Our case describes the efforts of team members drawn from oncology, palliative care, supportive care, and primary care to assist a woman with advanced cancer in accepting care for her psychosocial distress, integrating prognostic information so that she could share in decisions about treatment planning, involving family in her care, and ultimately transitioning to hospice. Team members in our setting included a medical oncologist, oncology nurse practitioner, palliative care nurse practitioner, oncology social worker, and primary care physician. The core members were the patient and her sister. Our team grew organically as a result of patient need and, in doing so, operationalized an explicitly shared understanding of care priorities. We refer to this shared understanding as a shared mental model for care delivery, which enabled our team to jointly set priorities for care through a series of warm handoffs enabled by the team's close proximity within the same clinic. When care providers outside our integrated team became involved in the case, significant communication gaps exposed the difficulty in extending our shared mental model outside the integrated team framework, leading to inefficiencies in care. Integration of this shared understanding for care and close proximity of team members proved to be key components in facilitating treatment of our patient's burdensome cancer-related distress so that she could more effectively participate in treatment decision making that reflected her goals of care. CASE SUMMARYMartha was a 48-year-old woman with widely metastatic breast cancer who transferred care to our institution in June 2014. During the initial visit with the oncologist and oncology nurse practitioner (ONP), Martha seemed to be tolerating first-line treatment with minimal adverse effects, but she presented with a high degree of cancer-related emotional distress. The oncology team referred Martha via face-toface handoff to the embedded palliative care nurse practitioner (PCNP) who saw her in the oncology clinic on the same day and found concerning scores on the patient's Edmonton Symptom Assessment Survey for anxiety (score of 7 out of 10) and mild depression (score of 2 out of 10). Martha

The chance for long-term remission with induction therapy with AFM and high-dose chemotherapy is increased for hormone receptor positive-patients with nonvisceral metastases who have not received prior adjuvant chemotherapy and have long disease-free intervals.

The use of hematopoietic support for patients receiving high-dose chemotherapy has increased over the past 10 years. Various quality controls are performed on the hematopoietic cells, including microbiologic cultures. There is considerable expense associated with the serial cultures performed at different times during the collection, processing, and use of the cells. We reviewed all the microbiologic cultures performed on bone marrow harvests and leukaphereses over a 17 month period. Of the 227 bone marrow harvests, 16 cultures were positive, but only 3 (1.3%) were repeat positives with the same organism after processing or at the time of reinfusion. Of the 560 leukaphereses, 4 (0.7%) were cultured positive at the time of collection and reinfusion. Two patients were bacteremic with gram-negative bacilli at the time of leukaphereses despite being asymptomatic, and these were the only two products that had to be collected again. No patient suffered an adverse clinical result after receiving culture-positive cells. Bone marrow and peripheral blood progenitor cells can be safely collected, and a culture after processing is adequate to ensure the safety of the product.