The interactive effect of advanced cancer patient and caregiver prognostic understanding on patients' completion of Do Not Resuscitate orders

A communication intervention to improve prognostic understanding and engagement in advance care planning among diverse advanced cancer patient-caregiver dyads: A pilot study

OBJECTIVES

Accurate prognostic understanding among patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers is associated with greater engagement in advance care planning (ACP) and receipt of goal-concordant care. Poor prognostic understanding is more prevalent among racial and ethnic minority patients. The purpose of this study was to examine the feasibility, acceptability, and impact of a patient-caregiver communication-based intervention to improve prognostic understanding, engagement in ACP, and completion of advance directives among a racially and ethnically diverse, urban sample of patients and their caregivers.

METHODS

Patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers (n = 22 dyads) completed assessments of prognostic understanding, engagement in ACP, and completion of advance directives at baseline and post-intervention, Talking About Cancer (TAC). TAC is a 7-session intervention delivered remotely by licensed social workers that includes distress management and communication skills, review of prognosis, and information on ACP.

RESULTS

TAC met a priori benchmarks for feasibility, acceptability, and fidelity. Prognostic understanding and engagement in ACP did not change over time. However, patients showed increases in completion of advance directives.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

TAC was feasible, acceptable, and delivered with high fidelity. Involvement of caregivers in TAC may provide added layers of support to patients facing advanced cancer diagnoses, especially among racial and ethnic minorities. Trends indicated greater completion of advance directives but not in prognostic understanding or engagement in ACP. Future research is needed to optimize the intervention to improve acceptability, tailor to diverse patient populations, and examine the efficacy of TAC in a randomized controlled trial.

What outcomes do studies use to measure the impact of prognostication on people with advanced cancer? Findings from a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies

BACKGROUND

Studies evaluating the impact of prognostication in advanced cancer patients vary in the outcomes they measure, and there is a lack of consensus about which outcomes are most important.

AIM

To identify outcomes previously reported in prognostic research with people with advanced cancer, as a first step towards constructing a core outcome set for prognostic impact studies.

DESIGN

A systematic review was conducted and analysed in two subsets: one qualitative and one quantitative. (PROSPERO ID: CRD42022320117; 29/03/2022).

DATA SOURCES

Six databases were searched from inception to September 2022. We extracted data describing (1) outcomes used to measure the impact of prognostication and (2) patients' and informal caregivers' experiences and perceptions of prognostication in advanced cancer. We classified findings using the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative taxonomy, along with a narrative description. We appraised retrieved studies for quality, but quality was not a basis for exclusion.

RESULTS

We identified 42 eligible studies: 32 quantitative, 6 qualitative, 4 mixed methods. We extracted 70 outcomes of prognostication in advanced cancer and organised them into 12 domains: (1) survival; (2) psychiatric outcomes; (3) general outcomes; (4) spiritual/religious/existential functioning/wellbeing, (5) emotional functioning/wellbeing; (6) cognitive functioning; (7) social functioning; (8) global quality of life; (9) delivery of care; (10) perceived health status; (11) personal circumstances; and (12) hospital/hospice use.

CONCLUSION

Outcome reporting and measurement varied markedly across the studies. A standardised approach to outcome reporting in studies of prognosis is necessary to enhance data synthesis, improve clinical practice and better align with stakeholders' priorities.

Patient-Caregiver Dyads' Prognostic Information Preferences and Perceptions in Advanced Cancer

CONTEXT

Prognostic information is considered important for advanced cancer patients and primary informal caregivers to prepare for the end of life. Little is known about discordance in patients' and caregivers' prognostic information preferences and prognostic perceptions, while such discordance complicates adaptive dyadic coping, clinical interactions and care plans.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the extent of patient-caregiver discordance in prognostic information preferences and perceptions, and the factors associated with discordant prognostic perceptions.

METHODS

We conducted secondary analyses of a cross-sectional study (PROSPECT, 2019-2021). Advanced cancer patients (median overall survival ≤12 months) from seven Dutch hospitals and caregivers completed structured surveys (n = 412 dyads).

