User login
Continuing Medical Education Program in
If you wish to receive credit for this activity, please refer to the website: www.wileyblackwellcme.com.
Accreditation and Designation Statement
Blackwell Futura Media Services designates this journal‐based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit.. Physicians should only claim credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.
Blackwell Futura Media Services is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
Educational Objectives
Upon completion of this educational activity, participants will be better able to:
-
Illustrate the elements of a systematic approach to successful hospital smoking cessation programs.
-
Describe the efficacy of a coordinated real world hospital smoking cessation program in a U.S. hospital.
-
Evaluate the barriers to successful hospital smoking cessation programs.
This manuscript underwent peer review in line with the standards of editorial integrity and publication ethics maintained by Journal of Hospital Medicine. The peer reviewers have no relevant financial relationships. The peer review process for Journal of Hospital Medicine is blinded. As such, the identities of the reviewers are not disclosed in line with the standard accepted practices of medical journal peer review.
Conflicts of interest have been identified and resolved in accordance with Blackwell Futura Media Services's Policy on Activity Disclosure and Conflict of Interest. The primary resolution method used was peer review and review by a non‐conflicted expert.
Instructions on Receiving Credit
For information on applicability and acceptance of CME credit for this activity, please consult your professional licensing board.
This activity is designed to be completed within an hour; physicians should claim only those credits that reflect the time actually spent in the activity. To successfully earn credit, participants must complete the activity during the valid credit period, which is up to two years from initial publication.
Follow these steps to earn credit:
-
Log on to www.wileyblackwellcme.com
-
Read the target audience, learning objectives, and author disclosures.
-
Read the article in print or online format.
-
Reflect on the article.
-
Access the CME Exam, and choose the best answer to each question.
-
Complete the required evaluation component of the activity.
This activity will be available for CME credit for twelve months following its publication date. At that time, it will be reviewed and potentially updated and extended for an additional twelve months.
If you wish to receive credit for this activity, please refer to the website: www.wileyblackwellcme.com.
Accreditation and Designation Statement
Blackwell Futura Media Services designates this journal‐based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit.. Physicians should only claim credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.
Blackwell Futura Media Services is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
Educational Objectives
Upon completion of this educational activity, participants will be better able to:
-
Illustrate the elements of a systematic approach to successful hospital smoking cessation programs.
-
Describe the efficacy of a coordinated real world hospital smoking cessation program in a U.S. hospital.
-
Evaluate the barriers to successful hospital smoking cessation programs.
This manuscript underwent peer review in line with the standards of editorial integrity and publication ethics maintained by Journal of Hospital Medicine. The peer reviewers have no relevant financial relationships. The peer review process for Journal of Hospital Medicine is blinded. As such, the identities of the reviewers are not disclosed in line with the standard accepted practices of medical journal peer review.
Conflicts of interest have been identified and resolved in accordance with Blackwell Futura Media Services's Policy on Activity Disclosure and Conflict of Interest. The primary resolution method used was peer review and review by a non‐conflicted expert.
Instructions on Receiving Credit
For information on applicability and acceptance of CME credit for this activity, please consult your professional licensing board.
This activity is designed to be completed within an hour; physicians should claim only those credits that reflect the time actually spent in the activity. To successfully earn credit, participants must complete the activity during the valid credit period, which is up to two years from initial publication.
Follow these steps to earn credit:
-
Log on to www.wileyblackwellcme.com
-
Read the target audience, learning objectives, and author disclosures.
-
Read the article in print or online format.
-
Reflect on the article.
-
Access the CME Exam, and choose the best answer to each question.
-
Complete the required evaluation component of the activity.
This activity will be available for CME credit for twelve months following its publication date. At that time, it will be reviewed and potentially updated and extended for an additional twelve months.
If you wish to receive credit for this activity, please refer to the website: www.wileyblackwellcme.com.
Accreditation and Designation Statement
Blackwell Futura Media Services designates this journal‐based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit.. Physicians should only claim credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.
Blackwell Futura Media Services is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
Educational Objectives
Upon completion of this educational activity, participants will be better able to:
-
Illustrate the elements of a systematic approach to successful hospital smoking cessation programs.
-
Describe the efficacy of a coordinated real world hospital smoking cessation program in a U.S. hospital.
-
Evaluate the barriers to successful hospital smoking cessation programs.
This manuscript underwent peer review in line with the standards of editorial integrity and publication ethics maintained by Journal of Hospital Medicine. The peer reviewers have no relevant financial relationships. The peer review process for Journal of Hospital Medicine is blinded. As such, the identities of the reviewers are not disclosed in line with the standard accepted practices of medical journal peer review.
Conflicts of interest have been identified and resolved in accordance with Blackwell Futura Media Services's Policy on Activity Disclosure and Conflict of Interest. The primary resolution method used was peer review and review by a non‐conflicted expert.
Instructions on Receiving Credit
For information on applicability and acceptance of CME credit for this activity, please consult your professional licensing board.
This activity is designed to be completed within an hour; physicians should claim only those credits that reflect the time actually spent in the activity. To successfully earn credit, participants must complete the activity during the valid credit period, which is up to two years from initial publication.
Follow these steps to earn credit:
-
Log on to www.wileyblackwellcme.com
-
Read the target audience, learning objectives, and author disclosures.
-
Read the article in print or online format.
-
Reflect on the article.
-
Access the CME Exam, and choose the best answer to each question.
-
Complete the required evaluation component of the activity.
This activity will be available for CME credit for twelve months following its publication date. At that time, it will be reviewed and potentially updated and extended for an additional twelve months.
Nonprocedural “Time Out”
Communication and teamwork failures are the most frequently cited cause of adverse events.1, 2 Strategies to improve communication have focused on implementing formal teamwork training programs and/or teaching specific communication skills.36 For instance, many institutions have adopted SBAR (Situation‐Background‐Assessment‐Recommendation) as a method for providers to deliver critical clinical information in a structured format.7 SBAR focuses on the immediate and urgent event at hand and can occur between any 2 providers. The situation is a brief description of the event (eg, Hi Dr. Smith, this is Paul from 14‐Long, I'm calling about Mrs. Jones in 1427 who is in acute respiratory distress). The background describes details relevant to the situation (eg, She was admitted with a COPD exacerbation yesterday night, and, for the past couple hours, she appears in more distress. Her vital signs are). The assessment (eg, Her breath sounds are diminished and she's moving less air) and recommendation (eg, I'd like to call respiratory therapy and would like you to come assess her now) drive toward having an action defined at the end. Given the professional silos that exist in healthcare, the advent of a shared set of communication tools helps bridge existing gaps in training, experience, and teamwork between different providers.
Regulatory agencies have been heavily invested in attempts to standardize communication in healthcare settings. In 2003, the Joint Commission elevated the concerns for wrong‐site surgery by making its prevention a National Patient Safety Goal, and the following year required compliance with a Universal Protocol (UP).8 In addition to adequate preoperative identification of the patient and marking of their surgical site, the UP called for a time out (TO) just prior to the surgery or procedure. The UP states that a TO requires active communication among all members of the surgical/procedure team, consistently initiated by a designated member of the team, conducted in a fail‐safe mode, so that the planned procedure is not started if a member of the team has concerns.8 Simply, the TO provides an opportunity to clarify plans for care and discuss events anticipated during the procedure among all members of the team (eg, surgeons, anesthesiologists, nurses, technicians). This all‐important pause point ensures that each team member is on the same page.
Whereas a TO involves many high‐risk procedural settings, a significant proportion of hospital care occurs outside of procedures. Patients are often evaluated in an emergency department, admitted to a medical/surgical ward, treated without the need for a procedure, and ultimately discharged home or transferred to another healthcare facility (eg, skilled nursing or acute rehabilitation). In this paper, we introduce the concept of Critical Conversations, a form of nonprocedural time out, as a tool, intervention, and policy that promotes communication and teamwork at the most vulnerable junctures in a patient's hospitalization.
Rationale for Critical Conversations: a Case Scenario
An 82‐year‐old man with hypertension and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is admitted to the hospital with community‐acquired pneumonia and an exacerbation of his COPD. The admitting physician evaluates the patient in the emergency department and completes admission orders. The patient arrives on the medical/surgical unit and the unit clerk processes the orders, stimulating a cascade of downstream events for different providers.
Nurse
The nurse reviews the medication list, notices antibiotics and bronchodilators, and wonders why aren't we administering steroids for his COPD? Do any of these medications need to be given now? Is there anything the physician is worried about? What specific things should prompt me to call the physician with an update or change in condition? I'm not sure if it's safe to send the patient down for the ordered radiographic study because he still looks pretty short of breath. I hate paging the physician several times to get these questions answered because I know that person is busy as well. I also know the patient will have questions about the care plans, which I won't be able to answer. I wonder if I should finish administering evening medications for my other patients as I'm running behind schedule on my other tasks.
Respiratory therapist
At the same time, the respiratory therapist (RT) is contacted to assist with nebulizer therapy for the patient. In reviewing the order for bronchodilators, the RT silently asks, do we think he is going to need continuous nebulizers? What is our oxygen saturation goaldo we want him at 90% or above 95%? I wonder if this patient has a history of CO2 retention and if I should have a BiPAP machine at the bedside.
Physician
After completing the orders for the patient, the physician remains in the emergency department to admit a different patient with a gastrointestinal bleed. This is the fifth admission in the past few hours. The physician feels the impact of constant paging interruptions. A unit clerk pages asking for clarification about a radiographic study that was ordered. A bedside nurse pages and asks if the physician can come and speak to the family about the diagnosis and treatment plans for an earlier admission (something the nurse is not clear about, either). A second bedside nurse pages, stating a different admission is still tachycardic after 3 liters of intravenous fluids and wants to know whether the fluids should be continued. Finally, the bedside nurse pages about whether the new COPD admission can go off the floor for the ordered chest CT or remain on continuous pulse oximetry because of shortness of breath.
Our case scenario is representative of most non‐surgical admissions to a hospital. The hypothetical questions posed from different provider perspectives are also common and often remain unanswered in a timely fashion. Partly because there is no site to mark and no anesthesia to deliver, the clinical encounter escapes attention as an opportunity for error prevention. In our experience, there are specific times during a hospitalization when communication failures are most likely to compromise patient care: the time of admission, the time of discharge,9 and any time when a patient's clinical condition changes acutely. Whereas handoff communications focus on transitions between providers (eg, shift changes), these circumstances are driven by patient transitions. Indirect communications, such as phone, email, or faxes, are suboptimal forms of communication at such times.10 We believe that there should be an expectation for direct communication at these junctures, and we define these direct communications as Critical Conversations.
Description of a Critical Conversation
In the hours that follow an admission, providers (and often the patients or their family as well) invariably exchange any number of inefficient calls or pages to clarify care plans, discuss a suspected diagnosis, anticipate concerns in the first night, and/or highlight which orders should be prioritized, such as medications or diagnostic studies. A Critical Conversation at time of admission does in this circumstance exactly what a TO attempts to provide before a procedure foster communication and teamwork as a patient is about to be placed at risk for adverse events. The exchange involves discussion of the following:
Admitting diagnosis
Immediate treatment plan
Medications ordered (particularly those new to a patient to anticipate an adverse event)
Priority for completing any admitting orders
Guidelines for physician notification when a change in patient condition occurs.
At the other end of a hospitalization, with the known complications arising from a patient's discharge,11, 12 the same process is needed. Rather than having each discipline focus on an individual role or task in getting a patient safely discharged, Critical Conversations allow the entire team, including the patient,13 to ensure that concerns have been addressed. This might help clarify simple measures around follow‐up appointments, whom to call with questions after discharge, or symptoms to watch for that may warrant a repeat evaluation. Nurses anecdotally lament that they first learn about a planned discharge only when the discharge order is written in the chart or if a patient informs them. Both scenarios reflect poorly on the teamwork required to assure patients we're working together, and that key providers are on the same page with respect to discharge planning. The exchange at discharge involves discussion of these elements:
Discharge diagnosis
Follow‐up plans
Need for education/training prior to discharge
Necessary paperwork completed
Anticipated time of discharge.
Finally, where many patients are admitted to a hospital, improve, and then return home, others develop acute changes during their hospitalization. For example, the patient in our case scenario could develop respiratory failure and require transfer to the intensive care unit (ICU). Or a different patient might have an acute change in mental status, a new fever, a new abnormal vital sign (eg, tachycardia or hypoxia), or an acute change re existing abdominal painall of which may require a battery of diagnostic tests. These circumstances define the third time for a Critical Conversation: a change in clinical condition. Such situations often require a change in the care plan, a change in priorities for delivering care at that time (for the patient in need and for other patients being cared for by the same nurse and physician), a need for additional resources (eg, respiratory therapist, phlebotomist, pharmacist), and, ultimately, a well‐orchestrated team effort to make it all happen. The specific item prompting the Critical Conversation may impact the nature of the exchange, which involves discussion of these components:
Suspected diagnosis
Immediate treatment plan
Medications ordered (particularly those new to a patient to anticipate an adverse event)
Priority for completing any new orders
Guidelines for physician notification when a change in patient condition occurs.
In addition to the above checklist for each Critical Conversation, each exchange should also address two open‐ended questions: 1) what do you anticipate happening in the next 24 hours, and 2) what questions might the patient/family have?
One may ask, and we did, why not have a direct communication daily between a physician and a bedside nurse on each patient? Most physicians and nurses know the importance of direct communication, but there are also times when each is prioritizing work in competing fashions. Adopting Critical Conversations isn't meant to deter from communications that are vital to patient care; rather, it is intended to codify distinct times when a direct communication is required for patient safety.
Lessons Learned
Table 1 provides an example of a Critical Conversation using the sample case scenario. Table 2 lists the most frequent outcomes that resulted from providers engaging in Critical Conversations. These were captured from discussions with bedside nurses and internal medicine residents on our primary medical unit. Both tables highlight how these deliberate and direct communications can create a shared understanding of the patient's medical problems, can help prioritize what tasks should take place (eg, radiology study, medication administration, calling another provider), can improve communication between providers and patients, and potentially accomplish all of these goals in a more efficient manner.
| Physician: Hi Nurse X, I'm Dr. Y, and I just wrote admission orders for Mr. Z whom, I understand, you'll be admitting. He's 82 with a history of COPD and is having an exacerbation related to a community‐acquired pneumonia. He looks comfortable right now as he's received his first dose of antibiotics, a liter of IVF, and 2 nebulizer treatments with some relief of his dyspnea. The main thing he needs up on the floor right now is to have respiratory therapy evaluate him. He's apparently been intubated before for his COPD, so I'd like to have them on board early and consider placing a BiPAP machine at the bedside for the next few hours. I don't anticipate an acute worsening of his condition given his initial improvements in the ED, but you should call me with any change in his condition. I haven't met the family yet because they were not at the bedside, but please convey the plans to them as well. I'll be up later to talk to them directly. Do you have any questions for me right now? |
| Nurse: I'll call the respiratory therapist right now and we'll make sure to contact you with any changes in his respiratory status. It looks like a chest CT was ordered, but not completed yet. Would you like him to go down for it off monitor? |
| Physician: Actually, let's watch him for a few hours to make sure he's continuing to improve. I initially ordered the chest CT to exclude a pulmonary embolus, but his history, exam, and chest x‐ray seem consistent with pneumonia. Let's reassess in a few hours. |
| Nurse: Sounds good. I'll text‐message you a set of his vital signs in 3‐4 hours to give you an update on his respiratory status. |
| General Themes | Specific Examples |
|---|---|
| Clarity on plan of care | Clear understanding of action steps at critical junctures of hospitalization |
| Goals of admission discussed rather than gleaned from chart or less direct modes of communication | |
| Discharge planning more proactive with better anticipation of timing among patients and providers | |
| Expectation for shared understanding of care plans | |
| Assistance with prioritization of tasks (as well as for competing tasks) | Allows RNs to prioritize tasks for new admissions or planned discharges, to determine whether these tasks outweigh tasks for other patients, and to provide early planning when additional resources will be required |
| Allows MDs to prioritize communications to ensure critical orders receive attention, to obtain support for care plans that require multiple disciplines, and to confirm that intended care plans are implemented with shared sense of priority | |
| Ability to communicate plans to patient and family members | Improved consistency in information provided to patients at critical hospital junctures |
| Increased engagement of patients in understanding their care plans | |
| Better model for teamwork curative for patients when providers on the same page with communication | |
| More efficient and effective use of resources | Fewer pages between admitting RN and MD with time saved from paging and waiting for responses |
| Less time trying to interpret plans of care from chart and other less direct modes of communication | |
| Improved sharing and knowledge of information with less duplication of gathering from patients and among providers | |
| Improved teamwork | Fosters a culture for direct communication and opens lines for questioning and speaking up when care plans are not clear |
Making Critical Conversations Happen
Integrating Critical Conversations into practice requires both buy‐in among providers and a plan for monitoring the interactions. We recommend beginning with educational efforts (eg, at a physician or nurse staff meeting) and reinforcing them with visual cues, such as posters on the unit (Figure 1). These actions promote awareness and generate expectations that this new clinical policy is being supported by clinical and hospital leadership. Our experiences have demonstrated tremendous learning, including numerous anecdotes about the value of Critical Conversations (Table 3). Our implementation efforts also raised a number of questions that ultimately led to improved clarity in later iterations.
| Nothing is worse than meeting a patient for the first time at admission and not being able to answer the basic question of why they were admitted or what the plan is. It gives the impression that we don't talk to each other in caring for patients. [Critical Conversations] can really minimize that interaction and reassure patients, rather than make them worried about the apparent mixed messages or lack of communication and teamwork.Bedside Nurse |
| [Critical Conversations] seemed like an additional timely responsibility, and not always a part of my workflow, when sitting in the emergency department admitting patients. But, I found that the often 60 second conversations decreased the number of pages I would get for the same patientactually saving me time.Physician |
| I don't need to have direct communications for every order written. In fact, it would be inefficient for me and the doctors. On the other hand, being engaged in a Critical Conversation provides an opportunity for me to prioritize not only my tasks for the patient in need, but also in context of the other patients I'm caring for.Bedside Nurse |
| Late in the afternoon, there will often be several admissions coming to our unit simultaneously. Prioritizing what orders need to be processed or faxed is a typically blind task based on the way charts get organizedrather than someone telling me this is a priority.Unit Clerk |
| There are so many times when I'm trying to determine what the care plans are for a new admission, and simply having a quick conversation allows me to feel part of the team, and, more importantly, allows me to reinforce education and support for the patients and their family members.Bedside Nurse |
| Discharge always seems chaotic with everyone racing to fill out forms and meet their own tasks and requirements. Invariably, you get called to fix, change, or add new information to the discharge process that would have been easily averted by actually having a brief conversation with the bedside nurse or case manager. Every time I have [a Critical Conversation], I realize its importance for patient care.Physician |
Who should be involved in a Critical Conversation?
Identifying which healthcare team members should be involved in Critical Conversations is best determined by the conversation owner. That is, we found communication was most effective when the individual initiating the Critical Conversation directed others who needed to be involved. At admission, the physician writing the admission orders is best suited to make this determination; at a minimum, he or she should engage the bedside nurse but, as in the case example presented, the physician may also need to engage other services in particularly complex situations (eg, respiratory therapy, pharmacy). At time of discharge, there should be a physiciannurse Critical Conversation; however, the owner of the discharge process may determine that other conversations should occur, and this may be inclusive of or driven by a case manager or social worker. Because local culture and practices may drive specific ownership, it's key to outline a protocol for how this should occur. For instance, at admission, we asked the admitting physicians to take responsibility in contacting the bedside nurse. In other venues, this may work more effectively if the bedside nurse pages the physician once the orders are received and reviewed.
Conclusions
We introduced Critical Conversations as an innovative tool and policy that promotes communication and teamwork in a structured format and at a consistent time. Developing formal systems that decrease communication failures in high‐risk circumstances remains a focus in patient safety, evidenced by guidelines for TOs in procedural settings, handoffs in patient care (eg, sign‐out between providers),14, 15 and transitions into and from the hospital setting.16 Furthermore, there is growing evidence that such structured times for communication and teamwork, such as with briefings, can improve efficiency and reduce delays in care.17, 18 However, handoffs, which address provider transitions, and daily multidisciplinary rounds, which bring providers together regularly, are provider‐centered rather than patient‐centered. Critical Conversations focus on times when patients require direct communication about their care plans to ensure safe and high quality outcomes.
Implementation of Critical Conversations provides an opportunity to codify a professional standard for patient‐centered communication at times when it should be expected. Critical Conversations also help build a system that supports a positive safety culture and encourages teamwork and direct communication. This is particularly true at a time when rapid adoption of information technology may have the unintended and opposite effect. For instance, as our hospital moved toward an entirely electronic health record, providers were increasingly relocating from patient care units into remote offices, corner hideaways, or designated computer rooms to complete orders and documentation. Although this may reduce many related errors in these processes and potentially improve communication via shared access to an electronic record, it does allow for less direct communicationa circumstance that traditionally occurs (even informally) when providers share the same clinical work areas. This situation is aggravated where the nurses are unit‐based and other providers (eg, physicians, therapists, case managers) are service‐based.
Integrating Critical Conversations into practice comes with expected challenges, most notably around workflow (eg, adds a step, although may save steps down the line) and the expectations concomitant with any change in standard of care (possible enforcement or auditing of their occurrence). Certain cultural barriers may also play a significant role, such as the presence of hierarchies that can hinder open communication and the related ability to speak up with concerns, as related in the TO literature. Where these cultural barriers highlight historical descriptions of the doctornurse relationship and its effect on patient care,1921 Critical Conversations provide an opportunity to improve such interdisciplinary relationships by providing a shared tool for direct communication.
In summary, we described an innovative communication tool that promotes direct communication at critical junctures during a hospitalization. With the growing complexity of hospital care and greater interdependence between teams that deliver this care, Critical Conversations provide an opportunity to further address the known communication failures that contribute to medical errors.
Acknowledgements
Critical Conversations was developed during the Triad for Optimal Patient Safety (TOPS) project, an effort focused on improving unit‐based safety culture through improved teamwork and communication. We thank the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation for their active support and funding of the TOPS project, which was a collaboration between the Schools of Medicine, Nursing, and Pharmacy at the University of California, San Francisco.
- ,,,,.Communication failures in patient sign‐out and suggestions for improvement: a critical incident analysis.Qual Saf Health Care.2005;14(6):401–407.
- ,,.Communication failures: an insidious contributor to medical mishaps.Acad Med.2004;79(2):186–194.
- ,.TeamSTEPPS: assuring optimal teamwork in clinical settings.Am J Med Qual.2007;22(3):214–217.
- ,,,,,.Medical team training: applying crew resource management in the Veterans Health Administration.Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf.2007;33(6):317–325.
- ,,,,,,,,,.A multidisciplinary teamwork training program: the Triad for Optimal Patient Safety (TOPS) Experience.J Gen Intern Med.2008;23(12):2053–2057.
- ,,.The human factor: the critical importance of effective teamwork and communication in providing safe care.Qual Saf Health Care.2004;13Suppl‐1:i85–90.
- ,,.SBAR: a shared mental model for improving communication between clinicians.Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf.2006;32(3):167–175.
- The Joint Commission Universal Protocol for Preventing Wrong Site, Wrong Procedure, Wrong Person Surgery. Available at: http://www.jointcommission.org/NR/rdonlyres/E3C600EB‐043B‐4E86‐B04E‐CA4A89AD5433/0/universal_protocol.pdf. Accessed January 24, 2010.
- ,,.The hospital discharge: a review of a high risk care transition with highlights of a reengineered discharge process.J Patient Saf.2007;3:97–106.
- How do we communicate? Communication on Agile Software Projects. Available at: www.agilemodeling.com/essays/communication.htm. Accessed January 24, 2010.
- ,,,.Promoting effective transitions of care at hospital discharge: a review of key issues for hospitalists.J Hosp Med.2007;2(5):314–323.
- ,,,,,.Deficits in communication and information transfer between hospital‐based and primary care physicians: implications for patient safety and continuity of care.JAMA.2007;297(8):831–841.
- .Engaging patients at hospital discharge.J Hosp Med.2008;3(6):498–500.
- ,,,,.Managing discontinuity in academic medical centers: strategies for a safe and effective resident sign‐out.J Hosp Med.2006;1(4):257–266.
- ,.Lost in transition: challenges and opportunities for improving the quality of transitional care.Ann Intern Med.2004;141(7):533–536.
- ,,, et al.Transition of care for hospitalized elderly patients—development of a discharge checklist for hospitalists.J Hosp Med.2006;1(6):354–360.
- ,,, et al.Impact of preoperative briefings on operating room delays.Arch Surg.2008;143(11):1068–1072.
- ,,, et al.Operating room briefings: working on the same page.Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf.2006;32(6):351–355.
- .Doctors and nurses: a troubled partnership.Ann Surg.1999;230(3):279–288.
- ,,, et al.Association between nurse‐physician collaboration and patient outcomes in three intensive care units.Crit Care Med.1999;27(9):1991–1998.
- ,,, et al.Evaluation of a preoperative checklist and team briefing among surgeons, nurses, and anesthesiologists to reduce failures in communication.Arch Surg.2008;143(1):12–17.
