Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Indicators of integration at ESMO Designated Centres of Integrated Oncology and Palliative Care
  1. David Hui1,
  2. Nathan I Cherny2,
  3. Jimin Wu1,
  4. Diane Liu1,
  5. Nicola Jane Latino3,
  6. Florian Strasser4
  1. 1 Department of Palliative Care, Rehabilitation and Integrative Medicine, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
  2. 2 Cancer Pain and Palliative Medicine Service, Department of Medical Oncology, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
  3. 3 European Society for Medical Oncology, ESMO-MCBS Working Group, Viganello, Switzerland
  4. 4 Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr David Hui; dhui{at}


Background A recent international consensus panel identified 13 major indicators to assess the level of integration between oncology and palliative care. We examined these indicators among European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Designated Centres (ESMO-DCs) of Integrated Oncology and Palliative Care (PC) and determined the centre characteristics associated with greater integration.

Methods This is a preplanned secondary analysis of a recent survey to characterise the structure, processes and outcomes of the palliative care programmes at ESMO-DCs. We assessed the level of integration using 13 major indicators. We calculated two Palliative Care and Oncology Integration Indexes consisting of all 13 indicators (PCOI-13, range 0–13) and 9 of the 13 indicators (PCOI-9, range 0–9), with a higher index indicating greater integration.

Results The survey response rate was 152/184 (83%). Among the 13 major indicators, interdisciplinary team was most likely to be achieved (95%), while early referral to palliative care (median time from referral to death >6 months before death) was only present in 24 (20%) of ESMO-DCs. The median PCOI-13 was 7.8 (IQR 6.4–9.6) and the median PCOI-9 was 6 (IQR 5–7). The presence of dually trained palliative oncologists was associated with higher PCOI-13 (median 8.4 vs 7.0; p=0.01) and PCOI-9 (median 6 vs 5; p=0.03). Non-tertiary hospitals generally had higher PCOI-13 (median 8.6 vs 7.2; p=0.01) and ESMO-DCs outside of Europe had higher PCOI-9 (median 7 vs 6; p=0.03).

Conclusions Assessment of the level of integration at ESMO-DCs with PCOIs highlighted strengths, areas for further development and how double-boarded palliative oncologists may promote integration.

  • delivery of healthcare
  • integrated
  • health care quality
  • access and evaluation
  • palliative care

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See:

View Full Text

Statistics from


  • Contributors All authors contributed to study design, data collection or analysis and manuscript preparation.

  • Funding This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent Not required.

  • Ethics approval ESMO.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Data sharing statement Data available on request.

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.