RESULTS

Seven percent of patient-caregiver dyads had discordant information preferences regarding the likelihood of cure; 24%-25% had discordant information preferences regarding mortality risk (5/2/1 year). Seventeen percent of dyads had discordant perceptions of the likelihood of cure; 12%-25% had discordant perceptions of mortality risk (5/2/1 year). Dyads with discordant prognostic information preferences (P < 0.05) and dyads in which patients reported better physical functioning (P < 0.01) were significantly more likely to perceive the one-year mortality risk discordantly.

CONCLUSION

Physicians should be sensitive to discordant prognostic information preferences and prognostic perceptions among patient-caregiver dyads in advanced cancer care.

Awareness of Disease Status Among Patients With Cancer: An Integrative Review

BACKGROUND

As the quality of cancer care improves, oncology patients face a rapidly increasing number of treatment options. Thus, it is vital that they are full and active partners in the treatment decision-making process. Awareness of disease status has been investigated in the literature; it has been inconsistently conceptualized and operationalized.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this integrative review was to develop a conceptual definition and model of the awareness of disease status among patients with cancer.

METHODS

Whittemore and Knafl's integrative review methodology guided this article. We obtained data through a systematic search of 8 databases. Key terms utilized were awareness, perception, truth disclosure, diagnosis, prognosis, terminal illness, status, neoplasm, and metastasis. Dates through January 2020 were searched to capture all relevant articles. Sixty-nine articles met inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

The integrative review methodology guided the development of a conceptual definition and model. The concept of "awareness of disease status" was defined as the individual patient's understanding of being diagnosed and treated for cancer based on the multifactorial components of individual patient characteristics and contextually driven communication practices of healthcare providers. This understanding is dynamic and changes throughout the disease trajectory.

CONCLUSION

These findings will inform consistency in the literature. Such consistency may improve person-centered clinical communication, care planning practices, and, ultimately, cancer-related outcomes.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

With a greater understanding of the complexity of patients' awareness of disease status, nurses will be able to guide their patients to make informed decisions throughout their disease trajectory.

The effect of joint involvement of nurse and physician in hospice care on terminal cancer patients on do-not-resuscitate orders signed by surrogates

OBJECTIVES

Patients with terminal cancer often experience physical and mental distress. Signing a do-not-resuscitate order (DNR) is crucial to protect against invalid treatment. This study aims to explore the effect of hospice shared care intervention by medical staff on the completion of a DNR-S (DNR order signed by surrogates) for patients with terminal cancer.

METHOD

The cross-sectional study in this research involved secondary analysis of data from the 2011-2015 clinical cancer case management database of a medical center in central Taiwan. Those with a DNR order signed by patients (DNR-P) or DNR-S before the hospice shared care consultation were excluded from this study; a total of 1,306 patients with terminal cancer were selected.

RESULTS

This study demonstrated that the percentage of DNR-S after consultation involving both nurse and physician was 75.4%. With other variables controlled, the number of DNR-Ss after consultation with a nurse was significantly lower [odds ratio (OR) = 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.42-0.75] and that of DNR-Ss after consultation involving both nurse and physician was significantly higher (OR = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.01-1.79), than that of DNR-Ss after consultation with only the physician.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

Joint involvement of the nurse and physician in hospice care provides sufficient information to patients and family with terminal cancer about their condition and enhances doctor-patient communication. This effectively assists patients with terminal cancer and their family members in making the major decision of signing a DNR, alleviates the concerns of patients and family members about signing a DNR, and reduces terminal cancer patients' pain at the end of life to ensure that they die in peace and dignity.

Coping with glioblastoma: prognostic communication and prognostic understanding among patients with recurrent glioblastoma, caregivers, and oncologists

PURPOSE

Glioblastoma (GBM) is a devastating neuro-oncologic disease with invariably poor prognosis. Despite this, research shows patients have unrealistic perceptions of their prognosis, which may relate in part to communication patterns between patients, caregivers and oncologists. The purpose of this study was to examine communication processes and goals among patients, caregivers, and oncologists to elucidate drivers of prognostic understanding (PU) in the context of recurrent GBM.

METHODS

This was a prospective, multi-center study enrolling adult patients with GBM, caregivers, and oncologists, who independently reported the content of a specific discussion involving the disclosure of GBM recurrence. Communication processes and goals were characterized for each participant, and concordance between all dyads and patient-caregiver-oncologist triads were calculated.

