RESUMEN

CONTEXT: Corticosteroids are commonly prescribed in oncology, but few studies have examined its adverse events (AEs) compared to placebo control. OBJECTIVES: Using data from a double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial, we evaluated the association between the dose and duration of dexamethasone and serious AEs. METHODS: This is a pre-planned secondary analysis of the Alleviating Breathlessness in Cancer Patients with Dexamethasone (ABCD) trial in which patients were randomized to dexamethasone 8 mg BID x1 week, then 4 mg BID x1 week or placebo, followed by an optional open-label phase with 4 mg BID x1 week, then 2 mg BID x1 week. The primary outcome was Grade 3+ AEs (CTCAE v4.03). We evaluated the association between AEs and dexamethasone exposure using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 119 cancer patients, 32 received intervention followed by open label (mean exposure 243 mg over 27 days), 47 received intervention with no open label, 20 received placebo followed by open label, and 20 received no dexamethasone. The most common AEs included insomnia (31%), dyspepsia (21%), neuropsychiatric symptoms (18%), and infections (17%). Overall, 38 (32%) had Grade 3+ AEs and 27 (23%) were hospitalized. Patients with the greatest exposure to dexamethasone experienced more Grade 3+ AEs compared to those with no exposure (65% vs. 15%); odds ratio of 15.1 (95% CI 1.4-160.8, P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Greater dexamethasone exposure, even at moderate doses, was associated with more serious AEs. Prescribers should cautiously weigh the risks and benefits of dexamethasone use, especially when considering for palliation of symptoms.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: The quality of the relationship between oncologists and cancer patients has been associated with caregiver bereavement outcomes, but no studies have examined whether the perceived quality of the relationship between cancer caregivers and oncologists is associated with caregiver experiences of end-of-life care or psychological adjustment after the patient's death. METHODS: We conducted secondary analyses of data collected in the Values and Options in Cancer Care (VOICE) study, a randomized controlled trial of an intervention that improved communication between oncologists and patients/caregivers (n = 204 dyads). At study entry, we assessed caregivers' experiences with the oncologist using four items from the Human Connection Scale. Following patients' deaths, we assessed bereaved caregivers' experiences with end-of-life cancer care (Quality of Death; Peace, Equanimity, and Acceptance in the Cancer Experience [PEACE]; Caregiver Evaluation of the Quality of End-of-Life Care [CEQUEL]; and modified Decision Regret scales) and psychological adjustment (Prolonged Grief Disorder-13 and Purpose in Life scales). We conducted multivariable regressions examining prospective associations between caregiver experiences with the oncologist at study entry and outcome variables. RESULTS: Data were collected from 105 caregivers of patients who died during the course of the study. Positive experience with the oncologist was prospectively associated with better experiences of end-of-life care, as reflected in better quality of death (estimate = 0.33, SE = 0.14, p = 0.02), PEACE (estimate = 0.11, SE = 0.05, p = 0.04), and decisional regret (estimate = - 0.16, SE = 0.06, p = 0.01). Caregivers' experience with the oncologist was not significantly associated with indicators of psychological adjustment. CONCLUSION: Caregivers' early experiences with oncologists may affect their experiences of the patient's end-of-life care.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Voluntary stopping of eating and drinking (VSED) is a deliberate, self-initiated attempt to hasten death in the setting of suffering refractory to optimal palliative interventions or prolonged dying that a person finds intolerable. Individuals who consider VSED tend to be older, have a serious but not always imminently terminal illness, place a high value on independence, and have significant illness burden. VSED can theoretically be performed independent of clinician assistance and therefore avoids many of the ethical and legal concerns associated with physician-assisted dying or other palliative measures of last resort, However, VSED is an intense process fraught with new sources of somatic and emotional suffering for individuals and their caregivers, so VSED is best supervised by an experienced, well-informed clinician who can provide appropriate pre-intervention assessment, anticipatory guidance, medical treatment of symptoms, and emotional support. Before initiation of VSED, clinicians should carefully screen for inadequately treated psychiatric conditions, unaddressed symptoms, existential suffering, and evidence of coercion-consultation from palliative medicine, psychiatry, or ethics is often indicated. The most common symptoms encountered after starting VSED are extreme thirst, hunger, dysuria, progressive disability, delirium, and somnolence. Although physiologically similar to cessation of artificial nutrition and hydration, the onset and management of symptoms is often different. We propose an organized system for evaluating individual appropriateness for VSED, anticipatory guidance, and management of symptoms associated with VSED. A brief review of ethical and legal considerations follows.

Asunto(s)