2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      External validation of life expectancy prognostic models in patients evaluated for palliative radiotherapy at the end‐of‐life

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The TEACHH and Chow models were developed to predict life expectancy (LE) in patients evaluated for palliative radiotherapy (PRT). We sought to validate the TEACHH and Chow models in patients who died within 90 days of PRT consultation.

          Methods

          A retrospective review was conducted on patients evaluated for PRT from 2017 to 2019 who died within 90 days of consultation. Data were collected for the TEACHH and Chow models; one point was assigned for each adverse factor. TEACHH model included: primary site of disease, ECOG performance status, age, prior palliative chemotherapy courses, hospitalization within the last 3 months, and presence of hepatic metastases; patients with 0‐1, 2‐4, and 5‐6 adverse factors were categorized into groups (A, B, and C). The Chow model included non‐breast primary, site of metastases other than bone only, and KPS; patients with 0‐1, 2, or 3 adverse factors were categorized into groups (I, II, and III).

          Results

          A total of 505 patients with a median overall survival of 2.1 months (IQR: 0.7‐2.6) were identified. Based on the TEACHH model, 10 (2.0%), 387 (76.6%), and 108 (21.4%) patients were predicted to live >1 year, >3 months to ≤1 year, and ≤3 months, respectively. Utilizing the Chow model, 108 (21.4%), 250 (49.5%), and 147 (29.1%) patients were expected to live 15.0, 6.5, and 2.3 months, respectively.

          Conclusion

          Neither the TEACHH nor Chow model correctly predict prognosis in a patient population with a survival <3 months. A better predictive tool is required to identify patients with short LE.

          Abstract

          In patients who died within 90 days of consultation for palliative radiotherapy, the TEACHH and Chow models inadequately identified patients at risk of short‐term mortality. Better prognostic models are required to minimize use of unnecessary oncologic treatments among patients seen at the end‐of‐life.

          Related collections

          Most cited references21

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Longitudinal perceptions of prognosis and goals of therapy in patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: results of a randomized study of early palliative care.

          Understanding of prognosis among terminally ill patients impacts medical decision making. The aims of this study were to explore perceptions of prognosis and goals of therapy in patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and to examine the effect of early palliative care on these views over time. Patients with newly diagnosed metastatic NSCLC were randomly assigned to receive either early palliative care integrated with standard oncology care or standard oncology care alone. Participants completed baseline and longitudinal assessments of their perceptions of prognosis and the goals of cancer therapy over a 6-month period. We enrolled 151 participants on the study. Despite having terminal cancer, one third of patients (46 of 145 patients) reported that their cancer was curable at baseline, and a majority (86 of 124 patients) endorsed getting rid of all of the cancer as a goal of therapy. Baseline perceptions of prognosis (ie, curability) and goals of therapy did not differ significantly between study arms. A greater percentage of patients assigned to early palliative care retained or developed an accurate assessment of their prognosis over time (82.5% v 59.6%; P = .02) compared with those receiving standard care. Patients receiving early palliative care who reported an accurate perception of their prognosis were less likely to receive intravenous chemotherapy near the end of life (9.4% v 50%; P = .02). Many patients with newly diagnosed metastatic NSCLC hold inaccurate perceptions of their prognoses. Early palliative care significantly improves patient understanding of prognosis over time, which may impact decision making about care near the end of life.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Discussions of Life Expectancy and Changes in Illness Understanding in Patients With Advanced Cancer

            Purpose Accurate illness understanding enables patients to make informed decisions. Evidence of the influence of prognostic discussions on the accuracy of illness understanding by patients would demonstrate the value of discussions. Methods Recent and past oncology provider-patient discussions about prognosis/life expectancy were examined for their association with changes in illness understanding by patients. Patients (N = 178) with advanced cancers refractory to prior chemotherapy whom oncologists expected to die within 6 months were interviewed before and after a visit in which cancer restaging scan results were discussed. Illness understanding scores were the sum of four indicator variables: patient terminal illness acknowledgment, recognition of incurable disease status, knowledge of the advanced stage of the disease, and expectation to live months as opposed to years. Results Before the restaging scan visit, nine (5%) of 178 patients had completely accurate illness understanding (ie, correctly answered each of the four illness understanding questions). Eighteen patients (10%) reported only recent discussions of prognosis/life expectancy with their oncologists; 68 (38%) reported only past discussions; 24 (13%) reported both recent and past discussions; and 68 (38%) reported that they never had discussions of prognosis/life expectancy with their oncologists. After adjustment for potential confounders (ie, education and race/ethnicity), analysis identified significant, positive changes in illness understanding scores for patients in groups that reported recent only (least-squares mean change score, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.23 to 1.01; P = .002) and both recent and past (least-squares mean change score, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.70; P = 0.028) discussions of prognosis/life expectancy with their oncologists. Conclusion Patients with advanced cancer who report recent discussions of prognosis/life expectancy with their oncologists come to have a better understanding of the terminal nature of their illnesses.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Predictive model for survival in patients with advanced cancer.

              To derive and validate a simple predictive model for survival of patients with metastatic cancer attending a palliative radiotherapy clinic. We described previously a model predicting survival of patients referred for palliative radiotherapy using six prognostic factors: primary cancer site, site of metastases, Karnofsky performance score (KPS), and the fatigue, appetite, and shortness of breath subscales from the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale. Here we simplified the model to include only three factors: primary cancer site, site of metastases, and KPS. Each factor was assigned a value proportional to its prognostic weight, and the weighted scores for each patient were summed to obtain a survival prediction score (SPS). Patients were also grouped according to their number of risk factors (NRF): nonbreast cancer, metastases other than bone, and KPS < or = 60. The three- and six- variable models were evaluated for their ability to predict survival in patients referred during a different time period and of those referred to a different cancer center. A training set of 395 patients, a temporal validation set of 445 patients, and an external validation set of 467 patients were used. The ability of the three- and six-variable models to separate patients into three prognostic groups and to predict their survival was similar using both SPS and NRF methods in the training, temporal, and external validation data sets. There was no statistically significant difference in the performance of the models. The three-variable NRF model is preferred because of its relative simplicity.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                beriwals@upmc.edu
                Journal
                Cancer Med
                Cancer Med
                10.1002/(ISSN)2045-7634
                CAM4
                Cancer Medicine
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                2045-7634
                26 June 2020
                August 2020
                : 9
                : 16 ( doiID: 10.1002/cam4.v9.16 )
                : 5781-5787
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Universidad Central del Caribe School of Medicine Bayamón PR USA
                [ 2 ] Department of Radiation Oncology UPMC Hillman Cancer Center University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine Pittsburgh PA USA
                [ 3 ] Department of Radiation Oncology Mount Carmel Health System Columbus OH USA
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence

                Sushil Beriwal, UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, 300 Halket St., Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA

                Email: beriwals@ 123456upmc.edu

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9955-7674
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4930-3363
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2961-9304
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4920-4595
                Article
                CAM43257
                10.1002/cam4.3257
                7433812
                32592315
                c5df4ca7-8459-4c41-bdd9-cc5080afa29d
                © 2020 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 19 January 2020
                : 08 June 2020
                : 10 June 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 5, Pages: 7, Words: 4991
                Funding
                Funded by: Shadyside Hospital Foundation , open-funder-registry 10.13039/100007454;
                Categories
                Original Research
                Clinical Cancer Research
                Original Research
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                August 2020
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:5.8.6 mode:remove_FC converted:18.08.2020

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                prognosis,radiation therapy,radiotherapy,survival
                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                prognosis, radiation therapy, radiotherapy, survival

                Comments

                Comment on this article