Communication and teamwork failures are the most frequently cited cause of adverse events.1, 2 Strategies to improve communication have focused on implementing formal teamwork training programs and/or teaching specific communication skills.36 For instance, many institutions have adopted SBAR (Situation‐Background‐Assessment‐Recommendation) as a method for providers to deliver critical clinical information in a structured format.7 SBAR focuses on the immediate and urgent event at hand and can occur between any 2 providers. The situation is a brief description of the event (eg, Hi Dr. Smith, this is Paul from 14‐Long, I'm calling about Mrs. Jones in 1427 who is in acute respiratory distress). The background describes details relevant to the situation (eg, She was admitted with a COPD exacerbation yesterday night, and, for the past couple hours, she appears in more distress. Her vital signs are). The assessment (eg, Her breath sounds are diminished and she's moving less air) and recommendation (eg, I'd like to call respiratory therapy and would like you to come assess her now) drive toward having an action defined at the end. Given the professional silos that exist in healthcare, the advent of a shared set of communication tools helps bridge existing gaps in training, experience, and teamwork between different providers.
Regulatory agencies have been heavily invested in attempts to standardize communication in healthcare settings. In 2003, the Joint Commission elevated the concerns for wrong‐site surgery by making its prevention a National Patient Safety Goal, and the following year required compliance with a Universal Protocol (UP).8 In addition to adequate preoperative identification of the patient and marking of their surgical site, the UP called for a time out (TO) just prior to the surgery or procedure. The UP states that a TO requires active communication among all members of the surgical/procedure team, consistently initiated by a designated member of the team, conducted in a fail‐safe mode, so that the planned procedure is not started if a member of the team has concerns.8 Simply, the TO provides an opportunity to clarify plans for care and discuss events anticipated during the procedure among all members of the team (eg, surgeons, anesthesiologists, nurses, technicians). This all‐important pause point ensures that each team member is on the same page.
Whereas a TO involves many high‐risk procedural settings, a significant proportion of hospital care occurs outside of procedures. Patients are often evaluated in an emergency department, admitted to a medical/surgical ward, treated without the need for a procedure, and ultimately discharged home or transferred to another healthcare facility (eg, skilled nursing or acute rehabilitation). In this paper, we introduce the concept of Critical Conversations, a form of nonprocedural time out, as a tool, intervention, and policy that promotes communication and teamwork at the most vulnerable junctures in a patient's hospitalization.
Rationale for Critical Conversations: a Case Scenario
An 82‐year‐old man with hypertension and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is admitted to the hospital with community‐acquired pneumonia and an exacerbation of his COPD. The admitting physician evaluates the patient in the emergency department and completes admission orders. The patient arrives on the medical/surgical unit and the unit clerk processes the orders, stimulating a cascade of downstream events for different providers.
Nurse
The nurse reviews the medication list, notices antibiotics and bronchodilators, and wonders why aren't we administering steroids for his COPD? Do any of these medications need to be given now? Is there anything the physician is worried about? What specific things should prompt me to call the physician with an update or change in condition? I'm not sure if it's safe to send the patient down for the ordered radiographic study because he still looks pretty short of breath. I hate paging the physician several times to get these questions answered because I know that person is busy as well. I also know the patient will have questions about the care plans, which I won't be able to answer. I wonder if I should finish administering evening medications for my other patients as I'm running behind schedule on my other tasks.
Respiratory therapist
At the same time, the respiratory therapist (RT) is contacted to assist with nebulizer therapy for the patient. In reviewing the order for bronchodilators, the RT silently asks, do we think he is going to need continuous nebulizers? What is our oxygen saturation goaldo we want him at 90% or above 95%? I wonder if this patient has a history of CO2 retention and if I should have a BiPAP machine at the bedside.
Physician
After completing the orders for the patient, the physician remains in the emergency department to admit a different patient with a gastrointestinal bleed. This is the fifth admission in the past few hours. The physician feels the impact of constant paging interruptions. A unit clerk pages asking for clarification about a radiographic study that was ordered. A bedside nurse pages and asks if the physician can come and speak to the family about the diagnosis and treatment plans for an earlier admission (something the nurse is not clear about, either). A second bedside nurse pages, stating a different admission is still tachycardic after 3 liters of intravenous fluids and wants to know whether the fluids should be continued. Finally, the bedside nurse pages about whether the new COPD admission can go off the floor for the ordered chest CT or remain on continuous pulse oximetry because of shortness of breath.
Our case scenario is representative of most non‐surgical admissions to a hospital. The hypothetical questions posed from different provider perspectives are also common and often remain unanswered in a timely fashion. Partly because there is no site to mark and no anesthesia to deliver, the clinical encounter escapes attention as an opportunity for error prevention. In our experience, there are specific times during a hospitalization when communication failures are most likely to compromise patient care: the time of admission, the time of discharge,9 and any time when a patient's clinical condition changes acutely. Whereas handoff communications focus on transitions between providers (eg, shift changes), these circumstances are driven by patient transitions. Indirect communications, such as phone, email, or faxes, are suboptimal forms of communication at such times.10 We believe that there should be an expectation for direct communication at these junctures, and we define these direct communications as Critical Conversations.
Description of a Critical Conversation
In the hours that follow an admission, providers (and often the patients or their family as well) invariably exchange any number of inefficient calls or pages to clarify care plans, discuss a suspected diagnosis, anticipate concerns in the first night, and/or highlight which orders should be prioritized, such as medications or diagnostic studies. A Critical Conversation at time of admission does in this circumstance exactly what a TO attempts to provide before a procedure foster communication and teamwork as a patient is about to be placed at risk for adverse events. The exchange involves discussion of the following:
Admitting diagnosis
Immediate treatment plan
Medications ordered (particularly those new to a patient to anticipate an adverse event)
Priority for completing any admitting orders
Guidelines for physician notification when a change in patient condition occurs.
At the other end of a hospitalization, with the known complications arising from a patient's discharge,11, 12 the same process is needed. Rather than having each discipline focus on an individual role or task in getting a patient safely discharged, Critical Conversations allow the entire team, including the patient,13 to ensure that concerns have been addressed. This might help clarify simple measures around follow‐up appointments, whom to call with questions after discharge, or symptoms to watch for that may warrant a repeat evaluation. Nurses anecdotally lament that they first learn about a planned discharge only when the discharge order is written in the chart or if a patient informs them. Both scenarios reflect poorly on the teamwork required to assure patients we're working together, and that key providers are on the same page with respect to discharge planning. The exchange at discharge involves discussion of these elements:
Discharge diagnosis
Follow‐up plans
Need for education/training prior to discharge
Necessary paperwork completed
Anticipated time of discharge.
Finally, where many patients are admitted to a hospital, improve, and then return home, others develop acute changes during their hospitalization. For example, the patient in our case scenario could develop respiratory failure and require transfer to the intensive care unit (ICU). Or a different patient might have an acute change in mental status, a new fever, a new abnormal vital sign (eg, tachycardia or hypoxia), or an acute change re existing abdominal painall of which may require a battery of diagnostic tests. These circumstances define the third time for a Critical Conversation: a change in clinical condition. Such situations often require a change in the care plan, a change in priorities for delivering care at that time (for the patient in need and for other patients being cared for by the same nurse and physician), a need for additional resources (eg, respiratory therapist, phlebotomist, pharmacist), and, ultimately, a well‐orchestrated team effort to make it all happen. The specific item prompting the Critical Conversation may impact the nature of the exchange, which involves discussion of these components:
Suspected diagnosis
Immediate treatment plan
Medications ordered (particularly those new to a patient to anticipate an adverse event)
Priority for completing any new orders
Guidelines for physician notification when a change in patient condition occurs.
In addition to the above checklist for each Critical Conversation, each exchange should also address two open‐ended questions: 1) what do you anticipate happening in the next 24 hours, and 2) what questions might the patient/family have?
One may ask, and we did, why not have a direct communication daily between a physician and a bedside nurse on each patient? Most physicians and nurses know the importance of direct communication, but there are also times when each is prioritizing work in competing fashions. Adopting Critical Conversations isn't meant to deter from communications that are vital to patient care; rather, it is intended to codify distinct times when a direct communication is required for patient safety.
Lessons Learned
Table 1 provides an example of a Critical Conversation using the sample case scenario. Table 2 lists the most frequent outcomes that resulted from providers engaging in Critical Conversations. These were captured from discussions with bedside nurses and internal medicine residents on our primary medical unit. Both tables highlight how these deliberate and direct communications can create a shared understanding of the patient's medical problems, can help prioritize what tasks should take place (eg, radiology study, medication administration, calling another provider), can improve communication between providers and patients, and potentially accomplish all of these goals in a more efficient manner.
| Physician: Hi Nurse X, I'm Dr. Y, and I just wrote admission orders for Mr. Z whom, I understand, you'll be admitting. He's 82 with a history of COPD and is having an exacerbation related to a community‐acquired pneumonia. He looks comfortable right now as he's received his first dose of antibiotics, a liter of IVF, and 2 nebulizer treatments with some relief of his dyspnea. The main thing he needs up on the floor right now is to have respiratory therapy evaluate him. He's apparently been intubated before for his COPD, so I'd like to have them on board early and consider placing a BiPAP machine at the bedside for the next few hours. I don't anticipate an acute worsening of his condition given his initial improvements in the ED, but you should call me with any change in his condition. I haven't met the family yet because they were not at the bedside, but please convey the plans to them as well. I'll be up later to talk to them directly. Do you have any questions for me right now? |
| Nurse: I'll call the respiratory therapist right now and we'll make sure to contact you with any changes in his respiratory status. It looks like a chest CT was ordered, but not completed yet. Would you like him to go down for it off monitor? |
| Physician: Actually, let's watch him for a few hours to make sure he's continuing to improve. I initially ordered the chest CT to exclude a pulmonary embolus, but his history, exam, and chest x‐ray seem consistent with pneumonia. Let's reassess in a few hours. |
| Nurse: Sounds good. I'll text‐message you a set of his vital signs in 3‐4 hours to give you an update on his respiratory status. |
| General Themes | Specific Examples |
|---|---|
| Clarity on plan of care | Clear understanding of action steps at critical junctures of hospitalization |
| Goals of admission discussed rather than gleaned from chart or less direct modes of communication | |
| Discharge planning more proactive with better anticipation of timing among patients and providers | |
| Expectation for shared understanding of care plans | |
| Assistance with prioritization of tasks (as well as for competing tasks) | Allows RNs to prioritize tasks for new admissions or planned discharges, to determine whether these tasks outweigh tasks for other patients, and to provide early planning when additional resources will be required |
| Allows MDs to prioritize communications to ensure critical orders receive attention, to obtain support for care plans that require multiple disciplines, and to confirm that intended care plans are implemented with shared sense of priority | |
| Ability to communicate plans to patient and family members | Improved consistency in information provided to patients at critical hospital junctures |
| Increased engagement of patients in understanding their care plans | |
| Better model for teamwork curative for patients when providers on the same page with communication | |
| More efficient and effective use of resources | Fewer pages between admitting RN and MD with time saved from paging and waiting for responses |
| Less time trying to interpret plans of care from chart and other less direct modes of communication | |
| Improved sharing and knowledge of information with less duplication of gathering from patients and among providers | |
| Improved teamwork | Fosters a culture for direct communication and opens lines for questioning and speaking up when care plans are not clear |
Making Critical Conversations Happen
Integrating Critical Conversations into practice requires both buy‐in among providers and a plan for monitoring the interactions. We recommend beginning with educational efforts (eg, at a physician or nurse staff meeting) and reinforcing them with visual cues, such as posters on the unit (Figure 1). These actions promote awareness and generate expectations that this new clinical policy is being supported by clinical and hospital leadership. Our experiences have demonstrated tremendous learning, including numerous anecdotes about the value of Critical Conversations (Table 3). Our implementation efforts also raised a number of questions that ultimately led to improved clarity in later iterations.
| Nothing is worse than meeting a patient for the first time at admission and not being able to answer the basic question of why they were admitted or what the plan is. It gives the impression that we don't talk to each other in caring for patients. [Critical Conversations] can really minimize that interaction and reassure patients, rather than make them worried about the apparent mixed messages or lack of communication and teamwork.Bedside Nurse |
| [Critical Conversations] seemed like an additional timely responsibility, and not always a part of my workflow, when sitting in the emergency department admitting patients. But, I found that the often 60 second conversations decreased the number of pages I would get for the same patientactually saving me time.Physician |
| I don't need to have direct communications for every order written. In fact, it would be inefficient for me and the doctors. On the other hand, being engaged in a Critical Conversation provides an opportunity for me to prioritize not only my tasks for the patient in need, but also in context of the other patients I'm caring for.Bedside Nurse |
| Late in the afternoon, there will often be several admissions coming to our unit simultaneously. Prioritizing what orders need to be processed or faxed is a typically blind task based on the way charts get organizedrather than someone telling me this is a priority.Unit Clerk |
| There are so many times when I'm trying to determine what the care plans are for a new admission, and simply having a quick conversation allows me to feel part of the team, and, more importantly, allows me to reinforce education and support for the patients and their family members.Bedside Nurse |
| Discharge always seems chaotic with everyone racing to fill out forms and meet their own tasks and requirements. Invariably, you get called to fix, change, or add new information to the discharge process that would have been easily averted by actually having a brief conversation with the bedside nurse or case manager. Every time I have [a Critical Conversation], I realize its importance for patient care.Physician |
Who should be involved in a Critical Conversation?
Identifying which healthcare team members should be involved in Critical Conversations is best determined by the conversation owner. That is, we found communication was most effective when the individual initiating the Critical Conversation directed others who needed to be involved. At admission, the physician writing the admission orders is best suited to make this determination; at a minimum, he or she should engage the bedside nurse but, as in the case example presented, the physician may also need to engage other services in particularly complex situations (eg, respiratory therapy, pharmacy). At time of discharge, there should be a physiciannurse Critical Conversation; however, the owner of the discharge process may determine that other conversations should occur, and this may be inclusive of or driven by a case manager or social worker. Because local culture and practices may drive specific ownership, it's key to outline a protocol for how this should occur. For instance, at admission, we asked the admitting physicians to take responsibility in contacting the bedside nurse. In other venues, this may work more effectively if the bedside nurse pages the physician once the orders are received and reviewed.
Conclusions
We introduced Critical Conversations as an innovative tool and policy that promotes communication and teamwork in a structured format and at a consistent time. Developing formal systems that decrease communication failures in high‐risk circumstances remains a focus in patient safety, evidenced by guidelines for TOs in procedural settings, handoffs in patient care (eg, sign‐out between providers),14, 15 and transitions into and from the hospital setting.16 Furthermore, there is growing evidence that such structured times for communication and teamwork, such as with briefings, can improve efficiency and reduce delays in care.17, 18 However, handoffs, which address provider transitions, and daily multidisciplinary rounds, which bring providers together regularly, are provider‐centered rather than patient‐centered. Critical Conversations focus on times when patients require direct communication about their care plans to ensure safe and high quality outcomes.
Implementation of Critical Conversations provides an opportunity to codify a professional standard for patient‐centered communication at times when it should be expected. Critical Conversations also help build a system that supports a positive safety culture and encourages teamwork and direct communication. This is particularly true at a time when rapid adoption of information technology may have the unintended and opposite effect. For instance, as our hospital moved toward an entirely electronic health record, providers were increasingly relocating from patient care units into remote offices, corner hideaways, or designated computer rooms to complete orders and documentation. Although this may reduce many related errors in these processes and potentially improve communication via shared access to an electronic record, it does allow for less direct communicationa circumstance that traditionally occurs (even informally) when providers share the same clinical work areas. This situation is aggravated where the nurses are unit‐based and other providers (eg, physicians, therapists, case managers) are service‐based.
Integrating Critical Conversations into practice comes with expected challenges, most notably around workflow (eg, adds a step, although may save steps down the line) and the expectations concomitant with any change in standard of care (possible enforcement or auditing of their occurrence). Certain cultural barriers may also play a significant role, such as the presence of hierarchies that can hinder open communication and the related ability to speak up with concerns, as related in the TO literature. Where these cultural barriers highlight historical descriptions of the doctornurse relationship and its effect on patient care,1921 Critical Conversations provide an opportunity to improve such interdisciplinary relationships by providing a shared tool for direct communication.
In summary, we described an innovative communication tool that promotes direct communication at critical junctures during a hospitalization. With the growing complexity of hospital care and greater interdependence between teams that deliver this care, Critical Conversations provide an opportunity to further address the known communication failures that contribute to medical errors.
Acknowledgements
Critical Conversations was developed during the Triad for Optimal Patient Safety (TOPS) project, an effort focused on improving unit‐based safety culture through improved teamwork and communication. We thank the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation for their active support and funding of the TOPS project, which was a collaboration between the Schools of Medicine, Nursing, and Pharmacy at the University of California, San Francisco.
Communication and teamwork failures are the most frequently cited cause of adverse events.1, 2 Strategies to improve communication have focused on implementing formal teamwork training programs and/or teaching specific communication skills.36 For instance, many institutions have adopted SBAR (Situation‐Background‐Assessment‐Recommendation) as a method for providers to deliver critical clinical information in a structured format.7 SBAR focuses on the immediate and urgent event at hand and can occur between any 2 providers. The situation is a brief description of the event (eg, Hi Dr. Smith, this is Paul from 14‐Long, I'm calling about Mrs. Jones in 1427 who is in acute respiratory distress). The background describes details relevant to the situation (eg, She was admitted with a COPD exacerbation yesterday night, and, for the past couple hours, she appears in more distress. Her vital signs are). The assessment (eg, Her breath sounds are diminished and she's moving less air) and recommendation (eg, I'd like to call respiratory therapy and would like you to come assess her now) drive toward having an action defined at the end. Given the professional silos that exist in healthcare, the advent of a shared set of communication tools helps bridge existing gaps in training, experience, and teamwork between different providers.
Regulatory agencies have been heavily invested in attempts to standardize communication in healthcare settings. In 2003, the Joint Commission elevated the concerns for wrong‐site surgery by making its prevention a National Patient Safety Goal, and the following year required compliance with a Universal Protocol (UP).8 In addition to adequate preoperative identification of the patient and marking of their surgical site, the UP called for a time out (TO) just prior to the surgery or procedure. The UP states that a TO requires active communication among all members of the surgical/procedure team, consistently initiated by a designated member of the team, conducted in a fail‐safe mode, so that the planned procedure is not started if a member of the team has concerns.8 Simply, the TO provides an opportunity to clarify plans for care and discuss events anticipated during the procedure among all members of the team (eg, surgeons, anesthesiologists, nurses, technicians). This all‐important pause point ensures that each team member is on the same page.
Whereas a TO involves many high‐risk procedural settings, a significant proportion of hospital care occurs outside of procedures. Patients are often evaluated in an emergency department, admitted to a medical/surgical ward, treated without the need for a procedure, and ultimately discharged home or transferred to another healthcare facility (eg, skilled nursing or acute rehabilitation). In this paper, we introduce the concept of Critical Conversations, a form of nonprocedural time out, as a tool, intervention, and policy that promotes communication and teamwork at the most vulnerable junctures in a patient's hospitalization.
Rationale for Critical Conversations: a Case Scenario
An 82‐year‐old man with hypertension and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is admitted to the hospital with community‐acquired pneumonia and an exacerbation of his COPD. The admitting physician evaluates the patient in the emergency department and completes admission orders. The patient arrives on the medical/surgical unit and the unit clerk processes the orders, stimulating a cascade of downstream events for different providers.
Nurse
The nurse reviews the medication list, notices antibiotics and bronchodilators, and wonders why aren't we administering steroids for his COPD? Do any of these medications need to be given now? Is there anything the physician is worried about? What specific things should prompt me to call the physician with an update or change in condition? I'm not sure if it's safe to send the patient down for the ordered radiographic study because he still looks pretty short of breath. I hate paging the physician several times to get these questions answered because I know that person is busy as well. I also know the patient will have questions about the care plans, which I won't be able to answer. I wonder if I should finish administering evening medications for my other patients as I'm running behind schedule on my other tasks.
Respiratory therapist
At the same time, the respiratory therapist (RT) is contacted to assist with nebulizer therapy for the patient. In reviewing the order for bronchodilators, the RT silently asks, do we think he is going to need continuous nebulizers? What is our oxygen saturation goaldo we want him at 90% or above 95%? I wonder if this patient has a history of CO2 retention and if I should have a BiPAP machine at the bedside.
Physician
After completing the orders for the patient, the physician remains in the emergency department to admit a different patient with a gastrointestinal bleed. This is the fifth admission in the past few hours. The physician feels the impact of constant paging interruptions. A unit clerk pages asking for clarification about a radiographic study that was ordered. A bedside nurse pages and asks if the physician can come and speak to the family about the diagnosis and treatment plans for an earlier admission (something the nurse is not clear about, either). A second bedside nurse pages, stating a different admission is still tachycardic after 3 liters of intravenous fluids and wants to know whether the fluids should be continued. Finally, the bedside nurse pages about whether the new COPD admission can go off the floor for the ordered chest CT or remain on continuous pulse oximetry because of shortness of breath.
Our case scenario is representative of most non‐surgical admissions to a hospital. The hypothetical questions posed from different provider perspectives are also common and often remain unanswered in a timely fashion. Partly because there is no site to mark and no anesthesia to deliver, the clinical encounter escapes attention as an opportunity for error prevention. In our experience, there are specific times during a hospitalization when communication failures are most likely to compromise patient care: the time of admission, the time of discharge,9 and any time when a patient's clinical condition changes acutely. Whereas handoff communications focus on transitions between providers (eg, shift changes), these circumstances are driven by patient transitions. Indirect communications, such as phone, email, or faxes, are suboptimal forms of communication at such times.10 We believe that there should be an expectation for direct communication at these junctures, and we define these direct communications as Critical Conversations.
Description of a Critical Conversation
In the hours that follow an admission, providers (and often the patients or their family as well) invariably exchange any number of inefficient calls or pages to clarify care plans, discuss a suspected diagnosis, anticipate concerns in the first night, and/or highlight which orders should be prioritized, such as medications or diagnostic studies. A Critical Conversation at time of admission does in this circumstance exactly what a TO attempts to provide before a procedure foster communication and teamwork as a patient is about to be placed at risk for adverse events. The exchange involves discussion of the following:
Admitting diagnosis
Immediate treatment plan
Medications ordered (particularly those new to a patient to anticipate an adverse event)
Priority for completing any admitting orders
Guidelines for physician notification when a change in patient condition occurs.
At the other end of a hospitalization, with the known complications arising from a patient's discharge,11, 12 the same process is needed. Rather than having each discipline focus on an individual role or task in getting a patient safely discharged, Critical Conversations allow the entire team, including the patient,13 to ensure that concerns have been addressed. This might help clarify simple measures around follow‐up appointments, whom to call with questions after discharge, or symptoms to watch for that may warrant a repeat evaluation. Nurses anecdotally lament that they first learn about a planned discharge only when the discharge order is written in the chart or if a patient informs them. Both scenarios reflect poorly on the teamwork required to assure patients we're working together, and that key providers are on the same page with respect to discharge planning. The exchange at discharge involves discussion of these elements:
Discharge diagnosis
Follow‐up plans
Need for education/training prior to discharge
Necessary paperwork completed
Anticipated time of discharge.
Finally, where many patients are admitted to a hospital, improve, and then return home, others develop acute changes during their hospitalization. For example, the patient in our case scenario could develop respiratory failure and require transfer to the intensive care unit (ICU). Or a different patient might have an acute change in mental status, a new fever, a new abnormal vital sign (eg, tachycardia or hypoxia), or an acute change re existing abdominal painall of which may require a battery of diagnostic tests. These circumstances define the third time for a Critical Conversation: a change in clinical condition. Such situations often require a change in the care plan, a change in priorities for delivering care at that time (for the patient in need and for other patients being cared for by the same nurse and physician), a need for additional resources (eg, respiratory therapist, phlebotomist, pharmacist), and, ultimately, a well‐orchestrated team effort to make it all happen. The specific item prompting the Critical Conversation may impact the nature of the exchange, which involves discussion of these components:
Suspected diagnosis
Immediate treatment plan
Medications ordered (particularly those new to a patient to anticipate an adverse event)
Priority for completing any new orders
Guidelines for physician notification when a change in patient condition occurs.
In addition to the above checklist for each Critical Conversation, each exchange should also address two open‐ended questions: 1) what do you anticipate happening in the next 24 hours, and 2) what questions might the patient/family have?
One may ask, and we did, why not have a direct communication daily between a physician and a bedside nurse on each patient? Most physicians and nurses know the importance of direct communication, but there are also times when each is prioritizing work in competing fashions. Adopting Critical Conversations isn't meant to deter from communications that are vital to patient care; rather, it is intended to codify distinct times when a direct communication is required for patient safety.
