Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26559912›Full record

SynthesisBMC cancer2015

Withdrawal of anticancer therapy in advanced disease: a systematic literature review.

G Clarke, S Johnston, P Corrie, I Kuhn, S Barclay

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC cancer, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
28.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 80 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. [Chemotherapy at the end of life is compatible with dignified death and palliative care]Revista de la Facultad de Ciencias Medicas (Cordoba, Argentina) · 2023
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

G ClarkePrimary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom. gcc29@medschl.cam.ac.uk.
S JohnstonCarroll Lab Cambridge Research Institute, Cancer Research UK Cambridge Research Institute, Cambridge, United Kingdom. simon.johnston@cruk.cam.ac.uk.
P CorrieDepartment of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom. pippa.corrie@addenbrookes.nhs.uk.
I KuhnMedical Library, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom. ilk21@cam.ac.uk.
S BarclayPrimary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom. sigb2@medschl.cam.ac.uk.
University of Cambridge · GBCancer Research UK Cambridge Center · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCurrent guidelines set out when to start anticancer treatments, but not when to stop as the end of life approaches. Conventional cytotoxic agents are administered intravenously and have major life-threatening toxicities. Newer drugs include molecular targeted agents (MTAs), in particular, small molecule kinase-inhibitors (KIs), which are administered orally. These have fewer life-threatening toxicities, and are increasingly used to palliate advanced cancer, generally offering additional months of survival benefit. MTAs are substantially more expensive, between £2-8 K per month, and perceived as easier to start than stop.

methodsA systematic review of decision-making concerning the withdrawal of anticancer drugs towards the end of life within clinical practice, with a particular focus on MTAs. Nine electronic databases searched. PRISMA guidelines followed.

resultsForty-two studies included. How are decisions made? Decision-making was shared and ongoing, including stopping, starting and trying different treatments. Oncologists often experienced 'professional role dissonance' between their self-perception as 'treaters', and talking about end of life care. Why are decisions made? Clinical factors: disease progression, worsening functional status, treatment side-effects. Non-clinical factors: physicians' personal experience, values, emotions. Some patients continued treatment to maintain 'hope', often reflecting limited understanding of palliative goals. When are decisions made? Limited evidence reveals patients' decisions based upon quality of life benefits. Clinicians found timing withdrawal particularly challenging. Who makes the decisions? Decisions were based within physician-patient interaction.

conclusionsOncologists report that decisions around stopping chemotherapy treatment are challenging, with limited evidence-based guidance outside of clinical trial protocols. The increasing availability of oral MTAs is transforming the management of incurable cancer; blurring boundaries between active treatment and palliative care. No studies specifically addressing decision-making around stopping MTAs in clinical practice were identified. There is a need to develop an evidence base to support physicians and patients with decision-making around the withdrawal of these high cost treatments.

Indexed as

Withholding TreatmentAntineoplastic AgentsClinical Decision-MakingHumansNeoplasmsTerminal CareTime FactorsAntineoplastic Agents

Identifiers

PMID26559912
PMCPMC4641339
OpenAlexW2144532729

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.