Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34855459›Full record

ArticleJCO oncology practice2022

Systemic Therapy Decision Making in Advanced Cancer: A Qualitative Analysis of Patient-Oncologist Encounters.

Garrett T Wasp, Kristin E Knutzen, Genevra F Murray, Olivia C Brody-Bizar, Matthew A Liu, Kathryn I Pollak, James A Tulsky, Yael Schenker, Amber E Barnato

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JCO oncology practice, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Real-world outcomes of metastatic cancer patients hospitalized at initial diagnosis: ONIRIS, a national study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. SCGAN: Sparse CounterGAN for Counterfactual Explanations in Breast Cancer Prediction.IEEE transactions on automation science and engineering : a publication of the IEEE Robotics and Automation Society · 2024
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Generating Counterfactual Explanations For Causal Inference in Breast Cancer Treatment Response.IEEE International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (CASE) : [proceedings]. IEEE Conference on Automation Science and Engineering · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Garrett T WaspSection of Oncology, Department of Medicine, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH.ORCID 0000-0002-1224-717X
Kristin E KnutzenDepartment of Behavioral, Social, and Health Education Sciences, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA.ORCID 0000-0002-4349-1378
Genevra F MurrayDepartment of General Internal Medicine, Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA.
Olivia C Brody-BizarDartmouth College, Hanover, NH.ORCID 0000-0002-4863-3566
Matthew A LiuUniversity of California San Diego School of Medicine, La Jolla, CA.ORCID 0000-0002-2296-5044
Kathryn I PollakDuke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC.
James A TulskyDepartment of Psychosocial Oncology and Palliative Care, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA.ORCID 0000-0002-7458-0453
Yael SchenkerPalliative Research Center (PaRC), University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA.ORCID 0000-0003-1307-9988
Amber E BarnatoNorris Cotton Cancer Center, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH.ORCID 0000-0003-1080-6270

Funding

Enhancing Patient-Oncologist CommunicationR01CA100387 · NCI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI POLLAK, KATHRYN I · 2003 to 2013
$6.1M
Training in Health Services Research for Vulnerable PopulationsT32HS022242 · AHRQ · BOSTON MEDICAL CENTER · PI LAROCHELLE, MARC · 2013 to 2024
$4.1M
AHRQ HHS T32 HS022242NCI NIH HHS R01 CA100387
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe sought to characterize patient-oncologist communication and decision making about continuing or limiting systemic therapy in encounters after an initial consultation, with a particular focus on whether and how oncologists foster shared decision making (SDM).

methodsWe performed content analysis of outpatient oncology encounters at two US National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers audio recorded between November 2010 and September 2014. A multidisciplinary team used a hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. We used a combination of random and purposive sampling. We restricted quantitative frequency counts to the coded random sample but included all sampled encounters in qualitative thematic analysis.

resultsAmong 31 randomly sampled dyads with three encounters each, systemic therapy decision making was discussed in 90% (84 of 93) encounters. Thirty-four (37%) broached limiting therapy, which 27 (79%) framed as temporary, nine (26%) as completion of a standard regimen, and five (15%) as permanent discontinuation. Thematic analysis of these 93 encounters, plus five encounters purposively sampled for permanent discontinuation, found that (1) patients and oncologists framed continuing therapy as the default, (2) deficiencies in the SDM process (facilitating choice awareness, discussing options, and incorporating patient preferences) contributed to this default, and (3) oncologists use persuasion rather than deliberation when broaching discontinuation.

conclusionIn this study of outpatient encounters between patients with advanced cancer and their oncologists, when discussing systemic therapy, there exists a default to continue systemic therapy, and deficiencies in SDM contribute to this default.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsOncologistsDecision Making, SharedHumansMedical OncologyPatient Participation

Identifiers

PMID34855459
PMCPMC9377707

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.