012;141(2-3):343-351.
5. Massie MJ. Prevalence of depression in patients with cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2004;(32):57-71.
6. Brown Johnson CG, Brodsky JL, Cataldo JK. Lung cancer stigma, anxiety, depression, and quality of life. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2014;32(1):59-73.
7. Cataldo JK, Jahan TM, Pongquan VL. Lung cancer stigma, depression, and quality of life among ever and never smokers. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2012;16(3):264-269.
8. Howlader N, Noone AM, Krapcho M, et al. SEER cancer statistics review, 1975-2010. https://seer.cancer.gov/archive/csr/1975_2010/. Revised February 21, 2014. Accessed July 12, 2017.
9. Li M, Boquiren V, Lo C, et al. Depression and anxiety in supportive oncology. In: Davis M, Feyer P, Ortner P, Zimmermann C, eds. Supportive Oncology. 1st ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier; 2011:528-540.
10. Brown LF, Kroenke K, Theobald DE, Wu J, Tu W. The association of depression and anxiety with health-related quality of life in cancer patients with depression and/or pain. Psychooncology. 2010;19(7):734-741.
11. Lazenby M, Ercolano E, Grant M, Holland JC, Jacobsen PB, McCorkle R. Supporting Commission on Cancer-mandated psychosocial distress screening with implementation strategies. J Oncol Pract. 2015;11(3):e413-e420.
12. Mystakidou K, Tsilika E, Parpa E, Katsouda E, Galanos A, Vlahos L. Psychological distress of patients with advanced cancer: influence and contribution of pain severity and pain interference. Cancer Nurs. 2006;29(5):400-405.
13. Passik SD, Dugan W, McDonald MV, Rosenfeld B, Theobald DE, Edgerton S. Oncologists’ recognition of depression in their patients with cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16(4):1594-1600.
14. Rahuma M, Kamel M, Nasar A, et al. Lung cancer patients have the highest malignancy-associated suicide rate in USA: a population based analysis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2017;195:A6730.
15. Sullivan DR, Ganzini L, Duckart JP, et al. Treatment receipt and outcomes among lung cancer patients with depression. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2014;26(1):25-31.
16. Merckaert I, Libert Y, Messin S, Milani M, Slachmuylder JL, Razavi D. Cancer patients’ desire for psychological support: prevalence and implications for screening patients psychological needs. Psychooncology. 2010;19(2):141-149.
17. Harrison JD, Young JM, Price MA, Butow PN, Solomon MJ. What are the unmet supportive care needs of people with cancer? A systematic review. Support Care Cancer. 2009;17(8):1117-1128.
18. Wu HS, Harden JK. Symptom burden and quality of life in survivorship: a review of the literature. Cancer Nurs. 2015;38(1):E29-E54.
19. Mols F, Husson O, Roukema JA, van de Poll-Franse LV. Depressive symptoms are a risk factor for all-cause mortality: results from a prospective population-based study among 3,080 cancer survivors from the PROFILES registry. J Cancer Surviv. 2013;7(3):484-492.
20. Hoge CW, Castro CA, Messer SC, McGurk D, Cotting DI, Koffman RL. Combat duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, mental health problems, and barriers to care. N Engl J Med. 2004;351(1):13-22.
21. Fortney JC, Curran GM, Hunt JB, et al. Prevalence of probable mental disorders and help-seeking behaviors among veteran and non-veteran community college students. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2016;38:99-104.
22. Pickett T, Rothman D, Crawford EF, Brancu M, Fairbank JA, Kudler HS. Mental health among military personnel and veterans. N C Med J. 2015;76(5):299-306.
23. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration. One in ten older vets is depressed. https://www.va.gov/health/NewsFeatures/20110624a.asp. Updated April 17, 2015. Accessed July 12, 2017.
24. Fontana A, Rosenheck R. Treatment-seeking veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan: comparison with veterans of previous wars. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2008;196(7):513-521.
25. Kessler RC. Posttraumatic stress disorder: the burden to the individual and to society. J Clin Psychiatry. 2000;61(suppl 5):4-12; discussion, 13-14.
26. Kartha A, Brower V, Saitz R, Samet JH, Keane TM, Liebschutz J. The impact of trauma exposure and post-traumatic stress disorder on healthcare utilization among primary care patients. Med Care. 2008;46(4):388-393.
27. National Cancer Institute. Cancer-related post-traumatic stress (PDQ®)–Patient version. https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/coping/survivorship/new-normal/ptsd-pdq. Updated July 7, 2015. Accessed July 12, 2017.
28. Andersen BL, DeRubeis RJ, Berman BS, et al; American Society of Clinical Oncology. Screening, assessment, and care of anxiety and depressive symptoms in adults with cancer: an American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline adaptation. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(15):1605-1619.
29. Howell D, Keller-Olaman S, Oliver TK, et al. A pan-Canadian practice guideline and algorithm: screening, assessment, and supportive care of adults with cancer-related fatigue. Curr Oncol. 2013;20(3):e233-e246.
30. Kroenke K, Wu J, Bair MJ, Krebs EE, Damush TM, Tu W. Reciprocal relationship between pain and depression: a 12-month longitudinal analysis in primary care. J Pain. 2011;12(9):964-973.
31. Walker J, Hansen CH, Martin P, et al; SMaRT (Symptom Management Research Trials) Oncology-3 Team. Integrated collaborative care for major depression comorbid with a poor prognosis cancer (SMaRT oncology-3): a multicentre randomised controlled trial in patients with lung cancer. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(10):1168-1176.
About Research in Context
In this article, the authors of recent scholarship have been asked to discuss the implications of their research on federal health care providers and specifically the veteran and active-duty service member patient populations. Because the article does not include new research and cannot be blinded, it has undergone an abbreviated peer review process. The original article can be found at Sullivan DR, Forsberg CW, Ganzini L, et al. Longitudinal changes in depression symptoms and survival among patients with lung cancer: a national cohort assessment. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(33):3984-3991.
Although depression is common among patients with cancer, patients with lung cancer are at particularly high risk. The prevalence of major depressive disorder (MDD) among patients with cancer can be as high as 13%, whereas up to 44% of patients with lung cancer experience depression symptoms at some point following their cancer diagnosis.1-3 These estimates are consistently higher than those of other types of cancer, possibly related to the stigma of the disease and the associated morbidity and mortality that are its hallmarks.4-8 This potentially life-threatening cancer diagnosis often evokes psychological distress; however, additional stressors contribute to the development of depression, including the effects of chemotherapeutic agents, surgical procedures, radiotherapy, and the consequences of physical symptoms and paraneoplastic syndromes.
In addition to the crippling effects of comorbid depression on patients’ quality of life (QOL), severe and persistent depression among patients with cancer is associated with prolonged hospital stays, worse treatment adherence, physical distress and pain, and increased desire for hastened death.9-11 During treatment, depression can amplify physical symptoms and interfere with effective coping.12,13
Depression also is likely a significant factor for the risk of suicide, which is 4 times higher in patients with lung cancer than that of the general population.14 Most important, as our recent study demonstrated, depression that develops at cancer diagnosis or during cancer treatment may contribute to worse survival. This effect was strongest among patients with early stage disease, in other words, the patients who are most likely to achieve cure.3 This association with early stage disease also has been observed in a strictly veteran population from the northwest U.S.15
Another key finding of our study was the similar survival among patients who experienced a remission of their depression and those who were never depressed. This finding reinforces the importance of effective depression treatment, which has the potential to reduce depression-related mortality; however, depression treatment was not fully captured and could not be directly compared in our study. Unfortunately, comorbid depression often goes undiagnosed and untreated in cancer patients as they report unmet emotional needs and a desire for psychological support during and after completion of cancer treatment.16,17
Given the general lack of depression treatment that occurs in patients with cancer, the negative consequences of depression can be sustained well into survivorship—defined clinically as someone who is free of any sign of cancer for 5 years. Cancer survivors frequently report fatigue, mood disturbance, sleep disruption, pain, and cognitive limitations that significantly impact QOL and are associated with disability and increased health care use.18 These symptoms likely are intertwined with and contribute to the development and persistence of depression. The ramifications of untreated depression on long-term cancer survivor outcomes are not completely understood, as few high-quality studies of depression in cancer survivors exist. However, in a mixed group of patients with cancer, there was a 2-fold risk of mortality in survivors with depression symptoms when these patients were assessed from 1 to 10 years into survivorship.19 The impact of depression on cancer survivorship is an important aspect of cancer care that deserves significantly more attention from both a research and clinical perspective.
Special Considerations for Veterans
There is a higher prevalence of mental health diagnoses in veterans than that in the general population, and depressive disorders are the most common.20-22 According to the VA National Registry for Depression, 11% of veterans aged ≥ 65 years have a diagnosis of MDD, a rate more than twice that in the general population of a similar age.23 However, the actual rate of depression among veterans may be even higher, as studies suggest depression is underdiagnosed in the veteran population.24 In addition to depression, veterans experience other disabling psychological illnesses, such as posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) related to deployment and combat duty or combat-related injuries, such as traumatic brain injuries. The negative consequences of PTSD on cancer outcomes are largely unexplored, but PTSD can contribute to increased health care utilization and costs.25,26 A similar psychological construct, cancer-related posttraumatic stress (PTS), which develops as a result of a cancer diagnosis or treatment, is associated with missed medical appointments and procedures, which could impact survival.27
Depression Screening and Treatment
Given the negative consequences of comorbid mental illness, professional oncology societies have started developing guidelines regarding the assessments and care of patients with cancer who are experiencing symptoms of depression and/or anxiety.11,28,29 Among these, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) has adapted the Pan-Canadian Practice Guideline on Screening, Assessment, and Care of Psychosocial Distress (Depression, Anxiety) in Adults With Cancer.28 Per ASCO, the target audience for these guidelines is health care providers (eg, medical, surgical, and radiation oncologists; psychiatrists; psychologists; primary care providers; nurses; and others involved in the delivery of care for adults with cancer) as well as patients with cancer and their family members and caregivers.28 These guidelines address the optimum screening, assessment, and psychosocial-supportive care interventions for adults with cancer who are identified as experiencing symptoms of depression. Among the most imperative recommendations are periodic assessments across the trajectory of cancer care, including after cure, as well as employing institutional and community resources for depression treatment.
In clinical practice in a VA setting, implementing these guidelines might involve various interventions. First, it is vital for providers to conduct depression screening during periodic health care encounters. Given the high prevalence of depression in patients with lung cancer, we suggest using the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) as an initial screening tool.30 Unlike the abridged 2-item PHQ-2 commonly used in the VA, the PHQ-9 provides an assessment of the full range of depressive symptoms. An elevated PHQ-9 score (≥ 10) is consistent with a major depressive episode and should trigger next steps.30
Once clinically significant depression is identified, initiation of treatment should occur next. The VA is well suited to assist and support non-mental health clinicians—particularly primary care—in treatment initiation and monitoring. This model of partnership is frequently called collaborative care, or integrated care, and it is well positioned to help patients with lung cancer with concomitant depression. In the VA, this model of care is called primary care-mental healthintegration (PC-MHI). One PC-MHI resource is called TIDES (Translating Initiatives for Depression into Effective Solutions), and when a patient is referred, a mental health nurse care manager helps to track the patients’ antidepressant adherence and treatment response while reporting results to primary care clinicians, who are generally responsible for initiating and continuing the antidepressant prescription. For patients preferring nonpharmacologic approaches or for whom an antidepressant may be contraindicated, PC-MHI can provide other assistance. For example, psychologists working in PC-MHI are equipped to provide a brief course of cognitive behavioral therapy sessions, another first-line, evidence-based treatment for clinical depression.
Clinician follow-up to ensure patient adherence, response, and satisfaction, and to adjust treatment as needed is essential. Besides ongoing coordination with PC-MHI services, including mental health clinicians as part of multidisciplinary cancer clinics could offer substantial added value to patients’ comprehensive cancer care. Indeed, the initiation of multicomponent depression care has been shown to improve QOL and role functioning in patients with cancer.31 Besides the established benefits on QOL, patients with lung cancer who achieve depression symptom remission also may enjoy a significant survival benefit over patients whose depression symptoms remain untreated during lung cancer treatment as our study suggests.3
Conclusion
Depression is a common comorbid disease among patients with lung cancer with important negative implications for QOL and survival. When it occurs after a cancer diagnosis, depression is expected to impact all phases of a patient’s life through treatment and survivorshi —ultimately affecting long-term survival. Veterans may be at particularly high risk given the increased prevalence of mental illness, including depression and PTSD in this group compared with that of the general population. Early detection and prompt treatment can promote depression remission, prevent relapse, and reduce the eventual emotional and financial burden of the disease. This approach may ultimately diminish the prevalence and persistence of depression symptoms and decrease the associated negative effects of this disease on patients with lung cancer.
The importance of integrated systems of depression treatment for patients with cancer as part of comprehensive cancer care cannot be overstated. Development and implementation of these systems should be a priority of lung cancer clinicians and treatment centers. The integrated system within the VA is well positioned to be a leader in this area, and VA clinicians who care for patients with lung cancer are encouraged to take advantage of available mental health resources. Additional research is urgently needed to explore optimal implementation of depression screening and subsequent treatment delivery to improve cancer patient outcomes in VA and non-VA health care settings.
Overall, there is minimal evidence that depression treatment can improve lung cancer survival; however, the lack of high-quality studies is a considerable limitation. Given the significant impact of depression on survival among patients with lung cancer, additional funding and resources are urgently needed to combat this debilitating comorbid disease.
Acknowledgments
This project was supported in part by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health under award K07CA190706 to Dr. Sullivan, a Career Development Award from the Veterans Health Administration Health Service Research and Development (CDA 14-428) to Dr. Teo and the HSR&D Center to Improve Veteran Involvement in Care (CIVIC) (CIN 13-404) at the VA Portland Health Care System.
Author disclosures
The authors report no actual or potential conflicts of interest with regard to this article.
Disclaimer
The VA had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; or decision to submit the manuscript for publication. The opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of Federal Practitioner, Frontline Medical Communications Inc., the U.S. Government, or any of its agencies.
Click here to read the digital edition.
About Research in Context
In this article, the authors of recent scholarship have been asked to discuss the implications of their research on federal health care providers and specifically the veteran and active-duty service member patient populations. Because the article does not include new research and cannot be blinded, it has undergone an abbreviated peer review process. The original article can be found at Sullivan DR, Forsberg CW, Ganzini L, et al. Longitudinal changes in depression symptoms and survival among patients with lung cancer: a national cohort assessment. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(33):3984-3991.
Although depression is common among patients with cancer, patients with lung cancer are at particularly high risk. The prevalence of major depressive disorder (MDD) among patients with cancer can be as high as 13%, whereas up to 44% of patients with lung cancer experience depression symptoms at some point following their cancer diagnosis.1-3 These estimates are consistently higher than those of other types of cancer, possibly related to the stigma of the disease and the associated morbidity and mortality that are its hallmarks.4-8 This potentially life-threatening cancer diagnosis often evokes psychological distress; however, additional stressors contribute to the development of depression, including the effects of chemotherapeutic agents, surgical procedures, radiotherapy, and the consequences of physical symptoms and paraneoplastic syndromes.
In addition to the crippling effects of comorbid depression on patients’ quality of life (QOL), severe and persistent depression among patients with cancer is associated with prolonged hospital stays, worse treatment adherence, physical distress and pain, and increased desire for hastened death.9-11 During treatment, depression can amplify physical symptoms and interfere with effective coping.12,13
Depression also is likely a significant factor for the risk of suicide, which is 4 times higher in patients with lung cancer than that of the general population.14 Most important, as our recent study demonstrated, depression that develops at cancer diagnosis or during cancer treatment may contribute to worse survival. This effect was strongest among patients with early stage disease, in other words, the patients who are most likely to achieve cure.3 This association with early stage disease also has been observed in a strictly veteran population from the northwest U.S.15
Another key finding of our study was the similar survival among patients who experienced a remission of their depression and those who were never depressed. This finding reinforces the importance of effective depression treatment, which has the potential to reduce depression-related mortality; however, depression treatment was not fully captured and could not be directly compared in our study. Unfortunately, comorbid depression often goes undiagnosed and untreated in cancer patients as they report unmet emotional needs and a desire for psychological support during and after completion of cancer treatment.16,17
Given the general lack of depression treatment that occurs in patients with cancer, the negative consequences of depression can be sustained well into survivorship—defined clinically as someone who is free of any sign of cancer for 5 years. Cancer survivors frequently report fatigue, mood disturbance, sleep disruption, pain, and cognitive limitations that significantly impact QOL and are associated with disability and increased health care use.18 These symptoms likely are intertwined with and contribute to the development and persistence of depression. The ramifications of untreated depression on long-term cancer survivor outcomes are not completely understood, as few high-quality studies of depression in cancer survivors exist. However, in a mixed group of patients with cancer, there was a 2-fold risk of mortality in survivors with depression symptoms when these patients were assessed from 1 to 10 years into survivorship.19 The impact of depression on cancer survivorship is an important aspect of cancer care that deserves significantly more attention from both a research and clinical perspective.
Special Considerations for Veterans
There is a higher prevalence of mental health diagnoses in veterans than that in the general population, and depressive disorders are the most common.20-22 According to the VA National Registry for Depression, 11% of veterans aged ≥ 65 years have a diagnosis of MDD, a rate more than twice that in the general population of a similar age.23 However, the actual rate of depression among veterans may be even higher, as studies suggest depression is underdiagnosed in the veteran population.24 In addition to depression, veterans experience other disabling psychological illnesses, such as posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) related to deployment and combat duty or combat-related injuries, such as traumatic brain injuries. The negative consequences of PTSD on cancer outcomes are largely unexplored, but PTSD can contribute to increased health care utilization and costs.25,26 A similar psychological construct, cancer-related posttraumatic stress (PTS), which develops as a result of a cancer diagnosis or treatment, is associated with missed medical appointments and procedures, which could impact survival.27
Depression Screening and Treatment
Given the negative consequences of comorbid mental illness, professional oncology societies have started developing guidelines regarding the assessments and care of patients with cancer who are experiencing symptoms of depression and/or anxiety.11,28,29 Among these, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) has adapted the Pan-Canadian Practice Guideline on Screening, Assessment, and Care of Psychosocial Distress (Depression, Anxiety) in Adults With Cancer.28 Per ASCO, the target audience for these guidelines is health care providers (eg, medical, surgical, and radiation oncologists; psychiatrists; psychologists; primary care providers; nurses; and others involved in the delivery of care for adults with cancer) as well as patients with cancer and their family members and caregivers.28 These guidelines address the optimum screening, assessment, and psychosocial-supportive care interventions for adults with cancer who are identified as experiencing symptoms of depression. Among the most imperative recommendations are periodic assessments across the trajectory of cancer care, including after cure, as well as employing institutional and community resources for depression treatment.
In clinical practice in a VA setting, implementing these guidelines might involve various interventions. First, it is vital for providers to conduct depression screening during periodic health care encounters. Given the high prevalence of depression in patients with lung cancer, we suggest using the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) as an initial screening tool.30 Unlike the abridged 2-item PHQ-2 commonly used in the VA, the PHQ-9 provides an assessment of the full range of depressive symptoms. An elevated PHQ-9 score (≥ 10) is consistent with a major depressive episode and should trigger next steps.30
Once clinically significant depression is identified, initiation of treatment should occur next. The VA is well suited to assist and support non-mental health clinicians—particularly primary care—in treatment initiation and monitoring. This model of partnership is frequently called collaborative care, or integrated care, and it is well positioned to help patients with lung cancer with concomitant depression. In the VA, this model of care is called primary care-mental healthintegration (PC-MHI). One PC-MHI resource is called TIDES (Translating Initiatives for Depression into Effective Solutions), and when a patient is referred, a mental health nurse care manager helps to track the patients’ antidepressant adherence and treatment response while reporting results to primary care clinicians, who are generally responsible for initiating and continuing the antidepressant prescription. For patients preferring nonpharmacologic approaches or for whom an antidepressant may be contraindicated, PC-MHI can provide other assistance. For example, psychologists working in PC-MHI are equipped to provide a brief course of cognitive behavioral therapy sessions, another first-line, evidence-based treatment for clinical depression.