Lessons Learned
Table 1 provides an example of a Critical Conversation using the sample case scenario. Table 2 lists the most frequent outcomes that resulted from providers engaging in Critical Conversations. These were captured from discussions with bedside nurses and internal medicine residents on our primary medical unit. Both tables highlight how these deliberate and direct communications can create a shared understanding of the patient's medical problems, can help prioritize what tasks should take place (eg, radiology study, medication administration, calling another provider), can improve communication between providers and patients, and potentially accomplish all of these goals in a more efficient manner.
| Physician: Hi Nurse X, I'm Dr. Y, and I just wrote admission orders for Mr. Z whom, I understand, you'll be admitting. He's 82 with a history of COPD and is having an exacerbation related to a community‐acquired pneumonia. He looks comfortable right now as he's received his first dose of antibiotics, a liter of IVF, and 2 nebulizer treatments with some relief of his dyspnea. The main thing he needs up on the floor right now is to have respiratory therapy evaluate him. He's apparently been intubated before for his COPD, so I'd like to have them on board early and consider placing a BiPAP machine at the bedside for the next few hours. I don't anticipate an acute worsening of his condition given his initial improvements in the ED, but you should call me with any change in his condition. I haven't met the family yet because they were not at the bedside, but please convey the plans to them as well. I'll be up later to talk to them directly. Do you have any questions for me right now? |
| Nurse: I'll call the respiratory therapist right now and we'll make sure to contact you with any changes in his respiratory status. It looks like a chest CT was ordered, but not completed yet. Would you like him to go down for it off monitor? |
| Physician: Actually, let's watch him for a few hours to make sure he's continuing to improve. I initially ordered the chest CT to exclude a pulmonary embolus, but his history, exam, and chest x‐ray seem consistent with pneumonia. Let's reassess in a few hours. |
| Nurse: Sounds good. I'll text‐message you a set of his vital signs in 3‐4 hours to give you an update on his respiratory status. |
| General Themes | Specific Examples |
|---|---|
| Clarity on plan of care | Clear understanding of action steps at critical junctures of hospitalization |
| Goals of admission discussed rather than gleaned from chart or less direct modes of communication | |
| Discharge planning more proactive with better anticipation of timing among patients and providers | |
| Expectation for shared understanding of care plans | |
| Assistance with prioritization of tasks (as well as for competing tasks) | Allows RNs to prioritize tasks for new admissions or planned discharges, to determine whether these tasks outweigh tasks for other patients, and to provide early planning when additional resources will be required |
| Allows MDs to prioritize communications to ensure critical orders receive attention, to obtain support for care plans that require multiple disciplines, and to confirm that intended care plans are implemented with shared sense of priority | |
| Ability to communicate plans to patient and family members | Improved consistency in information provided to patients at critical hospital junctures |
| Increased engagement of patients in understanding their care plans | |
| Better model for teamwork curative for patients when providers on the same page with communication | |
| More efficient and effective use of resources | Fewer pages between admitting RN and MD with time saved from paging and waiting for responses |
| Less time trying to interpret plans of care from chart and other less direct modes of communication | |
| Improved sharing and knowledge of information with less duplication of gathering from patients and among providers | |
| Improved teamwork | Fosters a culture for direct communication and opens lines for questioning and speaking up when care plans are not clear |
Making Critical Conversations Happen
Integrating Critical Conversations into practice requires both buy‐in among providers and a plan for monitoring the interactions. We recommend beginning with educational efforts (eg, at a physician or nurse staff meeting) and reinforcing them with visual cues, such as posters on the unit (Figure 1). These actions promote awareness and generate expectations that this new clinical policy is being supported by clinical and hospital leadership. Our experiences have demonstrated tremendous learning, including numerous anecdotes about the value of Critical Conversations (Table 3). Our implementation efforts also raised a number of questions that ultimately led to improved clarity in later iterations.
| Nothing is worse than meeting a patient for the first time at admission and not being able to answer the basic question of why they were admitted or what the plan is. It gives the impression that we don't talk to each other in caring for patients. [Critical Conversations] can really minimize that interaction and reassure patients, rather than make them worried about the apparent mixed messages or lack of communication and teamwork.Bedside Nurse |
| [Critical Conversations] seemed like an additional timely responsibility, and not always a part of my workflow, when sitting in the emergency department admitting patients. But, I found that the often 60 second conversations decreased the number of pages I would get for the same patientactually saving me time.Physician |
| I don't need to have direct communications for every order written. In fact, it would be inefficient for me and the doctors. On the other hand, being engaged in a Critical Conversation provides an opportunity for me to prioritize not only my tasks for the patient in need, but also in context of the other patients I'm caring for.Bedside Nurse |
| Late in the afternoon, there will often be several admissions coming to our unit simultaneously. Prioritizing what orders need to be processed or faxed is a typically blind task based on the way charts get organizedrather than someone telling me this is a priority.Unit Clerk |
| There are so many times when I'm trying to determine what the care plans are for a new admission, and simply having a quick conversation allows me to feel part of the team, and, more importantly, allows me to reinforce education and support for the patients and their family members.Bedside Nurse |
| Discharge always seems chaotic with everyone racing to fill out forms and meet their own tasks and requirements. Invariably, you get called to fix, change, or add new information to the discharge process that would have been easily averted by actually having a brief conversation with the bedside nurse or case manager. Every time I have [a Critical Conversation], I realize its importance for patient care.Physician |
Who should be involved in a Critical Conversation?
Identifying which healthcare team members should be involved in Critical Conversations is best determined by the conversation owner. That is, we found communication was most effective when the individual initiating the Critical Conversation directed others who needed to be involved. At admission, the physician writing the admission orders is best suited to make this determination; at a minimum, he or she should engage the bedside nurse but, as in the case example presented, the physician may also need to engage other services in particularly complex situations (eg, respiratory therapy, pharmacy). At time of discharge, there should be a physiciannurse Critical Conversation; however, the owner of the discharge process may determine that other conversations should occur, and this may be inclusive of or driven by a case manager or social worker. Because local culture and practices may drive specific ownership, it's key to outline a protocol for how this should occur. For instance, at admission, we asked the admitting physicians to take responsibility in contacting the bedside nurse. In other venues, this may work more effectively if the bedside nurse pages the physician once the orders are received and reviewed.
Conclusions
We introduced Critical Conversations as an innovative tool and policy that promotes communication and teamwork in a structured format and at a consistent time. Developing formal systems that decrease communication failures in high‐risk circumstances remains a focus in patient safety, evidenced by guidelines for TOs in procedural settings, handoffs in patient care (eg, sign‐out between providers),14, 15 and transitions into and from the hospital setting.16 Furthermore, there is growing evidence that such structured times for communication and teamwork, such as with briefings, can improve efficiency and reduce delays in care.17, 18 However, handoffs, which address provider transitions, and daily multidisciplinary rounds, which bring providers together regularly, are provider‐centered rather than patient‐centered. Critical Conversations focus on times when patients require direct communication about their care plans to ensure safe and high quality outcomes.
Implementation of Critical Conversations provides an opportunity to codify a professional standard for patient‐centered communication at times when it should be expected. Critical Conversations also help build a system that supports a positive safety culture and encourages teamwork and direct communication. This is particularly true at a time when rapid adoption of information technology may have the unintended and opposite effect. For instance, as our hospital moved toward an entirely electronic health record, providers were increasingly relocating from patient care units into remote offices, corner hideaways, or designated computer rooms to complete orders and documentation. Although this may reduce many related errors in these processes and potentially improve communication via shared access to an electronic record, it does allow for less direct communicationa circumstance that traditionally occurs (even informally) when providers share the same clinical work areas. This situation is aggravated where the nurses are unit‐based and other providers (eg, physicians, therapists, case managers) are service‐based.
Integrating Critical Conversations into practice comes with expected challenges, most notably around workflow (eg, adds a step, although may save steps down the line) and the expectations concomitant with any change in standard of care (possible enforcement or auditing of their occurrence). Certain cultural barriers may also play a significant role, such as the presence of hierarchies that can hinder open communication and the related ability to speak up with concerns, as related in the TO literature. Where these cultural barriers highlight historical descriptions of the doctornurse relationship and its effect on patient care,1921 Critical Conversations provide an opportunity to improve such interdisciplinary relationships by providing a shared tool for direct communication.
In summary, we described an innovative communication tool that promotes direct communication at critical junctures during a hospitalization. With the growing complexity of hospital care and greater interdependence between teams that deliver this care, Critical Conversations provide an opportunity to further address the known communication failures that contribute to medical errors.
Acknowledgements
Critical Conversations was developed during the Triad for Optimal Patient Safety (TOPS) project, an effort focused on improving unit‐based safety culture through improved teamwork and communication. We thank the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation for their active support and funding of the TOPS project, which was a collaboration between the Schools of Medicine, Nursing, and Pharmacy at the University of California, San Francisco.
- ,,,,.Communication failures in patient sign‐out and suggestions for improvement: a critical incident analysis.Qual Saf Health Care.2005;14(6):401–407.
- ,,.Communication failures: an insidious contributor to medical mishaps.Acad Med.2004;79(2):186–194.
- ,.TeamSTEPPS: assuring optimal teamwork in clinical settings.Am J Med Qual.2007;22(3):214–217.
- ,,,,,.Medical team training: applying crew resource management in the Veterans Health Administration.Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf.2007;33(6):317–325.
- ,,,,,,,,,.A multidisciplinary teamwork training program: the Triad for Optimal Patient Safety (TOPS) Experience.J Gen Intern Med.2008;23(12):2053–2057.
- ,,.The human factor: the critical importance of effective teamwork and communication in providing safe care.Qual Saf Health Care.2004;13Suppl‐1:i85–90.
- ,,.SBAR: a shared mental model for improving communication between clinicians.Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf.2006;32(3):167–175.
- The Joint Commission Universal Protocol for Preventing Wrong Site, Wrong Procedure, Wrong Person Surgery. Available at: http://www.jointcommission.org/NR/rdonlyres/E3C600EB‐043B‐4E86‐B04E‐CA4A89AD5433/0/universal_protocol.pdf. Accessed January 24, 2010.
- ,,.The hospital discharge: a review of a high risk care transition with highlights of a reengineered discharge process.J Patient Saf.2007;3:97–106.
- How do we communicate? Communication on Agile Software Projects. Available at: www.agilemodeling.com/essays/communication.htm. Accessed January 24, 2010.
- ,,,.Promoting effective transitions of care at hospital discharge: a review of key issues for hospitalists.J Hosp Med.2007;2(5):314–323.
- ,,,,,.Deficits in communication and information transfer between hospital‐based and primary care physicians: implications for patient safety and continuity of care.JAMA.2007;297(8):831–841.
- .Engaging patients at hospital discharge.J Hosp Med.2008;3(6):498–500.
- ,,,,.Managing discontinuity in academic medical centers: strategies for a safe and effective resident sign‐out.J Hosp Med.2006;1(4):257–266.
- ,.Lost in transition: challenges and opportunities for improving the quality of transitional care.Ann Intern Med.2004;141(7):533–536.
- ,,, et al.Transition of care for hospitalized elderly patients—development of a discharge checklist for hospitalists.J Hosp Med.2006;1(6):354–360.
- ,,, et al.Impact of preoperative briefings on operating room delays.Arch Surg.2008;143(11):1068–1072.
- ,,, et al.Operating room briefings: working on the same page.Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf.2006;32(6):351–355.
- .Doctors and nurses: a troubled partnership.Ann Surg.1999;230(3):279–288.
- ,,, et al.Association between nurse‐physician collaboration and patient outcomes in three intensive care units.Crit Care Med.1999;27(9):1991–1998.
- ,,, et al.Evaluation of a preoperative checklist and team briefing among surgeons, nurses, and anesthesiologists to reduce failures in communication.Arch Surg.2008;143(1):12–17.
- ,,,,.Communication failures in patient sign‐out and suggestions for improvement: a critical incident analysis.Qual Saf Health Care.2005;14(6):401–407.
- ,,.Communication failures: an insidious contributor to medical mishaps.Acad Med.2004;79(2):186–194.
- ,.TeamSTEPPS: assuring optimal teamwork in clinical settings.Am J Med Qual.2007;22(3):214–217.
- ,,,,,.Medical team training: applying crew resource management in the Veterans Health Administration.Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf.2007;33(6):317–325.
- ,,,,,,,,,.A multidisciplinary teamwork training program: the Triad for Optimal Patient Safety (TOPS) Experience.J Gen Intern Med.2008;23(12):2053–2057.
- ,,.The human factor: the critical importance of effective teamwork and communication in providing safe care.Qual Saf Health Care.2004;13Suppl‐1:i85–90.
- ,,.SBAR: a shared mental model for improving communication between clinicians.Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf.2006;32(3):167–175.
- The Joint Commission Universal Protocol for Preventing Wrong Site, Wrong Procedure, Wrong Person Surgery. Available at: http://www.jointcommission.org/NR/rdonlyres/E3C600EB‐043B‐4E86‐B04E‐CA4A89AD5433/0/universal_protocol.pdf. Accessed January 24, 2010.
- ,,.The hospital discharge: a review of a high risk care transition with highlights of a reengineered discharge process.J Patient Saf.2007;3:97–106.
- How do we communicate? Communication on Agile Software Projects. Available at: www.agilemodeling.com/essays/communication.htm. Accessed January 24, 2010.
- ,,,.Promoting effective transitions of care at hospital discharge: a review of key issues for hospitalists.J Hosp Med.2007;2(5):314–323.
- ,,,,,.Deficits in communication and information transfer between hospital‐based and primary care physicians: implications for patient safety and continuity of care.JAMA.2007;297(8):831–841.
- .Engaging patients at hospital discharge.J Hosp Med.2008;3(6):498–500.
- ,,,,.Managing discontinuity in academic medical centers: strategies for a safe and effective resident sign‐out.J Hosp Med.2006;1(4):257–266.
- ,.Lost in transition: challenges and opportunities for improving the quality of transitional care.Ann Intern Med.2004;141(7):533–536.
- ,,, et al.Transition of care for hospitalized elderly patients—development of a discharge checklist for hospitalists.J Hosp Med.2006;1(6):354–360.
- ,,, et al.Impact of preoperative briefings on operating room delays.Arch Surg.2008;143(11):1068–1072.
- ,,, et al.Operating room briefings: working on the same page.Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf.2006;32(6):351–355.
- .Doctors and nurses: a troubled partnership.Ann Surg.1999;230(3):279–288.
- ,,, et al.Association between nurse‐physician collaboration and patient outcomes in three intensive care units.Crit Care Med.1999;27(9):1991–1998.
- ,,, et al.Evaluation of a preoperative checklist and team briefing among surgeons, nurses, and anesthesiologists to reduce failures in communication.Arch Surg.2008;143(1):12–17.
Copyright © 2011 Society of Hospital Medicine
New DVT Guidelines Prompt HM Action
The greatest impact of new guidelines from the American Heart Association (AHA) that suggest additional therapies for treatment of more serious cases of DVT might be in prodding HM leaders to take ownership of existing standards to ensure greater compliance.
The review aims to help doctors "identify the severity of these disorders and to select who might be eligible for more invasive therapies, such as clot-busting drugs, catheter-based treatments or surgery," M. Sean McMurtry, MD, PhD, co-chair of the writing group said in a prepared statement. The guidelines outline multiple treatment options, including the use of fibrinolytic drugs, catheter-based interventions, treatment with surgery to remove the blood clots and use of filters. Additional guidance for treating pediatric patients is included.
But Gregory A. Maynard, MD, SFHM, hospital medicine division chief at the University of California at San Diego, says most hospitalists deal with more routine cases of DVT and VTE than the research paper highlights. Physicians need to take more control of the existing patchwork of guidelines recommended by various research and established protocols, he adds.
"What's missing in this paper ... is how to make those things happen more reliably," Dr. Maynard says. "To me, the hospitalist needs to look at guidelines like this and say, 'How can we make them happen reliably?'"
For example, Dr. Maynard notes that for the treatment of iliofemoral DVT, it is recommended to both overlap warfarin and heparin, as well as have patients wear elastic compression stockings. Yet, he says, neither of those recommendations is routinely followed. In fact, he says of the former: "I would guess the percentage of patients getting these stockings is a distinct minority."
And while that kind of reliability is tough to guarantee, it's one of the cornerstones of SHM's VTE prevention resource room and mentored implementation program.
The greatest impact of new guidelines from the American Heart Association (AHA) that suggest additional therapies for treatment of more serious cases of DVT might be in prodding HM leaders to take ownership of existing standards to ensure greater compliance.
The review aims to help doctors "identify the severity of these disorders and to select who might be eligible for more invasive therapies, such as clot-busting drugs, catheter-based treatments or surgery," M. Sean McMurtry, MD, PhD, co-chair of the writing group said in a prepared statement. The guidelines outline multiple treatment options, including the use of fibrinolytic drugs, catheter-based interventions, treatment with surgery to remove the blood clots and use of filters. Additional guidance for treating pediatric patients is included.
But Gregory A. Maynard, MD, SFHM, hospital medicine division chief at the University of California at San Diego, says most hospitalists deal with more routine cases of DVT and VTE than the research paper highlights. Physicians need to take more control of the existing patchwork of guidelines recommended by various research and established protocols, he adds.
"What's missing in this paper ... is how to make those things happen more reliably," Dr. Maynard says. "To me, the hospitalist needs to look at guidelines like this and say, 'How can we make them happen reliably?'"
For example, Dr. Maynard notes that for the treatment of iliofemoral DVT, it is recommended to both overlap warfarin and heparin, as well as have patients wear elastic compression stockings. Yet, he says, neither of those recommendations is routinely followed. In fact, he says of the former: "I would guess the percentage of patients getting these stockings is a distinct minority."
And while that kind of reliability is tough to guarantee, it's one of the cornerstones of SHM's VTE prevention resource room and mentored implementation program.
The greatest impact of new guidelines from the American Heart Association (AHA) that suggest additional therapies for treatment of more serious cases of DVT might be in prodding HM leaders to take ownership of existing standards to ensure greater compliance.
The review aims to help doctors "identify the severity of these disorders and to select who might be eligible for more invasive therapies, such as clot-busting drugs, catheter-based treatments or surgery," M. Sean McMurtry, MD, PhD, co-chair of the writing group said in a prepared statement. The guidelines outline multiple treatment options, including the use of fibrinolytic drugs, catheter-based interventions, treatment with surgery to remove the blood clots and use of filters. Additional guidance for treating pediatric patients is included.
But Gregory A. Maynard, MD, SFHM, hospital medicine division chief at the University of California at San Diego, says most hospitalists deal with more routine cases of DVT and VTE than the research paper highlights. Physicians need to take more control of the existing patchwork of guidelines recommended by various research and established protocols, he adds.
"What's missing in this paper ... is how to make those things happen more reliably," Dr. Maynard says. "To me, the hospitalist needs to look at guidelines like this and say, 'How can we make them happen reliably?'"
For example, Dr. Maynard notes that for the treatment of iliofemoral DVT, it is recommended to both overlap warfarin and heparin, as well as have patients wear elastic compression stockings. Yet, he says, neither of those recommendations is routinely followed. In fact, he says of the former: "I would guess the percentage of patients getting these stockings is a distinct minority."
And while that kind of reliability is tough to guarantee, it's one of the cornerstones of SHM's VTE prevention resource room and mentored implementation program.
HM Company Acquires Call Center
Apollo Medical Holdings of Glendale, Calif., which provides hospitalist services in 24 California hospitals, recently took a step toward expanding its business model and diversifying its continuum of services by acquiring Los Angeles-based Aligned Healthcare Group, a provider of physician call centers and specialized care management services for health plans.
Call centers provide patients in the community with telephonic access to physicians and other health professionals for help with urgent medical questions, health assessments, and triage. The Aligned call center was developed in 2009 at the request of Anthem Blue Cross, which wanted to provide an ED alternative for its Medi-Cal members who needed access to a physician, explains Bette Jane Reese, RN, MHA, COO of Apollo's Aligned Division.
Apollo's care continuum will include follow-up calls to recently discharged patients, post-discharge calls to PCPs, and early discharge planning. The model partners a hospitalist with a care management nurse; together, they function as a virtual team across settings.
The acquisition gives Apollo a leg up on developing a continuum of care management across settings, she adds. "I believe enhanced hospitalist models will be a trend. As healthcare revenues become tighter, with more entities coming together in what's called accountable healthcare, the name of the game is coordination between settings and providers," she says.
Experts have emphasized the importance of hospitalists looking beyond the four walls of their facility and participating in "cross-continuum teams" as a key to managing care transitions and preventing rehospitalizations. Apollo hopes its new collaboration will help eliminate communication breakdowns between hospitalists and PCPs, Reese says. "By merging these functions, we get a combination of efficient hospitalist care with a bridge to the next setting, and coordination with multiple payer entities. It all wraps around the integrated hospitalist model."
HM's future in Apollo's model might include staffing outpatient clinics located on the hospital campus for patients to return for follow-up care after they are discharged, or even making home visits for patients who need additional medical oversight. "We see the issues and problems that cause patients to go back to the hospital," Reese says. "We can suggest quality improvement approaches to address the root causes of avoidable readmissions."
Apollo Medical Holdings of Glendale, Calif., which provides hospitalist services in 24 California hospitals, recently took a step toward expanding its business model and diversifying its continuum of services by acquiring Los Angeles-based Aligned Healthcare Group, a provider of physician call centers and specialized care management services for health plans.
Call centers provide patients in the community with telephonic access to physicians and other health professionals for help with urgent medical questions, health assessments, and triage. The Aligned call center was developed in 2009 at the request of Anthem Blue Cross, which wanted to provide an ED alternative for its Medi-Cal members who needed access to a physician, explains Bette Jane Reese, RN, MHA, COO of Apollo's Aligned Division.
Apollo's care continuum will include follow-up calls to recently discharged patients, post-discharge calls to PCPs, and early discharge planning. The model partners a hospitalist with a care management nurse; together, they function as a virtual team across settings.
The acquisition gives Apollo a leg up on developing a continuum of care management across settings, she adds. "I believe enhanced hospitalist models will be a trend. As healthcare revenues become tighter, with more entities coming together in what's called accountable healthcare, the name of the game is coordination between settings and providers," she says.
Experts have emphasized the importance of hospitalists looking beyond the four walls of their facility and participating in "cross-continuum teams" as a key to managing care transitions and preventing rehospitalizations. Apollo hopes its new collaboration will help eliminate communication breakdowns between hospitalists and PCPs, Reese says. "By merging these functions, we get a combination of efficient hospitalist care with a bridge to the next setting, and coordination with multiple payer entities. It all wraps around the integrated hospitalist model."
HM's future in Apollo's model might include staffing outpatient clinics located on the hospital campus for patients to return for follow-up care after they are discharged, or even making home visits for patients who need additional medical oversight. "We see the issues and problems that cause patients to go back to the hospital," Reese says. "We can suggest quality improvement approaches to address the root causes of avoidable readmissions."
Apollo Medical Holdings of Glendale, Calif., which provides hospitalist services in 24 California hospitals, recently took a step toward expanding its business model and diversifying its continuum of services by acquiring Los Angeles-based Aligned Healthcare Group, a provider of physician call centers and specialized care management services for health plans.
Call centers provide patients in the community with telephonic access to physicians and other health professionals for help with urgent medical questions, health assessments, and triage. The Aligned call center was developed in 2009 at the request of Anthem Blue Cross, which wanted to provide an ED alternative for its Medi-Cal members who needed access to a physician, explains Bette Jane Reese, RN, MHA, COO of Apollo's Aligned Division.
Apollo's care continuum will include follow-up calls to recently discharged patients, post-discharge calls to PCPs, and early discharge planning. The model partners a hospitalist with a care management nurse; together, they function as a virtual team across settings.
The acquisition gives Apollo a leg up on developing a continuum of care management across settings, she adds. "I believe enhanced hospitalist models will be a trend. As healthcare revenues become tighter, with more entities coming together in what's called accountable healthcare, the name of the game is coordination between settings and providers," she says.
Experts have emphasized the importance of hospitalists looking beyond the four walls of their facility and participating in "cross-continuum teams" as a key to managing care transitions and preventing rehospitalizations. Apollo hopes its new collaboration will help eliminate communication breakdowns between hospitalists and PCPs, Reese says. "By merging these functions, we get a combination of efficient hospitalist care with a bridge to the next setting, and coordination with multiple payer entities. It all wraps around the integrated hospitalist model."
HM's future in Apollo's model might include staffing outpatient clinics located on the hospital campus for patients to return for follow-up care after they are discharged, or even making home visits for patients who need additional medical oversight. "We see the issues and problems that cause patients to go back to the hospital," Reese says. "We can suggest quality improvement approaches to address the root causes of avoidable readmissions."
Endobronchial Dysplasia Could Be Marker for Lung Cancer Chemoprevention
ORLANDO – Endobronchial dysplasia appears useful as a biomarker for measuring the success of lung cancer chemoprevention, investigators reported at the annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research.
Bronchoscopies, along with biopsies of standard endobronchial sites and any other abnormal appearing areas, were performed at baseline and at 6 months after randomization to treatment with iloprost (Ventavis) or placebo in a phase II chemoprevention trial involving 152 former or current smokers with at least a 20 pack-year history.