RESULTS

Seventeen patient, caregiver, and oncologist triads were analyzed. At the individual level, three (17.6%) patients and 8 (47.1%) caregivers reported having discussed prognosis during the clinical encounter, as compared to ten oncologists (58.8%). Seven patients (41.2%) and 5 caregivers (29.4%), versus thirteen oncologists (76.5%) reported ever discussing prognosis or life expectancy at previous appointments. Generally, patient-caregiver concordance (i.e., both answered the same) regarding communication goals and processes was low. Triads showed limited concordant responses in discussing curability (n = 5), prognosis (n = 4), end-of-life treatment goals (n = 4), and ever discussing prognosis (n = 3).

CONCLUSION

Patients, caregivers and oncologists had discordant views regarding communication processes and prognostic goals, even when recalling a single discussion. This study highlights the importance of clear and frequent communication about prognosis, and the need for further research on communication and PU in the neuro-oncology setting.

Older patients' and their caregivers' understanding of advanced care planning

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this study was to review the recent literature (2019-2021) on older patients' and their caregivers' understanding of advance care planning.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies highlight the continued gaps in knowledge about advance care planning for older adults with cancer and their caregivers both domestically and abroad. The recent literature also revealed that there is a lack of research methodology to assess knowledge of advance care planning reliably and validly in older adults with cancer and their caregivers given the lack of uniform scales to measure knowledge of advance care planning.

SUMMARY

Older adults with cancer are at an elevated risk of death from their illness, and it is essential they understand how advance care planning can improve their quality of life, facilitate goal congruent care and ultimately decrease medical expenditures at end of life. In order to engage in a process such as advance care planning, patients must know what it is and how it can be helpful to them. The lack of understanding about advance care planning presents a significant barrier to patients engaging in the process. Public health campaigns to increase advance care planning knowledge are needed to ensure that older adults with cancer and their caregivers understand how this service can be helpful to them as they approach end of life.

Ethics consultations in neuro-oncology

Background

Management of patients with brain tumors can lead to ethical and decisional dilemmas. The aim of this study was to characterize ethical conflicts encountered in neuro-oncologic patients.

Methods

Retrospective review of ethics consultations performed upon patients with primary and metastatic brain tumors at a tertiary cancer center. An ethics consultation database was examined to characterize ethical conflicts, contextual factors, and interventions by the consultation team.

Results

Fifty consultations were reviewed; 28 (56%) patients were women, median age 54 (range 4-86); 27 (54%) patients had a primary central nervous system malignancy; 20 (40%) had brain metastasis. At the time of consultations, 41 (82%) patients lacked decisional capacity; 48 (96%) had a designated surrogate decision maker; 3 (6%) had an advance directive outlining wishes regarding medical treatment; 12 (24%) had a Do Not Attempt Resuscitation (DNAR) order. Ethical conflicts centered upon management of end-of-life (EOL) circumstances in 37 (72%) of cases; of these, 30 did not have decisional capacity. The most common ethical issues were DNAR status, surrogate decision making, and request for nonbeneficial treatment. Consultants resolved conflicts by facilitating decision making for incapacitated patients in 30 (60%) cases, communication between conflicting parties in 10 (20%), and re-articulation of patients' previously stated wishes in 6 (12%).

Conclusions

Decisional capacity at EOL represents the primary ethical challenge in care of neuro-oncologic patients. Incomplete awareness among surrogate decision makers of patients' prognosis and preferences contributes to communication gaps and dilemmas. Early facilitation of communication between patients, caregivers, and medical providers may prevent or mitigate conflicts and allow the enactment of patients' goals and values.

Longitudinal Assessment of Prognostic Understanding in Patients with Advanced Lung Cancer and Its Association with Their Psychological Distress

BACKGROUND

Accurate prognostic understanding in patients with advanced cancer is essential for shared decision making; however, patients may experience psychological burden through knowing the incurable nature of advanced cancer. It has been unclear how their prognostic understanding fluctuates and whether accurate prognostic understanding is associated with psychological distress from the time of diagnosis over time.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We longitudinally investigated prognostic understanding in 225 patients with newly diagnosed advanced lung cancer at 16 hospitals in Japan until 24 months after diagnosis. We examined associated factors with being consistently accurate in prognostic understanding, especially focusing on its association with psychological well-being.

