Dataset Information

The Stability of Treatment Preferences Among Patients With Advanced Cancer.

ABSTRACT:

Context

Stability of patients' treatment preferences has important implications for decisions about concurrent and future treatment.

Objectives

To examine the stability of treatment preferences and correlates among patients with advanced cancer.

Methods

In this cohort, 104 patients with metastatic cancer, progression after at least one chemotherapy regimen, and an oncologist-estimated life expectancy of six or fewer months participated in structured interviews after clinical visits in which patients' recent scan results were discussed. Interviews were repeated in three monthly follow-ups. At baseline, patients' age, education, sex, race, marital status, insurance status, and type of cancer were documented. At each assessment, patients reported their treatment preferences (i.e., prioritizing life-prolonging vs. comfort), quality of life, and current health status.

Results

At baseline (n = 104), 55 (53%) patients preferred life-prolonging care and 49 (47%) preferred comfort care. Patients were followed up for one (n = 104), two (n = 74), or three months (n = 44). Between baseline and Month 1, 84 patients (81%) had stable preferences. During follow-up, preferences of 71 patients (68%) remained stable (equally divided between a consistent preference for life-prolonging and comfort care). Treatment preferences of 33 (32%) patients changed at least once during follow-up. Direction of change was inconsistent. Patients' preferences at baseline strongly predicted preferences at Month 1 (odds ratio = 17.8; confidence interval = 6.7-47.3; P < .001). Description of the current health status at baseline was the only variable significantly associated with stability of preferences at Month 1.

Conclusion

Two-thirds of patients with advanced cancer had stable preferences. Changes of preferences were often inconsistent and unpredictable. Our findings suggest potential benefits of ongoing communication about preferences.

SUBMITTER: Jabbarian LJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6700722 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Stability of Treatment Preferences Among Patients With Advanced Cancer.

Jabbarian Lea J LJ Maciejewski Renee C RC Maciejewski Paul K PK Rietjens Judith A C JAC Korfage Ida J IJ van der Heide Agnes A van Delden Johannes J M JJM Prigerson Holly G HG

Journal of pain and symptom management 20190219 6

<h4>Context</h4>Stability of patients' treatment preferences has important implications for decisions about concurrent and future treatment.<h4>Objectives</h4>To examine the stability of treatment preferences and correlates among patients with advanced cancer.<h4>Methods</h4>In this cohort, 104 patients with metastatic cancer, progression after at least one chemotherapy regimen, and an oncologist-estimated life expectancy of six or fewer months participated in structured interviews after clinica ...[more]

PMID: 30794935

Similar Datasets

Project description:Introduction: Lung cancer is the deadliest and most prevalent cancer worldwide. Lung cancer treatments have different characteristics and are associated with a range of benefits and side effects for patients. Such differences may raise uncertainty among drug developers, regulators, payers, and clinicians regarding the value of these treatment effects to patients. The value of conducting patient preference studies (using qualitative and/or quantitative methods) for benefits and side effects of different treatment options has been recognized by healthcare stakeholders, such as drug developers, regulators, health technology assessment bodies, and clinicians. However, evidence-based guidelines on how and when to conduct and use these studies in drug decision-making are lacking. As part of the Innovative Medicines Initiative PREFER project, we developed a protocol for a qualitative study that aims to understand which treatment characteristics are most important to lung cancer patients and to develop attributes and levels for inclusion in a subsequent quantitative preference survey. Methods: The study protocol specifies a four-phased approach: (i) a scoping literature review of published literature, (ii) four focus group discussions with stage III and IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer patients, (iii) two nominal group discussions with stage III and IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer patients, and (iv) multi-stakeholder discussions involving clinicians and preference experts. Discussion: This protocol outlines methodological and practical steps as to how qualitative research can be applied to identify and develop attributes and levels for inclusion in patient preference studies aiming to inform decisions across the drug life cycle. The results of this study are intended to inform a subsequent quantitative preference survey that assesses patient trade-offs regarding lung cancer treatment options. This protocol may assist researchers, drug developers, and decision-makers in designing qualitative studies to understand which treatment aspects are most valued by patients in drug development, regulation, and reimbursement.

