Use of procalcitonin for the differential diagnosis of fever in cancer patients: an observational study

Fever often occurs in cancer patients and the possibility of having a reliable marker for the differential etiological diagnosis is desirable. The aim of this study was to investigate the eligibility of the use of procalcitonin (PCT) in hemato-oncological patients for the differential diagnosis of fever. We prospectively enrolled 98 cancer patients and divided them into two groups: those with active disease and those with non-active disease. Procalcitonin was dosed at Time 0 (recruitment) and at the onset of fever. On enrollment, PCT values were 0.1 ng/mL in 83% patients with active disease, and lower than 0.5 ng/mL in 23%, which is usually considered not suggestive of bacterial infection. Four percent of patients had values over 0.5 ng/mL and these were mainly patients with neuroendocrine tumors or affiliates. On enrollment, there were also no statistically significant differences in PCT values between the two groups of patients. This showed that active cancer is unable by itself to change PCT levels. In the active disease group, 21 episodes of fever due to bacterial infection were registered, and in all of them an increase in PCT values was observed. This demonstrates the ability of PCT to detect an infection-induced fever in cancer patients. Procalcitonin concentrations are not significantly altered by active neoplastic disease. On the contrary, in the course of fever due to a bacterial infection, PCT values increase and can, therefore, be considered a useful tool in the differential diagnosis between infection-induced fever and drug-related or tumor associated-fever. Procalcitonin may be a useful marker of bacterial infection even in cancer patients

Perceptions of Hope Among Bereaved Caregivers of Cancer Patients Who Received Early Palliative Care: A Content and Lexicographic Analysis

BACKGROUND: Oncologists’ fear of taking away hope from patients when proposing early palliative care (EPC) is a barrier to the implementation of this model. This study explores hope perceptions among bereaved caregivers of onco-hematologic patients who received EPC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Open-ended questionnaires were administered to 36 primary caregivers of patients who received EPC (26 solid and 10 hematologic cancer patients; mean age: 51.4 years, range age: 20-74), at 2 cancer centers, 2 months to 3 years after a patient death. Definitions of hope in the caregivers’ narratives were analyzed through a directed approach to content analysis. Results were complemented with automated lexicographic analysis. RESULTS: Caregivers perceived hope mainly as resilience and as expectations based on what they were told about the patients’ clinical conditions. Their hope was bolstered by trusting relationships with the healthcare teams. EPC interventions were recalled as the major support for hope, both during the illness and after the death of the patient. The automated quantitative lexical analysis provided deeper insights into the links between hope, truth, and trust. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that telling the truth about an incurable onco-hematologic disease and beginning EPC might be the combination of factors triggering hope in the setting of incurable cancer

Changes in Cancer Patients' and Caregivers' Disease Perceptions While Receiving Early Palliative Care: A Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the underlying mechanisms through which early palliative care (EPC) improves multiple outcomes in patients with cancer and their caregivers. The aim of this study was to qualitatively and quantitatively analyze patients’ and caregivers’ thoughts and emotional and cognitive perceptions about the disease prior to and during the EPC intervention, and in the end of life, following the exposure to EPC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy‐seven patients with advanced cancer and 48 caregivers from two cancer centers participated in semistructured interviews. Their reports were qualitatively and quantitatively analyzed by the means of the grounded theory and a text‐analysis program. RESULTS: Participants reported their past as overwhelmed by unmanaged symptoms, with detrimental physical and psychosocial consequences. The EPC intervention allowed a prompt resolution of symptoms and of their consequences and empowerment, an appreciation of its multidimensional approach, its focus on the person and its environment, and the need for EPC for oncologic populations. Patients reported that conversations with the EPC team increased their acceptance of end of life and their expectation of a painless future. Quantitative analysis revealed higher use of Negative Affects (p < .001) and Biological Processes words (p < .001) when discussing the past; Agency words when discussing the present (p < .001); Positive Affects (p < .001), Optimism (p = .002), and Insight Thinking words (p < .001) when discussing the present and the future; and Anxiety (p = .002) and Sadness words (p = .003) when discussing the future. CONCLUSION: Overall, participants perceived EPC to be beneficial. Our findings suggest that emotional and cognitive processes centered on communication underlie the benefits experienced by participants on EPC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: By qualitative and quantitative analyses of the emotional and cognitive perceptions of cancer patients and their caregivers about their experiences before and during EPC interventions, this study may help physicians/nurses to focus on the disease perception by patients/caregivers and the benefits of EPC, as a standard practice. The analysis of words used by patients/caregivers provides a proxy for their psychological condition and support in tailoring an EPC intervention, based on individual needs. This study highlights that the relationship of the triad EPC team/patients/caregivers may rise as a therapeutic tool, allowing increasing awareness and progressive acceptance of the idea of death