Clinician follow-up to ensure patient adherence, response, and satisfaction, and to adjust treatment as needed is essential. Besides ongoing coordination with PC-MHI services, including mental health clinicians as part of multidisciplinary cancer clinics could offer substantial added value to patients’ comprehensive cancer care. Indeed, the initiation of multicomponent depression care has been shown to improve QOL and role functioning in patients with cancer.31 Besides the established benefits on QOL, patients with lung cancer who achieve depression symptom remission also may enjoy a significant survival benefit over patients whose depression symptoms remain untreated during lung cancer treatment as our study suggests.3
Conclusion
Depression is a common comorbid disease among patients with lung cancer with important negative implications for QOL and survival. When it occurs after a cancer diagnosis, depression is expected to impact all phases of a patient’s life through treatment and survivorshi —ultimately affecting long-term survival. Veterans may be at particularly high risk given the increased prevalence of mental illness, including depression and PTSD in this group compared with that of the general population. Early detection and prompt treatment can promote depression remission, prevent relapse, and reduce the eventual emotional and financial burden of the disease. This approach may ultimately diminish the prevalence and persistence of depression symptoms and decrease the associated negative effects of this disease on patients with lung cancer.
The importance of integrated systems of depression treatment for patients with cancer as part of comprehensive cancer care cannot be overstated. Development and implementation of these systems should be a priority of lung cancer clinicians and treatment centers. The integrated system within the VA is well positioned to be a leader in this area, and VA clinicians who care for patients with lung cancer are encouraged to take advantage of available mental health resources. Additional research is urgently needed to explore optimal implementation of depression screening and subsequent treatment delivery to improve cancer patient outcomes in VA and non-VA health care settings.
Overall, there is minimal evidence that depression treatment can improve lung cancer survival; however, the lack of high-quality studies is a considerable limitation. Given the significant impact of depression on survival among patients with lung cancer, additional funding and resources are urgently needed to combat this debilitating comorbid disease.
Acknowledgments
This project was supported in part by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health under award K07CA190706 to Dr. Sullivan, a Career Development Award from the Veterans Health Administration Health Service Research and Development (CDA 14-428) to Dr. Teo and the HSR&D Center to Improve Veteran Involvement in Care (CIVIC) (CIN 13-404) at the VA Portland Health Care System.
Author disclosures
The authors report no actual or potential conflicts of interest with regard to this article.
Disclaimer
The VA had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; or decision to submit the manuscript for publication. The opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of Federal Practitioner, Frontline Medical Communications Inc., the U.S. Government, or any of its agencies.
Click here to read the digital edition.
1. Derogatis LR, Morrow GR, Fetting J, et al. The prevalence of psychiatric disorders among cancer patients. JAMA. 1983;249(6):751-757.
2. Walker J, Holm Hansen C, Martin P, et al. Prevalence of depression in adults with cancer: a systematic review. Ann Oncol. 2013;24(4):895-900.
3. Sullivan DR, Forsberg CW, Ganzini L, et al. Longitudinal changes in depression symptoms and survival among patients with lung cancer: a national cohort assessment. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(33):3984-3991.
4. Linden W, Vodermaier A, Mackenzie R, Greig D. Anxiety and depression after cancer diagnosis: prevalence rates by cancer type, gender, and age. J Affect Disord. 2012;141(2-3):343-351.
5. Massie MJ. Prevalence of depression in patients with cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2004;(32):57-71.
6. Brown Johnson CG, Brodsky JL, Cataldo JK. Lung cancer stigma, anxiety, depression, and quality of life. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2014;32(1):59-73.
7. Cataldo JK, Jahan TM, Pongquan VL. Lung cancer stigma, depression, and quality of life among ever and never smokers. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2012;16(3):264-269.
8. Howlader N, Noone AM, Krapcho M, et al. SEER cancer statistics review, 1975-2010. https://seer.cancer.gov/archive/csr/1975_2010/. Revised February 21, 2014. Accessed July 12, 2017.
9. Li M, Boquiren V, Lo C, et al. Depression and anxiety in supportive oncology. In: Davis M, Feyer P, Ortner P, Zimmermann C, eds. Supportive Oncology. 1st ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier; 2011:528-540.
10. Brown LF, Kroenke K, Theobald DE, Wu J, Tu W. The association of depression and anxiety with health-related quality of life in cancer patients with depression and/or pain. Psychooncology. 2010;19(7):734-741.
11. Lazenby M, Ercolano E, Grant M, Holland JC, Jacobsen PB, McCorkle R. Supporting Commission on Cancer-mandated psychosocial distress screening with implementation strategies. J Oncol Pract. 2015;11(3):e413-e420.
12. Mystakidou K, Tsilika E, Parpa E, Katsouda E, Galanos A, Vlahos L. Psychological distress of patients with advanced cancer: influence and contribution of pain severity and pain interference. Cancer Nurs. 2006;29(5):400-405.
13. Passik SD, Dugan W, McDonald MV, Rosenfeld B, Theobald DE, Edgerton S. Oncologists’ recognition of depression in their patients with cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16(4):1594-1600.
14. Rahuma M, Kamel M, Nasar A, et al. Lung cancer patients have the highest malignancy-associated suicide rate in USA: a population based analysis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2017;195:A6730.
15. Sullivan DR, Ganzini L, Duckart JP, et al. Treatment receipt and outcomes among lung cancer patients with depression. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2014;26(1):25-31.
16. Merckaert I, Libert Y, Messin S, Milani M, Slachmuylder JL, Razavi D. Cancer patients’ desire for psychological support: prevalence and implications for screening patients psychological needs. Psychooncology. 2010;19(2):141-149.
17. Harrison JD, Young JM, Price MA, Butow PN, Solomon MJ. What are the unmet supportive care needs of people with cancer? A systematic review. Support Care Cancer. 2009;17(8):1117-1128.
18. Wu HS, Harden JK. Symptom burden and quality of life in survivorship: a review of the literature. Cancer Nurs. 2015;38(1):E29-E54.
19. Mols F, Husson O, Roukema JA, van de Poll-Franse LV. Depressive symptoms are a risk factor for all-cause mortality: results from a prospective population-based study among 3,080 cancer survivors from the PROFILES registry. J Cancer Surviv. 2013;7(3):484-492.
20. Hoge CW, Castro CA, Messer SC, McGurk D, Cotting DI, Koffman RL. Combat duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, mental health problems, and barriers to care. N Engl J Med. 2004;351(1):13-22.
21. Fortney JC, Curran GM, Hunt JB, et al. Prevalence of probable mental disorders and help-seeking behaviors among veteran and non-veteran community college students. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2016;38:99-104.
22. Pickett T, Rothman D, Crawford EF, Brancu M, Fairbank JA, Kudler HS. Mental health among military personnel and veterans. N C Med J. 2015;76(5):299-306.
23. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration. One in ten older vets is depressed. https://www.va.gov/health/NewsFeatures/20110624a.asp. Updated April 17, 2015. Accessed July 12, 2017.
24. Fontana A, Rosenheck R. Treatment-seeking veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan: comparison with veterans of previous wars. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2008;196(7):513-521.
25. Kessler RC. Posttraumatic stress disorder: the burden to the individual and to society. J Clin Psychiatry. 2000;61(suppl 5):4-12; discussion, 13-14.
26. Kartha A, Brower V, Saitz R, Samet JH, Keane TM, Liebschutz J. The impact of trauma exposure and post-traumatic stress disorder on healthcare utilization among primary care patients. Med Care. 2008;46(4):388-393.
27. National Cancer Institute. Cancer-related post-traumatic stress (PDQ®)–Patient version. https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/coping/survivorship/new-normal/ptsd-pdq. Updated July 7, 2015. Accessed July 12, 2017.
28. Andersen BL, DeRubeis RJ, Berman BS, et al; American Society of Clinical Oncology. Screening, assessment, and care of anxiety and depressive symptoms in adults with cancer: an American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline adaptation. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(15):1605-1619.
29. Howell D, Keller-Olaman S, Oliver TK, et al. A pan-Canadian practice guideline and algorithm: screening, assessment, and supportive care of adults with cancer-related fatigue. Curr Oncol. 2013;20(3):e233-e246.
30. Kroenke K, Wu J, Bair MJ, Krebs EE, Damush TM, Tu W. Reciprocal relationship between pain and depression: a 12-month longitudinal analysis in primary care. J Pain. 2011;12(9):964-973.
31. Walker J, Hansen CH, Martin P, et al; SMaRT (Symptom Management Research Trials) Oncology-3 Team. Integrated collaborative care for major depression comorbid with a poor prognosis cancer (SMaRT oncology-3): a multicentre randomised controlled trial in patients with lung cancer. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(10):1168-1176.
1. Derogatis LR, Morrow GR, Fetting J, et al. The prevalence of psychiatric disorders among cancer patients. JAMA. 1983;249(6):751-757.
2. Walker J, Holm Hansen C, Martin P, et al. Prevalence of depression in adults with cancer: a systematic review. Ann Oncol. 2013;24(4):895-900.
3. Sullivan DR, Forsberg CW, Ganzini L, et al. Longitudinal changes in depression symptoms and survival among patients with lung cancer: a national cohort assessment. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(33):3984-3991.
4. Linden W, Vodermaier A, Mackenzie R, Greig D. Anxiety and depression after cancer diagnosis: prevalence rates by cancer type, gender, and age. J Affect Disord. 2012;141(2-3):343-351.
5. Massie MJ. Prevalence of depression in patients with cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2004;(32):57-71.
6. Brown Johnson CG, Brodsky JL, Cataldo JK. Lung cancer stigma, anxiety, depression, and quality of life. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2014;32(1):59-73.
7. Cataldo JK, Jahan TM, Pongquan VL. Lung cancer stigma, depression, and quality of life among ever and never smokers. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2012;16(3):264-269.
8. Howlader N, Noone AM, Krapcho M, et al. SEER cancer statistics review, 1975-2010. https://seer.cancer.gov/archive/csr/1975_2010/. Revised February 21, 2014. Accessed July 12, 2017.
9. Li M, Boquiren V, Lo C, et al. Depression and anxiety in supportive oncology. In: Davis M, Feyer P, Ortner P, Zimmermann C, eds. Supportive Oncology. 1st ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier; 2011:528-540.
10. Brown LF, Kroenke K, Theobald DE, Wu J, Tu W. The association of depression and anxiety with health-related quality of life in cancer patients with depression and/or pain. Psychooncology. 2010;19(7):734-741.
11. Lazenby M, Ercolano E, Grant M, Holland JC, Jacobsen PB, McCorkle R. Supporting Commission on Cancer-mandated psychosocial distress screening with implementation strategies. J Oncol Pract. 2015;11(3):e413-e420.
12. Mystakidou K, Tsilika E, Parpa E, Katsouda E, Galanos A, Vlahos L. Psychological distress of patients with advanced cancer: influence and contribution of pain severity and pain interference. Cancer Nurs. 2006;29(5):400-405.
13. Passik SD, Dugan W, McDonald MV, Rosenfeld B, Theobald DE, Edgerton S. Oncologists’ recognition of depression in their patients with cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16(4):1594-1600.
14. Rahuma M, Kamel M, Nasar A, et al. Lung cancer patients have the highest malignancy-associated suicide rate in USA: a population based analysis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2017;195:A6730.
15. Sullivan DR, Ganzini L, Duckart JP, et al. Treatment receipt and outcomes among lung cancer patients with depression. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2014;26(1):25-31.
16. Merckaert I, Libert Y, Messin S, Milani M, Slachmuylder JL, Razavi D. Cancer patients’ desire for psychological support: prevalence and implications for screening patients psychological needs. Psychooncology. 2010;19(2):141-149.
17. Harrison JD, Young JM, Price MA, Butow PN, Solomon MJ. What are the unmet supportive care needs of people with cancer? A systematic review. Support Care Cancer. 2009;17(8):1117-1128.
18. Wu HS, Harden JK. Symptom burden and quality of life in survivorship: a review of the literature. Cancer Nurs. 2015;38(1):E29-E54.
19. Mols F, Husson O, Roukema JA, van de Poll-Franse LV. Depressive symptoms are a risk factor for all-cause mortality: results from a prospective population-based study among 3,080 cancer survivors from the PROFILES registry. J Cancer Surviv. 2013;7(3):484-492.
20. Hoge CW, Castro CA, Messer SC, McGurk D, Cotting DI, Koffman RL. Combat duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, mental health problems, and barriers to care. N Engl J Med. 2004;351(1):13-22.
21. Fortney JC, Curran GM, Hunt JB, et al. Prevalence of probable mental disorders and help-seeking behaviors among veteran and non-veteran community college students. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2016;38:99-104.
22. Pickett T, Rothman D, Crawford EF, Brancu M, Fairbank JA, Kudler HS. Mental health among military personnel and veterans. N C Med J. 2015;76(5):299-306.
23. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration. One in ten older vets is depressed. https://www.va.gov/health/NewsFeatures/20110624a.asp. Updated April 17, 2015. Accessed July 12, 2017.
24. Fontana A, Rosenheck R. Treatment-seeking veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan: comparison with veterans of previous wars. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2008;196(7):513-521.
25. Kessler RC. Posttraumatic stress disorder: the burden to the individual and to society. J Clin Psychiatry. 2000;61(suppl 5):4-12; discussion, 13-14.
26. Kartha A, Brower V, Saitz R, Samet JH, Keane TM, Liebschutz J. The impact of trauma exposure and post-traumatic stress disorder on healthcare utilization among primary care patients. Med Care. 2008;46(4):388-393.
27. National Cancer Institute. Cancer-related post-traumatic stress (PDQ®)–Patient version. https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/coping/survivorship/new-normal/ptsd-pdq. Updated July 7, 2015. Accessed July 12, 2017.
28. Andersen BL, DeRubeis RJ, Berman BS, et al; American Society of Clinical Oncology. Screening, assessment, and care of anxiety and depressive symptoms in adults with cancer: an American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline adaptation. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(15):1605-1619.
29. Howell D, Keller-Olaman S, Oliver TK, et al. A pan-Canadian practice guideline and algorithm: screening, assessment, and supportive care of adults with cancer-related fatigue. Curr Oncol. 2013;20(3):e233-e246.
30. Kroenke K, Wu J, Bair MJ, Krebs EE, Damush TM, Tu W. Reciprocal relationship between pain and depression: a 12-month longitudinal analysis in primary care. J Pain. 2011;12(9):964-973.
31. Walker J, Hansen CH, Martin P, et al; SMaRT (Symptom Management Research Trials) Oncology-3 Team. Integrated collaborative care for major depression comorbid with a poor prognosis cancer (SMaRT oncology-3): a multicentre randomised controlled trial in patients with lung cancer. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(10):1168-1176.
Some doctors are warming to single-payer medicine
When the American Medical Association – one of the nation’s most powerful health care groups – met in Chicago this June, its medical student caucus seized an opportunity for change.
Though they had tried for years to advance a resolution calling on the organization to drop its decades-long opposition to single-payer health care, this was the first time it got a full hearing. The debate grew heated – older physicians warned their pay would decrease, calling younger advocates naive to single-payer’s consequences. But this time, by the meeting’s end, the AMA’s older members had agreed to at least study the possibility of changing its stance.
“We believe health care is a human right, maybe more so than past generations,” said Brad Zehr, MD, a pathology resident at Ohio State University, who was part of the debate. “There’s a generational shift happening, where we see universal health care as a requirement.”
The ins and outs of the AMA’s policymaking may sound like inside baseball. But this year’s youth uprising at the nexus of the medical establishment speaks to a cultural shift in the medical profession, and one with big political implications.
Amid Republican attacks on the Affordable Care Act, an increasing number of Democrats – both candidates and Congress members – are putting forth proposals that would vastly increase the government’s role in running the health system. These include single-payer, Medicare-for-all, or an option for anyone to buy in to the Medicare program. At least 70 House Democrats have signed on to the new “Medicare-for-all” caucus.
Organized medicine, and previous generations of doctors, had for the most part staunchly opposed any such plan. The AMA has thwarted public health insurance proposals since the 1930s and long been considered one of the policy’s most powerful opponents.
But the battle lines are shifting as younger doctors flip their views, a change that will likely assume greater significance as the next generation of physicians takes on leadership roles. The AMA did not make anyone available for comment.
Many younger physicians are “accepting of single-payer,” said Christian Pean, MD, a third-year orthopedic surgery resident at New York University.
In prior generations, “intelligent, motivated, quantitative” students pursued medicine, both for the income and because of the workplace independence – running practices with minimal government interference, said Steven Schroeder, MD, professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco.
In his 50 years of teaching, students’ attitudes have changed, he said. “The ‘Oh, keep government out of my work’ feeling is not as strong as it was with maybe older cohorts,” said Dr. Schroeder. “Students come in saying, ‘We want to make a difference through social justice. That’s why we’re here.’ ”
Though single-payer health care long has been dismissed as a left-wing pipe dream, polling suggests a slim majority of Americans now support the idea – though it is not clear people know what the term means.
A full single-payer system means everyone gets coverage from the same insurance plan, usually sponsored by the government. “Medicare for all,” a phrase that gained currency with the presidential campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), means everyone gets Medicare, but, depending on the proposal, it may or may not allow private insurers to offer Medicare as well. (Sen. Sanders’ plan, which eliminates deductibles and expands benefits, would get rid of private insurers.)
Meanwhile, lots of countries achieve universal health care – everyone is covered somehow – but the method can vary. For example, France requires all citizens purchase coverage, which is sold through nonprofits. In Germany, most people get insurance from a government-run “public option,” while others purchase private plans. In England, health care is provided through the tax-funded National Health System.
American skeptics often use the phrase “socialized medicine” pejoratively to describe all of these models.
“Few really understand what you mean when you say single-payer,” said Frank Opelka, MD, medical director of quality and health policy for the American College of Surgeons, which opposes such a policy. “What they mean is, ‘I don’t think the current system is working.’ ”
But the willingness to explore previously unthinkable ideas is evident in young doctors’ ranks.
Recent surveys through LinkedIn, Merritt Hawkins, and NEJM Catalyst indicate growing support. In the March NEJM Catalyst survey, 61% of 607 respondents said single-payer would make it easier to deliver cost-effective, quality health care.
Delving further, that survey shows support is stronger among younger physicians, said Namita Mohta, MD, a hospitalist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, and clinical editor at NEJM Catalyst.
But it’s unclear whether these findings reflect young doctors’ feelings about the policy or whether they are tapping in to broader frustrations with the American health system.
Much like the general public, doctors often use terms like single-payer, Medicare for all, and universal health care interchangeably.
“Our younger generation is less afraid to come out and say we want universal health care,” said Anna Yap, MD, an emergency medicine resident at UCLA, who served as a medical student delegate to the AMA until this past June. “But how? It’s different in what forms we see.”
Younger doctors also pointed to growing concern about how best to keep patients healthy. They cited research that broadly suggests having health insurance tracks with better health outcomes.
“Medical students, I would say, are very interested in public health and improving social determinants of health – one of them being access to health insurance,” said Jerome Jeevarajan, MD, a neurology resident at the University of Texas–Houston, referring to nonmedical factors that improve health, such as food or housing.
Some of the shift in opinion has to do with the changing realities of medical practice. Doctors now are more likely to end up working for large health systems or hospitals, rather than starting a practice. Combined with the increasing complexity of billing private insurance, many said, that means contracting with the government may feel like less of an intrusion.
The debate is, at this point, still theoretical. Republicans – who control the White House and both houses of Congress – sharply oppose single-payer. Meanwhile, single-state efforts in California, Colorado, and New York have fallen flat.
Also, doctors represent only one part of the sprawling health care industrial complex. Other health care interests – including private insurance, the drug industry, and hospital trade groups – have been slower to warm to catchphrases like single-payer or universal health care, all of which would likely mean a drop in income.
But increasingly physicians seem to be switching sides in the debate, and young physicians want to be part of the discussion.
“There’s tremendous potential ... to be at the table if single-payer becomes a significant part of the political discourse, and create a system that is more equitable,” Dr. Pean said.