Project description:ContextAccurate prognostic understanding is associated with increased advance care planning, symptom control, and patient autonomy in oncology. The impact of prognostic understanding on patients' health information preferences (HIPs) and prognostic information preferences is unknown and has important implications for health care communication.ObjectivesThe present study characterized the HIPs of patients with advanced cancer; examined differences in HIPs between patients with varying curability beliefs; and identified differences in the characteristics and psychological well-being of patients with varying curability beliefs.MethodsThis cross-sectional study used a secondary data analysis of baseline data (prerandomization) for patients enrolled in a large randomized controlled psychotherapy trial. 206 participants were recruited from outpatient clinics at a single facility. Inclusion criteria included: 18 years and older; English speaking, Stage IV solid tumor cancer, and Distress Thermometer score of ≥4.ResultsMost participants preferred as many details as possible about their diagnosis and treatment (69.4%; n = 143), and the likely outcome of their disease (72.3%; n = 149). Most participants accurately described their cancer as unlikely curable or incurable (62.6%; n = 129). There were no significant differences in HIPs based on level of prognostic understanding. Poorer prognostic understanding was associated with religiosity and better quality of life and existential well-being.ConclusionIn the present study, prognostic understanding (i.e., curability beliefs) was not associated with HIPs. Therefore, oncology clinicians must individually and interatively evaluate patients' interest and preferences for receiving information. Future research should further clarify preferences for the framing and content of prognostic information from providers and improve the measurement of prognostic understanding to facilitate patient-centered end-of-life care.

Project description:Understanding patients' decision-making preferences is crucial for enhancing patients' outcomes. The current study aims to identify Jordanian advanced cancer patients' preferred decision-making and to explore the associated variables of the passive decision-making preference. We used a cross-sectional survey design. Patients with advanced cancer referred to the palliative care clinic at a tertiary cancer center were recruited. We measured patients' decision-making preferences using the Control Preference Scale. Patients' satisfaction with decision-making was assessed with the Satisfaction with Decision Scale. Cohen's kappa statistic was used to assess the agreement between decision-control preferences and actual decision-making, and the bivariate analysis with 95% CI and the univariate and multivariate logistic regression were used to examine the association and predictors of the demographical and clinical characteristics of the participants and the participants' decision-control preferences, respectively. A total of 200 patients completed the survey. The patients' median age was 49.8 years, and 115 (57.5%) were female. Of them, 81 (40.5%) preferred passive decision control, and 70 (35%) and 49 (24.5%) preferred shared and active decision control, respectively. Less educated participants, females, and Muslim patients were found to have a statistically significant association with passive decision-control preferences. Univariate logistic regression analysis showed that, being a male (p = 0.003), highly educated (p = 0.018), and a Christian (p = 0.006) were statistically significant correlates of active decision-control preferences. Meanwhile, the multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that being a male or a Christian were the only statistically significant predictors of active participants' decision-control preferences. Around 168 (84%) of participants were satisfied with the way decisions were made, 164 (82%) of patients were satisfied with the actual decisions made, and 143 (71.5%) were satisfied with the shared information. The agreement level between decision-making preferences and actual decision practices was significant (ⱪ coefficient = 0.69; 95% CI = 0.59 to 0.79). The study's results demonstrate that a passive decision-control preference was prominent among patients with advanced cancer in Jordan. Further studies are needed to evaluate decision-control preference for additional variables, such as patients' psychosocial and spiritual factors, communication, and information sharing preferences, throughout the cancer trajectory so as to inform policies and improve practice.

Dataset Information

The Stability of Treatment Preferences Among Patients With Advanced Cancer.

Context

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

The Stability of Treatment Preferences Among Patients With Advanced Cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets