ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2014
Comparative multidisciplinary prediction of survival in patients with advanced cancer.
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Systematic Review of Predictions of Survival in Palliative Care: How Accurate Are Clinicians and Who Are the Experts?PloS one · 2016Pooled it
- Estimating survival in advanced cancer: a comparison of estimates made by oncologists and patients.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020Trial
- Survival Time Difference Between High and Low Symptom Burden Considering Physical and Emotional Symptoms Among Terminal Cancer Patients.Journal of general and family medicine · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in multidisciplinary tumor boards enhancing decision making and clinical outcomes in oncology.iScience · 2025Review
- Outcomes of patients receiving urgent palliative radiotherapy for advanced lung cancer: an observational study.BMC palliative care · 2024Observational
- The relationship between nutritional status and prognosis in advanced gastrointestinal cancer patients in palliative care: a prospective cohort study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Article
- Prognosis and risk factor assessment of patients with advanced lung cancer with low socioeconomic status: model development and validation.BMC cancer · 2024Observational
- Factors related to accurate clinicians' prediction of survival: an international multicenter study in East Asia.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Article
- Clinicians' Perspectives on the Telehealth Serious Illness Care Program for Older Adults With Myeloid Malignancies: Single-Arm Pilot Study.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- Article
- Accuracy of oncologists' estimates of expected survival time in advanced cancer.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2023Article
- High fibrinogen levels are associated with poor survival in patients with liposarcoma.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Accuracy of clinical predictions of prognosis at the end-of-life: evidence from routinely collected data in urgent care records.BMC palliative care · 2023Observational
- How palliative care professionals deal with predicting life expectancy at the end of life: predictors and accuracy.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021Article
- The TEACHH model to predict life expectancy in patients presenting for palliative spine radiotherapy: external validation and comparison with alternate models.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2018Article
- The Accuracy of Nurses' Predictions for Clinical Outcomes in the Chronically Critically Ill.Research & reviews. Journal of nursing and health sciences · 2017Article
- Utilization of palliative radiotherapy for bone metastases near end of life in a population-based cohort.BMC palliative care · 2016Article
- Coming and going: predicting the discharge of cancer patients admitted to a palliative care unit: easier than thought?Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2015Observational
- Temporal, Probabilistic and Surprise Question Approaches of Clinician Predicted Survival in Advanced Hepatopancreaticobiliary Cancers: A Prospective Cohort Study.Indian journal of palliative careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe expected survival of patients with metastatic cancer can significantly impact decisions regarding treatment, care setting, and future planning. We evaluated the prognostication ability of a multidisciplinary team (MDT) experienced in providing supportive care and palliative radiotherapy.
methodsAfter clinical assessment of consecutive patients, survival predictions were independently made by each MDT member. Patient demographics, factors influencing predictions, and dates of death were collected. Clinical predictions of survival (CPS) were considered correct if within 30 days of actual survival (AS). Summary statistics and Kaplan-Meier estimates of overall survival were obtained. Correlations between actual and CPS were calculated using Spearman's correlation coefficient. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified factors associated with prognostication accuracy.
resultsA total of 395 predictions (06/2010-07/2012) were made by eight disciplines. Average age was 68 years, 68.3 % of patients were male, and 48.4 % had lung cancer. Median AS was 87 days (95 % CI 66-102 days). Survival was over-estimated 72.4 % (286/395) of the time with r = 0.54 (p < 0.0001) for all predictions across all disciplines. In addition, 30.3 % (36/119) of radiation therapist (RTT) predictions were correct compared to 30.1 % (22/73) of nurses', 28.7 % (43/150) of physicians', and 15.1 % (8/53) of allied health (AH) providers. There were no differences in accuracy by discipline except for the RTT versus AH groups (p = 0.04). Factors most frequently cited as influencing correct predictions were Karnofsky performance status (KPS), extent of disease, and histology. KPS was the only significant variable on multivariate analysis (p ≤ 0.04).
conclusionMDT members providing collaborative care for advanced cancer patients utilize similar factors in predicting survival with comparable accuracy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24136159What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.