RESULTS

The proportion of patients with an inaccurate prognostic understanding remained approximately 20% over time with the presence of patients with inconsistent understanding. Patients with consistently accurate prognostic understanding showed a significantly lower Emotional Well-Being subscale score at both 3 and 6 months after diagnosis (p = .010 and p = .014, respectively). In multivariate analyses, being consistently accurate in prognostic understanding was significantly associated with female gender and higher lung cancer-specific symptom burden at 3 months (p = .008 and p = .005, respectively) and lower emotional well-being at 6 months (p = .006).

CONCLUSION

Although substantial proportions of patients with advanced lung cancer had inaccurate prognostic understanding from the time of diagnosis over time, patients with consistently accurate prognostic understanding experienced greater psychological burden. Our findings highlight the importance of continuous psychological care and support for patients who understand their severe prognosis accurately.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This study demonstrated that approximately 20% of patients with advanced lung cancer had an inaccurate understanding about their prognosis, not only at the time of diagnosis but also at the later time points. Being consistently accurate in prognostic understanding was significantly associated with elevated levels of psychological distress. Although accurate prognostic understanding is essential for decision making for treatment and advance care planning, health care providers should be aware of psychological burdens in patients that accept their severe prognosis accurately. Appropriate care and support for such patients are warranted from diagnosis over time.

Prognostic Awareness in Advanced Disease: A Review Update and Concept Analysis

Purpose

Although subjective knowledge about the prognosis of an advanced disease is extremely important for coping and treatment planning, the concept of prognostic awareness (PA) remains inconsistently defined. The aims of the scoping review were to synthesize a definition of PA from the most recent literature, describe preconditions, correlates and consequences, and suggest a conceptual model.

Methods

By using scoping review methodology, we searched the Web of Science and PubMed databases, and included publications, reviews, meta-analyses or guidelines on all physical diagnoses, as well as publications offering a conceptual or an operational definition of PA. The data were analyzed by means of content analysis techniques.

Results

Of the 24 included publications, 21 referred exclusively to cancer, one to patients with hip fractures and two to palliative care in general. The deduced definition of PA comprised the following facets: adequate estimation of chances for recovery, knowledge of limited time to live, adequate estimation of life expectancy, knowledge of therapy goals, and knowledge of the course of the disease. Further content analysis results were mapped graphically and in a detailed table.

Conclusion

There appears to be a lack of theoretical embedding of PA that in turn influences the methods used for empirical investigation. Drawing on a clear conceptual definition, longitudinal or experimental studies would be desirable.

Relationships Between Advanced Cancer Patients' Worry About Dying and Illness Understanding, Treatment Preferences, and Advance Care Planning

CONTEXT

Patients with advanced cancer often worry about dying. Less is known about the role of worry in decision making regarding future care.

OBJECTIVES

To explore relationships between patients' worry about dying and their illness understanding, treatment preferences, and advance care planning (ACP).

METHODS

This cross-sectional study used baseline data from a primary palliative care intervention trial. All participants had metastatic solid tumors. Using patients' response to I worry about dying from the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness-Palliative Care survey instrument, univariate and multivariate analyses assessed associations with illness understanding, treatment preferences, and ACP.

RESULTS

Of 672 patients, 47% reported worrying about dying not at all, whereas 9.7% worried quite a bit or very much. In regression analysis, compared with patients who reported not worrying about dying, those who reported high levels of worry were more likely to describe themselves as terminally ill (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.98; 95% CI = 1.10-3.54; P = 0.021) and prefer life-extending therapy over symptom-focused care (AOR = 2.61; 95% CI = 1.30-5.22; P = 0.007). They were less likely to have completed an advance directive (AOR = 0.49; 95% CI = 0.25-0.94; P = 0.032). The same relationships were seen using patients' response to I feel scared about my future from the Herth Hope Index.

CONCLUSION

Patients with advanced cancer who worry about dying are more likely to identify as terminally ill and desire life-extending treatment and are less likely to engage in ACP. Understanding how patients cope with worry and make medical decisions is important in providing quality care to these patients.

Discussing Prognosis with Empathy to Cancer Patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Our goal was to provide healthcare professionals (HCPs) with evidence-based data about what can be done to handle prognostic discussions with empathy.

