Evidence supporting early palliative care is based on trials of specialised palliative care, but a more sustainable model might involve mainly primary providers. The aim of this study was to compare the characteristics of physicians providing primary and specialised palliative care, their attitudes towards early palliative care and their perception of having sufficient resources for its provision. Survey distributed by mail and e-mail. Specialised providers were defined as both receiving palliative care referrals from other physicians and not providing palliative care only for their own patients. A total of 531 physicians providing palliative care in Canada (71% participation) participated in the study. Of the participants, 257 (48.4%) provided specialised and 274 (51.6%) primary care. Specialists were more likely to have palliative care training (71.8% vs 35.2%), work in urban areas (94.1% vs 75.6%), academic centres (47.8% vs 26.0%) and on teams (82.4% vs 16.8%), and to provide mainly cancer care (84.4% vs 65.1%) (all p < 0.001). Despite strongly favouring early palliative care, only half in each group agreed they had resources to deliver it; agreement was stronger among family physicians, those working on teams and those with greater availability of community and psychosocial support. Primary providers were more likely to agree that renaming the specialty ‘supportive care’ would increase patient comfort with early palliative care referral (47.4% vs 35.5%, p < 0.001). Despite strongly favouring the concept, both specialists and primary providers lack resources to deliver early palliative care; its provision may be facilitated by team-based care with appropriate support. Opinions differ regarding the value of renaming palliative care.

To describe prevalence and characteristics associated with family physician and general practitioner (FP/GP) provision of home palliative care (HPC). We surveyed FP/GPs in an urban health region of Ontario, Canada, to determine their current involvement in HPC, the nature of services provided, and perceived barriers and enablers. A total of 1439 surveys were mailed. Of the 302 FP/GP respondents, 295 provided replies regarding engagement in HPC: 101 of 295 (33%) provided HPC, 76 (26%) were engageable with further support, and 118 (40%) were not engageable regardless of support. The most substantial barrier was time to provide home visits (81%). Engaged FP/GPs were most likely to be working with another physician providing HPC (P < .0001). Engageable FP/GPs were younger (P = .007) and placed greater value on improved remuneration (P < .001) than the other groups. Nonengageable physicians were most likely to view time as a barrier (P < .0001) and to lack interest in PC (P = .03). One-third of FP/GPs provide HPC. A cohort of younger physicians could be engageable with adequate support. Integrated practices including collaboration with specialist PC colleagues should be encouraged and supported.

PURPOSE: Use of chemotherapy at the end of life (EOL) is discouraged, but evidence to guide decisions on the use of novel systemic anticancer treatment (SACT) agents is lacking. We examined trends of use among SACT types and association with health services use at the EOL. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed Canadian Ontario Cancer Registry data for adults diagnosed with solid tumors or hematologic malignancies within 5 years of death who received SACT between March 2015 and March 2021. Receipt of SACT in the last 30 days of life was categorized as chemotherapy alone, chemotherapy and immunotherapy, immunotherapy alone, and targeted therapy alone. Outcomes included high health services use, including multiple (≥2) emergency department (ED) visits, multiple (≥2) hospitalizations, or any (≥1) intensive care unit admission, and hospital deaths. Segmented linear regression estimated monthly trends; multivariable logistic regression estimated adjusted odds ratios (aORs) of outcomes for various SACT types. RESULTS: Among 68,963 patients, 18,337 (26.6%) received SACT at the EOL. From March 2015 to March 2020, use of SACT at the EOL increased (0.072% per month; P < .001), mainly driven by increased use of immunotherapy alone (0.064% per month; P < .001). Adjusted odds of high health services use and hospital death were more than two-fold greater among patients receiving SACT at the EOL (vs. none); individual aORs of high health services use and hospital death were 2.20 and 2.72 for chemotherapy alone, 2.36 and 3.10 for chemotherapy and immunotherapy, 1.92 and 2.27 for immunotherapy alone, and 1.75 and 2.37 for targeted therapy alone, respectively. CONCLUSION: Use of SACT at the EOL increased significantly over time, driven by increased use of immunotherapy. SACT use at the EOL, regardless of its type, was associated with high health services use and hospital death. Guidelines on the use of SACT at the EOL should include novel cancer treatments.

Background: To assess correlation of pretreatment specific growth rate (SGR) value of 0.43 × 10^‐2 with overall and failure‐free survival of patients with early‐stage non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT).Methods: A retrospective chart review of 160 patients with pathologically confirmed stage I NSCLC treated with SBRT between June 2010 and December 2012 in a large, tertiary cancer institute was undertaken. Both diagnostic and archived planning CT were uploaded to the treatment planning system to determine tumor volume at diagnosis (GTV1) and planning time (GTV2). The time (t) between both CTs was recorded. SGR was calculated using GTV1, GTV2, and t. The median SGR (0.43 × 10^‐2) from our previous data was used to group patients into low and high SGR cohorts. Log‐rank test was used to compare overall (OS) and failure‐free survivals (FFS) of SGR groups.Results: The median time interval between diagnostic and planning CT scans was 87 days. The median OS was 38 and 66 months for high and low SGR cohorts, respectively (P = 0.03). The median FFS was 27 and 55 months for high and low SGR cohorts, respectively (P = 0.005). High SGR (P < 0.05), male gender (P = <0.01), and GTV2 (P = <0.05) were associated with poorer FFS.Conclusions: High SGR was associated with poorer outcome in patients with early‐stage NSCLC treated with SBRT. SGR can be used in conjunction with other well‐known predictive factors to formulate a practical predictive model to identify subgroups of the patient at higher risk of recurrence after SBRT.