Former smokers who received iloprost, an oral prostacyclin analog approved for the treatment of primary pulmonary hypertension, had significant improvements on several measures of endobronchial dysplasia, while current smokers had no improvement, Dr. Paul Bunn reported.
The findings demonstrate that iloprost, which has been shown to prevent the development of lung cancer in various murine models involving cigarette-smoke exposure, also might have the same effect in humans and thus deserves further study for this purpose, Dr. Bunn and his coauthors concluded.
The results also demonstrate that endobronchial dysplasia could serve as a biomarker for effectiveness of chemopreventive treatment– much as cholesterol does in patients being treated with statins to prevent cardiovascular disease, according to Dr. Bunn, executive director of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. He is also the James Dudley endowed professor of lung cancer research at the cancer center at the University of Colorado, Aurora.
In the current study, baseline histology was significantly worse in current smokers than in former smokers (average biopsy scores of 3.0 vs. 2.1, respectively, with a score of 4 indicating mild dysplasia). Former smokers experienced a 0.41-point improvement in average biopsy score (P = .010), a 1.10-point improvement in their worst baseline biopsy score (P = .002), and a 12.5% improvement in dysplasia index (P = .006), which was the percentage of biopsies with a score of at least 4, said Dr. Bunn.
"The histologic improvement in the treated patients who were former smokers was larger than the magnitude of the difference between current and former smokers," he said.
For example, the baseline dysplasia index in current and former smokers was 46% and 31%, respectively, but the pre- and post-treatment dysplasia index in former smokers was 43% and 19.6%, respectively.
Study participants had an average 30 pack-year history of smoking, and at least mild cytologic atypia on sputum cytology, but no previous history of cancer. Iloprost was given in escalating doses across the 6-month treatment period and was well tolerated. The treatment and placebo groups were well-matched for age, tobacco exposure and baseline histology, and there was no difference in dropout rate or serious adverse events between the treatment and placebo groups, Dr. Bunn noted.
Although antismoking campaigns are working – and about half of all smokers have quit, those who quit remain at greater risk for developing lung cancer than are nonsmokers; about half of all cases of lung cancer are in former smokers, and it is important to find effective chemopreventive measures for these individuals, he said.
Dr. Bunn discussed off-label use of iloprost for chemoprevention of lung cancer. He had no other disclosures.
ORLANDO – Endobronchial dysplasia appears useful as a biomarker for measuring the success of lung cancer chemoprevention, investigators reported at the annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research.
Bronchoscopies, along with biopsies of standard endobronchial sites and any other abnormal appearing areas, were performed at baseline and at 6 months after randomization to treatment with iloprost (Ventavis) or placebo in a phase II chemoprevention trial involving 152 former or current smokers with at least a 20 pack-year history.
Former smokers who received iloprost, an oral prostacyclin analog approved for the treatment of primary pulmonary hypertension, had significant improvements on several measures of endobronchial dysplasia, while current smokers had no improvement, Dr. Paul Bunn reported.
The findings demonstrate that iloprost, which has been shown to prevent the development of lung cancer in various murine models involving cigarette-smoke exposure, also might have the same effect in humans and thus deserves further study for this purpose, Dr. Bunn and his coauthors concluded.
The results also demonstrate that endobronchial dysplasia could serve as a biomarker for effectiveness of chemopreventive treatment– much as cholesterol does in patients being treated with statins to prevent cardiovascular disease, according to Dr. Bunn, executive director of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. He is also the James Dudley endowed professor of lung cancer research at the cancer center at the University of Colorado, Aurora.
In the current study, baseline histology was significantly worse in current smokers than in former smokers (average biopsy scores of 3.0 vs. 2.1, respectively, with a score of 4 indicating mild dysplasia). Former smokers experienced a 0.41-point improvement in average biopsy score (P = .010), a 1.10-point improvement in their worst baseline biopsy score (P = .002), and a 12.5% improvement in dysplasia index (P = .006), which was the percentage of biopsies with a score of at least 4, said Dr. Bunn.
"The histologic improvement in the treated patients who were former smokers was larger than the magnitude of the difference between current and former smokers," he said.
For example, the baseline dysplasia index in current and former smokers was 46% and 31%, respectively, but the pre- and post-treatment dysplasia index in former smokers was 43% and 19.6%, respectively.
Study participants had an average 30 pack-year history of smoking, and at least mild cytologic atypia on sputum cytology, but no previous history of cancer. Iloprost was given in escalating doses across the 6-month treatment period and was well tolerated. The treatment and placebo groups were well-matched for age, tobacco exposure and baseline histology, and there was no difference in dropout rate or serious adverse events between the treatment and placebo groups, Dr. Bunn noted.
Although antismoking campaigns are working – and about half of all smokers have quit, those who quit remain at greater risk for developing lung cancer than are nonsmokers; about half of all cases of lung cancer are in former smokers, and it is important to find effective chemopreventive measures for these individuals, he said.
Dr. Bunn discussed off-label use of iloprost for chemoprevention of lung cancer. He had no other disclosures.
ORLANDO – Endobronchial dysplasia appears useful as a biomarker for measuring the success of lung cancer chemoprevention, investigators reported at the annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research.
Bronchoscopies, along with biopsies of standard endobronchial sites and any other abnormal appearing areas, were performed at baseline and at 6 months after randomization to treatment with iloprost (Ventavis) or placebo in a phase II chemoprevention trial involving 152 former or current smokers with at least a 20 pack-year history.
Former smokers who received iloprost, an oral prostacyclin analog approved for the treatment of primary pulmonary hypertension, had significant improvements on several measures of endobronchial dysplasia, while current smokers had no improvement, Dr. Paul Bunn reported.
The findings demonstrate that iloprost, which has been shown to prevent the development of lung cancer in various murine models involving cigarette-smoke exposure, also might have the same effect in humans and thus deserves further study for this purpose, Dr. Bunn and his coauthors concluded.
The results also demonstrate that endobronchial dysplasia could serve as a biomarker for effectiveness of chemopreventive treatment– much as cholesterol does in patients being treated with statins to prevent cardiovascular disease, according to Dr. Bunn, executive director of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer. He is also the James Dudley endowed professor of lung cancer research at the cancer center at the University of Colorado, Aurora.
In the current study, baseline histology was significantly worse in current smokers than in former smokers (average biopsy scores of 3.0 vs. 2.1, respectively, with a score of 4 indicating mild dysplasia). Former smokers experienced a 0.41-point improvement in average biopsy score (P = .010), a 1.10-point improvement in their worst baseline biopsy score (P = .002), and a 12.5% improvement in dysplasia index (P = .006), which was the percentage of biopsies with a score of at least 4, said Dr. Bunn.
"The histologic improvement in the treated patients who were former smokers was larger than the magnitude of the difference between current and former smokers," he said.
For example, the baseline dysplasia index in current and former smokers was 46% and 31%, respectively, but the pre- and post-treatment dysplasia index in former smokers was 43% and 19.6%, respectively.
Study participants had an average 30 pack-year history of smoking, and at least mild cytologic atypia on sputum cytology, but no previous history of cancer. Iloprost was given in escalating doses across the 6-month treatment period and was well tolerated. The treatment and placebo groups were well-matched for age, tobacco exposure and baseline histology, and there was no difference in dropout rate or serious adverse events between the treatment and placebo groups, Dr. Bunn noted.
Although antismoking campaigns are working – and about half of all smokers have quit, those who quit remain at greater risk for developing lung cancer than are nonsmokers; about half of all cases of lung cancer are in former smokers, and it is important to find effective chemopreventive measures for these individuals, he said.
Dr. Bunn discussed off-label use of iloprost for chemoprevention of lung cancer. He had no other disclosures.
FROM THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR CANCER RESEARCH
Major Finding: Former smokers had an average 0.41-point improvement in biopsy score, an average 1.10-point improvement in their worst baseline biopsy score, and a 12.5% improvement in dysplasia index. No improvement occurred in current smokers.
Data Source: A randomized, placebo-controlled phase II trial.
Disclosures: Dr. Bunn discussed off-label use of iloprost for chemoprevention of lung cancer. He had no other disclosures.
HM Model Expands to Ears, Noses, and Throats
After five years in the department of otolaryngology/head and neck surgery at the University of California at San Francisco (UCSF), Matthew Russell, MD, is joining the faculty as an assistant professor. Normally, such a career arc is commonplace. But Dr. Russell’s new job title—ENT hospitalist—is worth noting. In fact, it could be groundbreaking.
When Dr. Russell begins work this summer, he might be the only otolaryngologist in the country whose entire patient census and surgical pipeline will be generated by admissions to his hospital. Although there are otolaryngologists around the country who spend the majority of their time working with inpatients, nearly all work an clinical outpatient service as well.
“The hospitalist model turns the traditional ENT practice on its head,” Dr. Russell says. “An otolaryngology practice we think of as being centered around the clinic, and the clinic and referrals is where we generate our operative cases and our patient load. The question really becomes: Can you sustain a practice without a clinic-based model?”
David Nielsen, MD, executive vice president and CEO of the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, says that while there is no current groundswell for the model, he can envision physicians being drawn to it for two reasons: an aging cohort of otolaryngologists and younger physicians looking for work-life balance.
—Matthew Russell, MD, oto-hospitalist, University of California at San Francisco
And while the otolaryngology world at large has not yet answered in unison, the presence of what some are calling an oto-hospitalist is the latest in a series of what HM pioneer Robert Wachter, MD, MHM, has termed “hyphenated hospitalists.” Dr. Wachter, chief of hospital medicine and chief of the medical service at UCSF Medical Center, a former SHM board member, and author of the Wachter’s World blog, says the needs of otolaryngology present the same set of circumstances that allowed internal-medicine-based HM to flourish.
“The forces,” Dr. Wachter wrote in January on his blog, “are the same: sick patients, highly specialized providers who may not be comfortable with all the issues that arise in the hospital, and the need to focus on system improvement.”
But just adding hospitalist to a job title is not the mark of HM’s presence.
“You can have any hyphenated medical specialist managing patients, but the question is, What are you getting out of it as a hospital or a hospitalist, or as an institution?” adds Gulshan Sharma MD, MPH, associate professor at the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston. “The hospitalists really have to figure out their boundaries.”
Dr. Russell says some physicians could be dismissive of the idea of an oto-hospitalist because they’re not clear about the role. They might picture a glorified resident constantly walking between wards to serve as a secondary opinion for other specialists. “There is a perception that this may not be a glamorous position,” he adds. “There’s an assumption that the position is nonsurgical.”
Dr. Russell’s workflow will include rounding and consultations across different wards, and he will assist with complex airway issues. But he also will perform surgeries and work on quality-improvement (QI) initiatives. For those who doubt the variety that a purely inpatient setting can deliver, Dr. Russell eagerly quotes statistics from a two-year pilot program UCSF ran before hiring him as a full-time ENT hospitalist:
- 300 inpatient consultations the first year, not including ED and urgent care;
- Sinonasal and laryngotracheal were the most common consults;
- 200 procedures generated billings; and
- 45% of procedures were laryngotracheal, 33% were sinonasal/anterior skull base, and 10% were otologic.
"The hospitalist movement, in general, fills a need for the acute-care setting and manages a different set of problems than is seen in the ambulatory clinics,” Dr. Russell says. “That same basic issue is found in otolaryngology. I think it’s an area that is perhaps underappreciated.”
Richard Quinn is a freelance writer based in New Jersey.
Hopkins Physician Sees Bright Future for ENT Hospitalists
In 2000, Nasir Bhatti, MD, associate professor of otolaryngology/head and neck surgery at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, started a program similar to the one at UCSF. At Johns Hopkins, Dr. Bhatti, and now his successors, acted primarily as an ENT hospitalist, although he maintained minimal clinic duties as well.
He says the oto-hospitalist model could work efficiently because it would allow physicians, by choice, to determine whether they wanted to focus on surgical procedures or nonsurgical medical services. Those who favor surgery and more intensive procedures could focus on those subspecialties without feeling distracted by the demands of less intensive duties, Dr. Russell adds. Also, Dr. Bhatti points out, the setup could create more revenue capture opportunities from consultations that currently are handled by nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs).
“Lots of these consultations go unstaffed and, therefore, unbilled,” Dr. Bhatti says.—RQ
After five years in the department of otolaryngology/head and neck surgery at the University of California at San Francisco (UCSF), Matthew Russell, MD, is joining the faculty as an assistant professor. Normally, such a career arc is commonplace. But Dr. Russell’s new job title—ENT hospitalist—is worth noting. In fact, it could be groundbreaking.
When Dr. Russell begins work this summer, he might be the only otolaryngologist in the country whose entire patient census and surgical pipeline will be generated by admissions to his hospital. Although there are otolaryngologists around the country who spend the majority of their time working with inpatients, nearly all work an clinical outpatient service as well.
“The hospitalist model turns the traditional ENT practice on its head,” Dr. Russell says. “An otolaryngology practice we think of as being centered around the clinic, and the clinic and referrals is where we generate our operative cases and our patient load. The question really becomes: Can you sustain a practice without a clinic-based model?”
David Nielsen, MD, executive vice president and CEO of the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, says that while there is no current groundswell for the model, he can envision physicians being drawn to it for two reasons: an aging cohort of otolaryngologists and younger physicians looking for work-life balance.
—Matthew Russell, MD, oto-hospitalist, University of California at San Francisco
And while the otolaryngology world at large has not yet answered in unison, the presence of what some are calling an oto-hospitalist is the latest in a series of what HM pioneer Robert Wachter, MD, MHM, has termed “hyphenated hospitalists.” Dr. Wachter, chief of hospital medicine and chief of the medical service at UCSF Medical Center, a former SHM board member, and author of the Wachter’s World blog, says the needs of otolaryngology present the same set of circumstances that allowed internal-medicine-based HM to flourish.
“The forces,” Dr. Wachter wrote in January on his blog, “are the same: sick patients, highly specialized providers who may not be comfortable with all the issues that arise in the hospital, and the need to focus on system improvement.”
But just adding hospitalist to a job title is not the mark of HM’s presence.
“You can have any hyphenated medical specialist managing patients, but the question is, What are you getting out of it as a hospital or a hospitalist, or as an institution?” adds Gulshan Sharma MD, MPH, associate professor at the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston. “The hospitalists really have to figure out their boundaries.”
Dr. Russell says some physicians could be dismissive of the idea of an oto-hospitalist because they’re not clear about the role. They might picture a glorified resident constantly walking between wards to serve as a secondary opinion for other specialists. “There is a perception that this may not be a glamorous position,” he adds. “There’s an assumption that the position is nonsurgical.”
Dr. Russell’s workflow will include rounding and consultations across different wards, and he will assist with complex airway issues. But he also will perform surgeries and work on quality-improvement (QI) initiatives. For those who doubt the variety that a purely inpatient setting can deliver, Dr. Russell eagerly quotes statistics from a two-year pilot program UCSF ran before hiring him as a full-time ENT hospitalist:
- 300 inpatient consultations the first year, not including ED and urgent care;
- Sinonasal and laryngotracheal were the most common consults;
- 200 procedures generated billings; and
- 45% of procedures were laryngotracheal, 33% were sinonasal/anterior skull base, and 10% were otologic.
"The hospitalist movement, in general, fills a need for the acute-care setting and manages a different set of problems than is seen in the ambulatory clinics,” Dr. Russell says. “That same basic issue is found in otolaryngology. I think it’s an area that is perhaps underappreciated.”
Richard Quinn is a freelance writer based in New Jersey.
Hopkins Physician Sees Bright Future for ENT Hospitalists
In 2000, Nasir Bhatti, MD, associate professor of otolaryngology/head and neck surgery at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, started a program similar to the one at UCSF. At Johns Hopkins, Dr. Bhatti, and now his successors, acted primarily as an ENT hospitalist, although he maintained minimal clinic duties as well.
He says the oto-hospitalist model could work efficiently because it would allow physicians, by choice, to determine whether they wanted to focus on surgical procedures or nonsurgical medical services. Those who favor surgery and more intensive procedures could focus on those subspecialties without feeling distracted by the demands of less intensive duties, Dr. Russell adds. Also, Dr. Bhatti points out, the setup could create more revenue capture opportunities from consultations that currently are handled by nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs).
“Lots of these consultations go unstaffed and, therefore, unbilled,” Dr. Bhatti says.—RQ
After five years in the department of otolaryngology/head and neck surgery at the University of California at San Francisco (UCSF), Matthew Russell, MD, is joining the faculty as an assistant professor. Normally, such a career arc is commonplace. But Dr. Russell’s new job title—ENT hospitalist—is worth noting. In fact, it could be groundbreaking.
When Dr. Russell begins work this summer, he might be the only otolaryngologist in the country whose entire patient census and surgical pipeline will be generated by admissions to his hospital. Although there are otolaryngologists around the country who spend the majority of their time working with inpatients, nearly all work an clinical outpatient service as well.
“The hospitalist model turns the traditional ENT practice on its head,” Dr. Russell says. “An otolaryngology practice we think of as being centered around the clinic, and the clinic and referrals is where we generate our operative cases and our patient load. The question really becomes: Can you sustain a practice without a clinic-based model?”
David Nielsen, MD, executive vice president and CEO of the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, says that while there is no current groundswell for the model, he can envision physicians being drawn to it for two reasons: an aging cohort of otolaryngologists and younger physicians looking for work-life balance.
—Matthew Russell, MD, oto-hospitalist, University of California at San Francisco
And while the otolaryngology world at large has not yet answered in unison, the presence of what some are calling an oto-hospitalist is the latest in a series of what HM pioneer Robert Wachter, MD, MHM, has termed “hyphenated hospitalists.” Dr. Wachter, chief of hospital medicine and chief of the medical service at UCSF Medical Center, a former SHM board member, and author of the Wachter’s World blog, says the needs of otolaryngology present the same set of circumstances that allowed internal-medicine-based HM to flourish.
“The forces,” Dr. Wachter wrote in January on his blog, “are the same: sick patients, highly specialized providers who may not be comfortable with all the issues that arise in the hospital, and the need to focus on system improvement.”
But just adding hospitalist to a job title is not the mark of HM’s presence.
“You can have any hyphenated medical specialist managing patients, but the question is, What are you getting out of it as a hospital or a hospitalist, or as an institution?” adds Gulshan Sharma MD, MPH, associate professor at the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston. “The hospitalists really have to figure out their boundaries.”
Dr. Russell says some physicians could be dismissive of the idea of an oto-hospitalist because they’re not clear about the role. They might picture a glorified resident constantly walking between wards to serve as a secondary opinion for other specialists. “There is a perception that this may not be a glamorous position,” he adds. “There’s an assumption that the position is nonsurgical.”
Dr. Russell’s workflow will include rounding and consultations across different wards, and he will assist with complex airway issues. But he also will perform surgeries and work on quality-improvement (QI) initiatives. For those who doubt the variety that a purely inpatient setting can deliver, Dr. Russell eagerly quotes statistics from a two-year pilot program UCSF ran before hiring him as a full-time ENT hospitalist:
- 300 inpatient consultations the first year, not including ED and urgent care;
- Sinonasal and laryngotracheal were the most common consults;
- 200 procedures generated billings; and
- 45% of procedures were laryngotracheal, 33% were sinonasal/anterior skull base, and 10% were otologic.
"The hospitalist movement, in general, fills a need for the acute-care setting and manages a different set of problems than is seen in the ambulatory clinics,” Dr. Russell says. “That same basic issue is found in otolaryngology. I think it’s an area that is perhaps underappreciated.”
Richard Quinn is a freelance writer based in New Jersey.
Hopkins Physician Sees Bright Future for ENT Hospitalists
In 2000, Nasir Bhatti, MD, associate professor of otolaryngology/head and neck surgery at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, started a program similar to the one at UCSF. At Johns Hopkins, Dr. Bhatti, and now his successors, acted primarily as an ENT hospitalist, although he maintained minimal clinic duties as well.
He says the oto-hospitalist model could work efficiently because it would allow physicians, by choice, to determine whether they wanted to focus on surgical procedures or nonsurgical medical services. Those who favor surgery and more intensive procedures could focus on those subspecialties without feeling distracted by the demands of less intensive duties, Dr. Russell adds. Also, Dr. Bhatti points out, the setup could create more revenue capture opportunities from consultations that currently are handled by nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs).
“Lots of these consultations go unstaffed and, therefore, unbilled,” Dr. Bhatti says.—RQ
Gene Expression Signatures Predict Erlotinib Sensitivity in NSCLC
ORLANDO – A set of epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition genes and a novel five-gene expression signature appear to predict disease control with erlotinib in refractory non–small cell lung cancer patients whether they have endothelial growth factor receptor mutations or not.
These candidate biomarkers have potentially broad impact, as they could help identify erlotinib (Tarceva) sensitivity in the 88% of patients with wild-type endothelial growth factor receptor (EGFR), Dr. John V. Heymach said at the annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research.
Dr. Heymach described the two gene profiles in an update of the phase II Biomarker-Integrated Approaches of Targeted Therapy for Lung Cancer Elimination (BATTLE) 1 trial. They were identified retrospectively from gene expression profiling of pretreatment core needle biopsies in 101 BATTLE trial patients and by studying 54 non–small cell lung cancer lines to find genes involved in the epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT).
Currently, the treatment benefit of erlotinib – a tyrosine kinase inhibitor that acts on EGFR and is approved for the treatment of non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and pancreatic cancer - can be predicted in only about 12% of patients who have certain mutations and amplifications of EGFR, said Dr. Heymach of the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.
Previously reported results from the BATTLE 1 trial, which were presented at the 2010 AACR annual meeting, focused on prespecified markers as predictors of response to EGFR inhibition; these updated findings focused on novel gene markers that were not prespecified, but were discovered retrospectively from the biopsies taken as part of the earlier BATTLE trial work.
The investigators found a five-gene expression signature, including Lipocalin-2 (LCN2), NPR3, OGG1, TRIM72, and a gene of unknown function called C5orf23, which was predictive of disease control in patients treated with erlotinib who lacked EGFR mutations. Disease control occurred by 8 weeks in 83% of those with the signature, compared with 0% of patients who lacked the signature (P less than .001).
They also found that LCN2 was involved in the EGFR pathway, and was associated with epithelial-type tumor cells. The findings suggest it is a promising potential target for therapy.
The EMT genes that were found to predict disease control in this study did so by a different measure: Disease control by 8 weeks occurred in 64% of those with cells that were still epithelial type, while disease control occurred in only 10% of those with mesenchymal type (P = .02). A gene called Axl, which is a tyrosine kinase receptor, was found to be associated with mesenchymal-type cells, and could also be a potential therapeutic target, Dr. Heymach said.
The predictive value of both the five-gene expression signature and the EMT signature will be tested prospectively in the upcoming BATTLE II trial, which will also test markers from the P13K-AKT pathway, EGFR signatures, and KRAS mutations. The trial will have four treatment arms, including erlotinib, sorafenib (Nexavar), erlotinib plus an AKT inhibitor, and the AKT inhibitor with an MEK inhibitor.
Dr. Thomas J. Lynch Jr., the discussant following Dr. Heymach’s presentation of his findings during a late-breaking abstract session at the AACR meeting, praised the "mining of data" from the landmark BATTLE 1 trial, which resulted in these findings.
While the finding are important, perhaps their greatest value is in "elucidating new targets in non–small cell lung cancer more than necessarily determining who benefits from marginally active therapy," said Dr. Lynch, director of the Yale Cancer Center and physician-in-chief at Smilow Cancer Hospital at Yale-New Haven (Conn.).
The BATTLE 1 trial, conducted by a team of researchers at M.D. Anderson, is the first completed prospective, adaptively randomized study in heavily pretreated non–small cell lung cancer patients that mandated tumor profiling with real-time core needle biopsies. The results of the trial demonstrate the feasibility of this approach, and create a new paradigm for translational research, and they represent a substantial step toward realizing personalized lung cancer therapy, according to the investigators. The findings are published in the inaugural issue of Cancer Discovery, which debuted at the 2011 AACR conference (Cancer Discovery 2011;1:OF42-9).
This study was funded by the U.S. Department of Defense, the M.D. Anderson and University of Texas Southwestern Lung Cancer Specialized Program in Research Excellence, and M.D. Anderson’s Cancer Center Support Grant from the National Cancer Institute. Dr. Heymach disclosed that he has received research support from AstraZeneca and Bayer, and has served on advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Genentech, and Bayer.
ORLANDO – A set of epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition genes and a novel five-gene expression signature appear to predict disease control with erlotinib in refractory non–small cell lung cancer patients whether they have endothelial growth factor receptor mutations or not.
These candidate biomarkers have potentially broad impact, as they could help identify erlotinib (Tarceva) sensitivity in the 88% of patients with wild-type endothelial growth factor receptor (EGFR), Dr. John V. Heymach said at the annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research.
Dr. Heymach described the two gene profiles in an update of the phase II Biomarker-Integrated Approaches of Targeted Therapy for Lung Cancer Elimination (BATTLE) 1 trial. They were identified retrospectively from gene expression profiling of pretreatment core needle biopsies in 101 BATTLE trial patients and by studying 54 non–small cell lung cancer lines to find genes involved in the epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT).
