Real-world quality analysis of palliative care utilization in patients with brain metastases at three academic institutes.

12080 Background: Brain metastases (BMETs) are a devastating complication of cancer, occurring in up to 30-50% of patients with advanced solid tumors. Median survival after diagnosis of BMETs can be limited, with 3-6 months survival for patients with poorer performance status (Updated Recursive Partition analysis U-RPA classification class 2b and 3). Early integration of palliative care (PC) can improve a patient’s quality of life. Per guidelines, patients with advanced cancer should be referred to an interdisciplinary team, including PC, early in the disease. We aimed to assess the utilization and impact of PC in patients with BMETs at three academic centers. Methods: We obtained data from the electronic medical record (EMR) of all patients diagnosed with BMETS at the University of Virginia, the Medical College of Wisconsin, and the University of Vermont between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2019. Inclusion criteria were age 18+ years, diagnosis of BMETs secondary to a solid tumor malignancy (excluding leptomeningeal metastases), and >3 months of follow-up treatment. Patients were included if considered at high risk for mortality, which was defined as KPS 65 (U-RPA Class 2b). Chi-squared and Fisher’s exact tests compared survival, hospice referral, emergency visits, readmissions, and advance directives (AD) on the file between the PC and non-PC groups. Results: In total, of the 309 patients that were assessed, 220 patients were class 2b, and 89 were class 3 per U-RPA classification. The mean age was 66 in both groups, and 167 (54%) were seen by PC. The median survival for patients seen by PC was 7.8 months compared to 8.3 months (p 0.056). There was no statistically significant difference in survival between the two groups. 80% of patients in the group seen by PC enrolled with hospice care compared to 58% in the non-PC group (p 0.0002). 80% of patients had an AD on file in the group seen by PC compared to 56% in the non-PC group (p <0.0001). In terms of ED visits or re-hospitalization, there was a trend for more ED visits/readmissions in the group seen by PC compared to the non-PC group (p 0.057). Conclusions: In this real-world quality analysis, we found that there is under-utilization of formal PC consultation in patients with BMETs. There was no difference in survival between groups, indicating PC is not synonymous with end-of-life or hospice care. PC was associated with more patients completing ADs and more patients using hospice. Health systems and policy initiatives promoting palliative care utilization earlier in the disease course may support patient values and preferences at the end of life. Table: see text