Patient, physician, and caregiver perspectives on ovarian cancer treatment decision making: lessons from a qualitative pilot study

Patient Interaction Involving Older Adults: Provider vs. Caregiver Expectations

This paper presents a study of the interaction between healthcare providers (HCPs) and older patients and their caregivers. The paper first presents results from a rapid review and narrative synthesis using PubMed and Google Scholar of HCP/patient/caregiver interactions involving older patients; these results then informed the design of a survey administered to HCPs and caregivers using a range of scenarios and their ratings of appropriateness of different responses, to explore where expectations align or differ between HCPs and caregivers. In analyzing ratings, the research found HCPs and caregivers generally approach the older adult encounter with similar expectations, but differences for specific situations are informative. HCPs appear to better recognize when there is a need to show empathy, as when a patient is frustrated or anxious. HCPs, overall, offer more calming responses, especially in embarrassing, upsetting, or worrying situations. For older patients of advanced age, HCPs value engagement with patients more than caregivers, but HCPs are more aligned with caregivers in their ratings of how to engage caregivers. Compared to caregivers, HCPs focus more on simplifying the description of treatment rather than using thorough explanations when a patient expresses hesitancy or avoidance. The results from this work suggest that having a fuller understanding of the different participants’ expectations may improve communication and identify potential pitfalls. A better understanding may also lead to changes in how students in the healthcare fields are trained; having better insight into this relationship will prepare them for interacting with older patients while addressing the needs of caregivers.

Communicating is analogous to caring: A systematic review and thematic synthesis of the patient-clinician communication experiences of individuals with ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review and synthesize the patient-clinician communication experiences of individuals with ovarian cancer.

METHODS

The CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Web of Science databases were reviewed for articles that described (a) original qualitative or mixed methods research, (b) the experiences of individuals with ovarian cancer, and (c) findings related to patient-clinician communication. Relevant data were extracted from study results sections, then coded for descriptive and analytical themes in accordance with Thomas and Harden's approach to thematic synthesis. Data were coded by two authors and discrepancies were resolved through discussion.

RESULTS

Of 1,390 unique articles, 65 met criteria for inclusion. Four descriptive themes captured participants' experiences communicating with clinicians: respecting me, seeing me, supporting me, and advocating for myself. Findings were synthesized into three analytical themes: communication is analogous to caring, communication is essential to personalized care, and communication may mitigate or exacerbate the burden of illness.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

Patient-clinician communication is a process by which individuals with ovarian cancer may engage in self-advocacy and appraise the extent to which they are seen, respected, and supported by clinicians. Strategies to enhance patient-clinician communication in the ovarian cancer care setting may promote patient perceptions of patient-centered care.

Cytoreductive Surgery plus Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy Improves Survival with Acceptable Safety for Advanced Ovarian Cancer: A Clinical Study of 100 Patients

Background

The mainstay of treatment for advanced ovarian cancer is debulking surgery followed by chemotherapy that includes carboplatin and paclitaxel, but the prognosis is poor. This study is aimed at evaluating the efficacy and safety of cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS+HIPEC) as first-line surgical treatment in patients with advanced ovarian cancer (AOC).

Methods

FIGO stage III/IV AOC patients underwent CRS+HIPEC as first-line surgical treatment at our center from December 2007 to January 2020. The primary endpoint was survival, and the secondary endpoint was safety.

Results

Among 100 patients, the median Karnofsky performance status (KPS) score was 80 (50-100), median peritoneal cancer index (PCI) was 19 (1-39), median completeness of cytoreduction (CC) score was 1 (0-3), number of organ regions removed was 4 (3-9), number of peritoneal regions removed was 4 (1-9), and number of anastomoses was 1 (0-4). The median follow-up was 36.8 months; 75 (75.0%) patients were still alive, and 25 (25.0%) had died. The median overall survival (mOS) was 87.6 (95% CI: 72.1-103.0) months, and the 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-year survival rates were 94.1%, 77.2%, 68.2%, 64.2%, and 64.2%, respectively. Univariate analysis showed that better mOS correlated with an age ≤, KPS ≥ 80, ascites ≤ 1000 ml, PCI < 19, and CC score 0-1. Multivariate Cox analysis showed that CC was an independent factor for OS; patients who underwent CRS with a CC score 0-1 had a mPFS of 67.8 (95% CI: 48.3-87.4) months. The perioperative serious adverse event and morbidity rates were 4.0% and 2.0%, respectively.

Conclusions

CRS+HIPEC improves survival for AOC patients with acceptable safety at experienced high-volume centers. Stringent patient selection and complete CRS are key factors for better survival.

Treatment patterns and associated factors in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: a population-based study

OBJECTIVES

A significant proportion of women with advanced-stage ovarian cancer receive no cancer-directed treatment and limited research has been devoted to this group. This population-based study aimed to gain insight into treatment patterns and trends in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer in the Netherlands and the main reasons for deciding for no cancer-directed treatment.

METHODS

All patients diagnosed with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) classification IIB-IV, between 2008 and 2016 were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Trends in the number of patients receiving cancer-directed treatment were analyzed. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with no cancer-directed treatment. The main reasons for no cancer-directed treatment were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 9303 patients were included, of whom 14% (n=1270) received no cancer-directed treatment while 67% (n=6218) received a combination of cytoreductive surgery and chemotherapy. Some 15% (n=1399) received chemotherapy only, and 4.5% (n=416) surgical resection or hormonal therapy only. The proportion of patients receiving no cancer-directed treatment was higher in 2014-2016 (16%, n=496/3175) compared with 2008-2010 (11%, n=349/3057, p<0.001). Associated factors with no cancer-directed treatment were higher age, FIGO stage IV, lower socioeconomic status, co-morbidity, and more recent years of diagnosis (p<0.001). Main reasons for no cancer-directed treatment were patient's choice (40%) and poor condition of the patient (29%).

CONCLUSIONS

The proportion of patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer not receiving cancer-directed treatment has increased in the last decade in the Netherlands. Patient's choice was the main reason for the decision to undergo no cancer-directed treatment, which indicates patient involvement in the decision-making process. The second most common reason for no cancer-directed treatment was poor condition of the patient, which might indicate careful selection of patients for treatment. Decision-making regarding treatment is well-considered, but more insight is needed, especially from the patient's perspective.