Currently, the treatment benefit of erlotinib – a tyrosine kinase inhibitor that acts on EGFR and is approved for the treatment of non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and pancreatic cancer - can be predicted in only about 12% of patients who have certain mutations and amplifications of EGFR, said Dr. Heymach of the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.
Previously reported results from the BATTLE 1 trial, which were presented at the 2010 AACR annual meeting, focused on prespecified markers as predictors of response to EGFR inhibition; these updated findings focused on novel gene markers that were not prespecified, but were discovered retrospectively from the biopsies taken as part of the earlier BATTLE trial work.
The investigators found a five-gene expression signature, including Lipocalin-2 (LCN2), NPR3, OGG1, TRIM72, and a gene of unknown function called C5orf23, which was predictive of disease control in patients treated with erlotinib who lacked EGFR mutations. Disease control occurred by 8 weeks in 83% of those with the signature, compared with 0% of patients who lacked the signature (P less than .001).
They also found that LCN2 was involved in the EGFR pathway, and was associated with epithelial-type tumor cells. The findings suggest it is a promising potential target for therapy.
The EMT genes that were found to predict disease control in this study did so by a different measure: Disease control by 8 weeks occurred in 64% of those with cells that were still epithelial type, while disease control occurred in only 10% of those with mesenchymal type (P = .02). A gene called Axl, which is a tyrosine kinase receptor, was found to be associated with mesenchymal-type cells, and could also be a potential therapeutic target, Dr. Heymach said.
The predictive value of both the five-gene expression signature and the EMT signature will be tested prospectively in the upcoming BATTLE II trial, which will also test markers from the P13K-AKT pathway, EGFR signatures, and KRAS mutations. The trial will have four treatment arms, including erlotinib, sorafenib (Nexavar), erlotinib plus an AKT inhibitor, and the AKT inhibitor with an MEK inhibitor.
Dr. Thomas J. Lynch Jr., the discussant following Dr. Heymach’s presentation of his findings during a late-breaking abstract session at the AACR meeting, praised the "mining of data" from the landmark BATTLE 1 trial, which resulted in these findings.
While the finding are important, perhaps their greatest value is in "elucidating new targets in non–small cell lung cancer more than necessarily determining who benefits from marginally active therapy," said Dr. Lynch, director of the Yale Cancer Center and physician-in-chief at Smilow Cancer Hospital at Yale-New Haven (Conn.).
The BATTLE 1 trial, conducted by a team of researchers at M.D. Anderson, is the first completed prospective, adaptively randomized study in heavily pretreated non–small cell lung cancer patients that mandated tumor profiling with real-time core needle biopsies. The results of the trial demonstrate the feasibility of this approach, and create a new paradigm for translational research, and they represent a substantial step toward realizing personalized lung cancer therapy, according to the investigators. The findings are published in the inaugural issue of Cancer Discovery, which debuted at the 2011 AACR conference (Cancer Discovery 2011;1:OF42-9).
This study was funded by the U.S. Department of Defense, the M.D. Anderson and University of Texas Southwestern Lung Cancer Specialized Program in Research Excellence, and M.D. Anderson’s Cancer Center Support Grant from the National Cancer Institute. Dr. Heymach disclosed that he has received research support from AstraZeneca and Bayer, and has served on advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Genentech, and Bayer.
ORLANDO – A set of epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition genes and a novel five-gene expression signature appear to predict disease control with erlotinib in refractory non–small cell lung cancer patients whether they have endothelial growth factor receptor mutations or not.
These candidate biomarkers have potentially broad impact, as they could help identify erlotinib (Tarceva) sensitivity in the 88% of patients with wild-type endothelial growth factor receptor (EGFR), Dr. John V. Heymach said at the annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research.
Dr. Heymach described the two gene profiles in an update of the phase II Biomarker-Integrated Approaches of Targeted Therapy for Lung Cancer Elimination (BATTLE) 1 trial. They were identified retrospectively from gene expression profiling of pretreatment core needle biopsies in 101 BATTLE trial patients and by studying 54 non–small cell lung cancer lines to find genes involved in the epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT).
Currently, the treatment benefit of erlotinib – a tyrosine kinase inhibitor that acts on EGFR and is approved for the treatment of non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and pancreatic cancer - can be predicted in only about 12% of patients who have certain mutations and amplifications of EGFR, said Dr. Heymach of the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.
Previously reported results from the BATTLE 1 trial, which were presented at the 2010 AACR annual meeting, focused on prespecified markers as predictors of response to EGFR inhibition; these updated findings focused on novel gene markers that were not prespecified, but were discovered retrospectively from the biopsies taken as part of the earlier BATTLE trial work.
The investigators found a five-gene expression signature, including Lipocalin-2 (LCN2), NPR3, OGG1, TRIM72, and a gene of unknown function called C5orf23, which was predictive of disease control in patients treated with erlotinib who lacked EGFR mutations. Disease control occurred by 8 weeks in 83% of those with the signature, compared with 0% of patients who lacked the signature (P less than .001).
They also found that LCN2 was involved in the EGFR pathway, and was associated with epithelial-type tumor cells. The findings suggest it is a promising potential target for therapy.
The EMT genes that were found to predict disease control in this study did so by a different measure: Disease control by 8 weeks occurred in 64% of those with cells that were still epithelial type, while disease control occurred in only 10% of those with mesenchymal type (P = .02). A gene called Axl, which is a tyrosine kinase receptor, was found to be associated with mesenchymal-type cells, and could also be a potential therapeutic target, Dr. Heymach said.
The predictive value of both the five-gene expression signature and the EMT signature will be tested prospectively in the upcoming BATTLE II trial, which will also test markers from the P13K-AKT pathway, EGFR signatures, and KRAS mutations. The trial will have four treatment arms, including erlotinib, sorafenib (Nexavar), erlotinib plus an AKT inhibitor, and the AKT inhibitor with an MEK inhibitor.
Dr. Thomas J. Lynch Jr., the discussant following Dr. Heymach’s presentation of his findings during a late-breaking abstract session at the AACR meeting, praised the "mining of data" from the landmark BATTLE 1 trial, which resulted in these findings.
While the finding are important, perhaps their greatest value is in "elucidating new targets in non–small cell lung cancer more than necessarily determining who benefits from marginally active therapy," said Dr. Lynch, director of the Yale Cancer Center and physician-in-chief at Smilow Cancer Hospital at Yale-New Haven (Conn.).
The BATTLE 1 trial, conducted by a team of researchers at M.D. Anderson, is the first completed prospective, adaptively randomized study in heavily pretreated non–small cell lung cancer patients that mandated tumor profiling with real-time core needle biopsies. The results of the trial demonstrate the feasibility of this approach, and create a new paradigm for translational research, and they represent a substantial step toward realizing personalized lung cancer therapy, according to the investigators. The findings are published in the inaugural issue of Cancer Discovery, which debuted at the 2011 AACR conference (Cancer Discovery 2011;1:OF42-9).
This study was funded by the U.S. Department of Defense, the M.D. Anderson and University of Texas Southwestern Lung Cancer Specialized Program in Research Excellence, and M.D. Anderson’s Cancer Center Support Grant from the National Cancer Institute. Dr. Heymach disclosed that he has received research support from AstraZeneca and Bayer, and has served on advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Genentech, and Bayer.
FROM THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR CANCER RESEARCH
Major Finding: Disease control at 8 weeks was 83% in patients with one signature vs. 0% in those without it, and 64% vs. 10% in a similar analysis of patients with and without the second signature.
Data Source: A retrospective analysis of data from the BATTLE trial in patients with non–small cell lung cancer.
Disclosures: This study was funded by the U.S. Department of Defense, the M.D. Anderson and University of Texas Southwestern Lung Cancer Specialized Program in Research Excellence, and M.D. Anderson’s Cancer Center Support Grant from the National Cancer Institute. Dr. Heymach disclosed that he has received research support from AstraZeneca and Bayer, and has served on advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Genentech, and Bayer.
Ratio of Triglycerides to HDL Predicts Cardiac Events at 10 Years
NEW ORLEANS – In the 10-year follow-up of a study in patients with stable coronary artery disease, the ratio of triglycerides to high-density lipoproteins was highly predictive of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE).
Dr. Raul D. Santos of the Heart Institute at the University of Sao Paulo Medical School Hospital in Brazil reported the analysis, which was part of the Medical, Angioplasty, or Surgery Study (MASS-II). That study compared the long-term effects of medical treatment, angioplasty, or surgical strategies in patients with stable angina symptoms of multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) and preserved ventricular function, determining that surgery was the optimal approach in this patient subset (J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2004;43:1743-51)
“After 10 years of follow-up of stable CAD patients in MASS-II, the TG/HDL [triglyceride/high-density lipoprotein] ratio was the only lipid parameter independently associated” with major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), Dr. Santos reported in the poster presentation.
The study randomly assigned 611 patients to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), or medical therapy. Lipid-modifying therapies were equally instituted in all study patient groups. Concentrations of total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL), non-HDL cholesterol, and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, as well as LDL/HDL and TG/HDL ratios, were divided according to distribution quartiles. The associations between MACE occurrence and plasma lipids at baseline and at 6 months, as well as other risk factors and randomized CAD treatment, were determined by Cox regression models.
Mean levels of lipids were 150 mg/dL for TG, 37 mg/dL for HDL cholesterol, and 140 mg/dL for LDL cholesterol.
“LDL was not well treated at the time this study began 11 years ago. Only about one third of patients were on statins, and mean levels were about 140 mg/dL,” Dr. Santos said. “Yet, even in these patients with high LDL, the TG/HDL ratio was a marker for later events.”
In the MASS-II patients followed for an average of 11.4 years (range 9-15 years), MACE were observed in 42% of the PCI arm, 59% of the medical therapy arm, and 33% of the CABG arm.
After adjustment for confounders, the investigators found the following factors to be independently associated with MACE: age greater than 65 years, randomization to CABG versus medical therapy, systemic arterial hypertension, and TG/HDL ratio determined at 6 months.
For the TG/HDL ratio, the hazard ratio for the occurrence of MACE, comparing the highest and lowest quartiles of the ratios, was significant at 1.57 (P = .015). Hazard ratios for the third versus first quartiles was 1.38 (P = .098) and for the second versus first quartiles was 0.83 (P = .445). No association was found between MACE and other plasma lipids.
Among patients with a TG/HDL ratio greater than 6, only about 45% of patients were free of MACE at 10 years, compared with greater than 70% for those with a TG/HDL ratio of less than 3.
“The TG/HDL ratio is a marker of residual risk,” Dr. Santos said. “For clinicians, this means that you treat the LDL, of course, but you need to look at triglycerides and HDL. While the lab doesn’t give you this ratio, it’s very easy to calculate.”
Dr. Gerald S. Berenson of Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, and principal investigator of the Bogalusa Heart Study, viewed the poster with interest. “This is very important information,” he said. “The TG/HDL ratio is so easy to measure. Everyone is looking at particle size, and so forth, but we routinely get these levels, so you just need to look at the ratio. It’s a good measure of insulin resistance as well.”
Dr. Santos has served on the speakers bureaus of Novartis, Merck, Biolab, and Bristol-Myers Squibb. Dr. Berenson had no relevant conflicts of interest.
NEW ORLEANS – In the 10-year follow-up of a study in patients with stable coronary artery disease, the ratio of triglycerides to high-density lipoproteins was highly predictive of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE).
Dr. Raul D. Santos of the Heart Institute at the University of Sao Paulo Medical School Hospital in Brazil reported the analysis, which was part of the Medical, Angioplasty, or Surgery Study (MASS-II). That study compared the long-term effects of medical treatment, angioplasty, or surgical strategies in patients with stable angina symptoms of multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) and preserved ventricular function, determining that surgery was the optimal approach in this patient subset (J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2004;43:1743-51)
“After 10 years of follow-up of stable CAD patients in MASS-II, the TG/HDL [triglyceride/high-density lipoprotein] ratio was the only lipid parameter independently associated” with major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), Dr. Santos reported in the poster presentation.
The study randomly assigned 611 patients to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), or medical therapy. Lipid-modifying therapies were equally instituted in all study patient groups. Concentrations of total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL), non-HDL cholesterol, and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, as well as LDL/HDL and TG/HDL ratios, were divided according to distribution quartiles. The associations between MACE occurrence and plasma lipids at baseline and at 6 months, as well as other risk factors and randomized CAD treatment, were determined by Cox regression models.
Mean levels of lipids were 150 mg/dL for TG, 37 mg/dL for HDL cholesterol, and 140 mg/dL for LDL cholesterol.
“LDL was not well treated at the time this study began 11 years ago. Only about one third of patients were on statins, and mean levels were about 140 mg/dL,” Dr. Santos said. “Yet, even in these patients with high LDL, the TG/HDL ratio was a marker for later events.”
In the MASS-II patients followed for an average of 11.4 years (range 9-15 years), MACE were observed in 42% of the PCI arm, 59% of the medical therapy arm, and 33% of the CABG arm.
After adjustment for confounders, the investigators found the following factors to be independently associated with MACE: age greater than 65 years, randomization to CABG versus medical therapy, systemic arterial hypertension, and TG/HDL ratio determined at 6 months.
For the TG/HDL ratio, the hazard ratio for the occurrence of MACE, comparing the highest and lowest quartiles of the ratios, was significant at 1.57 (P = .015). Hazard ratios for the third versus first quartiles was 1.38 (P = .098) and for the second versus first quartiles was 0.83 (P = .445). No association was found between MACE and other plasma lipids.
Among patients with a TG/HDL ratio greater than 6, only about 45% of patients were free of MACE at 10 years, compared with greater than 70% for those with a TG/HDL ratio of less than 3.
“The TG/HDL ratio is a marker of residual risk,” Dr. Santos said. “For clinicians, this means that you treat the LDL, of course, but you need to look at triglycerides and HDL. While the lab doesn’t give you this ratio, it’s very easy to calculate.”
Dr. Gerald S. Berenson of Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, and principal investigator of the Bogalusa Heart Study, viewed the poster with interest. “This is very important information,” he said. “The TG/HDL ratio is so easy to measure. Everyone is looking at particle size, and so forth, but we routinely get these levels, so you just need to look at the ratio. It’s a good measure of insulin resistance as well.”
Dr. Santos has served on the speakers bureaus of Novartis, Merck, Biolab, and Bristol-Myers Squibb. Dr. Berenson had no relevant conflicts of interest.
NEW ORLEANS – In the 10-year follow-up of a study in patients with stable coronary artery disease, the ratio of triglycerides to high-density lipoproteins was highly predictive of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE).
Dr. Raul D. Santos of the Heart Institute at the University of Sao Paulo Medical School Hospital in Brazil reported the analysis, which was part of the Medical, Angioplasty, or Surgery Study (MASS-II). That study compared the long-term effects of medical treatment, angioplasty, or surgical strategies in patients with stable angina symptoms of multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) and preserved ventricular function, determining that surgery was the optimal approach in this patient subset (J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2004;43:1743-51)
“After 10 years of follow-up of stable CAD patients in MASS-II, the TG/HDL [triglyceride/high-density lipoprotein] ratio was the only lipid parameter independently associated” with major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), Dr. Santos reported in the poster presentation.
The study randomly assigned 611 patients to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), or medical therapy. Lipid-modifying therapies were equally instituted in all study patient groups. Concentrations of total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL), non-HDL cholesterol, and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, as well as LDL/HDL and TG/HDL ratios, were divided according to distribution quartiles. The associations between MACE occurrence and plasma lipids at baseline and at 6 months, as well as other risk factors and randomized CAD treatment, were determined by Cox regression models.
Mean levels of lipids were 150 mg/dL for TG, 37 mg/dL for HDL cholesterol, and 140 mg/dL for LDL cholesterol.
“LDL was not well treated at the time this study began 11 years ago. Only about one third of patients were on statins, and mean levels were about 140 mg/dL,” Dr. Santos said. “Yet, even in these patients with high LDL, the TG/HDL ratio was a marker for later events.”
In the MASS-II patients followed for an average of 11.4 years (range 9-15 years), MACE were observed in 42% of the PCI arm, 59% of the medical therapy arm, and 33% of the CABG arm.
After adjustment for confounders, the investigators found the following factors to be independently associated with MACE: age greater than 65 years, randomization to CABG versus medical therapy, systemic arterial hypertension, and TG/HDL ratio determined at 6 months.
For the TG/HDL ratio, the hazard ratio for the occurrence of MACE, comparing the highest and lowest quartiles of the ratios, was significant at 1.57 (P = .015). Hazard ratios for the third versus first quartiles was 1.38 (P = .098) and for the second versus first quartiles was 0.83 (P = .445). No association was found between MACE and other plasma lipids.
Among patients with a TG/HDL ratio greater than 6, only about 45% of patients were free of MACE at 10 years, compared with greater than 70% for those with a TG/HDL ratio of less than 3.
“The TG/HDL ratio is a marker of residual risk,” Dr. Santos said. “For clinicians, this means that you treat the LDL, of course, but you need to look at triglycerides and HDL. While the lab doesn’t give you this ratio, it’s very easy to calculate.”
Dr. Gerald S. Berenson of Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, and principal investigator of the Bogalusa Heart Study, viewed the poster with interest. “This is very important information,” he said. “The TG/HDL ratio is so easy to measure. Everyone is looking at particle size, and so forth, but we routinely get these levels, so you just need to look at the ratio. It’s a good measure of insulin resistance as well.”
Dr. Santos has served on the speakers bureaus of Novartis, Merck, Biolab, and Bristol-Myers Squibb. Dr. Berenson had no relevant conflicts of interest.
FROM THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY
Major Finding: For the TG/HDL ratio, the hazard ratio for the
occurrence of MACE, comparing the highest and lowest quartiles of the
ratios, was significant at 1.57 at a mean 10-year-follow-up.
Data Source:
An analysis of 611 patients with stable angina symptoms of multivessel
coronary artery disease and preserved ventricular function in the
Medical, Angioplasty, or Surgery Study (MASS-II).
Disclosures: Dr. Raul D. Santos has served on the speakers bureaus of Novartis, Merck, Biolab, and Bristol-Myers Squibb.
Mipomersen Cut LDL Cholesterol Levels in Statin-Resistant Patients
NEW ORLEANS – In patients with hypercholesterolemia and high cardiovascular risk, the novel agent mipomersen administered as add-on therapy led to robust reductions in LDL cholesterol, based on the results of a double-blind, phase III study presented at the annual scientific sessions of the American College of Cardiology.
"In high-risk patients refractory to maximally tolerated statin therapy, the addition of mipomersen significantly reduced LDL-C and other atherogenic lipids and lipoproteins," said Dr. William C. Cromwell of the Presbyterian Cardiovascular Institute in Charlotte, N.C.
Mipomersen is the first of a new class of agents called apolipoprotein B (apoB) synthesis inhibitors. In the study, the drug was administered subcutaneously once a week. Among its side effects were injection site reactions, increases in alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels, and steatosis.
The study included 158 patients at high risk for cardiovascular events who were unable to achieve target LDL-C levels with statins, bile-acid sequestrants, and niacin. At baseline, all patients were on maximally tolerated doses of a statin; 63 were on the maximal approved dose, and 25 were also receiving ezetimibe.
All subjects had LDL-C levels of at least 100 mg/dL and triglycerides below 200 mg/dL. They were randomized 2:1 to 200 mg subcutaneous mipomersen or placebo weekly for 26 weeks. The primary end point was percent change in LDL-C from baseline at week 28 or 2 weeks after the last dose if treatment was not completed.
LDL-C levels of less than 100 mg/dL were achieved by 77 (76%) mipomersen-treated patients, compared with 19 (38%) placebo-treated patients. LDL-C levels of less than 70 mg/dL were achieved by 51 (50%) and 4 (8%), respectively.
The percent reduction in LDL cholesterol from baseline to the primary efficacy time point was a 37% drop in the mipomersen arm and a 5% drop in the placebo arm, a significant difference.
"LDL-C levels decreased through the first 17 weeks of treatment and remained relatively low through week 28," Dr. Cromwell observed. "Mipomersen’s lipid-lowering effects were independent of baseline LDL-C or race, and were similar for patients with and without diabetes."
The effect of the drug in the diabetic subset was robust. In the diabetes cohort, the mean decline in LDL-C from baseline was 51% for the 56 patients on mipomersen and 32% for the 29 on placebo.
Dr. Cromwell noted that the drug had a more pronounced effect in females and in patients whose age was above the median. However, mipomersen’s effects in males and in younger persons were still statistically significant and clinically meaningful.
Mipomersen also was associated with significant reductions from baseline values in apoB (38%), total cholesterol (26%), non-HDL cholesterol (36%), and lipoprotein(a) (24%). HDL-C levels did not change significantly from baseline.
Sixty of the 105 mipomersen-treated patients (57%) and 44 of 52 placebo patients (85%) completed treatment. A total of 26 mipomersen-treated patients and 2 placebo-treated patients discontinued due to on-treatment adverse events. Of the mipomersen noncompleters, seven discontinued due to a liver enzyme-related adverse event, and seven stopped because of an injection site reaction.
Injection site reactions were the most common adverse event, occurring in 78% of the mipomersen group and 31% of the placebo group. Flu-like symptoms occurred in 34% and 21%, respectively.
"Injection site reaction is the biggest side effect with this drug. This ranges from induration to redness, and some patients have skin discoloration. It’s real, and it does have to be managed," Dr. Cromwell acknowledged.
ALT elevations at least 3 times the upper limit of normal were observed in 14% of patients on mipomersen, versus none receiving placebo, but this occurred without concomitant significant bilirubin elevations, he said. For 10% of patients, ALT elevations occurred on consecutive measurements at least 7 days apart. One patient had an ALT of at least 10 times the upper limit of normal.
"We don’t see this as a huge ALT signal," Dr. Cromwell pointed out. "This is against the backdrop of a statin, which is already sensitizing the liver. We think it’s reassuring."
Approximately one-third of patients had an increase in steatosis, defined as liver fat increasing by at least 5%; median percent change from baseline was 15%. "This does not represent a huge accumulation of fat. Instead, it is a signal that it’s there at 28 weeks, and it is not particularly worrying. In a series of patients with much longer exposures, there is a plateau in this increase."
Dr. Patrick Moriarty, a lipid specialist who is assistant professor of medicine at the University of Kansas, Kansas City, commented, "We treat many refractory patients, and I can tell you that a drug of this class is very much needed in this patient population. It will help get their lipid numbers down."
The fact that patients achieve good LDL-C reductions on top of statin therapy is very encouraging, he said, noting, "The drug is not for every patient, but it could fill the need for an effective treatment in a small subset."
In Dr. Moriarty’s opinion, the injectable delivery will not be a barrier to acceptance. "It could be a problem for some patients and physicians, but patients can do these injections themselves, just like diabetes patients do. In studies I’ve participated in, we offer patients the opportunity to have the nurse give them the injections but most patients learn to do [the injections] themselves."
The study was sponsored by Isis Pharmaceuticals and Genzyme Corporation. Dr. Cromwell has received consultant fees or honoraria from Isis. Dr. Moriarty has participated in clinical trials of mipomersen.
NEW ORLEANS – In patients with hypercholesterolemia and high cardiovascular risk, the novel agent mipomersen administered as add-on therapy led to robust reductions in LDL cholesterol, based on the results of a double-blind, phase III study presented at the annual scientific sessions of the American College of Cardiology.
"In high-risk patients refractory to maximally tolerated statin therapy, the addition of mipomersen significantly reduced LDL-C and other atherogenic lipids and lipoproteins," said Dr. William C. Cromwell of the Presbyterian Cardiovascular Institute in Charlotte, N.C.
Mipomersen is the first of a new class of agents called apolipoprotein B (apoB) synthesis inhibitors. In the study, the drug was administered subcutaneously once a week. Among its side effects were injection site reactions, increases in alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels, and steatosis.
The study included 158 patients at high risk for cardiovascular events who were unable to achieve target LDL-C levels with statins, bile-acid sequestrants, and niacin. At baseline, all patients were on maximally tolerated doses of a statin; 63 were on the maximal approved dose, and 25 were also receiving ezetimibe.
All subjects had LDL-C levels of at least 100 mg/dL and triglycerides below 200 mg/dL. They were randomized 2:1 to 200 mg subcutaneous mipomersen or placebo weekly for 26 weeks. The primary end point was percent change in LDL-C from baseline at week 28 or 2 weeks after the last dose if treatment was not completed.
LDL-C levels of less than 100 mg/dL were achieved by 77 (76%) mipomersen-treated patients, compared with 19 (38%) placebo-treated patients. LDL-C levels of less than 70 mg/dL were achieved by 51 (50%) and 4 (8%), respectively.
The percent reduction in LDL cholesterol from baseline to the primary efficacy time point was a 37% drop in the mipomersen arm and a 5% drop in the placebo arm, a significant difference.
"LDL-C levels decreased through the first 17 weeks of treatment and remained relatively low through week 28," Dr. Cromwell observed. "Mipomersen’s lipid-lowering effects were independent of baseline LDL-C or race, and were similar for patients with and without diabetes."
