TY - JOUR
T1 - PALLIA 10 score in phase i cancer studies
AU - Ouali, Kaïssa
AU - Mateus, Christine
AU - Laparra, Arianne
AU - Martin Romano, Patricia
AU - Sampetrean, Anda
AU - Vuagnat, Perrine
AU - Varga, Andrea
AU - Champiat, Stephane
AU - Verlingue, Loic
AU - Geraud, Arthur
AU - Marabelle, Aurélien
AU - Hollebecque, Antoine
AU - Gazzah, Anas
AU - Bahleda, Rastilav
AU - Postel Vinay, Sophie
AU - Michot, Jean Marie
AU - Bernard-Tessier, Alice
AU - Bayle, Arnaud
AU - Ribrag, Vincent
AU - Soria, Jean Charles
AU - Scotte, Florian
AU - Massard, Christophe
AU - Pavliuc, Elena
AU - Baldini, Capucine
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
PY - 2022/1/1
Y1 - 2022/1/1
N2 - Objective: Phase I clinical trials usually include patients with advanced disease who have failed standard therapies and should benefit from early palliative care. We try to assess whether PALLIA 10, a score developed in France to help identify patients who might benefit from a palliative care referral, could be used in a phase I department trial. Methods: We assessed PALLIA 10 score and other prognostic factors in patients enrolled in phase I trials at Gustave Roussy Cancer Center prospectively during two periods of time (cohort 1 (C1) and 2 (C2)). A double-blind assessment of the PALLIA 10 score was done in C2 by a palliative care specialist and a nurse. Results: From 1 July 2018 to 1 November 2018 (C1) and from 1 December 2020 to 16 April 2021 (C2), 86 patients were assessed in C1 and 302 in C2. Median PALLIA 10 was very low in both cohorts (median 1, range 1-5 in C1 and 1-8 in C2). On C1 and C2, 12% and 5% of patients had a dedicated palliative consultation. In C2, assessment of PALLIA 10 score was significantly different between palliative care physician (median 5, range 3-8), phase I physician (median 1, range 1-6) and phase I nurse (median 3, range 1-8) (p<0.001). Conclusion: Median PALLIA 10 score was low when assessed by the phase I physician, which suggests the need for a better tool and appropriate clinician's education to implement early palliative care in clinical practice and trials.
AB - Objective: Phase I clinical trials usually include patients with advanced disease who have failed standard therapies and should benefit from early palliative care. We try to assess whether PALLIA 10, a score developed in France to help identify patients who might benefit from a palliative care referral, could be used in a phase I department trial. Methods: We assessed PALLIA 10 score and other prognostic factors in patients enrolled in phase I trials at Gustave Roussy Cancer Center prospectively during two periods of time (cohort 1 (C1) and 2 (C2)). A double-blind assessment of the PALLIA 10 score was done in C2 by a palliative care specialist and a nurse. Results: From 1 July 2018 to 1 November 2018 (C1) and from 1 December 2020 to 16 April 2021 (C2), 86 patients were assessed in C1 and 302 in C2. Median PALLIA 10 was very low in both cohorts (median 1, range 1-5 in C1 and 1-8 in C2). On C1 and C2, 12% and 5% of patients had a dedicated palliative consultation. In C2, assessment of PALLIA 10 score was significantly different between palliative care physician (median 5, range 3-8), phase I physician (median 1, range 1-6) and phase I nurse (median 3, range 1-8) (p<0.001). Conclusion: Median PALLIA 10 score was low when assessed by the phase I physician, which suggests the need for a better tool and appropriate clinician's education to implement early palliative care in clinical practice and trials.
KW - Supportive care
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85137674913&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/spcare-2022-003601
DO - 10.1136/spcare-2022-003601
M3 - Article
C2 - 36041820
AN - SCOPUS:85137674913
SN - 2045-435X
JO - BMJ Supportive and Palliative Care
JF - BMJ Supportive and Palliative Care
M1 - spcare-2022-003601
ER -