Kaiser Health News is a nonprofit national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation that is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.
When the American Medical Association – one of the nation’s most powerful health care groups – met in Chicago this June, its medical student caucus seized an opportunity for change.
Though they had tried for years to advance a resolution calling on the organization to drop its decades-long opposition to single-payer health care, this was the first time it got a full hearing. The debate grew heated – older physicians warned their pay would decrease, calling younger advocates naive to single-payer’s consequences. But this time, by the meeting’s end, the AMA’s older members had agreed to at least study the possibility of changing its stance.
“We believe health care is a human right, maybe more so than past generations,” said Brad Zehr, MD, a pathology resident at Ohio State University, who was part of the debate. “There’s a generational shift happening, where we see universal health care as a requirement.”
The ins and outs of the AMA’s policymaking may sound like inside baseball. But this year’s youth uprising at the nexus of the medical establishment speaks to a cultural shift in the medical profession, and one with big political implications.
Amid Republican attacks on the Affordable Care Act, an increasing number of Democrats – both candidates and Congress members – are putting forth proposals that would vastly increase the government’s role in running the health system. These include single-payer, Medicare-for-all, or an option for anyone to buy in to the Medicare program. At least 70 House Democrats have signed on to the new “Medicare-for-all” caucus.
Organized medicine, and previous generations of doctors, had for the most part staunchly opposed any such plan. The AMA has thwarted public health insurance proposals since the 1930s and long been considered one of the policy’s most powerful opponents.
But the battle lines are shifting as younger doctors flip their views, a change that will likely assume greater significance as the next generation of physicians takes on leadership roles. The AMA did not make anyone available for comment.
Many younger physicians are “accepting of single-payer,” said Christian Pean, MD, a third-year orthopedic surgery resident at New York University.
In prior generations, “intelligent, motivated, quantitative” students pursued medicine, both for the income and because of the workplace independence – running practices with minimal government interference, said Steven Schroeder, MD, professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco.
In his 50 years of teaching, students’ attitudes have changed, he said. “The ‘Oh, keep government out of my work’ feeling is not as strong as it was with maybe older cohorts,” said Dr. Schroeder. “Students come in saying, ‘We want to make a difference through social justice. That’s why we’re here.’ ”
Though single-payer health care long has been dismissed as a left-wing pipe dream, polling suggests a slim majority of Americans now support the idea – though it is not clear people know what the term means.
A full single-payer system means everyone gets coverage from the same insurance plan, usually sponsored by the government. “Medicare for all,” a phrase that gained currency with the presidential campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), means everyone gets Medicare, but, depending on the proposal, it may or may not allow private insurers to offer Medicare as well. (Sen. Sanders’ plan, which eliminates deductibles and expands benefits, would get rid of private insurers.)
Meanwhile, lots of countries achieve universal health care – everyone is covered somehow – but the method can vary. For example, France requires all citizens purchase coverage, which is sold through nonprofits. In Germany, most people get insurance from a government-run “public option,” while others purchase private plans. In England, health care is provided through the tax-funded National Health System.
American skeptics often use the phrase “socialized medicine” pejoratively to describe all of these models.
“Few really understand what you mean when you say single-payer,” said Frank Opelka, MD, medical director of quality and health policy for the American College of Surgeons, which opposes such a policy. “What they mean is, ‘I don’t think the current system is working.’ ”
But the willingness to explore previously unthinkable ideas is evident in young doctors’ ranks.
Recent surveys through LinkedIn, Merritt Hawkins, and NEJM Catalyst indicate growing support. In the March NEJM Catalyst survey, 61% of 607 respondents said single-payer would make it easier to deliver cost-effective, quality health care.
Delving further, that survey shows support is stronger among younger physicians, said Namita Mohta, MD, a hospitalist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, and clinical editor at NEJM Catalyst.
But it’s unclear whether these findings reflect young doctors’ feelings about the policy or whether they are tapping in to broader frustrations with the American health system.
Much like the general public, doctors often use terms like single-payer, Medicare for all, and universal health care interchangeably.
“Our younger generation is less afraid to come out and say we want universal health care,” said Anna Yap, MD, an emergency medicine resident at UCLA, who served as a medical student delegate to the AMA until this past June. “But how? It’s different in what forms we see.”
Younger doctors also pointed to growing concern about how best to keep patients healthy. They cited research that broadly suggests having health insurance tracks with better health outcomes.
“Medical students, I would say, are very interested in public health and improving social determinants of health – one of them being access to health insurance,” said Jerome Jeevarajan, MD, a neurology resident at the University of Texas–Houston, referring to nonmedical factors that improve health, such as food or housing.
Some of the shift in opinion has to do with the changing realities of medical practice. Doctors now are more likely to end up working for large health systems or hospitals, rather than starting a practice. Combined with the increasing complexity of billing private insurance, many said, that means contracting with the government may feel like less of an intrusion.
The debate is, at this point, still theoretical. Republicans – who control the White House and both houses of Congress – sharply oppose single-payer. Meanwhile, single-state efforts in California, Colorado, and New York have fallen flat.
Also, doctors represent only one part of the sprawling health care industrial complex. Other health care interests – including private insurance, the drug industry, and hospital trade groups – have been slower to warm to catchphrases like single-payer or universal health care, all of which would likely mean a drop in income.
But increasingly physicians seem to be switching sides in the debate, and young physicians want to be part of the discussion.
“There’s tremendous potential ... to be at the table if single-payer becomes a significant part of the political discourse, and create a system that is more equitable,” Dr. Pean said.
Kaiser Health News is a nonprofit national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation that is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.
When the American Medical Association – one of the nation’s most powerful health care groups – met in Chicago this June, its medical student caucus seized an opportunity for change.
Though they had tried for years to advance a resolution calling on the organization to drop its decades-long opposition to single-payer health care, this was the first time it got a full hearing. The debate grew heated – older physicians warned their pay would decrease, calling younger advocates naive to single-payer’s consequences. But this time, by the meeting’s end, the AMA’s older members had agreed to at least study the possibility of changing its stance.
“We believe health care is a human right, maybe more so than past generations,” said Brad Zehr, MD, a pathology resident at Ohio State University, who was part of the debate. “There’s a generational shift happening, where we see universal health care as a requirement.”
The ins and outs of the AMA’s policymaking may sound like inside baseball. But this year’s youth uprising at the nexus of the medical establishment speaks to a cultural shift in the medical profession, and one with big political implications.
Amid Republican attacks on the Affordable Care Act, an increasing number of Democrats – both candidates and Congress members – are putting forth proposals that would vastly increase the government’s role in running the health system. These include single-payer, Medicare-for-all, or an option for anyone to buy in to the Medicare program. At least 70 House Democrats have signed on to the new “Medicare-for-all” caucus.
Organized medicine, and previous generations of doctors, had for the most part staunchly opposed any such plan. The AMA has thwarted public health insurance proposals since the 1930s and long been considered one of the policy’s most powerful opponents.
But the battle lines are shifting as younger doctors flip their views, a change that will likely assume greater significance as the next generation of physicians takes on leadership roles. The AMA did not make anyone available for comment.
Many younger physicians are “accepting of single-payer,” said Christian Pean, MD, a third-year orthopedic surgery resident at New York University.
In prior generations, “intelligent, motivated, quantitative” students pursued medicine, both for the income and because of the workplace independence – running practices with minimal government interference, said Steven Schroeder, MD, professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco.
In his 50 years of teaching, students’ attitudes have changed, he said. “The ‘Oh, keep government out of my work’ feeling is not as strong as it was with maybe older cohorts,” said Dr. Schroeder. “Students come in saying, ‘We want to make a difference through social justice. That’s why we’re here.’ ”
Though single-payer health care long has been dismissed as a left-wing pipe dream, polling suggests a slim majority of Americans now support the idea – though it is not clear people know what the term means.
A full single-payer system means everyone gets coverage from the same insurance plan, usually sponsored by the government. “Medicare for all,” a phrase that gained currency with the presidential campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), means everyone gets Medicare, but, depending on the proposal, it may or may not allow private insurers to offer Medicare as well. (Sen. Sanders’ plan, which eliminates deductibles and expands benefits, would get rid of private insurers.)
Meanwhile, lots of countries achieve universal health care – everyone is covered somehow – but the method can vary. For example, France requires all citizens purchase coverage, which is sold through nonprofits. In Germany, most people get insurance from a government-run “public option,” while others purchase private plans. In England, health care is provided through the tax-funded National Health System.
American skeptics often use the phrase “socialized medicine” pejoratively to describe all of these models.
“Few really understand what you mean when you say single-payer,” said Frank Opelka, MD, medical director of quality and health policy for the American College of Surgeons, which opposes such a policy. “What they mean is, ‘I don’t think the current system is working.’ ”
But the willingness to explore previously unthinkable ideas is evident in young doctors’ ranks.
Recent surveys through LinkedIn, Merritt Hawkins, and NEJM Catalyst indicate growing support. In the March NEJM Catalyst survey, 61% of 607 respondents said single-payer would make it easier to deliver cost-effective, quality health care.
Delving further, that survey shows support is stronger among younger physicians, said Namita Mohta, MD, a hospitalist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, and clinical editor at NEJM Catalyst.
But it’s unclear whether these findings reflect young doctors’ feelings about the policy or whether they are tapping in to broader frustrations with the American health system.
Much like the general public, doctors often use terms like single-payer, Medicare for all, and universal health care interchangeably.
“Our younger generation is less afraid to come out and say we want universal health care,” said Anna Yap, MD, an emergency medicine resident at UCLA, who served as a medical student delegate to the AMA until this past June. “But how? It’s different in what forms we see.”
Younger doctors also pointed to growing concern about how best to keep patients healthy. They cited research that broadly suggests having health insurance tracks with better health outcomes.
“Medical students, I would say, are very interested in public health and improving social determinants of health – one of them being access to health insurance,” said Jerome Jeevarajan, MD, a neurology resident at the University of Texas–Houston, referring to nonmedical factors that improve health, such as food or housing.
Some of the shift in opinion has to do with the changing realities of medical practice. Doctors now are more likely to end up working for large health systems or hospitals, rather than starting a practice. Combined with the increasing complexity of billing private insurance, many said, that means contracting with the government may feel like less of an intrusion.
The debate is, at this point, still theoretical. Republicans – who control the White House and both houses of Congress – sharply oppose single-payer. Meanwhile, single-state efforts in California, Colorado, and New York have fallen flat.
Also, doctors represent only one part of the sprawling health care industrial complex. Other health care interests – including private insurance, the drug industry, and hospital trade groups – have been slower to warm to catchphrases like single-payer or universal health care, all of which would likely mean a drop in income.
But increasingly physicians seem to be switching sides in the debate, and young physicians want to be part of the discussion.
“There’s tremendous potential ... to be at the table if single-payer becomes a significant part of the political discourse, and create a system that is more equitable,” Dr. Pean said.
Kaiser Health News is a nonprofit national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation that is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.
Bendamustine-Based Salvage Regimen Offers Hope
Many patients with primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) experience rapid, aggressive progression of CNS malignancy. It is “accepted,” say researchers from Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital in the Republic of Korea, that salvage therapy is beneficial and significantly improves survival in comparison to palliative care, but therapy options remain limited—mainly because few trials have been done. Several case reports have suggested that bendamustine has modest clinical activity against relapsed PCNSL, the researchers note, but its effect as part of combination salvage therapy in these patients has not been established. The study offers some validation of previous findings and new information about the benefits of a bendamustine-based combination regimen.
The researchers enrolled 10 patients, of whom 7 had refractory disease. All had previously been on high-dose methotrexate. Of the 3 relapsed patients, 1 entered the study at second relapse. The patients received either R-B(O)AD or R-BAD (rituximab, vincristine, bendamustine, cytarabine, dexamethasone) every 4 weeks for up to 4 cycles. Vincristine was omitted in 4 regimens, and dosages of bendamustine and cytarabine were reduced for 4 patients who were over 70.
The overall response rate for R-B(O)AD was 50%. One patient achieved complete response and 4 achieved partial response. The researchers observed “remarkable effects” on imaging in patients who responded. They attribute the activity to the anticipated synergy of bendamustine combined with cytarabine—even though disease in the majority of the patients had progressed despite previous treatment with cytarabine.
However, the synergistic effects also led to significant marrow depression; hematologic toxicity with R-B(O)AD was “considerable,” with grade 3 or 4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia seen in more than 85% of treatment cycles. Moreover, 3 patients developed severe infection, all with involvement of the lungs. The researchers therefore amended the study protocol to reduce cytarabine dosage. While the toxicity is significant, the researchers say, it is manageable with the dose reduction and supportive care.
Bendamustine cerebrospinal fluid levels were minimal, but corresponded to plasma exposure and response to treatment in deep tumor locations.
Although the study is small, it supports the use of the bendamustine-based regimen as an effective salvage option, the researchers conclude, especially for patients who are no longer responding to methotrexate or have developed cumulative renal or neurotoxicity from treatment.
Source:
Kim T, Choi HY, Lee HS, et al. BMC Cancer. 2018;18(1):729
Many patients with primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) experience rapid, aggressive progression of CNS malignancy. It is “accepted,” say researchers from Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital in the Republic of Korea, that salvage therapy is beneficial and significantly improves survival in comparison to palliative care, but therapy options remain limited—mainly because few trials have been done. Several case reports have suggested that bendamustine has modest clinical activity against relapsed PCNSL, the researchers note, but its effect as part of combination salvage therapy in these patients has not been established. The study offers some validation of previous findings and new information about the benefits of a bendamustine-based combination regimen.
The researchers enrolled 10 patients, of whom 7 had refractory disease. All had previously been on high-dose methotrexate. Of the 3 relapsed patients, 1 entered the study at second relapse. The patients received either R-B(O)AD or R-BAD (rituximab, vincristine, bendamustine, cytarabine, dexamethasone) every 4 weeks for up to 4 cycles. Vincristine was omitted in 4 regimens, and dosages of bendamustine and cytarabine were reduced for 4 patients who were over 70.
The overall response rate for R-B(O)AD was 50%. One patient achieved complete response and 4 achieved partial response. The researchers observed “remarkable effects” on imaging in patients who responded. They attribute the activity to the anticipated synergy of bendamustine combined with cytarabine—even though disease in the majority of the patients had progressed despite previous treatment with cytarabine.
However, the synergistic effects also led to significant marrow depression; hematologic toxicity with R-B(O)AD was “considerable,” with grade 3 or 4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia seen in more than 85% of treatment cycles. Moreover, 3 patients developed severe infection, all with involvement of the lungs. The researchers therefore amended the study protocol to reduce cytarabine dosage. While the toxicity is significant, the researchers say, it is manageable with the dose reduction and supportive care.
Bendamustine cerebrospinal fluid levels were minimal, but corresponded to plasma exposure and response to treatment in deep tumor locations.
Although the study is small, it supports the use of the bendamustine-based regimen as an effective salvage option, the researchers conclude, especially for patients who are no longer responding to methotrexate or have developed cumulative renal or neurotoxicity from treatment.
Source:
Kim T, Choi HY, Lee HS, et al. BMC Cancer. 2018;18(1):729
Many patients with primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) experience rapid, aggressive progression of CNS malignancy. It is “accepted,” say researchers from Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital in the Republic of Korea, that salvage therapy is beneficial and significantly improves survival in comparison to palliative care, but therapy options remain limited—mainly because few trials have been done. Several case reports have suggested that bendamustine has modest clinical activity against relapsed PCNSL, the researchers note, but its effect as part of combination salvage therapy in these patients has not been established. The study offers some validation of previous findings and new information about the benefits of a bendamustine-based combination regimen.
The researchers enrolled 10 patients, of whom 7 had refractory disease. All had previously been on high-dose methotrexate. Of the 3 relapsed patients, 1 entered the study at second relapse. The patients received either R-B(O)AD or R-BAD (rituximab, vincristine, bendamustine, cytarabine, dexamethasone) every 4 weeks for up to 4 cycles. Vincristine was omitted in 4 regimens, and dosages of bendamustine and cytarabine were reduced for 4 patients who were over 70.
The overall response rate for R-B(O)AD was 50%. One patient achieved complete response and 4 achieved partial response. The researchers observed “remarkable effects” on imaging in patients who responded. They attribute the activity to the anticipated synergy of bendamustine combined with cytarabine—even though disease in the majority of the patients had progressed despite previous treatment with cytarabine.
However, the synergistic effects also led to significant marrow depression; hematologic toxicity with R-B(O)AD was “considerable,” with grade 3 or 4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia seen in more than 85% of treatment cycles. Moreover, 3 patients developed severe infection, all with involvement of the lungs. The researchers therefore amended the study protocol to reduce cytarabine dosage. While the toxicity is significant, the researchers say, it is manageable with the dose reduction and supportive care.
Bendamustine cerebrospinal fluid levels were minimal, but corresponded to plasma exposure and response to treatment in deep tumor locations.
Although the study is small, it supports the use of the bendamustine-based regimen as an effective salvage option, the researchers conclude, especially for patients who are no longer responding to methotrexate or have developed cumulative renal or neurotoxicity from treatment.
Source:
Kim T, Choi HY, Lee HS, et al. BMC Cancer. 2018;18(1):729
Treating immunotherapy-related AEs in the emergency department
In this interview, Dr David Henry and Dr Maura Sammon discuss some of the most common immunotherapy-related side effects – lung, gastrointestinal, rash, and endocrine-related problems – and Dr Sammon describes in detail how physicians in the ED would triage and treat the patient. However, the overarching takeaway is the importance of communication: first, between the oncologist and patient, so that the patient is aware of these nuances in advance of an emergency, and second, between the ED physician and the treating oncologist soon after the patient has presented and undergone an initial assessment.
Dr Henry is Editor-in-Chief of the JCSO, and Dr Sammon is at the Lewis Katz School of Medicine, Temple University, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Listen here:
In this interview, Dr David Henry and Dr Maura Sammon discuss some of the most common immunotherapy-related side effects – lung, gastrointestinal, rash, and endocrine-related problems – and Dr Sammon describes in detail how physicians in the ED would triage and treat the patient. However, the overarching takeaway is the importance of communication: first, between the oncologist and patient, so that the patient is aware of these nuances in advance of an emergency, and second, between the ED physician and the treating oncologist soon after the patient has presented and undergone an initial assessment.
Dr Henry is Editor-in-Chief of the JCSO, and Dr Sammon is at the Lewis Katz School of Medicine, Temple University, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Listen here:
In this interview, Dr David Henry and Dr Maura Sammon discuss some of the most common immunotherapy-related side effects – lung, gastrointestinal, rash, and endocrine-related problems – and Dr Sammon describes in detail how physicians in the ED would triage and treat the patient. However, the overarching takeaway is the importance of communication: first, between the oncologist and patient, so that the patient is aware of these nuances in advance of an emergency, and second, between the ED physician and the treating oncologist soon after the patient has presented and undergone an initial assessment.
Dr Henry is Editor-in-Chief of the JCSO, and Dr Sammon is at the Lewis Katz School of Medicine, Temple University, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Listen here:
A Veteran With Fibromyalgia Presenting With Dyspnea
Case Presentation. A 64-year-old US Army veteran with a history of colorectal cancer, melanoma, and fibrinolytic presented with dyspnea to VA Boston Healthcare System (VABHS). Seven years prior to the current presentation, at the time of her diagnosis of colorectal cancer, the patient was found to be HIV negative but to have a positive purified protein derivative (PPD) test. She was treated with isoniazid (INH) therapy for 9 months. Sputum cultures collected prior to initiation of therapy grew Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) in 1 of 3 samples, with these results reported several months after initiation of therapy. She was a never smoker with no known travel or exposure. At the time of the current presentation, her medications included bupropion, levothyroxine, capsaicin, cyclobenzaprine, ibuprofen, and acetaminophen.
►Lakshmana Swamy, MD, Chief Medical Resident, VABHS and Boston Medical Center. Dr. Monach, this patient is on a variety of pain medications and has a diagnosis of fibromyalgia. This diagnosis often frustrates doctors and patients alike. Can you tell us about fibromyalgia from the rheumatologist’s perspective and what you think of her current treatment regimen?