RECENT FINDINGS

First, disclosing prognosis involves a good reason to do so and making sure that the patient will be able to process the discussion. Second, communication tips are given for the three dimensions of empathy: "establishing rapport with the patient," which should not be overlooked; the emotional dimension, which involves an accurate understanding of the patient and communication skills; and the "active/positive" dimension which is about giving hope, explaining things clearly and helping patients take control with shared decision-making and a planned future. Although communication tips are helpful, empathy training should be based more on the development of HCPs' emotional skills, in order to help them regulate their emotions and thus be more comfortable with those of patients and families. Furthermore, research into empathy toward minorities and relatives is needed.

The Importance of Prognostication: Impact of Prognostic Predictions, Disclosures, Awareness, and Acceptance on Patient Outcomes

OPINION STATEMENT

In the advanced cancer setting, patients, families, and clinicians are often confronted with an uncertain future regarding treatment outcomes and survival. Greater certainty on what to expect can enhance decision-making for many personal and healthcare issues. Although 70-90% of patients with advanced cancer desire open and honest prognostic disclosure, a small proportion do not want to know. Approximately half of patients with advanced cancer have an inaccurate understanding of their illness, which could negatively impact their decision-making. In this review, we use a conceptual framework to highlight 5 key steps along the prognostic continuum, including (1) prognostic formulation, (2) prognostic disclosure, (3) prognostic awareness, (4) prognostic acceptance, and (5) prognosis-based decision-making. We shall summarize the impact of prognostic predictions, disclosure, awareness, and acceptance on various patient and caregiver outcomes, such as hope, trust, anxiety, depression, chemotherapy use, and care planning. Based on where the patient is at along the prognostic continuum, we propose 5 different subgroups (avoidance: "I don't want to know"; discordant, "I never wanted to know"; anxious, "I don't know what's happening"; concerned, "I don't like this"; acceptance, "I know how to plan ahead"). Although prognostication is not necessarily a linear process, recognizing where the patient is at cognitively and emotionally along the prognostic continuum may allow clinicians to provide personalized interventions, such as specialist palliative care and psychology referral, towards personalizing prognostic disclosure, enhancing prognostic awareness, increasing prognostic acceptance, and supporting decision-making and, ultimately, improving patient outcomes.

Evaluating if an Advance Care Planning Intervention Promotes Do-Not-Resuscitate Orders by Facilitating Accurate Prognostic Awareness

BACKGROUND

Issuing do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders has seldom been an outcome in randomized clinical trials of advance care planning (ACP) interventions. The aim of this study was to examine whether an ACP intervention facilitating accurate prognostic awareness (PA) for patients with advanced cancer was associated with earlier use of DNR orders.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Participants (n=460) were randomly assigned 1:1 to the experimental and control arms, with 392 deceased participants constituting the final sample of this secondary analysis study. Participants in the intervention and control arms had each received an intervention tailored to their readiness for ACP/prognostic information and symptom-management education, respectively. Effectiveness in promoting a DNR order by facilitating accurate PA was determined by intention-to-treat analysis using multivariate logistic regression with hierarchical linear modeling.

RESULTS

At enrollment in the ACP intervention and before death, 9 (4.6%) and 8 (4.1%) participants and 168 (85.7%) and 164 (83.7%) participants in the experimental and control arms, respectively, had issued a DNR order, without significant between-arm differences. However, participants in the experimental arm with accurate PA were significantly more likely than participants in the control arm without accurate PA to have issued a DNR order before death (adjusted odds ratio, 2.264; 95% CI, 1.036-4.951; P=.041). Specifically, participants in the experimental arm who first reported accurate PA 31 to 90 days before death were significantly more likely than their counterparts in the control arm who reported accurate PA to have issued a DNR order in the next wave of assessment (adjusted odds ratio, 13.365; 95% CI, 1.989-89.786; P=.008). Both arms issued DNR orders close to death (median, 5-6 days before death).

CONCLUSIONS

Our ACP intervention did not promote the overall presence of a DNR order. However, our intervention facilitated the issuance of NDR orders before death among patients with accurate PA, especially those who reported accurate PA 31 to 90 days before death, but it did not facilitate the issuance of DNR orders earlier than their counterparts in the control arm.ClinicalTrial.gov Identification: NCT01912846.

Timing of do-not-resuscitate orders and health care utilization near the end of life in cancer patients: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

The objectives are to explore the prevalence of DNR orders, the factors influencing them, and the association between DNR signing and health care utilization among advanced cancer patients.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study. Data from cancer decedents in three hospitals in China from January 2016 to December 2017 during their last hospitalization before death were obtained from the electronic medical records system.

RESULTS

In total, 427 cancer patients were included; 59.0% had a DNR order. Patients who had solid tumors, lived in urban areas, had more than one comorbidity, and had more than five symptoms were more likely to have DNR orders. The cut-off of the timing of obtaining a DNR order was 3 days, as determined by the median number of days from the signing of a DNR order to patient death. Patients with early DNR orders (more than 3 days before death) were less likely to be transferred to the intensive care unit and undergo cardiopulmonary resuscitation, tracheal intubation, and ventilation, while they were more likely to be given morphine and psychological support compared with those with late (within 3 days before death) and no orders.

CONCLUSIONS

Advanced cancer patients with solid tumors living in urban areas with more symptoms and comorbidities are relatively more likely to have DNR orders. Early DNR orders are associated with less aggressive procedures and more comfort measures. However, these orders are always signed late. Future studies are needed to better understand the timing of DNR orders.

Understanding Hospice Patients' Beliefs About Their Life Expectancy: A Qualitative Interview Study

BACKGROUND

Patients with advanced disease often overestimate their life expectancy, which potentially impacts decision making.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the nature and source of hospice patients' life expectancy estimates, about which little is known.

DESIGN

Using semi-structured interviews, patients were asked to estimate their life expectancy and elaborate on their response.

SETTING/SUBJECTS

Participants were hospice patients (n = 20, 55% male; 60% cancer).

MEASUREMENT

We conducted thematic analysis using open and focused coding.

RESULTS

Many participants had difficulty answering the life expectancy question and expressed uncertainty about when they would die. One-third overestimated their length of life relative to actual survival. The most common source of patients' prognostic beliefs was knowledge about their body, including physical symptoms and change over time. Half of patients reported that a provider had given them a prognostic estimate, and one-third agreed with, or gave estimates consistent with, the provider's estimate. Some patients said providers do not know prognosis or that time of death was unknowable.

CONCLUSIONS

Key findings were that 1) many hospice patients had difficulty estimating life expectancy, and 2) hospice patients' life expectancy estimates were frequently based on their body and not on information from medical providers. These findings have implications for measuring prognostic awareness, as valid assessment is a necessary component of determining whether prognostic awareness is beneficial for patients. Future research should examine how life expectancy estimates are associated with well-being and whether results extend to larger samples of patients with advanced disease not in hospice.

Advanced Cancer Patients' Changes in Accurate Prognostic Understanding and Their Psychological Well-Being

CONTEXT

Clinicians often worry that patients' recognition of the terminal nature of their illness may impair psychological well-being.

OBJECTIVES

To determine if such recognition was associated with decrements to psychological well-being that persisted over time.

METHODS

About 87 patients with advanced cancer, with an oncologist-expected life expectancy of less than six months, were assessed before and after an oncology visit to discuss cancer restaging scan results and again at follow-up (median time between assessments, approximately six weeks). Prognostic understanding (PU) was assessed at previsit and postvisit, and a change score was computed. Psychological well-being was assessed at pre, post, and follow-up, and two change scores were computed (post minus pre; follow-up minus post).

RESULTS

Changes toward more accurate PU was associated with a corresponding initial decline in psychological well-being (r = -0.33; P < 0.01) but thereafter was associated with subsequent improvements (r = 0.40; P < 0.001). This pattern remained controlling for potential confounds. Patients showed different patterns of psychological well-being change (F = 3.07, P = 0.05; F = 6.54, P < 0.01): among patients with improved PU accuracy, well-being initially decreased but subsequently recovered; by contrast, among patients with stable PU accuracy, well-being remained relatively unchanged, and among patients with decrements in PU accuracy, well-being initially improved but subsequently declined.

CONCLUSION

Improved PU may be associated with initial decrements in psychological well-being, followed by patients rebounding to baseline levels. Concerns about lasting psychological harm may not need to be a deterrent to having prognostic discussions with patients.

Perceptions of prognosis and goal of treatment in patients with malignant gliomas and their caregivers

Background

Patients with malignant gliomas have a poor prognosis. However, little is known about patients' and caregivers' understanding of the prognosis and the primary treatment goal.

Methods

We conducted a prospective study in patients with newly diagnosed malignant gliomas (N = 72) and their caregivers (N = 55). At 12 weeks after diagnosis, we administered the Prognosis and Treatment Perceptions Questionnaire to assess understanding of prognosis and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale to evaluate mood. We used multivariable regression analyses to explore associations between prognostic understanding and mood and McNemar tests to compare prognostic perceptions among patient-caregiver dyads (N = 48).

Results

A total of 87.1% (61/70) of patients and 79.6% (43/54) of caregivers reported that it was "very" or "extremely" important to know about the patient's prognosis. The majority of patients (72.7%, [48/66]) reported that their cancer was curable. Patients who reported that their illness was incurable had greater depressive symptoms (B = 3.01, 95% CI, 0.89-5.14, P = .01). There was no association between caregivers' prognostic understanding and mood. Among patient-caregiver dyads, patients were more likely than caregivers to report that their primary treatment goal was cure (43.8% [21/48] vs 25.0% [12/48], P = .04) and that the oncologist's primary goal was cure (29.2% [14/48] vs 8.3% [4/48], P = .02).

Conclusions

Patients with malignant gliomas frequently hold inaccurate perceptions of the prognosis and treatment goal. Although caregivers more often report an accurate assessment of these metrics, many still report an overly optimistic perception of prognosis. Interventions are needed to enhance prognostic communication and to help patients cope with the associated distress.

Illness and prognostic understanding in patients with hematologic malignancies

It is critical for patients with hematologic malignancies to have an accurate understanding of their illness and prognosis to make informed treatment decisions. Illness and prognostic understanding have primarily been studied in patients with solid tumors, however, data in patients with hematologic malignancies are rapidly growing. Patients with hematologic malignancies often face a unique and unpredictable illness trajectory with the possibility of cure persisting even in relapsed and refractory settings. These patients often require intensive therapies such as high-dose chemotherapy, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT), or CAR T-cell therapy, which carry with them significant risk of morbidity, mortality, and prognostic uncertainty. In this review article, we first described the current literature on illness and prognostic understanding in patients with hematologic malignancies including 1) patients' varying desire for prognostic information; (2) patients' prognostic misperceptions, (3) the association between patients' prognostic understanding and their psychological outcomes; and (4) barriers to prognostic understanding. Next, we examined insights gained from the literature about illness and prognostic understanding in patients with solid tumors to guide our understanding of the research gaps in hematologic malignancies. Future studies are needed to better delineate the longitudinal relationship between prognostic understanding, psychological distress, and coping in patients with hematologic malignancies. Strategies such as communicating effectively about prognosis, cultivating adaptive coping in the face of a terminal prognosis, and integrating specialty palliative care for patients with hematologic malignancies have the potential to improve patients' prognostic understanding and their quality of life and care.

Patient and caregiver agreement on prognosis estimates for older adults with advanced cancer

BACKGROUND

Disagreements between patients and caregivers about treatment benefits, care decisions, and patients' health are associated with increased patient depression as well as increased caregiver anxiety, distress, depression, and burden. Understanding the factors associated with disagreement may inform interventions to improve the aforementioned outcomes.

METHODS

For this analysis, baseline data were obtained from a cluster-randomized geriatric assessment trial that recruited patients aged ≥70 years who had incurable cancer from community oncology practices (University of Rochester Cancer Center 13070; Supriya G. Mohile, principal investigator). Patient and caregiver dyads were asked to estimate the patient's prognosis. Response options were 0 to 6 months, 7 to 12 months, 1 to 2 years, 2 to 5 years, and >5 years. The dependent variable was categorized as exact agreement (reference), patient-reported longer estimate, or caregiver-reported longer estimate. The authors used generalized estimating equations with multinomial distribution to examine the factors associated with patient-caregiver prognostic estimates. Independent variables were selected using the purposeful selection method.

RESULTS

Among 354 dyads (89% of screened patients were enrolled), 26% and 22% of patients and caregivers, respectively, reported a longer estimate. Compared with dyads that were in agreement, patients were more likely to report a longer estimate when they screened positive for polypharmacy (β = 0.81; P = .001), and caregivers reported greater distress (β = 0.12; P = .03). Compared with dyads that were in agreement, caregivers were more likely to report a longer estimate when patients screened positive for polypharmacy (β = 0.82; P = .005) and had lower perceived self-efficacy in interacting with physicians (β = -0.10; P = .008).

CONCLUSIONS

Several patient and caregiver factors were associated with patient-caregiver disagreement about prognostic estimates. Future studies should examine the effects of prognostic disagreement on patient and caregiver outcomes.

Emotions in the room: common emotional reactions to discussions of poor prognosis and tools to address them

Introduction: Advanced cancer patients often want prognostic information, and discussions of prognosis have been shown to enhance patient understanding of their illness. Such discussions can lead to high-quality, value-consistent care at the end of life, yet they are also often emotionally challenging. Despite how common and normal it is for patients to experience transient emotional distress when receiving 'bad news' about prognosis, emotional responses have been under-addressed in existing literature on prognostic discussions. Areas covered: Drawing upon psychology research, principles of skilled clinical communication, and published approaches to discussions of serious illness, we summarize patients' common emotional reactions and coping strategies. We then provide suggestions for how to respond to them in clinic. Expert opinion: Ultimately, effective management of emotional reactions to bad news may lead to earlier, more frequent, and more transparent discussions of prognosis, thus promoting cancer patients' understanding of, and adjustment to, their illness and improving the quality of their end-of-life care.

Advanced cancer patients' understanding of prognostic information: Applying insights from psychological research

PURPOSE

Informed medical decision-making at the end of life often requires engaging in highly emotional, potentially upsetting discussions about prognosis, while ensuring that patients grasp its personal meaning. Behavioral science offers insights into ways to promote prognostic understanding among patients with advanced cancer.

SUMMARY

In this literature review, we synthesize complementary findings from basic behavioral science and applied clinical research, which suggest that psychological factors can significantly influence both patients' clinical interactions and their prognostic understanding. For example, stress and emotion can affect cognition, which may shape how patients process complex medical information. Additionally, clinicians may be less likely to share prognostic information with distressed patients who, in turn, may be hesitant to ask about their prognosis for fear of the answer. Although traditional approaches for increasing advanced cancer patients' understanding focus on improving information delivery, these efforts may not be sufficient without corresponding interventions that assist patients in managing distress.

CONCLUSIONS

Psychological barriers may limit opportunities for patients to fully understand their prognosis and to receive high quality of end-of-life care that is linked with an accurate understanding of their disease and treatment options. Failure to attend to patients' emotional distress may undermine efforts to improve medical communication. This underscores the importance of increased attention to the psychological factors that impede patients' comprehension of material shared in cancer clinic visits, in order to inform interventions that address patient distress both before and after receiving "bad news." Integrating findings from psychological research into prognostic discussions may not only improve advanced cancer patients' mental health, but may also promote their ability to make informed, value-consistent medical decisions.

Association between advanced cancer patient-caregiver agreement regarding prognosis and hospice enrollment

BACKGROUND

Patients with advanced, incurable cancer who understand their illness is incurable are more likely to prefer hospice care at the end of life compared with patients who believe their illness is curable. To the authors' knowledge, it is unclear whether patient-caregiver agreement regarding perceived prognosis is associated with hospice enrollment.

METHODS

The current study examined the prospective relationship between patient-caregiver agreement concerning perceived prognosis and hospice enrollment in the last 30 days of life. Data were collected during a cluster randomized controlled trial examining a communication intervention for oncologists and patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers. At the time of study entry, patients and caregivers (141 dyads) were categorized as endorsing a "good" prognosis if they: 1) reported a >50% chance of surviving ≥2 years; or if they 2) predicted that the patient's quality of life 3 months into the future would be ≥7 on an 11-point scale.

RESULTS

Approximately one-fifth of dyads agreed on a poor prognosis whereas approximately one-half disagreed regarding prognosis. In approximately one-third of dyads, patients and caregivers both believed the patient's future quality of life would be good (34%) and that the patient would live for ≥2 years (30%). Patients in these dyads were less likely to enroll in hospice compared with patients in dyads who disagreed and those who agreed on a shorter life expectancy and poor future quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

Dyadic understanding of patients' projected life expectancy and future quality of life appears to be predictive of care received at the end of life. Improving rates of hospice enrollment may be best achieved with dyadic interventions.