[Current status of palliative care for patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer in China: a questionnaire-based survey].
F Wang,D L Chen,Z X Wang,Y He,J Li,S Z Zhang,G Chen,J M Xu,X L Yuan,Y Q Zhang,R H Xu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn441530-20240323-00107
2024-01-01
Abstract:Objective: To analyze the current adoption of palliative care by patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in China. Methods: From 1 March 2023 to 30 June 2023, a questionnaire survey was conducted by random sampling. An exclusive research platform for the Blue Book on Clinical Diagnosis and Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. An online questionnaire was sent to medical oncologists (including chief physicians, associate chief physicians, attending physicians and residents) in general hospitals and oncology hospitals in four major regions of East, Central, South and Northeast China. The questionnaire contained 28 questions requesting basic information about doctors, the number of patients with mCRC, the status of treatment from first to fourth line and beyond, points concerning treatment of pain in patients with mCRC, and expectations for the future. A medical team was responsible for the quality control of data collected, whereas statisticians performed the data cleaning and sorting and statistical analysis. Results: A total of 300 clinical questionnaires were collected, including 217 (72%) from doctors in general hospitals and 83 (28%) from doctors in oncology hospitals. Senior physicians (including associate chief physicians and chief physicians) accounted for 65% of the respondents, attending physicians 30%, and residents 5%. Within 3 months (average for each month), 46.4±26.6% patients were diagnosed with recurrent or unresectable mCRC by each physician, 51.6±26.8% of the patients being in cancer hospitals and 44.4±26.3% in general hospitals. One hundred percent of patients receiving first-line treatment received palliative care, as did 80.3% of those receiving second-line treatment, 58.2% of those receiving third-line treatment, and 35.1% of those receiving ≥fourth-line treatment. The primary factor governing selection of first-line treatment was guideline recommendations, whereas comorbidities and the patients' physical status dictated second line to fourth line treatment. Standard first-line treatment was administered to 93.8% of eligible patients, standard second-line treatment to 94.3%; and standard third-line treatment to 73.5%. First-line therapy included targeted therapy in 63.6% of patients and immunotherapy in 2.8%; second-line therapy included targeted therapy in 63.0% of patients and immunotherapy in 2.0%; third-line therapy included targeted therapy in 59.2% of patients and immunotherapy in 2.2%; and fourth-line therapy included targeted therapy in 48.7% of patients and immunotherapy in 3.1%. First-line treatment lasted an average of 9.6 months, second-line treatment 6.7 months, third-line treatment 4.9 months, and fourth-line treatment 3.7 months. More than 70% of the patients maintained a good quality of life after receiving first and second-line treatment and more than 60% of them had ECOG performance scores of 0-1. After receiving third- and fourth-line treatment, 50%-60% of patients maintained a good quality of life and 40%-50% of them maintained ECOG performance scores of 0-1. The survey also revealed that the main deficiencies in treatment were limited effectiveness of third-line treatment, insufficient availability and opportunity for clinical research, popularity of new drugs or new drug combination strategies, and limited channels for participation in multidisciplinary diagnosis and treatment. Clinicians reported looking forward to participating in more clinical research on new drugs, hearing about the experience of experts in the field, and discovery of new targets and new drugs that increased the options for posterior line treatment of colorectal cancer. Conclusions: This report objectively summarizes the current situation, treatment difficulties, and expectations of frontline physicians concerning management of mCRC, thus providing a basis for decision-making and future direction for the diagnosis and research on treatment of mCRC.