►Paul A. Monach, MD, PhD, Chief, Section of Rheumatology, VABHS and Associate Professor of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine. Fibromyalgia is a syndrome of chronic widespread pain without known pathology in the musculoskeletal system. It is thought to be caused by chronic dysfunction of pain-processing pathways in the central nervous system (CNS). It is often accompanied by other somatic symptoms such as chronic fatigue, irritable bowel syndrome, and bladder pain. It is a common condition, affecting up to 5% of otherwise healthy women. It is particularly common in persons with chronic nonrestorative sleep or posttraumatic stress disorder from a wide range of causes. However, it also is more common in persons with autoimmune inflammatory diseases, such as lupus, Sjögren syndrome, or rheumatoid arthritis. Concern for one of these diseases is the main reason to consider referring a patient for evaluation by a rheumatologist. Often rheumatologists participate in the management of fibromyalgia. A patient should be given appropriate expectations by the referring physician.
Effectiveness of treatment varies widely among patients. Nonpharmacologic approaches such as aerobic exercise, cognitive behavioral therapy, and tai chi have support from clinical trials, and yoga and aquatherapy also are widely used.1,2 The classes of drugs used are the same as for neuropathic pain: tricyclics, including cyclobenzaprine; serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs); and gabapentinoids. In contrast, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids are ineffective unless there is a superimposed mechanical or inflammatory cause in the periphery. The key point is that continuation of any treatment should be based entirely on the patient’s own assessment of benefit.
►Dr. Swamy. Seven years later, the patient returned to her primary care provider, reporting increased dyspnea on exertion as well as significant fatigue. She was referred to the pulmonary department and had repeat computed tomography (CT) scans of the chest, which indicated persistent right middle lobe (RML) bronchiectasis. She then underwent bronchoscopy with a subsequent bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) culture growing MAC. Dr. Fine, please interpret the baseline and follow-up CT scans and help us understand the significance of the MAC on sputum and BAL cultures.
►Alan Fine, MD, Section of Pulmonary and Critical Care, VABHS and Professor of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine. Prior to this presentation, the patient had a pleural-based area of fibrosis with possible associated RML bronchiectasis. This appears to be a postinflammatory process without classic features of malignant or metastatic disease. She then had a sputum, which grew MAC in only 1 of 3 samples and in liquid media only. Importantly, the sputum was not smear positive. All of this suggests a low organism burden. One possibility is that this could reflect colonization with MAC; it is not uncommon for patients with underlying chronic changes in their lung to grow MAC, and it is often difficult to tell whether it is indicative of active disease. Structural lung disease, such as bronchiectasis, predisposes a patient to MAC, but chronic MAC also may cause bronchiectasis. This chicken-and-egg scenario comes up frequently. She may have a MAC infection, but as she is HIV negative and asymptomatic, there is no urgent indication to treat, especially as the burden of therapy is not insignificant.
►Dr. Swamy. Do we need to worry about Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB)?
►Dr. Fine. Although she was previously PPD positive, she had already completed 1 year of isoniazid (INH) therapy, making active MTB less likely. From an infection control standpoint, it is important to distinguish MAC from MTB. The former is not contagious, and there is no need for airborne isolation.
►Dr. Swamy. Dr. Fine, where does MAC come from? Does it commonly cause disease?
►Dr. Fine. In the environment, MAC is nearly ubiquitous , especially in water and soil. In one study, 20% of showerheads were positive for MAC; when patients are infected, we may suggest changing/bleaching the showerhead, but there are no definitive recommendations.3 Because MAC is so common in the environment, it is unlikely that measures to target MAC colonization will be clinically meaningful. On the other hand, the incidence of nontuberculous mycobacterial infections is increasing across the US, and it may be a common and frequently underdiagnosed cause of chronic cough, especially in postmenopausal women.
►Dr. Swamy. Four years prior to the current presentation, the patient developed a cough after an upper respiratory tract infection that persisted for more than 2 weeks. Given her history, she underwent a repeat chest CT, which noted a slight increase in nodularity and ground-glass opacity restricted to the RML. She also reported dyspnea on exertion and was referred to the pulmonary medicine department. By the time she arrived, her dyspnea had largely resolved, but she reported persistent fatigue without other systemic symptoms, such as fevers or chills. Dr. Fine, does MAC explain this patient’s dyspnea?
►Dr. Fine. As her pulmonary symptoms resolved in a short period of time with only azithromycin, it is very unlikely that her symptoms were related to her prior disease. The MAC infection is not likely to cause dyspnea on exertion and fatigue and should be worked up more broadly before attributing it to MAC. In view of this, it would not be unreasonable to follow her clinically and see her again in 6 to 8 weeks. In this context, we also should consider the untoward impact of repeated radiation exposure derived from multiple CT scans. When a patient has an abnormality on CT scan, it often leads to further scans even if the symptoms do not match the previous findings, as in this case.
►Dr. Swamy. Given her ongoing fatigue and systemic symptoms (morning stiffness of the shoulders, legs, and thighs, and leg cramps), she was referred to the rheumatology department where the physical examination revealed muscle tenderness in her proximal arms and legs with normal strength, tender points at the elbows and medial side of the bilateral knees, significant tenderness of lower legs, and no synovitis.
Dr. Monach, can you walk us through your approach to this patient? Are we seeing manifestations of fibromyalgia? What diagnoses concerns you and how would you proceed?
►Dr. Monach. The history and exam are most helpful in raising or reducing suspicion for an underlying inflammatory disease. Areas of tenderness described in her case are typical of fibromyalgia, although it can be difficult to interpret symptoms in the hip girdle and shoulder girdle because objective findings are often absent on exam in patients with inflammatory arthritis or bursitis. Similarly, tenderness at sites of tendon insertion (enthuses) without objective abnormalities is common in different forms of spondyloarthritis, so tenderness at the elbow, knee, lateral hip, and low back can be difficult to interpret. What this patient is lacking is prominent subjective or objective findings in the joints most commonly affected in rheumatoid arthritis and lupus: wrists, hands, ankles, and feet.
►Dr. Swamy. Initial laboratory data include an erythrocyte sedimentation rate of 79 with a normal C-reactive protein. A tentative diagnosis of polymyalgia rheumatic is made with consideration of a trial treatment of prednisone.
Dr. Monach, this patient has an indolent infection and is about to be given glucocorticoids. Could you describe the situations in which you feel that glucocorticoids cause a relative immunosuppression?
►Dr. Monach. Glucocorticoids are considered safe in a patient whose infection is not intrinsically dangerous or who has started appropriate antibiotics for that infection. Although all toxicities of glucocorticoids are dose dependent, the long-standing assertion that doses below 10 mg to 15 mg do not increase risk of infection is contradicted by data published in the past 10 to 15 years, with the caveat that these patients were on long-term treatment.
►Dr. Swamy. The patient was started on prednisone 15 mg per day for 15 days. She returned to the clinic after 1 week of prednisone troutment and noted “significant improvement in fatigue, morning stiffness of shoulders, thighs, leg, back is better, leg cramps resolved, shooting pain in many joints resolved.” Further laboratory results were notable for a negative rheumatoid factor, negative antinuclear antibody, and a cyclic citrullinated peptide of 60. A presumptive diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) was made and plaquenil 200 mg twice daily was started.
Dr. Monach, can you explain why RA comes up now on serology but was not considered initially? Why does this presentation fit RA, and was her response to treatment typical? How does this fit in with her previous diagnosis of fibromyalgia? Was that just an atypical, indolent presentation of RA?
►Dr. Monach. Though her presentation is atypical for RA, in elderly patients, RA can present with symptoms resembling polymyalgia rheumatica. The question is whether she had RA all along (in which case “elderly onset” would not apply) or had fibromyalgia and developed RA more recently. The response to empiric glucocorticoid therapy is helpful, since fibromyalgia should not improve with prednisone even in a patient with RA unless treatment of RA would allow better sleep and ability to exercise. Rheumatoid arthritis typically responds very well to prednisone in the 5-mg to 15-mg range.
►Dr. Swamy. Given the new diagnosis of an inflammatory arthritis requiring immunosuppression, bronchoscopy with BAL is performed to evaluate for the presence of MAC. These cultures were positive for MAC.
Dr. Fine, does the positive BAL culture indicate an active MAC infection?
►Dr. Fine. Yes, based on these updated data, the patient has an active MAC infection. Active infection is defined as symptoms or imaging consistent with the diagnosis, supporting microbiology data (either 2 sputum or 1 BAL sample growing MAC) and the exclusion of other causes. Previously, this patient grew MAC in just one expectorated sputum; this did not meet the microbiologic criteria. Now sputum has grown in the BAL sample; along with the CT imaging, this is enough to diagnosis active MAC infection.
Treatment for MAC must consider the details of each case. First, this is not an emergency; treatment decisions should be made with the rheumatologist to consider the planned immunosuppression. For example, we must consider potential drug interactions. A specific point should be made of the use of tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibition, which data indicate can reactivate TB and may inhibit mechanisms that restrain mycobacterial disease. Serious cases of MAC infection have been reported in the literature in the setting of TNF-α inhibition.5,6 Despite these concerns, there is not a contraindication to using these therapies from the perspective of the active MAC disease. All of these decisions will impact the need to commit the patient to MAC therapy.
►Dr. Swamy. Dr. Fine, what do you consider prior to initiating MAC therapy?
► Dr. Fine. The decision to pursue MAC therapy should not be taken lightly. Therapy often entails prolonged multidrug regimens, usually spanning more than a year, with frequent adverse effects. Outside of very specific cases, such as TNF-β inhibition, MAC is rarely a life-threatening disease, so the benefit may be limited. Treatment for MAC is certainly unlikely to be fruitful without a diligent and motivated patient able to handle the high and prolonged pill burden. Of note, it is also important to keep this patient up-to-date with influenza and pneumonia vaccination given her structural lung disease.
►Dr. Swamy. The decision is made to treat MAC with azithromycin, rifampin, and ethambutol. The disease is noted to be nonfibrocavitary. The patient underwent monthly liver function test monitoring and visual acuity testing, which were unremarkable. Dr. Fine, can you describe the phenotypes of nontuberculous mycobacterial (NTM) disease?
►Dr. Fine. There are 3 main phenotypes of NTM.3 First, we see the elderly man with preexisting lung disease—usually chronic obstructive pulmonary disease—with fibrocavitary and/or reticulonodular appearance. Second, we see the slim, elderly woman often without any preexisting lung disease presenting with focal bronchiectasis and nodular lesions in right middle lobe and lingula—the Lady Windermere syndrome. This eponym is derived from Oscar Wilde’s play “Lady Windermere’s Fan, a Play About a Good Woman,” and was first associated with this disease in 1992.7 At the time, it was thought that the voluntary suppression of cough led to poorly draining lung regions, vulnerable to engraftment by atypical mycobacteria. Infection with atypical mycobacteria are associated with this population; however, it is no longer thought to be due to the voluntary suppression of cough.7,8 Third, we do occasionally see atypical presentations, such as focal masses and solitary nodules.
►Dr. Swamy. At 1-year follow-up she successfully completed MAC therapy and noted ongoing control of rheumatoid symptoms.
1. Bernardy K, Klose P, Welsch P, Häuser W. Efficacy, acceptability and safety of cognitive behavioural therapies in fibromyalgia syndrome—a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur J Pain. 2018;22(2):242-260.
2. Geneen LJ, Moore RA, Clarke C, Martin D, Colvin LA, Smith BH. Physical activity and exercise for chronic pain in adults: an overview of Cochrane Reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;4:CD011279.
3. Aksamit TR, Philley JV, Griffith DE. Nontuberculous mycobacterial (NTM) lung disease: the top ten essentials. Respir Med. 2014;108(3):417-425.
4. Aucott JN. Glucocorticoids and infection. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am. 1994;23(3):655-670.
5. Curtis JR, Yang S, Patkar NM, et al. Risk of hospitalized bacterial infections associated with biologic treatment among US veterans with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2014;66(7):990-997.
6. Lane MA, McDonald JR, Zeringue AL, et al. TNF-α antagonist use and risk of hospitalization for infection in a national cohort of veterans with rheumatoid arthritis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2011;90(2):139-145.
7. Reich JM, Johnson RE. Mycobacterium avium complex pulmonary disease presenting as an isolated lingular or middle lobe pattern. The Lady Windermere syndrome. Chest. 1992;101(6):1605-1609.
8. Kasthoori JJ, Liam CK, Wastie ML. Lady Windermere syndrome: an inappropriate eponym for an increasingly important condition. Singapore Med J. 2008;49(2):e47-e49.
Case Presentation. A 64-year-old US Army veteran with a history of colorectal cancer, melanoma, and fibrinolytic presented with dyspnea to VA Boston Healthcare System (VABHS). Seven years prior to the current presentation, at the time of her diagnosis of colorectal cancer, the patient was found to be HIV negative but to have a positive purified protein derivative (PPD) test. She was treated with isoniazid (INH) therapy for 9 months. Sputum cultures collected prior to initiation of therapy grew Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) in 1 of 3 samples, with these results reported several months after initiation of therapy. She was a never smoker with no known travel or exposure. At the time of the current presentation, her medications included bupropion, levothyroxine, capsaicin, cyclobenzaprine, ibuprofen, and acetaminophen.
►Lakshmana Swamy, MD, Chief Medical Resident, VABHS and Boston Medical Center. Dr. Monach, this patient is on a variety of pain medications and has a diagnosis of fibromyalgia. This diagnosis often frustrates doctors and patients alike. Can you tell us about fibromyalgia from the rheumatologist’s perspective and what you think of her current treatment regimen?
►Paul A. Monach, MD, PhD, Chief, Section of Rheumatology, VABHS and Associate Professor of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine. Fibromyalgia is a syndrome of chronic widespread pain without known pathology in the musculoskeletal system. It is thought to be caused by chronic dysfunction of pain-processing pathways in the central nervous system (CNS). It is often accompanied by other somatic symptoms such as chronic fatigue, irritable bowel syndrome, and bladder pain. It is a common condition, affecting up to 5% of otherwise healthy women. It is particularly common in persons with chronic nonrestorative sleep or posttraumatic stress disorder from a wide range of causes. However, it also is more common in persons with autoimmune inflammatory diseases, such as lupus, Sjögren syndrome, or rheumatoid arthritis. Concern for one of these diseases is the main reason to consider referring a patient for evaluation by a rheumatologist. Often rheumatologists participate in the management of fibromyalgia. A patient should be given appropriate expectations by the referring physician.
Effectiveness of treatment varies widely among patients. Nonpharmacologic approaches such as aerobic exercise, cognitive behavioral therapy, and tai chi have support from clinical trials, and yoga and aquatherapy also are widely used.1,2 The classes of drugs used are the same as for neuropathic pain: tricyclics, including cyclobenzaprine; serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs); and gabapentinoids. In contrast, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids are ineffective unless there is a superimposed mechanical or inflammatory cause in the periphery. The key point is that continuation of any treatment should be based entirely on the patient’s own assessment of benefit.
►Dr. Swamy. Seven years later, the patient returned to her primary care provider, reporting increased dyspnea on exertion as well as significant fatigue. She was referred to the pulmonary department and had repeat computed tomography (CT) scans of the chest, which indicated persistent right middle lobe (RML) bronchiectasis. She then underwent bronchoscopy with a subsequent bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) culture growing MAC. Dr. Fine, please interpret the baseline and follow-up CT scans and help us understand the significance of the MAC on sputum and BAL cultures.
►Alan Fine, MD, Section of Pulmonary and Critical Care, VABHS and Professor of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine. Prior to this presentation, the patient had a pleural-based area of fibrosis with possible associated RML bronchiectasis. This appears to be a postinflammatory process without classic features of malignant or metastatic disease. She then had a sputum, which grew MAC in only 1 of 3 samples and in liquid media only. Importantly, the sputum was not smear positive. All of this suggests a low organism burden. One possibility is that this could reflect colonization with MAC; it is not uncommon for patients with underlying chronic changes in their lung to grow MAC, and it is often difficult to tell whether it is indicative of active disease. Structural lung disease, such as bronchiectasis, predisposes a patient to MAC, but chronic MAC also may cause bronchiectasis. This chicken-and-egg scenario comes up frequently. She may have a MAC infection, but as she is HIV negative and asymptomatic, there is no urgent indication to treat, especially as the burden of therapy is not insignificant.
►Dr. Swamy. Do we need to worry about Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB)?
►Dr. Fine. Although she was previously PPD positive, she had already completed 1 year of isoniazid (INH) therapy, making active MTB less likely. From an infection control standpoint, it is important to distinguish MAC from MTB. The former is not contagious, and there is no need for airborne isolation.
►Dr. Swamy. Dr. Fine, where does MAC come from? Does it commonly cause disease?
►Dr. Fine. In the environment, MAC is nearly ubiquitous , especially in water and soil. In one study, 20% of showerheads were positive for MAC; when patients are infected, we may suggest changing/bleaching the showerhead, but there are no definitive recommendations.3 Because MAC is so common in the environment, it is unlikely that measures to target MAC colonization will be clinically meaningful. On the other hand, the incidence of nontuberculous mycobacterial infections is increasing across the US, and it may be a common and frequently underdiagnosed cause of chronic cough, especially in postmenopausal women.
►Dr. Swamy. Four years prior to the current presentation, the patient developed a cough after an upper respiratory tract infection that persisted for more than 2 weeks. Given her history, she underwent a repeat chest CT, which noted a slight increase in nodularity and ground-glass opacity restricted to the RML. She also reported dyspnea on exertion and was referred to the pulmonary medicine department. By the time she arrived, her dyspnea had largely resolved, but she reported persistent fatigue without other systemic symptoms, such as fevers or chills. Dr. Fine, does MAC explain this patient’s dyspnea?
►Dr. Fine. As her pulmonary symptoms resolved in a short period of time with only azithromycin, it is very unlikely that her symptoms were related to her prior disease. The MAC infection is not likely to cause dyspnea on exertion and fatigue and should be worked up more broadly before attributing it to MAC. In view of this, it would not be unreasonable to follow her clinically and see her again in 6 to 8 weeks. In this context, we also should consider the untoward impact of repeated radiation exposure derived from multiple CT scans. When a patient has an abnormality on CT scan, it often leads to further scans even if the symptoms do not match the previous findings, as in this case.
►Dr. Swamy. Given her ongoing fatigue and systemic symptoms (morning stiffness of the shoulders, legs, and thighs, and leg cramps), she was referred to the rheumatology department where the physical examination revealed muscle tenderness in her proximal arms and legs with normal strength, tender points at the elbows and medial side of the bilateral knees, significant tenderness of lower legs, and no synovitis.
Dr. Monach, can you walk us through your approach to this patient? Are we seeing manifestations of fibromyalgia? What diagnoses concerns you and how would you proceed?
►Dr. Monach. The history and exam are most helpful in raising or reducing suspicion for an underlying inflammatory disease. Areas of tenderness described in her case are typical of fibromyalgia, although it can be difficult to interpret symptoms in the hip girdle and shoulder girdle because objective findings are often absent on exam in patients with inflammatory arthritis or bursitis. Similarly, tenderness at sites of tendon insertion (enthuses) without objective abnormalities is common in different forms of spondyloarthritis, so tenderness at the elbow, knee, lateral hip, and low back can be difficult to interpret. What this patient is lacking is prominent subjective or objective findings in the joints most commonly affected in rheumatoid arthritis and lupus: wrists, hands, ankles, and feet.
►Dr. Swamy. Initial laboratory data include an erythrocyte sedimentation rate of 79 with a normal C-reactive protein. A tentative diagnosis of polymyalgia rheumatic is made with consideration of a trial treatment of prednisone.
Dr. Monach, this patient has an indolent infection and is about to be given glucocorticoids. Could you describe the situations in which you feel that glucocorticoids cause a relative immunosuppression?
►Dr. Monach. Glucocorticoids are considered safe in a patient whose infection is not intrinsically dangerous or who has started appropriate antibiotics for that infection. Although all toxicities of glucocorticoids are dose dependent, the long-standing assertion that doses below 10 mg to 15 mg do not increase risk of infection is contradicted by data published in the past 10 to 15 years, with the caveat that these patients were on long-term treatment.
►Dr. Swamy. The patient was started on prednisone 15 mg per day for 15 days. She returned to the clinic after 1 week of prednisone troutment and noted “significant improvement in fatigue, morning stiffness of shoulders, thighs, leg, back is better, leg cramps resolved, shooting pain in many joints resolved.” Further laboratory results were notable for a negative rheumatoid factor, negative antinuclear antibody, and a cyclic citrullinated peptide of 60. A presumptive diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) was made and plaquenil 200 mg twice daily was started.
Dr. Monach, can you explain why RA comes up now on serology but was not considered initially? Why does this presentation fit RA, and was her response to treatment typical? How does this fit in with her previous diagnosis of fibromyalgia? Was that just an atypical, indolent presentation of RA?
►Dr. Monach. Though her presentation is atypical for RA, in elderly patients, RA can present with symptoms resembling polymyalgia rheumatica. The question is whether she had RA all along (in which case “elderly onset” would not apply) or had fibromyalgia and developed RA more recently. The response to empiric glucocorticoid therapy is helpful, since fibromyalgia should not improve with prednisone even in a patient with RA unless treatment of RA would allow better sleep and ability to exercise. Rheumatoid arthritis typically responds very well to prednisone in the 5-mg to 15-mg range.
►Dr. Swamy. Given the new diagnosis of an inflammatory arthritis requiring immunosuppression, bronchoscopy with BAL is performed to evaluate for the presence of MAC. These cultures were positive for MAC.
Dr. Fine, does the positive BAL culture indicate an active MAC infection?
►Dr. Fine. Yes, based on these updated data, the patient has an active MAC infection. Active infection is defined as symptoms or imaging consistent with the diagnosis, supporting microbiology data (either 2 sputum or 1 BAL sample growing MAC) and the exclusion of other causes. Previously, this patient grew MAC in just one expectorated sputum; this did not meet the microbiologic criteria. Now sputum has grown in the BAL sample; along with the CT imaging, this is enough to diagnosis active MAC infection.
Treatment for MAC must consider the details of each case. First, this is not an emergency; treatment decisions should be made with the rheumatologist to consider the planned immunosuppression. For example, we must consider potential drug interactions. A specific point should be made of the use of tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibition, which data indicate can reactivate TB and may inhibit mechanisms that restrain mycobacterial disease. Serious cases of MAC infection have been reported in the literature in the setting of TNF-α inhibition.5,6 Despite these concerns, there is not a contraindication to using these therapies from the perspective of the active MAC disease. All of these decisions will impact the need to commit the patient to MAC therapy.
►Dr. Swamy. Dr. Fine, what do you consider prior to initiating MAC therapy?
► Dr. Fine. The decision to pursue MAC therapy should not be taken lightly. Therapy often entails prolonged multidrug regimens, usually spanning more than a year, with frequent adverse effects. Outside of very specific cases, such as TNF-β inhibition, MAC is rarely a life-threatening disease, so the benefit may be limited. Treatment for MAC is certainly unlikely to be fruitful without a diligent and motivated patient able to handle the high and prolonged pill burden. Of note, it is also important to keep this patient up-to-date with influenza and pneumonia vaccination given her structural lung disease.
►Dr. Swamy. The decision is made to treat MAC with azithromycin, rifampin, and ethambutol. The disease is noted to be nonfibrocavitary. The patient underwent monthly liver function test monitoring and visual acuity testing, which were unremarkable. Dr. Fine, can you describe the phenotypes of nontuberculous mycobacterial (NTM) disease?
►Dr. Fine. There are 3 main phenotypes of NTM.3 First, we see the elderly man with preexisting lung disease—usually chronic obstructive pulmonary disease—with fibrocavitary and/or reticulonodular appearance. Second, we see the slim, elderly woman often without any preexisting lung disease presenting with focal bronchiectasis and nodular lesions in right middle lobe and lingula—the Lady Windermere syndrome. This eponym is derived from Oscar Wilde’s play “Lady Windermere’s Fan, a Play About a Good Woman,” and was first associated with this disease in 1992.7 At the time, it was thought that the voluntary suppression of cough led to poorly draining lung regions, vulnerable to engraftment by atypical mycobacteria. Infection with atypical mycobacteria are associated with this population; however, it is no longer thought to be due to the voluntary suppression of cough.7,8 Third, we do occasionally see atypical presentations, such as focal masses and solitary nodules.
►Dr. Swamy. At 1-year follow-up she successfully completed MAC therapy and noted ongoing control of rheumatoid symptoms.
Case Presentation. A 64-year-old US Army veteran with a history of colorectal cancer, melanoma, and fibrinolytic presented with dyspnea to VA Boston Healthcare System (VABHS). Seven years prior to the current presentation, at the time of her diagnosis of colorectal cancer, the patient was found to be HIV negative but to have a positive purified protein derivative (PPD) test. She was treated with isoniazid (INH) therapy for 9 months. Sputum cultures collected prior to initiation of therapy grew Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) in 1 of 3 samples, with these results reported several months after initiation of therapy. She was a never smoker with no known travel or exposure. At the time of the current presentation, her medications included bupropion, levothyroxine, capsaicin, cyclobenzaprine, ibuprofen, and acetaminophen.
►Lakshmana Swamy, MD, Chief Medical Resident, VABHS and Boston Medical Center. Dr. Monach, this patient is on a variety of pain medications and has a diagnosis of fibromyalgia. This diagnosis often frustrates doctors and patients alike. Can you tell us about fibromyalgia from the rheumatologist’s perspective and what you think of her current treatment regimen?
►Paul A. Monach, MD, PhD, Chief, Section of Rheumatology, VABHS and Associate Professor of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine. Fibromyalgia is a syndrome of chronic widespread pain without known pathology in the musculoskeletal system. It is thought to be caused by chronic dysfunction of pain-processing pathways in the central nervous system (CNS). It is often accompanied by other somatic symptoms such as chronic fatigue, irritable bowel syndrome, and bladder pain. It is a common condition, affecting up to 5% of otherwise healthy women. It is particularly common in persons with chronic nonrestorative sleep or posttraumatic stress disorder from a wide range of causes. However, it also is more common in persons with autoimmune inflammatory diseases, such as lupus, Sjögren syndrome, or rheumatoid arthritis. Concern for one of these diseases is the main reason to consider referring a patient for evaluation by a rheumatologist. Often rheumatologists participate in the management of fibromyalgia. A patient should be given appropriate expectations by the referring physician.
Effectiveness of treatment varies widely among patients. Nonpharmacologic approaches such as aerobic exercise, cognitive behavioral therapy, and tai chi have support from clinical trials, and yoga and aquatherapy also are widely used.1,2 The classes of drugs used are the same as for neuropathic pain: tricyclics, including cyclobenzaprine; serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs); and gabapentinoids. In contrast, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids are ineffective unless there is a superimposed mechanical or inflammatory cause in the periphery. The key point is that continuation of any treatment should be based entirely on the patient’s own assessment of benefit.
►Dr. Swamy. Seven years later, the patient returned to her primary care provider, reporting increased dyspnea on exertion as well as significant fatigue. She was referred to the pulmonary department and had repeat computed tomography (CT) scans of the chest, which indicated persistent right middle lobe (RML) bronchiectasis. She then underwent bronchoscopy with a subsequent bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) culture growing MAC. Dr. Fine, please interpret the baseline and follow-up CT scans and help us understand the significance of the MAC on sputum and BAL cultures.
►Alan Fine, MD, Section of Pulmonary and Critical Care, VABHS and Professor of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine. Prior to this presentation, the patient had a pleural-based area of fibrosis with possible associated RML bronchiectasis. This appears to be a postinflammatory process without classic features of malignant or metastatic disease. She then had a sputum, which grew MAC in only 1 of 3 samples and in liquid media only. Importantly, the sputum was not smear positive. All of this suggests a low organism burden. One possibility is that this could reflect colonization with MAC; it is not uncommon for patients with underlying chronic changes in their lung to grow MAC, and it is often difficult to tell whether it is indicative of active disease. Structural lung disease, such as bronchiectasis, predisposes a patient to MAC, but chronic MAC also may cause bronchiectasis. This chicken-and-egg scenario comes up frequently. She may have a MAC infection, but as she is HIV negative and asymptomatic, there is no urgent indication to treat, especially as the burden of therapy is not insignificant.
►Dr. Swamy. Do we need to worry about Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB)?
►Dr. Fine. Although she was previously PPD positive, she had already completed 1 year of isoniazid (INH) therapy, making active MTB less likely. From an infection control standpoint, it is important to distinguish MAC from MTB. The former is not contagious, and there is no need for airborne isolation.
►Dr. Swamy. Dr. Fine, where does MAC come from? Does it commonly cause disease?
►Dr. Fine. In the environment, MAC is nearly ubiquitous , especially in water and soil. In one study, 20% of showerheads were positive for MAC; when patients are infected, we may suggest changing/bleaching the showerhead, but there are no definitive recommendations.3 Because MAC is so common in the environment, it is unlikely that measures to target MAC colonization will be clinically meaningful. On the other hand, the incidence of nontuberculous mycobacterial infections is increasing across the US, and it may be a common and frequently underdiagnosed cause of chronic cough, especially in postmenopausal women.
►Dr. Swamy. Four years prior to the current presentation, the patient developed a cough after an upper respiratory tract infection that persisted for more than 2 weeks. Given her history, she underwent a repeat chest CT, which noted a slight increase in nodularity and ground-glass opacity restricted to the RML. She also reported dyspnea on exertion and was referred to the pulmonary medicine department. By the time she arrived, her dyspnea had largely resolved, but she reported persistent fatigue without other systemic symptoms, such as fevers or chills. Dr. Fine, does MAC explain this patient’s dyspnea?
►Dr. Fine. As her pulmonary symptoms resolved in a short period of time with only azithromycin, it is very unlikely that her symptoms were related to her prior disease. The MAC infection is not likely to cause dyspnea on exertion and fatigue and should be worked up more broadly before attributing it to MAC. In view of this, it would not be unreasonable to follow her clinically and see her again in 6 to 8 weeks. In this context, we also should consider the untoward impact of repeated radiation exposure derived from multiple CT scans. When a patient has an abnormality on CT scan, it often leads to further scans even if the symptoms do not match the previous findings, as in this case.
►Dr. Swamy. Given her ongoing fatigue and systemic symptoms (morning stiffness of the shoulders, legs, and thighs, and leg cramps), she was referred to the rheumatology department where the physical examination revealed muscle tenderness in her proximal arms and legs with normal strength, tender points at the elbows and medial side of the bilateral knees, significant tenderness of lower legs, and no synovitis.
Dr. Monach, can you walk us through your approach to this patient? Are we seeing manifestations of fibromyalgia? What diagnoses concerns you and how would you proceed?
►Dr. Monach. The history and exam are most helpful in raising or reducing suspicion for an underlying inflammatory disease. Areas of tenderness described in her case are typical of fibromyalgia, although it can be difficult to interpret symptoms in the hip girdle and shoulder girdle because objective findings are often absent on exam in patients with inflammatory arthritis or bursitis. Similarly, tenderness at sites of tendon insertion (enthuses) without objective abnormalities is common in different forms of spondyloarthritis, so tenderness at the elbow, knee, lateral hip, and low back can be difficult to interpret. What this patient is lacking is prominent subjective or objective findings in the joints most commonly affected in rheumatoid arthritis and lupus: wrists, hands, ankles, and feet.
►Dr. Swamy. Initial laboratory data include an erythrocyte sedimentation rate of 79 with a normal C-reactive protein. A tentative diagnosis of polymyalgia rheumatic is made with consideration of a trial treatment of prednisone.
Dr. Monach, this patient has an indolent infection and is about to be given glucocorticoids. Could you describe the situations in which you feel that glucocorticoids cause a relative immunosuppression?
►Dr. Monach. Glucocorticoids are considered safe in a patient whose infection is not intrinsically dangerous or who has started appropriate antibiotics for that infection. Although all toxicities of glucocorticoids are dose dependent, the long-standing assertion that doses below 10 mg to 15 mg do not increase risk of infection is contradicted by data published in the past 10 to 15 years, with the caveat that these patients were on long-term treatment.
►Dr. Swamy. The patient was started on prednisone 15 mg per day for 15 days. She returned to the clinic after 1 week of prednisone troutment and noted “significant improvement in fatigue, morning stiffness of shoulders, thighs, leg, back is better, leg cramps resolved, shooting pain in many joints resolved.” Further laboratory results were notable for a negative rheumatoid factor, negative antinuclear antibody, and a cyclic citrullinated peptide of 60. A presumptive diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) was made and plaquenil 200 mg twice daily was started.
Dr. Monach, can you explain why RA comes up now on serology but was not considered initially? Why does this presentation fit RA, and was her response to treatment typical? How does this fit in with her previous diagnosis of fibromyalgia? Was that just an atypical, indolent presentation of RA?
►Dr. Monach. Though her presentation is atypical for RA, in elderly patients, RA can present with symptoms resembling polymyalgia rheumatica. The question is whether she had RA all along (in which case “elderly onset” would not apply) or had fibromyalgia and developed RA more recently. The response to empiric glucocorticoid therapy is helpful, since fibromyalgia should not improve with prednisone even in a patient with RA unless treatment of RA would allow better sleep and ability to exercise. Rheumatoid arthritis typically responds very well to prednisone in the 5-mg to 15-mg range.
►Dr. Swamy. Given the new diagnosis of an inflammatory arthritis requiring immunosuppression, bronchoscopy with BAL is performed to evaluate for the presence of MAC. These cultures were positive for MAC.
Dr. Fine, does the positive BAL culture indicate an active MAC infection?
►Dr. Fine. Yes, based on these updated data, the patient has an active MAC infection. Active infection is defined as symptoms or imaging consistent with the diagnosis, supporting microbiology data (either 2 sputum or 1 BAL sample growing MAC) and the exclusion of other causes. Previously, this patient grew MAC in just one expectorated sputum; this did not meet the microbiologic criteria. Now sputum has grown in the BAL sample; along with the CT imaging, this is enough to diagnosis active MAC infection.
Treatment for MAC must consider the details of each case. First, this is not an emergency; treatment decisions should be made with the rheumatologist to consider the planned immunosuppression. For example, we must consider potential drug interactions. A specific point should be made of the use of tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibition, which data indicate can reactivate TB and may inhibit mechanisms that restrain mycobacterial disease. Serious cases of MAC infection have been reported in the literature in the setting of TNF-α inhibition.5,6 Despite these concerns, there is not a contraindication to using these therapies from the perspective of the active MAC disease. All of these decisions will impact the need to commit the patient to MAC therapy.
►Dr. Swamy. Dr. Fine, what do you consider prior to initiating MAC therapy?
► Dr. Fine. The decision to pursue MAC therapy should not be taken lightly. Therapy often entails prolonged multidrug regimens, usually spanning more than a year, with frequent adverse effects. Outside of very specific cases, such as TNF-β inhibition, MAC is rarely a life-threatening disease, so the benefit may be limited. Treatment for MAC is certainly unlikely to be fruitful without a diligent and motivated patient able to handle the high and prolonged pill burden. Of note, it is also important to keep this patient up-to-date with influenza and pneumonia vaccination given her structural lung disease.
►Dr. Swamy. The decision is made to treat MAC with azithromycin, rifampin, and ethambutol. The disease is noted to be nonfibrocavitary. The patient underwent monthly liver function test monitoring and visual acuity testing, which were unremarkable. Dr. Fine, can you describe the phenotypes of nontuberculous mycobacterial (NTM) disease?
►Dr. Fine. There are 3 main phenotypes of NTM.3 First, we see the elderly man with preexisting lung disease—usually chronic obstructive pulmonary disease—with fibrocavitary and/or reticulonodular appearance. Second, we see the slim, elderly woman often without any preexisting lung disease presenting with focal bronchiectasis and nodular lesions in right middle lobe and lingula—the Lady Windermere syndrome. This eponym is derived from Oscar Wilde’s play “Lady Windermere’s Fan, a Play About a Good Woman,” and was first associated with this disease in 1992.7 At the time, it was thought that the voluntary suppression of cough led to poorly draining lung regions, vulnerable to engraftment by atypical mycobacteria. Infection with atypical mycobacteria are associated with this population; however, it is no longer thought to be due to the voluntary suppression of cough.7,8 Third, we do occasionally see atypical presentations, such as focal masses and solitary nodules.
►Dr. Swamy. At 1-year follow-up she successfully completed MAC therapy and noted ongoing control of rheumatoid symptoms.
1. Bernardy K, Klose P, Welsch P, Häuser W. Efficacy, acceptability and safety of cognitive behavioural therapies in fibromyalgia syndrome—a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur J Pain. 2018;22(2):242-260.
2. Geneen LJ, Moore RA, Clarke C, Martin D, Colvin LA, Smith BH. Physical activity and exercise for chronic pain in adults: an overview of Cochrane Reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;4:CD011279.
3. Aksamit TR, Philley JV, Griffith DE. Nontuberculous mycobacterial (NTM) lung disease: the top ten essentials. Respir Med. 2014;108(3):417-425.
4. Aucott JN. Glucocorticoids and infection. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am. 1994;23(3):655-670.
5. Curtis JR, Yang S, Patkar NM, et al. Risk of hospitalized bacterial infections associated with biologic treatment among US veterans with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2014;66(7):990-997.
6. Lane MA, McDonald JR, Zeringue AL, et al. TNF-α antagonist use and risk of hospitalization for infection in a national cohort of veterans with rheumatoid arthritis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2011;90(2):139-145.
7. Reich JM, Johnson RE. Mycobacterium avium complex pulmonary disease presenting as an isolated lingular or middle lobe pattern. The Lady Windermere syndrome. Chest. 1992;101(6):1605-1609.
8. Kasthoori JJ, Liam CK, Wastie ML. Lady Windermere syndrome: an inappropriate eponym for an increasingly important condition. Singapore Med J. 2008;49(2):e47-e49.
1. Bernardy K, Klose P, Welsch P, Häuser W. Efficacy, acceptability and safety of cognitive behavioural therapies in fibromyalgia syndrome—a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur J Pain. 2018;22(2):242-260.
2. Geneen LJ, Moore RA, Clarke C, Martin D, Colvin LA, Smith BH. Physical activity and exercise for chronic pain in adults: an overview of Cochrane Reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;4:CD011279.
3. Aksamit TR, Philley JV, Griffith DE. Nontuberculous mycobacterial (NTM) lung disease: the top ten essentials. Respir Med. 2014;108(3):417-425.
4. Aucott JN. Glucocorticoids and infection. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am. 1994;23(3):655-670.
5. Curtis JR, Yang S, Patkar NM, et al. Risk of hospitalized bacterial infections associated with biologic treatment among US veterans with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2014;66(7):990-997.
6. Lane MA, McDonald JR, Zeringue AL, et al. TNF-α antagonist use and risk of hospitalization for infection in a national cohort of veterans with rheumatoid arthritis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2011;90(2):139-145.
7. Reich JM, Johnson RE. Mycobacterium avium complex pulmonary disease presenting as an isolated lingular or middle lobe pattern. The Lady Windermere syndrome. Chest. 1992;101(6):1605-1609.
8. Kasthoori JJ, Liam CK, Wastie ML. Lady Windermere syndrome: an inappropriate eponym for an increasingly important condition. Singapore Med J. 2008;49(2):e47-e49.
Systems Automation for Cancer Surveillance: A Lean Six Sigma Project for Tracking Care of Patients With Head and Neck Cancer (FULL)
The American Cancer Society estimates that there were 1.68 million newly diagnosed cases of cancer in the U.S. in 2016, with an associated 595,690 deaths.1 Of this number, about 3% was attributable to head and neck cancer (HNC), with 48,330 new cases and 9,570 deaths in 2016. Cancer is among the leading causes of death worldwide, and veterans have a prevalence of HNC nearly twice that of the general population.2 The number of people living with and beyond a cancer diagnosis in the U.S. has risen to an estimated 15.5 million survivors.
