Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33871760›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer survivorship : research and practice2022

Is accurate routine cancer prognostication psychologically harmful? 5-year outcomes of life expectancy prognostication in uveal melanoma survivors.

Stephen L Brown, Peter Fisher, Laura Hope-Stone, Bertil Damato, Heinrich Heimann, Rumana Hussain, M Gemma Cherry

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice, 2022. 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
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 'I Don't Like Uncertainty, I Like to Know': How and why uveal melanoma patients consent to life expectancy prognostication.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Stephen L BrownDepartment of Primary Care and Mental Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L69 3GB, UK. slbrown@liverpool.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-6142-0995
Peter FisherDepartment of Primary Care and Mental Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L69 3GB, UK.
Laura Hope-StoneDepartment of Primary Care and Mental Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L69 3GB, UK.
Bertil DamatoLiverpool Ocular Oncology Centre, Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK.
Heinrich HeimannLiverpool Ocular Oncology Centre, Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK.
Rumana HussainLiverpool Ocular Oncology Centre, Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK.
M Gemma CherryDepartment of Primary Care and Mental Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L69 3GB, UK.
University of Liverpool · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePrognostication in cancer is growing in importance as increasingly accurate tools are developed. Prognostic accuracy intensifies ethical concerns that a poor prognosis could be psychologically harmful to survivors. Uveal melanoma (UM) prognostication allows survivors to be reliably told that life expectancy is either normal (good prognosis) or severely curtailed because of metastatic disease (poor prognosis). Treatment cannot change life expectancy. To identify whether prognosis is associated with psychological harm, we compared harm in UM survivors with good and poor prognoses and those who declined testing and compared these outcomes to general population norms.

methodsNon-randomized 5-year study of a consecutive series of 708 UM survivors (51.6% male, mean age 69.03, SD=12.12) with observations at 6, 12, 24, 36, 48 and 60 months. We operationalized psychological harm as anxiety and depression symptoms, worry about cancer recurrence (WREC) and poor quality of life (QoL).

resultsCompared to other groups, survivors with poor prognoses showed initially elevated anxiety and depression and consistently elevated worry about local or distant recurrence over 5 years. Good prognoses were not associated with outcomes. Generally, no prognostic groups reported anxiety, depression and WREC or QoL scores that exceeded general population norms.

conclusionsUsing a large sample, we found that harm accruing from a poor prognosis was statistically significant over 5 years, but did not exceed general non-cancer population norms. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Survivors desire prognostic information. At a population level, we do not believe that our findings show sufficiently strong links between prognostication outcome and psychological harm to deny patients the option of knowing their prognosis. Nonetheless, it is important that patients are informed of potential adverse psychological consequences of a poor prognosis.

Indexed as

Cancer SurvivorsQuality of LifeAgedAnxietyDepressionFemaleHumansLife ExpectancyMaleMelanomaNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalSurvivorsUveal MelanomaUveal NeoplasmsAnxietyDepressionOncologyPrognosticationQuality of lifeUveal melanoma

Identifiers

PMID33871760
PMCPMC8964647
OpenAlexW3156918560

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.