Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33927013›Full record

ArticleBMJ supportive & palliative care2021

Advanced cancer and COVID-19 comorbidity: medical oncology-palliative medicine ethics meetings in a comprehensive cancer centre.

Laura Marret, Pauline Vaflard, Perrine Vuagnat, Ophélie Soulie, Sylvie Dolbeault, Alexis Burnod, Céline Laouisset, Timothée Marchal, Marie-Ange Massiani, Laurence Bozec and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ supportive & palliative care, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

14 authors.

Laura MarretDepartment of Supportive and Palliative Care, Institut Curie, Paris et Saint-Cloud, France.
Pauline VaflardPSL University, Paris, France.
Perrine VuagnatDepartment of Medical Oncology, Institut Curie, Paris et Saint-Cloud, France.
Ophélie SouliePSL University, Paris, France.
Sylvie DolbeaultPSL University, Paris, France.
Alexis BurnodDepartment of Supportive and Palliative Care, Institut Curie, Paris et Saint-Cloud, France.
Céline LaouissetDepartment of Supportive and Palliative Care, Institut Curie, Paris et Saint-Cloud, France.
Timothée MarchalDepartment of Supportive and Palliative Care, Institut Curie, Paris et Saint-Cloud, France.
Marie-Ange MassianiDepartment of Medical Oncology, Institut Curie, Paris et Saint-Cloud, France.
Laurence BozecDepartment of Medical Oncology, Institut Curie, Paris et Saint-Cloud, France.
François-Clément BidardDepartment of Medical Oncology, Institut Curie, Paris et Saint-Cloud, France.
Paul CottuPSL University, Paris, France.
Elisabeth AngellierDepartment of Supportive and Palliative Care, Institut Curie, Paris et Saint-Cloud, France.
Carole BouleucDepartment of Supportive and Palliative Care, Institut Curie, Paris et Saint-Cloud, France carole.bouleuc@curie.fr.ORCID 0000-0003-0451-7720

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesIn managing patients with cancer in the COVID-19 era, clinical oncologists and palliative care practitioners had to face new, disrupting and complex medical situations, challenging the quality of the shared decision-making process. During the first lockdown in France, we developed an onco-palliative ethics meeting to enhance the quality of the decision-making process for patients with advanced cancer treated for COVID-19.

methodsA least one of the institutional ethics committee members was present along with oncologists, palliative care teams, psycho-oncologists, radiologists and intensive care specialists. Specific medical parameters were systematically collected to form a standardised framework for the discussions.

resultsThe main raised issues were the definition of new criteria for the implementation of invasive resuscitation techniques, optimal ways to adapt or delay anticancer treatment and best procedures to address terminal respiratory failure and end-of-life care. The main clinical and ethical guidelines that emerged during these debates are presented. The palliative care team played a major role in assessing and reporting patients' awareness of cancer-related prognosis and their wishes concerning invasive therapies or transfer to intensive care units, enabling an individualised benefit-risk balance assessment. The ethics committee members ensured continuous monitoring during the discussions. Their function was to recall the main ethical principles including dignity, which is conferred on people when there are treated as having equal status.

conclusionsThe onco-palliative ethics meeting provided a powerful avenue for improvement of collegiality and reinforcement of teamwork, which could be a major protection against burnout for healthcare professionals facing an epidemic onslaught.

Indexed as

cancerCOVID-19end of life careethicssupportive care

Identifiers

PMID33927013
PMCPMC8098300

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.