Head and neck cancer comprises several subsites, including the oral cavity (lips, buccal mucosa, anterior tongue, floor of mouth, hard palate, and gingiva), the pharynx (nasopharynx, oropharynx, and hypopharynx), the larynx (supraglottis, glottis, and subglottis), the nasal cavity, paranasal sinuses, and the saliva glands.3 The economic burden for HNC treatment was estimated at $3.64 billion in 2010.4
Treatment is based on primary site and staging, and staging is according to the tumor node metastasis system of the American Joint Committee on Cancer.5 In general, lower stages (in situ, stages I and II) are treated with single modalities of organ-sparing surgery or radiation, whereas higher stages (stages III and IV) are treated with multiple modalities, which may include radiation combined with chemotherapy or surgery before or after radiation/chemotherapy.
Survival rate after treatment varies by primary site, cancer stage at diagnosis, histopathologic cell type, viral association, tobacco use, chemical exposure, and treatment modality; survival ranges from 24% to 90% at 5 years based on these variables.6 There is not yet a reliable blood test or other biochemical marker for recurrence, and serial radiologic examinations are expensive and expose the survivor to large amounts of additional ionizing radiation.7,8 Surveillance for recurrence after treatment consists primarily of physical examination and reported symptoms, which may be difficult for the primary care provider (PCP) to perform and distinguish from treatment sequelae.9,10 Thus, HNC survivors are followed in the ear, nose, and throat (ENT) otolaryngology clinic on a decreasing frequency schedule based on risk of relapse, second primaries, treatment sequelae, and toxicities (every 1-3 months in year 1, 2-6 months in year 2, 4-8 months in years 3-5, and every 12 months after 5 years) according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines.11
Adherence with posttreatment surveillance in HNC recently was associated with length of survival; however, this observation at a single tertiary academic center was discordant with earlier published reports.12-15 About 80% to 90% of all postcurative intent treatment recurrences and second primary cancers occur within the first 4 years, with a better functional outcome if the recurrence is surgically salvageable or amenable to adjuvant radiation or combined radiation and chemotherapy.16,17 Nonadherence is generally associated with worse clinical and acute care utilization outcomes.18
Problem
At the Raymond G. Murphy VAMC, a tertiary care center in Albuquerque, New Mexico, there was a propensity of veteran HNC patients who missed scheduled surveillance appointments or were lost to follow-up. An informal review of several VA ENT departments revealed similar issues without any consistent method to solve the problem. In an effort to recapture these patients, in 2011 an ENT registered nurse (RN) was added to the team as cancer care coordinator (CCC). After several weeks of chart review of clinic records, it was determined that 31% of HNC patients had missed 1 or more ongoing surveillance appointments, either by patient no-show, clinic cancellations that failed to reschedule patients, or patient cancellation without rescheduling. The CCC was tasked with recapturing these lost patients, returning them to regular follow-up per NCCN guidelines, and tracking new cancer patients as they were diagnosed and progressed through treatment and surveillance. As there had been no one previously in this role in the ENT clinic, there was no guidance about how to proceed.
The mechanism in place for rescheduling no-show patients at that time consisted of a mailed postcard reminder sent by a medical support assistant who requested that the veteran contact the clinic to reschedule. Veterans reported that these reminders often appeared in their mail mingled with so-called junk mail and were discarded without reading. The CCC spent several more weeks examining clinic records in the computerized patient record system (CPRS), looking for patients with cancer in the 5-year surveillance period, and compiling a database of survivors and newly diagnosed patients. This database was compiled initially on paper and then converted to a spreadsheet. Patients who had missed appointments were contacted by the CCC and rescheduled, which resulted in a 100% recovery rate.
Unfortunately, although the manual tracking process was successful, it was laborious and time consuming. Weekly and sometimes daily examination of CPRS clinic records for new patients and survivor adherence was followed by tedious data entry into the spreadsheet. The manual tracking system was deemed suboptimal and a Lean Six Sigma process improvement project was initiated. The project goal was to produce a dashboard database tool that was patient centered to improve the quality of cancer care to veterans.
Methods
Lean Six Sigma is a combination of 2 improvement processes and is embraced by large business and government entities with the goal of improving efficiencies, reducing waste, decreasing errors, and generating cost savings.19 The first improvement process, Six Sigma, is a statistical concept with the goal of producing no more than 3.4 defects per million opportunities.20Using specific tools, Six Sigma identifies the cause of the problem to help develop effective solutions. Six Sigma also helps uncover defects and problems by using a standardized and systematic method for each process improvement project in a sequence of steps known as DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, and Control) to ensure a defect-free product at a rate of 99.99966%. Define, the first step, contains a written statement defining the problem and the goals; Measure scrutinizes the current baseline of the project in measureable data to identify possible contributing factors; Analyze uses data and tools to understand the cause-and-effect relationships in the process; Improve uses creative developments and changes that lead to process improvements; and Control takes measures to ensure the improvements are implemented, reliable, and constant.
Although slightly different but complementary, Lean focuses on streamlining improvement processes by identifying and eliminating waste that has little or no value to the customer. The 8 most common forms of waste are identified through the mnemonic DOWNTIME (Defects, Overproduction, Waiting, Not utilizing human talent, Transportation, Inventory excess, Motion excess, and Excess processing).21 When both Lean and Six Sigma are used together, the synergistic effects have a powerful impact on the complete quality improvement process and yield consistent reliability. The combined process then includes several methodologic tools for systems redesign, including root-cause analysis, defining waste barriers, measuring current and expected performance, analyzing the data collected, improving the target process, and controlling the improvements. Though already existing and used within the VA system, Lean Six Sigma training was included as a mandatory component of new employee orientation in a memo issued in August 2015 from the assistant secretary for human resources and administration (VA access-only memo VAIQ 7595924).
Root-cause analysis was accomplished using the “5 Why” technique adapted into Lean and Six Sigma from the Toyota Motor Corporation. For example, the question “Why do patients miss appointments?” was asked 5 different ways, and it was determined that many patients lacked transportation, some were not able to reschedule at the time they called to cancel their appointment, those with multiple same-day appointments at the tertiary medical center were not able to wait to schedule a follow-up appointment for fear of missing or being late to their next appointment, and others were placed on recall lists with appointment reminders that failed to accomplish the purpose of self-scheduling by veterans. Thus, the common denominator and answer to the question “why” was that there was no tracking system in place to identify and reschedule missed follow-ups, and before employing a dedicated coordinator, no one accountable for the process (Figure 1).
Wasteful barriers to efficiency were examined with particular attention to the rescheduling process. Rescheduling produced immediate duplication of work for scheduling staff and increased wait time for future appointments. There was potential for additional health care expenses related to costs of late and progressive salvage treatment or for less-than-timely correction of HNC treatment sequelae, such as scarring, lymphedema, or dysphagia. Ear, nose, and throat providers were concerned about missing occult recurrence or residual cancer.
In 2013, the Lean Six Sigma process was used again to critique efforts by the CCC to identify and track HNC patients. One suggestion was to automate the process, and the Information Resource Management (IRM) office was contacted via work order to explore options for mining CPRS data. Working with a committed health information analyst, further discussion was aimed at pulling in additional data that would simultaneously track required posttreatment laboratory results and imaging. It was decided that a secure dashboard format would provide greater utility than would an online report that the CCC had to request and generate daily.
Integrated technologist Stephen Few defines a data dashboard as “… a visual display of the most important information needed to achieve one or more objectives; consolidated and arranged on a single screen so the information can be monitored at a glance.”22 The Head & Neck Cancer Tracking Dashboard (HNC Dashboard), designed by the IRM analyst, queries the VA Corporate Data Warehouse each night to identify all patients recently diagnosed with HNC by examining outpatient visit and inpatient discharge International Classification of Disease (ICD) codes entered by providers when coding encounter notes in CPRS. It also adds those with a HNC diagnosis in the VistA problem list and the HNC pathology department Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine (SNOMED) codes (Figure 2).
The automated ENT cancer tracking dashboard prototype debuted in 2014, but several months of trial and error took place to reanalyze ICD codes and narrow the list. The dashboard underwent multiple tests to ensure accuracy. Identified patients are presented using an interactive report hosted on a secure SharePoint (Redmond,WA) site, which reduced the risk of a data breach as access requires multi-authenticated user identification from a VA computer.
Another characteristic of the dashboard’s format is the ability to add custom features as needed. Several features now included in the dashboard are location of residence, diagnosis date, ICD code, date captured in the tracking system, most recent ENT clinic visit, future scheduled ENT clinic appointment, date of last thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) laboratory test, and date of last position emission tomography scan. In addition, cancellations, no-shows, and patients overdue for TSH testing are highlighted in bold. Highlighted fields alert the CCC to reschedule patients in a timely manner and can alert providers to order needed follow-up tests and procedures.
Among the merits of the ENT cancer tracking dashboard is ease of use. The CCC uses a simple ABC acronym to describe utilization:
- A—added: The CCC daily edits new patients added to the dashboard with a HNC diagnosis. Several times recently the CCC saw a new diagnosis before the provider had been notified by pathology of biopsy results (Figure 3).
- B—browse: The dashboard format allows for rapid perusal of critical information at a glance (Figure 4). Recent labs and imaging can be discussed with providers immediately or at weekly ENT team cancer update meetings. Notification to clinicians can be rapid if the results show suspicion for residual/recurrent disease, a second primary site, metastasis, or there is need to notify the patient’s primary care provider to treat elevated TSH levels (hypothyroidism incidence after head and neck radiation is reportedly as high as 44%, with most patients being asymptomatic or simply fatigued).10,23
- C—check: Appointments are checked for those in the future, cancelled without rescheduling, or no-show dates. Empty fields under the “Next ENT Appointment” header alert the CCC to reschedule a follow-up appointment within NCCN guidelines. Alerting providers to upcoming surveillance appointments allows timely coordination with other care providers and departments, including speech pathology, nutrition, audiology, and social work. The “ENT Recall Date” has a unique time-sensitive feature and will visually display a bold type font when ready to be scheduled for a physical appointment (Figure 5).
Results
The cancer dashboard has demonstrated its success by supporting consistent and reliable monthly data. Results recorded over a 24-month period (from January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2016) showed that the electronic tracker identified 101 new HNC patients. During this period, 1,067 HNC patients were scheduled for follow-up appointments for cancer surveillance. Of these, the authors found that 112 HNC patients had missed their appointments due to calling and cancelling or not showing up as scheduled; resulting in a no-show status. This yielded an appointment nonadherence rate of 10%. The authors also found that 73 (7%) HNC patients did not have an elected scheduled appointment to return to the clinic for continued cancer surveillance. This number comprises all HNC patients whose appointments were cancelled by clinic cancellation, self-cancellation, no-show appointments, or those who left the clinic without scheduling a subsequent follow-up appointment. The electronic tracker identified 100% of these patients as missing and needing a future appointment. These patients may have otherwise been lost through manual tracking.
Implementation and utilization of a robust automated dashboard format HNC patient tracking system has been rewarding for the ENT department. The CCC has saved an estimated 600 to 800 hours per year of chart review and data entry. Although a time study was never conducted to measure the work process of this task, it is reasonable to conclude based on the following multiple manual step-by-step processes that the CCC had to perform frequently were now performed within the dashboard: reviewing consults for HNC diagnosis, recording new patient profile data on the spreadsheet; reviewing VA hospital pathology reports for new HNC diagnoses, reviewing the clinic schedule to track patient appointment adherence, updating and recording recent appointment activity, and reviewing the electronic medical records daily for recommended treatment plan and follow-up.
A side-by-side comparison of the functional features of tracking both manually and with automation showed that automation outnumbers the function of manual tracking by 36% and offers improved efficiency (Table). This has allowed time for the CCC to participate in simultaneous HNC care initiatives, including facilitating interfacility telehealth referrals for complex cancer surgery, scheduling and monitoring rural cancer surveillance telehealth appointments, and development of an ENT Survivorship Care Plan. These programs optimize time and workflow, reduce waste, reduce expenditures related to costly treatment modalities associated with advanced stages of malignancy, and improve the veteran experience. Further benefits to the veteran HNC patient population include increased self-efficacy and awareness for disease management through continuity of care, reduced cost associated with travel expense, and reduced potential copays due to additional medical care related to advanced stages of recurrent or residual disease.
In-house development of the HNC tracking dashboard has contributed to further cost savings for the VA. Specialized third-party acquired software can cost thousands of dollars for purchase and implementation and often includes ongoing fees for use. The Sustain and Spread concept of Lean Six Sigma is proven by a 100% recapture rate of HNC patients in the ENT clinic that potentially would have been lost to follow-up. The success in Spreading this innovation forward has resulted in adoption by other VAMCs for current use and implementation. After sharing information regarding the dashboard at 2 national conferences via presentations and poster, other VAMCs in neighboring states have requested the software and initiated custom versions. Because of this success and further demand, dashboard use is currently under consideration by the VA for nationwide availability.
Conclusion
Deficiencies in tracking cancer patients in the VA system exist in part due to little or no sophisticated electronic tracking systems that could perform multiple task functions to identify new cancer patients, the type of cancer, when appointments are missed, and notification when the required labs and procedures are completed. Often, the CCC is dependent on the arduous task of inputting of data to keep him/her up-to-date with patient care and coordination in a timely manner. As new VA policies attempts to perfect and streamline the scheduling process by way of providers placing “return to clinic” orders for patient follow-up care, there remains a potential risk of those patients not getting scheduled without a vigilant tracking process in place to monitor and ensure that all patients are scheduled.
The dashboard has proved to be an easy to use and vital tool in tracking HNC patients by the CCC. It will continue to assist in the identification of new HNC patients, provide ready access to patient information and follow-up care, and help facilitate CCC and provider communication on a daily basis, thereby meeting the goal of a patient-centered product that proves to improve the quality of cancer care of veterans.
Acknowledgment
The authors thank Mr. Dominic B. Ruiz, Visual Information Specialist, at the Raymond Murphy VAMC, who created images in high resolution for this article.
Author disclosures
The authors report no actual or potential conflicts of interest with regard to this article.
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of Federal Practitioner , Frontline Medical Communications Inc., the U.S. Government, or any of its agencies.
Click here to read the digital edition.
1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2016. CA Cancer J Clin. 2016;66(1):7-30.
2. Patil RD, Meinzen-Derr JK, Hendricks BL, Patil YJ. Improving access and timelines of care for veterans with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: a multidisciplinary team’s approach. Laryngoscope. 2016;126(3):627-631.
3. Wissinger E, Griebsch I, Lungershausen J, Foster T, Pashos CL. The economic burden of head and neck cancer: a systematic literature review. Pharmacoeconomics. 2014;32(9):865-882.
4. Mariotto AB, Yabroff KR, Shao Y, Feuer EJ, Brown ML. Projections of the cost of cancer care in the United States: 2010-2020. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103(2):117-128.
5. Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti A III, eds. American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging Manual. 7th ed. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag; 2010.
6. Cancer.net. Head and neck cancer: statistics. http://www.cancer.net/cancer-types/head-and-neck-cancer/Statistics. Updated September 2016. Accessed April 12, 2017.
7. Rachidi S, Wallace K, Wrangle JM, Day TA, Alberg AJ, Li Z. Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and overall survival in all sites of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Head Neck. 2016;38(suppl 1):E1068-E1074.
8. Cheung PK, Chin RY, Eslick GD. Detecting residual/recurrent head neck squamous cell carcinomas using PET or PET/CT: systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2016;154(3):421-432.
9. Haddad RI, Limaye S. Overview of approach to long-term survivors of head and neck cancer. http://www .uptodate .com/contents/overview-of-approach-to-long-term-survivors-of-head-and-neck-cancer. Updated October 26, 2016. Accessed April 12, 2017.
10. Manikantan K, Khode S, Dwivedi RC, et al. Making sense of post-treatment surveillance in head and neck cancer: when and what of follow-up. Cancer Treat Rev. 2009;35(8):744-753.
11. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Clinical practice guidelines in onclology:head and neck cancers(2.2017).2017. Updated May 8, 2017. https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/f_/pdf/head-and-neck.pdf. Accessed July 18, 2017.
12. Deutschmann MW, Sykes KJ, Harbison J, Cabrera-Muffly C, Schnayder Y. The impact of compliance in post treatment surveillance in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2015;141(6):519-525.
13. Merkx MA, van Gulick JJ, Marres HA, et al. Effectiveness of routine follow-up of patients treated for T1-2N0 oral squamous cell carcinomas of the floor of mouth and tongue. Head Neck. 2006:28(1):1-7.
14. Ritoe SC, de Vegt F, Scheike IM, et al. Effect of routine follow-up after treatment for laryngeal cancer on life expectancy and mortality: results of a Markov model analysis. Cancer. 2007;109(2):239-247.
15. Agrawal A, Hammond TH, Young GS, Avon AL, Ozer E, Schuller DE. Factors affecting long-term survival in patients with recurrent head and neck cancer may help define the role of post-treatment surveillance. Laryngoscope. 2009;119(11):2135-2140.
16. Roland NJ, Bradley PJ. The role of surgery in the palliation of head and neck cancer. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2014;22(2):101-108.
17. Riaz N, Hong JC, Sherman EJ, et al. A nomogram to predict loco-regional control after re-irradiation for head and neck cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2014;111(3):382-387.
18. Hwang AS, Atlas SJ, Cronin P, et al. Appointment “no-shows” are an independent predictor of subsequent quality of care and resource utilization outcomes. J Gen Intern Med. 2015;30(10):1426-1433.
19. Healthcare Daily Online. VA healthcare system adopts lean six sigma. http://www.healthcaredailyonline.com/news/va-lean-six-sigma-in-healthcare. Updated December 7, 2015. Accessed April 12, 2017.
20. Gygi C, Williams B. Six Sigma for Dummies. 2nd edition. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2012.
21. Kavanagh S, Krings D. The 8 sources of waste and how to eliminate them: improving performance with LEAN management techniques. http://www.gfoa.org/sites/default /files/GFR_DEC_11_18.pdf. Updated December, 2011. Accessed April 14, 2017.
22. Few S. What is a dashboard? In: Wheeler C, ed. Information Dashboard Design: The Effective Visual Communication of Data. 1st ed. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media; 2006:34.
23. Murthy V, Narang K, Ghosh-Laskar S, Gupta T, Budrukkar A, Agrawal JP. Hypothyroidism after 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for head and neck cancers: prospective data from 2 randomized controlled trials. Head Neck. 2014;36(11):1573-1780.
The American Cancer Society estimates that there were 1.68 million newly diagnosed cases of cancer in the U.S. in 2016, with an associated 595,690 deaths.1 Of this number, about 3% was attributable to head and neck cancer (HNC), with 48,330 new cases and 9,570 deaths in 2016. Cancer is among the leading causes of death worldwide, and veterans have a prevalence of HNC nearly twice that of the general population.2 The number of people living with and beyond a cancer diagnosis in the U.S. has risen to an estimated 15.5 million survivors.
Head and neck cancer comprises several subsites, including the oral cavity (lips, buccal mucosa, anterior tongue, floor of mouth, hard palate, and gingiva), the pharynx (nasopharynx, oropharynx, and hypopharynx), the larynx (supraglottis, glottis, and subglottis), the nasal cavity, paranasal sinuses, and the saliva glands.3 The economic burden for HNC treatment was estimated at $3.64 billion in 2010.4
Treatment is based on primary site and staging, and staging is according to the tumor node metastasis system of the American Joint Committee on Cancer.5 In general, lower stages (in situ, stages I and II) are treated with single modalities of organ-sparing surgery or radiation, whereas higher stages (stages III and IV) are treated with multiple modalities, which may include radiation combined with chemotherapy or surgery before or after radiation/chemotherapy.
