Citations

229 Background: Modern clinical practice places time restrictions on the amount of information and processing that can be done in a typical office visit. Meeting patient needs within the healthcare system is often inefficient and ineffective, contributing to patient and clinician dissatisfaction and suboptimal outcomes. We developed a point-of-care case management system for oncology clinical practices adapted from an algorithm initially designed for patients with diabetes. The system’s goal is to obtain patient-reported quality of life (QOL) outcomes and provide clinicians with information regarding QOL issues to address. Methods: Literature review and focus groups of oncology patients were used to identify key patient concerns. The program was adapted for cancer patients to collect the identified patient concern including QOL, fatigue, pain and other cancer-specific issues scored on a scale of 0-10. Suggested actions and available resources were identified for the patient/clinician based on the issue selected. We performed a pilot study involving 20 cancer patients to assess feasibility, and administered a “was it worth it survey” (WIWI). Results: The resultant hematology/oncology electronic system includes a set of eight primary “buttons”: Personal Relationships, Emotional health, Physical healthy, Cancer diagnosis and treatment, Health behaviors, Money, Care planning and Something else. Every “button” was selected, most commonly Cancer diagnosis and treatment 6/20 (30%). The median (range) reported QOL, fatigue and pain were 7 (1-10), 4 (0-8), 2 (0-8), respectively. The average completion of the tool took 4 minutes. One hundred percent of patients who took the survey thought it was worth it, would participate again and recommend it to others. Conclusions: The system was quick and easy to utilize in a small pilot of patients. All of the identified categories were chosen and relevant to our patient population. This tool has the potential to improve patient well-being and clinical outcomes, reduce the burden on clinicians and distribute case management activities to the most appropriate providers. Next steps include initiating a larger prospective protocol to assess if this tool improves QOL over time.

AbstractPatients with light chain amyloidosis (AL) often have delayed diagnosis and present with significant symptomatology; this may result in decreased quality of life (QOL). We prospectively employ a “Hematology Patient Reported Symptom Screen” (HPRSS), which is three questions about fatigue, pain, and QOL, scored 0–10. The aim of this study is to better understand QOL and determine if HPRSS parameters predict for clinical outcomes. From 2009 to 2014, 302 newly diagnosed AL patients were included. Baseline median scores [interquartile range] for fatigue, pain, and QOL were 6 [3,7], 2 [0,5], 5 [3,8], respectively. Median overall survival was 53 months, with 102 (34%) deaths in the first year. There were significant differences in baseline HPRSS between those that lived longer than one year and early death patients in the domains of fatigue (5 [IQR 3, 7] vs. 7 [IQR 5, 8], P < 0.0001) and QOL (6 [IQR 4, 8] vs. 5 [IQR 3, 7], P = 0.006). On univariate analysis fatigue, QOL, physician‐reported performance status, autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT), and Mayo stage were prognostic for survival. On multivariate analysis Mayo stage, ASCT, and baseline fatigue remained independently prognostic. When analyses were restricted to the 125 patients with HPRSS measurements at 12 months, we found that over time QOL scores improved significantly 6 [IQR 3.5, 8] → 7 [IQR 5, 8] (P = 0.01). Asking AL patients to rate their fatigue and QOL has predictive value. Baseline patient reported fatigue is an independent prognostic factor for survival. Survival at one year was associated with significant improvement in QOL.

Key Points Significant improvement in outcome is a reality for newly diagnosed AL amyloidosis in the past decade. Six-month mortality among transplant ineligible patients has declined since 2005.

Developing a systematic approach to hospital discharges can lead to improvements and serve a model for other inpatient wards.

AbstractImmunoglobulin light chain (AL) Amyloidosis is a condition whereby misfolded proteins generated by plasma cells deposit in tissues causing organ dysfunction. Chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplant when eligible are standard treatment options. Several studies report long‐term outcomes of patients post‐transplant. However, there is a paucity of literature describing outcomes of relapsed patients post‐transplant. We performed a retrospective study to assess outcomes and therapies employed upon relapse after transplant. Between 1996 and 2009, 410 patients received transplant at the Mayo Clinic as first‐line therapy. Of those patients, 42 (10%) died within 3 months of transplant, 64 (16%) died without documented relapse, 158 (38%) were alive without documented progression, and 146 (36%) had documented progression. Those 146 patients are the subject of our study, and their median time to hematologic relapse/progression was 23.6 months (95%CI 18.3, 26.3 months). Their median overall survival and 5‐yrs overall survival from post‐transplant relapse/progression was 51.7 months (95%CI 34.1–62.3) and 39%, respectively. The most common first regimen for treatment after relapse was lenalidomide or thalidomide. In conclusion, our study indicates that patients with AL amyloidosis fare well post‐transplant relapse/progression. Additionally, it provides a yardstick to design clinical trials to determine best treatment options.