Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30145739›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2019

What determines the timing of discussions on forgoing anticancer treatment? A national survey of medical oncologists.

Masanori Mori, Chikako Shimizu, Asao Ogawa, Takuji Okusaka, Saran Yoshida, Tatsuya Morita

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The effect of social care nurses on health related quality of life in patients with advanced cancer: A non-randomized, multicenter, controlled trial.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

6 authors.

Masanori MoriPalliative Care Team, Seirei Mikatahara General Hospital, 3453 Mikataharacho, Kita-ku, Hamamatsu, Shizuoka, 433-8558, Japan.
Chikako ShimizuDepartment of Breast Medical Oncology, National Center for Global Health and Medicine, 1-21-1, Toyama, Shinjuku, Tokyo, 162-8655, Japan. cshimizu@hosp.ncgm.go.jp.
Asao OgawaDivision of Psycho-Oncology, Exploratory Oncology Research and Clinical Trial Center, National Cancer Center, 6-5-1, Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa, Chiba, 277-8577, Japan.
Takuji OkusakaDepartment of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1, Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan.
Saran YoshidaGraduate School of Education, Tohoku University, 27-1, Kawauchi, Aoba-ku, Sendai, Miyagi, 980-8576, Japan.
Tatsuya MoritaPalliative and Supportive Care Division, Seirei Mikatahara General Hospital, 3453 Mikataharacho, Kita-ku, Hamamatsu, Shizuoka, 433-8558, Japan.

Funding

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science KAKENHI JP16K15418National Cancer Center Research and Development Fund 25-B-5
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeEnd-of-life discussions (EOLd) including the option of forgoing anticancer treatment infrequently occur until treatment options have been exhausted for advanced cancer patients. We aimed to identify oncologist-related factors contributing to the timing of discussing the option of forgoing anticancer treatment.

methodsIn this nationwide survey of 864 medical oncologists, we asked about physicians' attitudes toward the timing of discussing the option of forgoing anticancer treatment for a simulated patient with newly diagnosed metastatic cancer, physicians' experience of EOLd, perceptions of a good death, and beliefs. Multivariate analyses identified determinants of early discussions.

resultsAmong 490 physicians (response rate = 57%), 167 (35%) would discuss the option of forgoing anticancer treatment "now (at the diagnosis)." Physicians' attitudes toward discussing the option "now" were significantly correlated with a greater physician-perceived importance of life completion (odds ratio (OR) = 1.30, 95%CI = 1.00-1.69, p = 0.048) and dying in a preferred place (OR = 1.29, 95%CI = 1.01-1.65, p = 0.045) for a good death, and not perceiving EOLd as being severely distressing for patients/families (OR = 0.70, 95%CI = 0.54-0.95, p = 0.021). In multivariate analyses, independent determinants of the attitude toward discussing the option now included a greater physician-perceived importance of life completion for a good death (OR = 1.38, 95%CI = 1.05-1.81, p = 0.019), and not perceiving EOLd as being severely distressing for patients/families (OR = 0.70, 95%CI = 0.52-0.94, p = 0.017).

conclusionsReflection by oncologists on their own perception regarding a good death and beliefs about EOLd may help oncologists individualize the timing of discussing the option of forgoing anticancer treatment.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelLife Support CareOncologistsTreatment RefusalAdultAttitude to DeathCross-Sectional StudiesDecision MakingFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsTerminal CareAttitudeChemotherapyCommunicationOncologists

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.