Survival rate after treatment varies by primary site, cancer stage at diagnosis, histopathologic cell type, viral association, tobacco use, chemical exposure, and treatment modality; survival ranges from 24% to 90% at 5 years based on these variables.6 There is not yet a reliable blood test or other biochemical marker for recurrence, and serial radiologic examinations are expensive and expose the survivor to large amounts of additional ionizing radiation.7,8 Surveillance for recurrence after treatment consists primarily of physical examination and reported symptoms, which may be difficult for the primary care provider (PCP) to perform and distinguish from treatment sequelae.9,10 Thus, HNC survivors are followed in the ear, nose, and throat (ENT) otolaryngology clinic on a decreasing frequency schedule based on risk of relapse, second primaries, treatment sequelae, and toxicities (every 1-3 months in year 1, 2-6 months in year 2, 4-8 months in years 3-5, and every 12 months after 5 years) according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines.11
Adherence with posttreatment surveillance in HNC recently was associated with length of survival; however, this observation at a single tertiary academic center was discordant with earlier published reports.12-15 About 80% to 90% of all postcurative intent treatment recurrences and second primary cancers occur within the first 4 years, with a better functional outcome if the recurrence is surgically salvageable or amenable to adjuvant radiation or combined radiation and chemotherapy.16,17 Nonadherence is generally associated with worse clinical and acute care utilization outcomes.18
Problem
At the Raymond G. Murphy VAMC, a tertiary care center in Albuquerque, New Mexico, there was a propensity of veteran HNC patients who missed scheduled surveillance appointments or were lost to follow-up. An informal review of several VA ENT departments revealed similar issues without any consistent method to solve the problem. In an effort to recapture these patients, in 2011 an ENT registered nurse (RN) was added to the team as cancer care coordinator (CCC). After several weeks of chart review of clinic records, it was determined that 31% of HNC patients had missed 1 or more ongoing surveillance appointments, either by patient no-show, clinic cancellations that failed to reschedule patients, or patient cancellation without rescheduling. The CCC was tasked with recapturing these lost patients, returning them to regular follow-up per NCCN guidelines, and tracking new cancer patients as they were diagnosed and progressed through treatment and surveillance. As there had been no one previously in this role in the ENT clinic, there was no guidance about how to proceed.
The mechanism in place for rescheduling no-show patients at that time consisted of a mailed postcard reminder sent by a medical support assistant who requested that the veteran contact the clinic to reschedule. Veterans reported that these reminders often appeared in their mail mingled with so-called junk mail and were discarded without reading. The CCC spent several more weeks examining clinic records in the computerized patient record system (CPRS), looking for patients with cancer in the 5-year surveillance period, and compiling a database of survivors and newly diagnosed patients. This database was compiled initially on paper and then converted to a spreadsheet. Patients who had missed appointments were contacted by the CCC and rescheduled, which resulted in a 100% recovery rate.
Unfortunately, although the manual tracking process was successful, it was laborious and time consuming. Weekly and sometimes daily examination of CPRS clinic records for new patients and survivor adherence was followed by tedious data entry into the spreadsheet. The manual tracking system was deemed suboptimal and a Lean Six Sigma process improvement project was initiated. The project goal was to produce a dashboard database tool that was patient centered to improve the quality of cancer care to veterans.
Methods
Lean Six Sigma is a combination of 2 improvement processes and is embraced by large business and government entities with the goal of improving efficiencies, reducing waste, decreasing errors, and generating cost savings.19 The first improvement process, Six Sigma, is a statistical concept with the goal of producing no more than 3.4 defects per million opportunities.20Using specific tools, Six Sigma identifies the cause of the problem to help develop effective solutions. Six Sigma also helps uncover defects and problems by using a standardized and systematic method for each process improvement project in a sequence of steps known as DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, and Control) to ensure a defect-free product at a rate of 99.99966%. Define, the first step, contains a written statement defining the problem and the goals; Measure scrutinizes the current baseline of the project in measureable data to identify possible contributing factors; Analyze uses data and tools to understand the cause-and-effect relationships in the process; Improve uses creative developments and changes that lead to process improvements; and Control takes measures to ensure the improvements are implemented, reliable, and constant.
Although slightly different but complementary, Lean focuses on streamlining improvement processes by identifying and eliminating waste that has little or no value to the customer. The 8 most common forms of waste are identified through the mnemonic DOWNTIME (Defects, Overproduction, Waiting, Not utilizing human talent, Transportation, Inventory excess, Motion excess, and Excess processing).21 When both Lean and Six Sigma are used together, the synergistic effects have a powerful impact on the complete quality improvement process and yield consistent reliability. The combined process then includes several methodologic tools for systems redesign, including root-cause analysis, defining waste barriers, measuring current and expected performance, analyzing the data collected, improving the target process, and controlling the improvements. Though already existing and used within the VA system, Lean Six Sigma training was included as a mandatory component of new employee orientation in a memo issued in August 2015 from the assistant secretary for human resources and administration (VA access-only memo VAIQ 7595924).
Root-cause analysis was accomplished using the “5 Why” technique adapted into Lean and Six Sigma from the Toyota Motor Corporation. For example, the question “Why do patients miss appointments?” was asked 5 different ways, and it was determined that many patients lacked transportation, some were not able to reschedule at the time they called to cancel their appointment, those with multiple same-day appointments at the tertiary medical center were not able to wait to schedule a follow-up appointment for fear of missing or being late to their next appointment, and others were placed on recall lists with appointment reminders that failed to accomplish the purpose of self-scheduling by veterans. Thus, the common denominator and answer to the question “why” was that there was no tracking system in place to identify and reschedule missed follow-ups, and before employing a dedicated coordinator, no one accountable for the process (Figure 1).
Wasteful barriers to efficiency were examined with particular attention to the rescheduling process. Rescheduling produced immediate duplication of work for scheduling staff and increased wait time for future appointments. There was potential for additional health care expenses related to costs of late and progressive salvage treatment or for less-than-timely correction of HNC treatment sequelae, such as scarring, lymphedema, or dysphagia. Ear, nose, and throat providers were concerned about missing occult recurrence or residual cancer.
In 2013, the Lean Six Sigma process was used again to critique efforts by the CCC to identify and track HNC patients. One suggestion was to automate the process, and the Information Resource Management (IRM) office was contacted via work order to explore options for mining CPRS data. Working with a committed health information analyst, further discussion was aimed at pulling in additional data that would simultaneously track required posttreatment laboratory results and imaging. It was decided that a secure dashboard format would provide greater utility than would an online report that the CCC had to request and generate daily.
Integrated technologist Stephen Few defines a data dashboard as “… a visual display of the most important information needed to achieve one or more objectives; consolidated and arranged on a single screen so the information can be monitored at a glance.”22 The Head & Neck Cancer Tracking Dashboard (HNC Dashboard), designed by the IRM analyst, queries the VA Corporate Data Warehouse each night to identify all patients recently diagnosed with HNC by examining outpatient visit and inpatient discharge International Classification of Disease (ICD) codes entered by providers when coding encounter notes in CPRS. It also adds those with a HNC diagnosis in the VistA problem list and the HNC pathology department Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine (SNOMED) codes (Figure 2).
The automated ENT cancer tracking dashboard prototype debuted in 2014, but several months of trial and error took place to reanalyze ICD codes and narrow the list. The dashboard underwent multiple tests to ensure accuracy. Identified patients are presented using an interactive report hosted on a secure SharePoint (Redmond,WA) site, which reduced the risk of a data breach as access requires multi-authenticated user identification from a VA computer.
Another characteristic of the dashboard’s format is the ability to add custom features as needed. Several features now included in the dashboard are location of residence, diagnosis date, ICD code, date captured in the tracking system, most recent ENT clinic visit, future scheduled ENT clinic appointment, date of last thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) laboratory test, and date of last position emission tomography scan. In addition, cancellations, no-shows, and patients overdue for TSH testing are highlighted in bold. Highlighted fields alert the CCC to reschedule patients in a timely manner and can alert providers to order needed follow-up tests and procedures.
Among the merits of the ENT cancer tracking dashboard is ease of use. The CCC uses a simple ABC acronym to describe utilization:
- A—added: The CCC daily edits new patients added to the dashboard with a HNC diagnosis. Several times recently the CCC saw a new diagnosis before the provider had been notified by pathology of biopsy results (Figure 3).
- B—browse: The dashboard format allows for rapid perusal of critical information at a glance (Figure 4). Recent labs and imaging can be discussed with providers immediately or at weekly ENT team cancer update meetings. Notification to clinicians can be rapid if the results show suspicion for residual/recurrent disease, a second primary site, metastasis, or there is need to notify the patient’s primary care provider to treat elevated TSH levels (hypothyroidism incidence after head and neck radiation is reportedly as high as 44%, with most patients being asymptomatic or simply fatigued).10,23
- C—check: Appointments are checked for those in the future, cancelled without rescheduling, or no-show dates. Empty fields under the “Next ENT Appointment” header alert the CCC to reschedule a follow-up appointment within NCCN guidelines. Alerting providers to upcoming surveillance appointments allows timely coordination with other care providers and departments, including speech pathology, nutrition, audiology, and social work. The “ENT Recall Date” has a unique time-sensitive feature and will visually display a bold type font when ready to be scheduled for a physical appointment (Figure 5).
Results
The cancer dashboard has demonstrated its success by supporting consistent and reliable monthly data. Results recorded over a 24-month period (from January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2016) showed that the electronic tracker identified 101 new HNC patients. During this period, 1,067 HNC patients were scheduled for follow-up appointments for cancer surveillance. Of these, the authors found that 112 HNC patients had missed their appointments due to calling and cancelling or not showing up as scheduled; resulting in a no-show status. This yielded an appointment nonadherence rate of 10%. The authors also found that 73 (7%) HNC patients did not have an elected scheduled appointment to return to the clinic for continued cancer surveillance. This number comprises all HNC patients whose appointments were cancelled by clinic cancellation, self-cancellation, no-show appointments, or those who left the clinic without scheduling a subsequent follow-up appointment. The electronic tracker identified 100% of these patients as missing and needing a future appointment. These patients may have otherwise been lost through manual tracking.
Implementation and utilization of a robust automated dashboard format HNC patient tracking system has been rewarding for the ENT department. The CCC has saved an estimated 600 to 800 hours per year of chart review and data entry. Although a time study was never conducted to measure the work process of this task, it is reasonable to conclude based on the following multiple manual step-by-step processes that the CCC had to perform frequently were now performed within the dashboard: reviewing consults for HNC diagnosis, recording new patient profile data on the spreadsheet; reviewing VA hospital pathology reports for new HNC diagnoses, reviewing the clinic schedule to track patient appointment adherence, updating and recording recent appointment activity, and reviewing the electronic medical records daily for recommended treatment plan and follow-up.
A side-by-side comparison of the functional features of tracking both manually and with automation showed that automation outnumbers the function of manual tracking by 36% and offers improved efficiency (Table). This has allowed time for the CCC to participate in simultaneous HNC care initiatives, including facilitating interfacility telehealth referrals for complex cancer surgery, scheduling and monitoring rural cancer surveillance telehealth appointments, and development of an ENT Survivorship Care Plan. These programs optimize time and workflow, reduce waste, reduce expenditures related to costly treatment modalities associated with advanced stages of malignancy, and improve the veteran experience. Further benefits to the veteran HNC patient population include increased self-efficacy and awareness for disease management through continuity of care, reduced cost associated with travel expense, and reduced potential copays due to additional medical care related to advanced stages of recurrent or residual disease.
In-house development of the HNC tracking dashboard has contributed to further cost savings for the VA. Specialized third-party acquired software can cost thousands of dollars for purchase and implementation and often includes ongoing fees for use. The Sustain and Spread concept of Lean Six Sigma is proven by a 100% recapture rate of HNC patients in the ENT clinic that potentially would have been lost to follow-up. The success in Spreading this innovation forward has resulted in adoption by other VAMCs for current use and implementation. After sharing information regarding the dashboard at 2 national conferences via presentations and poster, other VAMCs in neighboring states have requested the software and initiated custom versions. Because of this success and further demand, dashboard use is currently under consideration by the VA for nationwide availability.
Conclusion
Deficiencies in tracking cancer patients in the VA system exist in part due to little or no sophisticated electronic tracking systems that could perform multiple task functions to identify new cancer patients, the type of cancer, when appointments are missed, and notification when the required labs and procedures are completed. Often, the CCC is dependent on the arduous task of inputting of data to keep him/her up-to-date with patient care and coordination in a timely manner. As new VA policies attempts to perfect and streamline the scheduling process by way of providers placing “return to clinic” orders for patient follow-up care, there remains a potential risk of those patients not getting scheduled without a vigilant tracking process in place to monitor and ensure that all patients are scheduled.
The dashboard has proved to be an easy to use and vital tool in tracking HNC patients by the CCC. It will continue to assist in the identification of new HNC patients, provide ready access to patient information and follow-up care, and help facilitate CCC and provider communication on a daily basis, thereby meeting the goal of a patient-centered product that proves to improve the quality of cancer care of veterans.
Acknowledgment
The authors thank Mr. Dominic B. Ruiz, Visual Information Specialist, at the Raymond Murphy VAMC, who created images in high resolution for this article.
Author disclosures
The authors report no actual or potential conflicts of interest with regard to this article.
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of Federal Practitioner , Frontline Medical Communications Inc., the U.S. Government, or any of its agencies.
Click here to read the digital edition.
The American Cancer Society estimates that there were 1.68 million newly diagnosed cases of cancer in the U.S. in 2016, with an associated 595,690 deaths.1 Of this number, about 3% was attributable to head and neck cancer (HNC), with 48,330 new cases and 9,570 deaths in 2016. Cancer is among the leading causes of death worldwide, and veterans have a prevalence of HNC nearly twice that of the general population.2 The number of people living with and beyond a cancer diagnosis in the U.S. has risen to an estimated 15.5 million survivors.
Head and neck cancer comprises several subsites, including the oral cavity (lips, buccal mucosa, anterior tongue, floor of mouth, hard palate, and gingiva), the pharynx (nasopharynx, oropharynx, and hypopharynx), the larynx (supraglottis, glottis, and subglottis), the nasal cavity, paranasal sinuses, and the saliva glands.3 The economic burden for HNC treatment was estimated at $3.64 billion in 2010.4
Treatment is based on primary site and staging, and staging is according to the tumor node metastasis system of the American Joint Committee on Cancer.5 In general, lower stages (in situ, stages I and II) are treated with single modalities of organ-sparing surgery or radiation, whereas higher stages (stages III and IV) are treated with multiple modalities, which may include radiation combined with chemotherapy or surgery before or after radiation/chemotherapy.
Survival rate after treatment varies by primary site, cancer stage at diagnosis, histopathologic cell type, viral association, tobacco use, chemical exposure, and treatment modality; survival ranges from 24% to 90% at 5 years based on these variables.6 There is not yet a reliable blood test or other biochemical marker for recurrence, and serial radiologic examinations are expensive and expose the survivor to large amounts of additional ionizing radiation.7,8 Surveillance for recurrence after treatment consists primarily of physical examination and reported symptoms, which may be difficult for the primary care provider (PCP) to perform and distinguish from treatment sequelae.9,10 Thus, HNC survivors are followed in the ear, nose, and throat (ENT) otolaryngology clinic on a decreasing frequency schedule based on risk of relapse, second primaries, treatment sequelae, and toxicities (every 1-3 months in year 1, 2-6 months in year 2, 4-8 months in years 3-5, and every 12 months after 5 years) according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines.11
Adherence with posttreatment surveillance in HNC recently was associated with length of survival; however, this observation at a single tertiary academic center was discordant with earlier published reports.12-15 About 80% to 90% of all postcurative intent treatment recurrences and second primary cancers occur within the first 4 years, with a better functional outcome if the recurrence is surgically salvageable or amenable to adjuvant radiation or combined radiation and chemotherapy.16,17 Nonadherence is generally associated with worse clinical and acute care utilization outcomes.18
Problem
At the Raymond G. Murphy VAMC, a tertiary care center in Albuquerque, New Mexico, there was a propensity of veteran HNC patients who missed scheduled surveillance appointments or were lost to follow-up. An informal review of several VA ENT departments revealed similar issues without any consistent method to solve the problem. In an effort to recapture these patients, in 2011 an ENT registered nurse (RN) was added to the team as cancer care coordinator (CCC). After several weeks of chart review of clinic records, it was determined that 31% of HNC patients had missed 1 or more ongoing surveillance appointments, either by patient no-show, clinic cancellations that failed to reschedule patients, or patient cancellation without rescheduling. The CCC was tasked with recapturing these lost patients, returning them to regular follow-up per NCCN guidelines, and tracking new cancer patients as they were diagnosed and progressed through treatment and surveillance. As there had been no one previously in this role in the ENT clinic, there was no guidance about how to proceed.
The mechanism in place for rescheduling no-show patients at that time consisted of a mailed postcard reminder sent by a medical support assistant who requested that the veteran contact the clinic to reschedule. Veterans reported that these reminders often appeared in their mail mingled with so-called junk mail and were discarded without reading. The CCC spent several more weeks examining clinic records in the computerized patient record system (CPRS), looking for patients with cancer in the 5-year surveillance period, and compiling a database of survivors and newly diagnosed patients. This database was compiled initially on paper and then converted to a spreadsheet. Patients who had missed appointments were contacted by the CCC and rescheduled, which resulted in a 100% recovery rate.
Unfortunately, although the manual tracking process was successful, it was laborious and time consuming. Weekly and sometimes daily examination of CPRS clinic records for new patients and survivor adherence was followed by tedious data entry into the spreadsheet. The manual tracking system was deemed suboptimal and a Lean Six Sigma process improvement project was initiated. The project goal was to produce a dashboard database tool that was patient centered to improve the quality of cancer care to veterans.
Methods
Lean Six Sigma is a combination of 2 improvement processes and is embraced by large business and government entities with the goal of improving efficiencies, reducing waste, decreasing errors, and generating cost savings.19 The first improvement process, Six Sigma, is a statistical concept with the goal of producing no more than 3.4 defects per million opportunities.20Using specific tools, Six Sigma identifies the cause of the problem to help develop effective solutions. Six Sigma also helps uncover defects and problems by using a standardized and systematic method for each process improvement project in a sequence of steps known as DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, and Control) to ensure a defect-free product at a rate of 99.99966%. Define, the first step, contains a written statement defining the problem and the goals; Measure scrutinizes the current baseline of the project in measureable data to identify possible contributing factors; Analyze uses data and tools to understand the cause-and-effect relationships in the process; Improve uses creative developments and changes that lead to process improvements; and Control takes measures to ensure the improvements are implemented, reliable, and constant.
Although slightly different but complementary, Lean focuses on streamlining improvement processes by identifying and eliminating waste that has little or no value to the customer. The 8 most common forms of waste are identified through the mnemonic DOWNTIME (Defects, Overproduction, Waiting, Not utilizing human talent, Transportation, Inventory excess, Motion excess, and Excess processing).21 When both Lean and Six Sigma are used together, the synergistic effects have a powerful impact on the complete quality improvement process and yield consistent reliability. The combined process then includes several methodologic tools for systems redesign, including root-cause analysis, defining waste barriers, measuring current and expected performance, analyzing the data collected, improving the target process, and controlling the improvements. Though already existing and used within the VA system, Lean Six Sigma training was included as a mandatory component of new employee orientation in a memo issued in August 2015 from the assistant secretary for human resources and administration (VA access-only memo VAIQ 7595924).
Root-cause analysis was accomplished using the “5 Why” technique adapted into Lean and Six Sigma from the Toyota Motor Corporation. For example, the question “Why do patients miss appointments?” was asked 5 different ways, and it was determined that many patients lacked transportation, some were not able to reschedule at the time they called to cancel their appointment, those with multiple same-day appointments at the tertiary medical center were not able to wait to schedule a follow-up appointment for fear of missing or being late to their next appointment, and others were placed on recall lists with appointment reminders that failed to accomplish the purpose of self-scheduling by veterans. Thus, the common denominator and answer to the question “why” was that there was no tracking system in place to identify and reschedule missed follow-ups, and before employing a dedicated coordinator, no one accountable for the process (Figure 1).
Wasteful barriers to efficiency were examined with particular attention to the rescheduling process. Rescheduling produced immediate duplication of work for scheduling staff and increased wait time for future appointments. There was potential for additional health care expenses related to costs of late and progressive salvage treatment or for less-than-timely correction of HNC treatment sequelae, such as scarring, lymphedema, or dysphagia. Ear, nose, and throat providers were concerned about missing occult recurrence or residual cancer.