The effect of the drug in the diabetic subset was robust. In the diabetes cohort, the mean decline in LDL-C from baseline was 51% for the 56 patients on mipomersen and 32% for the 29 on placebo.
Dr. Cromwell noted that the drug had a more pronounced effect in females and in patients whose age was above the median. However, mipomersen’s effects in males and in younger persons were still statistically significant and clinically meaningful.
Mipomersen also was associated with significant reductions from baseline values in apoB (38%), total cholesterol (26%), non-HDL cholesterol (36%), and lipoprotein(a) (24%). HDL-C levels did not change significantly from baseline.
Sixty of the 105 mipomersen-treated patients (57%) and 44 of 52 placebo patients (85%) completed treatment. A total of 26 mipomersen-treated patients and 2 placebo-treated patients discontinued due to on-treatment adverse events. Of the mipomersen noncompleters, seven discontinued due to a liver enzyme-related adverse event, and seven stopped because of an injection site reaction.
Injection site reactions were the most common adverse event, occurring in 78% of the mipomersen group and 31% of the placebo group. Flu-like symptoms occurred in 34% and 21%, respectively.
"Injection site reaction is the biggest side effect with this drug. This ranges from induration to redness, and some patients have skin discoloration. It’s real, and it does have to be managed," Dr. Cromwell acknowledged.
ALT elevations at least 3 times the upper limit of normal were observed in 14% of patients on mipomersen, versus none receiving placebo, but this occurred without concomitant significant bilirubin elevations, he said. For 10% of patients, ALT elevations occurred on consecutive measurements at least 7 days apart. One patient had an ALT of at least 10 times the upper limit of normal.
"We don’t see this as a huge ALT signal," Dr. Cromwell pointed out. "This is against the backdrop of a statin, which is already sensitizing the liver. We think it’s reassuring."
Approximately one-third of patients had an increase in steatosis, defined as liver fat increasing by at least 5%; median percent change from baseline was 15%. "This does not represent a huge accumulation of fat. Instead, it is a signal that it’s there at 28 weeks, and it is not particularly worrying. In a series of patients with much longer exposures, there is a plateau in this increase."
Dr. Patrick Moriarty, a lipid specialist who is assistant professor of medicine at the University of Kansas, Kansas City, commented, "We treat many refractory patients, and I can tell you that a drug of this class is very much needed in this patient population. It will help get their lipid numbers down."
The fact that patients achieve good LDL-C reductions on top of statin therapy is very encouraging, he said, noting, "The drug is not for every patient, but it could fill the need for an effective treatment in a small subset."
In Dr. Moriarty’s opinion, the injectable delivery will not be a barrier to acceptance. "It could be a problem for some patients and physicians, but patients can do these injections themselves, just like diabetes patients do. In studies I’ve participated in, we offer patients the opportunity to have the nurse give them the injections but most patients learn to do [the injections] themselves."
The study was sponsored by Isis Pharmaceuticals and Genzyme Corporation. Dr. Cromwell has received consultant fees or honoraria from Isis. Dr. Moriarty has participated in clinical trials of mipomersen.
NEW ORLEANS – In patients with hypercholesterolemia and high cardiovascular risk, the novel agent mipomersen administered as add-on therapy led to robust reductions in LDL cholesterol, based on the results of a double-blind, phase III study presented at the annual scientific sessions of the American College of Cardiology.
"In high-risk patients refractory to maximally tolerated statin therapy, the addition of mipomersen significantly reduced LDL-C and other atherogenic lipids and lipoproteins," said Dr. William C. Cromwell of the Presbyterian Cardiovascular Institute in Charlotte, N.C.
Mipomersen is the first of a new class of agents called apolipoprotein B (apoB) synthesis inhibitors. In the study, the drug was administered subcutaneously once a week. Among its side effects were injection site reactions, increases in alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels, and steatosis.
The study included 158 patients at high risk for cardiovascular events who were unable to achieve target LDL-C levels with statins, bile-acid sequestrants, and niacin. At baseline, all patients were on maximally tolerated doses of a statin; 63 were on the maximal approved dose, and 25 were also receiving ezetimibe.
All subjects had LDL-C levels of at least 100 mg/dL and triglycerides below 200 mg/dL. They were randomized 2:1 to 200 mg subcutaneous mipomersen or placebo weekly for 26 weeks. The primary end point was percent change in LDL-C from baseline at week 28 or 2 weeks after the last dose if treatment was not completed.
LDL-C levels of less than 100 mg/dL were achieved by 77 (76%) mipomersen-treated patients, compared with 19 (38%) placebo-treated patients. LDL-C levels of less than 70 mg/dL were achieved by 51 (50%) and 4 (8%), respectively.
The percent reduction in LDL cholesterol from baseline to the primary efficacy time point was a 37% drop in the mipomersen arm and a 5% drop in the placebo arm, a significant difference.
"LDL-C levels decreased through the first 17 weeks of treatment and remained relatively low through week 28," Dr. Cromwell observed. "Mipomersen’s lipid-lowering effects were independent of baseline LDL-C or race, and were similar for patients with and without diabetes."
The effect of the drug in the diabetic subset was robust. In the diabetes cohort, the mean decline in LDL-C from baseline was 51% for the 56 patients on mipomersen and 32% for the 29 on placebo.
Dr. Cromwell noted that the drug had a more pronounced effect in females and in patients whose age was above the median. However, mipomersen’s effects in males and in younger persons were still statistically significant and clinically meaningful.
Mipomersen also was associated with significant reductions from baseline values in apoB (38%), total cholesterol (26%), non-HDL cholesterol (36%), and lipoprotein(a) (24%). HDL-C levels did not change significantly from baseline.
Sixty of the 105 mipomersen-treated patients (57%) and 44 of 52 placebo patients (85%) completed treatment. A total of 26 mipomersen-treated patients and 2 placebo-treated patients discontinued due to on-treatment adverse events. Of the mipomersen noncompleters, seven discontinued due to a liver enzyme-related adverse event, and seven stopped because of an injection site reaction.
Injection site reactions were the most common adverse event, occurring in 78% of the mipomersen group and 31% of the placebo group. Flu-like symptoms occurred in 34% and 21%, respectively.
"Injection site reaction is the biggest side effect with this drug. This ranges from induration to redness, and some patients have skin discoloration. It’s real, and it does have to be managed," Dr. Cromwell acknowledged.
ALT elevations at least 3 times the upper limit of normal were observed in 14% of patients on mipomersen, versus none receiving placebo, but this occurred without concomitant significant bilirubin elevations, he said. For 10% of patients, ALT elevations occurred on consecutive measurements at least 7 days apart. One patient had an ALT of at least 10 times the upper limit of normal.
"We don’t see this as a huge ALT signal," Dr. Cromwell pointed out. "This is against the backdrop of a statin, which is already sensitizing the liver. We think it’s reassuring."
Approximately one-third of patients had an increase in steatosis, defined as liver fat increasing by at least 5%; median percent change from baseline was 15%. "This does not represent a huge accumulation of fat. Instead, it is a signal that it’s there at 28 weeks, and it is not particularly worrying. In a series of patients with much longer exposures, there is a plateau in this increase."
Dr. Patrick Moriarty, a lipid specialist who is assistant professor of medicine at the University of Kansas, Kansas City, commented, "We treat many refractory patients, and I can tell you that a drug of this class is very much needed in this patient population. It will help get their lipid numbers down."
The fact that patients achieve good LDL-C reductions on top of statin therapy is very encouraging, he said, noting, "The drug is not for every patient, but it could fill the need for an effective treatment in a small subset."
In Dr. Moriarty’s opinion, the injectable delivery will not be a barrier to acceptance. "It could be a problem for some patients and physicians, but patients can do these injections themselves, just like diabetes patients do. In studies I’ve participated in, we offer patients the opportunity to have the nurse give them the injections but most patients learn to do [the injections] themselves."
The study was sponsored by Isis Pharmaceuticals and Genzyme Corporation. Dr. Cromwell has received consultant fees or honoraria from Isis. Dr. Moriarty has participated in clinical trials of mipomersen.
FROM THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY
Major Finding: LDL-C levels of less than 100 mg/dL were achieved by 76% of mipomersen-treated patients, compared with 38% of placebo-treated patients. LDL-C levels of less than 70 mg/dL were achieved by 50% and 8%, respectively.
Data Source: The double-blind study included 158 high-risk patients who were unable to achieve target LDL-C levels on optimal therapy and were randomized 2:1 to 200 mg subcutaneous mipomersen or placebo weekly for 26 weeks.
Disclosures: The study was sponsored by Isis Pharmaceuticals and Genzyme Corporation. Dr. Cromwell has received consultant fees or honoraria from Isis. Dr. Moriarty has participated in clinical trials of mipomersen.
Recognizing Depression in Patients with Cancer
How we do it
Article Outline
Data summarized in an excellent review by Pirl published in 2004 show that up to one in five Americans will experience depressive symptoms over the course of their lifetime and that approximately 10%–25% of cancer patients meet criteria for clinical depression.[1] and [2] As our ability to treat depression has improved over the years, thanks in great part to advances in pharmacology and behavioral therapies, it is now critically important to recognize and treat this debilitating disease in individuals with cancer.3 Evidence exists that untreated depression is associated with a worse overall survival for some cancer patients and, paradoxically, that up to half of patients with cancer and concurrent depression are undertreated or receive no treatment.[4], [5] and [6] Medical oncologists receive little or no formal training in psycho-oncology yet are often faced with patients who exhibit changes in mood and become progressively disabled by psychiatric symptoms. Methodical assessment and frequent inquiry may identify patients with cancer and depression.
Peeling Back the Onion: Sorting through Symptoms to Reach a Diagnosis
A diagnosis of cancer often precipitates intense emotions such as fear, sadness, and sometimes anger.2 Individuals who may never have given much thought to their own death are confronted with the very real possibility of a shortened life and future suffering. Roles and relationships shift, careers are interrupted, and daily routines may be sacrificed to make room for cancer treatment. Add to this the financial worries that often accompany a serious illness and it is not surprising that patients may require some level of professional guidance or intervention in order to cope with the crisis. As a quick rule of thumb, it takes about 3–4 weeks after diagnosis to adjust, and during that period it is quite normal for patients to experience intense feelings.7 Weissman and Worden, among the first psychiatrists to study distress in cancer patients, described an acute syndrome of distress over existential plight with the diagnosis and with a recurrence that lasts about 100 days.8 Most individuals, given time and adequate support, will find the inner resources to cope with distressing symptoms and find a new normal. Not all do however, and it is important for oncologists to inquire at regular intervals about how the patient is feeling and coping with illness. A recent study by Lo et al9 found that predictors of depressive symptoms in patients with solid tumors included younger age, antidepressant use at baseline, lower self-esteem and spiritual well-being, greater attachment anxiety, hopelessness, the physical burden of symptoms, and proximity to death.
To facilitate screening for emotional distress in the context of a diagnosis of cancer, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) established guidelines that provide a reproducible algorithm for triaging patients with a suspected depression to mental health professionals.10 These guidelines were updated in 2010 and are widely available.11 The consensus definition of distress in cancer is “a multifactorial, unpleasant emotional experience of a psychological (cognitive, behavioral, emotional), social, and/or spiritual nature that may interfere with the ability to cope effectively with cancer, its physical symptoms and its treatment. Distress extends along a continuum, ranging from common feelings of vulnerability, sadness, and fears to problems that can become disabling, such as depression, anxiety, panic, social isolation, and existential and spiritual crisis.”10 By framing distress as a very broad concept, the guidelines separate the broad gamut of normal emotions from the distinct psychiatric syndromes of anxiety and depression which require specialized professional interventions.12
Distress may be a normal response to a threat or crisis, but depressive symptoms should alert the clinician that something more serious is going on. The appearance of persistent symptoms of dysphoria, hopelessness, helplessness, loss of self-esteem, feelings of worthlessness, and suicidal ideation indicates a psychiatric illness.13 The DSM-IV defines a major depressive episode as experiencing either dysphoria or anhedonia in addition to at least five somatic symptoms for at least 2 weeks.14 These somatic symptoms may well overlap with those experienced by patients as a direct result of their cancer or its treatment. Among these are changes in appetite, weight, or sleep; fatigue; loss of energy; and a diminished ability to think or concentrate. The challenge for clinicians is to tease apart the physiologic consequences of disease and side effects of medications from those due to profound and disabling psychiatric syndromes.
Many symptoms caused by cancer itself can be confused with neurovegetative symptoms of depression. Pain is known to modulate the reporting of symptoms; fatigue and weight changes are often secondary to cancer treatment or the illness itself. Patients often feel fatigued due to the heightened metabolic state present when there is a high burden of disease, and cytokines elevated in malignancy have been shown to cause fatigue and appetite suppression. There is a growing literature regarding the development of aberrant sleep patterns in patients with cancer, which can be mistaken for depressive daytime somnolence or insomnia.[15], [16], [17] and [18] Some cancers themselves are associated with a higher risk of depressive symptoms, including pancreatic cancer and cancers of the head and neck.[19], [20] and [21] Chemotherapy can also induce fatigue, insomnia, and anhedonia, as can the steroids often used concomitantly with chemotherapeutic or biologic agents. Interferon-alpha, used to treat melanoma and renal cell cancer, has been associated with depression in 3%–40% of patients; and there is a 5% rate of suicidal thoughts.22
Cancer patients exhibit a range of coping styles and varying degrees of emotional resiliency. If a patient is able to process his or her emotional responses to the physical threat of a diagnosis and becomes mobilized in such a way that he or she obtains useful information and is able to prioritize concerns, obtain social support, and move toward a coherent treatment plan, one can easily assume that he or she is coping well.23 On the other hand, if the patient appears unable to make a decision about treatment, avoids addressing or discussing important issues, and retreats from family, friends, and/or the medical team, one can infer that he or she is having trouble coping and could benefit from a referral to a mental health professional for evaluation.23 Known risk factors for poor coping and for developing depression include social isolation, use of few coping strategies, a history of recent losses or multiple obligations, inflexible coping strategies, the presence of pain, and socioeconomic pressures.[8] and [23] In extreme cases, patients may resort to deferring decisions or simply denying the problem.
Keep in mind there may also be cultural or personal barriers that interfere with a timely and accurate diagnosis of depression.12 Many families believe strongly in the “power of positive thinking” and need to feel that their family member is a “fighter.” This type of encouragement may at times be helpful for a patient, but it may not leave a safe opening for the expression of fear, pain, or depressed mood. If the matriarch or patriarch of the family has supported everyone else through the difficulties in their lives, she or he may not feel able to show weakness and seek help for depression. This can be a difficult patient to diagnose as the only clue to suffering may be easy to miss. In fact, if there are very few questions or complaints when there is clear physical suffering, one needs to worry that the patient is unable to express his or her deep concerns. The clinician who spots this situation early on may be able to lead the patient in the direction of expressing his or her feelings by suggesting that others in similar situations also experience stress or sadness. Finding a private time to talk, away from family members, may also provide a more comfortable environment for a candid conversation.
If we think of the disease trajectory as a marathon, then we can learn to recognize certain landmarks along the course and remember that these pose enormous challenges to patients. In addition to receiving the initial diagnosis, the period of active treatment, the conclusion of active treatment, and the time of disease recurrence pose specific challenges and precipitate intense emotions. Disease recurrence is a time of great anxiety when there is a need to plan for future treatment and an upheaval of the timeline a patient may have made.24
Should the Oncologist Offer Treatment for Depression?
Oncologists assume an important role in the medical care of their patients and often initiate or modify treatments for other medical conditions. If a patient develops hypertension or diabetes during or as a direct consequence of treatment, most oncologists feel comfortable starting medication and may then comanage the patient with internists. Primary care physicians and oncologists are typically familiar with a few basic antidepressants, and many are willing to prescribe these for patients who meet the diagnostic criteria for depression, especially since it takes weeks to achieve adequate therapeutic levels for many of these drugs. Recognizing the presence of depression is thus a key diagnostic intervention.
Several efforts have been made to develop self-report screening inventories that can improve the accuracy and efficiency of detection of depressive symptoms and are brief enough to administer in the setting of an office visit. Some tools have been validated and correlate well with more detailed inventories, although the gold standard remains the detailed psychiatric interview.25 A single-item interview screening proposed by Chochinov et al25 years ago performs as well as or better than longer instruments and is remarkably simple to remember. Asking patients “Are you depressed?” in a brief screening interview correctly identified the eventual diagnostic outcome of every patient in initial studies and has been adopted broadly by oncologists and palliative care clinicians caring for patients who are terminally ill.
We support immediate referral to a psychiatrist for any patient who exhibits symptoms of depression, and there is universal agreement that any person who may be suicidal should be referred immediately for urgent psychiatric evaluation. In practice, however, there are two main barriers to successful referrals for those who may be considered to be “managing” and not considered at risk for suicide: Patients are sometimes resistant to or reluctant to accept a recommendation for referral, and the shortage of mental health professionals trained in psycho-oncology limits quick access. It is, therefore, not surprising that cancer clinicians often initiate pharmacologic therapy for depression and provide emotional support to patients and families. Kadan-Lottick and colleagues5 reported that although 90% of patients agreed that they were willing to receive treatment for emotional distress associated with their cancer diagnosis, only 28% accessed treatment. Approximately 55% of the patients diagnosed in that study with major psychiatric disorders did not access treatment. It has been our experience that oncologists are often willing to initiate pharmacologic therapy while the patient is waiting for an appointment with a specialist.
The most frequently prescribed antidepressant medications are the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). Frequently, the choice of antidepressant is based on the side-effect profile of a particular medication as there are many effective options, none of which appears to be significantly more efficacious than the others.7 Antidepressants considered to be sedating may not be the preferred option for patients who have significant neurovegetative symptoms including fatigue and low energy. Conversely, antidepressants that cause anorexia and insomnia are poor options for patients experiencing sleepless nights and continued weight loss. Options for more activating antidepressants include sertraline, escitalopram, bupropion, and venlafaxine, while more sedating antidepressant medications include paroxetine and mirtazapine.7 Methylphenidate, a drug frequently used to treat attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, has been very effective in patients with low energy and anorexia.[26] and [27] Starting at a low dose in the morning, especially in the elderly, helps to minimize tachycardia and sleeplessness, which can be unwanted side effects of this medication. Lastly, a key point when choosing a medication is the potential for drug–drug interactions. Multiple antidepressants, including paroxetine, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, and bupropion, interact with the cytochrome P-450 2D6 system, making them more likely to interact with medications commonly used in oncology.28 One example of this potential for interaction occurs with tamoxifen, which is metabolized into its active form, endoxifen, by the cytochrome P-450 2D6 system. It may not be available in adequate concentrations in the setting of antidepressant medications like paroxetine, an inhibitor of cytochrome P-450 2D6. Whether this ultimately influences the efficacy of anticancer treatment is still under investigation.
While psychotherapy is outside the scope of most practicing oncologists, it may be helpful to provide patients with some guidance about the range of available therapies. Individuals may express a clear preference for nonpharmacologic treatments, so it is important for cancer clinicians to familiarize themselves with a few such options. These include cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), intensive psychotherapy, and group therapy. These interventions can aid patients in reducing anxiety and in strengthening their personal coping mechanisms. Studies to rigorously evaluate the efficacy of these interventions have been challenging to complete because of the lack of a “gold standard” definition of depression in cancer, no consensus on an appropriate length of treatment, no clear way to monitor compliance with a given therapy, and varied definitions of appropriate end points.12 Despite the challenges, several meta-analyses have been compiled to sort through the data. The more commonly referenced meta-analyses have included thousands of patients undergoing nonpharmacologic interventions ranging from individual psychotherapy to group therapy as far back as 1954.[29], [30], [31], [32], [33] and [34] None of the interventions indicate that any particular therapy is more clearly beneficial than another.
CBT has received recent attention and appears to be a good option for many cancer patients with depression. A review by Williams and Dale in the British Journal of Cancer in 200633 outlines 10 studies focusing on the use of CBT in cancer patients with mixed results. Of these, only two found CBT to be ineffective, whereas the rest demonstrated some benefit in reduction of depressive symptoms and improvement in quality of life for patients with a wide assortment of primary malignancies. Most found early improvement in symptoms but not necessarily long-term persistence of the initial positive effects. Group therapy has also been thoroughly studied in depression in cancer patients since Spiegel's landmark study in the late 1980s and has been shown to decrease anxiety, depression, and pain and to increase effective coping.[34], [35], [36], [37], [38] and [39] Many patients report positive experiences in support groups, but others express an intuitive fear that listening to other patients' concerns and negative thoughts will impair their own overall mood and outlook. Not all patients feel comfortable expressing their personal fears, doubts, and frustrations with a group of relative strangers. Any of these concerns is a sufficient reason to advise more personalized attention in a private therapy session with a specialist. Choosing between individual psychotherapy, group, and family therapy can be construed as another aspect of providing truly “personalized” cancer care.
A substantial number of patients worldwide turn to complementary and alternative therapies for the treatment of cancer and cancer-related symptoms.[40], [41] and [42] Estimates of the prevalence of complementary and alternative therapy use vary widely due to differences in definitions and inaccuracies in self-reporting and patient selection. There are emerging data that up to 60%–80% of cancer patients avail themselves of some form of alternative therapy at some point in the trajectory of their disease.42 This number varies widely, likely because the definition of “complementary and alternative therapies” is so broad and can include prayer, use of herbal medications, acupuncture, and meditation. In one study of early-stage breast cancer patients, the use of alternative medicine was significantly associated with patients experiencing depressive symptoms, heightened fear of recurrence, greater physical symptoms, and poor sexual satisfaction.42 At 1 year, all patients, both those using complementary and alternative therapies and those using traditional methods of care, experienced an improvement in quality of life.
For patients who do not meet the criteria for clinical depression and have no interest in or access to support groups, it is worth remembering there are other interventions that can facilitate adjustment and diminish symptoms of anxiety. Expressive writing, music, or art therapy and other activity-based therapies may provide the necessary vehicles for self-expression.
Conclusion
Depression clearly affects patients with cancer, and establishing the depression diagnosis is the first step toward progress in treatment. Despite the challenges, diagnosis is possible by establishing that the symptoms of depression are negatively impacting patients' abilities to cope with their circumstances and maintain balance in their lives. It is critical not only to make the diagnosis of depression but also to strongly encourage patients to seek treatment, either through pharmacologic or nonpharmacologic means. While we make every effort to eradicate our patients' malignancies, we owe it to them to work just as diligently to improve their daily lives by treating associated depression.
References2
1 W.F. Pirl, Evidence report on the occurrence, assessment, and treatment of depression in cancer patients, J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 32 (2004), pp. 32–39. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (67)
2 J.S. McDaniel, D.L. Musselman, M.R. Porter, D.A. Reed and C.B. Nemeroff, Depression in patients with cancer: diagnosis, biology, and treatment, Arch Gen Psychiatry 52 (1995), pp. 89–99. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (339)
3 R.W. Trijsburg, F.C.E. Van Knippenberg and S.E. Rijpma, Effects of psychological treatments on cancer patients: a critical review, Psychosom Med 54 (1992), pp. 489–517. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (171)
4 A. Gruneir, T.F. Smith, J. Hirdes and R. Cameron, Depression in patients with advanced illness: an examination of Ontario complex continuing care using the minimum data set 2.0, Palliat Support Care 3 (2005), pp. 99–105. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (6)
5 N.S. Kadan-Lottick, L.C. Vanderwerker, S.D. Block, B. Zhang and H.G. Prigerson, Psychiatric disorders and mental health service use in patients with advanced cancer: a report from the Coping with Cancer Study, Cancer 104 (2005), pp. 2872–2881. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (57)
6 J.L. Steel, D.A. Geller, T.C. Gamblin, M.C. Olek and B.I. Carr, Depression, immunity, and survival in patients with hepatobiliary carcinoma, J Clin Oncol 25 (2007), pp. 4526–4527.
7 W. Pirl, Depression, anxiety, and fatigue. In: B. Chabner, J. Lynch and D. Longo, Editors, Harrison's Manual of Oncology, McGraw-Hill, New York (2008), pp. 190–196.
8 A. Weissman and J. Worden, The existential plight in cancer: significance of the first 100 days, Psychiatr Med 7 (1976), pp. 1–15.
9 C. Lo, C. Zimmermann and A. Rydall et al., Longitudinal study of depressive symptoms in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal and lung cancer, J Clin Oncol 28 (18) (2010), pp. 3084–3089. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (2)
10 National Comprehensive Cancer Network, NCCN practice guidelines for the management of psychosocial distress, Oncology (Williston Park) 13 (1999), pp. 113–147.
11 National Comprehensive Cancer Network, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology, Distress management (2010) V.1. www.nccn.org.
12 M. Fisch, Treatment of depression in cancer, J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 32 (2004), pp. 105–111. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (45)
13 H.T. Mermelstein and L. Lesko, Depression in patients with cancer, Psychooncology 1 (1992), pp. 199–215. Full Text via CrossRef
14 American Psychiatric Association, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.), American Psychiatric Association, Washington DC (1994).
15 M.L. Chen, C.T. Yu and C.H. Yang, Sleep disturbances and quality of life in lung cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, Lung Cancer 62 (2008), pp. 391–400. Article |
16 J. Savard, S. Simard and J. Blanchet et al., Prevalence, clinical characteristics, and risk factors for insomnia in the context of breast cancer, Sleep 24 (2001), pp. 583–590. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (81)
17 J. Savard and C.M. Morin, Insomnia in the context of cancer: a review of a neglected problem, J Clin Oncol 19 (2001), pp. 895–908. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (147)
18 O.G. Palesh, J.A. Roscoe, K.M. Mustian, T. Roth, J. Savard, S. Ancoli-Israel, C. Heckler, J.Q. Purnell, M.C. Janelsins and G.R. Morrow, Prevalence, demographics, and psychological associations of sleep disruption in patients with cancer: University of Rochester Cancer Center–Community Clinical Oncology Program, J Clin Oncol 28 (2010), pp. 292–298. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (7)
19 I. Fras, E.M. Litin and J.S. Pearson, Comparison of psychiatric symptoms in carcinoma of the pancreas with those in some other intraabdominal neoplasms, Am J Psychiatry 123 (1967), pp. 1553–1562. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (38)
20 R.T. Joffe, D.R. Rubinow, K.D. Denicoff, M. Maher and W.F. Sindelar, Depression and carcinoma of the pancreas, Gen Hosp Psychiatry 8 (1986), pp. 241–245. Article |
21 R.P. Morton, A.D.M. Davies, J. Baker, G.A. Baker and P.M. Stell, Quality of life in treated head and neck cancer patients: a preliminary report, Clin Otolaryngol 9 (1984), pp. 181–185. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (59)
22 , Micromedex 2.0. DrugPoint summary, interferon alfa-2b http://www.micromedex.com/2 Accessed July 1, 2010.
23 D. Spiegel, A 43-year-old woman coping with cancer, JAMA 281 (4) (1999), pp. 371–377.
24 D.F. Cella, S.M. Mahon and M.I. Donovan, Cancer recurrence as a traumatic event, Behav Med 16 (1990), pp. 15–22. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (126)
25 H.M. Chochinov, K.G. Wilson, M. Enns and S. Lander, “Are you depressed?”: Screening for depression in the terminally ill, Am J Psychiatry 154 (1997), pp. 674–676. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (225)
26 E. Bruera, L. Driver and E. Barnes et al., Patient controlled methylphenidate for cancer-related fatigue: a preliminary report, Proc Annu Meet Am Soc Clin Oncol 22 (2003), p. 737.
27 J. Homsi, K.A. Nelson and N. Sarhill et al., A phase II study of methylphenidate for depression in advanced cancer, Am J Hosp Palliat Care 18 (2001), pp. 403–407. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (49)
28 G.R. Kalash, Psychotropic drug metabolism in the cancer patient: clinical aspects of management of potential drug interactions, Psychooncology 7 (1998), pp. 307–320. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (4)
29 E.C. Devine and S.K. Westlake, The effects of psychoeducational care provided by adults with cancer: meta-analysis of 116 studies, Oncol Nurs Forum 22 (1995), pp. 1369–1381. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (192)
30 T.J. Meyer and M.M. Mark, Effects of psychosocial interventions with adult cancer patients: a meta-analysis of randomized experiments, Health Psychol 14 (1995), pp. 101–108. Abstract |
31 S.A. Newell, R.W. Sanson-Fisher and N.J. Savolainen, Systematic review of psychological therapies for cancer patients: overview and recommendations for the future, J Natl Cancer Inst 94 (2002), pp. 558–584. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (201)
32 T. Sheard and P. Maguire, The effect of psychological interventions on anxiety and depression in cancer patients; results of two meta-analyses, Br J Cancer 80 (1999), pp. 1770–1780. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (210)
33 S. Williams and J. Dale, The effectiveness of treatment for depression/depressive symptoms in adults with cancer: a systematic review, Br J Cancer 94 (2006), pp. 372–390. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (60)
34 D. Spiegel, J.R. Bloom, H.C. Kraemer and E. Gottheil, Effect of psychosocial treatment on survival of patients with metastatic breast cancer, Lancet 2 (1989), pp. 888–891. Article |
35 L.F. Berkman and S.L. Syme, Social networks, host resistence, and mortality: a nine year follow-up study of Alameda County residents, Am J Epidemiol 109 (1979), pp. 186–204. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (1297)
36 D.P. Funch and J. Marshall, The role of stress, social support and age in survival from breast cancer, J Psychosom Res 27 (1983), pp. 77–83. Abstract |
37 D.C. Ganster and B. Victor, The impact of social support on mental and physical health, Br J Med Psychol 61 (1988), pp. 17–36. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (17)
38 F.I. Fawzy, N. Cousins, N.W. Fawzy, M.E. Kemeny, R. Elashoff and D. Morton, A structured psychiatric intervention for cancer patients: I: Changes over time in methods of coping and affective disturbance, Arch Gen Psychiatry 47 (1990), pp. 720–725. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (331)
39 D. Spiegel and J.R. Bloom, Group therapy and hypnosis reduce metastatic breast carcinoma pain, Psychosom Med 45 (1983), pp. 333–339. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (192)
40 T. Gansler, C. Kaw, C. Crammer and T. Smith, A population-based study of prevalence of complementary methods use by cancer survivors: a report from the American Cancer Society's studies of cancer survivors, Cancer 113 (2008), pp. 1048–1057. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (13)
41 M.A. Richardson, T. Sanders, J.L. Palmer, A. Greisinger and S.E. Singletary, Complementary/alternative medicine use in a comprehensive cancer center and the implications for oncology, J Clin Oncol 18 (13) (2000), pp. 2505–2514. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (407)
42 H.J. Burstein, S. Gelber, E. Guadagnoli and J.C. Weeks, Use of alternative medicine by women with early-stage breast cancer, N Engl J Med 340 (22) (1999), pp. 1733–1739. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (352)
How we do it
Article Outline
Data summarized in an excellent review by Pirl published in 2004 show that up to one in five Americans will experience depressive symptoms over the course of their lifetime and that approximately 10%–25% of cancer patients meet criteria for clinical depression.[1] and [2] As our ability to treat depression has improved over the years, thanks in great part to advances in pharmacology and behavioral therapies, it is now critically important to recognize and treat this debilitating disease in individuals with cancer.3 Evidence exists that untreated depression is associated with a worse overall survival for some cancer patients and, paradoxically, that up to half of patients with cancer and concurrent depression are undertreated or receive no treatment.[4], [5] and [6] Medical oncologists receive little or no formal training in psycho-oncology yet are often faced with patients who exhibit changes in mood and become progressively disabled by psychiatric symptoms. Methodical assessment and frequent inquiry may identify patients with cancer and depression.
Peeling Back the Onion: Sorting through Symptoms to Reach a Diagnosis
A diagnosis of cancer often precipitates intense emotions such as fear, sadness, and sometimes anger.2 Individuals who may never have given much thought to their own death are confronted with the very real possibility of a shortened life and future suffering. Roles and relationships shift, careers are interrupted, and daily routines may be sacrificed to make room for cancer treatment. Add to this the financial worries that often accompany a serious illness and it is not surprising that patients may require some level of professional guidance or intervention in order to cope with the crisis. As a quick rule of thumb, it takes about 3–4 weeks after diagnosis to adjust, and during that period it is quite normal for patients to experience intense feelings.7 Weissman and Worden, among the first psychiatrists to study distress in cancer patients, described an acute syndrome of distress over existential plight with the diagnosis and with a recurrence that lasts about 100 days.8 Most individuals, given time and adequate support, will find the inner resources to cope with distressing symptoms and find a new normal. Not all do however, and it is important for oncologists to inquire at regular intervals about how the patient is feeling and coping with illness. A recent study by Lo et al9 found that predictors of depressive symptoms in patients with solid tumors included younger age, antidepressant use at baseline, lower self-esteem and spiritual well-being, greater attachment anxiety, hopelessness, the physical burden of symptoms, and proximity to death.
To facilitate screening for emotional distress in the context of a diagnosis of cancer, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) established guidelines that provide a reproducible algorithm for triaging patients with a suspected depression to mental health professionals.10 These guidelines were updated in 2010 and are widely available.11 The consensus definition of distress in cancer is “a multifactorial, unpleasant emotional experience of a psychological (cognitive, behavioral, emotional), social, and/or spiritual nature that may interfere with the ability to cope effectively with cancer, its physical symptoms and its treatment. Distress extends along a continuum, ranging from common feelings of vulnerability, sadness, and fears to problems that can become disabling, such as depression, anxiety, panic, social isolation, and existential and spiritual crisis.”10 By framing distress as a very broad concept, the guidelines separate the broad gamut of normal emotions from the distinct psychiatric syndromes of anxiety and depression which require specialized professional interventions.12
Distress may be a normal response to a threat or crisis, but depressive symptoms should alert the clinician that something more serious is going on. The appearance of persistent symptoms of dysphoria, hopelessness, helplessness, loss of self-esteem, feelings of worthlessness, and suicidal ideation indicates a psychiatric illness.13 The DSM-IV defines a major depressive episode as experiencing either dysphoria or anhedonia in addition to at least five somatic symptoms for at least 2 weeks.14 These somatic symptoms may well overlap with those experienced by patients as a direct result of their cancer or its treatment. Among these are changes in appetite, weight, or sleep; fatigue; loss of energy; and a diminished ability to think or concentrate. The challenge for clinicians is to tease apart the physiologic consequences of disease and side effects of medications from those due to profound and disabling psychiatric syndromes.
Many symptoms caused by cancer itself can be confused with neurovegetative symptoms of depression. Pain is known to modulate the reporting of symptoms; fatigue and weight changes are often secondary to cancer treatment or the illness itself. Patients often feel fatigued due to the heightened metabolic state present when there is a high burden of disease, and cytokines elevated in malignancy have been shown to cause fatigue and appetite suppression. There is a growing literature regarding the development of aberrant sleep patterns in patients with cancer, which can be mistaken for depressive daytime somnolence or insomnia.[15], [16], [17] and [18] Some cancers themselves are associated with a higher risk of depressive symptoms, including pancreatic cancer and cancers of the head and neck.[19], [20] and [21] Chemotherapy can also induce fatigue, insomnia, and anhedonia, as can the steroids often used concomitantly with chemotherapeutic or biologic agents. Interferon-alpha, used to treat melanoma and renal cell cancer, has been associated with depression in 3%–40% of patients; and there is a 5% rate of suicidal thoughts.22
Cancer patients exhibit a range of coping styles and varying degrees of emotional resiliency. If a patient is able to process his or her emotional responses to the physical threat of a diagnosis and becomes mobilized in such a way that he or she obtains useful information and is able to prioritize concerns, obtain social support, and move toward a coherent treatment plan, one can easily assume that he or she is coping well.23 On the other hand, if the patient appears unable to make a decision about treatment, avoids addressing or discussing important issues, and retreats from family, friends, and/or the medical team, one can infer that he or she is having trouble coping and could benefit from a referral to a mental health professional for evaluation.23 Known risk factors for poor coping and for developing depression include social isolation, use of few coping strategies, a history of recent losses or multiple obligations, inflexible coping strategies, the presence of pain, and socioeconomic pressures.[8] and [23] In extreme cases, patients may resort to deferring decisions or simply denying the problem.
Keep in mind there may also be cultural or personal barriers that interfere with a timely and accurate diagnosis of depression.12 Many families believe strongly in the “power of positive thinking” and need to feel that their family member is a “fighter.” This type of encouragement may at times be helpful for a patient, but it may not leave a safe opening for the expression of fear, pain, or depressed mood. If the matriarch or patriarch of the family has supported everyone else through the difficulties in their lives, she or he may not feel able to show weakness and seek help for depression. This can be a difficult patient to diagnose as the only clue to suffering may be easy to miss. In fact, if there are very few questions or complaints when there is clear physical suffering, one needs to worry that the patient is unable to express his or her deep concerns. The clinician who spots this situation early on may be able to lead the patient in the direction of expressing his or her feelings by suggesting that others in similar situations also experience stress or sadness. Finding a private time to talk, away from family members, may also provide a more comfortable environment for a candid conversation.
If we think of the disease trajectory as a marathon, then we can learn to recognize certain landmarks along the course and remember that these pose enormous challenges to patients. In addition to receiving the initial diagnosis, the period of active treatment, the conclusion of active treatment, and the time of disease recurrence pose specific challenges and precipitate intense emotions. Disease recurrence is a time of great anxiety when there is a need to plan for future treatment and an upheaval of the timeline a patient may have made.24
Should the Oncologist Offer Treatment for Depression?
Oncologists assume an important role in the medical care of their patients and often initiate or modify treatments for other medical conditions. If a patient develops hypertension or diabetes during or as a direct consequence of treatment, most oncologists feel comfortable starting medication and may then comanage the patient with internists. Primary care physicians and oncologists are typically familiar with a few basic antidepressants, and many are willing to prescribe these for patients who meet the diagnostic criteria for depression, especially since it takes weeks to achieve adequate therapeutic levels for many of these drugs. Recognizing the presence of depression is thus a key diagnostic intervention.
Several efforts have been made to develop self-report screening inventories that can improve the accuracy and efficiency of detection of depressive symptoms and are brief enough to administer in the setting of an office visit. Some tools have been validated and correlate well with more detailed inventories, although the gold standard remains the detailed psychiatric interview.25 A single-item interview screening proposed by Chochinov et al25 years ago performs as well as or better than longer instruments and is remarkably simple to remember. Asking patients “Are you depressed?” in a brief screening interview correctly identified the eventual diagnostic outcome of every patient in initial studies and has been adopted broadly by oncologists and palliative care clinicians caring for patients who are terminally ill.
We support immediate referral to a psychiatrist for any patient who exhibits symptoms of depression, and there is universal agreement that any person who may be suicidal should be referred immediately for urgent psychiatric evaluation. In practice, however, there are two main barriers to successful referrals for those who may be considered to be “managing” and not considered at risk for suicide: Patients are sometimes resistant to or reluctant to accept a recommendation for referral, and the shortage of mental health professionals trained in psycho-oncology limits quick access. It is, therefore, not surprising that cancer clinicians often initiate pharmacologic therapy for depression and provide emotional support to patients and families. Kadan-Lottick and colleagues5 reported that although 90% of patients agreed that they were willing to receive treatment for emotional distress associated with their cancer diagnosis, only 28% accessed treatment. Approximately 55% of the patients diagnosed in that study with major psychiatric disorders did not access treatment. It has been our experience that oncologists are often willing to initiate pharmacologic therapy while the patient is waiting for an appointment with a specialist.
The most frequently prescribed antidepressant medications are the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). Frequently, the choice of antidepressant is based on the side-effect profile of a particular medication as there are many effective options, none of which appears to be significantly more efficacious than the others.7 Antidepressants considered to be sedating may not be the preferred option for patients who have significant neurovegetative symptoms including fatigue and low energy. Conversely, antidepressants that cause anorexia and insomnia are poor options for patients experiencing sleepless nights and continued weight loss. Options for more activating antidepressants include sertraline, escitalopram, bupropion, and venlafaxine, while more sedating antidepressant medications include paroxetine and mirtazapine.7 Methylphenidate, a drug frequently used to treat attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, has been very effective in patients with low energy and anorexia.[26] and [27] Starting at a low dose in the morning, especially in the elderly, helps to minimize tachycardia and sleeplessness, which can be unwanted side effects of this medication. Lastly, a key point when choosing a medication is the potential for drug–drug interactions. Multiple antidepressants, including paroxetine, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, and bupropion, interact with the cytochrome P-450 2D6 system, making them more likely to interact with medications commonly used in oncology.28 One example of this potential for interaction occurs with tamoxifen, which is metabolized into its active form, endoxifen, by the cytochrome P-450 2D6 system. It may not be available in adequate concentrations in the setting of antidepressant medications like paroxetine, an inhibitor of cytochrome P-450 2D6. Whether this ultimately influences the efficacy of anticancer treatment is still under investigation.
While psychotherapy is outside the scope of most practicing oncologists, it may be helpful to provide patients with some guidance about the range of available therapies. Individuals may express a clear preference for nonpharmacologic treatments, so it is important for cancer clinicians to familiarize themselves with a few such options. These include cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), intensive psychotherapy, and group therapy. These interventions can aid patients in reducing anxiety and in strengthening their personal coping mechanisms. Studies to rigorously evaluate the efficacy of these interventions have been challenging to complete because of the lack of a “gold standard” definition of depression in cancer, no consensus on an appropriate length of treatment, no clear way to monitor compliance with a given therapy, and varied definitions of appropriate end points.12 Despite the challenges, several meta-analyses have been compiled to sort through the data. The more commonly referenced meta-analyses have included thousands of patients undergoing nonpharmacologic interventions ranging from individual psychotherapy to group therapy as far back as 1954.[29], [30], [31], [32], [33] and [34] None of the interventions indicate that any particular therapy is more clearly beneficial than another.
CBT has received recent attention and appears to be a good option for many cancer patients with depression. A review by Williams and Dale in the British Journal of Cancer in 200633 outlines 10 studies focusing on the use of CBT in cancer patients with mixed results. Of these, only two found CBT to be ineffective, whereas the rest demonstrated some benefit in reduction of depressive symptoms and improvement in quality of life for patients with a wide assortment of primary malignancies. Most found early improvement in symptoms but not necessarily long-term persistence of the initial positive effects. Group therapy has also been thoroughly studied in depression in cancer patients since Spiegel's landmark study in the late 1980s and has been shown to decrease anxiety, depression, and pain and to increase effective coping.[34], [35], [36], [37], [38] and [39] Many patients report positive experiences in support groups, but others express an intuitive fear that listening to other patients' concerns and negative thoughts will impair their own overall mood and outlook. Not all patients feel comfortable expressing their personal fears, doubts, and frustrations with a group of relative strangers. Any of these concerns is a sufficient reason to advise more personalized attention in a private therapy session with a specialist. Choosing between individual psychotherapy, group, and family therapy can be construed as another aspect of providing truly “personalized” cancer care.
A substantial number of patients worldwide turn to complementary and alternative therapies for the treatment of cancer and cancer-related symptoms.[40], [41] and [42] Estimates of the prevalence of complementary and alternative therapy use vary widely due to differences in definitions and inaccuracies in self-reporting and patient selection. There are emerging data that up to 60%–80% of cancer patients avail themselves of some form of alternative therapy at some point in the trajectory of their disease.42 This number varies widely, likely because the definition of “complementary and alternative therapies” is so broad and can include prayer, use of herbal medications, acupuncture, and meditation. In one study of early-stage breast cancer patients, the use of alternative medicine was significantly associated with patients experiencing depressive symptoms, heightened fear of recurrence, greater physical symptoms, and poor sexual satisfaction.42 At 1 year, all patients, both those using complementary and alternative therapies and those using traditional methods of care, experienced an improvement in quality of life.
For patients who do not meet the criteria for clinical depression and have no interest in or access to support groups, it is worth remembering there are other interventions that can facilitate adjustment and diminish symptoms of anxiety. Expressive writing, music, or art therapy and other activity-based therapies may provide the necessary vehicles for self-expression.
Conclusion
Depression clearly affects patients with cancer, and establishing the depression diagnosis is the first step toward progress in treatment. Despite the challenges, diagnosis is possible by establishing that the symptoms of depression are negatively impacting patients' abilities to cope with their circumstances and maintain balance in their lives. It is critical not only to make the diagnosis of depression but also to strongly encourage patients to seek treatment, either through pharmacologic or nonpharmacologic means. While we make every effort to eradicate our patients' malignancies, we owe it to them to work just as diligently to improve their daily lives by treating associated depression.
References2
1 W.F. Pirl, Evidence report on the occurrence, assessment, and treatment of depression in cancer patients, J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 32 (2004), pp. 32–39. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (67)
2 J.S. McDaniel, D.L. Musselman, M.R. Porter, D.A. Reed and C.B. Nemeroff, Depression in patients with cancer: diagnosis, biology, and treatment, Arch Gen Psychiatry 52 (1995), pp. 89–99. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (339)
3 R.W. Trijsburg, F.C.E. Van Knippenberg and S.E. Rijpma, Effects of psychological treatments on cancer patients: a critical review, Psychosom Med 54 (1992), pp. 489–517. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (171)
4 A. Gruneir, T.F. Smith, J. Hirdes and R. Cameron, Depression in patients with advanced illness: an examination of Ontario complex continuing care using the minimum data set 2.0, Palliat Support Care 3 (2005), pp. 99–105. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (6)
5 N.S. Kadan-Lottick, L.C. Vanderwerker, S.D. Block, B. Zhang and H.G. Prigerson, Psychiatric disorders and mental health service use in patients with advanced cancer: a report from the Coping with Cancer Study, Cancer 104 (2005), pp. 2872–2881. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (57)
6 J.L. Steel, D.A. Geller, T.C. Gamblin, M.C. Olek and B.I. Carr, Depression, immunity, and survival in patients with hepatobiliary carcinoma, J Clin Oncol 25 (2007), pp. 4526–4527.
7 W. Pirl, Depression, anxiety, and fatigue. In: B. Chabner, J. Lynch and D. Longo, Editors, Harrison's Manual of Oncology, McGraw-Hill, New York (2008), pp. 190–196.
8 A. Weissman and J. Worden, The existential plight in cancer: significance of the first 100 days, Psychiatr Med 7 (1976), pp. 1–15.
9 C. Lo, C. Zimmermann and A. Rydall et al., Longitudinal study of depressive symptoms in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal and lung cancer, J Clin Oncol 28 (18) (2010), pp. 3084–3089. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (2)
10 National Comprehensive Cancer Network, NCCN practice guidelines for the management of psychosocial distress, Oncology (Williston Park) 13 (1999), pp. 113–147.
11 National Comprehensive Cancer Network, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology, Distress management (2010) V.1. www.nccn.org.
12 M. Fisch, Treatment of depression in cancer, J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 32 (2004), pp. 105–111. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (45)
13 H.T. Mermelstein and L. Lesko, Depression in patients with cancer, Psychooncology 1 (1992), pp. 199–215. Full Text via CrossRef
14 American Psychiatric Association, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.), American Psychiatric Association, Washington DC (1994).
15 M.L. Chen, C.T. Yu and C.H. Yang, Sleep disturbances and quality of life in lung cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, Lung Cancer 62 (2008), pp. 391–400. Article |
16 J. Savard, S. Simard and J. Blanchet et al., Prevalence, clinical characteristics, and risk factors for insomnia in the context of breast cancer, Sleep 24 (2001), pp. 583–590. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (81)
17 J. Savard and C.M. Morin, Insomnia in the context of cancer: a review of a neglected problem, J Clin Oncol 19 (2001), pp. 895–908. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (147)
18 O.G. Palesh, J.A. Roscoe, K.M. Mustian, T. Roth, J. Savard, S. Ancoli-Israel, C. Heckler, J.Q. Purnell, M.C. Janelsins and G.R. Morrow, Prevalence, demographics, and psychological associations of sleep disruption in patients with cancer: University of Rochester Cancer Center–Community Clinical Oncology Program, J Clin Oncol 28 (2010), pp. 292–298. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (7)
19 I. Fras, E.M. Litin and J.S. Pearson, Comparison of psychiatric symptoms in carcinoma of the pancreas with those in some other intraabdominal neoplasms, Am J Psychiatry 123 (1967), pp. 1553–1562. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (38)
20 R.T. Joffe, D.R. Rubinow, K.D. Denicoff, M. Maher and W.F. Sindelar, Depression and carcinoma of the pancreas, Gen Hosp Psychiatry 8 (1986), pp. 241–245. Article |
21 R.P. Morton, A.D.M. Davies, J. Baker, G.A. Baker and P.M. Stell, Quality of life in treated head and neck cancer patients: a preliminary report, Clin Otolaryngol 9 (1984), pp. 181–185. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (59)
22 , Micromedex 2.0. DrugPoint summary, interferon alfa-2b http://www.micromedex.com/2 Accessed July 1, 2010.
23 D. Spiegel, A 43-year-old woman coping with cancer, JAMA 281 (4) (1999), pp. 371–377.
24 D.F. Cella, S.M. Mahon and M.I. Donovan, Cancer recurrence as a traumatic event, Behav Med 16 (1990), pp. 15–22. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (126)
25 H.M. Chochinov, K.G. Wilson, M. Enns and S. Lander, “Are you depressed?”: Screening for depression in the terminally ill, Am J Psychiatry 154 (1997), pp. 674–676. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (225)
26 E. Bruera, L. Driver and E. Barnes et al., Patient controlled methylphenidate for cancer-related fatigue: a preliminary report, Proc Annu Meet Am Soc Clin Oncol 22 (2003), p. 737.
27 J. Homsi, K.A. Nelson and N. Sarhill et al., A phase II study of methylphenidate for depression in advanced cancer, Am J Hosp Palliat Care 18 (2001), pp. 403–407. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (49)
28 G.R. Kalash, Psychotropic drug metabolism in the cancer patient: clinical aspects of management of potential drug interactions, Psychooncology 7 (1998), pp. 307–320. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (4)
29 E.C. Devine and S.K. Westlake, The effects of psychoeducational care provided by adults with cancer: meta-analysis of 116 studies, Oncol Nurs Forum 22 (1995), pp. 1369–1381. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (192)
30 T.J. Meyer and M.M. Mark, Effects of psychosocial interventions with adult cancer patients: a meta-analysis of randomized experiments, Health Psychol 14 (1995), pp. 101–108. Abstract |
31 S.A. Newell, R.W. Sanson-Fisher and N.J. Savolainen, Systematic review of psychological therapies for cancer patients: overview and recommendations for the future, J Natl Cancer Inst 94 (2002), pp. 558–584. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (201)
32 T. Sheard and P. Maguire, The effect of psychological interventions on anxiety and depression in cancer patients; results of two meta-analyses, Br J Cancer 80 (1999), pp. 1770–1780. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (210)
33 S. Williams and J. Dale, The effectiveness of treatment for depression/depressive symptoms in adults with cancer: a systematic review, Br J Cancer 94 (2006), pp. 372–390. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (60)
34 D. Spiegel, J.R. Bloom, H.C. Kraemer and E. Gottheil, Effect of psychosocial treatment on survival of patients with metastatic breast cancer, Lancet 2 (1989), pp. 888–891. Article |
35 L.F. Berkman and S.L. Syme, Social networks, host resistence, and mortality: a nine year follow-up study of Alameda County residents, Am J Epidemiol 109 (1979), pp. 186–204. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (1297)
36 D.P. Funch and J. Marshall, The role of stress, social support and age in survival from breast cancer, J Psychosom Res 27 (1983), pp. 77–83. Abstract |
37 D.C. Ganster and B. Victor, The impact of social support on mental and physical health, Br J Med Psychol 61 (1988), pp. 17–36. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (17)
38 F.I. Fawzy, N. Cousins, N.W. Fawzy, M.E. Kemeny, R. Elashoff and D. Morton, A structured psychiatric intervention for cancer patients: I: Changes over time in methods of coping and affective disturbance, Arch Gen Psychiatry 47 (1990), pp. 720–725. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (331)
39 D. Spiegel and J.R. Bloom, Group therapy and hypnosis reduce metastatic breast carcinoma pain, Psychosom Med 45 (1983), pp. 333–339. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (192)
40 T. Gansler, C. Kaw, C. Crammer and T. Smith, A population-based study of prevalence of complementary methods use by cancer survivors: a report from the American Cancer Society's studies of cancer survivors, Cancer 113 (2008), pp. 1048–1057. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (13)
41 M.A. Richardson, T. Sanders, J.L. Palmer, A. Greisinger and S.E. Singletary, Complementary/alternative medicine use in a comprehensive cancer center and the implications for oncology, J Clin Oncol 18 (13) (2000), pp. 2505–2514. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (407)
42 H.J. Burstein, S. Gelber, E. Guadagnoli and J.C. Weeks, Use of alternative medicine by women with early-stage breast cancer, N Engl J Med 340 (22) (1999), pp. 1733–1739. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (352)
How we do it
Article Outline
Data summarized in an excellent review by Pirl published in 2004 show that up to one in five Americans will experience depressive symptoms over the course of their lifetime and that approximately 10%–25% of cancer patients meet criteria for clinical depression.[1] and [2] As our ability to treat depression has improved over the years, thanks in great part to advances in pharmacology and behavioral therapies, it is now critically important to recognize and treat this debilitating disease in individuals with cancer.3 Evidence exists that untreated depression is associated with a worse overall survival for some cancer patients and, paradoxically, that up to half of patients with cancer and concurrent depression are undertreated or receive no treatment.[4], [5] and [6] Medical oncologists receive little or no formal training in psycho-oncology yet are often faced with patients who exhibit changes in mood and become progressively disabled by psychiatric symptoms. Methodical assessment and frequent inquiry may identify patients with cancer and depression.
Peeling Back the Onion: Sorting through Symptoms to Reach a Diagnosis
A diagnosis of cancer often precipitates intense emotions such as fear, sadness, and sometimes anger.2 Individuals who may never have given much thought to their own death are confronted with the very real possibility of a shortened life and future suffering. Roles and relationships shift, careers are interrupted, and daily routines may be sacrificed to make room for cancer treatment. Add to this the financial worries that often accompany a serious illness and it is not surprising that patients may require some level of professional guidance or intervention in order to cope with the crisis. As a quick rule of thumb, it takes about 3–4 weeks after diagnosis to adjust, and during that period it is quite normal for patients to experience intense feelings.7 Weissman and Worden, among the first psychiatrists to study distress in cancer patients, described an acute syndrome of distress over existential plight with the diagnosis and with a recurrence that lasts about 100 days.8 Most individuals, given time and adequate support, will find the inner resources to cope with distressing symptoms and find a new normal. Not all do however, and it is important for oncologists to inquire at regular intervals about how the patient is feeling and coping with illness. A recent study by Lo et al9 found that predictors of depressive symptoms in patients with solid tumors included younger age, antidepressant use at baseline, lower self-esteem and spiritual well-being, greater attachment anxiety, hopelessness, the physical burden of symptoms, and proximity to death.
To facilitate screening for emotional distress in the context of a diagnosis of cancer, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) established guidelines that provide a reproducible algorithm for triaging patients with a suspected depression to mental health professionals.10 These guidelines were updated in 2010 and are widely available.11 The consensus definition of distress in cancer is “a multifactorial, unpleasant emotional experience of a psychological (cognitive, behavioral, emotional), social, and/or spiritual nature that may interfere with the ability to cope effectively with cancer, its physical symptoms and its treatment. Distress extends along a continuum, ranging from common feelings of vulnerability, sadness, and fears to problems that can become disabling, such as depression, anxiety, panic, social isolation, and existential and spiritual crisis.”10 By framing distress as a very broad concept, the guidelines separate the broad gamut of normal emotions from the distinct psychiatric syndromes of anxiety and depression which require specialized professional interventions.12
Distress may be a normal response to a threat or crisis, but depressive symptoms should alert the clinician that something more serious is going on. The appearance of persistent symptoms of dysphoria, hopelessness, helplessness, loss of self-esteem, feelings of worthlessness, and suicidal ideation indicates a psychiatric illness.13 The DSM-IV defines a major depressive episode as experiencing either dysphoria or anhedonia in addition to at least five somatic symptoms for at least 2 weeks.14 These somatic symptoms may well overlap with those experienced by patients as a direct result of their cancer or its treatment. Among these are changes in appetite, weight, or sleep; fatigue; loss of energy; and a diminished ability to think or concentrate. The challenge for clinicians is to tease apart the physiologic consequences of disease and side effects of medications from those due to profound and disabling psychiatric syndromes.
Many symptoms caused by cancer itself can be confused with neurovegetative symptoms of depression. Pain is known to modulate the reporting of symptoms; fatigue and weight changes are often secondary to cancer treatment or the illness itself. Patients often feel fatigued due to the heightened metabolic state present when there is a high burden of disease, and cytokines elevated in malignancy have been shown to cause fatigue and appetite suppression. There is a growing literature regarding the development of aberrant sleep patterns in patients with cancer, which can be mistaken for depressive daytime somnolence or insomnia.[15], [16], [17] and [18] Some cancers themselves are associated with a higher risk of depressive symptoms, including pancreatic cancer and cancers of the head and neck.[19], [20] and [21] Chemotherapy can also induce fatigue, insomnia, and anhedonia, as can the steroids often used concomitantly with chemotherapeutic or biologic agents. Interferon-alpha, used to treat melanoma and renal cell cancer, has been associated with depression in 3%–40% of patients; and there is a 5% rate of suicidal thoughts.22
Cancer patients exhibit a range of coping styles and varying degrees of emotional resiliency. If a patient is able to process his or her emotional responses to the physical threat of a diagnosis and becomes mobilized in such a way that he or she obtains useful information and is able to prioritize concerns, obtain social support, and move toward a coherent treatment plan, one can easily assume that he or she is coping well.23 On the other hand, if the patient appears unable to make a decision about treatment, avoids addressing or discussing important issues, and retreats from family, friends, and/or the medical team, one can infer that he or she is having trouble coping and could benefit from a referral to a mental health professional for evaluation.23 Known risk factors for poor coping and for developing depression include social isolation, use of few coping strategies, a history of recent losses or multiple obligations, inflexible coping strategies, the presence of pain, and socioeconomic pressures.[8] and [23] In extreme cases, patients may resort to deferring decisions or simply denying the problem.
Keep in mind there may also be cultural or personal barriers that interfere with a timely and accurate diagnosis of depression.12 Many families believe strongly in the “power of positive thinking” and need to feel that their family member is a “fighter.” This type of encouragement may at times be helpful for a patient, but it may not leave a safe opening for the expression of fear, pain, or depressed mood. If the matriarch or patriarch of the family has supported everyone else through the difficulties in their lives, she or he may not feel able to show weakness and seek help for depression. This can be a difficult patient to diagnose as the only clue to suffering may be easy to miss. In fact, if there are very few questions or complaints when there is clear physical suffering, one needs to worry that the patient is unable to express his or her deep concerns. The clinician who spots this situation early on may be able to lead the patient in the direction of expressing his or her feelings by suggesting that others in similar situations also experience stress or sadness. Finding a private time to talk, away from family members, may also provide a more comfortable environment for a candid conversation.
If we think of the disease trajectory as a marathon, then we can learn to recognize certain landmarks along the course and remember that these pose enormous challenges to patients. In addition to receiving the initial diagnosis, the period of active treatment, the conclusion of active treatment, and the time of disease recurrence pose specific challenges and precipitate intense emotions. Disease recurrence is a time of great anxiety when there is a need to plan for future treatment and an upheaval of the timeline a patient may have made.24
Should the Oncologist Offer Treatment for Depression?
Oncologists assume an important role in the medical care of their patients and often initiate or modify treatments for other medical conditions. If a patient develops hypertension or diabetes during or as a direct consequence of treatment, most oncologists feel comfortable starting medication and may then comanage the patient with internists. Primary care physicians and oncologists are typically familiar with a few basic antidepressants, and many are willing to prescribe these for patients who meet the diagnostic criteria for depression, especially since it takes weeks to achieve adequate therapeutic levels for many of these drugs. Recognizing the presence of depression is thus a key diagnostic intervention.
Several efforts have been made to develop self-report screening inventories that can improve the accuracy and efficiency of detection of depressive symptoms and are brief enough to administer in the setting of an office visit. Some tools have been validated and correlate well with more detailed inventories, although the gold standard remains the detailed psychiatric interview.25 A single-item interview screening proposed by Chochinov et al25 years ago performs as well as or better than longer instruments and is remarkably simple to remember. Asking patients “Are you depressed?” in a brief screening interview correctly identified the eventual diagnostic outcome of every patient in initial studies and has been adopted broadly by oncologists and palliative care clinicians caring for patients who are terminally ill.
We support immediate referral to a psychiatrist for any patient who exhibits symptoms of depression, and there is universal agreement that any person who may be suicidal should be referred immediately for urgent psychiatric evaluation. In practice, however, there are two main barriers to successful referrals for those who may be considered to be “managing” and not considered at risk for suicide: Patients are sometimes resistant to or reluctant to accept a recommendation for referral, and the shortage of mental health professionals trained in psycho-oncology limits quick access. It is, therefore, not surprising that cancer clinicians often initiate pharmacologic therapy for depression and provide emotional support to patients and families. Kadan-Lottick and colleagues5 reported that although 90% of patients agreed that they were willing to receive treatment for emotional distress associated with their cancer diagnosis, only 28% accessed treatment. Approximately 55% of the patients diagnosed in that study with major psychiatric disorders did not access treatment. It has been our experience that oncologists are often willing to initiate pharmacologic therapy while the patient is waiting for an appointment with a specialist.
The most frequently prescribed antidepressant medications are the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). Frequently, the choice of antidepressant is based on the side-effect profile of a particular medication as there are many effective options, none of which appears to be significantly more efficacious than the others.7 Antidepressants considered to be sedating may not be the preferred option for patients who have significant neurovegetative symptoms including fatigue and low energy. Conversely, antidepressants that cause anorexia and insomnia are poor options for patients experiencing sleepless nights and continued weight loss. Options for more activating antidepressants include sertraline, escitalopram, bupropion, and venlafaxine, while more sedating antidepressant medications include paroxetine and mirtazapine.7 Methylphenidate, a drug frequently used to treat attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, has been very effective in patients with low energy and anorexia.[26] and [27] Starting at a low dose in the morning, especially in the elderly, helps to minimize tachycardia and sleeplessness, which can be unwanted side effects of this medication. Lastly, a key point when choosing a medication is the potential for drug–drug interactions. Multiple antidepressants, including paroxetine, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, and bupropion, interact with the cytochrome P-450 2D6 system, making them more likely to interact with medications commonly used in oncology.28 One example of this potential for interaction occurs with tamoxifen, which is metabolized into its active form, endoxifen, by the cytochrome P-450 2D6 system. It may not be available in adequate concentrations in the setting of antidepressant medications like paroxetine, an inhibitor of cytochrome P-450 2D6. Whether this ultimately influences the efficacy of anticancer treatment is still under investigation.
While psychotherapy is outside the scope of most practicing oncologists, it may be helpful to provide patients with some guidance about the range of available therapies. Individuals may express a clear preference for nonpharmacologic treatments, so it is important for cancer clinicians to familiarize themselves with a few such options. These include cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), intensive psychotherapy, and group therapy. These interventions can aid patients in reducing anxiety and in strengthening their personal coping mechanisms. Studies to rigorously evaluate the efficacy of these interventions have been challenging to complete because of the lack of a “gold standard” definition of depression in cancer, no consensus on an appropriate length of treatment, no clear way to monitor compliance with a given therapy, and varied definitions of appropriate end points.12 Despite the challenges, several meta-analyses have been compiled to sort through the data. The more commonly referenced meta-analyses have included thousands of patients undergoing nonpharmacologic interventions ranging from individual psychotherapy to group therapy as far back as 1954.[29], [30], [31], [32], [33] and [34] None of the interventions indicate that any particular therapy is more clearly beneficial than another.
CBT has received recent attention and appears to be a good option for many cancer patients with depression. A review by Williams and Dale in the British Journal of Cancer in 200633 outlines 10 studies focusing on the use of CBT in cancer patients with mixed results. Of these, only two found CBT to be ineffective, whereas the rest demonstrated some benefit in reduction of depressive symptoms and improvement in quality of life for patients with a wide assortment of primary malignancies. Most found early improvement in symptoms but not necessarily long-term persistence of the initial positive effects. Group therapy has also been thoroughly studied in depression in cancer patients since Spiegel's landmark study in the late 1980s and has been shown to decrease anxiety, depression, and pain and to increase effective coping.[34], [35], [36], [37], [38] and [39] Many patients report positive experiences in support groups, but others express an intuitive fear that listening to other patients' concerns and negative thoughts will impair their own overall mood and outlook. Not all patients feel comfortable expressing their personal fears, doubts, and frustrations with a group of relative strangers. Any of these concerns is a sufficient reason to advise more personalized attention in a private therapy session with a specialist. Choosing between individual psychotherapy, group, and family therapy can be construed as another aspect of providing truly “personalized” cancer care.
A substantial number of patients worldwide turn to complementary and alternative therapies for the treatment of cancer and cancer-related symptoms.[40], [41] and [42] Estimates of the prevalence of complementary and alternative therapy use vary widely due to differences in definitions and inaccuracies in self-reporting and patient selection. There are emerging data that up to 60%–80% of cancer patients avail themselves of some form of alternative therapy at some point in the trajectory of their disease.42 This number varies widely, likely because the definition of “complementary and alternative therapies” is so broad and can include prayer, use of herbal medications, acupuncture, and meditation. In one study of early-stage breast cancer patients, the use of alternative medicine was significantly associated with patients experiencing depressive symptoms, heightened fear of recurrence, greater physical symptoms, and poor sexual satisfaction.42 At 1 year, all patients, both those using complementary and alternative therapies and those using traditional methods of care, experienced an improvement in quality of life.
For patients who do not meet the criteria for clinical depression and have no interest in or access to support groups, it is worth remembering there are other interventions that can facilitate adjustment and diminish symptoms of anxiety. Expressive writing, music, or art therapy and other activity-based therapies may provide the necessary vehicles for self-expression.
Conclusion
Depression clearly affects patients with cancer, and establishing the depression diagnosis is the first step toward progress in treatment. Despite the challenges, diagnosis is possible by establishing that the symptoms of depression are negatively impacting patients' abilities to cope with their circumstances and maintain balance in their lives. It is critical not only to make the diagnosis of depression but also to strongly encourage patients to seek treatment, either through pharmacologic or nonpharmacologic means. While we make every effort to eradicate our patients' malignancies, we owe it to them to work just as diligently to improve their daily lives by treating associated depression.
References2
1 W.F. Pirl, Evidence report on the occurrence, assessment, and treatment of depression in cancer patients, J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 32 (2004), pp. 32–39. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (67)
2 J.S. McDaniel, D.L. Musselman, M.R. Porter, D.A. Reed and C.B. Nemeroff, Depression in patients with cancer: diagnosis, biology, and treatment, Arch Gen Psychiatry 52 (1995), pp. 89–99. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (339)
3 R.W. Trijsburg, F.C.E. Van Knippenberg and S.E. Rijpma, Effects of psychological treatments on cancer patients: a critical review, Psychosom Med 54 (1992), pp. 489–517. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (171)
4 A. Gruneir, T.F. Smith, J. Hirdes and R. Cameron, Depression in patients with advanced illness: an examination of Ontario complex continuing care using the minimum data set 2.0, Palliat Support Care 3 (2005), pp. 99–105. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (6)
5 N.S. Kadan-Lottick, L.C. Vanderwerker, S.D. Block, B. Zhang and H.G. Prigerson, Psychiatric disorders and mental health service use in patients with advanced cancer: a report from the Coping with Cancer Study, Cancer 104 (2005), pp. 2872–2881. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (57)
6 J.L. Steel, D.A. Geller, T.C. Gamblin, M.C. Olek and B.I. Carr, Depression, immunity, and survival in patients with hepatobiliary carcinoma, J Clin Oncol 25 (2007), pp. 4526–4527.
7 W. Pirl, Depression, anxiety, and fatigue. In: B. Chabner, J. Lynch and D. Longo, Editors, Harrison's Manual of Oncology, McGraw-Hill, New York (2008), pp. 190–196.
8 A. Weissman and J. Worden, The existential plight in cancer: significance of the first 100 days, Psychiatr Med 7 (1976), pp. 1–15.
9 C. Lo, C. Zimmermann and A. Rydall et al., Longitudinal study of depressive symptoms in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal and lung cancer, J Clin Oncol 28 (18) (2010), pp. 3084–3089. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (2)
10 National Comprehensive Cancer Network, NCCN practice guidelines for the management of psychosocial distress, Oncology (Williston Park) 13 (1999), pp. 113–147.
11 National Comprehensive Cancer Network, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology, Distress management (2010) V.1. www.nccn.org.
12 M. Fisch, Treatment of depression in cancer, J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 32 (2004), pp. 105–111. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (45)
13 H.T. Mermelstein and L. Lesko, Depression in patients with cancer, Psychooncology 1 (1992), pp. 199–215. Full Text via CrossRef
14 American Psychiatric Association, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.), American Psychiatric Association, Washington DC (1994).
15 M.L. Chen, C.T. Yu and C.H. Yang, Sleep disturbances and quality of life in lung cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, Lung Cancer 62 (2008), pp. 391–400. Article |
16 J. Savard, S. Simard and J. Blanchet et al., Prevalence, clinical characteristics, and risk factors for insomnia in the context of breast cancer, Sleep 24 (2001), pp. 583–590. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (81)
17 J. Savard and C.M. Morin, Insomnia in the context of cancer: a review of a neglected problem, J Clin Oncol 19 (2001), pp. 895–908. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (147)
18 O.G. Palesh, J.A. Roscoe, K.M. Mustian, T. Roth, J. Savard, S. Ancoli-Israel, C. Heckler, J.Q. Purnell, M.C. Janelsins and G.R. Morrow, Prevalence, demographics, and psychological associations of sleep disruption in patients with cancer: University of Rochester Cancer Center–Community Clinical Oncology Program, J Clin Oncol 28 (2010), pp. 292–298. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (7)
19 I. Fras, E.M. Litin and J.S. Pearson, Comparison of psychiatric symptoms in carcinoma of the pancreas with those in some other intraabdominal neoplasms, Am J Psychiatry 123 (1967), pp. 1553–1562. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (38)
20 R.T. Joffe, D.R. Rubinow, K.D. Denicoff, M. Maher and W.F. Sindelar, Depression and carcinoma of the pancreas, Gen Hosp Psychiatry 8 (1986), pp. 241–245. Article |
21 R.P. Morton, A.D.M. Davies, J. Baker, G.A. Baker and P.M. Stell, Quality of life in treated head and neck cancer patients: a preliminary report, Clin Otolaryngol 9 (1984), pp. 181–185. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (59)
22 , Micromedex 2.0. DrugPoint summary, interferon alfa-2b http://www.micromedex.com/2 Accessed July 1, 2010.
23 D. Spiegel, A 43-year-old woman coping with cancer, JAMA 281 (4) (1999), pp. 371–377.
24 D.F. Cella, S.M. Mahon and M.I. Donovan, Cancer recurrence as a traumatic event, Behav Med 16 (1990), pp. 15–22. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (126)
25 H.M. Chochinov, K.G. Wilson, M. Enns and S. Lander, “Are you depressed?”: Screening for depression in the terminally ill, Am J Psychiatry 154 (1997), pp. 674–676. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (225)
26 E. Bruera, L. Driver and E. Barnes et al., Patient controlled methylphenidate for cancer-related fatigue: a preliminary report, Proc Annu Meet Am Soc Clin Oncol 22 (2003), p. 737.
27 J. Homsi, K.A. Nelson and N. Sarhill et al., A phase II study of methylphenidate for depression in advanced cancer, Am J Hosp Palliat Care 18 (2001), pp. 403–407. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (49)
28 G.R. Kalash, Psychotropic drug metabolism in the cancer patient: clinical aspects of management of potential drug interactions, Psychooncology 7 (1998), pp. 307–320. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (4)
29 E.C. Devine and S.K. Westlake, The effects of psychoeducational care provided by adults with cancer: meta-analysis of 116 studies, Oncol Nurs Forum 22 (1995), pp. 1369–1381. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (192)
30 T.J. Meyer and M.M. Mark, Effects of psychosocial interventions with adult cancer patients: a meta-analysis of randomized experiments, Health Psychol 14 (1995), pp. 101–108. Abstract |
31 S.A. Newell, R.W. Sanson-Fisher and N.J. Savolainen, Systematic review of psychological therapies for cancer patients: overview and recommendations for the future, J Natl Cancer Inst 94 (2002), pp. 558–584. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (201)
32 T. Sheard and P. Maguire, The effect of psychological interventions on anxiety and depression in cancer patients; results of two meta-analyses, Br J Cancer 80 (1999), pp. 1770–1780. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (210)
33 S. Williams and J. Dale, The effectiveness of treatment for depression/depressive symptoms in adults with cancer: a systematic review, Br J Cancer 94 (2006), pp. 372–390. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (60)
34 D. Spiegel, J.R. Bloom, H.C. Kraemer and E. Gottheil, Effect of psychosocial treatment on survival of patients with metastatic breast cancer, Lancet 2 (1989), pp. 888–891. Article |
35 L.F. Berkman and S.L. Syme, Social networks, host resistence, and mortality: a nine year follow-up study of Alameda County residents, Am J Epidemiol 109 (1979), pp. 186–204. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (1297)
36 D.P. Funch and J. Marshall, The role of stress, social support and age in survival from breast cancer, J Psychosom Res 27 (1983), pp. 77–83. Abstract |
37 D.C. Ganster and B. Victor, The impact of social support on mental and physical health, Br J Med Psychol 61 (1988), pp. 17–36. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (17)
38 F.I. Fawzy, N. Cousins, N.W. Fawzy, M.E. Kemeny, R. Elashoff and D. Morton, A structured psychiatric intervention for cancer patients: I: Changes over time in methods of coping and affective disturbance, Arch Gen Psychiatry 47 (1990), pp. 720–725. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (331)
39 D. Spiegel and J.R. Bloom, Group therapy and hypnosis reduce metastatic breast carcinoma pain, Psychosom Med 45 (1983), pp. 333–339. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (192)
40 T. Gansler, C. Kaw, C. Crammer and T. Smith, A population-based study of prevalence of complementary methods use by cancer survivors: a report from the American Cancer Society's studies of cancer survivors, Cancer 113 (2008), pp. 1048–1057. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (13)
41 M.A. Richardson, T. Sanders, J.L. Palmer, A. Greisinger and S.E. Singletary, Complementary/alternative medicine use in a comprehensive cancer center and the implications for oncology, J Clin Oncol 18 (13) (2000), pp. 2505–2514. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (407)
42 H.J. Burstein, S. Gelber, E. Guadagnoli and J.C. Weeks, Use of alternative medicine by women with early-stage breast cancer, N Engl J Med 340 (22) (1999), pp. 1733–1739. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (352)