Advertisement


Joseph A. Greer, PhD, on Lung Cancer: Telehealth vs In-Person Palliative Care

2024 ASCO Annual Meeting

Advertisement

Joseph A. Greer, PhD, of Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, discusses study findings showing the merits of delivering early palliative care via telehealth vs in person to patients with advanced lung cancer. Using telemedicine in this way may potentially improve access to and more broadly disseminate this evidence-based care model (LBA3).



Transcript

Disclaimer: This video transcript has not been proofread or edited and may contain errors.
We've seen tremendous breakthroughs in novel therapeutics for lung cancer, which is incredibly exciting. At the same time, most patients with advanced lung cancer will, at some point along their disease trajectory, experience disabling physical and psychological symptoms, poor quality of life, financial stressors, and often, functional changes and worries about what the future might hold. Their caregivers, their loved ones, their friends and family share in this distress. To address these unmet needs, ASCO and other professional societies have recommended the early integration of palliative and oncology care from the time of diagnosis of advanced cancer. These guidelines are based on evidence from multiple clinical trials demonstrating the efficacy of early palliative care for improving quality of life, mood symptoms, coping, and other key outcomes in this vulnerable population. However, and unfortunately, most patients and their families do not receive this evidence-based care due to multiple barriers, chief among them being the limited availability of specialty trained palliative care clinicians. As our team was conceiving of a way to overcome these barriers, one potential solution that seemed highly feasible and potentially acceptable was the use of telehealth to deliver video visits for early palliative care. Therefore, we constructed a large-scale comparative effectiveness trial to test the delivery of early palliative care, either via video visits or in-person visits, for patients with advanced lung cancer and their families. The primary aim was to assess the equivalence of these two modalities on patient-reported quality of life at 24 weeks. We enrolled 1,250 patients and 548 caregivers, and randomly assigned them in a one-to-one fashion, either to early integrated palliative care delivered via video or early integrated palliative care delivered in person, in clinic. Those patients followed the same protocol in both study groups by meeting with the palliative care clinician at least every four weeks over the course of their illness. In addition, a patient and their caregiver would complete self-report measures of quality of life, satisfaction with care, their mood symptoms, and other self-report measures prior to randomization, and then again every 12 weeks up through 48 weeks. In our analysis of these data, we found that the two study groups demonstrated equivalent effects on patient-reported quality of life at 24 weeks. In addition, patients and caregivers also similarly reported no difference in their satisfaction with care whether the delivery of the care was via video or in person. And lastly, patients and caregivers did not report any differences in their mood symptoms. We are very pleased with these findings showing the equivalence between these two modalities for improving patient's quality of life as well as their caregiver outcomes. These findings have implications for improving access to early integrated palliative care, particularly for patients who live in far distances from their clinics, as well as for those who may be frail or have comorbid conditions that make getting to the clinic very challenging. Our hope is that these findings will inform policy decisions and advocates in trying to ensure the coverage of telehealth services for patients with advanced cancer so that they can continue to receive evidence-based early palliative care.

Related Videos

Gynecologic Cancers

Alex Andrea Francoeur, MD, on Endometrial Cancer and Obesity Trends

Alex Andrea Francoeur, MD, of UC Irvine Health, discusses data showing an association between the increasing incidence of endometrial cancer and obesity, which disproportionately affects younger women and women of color. According to Dr. Francoeur, the findings warrant targeted health services and public health interventions to stabilize and ultimately reverse the rising rates (Abstract 5507).

Gynecologic Cancers

Jean-Marc Classe, MD, PhD, on Ovarian Cancer: New Data on Lymphadenectomy From the CARACO Trial

Jean-Marc Classe, MD, PhD, of France’s Nantes Université, discusses phase III results showing that systematic lymphadenectomy should be omitted in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer with clinically negative lymph nodes, as well as those undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy and interval complete surgery (LBA5505).

Kidney Cancer

Toni K. Choueiri, MD, FASCO, on RCC: Biomarker Analysis From the CLEAR Trial

Toni K. Choueiri, MD, FASCO, of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, discusses phase III findings showing that, in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC), the benefit of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab vs sunitinib in overall response rate does not appear to be affected by such factors as geneexpression signatures for tumorinduced proliferation, PDL1 status, or the mutation status of RCC driver genes.

Breast Cancer

Lisa A. Carey, MD, and Kevin Kalinsky, MD, on Advanced Breast Cancer: New Data on Abemaciclib and Fulvestrant From the postMONARCH Trial

Lisa A. Carey, MD, of University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill and UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, and Kevin Kalinsky, MD, of the Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University, discuss the first phase III findings showing a benefit of continued CDK4/6 inhibition with abemaciclib plus fulvestrant, following disease progression in patients with hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer (LBA1001).

Breast Cancer

Pierfranco Conte, MD, on Early-Stage Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Trial Update on Avelumab as Adjuvant Treatment

Pierfranco Conte, MD, of the University of Padua, discusses phase III findings from the A-BRAVE trial, which was designed to evaluate the efficacy of avelumab, an anti–PD-L1 antibody, as adjuvant treatment for patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer who are at high risk (LBA500).

Advertisement

Advertisement




Advertisement