In 2013, the Lean Six Sigma process was used again to critique efforts by the CCC to identify and track HNC patients. One suggestion was to automate the process, and the Information Resource Management (IRM) office was contacted via work order to explore options for mining CPRS data. Working with a committed health information analyst, further discussion was aimed at pulling in additional data that would simultaneously track required posttreatment laboratory results and imaging. It was decided that a secure dashboard format would provide greater utility than would an online report that the CCC had to request and generate daily.
Integrated technologist Stephen Few defines a data dashboard as “… a visual display of the most important information needed to achieve one or more objectives; consolidated and arranged on a single screen so the information can be monitored at a glance.”22 The Head & Neck Cancer Tracking Dashboard (HNC Dashboard), designed by the IRM analyst, queries the VA Corporate Data Warehouse each night to identify all patients recently diagnosed with HNC by examining outpatient visit and inpatient discharge International Classification of Disease (ICD) codes entered by providers when coding encounter notes in CPRS. It also adds those with a HNC diagnosis in the VistA problem list and the HNC pathology department Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine (SNOMED) codes (Figure 2).
The automated ENT cancer tracking dashboard prototype debuted in 2014, but several months of trial and error took place to reanalyze ICD codes and narrow the list. The dashboard underwent multiple tests to ensure accuracy. Identified patients are presented using an interactive report hosted on a secure SharePoint (Redmond,WA) site, which reduced the risk of a data breach as access requires multi-authenticated user identification from a VA computer.
Another characteristic of the dashboard’s format is the ability to add custom features as needed. Several features now included in the dashboard are location of residence, diagnosis date, ICD code, date captured in the tracking system, most recent ENT clinic visit, future scheduled ENT clinic appointment, date of last thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) laboratory test, and date of last position emission tomography scan. In addition, cancellations, no-shows, and patients overdue for TSH testing are highlighted in bold. Highlighted fields alert the CCC to reschedule patients in a timely manner and can alert providers to order needed follow-up tests and procedures.
Among the merits of the ENT cancer tracking dashboard is ease of use. The CCC uses a simple ABC acronym to describe utilization:
- A—added: The CCC daily edits new patients added to the dashboard with a HNC diagnosis. Several times recently the CCC saw a new diagnosis before the provider had been notified by pathology of biopsy results (Figure 3).
- B—browse: The dashboard format allows for rapid perusal of critical information at a glance (Figure 4). Recent labs and imaging can be discussed with providers immediately or at weekly ENT team cancer update meetings. Notification to clinicians can be rapid if the results show suspicion for residual/recurrent disease, a second primary site, metastasis, or there is need to notify the patient’s primary care provider to treat elevated TSH levels (hypothyroidism incidence after head and neck radiation is reportedly as high as 44%, with most patients being asymptomatic or simply fatigued).10,23
- C—check: Appointments are checked for those in the future, cancelled without rescheduling, or no-show dates. Empty fields under the “Next ENT Appointment” header alert the CCC to reschedule a follow-up appointment within NCCN guidelines. Alerting providers to upcoming surveillance appointments allows timely coordination with other care providers and departments, including speech pathology, nutrition, audiology, and social work. The “ENT Recall Date” has a unique time-sensitive feature and will visually display a bold type font when ready to be scheduled for a physical appointment (Figure 5).
Results
The cancer dashboard has demonstrated its success by supporting consistent and reliable monthly data. Results recorded over a 24-month period (from January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2016) showed that the electronic tracker identified 101 new HNC patients. During this period, 1,067 HNC patients were scheduled for follow-up appointments for cancer surveillance. Of these, the authors found that 112 HNC patients had missed their appointments due to calling and cancelling or not showing up as scheduled; resulting in a no-show status. This yielded an appointment nonadherence rate of 10%. The authors also found that 73 (7%) HNC patients did not have an elected scheduled appointment to return to the clinic for continued cancer surveillance. This number comprises all HNC patients whose appointments were cancelled by clinic cancellation, self-cancellation, no-show appointments, or those who left the clinic without scheduling a subsequent follow-up appointment. The electronic tracker identified 100% of these patients as missing and needing a future appointment. These patients may have otherwise been lost through manual tracking.
Implementation and utilization of a robust automated dashboard format HNC patient tracking system has been rewarding for the ENT department. The CCC has saved an estimated 600 to 800 hours per year of chart review and data entry. Although a time study was never conducted to measure the work process of this task, it is reasonable to conclude based on the following multiple manual step-by-step processes that the CCC had to perform frequently were now performed within the dashboard: reviewing consults for HNC diagnosis, recording new patient profile data on the spreadsheet; reviewing VA hospital pathology reports for new HNC diagnoses, reviewing the clinic schedule to track patient appointment adherence, updating and recording recent appointment activity, and reviewing the electronic medical records daily for recommended treatment plan and follow-up.
A side-by-side comparison of the functional features of tracking both manually and with automation showed that automation outnumbers the function of manual tracking by 36% and offers improved efficiency (Table). This has allowed time for the CCC to participate in simultaneous HNC care initiatives, including facilitating interfacility telehealth referrals for complex cancer surgery, scheduling and monitoring rural cancer surveillance telehealth appointments, and development of an ENT Survivorship Care Plan. These programs optimize time and workflow, reduce waste, reduce expenditures related to costly treatment modalities associated with advanced stages of malignancy, and improve the veteran experience. Further benefits to the veteran HNC patient population include increased self-efficacy and awareness for disease management through continuity of care, reduced cost associated with travel expense, and reduced potential copays due to additional medical care related to advanced stages of recurrent or residual disease.
In-house development of the HNC tracking dashboard has contributed to further cost savings for the VA. Specialized third-party acquired software can cost thousands of dollars for purchase and implementation and often includes ongoing fees for use. The Sustain and Spread concept of Lean Six Sigma is proven by a 100% recapture rate of HNC patients in the ENT clinic that potentially would have been lost to follow-up. The success in Spreading this innovation forward has resulted in adoption by other VAMCs for current use and implementation. After sharing information regarding the dashboard at 2 national conferences via presentations and poster, other VAMCs in neighboring states have requested the software and initiated custom versions. Because of this success and further demand, dashboard use is currently under consideration by the VA for nationwide availability.
Conclusion
Deficiencies in tracking cancer patients in the VA system exist in part due to little or no sophisticated electronic tracking systems that could perform multiple task functions to identify new cancer patients, the type of cancer, when appointments are missed, and notification when the required labs and procedures are completed. Often, the CCC is dependent on the arduous task of inputting of data to keep him/her up-to-date with patient care and coordination in a timely manner. As new VA policies attempts to perfect and streamline the scheduling process by way of providers placing “return to clinic” orders for patient follow-up care, there remains a potential risk of those patients not getting scheduled without a vigilant tracking process in place to monitor and ensure that all patients are scheduled.
The dashboard has proved to be an easy to use and vital tool in tracking HNC patients by the CCC. It will continue to assist in the identification of new HNC patients, provide ready access to patient information and follow-up care, and help facilitate CCC and provider communication on a daily basis, thereby meeting the goal of a patient-centered product that proves to improve the quality of cancer care of veterans.
Acknowledgment
The authors thank Mr. Dominic B. Ruiz, Visual Information Specialist, at the Raymond Murphy VAMC, who created images in high resolution for this article.
Author disclosures
The authors report no actual or potential conflicts of interest with regard to this article.
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of Federal Practitioner , Frontline Medical Communications Inc., the U.S. Government, or any of its agencies.
Click here to read the digital edition.
1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2016. CA Cancer J Clin. 2016;66(1):7-30.
2. Patil RD, Meinzen-Derr JK, Hendricks BL, Patil YJ. Improving access and timelines of care for veterans with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: a multidisciplinary team’s approach. Laryngoscope. 2016;126(3):627-631.
3. Wissinger E, Griebsch I, Lungershausen J, Foster T, Pashos CL. The economic burden of head and neck cancer: a systematic literature review. Pharmacoeconomics. 2014;32(9):865-882.
4. Mariotto AB, Yabroff KR, Shao Y, Feuer EJ, Brown ML. Projections of the cost of cancer care in the United States: 2010-2020. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103(2):117-128.
5. Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti A III, eds. American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging Manual. 7th ed. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag; 2010.
6. Cancer.net. Head and neck cancer: statistics. http://www.cancer.net/cancer-types/head-and-neck-cancer/Statistics. Updated September 2016. Accessed April 12, 2017.
7. Rachidi S, Wallace K, Wrangle JM, Day TA, Alberg AJ, Li Z. Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and overall survival in all sites of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Head Neck. 2016;38(suppl 1):E1068-E1074.
8. Cheung PK, Chin RY, Eslick GD. Detecting residual/recurrent head neck squamous cell carcinomas using PET or PET/CT: systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2016;154(3):421-432.
9. Haddad RI, Limaye S. Overview of approach to long-term survivors of head and neck cancer. http://www .uptodate .com/contents/overview-of-approach-to-long-term-survivors-of-head-and-neck-cancer. Updated October 26, 2016. Accessed April 12, 2017.
10. Manikantan K, Khode S, Dwivedi RC, et al. Making sense of post-treatment surveillance in head and neck cancer: when and what of follow-up. Cancer Treat Rev. 2009;35(8):744-753.
11. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Clinical practice guidelines in onclology:head and neck cancers(2.2017).2017. Updated May 8, 2017. https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/f_/pdf/head-and-neck.pdf. Accessed July 18, 2017.
12. Deutschmann MW, Sykes KJ, Harbison J, Cabrera-Muffly C, Schnayder Y. The impact of compliance in post treatment surveillance in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2015;141(6):519-525.
13. Merkx MA, van Gulick JJ, Marres HA, et al. Effectiveness of routine follow-up of patients treated for T1-2N0 oral squamous cell carcinomas of the floor of mouth and tongue. Head Neck. 2006:28(1):1-7.
14. Ritoe SC, de Vegt F, Scheike IM, et al. Effect of routine follow-up after treatment for laryngeal cancer on life expectancy and mortality: results of a Markov model analysis. Cancer. 2007;109(2):239-247.
15. Agrawal A, Hammond TH, Young GS, Avon AL, Ozer E, Schuller DE. Factors affecting long-term survival in patients with recurrent head and neck cancer may help define the role of post-treatment surveillance. Laryngoscope. 2009;119(11):2135-2140.
16. Roland NJ, Bradley PJ. The role of surgery in the palliation of head and neck cancer. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2014;22(2):101-108.
17. Riaz N, Hong JC, Sherman EJ, et al. A nomogram to predict loco-regional control after re-irradiation for head and neck cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2014;111(3):382-387.
18. Hwang AS, Atlas SJ, Cronin P, et al. Appointment “no-shows” are an independent predictor of subsequent quality of care and resource utilization outcomes. J Gen Intern Med. 2015;30(10):1426-1433.
19. Healthcare Daily Online. VA healthcare system adopts lean six sigma. http://www.healthcaredailyonline.com/news/va-lean-six-sigma-in-healthcare. Updated December 7, 2015. Accessed April 12, 2017.
20. Gygi C, Williams B. Six Sigma for Dummies. 2nd edition. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2012.
21. Kavanagh S, Krings D. The 8 sources of waste and how to eliminate them: improving performance with LEAN management techniques. http://www.gfoa.org/sites/default /files/GFR_DEC_11_18.pdf. Updated December, 2011. Accessed April 14, 2017.
22. Few S. What is a dashboard? In: Wheeler C, ed. Information Dashboard Design: The Effective Visual Communication of Data. 1st ed. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media; 2006:34.
23. Murthy V, Narang K, Ghosh-Laskar S, Gupta T, Budrukkar A, Agrawal JP. Hypothyroidism after 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for head and neck cancers: prospective data from 2 randomized controlled trials. Head Neck. 2014;36(11):1573-1780.
1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2016. CA Cancer J Clin. 2016;66(1):7-30.
2. Patil RD, Meinzen-Derr JK, Hendricks BL, Patil YJ. Improving access and timelines of care for veterans with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: a multidisciplinary team’s approach. Laryngoscope. 2016;126(3):627-631.
3. Wissinger E, Griebsch I, Lungershausen J, Foster T, Pashos CL. The economic burden of head and neck cancer: a systematic literature review. Pharmacoeconomics. 2014;32(9):865-882.
4. Mariotto AB, Yabroff KR, Shao Y, Feuer EJ, Brown ML. Projections of the cost of cancer care in the United States: 2010-2020. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103(2):117-128.
5. Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti A III, eds. American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging Manual. 7th ed. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag; 2010.
6. Cancer.net. Head and neck cancer: statistics. http://www.cancer.net/cancer-types/head-and-neck-cancer/Statistics. Updated September 2016. Accessed April 12, 2017.
7. Rachidi S, Wallace K, Wrangle JM, Day TA, Alberg AJ, Li Z. Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and overall survival in all sites of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Head Neck. 2016;38(suppl 1):E1068-E1074.
8. Cheung PK, Chin RY, Eslick GD. Detecting residual/recurrent head neck squamous cell carcinomas using PET or PET/CT: systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2016;154(3):421-432.
9. Haddad RI, Limaye S. Overview of approach to long-term survivors of head and neck cancer. http://www .uptodate .com/contents/overview-of-approach-to-long-term-survivors-of-head-and-neck-cancer. Updated October 26, 2016. Accessed April 12, 2017.
10. Manikantan K, Khode S, Dwivedi RC, et al. Making sense of post-treatment surveillance in head and neck cancer: when and what of follow-up. Cancer Treat Rev. 2009;35(8):744-753.
11. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Clinical practice guidelines in onclology:head and neck cancers(2.2017).2017. Updated May 8, 2017. https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/f_/pdf/head-and-neck.pdf. Accessed July 18, 2017.
12. Deutschmann MW, Sykes KJ, Harbison J, Cabrera-Muffly C, Schnayder Y. The impact of compliance in post treatment surveillance in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2015;141(6):519-525.
13. Merkx MA, van Gulick JJ, Marres HA, et al. Effectiveness of routine follow-up of patients treated for T1-2N0 oral squamous cell carcinomas of the floor of mouth and tongue. Head Neck. 2006:28(1):1-7.
14. Ritoe SC, de Vegt F, Scheike IM, et al. Effect of routine follow-up after treatment for laryngeal cancer on life expectancy and mortality: results of a Markov model analysis. Cancer. 2007;109(2):239-247.
15. Agrawal A, Hammond TH, Young GS, Avon AL, Ozer E, Schuller DE. Factors affecting long-term survival in patients with recurrent head and neck cancer may help define the role of post-treatment surveillance. Laryngoscope. 2009;119(11):2135-2140.
16. Roland NJ, Bradley PJ. The role of surgery in the palliation of head and neck cancer. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2014;22(2):101-108.
17. Riaz N, Hong JC, Sherman EJ, et al. A nomogram to predict loco-regional control after re-irradiation for head and neck cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2014;111(3):382-387.
18. Hwang AS, Atlas SJ, Cronin P, et al. Appointment “no-shows” are an independent predictor of subsequent quality of care and resource utilization outcomes. J Gen Intern Med. 2015;30(10):1426-1433.
19. Healthcare Daily Online. VA healthcare system adopts lean six sigma. http://www.healthcaredailyonline.com/news/va-lean-six-sigma-in-healthcare. Updated December 7, 2015. Accessed April 12, 2017.
20. Gygi C, Williams B. Six Sigma for Dummies. 2nd edition. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2012.
21. Kavanagh S, Krings D. The 8 sources of waste and how to eliminate them: improving performance with LEAN management techniques. http://www.gfoa.org/sites/default /files/GFR_DEC_11_18.pdf. Updated December, 2011. Accessed April 14, 2017.
22. Few S. What is a dashboard? In: Wheeler C, ed. Information Dashboard Design: The Effective Visual Communication of Data. 1st ed. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media; 2006:34.
23. Murthy V, Narang K, Ghosh-Laskar S, Gupta T, Budrukkar A, Agrawal JP. Hypothyroidism after 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy for head and neck cancers: prospective data from 2 randomized controlled trials. Head Neck. 2014;36(11):1573-1780.
FDA warns against azithromycin in blood or lymph node cancers
The Food and Drug Administration has issued a in patients with blood or lymph node cancers who have received donor stem cell transplants.
This use of azithromycin can lead to increased risk of cancer relapse and death in this population. The FDA is continuing to review data and is expected to issue further recommendations.
Patients with blood or lymph node cancers are at an increased risk of bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome after donor stem cell transplant; although azithromycin is not approved for prevention of this condition, the antibiotic is sometimes prescribed for that purpose.
A French study of 480 patients was undertaken to assess the effectiveness of this prophylaxis but revealed the increased risk of relapse and death and was halted 13 months after completing enrollment. The rate of cancer relapse was 32.9% in the azithromycin group and just 20.8% in the placebo group; the 2-year survival rate was 56.6% in the azithromycin group and 70.1% in the placebo group (JAMA 2017;318[6]:557-66).
Bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome is marked by inflammation and scarring of the airways that leads to severe shortness of breath and dry cough. There are no known effective antibiotic treatments for prophylaxis of the condition, according to the FDA.
FDA officials are advising physicians not to prescribe long-term azithromycin in this population. Patients who have had a stem cell transplant and are already taking the antibiotic, should consult a doctor before discontinuing.
The manufacturer of brand name azithromycin (Zithromax) has issued a Dear Healthcare Provider letter about the safety issue, and more information can be found in the FDA’s safety announcement.
The Food and Drug Administration has issued a in patients with blood or lymph node cancers who have received donor stem cell transplants.
This use of azithromycin can lead to increased risk of cancer relapse and death in this population. The FDA is continuing to review data and is expected to issue further recommendations.
Patients with blood or lymph node cancers are at an increased risk of bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome after donor stem cell transplant; although azithromycin is not approved for prevention of this condition, the antibiotic is sometimes prescribed for that purpose.
A French study of 480 patients was undertaken to assess the effectiveness of this prophylaxis but revealed the increased risk of relapse and death and was halted 13 months after completing enrollment. The rate of cancer relapse was 32.9% in the azithromycin group and just 20.8% in the placebo group; the 2-year survival rate was 56.6% in the azithromycin group and 70.1% in the placebo group (JAMA 2017;318[6]:557-66).
Bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome is marked by inflammation and scarring of the airways that leads to severe shortness of breath and dry cough. There are no known effective antibiotic treatments for prophylaxis of the condition, according to the FDA.
FDA officials are advising physicians not to prescribe long-term azithromycin in this population. Patients who have had a stem cell transplant and are already taking the antibiotic, should consult a doctor before discontinuing.
The manufacturer of brand name azithromycin (Zithromax) has issued a Dear Healthcare Provider letter about the safety issue, and more information can be found in the FDA’s safety announcement.
The Food and Drug Administration has issued a in patients with blood or lymph node cancers who have received donor stem cell transplants.
This use of azithromycin can lead to increased risk of cancer relapse and death in this population. The FDA is continuing to review data and is expected to issue further recommendations.
Patients with blood or lymph node cancers are at an increased risk of bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome after donor stem cell transplant; although azithromycin is not approved for prevention of this condition, the antibiotic is sometimes prescribed for that purpose.
A French study of 480 patients was undertaken to assess the effectiveness of this prophylaxis but revealed the increased risk of relapse and death and was halted 13 months after completing enrollment. The rate of cancer relapse was 32.9% in the azithromycin group and just 20.8% in the placebo group; the 2-year survival rate was 56.6% in the azithromycin group and 70.1% in the placebo group (JAMA 2017;318[6]:557-66).
Bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome is marked by inflammation and scarring of the airways that leads to severe shortness of breath and dry cough. There are no known effective antibiotic treatments for prophylaxis of the condition, according to the FDA.
FDA officials are advising physicians not to prescribe long-term azithromycin in this population. Patients who have had a stem cell transplant and are already taking the antibiotic, should consult a doctor before discontinuing.
The manufacturer of brand name azithromycin (Zithromax) has issued a Dear Healthcare Provider letter about the safety issue, and more information can be found in the FDA’s safety announcement.